13000 From: Lucy Date: Mon Apr 29, 2002 3:21pm Subject: Re: [dsg] ADL ch. 5 (1-7) Hi Larry > > Recently I've been thinking about mudita. It is specifically described > as rejoicing at the success and prosperity of others, but 'sympathetic > joy' sounds a lot like 'love' to me. > You may be right in the sense that we rejoice spontaneously at the success of people we love or like. Complete strangers aren't too hard either. But it's not easy to develop mudita towards people we dislike or see as competitors. Also, it seems easier to develop compassion (karuna) than metta or mudita towards those we don't like ... All 4 work as good "antidotes" to dosa, but perhaps only equanimity helps to neutralise lobha, at least that's my impression. Lucy 13001 From: Date: Mon Apr 29, 2002 4:36pm Subject: RE: [dsg] satipatthana/Kom Thanks Kom, I see my mistake. I was equating satipatthana with vipassana but that's not quite correct. I think I found the source of the controversy over objects of satipatthana, but first here are some interesting snippets from "A Comprehensive Manual Of Abhidhamma". ch. 2, guide to #5 The word sati derives from a root meaning "to remember," but as a mental factor it signifies presence of mind, attentiveness to the present, rather than the faculty of memory regarding the past. It has the characteristic of not wobbling, i.e. not floating away from the object. Its function is absence of confusion or non-forgetfulness. It is manifested as guardianship, or as the state of confronting an objective field. Its proximate cause is strong perception (thirasanna) or the four foundations of mindfulness. ch.2, #5 Faith, mindfulness, shame, fear of wrongdoing, non-greed, non-hatred, neutrality of mind, tranquility of (mental) body, tranquility of consciousness, lightness of (mental) body, lightness of consciousness, malleability of the (mental) body, malleability of consciousness, wieldiness of (mental) body, wieldiness of consciousness, proficiency of the (mental) body, proficiency of consciousnss, rectitude of the (mental) body, and rectitude of consciousness; these nineteen mental factors are termed the universal beautiful factors. [Larry: in other words, whenever sati arises all these other qualities also arise]. ch.7, #24 In the compendium of requisites of enlightenment, there are four foundations of mindfulness: (1) the foundation of mindfulness in contemplation of the body; (2) the foundation of mindfulness in contemplation of feelings; (3) the foundation of mindfulness in contemplation of consciousness; (4) the foundation of mindfulness in contemplation of mental objects. Larry: 'contemplation of mental objects' is a translation of 'dhammanupassana.' So the controversy is, does this 'dhamma' mean paramattha-dhamma or dhammarammana. I would think something would have to prevent sati from taking concepts as object, but I don't see what it would be. Do you have a source or reason for your interpretation? Larry 13002 From: Date: Mon Apr 29, 2002 6:03pm Subject: Re: [dsg] ADL ch. 5 (1-7) Hi Lucy, I messed up the definition of mudita. It's appreciative joy, not sympathetic joy. My mindfulness is operating on a three hour delay and it didn't occur to me until the middle of the night. What I find interesting about mudita is that it seems to open the door to liking people (and things). That's different! Larry 13003 From: Date: Mon Apr 29, 2002 6:47pm Subject: Re: [dsg] re:anicca (do concepts arise and fall?) Hi Goglerr, I've decided the most soothing way for my brain to understand concepts is if something is impermanent it is a reality (possibly an erroneous one). If it is not impermanent, it is as concept. So mathematics is a concept, but solving a mathematic problem is a reality. Also kings, and even governments, are realities. However, it would be very difficult to be mindful of a government. What do you think? Larry 13004 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Mon Apr 29, 2002 7:45pm Subject: RE: [dsg] satipatthana/Kom Dear Larry, > -----Original Message----- > From: LBIDD@w... [mailto:LBIDD@w...] > > ch. 2, guide to #5 > The word sati derives from a root meaning "to remember," but as a mental > factor it signifies presence of mind, attentiveness to the present, > rather than the faculty of memory regarding the past. It has the > characteristic of not wobbling, i.e. not floating away from the object. > Its function is absence of confusion or non-forgetfulness. It is > manifested as guardianship, or as the state of confronting an objective > field. Its proximate cause is strong perception (thirasanna) or the four > foundations of mindfulness. I think we will have to remember also that sati rises with all kusala (and sobhana vipaka and kiriya), even when sati is not itself satipatthana. There is sati at the sila level, at the dana level, at the tranquil meditation level, at satiipatthana level, at vipassana level, at magga level, etc. Does the manual say any more abou what the strong perception (thirasanna) is? > > ch.2, #5 > Faith, mindfulness, shame, fear of wrongdoing, non-greed, non-hatred, > neutrality of mind, tranquility of (mental) body, tranquility of > consciousness, lightness of (mental) body, lightness of consciousness, > malleability of the (mental) body, malleability of consciousness, > wieldiness of (mental) body, wieldiness of consciousness, proficiency of > the (mental) body, proficiency of consciousnss, rectitude of the > (mental) body, and rectitude of consciousness; these nineteen mental > factors are termed the universal beautiful factors. [Larry: in other > words, whenever sati arises all these other qualities also arise]. Yes. These are sobhana-sadarana-cetasikas. Sadrana means public (readily available to all sobhana), pretty much the same as in Pali as in Thai. > > ch.7, #24 > In the compendium of requisites of enlightenment, there are four > foundations of mindfulness: (1) the foundation of mindfulness in > contemplation of the body; (2) the foundation of mindfulness in > contemplation of feelings; (3) the foundation of mindfulness in > contemplation of consciousness; (4) the foundation of mindfulness in > contemplation of mental objects. > > Larry: 'contemplation of mental objects' is a translation of > 'dhammanupassana.' So the controversy is, does this 'dhamma' mean > paramattha-dhamma or dhammarammana. I would think something would have > to prevent sati from taking concepts as object, but I don't see what it > would be. Do you have a source or reason for your interpretation? I will have to pass here to others. However, as you don't appear to have problems with abhidhamma, I urge you to continue reading to find out what objects of Satipatthana could be. Let me give you the following observations: 1) B. Bodhi mentioned that there are at least 10 different meanings of the word dhamma, with some differences very subtle 2) Dhamayatana also includes only paramatha dhamma, and not concepts, but dhammaramana include concepts. 3) Concepts, as far as I know, have no ti-lakkhana (other members disagree, but I think you should read on), and since the object of the cittas immediately prior to magga citta is one of the ti-lakkhana, it does also make sense that concepts cannot be part of dhamma-nupassana (since concept doesn't have ti-lakkhana as its characteristics). 4) When you read satipathanna sutta, in the dhammayatna section, I believe all that are mentioned are paramatha dhammas: so this raises no confusion. The usual confusion comes in the kaya-nupassana, because it seems to include many conceptual objects. kom 13005 From: Date: Mon Apr 29, 2002 8:38pm Subject: ADL ch.6 (1-6) from: http://www.budsas.org/ebud/nina-abhidhamma/nina-abhi-00.htm Abhidhamma In Daily Life chapter 1, paragraphs 1-6 THE CHARACTERISTIC OF DOSA 1. When we are angry with other people we harm ourselves by our anger. The Buddha pointed out the adverse effects of anger (dosa). We read in the 'Gradual Sayings' (Book of the Sevens, Ch.VI, par. 10, Anger) about the ills a rival wishes his rival to have and which are actually the ills coming upon an angry woman or man. The sutta states: ...Monks, there is the case of the rival, who wishes thus of a rival: 'Would that he were ugly!'. And why? A rival, monks, does not like a handsome rival. Monks, this sort of person, being angry, is overwhelmed by anger; he is subverted by anger: and however well he be bathed, anointed, trimmed as to the hair and beard, clad in spotless linen; yet for all that he is ugly, being overwhelmed by anger. Monks, this is the first condition, fostered by rivals, causing rivals, which comes upon an angry woman or man. Again, there is the case of the rival, who wishes thus of a rival: 'Would that he might sleep badly!' And why? A rival, monks, does not like a rival to sleep well. Monks, this sort of person, being angry, is overwhelmed by anger... and in spite of his lying on a couch, spread with a fleecy cover, spread with a white blanket, spread with a woollen coverlet, flower embroidered, covered with rugs of antelope skins, with awnings above; or on a sofa, with crimson cushions at either end; yet for all that he lies in discomfort, being overwhelmed by anger. Monks, this is the second condition.... 2. We then read about other ills a rival wishes for his rival, which come upon an angry woman or man. We read that a rival wishes his rival to be without prosperity, wealth and fame. Further we read that a rival wishes a rival to be without friends and this happens to someone who is an angry person. 3. The text states: 'Monks, this sort of person, being angry... whatever friends, intimates, relations and kinsmen he may have, they will avoid him and keep far away from him, because he is overwhelmed by anger...' 4. A rival wishes his rival to have an unhappy rebirth and this can happen to an angry person. We read: ' ... ..Monks, this sort of person, being angry... he misconducts himself in deed, in word and thought; so living, so speaking and so thinking, on the breaking up of the body after death he is reborn in the untoward way, the ill way, the abyss, hell....' 5. We would like to live in a world of harmony and unity among nations and we are disturbed when people commit acts of violence. We should consider what is the real cause of war and discord between people: it is the defilements which people have accumulated. When we have aversion we think that other people or unpleasant situations are the cause of our aversion. However, our accumulation of dosa is the real cause that aversion arises time and again. If we want to have less dosa we should know the characteristic of dosa and we should be aware of it when it arises. 6. Dosa has many degrees; it can be a slight aversion or it can be more coarse, such as anger. We can recognize dosa when it is coarse, but do we realize that we have dosa when it is more subtle? Through the study of the Abhidhamma we learn more about the characteristic of dosa. Dosa is an akusala cetasika (mental factor) arising with an akusala citta. A citta rooted in dosa is called in Pali: dosa-mula.citta. The characteristic of dosa is different from the characteristic of lobha. When there is lobha, the citta likes the object which it experiences at that moment, whereas when there is dosa, the citta has aversion towards the object it experiences. We can recognize dosa when we are angry with someone and when we speak disagreeable words to him. But when we are afraid of something it is dosa as well, because one has aversion towards the object one is afraid of. There are so many things in life we are afraid of: one is afraid of the future, of diseases, of accidents, of death. One looks for many means in order to be cured of anguish, but the only way is the development of the wisdom which eradicates the latent tendency of dosa. 13006 From: Date: Mon Apr 29, 2002 9:14pm Subject: RE: [dsg] satipatthana/Kom Hi Kom, Good reminders about what arises with sati; this is one very good cetasika! One possibility I thought of about reading 'dhamma' as 'paramattha-dhamma' in satipatthana is that it could simply be a rule, a part of the proceedure of a formal practice that leads somewhere. As you say, sati can arise in other situations outside satipatthana. Mostly I'm still a little puzzled about how to understand concept. Hopefully this will clear up as we go along. I couldn't find any more info on thirasanna. Maybe Nina has something. best wishes, Larry 13007 From: Date: Mon Apr 29, 2002 9:23pm Subject: RE: [dsg] satipatthana/Kom Hi Kom, one more thought. I forgot about discursive thought during mindfulness practice. You're definitely not supposed to dwell on it. That probably factors in to the paramattha-dhamma 'rule'. Larry 13008 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Mon Apr 29, 2002 10:00pm Subject: RE: [dsg] satipatthana/Kom Dear Larry, > -----Original Message----- > From: LBIDD@w... [mailto:LBIDD@w...] > > Hi Kom, > > One possibility I thought of about reading 'dhamma' as > 'paramattha-dhamma' in satipatthana is that it > could simply be a rule, a > part of the proceedure of a formal practice that > leads somewhere. As you As far as I know, this is not a trick or a technique. It's simply just the truth. Only realities exist (even if infinitesmally briefly, even if it is dependently conditioned). > say, sati can arise in other situations outside > satipatthana. Mostly I'm > still a little puzzled about how to understand > concept. Hopefully this > will clear up as we go along. I understand this is really hard to understand (even intellectually, much harder in reality), even though I believe it is the most important distinction one could make. I am sure it will be easier if you keep reading and considering the different distinctions. The amount of explanation of the dhammas, both the tipitika and the commentaries themselves, is just mind boggling: this really shows the compassion of the Buddha. Let me summarize some points about realities and concepts: 1) Realities are directly known, without additional thinking. A baby doesn't know what a table is, but the baby can as well see what appears through the eye-door. Table requires thinking. Visible objects appear directly. 2) Realities have its own characteristics (visesa lakkhana) (including the ti-lakkhana). Concepts don't (again, controversial, at least in this group!). When realities appear through the mind door, it is quite different when concepts appear through the mind door. 3) For most suttas that are apparently about Satipatthana, the Buddha only mention realities (the 5 kandhas). When we compare something that doesn't directly relate to realities, like freedom, this may be easy to see. kom 13009 From: Sarah Date: Mon Apr 29, 2002 11:15pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Mind Objects and Satipatthana Hi Howard, --- upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, all - > > I took the following from Nyanatiloka's dictionary: > > *********************************** > > Dhamma, as object of mind (dhammáyatana, s. áyatana) may be anything > past, > > present or future, corporeal or mental, conditioned or not (cf. > sankhára, > > 4), real or imaginary. > ************************** It's a good point and it was mentioned when we were discussing ayatanas. I think Nyantiloka's dictionary is excellent but there are a few errors. He equates dhammayatana with dhammarammana without any distinction and this doesn't accord with the text as we discussed. Dhammayatana (mind object base) consists of 16 sukhuma rupa (subtle rupa), 52 cetasika (mental factors) and nibbana. I believe this was quoted from Abhidhamatha Sangaha and other source after Num raised the question of pannatti (concepts). Nyantiloka doesn't give any reference to any contrary sources to support his comment. Let me know if you'd like the reference again. Dhammarammana (objects of consciousness) on the other hand, also include objects of sense experience and pannatti (concepts) and the quote above regarding 'real or imaginary' applies to them. Not all arammana are real and can be objects of satipatthana. > dhammánupassaná: 'contemplation of the mind-objects' is the last of > the 4 > foundations of > > mindfulness (satipatthána, q.v.) > > ************************************ > > This says to me that the last of the 4 foundations of mindfulness > is > the contemplation, as object of mind, of "anything past, present or > future, > corporeal or mental, conditioned or not (cf. sankhára, 4), real or > imaginary > ". Does this not seem to go well beyond so-called "realities"? Again, this seems to be a description of dhammarammana and not of dhammanupassana which only refers to any paramattha dhammas which can be objects of satipathana. I haven't seen any evidence or reference in the texts to the contrary, i'll be happy to look at any you find. I agree that the comment in the dictionary is surprising. Kom (I believe) wrote a clear post defining these different terms before. Pls let me know if you'd like me to repost this also. The terms can be very confusing, I know. Sarah ====== 13010 From: Sarah Date: Mon Apr 29, 2002 11:25pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Samatha bhavana - Rob Ep Dear Rob Ep, --- Robert Epstein wrote: > Dear Jon, > Well I may have ruined our agreement with my latest rant, but do me a > favor and > pick out the points worth addressing in that thing. I am running away > from it, as > one would if discovering that they had given birth to an elephant. I have no idea about your agreement with Jon (hope you know about agreements with lawyers;-)), but I appreciate your 'rant' with your carefully considered comments and sincere expressions of your understanding of dhamma to date. I'm glad you share them with us all and don't worry about giving birth to elephants (as long as they're not white elephants);-) I'm also enjoying your discussion with Sukin and I think it's very useful and practical. Thanks to you both. No need to run...(leave it to Num), Sarah ===== 13011 From: Sarah Date: Tue Apr 30, 2002 0:28am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Study/Meditation Dear Christine, I read your post with great interest and also appreciated Howard’s points on the prison escape;-). --- christine_forsyth wrote: > Dear Sarah and All, > > Your on-list reply to my query about further suggestions for study > seemed a little negative to me at first, and rather startled me. > Then your words mentioning that I've probably read all there is to > read on Paticcasamuppada stimulated further reflection. Though I > have been reading lots and enjoying it, and 'feeling' that it is > helping understanding to grow by seeing the same teaching presented > in different ways - I now wonder if perhaps it was really just an > attempt at creating a structure, a feeling of 'doing' something. > Something to replace the sitting meditation I had ceased to practice. ..... I certainly didn’t mean to discourage any further study or reading and like you, I find it helpful to read different details. I think the point I was making, though, is whether we are studying, sitting in formal M or working in the hospital at this moment, it is the present state of mind that counts. I think we all agree on this. I think we all agree as well that while it is important, even essential, to hear and read the Teachings, the fomal S is not the same as the direct awareness of the realities we’ve just read about. We can never say how much it is useful for anyone to read about Paticcasamuppada or any other aspect of the Teachings. So much depends on our different inclinations and habits. Just as we can see that you and Lucy study maps a little differently from many others, so we all study the Tipitaka differently too. For all of us, though, the test of the study is always at this moment, just like the test of our map-reading is always whether it has helped or hindered at any given time. ..... > Time and again on other lists study is described by sincere, > experienced meditation practitioners as 'clinging to old books', > avoiding 'real' practice; that studying is fine as a small part of > buddhist life (mainly the suttas), but the 'real work' is done in > formal meditation, 'on the cushion'. ..... I think we’re all familiar with these ideas and have mostly thought the same at one time or other. I think it’s also clear that there are many different ideas of what M is. According to Goglerr’s use of the term, with reference to the texts and according to Rob Ep’s wide definition, then we’re all M practioners here. We have to know what ‘real practice’, ‘real work’ and ‘formal M’ are and where the definitions are supported in the Tipitaka as being the Teachings of the Buddha. I don’t think anyone would say that any followers in the Buddha’s life did not listen to the Teachings. Why would the Buddha have taught so extensively if it wasn’t necessary to hear and consider carefully? We seem to be discussing two opposite points here;-) ..... > It has always felt a little frustrating and 'unnatural' not to have > a method - everything else in life from academic learning to cooking > to driving a car, has a method that teaches one to first do this, > then that, and afterwards the next thing, until various milestones > and, eventually, the goal is reached, - except, it seems, in the > gaining of insight. In hindsight, I see that probably 'study' became > my 'method'. ..... I think you’ve understood the point beautifully. We like to be given a method, just as we like to cling to an idea of self and ‘control’ the progress. ..... > You mention the importance of 'developing awareness now and > understanding more about anatta'. I get confused between being > encouraged to 'develop' qualities like awareness, and being told that > these states will be arising regardless of any wishes....and I was > discouraged by my inability to ever fully comprehend 'anatta'. ..... Good points. There is a difference, however, between understanding the value of useful or wholesome qualities and having the idea of self doing something to increase them. You felt discouraged about *your* inability to comprehend anatta. May I suggest that it is discouraging only when there is still the clinging to the idea of *my* ability. or lack of. ..... > Recently though, I have corresponded with experienced people who have > pointed out to me that 'anatta' is not as difficult or complicated to > understand as I believe, or as some imply. That I may have been > making things more difficult for myself, and that increasing > concentration by meditation practice may do away with a lot of > unnecessary ruminating. That I will begin to 'know'.... ..... With all respect to those who have suggested the opposite, we read again and again in the texts about the just how deep in meaning the teaching is, how it cannot be comprehended without the help of the Buddha, how it is only for the very wise and so on. Rob K recently quoted this passage on this point: “in the Mahanidana sutta atthakatha it says that this is such a deep matter: "Its depth of penetration should be understood ..Deep is the meaning of consciousness as emptiness, abscence of an agent.." The tika continues: "Consciousness's meaning of emptiness is deep because consciousness is said to be the distinctive basis for the misapprehension of self. As it is said "for a long time the uninstructed worldling has been attached to this, appropriated it, and misapprehended it thus; 'This is mine this I am , this is self'"(samyutta XII 61 ii94)(bodhi p66)” ***** > When I was doing sitting meditation ( Mahasi), there was always > something to 'watch' and 'label', and be aware of. There was > seemingly some organisation, some structure, some method, some > purpose, something to do .... {- and, I know, some feeling of > some 'one' who is doing..