10400 From: christine_forsyth Date: Thu Dec 27, 2001 1:02am Subject: Bangkok tomorrow...... Dear All, I'm back from the beach.....still very hot here. I don't know if the bush fires in Oz have made it onto World News, many homes destroyed..... I'll be at home for the night, and then catch the planes tomorrow for Sydney and then Bangkok (where, thankfully, the forecast is little cooler than here.) I am really, really looking forward to learning as much as possible, and meeting as many people as possible. metta, Christine 10401 From: Sarah Date: Thu Dec 27, 2001 2:39am Subject: Re: [dsg] Bangkok tomorrow...... Dear Christine, --- christine_forsyth wrote: > Dear All, > > I'm back from the beach.....still very hot here. I don't know if the > bush fires in Oz have made it onto World News, many homes > destroyed..... Yes, CNN headlines....I'm just hoping Herman and family are not affected- I forget where they are in NSW. > I'll be at home for the night, and then catch the planes tomorrow for > Sydney and then Bangkok (where, thankfully, the forecast is little > cooler than here.) So we're preparing for the heat as you prepare for the cool;-) I'm so glad I don't have to keep this little secret any longer. (Christine was the other 'surprise' friend we mentioned we were looking forward to meeting for the first time and actually we're all staying together in the same hotel;-)) > I am really, really looking forward to learning as much as possible, > and meeting as many people as possible. It'll be quite a party and I have no doubt there will be some good discussions. Hope you have good flights and remember to jot down any thoughts or questions on the way;-) Sarah somewhat excited p.s. Rob K...hope you're around and very sorry we'll miss you this New Year. Hopefully, we'll be better co-ordinated next time;-) =============================================== 10402 From: Sarah Date: Thu Dec 27, 2001 2:50am Subject: Re: [dsg] luminous mind Dear Anders, I know I really shouldn't be getting into new discussions just as I'm going away, but I just can't resist making a couple of quick comments here;-) --- Anders Honore wrote: > Personally, I don't believe the commentaries at face value, and I believe > that Bikkhu Bodhi has more or less skilfully > pointed that they are sometimes even dead-wrong as they contradict some > suttas. This is interesting. B.Bodhi is certainly a lot, lot, lot more familiar with the suttas and commentaries than I am, but I have yet to come across such a contradiction and would be happy to have any (contradictions) pointed out Sometimes it just depends on how one understands both (as with the 'luminous' sutta discussion). A lot of what is found in the > commentaries (which are often abidhammically inspired) doesn't rely find > backing in the suttas themselves, which, along > with the Vinaya Pitaka, is the only source I will personally acknowledge as > being actually authoritative. > That the commentators were all supposedly Arahants is something I find more > credible to be a later invention by the > supporters of the commentaries, to lend authority to their claims. You may find it interesting to read back over the series of posts I've been doing on a weekly basis from 'Intro to Vinaya'. These are the areas I'm considering in them. > That it is not to say that they can't be extremely helpful in clarifying > certain points (I have certainly found them to be so), > but I would personally recommend that they should be taken with a grain of > salt Sounds like you're in my category 2 group, i.e. you accept those which conform with your understanding of the Suttas in question;-) (Category 1 were the dinosaurs, that accept them all and category 3 were those who reject them all). Good to have you around, Anders......I reckon you and Kom were just waiting for each other like Erik and Dan wait for each other here too;-)) Best wishes in the New Year for good results in your studies and ever-growing panna. Sarah 10403 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Thu Dec 27, 2001 3:21am Subject: Re: [dsg] Bhavanga cittas Rob --- Robert Epstein wrote: > Hi Sarah. : ) ................ > Nina's statement that the bhavanga cittas take place in between > sense-door and > mind-door moments to maintain continuity was a new piece of info for me. > I was > looking at the bhavangas as a separate process that only took place > during the > sleep state or in unconsciousness or death. You might find the passage from CMA on bhavanga citta below of interest. Jon CMA III, #8 (Guide) … The word bhavanga means factor(anga) of existence (bhava), that is, the indispensable condition of existence. Bhavanga is the function of consciousness by which the continuity of the individual is preserved through the duration of any single existence, from conception to death. … … . Bhavangacittas arise and pass away every moment during life whenever there is no active cognitive process taking place. … When an object impinges on a sense door, the bhavanga is arrested and an active cognitive process ensues for the purpose of cognizing the object. Immediately after the cognitive process is completed, again the bhavanga supervenes and continues until the next cognitive process arises. Arising and perishing at every moment during this passive phase of consciousness, the bhavanga flows on like a stream, without remaining static for two consecutive moments. 10404 From: Sarah Date: Thu Dec 27, 2001 3:24am Subject: RE: [dsg] Re: Parinibbana Subcommentary (Part Two) To Robert Epstein Dear Ken O, This is really my last post. As Jon's waiting to use the computer, i'll keep it short too. You've written several posts on the 'luminous' thread and I'm always struck by how very carefully you consider all our words and the words in the suttas and commentaries. Your reflections are always interesting and 'your own'. I've written so much on this thread that I think if i said any more I'd just be repeating myself and really boring everyone. So I think I'll just wait to look at the Tika (sub-com) translation and Suan's notes. Meanwhile I'll be happy to read any further reflections that you, Rob, Kom or Nina (or anyone else) has. --- Kenneth Ong wrote: > > Yes, it is a little difficult which is why I didn't post it all the > > first time > > I think. > > k: I do not think it is difficult at all. ;-)) > > > k: To me, this statement will imply that when a man dreams he is > > neither > > > sleeping or awake. > > > > That's right.... no sense-door activity (as I mentioned to Frank > > before), but > > mind-door activity and thinking of concepts. > > k: Nope I do not greed there is no sense-door activity if we look at the > statement again and your are using the neither awake portiion to explain > no sense door activity. I am using neither sleeping which means there is a > possibility of sense door activity Well, as Rob Ep wrote recently, we don't all have to agree;-) S: > > Nothing permanent at all. Just one citta and then another. > k: To me I think we are prejudice. When the this passage explain return > home, your position is changing cittas but when i see it it is abt > permanent self. So when I think TB is not talking abt permanent self, you > do not think otherwise as what your have written in msg #10218 (quoted > below). Hmmm....Firstly, I'm sorry if it sounds prejudiced in anyway. i think that when we read anything the Buddha taught, we know or have confidence that whatever terms are used, it is about realities which are anatta and for the dinosaurs amongst us, all the abhidhamma is inherently part of these Teachings. Hence my understanding about the Milinda passage and bhavanga cittas when it mentions in the English translation 'return home'. When we read a modern writer's ideas or translations, such as now when we read each other's posts, we have to read quite a lot before we really know what the other person's way of thinking is. All we can do is to suggest how it sounds to us according to our understanding. I hope this isn't 'prjudice';-) With regard to TB, I was interested to hear that Mike met him a couple of weeks ago and I suggested that he might even be encouraged to join us here. His translations and writings are so influential and personally I always prefer to talk to someone direct. It would be an honour. However, I also understand that he must be extemely busy. You asked about commentaries, Ken O and the answer is yes, there are commentaries on all the Sutta Pitaka. The main ones were written by Buddhaghosa and the others (Udana, Itivuttaka etc) were written by Dhammapala.Sorry I forget the rest of your question about them. Ooops, overtime. I may raise bhavanga cittas in Bkk with K.Sujin too and let you know if I learn anything new. Hope you keep everyone busy on the list while we're away;-) Just realised that we're about at the 2nd anniversary of dsg. Sarah ================================================= 10405 From: Anders Honore Date: Thu Dec 27, 2001 2:50am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Parinibbana Subcommentary (Part Two) To Robert Epstein 27-12-01 07:20:22, Sarah skrev: >Dear Howard, >Howard, I haven?t really considered how frequently the Buddha discusses >?citta?, using this terminology in the suttas. As others have suggested, I >believe it is synonymous with ?mano? and ?vi~n~nana? which may be more commonly >used, I?m not sure. I?d just like to finish with these translation notes by >Gayan posted in the series of translations to Mike where the term citta is >discussed in a sutta. The only sutta I can remember is the "luminosity" sutta, and I think that one has been discussed quite a bit already ;-) I think what Howard may be objecting to regarding citta is the non-practicality of talking about this and that citta. After all, consciousness/vinnana/citta is that which sees, which discerns. Can an eye see itself? If not, then why talk so much about it. I agree with Howard that there are more relevant objects to focus on, such as all that which the consciousness discerns, be it material objects, attachments, desires, anger etc etc. Or am I completely misreading you, Howard? 10406 From: Sarah Date: Thu Dec 27, 2001 3:45am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Parinibbana Subcommentary (Part Two) To Robert Epstein p.s. --- Kenneth Ong wrote: > Hi Sarah > > By the way, what happen to Gayan. It is been a long time, I have seen his > translation of the sutta which I find very beneficial. I hope he is well > and happy > It is a long time, now you mention it last time I heard from him he was on his way to Sri lanka.... Gayan, we're thinking of you and appreciating your translation;-) S. 10407 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Thu Dec 27, 2001 5:41am Subject: Some points Hi Sarah > Hmmm....Firstly, I'm sorry if it sounds prejudiced in anyway. i think > that when we read anything the Buddha taught, we know or have confidence that whatever terms are used, it is about realities which are anatta and for the dinosaurs amongst us, all the abhidhamma is inherently part of these Teachings. k: I don't think I have said that abhidhamma is not part of the Tripitika. In fact, I like Abhidhamma too :). I more concern with applying Abhidhamma with the Sutta (even though I am not very fimiliar with both :), gosh got to be more hardworking). I find that in order for Abhidhamma to survive in the long run, there is a need to have its practicality to be applied to the sutta. And definitely using ancient commentaries to support and explain. Actually my guts feel abt Abhidhamma is not concern abt developing kusala cittas, it is more abt understanding reality or seeing reality as it is (satipatthana). If it is confined in just explaining and developing kusala cittas and abt the danger of aksuala cittas, then the whole effect of Abhidhamma spirit will be lost. Care should be given to have a more investigative approach. I find Abhidhamma practical if one able to used present human moments we have as though it is a momentary citta moment, then its usefullness will be manifested. k: In certain ways, I disagree that there is no need for "sitting" or practise in one pointedness. I think the commentaries on "imparting of evenness to the [five] faculties" is very clear on balancing the five faculties. According to the commentary, to be bias on one group is not beneficial and the pitfalls are described clearly. I believe the commentaries do exhort concentration and understanding, and also mindfullness as the protector. I like to see your views or anyone, and any other commentaries that say otherwise to this. (that will be after your trip to bangkok). Definitely when we talk abt jhanas, there is a problem how many of us will know it is good or bad states. Or will we cling to it. As long as mindfullness is our guard and with understanding of anicca and anatta to every state, concentration leading to jhana should not be discouraged. I believe we should encourage pple to concentrate if they wish to, if they wish to investigating in the Abhidhamma way, we should also encourage. We should encourage those with good concentration to practise understanding and likewise to those with good understanding to practise concentration. To me they are both complementary or two legs that we have for walking. As recommended in the commentary they should be developed equally and not one sided. > Hence my understanding about the Milinda passage and bhavanga cittas when it mentions in the English translation 'return home'. When we read a modern writer's ideas or translations, such as now when we read each other's posts, we have to read quite a lot before we really know what the other person's way of thinking is. All we can do is to suggest how it sounds to us according to our understanding. I hope this isn't 'prjudice';-) k: I understand abt Milinda passage when return home or return to itself is used. It is just that I feel, lets us be open minded to views even it doesn't sound right to us. > You asked about commentaries, Ken O and the answer is yes, there are > commentaries on all the Sutta Pitaka. The main ones were written by > Buddhaghosa and the others (Udana, Itivuttaka etc) were written by Dhammapala.Sorry I forget the rest of your question about them. k: I really hope there are commentaries not written by Buddhaghosa bc he is viewed to be more of an Abhidhammaist. The greatest lost will be the ancient texts that Buddhaghosa have used. It would have been very valuable if such texts are still around. > Ooops, overtime. I may raise bhavanga cittas in Bkk with K.Sujin too and > let you know if I learn anything new. k: That will be great :). > Hope you keep everyone busy on the list while we're away;-) Just > realised that we're about at the 2nd anniversary of dsg. k: Hmm you are definitely more competent and knowledgeable than me a thousand times. it will be years even before I could keep everyone busy on the list. In fact I am neither here nor there in the Abhidhamma or Thervada sutta and honestly speaking I am lousy at both and coupled with my lazy attitude :). > Sarah > ================================================= > k: Have a nice and enjoyable trip :) and bon voyage Best wishes Ken O 10408 From: abhidhammika Date: Thu Dec 27, 2001 7:25am Subject: Re: luminous mind: To Kenneth Ong And Like-minded Dhamma Friends Dear Ken How are you? Thank you for your kind encouragement. Personally, I do have an attitude of equanimity towards those who criticize commentaries. The reason I mentioned my reluctance to post translation of them is that I do not want to impose these profound commentarial discussions on the critics and the general readers alike. Another reason is that they are the preserves of advanced students and teachers of Tipitaka who knows Pali. They are not for beginners and laypersons. In terms of modern academic ranking, they belong to the level of post-graduate or doctoral studies and post-doctral research. Therefore, if you post them for general laypersons, your action amounts to baffling, tiring and torturing them. In fact, one of the reasons the commentaries received criticisms could well be that we haven't convinced the critics of the value of the commentaries. Well, now, I know that there are are serious readers on this list, and I am willing to post the commentarial discussions here. And, as the latest news on the matter, I have already finished full translation of commentary and subcommentary on the luminous mind. When I have finished re-checking and editing them, I will be able to post them for the intellectual entertainment of the serious dhamma friends on this list. Coming very soon! With best wishes, Suan http://www.bodhiology.org --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Kenneth Ong wrote: > Hi Suan > > Don't worry abt others critising abt the commentaries. If commentaries > could not atest the criticism, then the value of the commentaries will > diminish greatly. > > Even if others critise the commentaries with ill intentions, then it is > their aksuala kamma and not ours :). > > What will happen, will happen :) so why worry what its beyond our control. > > > Kind regards > Ken O > > --- Robert Epstein wrote: > Dear Suan, 10409 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Thu Dec 27, 2001 8:02am Subject: RE: [dsg] chatting about India Dear Nina, You have got I think almost all of the big impressions I have from the trip. :-) The other (big) one that still stays in my mind (as I am still trying to make sense out of it) is what most of the teachings in the tipitaka ultimately describe. K. Jaran and A. Supi was discussing about Kilesa, and why only 10 akusala cetasikas are kilesas, and the other 4 are not. The answer, I think you also wrote in Cetasikas, is each Kilesa defiles the mind, where as the other four defile the mental factors. At that point, I was asking him questions about the other groupings of defilements including Asava, etc. A. Supi said at this point that to understand some of the teachings, one has to keep in mind that the teaching ultimately describes realities. The descriptions point to the characteristics of realities: they are there so that we can understand the realities as such. He then used the example of the 8-fold paths, and we discussed why it is that in the sutta, the 8-fold path sounds conventional and very much like concepts, but why it is that it really describes realities. For example, regarding Samma ditthi, we hear that right views include: a) Kamma is real. b) The benefaction of father and mother is real c) There exists ones who know, as it truly is, the existence of life before this, this life, and next life. This may sound very much to some of us like concepts: this is due to fact that there is no penetration of dhammas as they truly are. However, if panna, cognizing the realities, starts to develop, we would understand more, and in more intricate details, about what the statements really mean. For example, if one understands the difference between paramatha dhammas and concepts, then one starts to understand why Kamma and Kusala dhammas (benefaction of father and mother) are real, but father and mother are not real. Then, if one penetrates how kusala and akusala are different from one another, then one understands even more about a) and b). The more one penetrates the dhamma, the deeper and detailed one's understading of Samma-ditthi is, as the characteristics of realities as they truly are. In using this explanation, A. Supi didn't explicitly link the explanation to my question of why there are only 3 dhammas in the asava, but I think the above explanation implies an answer to my question. We read that Asava: 1) flows from the lowest realm of existence to the highest ones 2) is fermented. (The thai explanation also says it is accumulated and fermented) 3) is like poisonous drug or intoxicants. Nina, do you by any chance have any other explanations of why other akusala dhammas are not asava? For example, since Uddhacca, Ahiri, and Anottappa must co-arise with all the 4 asavas, but they are not are asavas. Why? Are there any other reasons besides the one implied above? > -----Original Message----- > From: Nina van Gorkom [mailto:nilo@e...] > Sent: Wednesday, December 26, 2001 10:24 AM > To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com > Subject: [dsg] chatting about India > > I find this very good, reminding us about > conditions. What else can we do > now but listening, studying, considering, > verifying in daily life now what > we learnt. I also found it helpful that A. Sujin > said: understanding leads > to detachment from the beginning to the end, > stressing detachment so often. > I was reminded that even reading the scriptures > and wishing to gain > understanding is often done with an idea of self. Now the question I asked you above is asked in such a context! Thanks for the immediate reminder. kom 10410 From: Date: Thu Dec 27, 2001 3:41am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Parinibbana Subcommentary (Part Two) To Robert Epstein Hi, Sarah - Thanks for your post. Yes, as I said: "I'm aware of being conscious, and of experiencing feelings, emotions, sights, sounds, smells, and tastes ..." There certainly is "in me" the awareness of many mental functions and their objects , and often there is the awareness if their impermanence, insubstantiality, and, very much, their impersonality. But the notions of 'citta' and 'process' are, with their presumed well-defined (sharp) starting and ending points, unobserved and, at best, definitional. As a mathematician, I'd have no problem giving formal definitions of these notions in terms of (what *I* see as) the more *basic* notion of the function of discernment of objects. But I've lost interest, as far as really "seeing the way things are", with conceptual theories. Again, as a specific, while it may very well be true that there is but one object per act of discernment at a time, so that there is no parallel processing in effect as far as discernment, alone, is concerned, I have no way of knowing this detail except for taking it "on faith". And I don't see this as of any particular importance ianyway (compared, for example, to the tilakkhana). Moreover, I've never seen that fine point ever alluded to in a discourse. As far as the cetasikas are concerned, I see no reason to speak of all of them as "having an object" at all (some, like sa~n~na, yes), at least not in the same sense that vi~n~nana has an object. For example, certainly vedana arises from contact between vi~n~nana and and arammmana, and, in that sense, it is *associated* with that arammana, but I do not see that as having that same item as object. It is simply that feeling occurs *in response* to contact. In any case, *what is important here* is the *conditionality* of the function of vedana and its *impersonality*. And *these* things *can* be seen. Memorizing supposed facts along the lines of there being up to 17 cittas per rupa is not an aspect of practice that I've ever seen suggested by the Buddha. Might this alleged fact be true? Sure, why not? But liberation won't come even 16 cittas sooner by storing this information in my arsenal. ;-)) Getting bogged down in such things does seem, for me, to be rather much of an impediment, in fact. (I don't imply in the slightest that this need be the case for anyone else.) My point, to summarize, is that much of abhidhamma consists of conceptual constucts, the result of intellectual theorizing. Of course, there is much of interest and value there, including some very useful ways of looking at things, but for me, abhidhammic theorizing has also become a danger, and I have to tread carefully. As I had written, I've tired of such theorizing, but more than that, and here is the main point, theorizing has come to serve in my case as a grossly inadequate substitute for the direct knowing, inadequate as it may be in my case at this stage, that results from the practice of sitting and walking meditation, and ongoing mindfulness practice (supported, of course, by a base of sila). With metta, Howard In a message dated 12/27/01 1:21:46 AM Eastern Standard Time, sarahdhhk@y... writes: > > Dear Howard, > > I don’t wish to bring up points that you may prefer to have a ‘break’ from > and > quite understand if you prefer not to respond to this note. I also hope I’m > not > taking this comment of yours to Rob Ep too much out of context: > .......... > Howard: “But as far as > providing the nitty gritty details of what, exactly, is the case in terms > of > such hard-to-find things as cittas, well, there's no way that I have the > slightest idea. As I said a while ago to Mike, while I'm aware of being > conscious, and of experiencing feelings, emotions, sights, sounds, smells, > and tastes, I've never experienced a citta, and I never read a sutta by the > > Buddha in which he discussed cittas........." > .................... > > What I just wish to humbly say is that perhaps you underestimate what ‘your’ > > panna knows and perhaps the terminology has caused some communication > difficulty. If we forget for a moment the word ‘citta’ and instead talk > about > tasting, it may sound a little more real;-) I’m sure we’ve all had plenty > of > experience ‘tasting’ over the holiday. At the moments of tasting the > tastes > (which are amongst the objects there is some awareness of, you mention), > aren’t > these just momentary phenomena discerning (yr usage) the tastes? The > experiencing, the tasting, is different from that which is tasted. We are > used > to think ‘I’m tasting the turkey of fried rice (in Jon’s case)’ when > really > isn’t it just an experiencing of the rupa at that moment? > > So, even it it’s intellectual understanding at this moment, if it’s right > and > skilful, it must be accompanied by sati and panna at this level which > understand the nature of this citta, tasting. So it is for seeing, hearing, > smelling, touching and thinking. These are the cittas that really can be > known > directly at this moment, not just by thinking about them either. (Of > course, > when we talk about bhavanga cittas, it is bound to be at an intellectual > level > only, unless panna has been highly developed.) > > I hope this doesn’t sound too ‘clumsy’..I’m having trouble finding the > right > words today. > > In the Ang Nik suttas being discussed on the luminous thread (1-10), we > read: > ‘Monks, I know not of any other single thing so quick to change as the > mind...’ > and later read ‘Monks, if for just the lasting of a finger-snap a monk > indulges > a thought of goodwill, such an one is to be called a monk. Not empty of > result > is his musing..’It goes on to talk about the ‘power’ of skilful and > unskilful > states of mind. > > In other words, we shouldn’t underestimate the power of the little wise > reflection andawareness that occurs in a day. There’s no need to feel > discouraged if there is less wise attention than we’d like. > > This morning we had a mini-personal drama. In a nutshell, there was some > uncertainty about whether Jon's mother would be able to continue with her > trip > and leave Hong Kong which would have meant one or both of us having to > cancel > our planned trip to Bangkok to stay and take care of her. So ‘my rapidly > changing mind’ was having moments of genuine concern for my mother-in-law, > aversion to all this news and worry, attachment to ‘me’ and ‘my’ plans > and so > on. A few moments of kusala cittas, but many more moments of akusala cittas > with many vipaka cittas such as seeing and hearing in between. > > This is daily life and facing up to and getting to know the different > cittas, > cetasikas and rupas just a little. Just one ‘finger-snap’ of awareness at > a > time. > > Fortunately the repeat blood-test gave a good result and we can all > continue > with our plans. Again there were moments of gladness for my mother-in-law > and > more attachment to ‘me’ and my plans and of course more seeing, hearing, > tasting and so on. > > Howard, I haven’t really considered how frequently the Buddha discusses > ‘citta’, using this terminology in the suttas. As others have suggested, I > believe it is synonymous with ‘mano’ and ‘vi~n~nana’ which may be more > commonly > used, I’m not sure. I’d just like to finish with these translation notes > by > Gayan posted in the series of translations to Mike where the term citta is > discussed in a sutta. > > I’ll just sign off first and hope I've helped rather than hindered or > aggravated the proliferations;-)) > > Best wishes, > > Sarah > > (p.s. Rob Ep: I’ve just noticed this line which may be relevant to my post > to > you yesterday, I’m not sure :â€?when citta is dirty, the beings become dirtyâ€? > -) > ********************* > Extract from Gayan’s post (8896): > > 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 ) > > > ******************** > /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) 10411 From: Date: Thu Dec 27, 2001 9:25am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Parinibbana Subcommentary (Part Two) To Robert Epstein Hi, Anders - In a message dated 12/27/01 6:29:08 AM Eastern Standard Time, anders.honore@g... writes: > 27-12-01 07:20:22, Sarah skrev: > > >Dear Howard, > >Howard, I haven?t really considered how frequently the Buddha discusses > >?citta?, using this terminology in the suttas. As others have suggested, I > >believe it is synonymous with ?mano? and ?vi~n~nana? which may be more > commonly > >used, I?m not sure. I?d just like to finish with these translation notes > by > >Gayan posted in the series of translations to Mike where the term citta is > >discussed in a sutta. > > The only sutta I can remember is the "luminosity" sutta, and I think that > one has been discussed quite a bit already ;-) > > I think what Howard may be objecting to regarding citta is the > non-practicality of talking about this and that citta. After all, > consciousness/vinnana/citta is that which sees, which discerns. Can an eye > see itself? If not, then why talk so much about > it. I agree with Howard that there are more relevant objects to focus on, > such as all that which the consciousness discerns, > be it material objects, attachments, desires, anger etc etc. Or am I > completely misreading you, Howard? > ============================ You're basically on target, Anders. To me, what is most important to see, and to see it directly and not theorize about or accept on faith, is the conditionality, impermanence, unsatisfactoriness, insubstantiality, and impersonality of all experience, and, in the seeing, to let it go. It does me little good, as far as I can determine, to study detailed lists of unexperienced phenomena and to then debate with others or with myself as to how "this" unobserved phenomenon relates to "that" unobserved phenomenon. What I need to see, directly, is the arising of suffering, and the grasping which leads to it, directly, in my own life. Most of all, I think it is important to not let studying and reasoning "take over"and replace the practice taught by the Buddha. This is the trap I need to avoid. Other folks may have other points of vulnerability. This is mine. 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) 10412 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Thu Dec 27, 2001 3:01pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Memory, Objects, and Continuity Num Many thanks for this reply, and anumodana in your work in analysing the texts and commentaries. The Canonial references seem to be rather few. I must say I had been hoping to uncover something further! However, the supplementary opinions of various writers are interesting. I may follow up while in Bangkok (I am now at Hong Kong airport), and will get back to you on the subject later. Thanks again for the most informative reply. Jon --- srnsk@a... wrote: > Hi Jon, > > > Do you have any references on the 4 manifestations of sanna that you > > mention --'registration (marking), retention, retrieval and recall'? > I > > would be interested to know where I can read more about this. > > > > > The bottom-line of how I came up with those descriptions is from > multiple > sources. Hmm, let me tell you how I came up. > > I have been reading lakkhanaticcatuka, (four characters: > {characteristics > (lakkhanam: specific or generic attribute) function (rasa: function or > achievement), manifestation (paccupat-thana: manifestation, appearance > or > effect) and proximate cause (padatthanam) }), from various sources, > English, > Pali and couple of different translations of these 4 characteristics in > Thai, > from Milindapanha, a little bit from my tipitaka online search. And I > have to > admit that I also reflect about it from my background, my training and > practice at work. > > I cut this from Nina's "Cetasikas": > " {The Atthasalini (I, Part IV, Chapter 1, 110) states about > sanna: > ...It has the characteristic of noting (In Pali: sanjanati, cognizing > well) > and the function of recognizing what has been previously noted.}". > Which is > consistent with pali description that I have in my Thai abdms. > > I think Nina put it together very nicely, from the same page, > " { The Visuddhimagga (XIV, 130) gives a similar definition. We > can > use the words perceiving, noting, recognizing and 'marking' in order to > designate the reality, which is sanna, but words are inadequate to > describe > realities. We should study the characteristic and function of sanna. > Sanna is not the same as citta which is the 'leader' in > cognizing an object. As we have seen, sanna recognizes the object and it > > 'marks' it so that it can be recognized again. This is explained by way > of a > simile: carpenters put tags or signs on logs so that they can recognize > them > at once by means of these marks. This simile can help us to understand > the > complex process of recognizing or remembering. What we in conventional > language call "remembering" consists of many different moments of citta > and > each of these moments of citta is accompanied by sanna which connects > past > experiences with the present one and conditions again recognition in the > > future. This connecting function is represented by the words > 'recognition' > and 'marking' (1 See Abhidhamma Studies, by the Ven. Nyanaponika, 1976, > page > 70, where it is explained that the making of marks and remembering is > included in every act of perception.) when the present experience has > fallen > away it has become past and what was future becomes the present, and all > the > time there is sanna which performs its function so that an object can > be > recognized. If we remember that sanna accompanies every citta, we will > better > understand that the characteristic of sanna is not exactly the same as > what > we mean by the conventional terms of 'recognition', 'perception' or > 'marking' > . Each citta which arises falls away immediately and is succeeded by the > next > citta, and since each citta is accompanied by sanna which recognizes and > > 'marks 'the object, one can recognize or remember what was perceived or > learnt before. }" > > To me noting, marking or the term I usually use in my work, registration > > point to same thing to make a mark of the input for later recall. Rasa > or > function as quoted above "recognizing what has been previously noted", > which > I use the word "recall". I put it the word retention and retrieval to > fill > the process between noting and recall. And I think that's part of sanna > as > well. When some one has memory problem, the way I was trained is where > on > the process has pathology. Registration problem is usually from > attention > span, level of consciousness. Recall usually with neuropathology or at > times > psychological. Anterograde amnesia is when one cannot retain new > information > and retrograde amnesia is when one cannot retrieve what had been > retained > before. > > The following I cut from online abdms by Nárada Thera, Vájiráráma, > Colombo. I > think he put the examples from Milindapanha, Atthasalini and > Visuddhimagga > together. > ----------------------------------------------------------------------- > 4. Saññá - Sam + ñá, to know, (Compare Latin cognoscere, to know.) > The meaning of this term widely varies according to the context. To > avoid > unnecessary confusion, it is best to understand the specific meaning > used in > the particular connection as a universal mental state. > > The chief characteristic of saññá is the cognition of an object by way > of a > mark as blue etc. It is saññá that enables one to recognize an object > that > has once been perceived by the mind through the senses. "Its procedure > is > likened to the carpenter's recognition of certain kinds of wood by the > mark > he had made on each; to the treasurer's specifying certain articles of > jewelry by the ticket on each; to the wild animal's discernment in the > scarecrow of the work of man." > > Saññá, therefore, means simple sense perception. > "Perception," according to a modern Dictionary of Philosophy, "is the > apprehension of ordinary sense-objects, such as trees, houses, chairs, > etc., > on the occasion of sensory stimulation." > > Perception is not used here in the sense employed by early modern > philosophers such as Bacon, Descartes, Spinoza, and Leibniz. > > As one of the five khandhas (Aggregates) saññá is used in the sense of > perception. > > Could it be that memory is due to this saññá? > > Saññá, viññána and paññá should be differentiated from one another. > Saññá is > like the mere perception of a rupee coin by a child. By its whiteness, > roundness and size it merely recognizes the coin as a rupee, utterly > ignorant > of its monetary value. A man, for instance, discerns its value and its > utility, but is not aware of its chemical composition. Viññána is > comparable > to the ordinary man's knowledge of the rupee. Paññá is like the > analytical > knowledge of a chemist who knows all its chemical properties in every > detail. > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > I feel like word or term have limitation but it impotant in > communication. > Even sanna is appearing here and now but word cannot describe it all. > > Further input and feedback are appreciated. > > Num 10413 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Thu Dec 27, 2001 3:09pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Dukkha (was, Concepts) Victor --- yuzhonghao wrote: > Hello Jon, > > It is good that you understand that: > Conditioned phenomenon is impermanent. > Conditioned phenomenon is unsatisfactory/dukkha. > Conditioned phenomenon is to be seen as it actually is with right > discernment thus: "This is not mine. This I am not. This is not my > self." Flattery will get you nowhere!! I am much more interested in hearing what you have to say about how the truths taught by the Buddha are to be understood. Please share your thoughts with us, Victor. No need to be afraid -- we are a friendly lot here! Jon > > While I understand the meaning of what you are saying, there is > surely > > more to it than this. Did the Buddha give any clues as to *how this > > understanding is to be developed*? Otherwise, one is just > repeating the > > words of the suttas. >> 10414 From: m. nease Date: Thu Dec 27, 2001 3:28pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Concept Hi Kenneth, --- Kenneth Ong wrote: > Hi Mike > > Concepts can't be the objects of satipa.t.thaana, > so can't produce this > kind of understanding. > k: I beg to differ. I think concepts are the > prelimnary stage for > satipatthana. I didn't say that concepts are not necessary, or not a preliminary stage to satipa.t.t.haana, or that they can't be the objects of understanding--just not the kind of understanding that eradicates defilements (satipa.t.thaana vipassanaa). This is completely different from conceptual understanding, as I see it. Concepts, pa.n.natti, are absolutely necessary as a preliminary stage for satipa.t.thaana, as I undersatnd it. What I meant to say (in brief) is that, as I understand it, concepts can't be the objects of satipa.t.t.haana, they cannot be directly experienced by sati, pa~n~naa etc. because they do not have the characteristic (sabhaava) necessary for direct experience. > Without realising concepts as it is, > then deeper level of > satipatthana could not be established. I agree that understanding the nature of concept is important, and that having the right concepts (pariyatti) is essential. > Only through > satipatthana the mind > becomes much "sharper" present moments become more > and more minute. No comment on this... > then > paramatha dhamma could be understand through > breaking down of concepts. Paramattha dhammas are understood (by pa~n~naa) by direct experience of them with pa~n~naa. Concepts are not paramattha dhammas. > the concept level started with the study of body > parts, slowly to other > namas. As in the book of dispeller of delusion, the > study of body parts > is discussed at great length, i think even such > discussion at length is > of paramount importance for the precendent study of > paramtha dhamma. The > study of concepts are impt bc we are still living at > the conceptual world. I have never suggested otherwise, sorry if I gave that impression. > Through detail studying then there is a possiblity > of studying paramtha > dhammas. Certainly--I have never disagreed with this. > Till then, the investigating of > paramatthas dhammas is could > only be applied on conceptual level (i.e. a series > of cittas to constitute > the present moment we have) and not at paramttha > dhamma level (citta by > citta). Certainly I would agree that, without the pariyatti, the likelihood of ever discovering the paramattha dhammas would be next to nil. > Merry Christmas and A happy new year to you :) Thanks and best wishes to you, too, Kenneth, mike 10415 From: Date: Thu Dec 27, 2001 10:44am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Parinibbana Subcommentary (Part Two) To Robert Epstein Hi Howard, > Again, as a specific, while it may very well be true that there is but > one object per act of discernment at a time, so that there is no parallel > processing in effect as far as discernment, alone, is concerned, I have no > way of knowing this detail except for taking it "on faith". And I don't see > > this as of any particular importance ianyway (compared, for example, to the > > tilakkhana). Moreover, I've never seen that fine point ever alluded to in a > > discourse. > As far as the cetasikas are concerned, I see no reason to speak of > all > of them as "having an object" at all (some, like sa~n~na, yes), at least > not > in the same sense that vi~n~nana has an object. For example, certainly > vedana > arises from contact between vi~n~nana and and arammmana, and, in that > sense, > it is *associated* with that arammana, but I do not see that as having that > > same item as object. It is simply that feeling occurs *in response* to > contact. In any case, *what is important here* is the *conditionality* of > the > function of vedana and its *impersonality*. And *these* things *can* be > seen. > You reminded me of maha-satipatthana-sutta. Let me cut just two sections from the sutta, http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/digha/dn22.html You probably have read it before. The sutta talks about things here and now in daily routine life. I understand that is what is you referred to. I agree that understanding, reality is here and now not there and then in the tipitaka. ------------------------------------------------------------------ (B. Feelings)"And how does a monk remain focused on feelings in & of themselves? There is the case where a monk, when feeling a painful feeling, discerns that he is feeling a painful feeling. When feeling a pleasant feeling, he discerns that he is feeling a pleasant feeling. When feeling a neither-painful-nor-pleasant feeling, he discerns that he is feeling a neither-painful-nor-pleasant feeling. "When feeling a painful feeling of the flesh, he discerns that he is feeling a painful feeling of the flesh. When feeling a painful feeling not of the flesh, he discerns that he is feeling a painful feeling not of the flesh. When feeling a pleasant feeling of the flesh, he discerns that he is feeling a pleasant feeling of the flesh. When feeling a pleasant feeling not of the flesh, he discerns that he is feeling a pleasant feeling not of the flesh. When feeling a neither-painful-nor-pleasant feeling of the flesh, he discerns that he is feeling a neither-painful-nor-pleasant feeling of the flesh. When feeling a neither-painful-nor-pleasant feeling not of the flesh, he discerns that he is feeling a neither-painful-nor-pleasant feeling not of the flesh. "In this way he remains focused internally on feelings in & of themselves, or externally on feelings in & of themselves, or both internally & externally on feelings in & of themselves. Or he remains focused on the phenomenon of origination with regard to feelings, on the phenomenon of passing away with regard to feelings, or on the phenomenon of origination & passing away with regard to feelings. Or his mindfulness that 'There are feelings' is maintained to the extent of knowledge & remembrance. And he remains independent, unsustained by (not clinging to) anything in the world. This is how a monk remains focused on feelings in & of themselves. (C. Mind)"And how does a monk remain focused on the mind in & of itself? There is the case where a monk, when the mind has passion, discerns that the mind has passion. When the mind is without passion, he discerns that the mind is without passion. When the mind has aversion, he discerns that the mind has aversion. When the mind is without aversion, he discerns that the mind is without aversion. When the mind has delusion, he discerns that the mind has delusion. When the mind is without delusion, he discerns that the mind is without delusion. "When the mind is restricted, he discerns that the mind is restricted. When the mind is scattered, he discerns that the mind is scattered. When the mind is enlarged, he discerns that the mind is enlarged. When the mind is not enlarged, he discerns that the mind is not enlarged. When the mind is surpassed, he discerns that the mind is surpassed. When the mind is unsurpassed, he discerns that the mind is unsurpassed. When the mind is concentrated, he discerns that the mind is concentrated. When the mind is not concentrated, he discerns that the mind is not concentrated. When the mind is released, he discerns that the mind is released. When the mind is not released, he discerns that the mind is not released. "In this way he remains focused internally on the mind in & of itself, or externally on the mind in & of itself, or both internally & externally on the mind in & of itself. Or he remains focused on the phenomenon of origination with regard to the mind, on the phenomenon of passing away with regard to the mind, or on the phenomenon of origination & passing away with regard to the mind. Or his mindfulness that 'There is a mind' is maintained to the extent of knowledge & remembrance. And he remains independent, unsustained by (not clinging to) anything in the world. This is how a monk remains focused on the mind in & of itself. -------------------------------------------------------- I agree with you about limitation of conceptualization of studying dhamma. As I mentioned before I personally do not like the word Abhidhamma, I mean to me dhamma is dhamma. I also mentioned that I like to read and definitely books of abhidhamma are fascinated me ( I feel abhidhamma is kind of a dry bone, suttanta is kind of lively and vinaya is kind of a mirror to remind myself how deep and pervasive kilesa can be). At this point my reading is kind of orientation to terms and vocabularies in dhamma, (very pannatti). I cannot prove nor disprove a lot of things I have read. Definitely the 17 series of citta is beyond my ability to discern. I can read and memorize (sometimes) the 17 moments back and forth but it does not mean I really see it. And as Nina mentioned, a lot of time I read or look up sutta are a mixture of greed to know and at times b/c I know I know very little and aware that to understand more in useful. I do not try to hypnotize myself to believe in all I have read. To me wisdom (panna) is illuminating and spontaneous. Anyhow, I still favor reading and gathering more information for being a food of thought. To me during reading, not matter I aware or not, mind (citta, consciousness, .....whatevere the term is), color, sound,.... come and go all the time. Always a good reminder that concept is not a reality as well as theory. Have to run to my tennis tournament. One thing I know that my mind have to move couple steps ahead of my opponent and the ball, if I want get deep in to the match. Best wishes, Num 10416 From: Robert Epstein Date: Thu Dec 27, 2001 6:35pm Subject: RE: [dsg] Re: Parinibbana Subcommentary (Part Two) To Robert Epstein : ) Nice to read your words. Robert Ep. ======= --- Kenneth Ong wrote: > Hi Robert > > I think my water analogy is wrong. I have mixed up bhavanga cittas with > other type of cittas. I find that the the parent and child analogy of > bhavanga cittas by the commentaries are not adequate to explain the > meaning of bhavanga cittas. > > To me I equate defiled as vibrations. the bhavanga cittas are vibrated by > sensory objects through causes and conditions (defilements) even though > their objects are not sensory ones. Such vibrations (or disturbances) > includes kusala and akusala, as long as there is vibrations hurling at > bhavanga cittas, it is meant to be defiled. > > We could not at one hand saying that is it only being defiled by just > aksuala bc it leave a loop hole "what happen if it is being disturbed by > kusala". To me it should be viewed that whatever vibrates bhavanga cittas > are defilements since bhavanga cittas are by nature luminious in this > context. > > When it is not being vibrated, it is considered luminious. > > I believe that you have understand that bhavanga cittas are also used for > sense proccess and in between sense process. I think I have a problem, > how come there is citta that is beyond our six senses. > > And that also remind me of dreaming. I believe there are latent tendecies > in bhavanga cittas also and such tendecies are manifested mostly affected > by lobha mula tendecies. When at times we seem to be very awake at > dreaming (half awake and half dreaming) the mind door sense process are > awake but not strong enough to be truly really awake. At that time of > such weak mind door sense process, there is an ability to see, hear and > taste and also memory. Such weak mind door sense process only, there is a > possiblity of reasoning or perceptions in our dream. Just guessing, he he > :) for the fun of it. > > > Kind regards > Ken O > > > --- Robert Epstein wrote: > Hi Kenneth. > > I guess we can get someone else to chime in again on this, but my > > understanding is > > that the bhavanga cittas never make any contact with sense objects and > > thus are > > never defiled. They only get 'turned on' in deep sleep, unconsciousness > > or death > > to ensure the continuity during the 'blank periods' when the conscious > > mind and > > sensory phenomena are absent. So when there is sense object impinging > > on a citta, > > it is never bhavanga citta, it is always the 'waking' citta. When > > bhavanga citta > > awakens, there is never any object there. Bhavanga citta only has as > > its object > > the last object before the previous death, and it never varies, so there > > is no > > chance of any defilement. > > > > If the above is true, by this logic, I cannot see how the bhavanga citta > > can be > > the one referred to in the statement: 'Mind is luminous, but is defiled > > by > > incoming defilements'. It would be quite impossible. > > > > And in fact, the commentaries seems to assume as I do that the bhavanga > > cittas > > cannot be directly defiled. That is why they employ the 'parent and > > child' > > analogy, which says that the waking cittas, which are defiled, ruin the > > reputation > > of the parents, the bhavanga cittas, even though the bhavanga cittas are > > never > > themselves defiled. So in a sense the Buddha could be saying that the > > bhavanga > > cittas are defiled by the other cittas, even though they themselves are > > actually > > *not* defiled. With respect, this seems to be stretching the meaning of > > the > > Buddha's very simple declarative statement quite a bit, in my opinion. > > > > I look forward to reading a greater part of the commentary on this > > subject, if > > Suan takes on the time-consuming task of translating it, and I hope it > > will > > clarify the above. > > > > Until then, I think it is interesting to note the different 'streams' of > > cittas > > that are taking place on different levels in the human structure, as it > > is > > constructed from moment to moment by a series of changing conditions and > > events. > > There are the subconsious cittas, the bhavanga cittas; the conscious > > ones, which > > perceive namas and rupas, and the supra-mundane cittas, which discern > > the reality > > of arising namas and rupas and some of which are capable of perceiving > > Nibbana. > > But as I understand it, it is still the case that only one of these > > cittas appears > > at a time. It is an interesting picture of reality. > > > > Best, > > Robert Ep. > > > > ============ > > > > --- Kenneth Ong wrote: 10417 From: Robert Epstein Date: Thu Dec 27, 2001 6:38pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Bhavanga cittas thanks, Jon. Robert Ep. ======== --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > Rob > > --- Robert Epstein wrote: > Hi Sarah. : ) > ................ > > Nina's statement that the bhavanga cittas take place in between > > sense-door and > > mind-door moments to maintain continuity was a new piece of info for me. > > I was > > looking at the bhavangas as a separate process that only took place > > during the > > sleep state or in unconsciousness or death. > > You might find the passage from CMA on bhavanga citta below of interest. > > Jon > > CMA III, #8 (Guide) > … > The word bhavanga means factor(anga) of existence (bhava), that is, the > indispensable condition of existence. Bhavanga is the function of > consciousness by which the continuity of the individual is preserved > through the duration of any single existence, from conception to death. … > … . Bhavangacittas arise and pass away every moment during life whenever > there is no active cognitive process taking place. … > > When an object impinges on a sense door, the bhavanga is arrested and an > active cognitive process ensues for the purpose of cognizing the object. > Immediately after the cognitive process is completed, again the bhavanga > supervenes and continues until the next cognitive process arises. Arising > and perishing at every moment during this passive phase of consciousness, > the bhavanga flows on like a stream, without remaining static for two > consecutive moments. > 10418 From: Robert Epstein Date: Thu Dec 27, 2001 6:41pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: luminous mind: To Kenneth Ong And Like-minded Dhamma Friends Dear Suan, Looking forward to it! Regards, Robert Ep. ====== --- abhidhammika wrote: > > > Dear Ken > > How are you? > > Thank you for your kind encouragement. > > Personally, I do have an attitude of equanimity towards those who > criticize commentaries. > > The reason I mentioned my reluctance to post translation of them is > that I do not want to impose these profound commentarial discussions > on the critics and the general readers alike. > > Another reason is that they are the preserves of advanced students > and teachers of Tipitaka who knows Pali. They are not for beginners > and laypersons. In terms of modern academic ranking, they belong to > the level of post-graduate or doctoral studies and post-doctral > research. Therefore, if you post them for general laypersons, your > action amounts to baffling, tiring and torturing them. In fact, one > of the reasons the commentaries received criticisms could well be > that we haven't convinced the critics of the value of the > commentaries. > > Well, now, I know that there are are serious readers on this list, > and I am willing to post the commentarial discussions here. > > And, as the latest news on the matter, I have already finished full > translation of commentary and subcommentary on the luminous mind. > When I have finished re-checking and editing them, I will be able to > post them for the intellectual entertainment of the serious dhamma > friends on this list. > > Coming very soon! > > With best wishes, > > Suan > > http://www.bodhiology.org > > 10419 From: Date: Thu Dec 27, 2001 2:15pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Parinibbana Subcommentary (Part Two) To Robert Epstein Hi, Num - Thank you for a very friendly and helpful post! With metta, Howard In a message dated 12/27/01 6:47:48 PM Eastern Standard Time, srnsk@a... writes: > > Hi Howard, > > > > Again, as a specific, while it may very well be true that there is but > > one object per act of discernment at a time, so that there is no parallel > > > processing in effect as far as discernment, alone, is concerned, I have > no > > way of knowing this detail except for taking it "on faith". And I don't > see > > > > this as of any particular importance ianyway (compared, for example, to > the > > > > tilakkhana). Moreover, I've never seen that fine point ever alluded to in > a > > > > discourse. > > As far as the cetasikas are concerned, I see no reason to speak of > > > all > > of them as "having an object" at all (some, like sa~n~na, yes), at least > > not > > in the same sense that vi~n~nana has an object. For example, certainly > > vedana > > arises from contact between vi~n~nana and and arammmana, and, in that > > sense, > > it is *associated* with that arammana, but I do not see that as having > that > > > > same item as object. It is simply that feeling occurs *in response* to > > contact. In any case, *what is important here* is the *conditionality* of > > > the > > function of vedana and its *impersonality*. And *these* things *can* be > > seen. > > > > You reminded me of maha-satipatthana-sutta. Let me cut just two sections > from > the sutta, http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/digha/dn22.html You > > probably have read it before. The sutta talks about things here and now in > daily routine life. I understand that is what is you referred to. I agree > > that understanding, reality is here and now not there and then in the > tipitaka. > ------------------------------------------------------------------ > (B. Feelings)"And how does a monk remain focused on feelings in & of > themselves? There is the case where a monk, when feeling a painful feeling, > > discerns that he is feeling a painful feeling. When feeling a pleasant > feeling, he discerns that he is feeling a pleasant feeling. When feeling a > neither-painful-nor-pleasant feeling, he discerns that he is feeling a > neither-painful-nor-pleasant feeling. "When feeling a painful feeling of > the > flesh, he discerns that he is feeling a painful feeling of the flesh. When > feeling a painful feeling not of the flesh, he discerns that he is feeling > a > painful feeling not of the flesh. When feeling a pleasant feeling of the > flesh, he discerns that he is feeling a pleasant feeling of the flesh. When > > feeling a pleasant feeling not of the flesh, he discerns that he is feeling > a > pleasant feeling not of the flesh. When feeling a > neither-painful-nor-pleasant feeling of the flesh, he discerns that he is > feeling a neither-painful-nor-pleasant feeling of the flesh. When feeling a > > neither-painful-nor-pleasant feeling not of the flesh, he discerns that he > is > feeling a neither-painful-nor-pleasant feeling not of the flesh. "In this > way > he remains focused internally on feelings in & of themselves, or externally > > on feelings in & of themselves, or both internally & externally on feelings > > in & of themselves. Or he remains focused on the phenomenon of origination > with regard to feelings, on the phenomenon of passing away with regard to > feelings, or on the phenomenon of origination & passing away with regard to > > feelings. Or his mindfulness that 'There are feelings' is maintained to the > > extent of knowledge & remembrance. And he remains independent, unsustained > by > (not clinging to) anything in the world. This is how a monk remains focused > > on feelings in & of themselves. > > (C. Mind)"And how does a monk remain focused on the mind in & of itself? > There is the case where a monk, when the mind has passion, discerns that > the > mind has passion. When the mind is without passion, he discerns that the > mind > is without passion. When the mind has aversion, he discerns that the mind > has > aversion. When the mind is without aversion, he discerns that the mind is > without aversion. When the mind has delusion, he discerns that the mind has > > delusion. When the mind is without delusion, he discerns that the mind is > without delusion. "When the mind is restricted, he discerns that the mind > is > restricted. When the mind is scattered, he discerns that the mind is > scattered. When the mind is enlarged, he discerns that the mind is > enlarged. > When the mind is not enlarged, he discerns that the mind is not enlarged. > When the mind is surpassed, he discerns that the mind is surpassed. When > the > mind is unsurpassed, he discerns that the mind is unsurpassed. When the > mind > is concentrated, he discerns that the mind is concentrated. When the mind > is > not concentrated, he discerns that the mind is not concentrated. When the > mind is released, he discerns that the mind is released. When the mind is > not > released, he discerns that the mind is not released. "In this way he > remains > focused internally on the mind in & of itself, or externally on the mind in > & > of itself, or both internally & externally on the mind in & of itself. Or > he > remains focused on the phenomenon of origination with regard to the mind, > on > the phenomenon of passing away with regard to the mind, or on the > phenomenon > of origination & passing away with regard to the mind. Or his mindfulness > that 'There is a mind' is maintained to the extent of knowledge & > remembrance. And he remains independent, unsustained by (not clinging to) > anything in the world. This is how a monk remains focused on the mind in & > of > itself. > -------------------------------------------------------- > > I agree with you about limitation of conceptualization of studying dhamma. > > As I mentioned before I personally do not like the word Abhidhamma, I mean > to > me dhamma is dhamma. I also mentioned that I like to read and definitely > books of abhidhamma are fascinated me ( I feel abhidhamma is kind of a dry > bone, suttanta is kind of lively and vinaya is kind of a mirror to remind > myself how deep and pervasive kilesa can be). At this point my reading is > kind of orientation to terms and vocabularies in dhamma, (very pannatti). > I > cannot prove nor disprove a lot of things I have read. Definitely the 17 > series of citta is beyond my ability to discern. I can read and memorize > (sometimes) the 17 moments back and forth but it does not mean I really see > > it. And as Nina mentioned, a lot of time I read or look up sutta are a > mixture of greed to know and at times b/c I know I know very little and > aware > that to understand more in useful. I do not try to hypnotize myself to > believe in all I have read. To me wisdom (panna) is illuminating and > spontaneous. Anyhow, I still favor reading and gathering more information > for being a food of thought. To me during reading, not matter I aware or > not, mind (citta, consciousness, .....whatevere the term is), color, > sound,.... come and go all the time. Always a good reminder that > concept > is not a reality as well as theory. > > Have to run to my tennis tournament. One thing I know that my mind have to > move couple steps ahead of my opponent and the ball, if I want get deep in > to > the match. > > Best wishes, > > Num > > /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) 10420 From: Purnomo . Date: Fri Dec 28, 2001 3:41am Subject: Re: [dsg] Concept Dear friend, I agree what you said. nice, purnomo >From: "m. nease" >Reply-To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com >To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com >Subject: Re: [dsg] Concept >Date: Wed, 26 Dec 2001 15:42:03 -0800 (PST) > >Dear Purnomo, > >As I understand it a naama is characterized by its >ability to experience an object. > >For example, tactile consciousness (kayavi~n~naa.na) >experiences tangible object, heat for example--feeling >(vedanaa) arising with tactile conciousness >experiences feeling, (pleasant or unpleasant in this >case). So kayavi~n~naa.na, a citta, and vedanaa, a >cetasika, are both experiencing the same object >(aarammana), heat--they are both naamas (heat is a >ruupa, it doesn't experience anything). Of course, >many other cetasikas arise at the same time as >vedanaa, all experiencing the same aarammana. > >The