8800 From: Robert Epstein Date: Sun Oct 21, 2001 11:17pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Re streams of namas/rupas... --- Howard wrote: So, indeed, we cannot change rock to water, > though I wouldn't rule out on the face of it the possibility of certain > advanced ariyans being able to change water to wine! ;-)) So, Howard, do you think Jesus studied that in the East? Best, Robert Ep. 8801 From: Howard Date: Sun Oct 21, 2001 7:21pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: bhavanga (life-continuum) Mike & Howard Hi, Robert - In a message dated 10/21/01 1:37:32 AM Eastern Daylight Time, Robert E writes: > --- Howard wrote: > > ...I don't think that is what "Buddha Nature" > > is intended to mean. I believe it refers, rather, to the capacity of all > > sentient beings for enlightenment, and is related to the mind being > > inherently luminous (but defiled by adventitious elements). > > Howard, > I don't mean to switch sides, but I want to ask you a question or two I > would like > to be able to answer: > > If the mind is inherently luminous, yet obscured by defilements, can you > tell me: > > What does this mind look like? > ------------------------------------------------------ Howard: Like nothing I've ever seen, actually. There is no mind, at least no "thing" called "mind". The term 'mind' is a conventional reference to a bunch of functions/operations within, apparently, a field of potential awareness. ----------------------------------------------------- > What space does it occupy? ----------------------------------------------------- Howard: The question doesn't seem to make sense. ---------------------------------------------------- > hat is its nature, beyond being luminous, and how does it function? ----------------------------------------------------- Howard: In a worldling, something along the lines of what is traditionally described as the five khandhas affected by clinging. When freed of defilement .. well, I shall have to wait to find out. There are numerous attempts to describe it, but I have no means of properly evaluating them. One which has some appeal to me is found in the Garland Sutra. -------------------------------------------------------- > > Hope you understand the spirit in which these questions are asked. > > [This is only a test] -------------------------------------------------------- Howard: I'm sure I failed. If not, you are much too easy a grader! ;-)) -------------------------------------------------------- > > Best Regards, > Robert Ep. > ============================ 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) 8802 From: Robert Epstein Date: Sun Oct 21, 2001 11:23pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Citta -Sarah --- Sarah wrote: > Anyway, I still agree with the main message that by understanding more about > all these realities, we begin to see that what are taken usually for realities, > are in fact mere concepts. > > However, now, I'll have to pause before opting for that easy life of > just agreeing with you once in a while;-) But I like it when you agree with me! Robert Ep. 8803 From: Robert Epstein Date: Sun Oct 21, 2001 11:30pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: bhavanga (life-continuum) Mike & Howard --- Howard wrote: > > In a message dated 10/21/01 1:37:32 AM Eastern Daylight Time, > Robert E writes: > > If the mind is inherently luminous, yet obscured by defilements, can you > > tell me: > > > > What does this mind look like? > > > ------------------------------------------------------ > Howard: > Like nothing I've ever seen, actually. There is no mind, at least no > "thing" called "mind". The term 'mind' is a conventional reference to a bunch > of functions/operations within, apparently, a field of potential awareness. > -------------------------------------------------------- Can you say a little more about a field of potential awareness? -------------------------------------------------------- > > > What space does it occupy? > ----------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > The question doesn't seem to make sense. > ---------------------------------------------------- Well, is it in the 'brain', is mind without form and without location? Is it equal to the space of all phenomena? etc. ------------------------------------------------------ > > What is its nature, beyond being luminous, and how does it function? > ----------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > In a worldling, something along the lines of what is traditionally > described as the five khandhas affected by clinging. When freed of defilement > .. well, I shall have to wait to find out. There are numerous attempts to > describe it, but I have no means of properly evaluating them. One which has > some appeal to me is found in the Garland Sutra. > -------------------------------------------------------- That sounds right. I'll have to take a look at the Garland Sutra some time. -------------------------------------------------------- > > > > Hope you understand the spirit in which these questions are asked. > > > > [This is only a test] > -------------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > I'm sure I failed. If not, you are much too easy a grader! ;-)) Just thought I'd take us on a bit of a Dharma romp, but I'm sure my questions were also not quite up to par! -------------------------------------------------------- Best Regards, Robert Ep. 8804 From: Howard Date: Sun Oct 21, 2001 7:44pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: bhavanga (life-continuum) Mike & Howard Hi, Kenneth - In a message dated 10/21/01 2:04:30 AM Eastern Daylight Time, Kenneth Ong writes: > > Hi Howard, > > Sorry Howard, I get carry away with the last part on Buddha Nature, let us > not further discuss abt it, before my good post mate Robert Ep come after > me again :). Let us focus on your questions again on your earlier email. > > > The entire citta/dhamma theory troubles me! Just one aspect of my > "problem": At a given point in time, for a quite miniscule period, a > citta is in effect (or occurs) together with a whole bunch of cetasikas, > this entire event having arisen due to causes and conditions no longer in > effect. What changes, then, result in that citta ceasing? The conditions > which resulted in its arising have *already* ceased! Moreover, that citta, > *while it is in effect*, is independent of any other conditions (it is > currently the whole enchilada), and when it ceases, it is completely > gone; this suggests to me a theory which simultaneously countenances both > substantialism and annihilationism! > > k: Let us use the word present and absent. Take for eg listening to a > song. When the the song is play, there is a presence of cittas to > perceive the songs. When it stops playing, we did not hear the song, then > there is an absence of cittas. > ------------------------------------------------------------- Howard: That is correct. And at that time, there is no hearing of music. The previous hearing of music ceased, leaving in its wake, of course, various effects, including memory, for example. ------------------------------------------------------------- > Then we play again. If we followed your defintion that if cittas cease > (your definition is total annihilated) then we should not be able to hear > again. But in fact we could hear again. Why? > -------------------------------------------------------------- Howard: The ceasing of the previous hearing was just that. That previous hearing no longer exists, but its cessation didn't destroy the ability to hear, and with the coming together of appropriate conditions, there can be new hearing (with new "cittas"). --------------------------------------------------------------- > > Because in fact citta do not cease, they appear to cease but in fact they > just mere absent. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Howard: No. When the old "cittas", to speak that way, ceased, they became absent, and when they became absent, they ceased. Two ways of saying the same thing. This does not preclude new "cittas" from arising when appropriate conditions are in place. Of course, the "new" cittas are not essentially new in the sense of being independent of everything else. Nothing is new in that sense. The whole business of perceiving separate, independent, self-existent "things" is a fundamental error to begin with, as is seeing a single, homogeneous "thing", as is seeing a total nothingness. There is a whole variety of alternative ways we worldlings misperceive the way things are. Eternalism is one of them. ---------------------------------------------------------------- > The right causes and conditions are not there for it to be present. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Howard: Well, we agree on that except terminologically. Your terminlogy is based on the essentialist view of the Surangama Sutra which views hearing/auditory consciousness as a permanent "thing", much along the lines of the Sarvastivadins, rather than simply as a function which can arise from time to time when appropriate conditions are present. BTW, that Sutra was one of my favorites when I was moving from Vedanta to Dhamma, because it wasn't a big step. ---------------------------------------------------------------- > > Let me say again, cittas do not cease, they are just absent. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Howard: Well, I have given my reply. Our approach is different here. --------------------------------------------------------------- They will be > present when there is right causes and conditions and vice versea. that is > how citta functions. They are there but not present if the right causes > and conditions are not there. > > Why cittas functions like that or what makes them act like that, it is a > question of origination. > > I hope this helps. For your kind comments please > > > > > Kindest regards. > Kenneth Ong > > ============================ 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) 8805 From: Howard Date: Sun Oct 21, 2001 7:59pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Re streams of namas/rupas... Hi, Kenneth - In a message dated 10/21/01 5:01:55 AM Eastern Daylight Time, Kenneth Ong writes: > Hi Robert Ep, > > I every reluctant to answer your question in Mahayana way. Yes, honestly > speaking, all exist in the mind (the mind of absolute reality). We are > clouded by this condition hence we thought there is outer and there is > inner. > > (Surangama Sutra). > All these six senses, the twelve ayatanas(six sense organs and six sense > data) and the eighteen realms of sense are appearing and dispearing within > the nature of the Tathagata store. These five aggregates fundamentally > are the same nature of the Tathagata store. > > > > For your kind comments please > > Kenenth Ong > =============================== Aiyeee! ;-)) You write " ... all exist in the mind (the mind of absolute reality)" This is why I say that the "Mahayana" of the Surangama Sutra is not far from Vedanta (and likewise for the substantialist idealism of the Lankavatara Sutra, another old love of mine). In what I quoted oy your writing above, one doesn't have to search hard to find Brahman! (Mind you, there is nothing wrong with being a cryto-Vedantist, or even a straight-out Vedantist. But I think I'm not mistaken when I see it as present.) 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) 8806 From: m. nease Date: Mon Oct 22, 2001 0:10am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] dsg friends in India Great anecdotes RobEp--thanks very much for sharing. mike --- Robert Epstein wrote: > > --- Sarah wrote: > > > This afternoon/evening, they're travelling to > Varanasi (Banares) where i hope > > to have contact. They'll be staying in Varanasi > for 3nts to visit Sarnath and > > Kosambi. > > Dear Sarah, > Just thought I'd mention that I've been to both > Varanasi and Sarnath twice before. > I went just for my own 'amusement' in 1989, then > again in 1996 when I dragged my > wife along for our honeymoon. That first time I was > on my own. I just had an > urge to see Nepal and India and also to visit a > couple of the places where the > Buddha had been. I really had no agenda. > > I ate some 'roadside chicken' with some of the > Nepalese guides in Nepal during a > bus trip to Pokhara, and my greed was rewarded with > a horrible illness. It > recurred again back in Katmandu. I had a high fever > to the point where I started > having sort of hallucinations. I was pretty scared, > but I was determined to get > to India, and not go home to the U.S. > > So I developed the idea that I would 'go to India to > get well'. In my slightly > altered state of consciousness, I thought this was a > very funny idea, since many > friends had warned me that I would get 'sick in > India'. So I thought, well, I'll > get well in India instead, since I'm already sick. > Funny arising cittas, eh? > > Well, I took a short plane ride from back in > Katmandu to Varanasi [45 minutes] and > got off in the middle of the night in Varanasi with > no plan and nowhere to go, > quite quite ill. I attached myself to a British > guy, and told him quite flatly > that I was going to go wherever he went! He > accepted and told me he wanted to be > close to the Ganges, so that he could go down there > at dawn and see folks coming > down for their prayers, etc. So he was not going to > stay at a 'good' hotel, but > one of the cheaper ones by the river. Well, I went > with him. And the place we > 'chose' was built of old green metal that had been > oxidized over many years. It > had bars on the windows and a shared bathroom and > shower in the hall. > > I went to sleep thinking 'Well if I die here at > least I'm in India and Varanasi is > supposed to guarantee a good death' [of course this > is on the Hindu side of > things]. My new friend woke me up at 5 in the > morning to go down to the river, > and guess what? I was all better. The fever had > broken and I just wasn't sick > anymore. I went down to the Ganges and went out in > a boat to watch the amazing > sunrise over the Ganges. > > I repeated the *good* part of this experience with > my wife when we went several > years later. She loved this part. Unfortunately we > got a bit sick again in India > this time, and wound up recuperating up in Simla in > the Himalayan foothills. But > that's another story. > > Anyway, Varanasi was quite amusing in a certain way. > The folks there had such a > long history, it made me laught to be an American > with our 200 year history! I > was talking to a restaurant owner, and he said > blithely: 'Well, my family has been > in this area for only 10, 000 years'. Boy, did I > have a laugh over that. In the > west, we really don't have that sense of continuity, > that brings us back to > ancient scriptures and makes us feel that we're > still connected to that reality. > > In India, it seemed that the results of arising > cittas was much more direct. I > would literally think of something and it would > manifest a little while later. > This happened several times. > > When I was up North in Haldwani in Uttar Pradesh > [trying to find a mysterious > ashram in the woods!] I kept getting lost in the > town. I would try to wander over > to my favorite Chinese restaurant [a little place > established there by a Chinese > guy who made his own type of food - it was great] > and then wander back to my > little hotel, and I would invariably get lost every > time. > > About three times when I was wandering around trying > to find my way, this young > guy on a motorcycle who spoke little English would > come and find me. He didn't > say anything, neither did I ever find out how he > knew me or how he happened to > come by when I was lost. He would motion for me to > hop on the motor bike behind > him, and he would drive me back to my hotel. I > always thanked him. He would > smile and drive off. I have no idea how this took > place, but I was very grateful > to be 'found' each time. > > When I went to Sarnath I went to the museum there. > They have a wonderful > collection of first century sculptures of the > Buddha. I found them quite > compelling. The giant Stupa at Sarnath is amazing, > marking the spot where Buddha > gave his first Sermon, if I've got it right. It was > quite wonderful to know I was > standing on that ground, and I can only imagine how > the current group feels going > to all those amazing spots. > > Thanks for sharing their ongoing journey. It makes > me feel that I'm back in that > area again. > > Regards, > Robert Ep. > > 8807 From: Howard Date: Sun Oct 21, 2001 9:17pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: bhavanga (life-continuum) Mike & Howard Hi, Robert - This will be most unsatisfying, I am sure. In a message dated 10/21/01 11:31:20 AM Eastern Daylight Time, Robert E writes: > > Howard: > > Like nothing I've ever seen, actually. There is no mind, at least > no > > "thing" called "mind". The term 'mind' is a conventional reference to a > bunch > > of functions/operations within, apparently, a field of potential > awareness. > > -------------------------------------------------------- > > Can you say a little more about a field of potential awareness? ------------------------------------------------------------ Howard: I wish I could, but, no, not really. This notion of mine is quite vague. I'm sorry. I have a good sense of it, but not good enough to say anything very useful. ---------------------------------------------------------- > > > > > > What space does it occupy? > > ----------------------------------------------------- > > Howard: > > The question doesn't seem to make sense. > > ---------------------------------------------------- > > Well, is it in the 'brain', is mind without form and without location? Is > it > equal to the space of all phenomena? etc. > --------------------------------------------------------- Howard: 'Mind' is the term we use for all our mental functions, but thought of as an aggregate. Certainly, when a sentient being is a human being or higher animal, the brain is associated with mental function. That is undisputable, I think. But if this question of brain and physical location presupposes an "external world" which underlies and exists independent of (potential) experience, then the question is ill-formed for me. To me, speaking of brains and places and people and the entire variety of "external" phenomena is just that, a mere manner of speaking, albeit a useful one. (As a metaphor: When talking about a movie seen up on a screen, it is quite useful to discuss how beautiful a garden pictured there is, but, of course, there really is no garden there at all. But the metaphor breaks down, because, when it comes to the "mind", there really is no screen either!!) BTW, this must sound very much like I am espousing an idealism such as in the Lankavatara Sutra. Honestly, though, I am not. It is much closer to a kind of phenomenalism. ============================== 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) 8808 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Mon Oct 22, 2001 1:27am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: bhavanga (life-continuum) Mike & Howard Hi Howard, You are confusing this with Surangama. There is nothing surangama here. I am most happy to discuss with anyone here who will say cittas cease (as defined by you as totally annihilated) during such a process (except for Nibbana). There is a whole world of difference between these two words, cease and absent. When we talk abt impermenance, it is not abt destruction and creation as they are mutally dependent. It is abt ever changing state. But what is this nature of ever changing state. Nobody can answer. Same as cittas, there are in ever changing state but what is its nature of this ever changing. Nobody can answer. Does its nature cease, it cannot because it is manifested when the right condition arise, but does its nature last forever, it cannot because it is ever changing. By the way my main book of Mahayana Doctrine is not Surangama, I have no fixed book of Mahayana Sutta. It is because of the questions ask here I got to use Surangama sutra as the five aggregates is widely discuss in Surangama. Actually if you really like to talk abt Mahayana, you are most weclome with me. It is just that I do not wish to explore certain area further as this list is not abt Mahayana. Kindest regards. Kenneth Ong --- Howard wrote: > Hi, Kenneth - > > In a message dated 10/21/01 2:04:30 AM Eastern Daylight Time, > Kenneth Ong writes: > > > > > > Hi Howard, > > > > Sorry Howard, I get carry away with the last part on Buddha Nature, > let us > > not further discuss abt it, before my good post mate Robert Ep come > after > > me again :). Let us focus on your questions again on your earlier > email. > > > > > The entire citta/dhamma theory troubles me! Just one aspect of my > > "problem": At a given point in time, for a quite miniscule period, a > > citta is in effect (or occurs) together with a whole bunch of > cetasikas, > > this entire event having arisen due to causes and conditions no > longer in > > effect. What changes, then, result in that citta ceasing? The > conditions > > which resulted in its arising have *already* ceased! Moreover, that > citta, > > *while it is in effect*, is independent of any other conditions (it is > > currently the whole enchilada), and when it ceases, it is completely > > gone; this suggests to me a theory which simultaneously countenances > both > > substantialism and annihilationism! > > > > k: Let us use the word present and absent. Take for eg listening to > a > > song. When the the song is play, there is a presence of cittas to > > perceive the songs. When it stops playing, we did not hear the song, > then > > there is an absence of cittas. > > > ------------------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > That is correct. And at that time, there is no hearing of music. > The > previous hearing of music ceased, leaving in its wake, of course, > various > effects, including memory, for example. > ------------------------------------------------------------- > > > Then we play again. If we followed your defintion that if cittas cease > > (your definition is total annihilated) then we should not be able to > hear > > again. But in fact we could hear again. Why? > > > -------------------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > The ceasing of the previous hearing was just that. That previous > hearing no longer exists, but its cessation didn't destroy the ability > to > hear, and with the coming together of appropriate conditions, there can > be > new hearing (with new "cittas"). > --------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > Because in fact citta do not cease, they appear to cease but in fact > they > > just mere absent. > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > No. When the old "cittas", to speak that way, ceased, they became > > absent, and when they became absent, they ceased. Two ways of saying the > same > thing. This does not preclude new "cittas" from arising when appropriate > > conditions are in place. Of course, the "new" cittas are not essentially > new > in the sense of being independent of everything else. Nothing is new in > that > sense. The whole business of perceiving separate, independent, > self-existent > "things" is a fundamental error to begin with, as is seeing a single, > homogeneous "thing", as is seeing a total nothingness. There is a whole > variety of alternative ways we worldlings misperceive the way things > are. > Eternalism is one of them. > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > > > The right causes and conditions are not there for it to be present. > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > Well, we agree on that except terminologically. Your terminlogy > is > based on the essentialist view of the Surangama Sutra which views > hearing/auditory consciousness as a permanent "thing", much along the > lines > of the Sarvastivadins, rather than simply as a function which can arise > from > time to time when appropriate conditions are present. BTW, that Sutra > was one > of my favorites when I was moving from Vedanta to Dhamma, because it > wasn't a > big step. > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > Let me say again, cittas do not cease, they are just absent. > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > Well, I have given my reply. Our approach is different here. > --------------------------------------------------------------- > They will be > > present when there is right causes and conditions and vice versea. > that is > > how citta functions. They are there but not present if the right > causes > > and conditions are not there. > > > > Why cittas functions like that or what makes them act like that, it is > a > > question of origination. > > > > I hope this helps. For your kind comments please > > > > > > > > > > Kindest regards. > > Kenneth Ong > > 8809 From: Howard Date: Sun Oct 21, 2001 10:44pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: bhavanga (life-continuum) Mike & Howard Hi, Kenneth - In a message dated 10/21/01 1:28:53 PM Eastern Daylight Time, Kenneth Ong writes: > Hi Howard, > > You are confusing this with Surangama. There is nothing surangama here. I > am most happy to discuss with anyone here who will say cittas cease (as > defined by you as totally annihilated) during such a process (except for > Nibbana). There is a whole world of difference between these two words, > cease and absent. > > When we talk abt impermenance, it is not abt destruction and creation as > they are mutally dependent. It is abt ever changing state. But what is > this nature of ever changing state. Nobody can answer. Same as cittas, > there are in ever changing state but what is its nature of this ever > changing. Nobody can answer. Does its nature cease, it cannot because it > is manifested when the right condition arise, but does its nature last > forever, it cannot because it is ever changing. > > By the way my main book of Mahayana Doctrine is not Surangama, I have no > fixed book of Mahayana Sutta. It is because of the questions ask here I > got to use Surangama sutra as the five aggregates is widely discuss in > Surangama. Actually if you really like to talk abt Mahayana, you are most > weclome with me. It is just that I do not wish to explore certain area > further as this list is not abt Mahayana. > > > > > Kindest regards. > Kenneth Ong > ===================== It seems to me that you are presuming some underlying something that continues, yet changes state. That underlying something is not, as I see it, appreciably different from Brahman, or, on a less grand scale, the usual sense of self/I that we worldlings typically have. It is permanent, eternal, yet it changes. All that is needed to turn this into Vedanta is to say that the changing is mere illusion superimposed (somehow) on a substantial, undifferentiated reality. As I understand "Buddhist reality" it is neither eternal substance, nor momentary realities that are cut off, nor both, nor neither. I think that Nagarjuna understood it well, and he did amazingly well in expressing the inexpressible. Once we see, thoroughly, through and through, that no things remain, even for a moment, and that no things have separate being, then we also come to see that change, itself, is empty, there being no real existents which change. Then all is seen as unborn and unceasing, as in the Udana. But here I am pointing beyond my understanding and experience. 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) 8810 From: Robert Epstein Date: Mon Oct 22, 2001 3:08am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: bhavanga (life-continuum) Mike & Howard --- Howard wrote: > ....When the old "cittas", to speak that way, ceased, they became > absent, and when they became absent, they ceased. Two ways of saying the same > thing. This does not preclude new "cittas" from arising when appropriate > conditions are in place. Of course, the "new" cittas are not essentially new > in the sense of being independent of everything else. Nothing is new in that > sense. The whole business of perceiving separate, independent, self-existent > "things" is a fundamental error to begin with, as is seeing a single, > homogeneous "thing", as is seeing a total nothingness. There is a whole > variety of alternative ways we worldlings misperceive the way things are. > Eternalism is one of them. > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > > > The right causes and conditions are not there for it to be present. > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > Well, we agree on that except terminologically. Your terminlogy is > based on the essentialist view of the Surangama Sutra which views > hearing/auditory consciousness as a permanent "thing", much along the lines > of the Sarvastivadins, rather than simply as a function which can arise from > time to time when appropriate conditions are present. BTW, that Sutra was one > of my favorites when I was moving from Vedanta to Dhamma, because it wasn't a > big step. Hi Howard. Let me ask you, how do you distinguish the belief in an 'underlying field' of awareness that is potential until conditions arise to activate it from the eternalism of something continuing without beginning or end, and from the essentialism of believing that there is a 'real' existent thing or quality that does not arise or cease? I ask this because I believe as you do, in an underlying awareness or unmodified consciousness, and I'm trying to clear up the challenges that might be thrown at this. Hope you don't mind, Robert Ep. 8811 From: Robert Epstein Date: Mon Oct 22, 2001 3:18am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] dsg friends in India --- "m. nease" wrote: > Great anecdotes RobEp--thanks very much for sharing. > > mike Thanks, Mike. I don't know why it is, but I really love being in that part of the world. Others sometimes see it as a difficult and even unpleasant terrain, especially aspects of travelling and accomodations in some of the areas, especially folks in U.S. or Western Europe. But I just love it. I knew I'd love it before I went, and went with no agenda, because I just wanted to travel freely for once in my life, and not have a schedule. I started out with two friends, but we split up before leaving Nepal. And being alone travelling in an unknown place was one of my best 'meditations'. I really couldn't hold onto either my idea of things or myself. I just had to accord with conditions and enjoy the moments. It was great. I would have gone back sooner than this for a third time if I hadn't gotten married and now have a three-year-old [who is an ideal meditation in and of her charming self!]. I have felt for a long time that India [including Nepal in my personal geography] is the 'motherland' in some way. I must have a strong karmic history with that region. Somehow I feel that just being in India is justification enough for being alive, and that I didn't really have to do anything to feel that I was accomplishing something. It's funny. I guess some people feel that way about California. That's just a joke!! I had planned to possibly go back to India with my wife, whose interests are a little different from mine, although she loved some of the sights, such as the Ganges at Varanasi, and the Taj Mahal. Wow it really is something. Anyway, when I said to my wife, 'Let's go back to India perhaps for our Fifth Anniversary' she looked me in the eye and said: 'I'm never going back to India again.' ha ha. Well, we just had our fifth anniversary [we married late, after 'assessing' each other for about 6 years previous] and still no talk of India. But I'm going to go eventually....hey, maybe in 2003 with this nice group!!! Best, Robert Ep. ============================== > --- Robert Epstein wrote: > > > > --- Sarah wrote: > > > > > This afternoon/evening, they're travelling to > > Varanasi (Banares) where i hope > > > to have contact. They'll be staying in Varanasi > > for 3nts to visit Sarnath and > > > Kosambi. > > > > Dear Sarah, > > Just thought I'd mention that I've been to both > > Varanasi and Sarnath twice before. > > I went just for my own 'amusement' in 1989, then > > again in 1996 when I dragged my > > wife along for our honeymoon. That first time I was > > on my own. I just had an > > urge to see Nepal and India and also to visit a > > couple of the places where the > > Buddha had been. I really had no agenda. > > > > I ate some 'roadside chicken' with some of the > > Nepalese guides in Nepal during a > > bus trip to Pokhara, and my greed was rewarded with > > a horrible illness. It > > recurred again back in Katmandu. I had a high fever > > to the point where I started > > having sort of hallucinations. I was pretty scared, > > but I was determined to get > > to India, and not go home to the U.S. > > > > So I developed the idea that I would 'go to India to > > get well'. In my slightly > > altered state of consciousness, I thought this was a > > very funny idea, since many > > friends had warned me that I would get 'sick in > > India'. So I thought, well, I'll > > get well in India instead, since I'm already sick. > > Funny arising cittas, eh? > > > > Well, I took a short plane ride from back in > > Katmandu to Varanasi [45 minutes] and > > got off in the middle of the night in Varanasi with > > no plan and nowhere to go, > > quite quite ill. I attached myself to a British > > guy, and told him quite flatly > > that I was going to go wherever he went! He > > accepted and told me he wanted to be > > close to the Ganges, so that he could go down there > > at dawn and see folks coming > > down for their prayers, etc. So he was not going to > > stay at a 'good' hotel, but > > one of the cheaper ones by the river. Well, I went > > with him. And the place we > > 'chose' was built of old green metal that had been > > oxidized over many years. It > > had bars on the windows and a shared bathroom and > > shower in the hall. > > > > I went to sleep thinking 'Well if I die here at > > least I'm in India and Varanasi is > > supposed to guarantee a good death' [of course this > > is on the Hindu side of > > things]. My new friend woke me up at 5 in the > > morning to go down to the river, > > and guess what? I was all better. The fever had > > broken and I just wasn't sick > > anymore. I went down to the Ganges and went out in > > a boat to watch the amazing > > sunrise over the Ganges. > > > > I repeated the *good* part of this experience with > > my wife when we went several > > years later. She loved this part. Unfortunately we > > got a bit sick again in India > > this time, and wound up recuperating up in Simla in > > the Himalayan foothills. But > > that's another story. > > > > Anyway, Varanasi was quite amusing in a certain way. > > The folks there had such a > > long history, it made me laught to be an American > > with our 200 year history! I > > was talking to a restaurant owner, and he said > > blithely: 'Well, my family has been > > in this area for only 10, 000 years'. Boy, did I > > have a laugh over that. In the > > west, we really don't have that sense of continuity, > > that brings us back to > > ancient scriptures and makes us feel that we're > > still connected to that reality. > > > > In India, it seemed that the results of arising > > cittas was much more direct. I > > would literally think of something and it would > > manifest a little while later. > > This happened several times. > > > > When I was up North in Haldwani in Uttar Pradesh > > [trying to find a mysterious > > ashram in the woods!] I kept getting lost in the > > town. I would try to wander over > > to my favorite Chinese restaurant [a little place > > established there by a Chinese > > guy who made his own type of food - it was great] > > and then wander back to my > > little hotel, and I would invariably get lost every > > time. > > > > About three times when I was wandering around trying > > to find my way, this young > > guy on a motorcycle who spoke little English would > > come and find me. He didn't > > say anything, neither did I ever find out how he > > knew me or how he happened to > > come by when I was lost. He would motion for me to > > hop on the motor bike behind > > him, and he would drive me back to my hotel. I > > always thanked him. He would > > smile and drive off. I have no idea how this took > > place, but I was very grateful > > to be 'found' each time. > > > > When I went to Sarnath I went to the museum there. > > They have a wonderful > > collection of first century sculptures of the > > Buddha. I found them quite > > compelling. The giant Stupa at Sarnath is amazing, > > marking the spot where Buddha > > gave his first Sermon, if I've got it right. It was > > quite wonderful to know I was > > standing on that ground, and I can only imagine how > > the current group feels going > > to all those amazing spots. > > > > Thanks for sharing their ongoing journey. It makes > > me feel that I'm back in that > > area again. > > > > Regards, > > Robert Ep. 8812 From: Howard Date: Sun Oct 21, 2001 11:29pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: bhavanga (life-continuum) Mike & Howard Hi, Robert - In a message dated 10/21/01 3:09:03 PM Eastern Daylight Time, Robert E writes: > --- Howard wrote: > > > ....When the old "cittas", to speak that way, ceased, they became > > absent, and when they became absent, they ceased. Two ways of saying the > same > > thing. This does not preclude new "cittas" from arising when appropriate > > conditions are in place. Of course, the "new" cittas are not essentially > new > > in the sense of being independent of everything else. Nothing is new in > that > > sense. The whole business of perceiving separate, independent, > self-existent > > "things" is a fundamental error to begin with, as is seeing a single, > > homogeneous "thing", as is seeing a total nothingness. There is a whole > > variety of alternative ways we worldlings misperceive the way things are. > > Eternalism is one of them. > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > > The right causes and conditions are not there for it to be present. > > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > > Howard: > > Well, we agree on that except terminologically. Your terminlogy is > > based on the essentialist view of the Surangama Sutra which views > > hearing/auditory consciousness as a permanent "thing", much along the > lines > > of the Sarvastivadins, rather than simply as a function which can arise > from > > time to time when appropriate conditions are present. BTW, that Sutra was > one > > of my favorites when I was moving from Vedanta to Dhamma, because it > wasn't a > > big step. > > Hi Howard. > Let me ask you, how do you distinguish the belief in an 'underlying field' > of > awareness that is potential until conditions arise to activate it from the > eternalism of something continuing without beginning or end, and from the > essentialism of believing that there is a 'real' existent thing or quality > that > does not arise or cease? > > I ask this because I believe as you do, in an underlying awareness or > unmodified > consciousness, and I'm trying to clear up the challenges that might be > thrown at > this. > > Hope you don't mind, > Robert Ep. > > ======================= I actually expected to be challenged on that, and exactly as you have done! ;-)) As I said, I am unclear about this concept, and am not invested in it. However, roughly what I mean by a "field of awareness" is a range of potential experience available to us at any time, and from which we "actualize" specific experience due to a variety of factors including kamma and personal interest. That range of potential experience, i.e., what we can observe, is a joint creation of the kamma of many sentient beings. Perhaps it corresponds to the notion of 'dharmadhatu' in Mahayana, but I don't understand that concept sufficiently to say yes or no. In any case, I do *not* think of a field of awareness as some sort of undifferentiated, cosmic consciousness, as some sort of mental "substance", or as an underlying "reality", but just as a range of potential experience. Whether this helps or not I don't know. I apologize for the inchoateness of my formulation. It matches my understanding! ;-)) 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) 8813 From: Robert Epstein Date: Mon Oct 22, 2001 3:30am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: bhavanga (life-continuum) Mike & Howard --- Howard wrote: > Hi, Robert - > > This will be most unsatisfying, I am sure. In a message dated 10/21/01 > 11:31:20 AM Eastern Daylight Time, Robert E writes: > > > > > Howard: > > > Like nothing I've ever seen, actually. There is no mind, at least > > no > > > "thing" called "mind". The term 'mind' is a conventional reference to a > > bunch > > > of functions/operations within, apparently, a field of potential > > awareness. > > > -------------------------------------------------------- > > > > Can you say a little more about a field of potential awareness? > ------------------------------------------------------------ > Howard: > I wish I could, but, no, not really. This notion of mine is quite > vague. I'm sorry. I have a good sense of it, but not good enough to say > anything very useful. > ---------------------------------------------------------- > > > > > > > > > > What space does it occupy? > > > ----------------------------------------------------- > > > Howard: > > > The question doesn't seem to make sense. > > > ---------------------------------------------------- > > > > Well, is it in the 'brain', is mind without form and without location? Is > > it > > equal to the space of all phenomena? etc. > > > --------------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > 'Mind' is the term we use for all our mental functions, but thought of > as an aggregate. Certainly, when a sentient being is a human being or higher > animal, the brain is associated with mental function. That is undisputable, I > think. But if this question of brain and physical location presupposes an > "external world" which underlies and exists independent of (potential) > experience, then the question is ill-formed for me. To me, speaking of brains > and places and people and the entire variety of "external" phenomena is just > that, a mere manner of speaking, albeit a useful one. (As a metaphor: When > talking about a movie seen up on a screen, it is quite useful to discuss how > beautiful a garden pictured there is, but, of course, there really is no > garden there at all. But the metaphor breaks down, because, when it comes to > the "mind", there really is no screen either!!) BTW, this must sound very > much like I am espousing an idealism such as in the Lankavatara Sutra. > Honestly, though, I am not. It is much closer to a kind of phenomenalism. > ============================== > With metta, > Howard Dear Howard, Why on earth would you think this would be unsatisfying to me? I love it. The cittas are flying. The cetasikas are working overtime. I may have even produced a few new brain cells, or at least newly wired synaptic connections, although I know that is only a metaphor for the kinds of twisting citta-combinations that the roller-coaster-like 'mind' [also a metaphor] can come up with at times. Okay, I'll calm down and stop kidding around. Your answer starts to address some of the issues I am aiming at. I take it that you agree with me, then, in my answer to Kenneth, that one cannot assume a 'real world of objects' just because one's perception of them seems to repeat in a kind of stable fashion. This can be an attribute of the way thoughts and perceptions interpret incoming pheneomena. Where and how the phenomena come in to be processed is uncertain, and comes from an uncertain source from our human standpoint. The idea of a projected movie, but without a screen, and perhaps even without a projector, makes sense to me. From within the experience of a dream, the dream figures seem to follow certain stable laws, of hardness, opacity, etc. There is a relationship of action and sometimes perception between dream subjects and objects. Yet, when one awakens, it is all seen to be a fabrication, real as a dream, but only as a projection of consciousness. One realizes when awakening from a dream that one has not only slept and dreamed this entire tale, but that the tale never took place, and that all the consequences of the dream never took place at all. I wonder if karma is like this as well. Obviously, that which is left over in Nibbana, whether it is pure cessation, as some here think, or an empty canvas of consciousness, as some of us think, has no more karmic impingements, and all of the problems of the kandhas and kammas are dissolved like smoke. One may disagree over whether there is anything at the end of the journey that resembles a 'true self' or a foundational consciousness, but we all pretty much agree that all that has seemed to impinge on 'us' was not really affecting any reality of our existence, and in fact the 'us' that may have been impinged was not 'us' after all. We are either a 'pure conscoiusness' at root, for those who cling to such a notion, such as myself, or we are a 'pure arising of phenomena' with no self at center. If such a being loses a leg, for instance, we can bemoan our fate, but it is not really our fate and not really our body, seen at a higher level. So the dream or projected film metaphors function on that level. Phew. Better stop rambling. I have no idea what sorts of kammic uprisings I may have engendered from the content of such a diatribe. But I thank you, Howard, for responding to all of my cosmic queries with such equanimity. Regards, Robert Ep. 8814 From: Robert Epstein Date: Mon Oct 22, 2001 3:40am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: bhavanga (life-continuum) Mike & Howard Dear Kenneth, I think the answer for most on this list is that the deepest nature of both beings and phenomena are anatta and anicca. I have not been used to looking at anatta as a 'nature' or essence, since it is a negation and thus doesn't indicate anything to me. But that is exactly, I think, the point of the pure Theravadins on this list: that anatta being the deepest nature of everything, there is absolutely nothing to hang onto about oneself or any effect that is caused or any arising phenomena. They are all absolutely freely arisen with no causal factor other than the factors that have arisen and vanished in the arising conditions immediately prior, and previous material or influences which that immediately arising and ceasing condition has carried with it and passed to the next arising set of co-arising conditions. Anicca is the complementary component to anatta, because if something has no central entity, it also has nothing that can outlast the moment. So impermanence and non-entity work together to insure that there is nothing to identify as a real self, and nothing to hold onto in the shifting stream of time and shifting conditions and effects. There is nothing to do but sit back and become more discerning of what is happening. There is no action to take which is not ordained by some other action. I think this is a very deep and comprehensible philosophy, with a little effort. But it is very difficult to take. I think this philosophy is even a good medicine for those like myself who believe that there is something else involved in the process. Why? Because it erases or reveals the slightest clinging to a notion of self. Even if there were that primordial consciousness at the end of the rainbow which I feel is there, any notion I may have of it or cling to is in fact not 'it', because it is also, whatever it is, necessarily beyond clinging to self or possession. The surest medicine for everyone, Theravadin or Mahayanist, is to know that every notion we have of self or dhamma or Nibbana, is false, and is just grist for the mill of discernment. Whatever is at the end of the journey, this is still the medicine that erases and reveals all clingings. I think that is why some of us that tend towards Mahayana have been attracted to this list and its understandings. We who tend to be idealist need a good dose of anatta to reveal our subtle clingings to self, and there is no real substitute for this. It is a rigorous and demanding process, to eradicate the notion of something there to hold onto or to 'salvage' from the enlightenment process. We will all agree, I think, that even our most precious notions will have to be washed out in the trickle and eventual flood of discernment. Regards, Robert =========================== --- Kenneth Ong wrote: > Hi Howard, > > You are confusing this with Surangama. There is nothing surangama here. I > am most happy to discuss with anyone here who will say cittas cease (as > defined by you as totally annihilated) during such a process (except for > Nibbana). There is a whole world of difference between these two words, > cease and absent. > > When we talk abt impermenance, it is not abt destruction and creation as > they are mutally dependent. It is abt ever changing state. But what is > this nature of ever changing state. Nobody can answer. Same as cittas, > there are in ever changing state but what is its nature of this ever > changing. Nobody can answer. Does its nature cease, it cannot because it > is manifested when the right condition arise, but does its nature last > forever, it cannot because it is ever changing. > > By the way my main book of Mahayana Doctrine is not Surangama, I have no > fixed book of Mahayana Sutta. It is because of the questions ask here I > got to use Surangama sutra as the five aggregates is widely discuss in > Surangama. Actually if you really like to talk abt Mahayana, you are most > weclome with me. It is just that I do not wish to explore certain area > further as this list is not abt Mahayana. > > > > > Kindest regards. > Kenneth Ong 8815 From: Howard Date: Sun Oct 21, 2001 11:40pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: bhavanga (life-continuum) Mike & Howard Hi, Robert - In a message dated 10/21/01 3:31:36 PM Eastern Daylight Time, Robert E writes: > Dear Howard, > Why on earth would you think this would be unsatisfying to me? I love it. > The > cittas are flying. The cetasikas are working overtime. I may have even > produced > a few new brain cells, or at least newly wired synaptic connections, > although I > know that is only a metaphor for the kinds of twisting citta-combinations > that the > roller-coaster-like 'mind' [also a metaphor] can come up with at times. > > Okay, I'll calm down and stop kidding around. > ------------------------------------------------- ;-)) ------------------------------------------------ > Your answer starts to address some of the issues I am aiming at. I take it > that > you agree with me, then, in my answer to Kenneth, that one cannot assume a > 'real > world of objects' just because one's perception of them seems to repeat in > a kind > of stable fashion. This can be an attribute of the way thoughts and > perceptions > interpret incoming pheneomena. Where and how the phenomena come in to be > processed is uncertain, and comes from an uncertain source from our human > standpoint. ---------------------------------------------- Howard: Yes. We agree. Perhaps my position is a bit more radical. I take the pragmatic position that what is in principle unknowable (in this discussion, a neumenon underlying phenomena) is as good as non-existent. --------------------------------------------- > > The idea of a projected movie, but without a screen, and perhaps even > without a > projector, makes sense to me. From within the experience of a dream, the > dream > figures seem to follow certain stable laws, of hardness, opacity, etc. > There is a > relationship of action and sometimes perception between dream subjects and > objects. Yet, when one awakens, it is all seen to be a fabrication, real > as a > dream, but only as a projection of consciousness. One realizes when > awakening > from a dream that one has not only slept and dreamed this entire tale, but > that > the tale never took place, and that all the consequences of the dream never > took > place at all. > > I wonder if karma is like this as well. Obviously, that which is left over > in > Nibbana, whether it is pure cessation, as some here think, or an empty > canvas of > consciousness, as some of us think, has no more karmic impingements, and > all of > the problems of the kandhas and kammas are dissolved like smoke. One may > disagree > over whether there is anything at the end of the journey that resembles a > 'true > self' or a foundational consciousness, but we all pretty much agree that > all that > has seemed to impinge on 'us' was not really affecting any reality of our > existence, and in fact the 'us' that may have been impinged was not 'us' > after > all. We are either a 'pure conscoiusness' at root, for those who cling to > such a > notion, such as myself, or we are a 'pure arising of phenomena' with no > self at > center. If such a being loses a leg, for instance, we can bemoan our fate, > but it > is not really our fate and not really our body, seen at a higher level. > > So the dream or projected film metaphors function on that level. > -------------------------------------------------- Howard: I think that dream analogy is *very* useful! --------------------------------------------------- > > Phew. Better stop rambling. I have no idea what sorts of kammic uprisings > I may > have engendered from the content of such a diatribe. But I thank you, > Howard, for > responding to all of my cosmic queries with such equanimity. > > Regards, > Robert Ep. > ============================ A pleasure "talking" with you, 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) 8816 From: Robert Epstein Date: Mon Oct 22, 2001 3:45am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: bhavanga (life-continuum) Mike & Howard --- Howard wrote: > Hi, Robert - > > In a message dated 10/21/01 3:09:03 PM Eastern Daylight Time, > Robert E writes: > > > > --- Howard wrote: > > > > > ....When the old "cittas", to speak that way, ceased, they became > > > absent, and when they became absent, they ceased. Two ways of saying the > > same > > > thing. This does not preclude new "cittas" from arising when appropriate > > > conditions are in place. Of course, the "new" cittas are not essentially > > new > > > in the sense of being independent of everything else. Nothing is new in > > that > > > sense. The whole business of perceiving separate, independent, > > self-existent > > > "things" is a fundamental error to begin with, as is seeing a single, > > > homogeneous "thing", as is seeing a total nothingness. There is a whole > > > variety of alternative ways we worldlings misperceive the way things are. > > > Eternalism is one of them. > > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > > > > The right causes and conditions are not there for it to be present. > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > > > Howard: > > > Well, we agree on that except terminologically. Your terminlogy is > > > based on the essentialist view of the Surangama Sutra which views > > > hearing/auditory consciousness as a permanent "thing", much along the > > lines > > > of the Sarvastivadins, rather than simply as a function which can arise > > from > > > time to time when appropriate conditions are present. BTW, that Sutra was > > one > > > of my favorites when I was moving from Vedanta to Dhamma, because it > > wasn't a > > > big step. > > > > Hi Howard. > > Let me ask you, how do you distinguish the belief in an 'underlying field' > > of > > awareness that is potential until conditions arise to activate it from the > > eternalism of something continuing without beginning or end, and from the > > essentialism of believing that there is a 'real' existent thing or quality > > that > > does not arise or cease? > > > > I ask this because I believe as you do, in an underlying awareness or > > unmodified > > consciousness, and I'm trying to clear up the challenges that might be > > thrown at > > this. > > > > Hope you don't mind, > > Robert Ep. > > > > > ======================= > I actually expected to be challenged on that, and exactly as you have > done! ;-)) As I said, I am unclear about this concept, and am not invested in > it. However, roughly what I mean by a "field of awareness" is a range of > potential experience available to us at any time, and from which we > "actualize" specific experience due to a variety of factors including kamma > and personal interest. That range of potential experience, i.e., what we can > observe, is a joint creation of the kamma of many sentient beings. Perhaps it > corresponds to the notion of 'dharmadhatu' in Mahayana, but I don't > understand that concept sufficiently to say yes or no. In any case, I do > *not* think of a field of awareness as some sort of undifferentiated, cosmic > consciousness, as some sort of mental "substance", or as an underlying > "reality", but just as a range of potential experience. Whether this helps or > not I don't know. I apologize for the inchoateness of my formulation. It > matches my understanding! ;-)) Dear Howard, You also said something else that was interesting: I think it was you....You postulated that one might have Nibbana without cessation of experience but with cessation of attachment. Was that you? In any case I thought it was very interesting. Obviously if one were past having any defiled response or clingings to things, the flow of phenomena could continue without impinging in any way. No? I think this may define Nibbana for some folks here, but not Parinibbana, in which even the unattached arising of phenomena ceases permanently. But then, one has to ask, ceases for whom? If it ceases, hasn't one postulated an entity by its absence? I am really getting deep today. [deep into trouble that is!] Robert Ep. 8817 From: Robert Epstein Date: Mon Oct 22, 2001 3:47am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: bhavanga (life-continuum) Mike & Howard --- Howard wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > I think that dream analogy is *very* useful! > --------------------------------------------------- > > > > > > Phew. Better stop rambling. I have no idea what sorts of kammic uprisings > > I may > > have engendered from the content of such a diatribe. But I thank you, > > Howard, for > > responding to all of my cosmic queries with such equanimity. > > > > Regards, > > Robert Ep. > > > ============================ > A pleasure "talking" with you, Robert. > > With metta, > Howard :] 8818 From: craig garner Date: Mon Oct 22, 2001 3:59am Subject: is time that I got In to you might be a better way to say it. I spoke to Barry which was good as allways and I am glad all is falling in to place just like I said it would(what a big head!) well I have to be good at something. 8819 From: Sarah Date: Mon Oct 22, 2001 7:50am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Horses and medicine [Erik] Hi Erik, I'm in a Monday-morning-rush, but just wanted to say that I thought your post was hysterical...in fact when Jon called me from the gas station in the middle of nowhere in Indiaand asked about my wekend, I started telling him about it (he had no idea what I was talking about ;-) I'm just waiting with lots of lobha for Dan's response....(Dan, just beg your wife and kids for a little extra time to continue this;-) Btw, you guys, the Buddha was an expert on horses and you might like to incorporate any of these suttas: 1. Four Thoroughbreads AN 1V, 113 (p105 BB's Numerical discourses) 2. The Thoroughbred AN. V111, (1V,188 pali) (PTS AN1V p130) 3. Kesi Sutta, AN 1V, 111 2.--- rikpa21 wrote: > --- Dan D wrote: Btw, Dan, i hope your wife is still reading some of the posts..pls tell her we'd be delighted to hear from her anytime as well....she doesn't need your wit and style;-) Erik, you could suggest this great new style of yours to other Tibetan debaters for a change - very refreshing;-) Thanks both of you, Sarah (still chuckling) > Howdy, Dan, > > > At the same time, it should be recognized that "applying medicine" > is > > not the Path and not a part of the Path, though kusala it may at > > times be. I think we are even in agreement on this, despite the > > differences in nuance about what we understand the word "Path" to > > mean. > > Whoa there, pard'ner! Sounds like you been practicin' a-twirlin' that > lasoo a bit lately, and plumb forgot that the Trail to the Promised > Land we're all a-ridin' also means, in addition to knowing the > destination (Right View), things like Right Livelihood (we ain't > leadin' no calves to slaughter now, I hope!), and the occasional kick > with the spurs of Right Effort to keep our direction a-forward-movin' > and steadfast, the right clicks of the tongue and whistles with Right > Speech to keep our trusty steeds in line, and keepin' our eyes on the > trail ahead of us with Right Mindfulness and Right Concentration if'n > we want to avoid taking the trail that leads down into some steep > gully our horses can't get back out of again! 