}. I guess I am one of those people who > feel more secure with structure and a task to accomplish - feeling I > have 'some' influence on the way that my life will go. > I wouldn't regard 'becoming an abhidhamma scholar' as any part of my > aim. My learning style is simply to 'hear' or 'read' the Teachings > in many different ways (in print, in person, on tape). Perhaps I am > a little slow, but one presentation of a particular topic doesn't > often 'take'; my experience has been that understanding creeps up on > me, something I couldn't grasp initially, appears fairly simple a few > months later. ..... Chris, I find your comments and considerations here to be very pertinent and useful and there seems to be a clear recognition of the clinging to structure and task and ‘doing’, a recognition of the “’one’ who is doing”, and the way understanding develops naturally, unfolding in its own time. ..... > And so, I am wondering what the point of the last year's work has > been, I feel I have come in a giant loop and I am back at the > beginning again......wondering at the 'gathering of theories, > opinions and book knowledge', wondering why the majority of western > buddhists are involved in sitting meditation and wondering why a very > few aren't. ..... In a way, I think the development of understanding and awareness is rather like a ‘giant loop’ and being ‘back at the beginning again’. We begin to see that the realities and phenomena to be known are just as they’ve always been in ordinary daily life which is just as it is, having been ‘formed up’ by so many different factors. So some of our former ideas and methods may have given the illusion of another kind of daily life or a different set of phenomena or a kind of ‘running away’ from the baby elephant (Rob Ep). I’m not at all poetic, but I want to suggest that there can be the illusion of running or escaping for so long, following all sorts of maps, methods or escape routes, but sooner or later, panna has to develop and know the real phenomena and the roots of dukkha, regardless of the ‘situation’. I’d like to finish with a quote from a post of Kom’s (26 Feb) which I found helpful on the same point: “One understands that when the intricate conditions completely culminates, then the dhamma arises. One understands that one cannot control ANY of the condition as each condition is complexly conditioned by more than a few other dhammas. Pratice (pati-pati, well-rounded comprehension of the dhamma) works in similar ways. No conventional effort is required. When there is enough of other levels of panna, then panna at the pati-pati level rises effortlessly, without the self (tanha, mana, and dithi) directing one to do things to achieve specific results.” ***** Understanding anatta takes courage, sincerity, patience and many other qualities which are often lacking. If we underestimate the difficulty of the path, I believe we make it harder still. Many thanks, Chris, for your open and helpful comments. I fully appreciate that you have probably been diplomatic (read-self moderated) in the comments on your reactions to much of what you read in my earlier post, but please feel free to disagree or raise any discouragement or credulity you feel at anytime. You’ll be doing us all a favour as there will always be others who share similar reactions. metta, Sarah ======= 13012 From: Sarah Date: Tue Apr 30, 2002 0:51am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Study/Meditation Hi Christine (and Ken H) --- christine_forsyth wrote: > Dear KenH, > Did I hear they'd seen the Irukanji > in large numbers off Noosa? :-) :-) > > metta, > Chris Ok...I won't discuss the universal metta now as I'm out of time, but I'd like you to know that the Irukanji reference has been noted...hmmmm:-( :-( According to a short note in our Sunday papers here (for the none-too-wise on this subject), two tourists "have been killed by jellyfish while swimming in NE australian waters..." It seems the Irukanji are highly venomous and very hard to spot as they are only the size of a thumbnail, but with long stinging tentacles. "The Irukandji may habe been responsible for numerous unexplained fatalities, or supposed heart attacks, at sea." Chris, remember when you're sitting snuggly with your hot choc that you're also on lifeguard rescue call. Hope it's not called for. I suppose we could always consider visiting Frank in Hawaii with all the Ss and hopefully no Irukanji...Hmm... As I was saying about present moment realities and proliferations.... Sarah p.s Frank - best wishes in your new spot of dukkha and hope you keep grinning;-) ========= 13013 From: goglerr Date: Tue Apr 30, 2002 1:58am Subject: Re: [dsg] re:anicca (do concepts arise and fall?) Hi Larry, --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., LBIDD@w... wrote: Hi Goglerr, L:I've decided the most soothing way for my brain to understand concepts is if something is impermanent it is a reality (possibly an erroneous one). If it is not impermanent, it is as concept. G: In my opinion, I would say it in this manner. If it is a concept, it does no have an intrinsic nature (sabhava lakkhana), and without intrinsic nature it's beyond impermanent, unsatisfactorines and non- self. Little addition, Nibbana is still reality, because it has some intrinsic nature but it is beyond the three universal characteristics. L:So mathematics is a concept, but solving a mathematic problem is a reality. G:You're right, the changing mind which is 'working and thinking' trying to solve the problem is reality. But this mind is a very discursive and too 'energetic', they cloud the realities of the mind. The true nature of the mind cannot be seen b'cos it's too 'unstable'. That what happen to us almost every moment of the waking hours where the mind 'wants' to be filled with all kinds of concept. L:Also kings, and even governments, are realities. However, it would be very difficult to be mindful of a government. What do you think? G: On the contrary, kings and goverments are not realities. How could that be? King is a human (concept) but a human is made up of mind and materiality, other words is 5 Aggregates (realities). G: When we see (or hear or read) a 'king', conceptualization takes place. It gives a notion of a 'form' (of a human), aided by memory and perception, mental factor of sanna. This sanna which are already conditioned countless of time since we are born, perceives that form as a 'human' (or a king). Without understanding of the ultimate realities, we are actually dwelling in the world of concepts. G: Of course, in the everyday usage, or in conventional usage, we use these concepts for the sake of communication. It is perfectly OK, nothing wrong with that. The important point is that we should not grasp on these concepts. G: The differentiation between concepts and realities can be achived by vipassana. When we know what is real and what is not-so-real, then letting go will start to take place. Larry Best wishes, goglerr 13014 From: Date: Tue Apr 30, 2002 2:24am Subject: Re: [dsg] satipatthana/Kom Hi, Kom (and Larry) - In a message dated 4/30/02 1:03:57 AM Eastern Daylight Time, kom@a... writes: > Let me summarize some points about realities and concepts: > > 1) Realities are directly known, without additional > thinking. A baby doesn't know what a table is, but the baby > can as well see what appears through the eye-door. Table > requires thinking. Visible objects appear directly. > --------------------------------------------------------- Howard: Mmm, maybe so. A baby also doesn't know what brown-wood-color is either, but sees it directly through the eye door. Brown-wood-color, at the sa~n~na level, requires thinking (or, better, mind involvement), though the visible object per se appears directly, without mental involvement. So, there is concept involved with a level of apprehension, the sa~n~na level, even of elementary experiences such as brown-wood-color, just as there is concept involved at the sa~n~na level of compounded experiences such as that of a table. The difference, it seems to me, is that the experience of a table is fabricated by mental functions from more elementary experiences, and involves not only the more elementary experienced objects, but also relations among them. It would seem that concepts of such alleged entities as tables are the standard means that humans have for apprehending patterns and relations. These concepts are powerful mental constructs with much genuine knowledge built in. They have "predictive capacity", to coin a term. By recognizing a pattern of direct experiences as a single "thing" called a table, we can, generally correctly, predict, for example, that carrying out the action we call "touching the table" will result in a feel of hardness. A baby, without that concept, likely would not make such prediction. The problem with concepts is that they are concepts of unitary "things", with separate own-being and identity, whereas the insight of an arahant is superior, giving knowledge and also being free of such reificational error. ----------------------------------------------------------------- > > 2) Realities have its own characteristics (visesa lakkhana) > (including the ti-lakkhana). Concepts don't (again, > controversial, at least in this group!). When realities > appear through the mind door, it is quite different when > concepts appear through the mind door. > ------------------------------------------------------- Howard: By concepts here, I presume what you are talking about is not concepts-as-ideas, such as the generic idea of 'table', but rather observed instances of such ideas, such as the table I see right now as I look into my living room. Now, in what sense does that table have no characteristics? It is brown, circular with scalloped edge, three-footed, about 3' 6" tall, and about 2' in diameter. It is also true that that table very gradually ages, becomes duller in color, etc, etc. So, it has characteristics, including the tilakkhana. A big difference that I see between that alleged table and the paramattha dhammas from which it is mentally constructed is that the paramattha dhammas are "internal" experiences of hardness, colors, etc, whereas the "table" is mentally projected as being "out there", a seemingly real, unitary "thing" outside of and independent of being discerned. So there is a greater degree of ignorance involved in our apprehension of such a thing as a table. ----------------------------------------------------------- > > 3) For most suttas that are apparently about Satipatthana, > the Buddha only mention realities (the 5 kandhas). When we > compare something that doesn't directly relate to realities, > like freedom, this may be easy to see. > > =========================== 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) 13015 From: Date: Tue Apr 30, 2002 6:43am Subject: RE: [dsg] satipatthana/Kom Hi Kom, I see what we are talking about now. I was confusing sati with manasikara (attention). I agree it is not a rule; sati cannot have concept for an object. However, isn't it also true sati cannot have any akusala citta for an object? Also, except for impermanence, what is the difference between kusala citta and nibbana? have a nice day, Larry 13016 From: wynn Date: Tue Apr 30, 2002 7:58am Subject: Iddhi Hi, Sorry to interupt. Also, I am not sure this is the right place to ask these questions. Before answering my questions, please take note that I am aware that supranormal power is NOT a pre-requisite for enlightenment and it is not necessary to have it all. I am just being curious after readings several passages about it in several books. First Question. Are the KASINA MEDITATION mentioned in the Tipitaka? Second Question Visudhimagga do teaches how to develop supranormal powers. (see Visudhimagga Chapter XII & Chapter V, verse 27 onwards) But does the Tipitaka tell us how? I have never come across it. The nearest is this: ".......And what is the miracle of psychic power? There is the case where a monk wields manifold psychic powers. Having been one he becomes many; having been many he becomes one. He appears. He vanishes. He goes unimpeded through walls, ramparts, and mountains as if through space. He dives in and out of the earth as if it were water. He walks on water without sinking as if it were dry land. Sitting cross-legged he flies through the air like a winged bird. With his hand he touches and strokes even the sun and moon, so mighty and powerful. He exercises influence with his body even as far as the Brahma worlds........." (Kevatta Sutta etc.) Third Question I understand that to have the supernormal power, one must have mastery over the 4 jhanas, right? But, the Visudhimagga said we must have mastery of all the 8 jhanas. But if this is true, does that mean that those who have supranormal powers have mastery of all the 8 jhanas? How do you explain the levitation perform by the yogis of TM (Transcendental Meditation) Regards, Wynn 13017 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Tue Apr 30, 2002 8:38am Subject: RE: [dsg] satipatthana/Kom Dear Larry, > -----Original Message----- > From: LBIDD@w... [mailto:LBIDD@w...] > Sent: Tuesday, April 30, 2002 6:43 AM > To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com > Subject: RE: [dsg] satipatthana/Kom > > > Hi Kom, I see what we are talking about now. I > was confusing sati with > manasikara (attention). I agree it is not a > rule; sati cannot have > concept for an object. However, isn't it also > true sati cannot have any > akusala citta for an object? For satipatthana, any reality can be its object, including akusala citta. Otherwise, we can't tell the difference between kusala and akusala cittas. For non-satipatthana, concepts can be an object of sati. When we have metta, karuna, mudita, or upekkha toward other people, the object is a person or an animal, which is concept (thinking that the visible we see is a person, or a sound we hear belongs to a person, etc.). > Also, except for > impermanence, what is the > difference between kusala citta and nibbana? > 1) Nibbana is an unconditioned reality. Its characteristics doesn't depend on other realties. 2) Nibbana has neither impermanence nor dukkha as its characteristics. When we say something is conditioned, it means a variety of factors bring something else into existence, although very briefly. For example, we may feel compassionate toward other people when they are suffering. Seeing and hearing, along with our accumulations, condition the thinking about the person in a compassionate way. When we see something unfolding in our daily life, and we think of how the dhamma applies to the situation, having listened to the dhamma, our accumulations, and seeing or hearing (etc.) condition the consideration. When we are aware of the characteristic of a reality, having listened to the dhamma and considered the dhamma, firm memory of the teaching, and seeing/hearing (etc.) condition the rising of awareness. There is no self that does, no single factor that brings about. When conditions are ripe, the result of those conditions occurs. Even right now, can we force ourself to understand what other people are saying? Can we force ourself to have kusala or akusala? I am hearing a voice outside my condo, I feel slight anger because I dislike loud noises. Hearing conditions unwise reflection which conditions akusala states. This is despite the knowledge that akusala is not good, and the fact that we are dicussing dhammas! Nibbana has no such property. Nothing conditions nibbana, although nibbana can be an object of the citta. Because nibbana is unconditioned, it also doesn't fall away. This is why nibbana is the supreme reality (bliss?). No other dhamma can be truely relied on, because they all fall away (including jhana, panna, kusala, etc.), but nibbana can be truly relied on. Nina has explain that when we say we take refuge in the Buddha, the Dhamma, and the Sangha, the dhamma here ultimately means nibbana, for it is an unconditioned reality. kom 13018 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Tue Apr 30, 2002 8:59am Subject: RE: [dsg] satipatthana/Kom Dear Howard, > -----Original Message----- > From: upasaka@a... [mailto:upasaka@a...] > > 1) Realities are directly known, without additional > > thinking. A baby doesn't know what a table is, > but the baby > > can as well see what appears through the > eye-door. Table > > requires thinking. Visible objects appear directly. > > > --------------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > Mmm, maybe so. A baby also doesn't know > what brown-wood-color is > either, but sees it directly through the eye > door. Brown-wood-color, at the > sa~n~na level, requires thinking (or, better, > mind involvement), though the > visible object per se appears directly, without > mental involvement. So, there > is concept involved with a level of apprehension, > the sa~n~na level, even of > elementary experiences such as brown-wood-color, > just as there is concept > involved at the sa~n~na level of compounded > experiences such as that of a > table. Thank you for the additional details adding depth to the discussions. The example of a table, and baby not cognizing table, and that we do are usually an effective example to explain the high-level differences between concepts and realities. The abhidhamma gives further explanation that even if the baby doesn't cognize the concept of a table (being a place to put things on, having 4 legs, being hard, called a table, etc.). By cognizing shape and form (this I have seen in the past, it is different from other shapes, it is located in such and such places, etc.), the baby is already cognizing a concept. When a visible object appears to the mind door, it also appears to the mind door that immediately follows afterward. After the repetition of the visible objects, elementary concepts form even without the knowledge of utility or a language. Animals also have concepts of things and selves. A full-grown human has more elaborate concepts (that more often mislead them) about a table because of the knowledge of utilities, language, etc. We mistake the concept as being real, identifying the concept with what just appeared through the eyedoor, and meanwhile missing all the sign of impermanence, dukkha, and non-self. > The difference, it seems to me, is that > the experience of a table is > fabricated by mental functions from more > elementary experiences, and involves > not only the more elementary experienced objects, > but also relations among > them. It would seem that concepts of such alleged > entities as tables are the > standard means that humans have for apprehending > patterns and relations. Agreeing with you so far. > These concepts are powerful mental constructs > with much genuine knowledge > built in. They have "predictive capacity", to > coin a term. By recognizing a > pattern of direct experiences as a single "thing" > called a table, we can, > generally correctly, predict, for example, that > carrying out the action we > call "touching the table" will result in a feel > of hardness. Yes, conventionally, this is a very useful knowledge. The problem is we take these tables as being what they are not: tables, without knowing that is a construct of realities (and beyond), and miss all the useful (dhammic) signs of visible objects as realities. > A baby, without > that concept, likely would not make such > prediction. The problem with > concepts is that they are concepts of unitary > "things", with separate > own-being and identity, whereas the insight of an > arahant is superior, giving > knowledge and also being free of such reificational error. I think we do agree quite a bit here, Howard. This conditions much joy and lobha. kom 13019 From: Date: Tue Apr 30, 2002 0:34pm Subject: RE: [dsg] satipatthana/Kom Hi Kom, How about this. Sati arises with all kusala cittas. Sati cetasika cannot arise with an akusala citta. However, a kusala consciousness stream practicing satipatthana can cognize an akusala consciousness which interrupts the satipatthana. This is called mindfulness of mind (cittanupassana-satipatthanam). This citta of cittanupassana which interrupts the satipatthana can be cognizing anything, even concepts as in discursive thinking. Also, I think panna must be present in satipatthana but not necessarily arise with all kusala cittas. Sati by itself is just presence of mind; panna brings the understanding. back to you, Larry 13020 From: Date: Tue Apr 30, 2002 0:51pm Subject: Re: [dsg] re:anicca (do concepts arise and fall?) Hi Goglerr, I don't know if it does much good to distinguish between concept and reality since they both can be the object of lobha-dosa-moha. Conceit (mana) and personality belief (sakkaya-ditthi) are realities, not concepts; how can that be? The main difference I see is that we can see the arising and dissolution of paramattha dhammas, but we can also see the arising and dissolution of a cookie. What about that??? Larry 13021 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Tue Apr 30, 2002 1:42pm Subject: RE: [dsg] satipatthana/Kom Dear Larry, > -----Original Message----- > From: LBIDD@w... [mailto:LBIDD@w...] > > > Hi Kom, > How about this. Sati arises with all kusala cittas. Sati cetasika cannot Sati also rises with sobhana vipaka and kiriya cittas. > arise with an akusala citta. However, a kusala consciousness stream Yes. > practicing satipatthana can cognize an akusala consciousness which > interrupts the satipatthana. This is called mindfulness of mind > (cittanupassana-satipatthanam). Yes, when there is satipatthana cognizing the citta as akusala (and as dhamma, not-self), this is called cittanupassana-satipatthanam. > This citta of cittanupassana which > interrupts the satipatthana can be cognizing anything, even concepts as > in discursive thinking. Yes. > > Also, I think panna must be present in satipatthana but not necessarily > arise with all kusala cittas. Yes. Panna is a necessary component in satipatthana, but panna doesn't rise with all kusala cittas (because we can give dana without any wisdom associated with it). In fact, not all panna is at the satipatthana level. There must be also panna in tranquil meditation, but it is panna that knows the differences between kusala and akusala states, and what brings about the kusala and akusala states. This is not panna at the satipatthana level, which requires the teaching of anattaness by a sammasam-Buddha (except for all the buddhas, of course!). > Sati by itself is just presence of mind; > panna brings the understanding. Yes. One thing that I notice is that you word it that Satipatthana is interrupted. In a person who just begins to develop satipatthana, it is more like satipatthana interrupting the stream of akusala, and not otherwise. kom 13022 From: Lucy Date: Tue Apr 30, 2002 3:20pm Subject: Re: [dsg] ADL ch. 5 (1-7) Hi Larry You didn't mess it up. I've seen it as sympathetic joy too --- somehow, I think one has to like people at least a little to be able to develop mudita. Perhaps that's why it comes after metta and karuna. Reading the description of metta practice in the Vismg., it seems like hardly anyone I know qualifies as an object to start with (apart from myself!!!) - can't be a teacher or a close friend or someone from the opposite sex or a sick or dead person or ... so, to be on the safe side, I started by cultivating metta on animals : ) Lucy ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Tuesday, April 30, 2002 2:03 AM Subject: Re: [dsg] ADL ch. 5 (1-7) > Hi Lucy, I messed up the definition of mudita. It's appreciative joy, > not sympathetic joy. My mindfulness is operating on a three hour delay > and it didn't occur to me until the middle of the night. > > What I find interesting about mudita is that it seems to open the door > to liking people (and things). That's different! > > Larry 13023 From: Date: Tue Apr 30, 2002 4:06pm Subject: RE: [dsg] satipatthana/Kom Thanks Kom,I didn't know that panna at the satipatthana level includes recognition of anatta. Good to know. I have a much better appreciation of sati now. Thanks Larry 13024 From: Date: Tue Apr 30, 2002 4:19pm Subject: Re: [dsg] ADL ch. 5 (1-7) Hi Lucy, regarding the develoment of metta, there's always regarding all beings as your mother from a previous life. I did that for a while but got some very funny looks. Larry 13025 From: Robert Epstein Date: Tue Apr 30, 2002 7:15pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Samatha bhavana - Rob Ep --- Sarah wrote: > Dear Rob Ep, > > --- Robert Epstein wrote: > Dear Jon, > > Well I may have ruined our agreement with my latest rant, but do me a > > favor and > > pick out the points worth addressing in that thing. I am running away > > from it, as > > one would if discovering that they had given birth to an elephant. > > I have no idea about your agreement with Jon (hope you know about > agreements with lawyers;-)), but I appreciate your 'rant' with your > carefully considered comments and sincere expressions of your > understanding of dhamma to date. I'm glad you share them with us all and > don't worry about giving birth to elephants (as long as they're not white > elephants);-) > > I'm also enjoying your discussion with Sukin and I think it's very useful > and practical. Thanks to you both. > > No need to run...(leave it to Num), > > Sarah > ===== > thanks, Sarah, very much for your reassurance. sometimes I frighten myself a bit when I read my own posts. now let's see if Jon is equally forgiving of my baby elephant. : ) best, Robert 13026 From: Robert Epstein Date: Tue Apr 30, 2002 7:18pm Subject: Re: [dsg] re:anicca (do concepts arise and fall?) this is very interesting. thanks! robert ep. --- goglerr wrote: > Hi Robert, Howard and all, > > Knock! Knock! I would like to barge in for a moment, if u don't > mind? > > The discussion on `concept' caught my eye. I have checked out a few > things from some books to add in, just to make the discussion more > interesting (or perhaps more confusing!). smile > > We understand that the 4 ultimate realities (paramattha dhamma) are > consisting of materiality, consciousness, mental factors and Nibbana. > And the `nature' of concepts (which are `natureless') are explained > from the by the excellent attachment posted by Robert > entitled`Philosophical Cornerstone of the ABHIDHAMMA' by Y. > Karunadasa, The Wheel Publication No. 412/413. > > Pa~n~nati (translated as concepts, idea or notion) are divided into > two categories. > > A. Concept which is made known (pa~n~napiyatiti) > It makes or fabricates a meaning for the mind. For e.g. the notion > of `a piece of machine with lighted screen which you're starring at', > therefore that `notion' begins to fabricate a meaning for the mind. > In other word a notion is born. This concept is also known as attha > pa~n~nati (concept-as-meanings or meaning-concept) > > B. Concepts which makes known (pa~n~napetiti) > It means labeling the notion with a name or a designation. For e.g. > the above notion `a piece of machine with lighted screen which > you're starring at', is mentally labeled as `monitor'. This > concepts is also known as nama pa~n~nati (concept-as-name or name- > concept). So the notion (attha pannati) is designated as `monitor' > (nama pannati). Then, this mental labeling is translated into > speech/words (sadda pannati), that means we actually say it out or > write it down. Just like what I understand (attha pannati) right now, > I put in down in words (nama/sadda pannati). Also we can translate > the notion into action like hand-sign. > > Let's go back to Atthapannathi. There are 6 classes of concept-as- > meaning. > > 1) Formal concepts (santhana pannati) > They correspond to form or configuration of things or the continuity > of things. They correspond to the 2-dimensional and 3-dimensional > world. For e.g. land, mountains, rivers etc. > > 2) Collective concept (samuha pannati) > They correspond to a collective or group of things. For e.g. house, > car, computer, man, woman, a being (satta pannati) etc. > > 3) Directional concepts (disa pannati) > They correspond to a locality or direction, the relationship from one > thing to another. For e.g. east, west, there, up, down, upward, > right, left etc. > > 4) Time concepts (kala pannati) > They correspond to periods or unit of time. They also built upon > recurrent and continuous flow of material and mental phenomena. For > e.g. morning, noon, week, months etc. In material sense, they involve > light and darkness (as in day or night). In mental sense, they > involve mental activities such as sleeping time, lunch time, working > time etc. (There is a book `Abhidhamma Studies: Buddhist > exploration of consciousness and time' by Nyanaponika Thera give wide > coverage on the idea of time from the Buddhist perspective). > > 5) Space concepts (akasa pannati) > They correspond to open spaces or to spatial regions void of > perceptible matter. For e.g. well, cave, hall, window etc. > > 6) Sign concepts (nimitta pannati) > They correspond to visualized images such the learner's sign and > mirror image of tranquility meditation (such as color kasina). Many > hallucination and imageries also come this category. > > Now we go to nama pannati (concept-as-name). They are also 6 ways of > labeling. > > 1) A (direct) concept of what is real. (vijjamana pannati) > Materiality, feelings, consciousness, greed, anger, mental factors, > Nibbana etc. really exist in ultimate sense, which can be directly > experienccs without conceptualisation. The concepts that designate > them (as in words) are called direct concepts of what is real. A > direct experience of the continous arising and ceasing of a real > phenomena (for e.g a painful feeling) is ultimate reality and terming > them as `impermanent' is a direct concept (of that painful feeling). > We have to convey the `activity' of a real phenomena to somebody, > therefore we have to the term `impermanent'. > > 2) A (direct) concept of what is unreal. (avijjamana pannati) > Land, river, hill, person, man, woman, etc. are not ultimate > realities but conventional entities established conceptually through > mental construction. Though these concepts are based on ultimate > realities, the meanings they convey are not things that are > themselves ultimate realities since they do not correspond to things > that exist of their own intrinsic nature (sabhavato). > > 3) A concept of the unreal by means of the real (vijjamanena > avijjamana pannati) > The following no. 3, 4, 5 and 6 will be a combination of no 1 and 2. > E.g. the meditator (person) is mindful. The `meditator' is not real > but `mindful' (with mindfulness) is something real. > > 4) A concept of the real by means of the unreal. (avijjamanena > vijjamana pannati) > E.g. the voice of a man. The `voice' is real but the 'man' is not > real. > > 5) A concept of real by means of real (vijjamanena vijjamana pannati) > E.g. the consciousness of greed. The `consciousness' and 'greed' are > real. > > 6) A concept of unreal by means of unreal (avijjamanena vijjamana > pannati) > E.g. Today is my birthday. `Today', `my', and 'birthday' are not real > ultimately. > > There is also another 6 ways of description of concepts but they are > actually a mixture of both type of concepts (attha and nama pannati) > which are presented above. > > So we may see from here how concepts are formed and conveyed to each > other. The world of concepts, without a doubt, still important in our > everyday life as we need to communicate with each other. We also need > to remind ourselves not to be too engrossed with them. Instead, we > need to look for the world of realities where the end of suffering > lies. > > There are some references for `concepts'. Visuddhimagga (trans by > Nanamoli, VII, footnote 18), Comprehensive manual of Abhidhamma > (trans by B. Bodhi, VIII, pg 325-328), The psychology & philosophy of > Buddhism (by Jayasuriya), Compendium of Philosophy (PTS, 1979 > Anuruddha), Essentials of Insight Meditation (Sujiva) > > Ok. That all for now. > > Goglerr > > > --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Robert Epstein wrote: > > > > --- upasaka@a... wrote: > > > Hi, Robert - > > > > > > In a message dated 4/26/02 3:11:29 AM Eastern Daylight Time, > > > robertkirkpatrick@r... writes: 13027 From: Robert Epstein Date: Tue Apr 30, 2002 7:31pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Supportive spiritual practices (was, what is extreme? ...) Dear Jon, For me personally, I tend to judge practices by their effects rather than by their designation. I tend to see Buddhist thought as the clearest expression of the true human condition, but do see other philosophies as having a place on the continuum of the spiritual life of our species. As regards yoga, I think that it has positive effects, and that it is a practice that can create conditions for the development of peacefulness, concentration, perceptual clarity, the ability to observe thoughts and calm emotions. While I appreciate the possibility you have mentioned several times that such practices can give 'false readings' through suppressing akusala without eradicating it, or create pleasant feelings with attachment that are not really kusala but seem to be [see, I do pay attention at times], I think the overall effect of yoga is positive. To me, the overall state of the body and mind, including the condition of the nervous system, and the psychic energy channels which correspond to what an acupuncurist would talk about, all have an influence on how capable someone is to view realities clearly as they arise, and distinguish thought from object, concept from thought, etc., all the things that denote mindfulness and the development of wisdom. I do not think that yoga by itself can take a person to an understanding of anatta and anicca, but I do think that yoga has a lot to teach about the changing nature of phenomena, control, dissatisfaction, all of which are confronted every time someone works through a pose. In other words, I think it is a positive conditioning agent and a powerful aid on the path. Like any corrolary medicine, it can take one in the wrong direction if used incorrectly. When the friend/teacher I mentioned did his Vipassana retreats, he was used to doing a little yoga inbetween sittings. This was generally discouraged at the retreat center, but they decided in his case to approve it, because the way that he used the yoga was to deal with his body in a way that promoted discernment. He had some medical conditions that the yoga handled to some extent. Anyway, if one has Buddhist principles and path in mind, and uses yoga as a corrolary agent, I think its preparation of the body and mind can be very helpful. Best, Robert Ep. ========================== --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > Rob E > > I note your impassioned (and articulate) arguments in favour of 'supportive > spiritual practices' from outside the teachings (for example, yoga) in the > development of the understanding that is the heart of the teachings. > > Just to clarify where you stand on this issue, would you say that the view > that, 'There is no connection between the practice of yoga and the development > of insight' is in accordance with, or is contrary to, the teachings as you > understand them. > > I ask this not to be picky or anything like that, but to draw out a point ;-). > > Jon > > --- Robert Epstein wrote: > hi. > > I am one of those strange people who think that supportive spiritual > > practices do > > increase one's spiritual state. That is one of the reasons I keep arguing in > > favor of meditation, and I would also argue in favor of yoga. To me, the > > path > > involves understanding Dhamma, everyday discernment and skillful practices > > that > > increase one's Right Energy, Right View, etc. When the mind is cleared of > > obscuring concepts in meditation, or the body made more relaxed and the > > nerves > > cleared out through yoga, to me these create conducive conditions for > > understanding and insight. > > > > I have never been able to put the Dhamma in a box where there is one right > > interpretation and one right practice. Has my knowledge of Hindu Advaita > > Vedanta > > or Zen or Tibetan Dzogchen been inconsequential to my understanding of > > Dhamma? To > > me, having a cross-reference of enlightened knowledge is a great asset which > > serves as an underlying commentary to rightly understand teachings. > > > > The fact that the 'modern' father of Yoga, Patanjali, wrote of an Eight-fold > > Path > > [Ashtanga], does not seem totally coincidental to me with the Buddha's Noble > > Eightfold Path. One who has a sense of history will see that there are often > > more > > than coincidences in these sorts of synchronies. Sometimes they mean > > something, > > sometimes they don't. But I don't personally find it helpful to see > > Theravadan > > Buddhism, or Abhidhamma in particular, or whatever one adopts as one's main > > approach to Realization, as an isolated study, an island in the middle of a > > sea of > > inconsequential things that are all thoroughly 'other'. I personally like a > > synergistic approach, as I believe that there is a dialectic in the history > > of > > thought, philosophy and even enlightenment, which comes up in different forms > > throughout history. > > > > The idea that there is a fixed 'Buddhism' which is the only right one, and > > that it > > is not developed but either found as a whole or lost as a static whole, does > > not > > seem right to me. Rather, it seems to me that the principles of Buddhism are > > the > > core that doesn't change, but that the outer form does change, and not only > > changed after the Buddha's parinibbana, but even during the Buddha's > > lifetime, as > > he spoke to different groups, and to my mind, probably became more skillful > > and > > precise at expressing the Dhamma throughout his long career. To see the > > Buddha as > > a static entity who was 'perfect' and thus fixed in stone from the moment of > > his > > Enlightenment, to me also turns the Buddha into a Godhead, and takes away the > > practical skillful development which he himself always praised, and which all > > Buddhist teachers have partaken of throughout their careers. > > > > So for me, the ultimate state of Realization may be a very definite > > experience and > > may not be variable, the principles of Buddhism may be unique, particularly > > Buddha's teaching of Anatta, but the evolution of Buddhism and many of its > > elements are not only shared by various forms of Buddhist practice, but even > > have > > elements in common with other traditions, and which may shed light on the > > true > > nature of the Dhamma. > > > > I know this is not a popular standpoint, but I thought I would take the > > occasion > > to speak my mind. Of course I will go back to the Dhamma, and attempt to be > > in > > the presence of its true meaning, but I will not erase my sense that the > > world is > > in a state of spiritual evolution, and that it is something that all of us > > share > > in various forms. > > > > If Frank *had* meant that his yoga had an influence on his spiritual opening > > or > > understanding of Buddhism, I personally would accept it as a good and > > worthwhile > > possibility. I don't want to be dogmatic about Buddhism, and assume that > > anything > > that isn't expressly from the official version of Buddhism as we imperfectly > > understand it at this time, is the only area from which to draw valuable > > experiences along the path. > > > > Take Care, > > Robert Ep. 13028 From: Date: Tue Apr 30, 2002 8:23pm Subject: ADL ch. 6 (7-17) from: http://www.budsas.org/ebud/nina-abhidhamma/nina-abhi-00.htm Abhidhamma In Daily Life chapter 6, paragraphs 7-17 7. Dosa is conditioned by lobha: we do not want to lose what is dear to us and when this actually happens we are sad. Sadness is dosa, it is akusala. If we do not know things as they are, we believe that people and things last. However, people and things are only phenomena which arise and fall away immediately. The next moment they have changed already. If we can see things as they are we will be less overwhelmed by sadness. It makes no sense to be sad about what has happened already. 8. In the 'Psalms of the Sisters' (Therigatha, 33) we read that the king's wife Ubbiri mourned the loss of her daughter Jiva. Every day she went to the cemetery. She met the Buddha who told her that in that cemetery about eighty-four thousand of her daughters (in past lives) had been burnt. 9.The Buddha said to her: 'O, Ubbiri, who wails in the wood Crying, O Jiva! O my daughter dear! Come to yourself! See, in this burying-ground Are burnt full many a thousand daughters dear, And all of them were named like unto her. Now which of all those Jivas do you mourn?' 10. After Ubbiri pondered over the Dhamma thus taught by the Buddha she developed insight and saw things as they really are; she even attained arahatship. 11. There are other akusala cetasikas which can arise with cittas rooted in dosa. Regret or worry, in Pali: kukkucca, is an akusala cetasika which arises with dosa-mula-citta at the moment we regret something bad we did or something good we did not do. When there is regret we are thinking of the past instead of knowing the present moment. When we have done something wrong it is of no use having aversion. 12. Envy (issa) is another cetasika which can arise with dosa-mula-citta. There is envy when we do not like someone else to enjoy pleasant things. At that moment the citta does not like the object it experiences. We should find out how often envy arises, even when it is more subtle. This is a way to know whether we really care for someone else or whether we only think of ourselves when we associate with others. 13. Stinginess (macchariya) is another akusala cetasika which may arise with dosa-mula-citta. When we are stingy there is dosa as well. At that moment we do not like someone else to share in our good fortune. 14. Dosa always arises with an unpleasant feeling (domanassa vedana). Most people do not like to have dosa because they do not like to have an unpleasant feeling. As we develop more understanding of realities we want to eradicate dosa not so much because we dislike unpleasant feeling but rather because we realize the adverse effects of akusala. 15. The doorways through which dosa can arise are the five sense-doors and the mind-door. It can arise when we see ugly sights, hear harsh sounds, smell unpleasant odours, taste unappetizing food, receive painful bodily impressions and think of disagreeable things. Whenever there is a feeling of uneasiness, no matter how slight, it is a sign that there is dosa. Dosa may often arise when there are unpleasant impressions through the senses, for example, when the temperature is too hot or too cold. Whenever there is a slightly unpleasant bodily sensation dosa may arise, be it only of a lesser degree. 16. Dosa arises when there are conditions for it. It arises so long as there is still attachment to the objects which can be experienced through the five senses. Everybody would like to experience only pleasant things and when we do not have them any more, dosa can arise. 