concept of pleasant or unpleasant heat arises >afterwards but doesn't experience anything, it is an >idea made up of memories of the experiences. To me, >this is important only because the experiences >(naamas) and the things they can experience >(aarammanas, naamas or ruupas) can be the objects of >satipa.t.thaana and so can produce the kind of >understanding (sati-pa~n~naa) that destroys >defilements. Concepts can't be the objects of >satipa.t.thaana, so can't produce this kind of >understanding. > >This is the way I see it, anyway. > >Always nice to see you here, Purnomo, > >mike > 10421 From: Purnomo . Date: Fri Dec 28, 2001 3:51am Subject: Re: [dsg] Concept dear all, I agree what you said. I think "Universe" is a concept. Purnomo >From: Sarah >Reply-To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com >To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com >Subject: Re: [dsg] Concept >Date: Thu, 27 Dec 2001 12:59:09 +0800 (CST) > >Dear Rob Ep, > > --- Robert Epstein wrote: > Dear Sarah, > > It's getting a little clearer, I hope. > >Good! > > > > A concept can be the object of a citta, but a concept is never a nama. > >Right! > > > A concept of the Universe is not a citta, because the 'Universe' is not >a > > real > > object, but a conceptual, imaginary one. > >Mmmm, yes the Universe is a concept and and the “Universe’ is not a real >object. Even if it were a concept of a real object, it would not be a >citta. >The reason that neither a concept or a rupa is ever a citta is because a >citta >is a reality which experiences an object which concepts and rupas don’t do. > > > But the citta that thinks about the concept of the Universe can have >that > > concept > > as its 'unreal' object. Is this correct? > >Yes, spot on! (Cittas in the mind-door process only). > > > A citta that recognizes a concept as a concept, an unreal object, occurs >with > > sati > > and perhaps with panna, > >Mmmmmm, sati arises with all kusala (wholesome) cittas and panna with any >related to bhavana (mental development). So if there is wise reflection >about >concepts, like now hopefully, this reflection will be accompanied by sati >and >panna. However, as Jon wrote in a post yesterday, if it is sati of >satipatthana, accompanied by panna, the object can only be a reality and >never >a concept. So there is no ‘knowing’ a concept, because a concept doesn’t >exist >except in our imagination. Sati and panna know that at these moments the >reality is thinking which can be understood precisely. > > >but a citta that mistakes a concept for a reality -- > > that > > thinks the 'Universe' is a real object, not a concept -- occurs with >moha, > > and is > > a 'deluded' citta. Is this correct? > >Certainly there is moha at these moments. When there is the ‘deluded’ citta >which wrongly takes concept for reality, there is also (micha) ditthi at >these >moments. This is why we can consider ditthi as the most ‘dangerous’ >cetasika >(to quote K.Sujin) and the first one that has to be eradicated. > >I think you’re getting ‘very warm’ indeed, > >Speak soon, >Sarah > ========== 10422 From: Purnomo . Date: Fri Dec 28, 2001 3:58am Subject: Re: [dsg] Concept Dear Ong, Concept is important to we understand, but if we want to get deeper level of satipathanna so we have to release all our concept. Do you agree ? nice, purnomo >From: Kenneth Ong >Reply-To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com >To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com >Subject: Re: [dsg] Concept >Date: Thu, 27 Dec 2001 07:01:03 +0000 (GMT) > >Hi Mike > > > Concepts can't be the objects of satipa.t.thaana, so can't produce this >kind of understanding. > >k: I beg to differ. I think concepts are the prelimnary stage for >satipatthana. Without realising concepts as it is, then deeper level of >satipatthana could not be established. Only through satipatthana the mind >becomes much "sharper" present moments become more and more minute. then >paramatha dhamma could be understand through breaking down of concepts. >the concept level started with the study of body parts, slowly to other >namas. As in the book of dispeller of delusion, the study of body parts >is discussed at great length, i think even such discussion at length is >of paramount importance for the precendent study of paramtha dhamma. The >study of concepts are impt bc we are still living at the conceptual world. > Through detail studying then there is a possiblity of studying paramtha >dhammas. Till then, the investigating of paramatthas dhammas is could >only be applied on conceptual level (i.e. a series of cittas to constitute >the present moment we have) and not at paramttha dhamma level (citta by >citta). > >Merry Christmas and A happy new year to you :) > > >Kind regards >Ken O > > > > > > This is the way I see it, anyway. > > > > Always nice to see you here, Purnomo, > > > > mike 10423 From: Purnomo . Date: Fri Dec 28, 2001 4:31am Subject: grandma Dear all, october 26, 2001, it's nightmare for me. Tomorrow, I should be happy because I have finished my study. Unfortunely, My grandma was died. December 24, 2001: My family and I called my 'grandma'. According my culture, 'soul' my grandma was called. I confused and not believe but this is true. I saw that 'grandma' appeared in someone(she who called my grandma). This someone acted if as that was my grandma. Grandma said that she was there so sad. She always cried. I so sad what she said. I know, my grandma have been born in niraya realm. I know I have to 'pindapatta' to help my grandma. Please, give me some messages which can help my grandma so she will be born in happier realm. nice, purnomo 10424 From: Anders Honore Date: Fri Dec 28, 2001 4:30am Subject: ... This was written to me by a friend who has absolutely no affiliations with Buddhism whatsoever: "Our illusory self seeks purity, perfection and so on - but this is all a concept, and so is the "I" that seeks this. This "purity" of self is simply the opposite of not pu?e, which just reflects ones conditioning. You cant have one without the other, and so the individual who sets out to be "pure" denies that he or she is also "not pure." Otherwise how would the individual know pure from not pure. In other words, whatever you do to try to be free of the illusion of self, (or try to strive for, achieve, or realise, or understand,) still remains of this conceptual, conditioned self." Anders 10425 From: Anders Honore Date: Fri Dec 28, 2001 4:27am Subject: Re: [dsg] Parinibbana Subcommentary (Part Two) To Robert Epstein 27-12-01 23:25:47, upasaka@a... skrev: >Hi, Anders - > >In a message dated 12/27/01 6:29:08 AM Eastern Standard Time, >anders.honore@g... writes: >> I think what Howard may be objecting to regarding citta is the >> non-practicality of talking about this and that citta. After all, >> consciousness/vinnana/citta is that which sees, which discerns. Can an eye >> see itself? If not, then why talk so much about >> it. I agree with Howard that there are more relevant objects to focus on, >> such as all that which the consciousness discerns, >> be it material objects, attachments, desires, anger etc etc. Or am I >> completely misreading you, Howard? >============================ > You're basically on target, Anders. To me, what is most important to >see, and to see it directly and not theorize about or accept on faith, is the >conditionality, impermanence, unsatisfactoriness, insubstantiality, and >impersonality of all experience, and, in the seeing, to let it go. As I was reading above where you said "what is most important to see" I thought "hmm, the most important thing to me is not-clinging, and then you write just below "to let it go". > It does me >little good, as far as I can determine, to study detailed lists of >unexperienced phenomena and to then debate with others or with myself as to >how "this" unobserved phenomenon relates to "that" unobserved phenomenon. Yes, that's what I am trying to stress as well. Study is a support for practise. The study that isn't related to practise becomes speculative and, imo, is no longer beneficial. The danger isn't really in the speculative discussions themselves, but it is extremely difficult to not become entrenched in them. And once that happens, it's all downhill. >What I need to see, directly, is the arising of suffering, and the grasping >which leads to it, directly, in my own life. Most of all, I think it is >important to not let studying and reasoning "take over"and replace the >practice taught by the Buddha. This is the trap I need to avoid. Other folks >may have other points of vulnerability. This is mine. 10426 From: Anders Honore Date: Fri Dec 28, 2001 4:14am Subject: Re: [dsg] luminous mind 27-12-01 11:50:50, Sarah skrev: >Dear Anders, > >I know I really shouldn't be getting into new discussions just as I'm going >away, but I just can't resist making a couple of quick comments here;-) > > --- Anders Honore wrote: > Personally, I don't >believe the commentaries at face value, and I believe >> that Bikkhu Bodhi has more or less skilfully >> pointed that they are sometimes even dead-wrong as they contradict some >> suttas. > >This is interesting. B.Bodhi is certainly a lot, lot, lot more familiar with >the suttas and commentaries than I am, but I have yet to come across such a >contradiction and would be happy to have any (contradictions) pointed out hurry> Sometimes it just depends on how one understands both (as with the >'luminous' sutta discussion). He made some comments in his notes (or was it his introduction?) to his translation of the Samyutta Nikaya. I can't remember where it is (and there's quite few pages to skim through) though, so it may be a while before I can be more specific about this. Btw, did I mention that I now have his full translations of the Digha, Majhima and Samyutta Nikayas? A friendly soul sent them to me for free shortly after I I took a break from dsg. >A lot of what is found in the >> commentaries (which are often abidhammically inspired) doesn't rely find >> backing in the suttas themselves, which, along >> with the Vinaya Pitaka, is the only source I will personally acknowledge as >> being actually authoritative. >> That the commentators were all supposedly Arahants is something I find more >> credible to be a later invention by the >> supporters of the commentaries, to lend authority to their claims. > >You may find it interesting to read back over the series of posts I've been >doing on a weekly basis from 'Intro to Vinaya'. These are the areas I'm >considering in them. I'll go and have a look in the archives. >> That it is not to say that they can't be extremely helpful in clarifying >> certain points (I have certainly found them to be so), >> but I would personally recommend that they should be taken with a grain of >> salt > >Sounds like you're in my category 2 group, i.e. you accept those which conform >with your understanding of the Suttas in question;-) (Category 1 were the >dinosaurs, that accept them all and category 3 were those who reject them all). I should add that I don't neccesarily believe that all the suttas are the quoted words of the Buddha either. When you have thousands of them such as you have in the Pali Canon and you wait a few hundreds before recording them in writing, there's bound to be some minor errors or fabrications. Perhaps I should clarify my own relationship with the commentaries. I evaluate them in the context of the suttas themselves. If I find that there isn't any valid basis for what the commentaries propose in the suttas themselves, then I don't buy it. It doesn't mean that I reject it as untrue or anything, because quite frankly I don't bother myself with having to label things as being "untrue" or "true". It just means that I don't find them relevant for me. Now, eveluating in the context of the suttas is a highly subjective matter of course, and the suttas themselves I interpret in the light of two things: Faith and practise. Things that I don't have any direct experience of myself from my practise (such as the jhanas, supernatural powers etc.) I can only take on faith. Since faith is a rather uncertain thing, I am wary of maintaining any positions on these matters. They are pointers for practitioners on higher stages than me, and so are not things I need concern myself with at the moment. When the suttas deal with things that I have direct experience of in my own practise, I tend to lend authority to my practise over my intellect, as it is the practise that it skilfully removing clinging, and not the intellect and I think the Buddha was quite aware of that. >Good to have you around, Anders......I reckon you and Kom were just waiting for >each other like Erik and Dan wait for each other here too;-)) Haha, probably. >Best wishes in the New Year for good results in your studies and ever-growing >panna. Thank you. Enjoy your trip! Anders 10427 From: Date: Fri Dec 28, 2001 3:02am Subject: Re: [dsg] grandma Hi, Purnomo - In a message dated 12/28/01 7:33:05 AM Eastern Standard Time, purnomo9@h... writes: > Dear all, > > october 26, 2001, it's nightmare for me. Tomorrow, I should be happy > because > I have finished my study. Unfortunely, My grandma was died. > > December 24, 2001: My family and I called my 'grandma'. According my > culture, 'soul' my grandma was called. I confused and not believe but this > is true. I saw that 'grandma' appeared in someone(she who called my > grandma). This someone acted if as that was my grandma. > > Grandma said that she was there so sad. She always cried. I so sad what she > > said. I know, my grandma have been born in niraya realm. I know I have to > 'pindapatta' to help my grandma. > > Please, give me some messages which can help my grandma so she will be born > > in happier realm. > > nice, > > purnomo > ================================ I'm very sorry for your loss. Of course, I don't know in what realm your grandmother has taken rebirth, but I don't think you need presume it is a hell realm. We are in a relatively wonderful realm, and yet we are often very sad right here! Also, in some Buddhist traditions, it takes a bit of time before the final "destination" is determined. So we really don't know the facts. Ultimately, it is our kamma that is the primary determiner in this sort of matter. Meanwhile, I, and I'm certain, all the rest of us, have loving thoughts for you, your family, and for your grandmother, and we can hope that in some way that may be of help. And please, while being mindful of your feelings of loss, let them come and go without magnifying them, and do recall the truth of the quotation at the end of this post. 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) 10428 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Fri Dec 28, 2001 8:07am Subject: RE: [dsg] grandma Dear Purnomo, My condolences for you grandmother's death. Her death can remind us that we too must die, sooner or later. It's important to develop wisdom and kusala whenever we could. What's your grandmother's name? We will think of her whenever a kusala deed is done. kom 10429 From: yklimov Date: Fri Dec 28, 2001 8:31am Subject: Re: grandma Dear Purnomo, I would like to say I am very sorry for your loss. I have never lost anyone yet, but I've lost a friend and I've seen my friends lost their daughter. Be supportive to your Mom or Dad, whoever Mother passed away. The freind of mine, when she was little, her grandma passed away, then when all her relatieves got together, father got a book and asked everyone to tell something good about grandma, then he wrote it into this book. She cherished this book all her life, and now gave it to her teenager son, I feel it's a great way to be close to you ancestors. Today we have camcorders, you can just kind of tape everyone saying something good about her. In my country it's a custom when someone dies, tell whatever good he's done, so he won't forget, leaving us. Love, Yulia PS Congratulation on finishing your study! 10430 From: Date: Fri Dec 28, 2001 4:19am Subject: Re: [dsg] grandma Dear Purnomo, Hope you and your family have strength to carry on during this hard time. I do not know where your grandma has gone. As it said, good seed will bring good fruit; I wish her good seeds took her into a good place. As couple people here have already said, if you can, try to turn this opportunity into learning experience. Our loss is our gain. Dhamma (both good and bad, pleasant and painful, tranquil and agitated) here and now, is our best teacher. This is my magic, OK: Grief when shared is half. Happiness when shared is double. May the force always be with you. Num 10431 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Dec 28, 2001 10:09am Subject: Gayan's text Dear Gayan, thanks very much for the Pali text, I am very happy with it. I have not finished studying it and will come back to you, best wishes, Nina. 10432 From: Anders Honore Date: Fri Dec 28, 2001 1:16pm Subject: Re: [dsg] grandma Perhpas this sutta will help you in this situation: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/majjhima/mn136.html 28-12-01 13:31:36, "Purnomo ." skrev: >Dear all, > >october 26, 2001, it's nightmare for me. Tomorrow, I should be happy because >I have finished my study. Unfortunely, My grandma was died. > >December 24, 2001: My family and I called my 'grandma'. According my >culture, 'soul' my grandma was called. I confused and not believe but this >is true. I saw that 'grandma' appeared in someone(she who called my >grandma). This someone acted if as that was my grandma. > >Grandma said that she was there so sad. She always cried. I so sad what she >said. I know, my grandma have been born in niraya realm. I know I have to >'pindapatta' to help my grandma. > >Please, give me some messages which can help my grandma so she will be born >in happier realm. > >nice, > >purnomo 10433 From: m. nease Date: Fri Dec 28, 2001 3:22pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Parinibbana Subcommentary (Part Two) To Robert Epstein Hi Howard, --- upasaka@a... wrote: > To me, > what is most important to > see, and to see it directly and not theorize about > or accept on faith, is the > conditionality, impermanence, unsatisfactoriness, > insubstantiality, and > impersonality of all experience, and, in the seeing, > to let it go. It does me > little good, as far as I can determine, to study > detailed lists of > unexperienced phenomena and to then debate with > others or with myself as to > how "this" unobserved phenomenon relates to "that" > unobserved phenomenon. I don't like studying detailed lists either, or debating--or see the merit in either one (a different matter of course). Here's and example of what I do like and do see the merit in from the Dhammavinaya: "'The six classes of consciousness should be known.' Thus it was said. In reference to what was it said? Dependent on the eye & forms there arises consciousness at the eye. Dependent on the ear & sounds there arises consciousness at the ear. Dependent on the nose & aromas there arises consciousness at the nose. Dependent on the tongue & flavors there arises consciousness at the tongue. Dependent on the body & tactile sensations there arises consciousness at the body. Dependent on the intellect & ideas there arises consciousness at the intellect. 'The six classes of consciousness should be known.' Thus it was said. And in reference to this was it said. This is the third sextet. ... "If anyone were to say, 'The eye is the self,' that wouldn't be tenable. The arising & falling away of the eye are discerned. And when its arising & falling away are discerned, it would follow that 'My self arises & falls away.' That's why it wouldn't be tenable if anyone were to say, 'The eye is the self.' So the eye is not-self. If anyone were to say, 'Forms are the self,' that wouldn't be tenable... Thus the eye is not-self and forms are not-self. If anyone were to say, 'Consciousness at the eye is the self,' that wouldn't be tenable... Thus the eye is not-self, forms are not-self, consciousness at the eye is not-self. If anyone were to say, 'Contact at the eye is the self,' that wouldn't be tenable... Thus the eye is not-self, forms are not-self, consciousness at the eye is not-self, contact at the eye is not-self. If anyone were to say, 'Feeling is the self,' that wouldn't be tenable... Thus the eye is not-self, forms are not-self, consciousness at the eye is not-self, contact at the eye is not-self, feeling is not self. If anyone were to say, 'Craving is the self,' that wouldn't be tenable. The arising & falling away of craving are discerned. And when its arising & falling away are discerned, it would follow that 'My self arises & falls away.' That's why it wouldn't be tenable if anyone were to say, 'Craving is the self.' Thus the eye is not-self, forms are not-self, consciousness at the eye is not-self, contact at the eye is not-self, feeling is not self, craving is not-self." Majjhima Nikaya 148 Chachakka Sutta The Six Sextets http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/majjhima/mn148.html To me, these are not just lists, or subjects for pointless debates. Although I've included only the third of the Six Sixes, it's clear to me that these particular 'lists' are essential to what the Buddha taught. He never excluded or suggesting excluding the sense bases from consideration because they can't sense 'themselves', e.g.--this notion will not be found in the Tipitaka. Don't mean to preach at you, your post just reminded me of this, one of my favorite suttas. Hope you don't find it empty or meaningless and get some enjoyement, at least, out of it. mike 10434 From: m. nease Date: Fri Dec 28, 2001 3:48pm Subject: Re: [dsg] grandma Dear Purnomo, It's always hard for me to know how to respond to a friend's grief. This kind of terrible unhappiness is so much about what the Buddha taught. Before he was the Buddha, he didn't want his relatives to suffer and die either--he wanted to find a way out of this, for himself and for others. What he found (in part) is that grief, sorrow, suffering, lamentation and dispair are all conditioned by birth--that only by putting and end to rebirth can we put an end to this cycle of suffering. I don't know what to say about helping your grandma now, this is beyond anything I know. But I hope this sadness you experience now will help you to understand and someday be free from suffering. Best Wishes, mike 10435 From: Date: Fri Dec 28, 2001 1:02pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Parinibbana Subcommentary (Part Two) To Robert Epstein Hi, Mike - I'm *completely* in agreement with you on the following. I've never read any suttas from which I haven't gained. I have found NONE of them to be empty or meaningless. Just the opposite!! In fact, I just started re-reading a modern commentary on the Kalakarama Sutta, one of my very favorites. I have never experienced empty theorizing in the suttas, and while I consider study of the suttas as secondary to the direct practice of sila, samadhi, and vipassana bhavana, sutta study is very important to me and is something I continually engage in. With metta, Howard In a message dated 12/28/01 6:23:03 PM Eastern Standard Time, mlnease@y... writes: > > Hi Howard, > > --- upasaka@a... wrote: > > > To me, > > what is most important to > > see, and to see it directly and not theorize about > > or accept on faith, is the > > conditionality, impermanence, unsatisfactoriness, > > insubstantiality, and > > impersonality of all experience, and, in the seeing, > > to let it go. It does me > > little good, as far as I can determine, to study > > detailed lists of > > unexperienced phenomena and to then debate with > > others or with myself as to > > how "this" unobserved phenomenon relates to "that" > > unobserved phenomenon. > > I don't like studying detailed lists either, or > debating--or see the merit in either one (a different > matter of course). Here's and example of what I do > like and do see the merit in from the Dhammavinaya: > > "'The six classes of consciousness should be known.' > Thus it was said. In reference to what was it said? > Dependent on the eye & forms there arises > consciousness at the eye. Dependent on the ear & > sounds there arises consciousness at the ear. > Dependent on the nose & aromas there arises > consciousness at the nose. Dependent on the tongue & > flavors there arises consciousness at the tongue. > Dependent on the body & tactile sensations there > arises consciousness at the body. Dependent on the > intellect & ideas there arises consciousness at the > intellect. 'The six classes of consciousness should be > known.' Thus it was said. And in reference to this was > it said. This is the third sextet. ... > "If anyone were to say, 'The eye is the self,' that > wouldn't be tenable. The arising & falling away of the > eye are discerned. And when its arising & falling away > are discerned, it would follow that 'My self arises & > falls away.' That's why it wouldn't be tenable if > anyone were to say, 'The eye is the self.' So the eye > is not-self. If anyone were to say, 'Forms are the > self,' that wouldn't be tenable... Thus the eye is > not-self and forms are not-self. If anyone were to > say, 'Consciousness at the eye is the self,' that > wouldn't be tenable... Thus the eye is not-self, forms > are not-self, consciousness at the eye is not-self. If > anyone were to say, 'Contact at the eye is the self,' > that wouldn't be tenable... Thus the eye is not-self, > forms are not-self, consciousness at the eye is > not-self, contact at the eye is not-self. If anyone > were to say, 'Feeling is the self,' that wouldn't be > tenable... Thus the eye is not-self, forms are > not-self, consciousness at the eye is not-self, > contact at the eye is not-self, feeling is not self. > If anyone were to say, 'Craving is the self,' that > wouldn't be tenable. The arising & falling away of > craving are discerned. And when its arising & falling > away are discerned, it would follow that 'My self > arises & falls away.' That's why it wouldn't be > tenable if anyone were to say, 'Craving is the self.' > Thus the eye is not-self, forms are not-self, > consciousness at the eye is not-self, contact at the > eye is not-self, feeling is not self, craving is > not-self." > > Majjhima Nikaya 148 > Chachakka Sutta > The Six Sextets > > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/majjhima/mn148.html > > To me, these are not just lists, or subjects for > pointless debates. Although I've included only the > third of the Six Sixes, it's clear to me that these > particular 'lists' are essential to what the Buddha > taught. He never excluded or suggesting excluding the > sense bases from consideration because they can't > sense 'themselves', e.g.--this notion will not be > found in the Tipitaka. > > Don't mean to preach at you, your post just reminded > me of this, one of my favorite suttas. Hope you don't > find it empty or meaningless and get some enjoyement, > at least, out of it. > > mike > /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) 10436 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Fri Dec 28, 2001 6:51pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Concept Hi Purnomo, I thought that is what I trying to point out. Sorry I am always lousy in sayings words to pple loss. My wife always complaint (very loudly) to me that I am not a sentimental which I agree with. Bc to me, what will happen will happen, if it comes, let it comes, there is nothing we could do abt it so what is the point to be attached or to be sad. To me this is life. Even if one day, my children would die earlier than me, I told my wife, this is life. I could empathise your emotion loss as I have witnessed the passing of my father and one of my close sister abt eleven years ago when I was 19 yrs old. As my sister died of suicide, the impact was traumatic. That emotion baggage was with me for seven years until the day I learnt Buddhism. Her loss taught me the importance of being kind to everyone I meet as I regret of not being kinder to her while she was alive. Even now when I write this to you, saddness still lingers in my heart. I always wish I could turn back the clock and help her. But this is life. I have to accept it whether I like it or not and carry with my life. My deepest condolences Ken O --- "Purnomo ." wrote: > Dear Ong, > > Concept is important to we understand, but if we want to get deeper > level of > satipathanna so we have to release all our concept. Do you agree ? > > nice, > purnomo > > 10437 From: Date: Fri Dec 28, 2001 2:06pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Parinibbana Subcommentary (Part Two) To Robert Epstein Hi again , Mike - One more point. In a message dated 12/28/01 6:23:03 PM Eastern Standard Time, mlnease@y... writes: > He never excluded or suggesting excluding the sense bases from consideration > because they can't > sense 'themselves', e.g.--this notion will not be > found in the Tipitaka. > ============================= For sure he didn't! And what Buddhist would dismiss sense bases from consideration? I, myself, said, if you will recall, that I'm *aware* of being conscious, of seeing, tasting, hearing, and so on and so forth. All objects are objects of the six senses, and it is there that we must "look" to see emptiness, impermanence, insubstantiality, and impersonality. Theoretical constructs such as cittas, and, particularly such things as bhavanga cittas with unobservable objects are another matter. What sort of discernment has no discernable object? Even the discernment of an absence discerns that absence! But, whether or not there are such things as bhavanga cittas with unobservable objects has no bearing whatsoever on the goal of the Dhamma, namely the cessation of suffering. The Dhamma, as I see it, is neither about belief (though some tentative belief can be useful) nor about deduction and theorizing (though some of that may be useful), but is all about moral action, guarding the senses, and cultivating the mind. With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 10438 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Fri Dec 28, 2001 11:48pm Subject: RE: [dsg] Re: Parinibbana Subcommentary (Part Two) To Robert Epstein Dear Howard, I believe the most important thing about learning about the bhavanga is that it too can be discerned as an object of Satipatthana. Without the discernment with panna, it is likely that someone with the accumulation of taking the kandha as self will take bhavanga as also self when bhavanga appears to them. As for having "theoretical constructs", I think all the teachings about dhamma is theoretical, until what is taught appears to panna. Nibbana is as theoretical to me as the object that bhawanga citta discerns. kom > -----Original Message----- > From: upasaka@a... [mailto:upasaka@a...] > Sent: Friday, December 28, 2001 7:07 PM > To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com > Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Parinibbana Subcommentary > (Part Two) To Robert > Epstein > > Theoretical constructs such as cittas, > and, particularly such things > as bhavanga cittas with unobservable objects are > another matter. What sort of > discernment has no discernable object? Even the > discernment of an absence > discerns that absence! But, whether or not there > are such things as bhavanga > cittas with unobservable objects has no bearing > whatsoever on the goal of the > Dhamma, namely the cessation of suffering. The > Dhamma, as I see it, is > neither about belief (though some tentative > belief can be useful) nor about > deduction and theorizing (though some of that may > be useful), but is all > about moral action, guarding the senses, and > cultivating the mind. > > With metta, > Howard 10439 From: Anders Honore Date: Sat Dec 29, 2001 1:27am Subject: Re: RE: [dsg] Re: Parinibbana Subcommentary (Part Two) To Robert Epstein 29-12-01 08:48:23, Kom Tukovinit skrev: >Dear Howard, > >I believe the most important thing about learning about the >bhavanga is that it too can be discerned as an object of >Satipatthana. Without the discernment with panna, it is >likely that someone with the accumulation of taking the >kandha as self will take bhavanga as also self when bhavanga >appears to them. > >As for having "theoretical constructs", I think all the >teachings about dhamma is theoretical, until what is taught >appears to panna. Nibbana is as theoretical to me as the >object that bhawanga citta discerns. Kom, the very point that is being made is that precisely because they are theoretical, there is no point in dwelling on it, since Buddhism (at least as I perceive it) is a practise and not a philosophical discipline. 10440 From: Anders Honore Date: Sat Dec 29, 2001 1:24am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Parinibbana Subcommentary (Part Two) To Robert Epstein 29-12-01 03:02:54, upasaka@a... skrev: >Hi, Mike - > > I'm *completely* in agreement with you on the following. I've never >read any suttas from which I haven't gained. I have found NONE of them to be >empty or meaningless. Just the opposite!! In fact, I just started re-reading >a modern commentary on the Kalakarama Sutta, one of my very favorites. I have >never experienced empty theorizing in the suttas, and while I consider study >of the suttas as secondary to the direct practice of sila, samadhi, and >vipassana bhavana, sutta study is very important to me and is something I >continually engage in. I quite agree. To me, they are secondary to the actual practise as well, but can serve as useful pointers and guidelines to the practise. 10441 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Sat Dec 29, 2001 6:21am Subject: RE: [dsg] Re: Parinibbana Subcommentary (Part Two) To Robert Epstein Dear Howards, > -----Original Message----- > From: upasaka@a... [mailto:upasaka@a...] > of my very favorites. I have > never experienced empty theorizing in the suttas, > and while I consider study > of the suttas as secondary to the direct practice > of sila, samadhi, and > vipassana bhavana, sutta study is very important > to me and is something I > continually engage in. > I am glad you found this to be true. After reading your previous post on this thread, I was compelled to post some details of the Kandaraka sutta that someone mentioned recently, to counter the point that direct practice can be done without listening to the dhamma (or listening to more even after the person has begun the direct practice) or consideration of what was heard. Given that you have no such perception anyway, I still post this, to extoll the virtues of the commentators who expand on the meaning of the points otherwise cannot be known. The full sutta is at: http://www.metta.lk/tipitaka/2Sutta-Pitaka/2Majjhima-Nikaya/ Majjhima2/051-kandaka-e1.htm The point that I wanted to raise was in the passage: Soon after the elephant rider’s son had left. The Blessed One addressed the bhikkhus: Bhikkhus, if the elephant rider’ s son had waited some more time until I explained these four persons, he would have amassed, much knowledge. O! Blessed One, this is the time to explain these four persons. The bhikkhus, hearing it from the Blessed One would bear it in mind. Bhikkhus, listen carefully, I will tell.. However, I found the passage from B. Bodhi's more complete, as it matches more to the Thai tipitaka: Soon after he had left, the Blessed One addressed the bhikkhus thus: "Bihkkhus, Pessa, the elephant driver's son, is wise, he has great wisdom. If he had sat a while longer until I had expounded for him in detail these four kinds of persons, he would have greatly benefited. Still he has already greatly benefited even as it is". The commentators explained that Pessa is wise because he develops Satipatthana. Also, from B. Bodhi's note explaining the two benefits mentioned: MA: (Commentators): Pessa would have attained the fruit of stream-entry, but he rose from his seat and left before the Buddha had completed his discourse. The benefits he did receive are two: he gained greater confidence in the Sangha, and he gave rise to a new method for comprehending the foundations of mindfulness. It appears to me in this specific case that by not having the opportunity to listen to the Buddha's explanation, even when Pessa is already developing Satipathana, he missed the chance of an attainment. kom 10442 From: Date: Sat Dec 29, 2001 2:48am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Parinibbana Subcommentary (Part Two) To Robert Epstein Hi, Kom - In a message dated 12/29/01 2:49:02 AM Eastern Standard Time, tikmok@y... writes: > Dear Howard, > > I believe the most important thing about learning about the > bhavanga is that it too can be discerned as an object of > Satipatthana. Without the discernment with panna, it is > likely that someone with the accumulation of taking the > kandha as self will take bhavanga as also self when bhavanga > appears to them. > > As for having "theoretical constructs", I think all the > teachings about dhamma is theoretical, until what is taught > appears to panna. Nibbana is as theoretical to me as the > object that bhawanga citta discerns. > > kom > =========================== So, are you saying that you have discerned bhavanga cittas? (I don't recall the Buddha discussing observing bhavanga cittas in the Satipatthana Sutta.) How did they seem? Was there, indeed, no evident object? Was there anything about them you noticed that made you inclined to think they were a "self" more than, for example, an experience of craving? While I have been aware of craving, I've never been aware of bhavanga cittas. For me personally, they are only hypothesized referents of concepts concocted to solve some discontinuity problems in a theory. Direct observation of them would certainly change my perspective on their existence, though not on their importance. 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) 10443 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Dec 29, 2001 10:04am Subject: Re: [dsg] chatting about India op 27-12-2001 17:02 schreef Kom Tukovinit op tikmok@y...: > You have got I think almost all of the big impressions I > have from the trip. :-) The other (big) one that still > stays in my mind (as I am still trying to make sense out of > it) is what most of the teachings in the tipitaka ultimately > describe. > > K. Jaran and A. Supi was discussing about Kilesa, and why > only 10 akusala cetasikas are kilesas, and the other 4 are > not. The answer, I think you also wrote in Cetasikas, is > each Kilesa defiles the mind, where as the other four defile > the mental factors. At that point, I was asking him > questions about the other groupings of defilements including > Asava, etc. Dear Kom, thank you for bringing up these points. As to the 10 kilesas, I leant that they defile the dhammas that are conascent with them. Thus, in the case of sloth that is listed but not torpor: when there is sloth, torpor is always conascent with it, it is defiled by it. Regret (not listed as kilesa) is defiled by dosa conascent with it and also by the other kilesas which (not all of them) are conascent with it. > > Kom: A. Supi said at this point that to understand some of the > teachings, one has to keep in mind that the teaching > ultimately describes realities. The descriptions point to > the characteristics of realities: they are there so that we > can understand the realities as such. He then used the > example of the 8-fold path, and we discussed why it is that > in the sutta, the 8-fold path sounds conventional and very > much like concepts, but why it is that it really describes > realities. > > For example, regarding Samma ditthi, we hear that right > views include: > a) Kamma is real. > b) The benefaction of father and mother is real > c) There exists ones who know, as it truly is, the existence > of life before this, this life, and next life. > > This may sound very much to some of us like concepts: this > is due to fact that there is no penetration of dhammas as > they truly are. However, if panna, cognizing the realities, > starts to develop, we would understand more, and in more > intricate details, about what the statements really mean. > For example, if one understands the difference between > paramatha dhammas and concepts, then one starts to > understand why Kamma and Kusala dhammas (benefaction of > father and mother) are real, but father and mother are not > real. Then, if one penetrates how kusala and akusala are > different from one another, then one understands even more > about a) and b). The more one penetrates the dhamma, the > deeper and detailed one's understading of Samma-ditthi is, > as the characteristics of realities as they truly are. N: Think of kammassakata ~naa.na, which arises with each vipassana ~naa.na, as A. Sujin explained. When you understand seeing as only an element, not self, you will also have a deeper understanding of vipaka caused by kamma. Not in conventional terms, but by real, deep understanding. > K: In using this explanation, A. Supi didn't explicitly link > the explanation to my question of why there are only 3 > dhammas in the asava, but I think the above explanation > implies an answer to my question. We read that Asava: > 1) flows from the lowest realm of existence to the highest > ones > 2) is fermented. (The thai explanation also says it is > accumulated and fermented) > 3) is like poisonous drug or intoxicants. > > Nina, do you by any chance have any other explanations of > why other akusala dhammas are not asava? For example, since > Uddhacca, Ahiri, and Anottappa must co-arise with all the 4 > asavas, but they are not are asavas. Why? Are there any > other reasons besides the one implied above? N: The classification by way of asavas shows the danger of these four that arise time and again, under a particular aspect. It shows that they are as dangerous as poison or drogen that can cause great harm, but we do not notice it, also at this moment. After a moment of seeing or hearing cankers arise but we do not know it, we are so intoxicated, the poison is working. Ignorance is so persistent even now, and only the arahat has eradicated this asava. N's original post:> >> I find this very good, reminding us about >> conditions. What else can we do >> now but listening, studying, considering, >> verifying in daily life now what >> we learnt. I also found it helpful that A. Sujin >> said: understanding leads >> to detachment from the beginning to the end, >> stressing detachment so often. > >> I was reminded that even reading the scriptures >> and wishing to gain >> understanding is often done with an idea of self. > > K: Now the question I asked you above is asked in such a > context! Thanks for the immediate reminder. > N: Thank you too for the reminders by way of questions and remarks. 10444 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Sat Dec 29, 2001 0:34pm Subject: RE: [dsg] Re: Parinibbana Subcommentary (Part Two) To Robert Epstein Dear Howards, > -----Original Message----- > From: upasaka@a... [mailto:upasaka@a...] > So, are you saying that you have discerned > bhavanga cittas? (I don't > recall the Buddha discussing observing bhavanga > cittas in the Satipatthana > Sutta.) All discernments which are functions of cittas are covered under citta-nupassana satipatthana. Bawhanga is a discernable object of satipatthana, but not as commonly discerned as other cittas that rise in the waking hours. You ask why it is that the Buddha didn't mention bawhanga explicitly in the Satipatthana sutta. I obviously can't answer the question. However, do you know that Anapana-sati sutta is considered to describe Satipatthana completely, even without all the details about objects of discernment that are described in the Satipatthana sutta? Do you know that the single short sentence that V. Asashi described to, and brought, V. Sariputta to become a sotapanna is considered to completely describe the 4 noble truths, even without all the explicit details? It is not just the wordings of the suttas that matter, it is also the wisdom of those who expound on, and listen to, the teachings. >How did they seem? Was there, indeed, no > evident object? You fall asleep, right? What's the difference between the consciousness that is awake and conciousness that is in deep sleep? Deep sleep means not dreaming (as dreaming is virtually identical to thinking while awake). You already know some details of bawhanga: there is no apparent object of discernments (even though there is). This is in contrast to the waking conciousness: there is (often more than not, is it always?) an evident object of conciousness. The bawhanga would appear just like all its (true) descriptions, as consciousness that differs from other conciousness pre-eminently for its object of discernment. It is described this way: it is like being in a world with no seeing, no sound, no smell, no taste, no tactile inputs, no thinking (completely dark, completely free of noise, etc.), and suddenly other things appear. >Was there > anything about them you noticed that made you > inclined to think they were a > "self" more than, for example, an experience of craving? > While I have been aware of craving, I've > never been aware of bhavanga > cittas. Obviously not, we will take things that appear commonly to be self more often (and more avijja is accumulated) than ones that don't appear as often. However, dhamma is truly subtle. Do you know of the different shades of subtleties of the "self-craving" that you have to all the 6 sense bases? If panna becomes keen, then more subtleties are known. The thing is, without the understanding about the different subtleties, and the different possible objects of discernments, then panna cannot develop to see the subtleties (and other possible objects of discernments) as just dhammas and not-self. Do you remember Gayan's translation of the "cheating" dhammas? Before you listen to that, how many do you know personally? How many do you know now? Without listening to and considering those pointers, do you think you can figure all those out by yourself? (These questions are obviously rhetorical, and require no answer). > For me personally, they are only > hypothesized referents of concepts As I mentioned (I think Num said the same thing), everything we learn in the tipitaka (also, for some: commentaries, their teacher's words, their own logics and intuition, their own pre-disposition toward certain concepts), everything remains theoretical until proven by panna. > concocted to solve some discontinuity problems in > a theory. How about dependent origination? Is it a theory and lots of thinking, or do they represent objects of discernments? Again, I think we would only know until panna discerns it to be identical, or not. > Direct > observation of them would certainly change my > perspective on their existence, > though not on their importance. I am glad that this is true as I believe Buddhism is a religion of wisdom, of direct observation, and of realities. Each develops wisdom (hopefully, and not micha-dithi) his/her own way. This is somewhat longer than I expected. I don't mean to preach or to convince, but I am pointing out that the problem of understanding bawhanga is not its being conceptual, but that it is the listener's confidence of the source of the concept. For some, the concept of bawhanga, even if it remains unexperienced, is as valid as Nibbana. For others, it represents other teachings not of the buddha's. kom 10445 From: Date: Sat Dec 29, 2001 9:25am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Parinibbana Subcommentary (Part Two) To Robert Epstein Hi, Kom - In a message dated 12/29/01 3:35:43 PM Eastern Standard Time, tikmok@y... writes: > Dear Howards, > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: upasaka@a... [mailto:upasaka@a...] > > > So, are you saying that you have discerned > > bhavanga cittas? (I don't > > recall the Buddha discussing observing bhavanga > > cittas in the Satipatthana > > Sutta.) > > All discernments which are functions of cittas are covered > under citta-nupassana satipatthana. Bawhanga is a > discernable object of satipatthana, but not as commonly > discerned as other cittas that rise in the waking hours. > You ask why it is that the Buddha didn't mention bawhanga > explicitly in the Satipatthana sutta. I obviously can't > answer the question. However, do you know that Anapana-sati > sutta is considered to describe Satipatthana completely, > even without all the details about objects of discernment > that are described in the Satipatthana sutta? > ---------------------------------------------------------- Howard: Yes, I'm familiar with both these suttas. They are certainly among the most important. ---------------------------------------------------------- Do you know > that the single short sentence that V. Asashi described to, > and brought, V. Sariputta to become a sotapanna is > considered to completely describe the 4 noble truths, even > without all the explicit details? > -------------------------------------------------------- Howard: I'm not familiar with what you're discussing here. ------------------------------------------------------ It is not just the> > wordings of the suttas that matter, it is also the wisdom of > those who expound on, and listen to, the teachings. > > >How did they seem? Was there, indeed, no > > evident object? > > You fall asleep, right? What's the difference between the > consciousness that is awake and conciousness that is in deep > sleep? Deep sleep means not dreaming (as dreaming is > virtually identical to thinking while awake). > -------------------------------------------------------- Howard: Yes, I'm familiar with falling asleep. In fact, I get to experience it all too often while meditating! ;-)) However, I've not been aware of deep sleep. Have you? I'm aware that it is said that the mind moves from bhavanga citta to bhavanga citta during deep, dreamless sleep. But, as I said, I've not experienced it. ------------------------------------------------------ You already > > know some details of bawhanga: there is no apparent object > of discernments (even though there is). This is in contrast > to the waking conciousness: there is (often more than not, > is it always?) an evident object of conciousness. > ---------------------------------------------------- Howard: So I have heard it said. But I have had no basis in directly knowing this. -------------------------------------------------- The> > bawhanga would appear just like all its (true) descriptions, > as consciousness that differs from other conciousness > pre-eminently for its object of discernment. It is > described this way: it is like being in a world with no > seeing, no sound, no smell, no taste, no tactile inputs, no > thinking (completely dark, completely free of noise, etc.), > and suddenly other things appear. > > >Was there > > anything about them you noticed that made you > > inclined to think they were a > > "self" more than, for example, an experience of craving? > > While I have been aware of craving, I've > > never been aware of bhavanga > > cittas. > > Obviously not, we will take things that appear commonly to > be self more often (and more avijja is accumulated) than > ones that don't appear as often. However, dhamma is truly > subtle. Do you know of the different shades of subtleties > of the "self-craving" that you have to all the 6 sense > bases? If panna becomes keen, then more subtleties are > known. The thing is, without the understanding about the > different subtleties, and the different possible objects of > discernments, then panna cannot develop to see the > subtleties (and other possible objects of discernments) as > just dhammas and not-self. > --------------------------------------------------------- Howard: I appreciate your telling me this, Kom, but I do not believe I need to know about alleged bhavanga cittas to help me along the path, even should they be realities and not just theoretical constructs. It *is* useful for me to be aware of the impermanence, conditionality, unsatisfactoriness, and impersonality of *all* that I experience, and to let all these things come and go without craving, aversion, and grasping. --------------------------------------------------------- > > Do you remember Gayan's translation of the "cheating" > dhammas? Before you listen to that, how many do you know > personally? How many do you know now? Without listening to > and considering those pointers, do you think you can figure > all those out by yourself? (These questions are obviously > rhetorical, and require no answer). > ------------------------------------------------------------- Howard: There's no need for me to have a large repertoire of observed objects, nor for me to know their particular characteristics. The only characteristics I need to observe are the universal ones which comprise the tilakkhana. ------------------------------------------------------------ > > > For me personally, they are only > > hypothesized referents of concepts > > As I mentioned (I think Num said the same thing), everything > we learn in the tipitaka (also, for some: commentaries, > their teacher's words, their own logics and intuition, their > own pre-disposition toward certain concepts), everything > remains theoretical until proven by panna. > > > concocted to solve some discontinuity problems in > > a theory. > > How about dependent origination? Is it a theory and lots of > thinking, or do they represent objects of discernments? > --------------------------------------------------------------- Howard: Dependent origination is directly discernable, with varying degrees of depth and understanding. In any case, I rarely if *ever* question things directly put forward by the Buddha, especially in the suttas. To the best of my knowledge, bhavanga cittas first appeared in commentaries, rather than the tipitaka. My order of reliability is (1) suttas, (2) abhidhamma, and (3) commentaries. (BTW, there is very good evidence that the Abhidhamma did not originate with the Buddha, but was a later codification of Buddhist ideas.) ------------------------------------------------------------------ > Again, I think we would only know until panna discerns it to > be identical, or not. > > > Direct > > observation of them would certainly change my > > perspective on their existence, > > though not on their importance. > > I am glad that this is true as I believe Buddhism is a > religion of wisdom, of direct observation, and of realities. > Each develops wisdom (hopefully, and not micha-dithi) > his/her own way. > > This is somewhat longer than I expected. I don't mean to > preach or to convince, but I am pointing out that the > problem of understanding bawhanga is not its being > conceptual, but that it is the listener's confidence of the > source of the concept. For some, the concept of bawhanga, > even if it remains unexperienced, is as valid as Nibbana. > ------------------------------------------------------------- Howard: I find the comparison of these two to be "way out". Nibbana is at the very core of the Buddha's teaching! To say the least, bhavanga cittas are not. ------------------------------------------------------------ > For others, it represents other teachings not of the > buddha's. > > kom > ============================== 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) 10446 From: m. nease Date: Sat Dec 29, 2001 3:18pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Parinibbana Subcommentary (Part Two) To Robert Epstein Hi Howard, --- upasaka@a... wrote: > I'm *completely* in agreement with you on the > following. I'm glad and relieved we're in agreement on this--this is mostly attachment of course... > I've never > read any suttas from which I haven't gained. I have > found NONE of them to be > empty or meaningless. Just the opposite!! In fact, I > just started re-reading > a modern commentary on the Kalakarama Sutta, one of > my very favorites. I have > never experienced empty theorizing in the suttas, > and while I consider study > of the suttas as secondary to the direct practice of > sila, samadhi, and > vipassana bhavana, sutta study is very important to > me and is something I > continually engage in. I find sila and samaadhi (including vipassanaa bhavana) just as important, I think. However for me study comes first, even before sila (though of course each supports all and all support each). The reason I put pariyatti first is that, without conceptual understanding of the teaching of the Buddha, I don't think I would ever discover the Buddha's meaning of sila and samadhi. Personally I find it all too easy to take off in any direction based on my own ideas of sila and samaadhi. Very useful I think to compare my ideas to those expressed in the tipitaka and, of course, to compare my interpretations of the latter to my own experience. mike 10447 From: m. nease Date: Sat Dec 29, 2001 3:28pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Parinibbana Subcommentary (Part Two) To Robert Epstein Hi, Howard, --- upasaka@a... wrote: > > He never excluded or suggesting excluding the > sense bases from consideration > > because they can't > > sense 'themselves', e.g.--this notion will not be > > found in the Tipitaka. > > > ============================= > For sure he didn't! And what Buddhist would > dismiss sense bases from > consideration? Sorry that my post gave the impression that I thought you might--it was an oblique reference to another post. I know you're well aware of this. > I, myself, said, if you will recall, > that I'm *aware* of being > conscious, of seeing, tasting, hearing, and so on > and so forth. All objects > are objects of the six senses, and it is there that > we must "look" to see > emptiness, impermanence, insubstantiality, and > impersonality. I do appreciate that you appreciate this, Howard, and didn't mean to suggest otherwise--please excuse my clumsiness. mike 10448 From: Date: Sat Dec 29, 2001 10:35am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Parinibbana Subcommentary (Part Two) To Robert Epstein Hi, Mike - In a message dated 12/29/01 6:28:59 PM Eastern Standard Time, mlnease@y... writes: > > Hi, Howard, > > --- upasaka@a... wrote: > > > > He never excluded or suggesting excluding the > > sense bases from consideration > > > because they can't > > > sense 'themselves', e.g.