8820 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Mon Oct 22, 2001 8:43am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: bhavanga (life-continuum) Mike & Howard Hi Howard, > As I understand "Buddhist reality" it is neither eternal > substance, nor momentary realities that are cut off, nor both, nor neither. I think that Nagarjuna understood it well, and he did amazingly well in expressing the inexpressible. Once we see, thoroughly, through and through, that no things remain, even for a moment, and that no things have separate being, then we also come to see that change, itself, is empty, there being no real existents which change. Then all is seen as unborn and unceasing, as in the Udana. But here I am pointing beyond my understanding and experience. k: Buddist reality is beyond is and is not, beyond dualism and oneness. that is why Buddha Nature as said by Nagarjuna is beyond expression, how do we express something that is incomprensible by our conditional mind. We could only infer meaning to. Actually I would like to address Robert Ep question again in a more conventional way. Let us use the objects of the mind as discussed between me and Robert Ep , If objects of the mind is in the mind, then the mind must be able to locate it (or the mind must be heavy with objects). if it does not in the mind, how do we perceived it in the first place. The problem with pple like me, we tend to see things as "is" and hence the teachings is seen to be taught as "is not". In fact the pivotal teaching of Sati is based on neither "is" nor "is not". The nature of cittas is in fact not explain in Thervada and is everybody guess. I am implying that nature of cittas is Buddha Nature as it is also unexplainable. The reason is because Buddha said that Buddha nature is in us, that is how I infer it. Even if you assume that what Nagarjuna said that it is inexpressible, isn't it also a problem of substantiality. Similarily, isn't Nibbana also a substantiality problem. I have told you in my previous email, there is always this problem of substantiality in Buddhism due to words that is expressing the inexpressible. Hence I am relunctant to engage anyone to discuss Buddha Nature because we will eventually got this problem of substantiality due to words. Similarly to your questions of Luminious mind, isn't it also a question of substantility. If it is not why should we talk abt the luminious mind in the first place, what are we hoping for. Even if we know, does it help us understand what is inexpressible in the first place. Kindest regards Kenneth Ong --- Howard wrote: > Hi, Kenneth - > > In a message dated 10/21/01 1:28:53 PM Eastern Daylight Time, > Kenneth Ong writes: > > > > Hi Howard, > > > > You are confusing this with Surangama. There is nothing surangama > here. I > > am most happy to discuss with anyone here who will say cittas cease > (as > > defined by you as totally annihilated) during such a process (except > for > > Nibbana). There is a whole world of difference between these two > words, > > cease and absent. > > > > When we talk abt impermenance, it is not abt destruction and creation > as > > they are mutally dependent. It is abt ever changing state. But what > is > > this nature of ever changing state. Nobody can answer. Same as > cittas, > > there are in ever changing state but what is its nature of this ever > > changing. Nobody can answer. Does its nature cease, it cannot > because it > > is manifested when the right condition arise, but does its nature last > > forever, it cannot because it is ever changing. > > > > By the way my main book of Mahayana Doctrine is not Surangama, I have > no > > fixed book of Mahayana Sutta. It is because of the questions ask here > I > > got to use Surangama sutra as the five aggregates is widely discuss in > > Surangama. Actually if you really like to talk abt Mahayana, you are > most > > weclome with me. It is just that I do not wish to explore certain > area > > further as this list is not abt Mahayana. > > > > > > > > > > Kindest regards. > > Kenneth Ong > > > ===================== > It seems to me that you are presuming some underlying something > that > continues, yet changes state. That underlying something is not, as I see > it, > appreciably different from Brahman, or, on a less grand scale, the usual > > sense of self/I that we worldlings typically have. It is permanent, > eternal, > yet it changes. All that is needed to turn this into Vedanta is to say > that > the changing is mere illusion superimposed (somehow) on a substantial, > undifferentiated reality. > As I understand "Buddhist reality" it is neither eternal > substance, > nor momentary realities that are cut off, nor both, nor neither. I think > that > Nagarjuna understood it well, and he did amazingly well in expressing > the > inexpressible. Once we see, thoroughly, through and through, that no > things > remain, even for a moment, and that no things have separate being, then > we > also come to see that change, itself, is empty, there being no real > existents > which change. Then all is seen as unborn and unceasing, as in the Udana. > But > here I am pointing beyond my understanding and experience. > > 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) > 8821 From: Herman Date: Mon Oct 22, 2001 9:06am Subject: Re: Where do cittas and cetasikas arise? Dear Robert, I value these posts enormously. The sense bases are rupas. What is the mind base/door? Thank you Herman --- robertkirkpatrick wrote: > > > > > ROBERT K: ...Cittas are conditioned phenomena and different cittas > > > need different bases to arise. the type of citta that is cakkhu- > > > vinnana (eye consciousness)can only arise at that very refined > rupa > > > called cakhhu pasada (eye base). This type of rupa is conditioned > by > > > kamma and arises in the center of the eye - it is such a subtle > rupa. > > > All eye consciousness has to arise dependent on this type of rupa > and > > > cannot arise anywhere else. Another example: the body > consciousness > > > depends on very subtle rupa that pervades the body . This type of > > > consciousness can arise anywhere in the body. > > > The different types of citta are different depending on the > base. > > > > Thanks, Rob K. > > I take it from this that not only are cittas' and rupas' arising > dependent on > > occurence within a physical body, but that they are even more > specific as to what > > sense-door or mind-doors they might operate in relation to. Very > interesting. > > > > Thanks again. > Robert Epstein > > > _________________ > Dear Rob Ep. > Yes, extremely specific as to what door. The cittas that arise at the > eyedoor can only ever arise there - they cannot arise anywhere else. > Until we hear the Dhamma we have an idea that it is pretty much the > same mind that carries on. Even many Buddhists have the idea that > while the mind changes it is still "my" mind. Sometimes people are > confused about rebirth too.They think it is the same citta that > carries on. But the citta, for example, that is seeing consciouness > (cakkhu vinnana) arises and falls away there and then. It can't even > move to the ear door (for example): the citta that hears is a > different citta and arises dependent on different conditions: > Thus the Buddha says in effect according to the Majjhima nikaya > atthakatha(sutta 38) that(see bodhi note 404, p1231)"In the occurence > of consciousness there is not even the mere transmigration from door > to door[base to base], so how can this misguided sati speak of > transmigration from existence to existence". > robert 8822 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Mon Oct 22, 2001 9:24am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: bhavanga (life-continuum) Mike & Howard Hi Robert Ep, I appreciate a lot this post of yours and I could feel your good intentions. The concept of anatta and dukkha is base on anicca. Yes, we could said that it is complementary. The problem it is view negatively because the word "impermenant" is inappropriate use to described anicca. Anicca is never abt live and die because it will be against the meaning of the middle path. Anicca is ever changing and we cannot cling something that is ever changing. Yes I agree with you that we should hold not on to this idea of clinging to anything even to the notion of Enlightment, as I said to Mike before, Thervada is clearer in their practise than Mahayana. I like Thervada for their explicit teachings of sati and anicca and I love Mahayana for is understanding what could not be explain in Thervada (kind of like having a safe haven). The more I look at Thervada the more I understand what Mahayana is pointing at and also vice versa. I got no preference be it Mahayana or Thervada because I realise each got is strength and weaknesses and each follow the concept of beyond dualism. It is just that, the old Mahayana habit is still there and the way the questions something ask cannot be answer by Thervada. (You know it don't you when you ask me abt objects of the mind :) and I always trying very hard to answer you in the Thervada way (sought of in Thervada way, please give me more time to learn to write conventional Thervada style). How can you do this to me:) ) Much thank and kindest regards Kenneth ong --- Robert Epstein wrote: > Dear Kenneth, > I think the answer for most on this list is that the deepest nature of > both beings > and phenomena are anatta and anicca. I have not been used to looking at > anatta as > a 'nature' or essence, since it is a negation and thus doesn't indicate > anything > to me. > > But that is exactly, I think, the point of the pure Theravadins on this > list: > that anatta being the deepest nature of everything, there is absolutely > nothing to > hang onto about oneself or any effect that is caused or any arising > phenomena. > They are all absolutely freely arisen with no causal factor other than > the factors > that have arisen and vanished in the arising conditions immediately > prior, and > previous material or influences which that immediately arising and > ceasing > condition has carried with it and passed to the next arising set of > co-arising > conditions. > > Anicca is the complementary component to anatta, because if something > has no > central entity, it also has nothing that can outlast the moment. So > impermanence > and non-entity work together to insure that there is nothing to identify > as a real > self, and nothing to hold onto in the shifting stream of time and > shifting > conditions and effects. There is nothing to do but sit back and become > more > discerning of what is happening. There is no action to take which is > not ordained > by some other action. > > I think this is a very deep and comprehensible philosophy, with a little > effort. > But it is very difficult to take. I think this philosophy is even a > good medicine > for those like myself who believe that there is something else involved > in the > process. Why? Because it erases or reveals the slightest clinging to a > notion of > self. Even if there were that primordial consciousness at the end of > the rainbow > which I feel is there, any notion I may have of it or cling to is in > fact not > 'it', because it is also, whatever it is, necessarily beyond clinging to > self or > possession. The surest medicine for everyone, Theravadin or Mahayanist, > is to > know that every notion we have of self or dhamma or Nibbana, is false, > and is just > grist for the mill of discernment. Whatever is at the end of the > journey, this is > still the medicine that erases and reveals all clingings. > > I think that is why some of us that tend towards Mahayana have been > attracted to > this list and its understandings. We who tend to be idealist need a > good dose of > anatta to reveal our subtle clingings to self, and there is no real > substitute for > this. It is a rigorous and demanding process, to eradicate the notion > of > something there to hold onto or to 'salvage' from the enlightenment > process. > > We will all agree, I think, that even our most precious notions will > have to be > washed out in the trickle and eventual flood of discernment. > > Regards, > Robert > > =========================== > > --- Kenneth Ong wrote: > > Hi Howard, > > > > You are confusing this with Surangama. There is nothing surangama > here. I > > am most happy to discuss with anyone here who will say cittas cease > (as > > defined by you as totally annihilated) during such a process (except > for > > Nibbana). There is a whole world of difference between these two > words, > > cease and absent. > > > > When we talk abt impermenance, it is not abt destruction and creation > as > > they are mutally dependent. It is abt ever changing state. But what > is > > this nature of ever changing state. Nobody can answer. Same as > cittas, > > there are in ever changing state but what is its nature of this ever > > changing. Nobody can answer. Does its nature cease, it cannot > because it > > is manifested when the right condition arise, but does its nature last > > forever, it cannot because it is ever changing. > > > > By the way my main book of Mahayana Doctrine is not Surangama, I have > no > > fixed book of Mahayana Sutta. It is because of the questions ask here > I > > got to use Surangama sutra as the five aggregates is widely discuss in > > Surangama. Actually if you really like to talk abt Mahayana, you are > most > > weclome with me. It is just that I do not wish to explore certain > area > > further as this list is not abt Mahayana. > > > > > > > > > > Kindest regards. > > Kenneth Ong 8823 From: dalthorp Date: Mon Oct 22, 2001 10:28am Subject: Re: Horses and medicine [Erik] No question that ALL the samma's are important--not just sammaditthi. My question is: how can we discern the difference between the samma's and miccha's and the vippayutta's? For example, in my second intensive meditation retreat a number of years ago, I worked so very hard sitting, walking at a snail's pace, taking an hour to eat a simple plate of food--formal practice for 12-15 hours a day, day after day, week after week. The samma's? At the time, I thought they were there almost all the time. Of course, it was obvious that sometimes they weren't, but basically I was pretty pleased with my samma's. But now I realize that for 23.99 hours per day there were no samma's. Nowadays? It's still 23.99 samma-free hours per day (on a good day!), but the difference is that I have an inkling that that's the way it is. That may not seem like a big deal in the grand scheme of things, and really it isn't--only a tiny step or two on a long, LONG path. But there is something liberating about realizing the quasi-ubiquity of being samma-free. Anyway, back to the conversation... ______________ Dan: > I meant to say that "applying medicine" is conventional wisdom and is > quite distinct from the heart of Dhamma, viz. anatta. Buddha taught > satipatthana not as a medicine, not as a technique, not as > conventional wisdom, but as the heart of Dhamma, as what the world > looks like when viewed through vision unclouded by sakayaditthi (even > if it's only for a moment of mundane insight). Erik: Just to clarify terms here: sakayaditthi merely means the VIEW of self, which isn't terminated until the view (subtle as it is) of "instrinsic self" has been seen directly as fictional construct Dan: I meant "ditthi" as a cetasika that doesn't arise in kusala cittas. I wanted specifically emphasize a particular ditthi that we had been discussing, viz. sakayaditthi. In a moment of mundane insight, sakayaditthi does not arise. But sakayaditti (in one of its many guises) is closely associated with the notion that satipatthana is like "applying medicine"; or that it is satipatthana in a mind says, "Hmmm.... There is akusala. Let me establish mindfulness to deal with it". As agreed, the view that satipatthana is a medicine to apply, something to do to remedy dosa after it arises is a conventional view, not "paramattha sacca", not Right View. Rooted as it is in sakayaditthi that wants control over cittas, it is impossible to get beyond the sequence pain->aversion->applying medicine as long as that view is held--anatta 101. 8824 From: rikpa21 Date: Mon Oct 22, 2001 10:37am Subject: Re: Horses and medicine [Erik] --- Sarah wrote: \ > Erik, you could suggest this great new style of yours to other Tibetan debaters > for a change - very refreshing;-) This sort of thing's nothing new to any of the great teacher's I've studied with! I think I mentioned one time my lama had one of those battery-powered laugh-boxes he was carrying around in his robes causing all sorts of ruckus and hysteria among our sangha. And yet he's also one of Tibet's greatest and fiercest debaters at the same time (many see him as an emanataion of the wrathful Yamanataka as well). > Thanks both of you, > Sarah (still chuckling) Glad to hear you're laughing! I'm laughing too! Even when I put on my fierce debater's mask. :) 8825 From: Howard Date: Mon Oct 22, 2001 7:01am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: bhavanga (life-continuum) Mike & Howard Hi, Robert - In a message dated 10/21/01 3:47:59 PM Eastern Daylight Time, Robert E writes: > Dear Howard, > You also said something else that was interesting: I think it was > you....You > postulated that one might have Nibbana without cessation of experience but > with > cessation of attachment. Was that you? > > In any case I thought it was very interesting. Obviously if one were past > having > any defiled response or clingings to things, the flow of phenomena could > continue > without impinging in any way. No? > > I think this may define Nibbana for some folks here, but not Parinibbana, > in which > even the unattached arising of phenomena ceases permanently. But then, one > has to > ask, ceases for whom? If it ceases, hasn't one postulated an entity by its > absence? > > I am really getting deep today. [deep into trouble that is!] > > Robert Ep. > ======================= No, it wasn't I who said that, but it does have an agreeable ring. ;-) 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) 8826 From: rikpa21 Date: Mon Oct 22, 2001 11:09am Subject: Re: Horses and medicine [Erik] --- Dan D wrote: Hey Dan, > No question that ALL the samma's are important--not just sammaditthi. > My question is: how can we discern the difference between the samma's > and miccha's and the vippayutta's? For example, in my second > intensive meditation retreat a number of years ago, I worked so very > hard sitting, walking at a snail's pace, taking an hour to eat a > simple plate of food--formal practice for 12-15 hours a day, day > after day, week after week. The samma's? At the time, I thought they > were there almost all the time. Of course, it was obvious that > sometimes they weren't, but basically I was pretty pleased with my > samma's. But now I realize that for 23.99 hours per day there were no > samma's. How's that, if you'll pardon my asking? Thre are many, many levels of "sammas" going on, just going by the definition of the Magga- Vibhanga Sutta. It sounds almost as if you're being unduly harsh on yourself and not cutting yourself enough slack here (and being gentle with ourselves is very important, I think). If you were abstaining from lying, divisive speech, etc; if you were practicing abandoning the unskillful and developing the skillful (as I imagine you were in retreat, especially practicing mindfulness), I think there were probably a whole lot more "sammas" going on than you're admitting to, even if they don't fully fir the ideal of samma from the perspective of a Buddha or an arahat. Samma is not all that complicated, as I see it. "Perfect" samma yes. But I think that sort of "samma" is reserved for those with no more work to do. Even we lesser developed beings (assuming without any basis you're not an arahat or Buddha here to ruffle my feathers) can have many moments of samma, even if imperfect! I am not talking samma here in the sense of cittas, but rather in their broader sense--the way of viewing this that makes the most sense to me. Perhaps what I am objecting to is that all this talk about the super- fast process of cittas and how few of them are "kusala" obscures the issue, and that to simply take much of the teaching in places like the Magga Vibhanga Sutta at face-value is "good enough" to get us to the desired destination. That is all this practice has to be: good enough! Good enough because it eventually leads one to the absence of all the defilements when pursued and developed. "Good enough" samma vaca, samma kammanata, samma ajiva, for example, refined ever-more by diligent training. "Good enough" is the best we can hope for short of arahants anyway, so my thinking on this is "don't worry, be happy!! Rejoice in the kusala and "sammas" cultivated, even if imperfect! Because they will be just a bit off-mark no matter what, and to idealize a perfect "samma" this or that, I think, places an unnecessarily big pack on our horses! Magga Vibhanga Sutta: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/samyutta/sn45-008.html Nowadays? It's still 23.99 samma-free hours per day (on a > good day!), but the difference is that I have an inkling that that's > the way it is. That may not seem like a big deal in the grand scheme > of things, and really it isn't--only a tiny step or two on a long, > LONG path. But there is something liberating about realizing the > quasi-ubiquity of being samma-free. In my case I have many moments of miccha this & that. But like you I'm much more aware of when this is the case. But I also rejoice when my practice is going well, however imperfectly that may be. That factor of rejiocing in the wholesomeness of even incremental (if imperfect) improvement I have found a great spur to develop eevn more good stuff--to the point I seek nothing les than the complete and the final cessation of dukkha, and if it doesn't happen in this lifetime I'll surely die trying. 8827 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Mon Oct 22, 2001 11:46am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: bhavanga (life-continuum) Mike & Howard Hi Robert Ep, Come to think abt it, I am a person who like things simple. I do not like studies that is going to be complicated. Furthermore I am the type of person who is not concern whether my progress is good or there is something to obtain or whether I explore more concepts of Buddhism. I always believe, when it comes, it will come. To be honest with you, I have stop reading the suttas a few years ago, until when I come to this list again. I find myself more addicted to discussion :) to learn abt Buddhism with pple here. Honestly, maybe one day, this will also pass. At present, the strength of attachment is very strong. Cheers :) Kenneth Ong --- Kenneth Ong wrote: > Hi Robert Ep, > > I appreciate a lot this post of yours and I could feel your good > intentions. > > The concept of anatta and dukkha is base on anicca. Yes, we could said > that it is complementary. The problem it is view negatively because the > word "impermenant" is inappropriate use to described anicca. Anicca is > never abt live and die because it will be against the meaning of the > middle path. Anicca is ever changing and we cannot cling something that > is > ever changing. > > Yes I agree with you that we should hold not on to this idea of clinging > to anything even to the notion of Enlightment, as I said to Mike before, > Thervada is clearer in their practise than Mahayana. I like Thervada > for > their explicit teachings of sati and anicca and I love Mahayana for is > understanding what could not be explain in Thervada (kind of like having > a > safe haven). The more I look at Thervada the more I understand what > Mahayana is pointing at and also vice versa. > > I got no preference be it Mahayana or Thervada because I realise each > got > is strength and weaknesses and each follow the concept of beyond > dualism. > It is just that, the old Mahayana habit is still there and the way the > questions something ask cannot be answer by Thervada. (You know it don't > you when you ask me abt objects of the mind :) and I always trying very > hard to answer you in the Thervada way (sought of in Thervada way, > please > give me more time to learn to write conventional Thervada style). How > can > you do this to me:) ) > > > > Much thank and kindest regards > Kenneth ong > > > > --- Robert Epstein wrote: > Dear Kenneth, > > I think the answer for most on this list is that the deepest nature of > > both beings > > and phenomena are anatta and anicca. I have not been used to looking > at > > anatta as > > a 'nature' or essence, since it is a negation and thus doesn't > indicate > > anything > > to me. > > > > But that is exactly, I think, the point of the pure Theravadins on > this > > list: > > that anatta being the deepest nature of everything, there is > absolutely > > nothing to > > hang onto about oneself or any effect that is caused or any arising > > phenomena. > > They are all absolutely freely arisen with no causal factor other than > > the factors > > that have arisen and vanished in the arising conditions immediately > > prior, and > > previous material or influences which that immediately arising and > > ceasing > > condition has carried with it and passed to the next arising set of > > co-arising > > conditions. > > > > Anicca is the complementary component to anatta, because if something > > has no > > central entity, it also has nothing that can outlast the moment. So > > impermanence > > and non-entity work together to insure that there is nothing to > identify > > as a real > > self, and nothing to hold onto in the shifting stream of time and > > shifting > > conditions and effects. There is nothing to do but sit back and > become > > more > > discerning of what is happening. There is no action to take which is > > not ordained > > by some other action. > > > > I think this is a very deep and comprehensible philosophy, with a > little > > effort. > > But it is very difficult to take. I think this philosophy is even a > > good medicine > > for those like myself who believe that there is something else > involved > > in the > > process. Why? Because it erases or reveals the slightest clinging to > a > > notion of > > self. Even if there were that primordial consciousness at the end of > > the rainbow > > which I feel is there, any notion I may have of it or cling to is in > > fact not > > 'it', because it is also, whatever it is, necessarily beyond clinging > to > > self or > > possession. The surest medicine for everyone, Theravadin or > Mahayanist, > > is to > > know that every notion we have of self or dhamma or Nibbana, is false, > > and is just > > grist for the mill of discernment. Whatever is at the end of the > > journey, this is > > still the medicine that erases and reveals all clingings. > > > > I think that is why some of us that tend towards Mahayana have been > > attracted to > > this list and its understandings. We who tend to be idealist need a > > good dose of > > anatta to reveal our subtle clingings to self, and there is no real > > substitute for > > this. It is a rigorous and demanding process, to eradicate the notion > > of > > something there to hold onto or to 'salvage' from the enlightenment > > process. > > > > We will all agree, I think, that even our most precious notions will > > have to be > > washed out in the trickle and eventual flood of discernment. > > > > Regards, > > Robert > > > > =========================== > > > > --- Kenneth Ong wrote: > > > Hi Howard, > > > > > > You are confusing this with Surangama. There is nothing surangama > > here. I > > > am most happy to discuss with anyone here who will say cittas cease > > (as > > > defined by you as totally annihilated) during such a process (except > > for > > > Nibbana). There is a whole world of difference between these two > > words, > > > cease and absent. > > > > > > When we talk abt impermenance, it is not abt destruction and > creation > > as > > > they are mutally dependent. It is abt ever changing state. But > what > > is > > > this nature of ever changing state. Nobody can answer. Same as > > cittas, > > > there are in ever changing state but what is its nature of this ever > > > changing. Nobody can answer. Does its nature cease, it cannot > > because it > > > is manifested when the right condition arise, but does its nature > last > > > forever, it cannot because it is ever changing. > > > > > > By the way my main book of Mahayana Doctrine is not Surangama, I > have > > no > > > fixed book of Mahayana Sutta. It is because of the questions ask > here > > I > > > got to use Surangama sutra as the five aggregates is widely discuss > in > > > Surangama. Actually if you really like to talk abt Mahayana, you > are > > most > > > weclome with me. It is just that I do not wish to explore certain > > area > > > further as this list is not abt Mahayana. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Kindest regards. > > > Kenneth Ong > > > > > > 8828 From: Ken Howard Date: Mon Oct 22, 2001 0:42pm Subject: Re: Cetana (volition, intention)is controllable? (was kusa.. --- Robert Epstein wrote: > > Thanks for your comments Ken. And for satisfying my curiosity. My point was > mainly that the world is a series of conventions, but you are right: some point > to the conventional, some point through the conventional to the absolute. > > However, I do think that Buddha sincerely taught certain ways of living and > practicing that would be conducive to receiving the teachings more usefully, such > as his instructions to the monks about how to conduct themselves. I think that > almost everything he said probably functioned on the absolute level while possibly > giving some information that would be conducive to understanding on the > conventional level. Personally I don't see that as a contradiction. > > To give an absurd example, if I were a physics teacher and I were to say: 'Well > I'm going to discuss particle physics with you. I suggest before we talk that you > don't drink a bottle of whiskey, or you probably won't understand what I say' you > wouldn't think: 'Well, he's a physics teacher so even his admonition about > drinking must really be physics.' You would understand that I am giving you a > useful piece of advice so that you will be able to have an intelligent > understanding of the physics to come. Likewise, I think Buddha taught some > practices that would affect the body and mind of the hearer and make the > conditions for teaching more conducive. To struggle for a higher meaning in the > Buddha telling us to avoid alcohol seems to be unnecessary when we can just take > it literally and follow the instruction for obvious reasons. > > Best, > Robert Ep. > > >Dear Robert This sums up our discussion beautifully. So much for my concerns that we were talking at cross purposes! You have described the platform from which you go in one direction and I in another. Is it an important parting of ways? I think that would depend on how it affects the `descriptive v's prescriptive' debate. To the extent that my suggestion (that the Buddha used conventional teachings for the purposes of communication only -- that they do not form part of the `way out'), goes outside that debate, it is of no importance whatsoever. Kind regards Ken Howard 8829 From: Ken Howard Date: Mon Oct 22, 2001 0:49pm Subject: Dear Christine Thanks for this post. I'm always pleased to be reminded of the late David Maurice. It was his, "The Lions Roar" and, "What the Buddha REALLY Taught" that introduced me to Buddhism back in 1976. He was one of our fellow Queenslanders as is Victor Gunasekara I believe. He (VG), has a reputation for being of the `straight talking' school, but perhaps he could learn a thing or two from dsg. That quote you have given, fails to address the dangers of wrongly thinking that by meditating, we can direct mindfulness or we can create a time and place conducive to satipatthana. From the beginning, I took to meditation like a duck to water. I had the self-hypnosis technique of creating a happy state of mind that made my face ache from smiling. But it was just clinging to feelings and reinforcing ideas of self, I'm afraid. It's so good to have put formal practices aside. Kind regards Ken Howard - "Christine Forsyth" wrote: > > Dear All, > > Fossicking around on Binh's site, I came across an interesting book > called Basic Buddhism by Dr. Victor A. Gunasekara. > http://www.budsas.org/ebud/ebdha104.htm > > I found it interesting that a quote in the excerpt below indicates > that stylised meditation (sitting/walking) is seen as only a > beginners practice. > Also, do you think that the first line of the second paragraph quoted > should end with the word 'not'? > And, if meditation is a beginners practice to be 'got away from' - > why start it in the first place? For calm and serenity? > > metta, > Christine > > > "The view that the awakening of wisdom can only come through intense > meditation is not only found in schools like Zen but is also held by > some teachers of Theravâda. However meditation in Buddhism is > primarily a method of mental training. It could be used to calm the > mind, to instil tranquillity, and to set the stage for the > realisation of true insight. In fact fascination with meditation can > be a distraction from the true path. A capable exponent of early > Buddhism David Maurice puts this quite well: "There is meditation at > the very beginning of the practice but the practice is to get away > from meditation". > > Even though stylised meditation may not be necessary it is > necessarily harmful. It could suit the temperament of some people, > especially those who desire a strict discipline. On the other hand > what we have termed Buddhist meditation is something that anyone can > do with profit. It may not lead to the final goal in itself, but it > could be a great help in the fulfilment of the other components of > the path." 8830 From: Gayan Karunaratne Date: Mon Oct 22, 2001 1:27pm Subject: dhammavicaya II hi mike, contd.. tanha => ponobhavika ( which has the strength to cause 'next' bhava ) nissaya = accompanying channovada sutta M N, " nissitassa calitam , anissitassa calitam natthi. calite asati passaddhi, passaddhiya sati nati na hoti. natiyaa asati aagati gati na hoti , aagatigatiya asati cutupapaato na hoti. cutupapaate asati, neva idha, na huram , na ubhayamantare, esevanto dukkhassa. " nissito - one who 'accompanies' something. calita - vibration, shaking, movement a nissito has calita,an anissito does not have a calita. when thers no calita, there is a calmness ( passaddhi ). when thers such calmness thers no 'bending to'. when thers no bending there are no going and coming. when there are no going and coming there is no cuti or uppatti(birth). when there is no cuti or uppatti hes not 'here' ( ne va idha ) hes not 'there' ( na huram ) hes not inbetween here and there ( na ubhayamantare ) this is the ending of dukkha ( esevanto dukkhassa ). --------------------------------------------------------------------- further on nissaya kaccanagotta sutta S N, kaccanagotta asks from buddha 'what is sammaditti?' buddha answers, " dvayanissito bvayam kaccayana loko yebhuuyena atarthanecava natthitanca. loka samudayam kho kaccayana ythabhutam sammappannaya passato ya loke natthita sa na hoti. loka nirodham kho kaccayana yathabhutam sammapannaya passato ya loke atthita sa na hoti " this world(loko) is mostly 'dvayanissito'. dvayanissito = accompnies two the two is astitva and nastitva . asti - exists , nasti - does not exist. the combined meaning is -> the world mostly accompanies two, the 'exists' or 'does not exist'. the one who knows the arising of loka perfectly as it is by samma panna, he does not have the view that 'the loka doesnt exist', the one who knows the cessation of loka by samma panna, he does not have the view that ' the loka exists', " upaayupaadaanaabhinivesavinibandho bvayam kaccana loko yebhuyyena , tanca upaayupaadanam cetaso adhitthanam abhinivesanusayam na upeti na upadiyati nadhitthati 'atta me' ti. dukkhameva uppajjamaanam uppajjati dukkham nirujjhamaanam nirujjhati, na kankhati na vichkiccati aparappaccaya nanamevassa ettha hoti ettavataa kho kaccana sammaditti hoti. " upaayupaadaanaabhinivesavinibandho = upaya + upaadaana + abhinivesa + vinibandho upaya = coming near upadana = grasping abhinivesa = getting into , getting inside and staying on the one with sammaditthi doesnt take any of these as 'self', his ditthi is that 'when arising , whats arising is just and only just a (package of, set of, bunch of) dukkha, when ceasing whats ceasing is just and only just dukkha. so he sees this as 'only dukkha'. kaccana , even with this he is a person who has samma ditthi. " sabbam atthiti kho kaccana ayam eko anto , sabbam natthiti ayam dutiyo anto. ete te kaccana ubho ante anupagamma majjhena tathagato dhammam deseti. avijjaa paccaya samkharaa, samkhara paccaya vinnanam, vinnana paccaya namarupam...( and so on ) .... evametassa kevalassa dukkakkhandassa nirodho hoti. " kaccana, 'everything exists' this is the first end 'everything doesnt exist' this is the second(other) end. without falling to both these ends, the tathagata preaches dhamma in the middleway, that is ..(avijja paccaya etc..) ( so buddha explains the paticca samuppada as the middle way ) ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Loka sutta , devata samyutta S N " chasu loko samuppanno chasu kubbati santhavam channameva upaadaaya chasu loko vihannati " the world arises in the six, the world accompanies the six, grasping the six, the world 'gets tired' of the six six = salayatana samudaya sutta , salayatana vagga S N , " cakkhum ca paticca rupe ca uppajjati cakkhuvinnanam, tinnam samgati passo , passa paccaya vedana , vedana paccaya ...( and so on ) " contd.. rgds gayan 8831 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Mon Oct 22, 2001 1:56pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] dhammavicaya II Hi Gayan Many thanks for these. I like these a lot. Maybe I should find a place to frame these words. Please continue with your sharing and I awaits eagerly for your next posts. Kind regards Kenneth Ong nissito - one who 'accompanies' something. > calita - vibration, shaking, movement "a nissito has calita,an anissito does not have a calita. > when thers no calita, there is a calmness ( passaddhi ). > when thers such calmness thers no 'bending to'. > when thers no bending there are no going and coming. > when there are no going and coming there is no cuti or uppatti(birth). > when there is no cuti or uppatti > hes not 'here' ( ne va idha ) > hes not 'there' ( na huram ) > hes not inbetween here and there ( na ubhayamantare ) > this is the ending of dukkha ( esevanto dukkhassa )." the one who knows the arising of loka perfectly as it is by samma panna, > he does not have the view that 'the loka doesnt exist', > the one who knows the cessation of loka by samma panna, > he does not have the view that ' the loka exists', --- Gayan Karunaratne wrote: > > hi mike, > > contd.. > > > tanha => ponobhavika ( which has the strength to cause 'next' bhava ) > > nissaya = accompanying > > channovada sutta M N, > > > " nissitassa calitam , anissitassa calitam natthi. > calite asati passaddhi, passaddhiya sati nati na hoti. > natiyaa asati aagati gati na hoti , aagatigatiya asati cutupapaato na > hoti. > cutupapaate asati, neva idha, na huram , na ubhayamantare, esevanto > dukkhassa. " > > nissito - one who 'accompanies' something. > calita - vibration, shaking, movement > > a nissito has calita,an anissito does not have a calita. > when thers no calita, there is a calmness ( passaddhi ). > when thers such calmness thers no 'bending to'. > when thers no bending there are no going and coming. > when there are no going and coming there is no cuti or uppatti(birth). > when there is no cuti or uppatti > hes not 'here' ( ne va idha ) > hes not 'there' ( na huram ) > hes not inbetween here and there ( na ubhayamantare ) > this is the ending of dukkha ( esevanto dukkhassa ). > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > further on nissaya > > kaccanagotta sutta S N, > > kaccanagotta asks from buddha 'what is sammaditti?' > > buddha answers, > > " dvayanissito bvayam kaccayana loko yebhuuyena atarthanecava > natthitanca. > loka samudayam kho kaccayana ythabhutam sammappannaya passato ya loke > natthita sa na hoti. > loka nirodham kho kaccayana yathabhutam sammapannaya passato ya loke > atthita > sa na hoti " > > > this world(loko) is mostly 'dvayanissito'. > > dvayanissito = accompnies two > the two is astitva and nastitva . asti - exists , nasti - does not > exist. > > the combined meaning is -> > the world mostly accompanies two, the 'exists' or 'does not exist'. > > the one who knows the arising of loka perfectly as it is by samma panna, > he does not have the view that 'the loka doesnt exist', > the one who knows the cessation of loka by samma panna, > he does not have the view that ' the loka exists', > > > " upaayupaadaanaabhinivesavinibandho bvayam kaccana loko yebhuyyena , > tanca > upaayupaadanam cetaso adhitthanam abhinivesanusayam na upeti na > upadiyati > nadhitthati 'atta me' ti. > dukkhameva uppajjamaanam uppajjati dukkham nirujjhamaanam nirujjhati, > na kankhati na vichkiccati aparappaccaya nanamevassa ettha hoti > ettavataa > kho kaccana sammaditti hoti. " > > upaayupaadaanaabhinivesavinibandho = upaya + upaadaana + abhinivesa + > vinibandho > upaya = coming near > upadana = grasping > abhinivesa = getting into , getting inside and staying on > > the one with sammaditthi doesnt take any of these as 'self', > his ditthi is that 'when arising , whats arising is just and only just a > (package of, set of, bunch of) dukkha, > when ceasing whats ceasing is just and only just dukkha. > so he sees this as 'only dukkha'. > kaccana , even with this he is a person who has samma ditthi. > > > " sabbam atthiti kho kaccana ayam eko anto , > sabbam natthiti ayam dutiyo anto. > ete te kaccana ubho ante anupagamma majjhena tathagato dhammam deseti. > avijjaa paccaya samkharaa, samkhara paccaya vinnanam, vinnana paccaya > namarupam...( and so on ) > .... > evametassa kevalassa dukkakkhandassa nirodho hoti. " > > > kaccana, 'everything exists' this is the first end > 'everything doesnt exist' this is the second(other) end. > without falling to both these ends, > the tathagata preaches dhamma in the middleway, > that is ..(avijja paccaya etc..) > > ( so buddha explains the paticca samuppada as the middle way ) > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > Loka sutta , devata samyutta S N > > " chasu loko samuppanno > chasu kubbati santhavam > channameva upaadaaya > chasu loko vihannati " > > the world arises in the six, > the world accompanies the six, > grasping the six, > the world 'gets tired' of the six > > > six = salayatana > > samudaya sutta , salayatana vagga S N , > > " cakkhum ca paticca rupe ca uppajjati cakkhuvinnanam, tinnam samgati > passo > , > passa paccaya vedana , vedana paccaya ...( and so on ) " > > > > contd.. > > rgds > gayan 8832 From: Sarah Date: Mon Oct 22, 2001 2:29pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] dsg friends in India Dear Rob Ep, Now you’ve started me off on nostalgic memories (lots of pannatti - let’s see if there’s any awareness of the thinking and sense door objects in between;-) --- Robert Epstein wrote: > Dear Sarah, > Just thought I'd mention that I've been to both Varanasi and Sarnath twice > before. > I went just for my own 'amusement' in 1989, then again in 1996 when I > dragged my > wife along for our honeymoon. Thanks for sharing your amusing accounts which rang lots of bells.....pls tell your wife that I think she’s a really good sport;-) Now I’ll try to remember Victor’s mininmalist lessons, but I fear this will be a compromise at best;-) When I was really young (still young now), I did the overland-to-India-on-a-shoe-string (actually 50 UK pounds and was away for 18mths!), through Afghanistan and so on. Got to Delhi, spent a week buying a complicated 3rd class (of course) train ticket to do a grand tour of Southern India in particular, planning to visit lots of yoga ashrams along the way. Whilst filling in time in Delhi, I was given my first and last-ever (I'm glad to report) opium to smoke. That night I had a very, very vivid opium-induced sleep which I can still ‘see’ (read think about through the mind-door). It was a vivid dream about a place in a lot of detail. It meant nothing to me at the time and I didn’t attach any importance to it then or later. I never mentioned it to anyone. A couple of days later, I went to the train station with my hard-earned multi-routed train ticket. Just as I arrived at the station, the purse in my hand containing the precious ticket was whisked away. Luckily my precious little money and passport were hidden inside my skirt. I cut my losses, decided it wasn’t to be and bought a simple ticket to Varanasi instead. I shared a dormitory there for a week with the wierd and wonderful and went out by rickshaw with a couple of others to Sarnath. Now I have no sense of direction at all, am hopeless at remembering places and get lost in my local supermarkets. However, for the first and last time in my life to date, I arrived at a place (Sarnath) and immediately knew my way around without any hesitation and was able to guide the 2 other wierdos. This was exactly the place I had ‘seen’ in that opium dream. I’ve never wanted to think much about this funny little experience or attach any importance to it. We have no idea about past experiences, lives and no very little about experience now. I don’t think it’s useful to speculate, but that’s just how it was. So Sarnath is pretty special to me. The funny thing is though, that I’ve been back 2 or 3 times since and it’s just like usual, i.e. no recollection, no sense of direction, no memory of having been there. The lost train-ticket-saga meant that a week later, I ended up in Bodh Gaya where I stayed for 5 mths in a Tibetan tent for half a rupee a day (including sampa for breakfast). I spent another half rupee for another meal and that was it. Every day I’d study (simple) Buddhist books and meditate with Munindra (Mahasi style) until the dust storms made it impossible for the Tibetans or any of us to stay longer. I never felt poor, because there were always beggars around who were a lot poorer.....wow, that was nearly 30 yrs ago. Actually, I prefer staying in luxury hotels these days....I think I’ve done enough roughing it for a few lifetimes. Then I went 18mths without a thought of calling home, just relying on occasional post restante super-snail mail post. Now I like to have daily connections and there was dosa when I couldn’t make a connection with the Group’s hotel in Banares this morning. Some may suggest this shows the lack of practice or development. I think it shows the accumulation at that moment. It too can be understood instead of being clung to as ‘my dosa which should be dealt with’. Rob Ep, your stories encouraged this. Just be grateful, others, that thanks to Victor’s influence it’s not twice as long;-) Yes, it would be great to meet you and anyone else from the list in any of these places or on tour;-) Sarah 8833 From: Sarah Date: Mon Oct 22, 2001 2:40pm Subject: Re: Fwd: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: 31 planes of existence Dear Gaga, --- Gaga wrote > > > Hello sarah, > > > > Thank you for taking the time to address the externalization of these > > thoughts > > I had. glad to hear of this. > > > > What prompted me to write in the first place was that I attended the > monthly > > meeting of the World Federation of Buddhists in Bangkok this month and the > > speaker talked about death and dying and went into great detail on the 31 > > planes. Actually, because he was speaking in conventional terms about > things > > that are unconventional, he tried to frame the whole talk in terms of a > > "soul" > > that passed from plane to plane. Simply put, whether someone is called a 'Mahayanist', 'Theravandan', 'Buddhist' or any other name, if there isn't the the development of satipatthana which is aware of realities appearing now as anatta, there is bound to be clinging to the idea of self or soul or something. As different people have commented here, this clinging to an idea of self is very insiduous, deeply-held and rooted and only eradicated by the wisdom of the sotapanna. With just a little understanding, it should be a condition for compassion for others rather than expectation that just because someone is a 'Buddhist' that they won't have any more wrong view, I think. Thanks for putting your questions in perspective. I had wondered about this. Hope to hear more from you, Gaga, in your own good time;-) Sarah 8834 From: Sarah Date: Mon Oct 22, 2001 3:04pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: cittas- Howard Dear Howard, --- Howard wrote: > Hi, Robert - > > As you might expect, I am comfortable with what you write here. The > only thing I might add is that the talk of cittas, if understood as real, and > > not just conventional, entities is something I find troublesome. The entire > citta/dhamma theory troubles me! Just one aspect of my "problem": At a given > point in time, for a quite miniscule period, a citta is in effect (or occurs) > > together with a whole bunch of cetasikas, this entire event having arisen due > > to causes and conditions no longer in effect. Howard, I was very glad to see this message and your deliberations of the details. Rob K or NUM or one of the pali experts (Jim, Suan or Gayan) may be able to give more back-up . so far, very much as I understand it, although there are still conditions having effect (including new ones) once the citta and cetasikas have arisen. For one simple example, as I was discussing with Mike, we know that cittas and cetasikas condition each other by sahagata condition (i.e being present is a condition for the others). Visible object is being seen now by arammana condition(object condition) or lobha now is present by root condition and lots and lots more. In other words, the conditions are now only causing the cittas and other realities to arise but also the different stages of them. What changes, then, result in > that citta ceasing? The conditions which resulted in its arising have > *already* ceased! Moreover, that citta, *while it is in effect*, is > independent of any other conditions (it is currently the whole enchilada), > and when it ceases, it is completely gone; this suggests to me a theory which > > simultaneously countenances both substantialism and annihilationism! Each citta has an arising, existing and falling/ceasing (I forget the pali terms for these stages - maybe Rob K can help). The arising of the citta is a condition for the 'existing' (can't think of the right English term either) and for the ceasing. So it is not 'in effect' independent of conditions at all. Like you and Rob Ep have explained to Ken O, once the citta has fallen away, it has ceased, gone, never to return. Again it's that clinging to self that clings to a lasting citta. Then this citta conditions the next one and so on. I've read about the stages of the citta (and heard K.Sujin talk about it ) but can't remember where to put my finger on the details quickly. What I also remember is that these 3 stages have a lakhana (characteristic) to be known, but just like the tri-lakhana of anicca, dukkha and anatta, no sabhava (essence). we can think and think about these details but the truth is that unless there is clear understanding and awareness of different cittas, cetasikas and rupas, there cannot possibly be the more highly developed understanding and awareness of the arising, existing and falling away of a reality (i.e the understanding of the impermanence of realities). These were very useful comments, I think, Howard and I look forward to anything any of the others may add. Sarah 8835 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Mon Oct 22, 2001 4:02pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: cittas- Howard Hi Sarah > Like you and Rob Ep have explained to Ken O, once the citta has fallen > away, it has ceased, gone, never to return. Again it's that clinging to self that clings to a lasting citta. Then this citta conditions the next one and so on. I've read about the stages of the citta (and heard K.Sujin talk about it ) but can't remember where to put my finger on the details quickly. Assume that old cittas cease and the information abt us is transmitted to the new cittas. Does this information abt us cease?. Secondly if I follow your theory, isn't Nibbana dependent on temporary cittas to be in existence. So does that mean that Nibbana is conditioned? Secondly if cittas cease and then recreated isn't it a bit not conforming the middle path? Thirdly, how does it ceased and recreated in the first place. How does it function like that or what is make it function like that? Isn't it a question of orginality. Isn't a question of orginality is the question of Nibbana? Isn't it dependent on each other? For you comments please Kind regards Kenneth Ong --- Sarah wrote: > Dear Howard, > > --- Howard wrote: > Hi, Robert - > > > > As you might expect, I am comfortable with what you write here. > The > > only thing I might add is that the talk of cittas, if understood as > real, and > > > > not just conventional, entities is something I find troublesome. The > entire > > citta/dhamma theory troubles me! Just one aspect of my "problem": At a > given > > point in time, for a quite miniscule period, a citta is in effect (or > occurs) > > > > together with a whole bunch of cetasikas, this entire event having > arisen due > > > > to causes and conditions no longer in effect. > > Howard, I was very glad to see this message and your deliberations of > the > details. Rob K or NUM or one of the pali experts (Jim, Suan or Gayan) > may be > able to give more back-up . > > so far, very much as I understand it, although there are still > conditions > having effect (including new ones) once the citta and cetasikas have > arisen. > For one simple example, as I was discussing with Mike, we know that > cittas and > cetasikas condition each other by sahagata condition (i.e being present > is a > condition for the others). Visible object is being seen now by arammana > condition(object condition) or lobha now is present by root condition > and lots > and lots more. In other words, the conditions are now only causing the > cittas > and other realities to arise but also the different stages of them. > > What changes, then, result in > > that citta ceasing? The conditions which resulted in its arising have > > *already* ceased! Moreover, that citta, *while it is in effect*, is > > independent of any other conditions (it is currently the whole > enchilada), > > and when it ceases, it is completely gone; this suggests to me a > theory which > > > > simultaneously countenances both substantialism and annihilationism! > > Each citta has an arising, existing and falling/ceasing (I forget the > pali > terms for these stages - maybe Rob K can help). The arising of the citta > is a > condition for the 'existing' (can't think of the right English term > either) and > for the ceasing. So it is not 'in effect' independent of conditions at > all. > > Like you and Rob Ep have explained to Ken O, once the citta has fallen > away, it > has ceased, gone, never to return. Again it's that clinging to self that > clings > to a lasting citta. Then this citta conditions the next one and so on. > I've > read about the stages of the citta (and heard K.Sujin talk about it ) > but can't > remember where to put my finger on the details quickly. > > What I also remember is that these 3 stages have a lakhana > (characteristic) to > be known, but just like the tri-lakhana of anicca, dukkha and anatta, no > sabhava (essence). > > we can think and think about these details but the truth is that unless > there > is clear understanding and awareness of different cittas, cetasikas and > rupas, > there cannot possibly be the more highly developed understanding and > awareness > of the arising, existing and falling away of a reality (i.e the > understanding > of the impermanence of realities). > > These were very useful comments, I think, Howard and I look forward to > anything > any of the others may add. > > Sarah 8836 From: Howard Date: Mon Oct 22, 2001 0:31pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: cittas- Howard Hi, Sarah - In a message dated 10/22/01 3:05:09 AM Eastern Daylight Time, Sarah writes: > Dear Howard, > > --- Howard wrote: > Hi, Robert - > > > > As you might expect, I am comfortable with what you write here. > The > > only thing I might add is that the talk of cittas, if understood as real, > and > > > > not just conventional, entities is something I find troublesome. The > entire > > citta/dhamma theory troubles me! Just one aspect of my "problem": At a > given > > point in time, for a quite miniscule period, a citta is in effect (or > occurs) > > > > together with a whole bunch of cetasikas, this entire event having arisen > due > > > > to causes and conditions no longer in effect. > > Howard, I was very glad to see this message and your deliberations of the > details. Rob K or NUM or one of the pali experts (Jim, Suan or Gayan) may > be > able to give more back-up . > > so far, very much as I understand it, although there are still conditions > having effect (including new ones) once the citta and cetasikas have arisen. > ------------------------------------------------------ Howard: But what items are present to be conditioning each other? One citta (act of discernment) together with a number of cetasikas? If they all exist during the same time, simultaneously, what conditioning is there other than the obvious co-occurrence? ------------------------------------------------------- > or one simple example, as I was discussing with Mike, we know that > cittas and > cetasikas condition each other by sahagata condition (i.e being present is a > condition for the others). > ------------------------------------------------------ Howard: Well, that's the co-occurrence, right? ------------------------------------------------------- Visible object is being seen now by arammana > condition(object condition) or lobha now is present by root condition and > lots > and lots more. ------------------------------------------------------ Howard: Sorry, but I don't seem to get any real content out of those terms. The first seems to be saying that an object is being discerned, which of course is the case, because that is what citta/vi~n~nana is about. That lobha is called a "root" doesn't really say what kind of same-time conditioning is going on with regard to it. ------------------------------------------------------ In other words, the conditions are now only causing the cittas > and other realities to arise but also the different stages of them. ----------------------------------------------------- Howard: What are the stages of a citta? I thought a citta was a unique act of discernment together with specific, simultaneously functioning cetasikas which "flavor" the act of discernment. You make it sound, instead, like a complex process unfolding in time. ----------------------------------------------------- > > What changes, then, result in > > that citta ceasing? The conditions which resulted in its arising have > > *already* ceased! Moreover, that citta, *while it is in effect*, is > > independent of any other conditions (it is currently the whole > enchilada), > > and when it ceases, it is completely gone; this suggests to me a theory > which > > > > simultaneously countenances both substantialism and annihilationism! > > Each citta has an arising, existing and falling/ceasing (I forget the pali > terms for these stages - maybe Rob K can help). ---------------------------------------------------------------- Howard: I didn't know this. How are those stages distinguished? Do they differ in object, or in the cetasikas present? If yes, then a citta would really be an unfolding process, the progress of which is previously determined by the conditions that led to it. That would be quite interesting. ------------------------------------------------------------------ The arising of the citta is a > condition for the 'existing' (can't think of the right English term either) > and > for the ceasing. ----------------------------------------------------------------- Howard: Yes, provided that the stages differ, as I mentioned above. ----------------------------------------------------------------- So it is not 'in effect' independent of conditions at all. --------------------------------------------------------------- Howard: Right, it wouldn't be. ------------------------------------------------------------------ Like you and Rob Ep have explained to Ken O, once the citta has fallen away, it > has ceased, gone, never to return. Again it's that clinging to self that > clings > to a lasting citta. Then this citta conditions the next one and so on. I've > read about the stages of the citta (and heard K.Sujin talk about it ) but > can't > remember where to put my finger on the details quickly. -------------------------------------------------------------------- Howard: Actually, it seems to me that the details of such a notion are critically important. ------------------------------------------------------------------- > > What I also remember is that these 3 stages have a lakhana (characteristic) > to > be known, but just like the tri-lakhana of anicca, dukkha and anatta, no > sabhava (essence). > --------------------------------------------------------------------- Howard: It would be very interesting to me to know what these characteristics are, and whether they are a matter of what cetasikas are present at what stages, or whether it is something else entirely. ------------------------------------------------------------------- > > we can think and think about these details but the truth is that unless > there > is clear understanding and awareness of different cittas, cetasikas and > rupas, > there cannot possibly be the more highly developed understanding and > awareness > of the arising, existing and falling away of a reality (i.e the > understanding > of the impermanence of realities). > -------------------------------------------------------------------- Howard: For me it is a conceptual theory. My "vision" hasn't picked up on individual cittas, and, so, I cannot determine by direct observation whether there is more to this than just a theory. Actually, the idea of observing cittas perplexes me to begin with. It is the cittas which are supposed to be doing the observing. A citta doesn't observe itself as an object does it, like a knife cutting itself? It already *has* its object. (And there is only one object per citta.) And, on the other hand, a current citta can't be observing a previous one, because the previous one has already ceased, and, as you say, "once > never to return". So you see, the citta theory presents some problems for me. ;-) --------------------------------------------------------- > > These were very useful comments, I think, Howard and I look forward to > anything > any of the others may add. > > Sarah > > ================================ Thanks for writing, Sarah. 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) 8837 From: Howard Date: Mon Oct 22, 2001 0:44pm Subject: Typo Correction Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: cittas- Howard Hi again, Sarah - In a message dated 10/22/01 4:33:13 AM Eastern Daylight Time, Howard writes: > Howard: > For me it is a conceptual theory. My "vision" hasn't picked up on > individual cittas, and, so, I cannot determine by direct observation > whether > there is more to this than just a theory. > Actually, the idea of observing cittas perplexes me to begin with. > It > is the cittas which are supposed to be doing the observing. A citta doesn't > observe itself as an object does it, like a knife cutting itself? It > already > *has* its object. (And there is only one object per citta.) And, on the > other > hand, a current citta can't be observing a previous one, because the > previous > one has already ceased, and, as you say, "once > > never to return". So you > see, the citta theory presents some problems for me. ;-) > =============================== What I wrote above got scrambled! My quoting of you above should have read: "once the citta has fallen away, it has ceased, gone, never to return." Sorry about that. From time to time there is difficulty with AOL quoting. 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) 8838 From: David Progosh Date: Mon Oct 22, 2001 7:14pm Subject: Fwd: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: 31 planes of existence/protocol? Hello Sarah and all, Hmmm. I'm not too sure how to say this. I think there might be a fundamental problem in editorializing on someone's ideas (or notions brought up), to the point that in picking up on one idea or notion and leaving out others, one loses the entirety of the message being conveyed. I used to do this sort of thing myself, where a notion piqued my interest, and then I would single that snippet out to comment about. But then I used to get very frustrated friends and strangers writing me back to say they didn't like that approach because by singling out one facet, others are left out, and the whole is not represented fully. I am very mindful about this point/counterpoint approach when it involves editing someone else's text. Usually I will ask their permission first if it would be OK (generally off a list group) and if I get the green light, then I will proceed, when appropriate to do so. It's just an added form of mindfulness as to not misrepresent or hurt someone else's feelings. I guess in our zeal to participate and respond (and so quickly!) we might overlook this point. That said, when you quoted what I wrote to you (off the group -- to you personally), you left out an important piece of information. The following you did decide to leave in: > > > What prompted me to write in the first place was that I attended the > > monthly > > > meeting of the World Federation of Buddhists in Bangkok this month and the > > > speaker talked about death and dying and went into great detail on the 31 > > > planes. Actually, because he was speaking in conventional terms about > > things > > > that are unconventional, he tried to frame the whole talk in terms of a > > > "soul" > > > that passed from plane to plane. But you left this snippet out: I think the speaker might have been more cautious in his address, and kept more closely with the Buddha's teachings rather than trying to make a point though the words he chose to illustrate his point. So this is what I have gathered from this entire episode. Be careful what you speak and lessen the burden! May you be well, David The rest of what you commented on follows this text. It takes a bit of time to settle into the conventions of something new--joining a group, learning a new skill, relocating to a new apartment-- and obviously I am a newbie to this forum, and as such might not be up to speed on all the conventions agreed upon. Therefore, I have asked not to be a participating member of this group until such a time I get the feel for what it is you are attempting to do here. If I do feel I have some comments to say to the entire group, I will do so. If folks would like to write me individually, please do. But I would ask that if you do write me personally, and I write you back, that you won't publish the conversation to the group at large, or if so, you would please take the time to ask if it if OK first. I don't know if this is ego talking or not, but it just seems to be the polite thing to do--to respect other people. May you be well, David > > Simply put, whether someone is called a 'Mahayanist', 'Theravandan', 'Buddhist' > or any other name, if there isn't the the development of satipatthana which is > aware of realities appearing now as anatta, there is bound to be clinging to > the idea of self or soul or something. > > As different people have commented here, this clinging to an idea of self is > very insiduous, deeply-held and rooted and only eradicated by the wisdom of the > sotapanna. > > With just a little understanding, it should be a condition for compassion for > others rather than expectation that just because someone is a 'Buddhist' that > they won't have any more wrong view, I think. > > Thanks for putting your questions in perspective. I had wondered about this. > Hope to hear more from you, Gaga, in your own good time;-) > > Sarah 8839 From: Sarah Date: Mon Oct 22, 2001 8:36pm Subject: Re: Fwd: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: 31 planes of existence/protocol? Dear David (Gaga), I sincerely apologise for any offence I have (unknowingly) caused or been a cause for. With regard to both points you mentioned, i.e replying to part of your message only and forwarding your message to the group as I had understood was intended by you, there has been a misunderstanding and I assure you, no intention at all to be impolite or discourteous in anyway. Best wishes for your move and please don't judge the group as a whole or other members by my mistakes! Hope to hear from you again when you have any comments or questions for the group. Best wishes, Sarah 8840 From: frank kuan Date: Mon Oct 22, 2001 9:05pm Subject: So you think you understand impermanence? I thought I did. I read a passage from the SN today and realize I'm not even close. from SN bhikkhu bodhi version vol 1. page 961: At Savatthi. "Bhikkhus, when the perception of impermanence is developed and cultivated, it eliminates all sensual lust, it eliminates all lust for existence, it eliminates all ignorance, it uproots all conceit 'I am.' ... "Just as, bhikkhus, in the autumn, when the sky is clear and cloudless, the sun, ascending in the sky, dispels all darkness from space as it shines and beams and radiates, so too, when the perception of impermanence is developed and cultivated, it eliminates all sensual lust, it eliminates all lust for existence, it eliminates all ignorance, it uproots all conceit 'I am.' "And how, bhikkhus, is the perception of impermanence developed and cultivated so that it eliminates all sensual sensual lust, eliminates all lust for existence, eliminates all ignorance, and uproots all conceit 'I am'? 'Such is form, such its origin, such its passing away; { same for feelings, perceptions, volitional formations, consciousness }: that is how the perception of impermanence is developed and cultivated so that it eliminatnes all sensual lust, eliminates all lust for existence, eliminates all ignornace, and uproots all conceit 'I am.'" 8841 From: Dan Dalthorp Date: Mon Oct 22, 2001 9:15pm Subject: Re: cittas- Howard > Actually, the idea of observing cittas perplexes me to begin with. It > is the cittas which are supposed to be doing the observing. A citta doesn't > observe itself as an object does it, like a knife cutting itself? It already > *has* its object. (And there is only one object per citta.) And, on the other > hand, a current citta can't be observing a previous one, because the previous > one has already ceased Observing cittas? No. Observing the characteristics of cittas, perhaps. E.g., kusala or akusala? Rooted in lobha or alobha-adosa-amoha? kamma or vipaka or neither? Etc. Viññana is manifested as a sense of continuity (Atthasalini). I find that to be an interesting thing to reflect on (meditation object?). 8842 From: Sarah Date: Mon Oct 22, 2001 9:53pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: cittas- Howard Hi Howard, --- Howard wrote: > ------------------------------------------------------ > Howard: > But what items are present to be conditioning each other? One citta > (act of discernment) together with a number of cetasikas? If they all exist > during the same time, simultaneously, what conditioning is there other than > the obvious co-occurrence? > ------------------------------------------------------- Sarah: OK, As we know all dhammas depend on different conditions and different dhammas are these conditions. Besides those that act as you’ve mentioned as conascence or co-occurrence (sahajata paccaya) there are, for example those that arise before dhammas they condition as prenascence condition (purejata paccaya) and those that arise after the dhammas they condition as postnascence condition (pacchajata paccaya). We’ve discussed at length about cittas and cetasikas conditioning each other by way of sahajata paccaya. As for purejata paccaya, there are 2 kinds: a) base prenascence condition b) object prenascence condition If you remember, rupa lasts longer than citta. Eye-base, for example, has to arise before seeing consciousness and is still present when seeing-consciousness arises. Visible object also conditions seeing in this way. As for pacchajata paccaya, this is like the opposite. A citta and accompanying cetasikas condition the rupas that have arisen and not yet fallen away.So they don’t condition the arising of the rupas (already arisen before the citta) but support the rupa (say visible object) still present and lasting as long as 17 moments of citta. I’ll happily add any details as I enjoy talking about and considering conditions, but am only a real beginner here myself;-) > ------------------------------------------------------- > Visible object is being seen now by arammana > > condition(object condition) or lobha now is present by root condition and > > lots > > and lots more. > ------------------------------------------------------ > Howard: > Sorry, but I don't seem to get any real content out of those terms. > The first seems to be saying that an object is being discerned, which of > course is the case, because that is what citta/vi~n~nana is about. That lobha > > is called a "root" doesn't really say what kind of same-time conditioning is > going on with regard to it. > ------------------------------------------------------ Sarah: Sorry! Of course any reality now is conditioned by many different conditions, some previous and some present. So object condition (arammana paccaya) can be previous (as above) or present or both. I think of root condition as being present, but actually the conditions are so complex I’d need to think or check more. I miss Kom for this. I’m pretty ‘rusty’ and need to consider more. Then of course there is proximity condition, repetition condition and so on. > In other words, the conditions are now only causing the cittas > > and other realities to arise but also the different stages of them. > ----------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > What are the stages of a citta? I thought a citta was a unique act of > discernment together with specific, simultaneously functioning cetasikas > which "flavor" the act of discernment. You make it sound, instead, like a > complex process unfolding in time. > ----------------------------------------------------- Sarah: A quick quote from the Vism (XX, 95)with regard to ‘Knowledge of Rise and Fall’ to indicate that yes, it’s all a little more complex: ‘In accordance with the method of this text he sees the characteristic of generation, the birth, the arising, the aspect of renewal, of born materiality, as ‘rise’, and he sees its characteristic of change, its destruction , its dissolution, as ‘fall He understands thus: There is no heap or store of unarisen mentality-materiality (existing) prior to its arising. When it arises, it does not come from any heap or store; and when it ceases, it does not go in any direction. There is nowhere any depository in the way of a heap or store or hoard of what has ceased...’ I added the last part for Ken O who may find it useful. A little later (103) it says: ‘The characteristic of not-self becomes evident to him through seeing rise according to condition owing to its discovery that states have no curiosity and that their existence depends upon conditions. The characteristic of impermanence becomes evident to him through seeing rise and fall according to instant owing to his discovery of non-existence after having been and owing to his discovery that they are secluded from past and future.’ Sometimes we hear people talking about understanding anicca without even understanding or being aware of realities, let alone the highly developed wisdom that can discern these finer details. . > > Each citta has an arising, existing and falling/ceasing (I forget the pali > > terms for these stages - maybe Rob K can help). > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > I didn't know this. How are those stages distinguished? Do they differ > > in object, or in the cetasikas present? If yes, then a citta would really be > an unfolding process, the progress of which is previously determined by the > conditions that led to it. That would be quite interesting. > ------------------------------------------------------------------ Sarah: Quick answer: by highly developed panna (rt understanding) which understands the nature of realities more and more precisely. Considering now, reflecting wisely now, can be conditions for panna to develop. > ----------------------------------------------------------------- > So it is not 'in effect' independent of conditions at all. > --------------------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > Right, it wouldn't be. > ------------------------------------------------------------------ > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > Actually, it seems to me that the details of such a notion are > critically important. > ------------------------------------------------------------------- Sarah: I think different details are important for each of us, perhaps. We can see on the list here that we all have different ‘blocks’ or aspects of the Teachings that need to be clarified in order to understand more about the ‘anattaness’ of realities. Knowing a little more about conditions can help break down any idea of presence, control or underlying consciousness, I think. Please also follow up any questions on this area with Nina when she comes back. She’ll be delighted to read your interest, Howard. > > > > > What I also remember is that these 3 stages have a lakhana (characteristic) > > > to > > be known, but just like the tri-lakhana of anicca, dukkha and anatta, no > > sabhava (essence). > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > It would be very interesting to me to know what these characteristics > are, and whether they are a matter of what cetasikas are present at what > stages, or whether it is something else entirely. > ------------------------------------------------------------------- Sarah: No, it doesn’t depend on the cetasikas present. These are characteristics of all cittas regardless of whether they are ever known or understood. > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > For me it is a conceptual theory. My "vision" hasn't picked up on > individual cittas, and, so, I cannot determine by direct observation whether > there is more to this than just a theory. > Actually, the idea of observing cittas perplexes me to begin with. It > is the cittas which are supposed to be doing the observing. A citta doesn't > observe itself as an object does it, like a knife cutting itself? It already > *has* its object. (And there is only one object per citta.) And, on the other > > hand, a current citta can't be observing a previous one, because the previous > > one has already ceased, and, as you say, "once > > never to return". So you > see, the citta theory presents some problems for me. ;-) > --------------------------------------------------------- Sarah: Such good points! Different cittas experience different realities. Seeing only ever experiences visible object, for example. But the cittas in the mind-door process can experience any reality (or concept). Awareness in the javana process can, as a result, be aware of any reality, including other cittas and cetasikas, such as seeing or hearing or like or dislike.. It’s pretty late (I’m not used to having the computer to myself) and I don’t know if I’m getting too technical, but these are very helpful comments and queeries for me to consider. Many thanks, Howard. It’s a complicated area. I also highly recommend to anyone: 1)conditions by Nina available on Zolag: http://www.zolag.co.uk/ 2) U Narada’s Guide to Conditional Relations (PTS) Sarah Rob K, pls let me know if I make any mistakes with any of the more technical details.....;-) The Group-in-Sarnath will have to wait til tomorrow for their update here;-) 8843 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Mon Oct 22, 2001 9:56pm Subject: minddoor , mindbase Dear Herman, You asked about the mind base/door. Base is usually translated as vatthu and door as dvara. This is complicated when we talk about the mind because, unlike the sense bases, the dvara and vatthu are different for mind. I take this mostly from the Abhidhammathasangaha - it is hard going so if you have questions or confusions please ask. Nina would be able to explain this much more clearly and simply but I will certainly try. http://www.palikanon.com/abhidham/sangaha/sangaha.htm The eye itself is the eye-door; and so for the ear-door and others. But bhavanga is called the mind-door. "Some types of consciousness such as relinking, bhavanga, and decease (cuti) are without doors . they are Dvára-vimutta, door-freed. Vibhávini Tíká explains that they are so called because (i) they do not arise in any of the sense-doors such as eye etc., (ii) bhavanga itself is the mind-door, and (iii) they exist without receiving any new external object (pertaining to the present life). The first reason applies to cuti and patisandhi, the second to bhavangupaccheda, and the third to all bhavangas and cuti" Mano-dvára - Mind-door "When an object enters the mind the bhavanga consciousness first vibrates for a moment and is then arrested. Subsequently ávajjana or apprehending thought-moment arises. In the case of a physical object it is one of the five sense-impressions. In the case of a mental object it is the manodvárávajjana mind-door consciousness. The bhavangupaccheda (bhavanga arrest) thought-moment that immediately precedes the mind-door apprehending consciousness is known as the mind-door (manodvára). Abhidhammávatára states - S'ávajjanam bhavangantu manodváranti vuccati. " (The bhavanga with the ávajjana is known as mind-door) . ==== _So much for the mind door (manodvara). Now for the mind base: There are six kinds: eye, ear, nose, tongue, body, and heart. (Herman I can explain much more about heart base if you wish- briefly it is not the same as the physical heart but is subtle rupa that resides dependent on blood in the heart). There is no heart base or any other base in the immaterial worlds. "Therein the five elements of sense-impressions lie entirely dependent on the five sensory parts of the organs as their respective bases. But the mind-element - namely, the five-door adverting consciousness and the (two types of) receiving consciousness - rest in dependence on the heart . Likewise the remaining mind-conscious-element comprising the investigating consciousness, the great Resultants, the two accompanied by aversion, the first Path consciousness, smiling consciousness (and Form-sphere consciousness, rest in dependence on the heart" The remaining classes of consciousness whether Moral, Immoral, Functional, or Supramundane, are either dependent on, or independent of, the heart-base. The Formless-sphere Resultants are independent of the heart-base. " Dear Robert, I value these posts enormously. The sense bases are rupas. What is the mind base/door? Thank you Herman --- robertkirkpatrick wrote: > > > > > ROBERT K: ...Cittas are conditioned phenomena and different cittas > > > need different bases to arise. the type of citta that is cakkhu- > > > vinnana (eye consciousness)can only arise at that very refined > rupa > > > called cakhhu pasada (eye base). This type of rupa is conditioned > by > > > kamma and arises in the center of the eye - it is such a subtle > rupa. > > > All eye consciousness has to arise dependent on this type of rupa > and > > > cannot arise anywhere else. Another example: the body > consciousness > > > depends on very subtle rupa that pervades the body . This type of > > > consciousness can arise anywhere in the body. > > > The different types of citta are different depending on the > base. > > > > Thanks, Rob K. > > I take it from this that not only are cittas' and rupas' arising > dependent on > > occurence within a physical body, but that they are even more > specific as to what > > sense-door or mind-doors they might operate in relation to. Very > interesting. > > > > Thanks again. > Robert Epstein > > > _________________ > Dear Rob Ep. > Yes, extremely specific as to what door. The cittas that arise at the > eyedoor can only ever arise there - they cannot arise anywhere else. > Until we hear the Dhamma we have an idea that it is pretty much the > same mind that carries on. Even many Buddhists have the idea that > while the mind changes it is still "my" mind. Sometimes people are > confused about rebirth too.They think it is the same citta that > carries on. But the citta, for example, that is seeing consciouness > (cakkhu vinnana) arises and falls away there and then. It can't even > move to the ear door (for example): the citta that hears is a > different citta and arises dependent on different conditions: > Thus the Buddha says in effect according to the Majjhima nikaya > atthakatha(sutta 38) that(see bodhi note 404, p1231)"In the occurence > of consciousness there is not even the mere transmigration from door > to door[base to base], so how can this misguided sati speak of > transmigration from existence to existence". > robert 8844 From: Howard Date: Mon Oct 22, 2001 7:37pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: cittas- Howard Hi, Dan - In a message dated 10/22/01 9:16:43 AM Eastern Daylight Time, Dan writes: > > > Actually, the idea of observing cittas perplexes me to begin > with. It > > is the cittas which are supposed to be doing the observing. A citta > doesn't > > observe itself as an object does it, like a knife cutting itself? It > already > > *has* its object. (And there is only one object per citta.) And, on > the other > > hand, a current citta can't be observing a previous one, because the > previous > > one has already ceased > > Observing cittas? No. Observing the characteristics of cittas, > perhaps. E.g., kusala or akusala? Rooted in lobha or > alobha-adosa-amoha? kamma or vipaka or neither? Etc. > ------------------------------------------------ Howard: I don't find that any better. What are these characteristics? The associated cetasikas? In any case, what is observing them? It can't be the same citta. Nor can it be a later one, because the earlier citta, along with its characteristics, is gone. ---------------------------------------------- > Viññana is manifested as a sense of continuity (Atthasalini). I find > that to be an interesting thing to reflect on (meditation object?). > > > =========================== 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) 8845 From: robertkirkpatrick Date: Tue Oct 23, 2001 0:14am Subject: Re: cittas- Howard --- Sarah wrote: > > > ----------------------------------------------------- > > Howard: > > What are the stages of a citta? I thought a citta was a unique act of > > discernment together with specific, simultaneously functioning cetasikas > > which "flavor" the act of discernment. You make it sound, instead, like a > > complex process unfolding in time. > > ----------------------------------------------------- > > Sarah: > > A quick quote from the Vism (XX, 95)with regard to `Knowledge of Rise and Fall' > to indicate that yes, it's all a little more complex: > > `In accordance with the method of this text he sees the characteristic of > generation, the birth, the arising, the aspect of renewal, of born materiality, > as `rise', and he sees its characteristic of change, its destruction , its > dissolution, as `fall > > --------- Dear Howard and sarah, In "A Comprehensive manual of Abhidhamma" Bhikkhu Bodhip156 Guide to #6 'The life span of a citta is termed , in the Abhidhamma a mindmoment(cittakhana). ..in a flash of lightning billions of mind- moments can elasp. Nevertheless, though seemingly infinetesimal each mind moment in turn consists of three sub-moments: arising(uppada) presence(thithi) and dissolution(bhavanga). Within the breath of a mindmoment a citta arises , performs its momentary function, and then dissolves, conditioning the next citta in immediate succesion"Endquote robert 8846 From: Howard Date: Mon Oct 22, 2001 8:17pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: cittas- Howard Hi, Sarah - Thank you so much for taking the time an making the effort for such a detailed reply. You mention in part that all of us have blocks against some of the material. it seems that I have quite a few blocks about a lot of it! ;-)) C'est la vie! With metta, Howard In a message dated 10/22/01 9:55:03 AM Eastern Daylight Time, Sarah writes: > Hi Howard, > > --- Howard wrote: > > ------------------------------------------------------ > > Howard: > > But what items are present to be conditioning each other? One > citta > > (act of discernment) together with a number of cetasikas? If they all > exist > > during the same time, simultaneously, what conditioning is there other > than > > the obvious co-occurrence? > > ------------------------------------------------------- > > Sarah: > > OK, As we know all dhammas depend on different conditions and different > dhammas > are these conditions. Besides those that act as you’ve mentioned as > conascence > or co-occurrence (sahajata paccaya) there are, for example those that arise > before dhammas they condition as prenascence condition (purejata paccaya) > and > those that arise after the dhammas they condition as postnascence condition > (pacchajata paccaya). We’ve discussed at length about cittas and cetasikas > conditioning each other by way of sahajata paccaya. > > As for purejata paccaya, there are 2 kinds: > a) base prenascence condition > b) object prenascence condition > > If you remember, rupa lasts longer than citta. Eye-base, for example, has to > arise before seeing consciousness and is still present when > seeing-consciousness arises. Visible object also conditions seeing in this > way. > > As for pacchajata paccaya, this is like the opposite. A citta and > accompanying > cetasikas condition the rupas that have arisen and not yet fallen away.So > they > don’t condition the arising of the rupas (already arisen before the citta) > but > support the rupa (say visible object) still present and lasting as long as > 17 > moments of citta. I’ll happily add any details as I enjoy talking about and > considering conditions, but am only a real beginner here myself;-) > > > ------------------------------------------------------- > > Visible object is being seen now by arammana > > > condition(object condition) or lobha now is present by root condition > and > > > lots > > > and lots more. > > ------------------------------------------------------ > > Howard: > > Sorry, but I don't seem to get any real content out of those > terms. > > The first seems to be saying that an object is being discerned, which of > > course is the case, because that is what citta/vi~n~nana is about. That > lobha > > > > is called a "root" doesn't really say what kind of same-time conditioning > is > > going on with regard to it. > > ------------------------------------------------------ > > Sarah: > > Sorry! Of course any reality now is conditioned by many different > conditions, > some previous and some present. So object condition (arammana paccaya) can > be > previous (as above) or present or both. I think of root condition as being > present, but actually the conditions are so complex I’d need to think or > check > more. I miss Kom for this. I’m pretty ‘rusty’ and need to consider more. > Then > of course there is proximity condition, repetition condition and so on. > > > In other words, the conditions are now only causing the cittas > > > and other realities to arise but also the different stages of them. > > ----------------------------------------------------- > > Howard: > > What are the stages of a citta? I thought a citta was a unique act > of > > discernment together with specific, simultaneously functioning cetasikas > > which "flavor" the act of discernment. You make it sound, instead, like a > > complex process unfolding in time. > > ----------------------------------------------------- > > Sarah: > > A quick quote from the Vism (XX, 95)with regard to ‘Knowledge of Rise and > Fall’ > to indicate that yes, it’s all a little more complex: > > ‘In accordance with the method of this text he sees the characteristic of > generation, the birth, the arising, the aspect of renewal, of born > materiality, > as ‘rise’, and he sees its characteristic of change, its destruction , its > dissolution, as ‘fall > > He understands thus: There is no heap or store of unarisen > mentality-materiality (existing) prior to its arising. When it arises, it > does > not come from any heap or store; and when it ceases, it does not go in any > direction. There is nowhere any depository in the way of a heap or store or > hoard of what has ceased...’ > > I added the last part for Ken O who may find it useful. > > A little later (103) it says: > > ‘The characteristic of not-self becomes evident to him through seeing rise > according to condition owing to its discovery that states have no curiosity > and > that their existence depends upon conditions. The characteristic of > impermanence becomes evident to him through seeing rise and fall according > to > instant owing to his discovery of non-existence after having been and owing > to > his discovery that they are secluded from past and future.’ > > Sometimes we hear people talking about understanding anicca without even > understanding or being aware of realities, let alone the highly developed > wisdom that can discern these finer details. > . > > > Each citta has an arising, existing and falling/ceasing (I forget the > pali > > > terms for these stages - maybe Rob K can help). > > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > > Howard: > > I didn't know this. How are those stages distinguished? Do they > differ > > > > in object, or in the cetasikas present? If yes, then a citta would really > be > > an unfolding process, the progress of which is previously determined by > the > > conditions that led to it. That would be quite interesting. > > ------------------------------------------------------------------ > > Sarah: > > Quick answer: by highly developed panna (rt understanding) which understands > the nature of realities more and more precisely. Considering now, reflecting > wisely now, can be conditions for panna to develop. > > > ----------------------------------------------------------------- > > So it is not 'in effect' independent of conditions at all. > > --------------------------------------------------------------- > > Howard: > > Right, it wouldn't be. > > ------------------------------------------------------------------ > > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Howard: > > Actually, it seems to me that the details of such a notion are > > critically important. > > ------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Sarah: > > I think different details are important for each of us, perhaps. We can see > on > the list here that we all have different ‘blocks’ or aspects of the > Teachings > that need to be clarified in order to understand more about the > ‘anattaness’ of > realities. Knowing a little more about conditions can help break down any > idea > of presence, control or underlying consciousness, I think. Please also > follow > up any questions on this area with Nina when she comes back. She’ll be > delighted to read your interest, Howard. > > > > > > > > What I also remember is that these 3 stages have a lakhana > (characteristic) > > > > > to > > > be known, but just like the tri-lakhana of anicca, dukkha and anatta, no > > > sabhava (essence). > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Howard: > > It would be very interesting to me to know what these > characteristics > > are, and whether they are a matter of what cetasikas are present at what > > stages, or whether it is something else entirely. > > ------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Sarah: > > No, it doesn’t depend on the cetasikas present. These are characteristics of > all cittas regardless of whether they are ever known or understood. > > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > Howard: > > For me it is a conceptual theory. My "vision" hasn't picked up on > > individual cittas, and, so, I cannot determine by direct observation > whether > > there is more to this than just a theory. > > Actually, the idea of observing cittas perplexes me to begin with. > It > > is the cittas which are supposed to be doing the observing. A citta > doesn't > > observe itself as an object does it, like a knife cutting itself? It > already > > *has* its object. (And there is only one object per citta.) And, on the > other > > > > hand, a current citta can't be observing a previous one, because the > previous > > > > one has already ceased, and, as you say, "once > > > never to return". So you > > see, the citta theory presents some problems for me. ;-) > > --------------------------------------------------------- > > Sarah: > > Such good points! Different cittas experience different realities. Seeing > only > ever experiences visible object, for example. But the cittas in the > mind-door > process can experience any reality (or concept). Awareness in the javana > process can, as a result, be aware of any reality, including other cittas > and > cetasikas, such as seeing or hearing or like or dislike.. > > It’s pretty late (I’m not used to having the computer to myself) and I > don’t > know if I’m getting too technical, but these are very helpful comments and > queeries for me to consider. Many thanks, Howard. > > It’s a complicated area. I also highly recommend to anyone: > 1)conditions by Nina available on Zolag: > http://www.zolag.co.uk/ > > 2) U Narada’s Guide to Conditional Relations (PTS) > > Sarah > > Rob K, pls let me know if I make any mistakes with any of the more technical > details.....;-) The Group-in-Sarnath will have to wait til tomorrow for > their > update here;-) > > /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) 8847 From: m. nease Date: Tue Oct 23, 2001 0:25am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: cittas- Howard Hi Howard and Dan, --- Howard wrote: > Dan writes: > > > Actually, the idea of observing cittas > perplexes me to begin > > with. It > > > is the cittas which are supposed to be doing the > observing. A citta > > doesn't > > > observe itself as an object does it, like a > knife cutting itself? It > > already > > > *has* its object. (And there is only one object > per citta.) And, on > > the other > > > hand, a current citta can't be observing a > previous one, because the > > previous > > > one has already ceased > > > > Observing cittas? No. Observing the > characteristics of cittas, > > perhaps. E.g., kusala or akusala? Rooted in lobha > or > > alobha-adosa-amoha? kamma or vipaka or neither? > Etc. > > > ------------------------------------------------ > Howard: > I don't find that any better. What are these > characteristics? The > associated cetasikas? In any case, what is observing > them? It can't be the > same citta. Nor can it be a later one, because the > earlier citta, along with > its characteristics, is gone. > ---------------------------------------------- I find this an interesting question too, Howard. I appreciate your patience and perseverance as it hasn't been answered yet to my satisfaction (or comprehension). I don't understand this stuff very well (as you know) but had a thought about this. As I understand it, cetasikas experience the same object that 'their' cittas experience, simultaneously of course. Among the condtions 'passed along' to the next citta (and its cetasikas) is the memory(?) of that citta/cetasikas experience. So, although pa~n~naa (a cetasika) can directly experience and understand an object simultaneously with its co-arising citta, retrospective reflection on the memory of the experience must be (pa~n~natti)and not direct insight--I think. This can have the effect of producing conventional, theoretical understanding (or misunderstanding), I think, but not satipatthaana vipassanaa. If I've got this right, the knife doesn't have to cut itself. The citta and 'it's' cetasikas experience one object--say, a painful sense-impression with aversion. A subsequent citta and ITS cetasikas can experience the memory of the previous event with some (or no) degree of understanding. By the way, I think sati can take vitakka as an object--not sure what the implication of this is. Does any of this make any sense and, if it does, does it help to resolve this at all? mike > > Viññana is manifested as a sense of continuity > (Atthasalini). This is really interesting, Dan--most get a copy of this. Cheers, mike 8848 From: robertkirkpatrick Date: Tue Oct 23, 2001 0:59am Subject: Re: minddoor , mindbase-correction --- Robert Kirkpatrick <> > _So much for the mind door (manodvara). Now for the mind base: > > There are six kinds: eye, ear, nose, tongue, body, and heart. {{{{{{. I should have said there are six kinds OF VATTHU (base):eye, ear etc..The rest is ok}}}} > (Herman I can explain much more about heart base if you wish- > briefly it is not the same as the physical heart but is subtle > rupa that resides dependent on blood in the heart). There is no > heart base or any other base in the immaterial worlds. > "Therein the five elements of sense-impressions lie entirely > dependent on the five sensory parts of the organs as their > respective bases. But the mind-element - namely, the five-door > adverting consciousness and the (two types of) receiving > consciousness - rest in dependence on the heart . Likewise the > remaining mind-conscious-element comprising the investigating > consciousness, the great Resultants, the two accompanied by > aversion, the first Path consciousness, smiling consciousness > (and Form-sphere consciousness, rest in dependence on the > heart" > The remaining classes of consciousness whether Moral, Immoral, > Functional, or Supramundane, are either dependent on, or > independent of, the heart-base. The Formless-sphere Resultants > are independent of the heart-base. " > > Dear Robert, > > I value these posts enormously. > > The sense bases are rupas. What is the mind base/door? > > Thank you > > Herman > > > --- robertkirkpatrick wrote: > > > > > > > > ROBERT K: ...Cittas are conditioned phenomena and different > > cittas > > > > need different bases to arise. the type of citta that is > cakkhu- > > > > vinnana (eye consciousness)can only arise at that very > refined > > rupa > > > > called cakhhu pasada (eye base). This type of rupa is > conditioned > > by > > > > kamma and arises in the center of the eye - it is such a > subtle > > rupa. > > > > All eye consciousness has to arise dependent on this type > of > rupa > > and > > > > cannot arise anywhere else. Another example: the body > > consciousness > > > > depends on very subtle rupa that pervades the body . This > type > of > > > > consciousness can arise anywhere in the body. > > > > The different types of citta are different depending on > the > > base. > > > > > > Thanks, Rob K. > > > I take it from this that not only are cittas' and rupas' > arising > > dependent on > > > occurence within a physical body, but that they are even > more > > specific as to what > > > sense-door or mind-doors they might operate in relation to. > Very > > interesting. > > > > > > Thanks again. > > Robert Epstein > > > > > _________________ > > Dear Rob Ep. > > Yes, extremely specific as to what door. The cittas that arise > at > the > > eyedoor can only ever arise there - they cannot arise anywhere > else. > > Until we hear the Dhamma we have an idea that it is pretty > much the > > same mind that carries on. Even many Buddhists have the idea > that > > while the mind changes it is still "my" mind. Sometimes people > are > > confused about rebirth too.They think it is the same citta > that > > carries on. But the citta, for example, that is seeing > consciouness > > (cakkhu vinnana) arises and falls away there and then. It > can't > even > > move to the ear door (for example): the citta that hears is a > > different citta and arises dependent on different conditions: > > Thus the Buddha says in effect according to the Majjhima > nikaya > > atthakatha(sutta 38) that(see bodhi note 404, p1231)"In the > occurence > > of consciousness there is not even the mere transmigration > from > door > > to door[base to base], so how can this misguided sati speak of > > > transmigration from existence to existence". > > robert > 8849 From: Num Date: Mon Oct 22, 2001 9:41pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] minddoor , mindbase Hi Robert, > You asked about the mind base/door. Base is usually translated > as vatthu and door as dvara. This is complicated when we talk > about the mind because, unlike the sense bases, the dvara and > vatthu are different for mind. > Let me share my view a little bit. I agree that Nina should have a better explanation. As I understand Vatthu is defined as place where citta being born and dvara is part of a channel of the stream of citta. So one is a kind anatomical and another is more functional description. Bhavaga is the mind door but the vatthu of this mind door is hataya-vatthu. I think the only exception by theory is in the arupa-brahma-bhumi where there is the stream of citta without vatthu as its base. In human plane citta needs to depend on rupa to arise and rupa has to arise before the citta (purechata) again except in pathisanthi moment. Just my idea. Have to run, Num 8850 From: m. nease Date: Tue Oct 23, 2001 2:14am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: bhavanga (life-continuum) Mike & Howard Hi Kenneth, --- Kenneth Ong wrote: > Hi Robert Ep, > > Come to think abt it, I am a person who like things > simple. I do not > like studies that is going to be complicated. I feel the same way. Your saying this reminded me of this line: '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 http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/anguttara/an08-030.html Just thought you'd appreciate this. > Furthermore I am the type > of person who is not concern whether my progress is > good or there is > something to obtain or whether I explore more > concepts of Buddhism. I > always believe, when it comes, it will come. To be > honest with you, I > have stop reading the suttas a few years ago, until > when I come to this > list again. I find myself more addicted to > discussion :) to learn abt > Buddhism with pple here. Honestly, maybe one day, > this will also pass. > At present, the strength of attachment is very > strong. Same here! Cheers, mike 8851 From: dalthorp Date: Tue Oct 23, 2001 3:45am Subject: Re: cittas- Howard Hi Mike and Howard, My comment ["viññana is manifested as a sense of continuity (Atthasalini)]" is from a vague memory. I haven't looked at Asl. for quite awhile and don't have a personal copy, but I did find "[Citta's] manifestation...is as a continuity of process" in B. Bodhi's CMA (p. 29). Your discussion about cittas is interesting, and I wish I could join you all in earnest but that'll be another day. I'll pop in again in a month or so to at least read what you guys have decided. Dan 8852 From: Robert Epstein Date: Tue Oct 23, 2001 5:25am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: bhavanga (life-continuum) Mike & Howard --- Kenneth Ong wrote: How can > you do this to me:) ) I'm just doing my job! :] Part of my job is to make you a little crazy with my ideas, but that's okay! :) Best Regards, Robert Ep. 8853 From: Robert Epstein Date: Tue Oct 23, 2001 7:15am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: bhavanga (life-continuum) Mike & Howard --- Howard wrote: > Hi, Robert - > > In a message dated 10/21/01 3:47:59 PM Eastern Daylight Time, > Robert E writes: > > ......postulated that one might have Nibbana without cessation of experience but > > with > > cessation of attachment. Was that you? > > > > In any case I thought it was very interesting. Obviously if one were past > > having > > any defiled response or clingings to things, the flow of phenomena could > > continue > > without impinging in any way. No? > > > > I think this may define Nibbana for some folks here, but not Parinibbana, > > in which > > even the unattached arising of phenomena ceases permanently. But then, one > > has to > > ask, ceases for whom? If it ceases, hasn't one postulated an entity by its > > absence? > > > > I am really getting deep today. [deep into trouble that is!] > > > > Robert Ep. > > > ======================= > No, it wasn't I who said that, but it does have an agreeable ring. ;-) > > With metta, > Howard It couldn't have been Mike, could it? Anyway, I thought it was interesting. Robert Ep. 8854 From: Num Date: Tue Oct 23, 2001 3:39am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] dsg friends in India Hi Sarah and Robert E. Enjoy reading your experiences in India. Sound like a real trip for me. I think I am somewhat adventurous but you beat me completely. Num 8855 From: Robert Epstein Date: Tue Oct 23, 2001 9:23am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: bhavanga (life-continuum) Mike & Howard --- Kenneth Ong wrote: > Hi Robert Ep, > > Come to think abt it, I am a person who like things simple. I do not > like studies that is going to be complicated. Furthermore I am the type > of person who is not concern whether my progress is good or there is > something to obtain or whether I explore more concepts of Buddhism. I > always believe, when it comes, it will come. To be honest with you, I > have stop reading the suttas a few years ago, until when I come to this > list again. I find myself more addicted to discussion :) to learn abt > Buddhism with pple here. Honestly, maybe one day, this will also pass. > At present, the strength of attachment is very strong. > > > Cheers :) > Kenneth Ong Dear Kenneth, I don't think 'addiction' to Dhamma discussion is a very bad addiction at all. Think of all the other things you could be addicted to. I find myself likewise 'addicted' to hearing real people share their knowledge. It's so nice to have a community of people who are involved in the great endeavor of enlightenment. Even though I often feel like a snail, it's nice to have other people around me while I try to crawl. :] Robert Ep. 8856 From: Robert Epstein Date: Tue Oct 23, 2001 9:29am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Cetana (volition, intention)is controllable? (was kusa.. --- Ken Howard wrote: > You have described the platform from which you go in one > direction and I in another. Is it an important parting of ways? I > think that would depend on how it affects the `descriptive v's > prescriptive' debate. To the extent that my suggestion (that the > Buddha used conventional teachings for the purposes of > communication only -- that they do not form part of the `way out'), > goes outside that debate, it is of no importance whatsoever. > > Kind regards > > Ken Howard Well perhaps I can prolong the discussion by asking you to say a little more about how the conventional language of the Buddha could be taken as an absolute teaching. And I wonder if you think that the 'prescriptions' that seem to be in some of the suttas make absolutely no difference for whether one is able to follow the 'path' or not. In other words, do you think that if the Buddha says 'don't drink' and it were purely prescriptive, would this have an influence on whether a monk would drink or not? And if the monk did or didn't drink, would this make a difference for whether he is able to discern realities and make progress on the path? Best, Robert Ep. 8857 From: Howard Date: Tue Oct 23, 2001 5:33am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: cittas- Howard Hi, Mike (and Dan) - In a message dated 10/22/01 12:27:27 PM Eastern Daylight Time, mike writes: > > Hi Howard and Dan, > > --- Howard wrote: > > Dan writes: > > > > > Actually, the idea of observing cittas > > perplexes me to begin > > > with. It > > > > is the cittas which are supposed to be doing the > > observing. A citta > > > doesn't > > > > observe itself as an object does it, like a > > knife cutting itself? It > > > already > > > > *has* its object. (And there is only one object > > per citta.) And, on > > > the other > > > > hand, a current citta can't be observing a > > previous one, because the > > > previous > > > > one has already ceased > > > > > > Observing cittas? No. Observing the > > characteristics of cittas, > > > perhaps. E.g., kusala or akusala? Rooted in lobha > > or > > > alobha-adosa-amoha? kamma or vipaka or neither? > > Etc. > > > > > ------------------------------------------------ > > Howard: > > I don't find that any better. What are these > > characteristics? The > > associated cetasikas? In any case, what is observing > > them? It can't be the > > same citta. Nor can it be a later one, because the > > earlier citta, along with > > its characteristics, is gone. > > ---------------------------------------------- > > I find this an interesting question too, Howard. I > appreciate your patience and perseverance as it hasn't > been answered yet to my satisfaction (or > comprehension). > > I don't understand this stuff very well (as you know) > but had a thought about this. As I understand it, > cetasikas experience the same object that 'their' > cittas experience, simultaneously of course. Among > the condtions 'passed along' to the next citta (and > its cetasikas) is the memory(?) of that > citta/cetasikas experience. So, although pa~n~naa (a > cetasika) can directly experience and understand an > object simultaneously with its co-arising citta, > retrospective reflection on the memory of the > experience must be (pa~n~natti)and not direct > insight--I think. This can have the effect of > producing conventional, theoretical understanding (or > misunderstanding), I think, but not satipatthaana > vipassanaa. > > If I've got this right, the knife doesn't have to cut > itself. The citta and 'it's' cetasikas experience one > object--say, a painful sense-impression with aversion. > A subsequent citta and ITS cetasikas can experience > the memory of the previous event with some (or no) > degree of understanding. By the way, I think sati can > take vitakka as an object--not sure what the > implication of this is. > > Does any of this make any sense and, if it does, does > it help to resolve this at all? > > mike > --------------------------------------------------------- Howard: Yes, I think it makes a lot of sense, and is a noble attempt. But this leaves us with a citta and cetasikas (including pa~n~na) all experiencing the object which is the memory of a previous citta or cetasika. Thus, there is never direct experiencing, even by wisdom, of any mental dhamma, but only a memory of such. I suspect that that is not Abhidhammika Gospel! ;-)) --------------------------------------------------------- > > > Viññana is manifested as a sense of continuity > > (Atthasalini). > > This is really interesting, Dan--most get a copy of > this. > > Cheers, > > mike > ============================ 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) 8858 From: Howard Date: Tue Oct 23, 2001 5:38am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: cittas- Howard Hi, Dan (and Mike) - In a message dated 10/22/01 3:47:05 PM Eastern Daylight Time, dalthorp writes: > Hi Mike and Howard, > My comment ["viññana is manifested as a sense of continuity > (Atthasalini)]" is from a vague memory. I haven't looked at Asl. for > quite awhile and don't have a personal copy, but I did > find "[Citta's] manifestation...is as a continuity of process" in B. > Bodhi's CMA (p. 29). > > Your discussion about cittas is interesting, and I wish I could join > you all in earnest but that'll be another day. I'll pop in again in a > month or so to at least read what you guys have decided. > > Dan > ===================== I can tell you right now what I've decided: With regard to Abhidhamma, I'm best described as clueless! ;-)) 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) 8859 From: Herman Date: Tue Oct 23, 2001 10:20am Subject: Re: Cetana (volition, intention)is controllable? (was kusa.. Ken, Robert et al, Pleasantries. :-) Sitting to one side. Discussion: Is there any teaching, any speech which is not conventional? In my humble opinion, the absolute cannot be expressed, conveyed, indicated. In Judaism, the name of God is not mentioned, because it is understood that any reference to God would fall drastically short of what God is. All discussions are conventional, even the ones about paramattha dhammas. It is said that the Buddha taught for 45 years after his enlightenment, but I'll bet you that most of that time was spent in solitude, even if it was in company. The "way out" and talking about the "way out" never ever ever coincide. Taking leave (Geez , I get sore legs from that sitting :-) Herman --- Robert Epstein wrote: > > --- <> wrote: > > > You have described the platform from which you go in one > > direction and I in another. Is it an important parting of ways? I > > think that would depend on how it affects the `descriptive v's > > prescriptive' debate. To the extent that my suggestion (that the > > Buddha used conventional teachings for the purposes of > > communication only -- that they do not form part of the `way out'), > > goes outside that debate, it is of no importance whatsoever. > > > > Kind regards > > > > Ken Howard > > Well perhaps I can prolong the discussion by asking you to say a little more about > how the conventional language of the Buddha could be taken as an absolute > teaching. And I wonder if you think that the 'prescriptions' that seem to be in > some of the suttas make absolutely no difference for whether one is able to follow > the 'path' or not. > > In other words, do you think that if the Buddha says 'don't drink' and it were > purely prescriptive, would this have an influence on whether a monk would drink or > not? And if the monk did or didn't drink, would this make a difference for > whether he is able to discern realities and make progress on the path? > > Best, > Robert Ep. > > > 8860 From: Robert Epstein Date: Tue Oct 23, 2001 10:28am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] dhammavicaya II Dear Gayan, I just wanted to say that I also find these translations extremely valuable. There is something about seeing the Pali and then reading your phrase by phrase construction that is very informing and inspiring. A little closer to hearing the Buddha speak. Regards, Robert Ep. ========================== --- Gayan Karunaratne wrote: > > hi mike, > > contd.. > > > tanha => ponobhavika ( which has the strength to cause 'next' bhava ) > > nissaya = accompanying > > channovada sutta M N, > > > " nissitassa calitam , anissitassa calitam natthi. > calite asati passaddhi, passaddhiya sati nati na hoti. > natiyaa asati aagati gati na hoti , aagatigatiya asati cutupapaato na hoti. > cutupapaate asati, neva idha, na huram , na ubhayamantare, esevanto > dukkhassa. " > > nissito - one who 'accompanies' something. > calita - vibration, shaking, movement > > a nissito has calita,an anissito does not have a calita. > when thers no calita, there is a calmness ( passaddhi ). > when thers such calmness thers no 'bending to'. > when thers no bending there are no going and coming. > when there are no going and coming there is no cuti or uppatti(birth). > when there is no cuti or uppatti > hes not 'here' ( ne va idha ) > hes not 'there' ( na huram ) > hes not inbetween here and there ( na ubhayamantare ) > this is the ending of dukkha ( esevanto dukkhassa ). > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > further on nissaya > > kaccanagotta sutta S N, > > kaccanagotta asks from buddha 'what is sammaditti?' > > buddha answers, > > " dvayanissito bvayam kaccayana loko yebhuuyena atarthanecava natthitanca. > loka samudayam kho kaccayana ythabhutam sammappannaya passato ya loke > natthita sa na hoti. > loka nirodham kho kaccayana yathabhutam sammapannaya passato ya loke atthita > sa na hoti " > > > this world(loko) is mostly 'dvayanissito'. > > dvayanissito = accompnies two > the two is astitva and nastitva . asti - exists , nasti - does not exist. > > the combined meaning is -> > the world mostly accompanies two, the 'exists' or 'does not exist'. > > the one who knows the arising of loka perfectly as it is by samma panna, > he does not have the view that 'the loka doesnt exist', > the one who knows the cessation of loka by samma panna, > he does not have the view that ' the loka exists', > > > " upaayupaadaanaabhinivesavinibandho bvayam kaccana loko yebhuyyena , tanca > upaayupaadanam cetaso adhitthanam abhinivesanusayam na upeti na upadiyati > nadhitthati 'atta me' ti. > dukkhameva uppajjamaanam uppajjati dukkham nirujjhamaanam nirujjhati, > na kankhati na vichkiccati aparappaccaya nanamevassa ettha hoti ettavataa > kho kaccana sammaditti hoti. " > > upaayupaadaanaabhinivesavinibandho = upaya + upaadaana + abhinivesa + > vinibandho > upaya = coming near > upadana = grasping > abhinivesa = getting into , getting inside and staying on > > the one with sammaditthi doesnt take any of these as 'self', > his ditthi is that 'when arising , whats arising is just and only just a > (package of, set of, bunch of) dukkha, > when ceasing whats ceasing is just and only just dukkha. > so he sees this as 'only dukkha'. > kaccana , even with this he is a person who has samma ditthi. > > > " sabbam atthiti kho kaccana ayam eko anto , > sabbam natthiti ayam dutiyo anto. > ete te kaccana ubho ante anupagamma majjhena tathagato dhammam deseti. > avijjaa paccaya samkharaa, samkhara paccaya vinnanam, vinnana paccaya > namarupam...( and so on ) > .... > evametassa kevalassa dukkakkhandassa nirodho hoti. " > > > kaccana, 'everything exists' this is the first end > 'everything doesnt exist' this is the second(other) end. > without falling to both these ends, > the tathagata preaches dhamma in the middleway, > that is ..(avijja paccaya etc..) > > ( so buddha explains the paticca samuppada as the middle way ) > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > Loka sutta , devata samyutta S N > > " chasu loko samuppanno > chasu kubbati santhavam > channameva upaadaaya > chasu loko vihannati " > > the world arises in the six, > the world accompanies the six, > grasping the six, > the world 'gets tired' of the six > > > six = salayatana > > samudaya sutta , salayatana vagga S N , > > " cakkhum ca paticca rupe ca uppajjati cakkhuvinnanam, tinnam samgati passo > , > passa paccaya vedana , vedana paccaya ...( and so on ) " > > > > contd.. > > rgds > gayan 8861 From: Robert Epstein Date: Tue Oct 23, 2001 10:38am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] dsg friends in India Thanks, Sarah! I so enjoyed your story. Well, there can't be anything wrong with revisiting some of the charmed events of the past, provided we don't cling too hard.... There is so much kammic depth to India, I'll bet those of us who have gone there had a real predisposition to go there and experience things on many different levels. But that's just the magic of the whole thing, we don't know what conditions are going to pop up next, or what place they will take us to, either in geography or in consciousness. Recalling my own stories and then hearing yours, I feel back in India for a moment myself. That is the power of the mind, isn't it? Well I for one am glad you were willing to share your vision of Sarnath, and your bad sense of direction. I may be the only person who has worse sense of direction than you! In my case, I think it's genetic, not kammic. Regards, Robert Ep. ============================= --- Sarah wrote: > Dear Rob Ep, > > Now you’ve started me off on nostalgic memories (lots of pannatti - let’s see > if there’s any awareness of the thinking and sense door objects in between;-) > > --- Robert Epstein wrote: > > > Dear Sarah, > > Just thought I'd mention that I've been to both Varanasi and Sarnath twice > > before. > > I went just for my own 'amusement' in 1989, then again in 1996 when I > > dragged my > > wife along for our honeymoon. > > Thanks for sharing your amusing accounts which rang lots of bells.....pls tell > your wife that I think she’s a really good sport;-) > > Now I’ll try to remember Victor’s mininmalist lessons, but I fear this will be > a compromise at best;-) > > When I was really young (still young now), I did the > overland-to-India-on-a-shoe-string (actually 50 UK pounds and was away for > 18mths!), through Afghanistan and so on. Got to Delhi, spent a week buying a > complicated 3rd class (of course) train ticket to do a grand tour of Southern > India in particular, planning to visit lots of yoga ashrams along the way. > > Whilst filling in time in Delhi, I was given my first and last-ever (I'm glad > to report) opium to smoke. That night I had a very, very vivid opium-induced > sleep which I can still ‘see’ (read think about through the mind-door). It was > a vivid dream about a place in a lot of detail. It meant nothing to me at the > time and I didn’t attach any importance to it then or later. I never mentioned > it to anyone. > > A couple of days later, I went to the train station with my hard-earned > multi-routed train ticket. Just as I arrived at the station, the purse in my > hand containing the precious ticket was whisked away. Luckily my precious > little money and passport were hidden inside my skirt. > > I cut my losses, decided it wasn’t to be and bought a simple ticket to Varanasi > instead. I shared a dormitory there for a week with the wierd and wonderful and > went out by rickshaw with a couple of others to Sarnath. Now I have no sense of > direction at all, am hopeless at remembering places and get lost in my local > supermarkets. However, for the first and last time in my life to date, I > arrived at a place (Sarnath) and immediately knew my way around without any > hesitation and was able to guide the 2 other wierdos. This was exactly the > place I had ‘seen’ in that opium dream. > > I’ve never wanted to think much about this funny little experience or attach > any importance to it. We have no idea about past experiences, lives and no very > little about experience now. I don’t think it’s useful to speculate, but that’s > just how it was. So Sarnath is pretty special to me. The funny thing is though, > that I’ve been back 2 or 3 times since and it’s just like usual, i.e. no > recollection, no sense of direction, no memory of having been there. > > The lost train-ticket-saga meant that a week later, I ended up in Bodh Gaya > where I stayed for 5 mths in a Tibetan tent for half a rupee a day (including > sampa for breakfast). I spent another half rupee for another meal and that was > it. Every day I’d study (simple) Buddhist books and meditate with Munindra > (Mahasi style) until the dust storms made it impossible for the Tibetans or any > of us to stay longer. I never felt poor, because there were always beggars > around who were a lot poorer.....wow, that was nearly 30 yrs ago. > > Actually, I prefer staying in luxury hotels these days....I think I’ve done > enough roughing it for a few lifetimes. Then I went 18mths without a thought of > calling home, just relying on occasional post restante super-snail mail post. > Now I like to have daily connections and there was dosa when I couldn’t make a > connection with the Group’s hotel in Banares this morning. Some may suggest > this shows the lack of practice or development. I think it shows the > accumulation at that moment. It too can be understood instead of being clung to > as ‘my dosa which should be dealt with’. > > Rob Ep, your stories encouraged this. Just be grateful, others, that thanks to > Victor’s influence it’s not twice as long;-) > > Yes, it would be great to meet you and anyone else from the list in any of > these places or on tour;-) > > Sarah 8862 From: Robert Epstein Date: Tue Oct 23, 2001 10:40am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] dsg friends in India By the way, isn't it great to stand where Buddha taught? Robert Ep. ========================== --- Sarah wrote: > Dear Rob Ep, > > Now you’ve started me off on nostalgic memories (lots of pannatti - let’s see > if there’s any awareness of the thinking and sense door objects in between;-) > > --- Robert Epstein wrote: > > > Dear Sarah, > > Just thought I'd mention that I've been to both Varanasi and Sarnath twice > > before. > > I went just for my own 'amusement' in 1989, then again in 1996 when I > > dragged my > > wife along for our honeymoon. > > Thanks for sharing your amusing accounts which rang lots of bells.....pls tell > your wife that I think she’s a really good sport;-) > > Now I’ll try to remember Victor’s mininmalist lessons, but I fear this will be > a compromise at best;-) > > When I was really young (still young now), I did the > overland-to-India-on-a-shoe-string (actually 50 UK pounds and was away for > 18mths!), through Afghanistan and so on. Got to Delhi, spent a week buying a > complicated 3rd class (of course) train ticket to do a grand tour of Southern > India in particular, planning to visit lots of yoga ashrams along the way. > > Whilst filling in time in Delhi, I was given my first and last-ever (I'm glad > to report) opium to smoke. That night I had a very, very vivid opium-induced > sleep which I can still ‘see’ (read think about through the mind-door). It was > a vivid dream about a place in a lot of detail. It meant nothing to me at the > time and I didn’t attach any importance to it then or later. I never mentioned > it to anyone. > > A couple of days later, I went to the train station with my hard-earned > multi-routed train ticket. Just as I arrived at the station, the purse in my > hand containing the precious ticket was whisked away. Luckily my precious > little money and passport were hidden inside my skirt. > > I cut my losses, decided it wasn’t to be and bought a simple ticket to Varanasi > instead. I shared a dormitory there for a week with the wierd and wonderful and > went out by rickshaw with a couple of others to Sarnath. Now I have no sense of > direction at all, am hopeless at remembering places and get lost in my local > supermarkets. However, for the first and last time in my life to date, I > arrived at a place (Sarnath) and immediately knew my way around without any > hesitation and was able to guide the 2 other wierdos. This was exactly the > place I had ‘seen’ in that opium dream. > > I’ve never wanted to think much about this funny little experience or attach > any importance to it. We have no idea about past experiences, lives and no very > little about experience now. I don’t think it’s useful to speculate, but that’s > just how it was. So Sarnath is pretty special to me. The funny thing is though, > that I’ve been back 2 or 3 times since and it’s just like usual, i.e. no > recollection, no sense of direction, no memory of having been there. > > The lost train-ticket-saga meant that a week later, I ended up in Bodh Gaya > where I stayed for 5 mths in a Tibetan tent for half a rupee a day (including > sampa for breakfast). I spent another half rupee for another meal and that was > it. Every day I’d study (simple) Buddhist books and meditate with Munindra > (Mahasi style) until the dust storms made it impossible for the Tibetans or any > of us to stay longer. I never felt poor, because there were always beggars > around who were a lot poorer.....wow, that was nearly 30 yrs ago. > > Actually, I prefer staying in luxury hotels these days....I think I’ve done > enough roughing it for a few lifetimes. Then I went 18mths without a thought of > calling home, just relying on occasional post restante super-snail mail post. > Now I like to have daily connections and there was dosa when I couldn’t make a > connection with the Group’s hotel in Banares this morning. Some may suggest > this shows the lack of practice or development. I think it shows the > accumulation at that moment. It too can be understood instead of being clung to > as ‘my dosa which should be dealt with’. > > Rob Ep, your stories encouraged this. Just be grateful, others, that thanks to > Victor’s influence it’s not twice as long;-) > > Yes, it would be great to meet you and anyone else from the list in any of > these places or on tour;-) > > Sarah 8863 From: Robert Epstein Date: Tue Oct 23, 2001 11:07am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: cittas- Howard --- Howard wrote: > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > For me it is a conceptual theory. My "vision" hasn't picked up on > individual cittas, and, so, I cannot determine by direct observation whether > there is more to this than just a theory. > Actually, the idea of observing cittas perplexes me to begin with. It > is the cittas which are supposed to be doing the observing. A citta doesn't > observe itself as an object does it, like a knife cutting itself? It already > *has* its object. (And there is only one object per citta.) And, on the other > hand, a current citta can't be observing a previous one, because the previous > one has already ceased, and, as you say, "once > > never to return". So you > see, the citta theory presents some problems for me. ;-) > --------------------------------------------------------- Dear Howard, You have raised a fascinating structural point here, and I am anxious to hear what the answer may be in Abhidhamma terms. It seems you have outlined the basic problem of mindfulness, if there is not to be a superseding field of awareness within which the cittas arise and fall. It would be that superseding awareness that is aware *of* the cittas while not being a citta itself. Of course, this is not possible in Abhidhamma, so there must be another explanation. I would guess, off the top of my head, that the explanation might be something like this: A citta arises that, for example, has a perception of a person as its object. In someone who is not practicing mindfulness, let's say the next citta is of a thought about the person, and then a memory of that person, a comparison and then the formulation of something to say to that person, to skip a lot of steps. Let's say that in someone practicing mindfulness, the same initial citta arises. A perception of a person. In the next moment a 'mindful' citta arises and takes as its object the citta before. Now you said, quite rightly, that this is impossible because the citta before is already totally gone before the next one arises. Yet we have also understood that the citta passes on its characteristics to the next citta, so perhaps the next citta can be one of 'a thought of the passed-on characteristics discerned' from the previous citta, but which are now contained within the thought-form of the new citta itself. Within the citta itself the character of the previous citta would be the object of its discernment and be identified as that of the prior citta. I don't know if this is too tortured, but I thought it might present a possiblity. In any case, it is a pivotal issue, and if there is no way that a present citta can be 'mindful' of the activity of another citta, then this would present a difficult problem. Best, Robert Ep. 8864 From: Robert Epstein Date: Tue Oct 23, 2001 11:50am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: cittas- Howard I think your reasoning is very good here, Mike. Since I can't seem to get my brain to function at the moment, I will happily await Howard's response, and will be very curious to see if he finds your model here a possibility. I think it's a pretty neat issue. Once again, good explanation, I think. I still find it hard to visualize where in the momentary arising citta and cetisikas the content that both are taking as object exists. I am guessing that even though there is one citta at a time, that the citta must arise while the aversion or percept or rupa or whatever the object of it is still present as the endpoint of the arising citta? Robert ==================================== --- "m. nease" wrote: > Hi Howard and Dan, > > --- Howard wrote: > > Dan writes: > > > > > Actually, the idea of observing cittas > > perplexes me to begin > > > with. It > > > > is the cittas which are supposed to be doing the > > observing. A citta > > > doesn't > > > > observe itself as an object does it, like a > > knife cutting itself? It > > > already > > > > *has* its object. (And there is only one object > > per citta.) And, on > > > the other > > > > hand, a current citta can't be observing a > > previous one, because the > > > previous > > > > one has already ceased > > > > > > Observing cittas? No. Observing the > > characteristics of cittas, > > > perhaps. E.g., kusala or akusala? Rooted in lobha > > or > > > alobha-adosa-amoha? kamma or vipaka or neither? > > Etc. > > > > > ------------------------------------------------ > > Howard: > > I don't find that any better. What are these > > characteristics? The > > associated cetasikas? In any case, what is observing > > them? It can't be the > > same citta. Nor can it be a later one, because the > > earlier citta, along with > > its characteristics, is gone. > > ---------------------------------------------- > > I find this an interesting question too, Howard. I > appreciate your patience and perseverance as it hasn't > been answered yet to my satisfaction (or > comprehension). > > I don't understand this stuff very well (as you know) > but had a thought about this. As I understand it, > cetasikas experience the same object that 'their' > cittas experience, simultaneously of course. Among > the condtions 'passed along' to the next citta (and > its cetasikas) is the memory(?) of that > citta/cetasikas experience. So, although pa~n~naa (a > cetasika) can directly experience and understand an > object simultaneously with its co-arising citta, > retrospective reflection on the memory of the > experience must be (pa~n~natti)and not direct > insight--I think. This can have the effect of > producing conventional, theoretical understanding (or > misunderstanding), I think, but not satipatthaana > vipassanaa. > > If I've got this right, the knife doesn't have to cut > itself. The citta and 'it's' cetasikas experience one > object--say, a painful sense-impression with aversion. > A subsequent citta and ITS cetasikas can experience > the memory of the previous event with some (or no) > degree of understanding. By the way, I think sati can > take vitakka as an object--not sure what the > implication of this is. > > Does any of this make any sense and, if it does, does > it help to resolve this at all? > > mike > > > > Viññana is manifested as a sense of continuity > > (Atthasalini). > > This is really interesting, Dan--most get a copy of > this. > > Cheers, > > mike 8865 From: Robert Epstein Date: Tue Oct 23, 2001 11:53am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] dsg friends in India --- Num wrote: > Hi Sarah and Robert E. > > Enjoy reading your experiences in India. Sound like a real trip for me. I > think I am somewhat adventurous but you beat me completely. > > Num :] Robert 8866 From: Herman Date: Tue Oct 23, 2001 0:15pm Subject: Re: dsg friends in India Dear Robert, This is my poor attempt at trying to find a constructive way of saying that you are crediting a physical location with some powers it doesn't have. Your mind is the source of whatever you are feeling, nothing more , nothing less. I don't want to deny anybody whatever experience they seek, but the experience is always the mind. The props , too, are the mind. As Sarah would say, it is all stories. There is no magic at Lumbini or Bethlehem, the magic is the mind, and it can be had anywhere anytime. I am sure there's a sutta which says as much. A reference, anybody? All the best Herman --- Robert Epstein wrote: > By the way, isn't it great to stand where Buddha taught? > > Robert Ep. > 8867 From: Robert Epstein Date: Tue Oct 23, 2001 0:25pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: dsg friends in India Well, Herman, I appreciate your correction, and I both agree and disagree, as you might perhaps expect. I agree that the mind is the source of all that we experience. I disagree that Sarnath is not part of what the mind creates as an experience, and therefore has no particular 'flavor' of its own. While things are impermanent and have no center they can call their own, since they are a shifting collection of factors, that does not mean that those shifting collections do not have their own 'flavors' and what is called by those here their own 'characteristics'. If all experiences had the same exact character, there would in a sense be no rising and falling, no distinction between one citta and the next. I also think it is okay to appreciate [without clinging if possible] the specific flavours and savours of different experiences, even though they are recognized as impermanent and lacking in entity. [Actually this may allow one to enjoy them more, like those wonderful Tibetan sand paintings that you know will be destroyed and dismantled a few days after you see them]. However, speaking ultimately, you are right, that the final characteristics of all experiences, whether they are eating breakfast in New York City, or standing near the Stupa at Sarnath, are the big three: anatta, anicca and dukha. And that makes them in their *essence* [or lack thereof] all the same. Now with all that said, are you *sure* you're not just jealous that we've been to Sarnath? Best Regards, Robert Ep. =================================== --- Herman wrote: > Dear Robert, > > This is my poor attempt at trying to find a constructive way of > saying that you are crediting a physical location with some powers it > doesn't have. Your mind is the source of whatever you are feeling, > nothing more , nothing less. > > I don't want to deny anybody whatever experience they seek, but the > experience is always the mind. The props , too, are the mind. As > Sarah would say, it is all stories. There is no magic at Lumbini or > Bethlehem, the magic is the mind, and it can be had anywhere anytime. > > I am sure there's a sutta which says as much. A reference, anybody? > > > All the best > > > Herman > > > --- Robert Epstein wrote: > > By the way, isn't it great to stand where Buddha taught? > > > > Robert Ep. 8868 From: Sarah Date: Tue Oct 23, 2001 0:55pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] dsg friends in India Dear Rob Ep, --- Robert Epstein wrote: > By the way, isn't it great to stand where Buddha taught? > > Robert Ep. > > ========================== I think so, if it’s a condition to pay respect to his great compassion and to the Teachings we’re here to consider and understand. So yesterday the India Group spent the whole day in Sarnath.