17. Another condition for dosa is ignorance of Dhamma. If we are ignorant of kamma and vipaka, cause and result., dosa may arise very easily on account of an unpleasant experience through one of the senses and thus dosa is accumulated time and again. An unpleasant experience through one of the senses is akusala vipaka caused by an unwholesome deed we perforrned. When we, for example, hear unpleasant words from someone else we may be angry with that person. Those who have studied Dhamma know that hearing something unpleasant is akusala vipaka which is not caused by someone else but by an unwholesome deed we performed ourselves. A moment of vipaka falls away immediately, it does not stay. Are we not inclined to keep on thinking about an unpleasant experience? If there is more awareness of the present moment one will be less inclined to think with aversion about one's akusala vipaka. 13029 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Tue Apr 30, 2002 10:32pm Subject: RE: [dsg] satipatthana/Kom Dear Larry, > -----Original Message----- > From: LBIDD@w... [mailto:LBIDD@w...] > > Thanks Kom,I didn't know that panna at the > satipatthana level includes > recognition of anatta. Good to know. I have a > much better appreciation > of sati now. Thanks Regarding cognition of anattaness, it is said that the first time that the anattaness truely appears is when the distinction between nama and rupa (nama-rupa-paricheta-nana) appears. This is when it is (temporarily) clear that there is only nama and rupa, and that there is no self. This is also when it is clear that conditioned realities come into existence because of conditions, and not a self that wills it. kom 13030 From: wangchuk37 Date: Tue Apr 30, 2002 11:10pm Subject: buddhist bibliography May update the May update to the Buddhist bibliography is now online at : http://www.cyberdistributeur.com/buddbib.html enjoy your reading ! 13031 From: Buddhist Environmental Network Date: Wed May 1, 2002 1:17am Subject: Buddhist Enironmental Network This month (May 2002) sees the launch of the Buddhist Enironmental Network (BEN). We need subscribers (it's free!) and also volunteers. If you simply want to be kept informed of progress and our campaigns, please reply, inserting the word "News" in the subject field. We aim to be an active, fully engaged network and are keen to recruit volunteers to help in BEN's development or to be more actively involved in campaigning work. If you think you could help then please reply to this email substituting the word "Help" in the subject field. (You will also automatically receive our update and campaign mailings.) In addition to working through email, we hope to set up local groups where members can meet and network on environmental issues. Below you will find more information in the form of BEN's Mission Statement MISSION STATEMENT The Buddhist Environmental Network (B-E-N) works with Buddhists from all traditions to create environmental solutions that are rooted deeply within the Buddhist Precepts and the acknowledgement of the interdependence of all life. Through public education, publications, practice groups and outreach, B-E-N seeks to link Buddhist teachings of compassion, wisdom, tolerance and non-violence with efforts and campaigns to create a sustainable environment together with a culture of reduced consumption and waste, serving as a catalyst for socially engaged Buddhism." With apologies for any cross-postings. David Meanwell - BEN 13032 From: christine_forsyth Date: Wed May 1, 2002 2:41am Subject: A question on enlightenment Dear All, While reading Summary of Paramattha Dhammas, I came across a passage that raised some questions. http://www.dhammastudy.com/paramat.html In SPD Part 1, it is said about the Buddha, " Enlightenment rendered him without defilement, and he manifested the Dhamma so that those who practice accordingly would also eradicate their defilements. Therefore Buddhists should study and examine to know the Dhamma, the truth with which the Buddha became enlightened, and how the latter differs from the truth as we imagine or believe it to be." Would it be possible for a person to think they were following 'right teachings of the Dhamma' and have various experiences they thought were 'right' mindfullness, 'right concentration' and 'right jhana' right up to an experience they felt was 'right' Nibbana - but all the time it was not 'right' but 'wrong' teachings of the Dhamma, 'wrong' mindfullness, 'wrong' concentration, 'wrong' jhana and even (is it possible) to experience 'wrong' nibbana? ....and, if so, how would they ever know? Feelings of peace and delight, and an inner certainty could deceive a person couldn't they? metta, Christine 13033 From: Sarah Date: Wed May 1, 2002 4:44am Subject: Re: [dsg] A question on enlightenment Dear Christine, --- christine_forsyth wrote: > > Would it be possible for a person to think they were following 'right > teachings of the Dhamma' and have various experiences they thought > were 'right' mindfullness, 'right concentration' and 'right jhana' > right up to an experience they felt was 'right' Nibbana - but all the > time it was not 'right' but 'wrong' teachings of the Dhamma, 'wrong' > mindfullness, 'wrong' concentration, 'wrong' jhana and even (is it > possible) to experience 'wrong' nibbana? .... ..... Yes. It's called wrong view which always thinks wrong is right. The Tipitaka is full of references. ..... >and, if so, how would > they ever know? ..... Only panna (wisdom) can know, which is why it is so essential. ..... >Feelings of peace and delight, and an inner certainty > could deceive a person couldn't they? ..... Certainly. Lobha (attachment), mana (conceit), ditthi.(wrong view)..... Sarah ======= 13034 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Wed May 1, 2002 5:36am Subject: Re: [dsg] Samatha bhavana - Rob Ep Rob E --- Robert Epstein wrote: > Dear Jon, > Well I may have ruined our agreement with my latest rant, but do me a favor and > pick out the points worth addressing in that thing. I am running away from it, as > one would if discovering that they had given birth to an elephant. Well, there was no agreement that said you couldn't have a rant -- feel free any time! I'll certainly get back to you on that post. In the meantime, I hope you don’t mind me picking up on the non-rant side of our discussion ;-)). You said: > > > … being present to the reality of the moment to the greatest extent > > > possible is … something that can be done at any time > > > and which is surely the correct practice in daily life. I'm sure this wasn’t just a throw-away remark on your part, Rob, and I believe it's well worth following up. Regardless of one's view of the relevance or importance of samatha to the development of the path, the fact is that for most if not all of the day we are in a situation other than a 'samatha practice' situation. What is the 'correct practice in daily life' at those times? I believe your characterisation of 'being present to the reality of the moment' is fine, assuming of course that reality here means the same as in the suttas. In the suttas, the emphasis is on the reality of the moment being something quite different from how it appears to us, namely as being the 5 khandhas, the six sets of six, the 'all' etc. In the Satipatthana Sutta, it is given a 4-fold classification. But it comes down to the same dhammas that make up the world as we know it. I would be interested to know whether you draw on these sutta descriptions in your use of the term 'reality of the moment'. Jon PS I would still like to hear your comments on my own attempt at your 'being present to the reality of the moment'. Do you see any major differences here? "> > ………. the crux of the development of > > insight is the knowing of the true nature of the realities of the present > > moment, and that this includes any reality of any present moment, regardless of > > the nature of the reality (nama or rupa, wholesome or unwholesome, internal or > > external), on the basis that all realties are taken as being permanent, > > satisfactory and self (in one of the 3 aspects), yet in reality are not so?" > --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > > Rob E > > > > I particularly liked your remarks that: > > > … being present to the reality of the moment to the greatest extent > > > possible is … something that can be done at any time > > > and which is surely the correct practice in daily life. So that may be > > > something we can all agree on, while we argue about everything else. > > > > As you say, we can keep up the discussion on other (doctrinal) points, but > > let's not neglect giving each other support in understanding the reality of the > > present moment at any time. > > > > Personally, I see this as the most useful thing that can be discussed on this > > list. It is the understanding of the realities ('dhammas') of the present > > moment that leads to the realisation of the Noble Eightfold Path. > > > > In my view this is also by far the most difficult aspect of the teaching to > > come to terms with. > > > > Jon 13035 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Wed May 1, 2002 5:43am Subject: RE: [dsg] satipatthana/Kom Larry --- LBIDD@w... wrote: > Thanks Kom, I see my mistake. I was equating satipatthana with vipassana > but that's not quite correct. I think I found the source of the > controversy over objects of satipatthana, but first here are some > interesting snippets from "A Comprehensive Manual Of Abhidhamma". … > ch.7, #24 > In the compendium of requisites of enlightenment, there are four > foundations of mindfulness: (1) the foundation of mindfulness in > contemplation of the body; (2) the foundation of mindfulness in > contemplation of feelings; (3) the foundation of mindfulness in > contemplation of consciousness; (4) the foundation of mindfulness in > contemplation of mental objects. > > Larry: 'contemplation of mental objects' is a translation of > 'dhammanupassana.' So the controversy is, does this 'dhamma' mean > paramattha-dhamma or dhammarammana. I would think something would have > to prevent sati from taking concepts as object, but I don't see what it > would be. Do you have a source or reason for your interpretation? The Satipatthana Sutta itself gives a detailed explanation of the things that comprise dhammanupassana. It says (quoting from the translation in 'The Way of Mindfulness', http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/bps/misc/wayof.html): "And how, O bhikkhus, does a bhikkhu live contemplating mental objects in mental objects? "Here, O bhikkhus, a bhikkhu lives contemplating the mental objects in the mental objects of the five hindrances, … of the five aggregates of clinging, … of the six internal and the six external sense-bases, … of the seven factors of enlightenment, … of the Four Noble Truths." According to my reading of the texts, these sets are all references to paramattha dhammas, not concepts. The commentary to the sutta (same translation) relates each of the 4 foundations of mindfulness to corresponding dhammas comprising the 5 aggregates (khandhas): "Further, … in the contemplation on the body, the laying hold of the aggregate of corporeality or materiality [J: rupa-khandha] was spoken of by the Master; "in the contemplation on feeling, the laying hold of the aggregate of feeling [J: vedana-khandha]; "in the contemplation on mind, the laying hold of the aggregate of consciousness [J: vinnana-khandha]; "and now [i.e. in the contemplation on mental objects] … the laying hold of the aggregates of perception and formations [J: sanna-khandha, sankhara-khandha], …" To my knowledge, all the ancient texts support the interpretation of the 5 khandhas and dhammanupassana as excluding concepts. Some modern-day commentators, however, assert that concepts are included in these classifications. Jon 13036 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Wed May 1, 2002 5:45am Subject: Re: [dsg] Antidotes to lobha Lucy --- Lucy wrote: > > > > 3. We should also know the more subtle lobha which arises when we enjoy > > a fragrant smell or beautiful music. It seems that there are no akusala > > cittas when we do not harm others, but also the more subtle lobha is > > akusala; it is different from generosity which is kusala. We cannot > > force ourselves not to have lobha, but we can get to know the > > characteristic of lobha when it appears. > > > > Hi all ! > > One of the "M" antidotes for lobha is to "offer" the object of enjoyment to > the Buddha when we notice lobha has arisen - If I'm mindful (not very > often), a drive from home to anywhere has me constantly piling up > mountains, sheep, colours, flowers, trees etc., etc. on the mental altar - > and then one has to remember dedicating the merit of the offerings... Don't > know whether there's much merit in it or not, but it's an interesting > little exercise because it can serve as a constant reminder of lobha. > > "M" is full of these "antidotes" - are there any similar practices in the > Theravada ? > > Best wishes > Lucy In the Theravada texts, the emphasis is on understanding the dhammas of the present moment as and when they arise, and this includes of course all kinds of lobha, although not especially lobha in preference to any other kind of reality. Seeing dhammas as they truly are is the only 'antidote' of any lasting efficacy. Lobha that has already arisen or has not yet arisen, is not regarded as being capable of being 'dealt with' in any sense, as far as I know. There is, however, a wholesome mental factor of 'wise attention' that has the function described as guarding the sense-doors. Jon 13037 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Wed May 1, 2002 5:47am Subject: Re: [dsg] 4 Ultimate Realities? TG --- TGrand458@a... wrote: > In the Samyutta Nikaya the Buddha describes the 5 Khandhas as... > > "...form should be seen as a bursting bubble, feeling should be seen as a > lump of foam, perception should be seen as a mirage, mental formations should > > be seen as a plantian tree (coreless), consciousness should be seen as a > conjurers trick..." > > Doesn't sound to me like the Buddha wants them to be thought of as ultimate > realities. Seems like he wants them to be seen as unsubstantial as humanly > possible. Calling them "ultimate realities" seems to against that grain to > me. I wonder if seeing them as ultimate realities embeds a type of > substantiality and self view that is counter-productive to detaching from > conditions (non-attachment). I understand the reasoning behind describing > them as ultimate realities, I'm just not sure its a very good idea? > > TG An interesting observation -- 'ultimate reality', yet like a bubble or a lump of foam. Well, I suppose it's an example of looking at the same thing from different perspectives. They are 'ultimate' in the sense of being the underlying phenomena of what we take for people and things, yet they also have no intrinsic merit. Both aspects need to be understood. Jon 13038 From: frank kuan Date: Wed May 1, 2002 7:28am Subject: RE: [dsg] satipatthana/Kom the controversy: --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: (4) the foundation > of mindfulness in > > contemplation of mental objects. ...So the controversy is, does > this 'dhamma' mean > > paramattha-dhamma or dhammarammana. > The Satipatthana Sutta... > "Here, O bhikkhus, a bhikkhu lives contemplating the > mental objects in the mental objects > of the five hindrances, … of the five aggregates of > clinging, … of the six internal and > the six external sense-bases, … of the seven factors > of enlightenment, … of the Four > Noble Truths." > > According to my reading of the texts, these sets are > all references to paramattha > dhammas, not concepts. Can you explain how you read it that way? I've always wondered what the hell is that sutta talking about with the 4th foundation of mindfulness being "mind-objects" when it appears to me dhamma is referring to concepts, specifically buddhist concepts. I mean, come on, 5 hindrances, 7 factors of enlightenment as paramatta ultimate realities? How do you make a case for that? Might as well say Frank is an ultimate reality too. As I see it, one could only make a case for that only if the 4th foundation of mindfulness of dhamma referred exclusively to the 3 marks, 5 aggregates, 6 sense bases. And even so, many buddhists would argue that even the 3 marks are concepts, not ultimate realities to be wrongly grasped. Now I should say that I'm still open to the possibility that the 4th foundtion of mindulness starts with concepts, but there is some special technique where one should contemplate these buddhist dhammic concepts in such a way that their "utlimate realities" can be seen, but where are the details on how this is done? It's not in the sutta. -fk 13039 From: Date: Wed May 1, 2002 4:10am Subject: Re: [dsg] A question on enlightenment Hi, Sarah (and Christine) - In a message dated 5/1/02 7:45:42 AM Eastern Daylight Time, sarahdhhk@y... writes: > Dear Christine, > > --- christine_forsyth wrote: > > > > Would it be possible for a person to think they were following 'right > > teachings of the Dhamma' and have various experiences they thought > > were 'right' mindfullness, 'right concentration' and 'right jhana' > > right up to an experience they felt was 'right' Nibbana - but all the > > time it was not 'right' but 'wrong' teachings of the Dhamma, 'wrong' > > mindfullness, 'wrong' concentration, 'wrong' jhana and even (is it > > possible) to experience 'wrong' nibbana? .... > ..... > > Yes. It's called wrong view which always thinks wrong is right. The > Tipitaka is full of references. > ..... > > >and, if so, how would > > they ever know? > ..... > Only panna (wisdom) can know, which is why it is so essential. > ---------------------------------------------------------- Howard: This is certainly true. However, how does one KNOW that what one sees to be the case is a matter of wisdom or of error? As I see it, there is no completely certain independent guarantee on this. I would suppose that one could use certain yardsticks (metre rods?) such as seeing that one has become calmer, more loving, less compulsive, less grasping, less aversive etc, etc. For stream entry and the more advanced stages, the Buddha laid out certain behavioral and personality criteria. All of these, I think, provided, of course, that one has confidence in the Buddha, could be used as indicators that one is moving in the right direction, but I doubt that one can know incontestably. ---------------------------------------------------- > ..... > > >Feelings of peace and delight, and an inner certainty > > could deceive a person couldn't they? > ..... > Certainly. Lobha (attachment), mana (conceit), ditthi.(wrong view)..... > > Sarah > ============================ With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 13040 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Wed May 1, 2002 8:20am Subject: RE: [dsg] attachment to concept Hi Kom; > Perhaps another way to "deal" with concept is the fact that we learn > from the Abhidhamma that concepts cannot be objects satipatthana. k: Would you like to share some commentary sayings on this statement. So are we saying that breathing which is a concept is not applicable in the satipatthana sutta or in which Buddha started the sutta by taking breathing at the forefront of satipatthana. To say concepts cannot be objects of satipatthana could be misleading, all of us started with concepts even Buddha. But to say that to obtain enlightment then concepts cannot be objects of satipatthana, it is paramtha that are objects of satipatthana in order to first discard wrong view (to enter stream winner stage)(talking Abidhammically). Hence we cannot conclude that concepts cannot be objects of satipatthana. It can but not effective in last few stages leading to enlightment kind rgds Ken O 13041 From: Date: Wed May 1, 2002 4:47am Subject: Re: [dsg] 4 Ultimate Realities? Hi, Jon (and TG) - In a message dated 5/1/02 8:49:55 AM Eastern Daylight Time, jonoabb@y... writes: > > TG > > --- TGrand458@a... wrote: > In the Samyutta Nikaya the Buddha describes > the 5 Khandhas > as... > > > > "...form should be seen as a bursting bubble, feeling should be seen as a > > > lump of foam, perception should be seen as a mirage, mental formations > should > > > > be seen as a plantian tree (coreless), consciousness should be seen as a > > conjurers trick..." > > > > Doesn't sound to me like the Buddha wants them to be thought of as > ultimate > > realities. Seems like he wants them to be seen as unsubstantial as > humanly > > possible. Calling them "ultimate realities" seems to against that grain > to > > me. I wonder if seeing them as ultimate realities embeds a type of > > substantiality and self view that is counter-productive to detaching from > > > conditions (non-attachment). I understand the reasoning behind > describing > > them as ultimate realities, I'm just not sure its a very good idea? > > > > TG > > An interesting observation -- 'ultimate reality', yet like a bubble or a > lump of foam. > Well, I suppose it's an example of looking at the same thing from different > perspectives. > They are 'ultimate' in the sense of being the underlying phenomena of what > we take for > people and things, yet they also have no intrinsic merit. > > Both aspects need to be understood. > > Jon > ========================== I think that TG makes an excellent point (as will not surprise you, Jon! ;-) I have long bristled at the term 'paramattha dhamma'. The actual experiences subsumed by the concept of 'paramattha dhamma' are, speaking precisely, actual elements of experience as opposed to imagined self-existent things "out there". For example, the experience of 'red' per se is a function of consciousness, and, when we can isolate it, it *seems* that way. But the experience of 'a red fire engine' always seems to be the experience of some self-existent thing "out there", a thing which has 'red' as a characteristic. A conceptual dhamma is always something imagined to be "out there". But, on close examination of an alleged red fire engine, for example, all that one actually comes upon are the direct experiences of 'red' and other colors, 'hardness', various shapes, etc, plus the thoughts of water, fires, etc. It is these internally experienced phenomena subsumed by 'the red fire engine', actually experienced without additional fabricating activity of the mind, which are the so-called "paramattha dhammas" involved. But the name 'paramattha dhamma' and, even worse, the English 'ultimate reality' do strike me as substantialist and terribly misleading. What these things are are actual elements of direct experience. They are fleeting and conditioned things-in-relation (except for nibbana), more like phantoms and shadows than separate, self-existent "ultimate realities". There's GOT to be a better term! ;-) What's in a name? I think an awful lot. THIS name we are discussing is, in my estimation, injurious to correct understanding, and injurious to the public image of Abhidhamma and, more generally, Theravada. 