--this notion will not be > > > found in the Tipitaka. > > > > > ============================= > > For sure he didn't! And what Buddhist would > > dismiss sense bases from > > consideration? > > Sorry that my post gave the impression that I thought > you might--it was an oblique reference to another > post. I know you're well aware of this. > ----------------------------------------------------------- Howard: No problem at all, Mike. With internet communication being what it is, I thought it possible that you were misreading me. ---------------------------------------------------------- > > > I, myself, said, if you will recall, > > that I'm *aware* of being > > conscious, of seeing, tasting, hearing, and so on > > and so forth. All objects > > are objects of the six senses, and it is there that > > we must "look" to see > > emptiness, impermanence, insubstantiality, and > > impersonality. > > I do appreciate that you appreciate this, Howard, and > didn't mean to suggest otherwise--please excuse my > clumsiness. > ----------------------------------------------------- Howard: Not at all, Mike. You are certainly careful in your writing and are always the gentleman! ---------------------------------------------------- > > mike > ========================== With much 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) 10449 From: lpjoe Date: Sun Dec 30, 2001 1:51am Subject: [dsg] Re: The noble nine fold path - Erik Dear Sarah I'm back home in Chiang Mai after a month in Mexico, and some time spent in Nepal and Laos, mostly promoting Buddhist Stupas in Asia: The Shape of Perfection, at your favorite bookstore now ... > How do you understand this phrase, Joe? Does it suggest any idea of self and > control and `should do' to you? Is this how you understand the Satipathana > Sutta? I'm not trying to be tricky, I am sincerely interested to hear more > about your considered understanding. I take it in Ven. Buddhadasa's Thai sense of phaasaa tham rather than phaasaa khon, that is the dhamma interpretation of 'we' rather than the conventional 'people' one. Just as when 'you' use 'I' or 'you' or 'we' in this discussion group. But I'm no authority, and ultimately the way I interpret it, or you interpret it, is going to be conditioned by what we've read elsewhere, what our teacher(s) have taught us, etc. Joe --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Sarah wrote: > Dear Joe, > > Great to hear you're still reading in after a long silence. Are you in Thailand > or in one of your other exotic locations right now? I hope the writing and > publishing is going well. > > --- lpjoe wrote: > Sarah & Erik > > > > I've been following your volley with interest, while reading some short > > works by Upasika Kee Nanayon (1902-1978), one of the most respected > > women dhamma teachers in Thailand. I was wondering if the following > > excerpts from Upasika's LOOKING INWARD: Observations on the Art of > > Meditation, bear on the discussion at all. > > Thanks for showing us this article. It starts with `we have to catch sight > of....' > > How do you understand this phrase, Joe? Does it suggest any idea of self and > control and `should do' to you? Is this how you understand the Satipathana > Sutta? I'm not trying to be tricky, I am sincerely interested to hear more > about your considered understanding. > > Btw, you have another chance to catch us and Erik `all in one' in Bkk over new > Year if you're around. Let me know off-list if so. > > Sarah > > > > THE PURE PRESENT > > > > We have to catch sight of the sensation of knowing when the mind > > gains knowledge of anything and yet isn't aware of itself, to see how > > it latches onto things -- physical form, feeling, perceptions, > > thought-formations, and consciousness. We have to probe on in and > > look > > on our own. We can't use the teachings we've memorized to catch > > sight > > of these things. That won't get us anywhere at all. We may remember, > > "The body is inconstant," but even though we can say it, we can't see > > it. > > > 10450 From: abhidhammika Date: Sun Dec 30, 2001 5:06am Subject: The White Radiant Mind Dear Dhamma Friends As some of you might remember, I posted Parinibbana Subcommentary (Part Two) awhile ago. In response, Robert Epstein and Upasaka Howard posted reply messages that seem to support a kind of consciousness surviving in parinibbaana after the death of an Arahant. Both of them also cited an Anguttra statement of the Buddha containing the description of the mind as being luminous in support of their survivalist view. This citation has forced me to study Ekakanipaata of Anguttra Nikaaya, its commentary and subcommentary. I also began to translate relavant passages from the Suttam and its commentary. And then, as a manner of one thing leading to another, Robert Epstein, Nina and Kom have requested me to translate the subcommentary on the suttam statement as well. As a result, I now have translated the Buddha's suttam statement, the commentary and subcommentary on that statement. The following suttam statement and its commentary come from Section 49, Ekakanipaata Pali, Anguttaranikaaya and Anguttaranikaaya atthakathaa. In terms of grouping, the section 49 is the ninth statement in "Panihita-accha Vaggo" which contains ten statements. Panihitaaccha Vaggo menas "Establishment and Placidity Group." All statements except the statement eight describe specific mental events. The statement eight at Section 48, which describes the extreme speed of the mind, refers to every mental event. I mention the above facts in order to show that the same term `cittam' that appears in the statements of the Buddha does not necessarily refer to the same mental event. The statements nine and ten are unique among other statements in the group in that the two different types of mental events are described in contrast to one another within the same statement. Even though careful readers of the Pali suttam statements who ar familiar with the technical mind terms can spot those differences in the Buddha's use of the term `cittam', it is the responsibility of the commentators to spell out the specific mental events the Buddha referred to in his statements. I have copied and pasted the Pali passages of the Suttam and Atthakathaa from Chatthasangayana CD-ROM version 3. I made sure that the English translation closely follows the syntax of the original Pali while making sure that the general readers can read them in as natural English as possible. Students of Pali who read these translations can perform "Syntax Walkthrough" to improve their commentarial Pali. In addition, I also provided some notes on selected, often difficult, expressions for further convenience. I will post the Subcommentary translation on the Statement 49 separately very soon when I finish writing some notes on it. SUTTAM STATEMENT AND TRANSLATION 49. "Pabhassaramidam, Bhikkhave, cittam. Tañca kho aagantukehi upakkilesehi upakkilitthanti." "Monks, this mind is radiant. And, that very mind is tarnished by guest blots." COMMENTARY PALI 49. Navame pabhassaranti pandaram parisuddham. Cittanti bhavangacittam. Kim pana cittassa vanno naama atth²ti? Natthi. Niilaadiinañhi aññataravannam vaa hotu avannam vaa yamkiñci parisuddhataaya "pabhassaran"ti vuccati. Idampi nirupakkilesataaya parisuddhanti pabhassaram. Tañca khoti tam bhavangacittam. Aagantukehiiti asahajaatehi pacchaa javanakkhane uppajjanakehi. Upakkilesehiiti raagaadiihi upakkilitthattaa upakkilittham naamaati vuccati. Katham? Yathaa hi siilavantaa aacaarasampannaa maataapitaro vaa aacariyupajjhaayaa vaa dussiilaanam duraacaaraanam avattasampannaanam puttaanañceva antevaasikasaddhivihaarikaanañca vasena "attano putte vaa antevaasikasaddhivihaarike vaa na tajjenti na sikkhaapenti na ovadanti naanusaasantii"ti avannam akittim labhanti, evamsampadamidam veditabbam. Aacaara-sampannaa maataapitaro viya ca aacariyupajjhaayaa viya ca bhavangacittam datthabbam, puttaadiinam vasena tesam akittilaabho viya javanakkhane rajjanadussanamuyhanasa bhaavaanam lobhasahagataadiinam cittaanam vasena uppannehi aagantukehi upakkilesehi pakatiparisuddhampi bhavangacittam upakkilittham naama hotiiti. COMMENTARY TRANSLATION 49. In the ninth statement, the term `radiant' signifies whiteness or purity, and means complete cleanness. The term `mind' refers to the life-cause consciousness. How is there such a thing as the color of the mind? There isn't. Whatever thing, be it with any color such as brown, or be it colorless, is said to be radiant, due to its complete cleanness. This mind, too, is said to be radiant because it is completely clean due to the absence of blots. The phrase `and that very mind' means `that life-cause consciousness.' The phrase `by guest' refers to the asynchronous mental events happening later at the moments of the rapid repeats. The phrase `by blots' means "by the mental events with lust and so on." The Buddha said the scenario of being tarnished due to the mind being tarnished by things such as lust. How so? Like the virtuous and refined parents or teachers and preceptors, - on account of the immoral, unrefined, undutiful sons or insider pupils and live-in pupils, - indeed received condemnation and notoriety as those who do not threaten, train, instruct, and steer one's own sons or insider pupils and live-in pupils, so this example's completeness should be noted. The life-cause consciousness should be seen as the refined parents or as the refined teachers and preceptors. And, like their earning of notoriety by means of sons and so on, the naturally pure life-cause consciousness comes to be tarnished by guest blots happening, at the moments of the rapid repeats, as the mental events co-arising with greed and so on having the instincts of lust, destructiveness, or foolishness. NOTES Aagantukehi - by guests Asahajaatehi uppajjanakehi - the asynchronous mental events Asahajaatehi – not happening together Uppajjanaka – Literally, those that happen Javanakkhane – the moments of the rapid repeats. Javana literally means rapidity. In the context of a cognitive series called viitthi, rapidity refers to the seven rapid repeats of the similar mental events. From the angle of the life-cause consciousness, the Buddha described the rapid repetitions as guests. It is simply a scenario of bhavanga cittas versus javana cittas. Pakatiparisuddham bhavangacittam - the naturally pure life-cause consciousness. Bhavanga cittam is a shorthand name for the sensuous healthy resultant mind (Kaamaavacara kusala vipaaka cittam). Therefore, the natural purity of bhavanga cittam does not extend beyond the meanings of the terms "kusala" and "vipaaka." Furthermore, it is continually conditioned and challenged by javana cittas. With best wishes Suan Lu Zaw http://www.bodhiology.org 10451 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Sun Dec 30, 2001 6:28am Subject: Re: [dsg] The White Radiant Mind Hi Suan Thanks for the New Year Gift. :) Could I clarify this statement in the notes: "Bhavanga cittam is a shorthand name for the sensuous healthy resultant mind (Kaamaavacara kusala vipaaka cittam)." Does that mean that bhavanga cittam only arise with kusala vipaka citta and not for akusala vipaka citta. If it arise only with akusala vipaka citta, then the sense process which starts with 3 bhavanga citta will not be applicable to akusala vipaka citta process. This will then insubstantiate the 17 cittas process of aksuala ones. Another area with this sutta I like to address is that how do we explain kusala vipaka cittas that disturbed the mind. Does that imply that the disturbances causes by kusala citta on bhavanga citta will not affect the luminous nature of the mind and only considered being defiled by akusala cittas. Then how do we in the first instance explain there are three bhavanga cittas in any sense process of any series of cittas. Kind regards Ken O --- abhidhammika wrote: > > > > Dear Dhamma Friends > > As some of you might remember, I posted Parinibbana Subcommentary > (Part Two) awhile ago. In response, Robert Epstein and Upasaka Howard > posted reply messages that seem to support a kind of consciousness > surviving in parinibbaana after the death of an Arahant. Both of them > also cited an Anguttra statement of the Buddha containing the > description of the mind as being luminous in support of their > survivalist view. This citation has forced me to study Ekakanipaata > of Anguttra Nikaaya, its commentary and subcommentary. I also began > to translate relavant passages from the Suttam and its commentary. > And then, as a manner of one thing leading to another, Robert > Epstein, Nina and Kom have requested me to translate the > subcommentary on the suttam statement as well. As a result, I now > have translated the Buddha's suttam statement, the commentary and > subcommentary on that statement. > > The following suttam statement and its commentary come from Section > 49, Ekakanipaata Pali, Anguttaranikaaya and Anguttaranikaaya > atthakathaa. In terms of grouping, the section 49 is the ninth > statement in "Panihita-accha Vaggo" which contains ten statements. > Panihitaaccha Vaggo menas "Establishment and Placidity Group." All > statements except the statement eight describe specific mental > events. The statement eight at Section 48, which describes the > extreme speed of the mind, refers to every mental event. > > I mention the above facts in order to show that the same > term `cittam' that appears in the statements of the Buddha does not > necessarily refer to the same mental event. The statements nine and > ten are unique among other statements in the group in that the two > different types of mental events are described in contrast to one > another within the same statement. > > Even though careful readers of the Pali suttam statements who ar > familiar with the technical mind terms can spot those differences in > the Buddha's use of the term `cittam', it is the responsibility of > the commentators to spell out the specific mental events the Buddha > referred to in his statements. > > I have copied and pasted the Pali passages of the Suttam and > Atthakathaa from Chatthasangayana CD-ROM version 3. I made sure that > the English translation closely follows the syntax of the original > Pali while making sure that the general readers can read them in as > natural English as possible. Students of Pali who read these > translations can perform "Syntax Walkthrough" to improve their > commentarial Pali. In addition, I also provided some notes on > selected, often difficult, expressions for further convenience. > > I will post the Subcommentary translation on the Statement 49 > separately very soon when I finish writing some notes on it. > > > > SUTTAM STATEMENT AND TRANSLATION > > 49. "Pabhassaramidam, Bhikkhave, cittam. Tañca kho aagantukehi > upakkilesehi upakkilitthanti." > > "Monks, this mind is radiant. And, that very mind is tarnished by > guest blots." > > > COMMENTARY PALI > > 49. Navame pabhassaranti pandaram parisuddham. > Cittanti bhavangacittam. Kim pana cittassa vanno naama > atth²ti? Natthi. Niilaadiinañhi aññataravannam vaa > hotu > avannam vaa yamkiñci parisuddhataaya "pabhassaran"ti > vuccati. Idampi nirupakkilesataaya parisuddhanti > pabhassaram. Tañca khoti tam bhavangacittam. > > Aagantukehiiti asahajaatehi pacchaa javanakkhane > uppajjanakehi. Upakkilesehiiti raagaadiihi upakkilitthattaa > upakkilittham naamaati vuccati. > > Katham? Yathaa hi siilavantaa aacaarasampannaa maataapitaro vaa > aacariyupajjhaayaa vaa dussiilaanam duraacaaraanam > avattasampannaanam puttaanañceva antevaasikasaddhivihaarikaanañca > vasena "attano putte vaa antevaasikasaddhivihaarike vaa na > tajjenti na sikkhaapenti na ovadanti naanusaasantii"ti avannam > akittim labhanti, evamsampadamidam veditabbam. > > Aacaara-sampannaa maataapitaro viya ca aacariyupajjhaayaa > viya ca bhavangacittam datthabbam, puttaadiinam vasena tesam > akittilaabho viya javanakkhane rajjanadussanamuyhanasa > bhaavaanam lobhasahagataadiinam cittaanam vasena uppannehi > aagantukehi upakkilesehi pakatiparisuddhampi bhavangacittam > upakkilittham naama hotiiti. > > > > COMMENTARY TRANSLATION > > 49. In the ninth statement, the term `radiant' signifies whiteness or > purity, and means complete cleanness. The term `mind' refers to the > life-cause consciousness. How is there such a thing as the color of > the mind? There isn't. Whatever thing, be it with any color such as > brown, or be it colorless, is said to be radiant, due to its complete > cleanness. This mind, too, is said to be radiant because it is > completely clean due to the absence of blots. The phrase `and that > very mind' means `that life-cause consciousness.' > > The phrase `by guest' refers to the asynchronous mental events > happening later at the moments of the rapid repeats. The phrase `by > blots' means "by the mental events with lust and so on." The Buddha > said the scenario of being tarnished due to the mind being tarnished > by things such as lust. > > How so? Like the virtuous and refined parents or teachers and > preceptors, - on account of the immoral, unrefined, undutiful sons or > insider pupils and live-in pupils, - indeed received condemnation and > notoriety as those who do not threaten, train, instruct, and steer > one's own sons or insider pupils and live-in pupils, so this > example's completeness should be noted. > > The life-cause consciousness should be seen as the refined parents or > as the refined teachers and preceptors. And, like their earning of > notoriety by means of sons and so on, the naturally pure life-cause > consciousness comes to be tarnished by guest blots happening, at the > moments of the rapid repeats, as the mental events co-arising with > greed and so on having the instincts of lust, destructiveness, or > foolishness. > > > NOTES > > Aagantukehi - by guests > > Asahajaatehi uppajjanakehi - the asynchronous mental events > > Asahajaatehi – not happening together > > Uppajjanaka – Literally, those that happen > > Javanakkhane – the moments of the rapid repeats. Javana literally > means rapidity. In the context of a cognitive series called viitthi, > rapidity refers to the seven rapid repeats of the similar mental > events. > > From the angle of the life-cause consciousness, the Buddha described > the rapid repetitions as guests. It is simply a scenario of bhavanga > cittas versus javana cittas. > > Pakatiparisuddham bhavangacittam - the naturally pure life-cause > consciousness. Bhavanga cittam is a shorthand name for the sensuous > healthy resultant mind (Kaamaavacara kusala vipaaka cittam). > Therefore, the natural purity of bhavanga cittam does not extend > beyond the meanings of the terms "kusala" and "vipaaka." Furthermore, > it is continually conditioned and challenged by javana cittas. > > > With best wishes > > Suan Lu Zaw > > http://www.bodhiology.org 10452 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Dec 30, 2001 6:43am Subject: Re: [dsg] abhidhamma Dear Num, I read what you said about applying your knowledge of the abhidhamma (saññaa) in your profession, and I always find it interesting when you speak about your experiences as a doctor. The Abhidhamma helps you to understand your patients better, for example the study of conditions, upanissaya paccaya. What would your life be without the Abhidhamma? You can guess now what I am about to say. You said Abhidhamma is like a dry bone. Lodewijk said, tell him it is like the flesh and sinews of our life. I agree that a Book like the Kathavatthu, Points of Controversy. is difficult reading. We do not have to study all details, it depends on the individual what he studies. In the Kathavatthu a question is asked in one way and then it is affirmed, and after that the same question is asked in another way and then it is refuted. It teaches us more precision. I find the "Guide through the Abhidhamma Pitaka" by Nyanatiloka, B.P.S. Kandy, very helpful to gradually get used to reading difficult passages, especially the Kathavatthu. For instance, Ch II, may someone by just repeating the word dukkha attain enlightenment. But this really happens, people are repeating words without understanding. Ch I: Is there in the absolute sense any personality to be found? These are questions people today also ask. Take the second Book of the Abhidhamma, the Vibhanga, Book of Analysis. The P.T.S. has edited this with a most helpful Intro by Iggleden. Here we see that also in the Abhidhamma there is Suttanta Method and Abhidhamma method. We should not separate these methods so much. In this book there are very vivid reminders of good and bad qualities occurring in daily life. Take conceit, that I quoted in my Cetasikas: ...pride of health, pride of youth, pride of life, pride of gain, pride of being honoured, pride of being respected, pride of prominence, pride of having adherence, pride of wealth, pride of appearance, pride of erudition, pride of intelligence, pride of being a knowledgeable authority.... This is not a list just to be remembered, or to debate about. It is a reminder to be aware when such forms of conceit occur, and they occur all the time, very treacherous. Only through satipatthana can we fully appreciate the great value of the Abhidhamma. As I said, not everybody has to study all details, but understanding of the basic notions helps us to have more precision with regard to realities. It is important to know that there are four paramattha dhammas, that our life consists of citta, cetasika and rupa. If there is no basic knowledge one is hopelessly confused about the different realities that occur, one is confused about what is a concept and what a reality. But I am sure that you know all this. Best wishes, Nina. 10453 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Dec 30, 2001 6:43am Subject: grandma Dear Purnomo,, I sympatheze with you because of your loss and sadness. There were very kind messages for you written with kusala cittas. I want to repost Num's message because it is so helpful and comforting: > I do not know where your grandma has gone. As it said, good seed will bring > good fruit; I wish her good seeds took her into a good place. > > As couple people here have already said, if you can, try to turn this > opportunity into learning experience. Our loss is our gain. Dhamma (both good > and bad, pleasant and painful, tranquil and agitated) here and now, is our > best teacher. > This is my magic, OK: Grief when shared is half. Happiness when shared is > double. > May the force always be with you. Nina: >Num gave us such good points: the learning experience, our loss is our gain. This can help all of us when we have a loss, and this is bound to happen for us too, anyway. You feel sad and although you know this is akusala, dosa, you can't help feeling sad. We all have that experience. But it shows how anatta it is. It is conditioned by former dosa that has been accumulated for a long time and thus there are conditions for it. Only the anagami who has attained the third stage of enlightenment has no sadness anymore, he has eradicated dosa. In India we extended merit to deceased people after our Dhamma talks. If they are in planes where they can know about our kusala they can rejoice in it and have kusala citta as well. This is a way of dana, dana is not only the giving of things to others. Now that I am alone in Holland I neglect this way of dana, but I shall try to remember this. Kom is a good example, he mentioned this. This is the way to give help to the person who was once your grandmother. If we worry about what happened to her, in what plane she is, it is only thinking, thinking with akusala. This does not help her. Dhamma here and now is our best teacher, what would your life be without the Dhamma. You understand now the difference between reality and concept. Your grandma is in reality five khandhas, nama and rupa, arising and falling away. She is no longer your grandma, but there is a new life, there are still the five khandhas arising and falling away. Her kindness and good qualities that arose in this life have been accumulated and form conditions for the arising again of kusala in the future. A friend of mine is worried about his next rebirth, of all the akusala kamma that could produce it. This is again thinking about what is not real. The person who has eradicated the belief in a self is no longer worried about what would happen to a "self" after death. But if we think about it that even akusala kamma many lives ago can produce rebirth it helps us to see the disadvantage of being in the cycle of birth and death. It reminds us to develop right understanding. Robert K. wrote a post about mindfulness of death. It is a subject of samatha we can practise any time in daily life. He spoke about it that life is so fragile, because in fact there is death at each moment when one citta arises and passes away, to be followed by the next one that arises and passes away. This is called momentary death. At the end of life the same happens: the dying-consciousness falls away and is immediately succeeded by the rebirth-consciousness. Robert wrote: "It is a good time now: we are human and have contact with the teaching of a Sammasambuddha. Much can be done indeed." Your study of the Dhamma is kusala and you can extend merit to your grandma. Death can remind us not to waste time. Best wishes, Nina. 10454 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Sun Dec 30, 2001 7:34am Subject: RE: [dsg] chatting about India Dear Nina, > -----Original Message----- > > > > K. Jaran and A. Supi was discussing about > Kilesa, and why > > only 10 akusala cetasikas are kilesas, and the > other 4 are > > not. The answer, I think you also wrote in > Cetasikas, is > > each Kilesa defiles the mind, where as the > other four defile > > the mental factors. At that point, I was asking him > > questions about the other groupings of > defilements including > > Asava, etc. > > Dear Kom, thank you for bringing up these points. > As to the 10 kilesas, I > leant that they defile the dhammas that are > conascent with them. Thus, in > the case of sloth that is listed but not torpor: > when there is sloth, torpor > is always conascent with it, it is defiled by it. > Regret (not listed as > kilesa) is defiled by dosa conascent with it and > also by the other kilesas > which (not all of them) are conascent with it. Thanks for explaining these points further. I would like to confirm what I understand you to say. 1) Torpor is defiled by sloth and other conascent kilesas? 2) Regret is defiled by kilesa and other conasccent kilesas? Thanks for discussing these points. kom 10455 From: m. nease Date: Sun Dec 30, 2001 3:12pm Subject: Sa~n~naa Just a follow-up from our brief (off-list) discussion on sa~n~naa yesterday. By the way, my internet access has been somewhat curtailed for the forseeable future. I'll receive a daily digest and respond when I'm able. 3. Remembrance or perception, sa~n~naa cetasika, "marks" the object so that it can be recognized. Sa~n~naa cetasika remembers each object which appears; it remembers the different objects appearing one after the other as a "whole", as a story, a concept of beings and people. Sa~n~naa remembers pleasant feeling, unpleasant feeling, bodily pleasant and painful feeling and indifferent feeling with regard to each object which appears. Sa~n~naa cetasika is an important condition inciting to attachment and clinging in life. from Survey of Paramattha Dhammas Sujin Boriharnwanaket Translated by Nina van Gorkom mike 10456 From: m. nease Date: Sun Dec 30, 2001 3:41pm Subject: Re: [dsg] The White Radiant Mind Dear Suan, Thanks for taking the time for this excellent work. Your conclusions concur with those arrived at yesterday in Bangkok after consulting the Thai translations of the sutta and commentaries (as I understood them). Even though topic itself, the purity of citta of bhavanga (and kusala and vipakka) citta and their defilement by 'guest blots' (I loved this) in the process of akusala javana (if I've understood this correctly) seems to me to be a minor point, it is of major significance if the sutta quoted has been misunderstood to support the Mahayana notion of cosmic consciousness without base or object. There are so few cases in the Tipitaka of suttas that can be misinterpreted in this way that, in my opinion, a detailed clarification is of really great value. Thanks again for your hard work. mike --- abhidhammika wrote: > > > > Dear Dhamma Friends > > As some of you might remember, I posted Parinibbana > Subcommentary > (Part Two) awhile ago. In response, Robert Epstein > and Upasaka Howard > posted reply messages that seem to support a kind of > consciousness > surviving in parinibbaana after the death of an > Arahant. Both of them > also cited an Anguttra statement of the Buddha > containing the > description of the mind as being luminous in support > of their > survivalist view. This citation has forced me to > study Ekakanipaata > of Anguttra Nikaaya, its commentary and > subcommentary. I also began > to translate relavant passages from the Suttam and > its commentary. > And then, as a manner of one thing leading to > another, Robert > Epstein, Nina and Kom have requested me to translate > the > subcommentary on the suttam statement as well. As a > result, I now > have translated the Buddha's suttam statement, the > commentary and > subcommentary on that statement. > > The following suttam statement and its commentary > come from Section > 49, Ekakanipaata Pali, Anguttaranikaaya and > Anguttaranikaaya > atthakathaa. In terms of grouping, the section 49 is > the ninth > statement in "Panihita-accha Vaggo" which contains > ten statements. > Panihitaaccha Vaggo menas "Establishment and > Placidity Group." All > statements except the statement eight describe > specific mental > events. The statement eight at Section 48, which > describes the > extreme speed of the mind, refers to every mental > event. > > I mention the above facts in order to show that the > same > term `cittam' that appears in the statements of the > Buddha does not > necessarily refer to the same mental event. The > statements nine and > ten are unique among other statements in the group > in that the two > different types of mental events are described in > contrast to one > another within the same statement. > > Even though careful readers of the Pali suttam > statements who ar > familiar with the technical mind terms can spot > those differences in > the Buddha's use of the term `cittam', it is the > responsibility of > the commentators to spell out the specific mental > events the Buddha > referred to in his statements. > > I have copied and pasted the Pali passages of the > Suttam and > Atthakathaa from Chatthasangayana CD-ROM version 3. > I made sure that > the English translation closely follows the syntax > of the original > Pali while making sure that the general readers can > read them in as > natural English as possible. Students of Pali who > read these > translations can perform "Syntax Walkthrough" to > improve their > commentarial Pali. In addition, I also provided some > notes on > selected, often difficult, expressions for further > convenience. > > I will post the Subcommentary translation on the > Statement 49 > separately very soon when I finish writing some > notes on it. > > > > SUTTAM STATEMENT AND TRANSLATION > > 49. "Pabhassaramidam, Bhikkhave, cittam. Tañca kho > aagantukehi > upakkilesehi upakkilitthanti." > > "Monks, this mind is radiant. And, that very mind is > tarnished by > guest blots." > > > COMMENTARY PALI > > 49. Navame pabhassaranti pandaram > parisuddham. > Cittanti bhavangacittam. Kim pana cittassa > vanno naama > atth²ti? Natthi. Niilaadiinañhi > aññataravannam vaa > hotu > avannam vaa yamkiñci parisuddhataaya > "pabhassaran"ti > vuccati. Idampi nirupakkilesataaya > parisuddhanti > pabhassaram. Tañca khoti tam bhavangacittam. > > Aagantukehiiti asahajaatehi pacchaa javanakkhane > > uppajjanakehi. Upakkilesehiiti raagaadiihi > upakkilitthattaa > upakkilittham naamaati vuccati. > > Katham? Yathaa hi siilavantaa aacaarasampannaa > maataapitaro vaa > aacariyupajjhaayaa vaa dussiilaanam > duraacaaraanam > avattasampannaanam puttaanañceva > antevaasikasaddhivihaarikaanañca > vasena "attano putte vaa > antevaasikasaddhivihaarike vaa na > tajjenti na sikkhaapenti na ovadanti > naanusaasantii"ti avannam > akittim labhanti, evamsampadamidam veditabbam. > > Aacaara-sampannaa maataapitaro viya ca > aacariyupajjhaayaa > viya ca bhavangacittam datthabbam, puttaadiinam > vasena tesam > akittilaabho viya javanakkhane > rajjanadussanamuyhanasa > bhaavaanam lobhasahagataadiinam cittaanam vasena > uppannehi > aagantukehi upakkilesehi pakatiparisuddhampi > bhavangacittam > upakkilittham naama hotiiti. > > > > COMMENTARY TRANSLATION > > 49. In the ninth statement, the term `radiant' > signifies whiteness or > purity, and means complete cleanness. The term > `mind' refers to the > life-cause consciousness. How is there such a thing > as the color of > the mind? There isn't. Whatever thing, be it with > any color such as > brown, or be it colorless, is said to be radiant, > due to its complete > cleanness. This mind, too, is said to be radiant > because it is > completely clean due to the absence of blots. The > phrase `and that > very mind' means `that life-cause consciousness.' > > The phrase `by guest' refers to the asynchronous > mental events > happening later at the moments of the rapid repeats. > The phrase `by > blots' means "by the mental events with lust and so > on." The Buddha > said the scenario of being tarnished due to the mind > being tarnished > by things such as lust. > > How so? Like the virtuous and refined parents or > teachers and > preceptors, - on account of the immoral, unrefined, > undutiful sons or > insider pupils and live-in pupils, - indeed received > condemnation and > notoriety as those who do not threaten, train, > instruct, and steer > one's own sons or insider pupils and live-in pupils, > so this > example's completeness should be noted. > > The life-cause consciousness should be seen as the > refined parents or > as the refined teachers and preceptors. And, like > their earning of > notoriety by means of sons and so on, the naturally > pure life-cause > consciousness comes to be tarnished by guest blots > happening, at the > moments of the rapid repeats, as the mental events > co-arising with > greed and so on having the instincts of lust, > destructiveness, or > foolishness. > > > NOTES > > Aagantukehi - by guests > > Asahajaatehi uppajjanakehi - the asynchronous mental > events > > Asahajaatehi – not happening together > > Uppajjanaka – Literally, those that happen > > Javanakkhane – the moments of the rapid repeats. > Javana literally > means rapidity. In the context of a cognitive series > called viitthi, > rapidity refers to the seven rapid repeats of the > similar mental > events. > > From the angle of the life-cause consciousness, the > Buddha described > the rapid repetitions as guests. It is simply a > scenario of bhavanga > cittas versus javana cittas. > > Pakatiparisuddham bhavangacittam - the naturally > pure life-cause > consciousness. Bhavanga cittam is a shorthand name > for the sensuous > healthy resultant mind (Kaamaavacara kusala vipaaka > cittam). > Therefore, the natural purity of bhavanga cittam > does not extend > beyond the meanings of the terms "kusala" and > "vipaaka." Furthermore, > it is continually conditioned and challenged by > javana cittas. > > > With best wishes > > Suan Lu Zaw > > http://www.bodhiology.org 10457 From: m. nease Date: Sun Dec 30, 2001 3:54pm Subject: Re: [dsg] The White Radiant Mind Happy New Year, Kenneth, Hope you don't mind my attempting to respond to this. --- Kenneth Ong wrote: > "Bhavanga cittam is a shorthand name for the > sensuous > healthy resultant mind (Kaamaavacara kusala vipaaka > cittam)." > > Does that mean that bhavanga cittam only arise with > kusala vipaka citta > and not for akusala vipaka citta. In human beings, the aarammana of bhavanga is always a pleasant object, as I understand it--the same object as that of the patisandhi citta, the rebirth consciousness--otherwise, no rebirth in manussa bhumi--so, yes, always kusala vipaaka citta. > If it arise only > with akusala vipaka [you meant kusala vipaaka?] > citta, then the sense process which starts with 3 > bhavanga citta will not > be applicable to akusala vipaka citta process. > This > will then > insubstantiate the 17 cittas process of aksuala > ones. The three bhavangas precede the sense-door process but are not a part of it--not vithi cittas. They are the same whether the precede a process of akusala or kusala (usually akusala, of course), as I understand it. > Another area with this sutta I like to address is > that how do we explain > kusala vipaka cittas that disturbed the mind. Does > that imply that the > disturbances causes by kusala citta on bhavanga > citta will not affect the > luminous nature of the mind and only considered > being defiled by akusala > cittas. As I understand it, yes--the kusala citta is still considered luminous, pure (and the vipaaka, as I understand it). > Then how do we in the first instance > explain there are three > bhavanga cittas in any sense process of any series > of cittas. They are not a part of the process--they precede it but are not vithi-citta. Hope I got this right and that it's of some use to you... mike 10458 From: m. nease Date: Sun Dec 30, 2001 3:57pm Subject: Re: [dsg] abhidhamma Thanks for the excellent post, Nina-- > If there is no > basic knowledge one is > hopelessly confused about the different realities > that occur, one is > confused about what is a concept and what a reality. -and thanks for helping me to see this. mike 10459 From: Date: Sun Dec 30, 2001 11:56am Subject: Re: [dsg] The White Radiant Mind <<<<< 49. In the ninth statement, the term `radiant' signifies whiteness or purity, and means complete cleanness. The term `mind' refers to the life-cause consciousness..' >>>>>> Dear Suan: Let me introduce myself. My name is Num. My Pali is at infancy level. I looked up in my Thai Tipitaka CD, which also has a Pali counterpart, both in Thai and Roman Pali. As I mentioned before the CD does not contain any commentaries. From my CD, as you mentioned the beginning of book 20th, suttanpitaka, aguttaranikaya started with danger of visible object, taste, odor and tangible object. Then in the 2nd vagga with pairs of opposite dhamma lust/asupa, anger/metta, sloth/energy, agitation/calmness, doubt/wise attention. In the 3rd vagga mentioned about quality and potentiality of the mind. The word "papasara" appears in 4 statements, 50-51-52and 53. I do not feel this refers to just bhavagacitta, at all. My understanding after I read the sutta, is the mind becomes defiled by upakilesa. So my understanding is all citta that accompanied by kilesa are not "papasara", not clear, not radiant, and not clean. The mind in itself is clear but the accompanied quality or states though can make the mind unclean. My understanding akusala cetasika is the one who makes the mind unclean. My 2 cents opinion after I read the sutta is citta by itself is clear but the quality of citta can be contaminated by kilesa. So all kusala citta are clear, I think vipaka and kiriya citta may also be able to fit in here. I do not feel it refers to only bhavagacitta. Just like to share my opinion. Thanks and appreciate in your hard work. Num 10460 From: yuzhonghao Date: Sun Dec 30, 2001 5:05pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Dukkha (was, Concepts) Hello Jon, The truths taught by the Buddha are to be understood and not to be misunderstood as they are. Regards, Victor --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Jonothan Abbott wrote: > Victor > > --- yuzhonghao wrote: > Hello Jon, > > > > It is good that you understand that: > > Conditioned phenomenon is impermanent. > > Conditioned phenomenon is unsatisfactory/dukkha. > > Conditioned phenomenon is to be seen as it actually is with right > > discernment thus: "This is not mine. This I am not. This is not my > > self." > > Flattery will get you nowhere!! I am much more interested in hearing what > you have to say about how the truths taught by the Buddha are to be > understood. > > Please share your thoughts with us, Victor. No need to be afraid -- we > are a friendly lot here! > > Jon > > > > > While I understand the meaning of what you are saying, there is > > surely > > > more to it than this. Did the Buddha give any clues as to *how this > > > understanding is to be developed*? Otherwise, one is just > > repeating the > > > words of the suttas. 10461 From: yuzhonghao Date: Sun Dec 30, 2001 5:18pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Concept Hello all, I have a question regarding the discussion on concept: How does a concept come to be? Regards, Victor 10462 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sun Dec 30, 2001 8:43pm Subject: Re: [dsg] grandma Purnomo I was very sorry to hear of the loss of your grandmother. What is the best way to help a departed relative? I believe the answer to this, like to most questions, is to develop kusala and in particular the understanding that we learn about from studying the dhamma. Kusala accrues to the benefit of oneself and others. If your grandma is in a realm where she can perceive your deeds, she may be able to benefit directly from appreciating your wholesome deeds. My condolences to you and your family. Jon --- "Purnomo ." wrote: > Dear all, > > october 26, 2001, it's nightmare for me. Tomorrow, I should be happy > because > I have finished my study. Unfortunely, My grandma was died. > > December 24, 2001: My family and I called my 'grandma'. According my > culture, 'soul' my grandma was called. I confused and not believe but > this > is true. I saw that 'grandma' appeared in someone(she who called my > grandma). This someone acted if as that was my grandma. > > Grandma said that she was there so sad. She always cried. I so sad what > she > said. I know, my grandma have been born in niraya realm. I know I have > to > 'pindapatta' to help my grandma. > > Please, give me some messages which can help my grandma so she will be > born > in happier realm. > > nice, > > purnomo > 10463 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sun Dec 30, 2001 8:55pm Subject: Hello from Bangkok Hi all, Just to touch base. Sarah and I have just had a very pleasant 'dsg' brunch at our hotel with Ivan, Sukin (and his charming wife), Jaran, Mike and Christine. Unfortunately, Erik was suffering from pre-New Years hangover and failed to make it, but he assures us he and Aert will be at the discussion this afternoon. We have enjoyed meeting Mike and Christine for the first time, and also the discussions at the Foundation yesterday and on Saturday. We have managed to touch on a number of current topics (luminous mind among them), and hope to be able to post about it when back in Hong Kong (we leave BAngkok tomorrow, Tuesday). New Year wishes to all. Jon PS Nina, i'm still working on the 3 rounds and 4NT 10464 From: robertkirkpatrick.rm Date: Sun Dec 30, 2001 11:23pm Subject: Re: [dsg] abhidhamma --- Thanks for all your helpful posts recently Mike, Here is something from a book I'm now looking at. The Udanaatthakatha (trans. masefield p.878) Blind from birth chapter: "since they do not know Dhamma, they do not know that which is not Dhamma either. For these, on account of pervesenesses, take dhamma though skilled as unskilled, take dhamma though unskilled as skilled. And not only are they confused where dhamma and what is not dhamma are concerened, but also the ripening thereof are concerned..Similarly, they neither know dhamma to be a thing having an owm nature (sabhava), nor do they know that which is not dhamma to be a thing lacking an own nature.(Dhammam sabhavadhammam..adhammam asabhavadhammam) And as such they declare a thing having an own nature as though it were a thing lacking an own nature.... robert In dhammastudygroup@y..., "m. nease" wrote: > Thanks for the excellent post, Nina-- > > > If there is no > > basic knowledge one is > > hopelessly confused about the different realities > > that occur, one is > > confused about what is a concept and what a reality. > > -and thanks for helping me to see this. > > mike > 10465 From: Robert Epstein Date: Sun Dec 30, 2001 11:42pm Subject: Re: [dsg] The White Radiant Mind Dear Suan, Thank you so much for the translation! I am quite excited, especially after taking a first look... I will only make two preliminary comments tonight, and will then study further. Thanks again! comments below: --- abhidhammika wrote: > > Dear Dhamma Friends > > As some of you might remember, I posted Parinibbana Subcommentary > (Part Two) awhile ago. In response, Robert Epstein and Upasaka Howard > posted reply messages that seem to support a kind of consciousness > surviving in parinibbaana after the death of an Arahant. Both of them > also cited an Anguttra statement of the Buddha containing the > description of the mind as being luminous in support of their > survivalist view. Just want to mention, in my own defense, that the idea that there may be some form of awareness in parinibbana is not *necessarily* a survivalist view. If by survivalist, you mean that an entity or identifiable being remains, as would be dependent on one or more of the five kandhas, then this is not what I have in mind. The awareness which I have in mind would be undifferentiated, unformed and unindividuated. While one can argue that even such a primordial, unformative awareness is a violation of one's reading of the definition of parinibbana, I don't think you can as easily accuse it of constituting an *entity* which survives the extinction of the kandhas. In both my view, and I believe Howard's, if there is any awareness that survives extinction of the kandhas, it would in fact *not* be an entity or being of any kind. What it would be has been discussed to some extent, but I will not go into it now. You are right, Suan, however, that to me the implication is that the 'luminous mind' suggests the possibility of this primordial pre-existent awareness which is then defiled by the concept of separate self-hood or entity, as well as other delusions which fetter it and cause suffering. [snip] > SUTTAM STATEMENT AND TRANSLATION > > 49. "Pabhassaramidam, Bhikkhave, cittam. Tañca kho aagantukehi > upakkilesehi upakkilitthanti." > > "Monks, this mind is radiant. And, that very mind is tarnished by > guest blots." This translation is quite revelatory on its face, and should cause everyone who has been interested in this sutta to pause and take a deep breath. According to your translation, Suan, the phrase 'that very mind' implies that the same citta that is radiant is the one that is tarnished by blots or defilements that don't belong there [my interpretation of 'guest' if that is a correct interpretation]. I understand that this is not the interpretation of the commentaries, but just taking the Sutta on its own for a moment, it seems that the 'guest' status of the 'blots' suggests that it is not the natural state of the citta to be thus blotted or defiled. It is hard for me to see how the commentary's interpretation makes use of the fact that the phrase 'that very mind' seems to especially emphasize the fact that Buddha is referring to one and the same mind, not two different ones. It doesn't seem on the face of it that such a statement would refer to the complex relationship of the bhavanga cittas being indirectly defiled by the javana cittas that arise at a different time. The statement appears to be much more simple than this, but I am very much looking forward to your subcommentary. I don't know if you plan to translate the full stanza of the original sutta, but if it were possible it would be great to see the whole verse. In any case, I thank you for this effort, which is already quite provocative. Best, Robert Ep. =========== 10466 From: wynn Date: Mon Dec 31, 2001 5:06am Subject: Contradiction (Views) Hi, The Buddha talk about Right View (samma ditthi). However, in Sutta Nipata verse 787, 800, 882, the Buddha said or (more impersonally) the true sage, has no views. How do you explain this contradiction? Thanks, Wynn 10467 From: abhidhammika Date: Mon Dec 31, 2001 6:51am Subject: Re: [dsg] The White Radiant Mind: To Ken Dear Ken How are you? Happy New Year! This is only a very brief answer. You asked: "Does that mean that bhavanga cittam only arise with kusala vipaka citta and not for akusala vipaka citta." The correct question is "Is bhavanga cittam the same as kaamavacara kusala vipaaka cittam in the present contect?" The answer is as follows. Yes, for human beings and sensuous gods (kaamaavacara devas), bhavanga cittam is always kaamaavacara kusala vipaaka cittam. That is why bhavanga cittam is described as being white or pure. With Best wishes, Suan http://www.bodhiology.org --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Kenneth Ong wrote: > Hi Suan > > Thanks for the New Year Gift. :) > > Could I clarify this statement in the notes: > > "Bhavanga cittam is a shorthand name for the sensuous > healthy resultant mind (Kaamaavacara kusala vipaaka cittam)." > > Does that mean that bhavanga cittam only arise with kusala vipaka citta > and not for akusala vipaka citta. If it arise only with akusala vipaka > citta, then the sense process which starts with 3 bhavanga citta will not > be applicable to akusala vipaka citta process. This will then > insubstantiate the 17 cittas process of aksuala ones. > > Another area with this sutta I like to address is that how do we explain > kusala vipaka cittas that disturbed the mind. Does that imply that the > disturbances causes by kusala citta on bhavanga citta will not affect the > luminous nature of the mind and only considered being defiled by akusala > cittas. Then how do we in the first instance explain there are three > bhavanga cittas in any sense process of any series of cittas. > > > > Kind regards > Ken O > 10468 From: abhidhammika Date: Mon Dec 31, 2001 7:21am Subject: Re: [dsg] The White Radiant Mind: To Mike And Ken Dear Mike (and Ken) How are you? Happy New Year! Thank you for completing my answer to Ken. Hi, Ken, what Mike wrote is corret. He has saved me from providing further details to your questions at this stage. With Best Wishes, Suan --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "m. nease" wrote: > Happy New Year, Kenneth, > > Hope you don't mind my attempting to respond to this. > > --- Kenneth Ong wrote: > > > "Bhavanga cittam is a shorthand name for the > > sensuous > > healthy resultant mind (Kaamaavacara kusala vipaaka > > cittam)." > > > > Does that mean that bhavanga cittam only arise with > > kusala vipaka citta > > and not for akusala vipaka citta. > > In human beings, the aarammana of bhavanga is always a > pleasant object, as I understand it--the same object > as that of the patisandhi citta, the rebirth > consciousness--otherwise, no rebirth in manussa > bhumi--so, yes, always kusala vipaaka citta. > > > If it arise only > > with akusala vipaka [you meant kusala vipaaka?] > > citta, then the sense process which starts with 3 > > bhavanga citta will not > > be applicable to akusala vipaka citta process. > > This > > will then > > insubstantiate the 17 cittas process of aksuala > > ones. > > The three bhavangas precede the sense-door process but > are not a part of it--not vithi cittas. They are the > same whether the precede a process of akusala or > kusala (usually akusala, of course), as I understand > it. > > > Another area with this sutta I like to address is > > that how do we explain > > kusala vipaka cittas that disturbed the mind. Does > > that imply that the > > disturbances causes by kusala citta on bhavanga > > citta will not affect the > > luminous nature of the mind and only considered > > being defiled by akusala > > cittas. > > As I understand it, yes--the kusala citta is still > considered luminous, pure (and the vipaaka, as I > understand it). > > > Then how do we in the first instance > > explain there are three > > bhavanga cittas in any sense process of any series > > of cittas. > > They are not a part of the process--they precede it > but are not vithi-citta. > > Hope I got this right and that it's of some use to > you... > > mike > 10469 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Dec 31, 2001 7:49am Subject: Re: [dsg] Luminous Mind > >> >> >> SUTTAM STATEMENT AND TRANSLATION >> >> 49. "Pabhassaramidam, Bhikkhave, cittam. Tañca kho aagantukehi >> upakkilesehi upakkilitthanti." >> >> "Monks, this mind is radiant. And, that very mind is tarnished by >> guest blots." >> >> >> COMMENTARY PALI >> >> 49. Navame pabhassaranti pandaram parisuddham. >> Cittanti bhavangacittam. Kim pana cittassa vanno naama >> atth²ti? Natthi. Niilaadiinañhi aññataravannam vaa >> hotu >> avannam vaa yamkiñci parisuddhataaya "pabhassaran"ti >> vuccati. Idampi nirupakkilesataaya parisuddhanti >> pabhassaram. Tañca khoti tam bhavangacittam. >> >> Aagantukehiiti asahajaatehi pacchaa javanakkhane >> uppajjanakehi. Upakkilesehiiti raagaadiihi upakkilitthattaa >> upakkilittham naamaati vuccati. >> >> Katham? Yathaa hi siilavantaa aacaarasampannaa maataapitaro vaa >> aacariyupajjhaayaa vaa dussiilaanam duraacaaraanam >> avattasampannaanam puttaanañceva antevaasikasaddhivihaarikaanañca >> vasena "attano putte vaa antevaasikasaddhivihaarike vaa na >> tajjenti na sikkhaapenti na ovadanti naanusaasantii"ti avannam >> akittim labhanti, evamsampadamidam veditabbam. >> >> Aacaara-sampannaa maataapitaro viya ca aacariyupajjhaayaa >> viya ca bhavangacittam datthabbam, puttaadiinam vasena tesam >> akittilaabho viya javanakkhane rajjanadussanamuyhanasa >> bhaavaanam lobhasahagataadiinam cittaanam vasena uppannehi >> aagantukehi upakkilesehi pakatiparisuddhampi bhavangacittam >> upakkilittham naama hotiiti. >> >> >> >> COMMENTARY TRANSLATION >> >> 49. In the ninth statement, the term `radiant' signifies whiteness or >> purity, and means complete cleanness. The term `mind' refers to the >> life-cause consciousness. How is there such a thing as the color of >> the mind? There isn't. Whatever thing, be it with any color such as >> brown, or be it colorless, is said to be radiant, due to its complete >> cleanness. This mind, too, is said to be radiant because it is >> completely clean due to the absence of blots. The phrase `and that >> very mind' means `that life-cause consciousness.' >> >> The phrase `by guest' refers to the asynchronous mental events >> happening later at the moments of the rapid repeats. The phrase `by >> blots' means "by the mental events with lust and so on." The Buddha >> said the scenario of being tarnished due to the mind being tarnished >> by things such as lust. >> >> How so? Like the virtuous and refined parents or teachers and >> preceptors, - on account of the immoral, unrefined, undutiful sons or >> insider pupils and live-in pupils, - indeed received condemnation and >> notoriety as those who do not threaten, train, instruct, and steer >> one's own sons or insider pupils and live-in pupils, so this >> example's completeness should be noted. >> >> The life-cause consciousness should be seen as the refined parents or >> as the refined teachers and preceptors. And, like their earning of >> notoriety by means of sons and so on, the naturally pure life-cause >> consciousness comes to be tarnished by guest blots happening, at the >> moments of the rapid repeats, as the mental events co-arising with >> greed and so on having the instincts of lust, destructiveness, or >> foolishness. >> >> >> NOTES >> >> Aagantukehi - by guests >> >> Asahajaatehi uppajjanakehi - the asynchronous mental events >> >> Asahajaatehi – not happening together >> >> Uppajjanaka – Literally, those that happen >> >> Javanakkhane – the moments of the rapid repeats. Javana literally >> means rapidity. In the context of a cognitive series called viitthi, >> rapidity refers to the seven rapid repeats of the similar mental >> events. >> >> From the angle of the life-cause consciousness, the Buddha described >> the rapid repetitions as guests. It is simply a scenario of bhavanga >> cittas versus javana cittas. >> >> Pakatiparisuddham bhavangacittam - the naturally pure life-cause >> consciousness. Bhavanga cittam is a shorthand name for the sensuous >> healthy resultant mind (Kaamaavacara kusala vipaaka cittam). >> Therefore, the natural purity of bhavanga cittam does not extend >> beyond the meanings of the terms "kusala" and "vipaaka." Furthermore, >> it is continually conditioned and challenged by javana cittas. >> >Dear Suan, thank you very much for your translation and remarks. The last sentence is indeed challenging. May I try with an example? Angulimaala was born with three wholesome roots: alobha, adosa and pa~n~naa. Also all his bhavangacittas were accompanied by these three. Bhavangacittas are vipaka, produced by kamma. Bhavangacitta arises and then falls away completely. But when there is a condition for its arising, in deep sleep or between processes, kamma produces bhavangacitta, always the same type type, throughout life. That type cannot change. That citta is just vipaka, passive, it cannot act in a kusala or akusala way. The fact that it is accompanied by pa~n~naa (but pa~n~naa is vipaka in this case) shows us that he was born with a capability to develop during his life right understanding, even to the degree of enlightenment. Pa~n~naa is developed during the moments of javana. But his javana cittas were often of a strong degree of akusala, killing other people to have their fingers for his collection. Evenso, he attained arahatship. He met the Buddha and could after listening develop understanding of all realities of his life. He also saw that akusala citta is a conditioned reality, non-self, otherwise he could not have attained arahatship. The bhavangacittas are the good parents, but he was blamed because of the akusala javana cittas, the naughty children. Would his accumulated wisdom be the conqueror, or his new accumulations of all that akusala during javana? A challenge, and what will conquer? The opposite can also happen. We may be born with pa~n~naa but we waste the accumulated potentialities by our laziness, by forgetfulness of realities. When we see someone else we can never judge him by his deeds, we do not know what kind of accumulations he has. You say, bhavangacitta is conditioned by the javanacittas that arise. By what type of the twentyfour conditions? I was puzzled by this. Thank you and my best wishes for the new year, Nina. 10470 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Dec 31, 2001 7:49am Subject: deceiving dhammas Dear Kom, you alluded to the vancaka dhammas, deceiving dhammas. Could you mention just a few that you find particularly helpful to consider in daily life? I find too that by hearing about more subtle defilements it helps at least on the level of pariyatti to notice them. On the other hand I was warned by A. Sujin: don't analyse, that is thinking again. I am inclined to analyse. Nina. 10471 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Dec 31, 2001 7:49am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Gayan's translation > >> ********************* >> Extract from Gayan¹s post (8896): >> >> 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. >> >> >> -Dear Gayan, I compared this translation with my P.T.S, text. I have some problems with the grammar:cittanneca: that ending of eca? and then: citta samkileso: must this not be put together as one word, just like the following: cittavodaanaa? The ending of samkileso: I was puzzled by that, what case, nominative? But should it not be by...? By a defiled mind? then: tiracchanagataa paana: is this from paa.no, life? I looked at the footnote, which says that the varied nature of all these animals is due to kamma. Because citta is so varied, it performs different kammas that create different births. This fits the following of the sutta: kamma is like a painter. What is your opinion about this? Thank you for translating this, I read it with interest. Nina. 10472 From: Date: Mon Dec 31, 2001 4:00am Subject: Re: [dsg] The White Radiant Mind Hi, Rob and Suan - In a message dated 12/31/01 2:44:28 AM Eastern Standard Time, epsteinrob@Y... writes: > Dear Suan, > Thank you so much for the translation! > I am quite excited, especially after taking a first look... > > I will only make two preliminary comments tonight, and will then study > further. > Thanks again! > > comments below: > > --- abhidhammika wrote: > > > > Dear Dhamma Friends > > > > As some of you might remember, I posted Parinibbana Subcommentary > > (Part Two) awhile ago. In response, Robert Epstein and Upasaka Howard > > posted reply messages that seem to support a kind of consciousness > > surviving in parinibbaana after the death of an Arahant. Both of them > > also cited an Anguttra statement of the Buddha containing the > > description of the mind as being luminous in support of their > > survivalist view. > > Just want to mention, in my own defense, that the idea that there may be > some form > of awareness in parinibbana is not *necessarily* a survivalist view. If by > survivalist, you mean that an entity or identifiable being remains, as > would be > dependent on one or more of the five kandhas, then this is not what I have > in > mind. The awareness which I have in mind would be undifferentiated, > unformed and > unindividuated. While one can argue that even such a primordial, > unformative > awareness is a violation of one's reading of the definition of parinibbana, > I > don't think you can as easily accuse it of constituting an *entity* which > survives > the extinction of the kandhas. > > In both my view, and I believe Howard's, if there is any awareness that > survives > extinction of the kandhas, it would in fact *not* be an entity or being of > any > kind. --------------------------------------------------------------- Howard: Certainly not. In fact, even now, while there is awareness, there is no entity or being which is agent for it. Awareness, consciousness, or discernment is an impersonal event/function/operation. The thing is, normal discrnment is the discernment of a flow of sense objects, and the sequential nature makes it temporal. But the consciousness of nibbana (without remainder) is a consciousness of absence of objects (and without any defiling sense of subject either) and is timeless, and it is, thus, so radically DIFFERENT from anything we have experienced as to be literally unimaginable and incomparable for the worldling. But the idea that (the state of) parinibbana is literally *nothing* in every possible sense strikes me as at best very silly. It makes the goal of Buddhism no different from the goal of a suicidal materialist! (How would it differ?) ----------------------------------------------------------- What it would be has been discussed to some extent, but I will not go into> > > it now. > You are right, Suan, however, that to me the implication is that the > 'luminous > mind' suggests the possibility of this primordial pre-existent awareness > which is > then defiled by the concept of separate self-hood or entity, as well as > other > delusions which fetter it and cause suffering. > > [snip] > > > SUTTAM STATEMENT AND TRANSLATION > > > > 49. "Pabhassaramidam, Bhikkhave, cittam. Tañca kho aagantukehi > > upakkilesehi upakkilitthanti." > > > > "Monks, this mind is radiant. And, that very mind is tarnished by > > guest blots." > > This translation is quite revelatory on its face, and should cause everyone > who > has been interested in this sutta to pause and take a deep breath. > According to > your translation, Suan, the phrase 'that very mind' implies that the same > citta > that is radiant is the one that is tarnished by blots or defilements that > don't > belong there [my interpretation of 'guest' if that is a correct > interpretation]. > > I understand that this is not the interpretation of the commentaries, but > just > taking the Sutta on its own for a moment, it seems that the 'guest' status > of the > 'blots' suggests that it is not the natural state of the citta to be thus > blotted > or defiled. > ----------------------------------------------------------------- Howard: I agree except for your use of 'citta'. Certainly it is not the mindstate which is pure which is also defiled. I do believe that when the Buddha says "mind" here, he is speaking conventionally - as he usually does. He is talking about mental function in general, and is pointing out that it is not inherent that it should be defiled, but that defilements are adventitious (guests). If defilement were inherent, liberation would be an unattainable goal. ---------------------------------------------------------------- > > It is hard for me to see how the commentary's interpretation makes use of > the fact > that the phrase 'that very mind' seems to especially emphasize the fact > that > Buddha is referring to one and the same mind, not two different ones. It > doesn't > seem on the face of it that such a statement would refer to the complex > relationship of the bhavanga cittas being indirectly defiled by the javana > cittas > that arise at a different time. The statement appears to be much more > simple than > this, but I am very much looking forward to your subcommentary. ---------------------------------------------------------- Howard: I certainly agree with this assessment. ---------------------------------------------------------- > > I don't know if you plan to translate the full stanza of the original > sutta, but > if it were possible it would be great to see the whole verse. > > In any case, I thank you for this effort, which is already quite > provocative. > > 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) 10473 From: Date: Mon Dec 31, 2001 4:42am Subject: Re: [dsg] abhidhamma Dear Nina: Thanks very much for your input and feedback :). _______________________ You said Abhidhamma is like a dry bone. Lodewijk said, tell him it is like the flesh and sinews of our life. _______________________ Num: I have to admit that I have a lot of appetite for Abhidhamma. I agree with Lodewijk that the bony part of the meat, esp. the rib, is my favorite part, yummy yummy. As I mentioned before the more I read (I haven't read a lot), the more I feel like all 3 pitaka keep talking and pointing to the same thing, DHAMMA. The 3 pitaka are mutually supportive. The terms and statements in Abhidhamma-pitaka were found all over in both vinaya and suttan-pitaka. In Abhidhamma-pitaka, names, places and persons were stripped out. So the bone can be obviously seen. In vinaya and suttanta the same things were talked in a more interactive manner, in different background, to different audiences, from the a wanderer to the great master of prominent philosophy school of thought. Let me share I personal impression, I read satipatthana-sutra, patikula puppa. It was so well said. In abhidhamma (as well as suttanta-) the same things were said on a basis of rupa, dhatu, ayatana and khandha. I feel like this is pretty straightforward. I read theri-katha, supajivakampavanika-therikatha, a man tried to say how much he admired supabhikhuni body appearance esp. her two dark, clear and very beautiful eyes. The theri finally pulled her eye out and gave to that man, which this time he no longer longed for the beauty of her eye. This is a wonderful sutra, I think. But when I see someone with beautiful eyes, I know what I feel. Kilesa is hard to see, reality is hard to discern, so subtle, well disguised. Even the Buddha said the same thing in another 100 aspects or levels, I do not sure that I can really see what exactly he very kindly tried to point at. ______________________ I agree that a Book like the Kathavatthu, Points of Controversy. is difficult reading. We do not have to study all details, it depends on the individual what he studies. In the Kathavatthu a question is asked in one way and then it is affirmed, and after that the same question is asked in another way and then it is refuted. It teaches us more precision. I find the "Guide through the Abhidhamma Pitaka" by Nyanatiloka, B.P.S. Kandy, very helpful to gradually get used to reading difficult passages, especially the Kathavatthu. For instance, Ch II, may someone by just repeating the word dukkha attain enlightenment. But this really happens, people are repeating words without understanding. Ch I: Is there in the absolute sense any personality to be found? These are questions people today also ask. ________________________ Num: I will try to check the Guide book out from the library. Thanks for this. I am not used to the mean that the same question were asked twice, but then the answers become totally opposite. I understand that my understanding is limited. I will try it later. My problem is I like bony stuff too much :). __________________________ Take the second Book of the Abhidhamma, the Vibhanga, Book of Analysis. The P.T.S. has edited this with a most helpful Intro by Iggleden. Here we see that also in the Abhidhamma there is Suttanta Method and Abhidhamma method. We should not separate these methods so much. In this book there are very vivid reminders of good and bad qualities occurring in daily life. Take conceit, that I quoted in my Cetasikas: ...pride of health, pride of youth, pride of life, pride of gain, pride of being honoured, pride of being respected, pride of prominence, pride of having adherence, pride of wealth, pride of appearance, pride of erudition, pride of intelligence, pride of being a knowledgeable authority.... This is not a list just to be remembered, or to debate about. It is a reminder to be aware when such forms of conceit occur, and they occur all the time, very treacherous. __________________________ Num: I have the Vibhanga by PTS. I've read some of it. I really admire the effort of the translator. It's not an easy task to translate. Even in Thai Vibhanga, a lot of Pali words were put in without any translation. I do enjoy Vibhanga, it reminds me of how reality can be seen at different levels and aspects. The conceit part in Vibhanga is well digested. ___________________________ Only through satipatthana can we fully appreciate the great value of the Abhidhamma. As I said, not everybody has to study all details, but understanding of the basic notions helps us to have more precision with regard to realities. It is important to know that there are four paramattha dhammas, that our life consists of citta, cetasika and rupa. If there is no basic knowledge one is hopelessly confused about the different realities that occur, one is confused about what is a concept and what a reality. But I am sure that you know all this. ___________________________ Num: Thanks a lot for this, I really appreciate. I always appreciate the reminder from Howard that text knowledge is not the same as panna or seeing reality here and now. One thing I know for sure is I know and see very little. Wish you and your family a Happy New Year. Num 10474 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Mon Dec 31, 2001 11:36am Subject: Re: [dsg] The White Radiant Mind Hi Mike, > In human beings, the aarammana of bhavanga is always a > pleasant object, as I understand it--the same object > as that of the patisandhi citta, the rebirth > consciousness--otherwise, no rebirth in manussa > bhumi--so, yes, always kusala vipaaka citta. k: How abt those who are reborn in lower realms. The aramana will be I believe akusala. I believe such these 3 initial bahavanga cittas would also apply to me. So do we still say in this context that bhavanga citta still luminious. k: Is that any commentaries that says that the nature of kusala cittas are also luminous. Kind regards Ken O 10475 From: robertkirkpatrick.rm Date: Mon Dec 31, 2001 0:26pm Subject: Re: [dsg] The White Radiant Mind --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., upasaka@a... wrote: > the consciousness of nibbana (without > remainder) is a consciousness of absence of objects (and without any defiling > sense of subject either) and is timeless, and it is, thus, so radically > DIFFERENT from anything we have experienced as to be literally unimaginable > and incomparable for the worldling. But the idea that (the state of) > parinibbana is literally *nothing* in every possible sense strikes me as at > best very silly. It makes the goal of Buddhism no different from the goal of > a suicidal materialist! (How would it differ?) > -----------------------------------------------------------Dear Howard, This 'consciousness of nibbana', does it exist after the death of an arahant? If so, what khanda (aggregate) is it, or is it something outside the khandas? A suicidal materialist beleives in a self, a self that will be extinguished at death. He thinks that by killing himself consciousness and the painful feelings that arise together with consciousness will then cease. However, this dependent origination that he takes to be "his" life cannot cease until the conditions for it have been uprooted. Physical death is just another moment like any other and the cycle continues on another plane somewhere. The death of an arahnat is different, there are no more conditions for this long, long cycle to continue. robert 10476 From: Date: Mon Dec 31, 2001 9:09am Subject: Re: [dsg] The White Radiant Mind Hi, Robert - In a message dated 12/31/01 3:27:36 PM Eastern Standard Time, robertkirkpatrick@r... writes: > --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., upasaka@a... wrote: > > the consciousness of nibbana (without > > remainder) is a consciousness of absence of objects (and without > any defiling > > sense of subject either) and is timeless, and it is, thus, so > radically > > DIFFERENT from anything we have experienced as to be literally > unimaginable > > and incomparable for the worldling. But the idea that (the state > of) > > parinibbana is literally *nothing* in every possible sense strikes > me as at > > best very silly. It makes the goal of Buddhism no different from > the goal of > > a suicidal materialist! (How would it differ?) > > ----------------------------------------------------------- Dear > Howard, > This 'consciousness of nibbana', does it exist after the death of an > arahant? If so, what khanda (aggregate) is it, or is it something > outside the khandas? ------------------------------------------------------------------ Howard: Yes, "outside" the khandhas. It seems to me that the khandha of vi~n~nana is the aggregate of discernment of objects. Is an absence of objects another object? Nibbana is not a khandha nor any aspect of a khandha. But it *is* said to be nama! And there is no more reason to say that something is nama just because it isn't rupa than there is to say that something is rupa just because it isn't nama. Nibbana is not vi~n~nana, but it is nama. That makes it some other sort of discernment/awareness, it would seem to me, a discernment radically "other", radically different from all that we know. ---------------------------------------------------------- > A suicidal materialist beleives in a self, a self that will be > extinguished at death. He thinks that by killing himself > consciousness and the painful feelings that arise together with > consciousness will then cease. However, this dependent origination > that he takes to be "his" life cannot cease until the conditions for > it have been uprooted. Physical death is just another moment like any > other and the cycle continues on another plane somewhere. The death > of an arahnat is different, there are no more conditions for this > long, long cycle to continue. > -------------------------------------------------------- Howard: To me it sounds like the death of an arahant brings exactly the nothingness sought by those who erroneously believe that it can be achieved by physical death. Even someone who doesn't believe in a self, but, who, for example, lives in unbearable pain, desires an escape to nothingness. This may well be so even for stream enterers. Perhaps even for once returners. One thing the Buddha described as a defilement is desire for extinction. If nibbana is extinction, not just of defilements, and not even of discernment of objects, but a complete and utter extinction without exception, and if this is the goal, then ..., well, the syllogism is easy to complete. ;-) ----------------------------------------------------------- > 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) 10477 From: m. nease Date: Mon Dec 31, 2001 3:39pm Subject: Anusaya Question I ran across the following note to V. Thanissaro's translation of the Anusaya Sutta (Anguttara Nikaya VII.11) on Access to Insight. Just thought I'd post it here for comments from our Pali scholars. Thanks, mike ---------------------------------------------------------- Note 1. This term -- anusaya -- is usually translated as "underlying tendency" or "latent tendency." These translations are based on the etymology of the term, which literally means, "to lie down with." However, in actual usage, the related verb (anuseti) means to be obsessed with something, for one's thoughts to return and "lie down with it" over and over again. [Go back] ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Revised: Mon 10 September 2001 http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/anguttara/an07-011.html 10478 From: m. nease Date: Mon Dec 31, 2001 3:52pm Subject: Anusaya Question I ran across the following note to V. Thanissaro's translation of the Anusaya Sutta (Anguttara Nikaya VII.11) on Access to Insight. Just thought I'd post it here for comments from our Pali scholars. Thanks, mike ---------------------------------------------------------- Note 1. This term -- anusaya -- is usually translated as "underlying tendency" or "latent tendency." These translations are based on the etymology of the term, which literally means, "to lie down with." However, in actual usage, the related verb (anuseti) means to be obsessed with something, for one's thoughts to return and "lie down with it" over and over again. [Go back] ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Revised: Mon 10 September 2001 http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/anguttara/an07-011.html 10479 From: mlnease Date: Mon Dec 31, 2001 4:07pm Subject: Re: [dsg] The White Radiant Mind Hi Kenneth, --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Kenneth Ong wrote: > Hi Mike, > > > In human beings, the aarammana of bhavanga is always a > > pleasant object, as I understand it--the same object > > as that of the patisandhi citta, the rebirth > > consciousness--otherwise, no rebirth in manussa > > bhumi--so, yes, always kusala vipaaka citta. > > k: How abt those who are reborn in lower realms. The aramana will be I > believe akusala. I believe such these 3 initial bahavanga cittas would > also apply to me. I dunno! Better leave this one to one of the better-read members. > So do we still say in this context that bhavanga citta > still luminious. My guess is, no. This gets complicated--the words we've been using for both 'luminous' and 'pure' (sorry--I don't have the Pali handy) have different meanings in different contexts. For example, in some contexts all cittas are considered pure, and are only defiled by the cetasikas arising with them (as I understand it). This makes the most sense to me, as a general rule. 