(Btw I’m skipping Taj visits, early morning Ganges trips and other excursions. Actually Jon has skipped all of these too, having ‘done’ them before, so I don’t get a report in any case. He uses the time to either join K.Sujin for a discussion, call me or try to catch up a little on a quirky internet) In the morning at Sarnath the full group planted mango tree saplings (over a hundred) in the school grounds. All the kids were out cheering and clapping and it was quite ‘moving’. This was followed by offering a meal to all the ‘international’ monks at the Mahabodhi Association. Jon said it was offered ‘Sri Lanka’ style, ladling the food into the bowls. The monks are from India, Sri Lanka, Thailand, Tibet, China, Korea, Burma and probably other places as well. Also every member in the group offered a set of robes and a bag of individually chosen and carried requisites to offer to the 100 plus monks. In the afternoon they paid homage at the stupa in the park and had discussions. As I’m sure all dsg members know, ‘it was the Deer park at Sarnath that the Buddha gave his first significant sermons on the Middle Way, the Four Noble Truths and the Eightfold path to his five fellow seekers who became the first monks of the order.’ There were also visits, for those not staying for the English discussion, to the museum (Rop Ep mentioned) and later by all (except Jon who called me from Sarnath) to see the relics. He said it was a treat for everyone to have a break from marathon bus trips. He also mentioned that I’d probably be rather disappointed if I went to Sarnath today (I haven’t been for over 10yrs)...because there is a lot more development and buildings right up to the site of the stupa in what were lovely spaces and grounds....(That dream probably wouldn’t give much sense of direction anymore,Rob.....It’s probably developed more in the 30 yrs since I was first there than in a few hundred before that...) Anyway, that would just all be ‘my’ lobha and dosa. It reminds me once when I told K.Sujin I really couldn’t pay respect in a particular temple in Sri Lanka because the Buddha statues and decorations were just too gaudy. She reminded me that it is the qualities of the Buddha that one is paying respect to and the appearances and images are not important (or sth along those lines). It shouldn’t make any difference whether it’s a gaudy statue or a beautifully carved one. It’s always been a helpful reminder for me. Today, the Group have a one day trip to Kosambhi ‘to visit the most important monument in Kosambhi, the Asokan pillar.’ After lunch they go on to Allahabad on the Ganges. Tomorrow they have another long trip to Buddh Gaya.;-))) Sarah 8869 From: Gayan Karunaratne Date: Tue Oct 23, 2001 0:59pm Subject: dhammavicaya III dear mike, contd. --------------------------------------------------------------- samudaya sutta , satipatthana samyutta , S N " catunnam bhikkhave satipatthanaanam samudayanca atthagamanca desissami. ko ca bhikkhave kaayassa samudayo ahara samudayaa kaayassa samudayo ahara nirodhaa kayassa atthagamo. phassa samudayaa vedananam samudayo phassa nirodhaa vedanaanam atthagamo. namarupa samudayaa cittassa samudayo namarupa nirodhaa cittassa atthagamo. manasikaara samudayaa dhammaanam samudayo manasikaara nirodhaa dhammaanam atthagamo. " fourth line -> namarupa causes( samudaya - arising of ) citta , namarupa nirodha causes fall ( atthagama ) of citta. --------------------------------------------------------------- dvayatanupassana sutta , sutta nipata " anissito na calati - nissito ca upaadiyam itthabhaavaannataabhaavam - samsaaram naativattati etamadiinavam natva - nissayesu mahabbhayam anissito anupaadaano - sato bhikkhu paribbje " anissito does not 'vibrate'/move - nissito ( one who accompanies views , sticks to views ) grasps (hard) cannot get away from thisness and otherness the samsara theres a great bhaya of these 'nissaya's knowing the badness/disadvantages the bhikkhu abides mindfully without nissaya, upadana. --------------------------------------------------------------- attadanda sutta , sutta nipata about arahant " na deti na nirassati " doesnt hold , doesnt let go (from hold) [ doesnt discard ] dutthatthaka sutta " attam nirattam na hi tassa atthi " not held , not discarded suddhatthaka sutta " na raaga raagi - na viraaga ratto " not longing for raaga - not longing for viraaga (either) [ this is very sloppy translation, but I think you can get the idea from the Pali phrase ] ------------------------------------------------------------------ khajjaniiya sutta , khanda samyutta " ayam vuccati bhikkhave ne va aacinaati na apacinaati, apacinitva thito ne va pajahati na upaadiyati . pachahitva thito ne va visenti na ussenti. visenetvaa thito ne va vidhupeti na sandhupeti. " monks, this is the way to describe this monk doesnt collect doesnt discard..... the point here is that the arahant cant be described from such dual terms. ------------------------------------------------------------------- dhammapada , brahmana vagga " yassa paaram apaaram va - paaraapaaram na vijjati viitaddaram visamyuttam - tamaham brumi brahmanam " when one doesnt have 'that shore' , 'this shore' or both, one without sorrow and free of bondings i say hes the brahmana( arahant ). -------------------------------------------------------------------- uraga sutta , sutta nipata " yo najjhagamaa bhavesu saaram - vicinam pupphamiva udumbaresu so bhikkhu chahaati orapaaram - urago chinnamiva tacam puraanam " a monk who doesnt see a worthiness in bhava, like searching for flowers in 'dimbul' tree and failing, discards both shores like a serpant discards its old skin . ------------------------------------------------------------------- ven sariputta says ( in Anguttara N ) " imina puutikaayena attiyaami haraayaami jigucchaami " i am ashamed of , condemn ... this 'rotten' body ------------------------------------------------------------------- contd. rgds, gayan 8870 From: Gayan Karunaratne Date: Tue Oct 23, 2001 1:11pm Subject: RE: [DhammaStudyGroup] dhammavicaya II dear ken o. and robert e. , many thanks for your compassionate comments. The attempt is only to unveil the profoundness,trickyness,"interesting"ness in hidden phrases in Pali Suttas. The least importance should be given to the translations. If these keep on triggering the need to explore the Real Pali thoroughly then they had done their job.( and nothing more is intended ) rgds, gayan 8871 From: Herman Date: Tue Oct 23, 2001 1:58pm Subject: Re: dsg friends in India Dear Robert, Thank you for taking the post in the "spirit" it was written. As for jealousy, I'm very much like Sarah with respect to roughing it. Give me five star comfort anytime. I'd rather make up stories from a climate controlled environment than from a tin shack in the blistering sun :-) Still, I do like reading other people's accounts of their journeys and discoveries. All the best Herman > > Now with all that said, are you *sure* you're not just jealous that we've been to > Sarnath? > > Best Regards, > Robert Ep. > > =================================== > > --- Herman wrote: > > Dear Robert, > > > > This is my poor attempt at trying to find a constructive way of > > saying that you are crediting a physical location with some powers it > > doesn't have. Your mind is the source of whatever you are feeling, > > nothing more , nothing less. > > > > I don't want to deny anybody whatever experience they seek, but the > > experience is always the mind. The props , too, are the mind. As > > Sarah would say, it is all stories. There is no magic at Lumbini or > > Bethlehem, the magic is the mind, and it can be had anywhere anytime. > > > > I am sure there's a sutta which says as much. A reference, anybody? > > > > > > All the best > > > > > > Herman > > > > > > --- Robert Epstein wrote: > > > By the way, isn't it great to stand where Buddha taught? > > > > > > Robert Ep. 8872 From: Sarah Date: Tue Oct 23, 2001 3:29pm Subject: RE: [DhammaStudyGroup] dhammavicaya II Gayan Let me add my name to your 'fan mail';-) A good pali lesson too..I plan to go over more carefully when I have a little time (and then hopefully incorporate occasional phrases into posts if I may). many thanks. If it doesn't cause extra work/trouble, may I suggest you add a sub-heading for quick reference/comprehension? eg nibbana, parinibbana, khandhas....o'wise, this can be done at the end. Nina will be v.pleased to see these too...I mentioned them to Jon on the phone;-) Sarah --- Gayan Karunaratne wrote: > > > dear ken o. and robert e. , > > many thanks for your compassionate comments. > > The attempt is only to unveil the profoundness,trickyness,"interesting"ness > in hidden phrases in Pali Suttas. > The least importance should be given to the translations. > > If these keep on triggering the need to explore the Real Pali thoroughly > then they had done their job.( and nothing more is intended ) 8873 From: Sarah Date: Tue Oct 23, 2001 3:34pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] So you think you understand impermanence? Frank, I always appreciate your choice of suttas and reflections on them...we have the same favourites often.... Good reflections too, which are very timely as they rather 'fit' with my discussion w/ Howard I think. Strangely, there's been almost no discussion of impermanence on dsg.... Sarah --- frank kuan wrote: > I thought I did. I read a passage from the SN today > and realize I'm not even close. > > from SN bhikkhu bodhi version vol 1. page 961: > At Savatthi. "Bhikkhus, when the perception of > impermanence is developed and cultivated, it > eliminates all sensual lust, it eliminates all lust > for existence, it eliminates all ignorance, it uproots > all conceit 'I am.' > > ... > "Just as, bhikkhus, in the autumn, when the sky is > clear and cloudless, the sun, ascending in the sky, > dispels all darkness from space as it shines and beams > and radiates, so too, when the perception of > impermanence is developed and cultivated, it > eliminates all sensual lust, it eliminates all lust > for existence, it eliminates all ignorance, it uproots > all conceit 'I am.' > "And how, bhikkhus, is the perception of > impermanence developed and cultivated so that it > eliminates all sensual sensual lust, eliminates all > lust for existence, eliminates all ignorance, and > uproots all conceit 'I am'? 'Such is form, such its > origin, such its passing away; { same for feelings, > perceptions, volitional formations, consciousness }: > that is how the perception of impermanence is > developed and cultivated so that it eliminatnes all > sensual lust, eliminates all lust for existence, > eliminates all ignornace, and uproots all conceit 'I > am.'" > 8874 From: Sarah Date: Tue Oct 23, 2001 3:42pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Horses and medicine [Erik] Dear Dan, It's a real treat for the list (in my view) when you drop in - Ken O, some may not agree, many may not agree, but you might like to consider framing some of these recent posts of Dan's too...(actually, you better get a lot of frames;-) Like Frank wrote too, one reason we consider carefully is to see that maybe we don't know as much as perhaps we once thought....this should be inspiring rather than the reverse. Dan, I know you're in a rush....just be sure to mark your diary for your next visit and I'll mark mine too;-) Sarah --- dalthorp wrote: > No question that ALL the samma's are important--not just sammaditthi. > My question is: how can we discern the difference between the samma's > and miccha's and the vippayutta's? For example, in my second > intensive meditation retreat a number of years ago, I worked so very > hard sitting, walking at a snail's pace, taking an hour to eat a > simple plate of food--formal practice for 12-15 hours a day, day > after day, week after week. The samma's? At the time, I thought they > were there almost all the time. Of course, it was obvious that > sometimes they weren't, but basically I was pretty pleased with my > samma's. But now I realize that for 23.99 hours per day there were no > samma's. Nowadays? It's still 23.99 samma-free hours per day (on a > good day!), but the difference is that I have an inkling that that's > the way it is. That may not seem like a big deal in the grand scheme > of things, and really it isn't--only a tiny step or two on a long, > LONG path. But there is something liberating about realizing the > quasi-ubiquity of being samma-free. > > Anyway, back to the conversation... > > ______________ > Dan: > > I meant to say that "applying medicine" is conventional wisdom and > is > > quite distinct from the heart of Dhamma, viz. anatta. Buddha taught > > satipatthana not as a medicine, not as a technique, not as > > conventional wisdom, but as the heart of Dhamma, as what the world > > looks like when viewed through vision unclouded by sakayaditthi > (even > > if it's only for a moment of mundane insight). > > Erik: > Just to clarify terms here: sakayaditthi merely means the VIEW of > self, which isn't terminated until the view (subtle as it is) > of "instrinsic self" has been seen directly as fictional construct > > Dan: > I meant "ditthi" as a cetasika that doesn't arise in kusala cittas. I > wanted specifically emphasize a particular ditthi that we had been > discussing, viz. sakayaditthi. In a moment of mundane insight, > sakayaditthi does not arise. But sakayaditti (in one of its many > guises) is closely associated with the notion that satipatthana is > like "applying medicine"; or that it is satipatthana in a mind > says, "Hmmm.... There is akusala. Let me establish mindfulness to > deal with it". As agreed, the view that satipatthana is a medicine to > apply, something to do to remedy dosa after it arises is a > conventional view, not "paramattha sacca", not Right View. Rooted as > it is in sakayaditthi that wants control over cittas, it is > impossible to get beyond the sequence pain->aversion->applying > medicine as long as that view is held--anatta 101. 8875 From: Sarah Date: Tue Oct 23, 2001 4:21pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] The Simple Life Dear Mike & Ken O, --- "m. nease" wrote: > Hi Kenneth, > Come to think abt it, I am a person who like things > > simple. I do not > > like studies that is going to be complicated. > > I feel the same way. Your saying this reminded me of > this line: > > '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 > > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/anguttara/an08-030.html I don't wish to spoil the party, but would just like to add a 'quickie';-) Is there not a difference between the papanca (proliferations) which I assume are being referred to in the sutta (i.e getting lost in concepts with wrong views) and realizing that the Teachings are very profound and intricate and that the development of understanding is not a simple matter at all? The following sutta has been quoted before, but let me repeat an extract as a reminder of this: ****************************** Samyutta Nikaya XX.7 Ani Sutta The Peg; "..........................In the same way, in the course of the future there will be monks who won't listen when discourses that are words of the Tathagata -- deep, deep in their meaning, transcendent, connected with emptiness -- are being recited. They won't lend ear, won't set their hearts on knowing them, won't regard these teachings as worth grasping or mastering. But they will listen when discourses that are literary works -- the works of poets, elegant in sound, elegant in rhetoric, the work of outsiders, words of disciples -- are recited. They will lend ear and set their hearts on knowing them. They will regard these teachings as worth grasping & mastering. "In this way the disappearance of the discourses that are words of the Tathagata -- deep, deep in their meaning, transcendent, connected with emptiness -- will come about. "Thus you should train yourselves: 'We will listen when discourses that are words of the Tathagata -- deep, deep in their meaning, transcendent, connected with emptiness -- are being recited. We will lend ear, will set our hearts on knowing them, will regard these teachings as worth grasping & mastering.' That's how you should train yourselves." ************************************* Hope I haven’t complicated your discussion, Best wishes, Sarah 8876 From: Sarah Date: Tue Oct 23, 2001 4:28pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: cittas- Ken O Dear Ken O, --- Kenneth Ong wrote: > Hi Sarah > Assume that old cittas cease and the information abt us is transmitted to > the new cittas. Does this information abt us cease?. Secondly if I > follow your theory, isn't Nibbana dependent on temporary cittas to be in > existence. So does that mean that Nibbana is conditioned? > > Secondly if cittas cease and then recreated isn't it a bit not conforming > the middle path? > > Thirdly, how does it ceased and recreated in the first place. How does it > function like that or what is make it function like that? Isn't it a > question of orginality. Isn't a question of orginality is the question of > Nibbana? Isn't it dependent on each other? > > > For you comments please Talking about a Simple life, you call these 3 questions, but I've just counted 10 questions;-)) My students are about to arrive so i'm going to keep this questions in mind and probably incorporate them into other posts rather than attempt to answer them all at one 'go'. (Actually, i'm hoping that you and your 'good post-mate, Rob Ep' might find a few answers in the meantime....) Always great to hear of your interest, Ken O....sorry I can't keep up with all the questions just for now, but i won't forget...;-) Sarah 8877 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Tue Oct 23, 2001 5:15pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] The Simple Life Hi Sarah, No you have not :). I throw away reading of suttas (I seldom read other Buddhists materials) because I have read too much suttas (too much concepts). So I let it go, and they come back and i let them in again for a relook but in the end, I let it go again. No books because there are enough materials in my mind in me for a long while unless the issue is serious enough to warrant a reread of suttas. To me there is enough sutta materials to last a life time, there is no need to read those flowerly poems, or literature works and anyway I too lazy to read them. :) Oops there is now a new trend, Chinese Buddhist KTV songs :). This is what i called commercialisation power. Cheers Ken O --- Sarah wrote: > Dear Mike & Ken O, > > --- "m. nease" wrote: > Hi Kenneth, > > > Come to think abt it, I am a person who like things > > > simple. I do not > > > like studies that is going to be complicated. > > > > I feel the same way. Your saying this reminded me of > > this line: > > > > '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 > > > > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/anguttara/an08-030.html > > I don't wish to spoil the party, but would just like to add a > 'quickie';-) > > Is there not a difference between the papanca (proliferations) which I > assume > are being referred to in the sutta (i.e getting lost in concepts with > wrong > views) and realizing that the Teachings are very profound and intricate > and > that the development of understanding is not a simple matter at all? > > The following sutta has been quoted before, but let me repeat an extract > as a > reminder of this: > > ****************************** > > Samyutta Nikaya XX.7 Ani Sutta The Peg; > > "..........................In the same way, in the course > of the future there will be monks who won't listen when discourses > that are words of the Tathagata -- deep, deep in their meaning, > transcendent, connected with emptiness -- are being recited. They > won't lend ear, won't set their hearts on knowing them, won't regard > these teachings as worth grasping or mastering. But they will listen > when discourses that are literary works -- the works of poets, elegant > in sound, elegant in rhetoric, the work of outsiders, words of > disciples -- are recited. They will lend ear and set their hearts on > knowing them. They will regard these teachings as worth grasping & > mastering. > > "In this way the disappearance of the discourses that are words of the > Tathagata -- deep, deep in their meaning, transcendent, connected with > emptiness -- will come about. "Thus you should train yourselves: 'We > will listen when discourses that are words of the Tathagata -- deep, > deep in their meaning, transcendent, connected with emptiness -- are > being recited. We will lend ear, will set our hearts on knowing them, > will regard these teachings as worth grasping & mastering.' That's how > you should train yourselves." > > ************************************* > > Hope I haven’t complicated your discussion, > > Best wishes, Sarah 8878 From: Howard Date: Tue Oct 23, 2001 3:19pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: cittas- Howard Hi, Robert - In a message dated 10/22/01 11:08:24 PM Eastern Daylight Time, Robert E writes: > --- Howard wrote: > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Howard: > > For me it is a conceptual theory. My "vision" hasn't picked up on > > individual cittas, and, so, I cannot determine by direct observation > whether > > there is more to this than just a theory. > > Actually, the idea of observing cittas perplexes me to begin with. > It > > is the cittas which are supposed to be doing the observing. A citta > doesn't > > observe itself as an object does it, like a knife cutting itself? It > already > > *has* its object. (And there is only one object per citta.) And, on the > other > > hand, a current citta can't be observing a previous one, because the > previous > > one has already ceased, and, as you say, "once > > > never to return". So you > > see, the citta theory presents some problems for me. ;-) > > --------------------------------------------------------- > > Dear Howard, > You have raised a fascinating structural point here, and I am anxious to > hear what > the answer may be in Abhidhamma terms. It seems you have outlined the basic > problem of mindfulness, if there is not to be a superseding field of > awareness > within which the cittas arise and fall. It would be that superseding > awareness > that is aware *of* the cittas while not being a citta itself. Of course, > this is > not possible in Abhidhamma, so there must be another explanation. ----------------------------------------------------------- Howard: Also, the notion of a "superseding awareness", if not meant just as a field of possible experience, of potentialities, but rather as an overarching "knowing", comes quite close to being a SELF. So it seems to me that some contortions one might adopt in order to make sense of the citta/dhamma theory start to approach the exit door from the Dhamma and the entry way to Vedanta. --------------------------------------------------------------- > > I would guess, off the top of my head, that the explanation might be > something > like this: > > A citta arises that, for example, has a perception of a person as its > object. In > someone who is not practicing mindfulness, let's say the next citta is of a > thought about the person, and then a memory of that person, a comparison > and then > the formulation of something to say to that person, to skip a lot of steps. > > Let's say that in someone practicing mindfulness, the same initial citta > arises. > A perception of a person. In the next moment a 'mindful' citta arises and > takes > as its object the citta before. Now you said, quite rightly, that this is > impossible because the citta before is already totally gone before the next > one > arises. Yet we have also understood that the citta passes on its > characteristics > to the next citta, so perhaps the next citta can be one of 'a thought of the > passed-on characteristics discerned' from the previous citta, but which are > now > contained within the thought-form of the new citta itself. Within the citta > itself the character of the previous citta would be the object of its > discernment > and be identified as that of the prior citta. I don't know if this is too > tortured, but I thought it might present a possiblity. > --------------------------------------------------------------- Howard: Well, this is a similar approach to Mike's, I think. Instead of taking cittas and cetasikas as objects, there is the taking as an object a "fresh memory" of a citta or cetasika. That's not bad ... but. ----------------------------------------------------------------- > > In any case, it is a pivotal issue, and if there is no way that a present > citta > can be 'mindful' of the activity of another citta, then this would present a > difficult problem. > ------------------------------------------------------------------ Howard: Yes. Well, I do think it is a problem. I think the entire "pointillist" theory is problematical. ------------------------------------------------------------------ > > Best, > Robert Ep. > > =================================== 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) 8879 From: Herman Date: Tue Oct 23, 2001 8:37pm Subject: Request for a link Hi all, Is there out there in Internet land an online version of the Brahmajala Sutta? in vain I have sought thus far.......... Otherwise a link to a bookshop would suffice :-) All the best Herman 8880 From: robertkirkpatrick Date: Tue Oct 23, 2001 9:18pm Subject: Re: Request for a link Dear Herman, Well worth investing in the full translation by Bhikkhu Bodhi of this sutta . You can buy it for US$19.50 from http://www.amazon.com/ Just drop this in their search engine: The Discourse On All-Embracing Net of Views: The Brahmajala Sutta and Its Commentaries by Bhikkhu Bodhi best wishes robert Herman wrote: > Hi all, > > Is there out there in Internet land an online version of the > Brahmajala Sutta? in vain I have sought thus far.......... > > Otherwise a link to a bookshop would suffice :-) > > > All the best > > > Herman 8881 From: m. nease Date: Tue Oct 23, 2001 10:22pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Request for a link Hi Herman, Here's a link--it's the very first sutta in the suttapitaka (as you probably know): http://www.metta.lk/tipitaka/2Sutta-Pitaka/1Digha-Nikaya/Digha1/01-brahmajala-e.htm Cheers, mike --- Herman wrote: > Hi all, > > Is there out there in Internet land an online > version of the > Brahmajala Sutta? in vain I have sought thus > far.......... > > Otherwise a link to a bookshop would suffice :-) > > > All the best > > > Herman 8882 From: m. nease Date: Tue Oct 23, 2001 11:36pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: bhavanga (life-continuum) Mike & Howard Dear Howard and RobEp, --- Robert Epstein wrote: > > --- Howard wrote: > > Hi, Robert - > > > > In a message dated 10/21/01 3:47:59 PM Eastern > Daylight Time, > > Robert E writes: > > > > ......postulated that one might have Nibbana > without cessation of experience > but > > > with > > > cessation of attachment. Was that you? > > > > > > In any case I thought it was very interesting. > Obviously if one were past > > > having > > > any defiled response or clingings to things, the > flow of phenomena could > > > continue > > > without impinging in any way. No? > > > > > > I think this may define Nibbana for some folks > here, but not Parinibbana, > > > in which > > > even the unattached arising of phenomena ceases > permanently. But then, one > > > has to > > > ask, ceases for whom? If it ceases, hasn't one > postulated an entity by its > > > absence? > > > > > > I am really getting deep today. [deep into > trouble that is!] > > > > > > Robert Ep. > > > > > ======================= > > No, it wasn't I who said that, but it does > have an agreeable ring. ;-) > > > > With metta, > > Howard > > It couldn't have been Mike, could it? Not that I recall--however, as I understand it, naamas do continue to arise and experience with an arahanta's ruupas until parinibbaana--and surely no attachment arising with them, so maybe I did? mike > Anyway, I thought it was interesting. > > Robert Ep. 8883 From: m. nease Date: Wed Oct 24, 2001 1:26am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] The Simple Life Hi Sarah, Yes, you have spoilt our fun and rightly too. For my part, my liking of simplicity is definitely not kusala. More laziness than anything else! That's why I'm so tempted by the idea that, 'if I just 'let it all go', I'll find I already understand perfectly'. Wouldn't it be nice... Your citation is perfectly apt and I do think the sutta I cited refers to papa~nca--not to the real intricacies of the Dhamma. I also think your citation of The Peg is perfectly apt--thanks for the reminder. mike --- Sarah wrote: > Dear Mike & Ken O, > > --- "m. nease" wrote: > Hi > Kenneth, > > > Come to think abt it, I am a person who like > things > > > simple. I do not > > > like studies that is going to be complicated. > > > > I feel the same way. Your saying this reminded me > of > > this line: > > > > '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 > > > > > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/anguttara/an08-030.html > > I don't wish to spoil the party, but would just like > to add a 'quickie';-) > > Is there not a difference between the papanca > (proliferations) which I assume > are being referred to in the sutta (i.e getting lost > in concepts with wrong > views) and realizing that the Teachings are very > profound and intricate and > that the development of understanding is not a > simple matter at all? > > The following sutta has been quoted before, but let > me repeat an extract as a > reminder of this: > > ****************************** > > Samyutta Nikaya XX.7 Ani Sutta The Peg; > > "..........................In the same way, in the > course > of the future there will be monks who won't listen > when discourses > that are words of the Tathagata -- deep, deep in > their meaning, > transcendent, connected with emptiness -- are being > recited. They > won't lend ear, won't set their hearts on knowing > them, won't regard > these teachings as worth grasping or mastering. But > they will listen > when discourses that are literary works -- the works > of poets, elegant > in sound, elegant in rhetoric, the work of > outsiders, words of > disciples -- are recited. They will lend ear and set > their hearts on > knowing them. They will regard these teachings as > worth grasping & > mastering. > > "In this way the disappearance of the discourses > that are words of the > Tathagata -- deep, deep in their meaning, > transcendent, connected with > emptiness -- will come about. "Thus you should train > yourselves: 'We > will listen when discourses that are words of the > Tathagata -- deep, > deep in their meaning, transcendent, connected with > emptiness -- are > being recited. We will lend ear, will set our hearts > on knowing them, > will regard these teachings as worth grasping & > mastering.' That's how > you should train yourselves." > > ************************************* > > Hope I haven’t complicated your discussion, > > Best wishes, Sarah 8884 From: m. nease Date: Wed Oct 24, 2001 3:19am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: cittas- Howard Hello Howard, --- Howard wrote: > Hi, Mike (and Dan) - > > In a message dated 10/22/01 12:27:27 PM Eastern > Daylight Time, > mike writes: > > > > > > Hi Howard and Dan, > > > > --- Howard wrote: > > > Dan writes: > > > > > > > Actually, the idea of observing > cittas > > > perplexes me to begin > > > > with. It > > > > > is the cittas which are supposed to be doing > the > > > observing. A citta > > > > doesn't > > > > > observe itself as an object does it, like a > > > knife cutting itself? It > > > > already > > > > > *has* its object. (And there is only one > object > > > per citta.) And, on > > > > the other > > > > > hand, a current citta can't be observing a > > > previous one, because the > > > > previous > > > > > one has already ceased > > > > > > > > Observing cittas? No. Observing the > > > characteristics of cittas, > > > > perhaps. E.g., kusala or akusala? Rooted in > lobha > > > or > > > > alobha-adosa-amoha? kamma or vipaka or > neither? > > > Etc. > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------ > > > Howard: > > > I don't find that any better. What are > these > > > characteristics? The > > > associated cetasikas? In any case, what is > observing > > > them? It can't be the > > > same citta. Nor can it be a later one, because > the > > > earlier citta, along with > > > its characteristics, is gone. > > > ---------------------------------------------- > > > > I find this an interesting question too, Howard. I > > appreciate your patience and perseverance as it > hasn't > > been answered yet to my satisfaction (or > > comprehension). > > > > I don't understand this stuff very well (as you > know) > > but had a thought about this. As I understand it, > > cetasikas experience the same object that 'their' > > cittas experience, simultaneously of course. > Among > > the condtions 'passed along' to the next citta > (and > > its cetasikas) is the memory(?) of that > > citta/cetasikas experience. So, although pa~n~naa > (a > > cetasika) can directly experience and understand > an > > object simultaneously with its co-arising citta, > > retrospective reflection on the memory of the > > experience must be (pa~n~natti)and not direct > > insight--I think. This can have the effect of > > producing conventional, theoretical understanding > (or > > misunderstanding), I think, but not satipatthaana > > vipassanaa. > > > > If I've got this right, the knife doesn't have to > cut > > itself. The citta and 'it's' cetasikas experience > one > > object--say, a painful sense-impression with > aversion. > > A subsequent citta and ITS cetasikas can > experience > > the memory of the previous event with some (or no) > > degree of understanding. By the way, I think sati > can > > take vitakka as an object--not sure what the > > implication of this is. > > > > Does any of this make any sense and, if it does, > does > > it help to resolve this at all? > > > > mike > > > --------------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > Yes, I think it makes a lot of sense, and is > a noble attempt. But this > leaves us with a citta and cetasikas (including > pa~n~na) all experiencing the > object which is the memory of a previous citta or > cetasika. Thus, there is > never direct experiencing, even by wisdom, of any > mental dhamma, but only a > memory of such. I suspect that that is not > Abhidhammika Gospel! ;-)) > ----------------------------------------------------- Probably not--I never seem to get it QUITE right... Anyway, I likely am missing something here. But what I meant to say was that these are two different events--(1) the citta/cetasikas experiencing an object directly (through a sense door) and (2) citta/cetasikas experiencing the memory of event(1) through the mind door. Does this make any difference? Awaiting corrections, mike > > > > Viññana is manifested as a sense of continuity > > > (Atthasalini). > > > > This is really interesting, Dan--most get a copy > of > > this. > > > > Cheers, > > > > mike > > 8885 From: m. nease Date: Wed Oct 24, 2001 3:21am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: cittas- Howard Dear Howard, --- Howard wrote: > I can tell you right now what I've decided: > With regard to Abhidhamma, > I'm best described as clueless! ;-)) You couldn't prove it by me--I think your investigations are among the most rigorous on the list (for what MY opinion's worth...!) mike 8886 From: Howard Date: Wed Oct 24, 2001 0:17am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: cittas- Howard Hi, Mike - In a message dated 10/23/01 3:20:25 PM Eastern Daylight Time, mike writes: > Probably not--I never seem to get it QUITE right... > Anyway, I likely am missing something here. But what > I meant to say was that these are two different > events--(1) the citta/cetasikas experiencing an object > directly (through a sense door) and (2) > citta/cetasikas experiencing the memory of event(1) > through the mind door. Does this make any difference? > Awaiting corrections, > > mike > ====================== I agree. There is a big difference between (1) and (2). 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) 8887 From: Howard Date: Wed Oct 24, 2001 0:21am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: cittas- Howard Hi, Mike - In a message dated 10/23/01 3:22:05 PM Eastern Daylight Time, mike writes: > Dear Howard, > > --- Howard wrote: > > > I can tell you right now what I've decided: > > With regard to Abhidhamma, > > I'm best described as clueless! ;-)) > > You couldn't prove it by me--I think your > investigations are among the most rigorous on the list > (for what MY opinion's worth...!) > > mike > ========================= That's nice of you to say. But my "investigations" just consist of *thinking*. If I were to cultivate really strong"investigation" in the sense of the investigation enlightenment factor, *then* I'd really be doing something! 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) 8888 From: m. nease Date: Wed Oct 24, 2001 4:37am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: cittas- Howard Hi Howard, --- Howard wrote: > ========================= > That's nice of you to say. But my > "investigations" just consist of > *thinking*. If I were to cultivate really > strong "investigation" in the sense > of the investigation enlightenment factor, *then* > I'd really be doing something! I don't think I can have one without the other. That is, if the Buddha hadn't discovered the Dhamma and expounded it, and I hadn't heard of and reflected on it, I don't think the enlightement factor could ever arise. In other words, without pariyatti I don't think that satipatthaana vipassanaa has any chance of occuring or being cultivated (this is highly theoretical I know--just a working hypothesis). mike 8889 From: Num Date: Wed Oct 24, 2001 2:31am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] The Simple Life Hi Mike and Sarah, > Yes, you have spoilt our fun and rightly too. For my > part, my liking of simplicity is definitely not > kusala. More laziness than anything else! That's why > I'm so tempted by the idea that, 'if I just 'let it > all go', I'll find I already understand perfectly'. > Wouldn't it be nice... > > Your citation is perfectly apt and I do think the > sutta I cited refers to papa~nca--not to the real > intricacies of the Dhamma. I also think your citation > of The Peg is perfectly apt--thanks for the reminder. > Hope you guys don't mind I am butting in. I am too prefer simple life. I am not sure how I define it. Does simple mean easy? I think of two sutta which I have been thinking of once in a while. Palesika-sutta, in Thai Tipitaka, it's in Salayatana vagga, Samyatta nikaya. The Buddha mentioned about the fishhunter and his fishhooks. There are six different kinds of fishhook in this world. In brief, visual object which is dear, pretty, should be longing for, should be possessed. If Bhikkhu enjoys, becomes addicted to that visual object, he can be called that he is swallowing the fishhook. Diaster, pain, suffer will belong to him. The evil fishhunter can do whatever he want with that fish. The same for sound, odor, flavor, physical contact and mental phenomena. But if bhikkhu does not cling, enjoy or become addicted to that object, he is then not swallowing that fishhook. I think if I were a fish, it's easier to take something looks good and easily seen in front of me. It sounds easy at the beginning but not at the middle and not the end. Another sutta about analogy of a man who has a fire burning on his head. He should try hard, day and night, with chanda, virira, sati and panna to stop the fire. There are 3 kinds of fire, lobha, dosa and moha fire. I think I do at times enjoy the fire (love to set a fire for a bbq :)) and do not even see the fire as something dangerous. Like a moth, may be. Ok, to me, life can be very simple but it's not easy. Num 8890 From: Howard Date: Wed Oct 24, 2001 4:58am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: cittas- Howard Hi, Mike - In a message dated 10/23/01 4:39:17 PM Eastern Daylight Time, mike writes: > Hi Howard, > > --- Howard wrote: > > > ========================= > > That's nice of you to say. But my > > "investigations" just consist of > > *thinking*. If I were to cultivate really > > strong "investigation" in the sense > > of the investigation enlightenment factor, *then* > > I'd really be doing something! > > I don't think I can have one without the other. That > is, if the Buddha hadn't discovered the Dhamma and > expounded it, and I hadn't heard of and reflected on > it, I don't think the enlightement factor could ever > arise. In other words, without pariyatti I don't > think that satipatthaana vipassanaa has any chance of > occuring or being cultivated (this is highly > theoretical I know--just a working hypothesis). > > mike > ======================= Of course, you are correct. I was just trying to put my cogitations a bit in perspective! ;-)) 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) 8891 From: Sarah Date: Wed Oct 24, 2001 4:03pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: cittas- Howard Dear Rob K, --- robertkirkpatrick wrote: > Dear Howard and sarah, > In "A Comprehensive manual of Abhidhamma" Bhikkhu Bodhip156 Guide to > #6 'The life span of a citta is termed , in the Abhidhamma a > mindmoment(cittakhana). ..in a flash of lightning billions of mind- > moments can elasp. Nevertheless, though seemingly infinetesimal each > mind moment in turn consists of three sub-moments: arising(uppada) > presence(thithi) and dissolution(bhavanga). Within the breath of a > mindmoment a citta arises , performs its momentary function, and then > dissolves, conditioning the next citta in immediate succesion"Endquote > robert Thanks (belatedly) for this..yes, exactly the passage I had in mind. I couldn't remember the name of the 'presence (thithi)' when I wrote. Yesterday, a group of the discussion keenies (inc. Jon, Nina and Kom of course) stayed behind at the hotel rather than go on the day trip.In the eve Jon started catching up on dsg posts until the internet cafe was invaded by mosquitoes.....(Rob Ep, you have to admit that California has some advantages, conventionally speaking of course;-) Anway, the discussion keenies are well-rested for the trip to Buddh Gaya today and hopefully will be sharing their 'enlightened' understanding with us all on return;-) One reason I mention some of these more mundane details is because I know people like Rob K like to hear them. The other reason is that people sometimes ask what we do on trips to India if we don't 'meditate' as usually understood by the word. Hope this helps. Sarah 8892 From: Sarah Date: Wed Oct 24, 2001 4:15pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: dsg friends in India Dear Herman, --- Herman wrote: > > I don't want to deny anybody whatever experience they seek, but the > experience is always the mind. The props , too, are the mind. As > Sarah would say, it is all stories. There is no magic at Lumbini or > Bethlehem, the magic is the mind, and it can be had anywhere anytime. Exactly so and thanks for the credit. I’m impressed;-) We hear a sound and immediately conjure up a long story. Who knows when someone tells the story, or even hears the story, whether there is any understanding of realities at any given moment? I find these reminders, including yours, very helpful indeed. Aren’t we lost in those stories and proliferations most the day? > I am sure there's a sutta which says as much. A reference, anybody? This is from the Bhikkhu Bodhi translation of the The Leash' (SN III 22.100) which was quoted on the list in another context recently: "Bhikkhus, have you seen the picture called `Faring On'?" "Yes, venerable sir." "Even that picture called `Faring On' has been designed in its diversity by the mind, yet the mind is even more diverse than that picture called `Faring On'. …" The footnote says: 'As 64-65 quotes this passage in its discussion of how mind designs the world.' Keep up the good reminders and questions, Sarah 8893 From: Sarah Date: Wed Oct 24, 2001 4:48pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] The Simple Life Dear Num, Mike, Ken O, --- Num wrote:> Hope you guys don't mind I am butting in. I did just the same;-).....a better party, I hope (and Mike, thanks for your kind response) > I am too prefer simple life. I am not sure how I define it. Does simple > mean easy? I think of two sutta which I have been thinking of once in a > while. Palesika-sutta, in Thai Tipitaka, it's in Salayatana vagga, Samyatta > nikaya. The Buddha mentioned about the fishhunter and his fishhooks. There > are six different kinds of fishhook in this world. In brief, visual object > which is dear, pretty, should be longing for, should be possessed. If > Bhikkhu enjoys, becomes addicted to that visual object, he can be called that > > he is swallowing the fishhook. Diaster, pain, suffer will belong to him. > The evil fishhunter can do whatever he want with that fish. The same for > sound, odor, flavor, physical contact and mental phenomena. But if bhikkhu > does not cling, enjoy or become addicted to that object, he is then not > swallowing that fishhook. I think if I were a fish, it's easier to take > something looks good and easily seen in front of me. It sounds easy at the > beginning but not at the middle and not the end. > > Another sutta about analogy of a man who has a fire burning on his head. He > should try hard, day and night, with chanda, virira, sati and panna to stop > the fire. There are 3 kinds of fire, lobha, dosa and moha fire. I think I > do at times enjoy the fire (love to set a fire for a bbq :)) and do not even > see the fire as something dangerous. Like a moth, may be. > > Ok, to me, life can be very simple but it's not easy. I enjoy your paraphrasing of suttas, Num and interesting to add them to this discussion. Perhaps we could say the path is like doing a giant jigsaw puzzle. When the piece actually ‘fits’ it’s so simple and obvious, but while we are considering and checking, we need to look for plenty of clues and the ‘blocks’ slow us down, especially if we become fixated on a piece going in a certain (wrong) place;-) What do you think? Yes, usually we just swallow the fish-hook , but occasionally there can be awareness of sound, odor, flavor.or any other reality appearing and then the ‘picture’ is clear and simple until the next fish-hook is swallowed... Like Mike, usually when I say I like a simple life, it merely reflects ‘my’ strong lobha for visible objects, sounds, flavors and so on to be a certain way. Your suttas are a reminder to see the value now of simply living /being aware of seeing, visible object and so on and to see the danger of the papa~ncha (proliferations). In other words ‘we’ have to learn to live alone with the realities, regardless of whether we’re in the crowds and the clutter or not. I was reading this passage in the commentary to the Udana (trans. by Masefield p1016) when I came across another reference to the difficulty of comprehension: ‘..gave rise to this Udana elucidating the fact that nibbana is hard to see on account of its being by nature profound. Herein: Hard to see: hard to see in that it is not capable of being beheld by those by whom the ingredients of knowledge have not been heaped up, on account of the profundity of its own nature and on account of the fact that its own nature is one that is extremely abstruse and subtle.’ So, Num, next time you have a bbq, don’t get burnt;-).....Any lobha, dosa, moha fire now? Thanks again, Sarah 8894 From: Sarah Date: Wed Oct 24, 2001 4:51pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: cittas- Howard Dear Howard, --- "m. nease" wrote: > Dear Howard, > > --- Howard wrote: > > > I can tell you right now what I've decided: > > With regard to Abhidhamma, > > I'm best described as clueless! ;-)) > > You couldn't prove it by me--I think your > investigations are among the most rigorous on the list > (for what MY opinion's worth...!) > > mike ..................... Seconded (for what MY opinion's worth too!) Sarah 8895 From: Sarah Date: Wed Oct 24, 2001 6:00pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Udana-Nibbana 1 Dear Rob Ep and Ken O, I’d like to discuss this Udana sutta (below) which has been mentioned a few times, but I think like the ‘luminous mind’/bhavanga thread, it will be long and difficult (for me), which is why I made no comment before;-) I’ve been reading the Udana commentary notes (by P.Masefield, PTS) to this short Udana, but they (the notes) run to over 7 pages, so I’ll just have to refer to parts for our discussion. I’m sure others have discussed this sutta at length, but it’s new to me, so have a little patience;-) To make my job ‘simpler’, I thought we could just go through line by line (slowly) and then anyone can shout out when they disagree or understand the words differently. Perhaps the commentary can be some kind of umpire (which doesn’t mean you have to agree with the umpire’s decision or interpret it the same way as me;-)) Anyone’s welcome to ‘join’.... --- Kenneth Ong wrote: > Udana VIII.1 > "There is that dimension where there is neither earth, nor water, nor > fire, nor wind; neither dimension of the infinitude of space, nor > dimension of the infinitude of consciousness, nor dimension of > nothingness, .................... Rob Ep, I’ve got your comments on the 2nd part noted at the end and will repeat them later. For today, let’s just check we all agree on the context and the first few words; As I understand, this is a description of nibbana (not parinibbana) as given to monks, ‘hearing Dhamma with attentive ear’. It must refer to nibbana as experienced by the arahat, I think. In the com. notes it says the Udana has “as its basis the Deathless element, that proceeded by way of making known the unconditioned element.....indicating nibbana in accordance with that characteristic of its own nature and function.(sabhavasarasalakkhanato- relationships between sabhava, sarasa and lakkhana)” The notes mention that “‘the unconditioned’, ‘the Deathless’, and ‘The peace’ and so on (are all defined in terms of) ‘The destruction of lust, the destruction of hatred, the destruction of delusion’”. (There are lots of sub-notes and cross references....which I may use at times.) Ken O, some of your questions may get answered as we proceed: “...In this Teaching, everything, with the exception of nibbana, having an own nature is discovered to be one having its livelihood contingent upon conditions, not one (whose livelihood is ) irrespective of conditions.” “‘There is, monks,that base’ (tadayatanam): that cause (karanam)....for nibbana is spoken of as a base in the sense of a cause on account of its being the object-condition for the knowledges associated with the paths and their fruitions and so on, just as visible forms and so forth constitute the objective-conditions for eye-consciousness and so on. And, thus far, has the Lord made known to those monks the existence, in its highest sense, of the unconditioned element...’ “ So, unless anyone shouts, I take it we all agree so far, that nibbana is the unconditioned base/object/element experienced by conditioned realities (magga and phala cittas). I think I’ll leave it there for the first part. I’m looking forward to this exercise. Some days, i’m too busy with work, so I’ll just carry on with my bits when I have time.. Sarah .................... Rob Ep wrote: Just want to use or abuse the moment to make these points: Buddha here says 'nor dimension of nothingness' which would imply something different from all things ceasing or becoming nil. That implies that something remains, although whatever it is has to avoid the definition of 'infinitude of consciousness' as well as 'dimension of nothingness'. nor dimension of neither perception nor non-perception; Again he not only says there is no perception, but he says there is no 'non-perception'. How can that be interpreted to mean anything other than that there is something that has not ceased, but which neither perceives nor doesn't perceive. It is not nil and it is not nothing. Something that does not partake of 'non-perception' cannot merely be the cessation of the kandhas. I say therer are more hints in the Buddha's refusal to merely say 'everything stops' than we are taking account of in the normal interpretation that the kandhas merely cease and nothing remains. > neither this world, nor the next world, nor sun, nor moon. And there, I > say, there is neither coming, nor going, nor staying; neither passing away > nor arising: unestablished, unevolving, without support (mental > object).[1] This, just this, is the end of stress." Robert Ep. 8896 From: Gayan Karunaratne Date: Wed Oct 24, 2001 6:20pm Subject: dhammavicaya IV dear mike, contd. --------------------------------------------------------------- Aasava -> fermenting , processing for a long long time ( like intoxicants ), has the ability to intoxicate kaamaasava bhavaasava avijjaasava ditthaasava aasavakkhaya = nibbana sacchikaraniya sutta , catukka nipata , " cattarome bhikkhave sacchikaraniya dhammaa, atthi bhikkhave dhamma kaayena sacchikaraniya atthi bhikkhave dhamma satiyaa sacchikaraniya, atthi bhikkhave dhamma cakkhuna sacchikaraniya , atthi bhikkhave dhamma pannaya sacchikaraniya " sacchikaraniya = knowing truely ( as it is ) [ understood as a solid fact ] there are dhammas known truly by kaaya ( body ) there are dhammas known truly by sati( mindfulness ) there are dhammas known truly by cakkhu( eye ) there are dhammas known truly by panna ( wisdom ) furthermore buddha says, example for first category is 'atthavimokkha' the 8 vimokkhas second (by sati )-> 'pubbenivaso' the ability to recall previous wanderings third ( by cakkhu ) -> 'cutupapato' the ability to see the birth and death of many forms of beings fourth ( by panna ) -> 'aasavakkhayo' ending of aasavas , the nibbana -------------------------------------------------------------------------- sammaditthi sutta . MN " aasava samudayaa avijja samudayo - aasava nirodhaa avijja nirodho " when aasava arises avijja ( ignorance ) aricess, when aasava ceases avijja ceases. further down in the sutta, " avijja samudayaa aasava samudayo - avijja nirodhaa aasava nirodho " when avijja arises aasava arises, when avijja ceases aasava ceases. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2nd Gaddula sutta , khanda samyutta , S N " dittham vo bhikkhave caranam naama cittanti evam bhante. tampi kho bhikkhave caranam naama cittam citteneva cintitam tena pi kho bhikkhave caranena cittena cittanneca cittataram, tasmatiha bhikkhave abhikkhanam sakam cittam paccavekkhitabbam, diigharattam idam cittam samkilittham raagena , dosena , mohenati. citta samkileso bhikkhave satta samkilissamti cittavodana satta visujjhanti. naaham bhikkhave annam eka nikaayampi samanupassami evam cittam yathayidam bhikkhave tiracchanagataa paanaa te pi kho tiracchanagataa paanaa cittaneva cintitaa. tehipi kho bhikkhave tiracchanagatehi paanehi cittanneca cittataram. " monks , have you seen a 'drawing' called 'carana' ? ( citta -> citra ( sanskrit ) ) yes venerable sir. monks, even that 'carana' is thought by the citta ( mind ) monks , ( so) the mind is more 'versatile/interesting/diverse...'(creatively, beautifully displayed) than that carana ( which is also thought by the mind ) [ carana is said to be a kind of beautiful animation graphics type of a thing existed those days ] monks every moment you should observe the mind. for a long period this mind has been subjected to the dirt of raaga, dosa, moha. when citta is dirty, the beings become dirty when the mind is cleaned, the beings become cleaned. monks I cant see a more versatile/diverse(creatively, beautifully displayed) category of beings than this animal category, monks even those animals are thought by the mind itself. this mind is more versatile than the animal kingdom, so monks you should observe it every moment. -------------------------------------------------- discussing above sutta, when one enjoys a carana citta like above, the enjoyment comes because of raaga , dosa , moha. The carana is displayed in the mind and the end product is helped by the raaga, dosa, moha dirt that has been there in the mind for a long time. Like a Movie,-> the same movie can be enjoyed by different persons with diffrent mind states. But the movie 'they' are seeing is different from eachother, because the movie created in the minds differ according to the person's mind state.( with diffrent intensities of raaga, dosa, moha ) with the help of the analogy of a movie -> a movie is normally shown with a dark background to have the contrasting effect in the viewers mind. what the director/producer of the movie only have done is to assemble a collection of displays that will trigger the imagination of the viewer. The viewer will create his own version of the movie from that collection of displays. So it becomes an illusion where the viewer is intoxicated. if when suddenly some flash of light was directed( like an exit door being opened in the theatre) at the movie screen(which has a dark background), there arise moments of viraaga from the movie. ' oh this is just a movie ' etc.. -------------------------------------------------------- dvayatanupassana sutta . sutta nipata, " nivutaanam tamo hoti - andhakaaro apassatam satam ca vivatam hoti - aloko passataamica santike na vijaananti - magaa dhammassa akovido " to ones with avijja theres only darkness , like darkness for the blind for ones like buddhas ( worthy ones ) this is open , like light for the non-blind the fools who dont know the dhamma, dont see the nibbana which is so near. -------------------------------------------------------- Udena sutta Khuddaka N " mohasambandhino loko - bhabbarupo va dissati upadhi sambandhano baalo - tamasa parivaarato sassato viya khaayati - passato natthi kincanam " for the one who bonded with ignorance , the world is displayed as a real thing( believable thing ) this fool who is bonded with upadhi , is accompanied by a huge darkness.( darkness prevails around ) to him it(world) looks like sassata ( existing ) but for a one who 'sees' theres nothing to be found. -------------------------------------------------------- 2nd Gaddula sutta , last part of the sutta , like a painter , on a board or a wall or a cloth, using red, blue , yellow etc colour paints a complete portrait of a man or a woman , sameway the putujjana ( un enlightened beings ) create, generate the rupa,vedana,sanna,samkhara,vinnana the 5 khandas. contd. rgds, gayan 8897 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Thu Oct 25, 2001 0:01am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Udana-Nibbana 1 Hi Sarah > In the com. notes it says the Udana has “as its basis the Deathless > element, that proceeded by way of making known the unconditioned > element.....indicating nibbana in accordance with that characteristic of its own nature and function.(sabhavasarasalakkhanato- relationships between sabhava, sarasa and lakkhana)” > > The notes mention that “‘the unconditioned’, ‘the Deathless’, and ‘The > peace’ and so on (are all defined in terms of) ‘The destruction of lust, the destruction of hatred, the destruction of delusion’”. > (There are lots of sub-notes and cross references....which I may use at > times.) k: This defintion kind of let me recall, in the Tibetan tradition, they call it the Unborn or uncreated. > Ken O, some of your questions may get answered as we proceed: > “...In this Teaching, everything, with the exception of nibbana, having > an own nature is discovered to be one having its livelihood contingent upon conditions, not one (whose livelihood is ) irrespective of conditions.” k: Yes this is true. > “‘There is, monks,that base’ (tadayatanam): that cause (karanam)....for > nibbana is spoken of as a base in the sense of a cause on account of its being the object-condition for the knowledges associated with the paths and their fruitions and so on, just as visible forms and so forth constitute the objective-conditions for eye-consciousness and so on. And, thus far, has the Lord made known to those monks the existence, in its highest sense, of the unconditioned element...’ “ > > So, unless anyone shouts, I take it we all agree so far, that nibbana is > the unconditioned base/object/element experienced by conditioned realities (magga and phala cittas). k: This explanation seems to point that Nibbana is a conditioned by the conditioned realities. I do not think conditonal realities can experience Nibbana. It just kind of moving state from the conditon reality to unconditional reality. To me it is just moments to moments when condition goes into unconditional reality. > I think I’ll leave it there for the first part. I’m looking forward to > this exercise. Some days, i’m too busy with work, so I’ll just carry on with my bits when I have time.. > > Sarah > Much thanks in your effort to take out some of your precious time to answer my questions and please take your time in answering them. Kindest regards Kenneth ong 8898 From: Ken Howard Date: Thu Oct 25, 2001 11:25am Subject: Re: Cetana (volition, intention)is controllable? (was kusa.. Dear Robert Ep You wrote: Well perhaps I can prolong the discussion by asking you to say a little more about how the conventional language of the Buddha could be taken as an absolute teaching. ************************ Perhaps it could be said that, by describing the `absolute' teaching as the Middle Way, the Buddha has told us that it is beyond the realm of conventional language. It is between the two concepts, self indulgence and self torment. These two, non-middle ways include not only the extremes (living in the lap of luxury or starving to death), but also the most subtle forms in between (the mere notion of either a controlling self or a self who is controlled by fate). In this way,they embrace all conceptual understanding of reality. To say the least, they cover the worldling's view of everything in daily life. I think our aim should be to understand and observe the worldling's daily life, as described by the Buddha, not to try to change it. If we understand how it differs from the Ariyan's daily life, then some changes might be conditioned. This is what I understand by Jon's comment that the discourses were descriptive, not prescriptive. ********************** You wrote: And I wonder if you think that the 'prescriptions' that seem to be in some of the suttas make absolutely no difference for whether one is able to follow the 'path' or not. ********************** Compliance with a prescription can only occur when the conditions for its occurring are present. If they aren't present, then try as we might, our accumulated tendencies will only produce a sad imitation. ************************* You wrote: In other words, do you think that if the Buddha says 'don't drink' and it were purely prescriptive, would this have an influence on whether a monk would drink or not? And if the monk did or didn't drink, would this make a difference for whether he is able to discern realities and make progress on the path? ***************************** Monks, of course, have rules of training which they follow with or without the delusion of self. By subduing their natural inclinations, they, like ourselves, change their behaviour -- they can perform wholesome deeds and refrain from unwholesome deeds. (There is no we who can do these things, but there is the required level of understanding for them to happen.) But this is still not the Middle Way. While there is the idea of a self, there is no right understanding of the present,absolute reality. Thanks for keeping the discussion going Robert, I am finding it very testing. Kind regards Ken Howard 8899 From: Robert Epstein Date: Thu Oct 25, 2001 1:03pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] dsg friends in India --- Sarah wrote: > Dear Rob Ep, > > --- Robert Epstein wrote: > By the way, isn't it great > to stand where Buddha taught? > > > > Robert Ep. > > > > ========================== > > I think so, if it’s a condition to pay respect to his great compassion and to > the Teachings we’re here to consider and understand. Of course, and also...I'm a groupie! I know, I'm attached..... Thanks for your nice description of the latest part of the trip. Maybe it's just attachment indeed, but I feel there is something special about these special spots. Within the dream of unreality we all live it, they represent openings or portals into the space of discernment and truth. Maybe a living metaphor like that really has a special function, even if it is within the illusion. And developing right up to the Stupa....well, it's just disrespectful of what that space represents, isn't it? Robert 8900 From: Robert Epstein Date: Thu Oct 25, 2001 1:11pm Subject: RE: [DhammaStudyGroup] dhammavicaya II --- Gayan Karunaratne wrote: > > > dear ken o. and robert e. , > > many thanks for your compassionate comments. > > The attempt is only to unveil the profoundness,trickyness,"interesting"ness > in hidden phrases in Pali Suttas. > The least importance should be given to the translations. > > If these keep on triggering the need to explore the Real Pali thoroughly > then they had done their job.