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) 13042 From: goglerr Date: Wed May 1, 2002 10:29am Subject: Re: [dsg] re:anicca (do concepts arise and fall?) --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., LBIDD@w... wrote: Larry said: Hi Goglerr, I don't know if it does much good to distinguish between concept and reality since they both can be the object of lobha-dosa-moha. Conceit (mana) and personality belief (sakkaya- ditthi)are realities, not concepts; how can that be? G: Hi Larry, in every day life, distinguishing between p.dh and concept, can help us to reduce of the attachment/aversion to them especially concept. For instance, when we are in pain (of cancer or something of that sort) we can, at least, understand something like 'this pain is not mine, it just terrible pain/feeling' rather than 'I'm so hurt, I'm in so much in pain, why me? why me?'. They are two totally different minds at work, the former mind are turning an obstacle to a spritual growth which involve wisdom and wise reflection whereas the latter mind are drown in misery and deep sorrow, which involve mana and ditthi and also dosa. Even more so, especially when it comes to developing insight, where fine tuning the bare mindfilness observation between what are the meditation objects or just drowing into conceptualization, thinking, or intellectualizaton. It's a very fine line to distinguish them from practical point of view, not as easy as what we read. We have been so conditioned by concepts since time immemorial. For e.g. when a idea or thought arises, during meditation we may grasp it wrongly thinking that is a p.dh. It happens to a lot of meditators, even those who very well read on the sutta and abhidhamma. In the mindfulness practice, sometimes when the mindfulness unknowingly slipped away, we are sort of drowned into our thoughts, mental images, reflections, concepts or series sensual fantansies. And when the mindfulness arises again, we may notice (if we are keen) that there is a seperation between what is a knowing mind and the thoughts which are running through. Larry said: The main difference I see is that we can see the arising and dissolution of paramattha dhammas, but we can also see the arising and dissolution of a cookie. What about that??? G: Seeing the the arising and passing away between a paramattha dhamma and cookie involve two different kinds of panna. The former one belongs to bhavana maya panna (wisdom arises from insight) whereas the latter one belongs to cinta maya panna (wise reflection). No doubt that the two minds are wholesome. Wisdom from insight will lead to Nibbana, end of suffering, uprooting of defilements and wise reflection will give a deeper understanding of what life is all about, though less suffering but still there. These two panna complement each other. Usually from wise reflection and we will gradually have the wholesome urge to begin to to make an inward journey to truly understand the mind and body. Unless, one wish just to stop at wise reflection. Without the a Buddha's teaching, this special panna of insight cannot arise to uproot the defilement. The cookie may cure the hunger but the seeing the p. dh. may cure the craving!! Your call. ;-) Goglerr 13043 From: goglerr Date: Wed May 1, 2002 11:18am Subject: Re: [dsg] satipatthana/Kom --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., frank kuan wrote: > the controversy: > --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > (4) the foundation > > of mindfulness in > > > contemplation of mental objects. > ...So the controversy is, does > > this 'dhamma' mean > > > paramattha-dhamma or dhammarammana. > > The Satipatthana Sutta... > > "Here, O bhikkhus, a bhikkhu lives contemplating the > > mental objects in the mental objects > > of the five hindrances, … of the five aggregates of > > clinging, … of the six internal and > > the six external sense-bases, … of the seven factors > > of enlightenment, … of the Four > > Noble Truths." > > > > According to my reading of the texts, these sets are > > all references to paramattha > > dhammas, not concepts. Frank: Can you explain how you read it that way? I've always wondered what the hell is that sutta talking about with the 4th foundation of mindfulness being "mind-objects" when it appears to me dhamma is referring to concepts, specifically buddhist concepts. I mean, come on, 5 hindrances, 7 factors of enlightenment as paramatta ultimate realities? How do you make a case for that? Might as well say Frank is an ultimate reality too. G: 5 Hind and 7 F of Enl. are actually mentals factors, cetasika with eventually becomes a 'mind object' when they become prominent to the knowing mind. We can be aware of greed when it arises or aversion, or even that we are calm or even energertic. Mental states are very subtle and swift. Usually meditation teachers will not instruct beginners to take these mind object as the initial object of contemplation. These states of mind will become clear when there are sufficient mindfulness and clarity, also when the mindfulness are 'swift' and 'flexible', as swift as the object flows the knowing mind will flow with it. Frank: As I see it, one could only make a case for that only if the 4th foundation of mindfulness of dhamma referred exclusively to the 3 marks, 5 aggregates, 6 sense bases. And even so, many buddhists would argue that even the 3 marks are concepts, not ultimate realities to be wrongly grasped. G: in my opinion the 3 marks are a 'direct' concept, because we have to 'label' that such and such an actual experince of the paramattha object arising and passing away are 'termed' as anicca, dukkha or anatta. Frank: Now I should say that I'm still open to the possibility that the 4th foundtion of mindulness starts with concepts, but there is some special technique where one should contemplate these buddhist dhammic concepts in such a way that their "utlimate realities" can be seen, but where are the details on how this is done? It's not in the sutta. G: It's may be not in the sutta, Frank, but it is the the actual practice. Take the in-breath out breath at the nostril. Initially, the whole 'form' of the breath will be seen. And when the mindfulness gradually develops, the 'form' sort of dissappear from the knowing but only the different motions, smoothness, tensions, of breath or the heat or coolness of breath remain. Also one may know the knowing mind, which may be clear, steady, energertic yet calm, and so on. These Dhamma are for one to realize for himself. When one actually experince them, then one may know what is the 'hidden meaning' of His words in the sutta. Goglerr 13044 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Wed May 1, 2002 2:34pm Subject: RE: [dsg] attachment to concept Dear Ken O, > -----Original Message----- > From: Kenneth Ong [mailto:ashkenn@y...] > Sent: Wednesday, May 01, 2002 8:21 AM > To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com > Subject: RE: [dsg] attachment to concept > > > Hi Kom; > > > Perhaps another way to "deal" with concept is the fact that we learn > > from the Abhidhamma that concepts cannot be objects satipatthana. > > k: Would you like to share some commentary sayings on this statement. So > are we saying that breathing which is a concept is not applicable in the > satipatthana sutta or in which Buddha started the sutta by taking > breathing at the forefront of satipatthana. To say concepts cannot be > objects of satipatthana could be misleading, all of us started with > concepts even Buddha. But to say that to obtain enlightment then concepts > cannot be objects of satipatthana, it is paramtha that are objects of > satipatthana in order to first discard wrong view (to enter stream winner > stage)(talking Abidhammically). Hence we cannot conclude that concepts > cannot be objects of satipatthana. It can but not effective in last few > stages leading to enlightment If you see Jon's previous message on the thread, I think you will see why some members in this group say that only paramatha objects are objects of satipatthana. Breathing in itself has paramatha components too (like hardness, heat, tension). The paramatha components can be objects of satipatthana. Again, as I understand it, only paramatha dhamma can be objects of satipatthana, from the beginning, to the end (magga). As far as references to the commentaries, Jon, Sarah, and Robert K. have posted some related materials in the past archived in the group. Although I have some access (requires lots of efforts) to the Thai commentaries, I am not that diligent to look them up or translate them to prove the point, but I do urge anybody who are interested to look them up themselves because I think this point (which I think you agree; otherwise, you wouldn't ask!) is fairly important (and controversial). Would only snips of passages (which can be selective!) satisfy your skepticism/wise question in this area? On the other hand, there can be wise reflection (with wisdom) on the concepts of realities too. It is just, as far as I know, not at the level of satipatthana, even if it may condition satipathana. kom 13045 From: Lucy Date: Wed May 1, 2002 3:31pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Antidotes to lobha Hi Jon Looks like we're talking from two different levels. You talk of *seeing* and *understanding*, but I'm barely preparing the ground here, picking up stones, weeding, raking, watering, digging in manure ... all very basic and with an awful lot of preparation work still to be done. Meanwhile, lobha for hills, wild flowers, lambs and May bird songs piles up, making the mind ground even harder to clear for *the* seeing to happen. If I'm not careful, I might forget there's such thing as a Path and a seeing until, whoops, too late!!! I'd be truly lost without my little bag of "upaya" ... No "antidotes" in the real sense, but a useful reminder of the Path, especially in May, blackbirds and thrushes singing among droopy cherry blossoms.... So, I offer all and look forward going out tomorrow looking for more offerings : ) Best wishes (and happy May Day) Lucy ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jonothan Abbott" > --- Lucy wrote: > > > > > 3. We should also know the more subtle lobha which arises when we enjoy > > > a fragrant smell or beautiful music. It seems that there are no akusala > > > cittas when we do not harm others, but also the more subtle lobha is > > > akusala; it is different from generosity which is kusala. We cannot > > > force ourselves not to have lobha, but we can get to know the > > > characteristic of lobha when it appears. > > > > > > > One of the "M" antidotes for lobha is to "offer" the object of enjoyment to > > the Buddha when we notice lobha has arisen - If I'm mindful (not very > > often), a drive from home to anywhere has me constantly piling up > > mountains, sheep, colours, flowers, trees etc., etc. on the mental altar - > > and then one has to remember dedicating the merit of the offerings... Don't > > know whether there's much merit in it or not, but it's an interesting > > little exercise because it can serve as a constant reminder of lobha. > > > > "M" is full of these "antidotes" - are there any similar practices in the > > Theravada ? > > > > In the Theravada texts, the emphasis is on understanding the dhammas of the present > moment as and when they arise, and this includes of course all kinds of lobha, although > not especially lobha in preference to any other kind of reality. Seeing dhammas as they > truly are is the only 'antidote' of any lasting efficacy. > > Lobha that has already arisen or has not yet arisen, is not regarded as being capable of > being 'dealt with' in any sense, as far as I know. There is, however, a wholesome mental > factor of 'wise attention' that has the function described as guarding the sense-doors. > > Jon > 13046 From: Date: Wed May 1, 2002 4:32pm Subject: Re: [dsg] re:anicca (do concepts arise and fall?) Goglerr: "The cookie may cure the hunger but the seeing the p. dh. may cure the craving!! Your call. ;-)" Hi Goglerr, actually I started to analyze the cookie and found that a good portion of its experinced identity was a kind of wet hunger sensation located in my mouth. I guess that's both not self and not cookie. Larry 13047 From: Date: Wed May 1, 2002 5:44pm Subject: Re: [dsg] ADL ch. 6 (7-17) Hi all, With reference to the paragraph below, I find there is even aversion to being in the present. Imagination is a kind of refuge from all the kamma vipaka which is invariably unpleasant. Not to mention boredom or fear of being undefined, fear of not self which is part of aversion to the present. It's good to remember the present is a kusala 'place', sati, even though it is witness to dosa and unpleasant feeling. Larry 17. Another condition for dosa is ignorance of Dhamma. If we are ignorant of kamma and vipaka, cause and result., dosa may arise very easily on account of an unpleasant experience through one of the senses and thus dosa is accumulated time and again. An unpleasant experience through one of the senses is akusala vipaka caused by an unwholesome deed we perforrned. When we, for example, hear unpleasant words from someone else we may be angry with that person. Those who have studied Dhamma know that hearing something unpleasant is akusala vipaka which is not caused by someone else but by an unwholesome deed we performed ourselves. A moment of vipaka falls away immediately, it does not stay. Are we not inclined to keep on thinking about an unpleasant experience? If there is more awareness of the present moment one will be less inclined to think with aversion about one's akusala vipaka. 13048 From: Date: Wed May 1, 2002 9:15pm Subject: ADL ch. 6 (18-23) from: http://www.budsas.org/ebud/nina-abhidhamma/nina-abhi-00.htm Abhidhamma In Daily Life chapter 6, paragraphs 18-23 18. When we study the Abhidhamma we learn that there are two types of dosa-mula-citta; one is asankharika (unprompted) and one is sasankharika (prompted). Dosa is sasankharika (prompted) when, for example, one becomes angry after having been reminded of the disagreeable actions of someone else. When dosa is asankharika (unprompted) it is more intense than when it is sasankharika. Dosa-mula-cittas are called patigha.sampayutta, or accompanied by patigha, which is another word for dosa. Dosa.mula-cittas are always accompanied by domanassa (unpleasant feeling). The two type of dosa-mula-citta are: 1. Accompanied by unpleasant feeling, arising with anger, unprompted (Domanassa-sahagatam, patigha-sampayuttam, asankharikam ekam) 2. Accompanied by unpleasant feeling, arising with anger, prompted (Domanassa-sahagatam, patigha-sampayuttam, sasankharikam ekam) 19. As we have seen, there are many degrees of dosa; it may be coarse or more subtle. When dosa is coarse, it causes akusala kamma-patha (unwholesome deeds) through body, speech or mind. Two kinds of akusala kamma-patha through the body can be performed with dosa-mula-citta: killing and stealing. If we want less violence in the world we should try not to kill. When we kill we accumulate a great deal of dosa. The monk's life is a life of non-violence; he does not hurt any living being in the world. However, not everyone is able to live like the monks. Defilements are anatta (not self); they arise because of conditions. The purpose of the Buddha's teachings is not to lay down rules which forbid people to commit ill deeds, but to help people to develop the wisdom which eradicates defilements. 20. As regards stealing, this can either be performed with lobha-mula-citta or with dosa-mula-citta. It is done with dosa-mula-citta when there is the intention to harm someone else. Doing damage to someone else's possessions is included in this kamma-patha. 21. Four kinds of akusala kamma-patha through speech are performed with dosa-mula-citta: lying, slandering, rude speech and frivolous talk. Lying, slandering and frivolous talk can either be done with lobha-mula-citta or with dosa-mula-citta. Slandering, for example, is done with dosa-mula-citta when there is the intention to cause damage to someone else, such as doing harm to his good name and causing him to be looked down upon by others. Most people think that the use of weapons is to be avoided, but they forget that the tongue can be a weapon as well, which can badly wound. Evil speech does a great deal of harm in the world; it causes discord between people. When we speak evil we harm ourselves, because at such moments akusala kamma is accumulated and it is capable of producing akusala vipaka. We read in the 'Sutta Nipata' (the Great Chapter, 'Khuddaka Nikava'): Truly to every person born An axe is born within his mouth Wherewith the fool cuts himself When he speaks evil. 22. As regards akusala kamma-patha through the mind performed with dosa-mula-citta, this is the intention to hurt or harm someone else. 23. People often speak about violence and the ways to cure It. Who of us can say that he is free from dosa and that he will never kill? We do not know how much dosa we have accumulated in the course of many lives. When the conditions are there we might commit an act of violence we did not realize we were capable of. When we understand how ugly dosa is and to what deeds it can lead we want to eradicate it. 13049 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Wed May 1, 2002 10:54pm Subject: RE: [dsg] attachment to concept Kom Everything has paramatha elements in it. Unless we assume we are able to observe them at this moment, then I would agree that only paramatha are the objects of satipatthana. If concepts are not objects of satipatthana, then Buddha is wasting his time teaching breathing as an object of satipatthana in Maha Satipatthana sutta. Definitely we know that breathing do as paramatha elements but to totally discard the notion of objects as satipatthana is to me far stretch and not in line with the sutta intention. The method of satipatthana is from the easiest to the hardest starting with breathing. Whether or not, or we like it or not, to totally discard the notion that concepts are not objects of satipatthana is not in line with what Buddha says conventionally in Maha Satipatthana. Everything can be intrepretted with Abhidhamma but I believe we should not cling to just what Abhidhamma has said, we got to be open minded to what the sutta says. Another big issue abt control/no control recently, if we read the definition of right effort in the suttas, it indicates there is control. But we stick our concept of Abhidhamma then there is no control. There is control but the control does not mean there is a need to "cling" to a self for control. If there is no control, why would Buddha seek enlightment to get out of the birth-death cycle, isn't it this intention (to get out of the birth cycle) attached to a desire. Buddha knows that we need a goal to relieve ourselve, isn't the goal of Abhidhamma is enlightment. So isn't it fits into our mental image of going to nirvana that let us eventually condition us to practise satipatthana. These are my train of thought, may sound confusing though. Kind regards Ken O --- Kom Tukovinit wrote: > Dear Ken O, > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Kenneth Ong [mailto:ashkenn@y...] > > Sent: Wednesday, May 01, 2002 8:21 AM > > To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com > > Subject: RE: [dsg] attachment to concept > > > > > > Hi Kom; > > > > > Perhaps another way to "deal" with concept is the fact that we learn > > > from the Abhidhamma that concepts cannot be objects satipatthana. > > > > k: Would you like to share some commentary sayings on this statement. > So > > are we saying that breathing which is a concept is not applicable in > the > > satipatthana sutta or in which Buddha started the sutta by taking > > breathing at the forefront of satipatthana. To say concepts cannot be > > objects of satipatthana could be misleading, all of us started with > > concepts even Buddha. But to say that to obtain enlightment then > concepts > > cannot be objects of satipatthana, it is paramtha that are objects of > > satipatthana in order to first discard wrong view (to enter stream > winner > > stage)(talking Abidhammically). Hence we cannot conclude that concepts > > cannot be objects of satipatthana. It can but not effective in last > few > > stages leading to enlightment > > If you see Jon's previous message on the thread, I think you will see > why > some members in this group say that only paramatha objects are objects > of > satipatthana. Breathing in itself has paramatha components too (like > hardness, heat, tension). The paramatha components can be objects of > satipatthana. > > Again, as I understand it, only paramatha dhamma can be objects of > satipatthana, from the beginning, to the end (magga). As far as > references > to the commentaries, Jon, Sarah, and Robert K. have posted some related > materials in the past archived in the group. Although I have some > access > (requires lots of efforts) to the Thai commentaries, I am not that > diligent > to look them up or translate them to prove the point, but I do urge > anybody > who are interested to look them up themselves because I think this point > (which I think you agree; otherwise, you wouldn't ask!) is fairly > important > (and controversial). Would only snips of passages (which can be > selective!) > satisfy your skepticism/wise question in this area? > > On the other hand, there can be wise reflection (with wisdom) on the > concepts of realities too. It is just, as far as I know, not at the > level > of satipatthana, even if it may condition satipathana. > > kom 13050 From: Sarah Date: Wed May 1, 2002 11:13pm Subject: Re: [dsg] ADL ch. 6 (7-17) Hi Larry, Thanks for all the good questions and comments and the excellent discussion with Kom and others. I think your points below show some real understanding of what we are studying in the book. No one is asking to have aversion, boredom or fear (which are never pleasant), but they arise when there are conditions, even when we’re reading about their uwholesome qualities. I liked Kom’s example about dosa for the noise yesterday, even when he was writing dhamma. It creeps in all the time, doesn’t it? When there is awareness (sati of satipatthana) of these mental states, there is no doubt at that moment that they are paramatha dhammas --whatever we call them-- as opposed to concepts. At that instant of awareness, the consciousness is wholesome and calm and there is no wrong view of self or special effort to have it. Then there is more thinking of concepts, so often accompanied by lobha, dosa or moha again. Isn’t it better to know and recognize, even the fear of anatta, than to continue in ignorance? In appreciation of these comments, Sarah ===== --- LBIDD@w... wrote: > Hi all, > > With reference to the paragraph below, I find there is even aversion to > being in the present. Imagination is a kind of refuge from all the kamma > vipaka which is invariably unpleasant. Not to mention boredom or fear of > being undefined, fear of not self which is part of aversion to the > present. It's good to remember the present is a kusala 'place', sati, > even though it is witness to dosa and unpleasant feeling. 