'Luminous' seems much more specific but, if I recall rightly, is always referred to thus because of its having come from bhavanga (the simile is that of a river and its tributaries). Don't know enough about all this to give you a really informed answer, though--sorry. > k: Is that any commentaries that says that the nature of kusala cittas > are also luminous. If I remember rightly from what we've read, no--pure, yes-- luminous, no. Corrections welcomed... Hope I haven't confused this issue more. mike 10480 From: Date: Mon Dec 31, 2001 11:24am Subject: An Addendum and a Msg to the List Re: [dsg] The White Radiant Mind Hi again, Robert - So as not to end the Gregorian-calendar year with a disagreement ;-)), let me add that whatever nibbana really is, and whatever our differing misguided notions of it may be ;-)), I know that we are in complete *agreement* in wishing for the other all and only what is good. May nibbana, the ultimate good, be yours (though there *is* no you! ;-), and soon! And may you, and *all* the loving and brilliant folks on DSG have a wonderful year, a year filled with santi, metta, and the sukkha of Dhamma - with peace, lovingkindness, and the joy of the Buddha's wonderful teaching! 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) 10481 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Mon Dec 31, 2001 9:41pm Subject: RE: [dsg] Contradiction (Views) Dear Wynn, If you think of Samma-ditthi as right views, and micha-ditthi as the wrong views, then you will get into quite a few discussions and possible contradictions about attachments to views, having views, and having no views. If you think of Samma-dithi as panna, a wisdom that co-arises with the mind whenever the mind cognize, co-arising with panna, realities as they are, when there is direct perception of true realities, then you will never run into problems with those discussions. Whenever there is an understanding of realities as they are, samma-ditthi co-arises with it. kom > -----Original Message----- > From: wynn [mailto:wewynal@t...] > Sent: Monday, December 31, 2001 5:06 AM > To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com > Subject: [dsg] Contradiction (Views) > > > Hi, > > The Buddha talk about Right View (samma ditthi). > > However, in Sutta Nipata verse 787, 800, 882, the > Buddha said or (more impersonally) the true sage, > has no views. > > How do you explain this contradiction? > > Thanks, > Wynn > > 10482 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Mon Dec 31, 2001 10:03pm Subject: Re: [dsg] The White Radiant Mind Hi Mike and (Suan), > My guess is, no. This gets complicated--the words we've been using for > both 'luminous' and 'pure' (sorry--I don't have the Pali handy) have > different meanings in different contexts. For example, in some contexts > all cittas are considered pure, and are only defiled by the cetasikas > arising with them (as I understand it). This makes the most sense to me, as a general rule. 'Luminous' seems much more specific but, if I recall rightly, is always referred to thus because of its having come from bhavanga (the simile is that of a river and its tributaries). Don't know enough about all this to give you a really informed answer, though--sorry. k: that is interesting all cittas are considered pure in some contexts. More evidence please. > > > k: Is that any commentaries that says that the nature of kusala > cittas > are also luminous. > > If I remember rightly from what we've read, no--pure, yes-- luminous, > no. Corrections welcomed... k: If then, kusala cittas should be luminious since Bhavanga cittas are vipaka kusala cittas in the context of humans. We could not at one hand said that it is luminous for vipaka kusala citta (bhavanga cittas) and than not for kusala citta. It sound contridictory. But I would like more commentary evidence on luminious portion of kusala cittas be it vipaka or not (for anyone in the list). Then another point, why shouldn't luminious mind be kusala cittas rather than bhavanga cittas and it still sounds correct in the sutta. Kind regards Ken O 10483 From: Robert Epstein Date: Mon Dec 31, 2001 10:53pm Subject: Re: [dsg] The White Radiant Mind --- upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, Rob and Suan - > > In a message dated 12/31/01 2:44:28 AM Eastern Standard Time, > epsteinrob@Y... writes: > > > > Dear Suan, > > Thank you so much for the translation! > > I am quite excited, especially after taking a first look... > > > > I will only make two preliminary comments tonight, and will then study > > further. > > Thanks again! > > > > comments below: > > > > --- abhidhammika wrote: > > > > > > Dear Dhamma Friends > > > > > > As some of you might remember, I posted Parinibbana Subcommentary > > > (Part Two) awhile ago. In response, Robert Epstein and Upasaka Howard > > > posted reply messages that seem to support a kind of consciousness > > > surviving in parinibbaana after the death of an Arahant. Both of them > > > also cited an Anguttra statement of the Buddha containing the > > > description of the mind as being luminous in support of their > > > survivalist view. > > > > Just want to mention, in my own defense, that the idea that there may be > > some form > > of awareness in parinibbana is not *necessarily* a survivalist view. If by > > survivalist, you mean that an entity or identifiable being remains, as > > would be > > dependent on one or more of the five kandhas, then this is not what I have > > in > > mind. The awareness which I have in mind would be undifferentiated, > > unformed and > > unindividuated. While one can argue that even such a primordial, > > unformative > > awareness is a violation of one's reading of the definition of parinibbana, > > I > > don't think you can as easily accuse it of constituting an *entity* which > > survives > > the extinction of the kandhas. > > > > In both my view, and I believe Howard's, if there is any awareness that > > survives > > extinction of the kandhas, it would in fact *not* be an entity or being of > > any > > kind. > --------------------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > Certainly not. In fact, even now, while there is awareness, there is > no entity or being which is agent for it. Awareness, consciousness, or > discernment is an impersonal event/function/operation. The thing is, normal > discrnment is the discernment of a flow of sense objects, and the sequential > nature makes it temporal. But the consciousness of nibbana (without > remainder) is a consciousness of absence of objects (and without any defiling > sense of subject either) and is timeless, and it is, thus, so radically > DIFFERENT from anything we have experienced as to be literally unimaginable > and incomparable for the worldling. But the idea that (the state of) > parinibbana is literally *nothing* in every possible sense strikes me as at > best very silly. It makes the goal of Buddhism no different from the goal of > a suicidal materialist! (How would it differ?) > ----------------------------------------------------------- > > What it would be has been discussed to some extent, but I will not go into> > > > > it now. > > You are right, Suan, however, that to me the implication is that the > > 'luminous > > mind' suggests the possibility of this primordial pre-existent awareness > > which is > > then defiled by the concept of separate self-hood or entity, as well as > > other > > delusions which fetter it and cause suffering. > > > > [snip] > > > > > SUTTAM STATEMENT AND TRANSLATION > > > > > > 49. "Pabhassaramidam, Bhikkhave, cittam. Tañca kho aagantukehi > > > upakkilesehi upakkilitthanti." > > > > > > "Monks, this mind is radiant. And, that very mind is tarnished by > > > guest blots." > > > > This translation is quite revelatory on its face, and should cause everyone > > who > > has been interested in this sutta to pause and take a deep breath. > > According to > > your translation, Suan, the phrase 'that very mind' implies that the same > > citta > > that is radiant is the one that is tarnished by blots or defilements that > > don't > > belong there [my interpretation of 'guest' if that is a correct > > interpretation]. > > > > I understand that this is not the interpretation of the commentaries, but > > just > > taking the Sutta on its own for a moment, it seems that the 'guest' status > > of the > > 'blots' suggests that it is not the natural state of the citta to be thus > > blotted > > or defiled. > > > ----------------------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > I agree except for your use of 'citta'. Certainly it is not the > mindstate which is pure which is also defiled. I do believe that when the > Buddha says "mind" here, he is speaking conventionally - as he usually does. > He is talking about mental function in general, and is pointing out that it > is not inherent that it should be defiled, but that defilements are > adventitious (guests). Dear Howard, I think that's a good correction, and I agree with it. Thanks. It makes the sense of the statement easier to understand in fact. I agree with the rest of what you have said here as well. Robert PS. Happy New Year! ================== If defilement were inherent, liberation would be an > unattainable goal. > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > > It is hard for me to see how the commentary's interpretation makes use of > > the fact > > that the phrase 'that very mind' seems to especially emphasize the fact > > that > > Buddha is referring to one and the same mind, not two different ones. It > > doesn't > > seem on the face of it that such a statement would refer to the complex > > relationship of the bhavanga cittas being indirectly defiled by the javana > > cittas > > that arise at a different time. The statement appears to be much more > > simple than > > this, but I am very much looking forward to your subcommentary. > ---------------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > I certainly agree with this assessment. > ---------------------------------------------------------- > > > > > I don't know if you plan to translate the full stanza of the original > > sutta, but > > if it were possible it would be great to see the whole verse. > > > > In any case, I thank you for this effort, which is already quite > > provocative. > > > > Best, > > Robert Ep. > > > ============================== > With metta, > Howard > 10484 From: Sarah Date: Tue Jan 1, 2002 0:55am Subject: Re: [dsg] The White Radiant Mind Dear Mike, Ken O (and others folowing the 'luminous' thread'), Just got back to Hong Kong...haven't unpacked or done any home chores, so I shouldn't be posting, but can't resist adding a note;-) As usual, Ken O, I'm impressed by your keen and pertinent questions. Mike, all the discussions together over the weekend were really great . Just to add a note to Mike's post and useful comments as we discussed this topic with K.Sujin, K.Supee, Jaran and others at the weekend: 1) Pabhassara.m (luminous) seems to refer to bhavanga cittas only in some contexts such as the sutta under discussion (AN 1,9 com): "Luminous is clear, pure (pabhassara.m). Citta is the life-continuum (bhavanga)." 2) In other contexts it refers to all kusala cittas as well as bhavanga cittas as you suggest : (AN 5,23com - Upakilesa Sutta (PTS trans: The Debasements): "Cittas that are defiled are not luminous (pabhassara.m). (Here) the cittas free from upakilesa refers to the kusala cittas in the 4 planes.." It doesn’t seem to refer to other vipaka cittas besides bhavanga cittas in any contexts so far (but you or Num may do a search on this) 3) Pandaram (purity) usually refers to all cittas and is another synonym for citta. We also looked at references in which it also refers to akusala cittas, but I can’t find my note or the Thai com notes (which Jon and Jaran translated for me on this). I understand the reason that all cittas are considered ‘pandaram’ is because they ‘spring’ from the bhavanga cittas....(It’s a little confusing because in both English and Thai ‘luminous’, ‘pure’ and the other translations sound very similar. In Pali, (I’m told) the meaning is quite different.) 4) Pandaram sometimes refers to bhavanga cittas and kusala citta only: In the Atthasalini reference given several times (Atth, 140,)where it says “cittas are pandara meaning pure. pandara refers to bhavanga cittas.....”, we found there was an extra line in the Thai translation not included in the PTS translation and this follows the Pali: “ ‘O Monks, cittas are pure, but they become tainted with upakilesa that come in, thus.’ Kusala cittas are pandara since they come from cittas (i.e. bhavanga cittas) like the Ganges river flows from the (source of) the Ganges river and the Godhaavarii river flows from the Godhaavarii river.” (Jaran’s transl.) This is a brief summary of what I understand. I may come across other notes in my bag or Jaran may add more. We raised the qustion of ‘why bother to find out anything about bhavanga cittas when they are not being experienced anyway, unlike attachment, aversion and so on. K.Sujin’s response was to the effect that if we don’t study the details or find out what kind of cittas arise in between the sense and mind processes, it will be taken for ‘self’. If there weren’t bhavanga cittas in between, there couldn’t be switching from eye-door to ear-door, for example. It may be (i.e. it is!) that bhavanga cittas are not as apparent or as easily observable as some other realities, but they can be known if there is right intellectual understanding first. It just depend on conditions and accumulations. One last point, Ken O, we are accepting what the commentary says about bhavanga cittas bcause a) we accept all the ancient commentaries and b) it makes sense to us. Also the reference to javana cittas makes sense because there cannot be ‘mind development’ of the bhavanga cittas, but there is ‘mind development’ when kusala cittas arise in the javana process as specified. Finally, Suan, many thanks for your very helpful translations and notes which I look forward to studying when I have a chance. I don’t have your post in front of me now which is why I haven’t referred to your translations. This is a really good and enjoyable team-work exercise I think. We even had the Pali experts at the Foundation pulling out Texts.and commentaries;-) If you have any comments on my notes above or anything to add, that’ll also be most helpful. We’re very fortunate to have some Pali expertise on list. Must start on some of those ‘return home chores’ We really had a super weekend seeing old friends (several from dsg) and meeting new ones like Mike and Christine (a real treat to spend ‘live’ time with them) and we had action-packed discussions with K.Sujin. Hopefully, we’ll add to other threads in due course. Sarah p.s ....and yes, Erik and his delightful and very sweet new bride joined us for the last discussion and the Satipatthana Sutta (“not the Samadhi Sutta”) was discussed at length. ======================================================= --- Kenneth Ong wrote: > Hi Mike and (Suan), > > > > My guess is, no. This gets complicated--the words we've been using > for > > both 'luminous' and 'pure' (sorry--I don't have the Pali handy) have > > different meanings in different contexts. For example, in some > contexts > > all cittas are considered pure, and are only defiled by the cetasikas > > arising with them (as I understand it). This makes the most sense to > me, as a general rule. 'Luminous' seems much more specific but, if I > recall rightly, is always referred to thus because of its having come > from bhavanga (the simile is that of a river and its tributaries). > Don't > know enough about all this to give you a really informed answer, > though--sorry. > > k: that is interesting all cittas are considered pure in some contexts. > More evidence please. > > > > > > > k: Is that any commentaries that says that the nature of kusala > > cittas > are also luminous. > > > > If I remember rightly from what we've read, no--pure, yes-- luminous, > > no. Corrections welcomed... > > k: If then, kusala cittas should be luminious since Bhavanga cittas are > vipaka kusala cittas in the context of humans. We could not at one hand > said that it is luminous for vipaka kusala citta (bhavanga cittas) and > than not for kusala citta. It sound contridictory. But I would like more > commentary evidence on luminious portion of kusala cittas be it vipaka > or > not (for anyone in the list). Then another point, why shouldn't > luminious > mind be kusala cittas rather than bhavanga cittas and it still sounds > correct in the sutta. .............................................................................................................. 10485 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Tue Jan 1, 2002 1:45am Subject: Re: [dsg] The White Radiant Mind Hi Sarah, Nice to hear from you again :). I like to point out something, > This is a brief summary of what I understand. I may come across other > notes in my bag or Jaran may add more. Your first point: > We raised the qustion of ‘why bother to find out anything about bhavanga > cittas when they are not being experienced anyway, unlike attachment, > aversion and so on. K.Sujin’s response was to the effect that if we > don’t study the details or find out what kind of cittas arise in between the sense and mind processes, it will be taken for ‘self’. If there weren’t bhavanga cittas in between, there couldn’t be switching from eye-door to> ear-door, for example. It may be (i.e. it is!) that bhavanga cittas are not as apparent or as easily observable as some other realities, but they can be known if there is right intellectual understanding first. It just depend on conditions and accumulations. Then you said > One last point, Ken O, we are accepting what the commentary says about > bhavanga cittas bcause a) we accept all the ancient commentaries and b) > it makes sense to us. Also the reference to javana cittas makes sense > because there cannot be ‘mind development’ of the bhavanga cittas, but there is ‘mind development’ when kusala cittas arise in the javana process as specified. Does it sound contridictory that when you said that abt accepting the commentary, then you said that A Sujin said that Bhavanga citta. "K.Sujin’s response was to the effect that if we don’t study the details or find out what kind of cittas arise in between the sense and mind processes, it will be taken for ‘self’." There is nothing wrong abt the commentary on developing the javana proccess bc it is a more impt process, imagine seven out of 17 cittas, that is a lot of cittas. I still find the commentary inconsistent on one hand saying abt bhavanga cittas then on the other hand saying that such development is for javana cittas process in this particular sutta. Don't sound right. It is a waste that I don't have the whole commentary. If from the onstart, it said that luminious mind is kusala cittas, that would have solved save us a lot of time discussing it :). By the way, do those bhavanga cittas of lower realms luminious or not since they should be akusala vipaka cittas. Kind regards Ken O P.S. Would you like to share any more interesting pointers other than Bhavanga cittas in your recent trip? I always sound greedy as usual :). 10486 From: Sarah Date: Tue Jan 1, 2002 5:09am Subject: Re: [dsg] The White Radiant Mind Hi Ken O, Great to see you so active and keen on the list....I also appreciate your ‘open book’ nature and sharing of the sad story about your sister to Purnomo. We can see how the Dhamma is really the only true refuge, I think. So many people on the list have experienced a lot of personal suffering and it’s wonderful that we can share useful reminders here. --- Kenneth Ong wrote: > > > Does it sound contridictory that when you said that abt accepting the > commentary, then you said that A Sujin said that Bhavanga citta. > "K.Sujin’s response was to the effect that if we don’t study the > details > or find out what kind of cittas arise in between the sense and mind > processes, it will be taken for ‘self’." Sorry, maybe it’s b.c I’m tired (or dense), but I’m not sure what the contradiction is. Pls explain. > There is nothing wrong abt the commentary on developing the javana > proccess bc it is a more impt process, imagine seven out of 17 cittas, > that is a lot of cittas. I still find the commentary inconsistent on > one > hand saying abt bhavanga cittas then on the other hand saying that such > development is for javana cittas process in this particular sutta. Don't > sound right. Not just in this sutta...development is in the javana process always, even when it’s not spelled out. We can’t just look at one sutta or one line, but need to look at the whole Tipitaka together to understand a sutta, I think. >It is a waste that I don't have the whole commentary. Well now, with the help of a few members like Suan and Nina we’re getting some of these commentaries and sub-commentaries translated to english for possibly the first time. In Thai (and probably Burmese and Singhalese) the commentaries are translated and included with the suttas. >If > from the onstart, it said that luminious mind is kusala cittas, that > would > have solved save us a lot of time discussing it :). But I thought you were enjoying the discussion:) Btw, when I wrote: 3) Pandaram (purity) usually refers to all cittas and is another synonym for citta, besides the discussion I mentioned about the Atthasalini passage, K.Sujin was also explaining that the reason it is also a synonym for citta is because, as Mike pointed out, cittas can be considered pure in the sense that they just experience their object and are defiled by the accompanying akusala cetasikas. > By the way, do those bhavanga cittas of lower realms luminious or not > since they should be akusala vipaka cittas. I’m sure you’re asking whether they’d be considered pabhassara.m (luminous) and not pandaram (pure). The quick answer is I’m not sure. Perhaps Mike can ask further about this. If I were to make a wild guess, I’d say they could be considered luminous because again they are vipaka (as you say), not accompanied or tainted by kilesa in the javana process. I’m not sure that being akusala vipaka (and having an unpleasant object) would make any difference to the argument. Even in lower realms, there are kusala and akusala cittas in the javana process and the same points would follow. Nina may be able to correct me. I’m a little puzzled (but not unduly concerned) as to why other vipaka cittas besides bhavangas are not considered pabhasara.m, but accept that’s just how it is. Again, all vipaka cittas, including those in lower planes can be considered pandaram (pure) in the sense explained above. This is all pretty new for me too, Ken O. As Mike said, the only real reason I think this discussion is of significance is because this one sutta and phrase is often quoted by people like yourself to support another interpretation of consciousness, awareness and parinibbana. I really appreciated Howard’s kind New Year message and would just like to also wish everyone here a year with significant growth of wisdom and plenty of kusala vipaka (good results of kamma). Sarah ====================================================== 10487 From: Sarah Date: Tue Jan 1, 2002 5:54am Subject: Re: [dsg] The White Radiant Mind Hi Ken O, A couple more references for you: 1) Dhammasangani 6 (PTS trans) “What on that occasion is thought (citta.m)? The thought which on that occasion is ideation, mind, heart, that which is clear (pa.n.dara ), ideation as the sphere of mind, the faculty of mind, intellection.......” i.e pa.n.dara as synonym for citta and mano 2)SN, V, Mahaavagga, 33(3) Corruptions (BB trans) “........S too, bhikkhus, there are these five corruptions of the mind, corrupted by which the mind is neither malleable nor wieldy nor radiant (pabbhasara ) but brittle and not rightly concentrated for the destruction of the taints. What five? Sensual desire is a corruption of the mind corrupted by which the mind is neither malleable nor wieldy nor radiant ..ill will.....” i.e. pabbhasara referring to kusala cittas Others may find other references... Sarah ======================================= --- Sarah wrote: K:> >If > > from the onstart, it said that luminious mind is kusala cittas, that > > would > > have solved save us a lot of time discussing it :). > S:> But I thought you were enjoying the discussion:) > > Btw, when I wrote: > 3) Pandaram (purity) usually refers to all cittas and is another synonym > for citta, besides the discussion I mentioned about the Atthasalini > passage, K.Sujin was also explaining that the reason it is also a > synonym > for citta is because, as Mike pointed out, cittas can be considered pure > in the sense that they just experience their object and are defiled by > the > accompanying akusala cetasikas. =============================================== 10488 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Tue Jan 1, 2002 6:16am Subject: Re: [dsg] The White Radiant Mind Hi Sarah > > > There is nothing wrong abt the commentary on developing the javana > > proccess bc it is a more impt process, imagine seven out of 17 cittas, > > that is a lot of cittas. I still find the commentary inconsistent on > > one > > hand saying abt bhavanga cittas then on the other hand saying that > such > > development is for javana cittas process in this particular sutta. > Don't sound right. > > Not just in this sutta...development is in the javana process always, > even when it’s not spelled out. We can’t just look at one sutta or one line,> but need to look at the whole Tipitaka together to understand a sutta, I think. k: This is always agreeable :). In fact, I am the same as you I believe in ancient accounts or commentaries as they are more reliable. Just that sometimes, I feel we should not take then as the "holy bible". To me if there is a need for discussion, I feel we should take a closer look. Eventually there is a need to stick to ancient context bc if we start painting our own picture, then in another one generation they paint again, then another, then another, that is how the sutta and commentaries get distorted. In ancient Chinese tradition of Buddhist Sutta, there is a rule I believe (once heard from a monk) no one suppose to change or add any word into it. But I believe such a tradition has been lost. This would mean eventually the Buddha's word will be corrupted. > >It is a waste that I don't have the whole commentary. > > Well now, with the help of a few members like Suan and Nina we’re > getting some of these commentaries and sub-commentaries translated to english for possibly the first time. In Thai (and probably Burmese and Singhalese) the commentaries are translated and included with the suttas. k: That will be great. > >If> from the onstart, it said that luminious mind is kusala cittas, that > > would > > have solved save us a lot of time discussing it :). > > But I thought you were enjoying the discussion:) k: Oh.. I always enjoy discussions. Just forgive me if I am sometime like to think things otherwise :). I just need to be more hardworking he he :). > > By the way, do those bhavanga cittas of lower realms luminious or not > > since they should be akusala vipaka cittas. > > I’m sure you’re asking whether they’d be considered pabhassara.m > (luminous) and not pandaram (pure). The quick answer is I’m not sure. > Perhaps Mike can ask further about this. k: My hunch is that they should not be luminious bc their would be akusala vipaka cittas and not kusala vipaka cittas in the case for human and above beings. Anyway the sutta is directed to humans hence in this context luminious is used is not wrong at all. > If I were to make a wild guess, I’d say they could be considered > luminous because again they are vipaka (as you say), not accompanied or tainted by kilesa in the javana process. I’m not sure that being akusala vipaka (and having an unpleasant object) would make any difference to the argument. Even in lower realms, there are kusala and akusala cittas in the javana process and the same points would follow. Nina may be able to correct me. > > I’m a little puzzled (but not unduly concerned) as to why other vipaka > cittas besides bhavangas are not considered pabhasara.m, but accept > that’s just how it is. Again, all vipaka cittas, including those in lower > planes can be considered pandaram (pure) in the sense explained above. > > This is all pretty new for me too, Ken O. As Mike said, the only real > reason I think this discussion is of significance is because this one > sutta and phrase is often quoted by people like yourself to support > another interpretation of consciousness, awareness and parinibbana. k: I think you have misunderstood me. I have not taken that to support another interpretation of consciouness or be it in parinibbana. To me I leave it to Buddha on such things like Unborn, Buddha Nature or PariNibbana. Too hard for me to think abt it and I let it be as it does not help presently in my mental development. Hence I prefer to leave PariNibbana as Undefined Reality and I am not going to pursue it. Kind regards Ken O 10489 From: rikpa21 Date: Tue Jan 1, 2002 6:17am Subject: Satipatthana and Practice --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Sarah wrote: > p.s > ....and yes, Erik and his delightful and very sweet new bride joined us > for the last discussion and the Satipatthana Sutta ("not the Samadhi > Sutta") was discussed at length. Eath was absolutely delighted to attend the Dhama discussion there yesterday, and in spite of not being able to completely follow the speed of our English, she recognized many of the Pali terms used, and we wound up having our own mini-discussion on some of the terms she did recognize from the discussion--pañña and sampajjana--sitting together under the Bo Tree (which she identified for me as a Bo tree--I'd never seen, or rather, recognized one, before, so that was kind of cool) outside the Foundation. Anyway the Samadhi Sutta is just as important (is one limb of the Noble Eightfold path "more or less" important than any other?), since concentration is inseparable from Right Mindfulness. Anything that serves as a basis for mindfulness and the final aim, the ending of the effluents, seems a pretty important teaching in my book. For example, the "Samadhi Sutta" notes: "And what is the development of concentration that, when developed & pursued, leads to mindfulness & alertness? There is the case where feelings are known to the monk as they arise, known as they persist, known as they subside. Perceptions are known to him as they arise, known as they persist, known as they subside. Thoughts are known to him as they arise, known as they persist, known as they subside. This is the development of concentration that, when developed & pursued, leads to mindfulness & alertness. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/anguttara/an04-041.html "And what is the development of concentration that, when developed & pursued, leads to the ending of the effluents? There is the case where a monk remains focused on arising & falling away with reference to the five clinging-aggregates: 'Such is form, such its origination, such its passing away. Such is feeling, such its origination, such its passing away. Such is perception, such its origination, such its passing away. Such are fabrications, such their origination, such their passing away. Such is consciousness, such its origination, such its disappearance.' This is the development of concentration that, when developed & pursued, leads to the ending of the effluents." This sutta seems to imply that samadhi is an important piece of the entire puzzle. No metion is made of "satipatthana" here. This is, after all, the "Samadhi Sutta." The presence of samadhi and the type of concentration on five aggregates formulated exactly as found in the Satipatthana Sutta (not to mention that "remaining focused" on various objects is mentioned in nearly every stanza of the Satipatthana Sutta) may give a better clue as to how samma sati and samma samadhi fit together. Just considering my own experience (the only thing any of us can rely on when all is said and done), Right Mindfulness requires concentration as a basis, and the mind needs to be trained well enough by diligent practicing the the exercises found in the Satipatthana or Samadhi Suttas, such that Right Mindfulness can remain unbroken over long periods of time and deepen to the point that meaningful insights have a basis for arising. I particularly like this quote, though I don't know the actual source for it: "...when the vipassana meditator develops strength and skill in noting, his khanika concentration occurs uninterruptedly in a series without a break. This concentration, when it occurs from moment to moment without a break, becomes so powerful that it can overcome the five mental hindrances, thus bringing about purification of mind (citta visuddhi) which can enable a meditator to attain all the insight knowledges up to the level of arahatship. Pure vipassana yogis can appreciate and understand the power of khanika concentration. For when their noting gains momentum, they can see for themselves how the noting goes on by itself uninterruptedly without a break. The noting seems to run on its own steam without any need for the yogi to make any concerted or deliberate effort. Thus, it is not unusual for a yogi to be able to sit for an hour, and even several hours, absorbed in noting." http://www.quantrum.com.my/bwc/vtribune/vt4n2p14.html This indicates the need for development in concentration to the point that, whether one calls it "khanika" or otherwise, strengthens Right Mindfulness to where it is deep enough to lead to release. Not giving proper due to the repeated injunctions in the Satipatthan Sutta to train in "remaining focused", for example, ("[one] trains [one]self to breathe in calming bodily fabrication, and to breathe out calming bodily fabrication") in the Satipatthana Sutta, it seems one could easily get lost amidst the cacophony of sensory stimuli of merely noting eye-sense, ear-sense, etc., and without the solid basis in concentration suggested by "remaining focused" until the mind is well-trained, it is difficult for me to see how one can develop the sort of concentration that acts as a basis for Right Mindfulness, which in turn acts as a basis for the insight leading to emergence (vutthanagamini-vipassana-ñana--which for the technically inclined kicks over into anuloma, gotrabhu, and the lokuttara cittas of magga and phala). If khanika samadhi (momentary samadhi possessed of all sentient beings, even insects, according to K. Sujin's definition synonymous with the ekagatta-cetasika samadhi arising as a sabba-citta- sadharana-cetasika--a concomitant of all cittas), then it seems that the concentration aspect of bhavana is being glossed over if one reads the Satipatthana Sutta without an eye toward concentrating the mind on the objects of focus until it is well-trained enough to maintain mindfulness uninterrruptedly for (relatively) long periods of time. I have found, parctically speaking, that all these exercises help "tighten" concentration to the point it can remain focused for extended periods of time, to where one-pointedness becomes automatic. Lacking sufficient concentration, it would appear one would only be scratching the surface of what is entailed by Right Mindfulness. So in my opnion (and just looking at the difference between when I have practiced these exercises and haven't, in terms of remaining mindful and concentrated), without experience informed by diligent practice of the mind training indicated in the Satipatthana Sutta, the odds of ever directly penetrating the characteristics of dhammas seems pretty slim. There are savants (usually autistic) who can belt out Rachmaninov without a day of practice; there are Dhamma geniuses who terminate the fetters on hearing a single sutta, or merely pursue wise consideration (yoniso mansikara) on certain objects and realize the fruits thereby. But this is not at all true for most of us. Those of us not similarly gifted seem to need a fair deal of concerted practice if we wish the Dhamma equivalent of playing Carnegie Hall: the lokuttara ñanas. That is why I cannot help but return again and again to the question I feel is of utmost importance here: how does being aware, intellectually, of the truth of anatta, lead to the sort of insight needed to terminate the fetters? I'm not denying the importance of studying how all things lack self-nature, but question how this-- without diligently practicing ones' meditative "chops" until the mind is well-trained and can remain focused for long periods of time- -is enough to lead to the sole aim of the Dhamma: the termination of suffering. 10490 From: abhidhammika Date: Tue Jan 1, 2002 7:38am Subject: Re: Luminous Mind: To Nina, Mike, Robert Kirk, Sarah, Howard, Robert Ep Dear Nina How are you? Happy new year! You wrote: " You say, bhavangacitta is conditioned by the javanacittas that arise. By what type of the twentyfour conditions? I was puzzled by this." It is "KAMMAPACCAYO" that conditions bhavangacittam. The following qoute comes from Section 13, Paccayuddesa, Patthaana Pali, Vol.1. I copied and pasted from Chatthasangayana CD-ROM version 3. 13. "Kammapaccayoti– kusalaakusalam kammam (vipaakaanam khandhaanam, resultant mental aggregates) katattaa ca ruupaanam kammapaccayena paccayo." This Patthaana statement also shows that we cannot equate bhavanga cittam with nibbaana. You know very well why. With best wishes Suan http://www.bodhiology.org --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > > >> > >> > >> SUTTAM STATEMENT AND TRANSLATION > >> > >> 49. "Pabhassaramidam, Bhikkhave, cittam. Tañca kho aagantukehi > >> upakkilesehi upakkilitthanti." > >> > >> "Monks, this mind is radiant. And, that very mind is tarnished by > >> guest blots." > >> > >> > >> COMMENTARY PALI > >> > >> 49. Navame pabhassaranti pandaram parisuddham. > >> Cittanti bhavangacittam. Kim pana cittassa vanno naama > >> atth²ti? Natthi. Niilaadiinañhi aññataravannam vaa > >> hotu > >> avannam vaa yamkiñci parisuddhataaya "pabhassaran"ti > >> vuccati. Idampi nirupakkilesataaya parisuddhanti > >> pabhassaram. Tañca khoti tam bhavangacittam. > >> > >> Aagantukehiiti asahajaatehi pacchaa javanakkhane > >> uppajjanakehi. Upakkilesehiiti raagaadiihi upakkilitthattaa > >> upakkilittham naamaati vuccati. > >> > >> Katham? Yathaa hi siilavantaa aacaarasampannaa maataapitaro vaa > >> aacariyupajjhaayaa vaa dussiilaanam duraacaaraanam > >> avattasampannaanam puttaanañceva antevaasikasaddhivihaarikaanañca > >> vasena "attano putte vaa antevaasikasaddhivihaarike vaa na > >> tajjenti na sikkhaapenti na ovadanti naanusaasantii"ti avannam > >> akittim labhanti, evamsampadamidam veditabbam. > >> > >> Aacaara-sampannaa maataapitaro viya ca aacariyupajjhaayaa > >> viya ca bhavangacittam datthabbam, puttaadiinam vasena tesam > >> akittilaabho viya javanakkhane rajjanadussanamuyhanasa > >> bhaavaanam lobhasahagataadiinam cittaanam vasena uppannehi > >> aagantukehi upakkilesehi pakatiparisuddhampi bhavangacittam > >> upakkilittham naama hotiiti. > >> > >> > >> > >> COMMENTARY TRANSLATION > >> > >> 49. In the ninth statement, the term `radiant' signifies whiteness or > >> purity, and means complete cleanness. The term `mind' refers to the > >> life-cause consciousness. How is there such a thing as the color of > >> the mind? There isn't. Whatever thing, be it with any color such as > >> brown, or be it colorless, is said to be radiant, due to its complete > >> cleanness. This mind, too, is said to be radiant because it is > >> completely clean due to the absence of blots. The phrase `and that > >> very mind' means `that life-cause consciousness.' > >> > >> The phrase `by guest' refers to the asynchronous mental events > >> happening later at the moments of the rapid repeats. The phrase `by > >> blots' means "by the mental events with lust and so on." The Buddha > >> said the scenario of being tarnished due to the mind being tarnished > >> by things such as lust. > >> > >> How so? Like the virtuous and refined parents or teachers and > >> preceptors, - on account of the immoral, unrefined, undutiful sons or > >> insider pupils and live-in pupils, - indeed received condemnation and > >> notoriety as those who do not threaten, train, instruct, and steer > >> one's own sons or insider pupils and live-in pupils, so this > >> example's completeness should be noted. > >> > >> The life-cause consciousness should be seen as the refined parents or > >> as the refined teachers and preceptors. And, like their earning of > >> notoriety by means of sons and so on, the naturally pure life- cause > >> consciousness comes to be tarnished by guest blots happening, at the > >> moments of the rapid repeats, as the mental events co-arising with > >> greed and so on having the instincts of lust, destructiveness, or > >> foolishness. > >> > >> > >> NOTES > >> > >> Aagantukehi - by guests > >> > >> Asahajaatehi uppajjanakehi - the asynchronous mental events > >> > >> Asahajaatehi – not happening together > >> > >> Uppajjanaka – Literally, those that happen > >> > >> Javanakkhane – the moments of the rapid repeats. Javana literally > >> means rapidity. In the context of a cognitive series called viitthi, > >> rapidity refers to the seven rapid repeats of the similar mental > >> events. > >> > >> From the angle of the life-cause consciousness, the Buddha described > >> the rapid repetitions as guests. It is simply a scenario of bhavanga > >> cittas versus javana cittas. > >> > >> Pakatiparisuddham bhavangacittam - the naturally pure life-cause > >> consciousness. Bhavanga cittam is a shorthand name for the sensuous > >> healthy resultant mind (Kaamaavacara kusala vipaaka cittam). > >> Therefore, the natural purity of bhavanga cittam does not extend > >> beyond the meanings of the terms "kusala" and "vipaaka." Furthermore, > >> it is continually conditioned and challenged by javana cittas. > >> > >Dear Suan, thank you very much for your translation and remarks. The last > sentence is indeed challenging. May I try with an example? Angulimaala was > born with three wholesome roots: alobha, adosa and pa~n~naa. Also all his > bhavangacittas were accompanied by these three. Bhavangacittas are vipaka, > produced by kamma. Bhavangacitta arises and then falls away completely. But > when there is a condition for its arising, in deep sleep or between > processes, kamma produces bhavangacitta, always the same type type, > throughout life. That type cannot change. That citta is just vipaka, > passive, it cannot act in a kusala or akusala way. The fact that it is > accompanied by pa~n~naa (but pa~n~naa is vipaka in this case) shows us that > he was born with a capability to develop during his life right > understanding, even to the degree of enlightenment. Pa~n~naa is developed > during the moments of javana. But his javana cittas were often of a strong > degree of akusala, killing other people to have their fingers for his > collection. Evenso, he attained arahatship. He met the Buddha and could > after listening develop understanding of all realities of his life. He also > saw that akusala citta is a conditioned reality, non-self, otherwise he > could not have attained arahatship. > The bhavangacittas are the good parents, but he was blamed because of the > akusala javana cittas, the naughty children. Would his accumulated wisdom be > the conqueror, or his new accumulations of all that akusala during javana? A > challenge, and what will conquer? > The opposite can also happen. We may be born with pa~n~naa but we waste the > accumulated potentialities by our laziness, by forgetfulness of realities. > When we see someone else we can never judge him by his deeds, we do not know > what kind of accumulations he has. > You say, bhavangacitta is conditioned by the javanacittas that arise. By > what type of the twentyfour conditions? I was puzzled by this. > Thank you and my best wishes for the new year, Nina. 10491 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Tue Jan 1, 2002 7:54am Subject: RE: [dsg] deceiving dhammas Dear Nina, Thanks for asking this question, as I got to review what are the vancaka dhammas. In general, I like hearing about some subtleties of the dhamma because I find that by knowing about them, I tend to pay attention toward the particular aspect (paying attention at pariyatti or direct level, or paying attention with panna are different stories). It is like opening up a new world previously unknown or only known through a veil. I think by being precise and detailed about the subtleties of the dhamma conceptually, panna (and all the associated nama) can develop to understand more detailed aspects of the dhammas. The other thing is, I don't see how one develops kusala and abandons akusala unless one understand in details the differences between them. It is so easy for me to mistake akusala as kusala. In retrospect, the mistakes are often (and continues to be!) not so subtle. It is amazing that it takes a person with panna to point out some of these big mistakes: avijja is so overwhelming. Before I mentioned the specific examples of the vancaka dhammas that apply to me (in another post), I have two more stories for you regarding the India trip that are somewhat related to this conversation. The first story is about what A. Supee said, and the other one a combination of what A. Supee and A. Sujin said. A. Supee mentioned that whenever you asked him questions (in India), he would like other people to hear the questions. He said you asked him very detaild questions, and it is rare to hear such questions, leaving alone good answers. One of the questions he mentioned was that when one runs into an unpleasant situation, one thinks(?) about something that on the surface sounds like panna. However, if one considers that more carefully, it appears that it is not panna that arises, but it is the lobha that chooses its object. This is generally exactly like the vancaka dhammas, and just like vancaka dhammas, it begs to be proven in daily life. There was another controversy that was discussed in India: how much detail does one study conceptually? On one side (A), it is said that one only needs to understand the basic concepts, and then after that, satipatthana should be the main way to develop panna. On the other side (B), it is necessary to know lots and lots of details. I understand (C) from A. Sujin and A. Supee(misunderstanding?) that one should study what one can understand, especially those that apply in daily life. I apply the above situations to the current particular situations as followed, which probably guarantee more controversies: (A): I already understand what Satipatthana is, why bother with hearing about vancaka dhammas, bhawangas, and conditionalities at all? I can learn the subtleties of the different dhammas through direct perception. (B): I need to know all the different aspects of vancaka dhammas, bhawangas, and conditionalities. I should be able to explain all dhammas in term of conditionalities, as that would give me all the different details about the dhammas. (C): One needs to listen a lot, and consider a lot, but one needs to know the limit of one's understanding. Remembering all the details about vancaka dhammas are not going to help in daily life, as not all the dhammas mentioned in the teaching would appear. Remembering all the details about conditionalities are not going to help, as the details of those don't appear to one anyway. It is important to learn enough to answer one's own (important) questions - to eliminate vicikiccha. For panna to know finer and more subtles dhammas (and panna must know, otherwise, how could it be [roo jang, roo tua] (penetration?, knowing all-around), then the conceptual understanding, through listening and consideration, must be equivallently well-refined. kom > -----Original Message----- > From: Nina van Gorkom [mailto:nilo@e...] > Sent: Monday, December 31, 2001 7:49 AM > To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com > Subject: [dsg] deceiving dhammas > > > Dear Kom, you alluded to the vancaka dhammas, > deceiving dhammas. Could you > mention just a few that you find particularly > helpful to consider in daily > life? I find too that by hearing about more > subtle defilements it helps at > least on the level of pariyatti to notice them. > On the other hand I was > warned by A. Sujin: don't analyse, that is > thinking again. I am inclined to > analyse. > Nina. 10492 From: fcckuan Date: Tue Jan 1, 2002 7:55am Subject: one limb of 8 fold path more important (was satipathana and practice) --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "rikpa21" wrote: > Anyway the Samadhi Sutta is just as important (is one limb of the > Noble Eightfold path "more or less" important than any other?), In the samyutta, the Buddha uses a simile. Just as dawn precedes sunrise, right view precedes the other factors of the 8fold noble path. This stands to reason. If one has keen right view, then with right view one can correct deficiencies in the other 7 factors. But if one is deficient in right view, deviant in view, lacking in right view, it's difficult if not impossible to correct or properly develop the other factors. The rest of Erik's post is interesting and I'd like to comment on it another time when I have more time :-) -fk > since concentration is inseparable from Right Mindfulness. Anything > that serves as a basis for mindfulness and the final aim, the ending > of the effluents, seems a pretty important teaching in my book. For > example, the "Samadhi Sutta" notes: > > "And what is the development of concentration that, when developed & > pursued, leads to mindfulness & alertness? There is the case where > feelings are known to the monk as they arise, known as they persist, > known as they subside. Perceptions are known to him as they arise, > known as they persist, known as they subside. Thoughts are known to > him as they arise, known as they persist, known as they subside. > This is the development of concentration that, when developed & > pursued, leads to mindfulness & alertness. > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/anguttara/an04-041.html > > "And what is the development of concentration that, when developed & > pursued, leads to the ending of the effluents? There is the case > where a monk remains focused on arising & falling away with > reference to the five clinging-aggregates: 'Such is form, such its > origination, such its passing away. Such is feeling, such its > origination, such its passing away. Such is perception, such its > origination, such its passing away. Such are fabrications, such > their origination, such their passing away. Such is consciousness, > such its origination, such its disappearance.' This is the > development of concentration that, when developed & pursued, leads > to the ending of the effluents." > > This sutta seems to imply that samadhi is an important piece of the > entire puzzle. No metion is made of "satipatthana" here. This is, > after all, the "Samadhi Sutta." The presence of samadhi and the type > of concentration on five aggregates formulated exactly as found in > the Satipatthana Sutta (not to mention that "remaining focused" on > various objects is mentioned in nearly every stanza of the > Satipatthana Sutta) may give a better clue as to how samma sati and > samma samadhi fit together. > > Just considering my own experience (the only thing any of us can > rely on when all is said and done), Right Mindfulness requires > concentration as a basis, and the mind needs to be trained well > enough by diligent practicing the the exercises found in the > Satipatthana or Samadhi Suttas, such that Right Mindfulness can > remain unbroken over long periods of time and deepen to the point > that meaningful insights have a basis for arising. > > I particularly like this quote, though I don't know the actual > source for it: > > "...when the vipassana meditator develops strength and skill in > noting, his khanika concentration occurs uninterruptedly in a series > without a break. This concentration, when it occurs from moment to > moment without a break, becomes so powerful that it can overcome the > five mental hindrances, thus bringing about purification of mind > (citta visuddhi) which can enable a meditator to attain all the > insight knowledges up to the level of arahatship. Pure vipassana > yogis can appreciate and understand the power of khanika > concentration. For when their noting gains momentum, they can see > for themselves how the noting goes on by itself uninterruptedly > without a break. The noting seems to run on its own steam without > any need for the yogi to make any concerted or deliberate effort. > Thus, it is not unusual for a yogi to be able to sit for an hour, > and even several hours, absorbed in noting." > http://www.quantrum.com.my/bwc/vtribune/vt4n2p14.html > > This indicates the need for development in concentration to the > point that, whether one calls it "khanika" or otherwise, strengthens > Right Mindfulness to where it is deep enough to lead to release. > > Not giving proper due to the repeated injunctions in the Satipatthan > Sutta to train in "remaining focused", for example, ("[one] trains > [one]self to breathe in calming bodily fabrication, and to breathe > out calming bodily fabrication") in the Satipatthana Sutta, it seems > one could easily get lost amidst the cacophony of sensory stimuli of > merely noting eye-sense, ear-sense, etc., and without the solid > basis in concentration suggested by "remaining focused" until the > mind is well-trained, it is difficult for me to see how one can > develop the sort of concentration that acts as a basis for Right > Mindfulness, which in turn acts as a basis for the insight leading > to emergence (vutthanagamini-vipassana-ñana--which for the > technically inclined kicks over into anuloma, gotrabhu, and the > lokuttara cittas of magga and phala). > > If khanika samadhi (momentary samadhi possessed of all sentient > beings, even insects, according to K. Sujin's definition synonymous > with the ekagatta-cetasika samadhi arising as a sabba-citta- > sadharana-cetasika--a concomitant of all cittas), then it seems that > the concentration aspect of bhavana is being glossed over if one > reads the Satipatthana Sutta without an eye toward concentrating the > mind on the objects of focus until it is well-trained enough to > maintain mindfulness uninterrruptedly for (relatively) long periods > of time. > > I have found, parctically speaking, that all these exercises > help "tighten" concentration to the point it can remain focused for > extended periods of time, to where one-pointedness becomes > automatic. > > Lacking sufficient concentration, it would appear one would only be > scratching the surface of what is entailed by Right Mindfulness. So > in my opnion (and just looking at the difference between when I have > practiced these exercises and haven't, in terms of remaining > mindful and concentrated), without experience informed by diligent > practice of the mind training indicated in the Satipatthana Sutta, > the odds of ever directly penetrating the characteristics of > dhammas seems pretty slim. > > There are savants (usually autistic) who can belt out Rachmaninov > without a day of practice; there are Dhamma geniuses who terminate > the fetters on hearing a single sutta, or merely pursue wise > consideration (yoniso mansikara) on certain objects and realize the > fruits thereby. But this is not at all true for most of us. Those of > us not similarly gifted seem to need a fair deal of concerted > practice if we wish the Dhamma equivalent of playing Carnegie Hall: > the lokuttara ñanas. > > That is why I cannot help but return again and again to the question > I feel is of utmost importance here: how does being aware, > intellectually, of the truth of anatta, lead to the sort of insight > needed to terminate the fetters? I'm not denying the importance of > studying how all things lack self-nature, but question how this-- > without diligently practicing ones' meditative "chops" until the > mind is well-trained and can remain focused for long periods of time- > -is enough to lead to the sole aim of the Dhamma: the termination of > suffering. 