( and nothing more is intended ) Still nice to have someone right here who can look at the words and talk about them in Pali and English. I can't help but find it a thrill. On another note, I've tried reading a little of the Pali to myself out loud, and it's so poetic, much of it sounds so beautiful. I know that the sounds of Sanskrit are supposed to be designed by the ancients to create certain spurs in the nervous system, and I believe the Pali must be like this as well. There's something profoundly ancient and compressed in the sound and feeling of the Pali. Here's my favorite for today: " na raaga raagi - na viraaga ratto " Isn't that beautiful? Robert 8901 From: Robert Epstein Date: Thu Oct 25, 2001 1:11pm Subject: RE: [DhammaStudyGroup] dhammavicaya II " na raaga raagi - na viraaga ratto " and have you noticed that the Pali sounds a little bit like Italian? Robert 8902 From: Robert Epstein Date: Thu Oct 25, 2001 1:58pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: cittas- Howard --- Howard wrote: > Also, the notion of a "superseding awareness", if not meant just as a > field of possible experience, of potentialities, but rather as an overarching > "knowing", comes quite close to being a SELF. So it seems to me that some > contortions one might adopt in order to make sense of the citta/dhamma theory > start to approach the exit door from the Dhamma and the entry way to Vedanta. > --------------------------------------------------------------- Let me isolate this point of yours for a moment. It has come up several times in your posts, and since I have had a strong interest in Vedanta, I would like to take a look at it. I hope the following discussion will not seem too off-topic to dsg-ers, but I include it here because I think that it may wind up having some relevance. If you'll indulge me for a moment. It has always seemed to me that the great Vedantic masters, such as Ramana Maharshi and Nisargardatta in particular, really understood and experienced Nibbana in the same way as the Arahant. I believe by the way they describe their view of individual self and what the transcendent state consists of, that the difference between their view and that of the Buddha's is merely one of working within a linguistic tradition that their followers would understand [being Hindus in India]. I feel absolutely certain that Ramana and Nisargardatta had an absolute experience and understanding of anatta and that they in fact transmitted this by the way they used language. Ramana would say: 'I see no difference between you and I. There is no master and no disciple. In fact, neither of us exists as individuals, that is just a convention of thought.' [paraphrasing] That is just one example and I won't belabor it. Their distinction between the false, illusory individual self and what they called the Self, which was real, certainly sounds on the surface as if they are promoting a view of a permanent, shared formless conscious Being within which all seeming individuals exist. But I don't think by their description that this was their real experience of Self. When they described it, it was essentially an experience of emptiness, of anatta plus the occurence of consciousness acts, much as is talked about here. Nisargardatta would put it even more 'objectively' and say that we think we have consciousness, but in fact we are mere objects within consciousness. And even this would be deconstructed so that there was nothing to hold on to in terms of an entity or object that was presumed to be real or permanent. So when our 'field of awareness' becomes an image of a substantial sort of 'thing', like a cloud floating around throughout the universe, yes, it begins to resemble a view of an essence, an entity or an eternal being of some kind. But this is because it is hard not to 'imagine' that which we speak of but have not yet been raised to the level of. When you say that it must remain a 'field of potentiality or possibility' this also has its difficulties, because a 'field' means that there is a space of some kind, which would be something more than mere potential or possibility, so the language tends to make trouble. If there is a 'field of potentiality', what is it that makes these possibilites have the potential to be actualized?, for without this possibility 'potential' is not 'potential' at all. And what is it that moves this field from potentiality to actrivity? And if you are saying that the 'field of potentiality' simply remains that way and never gets activated once Nibbana has been reached [because all seeds of action have reached cessation] then is this field really something other than the pure cessation without further experience that we tend to complain about? If it is not, what makes it different? I would tend to think that in the Nibbanic state, [if I can call it that; I know some think of it as only an event, but it is in any case an event that causes a permanent change] there is still awareness, but awareness merely of being aware when the senses are turned away from the sense objects. In other words, no object, no entity, no experience per se, and so anatta is satisfied by this state. If the Nibbanic person, like the Buddha, were to turn outward to teach, then the sense apparatus would functionally take place, but there would be no 'inner' experience of being the one teaching or seeing the students to be taught; there would be the mere awareness that within the awareness this or that was taking place; including the action and speech of one's own body. One would not identify with any of it. In fact it might be possible, as Ramana once said, to engage in this action without experiencing it. Ramana said: 'I'm not even aware of saying this to you even as I say it, for there is no awareness of being a separate person saying this or you being a separate person receiving it. It is just seeming to take place from the standpoint of the mind.' Anyway, I can't reach any conclusion in this, and I don't expect you to necessarily answer these questions, but I think it gives some idea of where some of the problems and potentialities lie, and the essential matter that Vedanta, Mahayana and Theravada have dealt with, each in their own way. And thanks all for your indulgence, and any comments you feel moved to make. Best, Robert Ep. 8903 From: Robert Epstein Date: Thu Oct 25, 2001 2:06pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: cittas- Howard --- "m. nease" wrote: > Hello Howard, > > --- Howard wrote: > --------------------------------------------------------- > > Howard: > > Yes, I think it makes a lot of sense, and is > > a noble attempt. But this > > leaves us with a citta and cetasikas (including > > pa~n~na) all experiencing the > > object which is the memory of a previous citta or > > cetasika. Thus, there is > > never direct experiencing, even by wisdom, of any > > mental dhamma, but only a > > memory of such. I suspect that that is not > > Abhidhammika Gospel! ;-)) > > > ----------------------------------------------------- > > Probably not--I never seem to get it QUITE right... > Anyway, I likely am missing something here. But what > I meant to say was that these are two different > events--(1) the citta/cetasikas experiencing an object > directly (through a sense door) and (2) > citta/cetasikas experiencing the memory of event(1) > through the mind door. Does this make any difference? > Awaiting corrections, > > mike With my very very limited knowledge, I would guess that the mind door experiences the 'sense object' which is the direct object as recorded by the sense-door, so it is a little different perhaps than a 'memory'. It may be that the mind-door picks it up while it is still 'active' in the sense-door. Does the sense-door moment have to be completed before the mind-door picks it up? Technical questions for Sarah or Nina. Robert Ep. 8904 From: Robert Epstein Date: Thu Oct 25, 2001 2:13pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: cittas- Howard --- Sarah wrote: > Yesterday, a group of the discussion keenies (inc. Jon, Nina and Kom of course) > stayed behind at the hotel rather than go on the day trip.In the eve Jon > started catching up on dsg posts until the internet cafe was invaded by > mosquitoes.....(Rob Ep, you have to admit that California has some advantages, > conventionally speaking of course;-) :] Robert Ep. 8905 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Thu Oct 25, 2001 2:18pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Horses and medicine [Erik] Hi Dan and (Jon) As I reread this post, please kindly allow me to comment on > --- dalthorp wrote: > No question that ALL the samma's > are important--not just sammaditthi. My question is: how can we discern the difference between the samma's and miccha's and the vippayutta's? For example, in my second intensive meditation retreat a number of years ago, I worked so very hard sitting, walking at a snail's pace, taking an hour to eat a simple plate of food--formal practice for 12-15 hours a day, day after day, week after week. The samma's? K: I was wondering whether he is trying too hard. To me he sounds like he is anticipating something to happen while trying very hard in his practise. With anticipation, I think there is kind of "desiring" To me when one tries to discern samma and miccha is still wrong view due to our view is conventional. As Dan already said in this statement "As agreed, the view that satipatthana is a medicine to apply, something to do to remedy dosa after it arises is a conventional view, not "paramattha sacca", not Right View.". In that case, sati will forever in the wrong view. We know that such method is a conventional method, but it is a mistake not to realise that we are all convetional pple and we need conventional view that we have derives from absolute view to order to have a proper understanding (which is also a conventional understanding) of the dhamma in order to practise this conventional method. This conventional method is the only way out for us to realise paramattha sacca and hence its good to be cautioned but not overly concern. To Jon Since all views are conventional, hence all our effort are conventional which implies that our effort will never be Right effort as long as we do not realise paramattha sacca. That is why the Eight Noble path can be mundane and Supramundane. Kind regards Kenneth Ong At the time, I thought they > > were there almost all the time. Of course, it was obvious that > sometimes they weren't, but basically I was pretty pleased with my > samma's. But now I realize that for 23.99 hours per day there were no samma's.Nowadays? It's still 23.99 samma-free hours per day (on a > good day!), but the difference is that I have an inkling that that's the way it is. That may not seem like a big deal in the grand scheme of things, and really it isn't--only a tiny step or two on a long, > > LONG path. But there is something liberating about realizing the > > quasi-ubiquity of being samma-free. > > > > Anyway, back to the conversation... > > > > ______________ > > Dan: > > > I meant to say that "applying medicine" is conventional wisdom and > > is > > > quite distinct from the heart of Dhamma, viz. anatta. Buddha taught > > > satipatthana not as a medicine, not as a technique, not as > > > conventional wisdom, but as the heart of Dhamma, as what the world > > > looks like when viewed through vision unclouded by sakayaditthi > > (even > > > if it's only for a moment of mundane insight). > > > > Erik: > > Just to clarify terms here: sakayaditthi merely means the VIEW of > > self, which isn't terminated until the view (subtle as it is) > > of "instrinsic self" has been seen directly as fictional construct > > > > Dan: > > I meant "ditthi" as a cetasika that doesn't arise in kusala cittas. I > > wanted specifically emphasize a particular ditthi that we had been > > discussing, viz. sakayaditthi. In a moment of mundane insight, > > sakayaditthi does not arise. But sakayaditti (in one of its many > > guises) is closely associated with the notion that satipatthana is > > like "applying medicine"; or that it is satipatthana in a mind > > says, "Hmmm.... There is akusala. Let me establish mindfulness to > > deal with it". As agreed, the view that satipatthana is a medicine to > > apply, something to do to remedy dosa after it arises is a > > conventional view, not "paramattha sacca", not Right View. Rooted as > > it is in sakayaditthi that wants control over cittas, it is > > impossible to get beyond the sequence pain->aversion->applying > > medicine as long as that view is held--anatta 101. > 8906 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Thu Oct 25, 2001 2:31pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Horses and medicine [Erik] Hi Dan As to my earlier email, furthermore, one do not need "pain" to be presence to "apply medicine" even during its absence we are "apply medicine". When "apply medicine" one is not concern whether there is samma or miccha since all cittas and cetasikas are just mechanical functions. Kindest regards Kenneth Ong Kenneth Ong wrote: > Hi Dan and (Jon) > > As I reread this post, please kindly allow me to comment on > > > --- dalthorp wrote: > No question that ALL the > samma's > > are important--not just sammaditthi. My question is: how can we > discern > the difference between the samma's and miccha's and the vippayutta's? > For > example, in my second intensive meditation retreat a number of years > ago, > I worked so very hard sitting, walking at a snail's pace, taking an > hour > to eat a simple plate of food--formal practice for 12-15 hours a day, > day > > after day, week after week. The samma's? > > > K: I was wondering whether he is trying too hard. To me he sounds like > he > is anticipating something to happen while trying very hard in his > practise. With anticipation, I think there is kind of "desiring" > > To me when one tries to discern samma and miccha is still wrong view due > to our view is conventional. As Dan already said in this statement "As > agreed, the view that satipatthana is a medicine to apply, something to > do > to remedy dosa after it arises is a conventional view, not "paramattha > sacca", not Right View.". In that case, sati will forever in the wrong > view. We know that such method is a conventional method, but it is a > mistake not to realise that we are all convetional pple and we need > conventional view that we have derives from absolute view to order to > have > a proper understanding (which is also a conventional understanding) of > the > dhamma in order to practise this conventional method. This conventional > method is the only way out for us to realise paramattha sacca and hence > its good to be cautioned but not overly concern. > > > To Jon > Since all views are conventional, hence all our effort are conventional > which implies that our effort will never be Right effort as long as we > do > not realise paramattha sacca. That is why the Eight Noble path can be > mundane and Supramundane. > > > > Kind regards > Kenneth Ong > > > At the time, I thought they > > were there almost all the time. Of > course, > it was obvious that > sometimes they weren't, but basically I was > pretty > pleased with my > samma's. But now I realize that for 23.99 hours per > day > there were no samma's.Nowadays? It's still 23.99 samma-free hours per > day > (on a > good day!), but the difference is that I have an inkling that > that's the way it is. That may not seem like a big deal in the grand > scheme of things, and really it isn't--only a tiny step or two on a > long, > > > > LONG path. But there is something liberating about realizing the > > > quasi-ubiquity of being samma-free. > > > > > > > Anyway, back to the conversation... > > > > > > ______________ > > > Dan: > > > > I meant to say that "applying medicine" is conventional wisdom and > > > > is > > > > quite distinct from the heart of Dhamma, viz. anatta. Buddha > taught > > > > satipatthana not as a medicine, not as a technique, not as > > > > conventional wisdom, but as the heart of Dhamma, as what the world > > > > > looks like when viewed through vision unclouded by sakayaditthi > > > (even > > > > if it's only for a moment of mundane insight). > > > > > > Erik: > > > Just to clarify terms here: sakayaditthi merely means the VIEW of > > > self, which isn't terminated until the view (subtle as it is) > > > of "instrinsic self" has been seen directly as fictional construct > > > > > > Dan: > > > I meant "ditthi" as a cetasika that doesn't arise in kusala cittas. > I > > > wanted specifically emphasize a particular ditthi that we had been > > > discussing, viz. sakayaditthi. In a moment of mundane insight, > > > sakayaditthi does not arise. But sakayaditti (in one of its many > > > guises) is closely associated with the notion that satipatthana is > > > like "applying medicine"; or that it is satipatthana in a mind > > > says, "Hmmm.... There is akusala. Let me establish mindfulness to > > > deal with it". As agreed, the view that satipatthana is a medicine > to > > > apply, something to do to remedy dosa after it arises is a > > > conventional view, not "paramattha sacca", not Right View. Rooted as > > > > it is in sakayaditthi that wants control over cittas, it is > > > impossible to get beyond the sequence pain->aversion->applying > > > medicine as long as that view is held--anatta 101. > > 8907 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Thu Oct 25, 2001 5:55pm Subject: Namaste from Bodh Gaya Namaste all, A quick hello from the place of the Lord Buddha's enlightenment. A very inspiring place to be, once you get past the vendors, beggars and assorted hangers-on that these places seem to attract. This morning we paid our respects at the bodhi tree and had a dhamma discussion in the grounds of the Maha-Bodhi temple complex. We talked about what it means to know nama as nama, rupa as rupa (there is more to this than some might think). Later there is a visit to other places in the area that feature in the Buddha's enlightenment story, such as the Nerajana river (I may skip that for some much-needed rest). I can see you have all been busy over the past 10 days or so, and I look forward to catching up on the messages I have missed during that period. Best wishes in the dhamma Jon 8908 From: Sarah Date: Thu Oct 25, 2001 6:59pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Udana-Nibbana 1 & 2 Dear Ken O & Rob Ep, --- Kenneth Ong wrote: > Hi Sarah > > > > The notes mention that “‘the unconditioned’, ‘the Deathless’, and ‘The > > peace’ > k: This defintion kind of let me recall, in the Tibetan tradition, they > call it the Unborn or uncreated. S: Sounds like we all agree nibbana is unconditioned at least:-) > > “...In this Teaching, everything, with the exception of nibbana, having > > an own nature is discovered to be one having its livelihood contingent >> upon conditions, not one (whose livelihood is ) irrespective of >> conditions.” > > k: Yes this is true. > > > “‘There is, monks,that base’ (tadayatanam): that cause (karanam)....for > > nibbana is spoken of as a base in the sense of a cause on account of its > >being the object-condition for the knowledges associated with the paths > >and their fruitions and so on, just as visible forms and so forth > >constitute the objective-conditions for eye-consciousness and so on. And, >> thus far, has the Lord made known to those monks the existence, in its >> highest sense, of the unconditioned element...’ “ > > > > So, unless anyone shouts, I take it we all agree so far, that nibbana is > > the unconditioned base/object/element experienced by conditioned > realities (magga and phala cittas). > k: This explanation seems to point that Nibbana is a conditioned by the > conditioned realities. I do not think conditonal realities can > experience Nibbana. It just kind of moving state from the conditon > reality to unconditional reality. To me it is just moments to moments > when condition goes into unconditional reality. S: Hey, Ken O, you just agred with ‘Yes, this is true’ that everything other than nibbana is dependent on conditions (above). Everything includes all the cittas, including those which (according to the Pali canon) experience nibbana. As the commentary notes say here, nibbana is the object for magga and phala cittas (paths and fruitions) and is a condition for them by beng arammana pacaya (object condition) which Howard and I were mentioning the other day. Ken O, let me know if you’re still not agreeing with the commentary or interpret it differently;-). UDANA- NIBBANA 2 Meanwhile I’ll move on just a little...(otherwise I’ll never get to Rob Ep’s comments;-) Just to repeat the initial extract: > Udana VIII.1 > "There is that dimension where there is neither earth, nor water, nor > fire, nor wind; neither dimension of the infinitude of space, nor > dimension of the infinitude of consciousness, nor dimension of > nothingness, .................... S: I may not have made it clear, that in the Masefield translation and Com notes which I’m using, base is used instead of dimension (as here) in ‘There is, monks,that base’ (tadayatanam) ******************** (p.1012 Udana com): “...The Lord, having thus indicated, face to face, the existence, in its highest sense, of the unconditioned element, next says ‘Wherein there is neither earth, nor water’ and so on so as to indicate its own nature via an elimination of things that are the antithesis thereof. Just as nibbana is nowhere (to be found) amidst conditioned (sankhata) things, since it has as its own nature that which is antithetical to all formations (sankhara), so are all cvonditioned things (not to be found) therein either, for the collection of things conditioned and unconditioned is (a thing) not witnessed......there is neither the earth element whose characteristic is that of hardness, nor the water element whose characteristic is that of oozing, nor the fire element whose characteristic is that of heat, nor the wind element whose characteristic is that of distending......absence therein of the four great elements, the absence of all derived materiality....absence..of any becoming associated with (the world of) sense desires and (the world of) form.....Even though its own nature is one in which there is an absence of forms, there is next said, so as to indicate the absence within nibbana of any of the states belonging to becoming in the formless (sphere), ‘Nor that base consisting of endless space......nor that base consisting of neither perception nor non-perception’.” ******************** In other words, as I understand ‘endless space.....non-perception’, these lines are referring to the arupa planes where there are already an absence of the elements and all rupas. They are referred to here to indicate that even so, all ‘states belonging’ to these planes (i.e. all conditioned realities) are also absent. Rob Ep, I’d be interested to hear if these notes make any difference to your understanding reflected below. I stress that, as I read it, the Buddha is describing nibbana here as experienced by the arahat’s cittas. At which point, all defilements are finally eradicated and at the end of the life, at parinibbana, there will be no more conditions for more becoming. There are one or two more sections which I’ll continue with next time. Sarah .................... Rob Ep wrote: Just want to use or abuse the moment to make these points: Buddha here says 'nor dimension of nothingness' which would imply something different from all things ceasing or becoming nil. That implies that something remains, although whatever it is has to avoid the definition of 'infinitude of consciousness' as well as 'dimension of nothingness'. nor dimension of neither perception nor non-perception; Again he not only says there is no perception, but he says there is no 'non-perception'. How can that be interpreted to mean anything other than that there is something that has not ceased, but which neither perceives nor doesn't perceive. It is not nil and it is not nothing. Something that does not partake of 'non-perception' cannot merely be the cessation of the kandhas. I say therer are more hints in the Buddha's refusal to merely say 'everything stops' than we are taking account of in the normal interpretation that the kandhas merely cease and nothing remains. .................... 8909 From: Sarah Date: Thu Oct 25, 2001 7:13pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Namaste from Bodh Gaya Dear Jon, --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > Namaste all, > > A quick hello from the place of the Lord Buddha's enlightenment. A very > inspiring place to be, once you get past the vendors, beggars and assorted > hangers-on that these places seem to attract. Nice surprise to hear from you here;-) ;-) We’ve all been following you all around and appreciate the ‘first-hand’ reprort for a change... > This morning we paid our respects at the bodhi tree and had a dhamma > discussion in the grounds of the Maha-Bodhi temple complex. We talked > about what it means to know nama as nama, rupa as rupa (there is more to > this than some might think). Later there is a visit to other places in > the area that feature in the Buddha's enlightenment story, such as the > Nerajana river (I may skip that for some much-needed rest). Please tell Khun Sujin, Nina and the others that we’re also discussing namas and rupas (mental and physical phenomena) in our high-tech environments . Your trip is a condition for us all to reflect on the holy places, whilst reminding ourselves that Bodh Gaya, the beggars and the river are only concepts.... > I can see you have all been busy over the past 10 days or so, and I look > forward to catching up on the messages I have missed during that period. Have some good rest too as we’ll all be looking forward to your ‘enlightened’ posts on return;-) It helps me to reflect (as I was reminded the other day) that: 'grief, sorrow, suffering, lamentation and despair are born of affection, originate in affection' (or 'a dear one'). See you on Sunday evening, conditions permitting Sar 8910 From: m. nease Date: Thu Oct 25, 2001 11:40pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: cittas- Howard Dear Sarah, --- Sarah wrote: > One reason I mention some of these more mundane > details is because I know > people like Rob K like to hear them. The other > reason is that people sometimes > ask what we do on trips to India if we don't > 'meditate' as usually understood > by the word. Hope this helps. Thanks Sarah, I like hearing about these too. I always enjoy reading about the mundane moments in the suttas and the vinaya too--they help to remind me that the Buddha et al. were real people (well--as real as people get). mike 8911 From: m. nease Date: Thu Oct 25, 2001 11:59pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] dhammavicaya IV Dear Gayan, The best one yet! I especially learned from the aasava piece--these connections are really valuable. Further down, do you remember the discussion we had on 'The Masterpiece' some time back? This is a very helpful revisiting. Thanks again for an all-round excellent post. This one (like all the others) is definitely a 'keeper' for future reference and reflection. mike --- Gayan Karunaratne wrote: > dear mike, > > > contd. > > --------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > > Aasava -> fermenting , processing for a long long > time ( like intoxicants ), > has the ability to intoxicate > > kaamaasava > bhavaasava > avijjaasava > ditthaasava > > aasavakkhaya = nibbana > > > sacchikaraniya sutta , catukka nipata , > > " cattarome bhikkhave sacchikaraniya dhammaa, > atthi bhikkhave dhamma kaayena sacchikaraniya > atthi bhikkhave dhamma satiyaa sacchikaraniya, > atthi bhikkhave dhamma cakkhuna sacchikaraniya , > atthi bhikkhave dhamma pannaya sacchikaraniya " > > sacchikaraniya = knowing truely ( as it is ) [ > understood as a solid fact ] > > there are dhammas known truly by kaaya ( body ) > there are dhammas known truly by sati( mindfulness ) > there are dhammas known truly by cakkhu( eye ) > there are dhammas known truly by panna ( wisdom ) > > furthermore buddha says, > example for first category is 'atthavimokkha' the 8 > vimokkhas > second (by sati )-> 'pubbenivaso' the ability to > recall previous wanderings > third ( by cakkhu ) -> 'cutupapato' the ability to > see the birth and death > of many forms of beings > fourth ( by panna ) -> 'aasavakkhayo' ending of > aasavas , the nibbana > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > sammaditthi sutta . MN > > " aasava samudayaa avijja samudayo - aasava nirodhaa > avijja nirodho " > > when aasava arises avijja ( ignorance ) aricess, > when aasava ceases avijja > ceases. > > further down in the sutta, > > " avijja samudayaa aasava samudayo - avijja nirodhaa > aasava nirodho " > > when avijja arises aasava arises, when avijja ceases > aasava ceases. > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > 2nd Gaddula sutta , khanda samyutta , S N > > " dittham vo bhikkhave caranam naama cittanti evam > bhante. > tampi kho bhikkhave caranam naama cittam citteneva > cintitam tena pi kho > bhikkhave > caranena cittena cittanneca cittataram, > tasmatiha bhikkhave abhikkhanam sakam cittam > paccavekkhitabbam, > diigharattam idam cittam samkilittham raagena , > dosena , mohenati. > citta samkileso bhikkhave satta samkilissamti > cittavodana satta visujjhanti. > naaham bhikkhave annam eka nikaayampi samanupassami > evam cittam yathayidam > bhikkhave > tiracchanagataa paanaa te pi kho tiracchanagataa > paanaa cittaneva cintitaa. > tehipi kho bhikkhave tiracchanagatehi paanehi > cittanneca cittataram. " > > > monks , have you seen a 'drawing' called 'carana' ? > ( citta -> citra ( > sanskrit ) ) > yes venerable sir. > monks, even that 'carana' is thought by the citta ( > mind ) > monks , ( so) the mind is more > 'versatile/interesting/diverse...'(creatively, > beautifully displayed) than > that carana ( which is also thought by the mind ) > > [ carana is said to be a kind of beautiful animation > graphics type of a > thing existed those days ] > > > monks every moment you should observe the mind. > for a long period this mind has been subjected to > the dirt of raaga, dosa, > moha. > when citta is dirty, the beings become dirty > when the mind is cleaned, the beings become cleaned. > > > monks I cant see a more > versatile/diverse(creatively, beautifully displayed) > category of beings than this animal category, > monks even those animals are thought by the mind > itself. > this mind is more versatile than the animal kingdom, > so monks you should observe it every moment. > > > -------------------------------------------------- > > discussing above sutta, > when one enjoys a carana citta like above, the > enjoyment comes because of > raaga , dosa , moha. > The carana is displayed in the mind and the end > product is helped by the > raaga, dosa, moha dirt that has been there in the > mind for a long time. > > Like a Movie,-> the same movie can be enjoyed by > different persons with > diffrent mind states. > But the movie 'they' are seeing is different from > eachother, because the > movie created in the minds differ according to the > person's mind state.( > with diffrent intensities of raaga, dosa, moha ) > > > > with the help of the analogy of a movie -> > > a movie is normally shown with a dark background to > have the contrasting > effect in the viewers mind. > what the director/producer of the movie only have > done is to assemble a > collection of displays that will trigger the > imagination of the viewer. The > viewer will create his own version of the movie from > that collection of > displays. > So it becomes an illusion where the viewer is > intoxicated. > > if when suddenly some flash of light was directed( > like an exit door being > opened in the theatre) at the movie screen(which has > a dark background), > there arise moments of viraaga from the movie. > ' oh this is just a movie ' etc.. > > -------------------------------------------------------- > > dvayatanupassana sutta . sutta nipata, > > " nivutaanam tamo hoti - andhakaaro apassatam > satam ca vivatam hoti - aloko passataamica > santike na vijaananti - magaa dhammassa akovido " > > to ones with avijja theres only darkness , like > darkness for the blind > for ones like buddhas ( worthy ones ) this is open , > like light for the > non-blind > the fools who dont know the dhamma, dont see the > nibbana which is so near. > > -------------------------------------------------------- > > Udena sutta Khuddaka N > > " mohasambandhino loko - bhabbarupo va dissati > upadhi sambandhano baalo - tamasa parivaarato > sassato viya khaayati - passato natthi kincanam " > > for the one who bonded with ignorance , the world is > displayed as a real > thing( believable thing ) > this fool who is bonded with upadhi , is accompanied > by a huge darkness.( > darkness prevails around ) > to him it(world) looks like sassata ( existing ) > but for a one who 'sees' theres nothing to be found. > > > -------------------------------------------------------- > > > 2nd Gaddula sutta , > > last part of the sutta , > > > like a painter , on a board or a wall or a cloth, > using red, blue , yellow > etc colour paints a complete portrait of a man or a > woman , > sameway the putujjana ( un enlightened beings ) > create, generate the > rupa,vedana,sanna,samkhara,vinnana the 5 khandas. > > > > contd. > > > rgds, > gayan 8912 From: Howard Date: Thu Oct 25, 2001 8:04pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: cittas- Howard Hi, Robert - In a message dated 10/25/01 2:01:06 AM Eastern Daylight Time, Robert E writes: > --- Howard wrote: > > > Also, the notion of a "superseding awareness", if not meant just as a > > field of possible experience, of potentialities, but rather as an > overarching > > "knowing", comes quite close to being a SELF. So it seems to me that some > > contortions one might adopt in order to make sense of the citta/dhamma > theory > > start to approach the exit door from the Dhamma and the entry way to > Vedanta. > > --------------------------------------------------------------- > > Let me isolate this point of yours for a moment. It has come up several > times in > your posts, and since I have had a strong interest in Vedanta, I would like > to > take a look at it. > > I hope the following discussion will not seem too off-topic to dsg-ers, but > I > include it here because I think that it may wind up having some relevance. > If > you'll indulge me for a moment. > > It has always seemed to me that the great Vedantic masters, such as Ramana > Maharshi and Nisargardatta in particular, really understood and experienced > Nibbana in the same way as the Arahant. I believe by the way they describe > their > view of individual self and what the transcendent state consists of, that > the > difference between their view and that of the Buddha's is merely one of > working > within a linguistic tradition that their followers would understand [being > Hindus > in India]. > > I feel absolutely certain that Ramana and Nisargardatta had an absolute > experience > and understanding of anatta and that they in fact transmitted this by the > way they > used language. Ramana would say: 'I see no difference between you and I. > There is > no master and no disciple. In fact, neither of us exists as individuals, > that is > just a convention of thought.' [paraphrasing] > ----------------------------------------------------- Howard: I won't say it is impossible that the only difference between some Vedantists and Buddhists is merely terminological. Even the great Shankhara (sp?) at times sounded quite Buddhist. (In fact, some have "accused" him of being strongly influenced by Mahayana.) --------------------------------------------------- > > That is just one example and I won't belabor it. Their distinction between > the > false, illusory individual self and what they called the Self, which was > real, > certainly sounds on the surface as if they are promoting a view of a > permanent, > shared formless conscious Being within which all seeming individuals exist. > But I > don't think by their description that this was their real experience of > Self. > When they described it, it was essentially an experience of emptiness, of > anatta > plus the occurence of consciousness acts, much as is talked about here. > Nisargardatta would put it even more 'objectively' and say that we think we > have > consciousness, but in fact we are mere objects within consciousness. And > even > this would be deconstructed so that there was nothing to hold on to in > terms of an > entity or object that was presumed to be real or permanent. > ------------------------------------------------------ Howard: Some Vedantists spoke that way, with Brahman being "neti, neti". However, the main thrust of Advaita Vedanta is that conditions, and conditioned dharmas, are, not only empty/illusory in the Buddhist sense, but are, in fact, absolutely *nothing*. Here I don't mean nothing-in-and-of-themselves, but an absolute nothing, whereas atman/brahman is absolute *being*, sat-chit-ananda with an emphasis on the "sat". Brahman is *all* that there is, and all else is mere illusion, superimposition. One wonders, of course, if Brahman is all that there is, and it is unchanging pure being, how such superimposition is possible! So, Advaita Vedanta is more than nondual (advaita), but is completely and absolutely monist. It is, I think, the quintessential eternalism and substantialism, diametrically opposed to a thoroughgoing nihilism, where as Buddhadhamma is a true middle way based on emptiness. I suspect that such an Advaita Vedanta, not necessarily the Vedanta of Ramana Maharshi, is based more on certain formless absorptions than on a realization of nirvana. -------------------------------------------------------------- > > So when our 'field of awareness' becomes an image of a substantial sort of > 'thing', like a cloud floating around throughout the universe, yes, it > begins to > resemble a view of an essence, an entity or an eternal being of some kind. > But > this is because it is hard not to 'imagine' that which we speak of but have > not > yet been raised to the level of. When you say that it must remain a 'field > of > potentiality or possibility' this also has its difficulties, because a > 'field' > means that there is a space of some kind, which would be something more > than mere > potential or possibility, so the language tends to make trouble. > ----------------------------------------------------- Howard: Then I need to find a substitute for 'field'! ;-)) ---------------------------------------------------- > > If there is a 'field of potentiality', what is it that makes these > possibilites > have the potential to be actualized?, for without this possibility > 'potential' is > not 'potential' at all. And what is it that moves this field from > potentiality to > actrivity? And if you are saying that the 'field of potentiality' simply > remains > that way and never gets activated once Nibbana has been reached [because > all seeds > of action have reached cessation] then is this field really something other > than > the pure cessation without further experience that we tend to complain > about? If > it is not, what makes it different? > -------------------------------------------------------------- Howard: I would suppose that my so-called field of potentiality is nothing more than the traces of joint kamma created by sentient beings since, to use a Mahyana phrase, the very no-beginning of time. What actually "occurs", what is "actualized", would be dependent on what has already occurred together with the specific accumulations of beings in a given realm. The whole business is, I suppose, a working out of kamma vipaka. Of course, this is all just sloppy theorizing on my part. --------------------------------------------------------------- > > I would tend to think that in the Nibbanic state, [if I can call it that; I > know > some think of it as only an event, but it is in any case an event that > causes a > permanent change] there is still awareness, but awareness merely of being > aware > when the senses are turned away from the sense objects. In other words, no > object, no entity, no experience per se, and so anatta is satisfied by this > state. > ------------------------------------------------------- Howard: You know, I'm not too sure about that. I know that the Abhidhamma take on nibbana is that of a separate dhamma, one dhamma among many, wherein there are no objects at all. But might not the fact of the matter be simply that there are no truly separable objects? It seems to me that our usual world of separate dhammas, both "internal"and "external", the "triple world" of samsara, is a matter of defiled perception. With the removal of defilements, achieved by "seeing through" all conditions, the "view" is radically different: There no longer are (separate) conditions, there is neither arising nor ceasing (of separate dhammas); samsara is "gone", and nibbana has "replaced" it (except all that has really happened is that avijja has taken a welcome exit). -------------------------------------------------------------- > > > If the Nibbanic person, like the Buddha, were to turn outward to teach, > then the > sense apparatus would functionally take place, but there would be no 'inner' > experience of being the one teaching or seeing the students to be taught; > there > would be the mere awareness that within the awareness this or that was > taking > place; including the action and speech of one's own body. One would not > identify > with any of it. In fact it might be possible, as Ramana once said, to > engage in > this action without experiencing it. Ramana said: 'I'm not even aware of > saying > this to you even as I say it, for there is no awareness of being a separate > person > saying this or you being a separate person receiving it. It is just > seeming to > take place from the standpoint of the mind.' -------------------------------------------------------------- Howard: I must admit that Maharshi sounds very good here! ------------------------------------------------------------- > > Anyway, I can't reach any conclusion in this, and I don't expect you to > necessarily answer these questions, but I think it gives some idea of where > some > of the problems and potentialities lie, and the essential matter that > Vedanta, > Mahayana and Theravada have dealt with, each in their own way. > > And thanks all for your indulgence, and any comments you feel moved to make. > > Best, > Robert Ep. > ================================= 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) 8913 From: Num Date: Thu Oct 25, 2001 8:44pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Namaste from Bodh Gaya Hi Sarah, > Please tell Khun Sujin, Nina and the others that we’re also discussing namas > and rupas (mental and physical phenomena) in our high-tech environments . > Your > trip is a condition for us all to reflect on the holy places, whilst > reminding > ourselves that Bodh Gaya, the beggars and the river are only concepts.... > > > I can see you have all been busy over the past 10 days or so, and I look > > forward to catching up on the messages I have missed during that period. > > Have some good rest too as we’ll all be looking forward to your > ‘enlightened’ > posts on return;-) > > It helps me to reflect (as I was reminded the other day) that: > 'grief, > sorrow, suffering, lamentation and despair are born of > affection, originate in affection' (or 'a dear one'). > > See you on Sunday evening, conditions permitting > > Sounds like a nice, sweet, romantic, wisdom-based love letter to me :) Me too, I like the Piyajatika sutta a lot. Best wishes, Num 8914 From: Robert Epstein Date: Fri Oct 26, 2001 4:02am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Udana-Nibbana 1 --- Sarah wrote: > Dear Rob Ep and Ken O, > > I’d like to discuss this Udana sutta (below) which has been mentioned a few > times, but I think like the ‘luminous mind’/bhavanga thread, it will be long > and difficult (for me), which is why I made no comment before;-) > > I’ve been reading the Udana commentary notes (by P.Masefield, PTS) to this > short Udana, but they (the notes) run to over 7 pages, so I’ll just have to > refer to parts for our discussion. I’m sure others have discussed this sutta at > length, but it’s new to me, so have a little patience;-) To make my job > ‘simpler’, I thought we could just go through line by line (slowly) and then > anyone can shout out when they disagree or understand the words differently. > Perhaps the commentary can be some kind of umpire (which doesn’t mean you have > to agree with the umpire’s decision or interpret it the same way as me;-)) > > Anyone’s welcome to ‘join’.... > > --- Kenneth Ong wrote: > > > Udana VIII.1 > > "There is that dimension where there is neither earth, nor water, nor > > fire, nor wind; neither dimension of the infinitude of space, nor > > dimension of the infinitude of consciousness, nor dimension of > > nothingness, > .................... > > Rob Ep, I’ve got your comments on the 2nd part noted at the end and will repeat > them later. For today, let’s just check we all agree on the context and the > first few words; > > As I understand, this is a description of nibbana (not parinibbana) as given to > monks, ‘hearing Dhamma with attentive ear’. It must refer to nibbana as > experienced by the arahat, I think. > > In the com. notes it says the Udana has “as its basis the Deathless element, > that proceeded by way of making known the unconditioned element.....indicating > nibbana in accordance with that characteristic of its own nature and > function.(sabhavasarasalakkhanato- relationships between sabhava, sarasa and > lakkhana)” > > The notes mention that “‘the unconditioned’, ‘the Deathless’, and ‘The peace’ > and so on (are all defined in terms of) ‘The destruction of lust, the > destruction of hatred, the destruction of delusion’”. > > (There are lots of sub-notes and cross references....which I may use at times.) > > Ken O, some of your questions may get answered as we proceed: > “...In this Teaching, everything, with the exception of nibbana, having an own > nature is discovered to be one having its livelihood contingent upon > conditions, not one (whose livelihood is ) irrespective of conditions.” > > “‘There is, monks,that base’ (tadayatanam): that cause (karanam)....for nibbana > is spoken of as a base in the sense of a cause on account of its being the > object-condition for the knowledges associated with the paths and their > fruitions and so on, just as visible forms and so forth constitute the > objective-conditions for eye-consciousness and so on. And, thus far, has the > Lord made known to those monks the existence, in its highest sense, of the > unconditioned element...’ “ > > So, unless anyone shouts, I take it we all agree so far, that nibbana is the > unconditioned base/object/element experienced by conditioned realities (magga > and phala cittas). > > I think I’ll leave it there for the first part. I’m looking forward to this > exercise. Some days, i’m too busy with work, so I’ll just carry on with my bits > when I have time.. > > Sarah Dear Sarah, Well, this is my first exposure -- I think -- to the commentaries, and while I'm sure many would like to have some commentaries on the commentaries, and some commentaries explaining those and so on [so highly refined and specific do I find the commentaries], I would like to say that I find them anything *but* forbidding or nihilistic. To the contrary, my brain must be deceiving me, because they seem to me to be very harmonious with my own sense of things. [I'm sure I'll be set straight quickly]. Although the commentaries state that all of the characteristics of Nibbana are to be understood in terms of cessation of defilements, etc., it still seems to me that the descriptors of Nibbana -- unconditioned, deathless, etc., are not forbidding, but descriptions of something pristine. That which is not affected by conditions [unconditioned], which is neither born nor dies [deathless], which is a state of perfect peace [the peace], indeed seems to describe the primordial condition of being, once defilements are removed. This is further supported in a sense by saying that Nibbana is not only the object of the path, but is also the base and the cause. There is a hint of Nibbana being the foundation of 'the true function of mind'. That may be a bit of a leap, but with Nibbana looming at the beginning, at the foundation of the whole process, there is a hint of Nibbana being one's true nature, which is a kind of background influence at the beginning, middle and end of the path. Which to me, is mirroring what you said, that Nibbana is the 'unconditioned base/object/element experienced by conditioned realities'. Of course, I hope you think my 'mirroring' is as horribly distorted as I think you may. What I mainly mean to say is that the terms of the commentaries do not strike me as annihilationist at all, and seem inviting rather than forbidding. Robert Ep. =============================================== > .................... > Rob Ep wrote: > > Just want to use or abuse the moment to make these points: > Buddha here says 'nor dimension of nothingness' which would imply something > different from all things ceasing or becoming nil. That implies that something > remains, although whatever it is has to avoid the definition of 'infinitude of > consciousness' as well as 'dimension of nothingness'. > > nor dimension of neither perception nor non-perception; > > Again he not only says there is no perception, but he says there is no > 'non-perception'. How can that be interpreted to mean anything other than that > there is something that has not ceased, but which neither perceives nor doesn't > perceive. It is not nil and it is not nothing. Something that does not > partake > of 'non-perception' cannot merely be the cessation of the kandhas. I say > therer > are more hints in the Buddha's refusal to merely say 'everything stops' than we > are taking account of in the normal interpretation that the kandhas merely > cease > and nothing remains. > > > neither this world, nor the next world, nor sun, nor moon. And there, I > > say, there is neither coming, nor going, nor staying; neither passing away > > nor arising: unestablished, unevolving, without support (mental > > object).[1] This, just this, is the end of stress." > > Robert Ep. 8915 From: Robert Epstein Date: Fri Oct 26, 2001 4:10am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] dhammavicaya IV I love it. Keep going Gayan. [hope it's not too much work] I find this stanza particularly compelling: 'to ones with avijja theres only darkness , like darkness for the blind for ones like buddhas ( worthy ones ) this is open , like light for the non-blind the fools who dont know the dhamma, dont see the nibbana which is so near.' The implication that nibbana is not something separate to be attained but is a prior possession clouded by ignorance is pretty clear to me in this stanza. I also love the one that follows, which is so beautiful, a beautiful example of the 'poetry of emptiness', you could say, almost the 'romance' of emptiness, it is so beautiful. I refer particularly to the last line: -------------------------------------------------------- Udena sutta Khuddaka N " mohasambandhino loko - bhabbarupo va dissati upadhi sambandhano baalo - tamasa parivaarato sassato viya khaayati - passato natthi kincanam " for the one who bonded with ignorance , the world is displayed as a real thing( believable thing ) this fool who is bonded with upadhi , is accompanied by a huge darkness.( darkness prevails around ) to him it(world) looks like sassata ( existing ) but for a one who 'sees' theres nothing to be found. ============================================== 'but for a one who 'sees' there's nothing to be found.' beautiful. Robert Ep. ================================================= ================================================= ================================================= --- Gayan Karunaratne wrote: > dear mike, > > > contd. > > --------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > > Aasava -> fermenting , processing for a long long time ( like intoxicants ), > has the ability to intoxicate > > kaamaasava > bhavaasava > avijjaasava > ditthaasava > > aasavakkhaya = nibbana > > > sacchikaraniya sutta , catukka nipata , > > " cattarome bhikkhave sacchikaraniya dhammaa, > atthi bhikkhave dhamma kaayena sacchikaraniya > atthi bhikkhave dhamma satiyaa sacchikaraniya, > atthi bhikkhave dhamma cakkhuna sacchikaraniya , > atthi bhikkhave dhamma pannaya sacchikaraniya " > > sacchikaraniya = knowing truely ( as it is ) [ understood as a solid fact ] > > there are dhammas known truly by kaaya ( body ) > there are dhammas known truly by sati( mindfulness ) > there are dhammas known truly by cakkhu( eye ) > there are dhammas known truly by panna ( wisdom ) > > furthermore buddha says, > example for first category is 'atthavimokkha' the 8 vimokkhas > second (by sati )-> 'pubbenivaso' the ability to recall previous wanderings > third ( by cakkhu ) -> 'cutupapato' the ability to see the birth and death > of many forms of beings > fourth ( by panna ) -> 'aasavakkhayo' ending of aasavas , the nibbana > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > sammaditthi sutta . MN > > " aasava samudayaa avijja samudayo - aasava nirodhaa avijja nirodho " > > when aasava arises avijja ( ignorance ) aricess, when aasava ceases avijja > ceases. > > further down in the sutta, > > " avijja samudayaa aasava samudayo - avijja nirodhaa aasava nirodho " > > when avijja arises aasava arises, when avijja ceases aasava ceases. > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > 2nd Gaddula sutta , khanda samyutta , S N > > " dittham vo bhikkhave caranam naama cittanti evam bhante. > tampi kho bhikkhave caranam naama cittam citteneva cintitam tena pi kho > bhikkhave > caranena cittena cittanneca cittataram, > tasmatiha bhikkhave abhikkhanam sakam cittam paccavekkhitabbam, > diigharattam idam cittam samkilittham raagena , dosena , mohenati. > citta samkileso bhikkhave satta samkilissamti cittavodana satta visujjhanti. > naaham bhikkhave annam eka nikaayampi samanupassami evam cittam yathayidam > bhikkhave > tiracchanagataa paanaa te pi kho tiracchanagataa paanaa cittaneva cintitaa. > tehipi kho bhikkhave tiracchanagatehi paanehi cittanneca cittataram. " > > > monks , have you seen a 'drawing' called 'carana' ? ( citta -> citra ( > sanskrit ) ) > yes venerable sir. > monks, even that 'carana' is thought by the citta ( mind ) > monks , ( so) the mind is more > 'versatile/interesting/diverse...'(creatively, beautifully displayed) than > that carana ( which is also thought by the mind ) > > [ carana is said to be a kind of beautiful animation graphics type of a > thing existed those days ] > > > monks every moment you should observe the mind. > for a long period this mind has been subjected to the dirt of raaga, dosa, > moha. > when citta is dirty, the beings become dirty > when the mind is cleaned, the beings become cleaned. > > > monks I cant see a more versatile/diverse(creatively, beautifully displayed) > category of beings than this animal category, > monks even those animals are thought by the mind itself. > this mind is more versatile than the animal kingdom, > so monks you should observe it every moment. > > > -------------------------------------------------- > > discussing above sutta, > when one enjoys a carana citta like above, the enjoyment comes because of > raaga , dosa , moha. > The carana is displayed in the mind and the end product is helped by the > raaga, dosa, moha dirt that has been there in the mind for a long time. > > Like a Movie,-> the same movie can be enjoyed by different persons with > diffrent mind states. > But the movie 'they' are seeing is different from eachother, because the > movie created in the minds differ according to the person's mind state.( > with diffrent intensities of raaga, dosa, moha ) > > > > with the help of the analogy of a movie -> > > a movie is normally shown with a dark background to have the contrasting > effect in the viewers mind. > what the director/producer of the movie only have done is to assemble a > collection of displays that will trigger the imagination of the viewer. The > viewer will create his own version of the movie from that collection of > displays. > So it becomes an illusion where the viewer is intoxicated. > > if when suddenly some flash of light was directed( like an exit door being > opened in the theatre) at the movie screen(which has a dark background), > there arise moments of viraaga from the movie. > ' oh this is just a movie ' etc.. > > -------------------------------------------------------- > > dvayatanupassana sutta . sutta nipata, > > " nivutaanam tamo hoti - andhakaaro apassatam > satam ca vivatam hoti - aloko passataamica > santike na vijaananti - magaa dhammassa akovido " > > to ones with avijja theres only darkness , like darkness for the blind > for ones like buddhas ( worthy ones ) this is open , like light for the > non-blind > the fools who dont know the dhamma, dont see the nibbana which is so near. > > -------------------------------------------------------- > > Udena sutta Khuddaka N > > " mohasambandhino loko - bhabbarupo va dissati > upadhi sambandhano baalo - tamasa parivaarato > sassato viya khaayati - passato natthi kincanam " > > for the one who bonded with ignorance , the world is displayed as a real > thing( believable thing ) > this fool who is bonded with upadhi , is accompanied by a huge darkness.( > darkness prevails around ) > to him it(world) looks like sassata ( existing ) > but for a one who 'sees' theres nothing to be found. > > > -------------------------------------------------------- > > > 2nd Gaddula sutta , > > last part of the sutta , > > > like a painter , on a board or a wall or a cloth, using red, blue , yellow > etc colour paints a complete portrait of a man or a woman , > sameway the putujjana ( un enlightened beings ) create, generate the > rupa,vedana,sanna,samkhara,vinnana the 5 khandas. > > > > contd. > > > rgds, > gayan 8916 From: Robert Epstein Date: Fri Oct 26, 2001 4:17am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Udana-Nibbana 1 --- Kenneth Ong wrote: > k: This explanation seems to point that Nibbana is a conditioned by the > conditioned realities. I do not think conditonal realities can > experience Nibbana. It just kind of moving state from the conditon > reality to unconditional reality. To me it is just moments to moments > when condition goes into unconditional reality. Yes, Kenneth, a good point which I asked about some weeks ago and had an interesting discussion. I think the conclusion we reached [in agreement?] was that conditioned realities can *take* Nibbana as their object, in terms of an idea, a concept, a goal, a spur, a base for the path, etc., but that this does not mean they *perceive it as it is*. The can only approach it, strive for it, move towards it, cognize it, etc., until it has been realized. But it is still the object of thought and endeavor. Nibbana is the *only* unconditioned reality, as I understand it, and thus it can only be *truly* perceived by and as itself. [?] In other words experienced as it is, but not perceived from a distance. [?] Sarah, would you agree with the above, or does your sense of it assert that the conditioned realities of the path actually do perceive Nibbana? Also, Sarah, I forgot to ask in response to your other post where you are discussing the sutra and commentaries [which I love]: Why do you say the sutta refers to the Nibbana of the Arahant, rather than the Buddha? I'm just curious what in the description of the Sutta suggests to you that it is below the 'Buddha level'? Thanks, Robert Ep. 8917 From: Robert Epstein Date: Fri Oct 26, 2001 6:03am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Cetana (volition, intention)is controllable? (was kusa.. Dear Ken, I amstarting out with your last statement, which I think is very funny. I hope you at least in part meant it that way: > Thanks for keeping the discussion going Robert, I am finding it > very testing. > > Kind regards > > Ken Howard ============== I actually found your comments very illuminating, and I appreciate them. More below: --- Ken Howard wrote: > Dear Robert Ep > > You wrote: > Well perhaps I can prolong the discussion by asking you to say a > little more about how the conventional language of the Buddha > could be taken as an absolute teaching. > > ************************ > > Perhaps it could be said that, by describing the `absolute' teaching > as the Middle Way, the Buddha has told us that it is beyond the > realm of conventional language. It is between the two concepts, > self indulgence and self torment. These two, non-middle ways include > not only the extremes (living in the lap of luxury or starving to > death), but also the most subtle forms in between (the mere notion > of either a controlling self or a self who is controlled by fate). > In this way,they embrace all conceptual understanding of reality. To > say the least, they cover the worldling's view of everything in daily > life. This is wonderful, a great description of not only the nature, but range, of the middle way, almost a mathematical/logical description which I think is very apt. > I think our aim should be to understand and observe the worldling's > daily life, as described by the Buddha, not to try to change it. If > we understand how it differs from the Ariyan's daily life, then some > changes might be conditioned. This is what I understand by Jon's > comment that the discourses were descriptive, not prescriptive. Well, I can see that if you wanted to understand all realities that the statements about what kind of action leads to what kind of result in every walk of life would be a worthwhile endeavor in itself, and does imply in itself that the Buddha was being 'prescriptive'. > ********************** > You wrote: > And I wonder if you think that the 'prescriptions' that seem to be in > some of the suttas make absolutely no difference for whether one is > able to follow the 'path' or not. > > ********************** > > Compliance with a prescription can only occur when the conditions for > its occurring are present. If they aren't present, then try as we > might, our accumulated tendencies will only produce a sad imitation. > > ************************* This is so true! And it really is sad! > You wrote: > In other words, do you think that if the Buddha says 'don't drink' > and it were purely prescriptive, would this have an influence on > whether a monk would drink or not? And if the monk did or didn't > drink, would this make a difference for whether he is able to > discern realities and make progress on the path? > > ***************************** > > Monks, of course, have rules of training which they follow with or > without the delusion of self. By subduing their natural > inclinations, they, like ourselves, change their behaviour -- they > can perform wholesome deeds and refrain from unwholesome deeds. > (There is no we who can do these things, but there is the required > level of understanding for them to happen.) But this is still not > the Middle Way. While there is the idea of a self, there is no right > understanding of the present,absolute reality. This is also a wonderful explanation for how empty following prescriptions can be if the actions do not arise naturally from understanding, and how this would not represent anything having to do with the path. Very good. > Thanks for keeping the discussion going Robert, I am finding it > very testing. > > > Kind regards > > Ken Howard I repeat your comment again in its natural place, at the end. Thanks very much for continuing the discussion 'against your will'. What is trying for you was illuminating for me! So I guess it is my nature to be selfish! Robert Ep. 8918 From: Robert Epstein Date: Fri Oct 26, 2001 11:45am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Namaste from Bodh Gaya --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > I can see you have all been busy over the past 10 days or so, and I look > forward to catching up on the messages I have missed during that period. > > Best wishes in the dhamma > > Jon Hi Jon, Just wanted to say nice to hear from you. Enjoy your journey! Regards, Robert Ep. 8919 From: Gayan Karunaratne Date: Fri Oct 26, 2001 0:01pm Subject: RE: [DhammaStudyGroup] dhammavicaya II dear robert e., It is said that every buddha will use Pali as his language of choice to teach dhamma. And when one learns pali it is apperant that he/she finds the significant profoundness, sharpness and simplicity right away. and theres a very unique "technologically advanced" ness about it , i thought.( words fail me ) :o) best wishes for your pali studies, sir . rgds, gayan -----Original Message----- From: Robert Epstein [mailto:Robert E] Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2001 11:11 AM Subject: RE: [DhammaStudyGroup] dhammavicaya II --- Gayan Karunaratne wrote: > > > dear ken o. and robert e. , > > many thanks for your compassionate comments. > > The attempt is only to unveil the profoundness,trickyness,"interesting"ness > in hidden phrases in Pali Suttas. > The least importance should be given to the translations. > > If these keep on triggering the need to explore the Real Pali thoroughly > then they had done their job.( and nothing more is intended ) Still nice to have someone right here who can look at the words and talk about them in Pali and English. I can't help but find it a thrill. On another note, I've tried reading a little of the Pali to myself out loud, and it's so poetic, much of it sounds so beautiful. I know that the sounds of Sanskrit are supposed to be designed by the ancients to create certain spurs in the nervous system, and I believe the Pali must be like this as well. There's something profoundly ancient and compressed in the sound and feeling of the Pali. Here's my favorite for today: " na raaga raagi - na viraaga ratto " Isn't that beautiful? Robert 8920 From: Gayan Karunaratne Date: Fri Oct 26, 2001 0:24pm Subject: RE: [DhammaStudyGroup] dhammavicaya IV dear robert e, thanks for the encouragement. just a comment, below >The implication that nibbana is not something separate to be attained but is a >prior possession clouded by ignorance is pretty clear to me in this stanza. I cant see the relationship of a 'prior possession' here , robert. >I also love the one that follows, which is so beautiful, a beautiful example of >the 'poetry of emptiness', you could say, almost the 'romance' of emptiness, it is >so beautiful. I refer particularly to the last line: yes sir, it is said that the prominence that should be given to the 'sunnatapatisamyutta suttas' ( discourses about sunnata ) will get receded as time goes on. This is due to the fact that , ordinary worldlings will not particularly like to hear about the emptiness, and the sangha will have increasing difficulties of propagating them due to their inability. I cant recall where I got this from, but it must be in an 'Anagatha Bhayani' sutta or a commentry. rgds, gayan 8921 From: Sarah Date: Fri Oct 26, 2001 2:04pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Tales from India Dear Mike, > > Thanks Sarah, I like hearing about these too. I > always enjoy reading about the mundane moments in the > suttas and the vinaya too--they help to remind me that > the Buddha et al. were real people (well--as real as > people get). I know just what you mean.....I enjoy the stories too (reminders and lobha;-)...Yesterday evening after other groups had left the bo tree, ‘our group’ walked around with candles and chanting I expect. According to Jon, everyone looks quite different after 2 weeks. Most the Thai ladies have replaced their western slacks with Indian sarees and I expect everyone’s lost weight too... This morning they had a 3am wake-up call, 4am breakfast and 5am departure to Rajgir, Nalanda and onto Patna for the night. Another action-packed day with long bus rides, in other words. At Rajgir, I’m reading that they ‘visit Grihakuta hill to pay homage’. Is this another name for Vulture’s Peak, I wonder, where many suttas were taught? I also remember King Bimbisara’s ‘park’ . (I had a silent retreat (on my own) in Rajgir in those old days. I’d go out early in the morning before sunrise to do my snail walking in this park, determined not to see or notice all the locals performing their early morning ‘bodily rites’. I expect they also preferred not to see this wierd little blond hippy, walking in slow motion. That was also the time I had the stay at the Japanese temple on the top of Vulture’s Peak with the chanting you helped me remember (and have since forgotten again;-) ) After lunch, today, the Group are due to visit Nalanda where ‘the monastic university was the foremost center of learning from the 5th to the 12th century AD for metaphysics, logic, medicine, grammar and Buddhist scriptures and practice. it is also the birth place of Ven. Sariputta’. The trip’s almost over....There is a little discussion amongst our friends left behind in Bangkok of arranging an English-speaking dsg trip with K.Sujin next time....Now, that’s an idea....I’m sure they’ll keep us posted ;-) Sarah 8922 From: Sarah Date: Fri Oct 26, 2001 2:39pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: cittas- Howard Dear Mike, Rob Ep, Howard, Rob Ep wrote: > With my very very limited knowledge, I would guess that the mind door > experiences > the 'sense object' which is the direct object as recorded by the sense-door, > so it > is a little different perhaps than a 'memory'. It may be that the mind-door > picks > it up while it is still 'active' in the sense-door. Does the sense-door > moment > have to be completed before the mind-door picks it up? Technical questions > for > Sarah or Nina. Heavens! (as Mike would say), I’m as technically handicapped (or usually more so) that the next person ....However, over time, I find a few details manage to filter through those big path-blocks, especially any that realate to understanding in daily life. Now, as I understand, if we’re talking about a sense door object such as visible object or sound, the javana cittas in the sense door process will ‘run through’ or ‘process’ the object and awareness may arise at this time to be aware of the object (remember rupa lasts for 17 cittas) which has just been seen or heard. After the sense door process, the same object may be experienced in the mind door process and similarly, the javana cittas may be accompanied by awareness (sati)which is aware of the very same characteristic. As discussed before, technically speaking, the visible object itself has fallen away, but the characteristic still appears. In terms of what awareness is aware of, as far as I understand, there is no difference in the characteristic which appears in either sense or mind door process and it’s not in the slightest bit important to know which process awareness is arising in (impossible to know) or to count the cittas. Awareness can be aware now of the characteristic of visible object or sound and at this time, there’s no thinking or wondering or confusion. And yes, there is only one door process at a time. On the other hand, if the object is a nama, then it is only experienced in the mind door process . In this case, the object has fallen away too, but again the characteristic can be the object of awareness. It’s not a memory, but the direct awareness of that characteristic or nature. Of course, the sati which may arise in the javana process is also conditioned and lasts for a brief moment before falling away as well. Is there any awareness of visible object or sound now? I’m sorry if this sounds clumsy....Rob K or Num may be able to help more while we all wait for Nina. Sarah 8923 From: Sarah Date: Fri Oct 26, 2001 3:21pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Udana-Nibbana 1 Dear Rob Ep and Ken O, May I say before giving a quick response to this note, that there was discussion before about how viriya (effort/energy) has the function of ‘energising’ the other cetasikas. May I say that you both play a similar role in terms of ‘energising’ the rest of us on dsg with your sincere, inspirational and enthusiatic comments and fine speech. I’m sure we're all grateful for this (even though conditions don’t allow us to always be in agreement on the points raised ) --- Robert Epstein wrote: > > Yes, Kenneth, a good point which I asked about some weeks ago and had an > interesting discussion. I think the conclusion we reached [in agreement?] > was > that conditioned realities can *take* Nibbana as their object, in terms of an > idea, a concept, a goal, a spur, a base for the path, etc., but that this > does not > mean they *perceive it as it is*. The can only approach it, strive for it, > move > towards it, cognize it, etc., until it has been realized. But it is still > the > object of thought and endeavor. Agreed;-) > Nibbana is the *only* unconditioned reality, as I understand it, and thus it > can > only be *truly* perceived by and as itself. [?] In other words experienced > as > it is, but not perceived from a distance. [?] > > Sarah, would you agree with the above, or does your sense of it assert that > the > conditioned realities of the path actually do perceive Nibbana? Nibbana is object (‘base’ as discussed in the com. notes) for the lokuttara cittas (magga and phala cittas) to experience directly. It is not perceived by itself, just as visible object or any other reality is not percieved by itself. ‘close’ or ‘distant’ don’t make much sense to me..you’d have to elaborate on this . The lokuttara cittas, like any other cittas, arise briefly to experience their object (nibbana) at the stages of enlightenment and then fall away.After that the objects, as before, are sound, visible object and so on and nibbana is no longer experienced > > Also, Sarah, I forgot to ask in response to your other post where you are > discussing the sutra and commentaries [which I love]: Why do you say the > sutta > refers to the Nibbana of the Arahant, rather than the Buddha? I'm just > curious > what in the description of the Sutta suggests to you that it is below the > 'Buddha > level'? Interesting question. By arahat, I was referring to the cittas which eradicate defilements completely (because there were references to the end of lobha and other defilements in the passage). With regard to the nature or ‘sabhava’ of nibbana, I don’t remember ever seeing anything to distinguish its characteristic as experienced by the Buddha’s cittas or the arahat’s cittas. The cittas of course are different. The degree and nature of wisdom is different, but I’m not sure we can say that nibbana is different as object. Like now, visible object as experienced by our cittas with ignorance does not have a different nature or characteristic from the visible object experienced by the arahat’swisdom. In other words, it is not the reality which changes with insight, but the nature of the cittas experiencing and understanding the reality. This is actually a key point, because people often have the idea that they need to change the reality being experienced (and try hard to have a particular reality) rather than developing understanding of the nama or rupas conditioned already. Hope that helps. I think I’ll have to leave your other reply to me on Udana-nibbana 1 (and also Udana 3) until after my busy Saturday teaching. Many, thanks, Rob Ep and Ken O.....Maybe if they organise a dsg/English trip with k.Sujin to India, you’ll both be able to join;-)) Sarah 8924 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Fri Oct 26, 2001 7:24pm Subject: RE: [DhammaStudyGroup] dhammavicaya II Hi Gayan Suddenly I become very interested in Pali because of you :). Do you know any good Pali Language centre in Singapore. Thanks and keep posting and I enjoy them very much Kinde regards Kenneth Ong --- Gayan Karunaratne wrote: > dear robert e., > > > It is said that every buddha will use Pali as his language of choice to > teach dhamma. > > And when one learns pali it is apperant that he/she finds the > significant > profoundness, sharpness and simplicity right away. > > and theres a very unique "technologically advanced" ness about it , i > thought.