13051 From: Robert Epstein Date: Wed May 1, 2002 11:15pm Subject: Re: [dsg] A question on enlightenment Howard, I have nothing intelligent to add at the moment, but I wanted to let you know that I think your recent posts, including this one and the one on paramatha dhammas, are very sharp. Robert Ep. ==== --- upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, Sarah (and Christine) - > > In a message dated 5/1/02 7:45:42 AM Eastern Daylight Time, > sarahdhhk@y... writes: > > > > Dear Christine, > > > > --- christine_forsyth wrote: > > > > > > Would it be possible for a person to think they were following 'right > > > teachings of the Dhamma' and have various experiences they thought > > > were 'right' mindfullness, 'right concentration' and 'right jhana' > > > right up to an experience they felt was 'right' Nibbana - but all the > > > time it was not 'right' but 'wrong' teachings of the Dhamma, 'wrong' > > > mindfullness, 'wrong' concentration, 'wrong' jhana and even (is it > > > possible) to experience 'wrong' nibbana? .... > > ..... > > > > Yes. It's called wrong view which always thinks wrong is right. The > > Tipitaka is full of references. > > ..... > > > > >and, if so, how would > > > they ever know? > > ..... > > Only panna (wisdom) can know, which is why it is so essential. > > > ---------------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > This is certainly true. However, how does one KNOW that what one sees > to be the case is a matter of wisdom or of error? As I see it, there is no > completely certain independent guarantee on this. I would suppose that one > could use certain yardsticks (metre rods?) such as seeing that one has become > calmer, more loving, less compulsive, less grasping, less aversive etc, etc. > For stream entry and the more advanced stages, the Buddha laid out certain > behavioral and personality criteria. All of these, I think, provided, of > course, that one has confidence in the Buddha, could be used as indicators > that one is moving in the right direction, but I doubt that one can know > incontestably. > ---------------------------------------------------- > > > ..... > > > > >Feelings of peace and delight, and an inner certainty > > > could deceive a person couldn't they? > > ..... > > Certainly. Lobha (attachment), mana (conceit), ditthi.(wrong view)..... > > > > Sarah > > > ============================ > With metta, > Howard 13052 From: Robert Epstein Date: Wed May 1, 2002 11:33pm Subject: Re: [dsg] 4 Ultimate Realities? --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > TG > > --- TGrand458@a... wrote: > In the Samyutta Nikaya the Buddha describes the 5 > Khandhas > as... > > > > "...form should be seen as a bursting bubble, feeling should be seen as a > > lump of foam, perception should be seen as a mirage, mental formations should > > > > be seen as a plantian tree (coreless), consciousness should be seen as a > > conjurers trick..." > > > > Doesn't sound to me like the Buddha wants them to be thought of as ultimate > > realities. Seems like he wants them to be seen as unsubstantial as humanly > > possible. Calling them "ultimate realities" seems to against that grain to > > me. I wonder if seeing them as ultimate realities embeds a type of > > substantiality and self view that is counter-productive to detaching from > > conditions (non-attachment). I understand the reasoning behind describing > > them as ultimate realities, I'm just not sure its a very good idea? > > > > TG > > An interesting observation -- 'ultimate reality', yet like a bubble or a lump of > foam. > Well, I suppose it's an example of looking at the same thing from different > perspectives. > They are 'ultimate' in the sense of being the underlying phenomena of what we > take for > people and things, yet they also have no intrinsic merit. > > Both aspects need to be understood. > > Jon Which makes Howard's and others' case that the word 'ultimate' is misleading and incorrect. It constantly needs to be re-explained and qualified, because it implies something other than what it means. Ultimate in common parlance means the height of something much more than it means the final particle that cannot be broken down. In math, which is Howard's area, I think there are terms that describe this kind of thing more generically, numbers that can't be broken down any further, equations that cannot be divided down to a lesser amount on either side. The least common denominator which unites equivalent mathematical terms. For myself, I would propose 'primary realities' or even 'basic realities', but primary accomplishes what you would want, it establishes them as indivisible and 'first and foremost' without the baggage of 'ultimate'. Now I may be paranoid, but it does seem like the term 'paramatha', if it is indeed 'ultimate' betrays a kind of idealization of these fleeting actualities, and perhaps is a way in which the idea of entity creeps back into Abhidhamma. Terms have a 'flavor' of meaning, and 'paramatha' seems to have precisely the wrong one. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think I recall the prefix 'para' as having a sense of something like 'great'. Is this not so? Best, Robert Ep. 13053 From: Robert Epstein Date: Wed May 1, 2002 11:48pm Subject: RE: [dsg] satipatthana/Kom --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > Larry > > --- LBIDD@w... wrote: > > Thanks Kom, I see my mistake. I was equating satipatthana with vipassana > > but that's not quite correct. I think I found the source of the > > controversy over objects of satipatthana, but first here are some > > interesting snippets from "A Comprehensive Manual Of Abhidhamma". > … > > ch.7, #24 > > In the compendium of requisites of enlightenment, there are four > > foundations of mindfulness: (1) the foundation of mindfulness in > > contemplation of the body; (2) the foundation of mindfulness in > > contemplation of feelings; (3) the foundation of mindfulness in > > contemplation of consciousness; (4) the foundation of mindfulness in > > contemplation of mental objects. > > > > Larry: 'contemplation of mental objects' is a translation of > > 'dhammanupassana.' So the controversy is, does this 'dhamma' mean > > paramattha-dhamma or dhammarammana. I would think something would have > > to prevent sati from taking concepts as object, but I don't see what it > > would be. Do you have a source or reason for your interpretation? > > The Satipatthana Sutta itself gives a detailed explanation of the things that > comprise > dhammanupassana. It says (quoting from the translation in 'The Way of > Mindfulness', > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/bps/misc/wayof.html): > > "And how, O bhikkhus, does a bhikkhu live contemplating mental objects in mental > objects? > > "Here, O bhikkhus, a bhikkhu lives contemplating the mental objects in the > mental objects > of the five hindrances, … of the five aggregates of clinging, … of the six > internal and > the six external sense-bases, … of the seven factors of enlightenment, … of the > Four > Noble Truths." > > According to my reading of the texts, these sets are all references to > paramattha > dhammas, not concepts. > > The commentary to the sutta (same translation) relates each of the 4 foundations > of > mindfulness to corresponding dhammas comprising the 5 aggregates (khandhas): > > "Further, … in the contemplation on the body, the laying hold of the aggregate > of > corporeality or materiality [J: rupa-khandha] was spoken of by the Master; > "in the contemplation on feeling, the laying hold of the aggregate of feeling > [J: > vedana-khandha]; > "in the contemplation on mind, the laying hold of the aggregate of consciousness > [J: > vinnana-khandha]; > "and now [i.e. in the contemplation on mental objects] … the laying hold of the > aggregates of perception and formations [J: sanna-khandha, sankhara-khandha], Can someone explain to me, please, how 'corporeality', 'materiality', 'feeling', etc., are not concepts? I can understand that a particular experience of corporeality, such as hardness or smoothness, would be a primary reality, and that a particular feeling as well, but it seems to me that these general terms that we are given to contemplate are general categories that are being referrred to, in other words: concepts. If they are concepts, then concepts are included in the objects of contemplation; if they are not concepts, I would like to have an explanation as to how these can be directly perceived in the way that primary realities must be: directly in an actual moment. Paramatha Dhammas must have their own characteristic. But 'corporeality' *is* a characteristic, not an object. It is a category or a quality that attends rupas, but it is not a rupa itself. Neither it is an actual mental event that takes place, so I don't think it can be a nama. In other words, corporeality as a category of the khandas can only be a concept until filled in with a specific example which has it as its characteristic. It will never be the rupa itself, it is the example that has the characteristic that is the rupa. So it will always be a concept as far as I can see. Yet it is an object of satipatthana along with the other kandhas? > To my knowledge, all the ancient texts support the interpretation of the 5 > khandhas and > dhammanupassana as excluding concepts. Some modern-day commentators, however, > assert > that concepts are included in these classifications. > > Jon 13054 From: Sarah Date: Wed May 1, 2002 11:58pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Antidotes to lobha Dear Lucy, > I'd be truly lost without my little bag of "upaya" ... No "antidotes" > in > the real sense, but a useful reminder of the Path, especially in May, > blackbirds and thrushes singing among droopy cherry blossoms.... So, I > offer all and look forward going out tomorrow looking for more offerings > : ) We had a public holiday in Hong Kong yesterday, so we also went out enjoying the countryside. On an early morning hike up the Peak, there were no lambs here, but squirrels, white cockatoos, other exotic birds and hot, humid, tropical conditions. And then, we came across a beautiful small silver and green snake on the path. It didn’t look injured at all, but it turned out to be dead. I decided to take it home by way of an ‘offering’ for my students, thinking they might enjoy it as much as ‘my’ lobha did. So Jon kindly put it in a bag in his backpack and when we got home, we put it in the freezer I have a group of so-called ‘gifted’ (you know,calculus at age 8,bored by everything at school, enjoy unusual offerings) students coming soon. I Just went to take out my beautiful snake, but instead found what looks like a limp, brown giant worm. Oh dear, how hard we work to try and maintain the illusion of beauty and permanence and how disappointed we are when it doesn't last;-( ..... > Best wishes (and happy May Day) ..... Thanks for the reminders of an English May Day. Actually as well as being a holiday here (thanks to being part of China) , it is also my birthday, so it’s always a happy day;-) I think that any reminders of the Teachings at anytime can be helpful. If your bag of upaya serve as reminders, then continue enjoying Spring, looking for offerings and developing awareness;-)) Sarah ===== 13055 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Wed May 1, 2002 11:59pm Subject: RE: [dsg] attachment to concept Dear Ken O, I think you are doing just fine in articulating your thoughts. > -----Original Message----- > From: Kenneth Ong [mailto:ashkenn@y...] > > Kom > > Everything has paramatha elements in it. Unless > we assume we are able to > observe them at this moment, then I would agree > that only paramatha are > the objects of satipatthana. If concepts are not > objects of satipatthana, > then Buddha is wasting his time teaching > breathing as an object of > satipatthana in Maha Satipatthana sutta. > Definitely we know that > breathing do as paramatha elements but to totally > discard the notion of > objects as satipatthana is to me far stretch and > not in line with the > sutta intention. > > The method of satipatthana is from the easiest to > the hardest starting > with breathing. Whether or not, or we like it or > not, to totally discard > the notion that concepts are not objects of > satipatthana is not in line > with what Buddha says conventionally in Maha > Satipatthana. Everything can > be intrepretted with Abhidhamma but I believe we > should not cling to just > what Abhidhamma has said, we got to be open > minded to what the sutta says. I disagree with you on this point (until I change my mind, obviously!). It is one of those things that I think we can say the Buddha definitely said either (but not both): 1) Concept can be an object of satipatthana 2) Concept cannot be an object of satipatthana. I think the difference is so substantial that there would be no ambiguity / different meanings in the 3 tipitakas. Also, it would make sense to have an interpretation of the teachings that are consistent across all the 3 tipitakas, not just suttanta or abhidhamma, and as far as I know, the position that a concept cannot be an object of satipatthana is the most consistent explanation among the 3 tipitakas, the commentaries, and Visuddhimagga. Of course, not knowing all the texts (or even a good part of the text), I will read on... Also, I think your point on the teaching being easiest (from the beginning of satipatthana sutta) is not consistent with what I know. Each person are pre-inclined to different sets of dhammas. We hear in the commentaries that the Buddha: 1) taught about Kandhas for those who are occupied (upadana) with the mental states (1 group of rupa, 4 in nama) 2) taught about ayatana for those who are occupied with the rupa (10 1/2 rupa, and 1 1/2 nama) 3) taught about dhatus for those who are occupied with both (10 1/2 rupa, 7 1/2 nama) We each pay attention to these different states very differently. An object that readily appears to some, may not appear very much to the others. When we talk about hardness as a paramatha dhamma, it is readily understood by most people. When we talk about the bhava rupa (male / female), most people's heads just spin. Paticasamudpada may be distinctly obvious to V. Ananda in the most fundamental (paramatha) sense, but we hardly even understand it conceptually. These are all dhammas that rise appropriately to their causes. > Another big issue abt control/no control > recently, if we read the > definition of right effort in the suttas, it > indicates there is control. > But we stick our concept of Abhidhamma then there > is no control. There is > control but the control does not mean there is a > need to "cling" to a self > for control. If there is no control, why would > Buddha seek enlightment to > get out of the birth-death cycle, isn't it this > intention (to get out of > the birth cycle) attached to a desire. Buddha > knows that we need a goal > to relieve ourselve, isn't the goal of Abhidhamma > is enlightment. So isn't > it fits into our mental image of going to nirvana > that let us eventually > condition us to practise satipatthana. These are > my train of thought, may > sound confusing though. Again, as far as I know, given the complexities of conditions that cause the dhamma to arise, no control (dhamma arises only because of conditions, and not a single agent causing the dhamma to arise) is the best explanation of the Buddha teachings. This theory doesn't support random arising: if there are no (or not enough) conditions for a dhamma to arise, then it cannot arise. If there is, then it must arise. This is regardless of the intention of the person (since intention is not the *only* dhamma that conditions). This theory doesn't preclude the situation like: I know there is a true teaching and it is readily accessible to me, if I listen to the dhamma, panna will (or may) develop. But every single step of the way on that path depends on conditions. If I have no done a good kamma in the past, then being born in the Buddha time, having the opportunity to hear, being in the affinity of the kalayanamitta who can explain the teachings so that I can understand correctly, being able to undestand the dhamma, all are impossible. Even if all those things apply, if I have no accumulation in the past to listen to the dhamma (my brother thinks it is scary that I am so absorbed in something commonly thought of as something you do in old ages, and that I believe in something that isn't immediately provable), then I will not listen to it. Have you tried unsuccessfully to convince your loved ones to listen to the dhammas? Many Thais have the opportunities to listen to the dhammas (public broadcasts, days and nights), but many think it is too boring, too dull, too unbelievable, too hard. I fall asleep occasionally (probably often) in dhamma discussions even though I expend great energy and efforts to go listen to it. When I narrow down my analysis further and further, I see that there are no choices at all that one is making: only dhammas are doing their things. No person, no animal, no me, and definitely no self. kom 13056 From: Sarah Date: Thu May 2, 2002 0:37am Subject: Re: [dsg] ..... MN117 and jhana in the last sentence of MN 152 Hi Jaran, Good to hear from you. I hoped someone more knowledgable might help, but anyway, here goes. (I’ve looked at the translation you refer to and also B.Bodhi’s translation and notes.) ..... --- Jaran Jainhuknan wrote: > Hi All and Sarah: > > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/majjhima/mn152.html > > Mindfulness develops, on the basis of right view, so that one is > precipient of the qualities (characteristics) of what 'comes > through' all six doorways. Indriya-bhavana Sutta (above) is a > good example of this. I enjoyed this sutta a lot because it > emphasizes that mindfulness develops in daily life (as no time > [to do this] is specified). It also states in the beginning that > 'blocking' anything from coming through the doorway -- as the > brahman Parasiri teaches his followers 'not to see forms with the > eye and not to hear sound with the ear' -- is not the development > of faculties. > > Q1. But at the end the Buddha pointed out to Ven. Ananda to > practice jhana. I am sure someone has asked this question, 'What > does this mean'? Ven. Ananda should practice jhana because it's > his way of life and the Buddha knows that his accumulation is for > him develop jhana? Does it mean anything is 'right practice' as > long as it is based firmly on the 'right view'? ..... OK, at the end of the ATI translation, we read “Practice jhana, Ananda. don’t be heedless...” We’ve discussed the Pali for similar phrases before with Jim. The following is a quote from a post of his ages ago which Rob K also requoted quite recently with further notes: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/11524 ..... QUOTE from Jim: >"Jhaayatha, Cunda, maa pamaadattha maa pacchaa vippa.tisaarino ahuvattha ..." -- M i 46 (near the end of MN 8). Also found at M i 118 (MN 19) with 'bhikkhave' instead of Cunda. Here, the commentary interprets "Meditate" as "Increase samatha and vipassanaa". "Samatha~nca vipassana~nca va.d.dhethaa ti vutta.m hoti." --MA ii 195 (there's a bit more just before this) Jim: >> I know about this translation of 'jhaayatha'. I find >> that it does not >> quite agree with the commentary which includes both >> samatha and >> vipassanaa. That's why I think 'Meditate' is a >> better translation than >> 'Practice jhana'. "Jhaayatha' is a verb in the 2nd person plural with the -tha ending. In the PED, the verbs are entered in their 3rd pers. sing. forms with the -ti ending. So you will have to look for 'jhaayati' for which you will find two entries. The first one has the following senses: to meditate, contemplate, think upon, brood over (c. acc.): . . . -- and for the second: to burn, to be on fire: . . . They are derived from two distinct roots. In the commentarial passage from which I quoted "Increase samatha and vipassanaa" in explaining 'jhaayatha' there is also the following comment that helps to clarify the difference between samatha and vipassana: "Meditate (upanijjhaayatha) on the 38 objects (aaramma.na) with the meditation (upanijjhaana) on an object and on aggregates, bases, etc. according to anicca, etc. with the meditation on a characteristic (lakkha.na)." -- MA i< END QUOTE ***** > [Right view begins with the right understanding that all > realities arise due to conditions, and then fall away as they > arise, and because they don't last, they are impermanent. These > processes of arising and falling away of realities (minfulness > and concentration included) and the conditions are > uncontrolable.] > > I understand the next sentence, though: "Don't be heedless". It > means 'be mindful now'. > > Q2. Also, I see phrase 'if he wants' all over the sutta, what > does it say in Pali? Anyone has access to co.. ..... Jaran, I thought you were helping us with the Pali??? I’m not sure. In BB’s translation, he uses “if he should wish..” Let us know if you find out. Maybe Suan. Stegan or someone else may help. ..... > Q3. And the last question, where it says ... "Furthermore, when > cognizing an idea with the intellect,.... in Thai version it > includes all dhammaramana (cittas, cetasikas, other rupas and (I > think) pannati). Can't this be right? Or it means only cittas, > cetasikas, the rest of rupas and the cittas (and accompanying > cetasikas) that 'think' about concepts? ..... In BB’s transl, he uses “cognizes a mind-object with the mind”. I would have assumed that the object would refer to dhammarammana including pannati as suggested in the Thai version. Why not? The passage is surely referring to pleasant, unpleasant and neutral feelings and other mental states on account of what is seen, heard, smelt, tasted, touched and experienced through the mind door (inc. concepts). It is discussed how ‘development of the faculties’ is not a matter of not seeing, hearing.......experiencing mind objects, but of understanding and developing detachment or equanimity on account of what is seen, heard ....’cognizable by the mind’ Let me know if this still isn’t clear or if I’ve misunderstood you or the passage. ...... > PS. Four of us from my family, my father included, are going to > Sri Lanka. It's going to be fun. :-) See you there. ..... Great news, thanks :-)) Sarah ==== 13057 From: Date: Thu May 2, 2002 1:01am Subject: Re: [dsg] A question on enlightenment Hi, Robert - In a message dated 5/2/02 2:17:02 AM Eastern Daylight Time, epsteinrob@Y... writes: > Howard, > I have nothing intelligent to add at the moment, but I wanted to let you > know that > I think your recent posts, including this one and the one on paramatha > dhammas, > are very sharp. > > Robert Ep =========================== Thank you. I always appreciate approval from you, because I have great respect for you and for your positions on matters of Dhamma. With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 13058 From: yuzhonghao Date: Thu May 2, 2002 1:36pm Subject: Re: [dsg] attachment to concept > When I narrow down my analysis further and further, I see > that there are no choices at all that one is making: only > dhammas are doing their things. No person, no animal, no > me, and definitely no self. > > kom See the following passage from http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/majjhima/mn117.html "And what is right view? Right view, I tell you, is of two sorts: There is right view with fermentations [asava], siding with merit, resulting in the acquisitions [of becoming]; and there is noble right view, without fermentations, transcendent, a factor of the path. "And what is the right view that has fermentations, sides with merit, & results in acquisitions? 