10493 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Tue Jan 1, 2002 8:27am Subject: RE: [dsg] deceiving dhammas Dear Nina, I forgot to mention in the previous post another story I remember. Regarding analysis, I think I like to do this too, even though it is impossible to do a proper analysis. In India, we discussed "identification" issues. She mentioned that unless one has reached a level of vipassana-nana (which one? nama-rupa?) it is really not possible to see clearly the difference between the different nama, e.g., lobha and dosa. Until one reaches the vipassana-nana, then the lakhana of the dhamma as being dhamma is not apparent, and therefore the differences (of the lakkhana) between the namas cannot be clearly seen. Hence, for those of us who likes to identify (in words or not), she mention that this is not fruitful (as it is impossible to clearly see). She said (or came close to saying) that instead of identification, seeing the lakhana of the nama that knows (the previous object?) would help with understandings more. Of course, unless one understands why identification (and analysis) is not as useful, or sees (perhaps) the lobha that comes with the identification/analysis, then one continues to analyze... kom > -----Original Message----- > From: Nina van Gorkom [mailto:nilo@e...] > Sent: Monday, December 31, 2001 7:49 AM > To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com > Subject: [dsg] deceiving dhammas > > > Dear Kom, you alluded to the vancaka dhammas, > deceiving dhammas. Could you > mention just a few that you find particularly > helpful to consider in daily > life? I find too that by hearing about more > subtle defilements it helps at > least on the level of pariyatti to notice them. > On the other hand I was > warned by A. Sujin: don't analyse, that is > thinking again. I am inclined to > analyse. > Nina. 10494 From: Date: Tue Jan 1, 2002 3:38am Subject: Re: [dsg] Satipatthana and Practice Hi, Erik - Thank you for this post! I just bookmarked the Samadhi Sutta for extended study. It looks like a real find to me. You may recall that in a recent post I briefly compared and contrasted the concentration of samatha bhavana and vipassana bhavana, indicating that while they differ, they may be comparably powerful. I suspect that the powerful moment-to-moment concentration on the flow of "paramattha dhammas" is at the very heart of vipassana bhavana (a concentration held in place by the vigilance of mindfulness, by the sati which "doesn't forget" to stay present.) With metta, Howard In a message dated 1/1/02 9:18:52 AM Eastern Standard Time, rikpa21@y... writes: > --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Sarah wrote: > > > p.s > > ....and yes, Erik and his delightful and very sweet new bride > joined us > > for the last discussion and the Satipatthana Sutta ("not the > Samadhi > > Sutta") was discussed at length. > > Eath was absolutely delighted to attend the Dhama discussion there > yesterday, and in spite of not being able to completely follow the > speed of our English, she recognized many of the Pali terms used, > and we wound up having our own mini-discussion on some of the terms > she did recognize from the discussion--pañña and > sampajjana--sitting together under the Bo Tree (which she identified > for me as a Bo tree--I'd never seen, or rather, recognized one, > before, so that was kind of cool) outside the Foundation. > > Anyway the Samadhi Sutta is just as important (is one limb of the > Noble Eightfold path "more or less" important than any other?), > since concentration is inseparable from Right Mindfulness. Anything > that serves as a basis for mindfulness and the final aim, the ending > of the effluents, seems a pretty important teaching in my book. For > example, the "Samadhi Sutta" notes: > > "And what is the development of concentration that, when developed & > pursued, leads to mindfulness & alertness? There is the case where > feelings are known to the monk as they arise, known as they persist, > known as they subside. Perceptions are known to him as they arise, > known as they persist, known as they subside. Thoughts are known to > him as they arise, known as they persist, known as they subside. > This is the development of concentration that, when developed & > pursued, leads to mindfulness & alertness. > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/anguttara/an04-041.html > > "And what is the development of concentration that, when developed & > pursued, leads to the ending of the effluents? There is the case > where a monk remains focused on arising & falling away with > reference to the five clinging-aggregates: 'Such is form, such its > origination, such its passing away. Such is feeling, such its > origination, such its passing away. Such is perception, such its > origination, such its passing away. Such are fabrications, such > their origination, such their passing away. Such is consciousness, > such its origination, such its disappearance.' This is the > development of concentration that, when developed & pursued, leads > to the ending of the effluents." > > This sutta seems to imply that samadhi is an important piece of the > entire puzzle. No metion is made of "satipatthana" here. This is, > after all, the "Samadhi Sutta." The presence of samadhi and the type > of concentration on five aggregates formulated exactly as found in > the Satipatthana Sutta (not to mention that "remaining focused" on > various objects is mentioned in nearly every stanza of the > Satipatthana Sutta) may give a better clue as to how samma sati and > samma samadhi fit together. > > Just considering my own experience (the only thing any of us can > rely on when all is said and done), Right Mindfulness requires > concentration as a basis, and the mind needs to be trained well > enough by diligent practicing the the exercises found in the > Satipatthana or Samadhi Suttas, such that Right Mindfulness can > remain unbroken over long periods of time and deepen to the point > that meaningful insights have a basis for arising. > > I particularly like this quote, though I don't know the actual > source for it: > > "...when the vipassana meditator develops strength and skill in > noting, his khanika concentration occurs uninterruptedly in a series > without a break. This concentration, when it occurs from moment to > moment without a break, becomes so powerful that it can overcome the > five mental hindrances, thus bringing about purification of mind > (citta visuddhi) which can enable a meditator to attain all the > insight knowledges up to the level of arahatship. Pure vipassana > yogis can appreciate and understand the power of khanika > concentration. For when their noting gains momentum, they can see > for themselves how the noting goes on by itself uninterruptedly > without a break. The noting seems to run on its own steam without > any need for the yogi to make any concerted or deliberate effort. > Thus, it is not unusual for a yogi to be able to sit for an hour, > and even several hours, absorbed in noting." > http://www.quantrum.com.my/bwc/vtribune/vt4n2p14.html > > This indicates the need for development in concentration to the > point that, whether one calls it "khanika" or otherwise, strengthens > Right Mindfulness to where it is deep enough to lead to release. > > Not giving proper due to the repeated injunctions in the Satipatthan > Sutta to train in "remaining focused", for example, ("[one] trains > [one]self to breathe in calming bodily fabrication, and to breathe > out calming bodily fabrication") in the Satipatthana Sutta, it seems > one could easily get lost amidst the cacophony of sensory stimuli of > merely noting eye-sense, ear-sense, etc., and without the solid > basis in concentration suggested by "remaining focused" until the > mind is well-trained, it is difficult for me to see how one can > develop the sort of concentration that acts as a basis for Right > Mindfulness, which in turn acts as a basis for the insight leading > to emergence (vutthanagamini-vipassana-ñana--which for the > technically inclined kicks over into anuloma, gotrabhu, and the > lokuttara cittas of magga and phala). > > If khanika samadhi (momentary samadhi possessed of all sentient > beings, even insects, according to K. Sujin's definition synonymous > with the ekagatta-cetasika samadhi arising as a sabba-citta- > sadharana-cetasika--a concomitant of all cittas), then it seems that > the concentration aspect of bhavana is being glossed over if one > reads the Satipatthana Sutta without an eye toward concentrating the > mind on the objects of focus until it is well-trained enough to > maintain mindfulness uninterrruptedly for (relatively) long periods > of time. > > I have found, parctically speaking, that all these exercises > help "tighten" concentration to the point it can remain focused for > extended periods of time, to where one-pointedness becomes > automatic. > > Lacking sufficient concentration, it would appear one would only be > scratching the surface of what is entailed by Right Mindfulness. So > in my opnion (and just looking at the difference between when I have > practiced these exercises and haven't, in terms of remaining > mindful and concentrated), without experience informed by diligent > practice of the mind training indicated in the Satipatthana Sutta, > the odds of ever directly penetrating the characteristics of > dhammas seems pretty slim. > > There are savants (usually autistic) who can belt out Rachmaninov > without a day of practice; there are Dhamma geniuses who terminate > the fetters on hearing a single sutta, or merely pursue wise > consideration (yoniso mansikara) on certain objects and realize the > fruits thereby. But this is not at all true for most of us. Those of > us not similarly gifted seem to need a fair deal of concerted > practice if we wish the Dhamma equivalent of playing Carnegie Hall: > the lokuttara ñanas. > > That is why I cannot help but return again and again to the question > I feel is of utmost importance here: how does being aware, > intellectually, of the truth of anatta, lead to the sort of insight > needed to terminate the fetters? I'm not denying the importance of > studying how all things lack self-nature, but question how this-- > without diligently practicing ones' meditative "chops" until the > mind is well-trained and can remain focused for long periods of time- > -is enough to lead to the sole aim of the Dhamma: the termination of > suffering. > /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) 10495 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Jan 1, 2002 10:04am Subject: Re: [dsg] defilements op 30-12-2001 16:34 schreef Kom Tukovinit op tikmok@y...: >>> >>> K. Jaran and A. Supi was discussing about >> Kilesa, and why >>> only 10 akusala cetasikas are kilesas, and the >> other 4 are >>> not. The answer, I think you also wrote in >> Cetasikas, is >>> each Kilesa defiles the mind, where as the >> other four defile >>> the mental factors. At that point, I was asking him >>> questions about the other groupings of >> defilements including >>> Asava, etc. >> >> Dear Kom, thank you for bringing up these points. >> As to the 10 kilesas, I >> leant that they defile the dhammas that are >> conascent with them. Thus, in >> the case of sloth that is listed but not torpor: >> when there is sloth, torpor >> is always conascent with it, it is defiled by it. >> Regret (not listed as >> kilesa) is defiled by dosa conascent with it and >> also by the other kilesas >> which (not all of them) are conascent with it. > >K: Thanks for explaining these points further. I would like to > confirm what I understand you to say. > 1) Torpor is defiled by sloth and other conascent kilesas? > 2) Regret is defiled by dosa and other conascent kilesas? > >N: I looked up my notes, A.Sujin dealt with them last time I was in Bgk. She said: <> As to the word follow, we do not think of time: this first, then that. The defilements that arise together with the other conascent cetasikas make them impure. Nina. > 10496 From: robertkirkpatrick.rm Date: Tue Jan 1, 2002 11:44am Subject: An Addendum and a Msg to the List Re: [dsg] The White Radiant Mind --- Thanks Howard, And thank you for being one of the main contributors to dsg, helping to make it the great place for the discussion of the Dhamma that it is. Had an interesting day yesterday: put a deposit on a small apartment in Auckland (for an investment), where I've been for the last week. Just before the agent arrived for the signing a woamn drove into a tree in front of me and was killed. I think we really live alone (no matter how many people we know) with kamma as our only possesion. robert In dhammastudygroup@y..., upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi again, Robert - > > So as not to end the Gregorian-calendar year with a disagreement ;-)), > let me add that whatever nibbana really is, and whatever our differing > misguided notions of it may be ;-)), I know that we are in complete > *agreement* in wishing for the other all and only what is good. May nibbana, > the ultimate good, be yours (though there *is* no you! ;-), and soon! And > may you, and *all* the loving and brilliant folks on DSG have a wonderful > year, a year filled with santi, metta, and the sukkha of Dhamma - with peace, > lovingkindness, and the joy of the Buddha's wonderful teaching! > > With metta, > Howard 10497 From: Date: Tue Jan 1, 2002 7:26am Subject: Re: An Addendum and a Msg to the List Re: [dsg] The White Radiant Mind Hi, Robert - In a message dated 1/1/02 2:47:02 PM Eastern Standard Time, robertkirkpatrick@r... writes: > Thanks Howard, > And thank you for being one of the main contributors to dsg, helping > to make it the great place for the discussion of the Dhamma that it > is. > ---------------------------------------------------- Howard: Thanks much, Robert! --------------------------------------------------- > Had an interesting day yesterday: put a deposit on a small apartment > in Auckland (for an investment), where I've been for the last week. > ---------------------------------------------------- Howard: Good luck with the investment. --------------------------------------------------- > > Just before the agent arrived for the signing a woamn drove into a > tree in front of me and was killed. > --------------------------------------------------- Howard: My god! (Hmm, yes ... interesting.) How awful! -------------------------------------------------- I think we really live alone (no > matter how many people we know) with > kamma as our only possesion. -------------------------------------------------- Howard: Yes. And there is much misery to go around. The year 2001 has been a difficult one for many people. On a personal note, there are many people, very close to us, who came down with rather serious cases of cancer during 2001. Frankly, I've never seen so much! I don't know whether the environment is "going to hell", or what. But it's been bad. And, of course, the various world events have affected many people quite personally. The only advantage to such tribulation, it seems, is the impetus it gives to spiritual practice (Buddhist practice in our case). ------------------------------------------------------- > 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) 10498 From: Sarah Date: Tue Jan 1, 2002 10:12pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Satipatthana and Practice Hi Erik, A quick correction and apology .., Sarah wrote: > > > p.s > > ....and yes, Erik and his delightful and very sweet new bride > joined us > > for the last discussion and the Satipatthana Sutta ("not the > Samadhi > > Sutta") was discussed at length. This should have read: for the last discussion and the Satipatthana Sutta(“not the Samadhipatthana Sutta”) was discussed at length. Sorry for the mistake. I certainly didn’t mean to suggest the Samadhi Sutta should not be studied or is not important. The point about Satipathana was that it is referring to the 4 Foundations of Mindfulness and not 4 Foundations of Samadhi here (or elsewhere). --- rikpa21 wrote: >> > Eath was absolutely delighted to attend the Dhama discussion there > yesterday, and in spite of not being able to completely follow the > speed of our English, she recognized many of the Pali terms used, > and we wound up having our own mini-discussion on some of the terms > she did recognize from the discussion--pañña and > sampajjana--sitting together under the Bo Tree (which she identified > for me as a Bo tree--I'd never seen, or rather, recognized one, > before, so that was kind of cool) outside the Foundation. I’m very glad to hear about Eath’s response....it’s not at all easy even for native English speakers to join these discussions in the beginning. Great seeing both of you and look f/w to hearing more discussion on your detailed post and reading it more carefully. Still catching up. Speak soon, best wishes to Eath, Sarah p.s ask Eath to keep up her good work of slowing your speech down;-)) ====================================================== 10499 From: Sarah Date: Tue Jan 1, 2002 10:51pm Subject: Re: [dsg] defilements Dear Nina & Kom. I asked a question on this topic following Kom's original post. K.Sujin repeated as you have written in these 2 notes below, Nina. She also used the word 'affected' in the sense that middha (torpor), kukkucca (regret,worry), machariya (stinginess) and issaa (jealousy) are all affected by the other akusala cetasikas; "you can have dosa (aversion) without machariya (stinginess), but not the other way round". Sarah --- Nina van Gorkom wrote: > >> Dear Kom, thank you for bringing up these points. > >> As to the 10 kilesas, I > >> leant that they defile the dhammas that are > >> conascent with them. Thus, in > >> the case of sloth that is listed but not torpor: > >> when there is sloth, torpor > >> is always conascent with it, it is defiled by it. > >> Regret (not listed as > >> kilesa) is defiled by dosa conascent with it and > >> also by the other kilesas > >> which (not all of them) are conascent with it. > > > >K: Thanks for explaining these points further. I would like to > > confirm what I understand you to say. > > 1) Torpor is defiled by sloth and other conascent kilesas? > > 2) Regret is defiled by dosa and other conascent kilesas? > > > >N: I looked up my notes, A.Sujin dealt with them last time I was in > Bgk. She > said: > < akusala to follow. Dosa is kilesa and it conditions other cetasikas, > such as > jealousy and avarice to follow. Sloth conditions torpor to follow it.>> > As to the word follow, we do not think of time: this first, then that. > The > defilements that arise together with the other conascent cetasikas make > them > impure. > Nina. 10500 From: Sarah Date: Wed Jan 2, 2002 0:25am Subject: Re: [dsg] The White Radiant Mind - annihilation view Dear Rob K and Howard, I had a few notes and references on the annihilation theme which I didn't have time to put together before my trip. Let me add them now after snipping from your interesting posts: Howard wrote: > > . But the idea that (the state > of) > > parinibbana is literally *nothing* in every possible sense strikes > me as at > > best very silly. It makes the goal of Buddhism no different from > the goal of > > a suicidal materialist! (How would it differ?) > > ----------------------------------------------------------- Rob K wrote: > A suicidal materialist believes in a self, a self that will be > extinguished at death. He thinks that by killing himself > consciousness and the painful feelings that arise together with > consciousness will then cease. However, this dependent origination > that he takes to be "his" life cannot cease until the conditions for > it have been uprooted. Physical death is just another moment like any > other and the cycle continues on another plane somewhere. The death > of an arahnat is different, there are no more conditions for this > long, long cycle to continue. ........................................................................................................ Sarah: There are some useful notes at the back of B.Bodhi’s translation of the Kaccaanagotta Sutta which I know is a favourite of Howard’s: ..... From the Sutta (SN 11, Nidaanavagga, 15(5) )we read: “This world, Kaccaana, for the most part depends upon a duality - upon the notion of existence and the notion of nonexistence “ (Dvayanissito khvaaya.m Kaccaana loko yebhuyyena atthita~n c’eva natthita~n ca.) ..... Com notes (Spk): “ ‘For the most part’ (yebhuyyena) means for the great multitude, with the exception of the noble individuals (ariyapuggala). The notion of existence (atthitaa) is eternalism (sassata); the notion of nonexistence (natthitaa) is annihilationism (uccheda).” ..... Com notes (Spk-p.t): “The notion of existence is eternalism because it maintains that the entire world (of personal existence) exists forever. The notion of nonexistence is annihilationism because it maintains that the entire world does not exist (forever) but is cut off.” ..... Back to the Sutta: “ But for one who sees the origin of the world as it really is with correct wisdom, there is no notion of nonexistence in regard to the world. And for one who sees the cessation of the world as it really is with correct wisdom, there is no notion of existence in regard to the world.” .... Com notes (Spk): “ ‘The origin of the world’: the production of the world of formations. ‘There is no notion of nonexistence in regard to the world’: there does not occur in him the annihilationist view that might arise in regard to phenomena produced and made manifest in the world of formations, holding ‘They do not exist.” ..... Com notes (Spk-p.t): “The annihilationist view might arise in regard to the world of formations thus: ‘On account of the annihilation and perishing of beings right where they are, there is no persisting being or phenomenon.’ It also includes the wrong view, having these formations as its object, which holds: ‘There are no beings who are reborn.’ That view does not occur in him; for one seeing with right understanding the production and origination of the world of formations in dependence on such diverse conditions as kamma, ignorance, craving, etc, that annihilationist view does not occur, since one sees the uninterrupted production of formations.” ..... Com notes (Spk): “ ‘The cessation of the world’: the dissolution (bhanga) of formations. ‘There is no notion of existence in regard to the world’; There does not occur in him the eternalist view which might arise in regard to phenomena produced and made manifest in the world of formations, holding ‘They exist’.” ..... Com notes (Spk-p.t): “The eternalist view mght arise in regard to the world of formations, taking it to exist at all times, owing to the apprehension of identity in the uninterrupted coninuum occurring in a cause-effect relationship. But that view ‘does not occur in him’; because he sees the cessation of the successively arisen phenomena and the arising of succesively new phenomena, the eternalist view does not occur.” ******* In other words, both views are inherently wrapped up in an idea of ‘self’ or identity in the ‘uninterrupted continuum’. While we cling to an idea of self, there is bound to be one of these views. In the Brahmajaala Sutta (and commentaries) we read in detail about all the possible wrong views including these. 7 kinds of annihilation view are mentioned in the sutta. I’ll just quote the first one: ..... (p.79 B.Bodhi trans.) “85. ‘Herein, bhikkhus, some recluse or brahmin asserts the following doctrine and view: ‘The self, good sir, has material form; it is composed of the four primary elements and originates from father and mother. Since this self, good sir, is annihilated and destroyed with the breakup of the body and does not exist after death, at this point the self is completely annihilated.’ In this way some proclaim the annihilation, destruction, and extermination of an existent being.’” ..... The other 6 kinds of annihilation view all end with the same last sentence about the belief of the ‘extermination of an existent being’. This idea of an ‘existent being’ is the real crux of the view. ..... In the sub-commentary notes (p.182), we read: “Since the destruction of the non-existent (asato) is impossible, the words ‘(annihilation) of an existent being’ are given signifying annihilation based on existence (atthibhaavanibandhano upacchedo).......” ..... A little later (p.183): “..For the assumption of a being arises when the compact of aggregates occurring in the form of a coninuum is not dissected (into its components). And since it is held that ‘the self exists so long as it is not annihilated,’ the assumption of annihilationism is based on the asumption of a being.’ “*** In summary, I don’t find any support for the idea that the cessation of all formations (i.e all phenomena including any experiencing of nibbana) at parinibbana has anything to do with an annihilation view Sarah ***For the non Pali-challenged: “Santaanavasena hi vattamaanesu khandhesu ghanavinibbhogaabhaavena sattagaaho, sattassa ca atthibhaavagaahanibandhano ucchedagaaho yaavaaya”m attaa na ucchijjati, taavaaya”m vijjati yevaa ti gaha.nto.” ====================================================== 10501 From: Sarah Date: Wed Jan 2, 2002 0:41am Subject: Re: An Addendum and a Msg to the List Re: [dsg] The White Radiant Mind Dear Howard, --- upasaka@a... wrote: > Howard: > Yes. And there is much misery to go around. The year 2001 has > been a > difficult one for many people. On a personal note, there are many > people, > very close to us, who came down with rather serious cases of cancer > during > 2001. Frankly, I've never seen so much! I don't know whether the > environment > is "going to hell", or what. But it's been bad. I'm very sorry to hear about these close friends (and relatives). We had a couple of years like that before and then 2001 was one of fine health for all those we 'hold dear'. We never know what conditions hold for us, but I sincerely hope you and your family and friends have a healthier and happier 2002. It's so very difficult, I find, when people are really sick to start considering Dhamma and kusala in general for the first time. Now we all have the chance. And, of course, the > various > world events have affected many people quite personally. The only > advantage > to such tribulation, it seems, is the impetus it gives to spiritual > practice > (Buddhist practice in our case). Yes, you've put it much better. As Nina and Num reminded us, we can put the loss or difficulties to good purpose if it encourages the development of all that is skilful and wise. Very best wishes to you and your family. Sarah p.s There are some really useful discussion groups on line (like this) for each kind of common and rare cancer which can be very useful for gaining information, accessing resources and offering support, just as we do with the dhamma. ------------------------------------------------------- 10502 From: wangchuk37 Date: Wed Jan 2, 2002 2:46am Subject: happy new year 2002 as my first gift to you for this new year you can still consult free of charge the full Buddhist bibliography at : http://www.cyberdistributeur.com/buddbib.html I am planning to launch a directory (list of links) to Buddhist web sites so if you wish to have your web site listed, please do let me know and i'll include it in the next update, for this please use the feedback form at : http://www.cyberdistributeur.com/feedback.htm Again of my best wishes for a prosperous happy new year, Roger 10503 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Wed Jan 2, 2002 5:22am Subject: Re: [dsg] defilements Nina, Kom, Sarah and others --- Nina van Gorkom wrote: > op 30-12-2001 16:34 schreef Kom Tukovinit op tikmok@y...: > >>> K. Jaran and A. Supi was discussing about > >> Kilesa, and why > >>> only 10 akusala cetasikas are kilesas, and the > >> other 4 are > >>> not. The answer, I think you also wrote in > >> Cetasikas, is > >>> each Kilesa defiles the mind, where as the > >> other four defile > >>> the mental factors. At that point, I was asking him > >>> questions about the other groupings of > >> defilements including > >>> Asava, etc. > >> > >> Dear Kom, thank you for bringing up these points. > >> As to the 10 kilesas, I > >> leant that they defile the dhammas that are > >> conascent with them. Thus, in > >> the case of sloth that is listed but not torpor: > >> when there is sloth, torpor > >> is always conascent with it, it is defiled by it. > >> Regret (not listed as > >> kilesa) is defiled by dosa conascent with it and > >> also by the other kilesas > >> which (not all of them) are conascent with it. > > > >K: Thanks for explaining these points further. I would like to > > confirm what I understand you to say. > > 1) Torpor is defiled by sloth and other conascent kilesas? > > 2) Regret is defiled by dosa and other conascent kilesas? > > > >N: I looked up my notes, A.Sujin dealt with them last time I was in > Bgk. She > said: > < akusala to follow. Dosa is kilesa and it conditions other cetasikas, > such as > jealousy and avarice to follow. Sloth conditions torpor to follow it.>> > As to the word follow, we do not think of time: this first, then that. > The > defilements that arise together with the other conascent cetasikas make > them > impure. > Nina. And see also the explanation given in the Visuddhimagga ("thus called because they are themselves defiled, and because they defile the mental factors associated with them"), quoted in 'Buddhist Dictionary', and also the other references given there, pasted below. Jon From 'Buddhist Dictionary': Kilesa: 'defilements', are mind-defiling, unwholesome qualities. Vis.M. XXII, 49, 65: "There are 10 defilements, thus called because they are themselves defiled, and because they defile the mental factors associated with them..." The ten are explained in Dhs. 1229f and enumerated in Vibh. XII. [ends] http://www.palikanon.com/english/wtb/dic3_k2.htm 10504 From: Date: Wed Jan 2, 2002 2:35am Subject: Re: An Addendum and a Msg to the List Re: [dsg] The White Radiant Mind Thank you, Sarah. With metta, Howard In a message dated 1/2/02 3:42:04 AM Eastern Standard Time, sarahdhhk@y... writes: > Dear Howard, > > --- upasaka@a... wrote: > > Howard: > > Yes. And there is much misery to go around. The year 2001 has > > been a > > difficult one for many people. On a personal note, there are many > > people, > > very close to us, who came down with rather serious cases of cancer > > during > > 2001. Frankly, I've never seen so much! I don't know whether the > > environment > > is "going to hell", or what. But it's been bad. > > I'm very sorry to hear about these close friends (and relatives). We had a > couple of years like that before and then 2001 was one of fine health for > all those we 'hold dear'. We never know what conditions hold for us, but I > sincerely hope you and your family and friends have a healthier and > happier 2002. It's so very difficult, I find, when people are really sick > to start considering Dhamma and kusala in general for the first time. Now > we all have the chance. > > And, of course, the > > various > > world events have affected many people quite personally. The only > > advantage > > to such tribulation, it seems, is the impetus it gives to spiritual > > practice > > (Buddhist practice in our case). > > Yes, you've put it much better. As Nina and Num reminded us, we can put > the loss or difficulties to good purpose if it encourages the development > of all that is skilful and wise. > > Very best wishes to you and your family. > > Sarah > > p.s There are some really useful discussion groups on line (like this) for > each kind of common and rare cancer which can be very useful for gaining > information, accessing resources and offering support, just as we do with > the dhamma. > ------------------------------------------------------- > > /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) 10505 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Wed Jan 2, 2002 8:14am Subject: RE: [dsg] defilements Dear Nina & Sarah & Jon: Sarah, thanks for confirming this with A. Sujin: it is so great to live in a time where a kalayanamitta can (sometimes) help you with your questions. Nina, thank you so much for the patience in looking through your note for this simple question. I think I will need to ask more questions as a result of this. If you haven't caught this discrepancy in what I wrote, I would have never caught this misunderstanding. Your book, Cetasikas, already addressed what I think you confirmed; I just didn't read it carefully enough. 1) They [kilesas] are dirty, unclean, impure; they defile or torment the mind. 2) From Visuddhimagga (XXII, 49): They are so called because they are themselves defiled and they defile the states [?: both citta and cetasikas???: Jon's reference said mental factors instead of states] associated with them. 3) Example: Shamelessness has no shame of akusala and recklessness does not fear its consequences. They arise with each akusala citta, they defile citta and the accompanying cetasikas. A. Sujin's explanation seems to link the two groups: kilesas, and the other akusala cetasikas: 4) they [kilesas] condition other types of akusala to follow 5) Example: Dosa is kilesa and it conditions other cetasikas, such as jealousy and avarice to follow. Sloth conditions torpor to follow it. 6) middha (torpor), kukkucca (regret,worry), machariya (stinginess) and issaa(jealousy) are all affected by the other [conascent] akusala cetasikas [kilesa] 7) Example: "you can have dosa (aversion) without machariya (stinginess), but not the other way round". The quoted references are: 1) Dhammasangani, 1229 2) Book of Analysis, Vibhanga 17, 966 [Jon said Vibh. XII: is this the same one?] 3) Visuddhimagga XXII, 49 > -----Original Message----- > From: Sarah [mailto:sarahdhhk@y...] > Sent: Tuesday, January 01, 2002 10:52 PM > To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com > Subject: Re: [dsg] defilements > > > Dear Nina & Kom. > > I asked a question on this topic following Kom's > original post. K.Sujin > repeated as you have written in these 2 notes > below, Nina. She also used > the word 'affected' in the sense that middha > (torpor), kukkucca > (regret,worry), machariya (stinginess) and issaa > (jealousy) are all > affected by the other akusala cetasikas; "you can > have dosa (aversion) > without machariya (stinginess), but not the other > way round". > > Sarah > > > --- Nina van Gorkom wrote: 10506 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Jan 2, 2002 10:09am Subject: Re: [dsg] abhidhamma op 31-12-2001 18:42 schreef srnsk@a... op srnsk@a...: >Nina: You said Abhidhamma is like a dry > bone. Lodewijk said, tell him it is like the flesh and sinews of our life. > _______________________ > > Num: I have to admit that I have a lot of appetite for Abhidhamma. I agree > with Lodewijk that the bony part of the meat, esp. the rib, is my favorite > part, yummy yummy. Nina:Dear Num, thank you for your insightful and witty post. Lodewijk and I had to laugh about the rib being your favorite. Num: As I mentioned before the more I read (I haven't read a > lot), the more I feel like all 3 pitaka keep talking and pointing to the same > thing, DHAMMA. The 3 pitaka are mutually supportive. The terms and statements > in Abhidhamma-pitaka were found all over in both vinaya and suttan-pitaka. > In Abhidhamma-pitaka, names, places and persons were stripped out. So the > bone can be obviously seen. In vinaya and suttanta the same things were > talked in a more interactive manner, in different background, to different > audiences, from the a wanderer to the > great master of prominent philosophy school of thought. > Nina: I find the > "Guide through the Abhidhamma Pitaka" by Nyanatiloka, B.P.S. Kandy, very > helpful to gradually get used to reading difficult passages, especially the > Kathavatthu. For instance, Ch II, may someone by just repeating the word > dukkha attain enlightenment. But this really happens, people are repeating > words without understanding. Ch I: Is there in the absolute sense any > personality to be found? > These are questions people today also ask. > ________________________ > > Num: I will try to check the Guide book out from the library. Thanks for > this. I am not used to the mean that the same question were asked twice, but > then the answers become totally opposite. I understand that my understanding > is limited. I will try it later. My problem is I like bony stuff too much :). Nina: I admire your taste for study, and your energy in getting this book. > Best wishes, Nina. 10507 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Jan 2, 2002 10:09am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Luminous Mind: op 01-01-2002 16:38 schreef abhidhammika op abhidhammika@y...: >>>> Nina wrote: > > " You say, bhavangacitta is conditioned by the javanacittas that > arise. By what type of the twentyfour conditions? I was puzzled by > this." > >Suan: It is "KAMMAPACCAYO" that conditions bhavangacittam. > > The following qoute comes from Section 13, Paccayuddesa, Patthaana > Pali, Vol.1. I copied and pasted from Chatthasangayana CD-ROM version > 3. > > 13. "Kammapaccayoti– kusalaakusalam kammam (vipaakaanam > khandhaanam, resultant mental aggregates) katattaa ca ruupaanam > kammapaccayena paccayo." > Dear Suan, yes, it is clear that kamma of the past produces the bhavangacitta that is vipakacitta. What I am puzzled about is that the javanacittas arising in processes can condition the bhavangacitta. I was wondering in what way they can do this, since the javana cittas arise in processes and the bhavangacitta is just in deep sleep so to say. Or did I misunderstand what you wrote? Best wishes from Nina. 10508 From: yuzhonghao Date: Wed Jan 2, 2002 2:04pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Concept Hello all, I posted the question in the previous message and it seems that there is no reponse so far. I am not sure if the question itself is not worth consideration and is best to be left unanswered with silence... So, I am posting the question again: How does a concept come to be? Thanks in advance. Regards, Victor --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "yuzhonghao" wrote: > Hello all, > > I have a question regarding the discussion on concept: > > How does a concept come to be? > > Regards, > Victor 10509 From: yuzhonghao Date: Wed Jan 2, 2002 2:42pm Subject: Re: Contradiction (Views) Hello Wynn, What contradiction are you talking about? Please refer to Anguttara Nikaya X.93, Ditthi Sutta, Views http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/anguttara/an10-093.html Especially, please consider the sort of view Anathapindika the householder has: "Whatever has been brought into being, is fabricated, willed, dependently originated, that is inconstant. Whatever is inconstant is stress. Whatever is stress is not me, is not what I am, is not my self. This is the sort of view I have." "So, householder, whatever has been brought into being, is fabricated, willed, dependently originated, that is inconstant. Whatever is inconstant is stress. You thus adhere to that very stress, submit yourself to that very stress." "Venerable sirs, whatever has been brought into being, is fabricated, willed, dependently originated, that is inconstant. Whatever is inconstant is stress. Whatever is stress is not me, is not what I am, is not my self. Having seen this well with right discernment as it actually is present, I also discern the higher escape from it as it actually is present." Right view leads to the cessation of the dukkha. Regards, Victor --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., wynn wrote: > Hi, > > The Buddha talk about Right View (samma ditthi). > > However, in Sutta Nipata verse 787, 800, 882, the Buddha said or (more impersonally) the true sage, has no views. > > How do you explain this contradiction? > > Thanks, > Wynn 10510 From: Sarah Date: Wed Jan 2, 2002 2:53pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Concept Hi Victor, --- yuzhonghao wrote: > Hello all, > > I posted the question in the previous message and it seems that there > is no reponse so far. I am not sure if the question itself is not > worth consideration and is best to be left unanswered with silence... Of course it's worth consideration..it's just that there's a lot of competition for consideration;-)) > So, I am posting the question again: > How does a concept come to be? Can we say that a 'concept comes to be' because of thinking? NO thinking means no concepts. As for what causes any particular thinking and set of concepts at any particular time, this depends on many different conditions intricately working together to form up this particulr kind of thinking and concept at this moment. we've discussed a lot about the important role sa~n~na (perception) plays, but other factors and conditions are also play crucial roles. Sorry, I have to go out now (7am), but someone else may be able to add more. Best wishes for your studies and understanding in the New Year. Speak soon. Sarah ================================================= 10511 From: yuzhonghao Date: Wed Jan 2, 2002 3:17pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Concept Hello Sarah, Thank you for tending to my question. Indeed, I think there is fierce competition for consideration (and attention, too!!) This is how I understand an important and valid point in what you wrote, namely: Concept is conditioned. Thank you and best wishes to you in the new year. Regards, Victor --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Sarah wrote: > Hi Victor, > > --- yuzhonghao wrote: > Hello all, > > > > I posted the question in the previous message and it seems that there > > is no reponse so far. I am not sure if the question itself is not > > worth consideration and is best to be left unanswered with silence... > > Of course it's worth consideration..it's just that there's a lot of > competition for consideration;-)) > > > So, I am posting the question again: > > How does a concept come to be? > > Can we say that a 'concept comes to be' because of thinking? NO thinking > means no concepts. As for what causes any particular thinking and set of > concepts at any particular time, this depends on many different conditions > intricately working together to form up this particulr kind of thinking > and concept at this moment. we've discussed a lot about the important role > sa~n~na (perception) plays, but other factors and conditions are also play > crucial roles. > > Sorry, I have to go out now (7am), but someone else may be able to add > more. > > Best wishes for your studies and understanding in the New Year. > > Speak soon. > > Sarah 10512 From: Sarah Date: Wed Jan 2, 2002 3:35pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Concept Hi Victor, --- yuzhonghao wrote: > Hello Sarah, > > Thank you for tending to my question. Indeed, I think there is > fierce competition for consideration (and attention, too!!) > > This is how I understand an important and valid point in what you > wrote, namely: > > Concept is conditioned. I think it's more accurate to say the thinking is conditioned and it depends on all the conditions as to what thinking arises and what it takes as object. A concept is not real, so we don't usually refer to it as being conditioned. This time I'm really leaving (late)..;-)) > Thank you and best wishes to you in the new year. Look forward to more discussions too. Sarah =================================================== 10513 From: christine_forsyth Date: Wed Jan 2, 2002 5:48pm Subject: Bangkok impressions 28/12/01-2/01/02 Dear All, Much to my surprise, my luggage and I arrived safely at the Hotel around midnight. Wonderful to find a message waiting from Sarah and to receive an early morning phone call. (English accent!) Meeting Sarah, Jon and Mike for a leisurely breakfast and discussion each morning was a much 'looked forward to' way to start the day.....on one enjoyable occasion we were also joined by Sukin and Balvindra, Ivan, and Jaran. Having only known people as marks on a computer screen, the sounds of voices made the most impact at first. (Australian, American, English, Indian, Thai, Thai/English accents.) Meeting everyone at the Foundation, and listening to Khun Sujin was the highlight.....her gentle patience with people of all levels of understanding, and seemingly inexhaustible energy, unattached to results, left an indelible memory. Khun Sujin clarified my dilemma about metta being 'other directed' not 'self directed', for which I'm grateful. I didn't end up 'enlightened' which my son claims as the minimum outcome he expected of me......I still don't understand Anatta, didn't eradicate self-view, and I found out about defilements (and they weren't even on my 'to learn' list). But I did learn the A,B,C stepwise technique of observing realities ....... [:-) only joking Sarah, settle down :-)]...... I still wish there was one...... A general warning to All:- Anyone contemplating a trip to Bangkok at the same time that Sarah and Jon are there - be careful of the breakfast gatherings......so friendly.....so relaxed..... such good conversation.....such a trap! :-) This only becomes apparent later in the day at the Foundation when either of this wonderful (but merciless) couple begins a sentence with "Khun Sujin, when I was talking with Christine earlier, she... (blah, blah, blah)....." Then you are under the search light of Khun Sujins' full attention, a microphone in your hands and not a thought in your empty head or a word in your mouth......All this after I found out that making deprecating remarks about your own lack of knowledge compared to everyone else is just mana. Why does it sound worse in Pali? And there must be a less harsh word than Defilements........... The REAL problem is that on the next morning you forget the consequences and the spell is woven again at breakfast....... NOTE: The defenses are 1. Keep your mouth full of food at breakfast and just nod and smile wisely. 2. At the Foundation, sit in the outer circle of chairs, close your eyes like Ivan and give the impression of profoundly contemplating the reality of sound appearing in the present moment. That IS what he does isn't it??? n.b. What is NOT considered acceptable when faced with unanswerable response from Khun Sujin is to look vague and after three or four seconds of silence say, 'Oh, and another thing I wanted to ask about was.......' or 'putting down the microphone'. Both of these manouevres will be greeted with laughter from the rest of the room, who will delight in pointing out that you are not getting off the hook so easily. I seem to have hook marks all over......But thanks to Amara, Betty, Sarah, Jon, Mike, Ivan, Ell, Sukin, Jaran, (and others whom I can clearly picture and fondly remember, but whom I don't wish to offend by a clumsy attempt at spelling their names) for helping me, and for the friendliness and good fellowship that seems to be a hallmark of a visit to the Foundation. note for Sukin - I have totally, absolutely forgiven you (almost) for bringing a digital camera and recording us for posterity on the same day my hair dryer died (r.i.p.) - henceforward to be known as Flat Hair Day. Other memories are of delightlful gifts from new friends, and books from the Foundation....feeding the fish (scores, as big as ironing boards!) near the Wat with Betty, Mike and Amara - Do you think fish are really that intelligent to know they are safe near a Wat? Are you sure it is not just that they know where half a ton of bread is going to be thrown in? (I am sure that's how much Amara had in the boot of the car). Lunch at the home of Khun Douangduan (?Sp) - delicious food in a lovely courtyard setting.....Sarah telling her dog-bite story........Betty telling her ?washing powder story (I will not type that word!).......lots of laughter..... Amaras' kindness and wonderful hospitality when she gave her time to take Mike and I around on New Years Day......Contrary to what you thought Jon, the traffic seemed to be horrendous, not light......I think 3 million of those 6 million didn't leave town for New Year, they seemed to be driving to the same places we were going!.......Thank goodness Amara is such an excellent driver (Rally Driver Extraordinaire).......though I think something...almost....happened because only once all day in awe- inspiring traffic did I hear her say 'Oooops!'. I tensed and tightly closed my eyes and practised a policy of 'don't ask and it didn't happen'.......and Mike didn't yell, but I think he sees Bangkok drivers as the norm now...... I really could write on and on, but may I just say one thing........the period I spent in Bangkok with the dsg-ers is a life changing experience and exceeded my expectations. I hope to go again. metta, Christine 10514 From: Date: Wed Jan 2, 2002 1:23pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Bangkok impressions 28/12/01-2/01/02 Dear Christine, Really nice to hear that you had a good time in BKK and met a group of very kind and nice persons. I really enjoy your explicit post :) Hope it is not to late to say welcome to Thailand. Let me ask you sth and I like to correct something as well. <<>> Could give more explicit detail about this? 10515 From: Date: Wed Jan 2, 2002 1:37pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Bangkok impressions 28/12/01-2/01/02 2nd part Sorry, I accidentally clicked Send by not finished writing my mail my yet. ------------------------------------------------------------- Part I, Dear Christine, Really nice to hear that you had a good time in BKK and met a group of very kind and nice persons. I really enjoy your explicit post :) Hope it is not to late to say welcome to Thailand. Let me ask you sth and I like to correct something as well. <<>> Could give more explicit detail about this? ----------------------------------------------- Here is what I about to put in, Part II: Myth :: <<<......Contrary to what you thought Jon, the traffic seemed to be horrendous, not light......I think 3 million of those 6 million didn't leave town for New Year, they seemed to be driving to the same places we were going!....... >>> Oh oh, this is probably 5 year ago census. I call this a book knowledge, not bases on reality here and now ;) (just kidding). By census, yes you are probably right 6 M. In reality is about 10 M, and in summer is probably 12 M. And you may be interested to know that nobody really know how many are the temporary workers (including child prostitutes) really there. Usually the government say NONE. Bangkok is a very interesting city. I better stop here. Num 10516 From: Sarah Date: Wed Jan 2, 2002 9:24pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Bangkok impressions 28/12/01-2/01/02 Hi Christine, I'm laughing out loud so much (with my English laugh) that I'm probably disturbing my neigbours;-) So very glad it was so worthwhile -- after all it's a long trip for a long weekend;-) It was a very intensive weekend of discussion and I was most impressed by your patience, stamina and keen interest. I heard on the news that flights into Sydney were being diverted because of the smoke from the fires, so I'm relieved to hear that somehow you got back to Queensland OK. It was really great having you in Bkk at the same time and at the same hotel.....I'm afraid I can't attempt to match your wit and style here;-) Just be very glad the sight-seeing tour wasn't on the day after New Year's Day, though! Speak very soon. I see Num has already put you back in the hot seat;-)) Looking forward to a repeat visit together and I'm already missing our breakfasts.....(lobha, lobha) Sarah ================================================= --- christine_forsyth wrote: > I really could write on and on, but may I just say one > thing........the period I spent in Bangkok with the dsg-ers is a life > changing experience and exceeded my expectations. I hope to go again. > > metta, > Christine > 10517 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Wed Jan 2, 2002 9:25pm Subject: RE: [dsg] deceiving dhammas Dear Nina, Here's the second posting listing some of what "cheating" dhammas remind me of. When I think of kusala that was done in the past with somanassa, I would like to think that the thinking itself is kusala, but it is really (or all mixed-up) with mana. When I am discussing dhammas with a person, I would like to think the motivation is kusala. This is all mixed up with mana (I am discussing dhamma), and sometimes even some irritation when the result is not what I want, or the other person does not agree. The irritation is coarse but is often unnoticed, sometimes noticable by the voice being too loud (right, Num?), or the sentence being a little too terse and inconsiderate. When I am discussing dhamma with a person, I would like to think that it is for the useful benefit of others and myself. It is really, sometimes, to get acknowledgement, even a small one. When I see something desirable, I sometimes think of the patikula characteristics of the seen thing. It is really all with mixed-up with wanting to not having such strong lobha. Although this is not quite like "patikkulasanna pathirupena vyapado vancethi (2)", but this reminds me so. When I see giving, or seeing good vipakas of other people, I sometimes feel jealous, but sometimes followed by anumoddhana / mudita. Part of what I think is kusala, or all of it, is fake, wanting to have kusala instead of akusala, or just plainly not liking the domanassa vedana. When I study the dhamma (or discusses) dhammas, I sometimes feel peace. I would like to think it is the result of kaya-passadhi and citta-passadhi, but often, it is just plain Dheena-mitha. samadhimukhena thinamiddhang vangcethi (3) is exactly like that. When I considers the dhamma (or analyzes the dhamma) excessively, especially on the thing that cannot (yet) be truly known (like analyzing things via conditionalities), I would like to think I am developing conceptual understandings, but is really uddhaca (and becomes obvious toward the end). This is just like viriyarambhamukhena uddhaccang vangcethi (4). vimansa mukhena hetupatirupaka pariggahena miccaditthi vanceti (9). I don't know if this applies to myself, but I sometimes wonder if how I understand things just happens to be how I like it. Uddacha again. I say something decent/kind to other people. I would like to think of it is metta, but it is often mixed up with wanting to be liked. samvibhaga seelata patirupataya miccajivo vangceti (13), and piyavadita patirupataya catukammata vangceti (18) remind me of this. I am not very talkative person. I would like to think that it is not being mixed up something that is not useful. Sometimes, it is just plain laziness (dina-mitha, again), or because of not having metta for others. mitabhanata patirupataya asammodana seelata vangceti (19) is exactly like this. attadhipateyyata patirupataya garunam anusasaniya appadakkhinaggahita vangceti (32). I am often feel grateful for a few people in this group who see dhammas in other's sayings, even when in many (or most) cases, they don't agree with one another. I am inpired by Boddhisatta for seeing dhammas in sayings that are not intended to be dhamma. It requires such a long accumulation to be reminded of the true dhammas even when one hears what is not dhamma. mettayana mukhena raago vangceti (35): raga as the metta. Try metta with a pretty girl, eh, Num? Listing some lists like this - it may be only because I want to show off that I am aware of some of these akusalas! kom > -----Original Message----- > From: Nina van Gorkom [mailto:nilo@e...] > Sent: Monday, December 31, 2001 7:49 AM > To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com > Subject: [dsg] deceiving dhammas > > > Dear Kom, you alluded to the vancaka dhammas, > deceiving dhammas. Could you > mention just a few that you find particularly > helpful to consider in daily > life? I find too that by hearing about more > subtle defilements it helps at > least on the level of pariyatti to notice them. > On the other hand I was > warned by A. Sujin: don't analyse, that is > thinking again. I am inclined to > analyse. > Nina. > 10518 From: jaranoh Date: Wed Jan 2, 2002 10:13pm Subject: Re: [dsg] deceiving dhammas Hi Kom and Nina: Thanks for the post(s). It is so helpful to see examples of akusala dhammas in disguise. All this doubt of whether they are kusalas or otherwise can only be eliminated when one is true (honest) to oneself. ('phu-trong' which itself is hard to realize.) Also, a lot of akusala dhammas can be mistakely taken as 'phu-trong'. I guess that's why the path to true understanding of realities is sooo long and bumpy. Nina, when you say 'analyse', what do you mean exactly? I would love to hear your chronical explanation (narration) from the moment a reality impings on the door ways to the moment of 'analysis'. I hope this makes some sense. If not, please forgive me. All the best, jaran PS. Give my regards to people I know in the bayarea, kom. --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Kom Tukovinit wrote: > Dear Nina, > > Here's the second posting listing some of what "cheating" > dhammas remind me of. > > On the other hand I was > > warned by A. Sujin: don't analyse, that is > > thinking again. I am inclined to > > analyse. > > Nina. > > 10519 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Wed Jan 2, 2002 11:04pm Subject: RE: [dsg] deceiving dhammas Dear K. Jaran, Thanks for the reminder that Vichikicca is also another cheating dhamma. > -----Original Message----- > From: jaranoh [mailto:jaranoh@y...] > PS. Give my regards to people I know in the bayarea, kom. Perhaps you would come back (maybe in October?) and tell us many things you learned at the foundations... Many people have mentioned that they have missed your presence. kom 10520 From: christine_forsyth Date: Thu Jan 3, 2002 2:51am Subject: Re: Bangkok impressions 28/12/01-2/01/02 2nd part Dear Num, Thank-you for your welcome :-) I am back home in Brisbane now - I left the Hotel at 2 p.m. on the 2nd, the flight left Bangkok at about 5.00 p.m., and after changing planes in Sydney I landed in Brisbane at 9.00 a.m. on the 3rd. Finally home at 10.30 a.m. Unfortunately, a tiny ill baby cried all night from Bangkok to Sydney, so a very weary group left the plane. Yes, I agree that Bangkok is a very interesting and complex city. I hope to be able to learn more about it first hand.....not book knowledge :-) - Sorry for the delay in replying.....I slept all afternoon after my post to dsg, and a couple of personal ones. Regarding the mention of metta, I am not sure if you read the previous thread http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/ I actually came in late on an already existing thread started by Ranil in post No. 9276 of 13/11/01; my first post is No. 9347 of 18 November, 2001 and is followed by a discussion I closely followed from other members of the list. Later, I reintroduced the topic on 5 December, 2001, in message 9818 (actually with what I incorrectly thought was a trump card) - followed by a shorter discussion. Much thought and heat and desperate turmoil has gone into this topic within my own mind. I strongly resisted anything that seemed to contradict what I wanted metta to be........what I needed it to be for me.......what I felt (if the world were fair) it should be for all those damaged by abuse in early childhood at critical periods of development. So, I read all the posts, I read the Useful Posts section on dsg, I used Google to search the Net for ammunition, I contacted previous teachers, I posted to other groups. I contacted esteemed individuals in various fields :-)....... In the end, the vast majority of sitting meditators were on one side of a line drawn in the sand, directing metta to oneself (as well as others).........and the minority who stated that metta can only be directed outwards to others, and that it was difficult to be certain it was really Metta anyway, were on the other side of the line. Even though the thread ran its course and ceased to be discussed, it still simmered away within me....like a soup, on the back hotplate, with all the flavours intermixing...... So, when I came to Bangkok and the subject was raised in the meeting with Khun Sujin at the Foundation, changes had already taken place in my understanding. I listened intently. There was quite a long discussion by different members of the group, and I am not sure that any startling new points were raised. The understanding I derived from what Khun Sujin said is approximately as follows, and is MY understanding, not necessarily what she may have hoped I would understand: Anyone else whether present or not, please feel free to join in if I go off the tracks......... I started out by saying that because of my work I often came home depleted and needed a moment when I could recharge myself with metta (as per my post 9347), but Khun Sujin told us that metta like all brahma vihara (metta, karuna, mudita and upekkha) has to have an entity, therefore a concept, as the object. To step outside myself in order to radiate metta to myself, I would still need another person to be the object of my metta, it can't perform a u-turn and head back to 'me'. Usually we love ourselves best of all, and we even love others because of the feelings they cause in 'us'. Most often we have lots of lobha for ourselves, and radiating metta for ourselves would be increasing the attachment, more and more. As I understand, KS said metta can be developed in daily life, when we meet someone or anyone for whom we feel friendliness and no wish to harm in anyway, and we look after their well being and happiness without the least thought of ourselves or how we might benefit from the situation, even from familiarity or friendly feelings in return. So we need not be alone in a dark room to feel friendship or 'loving kindness' towards any entity, it can arise at any moment and accumulate our own kusala citta. In the end, all metta would automatically accumulate in the citta, regardless of where we direct it. But if one has lobha for metta, the desire for it would impede its occurrence. Num, this is as far as I can go with this at the moment, but I would welcome anything you or anyone else may care to add or comment. metta, Christine --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., srnsk@a... wrote: > Sorry, I accidentally clicked Send by not finished writing my mail my yet. > > ------------------------------------------------------------- > Part I, > > Dear Christine, > > Really nice to hear that you had a good time in BKK and met a group of very > kind and nice persons. I really enjoy your explicit post :) Hope it is not > to late to say welcome to Thailand. > > Let me ask you sth and I like to correct something as well. > > << about metta being 'other directed' not 'self directed', for which I'm > grateful.>>> > > Could give more explicit detail about this? > ----------------------------------------------- > > Here is what I about to put in, > > Part II: > > Myth :: <<<......Contrary to what you > thought Jon, the traffic seemed to be horrendous, not light......I > think 3 million of those 6 million didn't leave town for New Year, > they seemed to be driving to the same places we were > going!....... > >>> > > Oh oh, this is probably 5 year ago census. I call this a book knowledge, not > bases on reality here and now ;) (just kidding). By census, yes you are > probably right 6 M. In reality is about 10 M, and in summer is probably 12 M. > And you may be interested to know that nobody really know how many are the > temporary workers (including child prostitutes) really there. Usually the > government say NONE. Bangkok is a very interesting city. I better stop here. > > > Num 10521 From: abhidhammika Date: Thu Jan 3, 2002 3:24am Subject: Re: luminous mind: To Nina And Kom On Kamma Modifying Bhavanga Cittam Dear Nina And Kom How are you? You wrote: " Dear Suan, yes, it is clear that kamma of the past produces the bhavangacitta that is vipakacitta. What I am puzzled about is that the javanacittas arising in processes can condition the bhavangacitta. I was wondering in what way they can do this, since the javana cittas arise in processes and the bhavangacitta is just in deep sleep so to say. Or did I misunderstand what you wrote? Best wishes from Nina." This problem has been raised by both of you (Kom off-list) previously many months before. I was occupied with many other matters which prevented me from solving this problem promptly. Not only that, I wanted to discuss this matter properly. And, even now, I won't be able to discuss this issue as much as I like. Sorry about this short reply. However, as you raised this question again, I will give you, as a quick answer, Buddhaghosa's statement on how javana cittas can condition bhavangacitta. The answer to this problem is to do with the timing and quality of javana cittas. When javana citta has the strength of a janaka kamma, it can modify bhavangacitta. In fact, it can cause new kinds of bhavangacitta to arise. The following Pali quote comes from Section 687, Kankhavitaranavisuddhi niddesa, Visuddhimaggo, Vol.2. 