( words fail me ) > :o) > > > best wishes for your pali studies, sir . > > rgds, > gayan > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Robert Epstein [mailto:Robert E] > Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2001 11:11 AM > Subject: RE: [DhammaStudyGroup] dhammavicaya II > > > > --- Gayan Karunaratne wrote: > > > > > > dear ken o. and robert e. , > > > > many thanks for your compassionate comments. > > > > The attempt is only to unveil the > profoundness,trickyness,"interesting"ness > > in hidden phrases in Pali Suttas. > > The least importance should be given to the translations. > > > > If these keep on triggering the need to explore the Real Pali > thoroughly > > then they had done their job.( and nothing more is intended ) > > Still nice to have someone right here who can look at the words and talk > about > them in Pali and English. I can't help but find it a thrill. > > On another note, I've tried reading a little of the Pali to myself out > loud, > and > it's so poetic, much of it sounds so beautiful. I know that the sounds > of > Sanskrit are supposed to be designed by the ancients to create certain > spurs > in > the nervous system, and I believe the Pali must be like this as well. > There's > something profoundly ancient and compressed in the sound and feeling of > the > Pali. > Here's my favorite for today: > > " na raaga raagi - na viraaga ratto " > > Isn't that beautiful? > > Robert > > > 8925 From: Howard Date: Fri Oct 26, 2001 4:54pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] dhammavicaya II Hi, Gayan - In a message dated 10/26/01 12:03:22 AM Eastern Daylight Time, Gayan writes: > dear robert e., > > > It is said that every buddha will use Pali as his language of choice to > teach dhamma. > > And when one learns pali it is apperant that he/she finds the significant > profoundness, sharpness and simplicity right away. > > and theres a very unique "technologically advanced" ness about it , i > thought.( words fail me ) > :o) > > > best wishes for your pali studies, sir . > > rgds, > gayan > ============================ If that was really said, and if it was said by someone who knew what he/she was talking about, then by "Pali" he/she must have meant "the vernacular". That is how the Buddha taught, and how he instructed his bhikkhus to teach: in the language of those being taught. 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) 8926 From: Yulia Klimov Date: Fri Oct 26, 2001 9:29pm Subject: RE: [DhammaStudyGroup] dhammavicaya II <> Hello, How can one learn Pali? Is it possible to do it without the teacher, just with books? Yulia -----Original Message----- From: Gayan Karunaratne [mailto:Gayan] Sent: Friday, October 26, 2001 12:02 AM Subject: RE: [DhammaStudyGroup] dhammavicaya II dear robert e., It is said that every buddha will use Pali as his language of choice to teach dhamma. And when one learns pali it is apperant that he/she finds the significant profoundness, sharpness and simplicity right away. and theres a very unique "technologically advanced" ness about it , i thought.( words fail me ) :o) best wishes for your pali studies, sir . rgds, gayan -----Original Message----- From: Robert Epstein [mailto:Robert E] Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2001 11:11 AM Subject: RE: [DhammaStudyGroup] dhammavicaya II --- Gayan Karunaratne wrote: > > > dear ken o. and robert e. , > > many thanks for your compassionate comments. > > The attempt is only to unveil the profoundness,trickyness,"interesting"ness > in hidden phrases in Pali Suttas. > The least importance should be given to the translations. > > If these keep on triggering the need to explore the Real Pali thoroughly > then they had done their job.( and nothing more is intended ) Still nice to have someone right here who can look at the words and talk about them in Pali and English. I can't help but find it a thrill. On another note, I've tried reading a little of the Pali to myself out loud, and it's so poetic, much of it sounds so beautiful. I know that the sounds of Sanskrit are supposed to be designed by the ancients to create certain spurs in the nervous system, and I believe the Pali must be like this as well. There's something profoundly ancient and compressed in the sound and feeling of the Pali. Here's my favorite for today: " na raaga raagi - na viraaga ratto " Isn't that beautiful? Robert 8927 From: Robert Epstein Date: Fri Oct 26, 2001 10:37pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] dhammavicaya II --- Howard wrote: > Hi, Gayan - > > In a message dated 10/26/01 12:03:22 AM Eastern Daylight Time, > Gayan writes: > > > > dear robert e., > > > > > > It is said that every buddha will use Pali as his language of choice to > > teach dhamma. > > > > And when one learns pali it is apperant that he/she finds the significant > > profoundness, sharpness and simplicity right away. > > > > and theres a very unique "technologically advanced" ness about it , i > > thought.( words fail me ) > > :o) > > > > > > best wishes for your pali studies, sir . > > > > rgds, > > gayan > > > ============================ > If that was really said, and if it was said by someone who knew what > he/she was talking about, then by "Pali" he/she must have meant "the > vernacular". That is how the Buddha taught, and how he instructed his > bhikkhus to teach: in the language of those being taught. > > With metta, > Howard Howard, I for one certainly take your point. Each language has means of communicating idiomatically to the people who use it and the true 'teacher' [happy to hear Buddha said so] uses the terms that the student will respond to and understand. With that said, and acknowledging that I really don't know the languages, I find my little exposures to Sanskrit and its close cousin Pali, the former the source of all our European languages, to have a sort of magical effect on me. I suppose in a world of various co-arising causes and effects, there might be some room for some weird or interesting mystical ones, couldn't there? Even without a self or a permanent entity or object of any kind, there are some strange and wonderful things in the various dimensions of living. I wonder if there really is a kind of magic in Pali and Sanskrit, or whether I'm romanticizing them? Either way, it is nice to hear the Buddha's message translated word for word at times, to hear the poetry and rhythm of the original. Best, Robert Ep. 8928 From: m. nease Date: Fri Oct 26, 2001 10:38pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: cittas- Howard Hi Sarah, --- Sarah wrote: > I’m sorry if this sounds clumsy....Rob K or Num may > be able to help more while > we all wait for Nina. This didn't seem clumsy to me, in fact I found it a very accessible recap of this process. Hearing it several times from different people has really helped me to get a handle on it (an adze-handle, no doubt). mike 8929 From: m. nease Date: Fri Oct 26, 2001 10:40pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Udana-Nibbana 1 Dear Sarah, --- Sarah wrote: > Like now, visible object as experienced by our > cittas with ignorance does not > have a different nature or characteristic from the > visible object experienced > by the arahat’swisdom. In other words, it is not the > reality which changes with > insight, but the nature of the cittas experiencing > and understanding the > reality. This is actually a key point, because > people often have the idea that > they need to change the reality being experienced > (and try hard to have a > particular reality) rather than developing > understanding of the nama or rupas > conditioned already. Good point with important implications I think--thanks. mike 8930 From: m. nease Date: Fri Oct 26, 2001 10:43pm Subject: RE: [DhammaStudyGroup] dhammavicaya II Hi Kenneth, Try these guys: Graduate School of Buddhist Studies (Singapore) No .2 Lorong 24-A Geylang, Singapore 398526 Tel: (65) 746 8435 Fax: (65) 7417689 Email: 014075080150042153036171203219231090006026057192209171188199172216051 http://web.singnet.com.sg/~buddhlib/GS/prospectus/admin.htm If they can't help you they may be able to put you in touch with someone who can. Cheers, mike --- Kenneth Ong wrote: > Hi Gayan > > Suddenly I become very interested in Pali because of > you :). Do you know > any good Pali Language centre in Singapore. > > Thanks and keep posting and I enjoy them very much > > Kinde regards > Kenneth Ong > > --- Gayan Karunaratne wrote: > > dear robert e., > > > > > > It is said that every buddha will use Pali as his > language of choice to > > teach dhamma. > > > > And when one learns pali it is apperant that > he/she finds the > > significant > > profoundness, sharpness and simplicity right away. > > > > and theres a very unique "technologically > advanced" ness about it , i > > thought.( words fail me ) > > :o) > > > > > > best wishes for your pali studies, sir . > > > > rgds, > > gayan > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Robert Epstein [mailto:Robert E] > > Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2001 11:11 AM > > > > Subject: RE: [DhammaStudyGroup] dhammavicaya II > > > > > > > > --- Gayan Karunaratne wrote: > > > > > > > > > dear ken o. and robert e. , > > > > > > many thanks for your compassionate comments. > > > > > > The attempt is only to unveil the > > profoundness,trickyness,"interesting"ness > > > in hidden phrases in Pali Suttas. > > > The least importance should be given to the > translations. > > > > > > If these keep on triggering the need to explore > the Real Pali > > thoroughly > > > then they had done their job.( and nothing more > is intended ) > > > > Still nice to have someone right here who can look > at the words and talk > > about > > them in Pali and English. I can't help but find > it a thrill. > > > > On another note, I've tried reading a little of > the Pali to myself out > > loud, > > and > > it's so poetic, much of it sounds so beautiful. I > know that the sounds > > of > > Sanskrit are supposed to be designed by the > ancients to create certain > > spurs > > in > > the nervous system, and I believe the Pali must be > like this as well. > > There's > > something profoundly ancient and compressed in the > sound and feeling of > > the > > Pali. > > Here's my favorite for today: > > > > " na raaga raagi - na viraaga ratto " > > > > Isn't that beautiful? > > > > Robert > > > > 8931 From: m. nease Date: Fri Oct 26, 2001 11:20pm Subject: RE: [DhammaStudyGroup] dhammavicaya II Hello, Yulia, Here's a great site with a lot of Pali resources: http://members.home.net/j-andrew-shaw/pali.htm Ñ÷àñòëèâî! mike --- Yulia Klimov wrote: > < language of choice to > teach dhamma.>> > Hello, > How can one learn Pali? > Is it possible to do it without the teacher, just > with books? > Yulia > > -----Original Message----- > From: Gayan Karunaratne [mailto:Gayan] > Sent: Friday, October 26, 2001 12:02 AM > Subject: RE: [DhammaStudyGroup] dhammavicaya II > > > dear robert e., > > > It is said that every buddha will use Pali as his > language of choice to > teach dhamma. > > And when one learns pali it is apperant that he/she > finds the significant > profoundness, sharpness and simplicity right away. > > and theres a very unique "technologically advanced" > ness about it , i > thought.( words fail me ) > :o) > > > best wishes for your pali studies, sir . > > rgds, > gayan > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Robert Epstein [mailto:Robert E] > Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2001 11:11 AM > > Subject: RE: [DhammaStudyGroup] dhammavicaya II > > > > --- Gayan Karunaratne wrote: > > > > > > dear ken o. and robert e. , > > > > many thanks for your compassionate comments. > > > > The attempt is only to unveil the > profoundness,trickyness,"interesting"ness > > in hidden phrases in Pali Suttas. > > The least importance should be given to the > translations. > > > > If these keep on triggering the need to explore > the Real Pali thoroughly > > then they had done their job.( and nothing more is > intended ) > > Still nice to have someone right here who can look > at the words and talk > about > them in Pali and English. I can't help but find it > a thrill. > > On another note, I've tried reading a little of the > Pali to myself out loud, > and > it's so poetic, much of it sounds so beautiful. I > know that the sounds of > Sanskrit are supposed to be designed by the ancients > to create certain spurs > in > the nervous system, and I believe the Pali must be > like this as well. > There's > something profoundly ancient and compressed in the > sound and feeling of the > Pali. > Here's my favorite for today: > > " na raaga raagi - na viraaga ratto " > > Isn't that beautiful? > > Robert 8932 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Fri Oct 26, 2001 11:35pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Udana-Nibbana 1 --- Sarah wrote: > Dear Rob Ep and Ken O, > > May I say before giving a quick response to this note, that there was > discussion before about how viriya (effort/energy) has the function of > ‘energising’ the other cetasikas. May I say that you both play a similar > role > in terms of ‘energising’ the rest of us on dsg with your sincere, > inspirational > and enthusiatic comments and fine speech. I’m sure we're all grateful > for this > (even though conditions don’t allow us to always be in agreement on the > points > raised ) > > --- Robert Epstein wrote: > > > > Yes, Kenneth, a good point which I asked about some weeks ago and had > an interesting discussion. I think the conclusion we reached [in > agreement?] was> that conditioned realities can *take* Nibbana as their object, in terms of an idea, a concept, a goal, a spur, a base for the path, etc., but that this does not mean they *perceive it as it is*. The can only approach it, strive for it, move towards it, cognize it, etc., until it has been realized. But it is still > > the object of thought and endeavor. > > Agreed;-) > > > Nibbana is the *only* unconditioned reality, as I understand it, and > thus it can only be *truly* perceived by and as itself. [?] In other words experienced asit is, but not perceived from a distance. [?] > > > > Sarah, would you agree with the above, or does your sense of it assert > that the conditioned realities of the path actually do perceive Nibbana? > > Nibbana is object (‘base’ as discussed in the com. notes) for the > lokuttara cittas (magga and phala cittas) to experience directly. It is not perceived by itself, just as visible object or any other reality is not percieved by itself.‘close’ or ‘distant’ don’t make much sense to me..you’d have to elaborate on this . The lokuttara cittas, like any other cittas, arise briefly to experience their object (nibbana) at the stages of enlightenment and then fall away.After that the objects, as before, are sound, visible object and so on and nibbana is no longer experienced k: sounds like taking Nibbana as an ordinary citta. Rise and fall. Lokuttara cittas are the resultant of mundane cittas. Hence if Nibbana is the resultant, then Lokuttara cittas are the cause. This means Nibbana is conditioned by Lokuttar cittas which inturns are conditioned by mundane cittas. Nibbana can never be experienced by conditioned cittas because Nibbana is unconditional, if it is not then why classified it as unconditional in the first place. Assuming Nibbana can be experienced by conditioned if we used the basis that Nibbana has the same nature of anatta as conditioned cittas. But the problem as they are anatta, whatever citta experienced will be illusory. Because this "illusory experience" is due to the speed of cittas which a self thought there is self in anatta. Nibbana cannot be substantiated on this basis because in Nibbana we see reality, which mean anatta is fully understand, hence there is no "illusory experience". > Interesting question. By arahat, I was referring to the cittas which > eradicate defilements completely (because there were references to the end of lobha and other defilements in the passage). With regard to the nature or ‘sabhava’ of nibbana, I don’t remember ever seeing anything to distinguish its characteristic as experienced by the Buddha’s cittas or the arahat’s cittas. The cittas of course are different. The degree and nature of wisdom is different, but I’m not sure we can say that nibbana is different as object. > k: The problem is then we thought kusala cittas is the one leading to Nibbana which is not correct. Because kusala cittas are dependent on akusala cittas to be in existence. If there is no akuasla citta, we would not know what is kuasala cittas in the first place. Cittas cannot eradicate another cittas because they have the same charateristics. Citta is categories into four jati but to me they are not mutually exclusive. Furthermore if we look at sati, it is never abt getting rid, it is abt knowing its coming and going. No eradication because eradication or getting rid is still attached to a subtle self concept for an "action" to be enforced whereas coming and going we let things as it is, attachment to a self concept is also let go. That is why I keep insisting that Nibbana to me is not eradication of defilements it is the letting go of defilements and in the next moment one is in Nibbana. One let go of conditions to reach unconditional reality. > Like now, visible object as experienced by our cittas with ignorance > does not have a different nature or characteristic from the visible object experienced by the arahat’swisdom. k: That is not true, because Arahat sees reality of rupa where we do not. They way they see visible object is totally different from us but they could choose to see like us because unconditional knows conditional but conditional does not knows unconditional In other words, it is not the reality which changes with insight, but the nature of the cittas experiencing and understanding the reality. This is actually a key point, because people often have the idea that they need to change the reality being experienced (and try hard to have a particular reality) rather than developing understanding of the nama or rupas conditioned already. k: Yes agreed because nobody can change reality because reality itself is anatta. Kind regards Kenneth Ong 8933 From: Num Date: Fri Oct 26, 2001 9:58pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: cittas- Howard Hi Sarah, Mike, Rob E and everyone I do not think I can help much. Still a long way for me. Theory is helpful and can condition right understanding according to one own accumulation. Awareness of dhamma as it is, I mean as paramatta nature, is satipattana. At that moment there is no theory, no story, no people, and the world is disappeared. > As discussed before, > technically speaking, the visible object itself has fallen away, but the > characteristic still appears. In terms of what awareness is aware of, as > far as > I understand, there is no difference in the characteristic which appears in > either sense or mind door process and it’s not in the slightest bit > important > to know which process awareness is arising in (impossible to know) or to > count > the cittas. > > I agree with Mike, that does not sound clumsy at all. From my limited understanding as well, the sense door vithi has completely fallen away and then there are many bhavaga citta moments. Then if conditions permit, bhavagagupaccheda(arrest-or cut-bhavaga) is acting as a mind-door for the mind-door process. (as discusses earlier that hadaya-rupa can candition citta to arise as a "a place of being born(nissaya-paccaya)". When citta arises at hadaya-rupa, at that moment we called hadaya-rupa : hadaya-vathu(mean a plcae where citta is being born (excluding dvi-pancavinna citta)), but it is not mano-dvara b/c bhavagagupaccheda(arrest-or cut-bhavaga) is mano-dvara, though it arises at hadaya-vathu. Object of mano-dvara vithi is, as Sarah mention, characteristic of object of sense-door(panca-dvara) vithi which just has fallen away. (we still call it present b/c it just fallen away,( paccupan-santati)) At that point object of mano-dvara vithi is still a paramutta object. Pannatti (eg mass, shape, name and etc.) about that object (paramutta) can be an object of much later mano-dvara vithi. I think sanna is involved in every vithi citta as to mark whatever object known by that moment citta. I hope I do not make thing messier. Again that is my personal understanding from reading. The bottom-line of this theory, to me, is to point out that the thing we call self or entity is subjected under multiple causes and conditions. I agree that Nina should have better explanation. BTW while we are waiting, you can check out from her online book, Abhidhamma in Daily Life chapter 12, intermediate section. And Summary of Paramuttadhamma, chapter 4, advance section. Both are available a www.dhammastudy.com Thanks for good question and comments. Num 8934 From: Howard Date: Fri Oct 26, 2001 11:42pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] dhammavicaya II Hi, Robert - In a message dated 10/26/01 10:41:16 AM Eastern Daylight Time, Robert E writes: > > --- Howard wrote: > > Hi, Gayan - > > > > In a message dated 10/26/01 12:03:22 AM Eastern Daylight Time, > > Gayan writes: > > > > > > > dear robert e., > > > > > > > > > It is said that every buddha will use Pali as his language of choice to > > > teach dhamma. > > > > > > And when one learns pali it is apperant that he/she finds the > significant > > > profoundness, sharpness and simplicity right away. > > > > > > and theres a very unique "technologically advanced" ness about it , i > > > thought.( words fail me ) > > > :o) > > > > > > > > > best wishes for your pali studies, sir . > > > > > > rgds, > > > gayan > > > > > ============================ > > If that was really said, and if it was said by someone who knew > what > > he/she was talking about, then by "Pali" he/she must have meant "the > > vernacular". That is how the Buddha taught, and how he instructed his > > bhikkhus to teach: in the language of those being taught. > > > > With metta, > > Howard > > Howard, > I for one certainly take your point. Each language has means of > communicating > idiomatically to the people who use it and the true 'teacher' [happy to hear > Buddha said so] uses the terms that the student will respond to and > understand. > > With that said, and acknowledging that I really don't know the languages, I > find > my little exposures to Sanskrit and its close cousin Pali, the former the > source > of all our European languages, to have a sort of magical effect on me. > > I suppose in a world of various co-arising causes and effects, there might > be some > room for some weird or interesting mystical ones, couldn't there? Even > without a > self or a permanent entity or object of any kind, there are some strange and > wonderful things in the various dimensions of living. I wonder if there > really is > a kind of magic in Pali and Sanskrit, or whether I'm romanticizing them? > > Either way, it is nice to hear the Buddha's message translated word for > word at > times, to hear the poetry and rhythm of the original. > > Best, > Robert Ep. > =========================== I think you *might* be romanticizing them. The Hindus did that with Sanskrit. Also the Jewish Cabbalists did that with Hebrew. People have a "thing" about language, based, perhaps on the idea that knowing the "true" name of something gives one power over it. This falls under "magic".[(Disclaimer: I don't rule out "magic". I just think that it is a matter of mind, not ritual - or, ritual only to the extent that ritual influences mind.] The Buddha, I have read, was very realistic about language, understanding the purely conventional nature of it. [This is not to deny that some mantras, because of their sound properties and/or onomatopoeia, could have special effects on the mind.] Oh, there is one more thing about Pali and Sanskrit which *does* make them special to native speakers of European languages (for example), and that is that they are not far removed from the proto-indo-european language which is the source language for all the European languages. 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) 8935 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Sat Oct 27, 2001 11:30am Subject: Re: intention/cetana in the Abhidhamma --- Robert Kirkpatrick wrote: > Dear jack, > I wrote a longish reply to this but lost it when my computer > jammed. Her's an abbreviated version. Comments interspersed: > _____ > Jack: I have a number of questions about intention or cetana, > not in the broader > sutta sense but in the more precise,narrow Abhidhamma sense. > > What is the difference between adhippaya and cetana? Both are > translated > intention. > _______ > Could you give some contexts for adhippaya. > _______ > Also how does cetana differ from chanda? > ____ > Robert:they are different cetasikas. Both may be present at > the > same time. Cetana arises with every citta but has differing > intensities depending on the type of citta: Nina van gorkom > writes "As regards the manifestation of cetana which is > directing, the Atthasalini compares cetana with the chief > disciple who recites his own lessons and makes the other > pupils > recite their lessons as well, with the chief carpenter who > does > his own work and makes the other carpenters do their work, or > with the general who fights himself and makes the other > soldiers > take part in the battle, "...for when he begins, the others > follow his example. Even so, when volition starts work on its > object, it sets associated states to do each its own." see > http://www.dhammastudy.com/cetasikas6.html > Chanda is a pakinnaka (particular) that arises with many > cittas > but not all. It arises with ALL kusala (faultless) cittas and > also all types of cittas rooted in lobha (craving, attachment) > and aversion(faulty). It does not arise with cittas rooted in > doubt. We can see that it is differnt from craving as it also > arises with cittas rooted in alobha(detachment) > ______ > > Jack: Is the following correct? Cetana (will) is present in > each > moment. If it > becomes strong enough, it becomes chanda (intention) which > becomes adhimokkha > (resolve) which becomes padhana (effort). > > _ > Robert: No, they are all differnt cetasikas that have > different > functions and can arise together. Padhana is actually viriya > cetasika. Samma-vayama, also viriya, is effort of the eighfold > path and arises dependent on correct insight at the level of > satipatthana. > ____ > ______ > Adhimokkha directs cedana toward a > specific goal which can be fulfilled by padhana. If vedana is > corrupted by > craving, then cetana, chanda, adhimokkha and padhana are also > defiled and > lead to suffering. If vedana is not corrupted, they do not > lead > toward > suffering. > _____ > Robert: Adhimokkha, determination: see Nina van Gorkom > http://www.dhammastudy.com/cetasikas11.html > Vedana arises with all cittas . If the citta is rooted in > aversion , ignorance, or attachment then all the feelings, and > any other mental factors are tainted by the roots. > the conditions for kusala(wholesome) or akusala(unwholesome) > are > complex and include fators from the past and present. There is > no self doing any of this conditioning and this is what true > satipatthana sees: only varied, evanescent, irreducible and > entangled conditions and conditioned factors arising and > pasing > away. > One may wonder why the details about cetasikas are important: > By > investigating (Dhammavicaya) into the nature of this > psycho-physical stream of becoming the idea of a whole is > broken > up. Resolution into the component parts is an antidote to the > hallucination, the wrong idea of a self that exists and is > somehow directing this conglomerate of namas and rupas. > It is like a butcher; when he takes the whole cow he thinks > 'this is a cow'. But by the time he has skinned, chopped , > cut, > boned, diced, sliced and minced the carcase that idea of "cow" > is gone. > robert > 8936 From: Sarah Date: Sat Oct 27, 2001 9:04pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Tales from India Hi Mike, Many thanks to you and others for the encouragement with these posts. Yes, they all walked up Vulture's Peak (actually, as I remember a little different from the spot with the Japanese temple which all the toursits go to, now by chairlift I hear) and yes this is Grihakuta hill. They had a discussion in the grounds of the Nalanda university ruins which Jon reminded me are magnificent. They arrived very late in Patna after the buses were forced to go at a snail's pace as there was a festival in progross and throngs of people were in the streets as they approached the town. Those with stamina and able to face yet another day in the bus went off to Vaisali 'to visit historically and religiously sites' today, whilst the tired and the discussion keenies stayed for a full day of 'excellent' discussion in a small group. A few left this afternoon and the rest take a very late flight to Calcutta tonight and then a morning flight to Bangkok. I'm told that by now, nearly everyone has a cough or sore throat (or worse) and many have suffered from 'Delhi bellies', so I imagine that most will be glad to get home and rest. Thanks for reading and encouraging these reports, It's been fun. Sarah 8937 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Sun Oct 28, 2001 10:38am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Udana-Nibbana 1 & 2 Hi Sarah --- Sarah wrote: > Dear Ken O & Rob Ep, > > > “...In this Teaching, everything, with the exception of nibbana, > having an own nature is discovered to be one having its livelihood > contingent> upon conditions, not one (whose livelihood is ) irrespective of conditions.” > > > > k: Yes this is true. > > > > > “‘There is, monks,that base’ (tadayatanam): that cause > (karanam)....for nibbana is spoken of as a base in the sense of a cause on account of its being the object-condition for the knowledges associated with the paths and their fruitions and so on, just as visible forms and so forth constitute the objective-conditions for eye-consciousness and so on. > And, thus far, has the Lord made known to those monks the existence, in > its highest sense, of the unconditioned element...’ “ > > > > > > So, unless anyone shouts, I take it we all agree so far, that > nibbana is > > > the unconditioned base/object/element experienced by conditioned > > realities (magga and phala cittas). > > > k: This explanation seems to point that Nibbana is a conditioned by > the conditioned realities. I do not think conditonal realities can > > experience Nibbana. It just kind of moving state from the conditon > > reality to unconditional reality. To me it is just moments to moments > > when condition goes into unconditional reality. > > S: Hey, Ken O, you just agred with ‘Yes, this is true’ that everything > other > than nibbana is dependent on conditions (above). Everything includes all > the > cittas, including those which (according to the Pali canon) experience > nibbana. > As the commentary notes say here, nibbana is the object for magga and > phala > cittas (paths and fruitions) and is a condition for them by beng > arammana > pacaya (object condition) which Howard and I were mentioning the other > day. > > Ken O, let me know if you’re still not agreeing with the commentary or > interpret it differently;-). k: Yes i have interpreted differently from the commentary and I have explain in my earlier email what I think. > > > Udana VIII.1 > > "There is that dimension where there is neither earth, nor water, nor > > fire, nor wind; neither dimension of the infinitude of space, nor > > dimension of the infinitude of consciousness, nor dimension of > > nothingness, > .................... > > S: I may not have made it clear, that in the Masefield translation and > Com notes which I’m using, base is used instead of dimension (as here) in ‘There is, monks,that base’ (tadayatanam) k: How would he described a base which Buddha has refused to say in detail and I have find doubts abt such a description. What Buddha is describing in that Sutta is basically "cannot be explained in mortal words" By using base this word, it is a already a conditionality. > ******************** > > (p.1012 Udana com): > > “...The Lord, having thus indicated, face to face, the existence, in its > highest sense, of the unconditioned element, next says ‘Wherein there is > neither earth, nor water’ and so on so as to indicate its own nature via > an elimination of things that are the antithesis thereof. > > Just as nibbana is nowhere (to be found) amidst conditioned (sankhata) > things, since it has as its own nature that which is antithetical to all > formations (sankhara), so are all cvonditioned things (not to be found) therein either, for the collection of things conditioned and unconditioned is (a thing) not witnessed......there is neither the earth element whose characteristic is that of hardness, nor the water element whose characteristic is that of oozing, nor the fire element whose characteristic is that of heat, nor the wind element whose characteristic is that of distending......absence therein of the four great elements, the absence of all derived materiality....absence..of any becoming associated with (the world of) sense desires and (the world of) form.....Even though its own nature is one in which there is an absence of forms, there is next said, so as to indicate the absence within nibbana of any > of the states belonging to becoming in the formless (sphere), ‘Nor that > base consisting of endless space......nor that base consisting of neither > perception nor non-perception’.” > > ******************** k: When the commentary says that it has its own nature, isn't this an outter ego. Isn't this a substantiality issue that I have mentioen a few times. No matter how we say or explain, there is always this issue where Buddha refuse to answer. kind regards Kenneth Ong 8938 From: Robert Epstein Date: Sun Oct 28, 2001 11:33am Subject: RE: [DhammaStudyGroup] dhammavicaya II --- Gayan Karunaratne wrote: > dear robert e., > > > It is said that every buddha will use Pali as his language of choice to > teach dhamma. > > And when one learns pali it is apperant that he/she finds the significant > profoundness, sharpness and simplicity right away. > > and theres a very unique "technologically advanced" ness about it , i > thought.( words fail me ) > :o) > > > best wishes for your pali studies, sir . > > rgds, > gayan Thank you , Gayan. I continue to appreciate your translations. Thanks for the gift. Robert Ep. 8939 From: Robert Epstein Date: Sun Oct 28, 2001 11:38am Subject: RE: [DhammaStudyGroup] dhammavicaya IV Dear Gayan, I don't have the stanza in front of me, but the first one I mentioned spoke of Nibbana in a way that made it seem a part of the current experience, although not experienced by defiled cittas, rather than a distant goal. Regarding sunnata, emptiness, if you can direct me to the names of the suttas on sunnata, I think I should take a look right now. Are they called 'Anagatha Bhayanai'? .....And if you happen to feel like translating a verse or two....... Well, that would be nice too. Your schedule permitting of course. Regards, Robert Ep. =========================================== --- Gayan Karunaratne wrote: > dear robert e, > > thanks for the encouragement. > > just a comment, below > > >The implication that nibbana is not something separate to be attained but > is a > >prior possession clouded by ignorance is pretty clear to me in this > stanza. > > I cant see the relationship of a 'prior possession' here , robert. > > > >I also love the one that follows, which is so beautiful, a beautiful > example of > >the 'poetry of emptiness', you could say, almost the 'romance' of > emptiness, it is > >so beautiful. I refer particularly to the last line: > > yes sir, it is said that the prominence that should be given to the > 'sunnatapatisamyutta suttas' ( discourses about sunnata ) will get receded > as time goes on. > This is due to the fact that , ordinary worldlings will not particularly > like to hear about the emptiness, and the sangha will have increasing > difficulties of propagating them due to their inability. > I cant recall where I got this from, but it must be in an 'Anagatha Bhayani' > sutta or a commentry. > > > rgds, > gayan 8940 From: Robert Epstein Date: Sun Oct 28, 2001 11:51am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: cittas- Howard Dear Sarah, Thanks for your help. I found it very clear. I do have a couple of questions: Is there any reason given why only one citta can arise at a time? Why must they be sequential? If there is no 'mind' in which they are to occur, why or how are they coordinated in a tight sequential string? If sati is an 'accompaniment' of a citta when it does occur, rather than a citta itself, what is it? Where or how does sati arise? Does it 'piggyback' on its associated citta(s)? Does it also last for specific number of cittas as a rupa does? How would you define sati? I always thought of mindfulness as being 'an awareness of being aware'. In other words, for those moments, one is aware that there is a process of consciousness taking place, rather than merely participating in the consciousness without realizing it. Is this a definition you would accord with? Would it be fair to say that the process that sati 'awakens' to in insight moments and eventually in Nibbana, is an awareness that all that seems to be a relation with real objects is really a relation of mind with objects of mind? Gee, I really have no hesitation to give you a hard time while your dear friends and associates are away. If I'm being overly inquisitive, just let me know. I know you have a schedule beyond our little 'chats'! Regards, Robert Ep. ========================= --- Sarah wrote: > Dear Mike, Rob Ep, Howard, > > Rob Ep wrote: > > > With my very very limited knowledge, I would guess that the mind door > > experiences > > the 'sense object' which is the direct object as recorded by the sense-door, > > so it > > is a little different perhaps than a 'memory'. It may be that the mind-door > > picks > > it up while it is still 'active' in the sense-door. Does the sense-door > > moment > > have to be completed before the mind-door picks it up? Technical questions > > for > > Sarah or Nina. > > > Heavens! (as Mike would say), I’m as technically handicapped (or usually more > so) that the next person ....However, over time, I find a few details manage to > filter through those big path-blocks, especially any that realate to > understanding in daily life. > > Now, as I understand, if we’re talking about a sense door object such as > visible object or sound, the javana cittas in the sense door process will ‘run > through’ or ‘process’ the object and awareness may arise at this time to be > aware of the object (remember rupa lasts for 17 cittas) which has just been > seen or heard. > > After the sense door process, the same object may be experienced in the mind > door process and similarly, the javana cittas may be accompanied by awareness > (sati)which is aware of the very same characteristic. As discussed before, > technically speaking, the visible object itself has fallen away, but the > characteristic still appears. In terms of what awareness is aware of, as far as > I understand, there is no difference in the characteristic which appears in > either sense or mind door process and it’s not in the slightest bit important > to know which process awareness is arising in (impossible to know) or to count > the cittas. > > Awareness can be aware now of the characteristic of visible object or sound and > at this time, there’s no thinking or wondering or confusion. And yes, there is > only one door process at a time. > > On the other hand, if the object is a nama, then it is only experienced in the > mind door process . In this case, the object has fallen away too, but again the > characteristic can be the object of awareness. It’s not a memory, but the > direct awareness of that characteristic or nature. Of course, the sati which > may arise in the javana process is also conditioned and lasts for a brief > moment before falling away as well. > > Is there any awareness of visible object or sound now? > > I’m sorry if this sounds clumsy....Rob K or Num may be able to help more while > we all wait for Nina. > > Sarah 8941 From: Robert Epstein Date: Sun Oct 28, 2001 0:05pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Udana-Nibbana 1 --- Sarah wrote: > Nibbana is object (‘base’ as discussed in the com. notes) for the lokuttara > cittas (magga and phala cittas) to experience directly. It is not perceived by > itself, just as visible object or any other reality is not percieved by itself. > ‘close’ or ‘distant’ don’t make much sense to me..you’d have to elaborate on > this . The lokuttara cittas, like any other cittas, arise briefly to experience > their object (nibbana) at the stages of enlightenment and then fall away.After > that the objects, as before, are sound, visible object and so on and nibbana is > no longer experienced Dear Sarah, Hi! Can one say what is experienced in relation to Nibbana after it has fallen away? Is it a one-time deal? And what is the purpose of this momentary experience? What status does Nibbana have in this process? What is it's nature? [more small questions: and more below]. > > Also, Sarah, I forgot to ask in response to your other post where you are > > discussing the sutra and commentaries [which I love]: Why do you say the > > sutta > > refers to the Nibbana of the Arahant, rather than the Buddha? I'm just > > curious > > what in the description of the Sutta suggests to you that it is below the > > 'Buddha > > level'? > > Interesting question. By arahat, I was referring to the cittas which eradicate > defilements completely (because there were references to the end of lobha and > other defilements in the passage). With regard to the nature or ‘sabhava’ of > nibbana, I don’t remember ever seeing anything to distinguish its > characteristic as experienced by the Buddha’s cittas or the arahat’s cittas. > The cittas of course are different. The degree and nature of wisdom is > different, but I’m not sure we can say that nibbana is different as object. > > Like now, visible object as experienced by our cittas with ignorance does not > have a different nature or characteristic from the visible object experienced > by the arahat’swisdom. In other words, it is not the reality which changes with > insight, but the nature of the cittas experiencing and understanding the > reality. This is actually a key point, because people often have the idea that > they need to change the reality being experienced (and try hard to have a > particular reality) rather than developing understanding of the nama or rupas > conditioned already. This is fascinating. So Nibbana is seen as a separate 'object' from the cittas that experience it? This is a unique idea from my former understandings [mostly conceptual]. Nibbana always seems to me to be a description of a 'state' in which there is no longer any defilements blocking the direct discernment of realities, and the nature of consciousness itself [the object of sati/satipathana?]. So if Nibbana is not a non-defiled citta itself, or a form of undefiled unconditioned sati, but an object, is there any way that you can explain this a little more? I don't quite get the idea of what kind of object, albeit completely unconditioned, Nibbana would be, and what the effect of momentarily experiencing it would be. How does this process 'clear' the cittas [if that is correct] of defilements in order to initiate one into an Arahat? [Boy, I'm really full of complicated questions these last two days. Sorry!] > Hope that helps. I think I’ll have to leave your other reply to me on > Udana-nibbana 1 (and also Udana 3) until after my busy Saturday teaching. Many, > thanks, Rob Ep and Ken O.....Maybe if they organise a dsg/English trip with > k.Sujin to India, you’ll both be able to join;-)) > > Sarah I would love it if it worked out; conditions allowing, as we say. Robert Ep. 8942 From: Robert Epstein Date: Sun Oct 28, 2001 0:07pm Subject: RE: [DhammaStudyGroup] dhammavicaya II Gayan, You're causing a Pali revolution! Robert Ep. ========================== --- Yulia Klimov wrote: > < teach dhamma.>> > Hello, > How can one learn Pali? > Is it possible to do it without the teacher, just with books? > Yulia > > -----Original Message----- > From: Gayan Karunaratne [mailto:Gayan] > Sent: Friday, October 26, 2001 12:02 AM > Subject: RE: [DhammaStudyGroup] dhammavicaya II > > > dear robert e., > > > It is said that every buddha will use Pali as his language of choice to > teach dhamma. > > And when one learns pali it is apperant that he/she finds the significant > profoundness, sharpness and simplicity right away. > > and theres a very unique "technologically advanced" ness about it , i > thought.( words fail me ) > :o) > > > best wishes for your pali studies, sir . > > rgds, > gayan > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Robert Epstein [mailto:Robert E] > Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2001 11:11 AM > > Subject: RE: [DhammaStudyGroup] dhammavicaya II > > > > --- Gayan Karunaratne wrote: > > > > > > dear ken o. and robert e. , > > > > many thanks for your compassionate comments. > > > > The attempt is only to unveil the > profoundness,trickyness,"interesting"ness > > in hidden phrases in Pali Suttas. > > The least importance should be given to the translations. > > > > If these keep on triggering the need to explore the Real Pali thoroughly > > then they had done their job.( and nothing more is intended ) > > Still nice to have someone right here who can look at the words and talk > about > them in Pali and English. I can't help but find it a thrill. > > On another note, I've tried reading a little of the Pali to myself out loud, > and > it's so poetic, much of it sounds so beautiful. I know that the sounds of > Sanskrit are supposed to be designed by the ancients to create certain spurs > in > the nervous system, and I believe the Pali must be like this as well. > There's > something profoundly ancient and compressed in the sound and feeling of the > Pali. > Here's my favorite for today: > > " na raaga raagi - na viraaga ratto " > > Isn't that beautiful? > > Robert > 8943 From: Sarah Date: Sun Oct 28, 2001 3:46pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Udana-Nibbana 1& 3 Dear Rob Ep and Ken O, ******************** > > > Udana VIII.1 > > > "There is that dimension where there is neither earth, nor water, nor > > > fire, nor wind; neither dimension of the infinitude of space, nor > > > dimension of the infinitude of consciousness, nor dimension of > > > nothingness, ******************** Rob Ep: > Dear Sarah, > Well, this is my first exposure -- I think -- to the commentaries, and while > I'm > sure many would like to have some commentaries on the commentaries, and some > commentaries explaining those and so on [so highly refined and specific do I > find > the commentaries], I would like to say that I find them anything *but* > forbidding > or nihilistic. ................... Sarah: Glad to hear it....This particular translation is very readable, I find. .................... Rob Ep: >To the contrary, my brain must be deceiving me, because they > seem > to me to be very harmonious with my own sense of things. [I'm sure I'll be > set > straight quickly]. .................... Sarah: Let’s see... .................... Rob Ep: > Although the commentaries state that all of the characteristics of Nibbana > are to > be understood in terms of cessation of defilements, etc., it still seems to > me > that the descriptors of Nibbana -- unconditioned, deathless, etc., are not > forbidding, but descriptions of something pristine. That which is not > affected by > conditions [unconditioned], which is neither born nor dies [deathless], .................... Sarah: so far, so good.... .................... Rob Ep: >which is a > state of perfect peace [the peace], indeed seems to describe the primordial > condition of being, once defilements are removed. .................... Sarah: I find it more useful to consider nibbana as a reality or an element with characteristic lakkhana) and nature (sabhava) than a state . Just to requote here from the Commentary: > > that proceeded by way of making known the unconditioned > element.....indicating > > nibbana in accordance with that characteristic of its own nature and > > function.(sabhavasarasalakkhanato- relationships between sabhava, sarasa > and > > lakkhana)” I’m also not sure where you get the ‘primordial condition of being’ from anything quoted so far... .................... Rob Ep: > This is further supported in a sense by saying that Nibbana is not only the > object > of the path, but is also the base and the cause. There is a hint of Nibbana > being > the foundation of 'the true function of mind'. .................... Sarah: I think you’re referring to this extract: > > is spoken of as a base in the sense of a cause on account of its being the > > object-condition for the knowledges associated with the paths and their > > fruitions and so on, just as visible forms and so forth constitute the > > objective-conditions for eye-consciousness and so on. Please note that it is here referring to specific path and fruition consciousness (magga and phala cittas) which arise momentarily just as eye consciousness arises momentarily to see visible object. The objects in both cases are a condition for the cittas at those moments. I’m not sure what is meant by ‘the true function of mind’, but if it refers to a state or cittas now (if only they could be seen with the clouds removed), I don’t.read any reference to this interpretation. .................... Rob Ep: >That may be a bit of a leap, > but > with Nibbana looming at the beginning, at the foundation of the whole > process, > there is a hint of Nibbana being one's true nature, which is a kind of > background > influence at the beginning, middle and end of the path. .................... Sarah: Sorry, but where does it say any of this? .................... Rob Ep: > Which to me, is mirroring what you said, that Nibbana is the 'unconditioned > base/object/element experienced by conditioned realities'. Of course, I hope > you > think my 'mirroring' is as horribly distorted as I think you may. .................... Sarah: Well......I can’t see the connection I’m sorry to say..But then, as I said at the outset, I knew this wouldn’t be a quick or easu exercise and I’m not going anywhere;-) There are a couple more replies from you and ken O (I’m glad to see), but I think I’ll post Udana-nibbana 3 before reading them;-) -------------------- UDANA-NIBBANA 3 I’d like to consider these lines which follow on from the ones at the beginning of this post: > > > neither this world, nor the next world, nor sun, nor moon. And there, I > > > say, there is neither coming, nor going, nor staying; neither passing > away > > > nor arising: unestablished, unevolving, without support (mental > > > object).[1] This, just this, is the end of stress." ******************** ‘....And, since at whatever point there is within nibbana an absence of the worlds of sense-desires and so on, (here is) at the same point therein also an absence of this world and the next world, he (therefore) says “Nor this world, nor the next world’. this is its meaning: there is therein neither of these two, viz. that world of the khandhas “....this state of affairs” and that world of khandhas....”The future state, that which is other than, subsequent to, that”. “Nor both sun and moon “(na ubho candimasuriyaa): means that since it is possible to speak of the gloom and of a need for that gloom’s scattering to be maintained by a sun and a moon (only)........therefore there is therein, in that nibbana, neither, vz.sun nor moon; in this way he indicates the fact of nibbana having as its own nature solely of light.(aalokasabhaavata.m). and as the Dhamma-king was explaining to those monks lacking complete penetration the ultra-profound, extremely hard to see, abstruse and subtle, extremely choice, (yet) not formerly experienced (by them), even in a dream, within this sa.msaara that is without beginning, ....... ******************** I would just like to emphasise that the 'worlds' are referring to the worlds of khandhas which do not exist in nibbana. also this passage stresses that nibbana is not and has never been experienced in samsara and is only ever experienced by the highly developed wisdom, able to penetrate or see the ‘ultra profound’. There is no hint that nibbana is ‘one’s true nature’ as I read it;-) There are just one or two more passages I’d like to quote next time. Sarah 8944 From: Sarah Date: Sun Oct 28, 2001 4:01pm Subject: RE: [DhammaStudyGroup] dhammavicaya II & welcome Dear Yulia, --- Yulia Klimov wrote: > Hello, > How can one learn Pali? > Is it possible to do it without the teacher, just with books? > Yulia > Dear Yulia, I've always been a very poor Pali student, so I'm not really qualified to advise you on this. I do know that some members here have studied 'just with books'. Nina Van Gorkom told me that she just went through the book by Warder (pub. by PTS) several times to get a good grounding. I'm really writing just to welcome you here to dsg. i hope you enjoy the messages and the list. sometimes it's a bit confusing coming in in the middle of threads and takes a while to work out what anyone is talking about I know;-) If you are inclined to say a few words about yourself and your interest in dhamma, we'd all be interested to hear. I'd also be interested to know where you're from... I met a friend for breakfast the other day who is also new to the list. He asked me where he could find previous posts on particular topics, so I'd like to use this post to you to give a couple of links for any other 'newbies': 1. Back-up list with a better search engine (for posts since ?date only): . NOTE: password is METTA http://www.escribe.com/religion/dhammastudygroup/ 2. Selected 'Useful Posts' under topic headings: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/files/Useful_Posts 3. Glossary for confusing Pali terms: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/files/Pali_Glossary Best wishes, Sarah 8945 From: Sarah Date: Sun Oct 28, 2001 4:34pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Udana-Nibbana 1 Dear Ken O, Many thanks for your interest. --- Kenneth Ong wrote: > k: sounds like taking Nibbana as an ordinary citta. Rise and fall. > Lokuttara cittas are the resultant of mundane cittas. Hence if Nibbana is > the resultant, then Lokuttara cittas are the cause. This means Nibbana is > conditioned by Lokuttar cittas which inturns are conditioned by mundane > cittas. S: Hmmm....It’s true that mundane cittas acompanied by panna (more and more highly developed) and the other necessary wholesome cetasikas eventually condition the lokuttara cittas. Conditions are very complex, so I wouldn’t call these cittas ‘the resultant’, nor do I understand your first sentence above. Nibbana is not conditioned by any cittas. It is expereinced (the object of) the lokuttara cittas. Sorry if I sound very ‘finicky’, but the dhamma is very precise, I think. >K: Nibbana can never be experienced by conditioned cittas because Nibbana is > unconditional, if it is not then why classified it as unconditional in the > first place. S: There’s been a lot of discussion on this issue (see ‘useful posts’ under nibbana perhaps...) Many people here find it very difficult to accept that the unconditioned (Nibbana) is experienced by the conditioned (lokuttara cittas), but that’s how it is in the Pali canon as indicated in my previous quote. >K: Assuming Nibbana can be experienced by conditioned if we used the basis > that Nibbana has the same nature of anatta as conditioned cittas. But the > problem as they are anatta, whatever citta experienced will be illusory. > Because this "illusory experience" is due to the speed of cittas which a > self thought there is self in anatta. Nibbana cannot be substantiated on > this basis because in Nibbana we see reality, which mean anatta is fully > understand, hence there is no "illusory experience". S: I agree there is no illusory experience. The cittas and nibbana are anatta. Anatta doesn’t mean illusory. Sorry I’m having trouble following you here. Rob Ep or Howard may be able to follow your thinking better here. > k: The problem is then we thought kusala cittas is the one leading to > Nibbana which is not correct. Because kusala cittas are dependent on > akusala cittas to be in existence. If there is no akuasla citta, we would > not know what is kuasala cittas in the first place. Cittas cannot > eradicate another cittas because they have the same charateristics. Citta > is categories into four jati but to me they are not mutually exclusive. > Furthermore if we look at sati, it is never abt getting rid, it is abt > knowing its coming and going. No eradication because eradication or > getting rid is still attached to a subtle self concept for an "action" to > be enforced whereas coming and going we let things as it is, attachment to > a self concept is also let go. That is why I keep insisting that Nibbana > to me is not eradication of defilements it is the letting go of > defilements and in the next moment one is in Nibbana. One let go of > conditions to reach unconditional reality. S: Sorry, can you give the the text or the commentary reference you are referring to here as I’m not clear where these ideas come from. May I just stress that the characteristic of sati is to be aware of a reality for a moment and then gone. There is no ‘one’ to let go of conditions or defilements or anything else. If it is not the development of kusala cittas (and in particular, the development of wisdom) that leads to nibbana, then I wonder why the Buddha stresses this development so much? > k: That is not true, because Arahat sees reality of rupa where we do not. > They way they see visible object is totally different from us but they > could choose to see like us because unconditional knows conditional but > conditional does not knows unconditional S: Remember Ken, that all realities are conditioned and not self. Even the Buddha could not ‘choose’ to do anything. When realities are understood, as I mentioned before, seeing sees visble object, hearing hears sound and so on, just like now. The difference is that there is no wrong view immediately following these cittas, taking the objects for ‘something’ or ‘self’. In the case of the arahat, there are no more conditions for any defilements to arise at all, as we know. >S: In other words, it is not the reality which changes with insight, but the > nature of the cittas experiencing and understanding the reality. This is > actually a key point, because people often have the idea that they need to > change the reality being experienced (and try hard to have a particular > reality) rather than developing understanding of the nama or rupas > conditioned already. > k: Yes agreed because nobody can change reality because reality itself is > anatta. S:Glad we agree here;-) Ken O, I may have misunderstood you in places. I apologise if this is so. Just heard the India Group have arrived safely in Bangkok..all very, very happy about their wonderful trip.....I’m looking forward to going out to meet Jon at Hong Kong airport this evening;-)) I’d better go and do a few household chores quickly;-( Sarah 8946 From: manji Date: Mon Oct 29, 2001 4:41am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Udana-Nibbana 1 Well, I just joined this list last week and will post something about joining, however I have something to ask. I think Nibbana should not be understood without the realization that Nibbana itself is Dhamma. Unconditioned Dhamma. What is dhamma? There is "knowing dhamma", citta and cetasika... There is rupa. But... right here is nibbana. "Knowing dhamma" is conditioned. I think this is important difference between conditioned dhamma and unconditioned dhamma. Nibbana is unconditioned dhamma, yet there are concepts from conventional writings and discussion pointing to the experience of nibbana. Who says that nibbana is any different than other dhamma? So what there is now is two differences... There is "knowing dhamma" and there is knowing "dhamma". So what means... unconditioned dhamma? Now do you want a twist? Conceptually... look up the roots of the word dhamma. Unconditioned dhamma... right now dhamma. So great is the contrast between conditioned dhamma and unconditioned dhamma, that there is a saying... gone... gone... gone to the other shore. But until that contrast is right now known, i don't think there is knowing nibbana. Afterword perhaps there is reflection on this contrast of "knowing nibbana dhamma" - "knowing conditioned dhamma". :) keep going. -manji- ----- Original Message ----- From: "Sarah" Sent: Sunday, October 28, 2001 3:34 AM Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Udana-Nibbana 1 > Dear Ken O, > > Many thanks for your interest. > > --- Kenneth Ong wrote: > > > k: sounds like taking Nibbana as an ordinary citta. Rise and fall. > > Lokuttara cittas are the resultant of mundane cittas. Hence if Nibbana is > > the resultant, then Lokuttara cittas are the cause. This means Nibbana is > > conditioned by Lokuttar cittas which inturns are conditioned by mundane > > cittas. > > S: Hmmm....It's true that mundane cittas acompanied by panna (more and more > highly developed) and the other necessary wholesome cetasikas eventually > condition the lokuttara cittas. Conditions are very complex, so I wouldn't call > these cittas 'the resultant', nor do I understand your first sentence above. > Nibbana is not conditioned by any cittas. It is expereinced (the object of) the > lokuttara cittas. Sorry if I sound very 'finicky', but the dhamma is very > precise, I think. > > >K: Nibbana can never be experienced by conditioned cittas because Nibbana is > > unconditional, if it is not then why classified it as unconditional in the > > first place. > > S: There's been a lot of discussion on this issue (see 'useful posts' under > nibbana perhaps...) Many people here find it very difficult to accept that the > unconditioned (Nibbana) is experienced by the conditioned (lokuttara cittas), > but that's how it is in the Pali canon as indicated in my previous quote. > > >K: Assuming Nibbana can be experienced by conditioned if we used the basis > > that Nibbana has the same nature of anatta as conditioned cittas. But the > > problem as they are anatta, whatever citta experienced will be illusory. > > Because this "illusory experience" is due to the speed of cittas which a > > self thought there is self in anatta. Nibbana cannot be substantiated on > > this basis because in Nibbana we see reality, which mean anatta is fully > > understand, hence there is no "illusory experience". > > S: I agree there is no illusory experience. The cittas and nibbana are anatta. > Anatta doesn't mean illusory. Sorry I'm having trouble following you here. Rob > Ep or Howard may be able to follow your thinking better here. > > > k: The problem is then we thought kusala cittas is the one leading to > > Nibbana which is not correct. Because kusala cittas are dependent on > > akusala cittas to be in existence. If there is no akuasla citta, we would > > not know what is kuasala cittas in the first place. Cittas cannot > > eradicate another cittas because they have the same charateristics. Citta > > is categories into four jati but to me they are not mutually exclusive. > > Furthermore if we look at sati, it is never abt getting rid, it is abt > > knowing its coming and going. No eradication because eradication or > > getting rid is still attached to a subtle self concept for an "action" to > > be enforced whereas