'There is what is given, what is offered, what is sacrificed. There are fruits & results of good & bad actions. There is this world & the next world. There is mother & father. There are spontaneously reborn beings; there are priests & contemplatives who, faring rightly & practicing rightly, proclaim this world & the next after having directly known & realized it for themselves.' This is the right view that has fermentations, sides with merit, & results in acquisitions. "And what is the right view that is without fermentations, transcendent, a factor of the path? The discernment, the faculty of discernment, the strength of discernment, analysis of qualities as a factor for Awakening, the path factor of right view in one developing the noble path whose mind is noble, whose mind is free from fermentations, who is fully possessed of the noble path. This is the right view that is without fermentations, transcendent, a factor of the path. 13059 From: Date: Thu May 2, 2002 9:40am Subject: Re: [dsg] ..... MN117 and jhana in the last sentence of MN 152 Hi Jaran and Sarah, This is a quick mail. I am now in a lurking mode of operation. I have never read this sutta before. I looked it up. It's very good. Thanks for bringing it up. <>> My understanding is as long as there is citta, sati can be aware of the citta and nature of its arammana. Jhana citta can be arammana of satipathana as well, in case that person develops jhana to the point that it becomes his second nature, although most of the arammanas of jhana citta are pannatti. I do not think the Buddha told Ven. Ananda to practice jhana as a stepping-stone to satipathana. In nnana or magga level, all 5 or 8 factors come all together. <> I looked up from my CD, "if you want" in Pali is "sace akankhati". I have no access to this particular com. <> I looked up the sutta in Thai and in Pali. <> Pali: <> And <> < >. Sound like this refers to the nature of the flow in paticcasamuppada. I feel that satipatthana and paticcasamuppada refer to the same thing, nature of dhamma, trilakkhana. Have to run. Hope everyone have a good time in Sri Lanka. Bon Voyage. Run. Num PS. Larry, I appreciate your ADL series and still keep my eyes on it. I have learned a lot from a lot of good input from the wise :-) 13060 From: Date: Thu May 2, 2002 9:50pm Subject: ADL ch. 6 (24-30) from: http://www.budsas.org/ebud/nina-abhidhamma/nina-abhi-00.htm Abhidhamma In Daily Life chapter 6, paragraphs 24-30 24. In doing kind deeds to others we cannot eradicate the latent tendency of dosa, but at least at those moments we do not accumulate more dosa. The Buddha exhorted people to cultivate lovingkindness (metta). We read in the 'Karaniya Metta-sutta'; (Sutta Nipata, vs. 143-152 : I am using the translation by Nanamoli Thera, Buddhist Publicafion Society, Kandy, Sri Lanka.) what one should do in order to gain the 'state of peace'. One should have thought of love for all living beings: . ...In safety and in bliss May creatures all be of a blissful heart. Whatever breathing beings there may be, No matter whether they are frail or firm, With none excepted, be they long or big Or middle-sized, or be they short or small Or thick, as well as those seen or unseen, Or whether they are dwelling far or near, Existing or yet seeking to exist, May creatures all be of a blissful heart. Let no one work another one's undoing Or even slight him at all anywhere; And never let them wish each other ill Through provocation or resentful thought. And just as might a mother with her life Protect the son that was her only child, So let him then for every living thing Maintain unbounded consciousness in being, And let him too with love for all the world Maintain unbounded consciousness in being Above, below, and all around in between, Untroubled, with no enemy or foe.... 25. The Buddha taught us not to be angry with those who are unpleasant to us. We read in the Vinaya (Mahavagga X, 349 : Translation by Nanamoli Thera.) that the Buddha said to the monks: They who (in thought) belabour this: That man has me abused, has hurt, has worsted me, has me despoiled: in these wrath is not allayed. They who do not belabour this: That man has me abused, has hurt, has wosted me, has me despoiled: in them wrath is allayed. Nay, not by wrath are wrathful moods allayed here (and) at any time, but by not-wrath are they allayed: this is an (ageless) endless rule.... 26. At times it seems impossible for us to have metta instead of dosa. For example, when people treat us badly we may feel very unhappy and we keep on pondering over our misery. When dosa has not been eradicated there are still conditions for it to arise. In being mindful of all realities which appear the wisdom is developed which can eradicate dosa. 27. Dosa can only be eradicated stage by stage. The sotapanna (who has attained the first stage of enlightenment) has not yet eradicated dosa. At the subsequent stage of enlightenment, the stage of the sakadagami (once-returner), dosa is not yet eradicated completely. The anagami (non-returner, who has attained the third stage of enlightenment) has eradicated dosa completely; he has no more latent tendency of dosa. 28. We have not eradicated dosa, but when dosa appears, we can be mindful of its characteristic in order to know it as a type of nama, arising because of conditions. When there is no mindfulness of dosa when it appears, dosa seems to last and we take it for self; neither do we notice other namas and rupas presenting themselves. Through mindfulness of namas and rupas which present themselves one at a time, we will learn that there are different characteristics of nama and rupa, none of which stays; and we will also know the characteristic of dosa as only a type of nama, not self. 29. When a clearer understanding of realities is developed we will be less inclined to ponder for a long time over an unpleasant experience, since it is only a type of nama which does not last. We will attend more to the present moment instead of thinking about the past or the future. We will also be less inclined to tell other people about unpleasant things which have happened to us, since that may be a condition both for ourselves and for others to accumulate more dosa. When someone is angry with us we will have more understanding of his conditions; he may be tired or not feeling well. Those who treat us badly deserve compassion because they actually make themselves unhappy. 30. Right understanding of realities will help us most of all to have more lovingkindness and compassion towards others instead of dosa. Questions 1. Why is lobha a condition for dosa? 2. Lying, slandering and frivolous talk are akusala kamma-patha through speech which can be performed either with lobha-mula-citta or with dosa-mula-citta. When are they performed with dosa-mula-citta? 3. Is there akusala kamma-patha through the mind performed with dosa-mula-citta? 13061 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Thu May 2, 2002 10:06pm Subject: RE: [dsg] attachment to concept Dear Victor, Thank you for your helpful post, like usual. > -----Original Message----- > From: yuzhonghao [mailto:victoryu@s...] > > "And what is right view? Right view, I tell you, > is of two sorts: > There is right view with fermentations [asava], > siding with merit, > resulting in the acquisitions [of becoming]; and > there is noble right > view, without fermentations, transcendent, a > factor of the path. > > "And what is the right view that has > fermentations, sides with merit, > & results in acquisitions? 'There is what is > given, what is offered, > what is sacrificed. There are fruits & results of > good & bad actions. > There is this world & the next world. There is > mother & father. There > are spontaneously reborn beings; there are > priests & contemplatives > who, faring rightly & practicing rightly, > proclaim this world & the > next after having directly known & realized it > for themselves.' This > is the right view that has fermentations, sides > with merit, & results > in acquisitions. > > "And what is the right view that is without > fermentations, > transcendent, a factor of the path? The > discernment, the faculty of > discernment, the strength of discernment, > analysis of qualities as a > factor for Awakening, the path factor of right > view in one developing > the noble path whose mind is noble, whose mind is > free from > fermentations, who is fully possessed of the > noble path. This is the > right view that is without fermentations, > transcendent, a factor of > the path. > Of course, like any other sayings of the Buddhas, it is subject to interpretation fitting our own accumulations! kom 13062 From: Sarah Date: Fri May 3, 2002 0:17am Subject: Re: [dsg] 4 Ultimate Realities? Dear TG, I’m glad to read your comments and see you are following the ADL studies. --- TGrand458@a... wrote: > In the Samyutta Nikaya the Buddha describes the 5 Khandhas as... > > "...form should be seen as a bursting bubble, feeling should be seen as > a > lump of foam, perception should be seen as a mirage, mental formations > should > be seen as a plantian tree (coreless), consciousness should be seen as a > > conjurers trick..." ..... S:Hope you don’t mind if I add some commentary notes I typed in for an earlier post of mine(11th December, the 9fold Path) and which I just came across (Spk refers to the SN commentary): ====================================================== From the Phena Sutta (A Lump of Foam) Spk notes translated by B.Bodhi: ***** note 190: “Spk: a bubble (bubbu.la) is feeble and cannot be grasped, for it breaks up as soon as it is seized; so too feeling is feeble and cannot be grasped as permanent and stable. As a bubble arises and ceases in a drop of water and does not last long, so too with feeling: 100,000 ‘ko.tis’ of feelings arise and cease in the time of a fingersnap (one ko.ti = 10 million). As a bubble arises in dependence on conditions, so feeling arises in dependence on a sense base, an object, the defilements, and contact.” “Spk: Perception is like a mirage (marikaa) in the sense that it is insubstantial, for one cannot grasp a mirage to drink or bathe or fill a pitcher. As a mirage deceives the multitude, so does perception, which entices people with th idea that the colourful object is beautiful, pleasurable, and permanent.” ***** Sarah:Does this mean feelings, perceptions and other paramatha dhammas (realities) don’t have lakhana (characteristics) or sabhava (nature) or that they don’t exist momentarily in their different ‘activities’? No. ***** “Spk: As a plaintain trunk (kadalikkhandha) is an assemblage of many sheaths, each with its own characteristic, so the aggregate of volitional formations is an assemblage of many phenomena, each with its own characteristic.” “Spk: Consciousness is like a magical illusion (maayaa) in the sense that it is insubstantial and cannot be grasped. Consciousness is even more transient and fleeting than a magical illusion. For it gives the impression that a person comes and goes, stands and sits, with the same mind, but the mind is different in each of these activities. Consciousness deceives the multitude like a magical illusion.” ***** ====================================================== TG> Doesn't sound to me like the Buddha wants them to be thought of as > ultimate > realities. Seems like he wants them to be seen as unsubstantial as > humanly > possible. ..... S:Though insubstantial, each ‘with its own characteristic’, however fleeting, transient and deceptive. Because there is no understanding of the ‘paramatha’ nature of these phenomena, like a magical illusion, we’re deceived and take them for a ‘whole’, for a self of substance. ..... TG:>Calling them "ultimate realities" seems to against that grain > to > me. I wonder if seeing them as ultimate realities embeds a type of > substantiality and self view that is counter-productive to detaching > from > conditions (non-attachment). I understand the reasoning behind > describing > them as ultimate realities, I'm just not sure its a very good idea? ..... S:You might like to read Jon’s comments in the following post to Rob Ep: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/10241 There are also many other detailed posts on this topic in Useful Posts under ‘Concepts and Realities’: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/files/Useful_Posts ‘Ultimately’ the label isn’t important. Ultimate is a direct translation of paramattha. We can use paramatha or any other word that helps us understand that these are the phenomena that can be and must be known directly by sati and panna and should be distinguished from ‘worldly’ or conceptual realities. I would suggest that seeing them as ‘substantial’ or with ‘self view’ is more a problem of the limited understanding than of the phenomena themselves or the labels we use. I’d also like to use this post to thank Goglerr for his very helpful and detailed recent posts (re: anicca -do concepts arise and fall? -)on pannatti (concepts). I think that the more we read about the various kinds of concepts, the less inclined we’ll be to take them for realities and the less likely to be deceived by the 'magical illusions'. Look forward to any further comments you many have, TG, Sarah ===== 13063 From: robertkirkpatrick.rm Date: Fri May 3, 2002 1:46am Subject: Re: [dsg] 4 Ultimate Realities? --- Dear Sarah, TG , Howard and all, Here are some quotes from a sutta and commentary to add to those that Sarah gave: Samyutta nikaya Khanda vagga XXII 94 (p.950 of Bodhi translation) "Rupa(matter, physical phenomena) that is impermanent, suffering and subject to change: this the wise in the world agree upon as existing, and I too say it exists. Feeling...perception..volitional formations..consciouness..that is impermanent, suffering and subject to change..I too say that it exists" endquote 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 own 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.."" endquote Dhammas like feeling and anger and greed and hardness are real - unlike concepts such as human and man - but dhammas are impermanent. A dhamma cannot be changed into something other than what it is right now, but it lasts for an infinitely brief instant only, no matter we want it to stay or go. best wishes robert In dhammastudygroup@y..., Sarah wrote: > Dear TG, > > I'm glad to read your comments and see you are following the ADL studies. > > --- TGrand458@a... wrote: > In the Samyutta Nikaya the Buddha > describes the 5 Khandhas as... > > > > "...form should be seen as a bursting bubble, feeling should be seen as > > a > > lump of foam, perception should be seen as a mirage, mental formations > > should > > be seen as a plantian tree (coreless), consciousness should be seen as a > > > > conjurers trick..." > ..... > > S:Hope you don't mind if I add some commentary notes I typed in for an > earlier post of mine(11th December, the 9fold Path) and which I just came > across (Spk refers to the SN commentary): > ====================================================== > From the Phena Sutta (A Lump of Foam) Spk notes translated by B.Bodhi: > ***** > note 190: "Spk: a bubble (bubbu.la) is feeble and cannot be grasped, for > it > breaks up as soon as it is seized; so too feeling is feeble and cannot be > grasped as permanent and stable. As a bubble arises and ceases in a drop > of > water and does not last long, so too with feeling: 100,000 `ko.tis' of > feelings arise and cease in the time of a fingersnap (one ko.ti = 10 > million). > As a bubble arises in dependence on conditions, so feeling arises in > dependence > on a sense base, an object, the defilements, and contact." > > "Spk: Perception is like a mirage (marikaa) in the sense that it is > insubstantial, for one cannot grasp a mirage to drink or bathe or fill a > pitcher. As a mirage deceives the multitude, so does perception, which > entices > people with th idea that the colourful object is beautiful, pleasurable, > and > permanent." > ***** > Sarah:Does this mean feelings, perceptions and other paramatha dhammas > (realities) > don't have lakhana (characteristics) or sabhava (nature) or that they > don't > exist momentarily in their different `activities'? No. > ***** > "Spk: As a plaintain trunk (kadalikkhandha) is an assemblage of many > sheaths, > each with its own characteristic, so the aggregate of volitional > formations is > an assemblage of many phenomena, each with its own characteristic." > > "Spk: Consciousness is like a magical illusion (maayaa) in the sense that > it is > insubstantial and cannot be grasped. Consciousness is even more transient > and > fleeting than a magical illusion. For it gives the impression that a > person > comes and goes, stands and sits, with the same mind, but the mind is > different > in each of these activities. Consciousness deceives the multitude like a > magical illusion." > ***** > > ====================================================== > TG> Doesn't sound to me like the Buddha wants them to be thought of as > > ultimate > > realities. Seems like he wants them to be seen as unsubstantial as > > humanly > > possible. > ..... > > S:Though insubstantial, each `with its own characteristic', however > fleeting, transient and deceptive. Because there is no understanding of > the `paramatha' nature of these phenomena, like a magical illusion, we're > deceived and take them for a `whole', for a self of substance. > ..... > TG:>Calling them "ultimate realities" seems to against that grain > > to > > me. I wonder if seeing them as ultimate realities embeds a type of > > substantiality and self view that is counter-productive to detaching > > from > > conditions (non-attachment). I understand the reasoning behind > > describing > > them as ultimate realities, I'm just not sure its a very good idea? > ..... > S:You might like to read Jon's comments in the following post to Rob Ep: > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/10241 > > There are also many other detailed posts on this topic in Useful Posts > under `Concepts and Realities': > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/files/Useful_Posts > > `Ultimately' the label isn't important. Ultimate is a direct translation > of paramattha. We can use paramatha or any other word that helps us > understand that these are the phenomena that can be and must be known > directly by sati and panna and should be distinguished from `worldly' or > conceptual realities. > > I would suggest that seeing them as `substantial' or with `self view' is > more a problem of the limited understanding than of the phenomena > themselves or the labels we use. > > I'd also like to use this post to thank Goglerr for his very helpful and > detailed recent posts (re: anicca -do concepts arise and fall? -)on > pannatti (concepts). I think that the more we read about the various > kinds of concepts, the less inclined we'll be to take them for realities > and the less likely to be deceived by the 'magical illusions'. > > Look forward to any further comments you many have, TG, > > Sarah > ===== 13064 From: ranil gunawardena Date: Fri May 3, 2002 5:07am Subject: News >From: "Buddhist Environmental Network" >Reply-To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com >To: , , >, , >, , >, >Subject: [dsg] Buddhist Enironmental Network >Date: Wed, 1 May 2002 09:17:44 +0100 > >This month (May 2002) sees the launch of the Buddhist Enironmental Network >(BEN). > >We need subscribers (it's free!) and also volunteers. > >If you simply want to be kept informed of progress and our campaigns, >please reply, inserting the word "News" in the subject field. > >We aim to be an active, fully engaged network and are keen to recruit >volunteers to help in BEN's development or to be more actively involved in >campaigning work. If you think you could help then please reply to this >email substituting the word "Help" in the subject field. (You will also >automatically receive our update and campaign mailings.) > >In addition to working through email, we hope to set up local groups where >members can meet and network on environmental issues. > >Below you will find more information in the form of BEN's Mission Statement > >MISSION STATEMENT >The Buddhist Environmental Network (B-E-N) works with Buddhists from all >traditions to create environmental solutions that are rooted deeply within >the Buddhist Precepts and the acknowledgement of the interdependence of all >life. Through public education, publications, practice groups and outreach, >B-E-N seeks to link Buddhist teachings of compassion, wisdom, tolerance and >non-violence with efforts and campaigns to create a sustainable environment >together with a culture of reduced consumption and waste, serving as a >catalyst for socially engaged Buddhism." > >With apologies for any cross-postings. >David Meanwell - BEN 13065 From: Date: Fri May 3, 2002 1:25am Subject: Re: [dsg] 4 Ultimate Realities? Hi, Robert - In a message dated 5/3/02 4:48:19 AM Eastern Daylight Time, robertkirkpatrick@r... writes: > > Dear Sarah, TG , Howard and all, > > Here are some quotes from a sutta and commentary to add to those > that Sarah gave: > Samyutta nikaya Khanda vagga XXII 94 (p.950 of Bodhi translation) > "Rupa(matter, physical phenomena) that is impermanent, suffering and > subject to change: this > the wise in the world agree upon as existing, and I too say it > exists. Feeling...perception..volitional > formations..consciouness..that is impermanent, suffering and > subject to change..I too say that it exists" endquote > 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 own 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.."" endquote > > Dhammas like feeling and anger and greed and hardness are real - > unlike concepts such as human and man - but dhammas are impermanent. > A dhamma cannot be changed into something other than what it is > right now, but it lasts for an infinitely brief instant only, no > matter we want it to stay or go. > best wishes > robert > > ============================ Yes, these dhammas exist, conditions exist - they are not imagined. The question is what their mode of existence is. They are things-in-relation, arising in dependence on other, similarly empty conditions, including discernment (vi~n~nana). We tend to see them as separate and self-existing, and that is avijja. The preceding is not all of avijja, but it is a part of it. Seeing dhammas as personal is another critical part. And seeing alleged referents of many concepts as existent is yet another critical part. 