687. .....Tattha janakam naama kusalampi hoti akusalampi. Tam patisandhiyampi pavattepi ruupaaruuupavipaakakkhandhe janeti. "...There, janakam is either healthy or unhealthy action. It (janaka kamma) can cause resultant physical and mental aggegates to arise either at the moment of linking consciousness (conception) or during the current lifetime." Please kindly note that the resultant mental aggregates (aruupa vipaaka khandhaa) during the current lifetime refer to bhavanga cittas. You wrote: "Or did I misunderstand what you wrote?" I don't think you misunderstood what I wrote. Perhaps, you did not see a connection between what I wrote and what Buddhaghosa wrote. Having said that, Buddhaghosa wrote a disclaimer as well further down the paragraph to the effect that full understanding of how kamma and vipaaka works is the domain only of the Buddhas, not that of us. Hope this message solves your puzzle! With best wishes, Suan http://www.bodhiology.org --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Nina van Gorkom wrote: > op 01-01-2002 16:38 schreef abhidhammika op abhidhammika@y...: > > >>>> Nina wrote: > > > > " You say, bhavangacitta is conditioned by the javanacittas that > > arise. By what type of the twentyfour conditions? I was puzzled by > > this." > > > >Suan: It is "KAMMAPACCAYO" that conditions bhavangacittam. > > > > The following qoute comes from Section 13, Paccayuddesa, Patthaana > > Pali, Vol.1. I copied and pasted from Chatthasangayana CD-ROM version > > 3. > > > > 13. "Kammapaccayoti– kusalaakusalam kammam (vipaakaanam > > khandhaanam, resultant mental aggregates) katattaa ca ruupaanam > > kammapaccayena paccayo." > > > Dear Suan, yes, it is clear that kamma of the past produces the > bhavangacitta that is vipakacitta. What I am puzzled about is that the > javanacittas arising in processes can condition the bhavangacitta. I was > wondering in what way they can do this, since the javana cittas arise in > processes and the bhavangacitta is just in deep sleep so to say. Or did I > misunderstand what you wrote? Best wishes from Nina. 10522 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Thu Jan 3, 2002 4:43am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: luminous mind: To Nina And Kom On Kamma Modifying Bhavanga Cittam Hi Suan, That is interesting. "When javana citta has the strength of a janaka kamma, it can modify bhavangacitta. In fact, it can cause new kinds of bhavangacitta to arise. Could you kindly explained the sentence "new kinds of bhavangacittas". Secondly since the objects of bhavangacittas are the same throughout one's life, will that mean that these new kinds of bhavangacittas have different objects. Do you know of any commentaries that mention the objects of bhavangcittas. Sometimes I wondering why the objects are a mystery, since bhanvagacittas are conditioned by the rebirth citta which are in turn conditioned by last citta, then in turn by the last javana cittas of the last series of citta process. Since the last series process of cittas objects are known then why when it reach bhavanga citta, its object is not known. Kind regards Ken O --- abhidhammika wrote: > > > > Dear Nina And Kom > > How are you? > > You wrote: > > " Dear Suan, yes, it is clear that kamma of the past produces the > bhavangacitta that is vipakacitta. What I am puzzled about is that > the javanacittas arising in processes can condition the > bhavangacitta. I was wondering in what way they can do this, since > the javana cittas arise in processes and the bhavangacitta is just in > deep sleep so to say. Or did I misunderstand what you wrote? Best > wishes from Nina." > > This problem has been raised by both of you (Kom off-list) previously > many months before. I was occupied with many other matters which > prevented me from solving this problem promptly. Not only that, I > wanted to discuss this matter properly. And, even now, I won't be > able to discuss this issue as much as I like. > > Sorry about this short reply. > > However, as you raised this question again, I will give you, as a > quick answer, Buddhaghosa's statement on how javana cittas can > condition bhavangacitta. > > The answer to this problem is to do with the timing and quality of > javana cittas. > > When javana citta has the strength of a janaka kamma, it can modify > bhavangacitta. In fact, it can cause new kinds of bhavangacitta to > arise. > > The following Pali quote comes from Section 687, > Kankhavitaranavisuddhi niddesa, Visuddhimaggo, Vol.2. > > 687. .....Tattha janakam naama kusalampi hoti akusalampi. Tam > patisandhiyampi pavattepi ruupaaruuupavipaakakkhandhe janeti. > > "...There, janakam is either healthy or unhealthy action. It (janaka > kamma) can cause resultant physical and mental aggegates to arise > either at the moment of linking consciousness (conception) or during > the current lifetime." > > Please kindly note that the resultant mental aggregates (aruupa > vipaaka khandhaa) during the current lifetime refer to bhavanga > cittas. > > > You wrote: > > "Or did I misunderstand what you wrote?" > > I don't think you misunderstood what I wrote. Perhaps, you did not > see a connection between what I wrote and what Buddhaghosa wrote. > > Having said that, Buddhaghosa wrote a disclaimer as well further down > the paragraph to the effect that full understanding of how kamma and > vipaaka works is the domain only of the Buddhas, not that of us. > > Hope this message solves your puzzle! > > > With best wishes, > > > Suan > > http://www.bodhiology.org 10523 From: ashkenn Date: Thu Jan 3, 2002 4:55am Subject: Re: [dsg] The White Radiant Mind Hi Sarah, Mike said that our cittas are pure and bc of akusala cetasikas they become "not pure". Second look of this statement left with a reservation with this explanation. This would mean our underlying cittas are pure, this support an inherent implication of pureness in turn will support the notion that our underlying nature is pure. this raise more questions than answers. Kind regards Ken O --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Sarah wrote: > Hi Ken O, > > A couple more references for you: > > 1) Dhammasangani 6 (PTS trans) > > "What on that occasion is thought (citta.m)? > > The thought which on that occasion is ideation, mind, heart, that which is > clear (pa.n.dara ), ideation as the sphere of mind, the faculty > of mind, intellection......." > > i.e pa.n.dara as synonym for citta and mano > > 2)SN, V, Mahaavagga, 33(3) Corruptions (BB trans) > > "........S too, bhikkhus, there are these five corruptions of the mind, > corrupted by which the mind is neither malleable nor wieldy nor radiant > (pabbhasara ) but brittle and not rightly concentrated for the > destruction of the taints. What five? Sensual desire is a corruption of > the mind corrupted by which the mind is neither malleable nor wieldy nor > radiant ..ill will....." > > i.e. pabbhasara referring to kusala cittas > > Others may find other references... > > Sarah > ======================================= > 10524 From: Sarah Date: Thu Jan 3, 2002 6:07am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Bangkok impressions 28/12/01-2/01/02 2nd part Dear Christine, This is a really good summary......I'm so impressed that you can recall the details, especially just after such a long trip home and crying baby on flight as well;-) Impressed! Sarah --- christine_forsyth wrote: > The understanding I derived from what Khun Sujin said is > approximately as follows, and is MY understanding, not necessarily > what she may have hoped I would understand: Anyone else whether > present or not, please feel free to join in if I go off the > tracks......... I started out by saying that because of my work I > often came home depleted and needed a moment when I could recharge > myself with metta (as per my post 9347), but Khun Sujin told us that > metta like all brahma vihara (metta, karuna, mudita and upekkha) has > to have an entity, therefore a concept, as the object. To step > outside myself in order to radiate metta to myself, I would still > need another person to be the object of my metta, it can't perform a > u-turn and head back to 'me'. Usually we love ourselves best of all, > and we even love others because of the feelings they cause in 'us'. > Most often we have lots of lobha for ourselves, and radiating metta > for ourselves would be increasing the attachment, more and more. > As I understand, KS said metta can be developed in daily life, when > we meet someone or anyone for whom we feel friendliness and no wish > to harm in anyway, and we look after their well being and happiness > without the least thought of ourselves or how we might benefit from > the situation, even from familiarity or friendly feelings in return. > > So we need not be alone in a dark room to feel friendship or 'loving > kindness' towards any entity, it can arise at any moment and > accumulate our own kusala citta. In the end, all metta would > automatically accumulate in the citta, regardless of where we direct > it. But if one has lobha for metta, the desire for it would impede > its occurrence. Num, this is as far as I can go with this at the > moment, but I would welcome anything you or anyone else may care to > add or comment. 10525 From: Sarah Date: Thu Jan 3, 2002 6:23am Subject: RE: [dsg] deceiving dhammas Dear Kom, I found these comments really great as well....and I think this is really the 'development' when 'one' begins to see all the akusala coming in at any time. --- Kom Tukovinit wrote: > Dear Nina, > > Here's the second posting listing some of what "cheating" > dhammas remind me of. > > When I think of kusala that was done in the past with > somanassa, I would like to think that the thinking itself is > kusala, but it is really (or all mixed-up) with mana. > > When I am discussing dhammas with a person, I would like to > think the motivation is kusala. This is all mixed up with > mana (I am discussing dhamma), and sometimes even some > irritation when the result is not what I want, or the other > person does not agree. The irritation is coarse but is > often unnoticed, sometimes noticable by the voice being too > loud (right, Num?), or the sentence being a little too terse > and inconsiderate. This is interesting. Funnily enough, in the middle of a dhamma discussion, such as the recent ones at the Foundation, I notice the akusala (unwholesome) states almost more than at any other time, even when I'm just sitting quietly there. Like you say, so many opportunities for mana (conceit), irritation, attachment and sometimes I find myself lost in some papanca (proliferations) and quite lose the thread of what is being said. Then, as you describe, when speaking, there is so much attachment and so on mixed with the few really kusala (wholesome) states.....and of course, it's all just the same here too;-) > When I am discussing dhamma with a person, I would like to > think that it is for the useful benefit of others and > myself. It is really, sometimes, to get acknowledgement, > even a small one. Oh well, I've given you an acknowledgement;-) But, I really know how you feel. Your other points are all so good too. Btw, I think 'patikula' as in the para. below refers to the 'loathsome qualities'.. correct me if this is wrong (too lazy to check). Thanks, Sarah p.s. NUM- dragged Jon off to see Harry Potter (movie) after work- now I say it was because my students gave me this task for homework and they're all going to check when they start returning on Saturday, but really it was all just a good excuse for the lobha;-) =================================================== Kom> When I see something desirable, I sometimes think of the > patikula characteristics of the seen thing. It is really > all with mixed-up with wanting to not having such strong > lobha. Although this is not quite like "patikkulasanna > pathirupena vyapado vancethi (2)", but this reminds me so. > > When I see giving, or seeing good vipakas of other people, I > sometimes feel jealous, but sometimes followed by > anumoddhana / mudita. Part of what I think is kusala, or > all of it, is fake, wanting to have kusala instead of > akusala, or just plainly not liking the domanassa vedana. > > When I study the dhamma (or discusses) dhammas, I sometimes > feel peace. I would like to think it is the result of > kaya-passadhi and citta-passadhi, but often, it is just > plain Dheena-mitha. samadhimukhena thinamiddhang vangcethi > (3) is exactly like that. > > When I considers the dhamma (or analyzes the dhamma) > excessively, especially on the thing that cannot (yet) be > truly known (like analyzing things via conditionalities), I > would like to think I am developing conceptual > understandings, but is really uddhaca (and becomes obvious > toward the end). This is just like viriyarambhamukhena > uddhaccang vangcethi (4). > > vimansa mukhena hetupatirupaka pariggahena miccaditthi > vanceti (9). I don't know if this applies to myself, but I > sometimes wonder if how I understand things just happens to > be how I like it. Uddacha again. > > I say something decent/kind to other people. I would like > to think of it is metta, but it is often mixed up with > wanting to be liked. samvibhaga seelata patirupataya > miccajivo vangceti (13), and piyavadita patirupataya > catukammata vangceti > (18) remind me of this. > > I am not very talkative person. I would like to think that > it is not being mixed up something that is not useful. > Sometimes, it is just plain laziness (dina-mitha, again), or > because of not having metta for others. mitabhanata > patirupataya asammodana seelata vangceti (19) is exactly > like this. > > attadhipateyyata patirupataya garunam anusasaniya > appadakkhinaggahita > vangceti (32). I am often feel grateful for a few people in > this group who see dhammas in other's sayings, even when in > many (or most) cases, they don't agree with one another. I > am inpired by Boddhisatta for seeing dhammas in sayings that > are not intended to be dhamma. It requires such a long > accumulation to be reminded of the true dhammas even when > one hears what is not dhamma. > > mettayana mukhena raago vangceti (35): raga as the metta. > Try metta with a pretty girl, eh, Num? > > Listing some lists like this - it may be only because I want > to show off that I am aware of some of these akusalas! > 10526 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Thu Jan 3, 2002 8:49am Subject: RE: [dsg] The White Radiant Mind Dear Ken, I have a question for you. > -----Original Message----- > From: ashkenn [mailto:ashkenn@y...] > > Mike said that our cittas are pure and bc of > akusala cetasikas they > become "not pure". Second look of this statement > left with a > reservation with this explanation. This would > mean our underlying > cittas are pure, this support an inherent > implication of pureness in > turn will support the notion that our underlying > nature is pure. > this raise more questions than answers. I don't understand how the statement that the citta (without defilment) is pure supports the notion that our underlying "nature" is pure. Would you explain what you mean by "our nature"? kom 10527 From: Date: Thu Jan 3, 2002 4:32am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Bangkok impressions 28/12/01-2/01/02 2nd part Dear Christine, I am very impressed by your insight :) Oh, I see you had to fly down to Sydney first and then back up to Brisbane. Wish you have a good rest and a quick recover from a long trip. Yes, I have been following the thread. But let me take the topic a little further, OK. > The understanding I derived from what Khun Sujin said is > approximately as follows, and is MY understanding, not necessarily > what she may have hoped I would understand: Anyone else whether > present or not, please feel free to join in if I go off the > tracks......... I started out by saying that because of my work I > often came home depleted and needed a moment when I could recharge > myself with metta (as per my post 9347), but Khun Sujin told us that > metta like all brahma vihara (metta, karuna, mudita and upekkha) has > to have an entity, therefore a concept, as the object. To step > outside myself in order to radiate metta to myself, I would still > need another person to be the object of my metta, it can't perform a > u-turn and head back to 'me'. Usually we love ourselves best of all, > and we even love others because of the feelings they cause in 'us'. > Most often we have lots of lobha for ourselves, and radiating metta > for ourselves would be increasing the attachment, more and more. > As I understand, KS said metta can be developed in daily life, when > we meet someone or anyone for whom we feel friendliness and no wish > to harm in anyway, and we look after their well being and happiness > without the least thought of ourselves or how we might benefit from > the situation, even from familiarity or friendly feelings in return. > So then why in Visuddhimagga mentioned couple times that one shall start to practice metta toward oneself first and then directed outward? What do you think it meant by that? I completely agree with your points above but I'd like to see the subject in various perspectives. Another point I'd like to add is bhramavihara also can be taken as an object (arammana) for every aspect of akusala (asava, ogha, yogha, gantha, upadhana, nivorana, anusaya,samyojana, and kilesa) as well. Your mail yesterday made me laugh :) Best wishes, Num 10528 From: Date: Thu Jan 3, 2002 4:47am Subject: Re: [dsg] deceiving dhammas Hi Kom, Nina, Sarah, Jaran and everyone. I'd like to express that I really appreciate this particular thread. Kom let me anomodhana in your kusala moment again and again. After I read your posts, I thought that is how parami developed in daily life, little by little. I do not know how long is the path but I know for sure that if one just want or attach to the idea or mental image of the path or goal without making just a step here and now, one will be swept away by the flow (may I call it asava or ogha). All parami are mutually supportive. Kanthi and sacca needs panna and vice versa. Let me try some pali: pannasattha, pannaaloko, pannaobhaso, pannapajjoto, pannaratano, amoho, dhammvicayo, samadhitthi and finally natthi panna sama abha, nothing is as illuminating as panna. Best wishes and always appreciate. Num 10529 From: christine_forsyth Date: Thu Jan 3, 2002 0:14pm Subject: Understanding Metta (was [dsg] Re: Bangkok impressions 28/12/01-2/01/02) Dear Sarah, Thank you, but I would be a fraud if I allowed you to think there had been such an increase in my understanding and recall. I never rely on memory especially with all that Pali flying around. I owe much to writing a diary after the sessions, but most particularly from being able to discuss things and correspond with K. Amara. I think I owe her a post for DL on this subject as well....... metta, Christine --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Sarah wrote: > Dear Christine, > > This is a really good summary......I'm so impressed that you can recall > the details, especially just after such a long trip home and crying baby > on flight as well;-) > > Impressed! > Sarah > > --- christine_forsyth wrote: > > > The understanding I derived from what Khun Sujin said is > > approximately as follows, and is MY understanding, not necessarily > > what she may have hoped I would understand: Anyone else whether > > present or not, please feel free to join in if I go off the > > tracks......... I started out by saying that because of my work I > > often came home depleted and needed a moment when I could recharge > > myself with metta (as per my post 9347), but Khun Sujin told us that > > metta like all brahma vihara (metta, karuna, mudita and upekkha) has > > to have an entity, therefore a concept, as the object. To step > > outside myself in order to radiate metta to myself, I would still > > need another person to be the object of my metta, it can't perform a > > u-turn and head back to 'me'. Usually we love ourselves best of all, > > and we even love others because of the feelings they cause in 'us'. > > Most often we have lots of lobha for ourselves, and radiating metta > > for ourselves would be increasing the attachment, more and more. > > As I understand, KS said metta can be developed in daily life, when > > we meet someone or anyone for whom we feel friendliness and no wish > > to harm in anyway, and we look after their well being and happiness > > without the least thought of ourselves or how we might benefit from > > the situation, even from familiarity or friendly feelings in return. > > > > So we need not be alone in a dark room to feel friendship or 'loving > > kindness' towards any entity, it can arise at any moment and > > accumulate our own kusala citta. In the end, all metta would > > automatically accumulate in the citta, regardless of where we direct > > it. But if one has lobha for metta, the desire for it would impede > > its occurrence. Num, this is as far as I can go with this at the > > moment, but I would welcome anything you or anyone else may care to > > add or comment. > > > 10530 From: yuzhonghao Date: Thu Jan 3, 2002 1:06pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Concept Hello Sarah, You questioned that "Can we say that a concept comes to be because of thinking?" What do you think? Can we? You wrote that no thinking means no concepts. From what you wrote, it seems to me that you mean that concept is dependent on thinking. This is how I understand the word "concept" from the online dictionary in http://www.webster.com: A concept means something conceived in the mind, a thought, a notion. It also means an abstract or generic idea generalized from particular instances. The synonym to the word "concept" is the word "idea." I agree with you that thinking is conditioned. Regards, Victor --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Sarah wrote: > Hi Victor, > > --- yuzhonghao wrote: > Hello Sarah, > > > > Thank you for tending to my question. Indeed, I think there is > > fierce competition for consideration (and attention, too!!) > > > > This is how I understand an important and valid point in what you > > wrote, namely: > > > > Concept is conditioned. > > I think it's more accurate to say the thinking is conditioned and it > depends on all the conditions as to what thinking arises and what it takes > as object. A concept is not real, so we don't usually refer to it as being > conditioned. > > This time I'm really leaving (late)..;-)) > > > Thank you and best wishes to you in the new year. > > Look forward to more discussions too. > > Sarah 10531 From: m. nease Date: Thu Jan 3, 2002 3:20pm Subject: Re: [dsg] The White Radiant Mind Hi Kenneth, Hope you didn't take my attempt at answering too seriously--it's sure to be incomplete at best. --- ashkenn wrote: > Mike said that our cittas are pure and bc of akusala > cetasikas they > become "not pure". Second look of this statement > left with a > reservation with this explanation. This would mean > our underlying > cittas are pure, What 'underlying cittas'? mike 10532 From: m. nease Date: Thu Jan 3, 2002 3:44pm Subject: RE: [dsg] deceiving dhammas Dear Kom (and Num), Just want to take a moment to say how much I appreciate this thread. This is just the way I see it, almost all akusala almost all the time, and often taken for 'practice', 'insight' (conceptual, of course!), etc. Sorry I can't match your detail, this is very valuable I think--but don't have the time to get very specific. It reminds me of Jon's 'fire extinguisher' practice--constantly 'putting out fires' of supposed dosa. Of course this is really conditioned by the desire to be free from domanassa etc., and, when it 'works', gives the impression of 'successful practice'. Just substituting a pleasant object for an unpleasant one usually, I think--all conditioned by aversion (to unhappiness) and desire (for happiness) and ignorance (of the nature of both). So many different forms of this same unfortunate process (in my experience), some identified with 'Dhamma' and some not. It's relentless, conditioned no doubt by so many countless javanas and extremely hard to break--impossible, I think, by this kind of 'effort'. I sometimes find this thought discouraging. I certainly hope that some small degree of awareness of these moments of 'self'-deception will someday loosen their grip--but there I go again. mike --- Kom Tukovinit wrote: > Dear Nina, > > Here's the second posting listing some of what > "cheating" > dhammas remind me of. > > When I think of kusala that was done in the past > with > somanassa, I would like to think that the thinking > itself is > kusala, but it is really (or all mixed-up) with > mana. > > When I am discussing dhammas with a person, I would > like to > think the motivation is kusala. This is all mixed > up with > mana (I am discussing dhamma), and sometimes even > some > irritation when the result is not what I want, or > the other > person does not agree. The irritation is coarse but > is > often unnoticed, sometimes noticable by the voice > being too > loud (right, Num?), or the sentence being a little > too terse > and inconsiderate. > > When I am discussing dhamma with a person, I would > like to > think that it is for the useful benefit of others > and > myself. It is really, sometimes, to get > acknowledgement, > even a small one. > > When I see something desirable, I sometimes think of > the > patikula characteristics of the seen thing. It is > really > all with mixed-up with wanting to not having such > strong > lobha. Although this is not quite like > "patikkulasanna > pathirupena vyapado vancethi (2)", but this reminds > me so. > > When I see giving, or seeing good vipakas of other > people, I > sometimes feel jealous, but sometimes followed by > anumoddhana / mudita. Part of what I think is > kusala, or > all of it, is fake, wanting to have kusala instead > of > akusala, or just plainly not liking the domanassa > vedana. > > When I study the dhamma (or discusses) dhammas, I > sometimes > feel peace. I would like to think it is the result > of > kaya-passadhi and citta-passadhi, but often, it is > just > plain Dheena-mitha. samadhimukhena thinamiddhang > vangcethi > (3) is exactly like that. > > When I considers the dhamma (or analyzes the dhamma) > excessively, especially on the thing that cannot > (yet) be > truly known (like analyzing things via > conditionalities), I > would like to think I am developing conceptual > understandings, but is really uddhaca (and becomes > obvious > toward the end). This is just like > viriyarambhamukhena > uddhaccang vangcethi (4). > > vimansa mukhena hetupatirupaka pariggahena > miccaditthi > vanceti (9). I don't know if this applies to > myself, but I > sometimes wonder if how I understand things just > happens to > be how I like it. Uddacha again. > > I say something decent/kind to other people. I > would like > to think of it is metta, but it is often mixed up > with > wanting to be liked. samvibhaga seelata > patirupataya > miccajivo vangceti (13), and piyavadita patirupataya > catukammata vangceti > (18) remind me of this. > > I am not very talkative person. I would like to > think that > it is not being mixed up something that is not > useful. > Sometimes, it is just plain laziness (dina-mitha, > again), or > because of not having metta for others. mitabhanata > patirupataya asammodana seelata vangceti (19) is > exactly > like this. > > attadhipateyyata patirupataya garunam anusasaniya > appadakkhinaggahita > vangceti (32). I am often feel grateful for a few > people in > this group who see dhammas in other's sayings, even > when in > many (or most) cases, they don't agree with one > another. I > am inpired by Boddhisatta for seeing dhammas in > sayings that > are not intended to be dhamma. It requires such a > long > accumulation to be reminded of the true dhammas even > when > one hears what is not dhamma. > > mettayana mukhena raago vangceti (35): raga as the > metta. > Try metta with a pretty girl, eh, Num? > > Listing some lists like this - it may be only > because I want > to show off that I am aware of some of these > akusalas! > > kom > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Nina van Gorkom [mailto:nilo@e...] > > Sent: Monday, December 31, 2001 7:49 AM > > To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com > > Subject: [dsg] deceiving dhammas > > > > > > Dear Kom, you alluded to the vancaka dhammas, > > deceiving dhammas. Could you > > mention just a few that you find particularly > > helpful to consider in daily > > life? I find too that by hearing about more > > subtle defilements it helps at > > least on the level of pariyatti to notice them. > > On the other hand I was > > warned by A. Sujin: don't analyse, that is > > thinking again. I am inclined to > > analyse. > > Nina. 10533 From: christine_forsyth Date: Thu Jan 3, 2002 9:13pm Subject: Undertanding Metta - was([dsg] Re: Bangkok impressions 28/12/01-2/01/02) Dear Num, and All, Num, Thank you for your kind remarks, - as I said to Sarah I am indebted to on and off-list discussions with dhamma friends, as well as a little note taking. When once I have understood and agreed with explanations and teachings, some of this becomes re-presented...... I call this 'parrot' dhamma :)) You say: "So then why in Visuddhimagga mentioned couple times that one shall start to practice metta toward oneself first and then directed outward? What do you think it meant by that? " I have had a look back at the Visuddhi Magga Chapter IX Description of Concentration - The Divine Abidings verses 8-10 and 92 mentioned in the previous thread. I think what is meant is that I should use 'myself' as an example to bring to mind that other beings feel emotional, psychological and physical pain just as 'I' do. I was watching a one year old toddler at the Shopping Mall this morning. She had pulled the legs off her doll when a tiny puppy came close; she picked it up and seemed to be trying to do the same to the puppy, with no understanding that it could feel pain or fear, anymore than the doll could. Her mother quickly removed the puppy and said "How would you like it if I pulled your legs off?' .... giving a sharp tug on the childs' legs. Quite clearly from the yell of protest, she wouldn't have liked it at all..... I know none of us are quite like that, and that it is just a developmental stage. But some adults (maybe all of us to a smaller or greater degree) can grow indifferent, or a little callous about the suffering of others, or see it as 'their own fault' 'kamma' 'not as bad as someone else's suffering' - or just not notice it in the busyness of our day. I think practising Metta initially as an exercise towards oneself is a gentler Adults Only version of the above. It is sort of an initial sensitising, training activity - a reminder to be un-self- ish, but it is not meant as a supportive, self-loving or consoling 'stand alone' practice. What do you think? You say: "Another point I'd like to add is bhramavihara also can be taken as an object (arammana) for every aspect of akusala (asava, ogha, yogha, gantha, upadhana, nivorana, anusaya,samyojana, and kilesa) as well." I didn't know this - do you have any references where I can read about it? metta, Christine --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., srnsk@a... wrote: > Dear Christine, > > > I am very impressed by your insight :) Oh, I see you had to fly down to > Sydney first and then back up to Brisbane. Wish you have a good rest and a > quick recover from a long trip. > > > Yes, I have been following the thread. But let me take the topic a little > further, OK. > > > > The understanding I derived from what Khun Sujin said is > > approximately as follows, and is MY understanding, not necessarily > > what she may have hoped I would understand: Anyone else whether > > present or not, please feel free to join in if I go off the > > tracks......... I started out by saying that because of my work I > > often came home depleted and needed a moment when I could recharge > > myself with metta (as per my post 9347), but Khun Sujin told us that > > metta like all brahma vihara (metta, karuna, mudita and upekkha) has > > to have an entity, therefore a concept, as the object. To step > > outside myself in order to radiate metta to myself, I would still > > need another person to be the object of my metta, it can't perform a > > u-turn and head back to 'me'. Usually we love ourselves best of all, > > and we even love others because of the feelings they cause in 'us'. > > Most often we have lots of lobha for ourselves, and radiating metta > > for ourselves would be increasing the attachment, more and more. > > As I understand, KS said metta can be developed in daily life, when > > we meet someone or anyone for whom we feel friendliness and no wish > > to harm in anyway, and we look after their well being and happiness > > without the least thought of ourselves or how we might benefit from > > the situation, even from familiarity or friendly feelings in return. > > > > So then why in Visuddhimagga mentioned couple times that one shall start to > practice metta toward oneself first and then directed outward? What do you > think it meant by that? I completely agree with your points above but I'd > like to see the subject in various perspectives. > > Another point I'd like to add is bhramavihara also can be taken as an object > (arammana) for every aspect of akusala (asava, ogha, yogha, gantha, upadhana, > nivorana, anusaya,samyojana, and kilesa) as well. > > Your mail yesterday made me laugh :) > > Best wishes, > > Num > > 10534 From: Sarah Date: Thu Jan 3, 2002 9:16pm Subject: Re: [dsg] deceiving dhammas Hi Num, --- srnsk@a... wrote: > > Let me try some pali: pannasattha, pannaaloko, pannaobhaso, > pannapajjoto, > pannaratano, amoho, dhammvicayo, samadhitthi and finally natthi panna > sama > abha, nothing is as illuminating as panna. > Hmmm....Are you sure you translated it all? For the 95% of members who are pali challenged (inc.me), could you add a little more translation and explanation of your words of wisdom? Thanks, Sarah ================================================ 10535 From: Robert Epstein Date: Thu Jan 3, 2002 9:54pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Bangkok impressions 28/12/01-2/01/02 Dear Christine, What a lovely, humorous and evocative account of your trip and the meeting with dsg'ers and others. If you decide to write a travel book, I'm ready to fill out the order form any time. Thanks for bringing the event to life. Now on to more important matters: Sukin, are you going to post the photos???? Best Regards, Robert Ep. ========================= --- christine_forsyth wrote: > Dear All, > > Much to my surprise, my luggage and I arrived safely at the Hotel > around midnight. Wonderful to find a message waiting from Sarah and > to receive an early morning phone call. (English accent!) Meeting > Sarah, Jon and Mike for a leisurely breakfast and discussion each > morning was a much 'looked forward to' way to start the day.....on > one enjoyable occasion we were also joined by Sukin and Balvindra, > Ivan, and Jaran. > Having only known people as marks on a computer screen, the sounds of > voices made the most impact at first. (Australian, American, English, > Indian, Thai, Thai/English accents.) > Meeting everyone at the Foundation, and listening to Khun Sujin was > the highlight.....her gentle patience with people of all levels of > understanding, and seemingly inexhaustible energy, unattached to > results, left an indelible memory. Khun Sujin clarified my dilemma > about metta being 'other directed' not 'self directed', for which I'm > grateful. > I didn't end up 'enlightened' which my son claims as the minimum > outcome he expected of me......I still don't understand Anatta, > didn't eradicate self-view, and I found out about defilements (and > they weren't even on my 'to learn' list). > But I did learn the A,B,C stepwise technique of observing > realities ....... [:-) only joking Sarah, settle down :-)]...... I > still wish there was one...... > A general warning to All:- Anyone contemplating a trip to Bangkok at > the same time that Sarah and Jon are there - be careful of the > breakfast gatherings......so friendly.....so relaxed..... such good > conversation.....such a trap! :-) > This only becomes apparent later in the day at the Foundation when > either of this wonderful (but merciless) couple begins a sentence > with "Khun Sujin, when I was talking with Christine earlier, she... > (blah, blah, blah)....." Then you are under the search light of Khun > Sujins' full attention, a microphone in your hands and not a thought > in your empty head or a word in your mouth......All this after I > found out that making deprecating remarks about your own lack of > knowledge compared to everyone else is just mana. Why does it sound > worse in Pali? And there must be a less harsh word than > Defilements........... > > The REAL problem is that on the next morning you forget the > consequences and the spell is woven again at breakfast....... > NOTE: > The defenses are 1. Keep your mouth full of food at breakfast and > just nod and smile wisely. > 2. At the Foundation, sit in the outer > circle of chairs, close your eyes like Ivan and give the impression > of profoundly contemplating the reality of sound appearing in the > present moment. That IS what he does isn't it??? > n.b. What is NOT considered acceptable when faced with unanswerable > response from Khun Sujin is to look vague and after three or four > seconds of silence say, 'Oh, and another thing I wanted to ask about > was.......' or 'putting down the microphone'. Both of these > manouevres will be greeted with laughter from the rest of the room, > who will delight in pointing out that you are not getting off the > hook so easily. I seem to have hook marks all over......But thanks > to Amara, Betty, Sarah, Jon, Mike, Ivan, Ell, Sukin, Jaran, (and > others whom I can clearly picture and fondly remember, but whom I > don't wish to offend by a clumsy attempt at spelling their names) for > helping me, and for the friendliness and good fellowship that seems > to be a hallmark of a visit to the Foundation. > > note for Sukin - I have totally, absolutely forgiven you (almost) for > bringing a digital camera and recording us for posterity on the same > day my hair dryer died (r.i.p.) - henceforward to be known as Flat > Hair Day. > > Other memories are of delightlful gifts from new friends, and books > from the Foundation....feeding the fish (scores, as big as ironing > boards!) near the Wat with Betty, Mike and Amara - Do you think fish > are really that intelligent to know they are safe near a Wat? Are > you sure it is not just that they know where half a ton of bread is > going to be thrown in? (I am sure that's how much Amara had in the > boot of the car). > > Lunch at the home of Khun Douangduan (?Sp) - delicious food in a > lovely courtyard setting.....Sarah telling her dog-bite > story........Betty telling her ?washing powder story (I will not type > that word!).......lots of laughter..... > > Amaras' kindness and wonderful hospitality when she gave her time to > take Mike and I around on New Years Day......Contrary to what you > thought Jon, the traffic seemed to be horrendous, not light......I > think 3 million of those 6 million didn't leave town for New Year, > they seemed to be driving to the same places we were > going!.......Thank goodness Amara is such an excellent driver (Rally > Driver Extraordinaire).......though I think > something...almost....happened because only once all day in awe- > inspiring traffic did I hear her say 'Oooops!'. I tensed and tightly > closed my eyes and practised a policy of 'don't ask and it didn't > happen'.......and Mike didn't yell, but I think he sees Bangkok > drivers as the norm now...... > > I really could write on and on, but may I just say one > thing........the period I spent in Bangkok with the dsg-ers is a life > changing experience and exceeded my expectations. I hope to go again. > > metta, > Christine 10536 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Thu Jan 3, 2002 10:02pm Subject: RE: [dsg] The White Radiant Mind Hi Kom, I was using a hypothetical situation. Imagine all cittas that arise without any cetasikas, since cittas are pure as described, then our series of cittas will be pure. This would infer a underlying nature of "pure" in that sense. That is how I got my inference. Was it this hypothetical situation used to justify pureness or Absolute Nature. Kind regards Ken O --- Kom Tukovinit wrote: > Dear Ken, > > I have a question for you. > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: ashkenn [mailto:ashkenn@y...] > > > > > Mike said that our cittas are pure and bc of > > akusala cetasikas they > > become "not pure". Second look of this statement > > left with a > > reservation with this explanation. This would > > mean our underlying > > cittas are pure, this support an inherent > > implication of pureness in > > turn will support the notion that our underlying > > nature is pure. > > this raise more questions than answers. > > I don't understand how the statement that the citta (without > defilment) is pure supports the notion that our underlying > "nature" is pure. Would you explain what you mean by "our > nature"? > > kom 10537 From: christine_forsyth Date: Thu Jan 3, 2002 10:08pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Bangkok impressions 28/12/01-2/01/02 Dear Rob Ep, Thank you for your kind words......Maybe we'll all get there together sometime....We missed Robert K by a week or so......Trouble is with you and Howard there, who else would get a word in? :-) Would I be persona non grata on the List if I slightly threatened Sujin....only a tiny little bit? Like getting Balvindra on our side somehow....... I feel the women in the photo should have the right to accept, or reject, or select, the photo (especially that poor one with flat hair). Or even wait 'til next year...... metta, Christine --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Robert Epstein wrote: > Dear Christine, > What a lovely, humorous and evocative account of your trip and the meeting with > dsg'ers and others. If you decide to write a travel book, I'm ready to fill out > the order form any time. > > Thanks for bringing the event to life. > > Now on to more important matters: Sukin, are you going to post the photos???? > > > Best Regards, > Robert Ep. > > ========================= > > --- christine_forsyth wrote: > > Dear All, > > > > Much to my surprise, my luggage and I arrived safely at the Hotel > > around midnight. Wonderful to find a message waiting from Sarah and > > to receive an early morning phone call. (English accent!) Meeting > > Sarah, Jon and Mike for a leisurely breakfast and discussion each > > morning was a much 'looked forward to' way to start the day.....on > > one enjoyable occasion we were also joined by Sukin and Balvindra, > > Ivan, and Jaran. > > Having only known people as marks on a computer screen, the sounds of > > voices made the most impact at first. (Australian, American, English, > > Indian, Thai, Thai/English accents.) > > Meeting everyone at the Foundation, and listening to Khun Sujin was > > the highlight.....her gentle patience with people of all levels of > > understanding, and seemingly inexhaustible energy, unattached to > > results, left an indelible memory. Khun Sujin clarified my dilemma > > about metta being 'other directed' not 'self directed', for which I'm > > grateful. > > I didn't end up 'enlightened' which my son claims as the minimum > > outcome he expected of me......I still don't understand Anatta, > > didn't eradicate self-view, and I found out about defilements (and > > they weren't even on my 'to learn' list). > > But I did learn the A,B,C stepwise technique of observing > > realities ....... [:-) only joking Sarah, settle down :- )]...... I > > still wish there was one...... > > A general warning to All:- Anyone contemplating a trip to Bangkok at > > the same time that Sarah and Jon are there - be careful of the > > breakfast gatherings......so friendly.....so relaxed..... such good > > conversation.....such a trap! :-) > > This only becomes apparent later in the day at the Foundation when > > either of this wonderful (but merciless) couple begins a sentence > > with "Khun Sujin, when I was talking with Christine earlier, she... > > (blah, blah, blah)....." Then you are under the search light of Khun > > Sujins' full attention, a microphone in your hands and not a thought > > in your empty head or a word in your mouth......All this after I > > found out that making deprecating remarks about your own lack of > > knowledge compared to everyone else is just mana. Why does it sound > > worse in Pali? And there must be a less harsh word than > > Defilements........... > > > > The REAL problem is that on the next morning you forget the > > consequences and the spell is woven again at breakfast....... > > NOTE: > > The defenses are 1. Keep your mouth full of food at breakfast and > > just nod and smile wisely. > > 2. At the Foundation, sit in the outer > > circle of chairs, close your eyes like Ivan and give the impression > > of profoundly contemplating the reality of sound appearing in the > > present moment. That IS what he does isn't it??? > > n.b. What is NOT considered acceptable when faced with unanswerable > > response from Khun Sujin is to look vague and after three or four > > seconds of silence say, 'Oh, and another thing I wanted to ask about > > was.......' or 'putting down the microphone'. Both of these > > manouevres will be greeted with laughter from the rest of the room, > > who will delight in pointing out that you are not getting off the > > hook so easily. I seem to have hook marks all over......But thanks > > to Amara, Betty, Sarah, Jon, Mike, Ivan, Ell, Sukin, Jaran, (and > > others whom I can clearly picture and fondly remember, but whom I > > don't wish to offend by a clumsy attempt at spelling their names) for > > helping me, and for the friendliness and good fellowship that seems > > to be a hallmark of a visit to the Foundation. > > > > note for Sukin - I have totally, absolutely forgiven you (almost) for > > bringing a digital camera and recording us for posterity on the same > > day my hair dryer died (r.i.p.) - henceforward to be known as Flat > > Hair Day. > > > > Other memories are of delightlful gifts from new friends, and books > > from the Foundation....feeding the fish (scores, as big as ironing > > boards!) near the Wat with Betty, Mike and Amara - Do you think fish > > are really that intelligent to know they are safe near a Wat? Are > > you sure it is not just that they know where half a ton of bread is > > going to be thrown in? (I am sure that's how much Amara had in the > > boot of the car). > > > > Lunch at the home of Khun Douangduan (?Sp) - delicious food in a > > lovely courtyard setting.....Sarah telling her dog-bite > > story........Betty telling her ?washing powder story (I will not type > > that word!).......lots of laughter..... > > > > Amaras' kindness and wonderful hospitality when she gave her time to > > take Mike and I around on New Years Day......Contrary to what you > > thought Jon, the traffic seemed to be horrendous, not light......I > > think 3 million of those 6 million didn't leave town for New Year, > > they seemed to be driving to the same places we were > > going!.......Thank goodness Amara is such an excellent driver (Rally > > Driver Extraordinaire).......though I think > > something...almost....happened because only once all day in awe- > > inspiring traffic did I hear her say 'Oooops!'. I tensed and tightly > > closed my eyes and practised a policy of 'don't ask and it didn't > > happen'.......and Mike didn't yell, but I think he sees Bangkok > > drivers as the norm now...... > > > > I really could write on and on, but may I just say one > > thing........the period I spent in Bangkok with the dsg-ers is a life > > changing experience and exceeded my expectations. I hope to go again. > > > > metta, > > Christine 10538 From: Sarah Date: Thu Jan 3, 2002 10:54pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Bangkok impressions 28/12/01-2/01/02 Dear Christine, --- christine_forsyth wrote: > Dear Rob Ep, > > Thank you for your kind words......Maybe we'll all get there together > sometime....We missed Robert K by a week or so......Trouble is with > you and Howard there, who else would get a word in? :-) ;-)) > Would I be persona non grata on the List if I slightly threatened > Sujin....only a tiny little bit? Like getting Balvindra on our side > somehow....... I think you may be getting Sujin and Sukin mixed up here...I'm sure it's Sukin you'd like to threaten;-) Yes, why not ask Balvindra (Sukin's wife) to check whether your hair looks flat first? (..I'm so glad mine is too short to worry about..) > I feel the women in the photo should have the right to accept, or > reject, or select, the photo (especially that poor one with flat > hair). Or even wait 'til next year...... Yes, I think so too....don't worry....In any case, Sukin was not sure his digital camera was up to doing whatever it's meant to do, so maybe your hair will be safe and it'll be an extra incentive for others to join us next year;-) Back to testing metta with my students tomorrow...still it's been a good break from the 'little darlings';-) Sarah =========================================== 10539 From: christine_forsyth Date: Thu Jan 3, 2002 11:04pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Bangkok impressions 28/12/01-2/01/02 Dear Sarah, Thanks for the correction, my apologies to all. Hmmmmm! interesting about Sukins' camera..... :-) metta, Christine --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Sarah wrote: > Dear Christine, > > --- christine_forsyth wrote: > Dear Rob Ep, > > > > Thank you for your kind words......Maybe we'll all get there together > > sometime....We missed Robert K by a week or so......Trouble is with > > you and Howard there, who else would get a word in? :-) > > ;-)) > > > Would I be persona non grata on the List if I slightly threatened > > Sujin....only a tiny little bit? Like getting Balvindra on our side > > somehow....... > > I think you may be getting Sujin and Sukin mixed up here...I'm sure it's > Sukin you'd like to threaten;-) Yes, why not ask Balvindra (Sukin's wife) > to check whether your hair looks flat first? (..I'm so glad mine is too > short to worry about..) > > > I feel the women in the photo should have the right to accept, or > > reject, or select, the photo (especially that poor one with flat > > hair). Or even wait 'til next year...... > > Yes, I think so too....don't worry....In any case, Sukin was not sure his > digital camera was up to doing whatever it's meant to do, so maybe your > hair will be safe and it'll be an extra incentive for others to join us > next year;-) > > Back to testing metta with my students tomorrow...still it's been a good > break from the 'little darlings';-) > > Sarah > =========================================== > > 10540 From: Sukinderpal Narula Date: Thu Jan 3, 2002 11:13pm Subject: RE: [dsg] Bangkok impressions 28/12/01-2/01/02 Dear Robert, You asked: Now on to more important matters: Sukin, are you going to post the photos???? Now since Christine has forgiven me for choosing a bad day for taking her picture, I think she doesn't mind me sending it to you. Actually I don't know what she meant by 'flat hair', I just looked at the picture and found that she was really looking very nice that morning. You'll have to wait though since I took the picture in high resolution, I need to figure out a way to reduce their size before I can send them to you or anyone else who might be interested. There is also a group picture with Jon, Sarah, K. Sujin, Betty, Christine, Mike and myself. Best wishes, Sukin. ps: Sorry if multiple copies of this post has been sent. I am new to Microsoft Outlook and am having difficulty handling it. 10541 From: Sarah Date: Thu Jan 3, 2002 11:36pm Subject: Re: [dsg] luminous mind Hi Anders, Hope you’re still around and on holiday/vacation still. --- Anders Honore wrote: A:> Personally, I > don't > >believe the commentaries at face value, and I believe > >> that Bikkhu Bodhi has more or less skilfully > >> pointed that they are sometimes even dead-wrong as they contradict > some > >> suttas. S:> >This is interesting. B.Bodhi is certainly a lot, lot, lot more familiar > with > >the suttas and commentaries than I am, but I have yet to come across > such a > >contradiction and would be happy to have any (contradictions) pointed > out >hurry> Sometimes it just depends on how one understands both (as with > the > >'luminous' sutta discussion). A:> He made some comments in his notes (or was it his introduction?) to his > translation of the Samyutta Nikaya. I can't > remember where it is (and there's quite few pages to skim through) > though, so it may be a while before I can be more > specific about this. S: OK, I’m looking at his notes in the intro to SN as I write. The relevant passage, I think, is on p.16 . He starts off by saying “that the commentaries explain the suttas as they were understood sometime around the first century C.E. at the latest, at which time the old commentaries drawn upon by Buddhaghosa were closed to further additions.” Later he says “The fact that I cite the commentaries so often in the notes does not necessarily mean that I always agree with them, though where I interpret a passage differently I generally say so.” Does this mean that he concludes they are sometimes ‘dead wrong’? Maybe. Does it mean they really are sometimes ‘dead wrong’? Perhaps it means our understanding of the Teachings might sometimes be ‘dead wrong’. Anyway, I’m not at all sure I share his sentiments and would be happy to discuss any specific examples. Does this mean we should blindly believe and have faith in everything we read in the Tipitaka (inc. commentaries)? Not at all. It needs to be considered and considered and tested and proven according to experience in daily life. I find the more is tested out and proved, the more confidence tends to grow in other aspects not yet directly experienced, but these aspects are still intellectual understanding or pariyatti only. A:> Btw, did I mention that I now have his full translations of the Digha, > Majhima and Samyutta Nikayas? A friendly soul sent > them to me for free shortly after I I took a break from dsg. S:This is really great news. I know you’ll make very good use of them. Anumodana indeed to the ‘friendly soul’. S:> >You may find it interesting to read back over the series of posts I've > been > >doing on a weekly basis from 'Intro to Vinaya'. These are the areas I'm > >considering in them. A:> I'll go and have a look in the archives. S:You may find the last paragraph of the last one (6) of personal interest. I’m giving everyone a break this week and will consider whether to continue next week. (They've all been saved together as a set under Vinaya- Introduction to in 'useful posts') http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/files/Useful_Posts A: > I should add that I don't neccesarily believe that all the suttas are > the quoted words of the Buddha either. When you have > thousands of them such as you have in the Pali Canon and you wait a few > hundreds before recording them in writing, > there's bound to be some minor errors or fabrications. S: I think that what is amazing (thanks to the arahats at the 1st council and so on) is just how cohesive and how few errors (if any?) there are.... A:> Perhaps I should clarify my own relationship with the commentaries. I > evaluate them in the context of the suttas > themselves. If I find that there isn't any valid basis for what the > commentaries propose in the suttas themselves, then I > don't buy it. It doesn't mean that I reject it as untrue or anything, > because quite frankly I don't bother myself with having to > label things as being "untrue" or "true". It just means that I don't > find them relevant for me. S:I think this is a pretty healthy approach to the entire Tipitaka, Anders. If we’re reading something which is not relevant to us at the time, no need to ‘buy it’. No need to reject it either (as you say) and who knows what will be relevant later. My approach is pretty close to this, I think. There are many parts of the Tipitaka now which I consider (not having found them relevant before). There are many other parts I just leave. A:> Now, eveluating in the context of the suttas is a highly subjective > matter of course, and the suttas themselves I interpret in > the light of two things: Faith and practise. Things that I don't have > any direct experience of myself from my practise (such > as the jhanas, supernatural powers etc.) I can only take on faith. Since > faith is a rather uncertain thing, I am wary of > maintaining any positions on these matters. They are pointers for > practitioners on higher stages than me, and so are not > things I need concern myself with at the moment. > When the suttas deal with things that I have direct experience of in my > own practise, I tend to lend authority to my practise > over my intellect, as it is the practise that it skilfully removing > clinging, and not the intellect and I think the Buddha was > quite aware of that. I agree that it is the testing, proving and direct experience right now that counts. On the other hand, wrong view and wrong practise always thinks it’s right, so it’s very useful indeed to continually consider, check and question what the Tipitaka itself says. For example, many people think they have attained jhanas, but when they read the texts in detail and consider carefully, they find that they are mistaken. The same applies to other insights and levels of bhavana (mental development). That’s why the intellectual and direct understanding work together in a kind of spiral (as Rob K once described). Many thanks for clarifying your position with regard to the Suttas and Commentaries which I certainly respect. Good to have you back for however long it is. Sarah ====================================================== 10542 From: Sarah Date: Thu Jan 3, 2002 11:41pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Concept Hello Victor, --- yuzhonghao wrote: > Hello Sarah, > > You questioned that "Can we say that a concept comes to be because of > thinking?" What do you think? Can we? Well, it was a question for you, but yes, I think we can;-) You wrote that no thinking > means no concepts. From what you wrote, it seems to me that you mean > that concept is dependent on thinking. This is how I understand the > word "concept" from the online dictionary in http://www.webster.com: > A concept means something conceived in the mind, a thought, a > notion. It also means an abstract or generic idea generalized from > particular instances. The synonym to the word "concept" is the > word "idea." I agree with you that thinking is conditioned. ..and I fully agree with all your comments here, Victor ;-)) Maybe a 'first'! Did you ever tell us where you live? I'd be interested to know a little more about where you are and your study and interest in dhamma, now we're in such agreement for a pleasant change;-) Sarah ================================================ 10543 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Thu Jan 3, 2002 11:50pm Subject: RE: [dsg] The White Radiant Mind Dear Kenneth, > -----Original Message----- > From: Kenneth Ong [mailto:ashkenn@y...] > > Hi Kom, > > I was using a hypothetical situation. Imagine > all cittas that arise > without any cetasikas, since cittas are pure as > described, then our series > of cittas will be pure. This would infer a > underlying nature of "pure" in > that sense. We know in some situations that the citta, with the cetasikas, are described as pure. So far, we hear from people the following theories: 1) Bhawanga is pure, as the commentaries have described it. However, I haven't seen the details if this is inclusive of all bhawanga, or does it just include the bhawangas with 2-hetu/3-hetus. How about the other sobhana vipakas? 2) Some have alluded to that all sobhana cittas are all pure, so this includes all vipaka/kusala/and kiriya with 2-hetu/3-hetu. 3) Some think the citta itself [maybe this is what you are talking about?], even with the cetasikas, is itself pure. This theory says all cittas (kusala/akusala/the rest) are pure. This perhaps may be due to the fact that cittas are said to see all the details of the object (although it doesn't penetrate the true characteristics), and that citta is defiled by kilesa (cetasikas), and not the other way around. Do you think the Buddha maybe describing one of the above situations, or do you think he is describing a pure consciousness that transcends all conditioned realities? kom 10544 From: Sarah Date: Thu Jan 3, 2002 11:52pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Concept Dear Rob Ep, --- Robert Epstein wrote: > Dear Sarah, > Thanks for your note! > If you could define micha/ditthi for me I would be much appreciative! Sorry, I think I overlooked this before i went away. Micha ditthi refers to 'wrong view'....Christine will say that 'wrong view' sounds so harsh and black, but then wrong view is the most harmful cetasika (mental factor). Please read more details about it (including the quote from the Nyantiloka dictionary) under 'Wrong View' in "useful Posts': http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/files/Useful_Posts Let me know if there was anything else (not that I can be at all sure of knowing the answer;-) Sarah R:> > >but a citta that mistakes a concept for a reality -- > > > that > > > thinks the 'Universe' is a real object, not a concept -- occurs with > moha, > > > and is > > > a 'deluded' citta. Is this correct? S:> > Certainly there is moha at these moments. When there is the ‘deluded’ > citta > > which wrongly takes concept for reality, there is also (micha) ditthi > at these > > moments. This is why we can consider ditthi as the most ‘dangerous’ > cetasika > > (to quote K.Sujin) and the first one that has to be eradicated. > > > > I think you’re getting ‘very warm’ indeed, > > > > Speak soon, > > Sarah > > ========== 10545 From: Sarah Date: Fri Jan 4, 2002 0:01am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: grandma Dear Yulia, I was very glad to hear from you and to read your nice post to Purnomo below. I liked the story about your friend's book and the custom of remembering the good someone has done. When Jon gave a eulogy at his father's funeral a couple of years ago, it was really a reflection on his good qualities and deeds which I think is helpful for everyone. Hope you're enjoying the other posts on the lists and finding some of value. Hope to hear more from you too;-) Sarah p.s I just forget, did you tell us where you live? (Sorry if you did and I've forgotten) ================================================ --- yklimov wrote: > Dear Purnomo, > > I would like to say I am very sorry for your loss. I have never > lost anyone yet, but I've lost a friend and I've seen my friends lost > their daughter. Be supportive to your Mom or Dad, whoever Mother > passed away. > The freind of mine, when she was little, her grandma passed away, > then when all her relatieves got together, father got a book and > asked everyone to tell something good about grandma, then he wrote it > into this book. She cherished this book all her life, and now gave it > to her teenager son, I feel it's a great way to be close to you > ancestors. Today we have camcorders, you can just kind of tape > everyone saying something good about her. In my country it's a custom > when someone dies, tell whatever good he's done, so he won't forget, > leaving us. > > Love, > Yulia > > PS Congratulation on finishing your study! ..................................................................................................... 