coming and going we let things as it is, attachment to > > a self concept is also let go. That is why I keep insisting that Nibbana > > to me is not eradication of defilements it is the letting go of > > defilements and in the next moment one is in Nibbana. One let go of > > conditions to reach unconditional reality. > > S: Sorry, can you give the the text or the commentary reference you are > referring to here as I'm not clear where these ideas come from. May I just > stress that the characteristic of sati is to be aware of a reality for a moment > and then gone. There is no 'one' to let go of conditions or defilements or > anything else. If it is not the development of kusala cittas (and in > particular, the development of wisdom) that leads to nibbana, then I wonder why > the Buddha stresses this development so much? > > > k: That is not true, because Arahat sees reality of rupa where we do not. > > They way they see visible object is totally different from us but they > > could choose to see like us because unconditional knows conditional but > > conditional does not knows unconditional > > S: Remember Ken, that all realities are conditioned and not self. Even the > Buddha could not 'choose' to do anything. When realities are understood, as I > mentioned before, seeing sees visble object, hearing hears sound and so on, > just like now. The difference is that there is no wrong view immediately > following these cittas, taking the objects for 'something' or 'self'. In the > case of the arahat, there are no more conditions for any defilements to arise > at all, as we know. > > >S: In other words, it is not the reality which changes with insight, but the > > nature of the cittas experiencing and understanding the reality. This is > > actually a key point, because people often have the idea that they need to > > change the reality being experienced (and try hard to have a particular > > reality) rather than developing understanding of the nama or rupas > > conditioned already. > > > k: Yes agreed because nobody can change reality because reality itself is > > anatta. > > S:Glad we agree here;-) Ken O, I may have misunderstood you in places. I > apologise if this is so. > > Just heard the India Group have arrived safely in Bangkok..all very, very happy > about their wonderful trip.....I'm looking forward to going out to meet Jon at > Hong Kong airport this evening;-)) I'd better go and do a few household chores > quickly;-( > > Sarah 8947 From: Ken Howard Date: Mon Oct 29, 2001 7:46am Subject: Re: Cetana (volition, intention)is controllable? (was kusa.. --- Robert Epstein wrote: > Dear Ken, > I amstarting out with your last statement, which I think is very funny. I hope > you at least in part meant it that way: > > > Thanks for keeping the discussion going Robert, I am finding it > > very testing. > > > > Kind regards > > > > Ken Howard > > ============== > > Oh, I see what you mean! I meant the discussion was testing my grasp of the subject matter, certainly not that it was testing my patience. (Testing my command of the English language, more like it.) Thanks for not taking offence. Thanks also for your compliments on what I wrote. With my style of writing, it's not always clear where the reliable source material ends and the unreliable extrapolations begin. Hopefully, no one will take it too seriously. Kind regards Ken H 8948 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Mon Oct 29, 2001 10:48am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Udana-Nibbana 1 Hello Sarah Its me again. > S: Hmmm....It’s true that mundane cittas acompanied by panna (more and > more highly developed) and the other necessary wholesome cetasikas eventually condition the lokuttara cittas. Conditions are very complex, so I wouldn’t call these cittas ‘the resultant’, nor do I understand your first sentence above. Nibbana is not conditioned by any cittas. It is expereinced (the object of) the lokuttara cittas. Sorry if I sound very ‘finicky’, but the dhamma is very precise, I think. k: No I do not agreed. We cannot use this basis to divert the point. We got to admit weakness if there are, as like when I point out there is substantiality issues in Buddhism. > >K: Nibbana can never be experienced by conditioned cittas because > Nibbana is unconditional, if it is not then why classified it as unconditionanal the first place. > > S: There’s been a lot of discussion on this issue (see ‘useful posts’ > under nibbana perhaps...) Many people here find it very difficult to accept that the unconditioned (Nibbana) is experienced by the conditioned (lokuttara cittas), but that’s how it is in the Pali canon as indicated in my previous quote. k: It is the same thing when I say cittas don't die, you find it difficult to believe me. > >K: Assuming Nibbana can be experienced by conditioned if we used the > basis > that Nibbana has the same nature of anatta as conditioned cittas. But the > problem as they are anatta, whatever citta experienced will be illusory. Because this "illusory experience" is due to the speed of cittas which a self thought there is self in anatta. Nibbana cannot be substantiated on this basis because in Nibbana we see reality, which mean anatta is fully understand, hence there is no "illusory experience". > > S: I agree there is no ilusory experience. The cittas and nibbana are > anatta. Anatta doesn’t mean illusory. Sorry I’m having trouble following you here. Rob Ep or Howard may be able to follow your thinking better here. > > > k: The problem is then we thought kusala cittas is the one leading to > > Nibbana which is not correct. Because kusala cittas are dependent on > > akusala cittas to be in existence. If there is no akuasla citta, we > would not know what is kuasala cittas in the first place. Cittas cannot > > eradicate another cittas because they have the same charateristics. > Citta is categories into four jati but to me they are not mutually > exclusive. Furthermore if we look at sati, it is never abt getting rid, it is abt knowing its coming and going. No eradication because eradication or getting rid is still attached to a subtle self concept for an "action" to be enforced whereas coming and going we let things as it is, > attachment to a self concept is also let go. That is why I keep insisting that Nibbana to me is not eradication of defilements it is the letting go of defilements and in the next moment one is in Nibbana. One let go of conditions to reach unconditional reality. > S: Sorry, can you give the the text or the commentary reference you are > referring to here as I’m not clear where these ideas come from. May I > just stress that the characteristic of sati is to be aware of a reality for a moment and then gone. There is no ‘one’ to let go of conditions or defilements or anything else. If it is not the development of kusala cittas (and in particular, the development of wisdom) that leads to nibbana, then I wonder why the Buddha stresses this development so much? k: It is we classify those sati, metta, other wholesome practises as kusala cittas and during such kusala cittas there is no akusala cittas. Buddha urge us to do kusala cittas but he did not classify that if we have kusala cittas there is no akusala present in this kusala itself. Because kusala does not equate akusala. It is like using another "self" to replace a "self". Furthermore as I have said earlier, kusala and akusala both depend on each other to be in existence, hence it is not permanent. To do kusala like metta is conventional so that the mind is more peaceful but these do not help us to attain arahant bc all religion urges goodness but they do not attain arahant bc they are one sided in their practise. In his method of sati, there is no right or wrong just pure attention to what arise. If we have pure attention what arise, it is very difficult to do bad or to be attached. Sorry my understanding does not base on commentaries, it is base on practise that I feel this is the point and plus Mahayana doctrinal influences and relooking at sati sutras. Kindest regards. Kenneth Ong 8949 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Mon Oct 29, 2001 10:53am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Tales from India Mike and All --- Sarah wrote: > Hi Mike, > > Many thanks to you and others for the encouragement with these posts. > > Yes, they all walked up Vulture's Peak (actually, as I remember a little > different from the spot with the Japanese temple which all the toursits > go to, > now by chairlift I hear) and yes this is Grihakuta hill. > > They had a discussion in the grounds of the Nalanda university ruins > which Jon > reminded me are magnificent. They arrived very late in Patna after the > buses were forced to go at a snail's pace as there was a festival in > progross > and throngs of people were in the streets as they approached the town. > > Those with stamina and able to face yet another day in the bus went off > to > Vaisali 'to visit historically and religiously sites' today, whilst the > tired > and the discussion keenies stayed for a full day of 'excellent' > discussion in a > small group. A few left this afternoon and the rest take a very late > flight to > Calcutta tonight and then a morning flight to Bangkok. I'm told that by > now, > nearly everyone has a cough or sore throat (or worse) and many have > suffered > from 'Delhi bellies', so I imagine that most will be glad to get home > and rest. > > > Thanks for reading and encouraging these reports, It's been fun. > > Sarah Just a quick note to say that the group arrived back in Bangkok yesterday (Sunday) afternoon and I flew straight on to Hong Kong the same evening. This is written from my office on Monday morning, which seems another world altogether from the sights, sounds and smells of just 24 hours ago, but in the absolute sense is, as we know in theory at least, different only in terms of the shape-and-form and detail (nimitta and anupayancanna -- sometimes translated as 'outward appearance and particulars') appearing through those doorways. The actual experiencing of objects through the various doorways remains the same in its essential nature throughout, and it is this essential nature that is the object of the understanding that we are urged to develop. Leaving the group was for me a classic example of 'sweet sorrow', that is, both strong pleasant feeling (because of attachment to the good people and the many fruitful discussions) and sadness (at the fact that it was all coming to an end) arising alternately and apparently simultaneously. This was a condition for tears to appear when saying my final goodbye to the group, but since one still has so much accumulated kilesa, this is only to be expected I suppose. And any embarrassment I may have felt at this unseemly exhibition on my part is itself just another example of that particular kilesa known as mana (seeing oneself as important)! There were many useful snippets that came up during the trip, and I will try to bring these in to posts as and when appropriate. For anyone who has the slightest inclination, I would strongly recommend taking any opportunity to visit the holy places or join any trip that Khun Sujin is doing (and ideally, of course, to combine both of these if at all possible). It's good to be back with you all. Jon 8950 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Mon Oct 29, 2001 11:03am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Udana-Nibbana 1& 3 Hi Sarah > I would just like to emphasise that the 'worlds' are referring to the > worlds of khandhas which do not exist in nibbana. also this passage stresses that nibbana is not and has never been experienced in samsara and is only ever experienced by the highly developed wisdom, able to penetrate or see the ‘ultra profound’. k: Isn't this just describing there exist a nature without khandhas, isn't that an outter ego also. There is no hint that nibbana is ‘one’s true nature’ as I read it;-) k: I know there is no hint of 'one' true nature, but is it still a nature that is described. > > There are just one or two more passages I’d like to quote next time. > k: :) I would most happy to read it. kind regards Ken O 8951 From: Robert Epstein Date: Mon Oct 29, 2001 2:00pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Udana-Nibbana 1 Nice, Kenneth. Many good points. Robert Ep. --- Kenneth Ong wrote: > --- Sarah wrote: > Dear Rob Ep and Ken O, > > > > May I say before giving a quick response to this note, that there was > > discussion before about how viriya (effort/energy) has the function of > > ‘energising’ the other cetasikas. May I say that you both play a similar > > role > > in terms of ‘energising’ the rest of us on dsg with your sincere, > > inspirational > > and enthusiatic comments and fine speech. I’m sure we're all grateful > > for this > > (even though conditions don’t allow us to always be in agreement on the > > points > > raised ) > > > > --- Robert Epstein wrote: > > > > > > Yes, Kenneth, a good point which I asked about some weeks ago and had > > an interesting discussion. I think the conclusion we reached [in > > agreement?] was> that conditioned realities can *take* Nibbana as their > object, in terms of an idea, a concept, a goal, a spur, a base for the > path, etc., but that this does not mean they *perceive it as it is*. The > can only approach it, strive for it, move towards it, cognize it, etc., > until it has been realized. But it is still > > > the object of thought and endeavor. > > > > Agreed;-) > > > > > Nibbana is the *only* unconditioned reality, as I understand it, and > > thus it can only be *truly* perceived by and as itself. [?] In other > words experienced asit is, but not perceived from a distance. [?] > > > > > > Sarah, would you agree with the above, or does your sense of it assert > > that the conditioned realities of the path actually do perceive Nibbana? > > > > Nibbana is object (‘base’ as discussed in the com. notes) for the > > lokuttara cittas (magga and phala cittas) to experience directly. It is > not perceived by itself, just as visible object or any other reality is > not percieved by itself.‘close’ or ‘distant’ don’t make much sense to > me..you’d have to elaborate on this . The lokuttara cittas, like any other > cittas, arise briefly to experience their object (nibbana) at the stages > of enlightenment and then fall away.After that the objects, as before, are > sound, visible object and so on and nibbana is no longer experienced > > k: sounds like taking Nibbana as an ordinary citta. Rise and fall. > Lokuttara cittas are the resultant of mundane cittas. Hence if Nibbana is > the resultant, then Lokuttara cittas are the cause. This means Nibbana is > conditioned by Lokuttar cittas which inturns are conditioned by mundane > cittas. > > Nibbana can never be experienced by conditioned cittas because Nibbana is > unconditional, if it is not then why classified it as unconditional in the > first place. > > Assuming Nibbana can be experienced by conditioned if we used the basis > that Nibbana has the same nature of anatta as conditioned cittas. But the > problem as they are anatta, whatever citta experienced will be illusory. > Because this "illusory experience" is due to the speed of cittas which a > self thought there is self in anatta. Nibbana cannot be substantiated on > this basis because in Nibbana we see reality, which mean anatta is fully > understand, hence there is no "illusory experience". > > > Interesting question. By arahat, I was referring to the cittas which > > eradicate defilements completely (because there were references to the > end of lobha and other defilements in the passage). With regard to the > nature or ‘sabhava’ of nibbana, I don’t remember ever seeing anything to > distinguish its characteristic as experienced by the Buddha’s cittas or > the arahat’s cittas. The cittas of course are different. The degree and > nature of wisdom is different, but I’m not sure we can say that nibbana is > different as object. > > > k: The problem is then we thought kusala cittas is the one leading to > Nibbana which is not correct. Because kusala cittas are dependent on > akusala cittas to be in existence. If there is no akuasla citta, we would > not know what is kuasala cittas in the first place. Cittas cannot > eradicate another cittas because they have the same charateristics. Citta > is categories into four jati but to me they are not mutually exclusive. > Furthermore if we look at sati, it is never abt getting rid, it is abt > knowing its coming and going. No eradication because eradication or > getting rid is still attached to a subtle self concept for an "action" to > be enforced whereas coming and going we let things as it is, attachment to > a self concept is also let go. That is why I keep insisting that Nibbana > to me is not eradication of defilements it is the letting go of > defilements and in the next moment one is in Nibbana. One let go of > conditions to reach unconditional reality. > > > > Like now, visible object as experienced by our cittas with ignorance > > does not have a different nature or characteristic from the visible > object experienced by the arahat’swisdom. > > k: That is not true, because Arahat sees reality of rupa where we do not. > They way they see visible object is totally different from us but they > could choose to see like us because unconditional knows conditional but > conditional does not knows unconditional > > > > In other words, it is not the reality which changes with insight, but the > nature of the cittas experiencing and understanding the reality. This is > actually a key point, because people often have the idea that they need to > change the reality being experienced (and try hard to have a particular > reality) rather than developing understanding of the nama or rupas > conditioned already. > > k: Yes agreed because nobody can change reality because reality itself is > anatta. > > > Kind regards > Kenneth Ong 8952 From: Robert Epstein Date: Mon Oct 29, 2001 2:03pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] dhammavicaya II Yes, Howard, I tend to have a deeply superstitious mystical side. Just more defilements, eh? ah, well....... Robert Ep. ========================== --- Howard wrote: > Hi, Robert - > > In a message dated 10/26/01 10:41:16 AM Eastern Daylight Time, > Robert E writes: > > > > > > --- Howard wrote: > > > Hi, Gayan - > > > > > > In a message dated 10/26/01 12:03:22 AM Eastern Daylight Time, > > > Gayan writes: > > > > > > > > > > dear robert e., > > > > > > > > > > > > It is said that every buddha will use Pali as his language of choice to > > > > teach dhamma. > > > > > > > > And when one learns pali it is apperant that he/she finds the > > significant > > > > profoundness, sharpness and simplicity right away. > > > > > > > > and theres a very unique "technologically advanced" ness about it , i > > > > thought.( words fail me ) > > > > :o) > > > > > > > > > > > > best wishes for your pali studies, sir . > > > > > > > > rgds, > > > > gayan > > > > > > > ============================ > > > If that was really said, and if it was said by someone who knew > > what > > > he/she was talking about, then by "Pali" he/she must have meant "the > > > vernacular". That is how the Buddha taught, and how he instructed his > > > bhikkhus to teach: in the language of those being taught. > > > > > > With metta, > > > Howard > > > > Howard, > > I for one certainly take your point. Each language has means of > > communicating > > idiomatically to the people who use it and the true 'teacher' [happy to hear > > Buddha said so] uses the terms that the student will respond to and > > understand. > > > > With that said, and acknowledging that I really don't know the languages, I > > find > > my little exposures to Sanskrit and its close cousin Pali, the former the > > source > > of all our European languages, to have a sort of magical effect on me. > > > > I suppose in a world of various co-arising causes and effects, there might > > be some > > room for some weird or interesting mystical ones, couldn't there? Even > > without a > > self or a permanent entity or object of any kind, there are some strange and > > wonderful things in the various dimensions of living. I wonder if there > > really is > > a kind of magic in Pali and Sanskrit, or whether I'm romanticizing them? > > > > Either way, it is nice to hear the Buddha's message translated word for > > word at > > times, to hear the poetry and rhythm of the original. > > > > Best, > > Robert Ep. > > > =========================== > I think you *might* be romanticizing them. The Hindus did that with > Sanskrit. Also the Jewish Cabbalists did that with Hebrew. People have a > "thing" about language, based, perhaps on the idea that knowing the "true" > name of something gives one power over it. This falls under > "magic".[(Disclaimer: I don't rule out "magic". I just think that it is a > matter of mind, not ritual - or, ritual only to the extent that ritual > influences mind.] The Buddha, I have read, was very realistic about language, > understanding the purely conventional nature of it. [This is not to deny that > some mantras, because of their sound properties and/or onomatopoeia, could > have special effects on the mind.] > Oh, there is one more thing about Pali and Sanskrit which *does* make > them special to native speakers of European languages (for example), and that > is that they are not far removed from the proto-indo-european language which > is the source language for all the European languages. > > 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) > 8953 From: Robert Epstein Date: Mon Oct 29, 2001 2:18pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Udana-Nibbana 1& 3 Dear Sarah, I am going to restrict my response to this passage in the commentaries which I think sums up my current sense of things. I appreciate your responses to my other speculations. I think they are based on my sense of the language more than a specific point I could refer back to, so I think I'll move forward with you, and wait for your replies to the other posts. --- Sarah wrote: From the commentaries: since it is > possible to speak of the gloom and of a need for that gloom’s scattering to be > maintained by a sun and a moon (only)........therefore there is therein, in > that nibbana, neither, vz.sun nor moon; in this way he indicates the fact of > nibbana having as its own nature solely of light.(aalokasabhaavata.m). and as > the Dhamma-king was explaining to those monks lacking complete penetration the > ultra-profound, extremely hard to see, abstruse and subtle, extremely choice, > (yet) not formerly experienced (by them), even in a dream, within this > sa.msaara that is without beginning, ....... Two points: 1/ Nibbana is here said to be 'solely of the nature of light'. I don't see in any way how this description can be reconciled with Nibbana being 'purely the ending of defilements'. What in the ending of defilements gives Nibbana 'solely the nature of light'? I would say nothing, and that the 'light nature' of Nibbana must come from another source, the light of pure consciousness. What other light could give it this nature? I am open to another explanation of this statement. 2/ The following passage in which Nibbana is described as 'abstruse and subtle, extremely choice, not formerly experienced even in a dream' seems to very much describe a definitive experience, not merely a negative experience of defilements ended. Does it seem to you that this description of the most choice experience that few have experienced suggests a state of nullity? It suggests to me a state of the most refined, pure experience possible to experience, which is enabled by the defilements having been put to rest. To me at least, it seems to be very much the case that the commentaries, perhaps even more than the Suttas themselves, suggest a state of prized experience in which human awareness reaches its fruition. I can't go beyond that, but I can't see this as a description of merely seeing into the complete Anatta of everything. And this is not even suggested in these passages. I do not exaggerate when I say that I am anxious to hear your response and to engage with this question. Best, Robert Ep. 8954 From: Robert Epstein Date: Mon Oct 29, 2001 2:19pm Subject: RE: [DhammaStudyGroup] dhammavicaya II & welcome Dear Sarah, Is there a complete copy of the Pali Canon translated into English on the web? I have downloaded one in Pali, but I'm afraid I can only enjoy it for the pure poetry of the sound. Robert Ep. ========================== --- Sarah wrote: > Dear Yulia, > > --- Yulia Klimov wrote: > > > Hello, > > How can one learn Pali? > > Is it possible to do it without the teacher, just with books? > > Yulia > > > > Dear Yulia, > > I've always been a very poor Pali student, so I'm not really qualified to > advise you on this. I do know that some members here have studied 'just with > books'. Nina Van Gorkom told me that she just went through the book by Warder > (pub. by PTS) several times to get a good grounding. > > I'm really writing just to welcome you here to dsg. i hope you enjoy the > messages and the list. sometimes it's a bit confusing coming in in the middle > of threads and takes a while to work out what anyone is talking about I know;-) > > If you are inclined to say a few words about yourself and your interest in > dhamma, we'd all be interested to hear. I'd also be interested to know where > you're from... > > I met a friend for breakfast the other day who is also new to the list. He > asked me where he could find previous posts on particular topics, so I'd like > to use this post to you to give a couple of links for any other 'newbies': > > 1. Back-up list with a better search engine (for posts since ?date only): . > NOTE: password is METTA > http://www.escribe.com/religion/dhammastudygroup/ > > 2. Selected 'Useful Posts' under topic headings: > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/files/Useful_Posts > > 3. Glossary for confusing Pali terms: > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/files/Pali_Glossary > > Best wishes, > > Sarah > 8955 From: Robert Epstein Date: Mon Oct 29, 2001 2:21pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Cetana (volition, intention)is controllable? (was kusa.. --- Ken Howard wrote: > --- Robert Epstein wrote: > > Dear Ken, > > I amstarting out with your last statement, which I think is very > funny. I hope > > you at least in part meant it that way: > > > > > Thanks for keeping the discussion going Robert, I am finding it > > > very testing. > > > > > > Kind regards > > > > > > Ken Howard > > > > ============== > > > > > > Oh, I see what you mean! I meant the discussion was testing my > grasp of the subject matter, certainly not that it was testing my > patience. (Testing my command of the English language, more like > it.) Thanks for not taking offence. > > Thanks also for your compliments on what I wrote. With my style > of writing, it's not always clear where the reliable source > material ends and the unreliable extrapolations begin. Hopefully, no > one will take it too seriously. > > Kind regards > Ken H No I seriously think your explanation of 'absolute teaching' in the relative terms of some of the Suttas to be very clear and helpful. I think you opened up a new thought process on the Suttas regarding this. Thanks. Robert Ep. 8956 From: Sarah Date: Mon Oct 29, 2001 3:00pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Udana-Nibbana 1 & 2 Dear Ken O, --- Kenneth Ong wrote: > Hi Sarah > > Ken O, let me know if you’re still not agreeing with the commentary or > > interpret it differently;-). > > k: Yes i have interpreted differently from the commentary and I have > explain in my earlier email what I think. Ken, that’s fine. Most the world interpret realities differently from the Buddha too. I’m not trying to persuade you to change your views, I’m only trying to present a sutta with its commentary which forms part of the Pali Tipitaka, accepted and recited by the various councils of arahats. The sutta is one which you and Rob Ep (and others I think) have raised here several times with a different interpretation and so I thought it would be a useful exercise to look at the commentary interpretation,.as none of us can rely on ‘our experience’ in this area;-) > > > Udana VIII.1 > > > "There is that dimension where there is neither earth, nor water, nor > > > fire, nor wind; neither dimension of the infinitude of space, nor > > > dimension of the infinitude of consciousness, nor dimension of > > > nothingness, > > .................... > > > > S: I may not have made it clear, that in the Masefield translation and > > Com notes which I’m using, base is used instead of dimension (as here) > in ‘There is, monks,that base’ (tadayatanam) > k: How would he described a base which Buddha has refused to say in > detail and I have find doubts abt such a description. What Buddha is > describing in that Sutta is basically "cannot be explained in mortal > words" By using base this word, it is a already a conditionality. I presume you mean the commentary when you talk about ‘he’ here...? Where has the Buddha refused to say in detail? Where does it say “cannot be explained in mortal words’? I would suggest that the words were fully adequate for those listening to comprehend the meaning and that the ancient commentators have given more detail for those of us who are slower and need more guidance. I have complete confidence in the commentary words and find they assist rather than add doubts or confusions, but this is a personal matter. > k: When the commentary says that it has its own nature, isn't this an > outter ego. Isn't this a substantiality issue that I have mentioen a few > times. No matter how we say or explain, there is always this issue where > Buddha refuse to answer. No, I don't think so. When we refer to sabhava or nature in Theravada texts, there is no hint or inner or outer ego or substantiality. Where does the Buddha refuse to answer here? Quite a lot has been written on the ‘sabhava thread’ (another popular one for those from a mahayana background). Please refer to ‘Useful Posts’ under ‘Sabhava’. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/files/Useful_Posts> Ken, as far as those early councils were concerned and up til now, the Suttanta, Vinaya, Abhidhamma and ancient commentaries all make up the Pali canon. Some people would like the Abhidhamma removed, others would like the commentaries removed and so on. This is one way that the Buddha’s Teachings slowly decline. I rejoice that we have access to as much of the Tipitaka as we do. There may be many, many points we don’t understand, but isn’t it helpful to study and consider, rather than to disagree with it from our very limited understanding? Just a thought... Sarah 8957 From: Sarah Date: Mon Oct 29, 2001 3:28pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Udana-Nibbana 1 Dear Rob Ep, --- Robert Epstein wrote: > >>. The lokuttara cittas, like any other cittas, arise briefly to > experience > > their object (nibbana) at the stages of enlightenment and then fall > away.After > > that the objects, as before, are sound, visible object and so on and > nibbana is > > no longer experienced > > Dear Sarah, > Hi! > > Can one say what is experienced in relation to Nibbana after it has fallen > away? > Is it a one-time deal? And what is the purpose of this momentary experience? > > What status does Nibbana have in this process? What is it's nature? [more > small > questions: and more below]. Rob K or Num would do better on these tricky questions which can also be checked in the Visuddhimagga or Abhidamatha Sangaha I think.(sorry, no time for me to check now...) In brief, the lokuttara cittas which experience nibbana are a ‘one time deal’ at each of the 4 stages of enlightenment. There may be conditions for those who have attained jhanas (what level I forget) to experience nibbana afterwards...but this is where I forget the details. Lots has been written on the list about the nature of nibbana (see ‘useful posts’) and I think I’ll pass on the other good questions for now....I’m getting into deep water and don’t want to rush in..... > > Like now, visible object as experienced by our cittas with ignorance does > not > > have a different nature or characteristic from the visible object > experienced > > by the arahat’swisdom. In other words, it is not the reality which changes > with > > insight, but the nature of the cittas experiencing and understanding the > > reality. This is actually a key point, because people often have the idea > that > > they need to change the reality being experienced (and try hard to have a > > particular reality) rather than developing understanding of the nama or > rupas > > conditioned already. > This is fascinating. So Nibbana is seen as a separate 'object' from the > cittas > that experience it? Exactly so, and I’m very encouraged that you are beginning to appreciate this, Rob Ep. This is a unique idea from my former understandings > [mostly > conceptual]. Nibbana always seems to me to be a description of a 'state' in > which > there is no longer any defilements blocking the direct discernment of > realities, > and the nature of consciousness itself [the object of sati/satipathana?]. > So if Nibbana is not a non-defiled citta itself, or a form of undefiled > unconditioned sati, but an object, is there any way that you can explain this > a > little more? I don't quite get the idea of what kind of object, albeit > completely > unconditioned, Nibbana would be, and what the effect of momentarily > experiencing > it would be. How does this process 'clear' the cittas [if that is correct] > of > defilements in order to initiate one into an Arahat? I don’t think I’ll say more on the nature of nibbana (not sure it helps either). Remember the development of wisdom and wholesome states has been developing so that just prior to the final enlightenment of the arahat, the path factors are very highly developed. The cittas in the enlightenment process are accompanied by all the 8fold path factors (as discussed before). The object is nibbana, the unconditioned state. In the subsequent mind door processes, it is evident that the remaining defilements such as the last remains of lobha and mana have been finally eradicated. I’m sorry, but I can’t add more technical details without checking. I hope someone else may add these. > [Boy, I'm really full of complicated questions these last two days. Sorry!] These are all excellent questions..it’s just that I’m not a ‘nibbana expert’.and I’m going to be quite busy this week...;-) Delighted to read of your interest in the passages...will get back later on your other posts, I hope. Sarah 8958 From: Gayan Karunaratne Date: Mon Oct 29, 2001 3:43pm Subject: dhammavicaya V dear mike, --------------------------------------------------------- contd. Phena sutta,khandha samyutta " phena pindupamam rupam - vedana bubbalupamaa maricikuupamaa sannaa - samkhaaraa kadalupamaa maayuupamanca vinnanam - dipitadicca bandhunaa " the buddha has given the following similes rupa as lump of foam vedana as a bubble sanna as mirage samkhara as a log from a banana tree vinnana as a majic show done by a magician samkhara as banana log , because one can remove layer by layer and still wont find any core or worth. ----------------------------------------------------------- Khajjaniiya sutta, khandha samyutta about samkhara -> " kinca bhikkhave samkhaare vadetha ? , samkhatam abhisamkharontiiti , bhikkhave tasma samkhaaraati vuccanti kinca samkhatam abhisamkharonti rupam ruupattaaya samkhatam abhisamkharonti vedanam vedanattaaya samkhatam abhisamkharonti sannam sannattaaya samkhatam abhisamkharonti samkhare samkharattaaya samkhatam abhisamkharonti vinnanam vinnaanattaaya samkhatam abhisamkharonti " monks, what is samkhara, what is known as samkhara, in what sense its called samkhara ? what makes/forms/fabricates a formation/fabrication into the likeness of a formation/fabrication , is called samkhara. what makes rupa into te likeness of rupa ( rupatthaaya ) / ( rupaness) ,is samkhara . what makes vedana into the likeness of vedana ( vedananess ) , is samkhara. what makes sanna into the likeness of sanna ( sannaness ) , is samkhara. ' what makes samkhara into the likeness of samkhara ( samkharaness ) , is samkhara. ' what makes vinnana into the likeness of vinnana ( vinnananess ) , is samkhara . ------------------------------------------------------------ the important point here is that , samkhara fabricates samkhara into its samkharaness. Such is the profoundness of the discourse. samkhatam = formed by fabrications abhisamkhatam and abhisamceyitam mostly come as having similar meaning abhisamceyitam = formed by cetana ceteti and pakappeti mostly come together in discourses. -------------------------------------------------------------- samcetana sutta,catukka nipata , samcetaniya vagga . A N " kaaye vaa bhikkhave sati kaaya samcetana hetu uppajjati ajjhattam sukhadukkham, vacaaya vaa bhikkhave sati vacii samcetana hetu uppajjati ajjhattam sukhadukkham, mane vaa bhikkhave sati mano samcetana hetu uppajjati ajjhattam sukhadukkham avijja paccaya va, " monks , because of the cetana ( which take body as arammana ) there arise sukha and dukkha internally, because of the cetana , which take words as arammana , there arise sukha and dukkha internally, because of the cetana , which take mind as arammana, there arise sukha and dukkha internally. these are conditioned by ignorance. " saamam vaa tam bhikkhave kaya samkhaaram abhisamkharoti yam paccayassa tam uppajjati ajjattam sukhadukkham, pare vaassa tam bhikkhave kaya samkhaaram abhisamkharonti yam paccayassa tam uppajjati ajjattam sukhadukkham, sampajaano vaa tam bhikkhave kaya samkhaaram abhisamkaronti , yam paccayassa tam uppajjati ajjattam sukhadukkham, asampajaano vaa tam bhikkhave kaya samkhaaram abhsamkaronti , yam paccayassa tam uppajati ajjattam sukhadukkham. " monks , one forms kaya samkhara by oneself, and because of that ( those samkhara paccaya ) he experiences sukha and dukkha inside( internally ). Others form kaya samkhara for him , and because of that he experiences sikha and dukkha internally, this happens knowingly. this happens without knowing. ( same for vaci samkhara and mano samkhara ),..... " imesu bhikkhave dhammesu avijja anupati ta , avijjayatveva asse viraaga nirodhaa so kaayo na hoti yam paccayassa tam uppajjati ajjattam sukhadukkham, so vacaa na hoti yam paccayassa tam uppajjati ajjattam sukhadukkham, so mano na hoti yam paccayassa tam uppajjati ajjattam sukhadukkham, khettam tam na hoti, vatthum tam na hoti, aayatanam tam na hoti , adhikaranam tam na hoti, yampaccayassa tam uppajjati ajjattam sukhadukkham. " monks , in the aforesaid instances , they( instances ) were chased by ignorance, but because of the complete viraga and nirodha of the ignorance there wont be such kaya(body) ,which experiences sukha and dukkha internally because of some condition. there wont be such vaca(words) , which experiences sukha and dukkha internally because of some conditions. there wont be such mano ( mind ) , which experiences sukha and dukkha internally because of some conditions. there wont be the field, land , faculty , reason , which experiences sukha and dukkha internally because of some conditions. contd, rgds, gayan 8959 From: Gayan Karunaratne Date: Mon Oct 29, 2001 3:56pm Subject: RE: [DhammaStudyGroup] dhammavicaya II dear kenneth, thats great! happy journey thru the wonderful world of walt disney...i mean lord buddha. Sorry I dont know much about pali lang centres in S'pore, but mike has already helped you to find one. rgds, gayan -----Original Message----- From: Kenneth Ong [mailto:Kenneth Ong] Sent: Friday, October 26, 2001 5:24 PM Subject: RE: [DhammaStudyGroup] dhammavicaya II Hi Gayan Suddenly I become very interested in Pali because of you :). Do you know any good Pali Language centre in Singapore. Thanks and keep posting and I enjoy them very much Kinde regards Kenneth Ong --- Gayan Karunaratne wrote: > dear robert e., > > > It is said that every buddha will use Pali as his language of choice to > teach dhamma. > > And when one learns pali it is apperant that he/she finds the > significant > profoundness, sharpness and simplicity right away. > > and theres a very unique "technologically advanced" ness about it , i > thought.( words fail me ) > :o) > > > best wishes for your pali studies, sir . > > rgds, > gayan > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Robert Epstein [mailto:Robert E] > Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2001 11:11 AM > > Subject: RE: [DhammaStudyGroup] dhammavicaya II > > > > --- Gayan Karunaratne wrote: > > > > > > dear ken o. and robert e. , > > > > many thanks for your compassionate comments. > > > > The attempt is only to unveil the > profoundness,trickyness,"interesting"ness > > in hidden phrases in Pali Suttas. > > The least importance should be given to the translations. > > > > If these keep on triggering the need to explore the Real Pali > thoroughly > > then they had done their job.( and nothing more is intended ) > > Still nice to have someone right here who can look at the words and talk > about > them in Pali and English. I can't help but find it a thrill. > > On another note, I've tried reading a little of the Pali to myself out > loud, > and > it's so poetic, much of it sounds so beautiful. I know that the sounds > of > Sanskrit are supposed to be designed by the ancients to create certain > spurs > in > the nervous system, and I believe the Pali must be like this as well. > There's > something profoundly ancient and compressed in the sound and feeling of > the > Pali. > Here's my favorite for today: > > " na raaga raagi - na viraaga ratto " > > Isn't that beautiful? > > Robert > 8960 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Mon Oct 29, 2001 4:22pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Namaste from Bodh Gaya --- Robert Epstein wrote: > > --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > > > I can see you have all been busy over the past 10 days or so, and I > look > > forward to catching up on the messages I have missed during that > period. > > > > Best wishes in the dhamma > > > > Jon > > Hi Jon, > Just wanted to say nice to hear from you. Enjoy your journey! > > Regards, > Robert Ep. Thanks, Rob. Did not get to a computer again before the end of the trip, so have just seen your note. Thanks for your good wishes. There have been many lively and stimulating exchanges during the past 2 weeks, and some challenging points raised that will need chasing down, too! Best wishes Jon "The awareness to be developed is the awareness that arises by conditions, not by one's will" 8961 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Mon Oct 29, 2001 4:32pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Udana-Nibbana 1 & 2 Hi Sarah > Ken, that’s fine. Most the world interpret realities differently from > the Buddha too. I’m not trying to persuade you to change your views, I’m > only trying to present a sutta with its commentary which forms part of the Pali Tipitaka, accepted and recited by the various councils of arahats. > > The sutta is one which you and Rob Ep (and others I think) have raised > here several times with a different interpretation and so I thought it would be a useful exercise to look at the commentary interpretation,.as none of us can rely on ‘our experience’ in this area;-) k: Isn't commentary also basing on their own experience :). No offence here, to me, we got to use the Kalama approach even to the commentary or to the sutta. > I presume you mean the commentary when you talk about ‘he’ here...? > Where has the Buddha refused to say in detail? Where does it say “cannot be explained in mortal words’? I would suggest that the words were fully adequate for those listening to comprehend the meaning and that the ancient commentators have given more detail for those of us who are slower and need more guidance. I have complete confidence in the commentary words and find they assist rather than add doubts or confusions, but this is a personal matter. k: Buddha has always limited in his description in Nibbana even less for PariNibbana. How would a commentary explain what Buddha does not wish to explain further in the sutta. If it is that impt, Buddha would have explain again and again just like what he do to sati, anatta, anicca. > > k: When the commentary says that it has its own nature, isn't this an > > outter ego. Isn't this a substantiality issue that I have mentioen a > few times. No matter how we say or explain, there is always this issue > where > Buddha refuse to answer. > > No, I don't think so. When we refer to sabhava or nature in Theravada > texts, there is no hint or inner or outer ego or substantiality. Where does the Buddha refuse to answer here? Quite a lot has been written on the ‘sabhava thread’ (another popular one for those from a mahayana background). Please refer to ‘Useful Posts’ under ‘Sabhava’. > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/files/Useful_Posts> k: Isn't Sabhava also a sustaintiality or nature issue. How do I explain to you. No matter how we see Buddhism be it PariNibbana or Nibbana is always this issue of a state or nature of PariNibbana or Nibbana. Isn't this nature Nibbana or Parinibbana is also an substance in a sense. Thervada use words like Sabhava to escape this fundamental questions, Mahayana escape by using emptiness, unborn to explain this question. Even anatta is itself is a substantiality issue if we look at the other way round from non self. Isn't non self dependent on self to be non self? Just a thinker :). > Ken, as far as those early councils were concerned and up til now, the > Suttanta, Vinaya, Abhidhamma and ancient commentaries all make up the > Pali canon. Some people would like the Abhidhamma removed, others would like the commentaries removed and so on. This is one way that the Buddha’s > Teachings slowly decline. I rejoice that we have access to as much of the Tipitaka as we do. There may be many, many points we don’t understand, but isn’t it helpful to study and consider, rather than to disagree with it from our very limited understanding? Just a thought... > > Sarah k: Sarah, I respect your upholding of the sutta. I value the tripakata same as you. But to me, I do not think we should accept just as it is. Understanding can be improve if we are willing to look at other school of thoughts. From different school of thoughts and I realise that from each school the weaknesses of one school could be explain in another school of thought. Kindest regards Kenneth 8962 From: gayan Date: Mon Oct 29, 2001 5:32pm Subject: Re: dhammavicaya II dear yulia, its always better if one has a good teacher to learn any language. But i think that self-learn options are available. for starters it will be more helpful to read and learn good english translations of scriptures, and they always mention the important Pali words and meanings in the translations itself.Then one will get the familiarisation of the words buddha has commonly used. rgds, gayan --- "Yulia Klimov" wrote: > < teach dhamma.>> > Hello, > How can one learn Pali? > Is it possible to do it without the teacher, just with books? > Yulia > > -----Original Message----- > From: Gayan Karunaratne > Sent: Friday, October 26, 2001 12:02 AM > To: '<>' > Subject: RE: [DhammaStudyGroup] dhammavicaya II > > > dear robert e., > > > It is said that every buddha will use Pali as his language of choice to > teach dhamma. > > And when one learns pali it is apperant that he/she finds the significant > profoundness, sharpness and simplicity right away. > > and theres a very unique "technologically advanced" ness about it , i > thought.( words fail me ) > :o) > > > best wishes for your pali studies, sir . > > rgds, > gayan > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Robert Epstein > Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2001 11:11 AM > To: <> > Subject: RE: [DhammaStudyGroup] dhammavicaya II > > > > --- Gayan Karunaratne wrote: > > > > > > dear ken o. and robert e. , > > > > many thanks for your compassionate comments. > > > > The attempt is only to unveil the > profoundness,trickyness,"interesting"ness > > in hidden phrases in Pali Suttas. > > The least importance should be given to the translations. > > > > If these keep on triggering the need to explore the Real Pali thoroughly > > then they had done their job.( and nothing more is intended ) > > Still nice to have someone right here who can look at the words and talk > about > them in Pali and English. I can't help but find it a thrill. > > On another note, I've tried reading a little of the Pali to myself out loud, > and > it's so poetic, much of it sounds so beautiful. I know that the sounds of > Sanskrit are supposed to be designed by the ancients to create certain spurs > in > the nervous system, and I believe the Pali must be like this as well. > There's > something profoundly ancient and compressed in the sound and feeling of the > Pali. > Here's my favorite for today: > > " na raaga raagi - na viraaga ratto " > > Isn't that beautiful? > > Robert > > 8963 From: gayan Date: Mon Oct 29, 2001 5:33pm Subject: Re: dhammavicaya II dear yulia, its always better if one has a good teacher to learn any language. But i think that self-learn options are available. for starters it will be more helpful to read and learn good english translations of scriptures, and they always mention the important Pali words and meanings in the translations itself.Then one will get the familiarisation of the words buddha has commonly used. rgds, gayan --- "Yulia Klimov" wrote: > < teach dhamma.>> > Hello, > How can one learn Pali? > Is it possible to do it without the teacher, just with books? > Yulia > > -----Original Message----- > From: Gayan Karunaratne > Sent: Friday, October 26, 2001 12:02 AM > To: '<>' > Subject: RE: [DhammaStudyGroup] dhammavicaya II > > > dear robert e., > > > It is said that every buddha will use Pali as his language of choice to > teach dhamma. > > And when one learns pali it is apperant that he/she finds the significant > profoundness, sharpness and simplicity right away. > > and theres a very unique "technologically advanced" ness about it , i > thought.( words fail me ) > :o) > > > best wishes for your pali studies, sir . > > rgds, > gayan > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Robert Epstein > Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2001 11:11 AM > To: <> > Subject: RE: [DhammaStudyGroup] dhammavicaya II > > > > --- Gayan Karunaratne wrote: > > > > > > dear ken o. and robert e. , > > > > many thanks for your compassionate comments. > > > > The attempt is only to unveil the > profoundness,trickyness,"interesting"ness > > in hidden phrases in Pali Suttas. > > The least importance should be given to the translations. > > > > If these keep on triggering the need to explore the Real Pali thoroughly > > then they had done their job.( and nothing more is intended ) > > Still nice to have someone right here who can look at the words and talk > about > them in Pali and English. I can't help but find it a thrill. > > On another note, I've tried reading a little of the Pali to myself out loud, > and > it's so poetic, much of it sounds so beautiful. I know that the sounds of > Sanskrit are supposed to be designed by the ancients to create certain spurs > in > the nervous system, and I believe the Pali must be like this as well. > There's > something profoundly ancient and compressed in the sound and feeling of the > Pali. > Here's my favorite for today: > > " na raaga raagi - na viraaga ratto " > > Isn't that beautiful? > > Robert > 8964 From: gayan Date: Mon Oct 29, 2001 6:18pm Subject: Re: dhammavicaya IV dear robert e, 'anagatha bhayani' suttas are about the fears that will come in future. You can find the english translations in accesstoinsight site. I will try to give you some references for sunnata in the future. rgds, gayan --- Robert Epstein wrote: > Dear Gayan, > I don't have the stanza in front of me, but the first one I mentioned spoke of > Nibbana in a way that made it seem a part of the current experience, although not > experienced by defiled cittas, rather than a distant goal. > > Regarding sunnata, emptiness, if you can direct me to the names of the suttas on > sunnata, I think I should take a look right now. Are they called 'Anagatha > Bhayanai'? .....And if you happen to feel like translating a verse or two....... > > Well, that would be nice too. Your schedule permitting of course. > > Regards, > Robert Ep. > > =========================================== > > > > --- Gayan Karunaratne wrote: > > dear robert e, > > > > thanks for the encouragement. > > > > just a comment, below > > > > >The implication that nibbana is not something separate to be attained but > > is a > > >prior possession clouded by ignorance is pretty clear to me in this > > stanza. > > > > I cant see the relationship of a 'prior possession' here , robert. > > > > > > >I also love the one that follows, which is so beautiful, a beautiful > > example of > > >the 'poetry of emptiness', you could say, almost the 'romance' of > > emptiness, it is > > >so beautiful. I refer particularly to the last line: > > > > yes sir, it is said that the prominence that should be given to the > > 'sunnatapatisamyutta suttas' ( discourses about sunnata ) will get receded > > as time goes on. > > This is due to the fact that , ordinary worldlings will not particularly > > like to hear about the emptiness, and the sangha will have increasing > > difficulties of propagating them due to their inability. > > I cant recall where I got this from, but it must be in an 'Anagatha Bhayani' > > sutta or a commentry. > > > > > > rgds, > > gayan > > 8965 From: Sarah Date: Mon Oct 29, 2001 6:23pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Udana-Nibbana 1 Dear Rob Ep, --- Sarah wrote: R: > > Can one say what is experienced in relation to Nibbana after it has fallen > > away? > > Is it a one-time deal? And what is the purpose of this momentary > experience? > > > > What status does Nibbana have in this process? What is it's nature? [more > > small > > questions: and more below]. S: > Rob K or Num would do better on these tricky questions which can also be > checked in the Visuddhimagga or Abhidamatha Sangaha I think.(sorry, no time > for > me to check now...) In brief, the lokuttara cittas which experience nibbana > are > a ‘one time deal’ at each of the 4 stages of enlightenment. There may be > conditions for those who have attained jhanas (what level I forget) to > experience nibbana afterwards...but this is where I forget the details. Lots > has been written on the list about the nature of nibbana (see ‘useful posts’) > and I think I’ll pass on the other good questions for now....I’m getting into > deep water and don’t want to rush in..... S: An afterthought in haste - You may wish to re-read this extract from an earlier post of mine to Ken O in which I quote from 'Abhidhamma in Daily Life': ******************************** Post 8487 Sarah: The details about cittas are very precise in the Tipitaka and especially in the abhidhamma. Again let me quote from Nina’s book to add to the details Rob gave you:. .................... ...... The magga-citta is the first lokuttara citta in that process of cittas. When it has fallen away it is succeeded by two (or three) phala-cittas which are the result of the magga-citta and which still have nibbana as the object. As we have seen, the magga-citta is succeeded immediately by its result, in the same process of citta. The magga-citta cannot produce vipaka in the form of rebirth, such as the kusala citta of the other planes of consciousness. The phala-cittas are succeeded by bhavanga-cittas. Some people do not need the moment of parikamma (preparatory consciousness) and in that case three moments of phala-citta arise instead of two moments. Summarizing the process of citta, during which enlightenment is attained, it is as follows: mano-dvaravajjana-citta (mind-door-adverting-consciousness) parikamma (preparatory; for some people not necessary) upacara (proximatory) anuloma (adaptation) gotrabhu (change of lineage) magga-citta phala-citta (two or three moments, depending on the individual) B. When the lokuttara cittas have fallen away and there are kamavacara cittas again, can nibbana also be the object of kamavacara citta? A. Nibbana can be the object of kamavacara-cittas which arise after the lokuttara cittas have fallen away. Before someone becomes an ariyan there can only be speculation about nibbana. Since the ariyan, however, directly experiences nibbana, he can reflect upon his experience afterwards. We read in the 'Visuddhimagga' (XXII, 19) that, after the lokuttara cittas have fallen away, the person who attained enlightenment reviews in different mind-door processes of citta the path, fruition, the defilements which have been abandoned, the defilements still remaining and nibbana. ..................... Sarah: You’ll note that the result of the magga (path) cittas which experience nibbana follow immediately. In the last quote from the Vis., which mentions the defilements still remaining, this of course does not apply to the arahat. .................... ******************** If any of your questions are not answered to your satisfaction in the next while, please raise them again for Nina when she is back too. Sarah 8966 From: Howard Date: Mon Oct 29, 2001 7:13pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Udana-Nibbana 1 Hi, Kenneth and Sarah - In a message dated 10/28/01 9:49:19 PM Eastern Standard Time, Kenneth Ong writes: > Hello Sarah > > Its me again. > > > > S: Hmmm....It’s true that mundane cittas acompanied by panna (more and > > more highly developed) and the other necessary wholesome cetasikas > eventually condition the lokuttara cittas. Conditions are very complex, so > I wouldn’t call these cittas ‘the resultant’, nor do I understand your > first sentence above. Nibbana is not conditioned by any cittas. It is > expereinced (the object of) the lokuttara cittas. Sorry if I sound very > ‘finicky’, but the dhamma is very precise, I think. > > k: No I do not agreed. We cannot use this basis to divert the point. We > got to admit weakness if there are, as like when I point out there is > substantiality issues in Buddhism. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Howard: I tend to agree with you, Ken, on this specific point: When there is a relation occuring between things - and observing *is* a relation - there is conditioning. Totally separate things, neither conditioned by the other, cannot interrelate. --------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > >K: Nibbana can never be experienced by conditioned cittas because > > Nibbana is unconditional, if it is not then why classified it as > unconditionanal the first place. > > > > S: There’s been a lot of discussion on this issue (see ‘useful posts’ > > under nibbana perhaps...) Many people here find it very difficult to > accept that the unconditioned (Nibbana) is experienced by the conditioned > (lokuttara cittas), but that’s how it is in the Pali canon as indicated in > my previous quote. ------------------------------------------------------ Howard: Just a request for clarification: Found in which pitakas? And if it is found in the suttas, is it clear there that nibbana is intended to be a positively existing separate dhamma being observed by cittas, or is "observing nibbana" more along the lines of the mind getting a glimpse of what it is like to have ignorance dispelled, a glimpse of the way things really are when seen truly? ------------------------------------------------------ > > k: It is the same thing when I say cittas don't die, you find it difficult > to believe me. ------------------------------------------------------ Howard: Ken, what do you mean by "believe me"? Are you claiming to have a direct line to "The Truth"? The Buddha said quite clearly that all conditions cease. Nothing lasts. Impermanence. Are you saying that you have directly seen that to be false? As far as "believing" you is concerned, the Buddha said that even *he* should not be taken purely on faith. Now, all my direct experience has confirmed to me the Buddha's teaching on impermanence. With all due respect, on what basis do you suggest we "believe" you? ------------------------------------------------------- > > > >K: Assuming Nibbana can be experienced by conditioned if we used the > > basis > that Nibbana has the same nature of anatta as conditioned > cittas. But the > problem as they are anatta, whatever citta experienced > will be illusory. Because this "illusory experience" is due to the > speed of cittas which a self thought there is self in anatta. Nibbana > cannot be substantiated on this basis because in Nibbana we see reality, > which mean anatta is fully understand, hence there is no "illusory > experience". > > > > S: I agree there is no ilusory experience. The cittas and nibbana are > > anatta. Anatta doesn’t mean illusory. Sorry I’m having trouble following > you here. Rob Ep or Howard may be able to follow your thinking better > here. > > > > > k: The problem is then we thought kusala cittas is the one leading to > > > Nibbana which is not correct. Because kusala cittas are dependent on > > > akusala cittas to be in existence. If there is no akuasla citta, we > > would not know what is kuasala cittas in the first place. Cittas cannot > > > eradicate another cittas because they have the same charateristics. > > Citta is categories into four jati but to me they are not mutually > > exclusive. Furthermore if we look at sati, it is never abt getting > rid, it is abt knowing its coming and going. No eradication because > eradication or getting rid is still attached to a subtle self concept for > an "action" to be enforced whereas coming and going we let things as it > is, > > attachment to a self concept is also let go. That is why I keep > insisting that Nibbana to me is not eradication of defilements it is the > letting go of defilements and in the next moment one is in Nibbana. One > let go of conditions to reach unconditional reality. > > > S: Sorry, can you give the the text or the commentary reference you are > > referring to here as I’m not clear where these ideas come from. May I > > just stress that the characteristic of sati is to be aware of a reality > for a moment and then gone. There is no ‘one’ to let go of conditions or > defilements or anything else. If it is not the development of kusala > cittas (and in particular, the development of wisdom) that leads to > nibbana, then I wonder why the Buddha stresses this development so much? > > k: It is we classify those sati, metta, other wholesome practises as > kusala cittas and during such kusala cittas there is no akusala cittas. > Buddha urge us to do kusala cittas but he did not classify that if we have > kusala cittas there is no akusala present in this kusala itself. Because > kusala does not equate akusala. It is like using another "self" to > replace a "self". Furthermore as I have said earlier, kusala and akusala > both depend on each other to be in existence, hence it is not permanent. -------------------------------------------------------- Howard: I won't argue about things not being permanent! ;-)) But, as far as kusala and akusala being mutually dependent, I believe you are mixing two different senses of 'dependent' here. For sure, the *concepts* of 'kusala' and 'akusala' are mutually dependent. But that does not, in and of itself, imply that any kusala dhamma arises in dependence on an akusala one or vice-versa. Dependent arising of specific experienced dhammas differs from the logico-semantic interdependence of concepts. ------------------------------------------------------------- > > To do kusala like metta is conventional so that the mind is more peaceful > but these do not help us to attain arahant bc all religion urges goodness > but they do not attain arahant bc they are one sided in their practise. ------------------------------------------------------------ Howard: Certainly sila is not sufficient for awakening, but it is a necessary part of the Buddha's path, a part which you correctly point out is common to all religions. ------------------------------------------------------------- > In his method of sati, there is no right or wrong just pure attention to > what arise. If we have pure attention what arise, it is very difficult to > do bad or to be attached. Sorry my understanding does not base on > commentaries, it is base on practise that I feel this is the point and > plus Mahayana doctrinal influences and relooking at sati sutras. ------------------------------------------------------------- Howard: When one's mind is not already reasonably free of the turmoil of akusala thought and emotion - and I do assume that your mind *is* free of such, at least to the same extent as the rest of us - there is rarely a solid enough foundation for the development of further calm and insight. Moreover, when one is tied to wrong view and filled with hate or craving, should one somehow be able to make progress in meditation, one is likely to misinterpret what one "sees" and to misuse the fruits of the practice. ------------------------------------------------------------- > > > Kindest regards. > Kenneth Ong ================================ 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) 8967 From: Yulia Klimov Date: Tue Oct 30, 2001 3:16am Subject: RE: [DhammaStudyGroup] dhammavicaya II & welcome Dear Sarah, Thank you very much for your welcome letter! This group was recommended to me by one of your members, Robert. And I am very glad he did! I have to say I understand a little from postings here, because I am very new to Buddhism. I forgot to say, I've read a book on line by Nina Van Gorkom and was moved by it. I am a very first grader now and take off my hat for you, graduates :). I live in Florida, originally from Russia. I have a language ability, that's why I asked about Pali. I am little bit disagree with people here who said, language doesn't matter. It's not what language matters, translator will always brings his (her) feelings, vision to the subject. If you read Shakspiere in old English and read it in Russian translation, it leaves you wonder, if that was the same autor :). Thank you for all your postings here, I really enjoy atmosphere here (does it sound like attachement to you :)?). Yours, Yulia -----Original Message----- From: Sarah [mailto:Sarah] Sent: Sunday, October 28, 2001 3:02 AM Subject: RE: [DhammaStudyGroup] dhammavicaya II & welcome Dear Yulia, --- Yulia Klimov wrote: > Hello, > How can one learn Pali? > Is it possible to do it without the teacher, just with books? > Yulia > Dear Yulia, I've always been a very poor Pali student, so I'm not really qualified to advise you on this. I do know that some members here have studied 'just with books'. Nina Van Gorkom told me that she just went through the book by Warder (pub. by PTS) several times to get a good grounding. I'm really writing just to welcome you here to dsg. i hope you enjoy the messages and the list. sometimes it's a bit confusing coming in in the middle of threads and takes a while to work out what anyone is talking about I know;-) If you are inclined to say a few words about yourself and your interest in dhamma, we'd all be interested to hear. I'd also be interested to know where you're from... I met a friend for breakfast the other day who is also new to the list. He asked me where he could find previous posts on particular topics, so I'd like to use this post to you to give a couple of links for any other 'newbies': 1. Back-up list with a better search engine (for posts since ?date only): . NOTE: password is METTA http://www.escribe.com/religion/dhammastudygroup/ 2. Selected 'Useful Posts' under topic headings: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/files/Useful_Posts 3. Glossary for confusing Pali terms: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/files/Pali_Glossary Best wishes, Sarah 8968 From: Lisa Date: Tue Oct 30, 2001 10:08am Subject: Hello... I'm Dan's wife, and he's been after me for a while to join this group and introduce myself. Shortly after we were married, Dan dragged me to a meditation retreat. Thereafter, I went willingly to another two or three, but not since we had kids. Dan and I don't get much time together these days, but when we do, he tries to explain Dhamma to me. I always get bogged down in the Pali terminology. Last time we had one of these conversations, I asked him a question that he told me to post here: If one doesn't have wisdom, how does one choose the right action? Lisa 8969 From: rikpa21 Date: Tue Oct 30, 2001 10:11am Subject: Re: Udana-Nibbana 1 Hi Howard, > When one's mind is not already reasonably free of the turmoil of > akusala thought and emotion - and I do assume that your mind *is* free of > such, at least to the same extent as the rest of us - there is rarely a solid > enough foundation for the development of further calm and insight. Moreover, > when one is tied to wrong view and filled with hate or craving, should one > somehow be able to make progress in meditation, one is likely to misinterpret > what one "sees" and to misuse the fruits of the practice. I could not agree with you more in this. Ridding the mind of unwholseome tendencies is but the first baby-step on the path to freedom. So long as there is sufficient craving or aversion present, forget getting to the deeper level, the root-controller of that: ignorance! And forget insight into the nature of things for that reason alone, since craving and aversion will hold so much sway ignorance will remain all but invisible, as it is hidden by the coarser faculties of craving and aversion. In other words, forget believing there will be enough of the right conditions for insight even into the unpleasant sensations to arise without this basic, basic foundation of sila. IT IS SO IMPORTANT to cultivate wholesome states of mind, all the time, day in, day out, all the time, without fail, to endeavor to see all things that arise as opportunities to be turned into skillful activities somehow, using the simply threefold formula laid out by Lord Buddha: morality, THEN concentration, THEN wisdom. May all beings gain the wisdom of seeing things-as-they-are, in this very lifetime! 