10546 From: Sarah Date: Fri Jan 4, 2002 0:10am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: The noble nine fold path - Erik & Joe Dear Joe, --- lpjoe wrote: > Dear Sarah > > I'm back home in Chiang Mai after a month in Mexico, and some time > spent in Nepal and Laos, mostly promoting Buddhist Stupas in Asia: The > Shape of Perfection, at your favorite bookstore now ... I knew some exotic travels would be involved;-) I'll certainly look out for the book with interest. Quite a change from writing travel books, I'd think. (I'm sure you'll have noted our other budding travel writer on list;-) > > How do you understand this phrase, Joe? Does it suggest any idea of > self and > > control and `should do' to you? Is this how you understand the > Satipathana > > Sutta? I'm not trying to be tricky, I am sincerely interested to hear > more > > about your considered understanding. > > I take it in Ven. Buddhadasa's Thai sense of phaasaa tham rather than > phaasaa khon, that is the dhamma interpretation of 'we' rather than the > conventional 'people' one. Just for others: phaasaa tham= dhamma language (absolute realities?) phaasaa khon= people language (conventional language) Just as when 'you' use 'I' or 'you' or 'we' > in > this discussion group. But I'm no authority, and ultimately the way I > interpret it, or you interpret it, is going to be conditioned by what > we've > read elsewhere, what our teacher(s) have taught us, etc. Quite so and agreed. Sometimes we need to hear someone speaking quite a lot to really know what their understanding is too. Very glad that you're still keeping an eye on us and always glad to hear from you and hope you're enjoying the cool weather in Chengmai. Best wishes, Sarah =================================================== 10547 From: Sarah Date: Fri Jan 4, 2002 0:16am Subject: Re: [dsg] one limb of 8 fold path more important (was satipathana and practice) Dear Frank, --- fcckuan wrote: > --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "rikpa21" wrote: > > > Anyway the Samadhi Sutta is just as important (is one limb of the > > Noble Eightfold path "more or less" important than any other?), > > In the samyutta, the Buddha uses a simile. Just as dawn precedes > sunrise, right view precedes the other factors of the 8fold noble > path. This stands to reason. If one has keen right view, then with > right view one can correct deficiencies in the other 7 factors. But > if one is deficient in right view, deviant in view, lacking in right > view, it's difficult if not impossible to correct or properly develop > the other factors. This is a great little summary on the importance of samma ditthi (rt view) which also helps to explain the danger of micha ditthi (wrong view) as I just mentioned to Rob Ep. > The rest of Erik's post is interesting and I'd like to comment on > it another time when I have more time :-) Yes, Erik's post was very well-written and presented and I'm sure we'd all be very glad to hear your further comments. Sarah ==================================================== 10548 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Jan 4, 2002 1:22am Subject: Re: [dsg] deceiving dhammas op 01-01-2002 16:54 schreef Kom Tukovinit op tikmok@y...: N: I could not send this yesterday, so I try again. See addition on sevitabba. I got to review what are > the vancaka dhammas. In general, I like hearing about some > subtleties of the dhamma because I find that by knowing > about them, I tend to pay attention toward the particular > aspect (paying attention at pariyatti or direct level, or > paying attention with panna are different stories). It is > like opening up a new world previously unknown or only known > through a veil. I think by being precise and detailed about > the subtleties of the dhamma conceptually, panna (and all > the associated nama) can develop to understand more detailed > aspects of the dhammas. > > The other thing is, I don't see how one develops kusala and > abandons akusala unless one understand in details the > differences between them. It is so easy for me to mistake > akusala as kusala. In retrospect, the mistakes are often > (and continues to be!) not so subtle. It is amazing that it > takes a person with panna to point out some of these big > mistakes: avijja is so overwhelming. Nina: I find it useful that you mention this, we all have this experience. I also need a good friend in Dhamma to point this out. It is just as you say: avijja is overwhelming, a good reminder. > K: Before I mentioned the specific examples of the vancaka > dhammas that apply to me (in another post), I have two more > stories for you regarding the India trip that are somewhat > related to this conversation. The first story is about what > A. Supee said, and the other one a combination of what A. > Supee and A. Sujin said. > > A. Supee mentioned that whenever you asked him questions (in > India), he would like other people to hear the questions. > He said you asked him very detaild questions, and it is rare > to hear such questions, leaving alone good answers. One of > the questions he mentioned was that when one runs into an > unpleasant situation, one thinks(?) about something that on > the surface sounds like panna. However, if one considers > that more carefully, it appears that it is not panna that > arises, but it is the lobha that chooses its object. This > is generally exactly like the vancaka dhammas, and just like > vancaka dhammas, it begs to be proven in daily life. > N: I like your observations about the subtlety of Dhamma. I had exhilarating conversations with A. Supee about many topics and some I shall write about in my India impressions. Those conversations just came up when there was an opportunity. I had jotted down questions when in Holland. He is very kind and he has considered the Dhamma deeply. About the above incident, taking lobha for pa~n~naa: I had aversion about something at the moment that we were about to go around the Sarnath stupa. I felt unpleasant. Then I remembered some conversation with Ivan about akusala citta at the holy places. He said that we believe we should only have kusala cittas at the holy places, but that this is not realistic. When I remembered this I did not mind anymore having dosa, but A. Sujin said that there may be an idea of self who does not mind. Not pa~n~naa, as we may think (vancaka dhamma) but lobha chooses its object. I answered that I need a good friend who points this out, by oneself it is not easy to find out. Although A. Sujin says that the teachings are the good friend and pa~n~naa can find out all such moments. K: There was another controversy that was discussed in India: > how much detail does one study conceptually? On one side > (A), it is said that one only needs to understand the basic > concepts, and then after that, satipatthana should be the > main way to develop panna. On the other side (B), it is > necessary to know lots and lots of details. I understand > (C) from A. Sujin and A. Supee(misunderstanding?) that one > should study what one can understand, especially those that > apply in daily life. > > I apply the above situations to the current particular > situations as followed, which probably guarantee more > controversies: > (A): I already understand what Satipatthana is, why bother > with hearing about vancaka dhammas, bhawangas, and > conditionalities at all? I can learn the subtleties of the > different dhammas through direct perception. N: How much detail should we study? No rule, it depends on a person's inclinations . Also understanding on the level of pa~n~natti should, I believe, be developed naturally, at ease, and with pleasure. The purpose is, as A. Sujin stresses: understanding of this moment in your life, thus, what you learn should be applied to your life. How many details you study: it depends on your liking and also another condition: how much free time does one have. You cannot choose that, it is also dependent on conditions. K: (B): I need to know all the different aspects of vancaka > dhammas, bhawangas, and conditionalities. I should be able > to explain all dhammas in term of conditionalities, as that > would give me all the different details about the dhammas. N: Again, it depends on your inclination, not: you have to know. Then there can be the lobha which wants to know a lot so that there is a good foundation for the level of patipatti. Everything that is forced is, I personally think, no good. K: (C): One needs to listen a lot, and consider a lot, but one > needs to know the limit of one's understanding. Remembering > all the details about vancaka dhammas are not going to help > in daily life, as not all the dhammas mentioned in the > teaching would appear. Remembering all the details about > conditionalities are not going to help, as the details of > those don't appear to one anyway. It is important to learn > enough to answer one's own (important) questions - to > eliminate vicikiccha. N: That is what A. Sujin said in Cambodia: know the limit of what you can understand. (in another post I shall give more examples) K: For panna to know finer and more > subtles dhammas (and panna must know, otherwise, how could > it be [roo jang, roo tua] (penetration?, knowing > all-around), then the conceptual understanding, through > listening and consideration, must be equivallently > well-refined. N: I am not sure about this. Pa~n~naa of the level of patipatti is much more subtle than theoretical understanding. One may have studied only a few basic details, but one may have considered these deeply in one's life. Then there are conditions for the development of pa~n~naa of the level of patipatti, and this kind of pa~n~naa is much keener and sharper than just theoretical knowledge. It can know all dhammas that appear thoroughly, but this again depends on one's accumulations. One may have listened, considered and developed pa~n~naa in former lives. You remember the example of the person who could not remember any stanza, but received a cloth that he had to rub on his finger, to remove dirt. He saw his own defilements and attained enlightenment. (Visuddhimagga). Again, pa~n~naa works its way. I keep in mind A. Supee's reminder you wrote about that if sammasati, direct awareness, and understanding do not arise, there is not enough firm foundation of theoretical understanding. This helps us to see how much this depends on conditions. It is reassuring, we are not forcing ourselves to hurry, learning many details. A condition to remember this is the fact that you brought this up! It impressed me suddenly so much. There are basic things we have to know, for example, that pleasant feeling can arise with kusala citta but also with lobha, otherwise we are misled all the time, we mistake akusala for kusala, and as you said, such mistakes are not so subtle. Vancaka dhamma coming in again. Some details do not seem to relate to daily life, but when someone else mentions them or asks a question about them, there are conditions to study them, consider them more, and then we see: they do relate to daily life. At first we find them "dry bones" but then we start to take an interest in them, yes, we begin to like them. Robert K. mentioned the "Guide", Netti, and referred to: lobha that should be pursued (sevitabba) and that should not be pursued. This is not abstract, it relates to our life. I kn ow this was dealt with before, pertaining to someone who is about to attain arahatship and longs for this beforehand. But I found interesting what A. Supee said about the lower levels, for us. A. Supee explained: when you cook or you apply yourself to your profession, there are conditions for the arising of lobha. This is not akusala kamma, it does not lead to an unhappy rebirth. It is not wrong practice that hinders the development of panna. He mentioned examples of wrong practice: you visit the holy sites and pay respect to the relics because you want to induce sati. Thus the kind of lobha that can be pursued is not lobha with wrong view. Sevitabba does not mean: we should pursue it, but, it has conditions for its arising. It can be object of pa~n~naa. Later on I shall give more examples of studying details, and starting to like them, to find them relevant, but this post gets too long. In a few moments I have to pursue the lobha that can be pursued, while cooking. Best wishes from Nina. 10549 From: rikpa21 Date: Fri Jan 4, 2002 5:26am Subject: Re: [dsg] one limb of 8 fold path more important (was satipathana and practice) --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Sarah wrote: > Dear Frank, > > --- fcckuan wrote: > --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., > "rikpa21" wrote: > > > > > Anyway the Samadhi Sutta is just as important (is one limb of the > > > Noble Eightfold path "more or less" important than any other?), > > > > In the samyutta, the Buddha uses a simile. Just as dawn precedes > > sunrise, right view precedes the other factors of the 8fold noble > > path. This stands to reason. If one has keen right view, then with > > right view one can correct deficiencies in the other 7 factors. But > > if one is deficient in right view, deviant in view, lacking in right > > view, it's difficult if not impossible to correct or properly develop > > the other factors. > > This is a great little summary on the importance of samma ditthi (rt view) > which also helps to explain the danger of micha ditthi (wrong view) as I > just mentioned to Rob Ep. I agree completely the "Right View" is the forerunner, but Right View in what sense, mundane, suparmundane? "Right View" in the mundane sense only takes one so far. If kamma and paticca samuppada and anatta are explained well they are not unduly difficult to grasp intellectually. What is much harder is getting rid of the views part and coming to supramundane Right View, which it tanamount to abandoning "views" (read, speculation) altogether. Similarly, one needs hold no "belief" (ditthi) regarding the taste of a ripe mango if one has actually tasted a ripe mango, though one may hold beliefs about its flavor as "sweet, delicious, etc." prior to actually tasting it. Once tasted, there is no longer any need for any "view" of a mango's taste, hence there is nothing to associate with view or speculation regarding its flavor and texture. But, absent this taste, there has to be some way to acquire a mango for the tasting! :) So my question, from the other day and again is, "Now what"? Intellectual analysis can only take one so far. It is possible to beak down the body into a bunch of functions and dis-identify them with an "I" intellectually. But this can never substitute for directly seeing this reality with supramundane panna, which is unmediated by conceptual elaborations. The means to tasting this ripe mango I'm familiar with (the one outlined by the Buddha in the Satipatthana Sutta and the Samadhi Sutta and many other places) demands a lot more than merely understanding intellectually (lokiya samma ditthi) that all things are anatta, or that we all heirs to our own kamma, or believing that there is no "driver" or "I" behind everything in the ultimate sense. According to my understanding, the panna that cuts the defilements takes unbroken mindfulness brought about by persistence and effort (viriya) training in mindfulness and concentration, (sati and samadhi), applying that to the direct investigation (dhamma-vicaya) into the charactetristics of dhammas arising and passing away in terms of noting their inconstancy, combined with other factors (piti, passadhi, upekkha), which, when brought to their culmination in the proper balance, lead to the insight that terminates the fetters and brings to fruition the sole aim of the Dhamma: final release from identification with the imputed "self," the "I, me, mine," which lies at the root of suffering. So there are many factors involved, and what I've found most helpful is to reflect on what the Buddha actually taught regarding the cause- and-effect relationships that lead from suffering sentient being to final release. For example, if the hindrances are present, can any of the enlightenment factors like piti, passadhi, upekkha, or sati arise? What about samadhi? Without these factors, is there any hope of release? So based on my understanding, it's a matter of working with these cause-and-effect relationships in the approriate order, knowing, for example, that without pacifying the hindrances, the seven factors of enlightenment have no basis for arising, not to mention enlightenment and final release. Not only that, but among all these factors there needs to be the appropriate balance. To veer too far in any direction is to depart from the Middle Way, to miss the "sweet spot" as in the "lute-string" simile, and to miss the mark entirely. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/modern/wings/2g.html 10550 From: abhidhammika Date: Fri Jan 4, 2002 5:58am Subject: [dsg] Re: luminous mind: To Kenneth Ong Dear Ken How are you? Thank you for your keen interest and questions. However, I may not have enough time to answer all your questions. As you might know, I am about to post Subcommentary On The White Radiant Mind. I need to rewrite the Pali passage from CD-ROM into the Yahoo text format. I can't post the Pali passage with correct fonts to this list. I also need to write notes on technical details that are, by the way, more numerous than those in the commentary. You asked: "Could you kindly explained the sentence "new kinds of bhavangacittas"." Well, you first had the given bhavangacittas from birth. During your current lifetime, you happened to perform janaka kamma. Suppose that the effect of javana kamma did not wait till your next conception, and needed to appear during your currect lifetime. And, suppose also that the effect was the resultant mental aggregate (aruupa vipaaka khandhaa), then you got different kind of bhavangacitta. As simple as that. You also asked: "Secondly since the objects of bhavangacittas are the same throughout one's life, will that mean that these new kinds of bhavangacittas have different objects." Yes, of course. You also asked: "Do you know of any commentaries that mention the objects of bhavangcittas." Yes, I have read some. You may need to wait for exact references, though. And, by the way, why are you obsessed by the objects of bhavangacittas? With best wishes, Suan http://www.bodhiology.org --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Kenneth Ong wrote: > Hi Suan, > > That is interesting. > > "When javana citta has the strength of a janaka kamma, it can modify > bhavangacitta. In fact, it can cause new kinds of bhavangacitta to arise. > > Could you kindly explained the sentence "new kinds of bhavangacittas". > Secondly since the objects of bhavangacittas are the same throughout one's > life, will that mean that these new kinds of bhavangacittas have different > objects. Do you know of any commentaries that mention the objects of > bhavangcittas. > > Sometimes I wondering why the objects are a mystery, since bhanvagacittas > are conditioned by the rebirth citta which are in turn conditioned by last > citta, then in turn by the last javana cittas of the last series of citta > process. Since the last series process of cittas objects are known then > why when it reach bhavanga citta, its object is not known. > > > Kind regards > Ken O > > > > --- abhidhammika wrote: > > > > > > > Dear Nina And Kom > > > > How are you? > > > > You wrote: > > > > " Dear Suan, yes, it is clear that kamma of the past produces the > > bhavangacitta that is vipakacitta. What I am puzzled about is that > > the javanacittas arising in processes can condition the > > bhavangacitta. I was wondering in what way they can do this, since > > the javana cittas arise in processes and the bhavangacitta is just in > > deep sleep so to say. Or did I misunderstand what you wrote? Best > > wishes from Nina." > > > > This problem has been raised by both of you (Kom off-list) previously > > many months before. I was occupied with many other matters which > > prevented me from solving this problem promptly. Not only that, I > > wanted to discuss this matter properly. And, even now, I won't be > > able to discuss this issue as much as I like. > > > > Sorry about this short reply. > > > > However, as you raised this question again, I will give you, as a > > quick answer, Buddhaghosa's statement on how javana cittas can > > condition bhavangacitta. > > > > The answer to this problem is to do with the timing and quality of > > javana cittas. > > > > When javana citta has the strength of a janaka kamma, it can modify > > bhavangacitta. In fact, it can cause new kinds of bhavangacitta to > > arise. > > > > The following Pali quote comes from Section 687, > > Kankhavitaranavisuddhi niddesa, Visuddhimaggo, Vol.2. > > > > 687. .....Tattha janakam naama kusalampi hoti akusalampi. Tam > > patisandhiyampi pavattepi ruupaaruuupavipaakakkhandhe janeti. > > > > "...There, janakam is either healthy or unhealthy action. It (janaka > > kamma) can cause resultant physical and mental aggegates to arise > > either at the moment of linking consciousness (conception) or during > > the current lifetime." > > > > Please kindly note that the resultant mental aggregates (aruupa > > vipaaka khandhaa) during the current lifetime refer to bhavanga > > cittas. > > > > > > You wrote: > > > > "Or did I misunderstand what you wrote?" > > > > I don't think you misunderstood what I wrote. Perhaps, you did not > > see a connection between what I wrote and what Buddhaghosa wrote. > > > > Having said that, Buddhaghosa wrote a disclaimer as well further down > > the paragraph to the effect that full understanding of how kamma and > > vipaaka works is the domain only of the Buddhas, not that of us. > > > > Hope this message solves your puzzle! > > > > > > With best wishes, > > > > > > Suan > > > > http://www.bodhiology.org > > 10551 From: Robert Epstein Date: Fri Jan 4, 2002 6:34am Subject: Re: Undertanding Metta - was([dsg] Re: Bangkok impressions 28/12/01-2/01/02) --- christine_forsyth wrote: > I was watching a one year old toddler at the Shopping Mall this > morning. She had pulled the legs off her doll when a tiny puppy came > close; she picked it up and seemed to be trying to do the same to the > puppy, with no understanding that it could feel pain or fear, anymore > than the doll could. Her mother quickly removed the puppy and > said "How would you like it if I pulled your legs off?' .... giving a > sharp tug on the childs' legs. Quite clearly from the yell of > protest, she wouldn't have liked it at all..... I know none of us > are quite like that, and that it is just a developmental stage. But > some adults (maybe all of us to a smaller or greater degree) can grow > indifferent, or a little callous about the suffering of others... Hi Christine, This is just a side-note to your interesting message, but I wanted to focus on this little event, since I am the father of a three-year-old girl. I often make little threats that she will be put in her room or take things away from her when she is stubborn about doing things that are destructive to objects or that are harmful to herself, but it occurs to me that this can sometimes have the opposite effect. In your example, the mother pulled sharply on the child's legs to give her the idea. If indeed the child really didn't understand this seems like a rather harsh way of making the point. In my mind, the child would feel just like the puppy in a sense: unfairly attacked, and would not understand why she was being physically hurt. This would cause more anger/resentment and lead to greater violence in the future. In other words, the wrong antidote produces more causes, more kammas, and eventually will yield akusula fruit. This is my view anyway. It is exceedingly difficult to maintain the balance between stopping akusala results and creating more, which is why the cycle of attachment, birth and death is so incredibly hard to break. This brings out another aspect of metta, which I think is interesting to contemplate. How could the mother in that example make the point to the child that she must not harm other beings while expressing metta to her at the same time? How could she treat the child with lovingkindness and still stop her from further 'assaults'? It seems to me that the principle of ahimsa, harmlessness, goes hand in hand with metta, that one who wants to stop harm must also be harmless. I believe that the mother could have grabbed the child's attention, really described to her what the puppy might feel if its legs were pulled and allow the child to develop understanding and empathy. To pull the child's legs seems to bypass a more mindful process. Anyway, when my child won't listen I can be pretty gruff. I raise my intensity level in direct proportion to her resistance -- most of the time, I hope, and try to remain calm even while setting boundaries. I hope that I can teach her to grow in the right direction without sowing seeds of fear and anger at the same time. Best, Robert Ep. ================= 10552 From: Robert Epstein Date: Fri Jan 4, 2002 6:41am Subject: Re: [dsg] Bangkok impressions 28/12/01-2/01/02 --- christine_forsyth wrote: > Dear Rob Ep, > > Thank you for your kind words......Maybe we'll all get there together > sometime....We missed Robert K by a week or so......Trouble is with > you and Howard there, who else would get a word in? :-) ha ha, I'd be happy to take a vow of silence if it gains me admittance! > Would I be persona non grata on the List if I slightly threatened > Sujin....only a tiny little bit? Like getting Balvindra on our side > somehow....... > I feel the women in the photo should have the right to accept, or > reject, or select, the photo (especially that poor one with flat > hair). Or even wait 'til next year...... Well, it was the flat hair that particularly intrigued me, but I understand your feelings about it. My wife regularly de-selects photos that I think are perfectly nice, and files them in the 'garbage file'. Sometimes we are forced to cut parts of pictures out for my mother, meaning the part with her in it, leading to a collection of odd-sized photos. Perhaps Sukin can selectively crop the photos and only post ones that have permission. I guess that would be fair, as long as you allow one of you to come through so that those unlucky enough to be absent we can identify you as well as the others! I would be happy to crop and post them myself if Sukin is too busy and want to just email them to me. That's something that I can do pretty quickly. In any case, I am sorry that I took your revelation of the photos to put you on the spot. That is a little bit mean, and I have some regret about that.........but I'm just curious to see everyone that I've been talking to [or at!] here on dsg. In exchange, maybe I'll find a bad photo of myself and put it in the dsg files. Regards to you, Robert Ep. =========== > metta, > Christine > > --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Robert Epstein wrote: > > Dear Christine, > > What a lovely, humorous and evocative account of your trip and the > meeting with > > dsg'ers and others. If you decide to write a travel book, I'm > ready to fill out > > the order form any time. > > > > Thanks for bringing the event to life. > > > > Now on to more important matters: Sukin, are you going to post the > photos???? > > > > > > Best Regards, > > Robert Ep. > > > > ========================= > > > > --- christine_forsyth wrote: 10553 From: Robert Epstein Date: Fri Jan 4, 2002 6:44am Subject: RE: [dsg] Bangkok impressions 28/12/01-2/01/02 Dear Sukin, That would be great if you have the chance to send the photos. I have a simple Application, Adobe Photodeluxe, which will reduce the resolution of the pictures, once in the computer, to 72 dpi and will then convert them to jpeg files. It does so in a matter of seconds. If you want to send me the 'big picture files' and have me do the reduction, I will be happy to do it. If they're too big to send, a good photo app, perhaps one that comes with the camera's software?, should have a component to do what I have described. Best, Robert Ep. ============= --- Sukinderpal Narula wrote: > Dear Robert, > You asked: > > Now on to more important matters: Sukin, are you going to post the > photos???? > > > Now since Christine has forgiven me for choosing a bad day for taking her > picture, > I think she doesn't mind me sending it to you. Actually I don't know what > she meant > by 'flat hair', I just looked at the picture and found that she was really > looking > very nice that morning. > You'll have to wait though since I took the picture in high resolution, I > need to > figure out a way to reduce their size before I can send them to you or > anyone else > who might be interested. There is also a group picture with Jon, Sarah, K. > Sujin, > Betty, Christine, Mike and myself. > > Best wishes, > Sukin. > > ps: Sorry if multiple copies of this post has been sent. I am new to > Microsoft Outlook > and am having difficulty handling it. 10554 From: Robert Epstein Date: Fri Jan 4, 2002 6:49am Subject: Re: [dsg] Concept Thanks, Sarah! Rob Ep. ==== --- Sarah wrote: > Dear Rob Ep, > > --- Robert Epstein wrote: > Dear Sarah, > > Thanks for your note! > > If you could define micha/ditthi for me I would be much appreciative! > > Sorry, I think I overlooked this before i went away. Micha ditthi refers > to 'wrong view'....Christine will say that 'wrong view' sounds so harsh > and black, but then wrong view is the most harmful cetasika (mental > factor). > > Please read more details about it (including the quote from the Nyantiloka > dictionary) under 'Wrong View' in "useful Posts': > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/files/Useful_Posts > > Let me know if there was anything else (not that I can be at all sure of > knowing the answer;-) > > Sarah 10555 From: yklimov Date: Fri Jan 4, 2002 7:28am Subject: [dsg] Re: grandma / to Sarah Dear Sarah Thank you for your nice letter. I usally don't talk here much, because basically I have nothing to say :). I am a beginner to Buddhism, this group was recommended by Robert to me, I am very grateful to him for that. I am native Russian, immigrated to USA in 1995, still trying to "fit". I live in South Florida, in Hollywood. I enjoy very much this group, even sometimes I don't really understand what people are telling here. Thank you again for giving some attention to me :) Yulia --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Sarah wrote: > Dear Yulia, > > I was very glad to hear from you and to read your nice post to Purnomo > below. I liked the story about your friend's book and the custom of > remembering the good someone has done. When Jon gave a eulogy at his > father's funeral a couple of years ago, it was really a reflection on his > good qualities and deeds which I think is helpful for everyone. > > Hope you're enjoying the other posts on the lists and finding some of > value. Hope to hear more from you too;-) > > Sarah > > p.s I just forget, did you tell us where you live? (Sorry if you did and > I've forgotten) > ================================================ > > --- yklimov wrote: > Dear Purnomo, > > > > I would like to say I am very sorry for your loss. I have never > > lost anyone yet, but I've lost a friend and I've seen my friends lost > > their daughter. Be supportive to your Mom or Dad, whoever Mother > > passed away. > > The freind of mine, when she was little, her grandma passed away, > > then when all her relatieves got together, father got a book and > > asked everyone to tell something good about grandma, then he wrote it > > into this book. She cherished this book all her life, and now gave it > > to her teenager son, I feel it's a great way to be close to you > > ancestors. Today we have camcorders, you can just kind of tape > > everyone saying something good about her. In my country it's a custom > > when someone dies, tell whatever good he's done, so he won't forget, > > leaving us. > > > > Love, > > Yulia > > > > PS Congratulation on finishing your study! 10556 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Jan 4, 2002 10:00am Subject: bhavangacitta, to Suan. Dear Suan, thank you for your patience in answering our questions and providing us with the Pali. I find the subject more and more complicated and I know you give this subject much thought. With appreciation, Nina. 10557 From: Date: Fri Jan 4, 2002 6:10am Subject: Re: Undertanding Metta - was([dsg] Re: Bangkok impressions 28/12/01-2/01/02) Dear Christine : > I think what is meant is that I should use 'myself' as an example to > bring to mind that other beings feel emotional, psychological and > physical pain just as 'I' do. > I am very delighted with your explanation above. Anyhow, let me digest it further and I'd like to put your analogy up-side-down to see the other side of the coin a little bit. After I read your post, this is what I can extract. Panna and sati are there in metta development. Panna is at least in a level to understand and see that one can get hurt, to a level to see and recognize disadvantages of dosa, and to a level to recognize the difference between lobha and metta(adosa to entity). Sati is definitely always be there at that moment with panna. I think this is what I got from your message. So if this what you meant to say, metta is not just sitting and trying to meditate or radiate metta power onto every being on every possible plane. I meant it can be to that degree but it has to start with right understanding of what really is metta. Metta again, can be start here and now in daily life (meditation on metta can also be daily life for someone who have inclination to do that as well). <<< I was watching a one year old toddler at the Shopping Mall this morning. She had pulled the legs off her doll when a tiny puppy came close; she picked it up and seemed to be trying to do the same to the puppy, with no understanding that it could feel pain or fear, anymore than the doll could. Her mother quickly removed the puppy and said "How would you like it if I pulled your legs off?' .... giving a sharp tug on the childs' legs. Quite clearly from the yell of protest, she wouldn't have liked it at all..... >>> Let me be mean a little this time. OK, I'd like to change a puppy into a little 1 y/o girl, change the girl into a mean criminal street drug user guy. Yes, he is trying to pull the lovely little girl's leg (can be a symbol for her physical health, mental health or spiritual health). For me I definitely love cute little girl, wish her no harm and pain. If she cry for food I will always attend her. It's very easy for me to do that. Is that metta? Come back to the analogy, what about the guy, can I still be kind and practice metta to him. Sound much harder. Let me put the analogy further, if the street guy is someone we love and know as well, let say the girl's father, brother, relative or someone we love. Where will we put ourselves. Everyone will probably has his/her version of answer. But real life is the best test. Test what ground we stand on, how firm is our kindness, how firm is our wisdom (panna). I do not want to be mean, take it as a food of thought, OK :) <<< You say: "Another point I'd like to add is bhramavihara also can be taken as an object (arammana) for every aspect of akusala (asava, ogha, yogha, gantha, upadhana, nivorana, anusaya,samyojana, and kilesa) as well." I didn't know this - do you have any references where I can read about it? >>> The reason I mentioned this b/c I'd like to share that metta in itself is a very good deed, but kusla (except lokuttara level and nibbana) can be taken as an object for akusala citta. This is my metta, I give him metta why he is still mean to me, good feeling that come along with metta can also be addicted, etc...... I got this from question-answer part in Dhammasangani. I haven't looked in Atthasalini in detail but it might be some explanation in there. Best wishes, Num 10558 From: Date: Fri Jan 4, 2002 6:36am Subject: Re: [dsg] deceiving dhammas Hi Sarah, > > Let me try some pali: pannasattha, pannaaloko, pannaobhaso, > > pannapajjoto, > > pannaratano, amoho, dhammvicayo, samadhitthi and finally natthi panna > > sama > > abha, nothing is as illuminating as panna. > > > > Hmmm....Are you sure you translated it all? For the 95% of members who are > pali challenged (inc.me), could you add a little more translation and > explanation of your words of wisdom? Ohoh ;P , this is not my words of wisdom, sorry I just parroted them. Are you sure you like to see my translation, I am a pali babble? Jargoning is probably the right word to call my pali. Since you have asked, I will try my best. But take it with caution, OK. pannasattha: panna is like a weapon (addendum: piercing through reality, akusala, kusala and/or neutral) pannaaloko: panna is like a radiant light pannaobhaso: panna is illuminating pannapajjoto: panna is like a lamp pannaratano: panna is like a precious gem amoho: amoha: panna dhammvicayo: analyzing or knowing dhamma clearly samaditthi : panna natthi panna sama abha: nothing is as illuminating as panna. Ohoh, I have pali dyslexic syndrome. Num 10559 From: christine_forsyth Date: Fri Jan 4, 2002 2:33pm Subject: Undertanding Metta - was([dsg] Re: Bangkok impressions 28/12/01-2/01/02) Dear Rob Ep, You say: " the wrong antidote produces more causes, more kammas,and eventually will yield akusula fruit" I absolutely agree with you. The incident happened in much less time than it took to write about, and it was completely out of my control (that word again)..... I have to say on a more serious occasion at a shopping mall I did intervene, but this particular incident was in the 'don't interfere' category.......maybe I would have had MY legs pulled if I had. :-) :-) I always tried to use distraction, or if that didn't work, restraint, when my son and daughter were very young. ? part of skilful means of parenthood. (And maybe the mother in my post does also, and she was just tired and stressed on this occasion.) metta, Christine --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Robert Epstein wrote: > > --- christine_forsyth wrote: > > > I was watching a one year old toddler at the Shopping Mall this > > morning. She had pulled the legs off her doll when a tiny puppy came > > close; she picked it up and seemed to be trying to do the same to the > > puppy, with no understanding that it could feel pain or fear, anymore > > than the doll could. Her mother quickly removed the puppy and > > said "How would you like it if I pulled your legs off?' .... giving a > > sharp tug on the childs' legs. Quite clearly from the yell of > > protest, she wouldn't have liked it at all..... I know none of us > > are quite like that, and that it is just a developmental stage. But > > some adults (maybe all of us to a smaller or greater degree) can grow > > indifferent, or a little callous about the suffering of others... > > Hi Christine, > This is just a side-note to your interesting message, but I wanted to focus on > this little event, since I am the father of a three-year-old girl. I often make > little threats that she will be put in her room or take things away from her when > she is stubborn about doing things that are destructive to objects or that are > harmful to herself, but it occurs to me that this can sometimes have the opposite > effect. > > In your example, the mother pulled sharply on the child's legs to give her the > idea. If indeed the child really didn't understand this seems like a rather harsh > way of making the point. In my mind, the child would feel just like the puppy in > a sense: unfairly attacked, and would not understand why she was being physically > hurt. This would cause more anger/resentment and lead to greater violence in the > future. In other words, the wrong antidote produces more causes, more kammas, and > eventually will yield akusula fruit. This is my view anyway. It is exceedingly > difficult to maintain the balance between stopping akusala results and creating > more, which is why the cycle of attachment, birth and death is so incredibly hard > to break. > > This brings out another aspect of metta, which I think is interesting to > contemplate. How could the mother in that example make the point to the child > that she must not harm other beings while expressing metta to her at the same > time? How could she treat the child with lovingkindness and still stop her from > further 'assaults'? It seems to me that the principle of ahimsa, harmlessness, > goes hand in hand with metta, that one who wants to stop harm must also be > harmless. > > I believe that the mother could have grabbed the child's attention, really > described to her what the puppy might feel if its legs were pulled and allow the > child to develop understanding and empathy. To pull the child's legs seems to > bypass a more mindful process. > > Anyway, when my child won't listen I can be pretty gruff. I raise my intensity > level in direct proportion to her resistance -- most of the time, I hope, and try > to remain calm even while setting boundaries. I hope that I can teach her to grow > in the right direction without sowing seeds of fear and anger at the same time. > > Best, > Robert Ep. > > ================= > > 10560 From: christine_forsyth Date: Fri Jan 4, 2002 2:47pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Bangkok impressions 28/12/01-2/01/02 Dear Rob Ep, You say: "My wife regularly de-selects photos that I think are perfectly nice, and files them in the 'garbage file'. Sometimes we are forced to cut parts of pictures out for my mother, meaning the part with her in it, leading to a collection of odd-sized photos." **I believe this is a genetic trait 100% inherited down the female line.:-) You say: "In any case, I am sorry that I took your revelation of the photos to put you on the spot. That is a little bit mean, and I have some regret about that.........but I'm just curious to see everyone that I've been talking to [or at!] here on dsg." **Rob - I have two brothers (of the blood, so to speak) so teasing from dhamma brothers needs no apology, and certainly isn't seen by me as mean. The only difference is - I can't throw a cushion at you via the computer. :-) Though I really wouldn't like Sukin to put them in the Files......just send via email to those who request them. Is that possible, ... by email, I mean? metta, Christine --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Robert Epstein wrote: > > --- christine_forsyth wrote: > > Dear Rob Ep, > > > > Thank you for your kind words......Maybe we'll all get there together > > sometime....We missed Robert K by a week or so......Trouble is with > > you and Howard there, who else would get a word in? :-) > > ha ha, I'd be happy to take a vow of silence if it gains me admittance! > > > Would I be persona non grata on the List if I slightly threatened > > Sujin....only a tiny little bit? Like getting Balvindra on our side > > somehow....... > > I feel the women in the photo should have the right to accept, or > > reject, or select, the photo (especially that poor one with flat > > hair). Or even wait 'til next year...... > > Well, it was the flat hair that particularly intrigued me, but I understand your > feelings about it. My wife regularly de-selects photos that I think are perfectly > nice, and files them in the 'garbage file'. Sometimes we are forced to cut parts > of pictures out for my mother, meaning the part with her in it, leading to a > collection of odd-sized photos. Perhaps Sukin can selectively crop the photos and > only post ones that have permission. I guess that would be fair, as long as you > allow one of you to come through so that those unlucky enough to be absent we can > identify you as well as the others! > > I would be happy to crop and post them myself if Sukin is too busy and want to > just email them to me. That's something that I can do pretty quickly. > > In any case, I am sorry that I took your revelation of the photos to put you on > the spot. That is a little bit mean, and I have some regret about > that.........but I'm just curious to see everyone that I've been talking to [or > at!] here on dsg. > > In exchange, maybe I'll find a bad photo of myself and put it in the dsg files. > > Regards to you, > Robert Ep. > > =========== 10561 From: m. nease Date: Fri Jan 4, 2002 3:33pm Subject: FYI Just to let you all know, The combination of the recent cut-back in my internet access and the extreme unreliability of this connection, I'll most likely be out of touch most of the time from now on. I'll drop into an internet shop, as Sarah suggested, when that's possible. Just didn't want anyone to take personally any posts left unanswered. See you when I see you, mike 10562 From: christine_forsyth Date: Fri Jan 4, 2002 3:53pm Subject: Undertanding Metta - was([dsg] Re: Bangkok impressions 28/12/01-2/01/02) Dear Num, and All, Yes, I agree, Num, that right understanding of what metta really is, is crucial. And wrong understanding is so difficult to see when you are in the middle of it...Mainly because you don't want to see it, or it doesn't occur to you that "your" method could be wrong, it's "everyone else" who is wrong :-).... Interesting to change the 'actors' in the girl/puppy story....those who pose no threat to us are alway easier to like in the conventional sense (maybe this is why babies are born able to engage others with their cuteness and helplessnss). In the safety of 'the dark room', I could radiate metta to anyone.....people who have been violent in the past, those in the here-and-now whom I am not particularly 'in tune' with. .....as You say: "But real life is the best test. Test what ground we stand on, how firm is our kindness, how firm is our wisdom (panna). I do not want to be mean, take it as a food of thought, OK :)" Not mean, Num....very helpful, and I do take it as food for thought. You say: "The reason I mentioned this b/c I'd like to share that metta in itself is a very good deed, but kusla (except lokuttara level and nibbana) can be taken as an object for akusala citta. This is my metta, I give him metta why he is still mean to me, good feeling that come along with metta can also be addicted, etc...... I got this from question-answer part in Dhammasangani. I haven't looked in Atthasalini in detail but it might be some explanation in there." Yes, this 'pollution' of kusala by being taken as an object for akusala citta, is becoming clearer to me. Mixed motives for 'good' acts......e.g. Before I went to Bangkok I needed to call a Locksmith to my home to open a jammed garage door. He brought his tiny daughter with him, perhaps two or three years old. She was so good and patient waiting for Daddy to do his work, and I wanted to give her something as a reward. I had a new doll, and gave it to her. Her father and she were delighted and thought I was very nice. But, what they didn't know (and I don't think it was clear to me until now) is that first of all, my mind ranged over the facts: I didn't want the doll; it hadn't cost me anything; my youngest niece already had a similar doll; it was only gathering dust in my house; and wouldn't they like me for giving it to her...a little embarrassing really when you think of it.... Your mention of the Dhammasangani and Atthasalini raise a difficulty I am having.... Does anyone know how I can obtain copies of Dhamma literature more quickly than my current method? Presently, I order books through either Amazon.com or Adyar Bookshop down in Sydney. Unless Adyar have the text in stock (and they sell all sorts of Metaphysical books as well) they will order it, and usually it takes a minimum of four months for the copy to arrive. Needless to say, interest has often 'gone off the boil' by that stage. Thanks for all you help, Num. metta, Christine 10563 From: fcckuan Date: Fri Jan 4, 2002 6:27pm Subject: Re: [dsg] one limb of 8 fold path more important (was satipathana and practice) Hi Erik and Sarah, [thread on one limb to rule them all, i.e. is one limb of the 8fold path more important?] > I agree completely the "Right View" is the forerunner, but Right > View in what sense, mundane, suparmundane? That's a good question. Let's perform a thought experiment. Say someone has high intellect, impeccably developed discerment/wisdom factors at the mundane level at least, well refined ethical conduct, well developed concentration factors, but still finds oneself cursing at people when traffic is bad, lust arising when they drive past sexy bill boards on the freeway. This cultivator is able to enter deep levels of concentration and feels both mental and physical pleasure while in meditation, but is not yet able to carry it through to non- meditation times. So what's going on here? My unenlightened diagnosis: There isn't any deficiency in the mundane aspect of right view, or the factor of concentration, but probably insufficient mindfulness. Mindfulness brought to fruition would apply discernment factors and good-enough-concentration factors to every moment of waking consciousness, deepening and continually directly penetrating the 3 signata at the experiential level until at some fruitful moment there is complete penetration of the 4 noble truths, destruction of the taints, full enlightenment. So one could argue that for such a cultivator, the 8fold factor of mindfulness was the bottleneck or crucial limb. However, wasn't it mundane right view/discernment/wisdom that made the diagnosis that led to the fix? In my mind, that still makes right view, even at the mundane level, the most important factor, even though in this case it was indirect. > > "Right View" in the mundane sense only takes one so far. If kamma > and paticca samuppada and anatta are explained well they are not > unduly difficult to grasp intellectually. What is much harder is > getting rid of the views part and coming to supramundane Right View, > which it tanamount to abandoning "views" (read, speculation) > altogether. Agreed, but once again, it could be argued that mundane right view had a key supporting role in abandoning views leading to higher attainments. > > Similarly, one needs hold no "belief" (ditthi) regarding the taste > of a ripe mango if one has actually tasted a ripe mango, though one > may hold beliefs about its flavor as "sweet, delicious, etc." prior > to actually tasting it. Once tasted, there is no longer any need for > any "view" of a mango's taste, hence there is nothing to associate > with view or speculation regarding its flavor and texture. That's a good analogy, but here's a similar analogy that's based on a personal true story. I used to hate papayas. The reason is the first few papayas I ate as a child were overripe, underripe, or just not that sweet. It was only after I tasted a good papaya years later that I fully understood what was gratifying about a papaya. So the moral of the story: Without mundane right view guiding me with the view that it is possible that a tastier worthy papaya exists, I might have stuck with my original assessment of papayas and never discovered the truth. Translating the analogy to spiritual practice. Suppose your initial introduction to Buddhism is through a charismatic cultlike buddhist leader. You gain some legitimate attainments, but along with that you also have accumulated wrong views, corrupt views, corrupt practices. You have not yet acquired supramundane right view, so all you have is mundane intellectual discerment to guide you out of the mess. On the rest of Erik's post: Great stuff. I'm in full agreement, and have nothing to add. While I agree that mundane right view alone can't take you all the way to full liberation, it plays an important supporting role nonetheless :-) -fk (the rest of Erik's post is worth re-reading again) > > But, absent this taste, there has to be some way to acquire a mango > for the tasting! :) > > So my question, from the other day and again is, "Now what"? > Intellectual analysis can only take one so far. It is possible to > beak down the body into a bunch of functions and dis-identify them > with an "I" intellectually. But this can never substitute for > directly seeing this reality with supramundane panna, which is > unmediated by conceptual elaborations. > > The means to tasting this ripe mango I'm familiar with (the one > outlined by the Buddha in the Satipatthana Sutta and the Samadhi > Sutta and many other places) demands a lot more than merely > understanding intellectually (lokiya samma ditthi) that all things > are anatta, or that we all heirs to our own kamma, or believing that > there is no "driver" or "I" behind everything in the ultimate sense. > > According to my understanding, the panna that cuts the defilements > takes unbroken mindfulness brought about by persistence and effort > (viriya) training in mindfulness and concentration, (sati and > samadhi), applying that to the direct investigation (dhamma-vicaya) > into the charactetristics of dhammas arising and passing away in > terms of noting their inconstancy, combined with other factors > (piti, passadhi, upekkha), which, when brought to their culmination > in the proper balance, lead to the insight that terminates the > fetters and brings to fruition the sole aim of the Dhamma: final > release from identification with the imputed "self," the "I, me, > mine," which lies at the root of suffering. > > So there are many factors involved, and what I've found most helpful > is to reflect on what the Buddha actually taught regarding the cause- > and-effect relationships that lead from suffering sentient being to > final release. For example, if the hindrances are present, can any > of the enlightenment factors like piti, passadhi, upekkha, or sati > arise? What about samadhi? Without these factors, is there any hope > of release? > > So based on my understanding, it's a matter of working with these > cause-and-effect relationships in the approriate order, knowing, for > example, that without pacifying the hindrances, the seven factors of > enlightenment have no basis for arising, not to mention > enlightenment and final release. Not only that, but among all these > factors there needs to be the appropriate balance. To veer too far > in any direction is to depart from the Middle Way, to miss > the "sweet spot" as in the "lute-string" simile, and to miss the > mark entirely. > > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/modern/wings/2g.html 10564 From: Robert Epstein Date: Fri Jan 4, 2002 9:24pm Subject: Re: Undertanding Metta - was([dsg] Re: Bangkok impressions 28/12/01-2/01/02) --- christine_forsyth wrote: > Dear Rob Ep, > > You say: " the wrong antidote produces more causes, more kammas,and > eventually will yield akusula fruit" > > I absolutely agree with you. The incident happened in much less time > than it took to write about, and it was completely out of my control > (that word again)..... I have to say on a more serious occasion at a > shopping mall I did intervene, but this particular incident was in > the 'don't interfere' category.......maybe I would have had MY legs > pulled if I had. :-) :-) > I always tried to use distraction, or if that didn't work, restraint, > when my son and daughter were very young. ? part of skilful means of > parenthood. (And maybe the mother in my post does also, and she > was just tired and stressed on this occasion.) > > metta, > Christine Well we all lose it a little bit on occasion. When I do, I apologize to my child, so she's knows what I think is 'okay' and not. I also would not intervene with another parent unless it was a clear case of abuse. For better or worse, parents have the right to pull their kids' legs, at least up to a point. When I did see a mother in two cases and a big mean-looking dad in another case hit their kids hard enough to cause damage, I spontaneously intervened, and I think prevented more damage for the moment. It is quite horrifying to see this, especially with really young children. With the big guy, he was angry at first, but when I expressed concern for the child and didn't try to give him a lecture, he softened and I was able to get the message across to him that he was hitting his boy 'too hard' and that he might really hurt him. I didn't try to convince him not to use physical discipline, just to make sure the boy didn't get serious damage. Anyway, I noticed in these incidents that if I let myself get enraged at the parents [which I did sometimes] it added more intensity, but when I stayed detached I was much more effective. Wonder about the relation between detachment and metta, perhaps one helps create the other. Robert Ep. ============================= > --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Robert Epstein wrote: > > > > --- christine_forsyth wrote: 10565 From: Robert Epstein Date: Fri Jan 4, 2002 9:29pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Bangkok impressions 28/12/01-2/01/02 --- christine_forsyth wrote: > Dear Rob Ep, > > You say: "My wife regularly de-selects photos that I think are > perfectly nice, and files them in the 'garbage file'. Sometimes we > are forced to cut parts of pictures out for my mother, meaning the > part with her in it, leading to a collection of odd-sized photos." > > **I believe this is a genetic trait 100% inherited down the female > line.:-) > > You say: "In any case, I am sorry that I took your revelation of the > photos to put you on the spot. That is a little bit mean, and I have > some regret about that.........but I'm just curious to see everyone > that I've been talking to [or at!] here on dsg." > > **Rob - I have two brothers (of the blood, so to speak) so teasing > from dhamma brothers needs no apology, and certainly isn't seen by me > as mean. The only difference is - I can't throw a cushion at you via > the computer. :-) Though I really wouldn't like Sukin to put them in > the Files......just send via email to those who request them. Is > that possible, ... by email, I mean? > > metta, > Christine Dear Christine, Yes, the photos should be able to be sent privately via email as attachments. That is fair enough not to have them in the files. Thanks for being a good sport, and....consider me cyber-cushioned. I have torn up a few photos myself that showed me [throug some lie of the camera] to have a little more of a pot belly than I give myself credit for. I won't put up with visual lies about myself, so I understand. Robert Ep. =============================== 10567 From: Purnomo . Date: Fri Jan 4, 2002 9:54pm Subject: grandma again dear all, thank for you support to me. I will forget my grandma slowly. I so love her. If I chanting for my grandma, do she hear my chanting? How do process it? metta, purnomo 10568 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Fri Jan 4, 2002 10:57pm Subject: RE: [dsg] The White Radiant Mind Hi Kom > > We know in some situations that the citta, with the > cetasikas, are described as pure. So far, we hear from > people the following theories: > 1) Bhawanga is pure, as the commentaries have described it. > However, I haven't seen the details if this is inclusive of > all bhawanga, or does it just include the bhawangas with > 2-hetu/3-hetus. How about the other sobhana vipakas? > 2) Some have alluded to that all sobhana cittas are all > pure, so this includes all vipaka/kusala/and kiriya with > 2-hetu/3-hetu. > 3) Some think the citta itself [maybe this is what you are > talking about?], even with the cetasikas, is itself pure. > This theory says all cittas (kusala/akusala/the rest) are > pure. This perhaps may be due to the fact that cittas are > said to see all the details of the object (although it > doesn't penetrate the true characteristics), and that citta > is defiled by kilesa (cetasikas), and not the other way > around. > > Do you think the Buddha maybe describing one of the above > situations, or do you think he is describing a pure > consciousness that transcends all conditioned realities? > > kom I don't think Buddha would describe there is a pure consciouness that transcends all conditioned realities. This would imply an underlying nature. The problem with the reason that all cittas are pure are weak bc a. Firstly all cittas need at least two hetu as paccaya and the likelihood of aksuala hetu is more common for those who are not Arahant b. Secondly, all cittas has latent defilements. Even bhavanga citta have latency and also hetu paccaya, how could it be pure. Luminious yes but not pure. c. Pure could only be ascribed to when we are able to eradicate latent tendency which means a fully enlighted Arahant. This is probably why we mixed up those who are not enlightend and those who are when we describe cittas are pure. Kind regards Ken O 10569 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Fri Jan 4, 2002 11:11pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: luminous mind: To Kenneth Ong Hi Suan > You asked: > > "Could you kindly explained the sentence "new kinds of > bhavangacittas"." > > Well, you first had the given bhavangacittas from birth. During your > current lifetime, you happened to perform janaka kamma. Suppose that > the effect of javana kamma did not wait till your next conception, > and needed to appear during your currect lifetime. And, suppose also > that the effect was the resultant mental aggregate (aruupa vipaaka > khandhaa), then you got different kind of bhavangacitta. As simple as > that. k: I thought in this list, the assumption was that bhavanga cittas could not be change throughout ones life. Do you have commentary texts to substantiate your point. > You also asked: > > "Secondly since the objects of bhavangacittas are the same throughout > one's life, will that mean that these new kinds of bhavangacittas > have different objects." > > Yes, of course. > > You also asked: > > "Do you know of any commentaries that mention the objects of > bhavangcittas." > > Yes, I have read some. You may need to wait for exact references, > though. > > And, by the way, why are you obsessed by the objects of > bhavangacittas? k: Oh, bc it is a subject that there is little information and too much mystery :). Kind regards Ken O 10570 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sat Jan 5, 2002 0:26am Subject: Re: [dsg] Three Rounds Nina (and Num) --- Nina van Gorkom wrote: > Dear Num, Thank you for your further info. In the Co to the > Dhammacakkhapavattana Sutta the three ~naa.nas are dealt with > expressively. > Now another text: Debates Commentary,( to Kathavatthu, I also have the > Thai), Ch 20, VI, Some thought that all the twelve constituent parts > were > lokuttara, but this has been refuted. Here the English translation is > not > clear: the diversity of insight as to nature: sacca, the need to do, > kicca, > and the being done, kata, respecting each truth. > I looked at my India notes: I understood from A. Sujin: there is even > kata > ~naa.na at the first stage of vipassana ~naa.na, but not fulfilled. The > nature of dukkha is penetrated more when there is mahaavipassana > ~naa.na, > when the arising and falling away of dhammas has been realized. We can > say, > when realities are seen as just elements, dhatus, at the first vipassana > ~naa.na, there is some fruit of the development, something has baan > done, > kata, but the development has to go on and on. > Best wishes, I am glad you can play tennis again, Nina. We had some discussion with A. sujin on this topic. My understanding from those discussions is as follows: - sacca-nana is correct conceptual understanding about the 4 Noble Truths - kicca-nana is any moment of direct understanding of the true nature of a reality (mundane or lokuttara) - kata-nana is mentioned in the texts in the context of lokuttara citta, but A. Sujin takes this to be a case of 'only the highest being mentioned', and accordingly kata-nana includes the realisation of attainment of any of the stages of vipassana nana. Nina, I hope this covers the points on which you were looking for clarification. The 3 rounds are of course to be understood in the dynamic sense in which you mentioned in an earlier post. Please let me know if there was anything else you were hoping to have covered. Jon PS A. sujin made a point of mentioning that her interpretation on kata-nana had not been formally considered by the teachers' committee at the Foundation. 10571 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sat Jan 5, 2002 0:30am Subject: Re: An Addendum and a Msg to the List Re: [dsg] The White Radiant Mind Howard --- upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi again, Robert - > > So as not to end the Gregorian-calendar year with a disagreement > ;-)), > let me add that whatever nibbana really is, and whatever our differing > misguided notions of it may be ;-)), I know that we are in complete > *agreement* in wishing for the other all and only what is good. May > nibbana, > the ultimate good, be yours (though there *is* no you! ;-), and soon! > And > may you, and *all* the loving and brilliant folks on DSG have a > wonderful > year, a year filled with santi, metta, and the sukkha of Dhamma - with > peace, > lovingkindness, and the joy of the Buddha's wonderful teaching! I second all you've said here! And I thank you for your significant contribution to the discussion on the list. Jon 10572 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sat Jan 5, 2002 0:32am Subject: Re: [dsg] Bangkok impressions 28/12/01-2/01/02 Christine Thanks for the amusing yet perceptive report of your visit. It was a delight to meet you. I'm glad you did not find everythiing too overwhelming, as can happen with new ideas and new people in new (exotic) places. You handled it all very well, a testament I think to your confidence and understanding in the teachings. --- christine_forsyth wrote: > Dear Rob Ep, > > Thank you for your kind words......Maybe we'll all get there together > sometime.... Good thinking! Maybe we should pencil in Bangkok for next Christmas/New Year (dsg jamboree?). Jon 10573 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sat Jan 5, 2002 0:33am Subject: Re: [dsg] FYI Mike I enjoyed very much meeting you in Bangkok over the New Year. The breakfast chats were a great start to the day, and I also appreciated your useful contribution to the discussions. --- "m. nease" wrote: > Just to let you all know, > > The combination of the recent cut-back in my internet > access and the extreme unreliability of this > connection, I'll most likely be out of touch most of > the time from now on. > > I'll drop into an internet shop, as Sarah suggested, > when that's possible. Just didn't want anyone to take > personally any posts left unanswered. I was sorry to learn about the loss of internet access, particularly as I had been appreciating your recent posts. I do hope you'll be able to find a workaround that will allow you to remain active on the list. I hope things work out for the rest of the period until you are able to get into WPN. Jon 10574 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sat Jan 5, 2002 0:39am Subject: Re: [dsg] Ultimate realities (and khandhas) Rob Ep --- Robert Epstein wrote: > Dear Jon, > Due to pleasantly synchronistic conditions arising, your answer to > Herman here has > answered the question I just asked in my last post to you. The rupa is > experienced directly by the citta and it doesn't matter whether it's an > 'accurate' > reflection of a 'real external object' [probably because there's no such > things -- > just momentary rupas arising]. What matters is that the rupa will be > shaped by > the kammic predispositions of the sense-door moment, and this is all > that is > necessary to get one's *real rupa* in the moment. It is not *the* rupa, > it is the > appropriate rupa for that citta in that moment. I couldn't have put it better myself. (You have quite a way when it comes to stating these propositions/concepts -- I'm most envious of this ability!) Jon 10575 From: christine_forsyth Date: Sat Jan 5, 2002 2:00am Subject: Re: grandma again Dear Purnomo, I will leave it to others to write about the chanting. I am very sorry you are hurting, the story of your loss and the grief you feel for your Grandma is heart rending, as are all such losses that occur, and have occurred, to members of this group. You are not alone. We understand. If you are able, try to stay aware of the mind and body conditions in the present moment. You may feel some of the following feelings - sadness, anger, guilt, anxiety, loneliness, shock, yearning, numbness, helplessness. Physically you may feel fatigue, tightness in the chest, a dry mouth, a hollow feeling in the stomach, tightness in the throat. You may also feel like crying all the time, not wanting to see your friends, being unable to sleep properly. This will pass away in time - though not as soon as most people predict. And, even after grief fades, it will occasionally come back to visit you at the most unexpected of times. But through all of this, remember one thing, you will be happy again. Be kind to yourself, and find a person to whom you can talk (maybe over and over again) about your Grandma, how she died, your memories of her, how much you love her and how you are feeling.....a person who will keep what you tell them confidential. It is often hard to talk with close family because they are trying to bear the same loss, and you need to talk to someone who isn't in pain, as you are. Once upon a time, when I felt great grief, I found out that even those, like Vasetthi, who were very nearly Arahants didn't escape this dukkha. Knowing this didn't stop my pain, but it helped, somehow. Vasetthi was born in Vesali and was happily married to a man whom she bore a son. When her child died, she went mad and ran away from home.... Eventually, she came to Mithila, encountered the Buddha and regained her sanity. Then Vasetthi joined the nuns' sangha and later became an arahant. Grief-stricken for my son, mad-minded, out of my senses, I was naked with wild hair and I wandered anywhere. I lived on trash heaps, in a graveyard, and by the highways. Three years' wandering, starved and thirsty. Then in the city of Mithila I saw the one who tames what is untamed and goes his way in happiness, enlightened, unafraid. I came to my senses paid homage, and sat down. Out of compassion, Guatama (Buddha) taught me the way. When I heard his words I set out into homelessness. By putting his teachings into practice, I realized great joy. My grief is cut out, finished, ended, for I have understood the ground from which all grief comes. May you soon be peaceful and happy, Purnomo May you understand the ground from which all grief comes May you live with ease and well being. metta, Christine --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "Purnomo ." wrote: > dear all, > > thank for you support to me. I will forget my grandma slowly. I so love her. > If I chanting for my grandma, do she hear my chanting? How do process it? > > metta, > > purnomo > > > 10576 From: Ong Teng Kee Date: Sat Jan 5, 2002 3:33am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: luminous mind: To Nina And Kom On Kamma Modifying Bhavanga Cittam Dear Mr.Suan, I think buddhaghosa would say you are having crazy idea about bhavanga.He would say you are just a non theravadin.Read ch.20 in Visuddhimagga for kamma produce material,bhavanga citta produce material during life time.You cannot say during life time we produce kamma call janaka kamma because those are supplanmanting kamma etc.Janaka kamma cannot be change after rebirth citta.janaka kamma basically means our life time span produce from previous life.Are you saying that we can change from among 4 kinds of two roots to 4 kinds of three roots or from ahetu to two roots.We are still not enter into bhavanga citta of brahma when we attain jhana as a human because we are merely attain into form/formless javana.Do not be overclever. >From: "abhidhammika" >Reply-To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com >To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com >Subject: [dsg] Re: luminous mind: To Nina And Kom On Kamma Modifying >Bhavanga Cittam >Date: Thu, 03 Jan 2002 11:24:13 -0000 > > > > >Dear Nina And Kom > >How are you? > >You wrote: > >" Dear Suan, yes, it is clear that kamma of the past produces the >bhavangacitta that is vipakacitta. What I am puzzled about is that >the javanacittas arising in processes can condition the >bhavangacitta. I was wondering in what way they can do this, since >the javana cittas arise in processes and the bhavangacitta is just in >deep sleep so to say. Or did I misunderstand what you wrote? Best >wishes from Nina." > >This problem has been raised by both of you (Kom off-list) previously >many months before. I was occupied with many other matters which >prevented me from solving this problem promptly. Not only that, I >wanted to discuss this matter properly. And, even now, I won't be >able to discuss this issue as much as I like. > >Sorry about this short reply. > >However, as you raised this question again, I will give you, as a >quick answer, Buddhaghosa's statement on how javana cittas can >condition bhavangacitta. > >The answer to this problem is to do with the timing and quality of >javana cittas. > >When javana citta has the strength of a janaka kamma, it can modify >bhavangacitta. In fact, it can cause new kinds of bhavangacitta to >arise. > >The following Pali quote comes from Section 687, >Kankhavitaranavisuddhi niddesa, Visuddhimaggo, Vol.2. > > 687. .....Tattha janakam naama kusalampi hoti akusalampi. Tam >patisandhiyampi pavattepi ruupaaruuupavipaakakkhandhe janeti. > >"...There, janakam is either healthy or unhealthy action. It (janaka >kamma) can cause resultant physical and mental aggegates to arise >either at the moment of linking consciousness (conception) or during >the current lifetime." > >Please kindly note that the resultant mental aggregates (aruupa >vipaaka khandhaa) during the current lifetime refer to bhavanga >cittas. > > >You wrote: > >"Or did I misunderstand what you wrote?" > >I don't think you misunderstood what I wrote. Perhaps, you did not >see a connection between what I wrote and what Buddhaghosa wrote. > >Having said that, Buddhaghosa wrote a disclaimer as well further down >the paragraph to the effect that full understanding of how kamma and >vipaaka works is the domain only of the Buddhas, not that of us. > >Hope this message solves your puzzle! > > >With best wishes, > > >Suan > >http://www.bodhiology.org > > > > > >--- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > op 01-01-2002 16:38 schreef abhidhammika op abhidhammika@y...: 10577 From: abhidhammika Date: Sat Jan 5, 2002 6:24am Subject: Re: bhavangacitta, to Suan. To Nina Dear Nina How are you? Just to say "You are welcome". With regards, Suan --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Nina van Gorkom wrote: > Dear Suan, thank you for your patience in answering our questions and > providing us with the Pali. I find the subject more and more complicated and > I know you give this subject much thought. With appreciation, Nina. 10578 From: abhidhammika Date: Sat Jan 5, 2002 6:46am Subject: [dsg] Re: luminous mind: To Kenneth Ong Dear Ken How are you? You wrote and asked: "k: I thought in this list, the assumption was that bhavanga cittas could not be change throughout ones life. Do you have commentary texts to substantiate your point." Yes, I have already provided the commentary Pali reference and translation in my post 10521. In fact, you asked me questions by reading what I wrote and what I quote in that post. Perhaps, you had been incoherent and forgot things too soon. So, please kindly read the post 10521 again to read the commentary Pali and its translation which had been provided for the sole purpose of substantiating my very point. With best wishes, Suan http://www.bodhiology.org --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Kenneth Ong wrote: > Hi Suan > > > > You asked: > > > > "Could you kindly explained the sentence "new kinds of > > bhavangacittas"." > > > > Well, you first had the given bhavangacittas from birth. During your > > current lifetime, you happened to perform janaka kamma. Suppose that > > the effect of javana kamma did not wait till your next conception, > > and needed to appear during your currect lifetime. And, suppose also > > that the effect was the resultant mental aggregate (aruupa vipaaka > > khandhaa), then you got different kind of bhavangacitta. As simple as > > that. > > k: I thought in this list, the assumption was that bhavanga cittas could > not be change throughout ones life. Do you have commentary texts to > substantiate your point. > > > > You also asked: > > > > "Secondly since the objects of bhavangacittas are the same throughout > > one's life, will that mean that these new kinds of bhavangacittas > > have different objects." > > > > Yes, of course. > > > > You also asked: > > > > "Do you know of any commentaries that mention the objects of > > bhavangcittas." > > > > Yes, I have read some. You may need to wait for exact references, > > though. > > > > And, by the way, why are you obsessed by the objects of > > bhavangacittas? > > k: Oh, bc it is a subject that there is little information and too much > mystery :). > > > Kind regards > Ken O 10579 From: abhidhammika Date: Sat Jan 5, 2002 7:21am Subject: Re: luminous mind: To Ong Teng Kee Dear Ong Teng Kee How are you? I am afraid I don't think I understand your message. Did you carefully read my post 10521 that you were complaining about? I provided Buddhaghosa's own statement on the matter both in Pali and its translation. Not only that. I also mentioned Buddhaghosa's disclaimer regarding the matter. If you read Pali language, I could analyse the Pali quote word for word, if necessary. If you do not read Pali, well, I am afraid I could not help you in that way. And, as I do not understand your message properly, I may not be able to answer your questions, either. I do not find your post very coherent, I am afraid. I am really sorry about my failure to resolve your complaints on this occasion. Of course, you may attempt to clarify your complaints after having carefully read my post 10521. It is a Buddhist virtue to remove someone's ignorance (my failure to understand your message, in this case)! Thank you for your attempt to make sense of my post and respond to it. With kind regards, Suan http://www.bodhiology.org --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "Ong Teng Kee" wrote: > Dear Mr.Suan, > I think buddhaghosa would say you are having crazy idea about bhavanga.He > would say you are just a non theravadin.Read ch.20 in Visuddhimagga for > kamma produce material,bhavanga citta produce material during life time.You > cannot say during life time we produce kamma call janaka kamma because those > are supplanmanting kamma etc.Janaka kamma cannot be change after rebirth > citta.janaka kamma basically means our life time span produce from previous > life.Are you saying that we can change from among 4 kinds of two roots to 4 > kinds of three roots or from ahetu to two roots.We are still not enter into > bhavanga citta of brahma when we attain jhana as a human because we are > merely attain into form/formless javana.Do not be overclever. > > > 10580 From: Mom Bongkojpriya (Betty) Yugala Date: Sat Jan 5, 2002 8:29am Subject: Deceiving dhammas Dear Kom and everyone on the list, First, a very happy new year to you all, and especially anomodhana to everyone for providing wonderful opportunities for contemplation, sati and understanding to arise, as conditioned by the insightful discussions here. There has been much discussion of "cheating" dhammas, and we tend to think that just because akusala cittas/cetasikas arose just after the kusala, that somehow the kusala has thus been "tainted" to some extent. But, I'd like to think that just being able to recognize both the kusala and the akusala that arose is an excellent indication that sati, and perhaps understanding, has arisen. So, as long as sati has arisen too, "progress" can be "seen.". Let me relate a personal experience that just occurred just before new years, and which Sarah asked me to write about. After our wonderful discussions here in Bkk last Saturday and Sunday (I couldn't make it on Monday), enhanced by the visit of Sarah, Jon, Jaran and Christine, we had gone to feed the fish. I went on home and discovered that my good, dress watch must have slipped off my wrist somewhere between the fish and home. It was lost, and yet I felt no regret, no attachment to it (ubekha-kusala=anatta). But then, right after that a feeling of pride arose: great, I'm proud of myself for not getting upset over the loss of the watch (mana-akusala=self concept). Then, more akusala arose, because the thought arose that the ubekha had been "cancelled out" by the akusala (dosa). Later still, it was realized that being able just to "follow" the process of the arising of these cittas and cetasikas was sati itself, and it was ok. Looking forward to seeing you all making it to Bkk in the near, and not too distant, future. with metta, Betty _______________________ Mom Bongkojpriya Yugala 38 Soi 41 Phaholyothin Road Bangkok 10900, Thailand tel: 662-579-1050; 661-826-7160 e-mail: beyugala@k... 10581 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Sat Jan 5, 2002 8:38am Subject: RE: [dsg] The White Radiant Mind Dear Ken O, > -----Original Message----- > From: Kenneth Ong [mailto:ashkenn@y...] > > We know in some situations that the citta, with the > > cetasikas, are described as pure. So far, we hear from > > people the following theories: > > 1) Bhawanga is pure, as the commentaries have > described it. > > However, I haven't seen the details if this is > inclusive of > > all bhawanga, or does it just include the bhawangas with > > 2-hetu/3-hetus. How about the other sobhana vipakas? > > 2) Some have alluded to that all sobhana cittas are all > > pure, so this includes all vipaka/kusala/and kiriya with > > 2-hetu/3-hetu. > > 3) Some think the citta itself [maybe this is > what you are > > talking about?], even with the cetasikas, is > itself pure. > > This theory says all cittas (kusala/akusala/the > rest) are > > pure. This perhaps may be due to the fact that > cittas are > > said to see all the details of the object (although it > > doesn't penetrate the true characteristics), > and that citta > > is defiled by kilesa (cetasikas), and not the other way > > around. > > > > Do you think the Buddha maybe describing one of > the above > > situations, or do you think he is describing a pure > > consciousness that transcends all conditioned realities? > > > > kom > > > I don't think Buddha would describe there is a > pure consciouness that > transcends all conditioned realities. This would > imply an underlying > nature. The problem with the reason that all > cittas are pure are weak bc > > a. Firstly all cittas need at least two hetu as > paccaya and the > likelihood of aksuala hetu is more common for > those who are not Arahant > > b. Secondly, all cittas has latent defilements. > Even bhavanga citta have > latency and also hetu paccaya, how could it be > pure. Luminious yes but not > pure. > > c. Pure could only be ascribed to when we are > able to eradicate latent > tendency which means a fully enlighted Arahant. > This is probably why we > mixed up those who are not enlightend and those > who are when we describe > cittas are pure. You have no disagreements from me in any of these 3 points. I think I was using the two words somewhat interchangeably, but I like your distinction between luminous and pure better. So, what is your theory about the luminous citta? One of 1 to 3 above? None of the above? Why? I know you didn't quite like the commentaries' explanations well enough. kom 10582 From: yuzhonghao Date: Sat Jan 5, 2002 8:41am Subject: Re: [dsg] Concept Hello Sarah, I posted a message on the list before saying where I lived. At that time I was in Philadelphia. Now I am in the Washington, D. C. metro area. For past three year or so, discourses from the Pali Canon have been a major source from which I learn what the Buddha taught. Regards, Victor --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Sarah wrote: > Hello Victor, > > --- yuzhonghao wrote: > Hello Sarah, > > > > You questioned that "Can we say that a concept comes to be because of > > thinking?" What do you think? Can we? > > Well, it was a question for you, but yes, I think we can;-) > > You wrote that no thinking > > means no concepts. From what you wrote, it seems to me that you mean > > that concept is dependent on thinking. This is how I understand the > > word "concept" from the online dictionary in http://www.webster.com: > > A concept means something conceived in the mind, a thought, a > > notion. It also means an abstract or generic idea generalized from > > particular instances. The synonym to the word "concept" is the > > word "idea." I agree with you that thinking is conditioned. > > ..and I fully agree with all your comments here, Victor ;-)) Maybe a > 'first'! > > Did you ever tell us where you live? I'd be interested to know a little > more about where you are and your study and interest in dhamma, now we're > in such agreement for a pleasant change;-) > > Sarah 10583 From: Date: Sat Jan 5, 2002 4:02am Subject: please discontinue... i have been studing buddhism for only 3 months & seem to be at a loss trying to "keep up" with your site's postings. thank you for being there , but please discontinue my subscription. 10584 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Jan 5, 2002 9:55am Subject: Re: [dsg] deceiving dhammas op 03-01-2002 06:25 schreef Kom Tukovinit op tikmok@y...: > > Here's the second posting listing some of what "cheating" > dhammas remind me of. > > When I think of kusala that was done in the past with > somanassa, I would like to think that the thinking itself is > kusala, but it is really (or all mixed-up) with mana. > > When I am discussing dhammas with a person, I would like to > think the motivation is kusala. This is all mixed up with > mana (I am discussing dhamma), and sometimes even some > irritation when the result is not what I want, or the other > person does not agree. The irritation is coarse but is > often unnoticed, sometimes noticable by the voice being too > loud (right, Num?), or the sentence being a little too terse > and inconsiderate. > > When I am discussing dhamma with a person, I would like to > think that it is for the useful benefit of others and > myself. It is really, sometimes, to get acknowledgement, > even a small one. > > When I see something desirable, I sometimes think of the > patikula characteristics of the seen thing. It is really > all with mixed-up with wanting to not having such strong > lobha. Although this is not quite like "patikkulasanna > pathirupena vyapado vancethi (2)", but this reminds me so. > > When I see giving, or seeing good vipakas of other people, I > sometimes feel jealous, but sometimes followed by > anumoddhana / mudita. Part of what I think is kusala, or > all of it, is fake, wanting to have kusala instead of > akusala, or just plainly not liking the domanassa vedana. > > When I study the dhamma (or discusses) dhammas, I sometimes > feel peace. I would like to think it is the result of > kaya-passadhi and citta-passadhi, but often, it is just > plain Dheena-mitha. samadhimukhena thinamiddhang vangcethi > (3) is exactly like that. > > When I considers the dhamma (or analyzes the dhamma) > excessively, especially on the thing that cannot (yet) be > truly known (like analyzing things via conditionalities), I > would like to think I am developing conceptual > understandings, but is really uddhaca (and becomes obvious > toward the end). This is just like viriyarambhamukhena > uddhaccang vangcethi (4). > > vimansa mukhena hetupatirupaka pariggahena miccaditthi > vanceti (9). I don't know if this applies to myself, but I > sometimes wonder if how I understand things just happens to > be how I like it. Uddacha again. > > I say something decent/kind to other people. I would like > to think of it is metta, but it is often mixed up with > wanting to be liked. samvibhaga seelata patirupataya > miccajivo vangceti (13), and piyavadita patirupataya > catukammata vangceti > (18) remind me of this. > > I am not very talkative person. I would like to think that > it is not being mixed up something that is not useful. > Sometimes, it is just plain laziness (dina-mitha, again), or > because of not having metta for others. mitabhanata > patirupataya asammodana seelata vangceti (19) is exactly > like this. > > attadhipateyyata patirupataya garunam anusasaniya > appadakkhinaggahita > vangceti (32). I am often feel grateful for a few people in > this group who see dhammas in other's sayings, even when in > many (or most) cases, they don't agree with one another. I > am inpired by Boddhisatta for seeing dhammas in sayings that > are not intended to be dhamma. It requires such a long > accumulation to be reminded of the true dhammas even when > one hears what is not dhamma. > > mettayana mukhena raago vangceti (35): raga as the metta. > Try metta with a pretty girl, eh, Num? > > Listing some lists like this - it may be only because I want > to show off that I am aware of some of these akusalas! > Dear Kom, thank you for these excellent reminders, I am glad I asked you. We are such a mixture of kusala and akusala, mostly akusala. Sometimes we think: we cannot do anything anymore, it is only akusala. Mike felt discouraged, we all have such moments of discouragement. Where is the cheerfulness of Dhamma? We should be glad to know. It is good to just know and understand that there are many ways by which we are deceived by our akusala, but not try to catch such moments the whole day. I had such feeling when discussing conceit, mana in India: mana the whole day: whenever there is the other person and myself. Or even not comparing, still mana. As you also mentioned, thinking and analysing too much. A. Supee kept on saying: lobha is so natural, normal (thammada, thammada). I lost the pali text and translation of these deceivers, and could not make out some of the Pali: seelata (13) must be siilata? And the Pali of 32 I could not make out. As promised, another example of studying details, as to Condiitons. I was impressed by the Thai tapes of A. Sujin on conditions, so much related to daily life. I decided to write my Intro to Conditions. I read in Guide to Conditional Relations, U Narada, about many details, finding the numbers of common conditions, the enumerations. I tried a few but then found that it did not help me personally, that it was above me, so I left that. It depends on one's personal inclination again how many details are helpful. I paste your other remark about analysing: K: Regarding analysis, I think I like to do this too, even though it is impossible to do a proper analysis. In India, we discussed "identification" issues. She mentioned that unless one has reached a level of vipassana-nana (which one? nama-rupa?) it is really not possible to see clearly the difference between the different nama, e.g., lobha and dosa. Until one reaches the vipassana-nana, then the lakhana of the dhamma as being dhamma is not apparent, and therefore the differences (of the lakkhana) between the namas cannot be clearly seen. N: When one has reached the first vipassana nana (nama-rupa) the different akusala dhammas are seen as only elements, nama dhammas. Dosa and lobha have different characteristics, we notice them, but they are not yet seen as just namas. We think of them and we begin to be aware of them. Hence, for those of us who likes to identify (in words or not), she mention that this is not fruitful (as it is impossible to clearly see). She said (or came close to saying) that instead of identification, seeing the lakhana of the nama that knows (the previous object?) would help with understandings more. Of course, unless one understands why identification (and analysis) is not as useful, or sees (perhaps) the lobha that comes with the identification/analysis, then one continues to analyze... It is more useful to be aware of what appears, thus, we should not neglect visible object, seeing, sound, etc. It depends on condiitons, sometimes there are conditions to think a lot, but this is not I who thinks. We do not think of whether it is a previous object, that is again thinking. But again, we are likely to think more often than being aware. It is natural. Best wishes, Nina. 10585 From: 123Signup Date: Sat Jan 5, 2002 11:44am Subject: Subject: Re: [dsg] deceiving dhammas Dear Nina, Thank you for the encouragement to be cheerful in dhamma. >op 03-01-2002 06:25 schreef Kom Tukovinit op tikmok@y...: >I lost the pali text and translation of these deceivers, and could not make >out some of the Pali: seelata (13) must be siilata? And the Pali of 32 I >could not make out. I am not sure if the following would be helpful or not, but these were Gayan's original posts: (if prompted for passwords, enter "dsgarchives", password "metta". http://www.escribe.com/religion/dhammastudygroup/m117.html http://www.escribe.com/religion/dhammastudygroup/m118.html http://www.escribe.com/religion/dhammastudygroup/m119.html >As promised, another example of studying details, as to Condiitons. I was >impressed by the Thai tapes of A. Sujin on conditions, so much related to >daily life. I decided to write my Intro to Conditions. I read in Guide to >Conditional Relations, U Narada, about many details, finding the numbers of >common conditions, the enumerations. I tried a few but then found that it >did not help me personally, that it was above me, so I left that. It depends >on one's personal inclination again how many details are helpful. Thank you for this nice example. kom 10586 From: m. nease Date: Sat Jan 5, 2002 3:23pm Subject: Re: [dsg] FYI Jon, --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > I enjoyed very much meeting you in Bangkok over the > New Year. Ditto--it was great meeting you both and being moderated in person...! > --- "m. nease" wrote: > I was sorry to learn about the loss of internet > access, particularly as I > had been appreciating your recent posts. I do hope > you'll be able to find > a workaround that will allow you to remain active on > the list. Thanks, I'll do what I can. This shouldn't be impossible--just a matter of re-writing my work schedule to fit in daily trips to an ISP. Good to begin the weaning process now anyway as I'll be off altogether before long. > I hope things work out for the rest of the period > until you are able to > get into WPN. Thanks again. I should hear back soon re. my request to move up my departure date--I'll keep you posted. I meet today with the Wat Mahatat monks for a formal apology(!) for not having moved in there and taken up their unusual meditation practice after my return from Laos. It'll be a relief to have that over with, at least. mike 10587 From: m. nease Date: Sat Jan 5, 2002 3:42pm Subject: Re: [dsg] deceiving dhammas Dear Nina, --- Nina van Gorkom wrote: > Robert K. > mentioned the "Guide", Netti, > and referred to: lobha that should be pursued > (sevitabba) and that should > not be pursued. ... > Later on I shall give more examples of studying > details, and starting to > like them, to find them relevant, but this post gets > too long I'd certainly like (!) to hear more about this and to be reminded of Robert K's citation. Liking and disliking seem to me to be so central to dukkha in everyday life. mike 10588 From: sukinderpal Date: Sat Jan 5, 2002 7:29pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Bangkok impressions 28/12/01-2/01/02 Dear Robert, The pictures are 400KB each and already in jpg format, I think that it would be better that I reduce the size myself before sending them to you. My last attempt with an earlier version of Micrografx Picture Publisher produced bad quality pictures. I will try to use some other program, perhaps Photoshop, and see what happens. Best wishes, Sukin. --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Robert Epstein wrote: > Dear Sukin, > That would be great if you have the chance to send the photos. I have a simple > Application, Adobe Photodeluxe, which will reduce the resolution of the pictures, > once in the computer, to 72 dpi and will then convert them to jpeg files. It does > so in a matter of seconds. > > If you want to send me the 'big picture files' and have me do the reduction, I > will be happy to do it. If they're too big to send, a good photo app, perhaps one > that comes with the camera's software?, should have a component to do what I have > described. > > Best, > Robert Ep. > > ============= > > --- Sukinderpal Narula wrote: > > Dear Robert, > > You asked: > > > > Now on to more important matters: Sukin, are you going to post the > > photos???? > > > > > > Now since Christine has forgiven me for choosing a bad day for taking her > > picture, > > I think she doesn't mind me sending it to you. Actually I don't know what > > she meant > > by 'flat hair', I just looked at the picture and found that she was really > > looking > > very nice that morning. > > You'll have to wait though since I took the picture in high resolution, I > > need to > > figure out a way to reduce their size before I can send them to you or > > anyone else > > who might be interested. There is also a group picture with Jon, Sarah, K. > > Sujin, > > Betty, Christine, Mike and myself. > > > > Best wishes, > > Sukin. > > > > ps: Sorry if multiple copies of this post has been sent. I am new to > > Microsoft Outlook > > and am having difficulty handling it. > 10589 From: Robert Epstein Date: Sat Jan 5, 2002 10:07pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Ultimate realities (and khandhas) --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > Rob Ep > > --- Robert Epstein wrote: > Dear Jon, > > Due to pleasantly synchronistic conditions arising, your answer to > > Herman here has > > answered the question I just asked in my last post to you. The rupa is > > experienced directly by the citta and it doesn't matter whether it's an > > 'accurate' > > reflection of a 'real external object' [probably because there's no such > > things -- > > just momentary rupas arising]. What matters is that the rupa will be > > shaped by > > the kammic predispositions of the sense-door moment, and this is all > > that is > > necessary to get one's *real rupa* in the moment. It is not *the* rupa, > > it is the > > appropriate rupa for that citta in that moment. > > I couldn't have put it better myself. (You have quite a way when it comes > to stating these propositions/concepts -- I'm most envious of this > ability!) > > Jon Thank you, Jon, and especially for your help in partially clearing up my understanding of this. I'm still struggling with the relation of namas and rupas and have appreciated all your input. When I first heard about namas and rupas I thought they sounded kind of obvious. Now I say: 'ha!' to that. Best, Robert Ep. 10590 From: Robert Epstein Date: Sat Jan 5, 2002 10:16pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Bangkok impressions 28/12/01-2/01/02 That would be great, Sukin. I will wait to hear from you, and thanks! Best, Robert Ep. ===== --- sukinderpal wrote: > Dear Robert, > The pictures are 400KB each and already in jpg format, I think that > it would be better that I reduce the size myself before sending them > to you. My last attempt with an earlier version of Micrografx > Picture Publisher produced bad quality pictures. I will try to use > some other program, perhaps Photoshop, and see what happens. > Best wishes, > Sukin. > 10591 From: rikpa21 Date: Sun Jan 6, 2002 0:25am Subject: Re: [dsg] FYI --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "m. nease" wrote: > Thanks again. I should hear back soon re. my request > to move up my departure date--I'll keep you posted. I > meet today with the Wat Mahatat monks for a formal > apology(!) for not having moved in there and taken up > their unusual meditation practice after my return from > Laos. It'll be a relief to have that over with, at > least. Hi Mike, I find this statement curious, given everything I've been taught there I have found to be in perfect accord with the actual instructions outlined by the Buddha in the Satipatthana Sutta (any teacher, as one of mine did, who begins a teaching with the simile of the raft, has my rapt attention!). I have furthermore found that what I have been taught does not diverge one iota from what the Buddha actually taught in lpaes like the Satipatthana Sutta, for example. The methods I've learned there are about as mainstream Buddhist (whether Theravada or Mahayana) as they come. I would be very interested in hearing specifically what you find "unusual" about the practices there (such as anapanasati or for some, the Mahasi Sayadaw method of focus on the rising and falling of the abdomen), or, for example, regarding specific methods of training in mindfulness such as: "when walking, the monk discerns that he is walking. When standing, he discerns that he is standing. When sitting, he discerns that he is sitting. When lying down, he discerns that he is lying down. Or however his body is disposed, that is how he discerns it." I was reminded of this consonance in theory and praxis between what I've learned from the many teachers there (as well as from my Tibetan teachers) even more after a long conversation I had with a monk in a small village wat in Laos a few weeks ago. He is a Lao (US Citizen now) monk who's lived in American 28 years who'd ordianed in a small village wat a ways outside Vientiane. After a "coincidental" and fortuitous meeting, we would up having a wonderfully detailed conversation for a few hours on the Dhamma and meditation in specific, which merely confirmed for me the universality of the methods taught at mainstream places like Wat Mahatat that adhere to the teachings in the Satipatthana Sutta, given he has been taught and practies in exactlty the same way as is taught at mainstream places like Wat Mahatat. But that discussion wasn't even necessary to ascertain the viability of those methods in my own case--merely the direct application of those methods in my own limited experience proved almost instantly that these "pure vipassana" approaches definitely work, and act as powerful conditions for Right Mindfulness and Right Concentration, even setting aside for a moment that I've been trained in methods that emphasize cultivating jhana combined with vipassana (also what the Buddha specifically taught in the Suttas). That said, I have encountered other other approaches that sounded superficially OK at first, but when I examined them with great care, they appeared to diverge significantly from what the Buddha actually taught in places like the Satipatthan Sutta and elsewhere. I have found such apparently divergent approaches raise far more questions than they answer for me--especially in terms of how one can apply them to get from point A (suffering sentient being) to point B (liberated by direct insight). Just by way of anectdote, it took me less than two hours of practicing the methods of "training" and "remaining focused" using the methods outlined by my teachers at places like Wat Mahatat (not to mention they accord perfectly with what I've been taught by my Tibetan teachers) to engender significantly increased mindfulness. And again, this from a totally different tradition than the one I've been trained in! Conversely, other approaches, even after serious, and what I believe to be dispassionate analysis (after all my primary training has been in the Tibetan Geluk-pa system, yet I actively seek out teachings from Theravada teachers with the eye to comparing, constrasting, and most imoprtant, integrating those teachings into my own practice), combined with long and deliberate consideration, discussion, and analysis, I have found neither clear precedent for such approaches in the Suttas, nor have I found them conducive to the sort of mindfulness I have come to associate with Right Mindfulness and Right Concentration in my own limited experiences. What I can say is that there is a difference as great as night and day between the approaches I've found have led to increased sati and samadhi, vs. those that provide too little "traction" to lead someone with my accumulations to true samma sati and samma samadhi. One rule of thumb I find helpful in discerning what is and is not effective "method" is if it really engenders the results the Buddha detailed. For example, how well doeas any given approach help engender unbroken focus, clear comprehension, and concentration over long peiods of time? Taking what the Buddha taught in the Anapanasati Sutta: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/majjhima/mn118.html "And how are the four frames of reference developed & pursued so as to bring the seven factors of awakening to their culmination?" [Note again this is specifically what the Buddha taught as the factors leading to release: the seven factors of enlightenment, the bojjhangas] "[1] On whatever occasion the monk remains focused on the body in & of itself -- ardent, alert, & mindful -- putting aside greed & distress with reference to the world, on that occasion his mindfulness is steady & without lapse. When his mindfulness is steady & without lapse, then mindfulness as a factor of awakening becomes aroused. He develops it, and for him it goes to the culmination of its development." I find it beneficial to pay particular attention to the instruction that says: "When his mindfulness is ***steady & without lapse*** [emphasis mine], then mindfulness as a factor of awakening becomes aroused. He develops it, and for him it goes to the culmination of its development." Since few Buddhists would argue against the crititical position the bojjhangas play in awakening and final release, then unless one has unbroken mindfulness (which carries with it the implication of highly developed concentration as well), then there is not the development of samma sati that leads to release, not to mention the other factors: "[2] Remaining mindful in this way, he examines, analyzes, & comes to a comprehension of that quality with discernment. When he remains mindful in this way, examining, analyzing, & coming to a comprehension of that quality with discernment, then analysis of qualities as a factor of awakening becomes aroused. He develops it, and for him it goes to the culmination of its development. "[3] In one who examines, analyzes, & comes to a comprehension of that quality with discernment, unflagging persistence is aroused. When unflagging persistence is aroused in one who examines, analyzes, & comes to a comprehension of that quality with discernment, then persistence as a factor of awakening becomes aroused. He develops it, and for him it goes to the culmination of its development. "[4] In one whose persistence is aroused, a rapture not-of-the-flesh arises. When a rapture not-of-the-flesh arises in one whose persistence is aroused, then rapture as a factor of awakening becomes aroused. He develops it, and for him it goes to the culmination of its development. "[5] For one who is enraptured, the body grows calm and the mind grows calm. When the body & mind of an enraptured monk grow calm, then serenity as a factor of awakening becomes aroused. He develops it, and for him it goes to the culmination of its development. "[6] For one who is at ease -- his body calmed -- the mind becomes concentrated. When the mind of one who is at ease -- his body calmed -- becomes concentrated, then concentration as a factor of awakening becomes aroused. He develops it, and for him it goes to the culmination of its development. "[7] He oversees the mind thus concentrated with equanimity. When he oversees the mind thus concentrated with equanimity, equanimity as a factor of awakening becomes aroused. He develops it, and for him it goes to the culmination of its development. [Similarly with the other three frames of reference: feelings, mind, & mental qualities.] "This is how the four frames of reference are developed & pursued so as to bring the seven factors of awakening to their culmination. (Clear Knowing & Release) "And how are the seven factors of awakening developed & pursued so as to bring clear knowing & release to their culmination? There is the case where a monk develops mindfulness as a factor of awakening dependent on seclusion... dispassion... cessation, resulting in relinquishment. He develops analysis of qualities as a factor of awakening... persistence as a factor of awakening... rapture as a factor of awakening... serenity as a factor of awakening... concentration as a factor of awakening... equanimity as a factor of awakening dependent on seclusion... dispassion... cessation, resulting in relinquishment. "This is how the seven factors of awakening, when developed & pursued, bring clear knowing & release to their culmination." So what to make of all this? I think any teaching that does NOT emphasize all of these factors in the appropriate degree and balance, or any teaching that does not lead to the sort of mindfulness ("steady and without lapse") that serves as the foundation for the remaining bojjhanagas, that release would be something extremely difficult to come by. What are your thoughts on all of this, Mike? *** May all beings have happinhess and cause of happiness. May all beings be free from suffering and the cause of suffering. May all beings never be separated from perfect joy. May all beings abide in equanimity, undefiled by the taints of the Eight Worldly Concenrns. 10592 From: Sarah Date: Sun Jan 6, 2002 0:26am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: luminous mind: To Kenneth Ong Dear Suan, Many thanks for your efforts to answer so many difficult questions. --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "abhidhammika" wrote: > However, as you raised this question again, I will give you, as a > quick answer, Buddhaghosa's statement on how javana cittas can > condition bhavangacitta. > > The answer to this problem is to do with the timing and quality of > javana cittas. > > When javana citta has the strength of a janaka kamma, it can modify > bhavangacitta. In fact, it can cause new kinds of bhavangacitta to > arise. > > The following Pali quote comes from Section 687, > Kankhavitaranavisuddhi niddesa, Visuddhimaggo, Vol.2. > > 687. .....Tattha janakam naama kusalampi hoti akusalampi. Tam > patisandhiyampi pavattepi ruupaaruuupavipaakakkhandhe janeti. > > "...There, janakam is either healthy or unhealthy action. It (janaka > kamma) can cause resultant physical and mental aggegates to arise > either at the moment of linking consciousness (conception) or during > the current lifetime." > > Please kindly note that the resultant mental aggregates (aruupa > vipaaka khandhaa) during the current lifetime refer to bhavanga > cittas. > I’m looking at Nanamoli’s English translation of Vism, chXX11because I believe the Pali section 687 falls here under the English sections 79, 80. but I can’t find your exact quote and in the index there is no reference to bhavanga in this section. (It is well-worth reading however as there is a useful discussion about latent tendencies, accumulations, kamma and time sequence which may be of interest to Howard in particular). If you can give me a further reference to Nanamoli’s translation, that would be useful, in order to read the surrounding section too. I’m. sorry to ask this. In the same text, Vism X1V, 114, (458 in the Pali) we read specifically about bhavanga cittas: “When the rebirth-linking consciousness has ceased, then following on whatever kind of rebirth-linking it may be, the same kinds, being the result of that same kamma whatever it may be, occur as life continuum consciousness with the same object; and again those same kinds. And as long as there is no other kind of arising of consciousness to interrupt the continuity, they also go on occurring endlessly in periods of dreamless sleep, etc., like the current of a river.” It continues to discuss how the bhavanga cittas are interrupted by processed through the sense doors and mind door. There is no suggestion that I’ve read either of the bhavanga cittas or objects changing/being affected by javana cittas in this lifetime. Thanks again for the interesting points, Sarah ====================================================== 10593 From: Sarah Date: Sun Jan 6, 2002 0:57am Subject: Teng Kee's comments Dear Teng Kee, It’s good to hear from you after a long break! I think I share the same understanding on these points as you (of course my understanding is still kindergartedn technical knowledge unlike your detailed Pali expertise;-) Now I think I’m looking in the wrong section for Suan’s Pali quote. I’m hoping for a redirection. As you suggest, it seems the reference would be to rebirth in other planes (as a result of javana processes in this lifetime) rather than any change of bhavanga cittas in this lifetime. Back to old discussion topics, I’m wondering if you ever read my post addressed to you and others: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/8750 This was on the subject of types/characters and carita and followed on from some discussion you were having on this topic with Rob K and others before and reference to difficulties you mentioned then in the Satipatthana Sutta. I had discussed the points further with K.Sujin, but as Christine would say, the post reflects my understanding of this tricky subject quite a while later. I’d be interested to hear any further comments from you or Nina or anyone else. Best wishes, Sarah p.s Suan, we all find Teng Kee’s posts to be a bit of a maze in which we often get pretty lost. Also his bark (like Erik’s) is definitely worse than his bite;-)) ====================================================== --- Ong Teng Kee wrote: > Dear Mr.Suan, > I think buddhaghosa would say you are having crazy idea about > bhavanga.He > would say you are just a non theravadin.Read ch.20 in Visuddhimagga for > kamma produce material,bhavanga citta produce material during life > time.You > cannot say during life time we produce kamma call janaka kamma because > those > are supplanmanting kamma etc.Janaka kamma cannot be change after rebirth > > citta.janaka kamma basically means our life time span produce from > previous > life.Are you saying that we can change from among 4 kinds of two roots > to 4 > kinds of three roots or from ahetu to two roots.We are still not enter > into > bhavanga citta of brahma when we attain jhana as a human because we are > merely attain into form/formless javana.Do not be overclever. > --- Ong Teng Kee wrote: > Dear Mr.Suan, > I think buddhaghosa would say you are having crazy idea about > bhavanga.He > would say you are just a non theravadin.Read ch.20 in Visuddhimagga for > kamma produce material,bhavanga citta produce material during life > time.You > cannot say during life time we produce kamma call janaka kamma because > those > are supplanmanting kamma etc.Janaka kamma cannot be change after rebirth > > citta.janaka kamma basically means our life time span produce from > previous > life.Are you saying that we can change from among 4 kinds of two roots > to 4 > kinds of three roots or from ahetu to two roots.We are still not enter > into > bhavanga citta of brahma when we attain jhana as a human because we are > merely attain into form/formless javana.Do not be overclever. > ................................................................................................................ 10594 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sun Jan 6, 2002 1:17am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: The Two Truths (for Howard) Rob Ep --- Robert Epstein wrote: > Dear Jon, > I understand your statement that both arising and conceptual wrong > understanding > can be an obstacle. But this leaves me a little confused about what you > meant in > your original statement by: 'The root cause of our problems in not our > wrong > conceptual grasp of things...' Could you say a word about that? I > understand > the second part of the sentence, but I don't understand how wrong > conceptual grasp > is not a root cause, yet our 'general accumulated wrong view' about > realities is. > I don't quite have the distinction between those two..... > > Best, > Robert Ep. I'm a little confused myself, Rob, since I've lost track of the original thread. However, let me try to restate what I might have had in mind. Wrong conceptual understanding is based on wrong understanding of realities (dhammas); it is the latter that is the cause of the former and not the other way around. To give an example from our discussion, our conceptual idea of 'hardness' is bound to be inaccurate as long as direct understanding of the reality that is hardness has not been fully developed. No amount of 'correcting' our conceptual misunderstanding can bring any meaningful progress along the path. Another example. An idea of 'self' arises because realities have not been directly seen with panna as having the characteristic of 'not-self'. Even though we may have accepted as correct at an intellectual level the teaching on no self, the concept of self is still there and will arise, because of the lack of understanding of realities. I hope this is clearer. Jon 10595 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sun Jan 6, 2002 1:23am Subject: Re: [dsg] Ultimate realities (and khandhas) Howard --- upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, Jon - > > Thank you for the following informative post. > At one point you ask, with regard to the possibility of concepts > being > among the objects discussed in the 4th foundation of mindfulness: "So > even on > your own interpretation, Howard, wouldn't that leave the Four Noble > Truths as > the only possible 'concept' anyway?" With regard to this, I would say > that, > yes, these seem to be the only concepts dealt with there. But I > certainly do > see them as concepts. The Four Noble Truths are fully realised at the moment of arahantship, at which moment the object of the citta is nibbana, a reality. So I think that for the arahant it can be said that the Four Noble Truths are not a concept but an aspect of reality. In the course of the development of the path to enlightenment, the Four Noble Truths are progressively realised. To those of us who are far from enlightenment, they are a mere concept. I don’t know if this agrees with your take on the subject? Jon 10596 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sun Jan 6, 2002 1:28am Subject: Re: [dsg] Memory, Objects, and Continuity Num, Mike --- srnsk@a... wrote: > Hi Jon, > > > Do you have any references on the 4 manifestations of sanna that you > > mention --'registration (marking), retention, retrieval and recall'? > I > > would be interested to know where I can read more about this. > > > > > The bottom-line of how I came up with those descriptions is from > multiple > sources. Hmm, let me tell you how I came up. > > I have been reading lakkhanaticcatuka, (four characters: > {characteristics > (lakkhanam: specific or generic attribute) function (rasa: function or > achievement), manifestation (paccupat-thana: manifestation, appearance > or > effect) and proximate cause (padatthanam) }), from various sources, > English, > Pali and couple of different translations of these 4 characteristics in > Thai, > from Milindapanha, a little bit from my tipitaka online search. And I > have to > admit that I also reflect about it from my background, my training and > practice at work. I was interested to read Mike's post on this subject (thanks, Mike), which quotes the following passage from 'Survey' > 3. Remembrance or perception, sa~n~naa cetasika, > "marks" the object so that it can be recognized. > Sa~n~naa cetasika remembers each object which appears; > it remembers the different objects appearing one after > the other as a "whole", as a story, a concept of > beings and people. Sa~n~naa remembers pleasant > feeling, unpleasant feeling, bodily pleasant and > painful feeling and indifferent feeling with regard to > each object which appears. Sa~n~naa cetasika is an > important condition inciting to attachment and > clinging in life. > > from > Survey of Paramattha Dhammas > Sujin Boriharnwanaket > Translated by Nina van Gorkom It seems to me, on the basis of the textual references, that the function of sanna is to mark the object of the citta at, say, the moment of experiencing an object through one of the sense doors and then in subsequent mind moments to play a part in enabling us to relate that object to objects previously experienced. Any thoughts/comments on this hypothesis? Jon 10597 From: Sarah Date: Sun Jan 6, 2002 1:34am Subject: Re: [dsg] one limb of 8 fold path more important (was satipathana and practice) Dear Erik (and Frank), Further to Frank’s helpful comments, I’d just like to add a couple more points: --- rikpa21 wrote: > > I agree completely the "Right View" is the forerunner, but Right > View in what sense, mundane, suparmundane? > > "Right View" in the mundane sense only takes one so far. If kamma > and paticca samuppada and anatta are explained well they are not > unduly difficult to grasp intellectually. What is much harder is > getting rid of the views part and coming to supramundane Right View, > which it tanamount to abandoning "views" (read, speculation) > altogether. When we talk (or rather the Buddha talks) about mundane right view or pa~n~na, this is not merely intellectual right view but direct understanding of realities at this moment. It is by beginning to develop pa~n~na little by little of paramatha dhammas that wrong views and speculations are gradually abandoned. This is the path which will eventually result in supramundane panna. One step at a time. Each moment of panna erodes ignorance and wrong view just a little more as in the often quoted axe-handle verse. > > Similarly, one needs hold no "belief" (ditthi) regarding the taste > of a ripe mango if one has actually tasted a ripe mango, though one > may hold beliefs about its flavor as "sweet, delicious, etc." prior > to actually tasting it. Once tasted, there is no longer any need for > any "view" of a mango's taste, hence there is nothing to associate > with view or speculation regarding its flavor and texture. > > But, absent this taste, there has to be some way to acquire a mango > for the tasting! :) I liked Frank’s papaya story very much;-) Right intellectual understanding and direct understanding work together. Without hearing and considering that the mango tastes so delicious on the inside, would one even open it to check out? > So my question, from the other day and again is, "Now what"? > Intellectual analysis can only take one so far. It is possible to > beak down the body into a bunch of functions and dis-identify them > with an "I" intellectually. But this can never substitute for > directly seeing this reality with supramundane panna, which is > unmediated by conceptual elaborations. As for “now what?”, let’s not be concerned about supramundane panna, because now there is no supramundane panna. So what is there now? Sense door activity and objects, thinking, the ‘cheating’ dhammas being discussed and so on. It’s not just a question of thinking and breaking down and dis-identifying these realities but seeing that right now there is no other world other than that of seeing, hearing and so on. In other words, instead of selecting or focussing, there can be direct understanding of whatever reality appears for an instant. If we wish for more moments of panna or of lasting moments of panna, it shows the attachment and clinging to self again. > The means to tasting this ripe mango I'm familiar with (the one > outlined by the Buddha in the Satipatthana Sutta and the Samadhi > Sutta and many other places) demands a lot more than merely > understanding intellectually (lokiya samma ditthi) that all things > are anatta, or that we all heirs to our own kamma, or believing that > there is no "driver" or "I" behind everything in the ultimate sense. When we read about (lokiya) samma ditthi (rt understanding), I don’t understand it to be intellectual understanding. > According to my understanding, the panna that cuts the defilements > takes unbroken mindfulness brought about by persistence and effort > (viriya) training in mindfulness and concentration, (sati and > samadhi), applying that to the direct investigation (dhamma-vicaya) > into the charactetristics of dhammas arising and passing away in > terms of noting their inconstancy, combined with other factors > (piti, passadhi, upekkha), which, when brought to their culmination > in the proper balance, lead to the insight that terminates the > fetters and brings to fruition the sole aim of the Dhamma: final > release from identification with the imputed "self," the "I, me, > mine," which lies at the root of suffering. I think we need to start at the beginning. One moment of satipatthana is very precious (‘one finger-snap’..). > So there are many factors involved, and what I've found most helpful > is to reflect on what the Buddha actually taught regarding the cause- > and-effect relationships that lead from suffering sentient being to > final release. For example, if the hindrances are present, can any > of the enlightenment factors like piti, passadhi, upekkha, or sati > arise? What about samadhi? Without these factors, is there any hope > of release? Certainly, if panna and the other wholesome mental factors are not highly developed, there is no chance of enlightenment factors. The way they will be highly developed, however, is not by imagining what they must be like but by directly understanding the characteristics of skilful and unskilful states and other realities appearing now. > So based on my understanding, it's a matter of working with these > cause-and-effect relationships in the approriate order, knowing, for > example, that without pacifying the hindrances, the seven factors of > enlightenment have no basis for arising, not to mention > enlightenment and final release. Not only that, but among all these > factors there needs to be the appropriate balance. To veer too far > in any direction is to depart from the Middle Way, to miss > the "sweet spot" as in the "lute-string" simile, and to miss the > mark entirely. Erik, as I’ve mentioned, I’ve appreciated the pleasant tone in your recent messages and well-considered points and quotes. I also appreciated the same in the live discussion;-)) May I suggest, though, that there is still an idea of ‘control’ in what you write above. Instead of considering the ‘Middle Way’ as not veering too much in one direction and missing your “sweet-spot”, can we see it as a moment of understanding? At a moment of panna, there is no eternalist or annihilation belief, there is no wrong view or ignorance. It understands the visible object, sound, feeling or other reality and at that moment. It is accompanied by right awareness, concentration and effort already. This is why, as Frank pointed out with the helpful quote, right understanding is the forerunner or dawn. Sarah ====================================================== 10598 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sun Jan 6, 2002 1:35am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: What is Concentration Actually? Howard --- upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, Erik - ........... > I've had a drop of experience in samatha bhavana, involving > concentration practice focusing the mind on a single meditation subject, > and > also some practice in vipassana bhavana, involving what is sometimes > called > moment-to-moment concentration practice. In my experience these types of > > concentration are different, but, in their different ways, equally > powerful. > In either of these cases, the concentration is, as you say, radically > different from "the normal sort of samadhi that (may) arise in > day-to-day > life through concentrating on random object arising through thes > sense-doors". > The point of my post, however, was to inquire into the technical > question of what is actually occurring, at a microscopic level of > detail, > when concentration has increased. My conjecture was that the switching > back > and forth among various (instances of) objects from citta to citta to > citta > typical of ordinary experience is reduced, in the extreme case to a > single > object (or near-replicates identified as "the same object") which is the > > arammana in mental process after mental process. Now, it seems almost > certain > to me that such a curtailing of the diversity of objects of awareness, > such > focusing and stabilization, is due to some functional characteristic or > cetasika within each mindstate becoming strengthened, in which case that > > cetasika, itself, might be called "concentration". I am asking those who > are > well versed in Abhidhamma what their understanding of the Abhidhamma > "take" > is on this subject. I have sought the views of some persons well-versed in Abhidhamma, and would like to attempt an answer to your question. You are wondering what is the factor in samatha bhavana that allows successive cittas to take the same object (i.e., the 'meditation subject'). I would agree that, conventionally speaking, we could call this 'concentration'. However, there is already a 'concentration' cetasika -- ekaggataa cetasika -- whose function is somewhat different, namely, to concentrate the citta on its present object, whatever that object might be (and regardless of whether it is the same object as the object the preceding citta). Being one of the 'universals', ekaggataa cetasika does of course arise at moments of samatha bhavana where it performs exactly this function. The answer to your question is I think found in Ch. 8 of Nina's 'Cetasikas'. There it is explained that it is the function of vitakka cetasika to strike or hit upon the object of the citta, and that in samatha bhavana, vitakka "thinks of" or "touches" the meditation subject again and again. Vitakka is the first of the jhana factors. Both ekaggataa cetasika and vitakka cetasika are also present at moments of vipassana and enlightenment. Indeed, in this context they are path factors -- ekaggataa cetasika is the path factor that is 'right concentration/samma samadhi', and vitakka cetasika is the path factor that is 'right thinking/samma-vayama'. Confusingly, the term 'samadhi' is sometimes used in the texts to refer to samatha bhavana and sometimes to ekagatta cetasika. I have set out below some relevant terms (as I understand them). Jon Samatha -- 'Calmness' or 'tranquillity'. An attribute of all kusala cittas, in the sense of being calm or tranquil from akusala. Samatha bhavana -- The development of certain kinds of kusala that are particularly conducive to calmness, accompanied by panna (wisdom), to the level of jhana. Ekagatta cetasika -- The cetasika (mental factor) that is 'concentration'. It concentrates the citta on its object. Is a 'universal' (i.e., arises with every citta) and so may be kusala or akusala depending on the citta it accompanies Passaddhi -- The cetasika (mental factor) that is calmness or tranquillity It arises with each moment of kusala citta. Vitakka -- The cetasika that that strikes or hits upon the object of the citta. In samatha bhavana, it causes/allows the citta to take the same object on successive moments. Samadhi -- 'Concentration'. A term whose meaning rather depends on the context. Sometimes used as a synonym for ekagatta cetasika, sometimes for samatha/samatha bhavana (and sometimes something else). 10599 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sun Jan 6, 2002 1:39am Subject: Re: [dsg] Concept Victor --- yuzhonghao wrote: > Hello Sarah, > > You questioned that "Can we say that a concept comes to be because of > thinking?" What do you think? Can we? You wrote that no thinking > means no concepts. From what you wrote, it seems to me that you mean > that concept is dependent on thinking. This is how I understand the > word "concept" from the online dictionary in http://www.webster.com: > A concept means something conceived in the mind, a thought, a > notion. It also means an abstract or generic idea generalized from > particular instances. The synonym to the word "concept" is the > word "idea." I agree with you that thinking is conditioned. I had planned to give a reply to your original question (> How does a concept come to be?), but had not got around to it by the time you sent your follow-up. A you rightly point out, a concept is a mere creation of the mind, a notion. The importance of this from our point of view is that a concept has no 'existence' independently of the citta that 'creates' it. The abhidhamma makes a distinction between concepts and realities (dhammas). Realities have an essential nature that can be experienced by sati/panna, while concepts do not. Concepts are undoubtedly conditioned, in the sense that, as you say, they are dependent on thinking, which is itself conditioned. But whereas the thinking is a reality that has an individual nature capable of being experienced by panna, a concept has no such individual nature, according to the abhidhamma. Jon