8970 From: rikpa21 Date: Tue Oct 30, 2001 10:26am Subject: Re: Hello... --- Lisa wrote: > I'm Dan's wife, and he's been after me for a while to join this group > and introduce myself. Shortly after we were married, Dan dragged me > to a meditation retreat. Thereafter, I went willingly to another two > or three, but not since we had kids. Dan and I don't get much time > together these days, but when we do, he tries to explain Dhamma to me. > I always get bogged down in the Pali terminology. Last time we had > one of these conversations, I asked him a question that he told me to > post here: If one doesn't have wisdom, how does one choose the right > action? Hello Lisa! As Dan's arch-nemesis (and vice-versa! :) here in DSG, I'll take the risk of his humorous wrath and weigh in. FORGET THE PALI TERMINOLOGY! The Buddha emphasized speaking in the native language of the listerer. Why? Because the aim is usderstanding, not confusion. The aim of the Dharma is awakening, awakening to see things as they truly are. And that requires clear understanding of basic concepts, first. If I were to dispense kindly advice, I'd say to simply keep a strong focus on doing good--thinking kindly toward others as much as possible, helping others when the chance arises, with as little hope of them rewarding you as possible. When this is firmly established, such that you feel good will toward others much, if not all of the time, then there are deeper levels of the Dharma to investigate. The really profound stuff, though, requires at least a basic foundation in goodness of heart. And what could possibly be objectionable about such an endeavour anyway? It is also helpful throughout this to try to remauin mindful of avoiding anger and frustration (though not fearing the fact that anger always arises when it has the right opportunity) when things don't go as planned, because in this world, what ever goes as planned? Things happen, and the greatest Buddhist masters are at peace no matter the exernal circumstances. Also, there's no point beating ourselves up over our many faults; better to recognize them for what they are and resolve to practice ways of overcoming them, which takes TIME and PATIENCE. Just noting when we feel things like strong attachment or strong aversion are excellent ways to see these sensations as merely neutral functions, devoid of any characteristic that "belongs" to "I", "me", or "mine." They're just mental and physical sensations, arising and passing away, impermanent. This makes it easier to let these sensations go, because to attach to them is to create the conditions for further suffering. I can provide more on this later, if you're interested, and if Dan doesn't beat me up for my shocking presumptuousness! :) :) :) 8971 From: dalthorp Date: Tue Oct 30, 2001 10:29am Subject: Re: horses [Ken O] It's great to hear from you, Kenneth O. Sorry I couldn't respond to your thoughtful comments earlier. You do raise some interesting points that I'd like to comment on. I earlier wrote: > No question that ALL the samma's > > are important--not just sammaditthi. My question is: how can we discern > the difference between the samma's and miccha's and the vippayutta's? For > example, in my second intensive meditation retreat a number of years ago, > I worked so very hard sitting, walking at a snail's pace, taking an hour > to eat a simple plate of food--formal practice for 12-15 hours a day, day > > after day, week after week. The samma's... To which you responded: > K: I was wondering whether he is trying too hard. Dan: It's not that he was trying too hard, it's just that he was mistaking 'effort' for 'right effort'. Ken O: >To me he sounds like he > is anticipating something to happen while trying very hard in his > practise. With anticipation, I think there is kind of "desiring" Dan: Right. Ken O: > To me when one tries to discern samma and miccha is still wrong view due > to our view is conventional. Dan: Right, but at the same time, it must be understood that discernment between samma and miccha is a foundation of Right View, the forerunner of the path. Paradoxical? It must be so, as long as the "tries" is not de-conventionalized. Ken O: > dhamma in order to practise this conventional method. This conventional > method is the only way out for us to realise paramattha sacca and hence > its good to be cautioned but not overly concern. Dan: There are no recipes for realising paramattha sacca. But it is essential to develop discernment between samma and miccha, to recognize that conventional effort is not samma. It is not conventional effort, conventional "method" that gives rise to understanding of paramattha sacca. Ken O: > Since all views are conventional, hence all our effort are conventional Dan: I don't understand what you mean here. Sammaditthi of the noble 8- fold path is not conventional, nor is the sammaditthi in moments of mundane insight. There is a strong and clear distinction between mundane right effort and conventional right effort, and a strong and clear distinction between mundane right effort and supramundane right effort. Ken O: > which implies that our effort will never be Right effort as long as we do > not realise paramattha sacca. That is why the Eight Noble path can be > mundane and Supramundane. Dan: There's been a good deal of discussion on this list about the differences between conventional, mundane, and supramundane understanding of "Path". "Conventional" is what we normally think of when, for example, people talk about "effort", but Buddha usually talks about "mundane" path (satipatthana with mundane object) or supramundane. There must be a few posts among the "useful posts" that make the distinction more clear. Maybe Jon or Sarah could point some of these out. 8972 From: dalthorp Date: Tue Oct 30, 2001 10:30am Subject: Re; Horses [Erik] Hi Erik, Just a few words on our old conversation from a week and a half ago... Dan: > > samma's. But now I realize that for 23.99 hours per day there were > no > > samma's. Erik: > How's that, if you'll pardon my asking? Thre are many, many levels > of "sammas" going on, just going by the definition of the Magga- > Vibhanga Sutta. It sounds almost as if you're being unduly harsh on > yourself and not cutting yourself enough slack here (and being gentle > with ourselves is very important, I think).... Dan: Hmmmm... There is no being harsh on myself here. Recognizing just a taste of the reality of kusala/akusala is liberating. I don't see any tinge of "being harsh". The reality of the noble truth of suffering SOUNDS harsh, but each little grain of understanding about it is precious, liberating. In the conventional meaning and the conventional understanding, the idea of the ubiquity of suffering is discouraging, depressing, pessimistic, harsh. But the deeper it is examined in the light of anatta, the more liberating it becomes. The differences between conventional, mundane, and supramundane understanding are striking. > Perhaps what I am objecting to is that all this talk about the super- > fast process of cittas and how few of them are "kusala" obscures the > issue, and that to simply take much of the teaching in places like > the Magga Vibhanga Sutta at face-value is "good enough" to get us to > the desired destination. > > That is all this practice has to be: good enough! Good enough because > it eventually leads one to the absence of all the defilements when > pursued and developed. Dan: I find that the more I probe the meaning of the Buddha's words, the more the great depth and exquisiteness of the Dhamma is revealed. And discoveries are unraveled in quite unexpected ways, at unexpected times, under unexpected conditions. It would be stultifying to take the conventional understanding of suttas at "face value" as "good enough" and not appreciate that the words have immense depth that cannot be duly appreciated until they are examined at deeper and deeper levels and observed at deeper and deeper levels in the mind. Erik: > my practice is going well, however imperfectly that may be. That > factor of rejiocing in the wholesomeness of even incremental (if > imperfect) improvement I have found a great spur to develop eevn more > good stuff-- May your search for good stuff yield good fruit, Erik. Dan 8973 From: dalthorp Date: Tue Oct 30, 2001 10:37am Subject: Re: Hello...[Erik] Hey, are you making moves on my wife?! You recently wrote: "if you walked in on your wife in bed with your worst nemesis..." My first reaction was to laugh because such a scenario is inconceivable. Bandits savagely cutting off my arms with a two-handed saw? Now, that's more believable. 8974 From: Howard Date: Tue Oct 30, 2001 5:37am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Udana-Nibbana 1 Hi, Erik - In a message dated 10/29/01 9:13:38 PM Eastern Standard Time, rikpa21 writes: > Ridding the mind of > unwholseome tendencies is but the first baby-step on the path to > freedom. So long as there is sufficient craving or aversion present, > forget getting to the deeper level, the root-controller of that: > ignorance! And forget insight into the nature of things for that > reason alone, since craving and aversion will hold so much sway > ignorance will remain all but invisible, as it is hidden by the > coarser faculties of craving and aversion. > > In other words, forget believing there will be enough of the right > conditions for insight even into the unpleasant sensations to arise > without this basic, basic foundation of sila. IT IS SO IMPORTANT to > cultivate wholesome states of mind, all the time, day in, day out, > all the time, without fail, to endeavor to see all things that arise > as opportunities to be turned into skillful activities somehow, using > the simply threefold formula laid out by Lord Buddha: morality, THEN > concentration, THEN wisdom. > > May all beings gain the wisdom of seeing things-as-they-are, in this > very lifetime! > ========================== Thank you. So very well said! 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) 8975 From: m. nease Date: Tue Oct 30, 2001 0:03pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Hello... Dear Lisa, --- Lisa wrote: > I'm Dan's wife, and he's been after me for a while > to join this group > and introduce myself. Shortly after we were > married, Dan dragged me > to a meditation retreat. Sorry Dan dragged you there, hope he didn't goat-rope ye... > Thereafter, I went > willingly to another two > or three, but not since we had kids. Sensible woman--after the kids, anyhow. > Dan and I > don't get much time > together these days, but when we do, he tries to > explain Dhamma to me. Well, he does better than most. Still...! > I always get bogged down in the Pali terminology. Seriously, if you find this stuff interesting at all, just look at the Pali gradually, as you come across it. It gets better and better. > Last time we had > one of these conversations, I asked him a question > that he told me to > post here: If one doesn't have wisdom, how does one > choose the right > action? Nobody to choose it, Lisa. Whether the action is mental, verbal or physical, it's determined by a great number of past and present conditions. Determinism vs. free will? No. Both just concepts, I think. The right choice depends on having heard and reflected on the right stuff, and in the right way. I ain't so smart as Dan though. Nice to meet you, Ma'am, mike 8976 From: Sarah Date: Tue Oct 30, 2001 0:46pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Udana-Nibbana 1 Dear Manji, --- manji wrote: > Well, I just joined this list last week and will post something about > joining, A big welcome, Manji and look forward to the intro whenever you feel inclined.....sorry about the delay to your post, I’m a little behind at the moment;-) >however I have something to ask. > > I think Nibbana should not be understood without the realization that > Nibbana itself is Dhamma. Unconditioned Dhamma. What is dhamma? > > There is "knowing dhamma", citta and cetasika... There is rupa. But... right > here is nibbana. "Knowing dhamma" is conditioned. I think this is important > difference between conditioned dhamma and unconditioned dhamma. > > Nibbana is unconditioned dhamma, yet there are concepts from conventional > writings and discussion pointing to the experience of nibbana. Who says that > nibbana is any different than other dhamma? So what there is now is two > differences... > > There is "knowing dhamma" and there is knowing "dhamma". So what means... > unconditioned dhamma? These are all very astute comments, Manji, that reflect your serious studies of the Tipitaka, I’d say. As you indicate, nibbana is always a concept until it is directly experienced by the conditioned cittas and cetasikas. >Now do you want a twist? Conceptually... look up the > roots of the word dhamma. > > Unconditioned dhamma... right now dhamma. So great is the contrast between > conditioned dhamma and unconditioned dhamma, that there is a saying... > gone... gone... gone to the other shore. But until that contrast is right > now known, i don't think there is knowing nibbana. Afterword perhaps there > is reflection on this contrast of "knowing nibbana dhamma" - "knowing > conditioned dhamma". Yes, I know dhamma has many, many meanings which vary acording to the context, but for sure, as you indicate so well, only after nibbana has been directly experienced can one say there is any real understanding of the contrast or difference between conditioned and unconditioned dhamma....until then, it is just thinking, hopefully guided by the Buddha’s Teachings. Thank you for these reminders. After re-reading your wise comments, I’m even more curious to ‘get to know you’ a little better;-) > :) keep going. Thanks Manji, I’ll try to finish the Commentary notes and not get too side-tracked a little later today...Look forward to hearing more from you and thanks for joining us. Sarah p.s. I just followed your advice to look up the root of dhamma (in the PTS Rhys Davids dict): dhr- to hold, support: that which forms a foundation and upholds = constitution..This is followed by many pages of fine detail and the contexts in which different meanings of dhamma are used in the Tipitaka. Was there anything you wished to emphasise further? thanks 8977 From: manji Date: Tue Oct 30, 2001 0:52pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Udana-Nibbana 1 well, now i will ask the question. and after post a bit about training for me :) ----- Original Message ----- From: "Sarah" Sent: Monday, October 29, 2001 11:46 PM Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Udana-Nibbana 1 SNIP SNIP SNIP > Thanks Manji, I'll try to finish the Commentary notes and not get too > side-tracked a little later today...Look forward to hearing more from you and > thanks for joining us. > > Sarah > > p.s. I just followed your advice to look up the root of dhamma (in the PTS Rhys > Davids dict): dhr- to hold, support: that which forms a foundation and upholds > = constitution..This is followed by many pages of fine detail and the contexts > in which different meanings of dhamma are used in the Tipitaka. Was there > anything you wished to emphasise further? thanks Nibbana is a dhamma, what does it uphold? 8978 From: robertkirkpatrick Date: Tue Oct 30, 2001 0:57pm Subject: Re: Hello... --- Lisa wrote: > If one doesn't have wisdom, how does one choose the right > action? > > Lisa ______ Dear Lisa, Welcome to the list. Dan is a very respected and admired member here. Without wisdom we are lost in the ocean of samsara- sometimes doing good, sometimes bad , but with no way to truly discern which is which. The main conditions for wisdom of the eightfold path are hearing true Dhamma from the Buddha or one of his disciples, wise attention to that and also having accumulated wisdom and other parami in the infinite past. From right study and development we find that what we had once thought were our strenghts turn out to be faults:our confident nature is mostly mana(conceit). The calmness we cherish only clinging to quiet; our directness mostly aversion. Also it sometimes happens that the teachers we first thought so wise turn out to be stuck in some place or another. In the Intro. to the Vibhanga(Abhidhamma pitaka) (Pali text society) writes "It is all very well to say 'I know what is right and what is wrong'The fact is very few people do know when it comes to the precison of mental behaviour essential to correct development toward release. It is this exactitude of behaviour;mental physical and the conseqeunces thereof, that the scriptures elucidate in detail". Iggelden carries on "It is all very well to say 'I know what needs to be done to break the continuity of rebirth and death'. In fact very few people know of even the most elementary reasons for the continuity of process, let alone of breaking it. It is the detailed description, analysis and reasons given for this cyclic process that the scriptures spend so much care in putting before us. It is all very well to say 'What do I want to know all these definitions of terms for, it only clutters the mind?'The question is, though, how many people when they seriously ask themselves as to the extent and range of some such apparently simple terms as greed, hatred and ignorance, can know their full and proper implications and manifestations within their own thoughts and actions..This the scriptures are at pains to make clear to even the dullest reader.."Endquote. robert 8979 From: Sarah Date: Tue Oct 30, 2001 1:35pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Hello... Dear Lisa. --- Lisa wrote: > I'm Dan's wife, and he's been after me for a while to join this group > and introduce myself. I'm really delighted to see you here too.... Shortly after we were married, Dan dragged me > to a meditation retreat. Thereafter, I went willingly to another two > or three, but not since we had kids. Dan and I don't get much time > together these days, but when we do, he tries to explain Dhamma to me. I know what it's like. (trying to find time together)... and we all really appreciate your support for Dan's fine interest (and wisdom) in Dhamma and your interest to hear more yourself. > I always get bogged down in the Pali terminology. May I suggest you just skip the posts which seem to have too much Pali for now and as you're doing, start your own threads in your own language.....Use the list like a restaurant and select what takes your fancy. (Your husband's posts are a hot favourite with us all, I think, and we all 'cry' when they run out;-) >Last time we had > one of these conversations, I asked him a question that he told me to > post here: If one doesn't have wisdom, how does one choose the right > action? Lisa, I have a 'queue' of posts waiting for answers, so I'll let others discuss this excellent question with you for now. Thanks again for joining and hope to see plenty of you. Sarah 8980 From: Herman Date: Tue Oct 30, 2001 1:42pm Subject: Anicca (Impermanence) Hello everybody, Apologies up front. I am going from memory only, and would not be able to point you to the sutta even if you offered me some very nice cheese and biscuits :-) I seem to recall that the Buddha was asked re the rising, being and falling away of rupas whether it is the same rupas that arise or whether they are different. From memory his answer was: neither. Three questions. Did I remember this correctly? If so, where in the suttas will I find this? What does it mean? Regards Herman 8981 From: rikpa21 Date: Tue Oct 30, 2001 1:59pm Subject: Re: Re; Horses [Erik] --- Dan D wrote: Hi Dan! > Dan: > Hmmmm... There is no being harsh on myself here. Recognizing just a > taste of the reality of kusala/akusala is liberating. I don't see any > tinge of "being harsh". The reality of the noble truth of suffering > SOUNDS harsh, but each little grain of understanding about it is > precious, liberating. In the conventional meaning and the > conventional understanding, the idea of the ubiquity of suffering is > discouraging, depressing, pessimistic, harsh. But the deeper it is > examined in the light of anatta, the more liberating it becomes. The > differences between conventional, mundane, and supramundane > understanding are striking. No joking. But that's not what I was driving at. More to the point: that even conventional kusala is a really fine thing, really fine, and I think it would be a shame to give it short shrift, even by subtle implication. That is all. > > That is all this practice has to be: good enough! Good enough > because > > it eventually leads one to the absence of all the defilements when > > pursued and developed. > > Dan: > I find that the more I probe the meaning of the Buddha's words, the > more the great depth and exquisiteness of the Dhamma is revealed. Indeed it is. But, first things first, as it were. I always come back to this point here, it seems. While we can talk about anatta until the cows come home, even particle physicists know that nothing has any intrinsic nature. And yet what does that do for them in terms of eradicating the source of suffering? Seriously? There is much more to the game than just the study of Right View, which, as forerunner, may be key, yet it still plays a holistic role with all the other path- factors like Right Speech, Right Resolve, Right Effort, etc., and these operate at both the conventional and supramundane levels. > And > discoveries are unraveled in quite unexpected ways, at unexpected > times, under unexpected conditions. It would be stultifying to take > the conventional understanding of suttas at "face value" as "good > enough" and not appreciate that the words have immense depth that > cannot be duly appreciated until they are examined at deeper and > deeper levels and observed at deeper and deeper levels in the mind. I am not suggesting ONLY taking them at face value. I am suggesting that we CAN take what the Buddha outlined at face-value here, and indeed, should. Though with the caveat I'm NOT suggesting that this be to the exclusion of resolving to comprehend the supramundane aspects of the path either! This never denies that doorways open to deeper and deeper levels of understanding (and as you say in most unexpected ways!), but I am saying that these "sammas" operate at ALL levels: conventional, and supramundane. And again my point is that I think it is a mistake to downplay the importance of the conventional aspects of skillful and wholesome activities. It's all about emphasis. Where are our best efforst spent, RIGHT NOW? What if we're actively breakinging the five precepts, still killing, stealing, lying, etc.? What are the odds Right View of the supramundane flavor has any chance at all of arising? Slim to none, I'd say. That is the gist of what I'm trying to get at here, in other words. Kusala's WAY cool. It DOES eventually lead to the place where all the deeper insights arise, if we're aligned with the Noble Eightfold path, that is, and know about the progression beginning with ethics, concentration, and wisdom, and how they all hang together. Even ariya puggalas prior to anagami have to deal with conventional sammas with regard to things like attachment and aversion, for example, so even those on the supramundane path have to work with conventional samma! What do you think the whole notion of the Six Paramitas refer to (at least in the Mahayana) and the Bodhisattvaa bhumis (grounds)? They are ALL (except for the the Paramita of Prajna) about cultivating the more "mundane" faculties, beginning with Generosity (automatically actualized at the first bhumi), then Ethics, then Patience, then Effor, then Meditation, THEN Wisdom (Prajna--as in Prajnaparamita-- the "Perfection of Wisdom"). > Erik: > > my practice is going well, however imperfectly that may be. That > > factor of rejiocing in the wholesomeness of even incremental (if > > imperfect) improvement I have found a great spur to develop eevn > more > > good stuff-- > > May your search for good stuff yield good fruit, Erik. It has yielded some pretty amazing fruits so far, and will inevitably continue to do so. May your pursuit of this Noble Eightfold Path bring you the very same! :) 8982 From: manji Date: Tue Oct 30, 2001 2:01pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Udana-Nibbana 1 Hi, I am deshi living in a dojo in Washington, DC. I am so happy to find a dhamma discussion group, so I joined. Anyways, I learn from daily life and meditation. I have been reading suttra, abhidhamma and vinaya for about 5 years. This path was started along time ago, however I am thinking that maybe the bell sounded greatest when a quote appeared on the back of a book I walked by in the bookstore when i was very young. Do not seek to follow in the footsteps of the wise, seek what they sought. - Basho ... After some time being learning about cetasika in a quite direct fashion I am right now understanding why aversion is akusala. It is akusala for what it is, not for what it is about or around. I spent much time after the military service "beating" myself up mentally over living the way I wanted to live, in the military I thought of completing military service and becomming a monk. I thought I had aversion to work and going to college and universities, but really it was a conditioned aversion to living a monk's life and attachment to living a monk's life. Doubt... maybe we all know this... so using that opportunity to listen to the dhamma of doubt, the dhamma of aversion... the dhamma of... the dhamma of... So now I am here, practicing and studying, after realizing that it is noble to live this way. So maybe others realize this too. Experiencing nama-rupa... I am very fortunate to experience and grow up these ways, and realizing that living a human existence allows all the chimes of dhamma to ring. We are very fortunate, so use every opportunity to listen to the dhamma. Nice to meet you Sarah :) keep going, manji ----- Original Message ----- From: "Sarah" Sent: Monday, October 29, 2001 11:46 PM Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Udana-Nibbana 1 > Dear Manji, > > --- manji wrote: > > Well, I just joined this list last week and will post something about > > joining, > > A big welcome, Manji and look forward to the intro whenever you feel > inclined.....sorry about the delay to your post, I'm a little behind at the > moment;-) > > >however I have something to ask. > > > > I think Nibbana should not be understood without the realization that > > Nibbana itself is Dhamma. Unconditioned Dhamma. What is dhamma? > > > > There is "knowing dhamma", citta and cetasika... There is rupa. But... right > > here is nibbana. "Knowing dhamma" is conditioned. I think this is important > > difference between conditioned dhamma and unconditioned dhamma. > > > > Nibbana is unconditioned dhamma, yet there are concepts from conventional > > writings and discussion pointing to the experience of nibbana. Who says that > > nibbana is any different than other dhamma? So what there is now is two > > differences... > > > > There is "knowing dhamma" and there is knowing "dhamma". So what means... > > unconditioned dhamma? > > These are all very astute comments, Manji, that reflect your serious studies of > the Tipitaka, I'd say. As you indicate, nibbana is always a concept until it is > directly experienced by the conditioned cittas and cetasikas. > > >Now do you want a twist? Conceptually... look up the > > roots of the word dhamma. > > > > Unconditioned dhamma... right now dhamma. So great is the contrast between > > conditioned dhamma and unconditioned dhamma, that there is a saying... > > gone... gone... gone to the other shore. But until that contrast is right > > now known, i don't think there is knowing nibbana. Afterword perhaps there > > is reflection on this contrast of "knowing nibbana dhamma" - "knowing > > conditioned dhamma". > > Yes, I know dhamma has many, many meanings which vary acording to the context, > but for sure, as you indicate so well, only after nibbana has been directly > experienced can one say there is any real understanding of the contrast or > difference between conditioned and unconditioned dhamma....until then, it is > just thinking, hopefully guided by the Buddha's Teachings. Thank you for these > reminders. > > After re-reading your wise comments, I'm even more curious to 'get to know you' > a little better;-) > > > :) keep going. > > Thanks Manji, I'll try to finish the Commentary notes and not get too > side-tracked a little later today...Look forward to hearing more from you and > thanks for joining us. > > Sarah > > p.s. I just followed your advice to look up the root of dhamma (in the PTS Rhys > Davids dict): dhr- to hold, support: that which forms a foundation and upholds > = constitution..This is followed by many pages of fine detail and the contexts > in which different meanings of dhamma are used in the Tipitaka. Was there > anything you wished to emphasise further? thanks > 8983 From: rikpa21 Date: Tue Oct 30, 2001 2:17pm Subject: Re: Hello...[Erik] --- Dan D wrote: > Hey, are you making moves on my wife?! Fortunately you're in luck, Dan, because on Sunday I will be officially married, and my new bride will have none of that sort of thing, so you're off the hook! I'm just trying to get my flirtation in while I can still get away with it. > You recently wrote: "if you walked in on your wife in bed with your > worst nemesis..." My first reaction was to laugh because such a > scenario is inconceivable. This assumes you can see into the future. Vipaka is a strange beast, and you never know what's just around the corner. At least, this has been my experience. Your experiences will vary. > Bandits savagely cutting off my arms with > a two-handed saw? Now, that's more believable. After just revisiting Tuol Sleng "Genocide Prison" and the Choeung Ek "Killing Fields" outside Phnom Phen with my fiancee a couple of weeks ago so she could see what sort of atrocities humans are capable of--and Cambodia during the Pol Pot years had to be the worst of the worst--we were both reminded just how much suffering there is even in this realm. Concemplating just how bad it can get gave me serious pause, and has made me meditate intensely on the degree of equanimity needed to remain unperturbed at some of the horrific things they did to people at Tuol Sleng. These were people who took babies by their legs and swung them headfirst into trees, braining them. Or slit their throats with the jagged edge of palm leaves. Among all the other various tortures devised to create maximum suffering for the victims. 8984 From: Jesse Dhillon Date: Tue Oct 30, 2001 2:36pm Subject: Hello Hello, I just joined this list on the recommendation of a friend on IRC. I got into Buddhism just a short while ago, and I am trying to read the various suttas as I find them. I may not be very knowledgeable or useful in the various discussions, so I will just watch for the time being. Thanks. Jesse Dhillon. "Subject to decay are all component things; strive earnestly to work out your own salvation." 8985 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Tue Oct 30, 2001 2:43pm Subject: RE: [DhammaStudyGroup] dhammavicaya IV Rob Ep The 'Buddhist Dictionary' by Nanatiloka at http://www.palikanon.com/english/wtb/dic_idx.html is a handy on-line source of textual references to terms and concepts. I have extracted below the entries and references on nibbana and sunnata. Hope you find them useful. Jon PS Many of the texts refered to are also available on-line; perhaps you or some other good soul could provided us all with the links. --- Robert Epstein wrote: > Dear Gayan, > I don't have the stanza in front of me, but the first one I mentioned > spoke of > Nibbana in a way that made it seem a part of the current experience, > although not > experienced by defiled cittas, rather than a distant goal. Nibbána, (Sanskrit nirvána): lit. 'extinction' (nir + Ö va, to cease blowing, to become extinguished); according to the commentaries, 'freedom from desire' (nir+ vana). Nibbána constitutes the highest and ultimate goal of all Buddhist aspirations, i.e. absolute extinction of that life-affirming will manifested as greed, hate and delusion, and convulsively clinging to existence; and therewith also the ultimate and absolute deliverance from all future rebirth, old age, disease and death, from all suffering and misery. Cf. Parinibbána. "Extinction of greed, extinction of hate, extinction of delusion: this is called Nibbána" (S. XXXVIII. 1). The 2 aspects of Nibbána are: (1) The full extinction of defilements (kilesa-parinibbána), also called sa-upádi-sesa-nibbána (s. It. 41), i.e. 'Nibbána with the groups of existence still remaining' (s. upádi). This takes place at the attainment of Arahatship, or perfect holiness (s. ariya-puggala). (2) The full extinction of the groups of existence (khandha-parinibbána), also called an-upádi-sesa-nibbána (s. It. 41, A. IV, 118), i.e. 'Nibbána without the groups remaining', in other words, the coming to rest, or rather the 'no-more-continuing' of this physico-mental process of existence. This takes place at the death of the Arahat. - (App.: Nibbána). Sometimes both aspects take place at one and the same moment, i.e. at the death of the Arahat; s. sama-sísí. "This, o monks, truly is the peace, this is the highest, namely the end of all formations, the forsaking of every substratum of rebirth, the fading away of craving, detachment, extinction, Nibbána" (A. III, 32). "Enraptured with lust (rága), enraged with anger (dosa), blinded by delusion (moha), overwhelmed, with mind ensnared, man aims at his own ruin, at the ruin of others, at the ruin of both, and he experiences mental pain and grief. But if lust, anger and delusion are given up, man aims neither at his own ruin, nor at the ruin of others, nor at the ruin of both, and he experiences no mental pain and grief. Thus is Nibbána visible in this life, immediate, inviting, attractive, and comprehensible to the wise" (A. III, 55). "Just as a rock of one solid mass remains unshaken by the wind, even so neither visible forms, nor sounds, nor odours, nor tastes, nor bodily impressions, neither the desired nor the undesired, can cause such a one to waver. Steadfast is his mind, gained is deliverance" (A, VI, 55). "Verily, there is an Unborn, Unoriginated, Uncreated, Unformed. If there were not this Unborn, Unoriginated, Uncreated, Unformed, escape from the world of the born, the originated, the created, the formed, would not be possible" (Ud. VIII, 3). One cannot too often and too emphatically stress the fact that not only for the actual realization of the goal of Nibbána, but also for a theoretical understanding of it, it is an indispensable preliminary condition to grasp fully the truth of anattá (q.v.), the egolessness and insubstantiality of all forms of existence. Without such an understanding, one will necessarily misconceive Nibbána - according to one's either materialistic or metaphysical leanings - either as annihilation of an ego, or as an eternal state of existence into which an ego or self enters or with which it merges. Hence it is said: "Mere suffering exists, no sufferer is found; The deed is, but no doer of the deed is there; Nibbána is, but not the man that enters it; The path is, but no traveler on it is seen." (Vis.M. XVI) Literature: For texts on Nibbána, see -- Path to Deliverance (Nyanatiloka), 36ff. Vis.M. XVI. 64ff. Anattá and Nibbána, by Nyanaponika Thera (WHEEL 11) The Buddhist Doctrine of Nibbána, by Ven. P. Vajiranana & F. Story (WHEEL 165/166). > Regarding sunnata, emptiness, if you can direct me to the names of the > suttas on > sunnata, I think I should take a look right now. suñña (adj.), suññatá (noun): void (ness), empty (emptiness). As a doctrinal term it refers, in Theraváda, exclusively to the anattá doctrine,.i.e. the unsubstantiality of all phenomena: "Void is the world ... because it is void of a self and anything belonging to a self" (suññam attena vá attaniyena vá; S. XXXV, 85); also stated of the 5 groups of existence (khandha, q.v.) in the same text. See also M. 43, M. 106. In CNidd. (quoted in Vis.M. XXI, 55), it is said: "Eye ... mind, visual objects ... mind-objects, visual consciousness ... mind-consciousness, corporeality ... consciousness, etc., are void of self and anything belonging to a self; void of permanency and of anything lasting, eternal or immutable.. They are coreless: without a core of permanency, or core of happiness or core of self." In M. 121, the voiding of the mind of the cankers, in the attainment of Arahatship, is regarded as the "fully purified and incomparably highest (concept of) voidness. See Sn. v. 1119; M. 121; M. 122 (WHEEL 87); Pts.M. II: Suñña-kathá; Vis.M. XXI, 53ff. 8986 From: Sarah Date: Tue Oct 30, 2001 2:54pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Udana-Nibbana 4 Dear Rob Ep, Ken O, Howard and all, UDANA-NIBBANA 4 I’d like to continue with the notes and then I hope to get back to your queeries (read ‘different understandings’;-)) > > > > Udana VIII.1 >>>" And there, I > > > say, there is neither coming, nor going, nor staying; neither passing >>> away > > > nor arising: unestablished, unevolving, without support (mental > > > object). This, just this, is the end of stress." translated by Masefield to read: "There too, monks, I do not speak either of coming, or going, or remaining, or falling, or arising. This is (quite) without foundation, (quite) without ocurrence, quite without object. This alone is the end of dukkha." ******************** Last time, I quoted the following paragraph from the Commentary, but am adding a line now (beginning with ‘Deathless’), which I inadvertently skipped when I was typing last time. I’m also quoting on a little further at the end to include the next line: .................... ‘the Dhamma-king was explaining to those monks lacking complete penetration the ultra-profound, extremely hard to see, abstruse and subtle, Deathless nibbana, that is beyond the sphere of logic, perpetually calm, capable of being experienced only by the wise, extremely choice, (yet) not formerly experienced (by them), even in a dream, within this sa.msaara that is without beginning, he, having, thus far, first of all dispelled their lack of knowledge and so on as to its existence saying “There is, monks, that base”, then explains that (same nibbana) via an elimination of things that are other than that saying “wherein there is neither earth..nor both sun and moon”, whereby there is elucidated the fact that that which is the unconditioned element, which has as its own nature that which is the antithesis of all conditioned things, such as earth and so forth, is nibbana, for which same reason he (next) says “There, too, monks, I do not speak either of coming” (and so on).’ .................... I’ll just add a couple of comments as I read this passage before adding another quote. The last phrase clearly applies to the unconditioned nature of nibbana. It is clear (to me) that nibbana is unconditioned, while being experienced by the conditioned. All the references to ‘penetration’, ‘hard to see’, ‘abstruse’, ‘logic’, ‘wise’, ‘knowledge’,refer to the cittas and cetasikas (and in particular to panna) which have to be developed to ‘penetrate’ and ‘realise’ the unconditioned ‘element’. Without this ‘ultra-profound’ development, nibbana is not experienced. Nibbana has its ‘own nature’ does not suggest any self, just as seeing, hearing and other realities have their ‘own nature’ which is not self too. To continue: .................... ‘.....for therein, save for knowledge making (something) its object, there is not witnessed any coming or going on the part of beings. I do not speak, too (api), of remaining, falling, and arising. The (canonical) Pali also has ‘tadaapaha.m’ (that too I). This is its meaning: that base, too, is no coming, on account of its not being something that could be come to, unlike some village from some other village, or a going, on account of its not having, unlike the earth and a mountain and so on, any solid ground; or alternatively, (that base) is, on account of its being conditionless, one with an absence of arising, due to which, on account of its having the Deathless as its own nature, it is one with an absence of falling, its being both on account of the absence of arising and cessation and on account of the absence of remaining, that is bounded by both of these, that I do not speak of remaining, or falling, or arising. Moreover, this whole nibbana, that is spoken of as a “base”, is “without foundation” since it is not founded anywhere, on account of its immaterial nature and on account of the fact that it is without conditions, “without occurrence” , on account of the absence of occurrence therein and on account of its being the opposite of occurrence, whilst, despite its immaterial nature, it is, unlike sensation and so on (which are also immaterial but which take objects), “quite without object (anaaramma.na.m)”, on acccount of its not involving the objectification (anaalambanato) of any object (aaramma.nassa) whatsoever and on account of its (existing) irrespective of any propping up....*’ *Footnote: The word aaramma.na has two meanings: (1) an object (of consciousness); and (2) a support. Dhammapaala’s remark here is intended to show that nibbaana is without aaramma.na in both senses - that is, that it neither takes an object nor has an underlying support (Bhikkhu Bodhi). ******************** This is just one further short segment which I’ll leave ‘til later as we all have plenty to consider here. I’ll look forward to any further comments from any of you too. Sarah p.s sorry for any typos;-) 8987 From: Robert Epstein Date: Tue Oct 30, 2001 4:36pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: dhammavicaya IV --- gayan wrote: > dear robert e, > > 'anagatha bhayani' suttas are about the fears that will come in > future. > You can find the english translations in accesstoinsight site. > > I will try to give you some references for sunnata in the future. > > rgds, > gayan thanks, whenever you have a chance..... Best, Robert Ep. 8988 From: Robert Epstein Date: Tue Oct 30, 2001 4:31pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Udana-Nibbana 1 --- Sarah wrote: > These are all excellent questions..it’s just that I’m not a ‘nibbana > expert’.and I’m going to be quite busy this week...;-) Delighted to read of > your interest in the passages...will get back later on your other posts, I > hope. > > Sarah well I know I've been flooding you. It's been provocative for me lately, very interesting. I am enjoying the quotes from the commentaries quite a lot and your comments on these suttas. Robert Ep. 8989 From: Robert Epstein Date: Tue Oct 30, 2001 4:39pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Udana-Nibbana 1 --- Sarah wrote: > If any of your questions are not answered to your satisfaction in the next > while, please raise them again for Nina when she is back too. > > Sarah thanks. that excerpt from the commentaries from the post to Ken was helpful. Robert Ep. 8990 From: Robert Epstein Date: Tue Oct 30, 2001 4:55pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Re; Horses [Erik] --- rikpa21 wrote: ...I always come back > to this point here, it seems. While we can talk about anatta until > the cows come home, even particle physicists know that nothing has > any intrinsic nature. And yet what does that do for them in terms of > eradicating the source of suffering? Seriously? There is much more to > the game than just the study of Right View, which, as forerunner, may > be key, yet it still plays a holistic role with all the other path- > factors like Right Speech, Right Resolve, Right Effort, etc., and > these operate at both the conventional and supramundane levels. Erik, I don't know if this applies to what you are saying, but I would say there's a big difference between understanding something as a concept and experiencing it. But they are related. I spent some time trying to directly contemplate anicca and anatta the other week and had a moment when I suddenly realized that what I considered 'Robert' was just a temporary collection of experiences. I had understood this concept for a long time, but the realization at that moment was that it was not just right but *actual*. It was quite a shock. Instead of having the reaction I thought I would have had, that I would be depressed at the sense of temporariness and mortality that this revealed, it was exciting and liberating. So this to me was a direct experience of anicca. Now I can't say what ultimate effect it had. But when I think back I now have this memory of a direct experience of 'anicca' as it pertains to my 'self' [just meaning the familiar body, thoughts, etc. that I associate with 'Robert']. These moments of direct insight, whether they are 'large' or 'small' have a very different flavour from studying and understanding a concept. And in that sense they seem to me to be akin to the real workings of the path. I've also sometimes gone for years looking at concepts and had *no* insights of that sudden and direct kind, so I can't say that there is any direct relation. But I'm sure there is an indirect and cumulative relation between Right View and the development of Insight. What do you think? Best, Robert Ep. 8991 From: Robert Epstein Date: Tue Oct 30, 2001 5:01pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Hello...[Erik] --- rikpa21 wrote: > Concemplating just how bad it can get gave me serious pause, and has > made me meditate intensely on the degree of equanimity needed to > remain unperturbed at some of the horrific things they did to people > at Tuol Sleng. These were people who took babies by their legs and > swung them headfirst into trees, braining them. Or slit their throats > with the jagged edge of palm leaves. Among all the other various > tortures devised to create maximum suffering for the victims. Similar things took place in Guatemala and El Salvador in the 70s and 80s, Ruanda in the 90s......, Bosnia, Croatia and Kosovo..... It's amazing to contemplate how frequently humans fall into this kind of savagery. Says something about our condition as a species on this planet and makes discernment and equanimity all the more important. Robert Ep. 8992 From: Gayan Karunaratne Date: Tue Oct 30, 2001 6:18pm Subject: dhammavicaya VI contd. Vihanga sutta , nidaana samyutta , SN " katame ca bhikkhave samkhaaraa ? tayo me bhikkhave samkhaaraa, kaaya samkhaaro vacii samkhaaro citta samkhaaro " Note -> here buddha uses the singular samkhaaro instead of the plural samkhaaraa and instead of 'Mano' he uses 'Citta' ---------------------------------------------- cula vedalla sutta , MN Dhamma discussion between arahant Bhikkhuni Dhammadinnaa and upaasaka Visaakha . She says " assaasa passaasaa kho avuso visaakha , kaayikaa ete dhammaa , kaaya patibaddhaa tasmaa assaasa passaasaa kaaya samkhaaro ." visaakha , breathing in and breathing out are dhammas about/connected to the kaaya, so breathing in ( assaasa ) breathing out ( passaasa ) are kaaya samkhaara. " pubbe kho avuso visaakha , vitakketvaa vicaaretvaa pacca vaacam bhindati , tasma vitakka vicaaraa vacii samkhaaro . " visaakha , after vitakka( applied thoughts ) and vicara(sustained thoughts) , the words come out, so vitakka and vicaara are vacii samkhaara. " sanna ca vedana ca cetasikaa ete dhamma citta patibaddhaa , tasma sanna ca vedana ca citta samkhaaro . " sanna ( perception ) and vedana ( feeling ) are about/connected to mind(citta) , so sanna and vedana are citta samkhaara. ---------------------------------------------- so its like the hidden formations/preparations which take place just before something happens in the body , speech or mind ---------------------------------------------- the people before buddha, who were seeking release from suffering tried to control and get rid of these formations. They thought that by doing that, they can get the solution for the ending of samsaara. So they did the refining process. They controlled the assaasa and passaasa. ( as coming in apraanaka dyaana ) they contrlled the vitakka and vicaara by doing samatha bhavana But they encountered a 'big' problem when they reached nevasannanaasannayatana ( the most refined[4th] arupa[formless] jhaana ). neva + sanna + na + asanna + ayatana = sphere of neither perception nor non-perception Pancattaya sutta in MN shows the problem they encountered. they came to the conclusion that " sanna rogo , sanna gando , sanna sallam, asanna sammoho etam santam, etam panitam, yadidam nevasannanaasannaayatanam " the sanna is a disease, a wound , a thorn ( but on the other hand ) no sanna is a mis-guided,deluded state ( so ) this is calm,this is serene, it is navasannanaasannayatana . But siddhartha went forward, without stopping there. contd. 8993 From: dalthorp Date: Tue Oct 30, 2001 8:04pm Subject: Re: Hello...[Robert] > From right study and development we find that what we had once > thought were our strenghts turn out to be faults:our confident > nature is mostly mana(conceit). The calmness we cherish only clinging > to quiet; our directness mostly aversion. Magnificent, Venerable Rob! Magnificent, Venerable Rob! Rob has made the Dhamma clear in many ways, holding up a lamp in the dark for those with eyesight to see forms. Dan was satisfied and delighted in Rob's words. 8994 From: m. nease Date: Tue Oct 30, 2001 8:13pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Hello...[Robert] Hear, hear! mike --- dalthorp wrote: > > From right study and development we find that > what we had once > > thought were our strenghts turn out to be > faults:our confident > > nature is mostly mana(conceit). The calmness we > cherish only > clinging > > to quiet; our directness mostly aversion. > > Magnificent, Venerable Rob! Magnificent, Venerable > Rob! Rob has made > the Dhamma clear in many ways, holding up a lamp in > the dark for > those with eyesight to see forms. > > Dan was satisfied and delighted in Rob's words. 8995 From: Howard Date: Tue Oct 30, 2001 3:29pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Anicca (Impermanence) Hi, Herman - In a message dated 10/30/01 12:43:20 AM Eastern Standard Time, Herman writes: > Hello everybody, > > Apologies up front. I am going from memory only, and would not be > able to point you to the sutta even if you offered me some very nice > cheese and biscuits :-) > > I seem to recall that the Buddha was asked re the rising, being and > falling away of rupas whether it is the same rupas that arise or > whether they are different. From memory his answer was: neither. > > Three questions. > > Did I remember this correctly? > If so, where in the suttas will I find this? > What does it mean? > > Regards > > > Herman > ========================= I think one source may be in the questions of King Milinda. As far as what it means, it is a perfect expression of the middle-way status of things. Things are neither absolutely nothing nor are they separate and self-existing. One analogy given is that of a burning lamp light, with a wick and oil: the flame burning in the middle of the night is neither the same as that which burned in the early evening, nor is it independent of it. Neither is a self-existent entity nor is it nothing at all. The interdependence of things is the basis of their emptiness. 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) 8996 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Tue Oct 30, 2001 8:30pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: horses [Ken O] Hi Dan Thanks for responding, --- dalthorp wrote: > It's great to hear from you, Kenneth O. Sorry I couldn't respond to > your thoughtful comments earlier. You do raise some interesting > points that I'd like to comment on. > > I earlier wrote: > > No question that ALL the samma's > > > are important--not just sammaditthi. My question is: how can we > discern > > the difference between the samma's and miccha's and the > vippayutta's? For > > example, in my second intensive meditation retreat a number of > years ago, > > I worked so very hard sitting, walking at a snail's pace, taking > an hour > > to eat a simple plate of food--formal practice for 12-15 hours a > day, day > > > > after day, week after week. The samma's... > > To which you responded: > > K: I was wondering whether he is trying too hard. > > Dan: > It's not that he was trying too hard, it's just that he was > mistaking 'effort' for 'right effort'. > > Ken O: > >To me he sounds like he > > is anticipating something to happen while trying very hard in his > > practise. With anticipation, I think there is kind of "desiring" > > Dan: > Right. > > Ken O: > > To me when one tries to discern samma and miccha is still wrong > view due > > to our view is conventional. > > Dan: > Right, but at the same time, it must be understood that discernment > between samma and miccha is a foundation of Right View, the > forerunner of the path. Paradoxical? It must be so, as long as > the "tries" is not de-conventionalized. k: Yes dhamma practise is always paradoxical. > Ken O: > > dhamma in order to practise this conventional method. This > conventional > > method is the only way out for us to realise paramattha sacca and > hence > > its good to be cautioned but not overly concern. > > Dan: > There are no recipes for realising paramattha sacca. But it is > essential to develop discernment between samma and miccha, to > recognize that conventional effort is not samma. It is not > conventional effort, conventional "method" that gives rise to > understanding of paramattha sacca. > Ken O: > > Since all views are conventional, hence all our effort are > conventional > > Dan: > I don't understand what you mean here. Sammaditthi of the noble 8- > fold path is not conventional, nor is the sammaditthi in moments of > mundane insight. There is a strong and clear distinction between > mundane right effort and conventional right effort, and a strong and > clear distinction between mundane right effort and supramundane right > effort. > > Ken O: > > which implies that our effort will never be Right effort as long as > we do > > not realise paramattha sacca. That is why the Eight Noble path can > be > > mundane and Supramundane. > > Dan: > There's been a good deal of discussion on this list about the > differences between conventional, mundane, and supramundane > understanding of "Path". "Conventional" is what we normally think of > when, for example, people talk about "effort", but Buddha usually > talks about "mundane" path (satipatthana with mundane object) or > supramundane. There must be a few posts among the "useful posts" that > make the distinction more clear. Maybe Jon or Sarah could point some > of these out. k: Yes I agree that in understanding of dhamma we need to known what is conventional and what is not conventional in order to develop right understanding. But in our practise, such delineation no longer holds true because Buddha dhamma is a living dhamma, what I mean is applying absolute truth into conventional living. Ken O 8997 From: Howard Date: Tue Oct 30, 2001 3:35pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Hello...[Erik] Hi, Erik - In a message dated 10/30/01 1:19:28 AM Eastern Standard Time, rikpa21 writes: > on Sunday I will be > officially married ============================= Warmest congratulations, Erik!! May you have lifetimes of happiness together. 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) 8998 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Tue Oct 30, 2001 9:04pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Udana-Nibbana 1 Hi Howard Thanks for you point of view. > > > > > >K: Nibbana can never be experienced by conditioned cittas because > > > Nibbana is unconditional, if it is not then why classified it as > > unconditionanal the first place. > > > > > > S: There’s been a lot of discussion on this issue (see ‘useful > posts’ > > > under nibbana perhaps...) Many people here find it very difficult to > > accept that the unconditioned (Nibbana) is experienced by the > conditioned > > (lokuttara cittas), but that’s how it is in the Pali canon as > indicated in > > my previous quote. > > ------------------------------------------------------ > Howard: > Just a request for clarification: Found in which pitakas? And if > it is found in the suttas, is it clear there that nibbana is intended to be a positively existing separate dhamma being observed by cittas, or is "observing nibbana" more along the lines of the mind getting a glimpse > of what it is like to have ignorance dispelled, a glimpse of the way things really are when seen truly? > ------------------------------------------------------ k: Yes Howard we can see a glimpse of it is base on the definition of Nibbana in Mahayana terms. > > > > k: It is the same thing when I say cittas don't die, you find it > difficult > > to believe me. > > ------------------------------------------------------ > Howard: > Ken, what do you mean by "believe me"? Are you claiming to have a > direct line to "The Truth"? The Buddha said quite clearly that all conditions cease. Nothing lasts. Impermanence. Are you saying that you have directly seen that to be false? > As far as "believing" you is concerned, the Buddha said that even > *he* should not be taken purely on faith. Now, all my direct experience has confirmed to me the Buddha's teaching on impermanence. With all due > respect, on what basis do you suggest we "believe" you? > ------------------------------------------------------- k: Howard you have misread me. I disagree with you that Buddha said that all conditions cease means all things are destroyed. I have said a few times that I disgree with you on the defintion of ceassation. Would you like to quote me the Pali Cannon Suttas where Buddha said all cittas are destroyed completely or annihilated. > > > > > > >K: Assuming Nibbana can be experienced by conditioned if we used > the > > > basis > that Nibbana has the same nature of anatta as conditioned > > cittas. But the > problem as they are anatta, whatever citta > experienced > > will be illusory. Because this "illusory experience" is due to the > > speed of cittas which a self thought there is self in anatta. Nibbana > > cannot be substantiated on this basis because in Nibbana we see > reality, > > which mean anatta is fully understand, hence there is no "illusory > > experience". > > > > > > S: I agree there is no ilusory experience. The cittas and nibbana > are > > > anatta. Anatta doesn’t mean illusory. Sorry I’m having trouble > following > > you here. Rob Ep or Howard may be able to follow your thinking better > > here. > > > > > > > k: The problem is then we thought kusala cittas is the one > leading to > > > > Nibbana which is not correct. Because kusala cittas are dependent > on > > > > akusala cittas to be in existence. If there is no akuasla citta, > we > > > would not know what is kuasala cittas in the first place. Cittas > cannot > > > > eradicate another cittas because they have the same > charateristics. > > > Citta is categories into four jati but to me they are not mutually > > > exclusive. Furthermore if we look at sati, it is never abt getting > > rid, it is abt knowing its coming and going. No eradication because > > eradication or getting rid is still attached to a subtle self concept > for > > an "action" to be enforced whereas coming and going we let things as > it > > is, > > > attachment to a self concept is also let go. That is why I keep > > insisting that Nibbana to me is not eradication of defilements it is > the > > letting go of defilements and in the next moment one is in Nibbana. > One > > let go of conditions to reach unconditional reality. > > > > > S: Sorry, can you give the the text or the commentary reference you > are > > > referring to here as I’m not clear where these ideas come from. > May I > > > just stress that the characteristic of sati is to be aware of a > reality > > for a moment and then gone. There is no ‘one’ to let go of > conditions or > > defilements or anything else. If it is not the development of kusala > > cittas (and in particular, the development of wisdom) that leads to > > nibbana, then I wonder why the Buddha stresses this development so > much? > > > > k: It is we classify those sati, metta, other wholesome practises as > > kusala cittas and during such kusala cittas there is no akusala > cittas. > > Buddha urge us to do kusala cittas but he did not classify that if we > have > > kusala cittas there is no akusala present in this kusala itself. > Because > > kusala does not equate akusala. It is like using another "self" to > > replace a "self". Furthermore as I have said earlier, kusala and > akusala > > both depend on each other to be in existence, hence it is not > permanent. > > -------------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > I won't argue about things not being permanent! ;-)) But, as far > as > kusala and akusala being mutually dependent, I believe you are mixing > two > different senses of 'dependent' here. For sure, the *concepts* of > 'kusala' > and 'akusala' are mutually dependent. But that does not, in and of > itself, > imply that any kusala dhamma arises in dependence on an akusala one or > vice-versa. Dependent arising of specific experienced dhammas differs > from > the logico-semantic interdependence of concepts. > ------------------------------------------------------------- k: I know what you mean, I like to ask you this questions do cittas cares whether they are kusala or akusala. Do they share the same function as cognize. It is we when we start to differentiate that this is kusala or that is akusala then we are in the begining of attaching to ideas again or in short discrimination. Dan says Buddhist practise is paradoxical and I agree with him. > > > > To do kusala like metta is conventional so that the mind is more > peaceful > > but these do not help us to attain arahant bc all religion urges > goodness > > but they do not attain arahant bc they are one sided in their > practise. > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > Howard: > Certainly sila is not sufficient for awakening, but it is a > necessary > part of the Buddha's path, a part which you correctly point out is > common to > all religions. > ------------------------------------------------------------- > > > In his method of sati, there is no right or wrong just pure attention > to > > what arise. If we have pure attention what arise, it is very > difficult to > > do bad or to be attached. Sorry my understanding does not base on > > commentaries, it is base on practise that I feel this is the point and > > plus Mahayana doctrinal influences and relooking at sati sutras. > > ------------------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > When one's mind is not already reasonably free of the turmoil of > akusala thought and emotion - and I do assume that your mind *is* free > of > such, at least to the same extent as the rest of us - there is rarely a > solid > enough foundation for the development of further calm and insight. > Moreover, > when one is tied to wrong view and filled with hate or craving, should > one > somehow be able to make progress in meditation, one is likely to > misinterpret > what one "sees" and to misuse the fruits of the practice. > ------------------------------------------------------------- k: Thanks for your advice and concern. To me what I just trying to say what I think. It was not meant to talk down to pple or force my idea on other pple. If I sound like that, I sincerely apologise to everyone here. But to me if you think I am wrong, talk to me. Clear my doubts. Yes I admit I am a stubborn person hence that is why I throw away all the fixations ideas of Buddhism away once in a while. I never said that understanding the three posions is not impt. It is there we know it, but as I say in sati, when we are mindful, it is difficult to do things that are attached to these three poisons. My argument is base on sati principle and not on anything else. We must know when we talk abt kusala or akusala is like saying this is good and this is bad. This principle of practise is to me not agreeable to what I think Buddha is trying to say. He is I think trying to point a practise that is neither attached to both ends of discrimination. Chan Master Hui Neng say that "our difference between us and Buddha is because we are full of right and wrong, and good and bad" k: Once again I sincerely apologise if I sound forceful in my views which sincerely I feel very unmindful of me and very inconsiderate of me. Kind regards Ken O 8999 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Tue Oct 30, 2001 9:12pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Udana-Nibbana 1 Hi Erik > > I could not agree with you more in this. Ridding the mind of > unwholseome tendencies is but the first baby-step on the path to > freedom. So long as there is sufficient craving or aversion present, > forget getting to the deeper level, the root-controller of that: > ignorance! And forget insight into the nature of things for that > reason alone, since craving and aversion will hold so much sway > ignorance will remain all but invisible, as it is hidden by the > coarser faculties of craving and aversion. > > In other words, forget believing there will be enough of the right > conditions for insight even into the unpleasant sensations to arise > without this basic, basic foundation of sila. IT IS SO IMPORTANT to > cultivate wholesome states of mind, all the time, day in, day out, > all the time, without fail, to endeavor to see all things that arise > as opportunities to be turned into skillful activities somehow, using > the simply threefold formula laid out by Lord Buddha: morality, THEN > concentration, THEN wisdom. > > May all beings gain the wisdom of seeing things-as-they-are, in this > very lifetime! As I said to Howard, I disagree. It is not cultivating a wholesome state of mind bc it leads to an attachment to an wholesome state of mind. It is a practise just being in the present, free of attaching views or fixations of ideas. It is just there, seeing things as it is. No discriminations, just in the presence. All religions exhorts its fellowers to cultivate wholesome state of mind but most of them cannot reach Arahantship bc they are attached to one sided of the practise similiarly to satanic cults, they are attached to the other side of the practise. Ken O