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) 13066 From: goglerr Date: Fri May 3, 2002 6:49am Subject: Away for a month! Dear all, I'll be away for month (more or less), to do a little contemplate on this mind and body. See u guys then. A poem for reflection.......Bye. Many a door is open to us with knowledge as the key. We discover paths to lead us to our dreams of what could be. We find that we have choices and that life has much to give. If only we are wise enough to keep learning as we live. For each day that lies ahead brings joys for us to see.... Many a door is open to us with knowledge as the key. ~anonymous goglerr p.s. Cheer up! Life is short, for soon we all be dead! :-) 13067 From: Lucy Date: Fri May 3, 2002 0:39pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Antidotes to lobha Dear Sarah Happy birthday ! (sorry a bit late - will remember next year) I liked the tale of the snake - though felt sorry for the poor thing (I'm rather fond of snakes, had one as pet for a short while) - of course, my little upaya bag has a few mantras for dead critters : ) I really, really liked your comment: > Oh dear, how hard we work to try and > maintain the illusion of beauty and permanence and how disappointed we are > when it doesn't last;-( Funny you bringing it up --- Most of today I was thinking about lambs and what a good illustration they are of samsara. When you see them playing carefree on the fields, it is such a joy! --- until you remember that in a few weeks time they are someone's Sunday roast. And then also remember the sad, desperate, all night long crying of the mother sheeps when their lambs are all taken away one evening... so the sight of the lambs didn't make me very happy today. I think all the joys of samsara are like that Best wishes Lucy ----- Original Message ----- From: "Sarah" > Dear Lucy, > > > I'd be truly lost without my little bag of "upaya" ... No "antidotes" > > in > > the real sense, but a useful reminder of the Path, especially in May, > > blackbirds and thrushes singing among droopy cherry blossoms.... So, I > > offer all and look forward going out tomorrow looking for more offerings > > : ) > > We had a public holiday in Hong Kong yesterday, so we also went out > enjoying the countryside. On an early morning hike up the Peak, there were > no lambs here, but squirrels, white cockatoos, other exotic birds and > hot, humid, tropical conditions. > > And then, we came across a beautiful small silver and green snake on the > path. It didn't look injured at all, but it turned out to be dead. I > decided to take it home by way of an 'offering' for my students, thinking > they might enjoy it as much as 'my' lobha did. So Jon kindly put it in a > bag in his backpack and when we got home, we put it in the freezer > > I have a group of so-called 'gifted' (you know,calculus at age 8,bored by > everything at school, enjoy unusual offerings) students coming soon. I > Just went to take out my beautiful snake, but instead found what looks > like a limp, brown giant worm. Oh dear, how hard we work to try and > maintain the illusion of beauty and permanence and how disappointed we are > when it doesn't last;-( > ..... > > Best wishes (and happy May Day) > ..... > Thanks for the reminders of an English May Day. Actually as well as being > a holiday here (thanks to being part of China) , it is also my birthday, > so it's always a happy day;-) > > I think that any reminders of the Teachings at anytime can be helpful. If > your bag of upaya serve as reminders, then continue enjoying Spring, > looking for offerings and developing awareness;-)) > > Sarah > ===== 13068 From: Lucy Date: Fri May 3, 2002 0:45pm Subject: Re: [dsg] ADL ch. 6 (18-23) Hi Larry and all ADL's I don't really get the prompted and unprompted ... Unprompted makes me think of "uncaused", but we know that's impossible. Everything arises from a cause (in the case of dosa, it'd be past dosa and latent tendencies to develop dosa whenever the condition appears). So any dosa is always *prompted* by its cause. What seems to be prompted or unprompted are conditions for dosa to arise, not dosa itself. Comments, anyone? Lucy > from: http://www.budsas.org/ebud/nina-abhidhamma/nina-abhi-00.htm > > Abhidhamma In Daily Life > chapter 6, paragraphs 18-23 > > 18. When we study the Abhidhamma we learn that there are two types of > dosa-mula-citta; one is asankharika (unprompted) and one is sasankharika > (prompted). Dosa is sasankharika (prompted) when, for example, one > becomes angry after having been reminded of the disagreeable actions of > someone else. When dosa is asankharika (unprompted) it is more intense > than when it is sasankharika. Dosa-mula-cittas are called > patigha.sampayutta, or accompanied by patigha, which is another word for > dosa. Dosa.mula-cittas are always accompanied by domanassa (unpleasant > feeling). The two type of dosa-mula-citta are: > > 1. Accompanied by unpleasant feeling, arising with anger, unprompted > (Domanassa-sahagatam, patigha-sampayuttam, asankharikam ekam) > 2. Accompanied by unpleasant feeling, arising with anger, prompted > (Domanassa-sahagatam, > patigha-sampayuttam, sasankharikam ekam) > > 19. As we have seen, there are many degrees of dosa; it may be coarse or > more subtle. When dosa is coarse, it causes akusala kamma-patha > (unwholesome deeds) through body, speech or mind. Two kinds of akusala > kamma-patha through the body can be performed with dosa-mula-citta: > killing and stealing. If we want less violence in the world we should > try not to kill. When we kill we accumulate a great deal of dosa. The > monk's life is a life of non-violence; he does not hurt any living being > in the world. However, not everyone is able to live like the monks. > Defilements are anatta (not self); they arise because of conditions. The > purpose of the Buddha's teachings is not to lay down rules which forbid > people to commit ill deeds, but to help people to develop the wisdom > which eradicates defilements. > > 20. As regards stealing, this can either be performed with > lobha-mula-citta or with dosa-mula-citta. It is done with > dosa-mula-citta when there is the intention to harm someone else. Doing > damage to someone else's possessions is included in this kamma-patha. > > 21. Four kinds of akusala kamma-patha through speech are performed with > dosa-mula-citta: lying, slandering, rude speech and frivolous talk. > Lying, slandering and frivolous talk can either be done with > lobha-mula-citta or with dosa-mula-citta. Slandering, for example, is > done with dosa-mula-citta when there is the intention to cause damage to > someone else, such as doing harm to his good name and causing him to be > looked down upon by others. Most people think that the use of weapons is > to be avoided, but they forget that the tongue can be a weapon as well, > which can badly wound. Evil speech does a great deal of harm in the > world; it causes discord between people. When we speak evil we harm > ourselves, because at such moments akusala kamma is accumulated and it > is capable of producing akusala vipaka. We read in the 'Sutta Nipata' > (the Great Chapter, 'Khuddaka Nikava'): > Truly to every person born > An axe is born within his mouth > Wherewith the fool cuts himself > When he speaks evil. > > 22. As regards akusala kamma-patha through the mind performed with > dosa-mula-citta, this is the intention to hurt or harm someone else. > > 23. People often speak about violence and the ways to cure It. Who of us > can say that he is free from dosa and that he will never kill? We do not > know how much dosa we have accumulated in the course of many lives. When > the conditions are there we might commit an act of violence we did not > realize we were capable of. When we understand how ugly dosa is and to > what deeds it can lead we want to eradicate it. 13069 From: Date: Fri May 3, 2002 6:23pm Subject: Re: [dsg] ADL ch. 6 (18-23) Hi Lucy (& Christine at the end), according to "A comprehensive Manual Of Abhidhamma", 'prompting occurs through inducement by another or by personal deliberation'. So when I watch 'The Nightly Business Report' and learn that the stock market is going to keep going down, dosa arises concerning my prospects. But in walking up and down stairs all day dosa spontaneously arises; I don't have to be convinced of anything. I'm finding that there is a certain satisfaction in identifying dosa but in identifying lobha there was aversion. Maybe identifying these states slightly disidentifies us from them. Also I noticed that dosa isn't a feeling and the object of dosa is neither the dosa nor the unpleasant feeling. This gives a new perspective in the process of dosa arising with unpleasant feeling regarding an object. Christine, how did you fare with this chapter? Larry 13070 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Fri May 3, 2002 8:13pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Away for a month! Goglerr --- goglerr wrote: > Dear all, > > I'll be away for month (more or less), to do a little contemplate on > this mind and body. See u guys then. Have fun! Will miss your useful contributions in the meantime. When you come back, do let us know whether dhammas are any different under intensive contemplation than in ordinary life ;-)). And thanks for the poem below. I like the sentiment (knowledge is the key). Jon > A poem for reflection.......Bye. > > Many a door is open to us > with knowledge as the key. > > We discover paths to lead us > to our dreams of what could be. > > We find that we have choices > and that life has much to give. > > If only we are wise enough > to keep learning as we live. > > For each day that lies ahead > brings joys for us to see.... > > Many a door is open to us > with knowledge as the key. > > ~anonymous > > goglerr > p.s. Cheer up! Life is short, for soon we all be dead! :-) 13071 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Fri May 3, 2002 8:45pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Prompted/unprompted (was, ADL ch. 6 (18-23)) Larry --- LBIDD@w... wrote: > Hi Lucy (& Christine at the end), > > according to "A comprehensive Manual Of Abhidhamma", 'prompting occurs > through inducement by another or by personal deliberation'. So when I > watch 'The Nightly Business Report' and learn that the stock market is > going to keep going down, dosa arises concerning my prospects. But in > walking up and down stairs all day dosa spontaneously arises; I don't > have to be convinced of anything. Thanks for this definition from CMA. See also the definition from Nyanatiloka’s ‘Buddhist Dictionary’ below, under the Pali terms ‘asankharika’ (umprompted) and ‘sasankharika’ (prompted), and the example given in Visuddhimagga. Just wanted to add the point that the prompted/unprompted classification applies to all kinds of kusala and akusala cittas (not just dosa citta). The arising of a tendency unprompted indicates a stronger disposition towards the tendency (wholesome or unwholesome) in that particular circumstance. Note that, on the basis of the Vis. example, your example of dosa on hearing the daily financial news report may not count as prompted, since the dosa arises spontaneously and without any prompting as to the nature of the response. In that situation, it is the kusala response that could only arise with prompting (in my case, anyway!) Jon A. BUDDHIST DICTIONARY asankhárika-citta: “An Abhidhamma term signifying a 'state of consciousness arisen spontaneously', i. e. without previous deliberation, preparation, or prompting by others; hence: 'unprepared, unprompted'. “This term and its counterpart (sasankhárikacitta), probably go back to a similar distinction made in the Suttas (A. IV, 171).” sasankhárika-citta: “A prepared, or prompted. state of consciousness, arisen after prior deliberation (e.g. weighing of motives) or induced by others (command, advice, persuasion).” B. VISUDDHIMAGGA XIV, 84 “(1) When a man is happy on encountering an excellent gift to be given, or recipient, etc., or some such cause for joy, or by placing right view foremost in the way that occurs beginning ‘There is [merit in] giving’ (M. I, 288), he unhesitatingly and unurged by others perform such merit as giving, etc., then his consciousness is accompanied by joy, associated with knowledge, and unprompted. “(2) But when a man is happy and content in the way aforesaid, and, while placing right view foremost, yet he does it hesitatingly through lack of free generosity, etc., or urged on by others, then his consciousness is of the same kind as the last but prompted; for in this sense ‘prompting’ is a term for prior effort exerted by himself or others.” 13072 From: Date: Fri May 3, 2002 10:08pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Prompted/unprompted (was, ADL ch. 6 (18-23)) Hi Jon, Thanks for this further clarification. So you are saying the response has to be suggested by another or one has to talk oneself into it. Another point, prompting can be by body, speech, or mind (as I recall). But I can't think of a good example for body. Unprompted is said to be more intense but I think this might be a factor of speed. Unprompted happens immediately (habitual/automatic), but prompted takes a couple of seconds (for deliberation). Maybe if someone hits you and it takes a couple of seconds before you decide to be angry, that is dosa prompted by body.??? Larry ------------ Jon Thanks for this definition from CMA. See also the definition from Nyanatiloka's 'Buddhist Dictionary' below, under the Pali terms 'asankharika' (umprompted) and 'sasankharika' (prompted), and the example given in Visuddhimagga. Just wanted to add the point that the prompted/unprompted classification applies to all kinds of kusala and akusala cittas (not just dosa citta). The arising of a tendency unprompted indicates a stronger disposition towards the tendency (wholesome or unwholesome) in that particular circumstance. Note that, on the basis of the Vis. example, your example of dosa on hearing the daily financial news report may not count as prompted, since the dosa arises spontaneously and without any prompting as to the nature of the response. In that situation, it is the kusala response that could only arise with prompting (in my case, anyway!) Jon 13073 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sat May 4, 2002 1:08am Subject: RE: [dsg] Satipatthana and concepts/realities Frank --- frank kuan wrote: > the controversy: > --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > (4) the foundation > > of mindfulness in > > > contemplation of mental objects. > ...So the controversy is, does > > this 'dhamma' mean > > > paramattha-dhamma or dhammarammana. > > The Satipatthana Sutta... > > "Here, O bhikkhus, a bhikkhu lives contemplating the > > mental objects in the mental objects > > of the five hindrances, … of the five aggregates of > > clinging, … of the six internal and > > the six external sense-bases, … of the seven factors > > of enlightenment, … of the Four > > Noble Truths." > > > > According to my reading of the texts, these sets are > > all references to paramattha > > dhammas, not concepts. > > Can you explain how you read it that way? I've > always wondered what the hell is that sutta talking > about with the 4th foundation of mindfulness being > "mind-objects" when it appears to me dhamma is > referring to concepts, specifically buddhist concepts. > > I mean, come on, 5 hindrances, 7 factors of > enlightenment as paramatta ultimate realities? How do > you make a case for that? Might as well say Frank is > an ultimate reality too. > > As I see it, one could only make a case for that > only if the 4th foundation of mindfulness of dhamma > referred exclusively to the 3 marks, 5 aggregates, 6 > sense bases. And even so, many buddhists would argue > that even the 3 marks are concepts, not ultimate > realities to be wrongly grasped. My reading is based on the commentaries and other ancient texts. I’ll do my best to share my thinking with you. I think you accept that the 5 aggregates and 6 sense bases are dhammas (phenomena of existence), but you question whether the 5 hindrances or the 7 factors of enlightenment are dhammas. The texts contain many classifications or groupings of dhammas. Some of these are ways of classifying all dhammas (and may or may not include concepts also), while others are ways of grouping certain dhammas by a common factor. A. Examples of ways of classifying all phenomena are— aggregates (khandhas) ayatanas (bases) dhatus (elements) the all the six sixes nama’s and rupa’s B. Examples of ways of grouping akusala dhammas are— asava’s (cankers or poisons) ogha’s (floods) yogha’s (yokes) upadana’s (ways of clinging) nivarana (hindrances) anusaya (latent tendencies) samyogana’s (fetters) C. Examples of ways of grouping kusala dhammas are— padhana’s (right efforts, strivings, perseverences) iddhi-pada (roads to power) indriya (spiritual faculties) bala (mental powers) bojjhanga’s (factors of enlightenment) According to the texts (including the abhidhamma and the commentaries to the suttas), all these classifications and groupings refer to specific dhammas. The groupings of the kusala and akusala dhammas (B. and C.) refer to particular mental factors/cetasikas (there is 1 exception to this that I will ignore for the moment). These mental factors/cetasikas are included among the cetasikas that comprise the aggregate known as sankhara khandha. So all these factors are as much ‘realties’ as each other, and the hindrances are no less ‘real’ than the aggregates. The groupings at C. are part of the 37 bodhi-pakkhiya dhamma (factors pertaining to enlightenment). The texts explain that these 37 factors are in fact different ways of describing just 14 cetasikas. Frank, this is a necessarily cursory treatment, but I hope it gives a sense of how I read the texts, based on a study of the tipitaka as a whole and its commentaries. I would be happy to expand on these groupings, with references, in a later post if you would like to see more detail. > Now I should say that I'm still open to the > possibility that the 4th foundtion of mindulness > starts with concepts, but there is some special > technique where one should contemplate these buddhist > dhammic concepts in such a way that their "utlimate > realities" can be seen, but where are the details on > how this is done? It's not in the sutta. I think the short answer to this is that the Satipatthana Sutta should be read as dealing with the contemplation of dhammas *as and when they arise*. As I think you are suggesting, unless a dhamma is presently arising, there is no reality of that dhamma, and only its concept can be contemplated. And the contemplating is merely a form of *thinking about* the concept, rather than the *direct experience of* the presently arising reality. Jon 13074 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sat May 4, 2002 1:50am Subject: Re: [dsg] Antidotes to lobha Lucy --- Lucy wrote: > Hi Jon > > Looks like we're talking from two different levels. You talk of *seeing* > and *understanding*, but I'm barely preparing the ground here, picking up > stones, weeding, raking, watering, digging in manure ... all very basic and > with an awful lot of preparation work still to be done. Meanwhile, lobha > for hills, wild flowers, lambs and May bird songs piles up, making the mind > ground even harder to clear for *the* seeing to happen. If I'm not careful, > I might forget there's such thing as a Path and a seeing until, whoops, too > late!!! Hang on -- we’re actually talking from the same level here. I’m just trying to explain the teaching as I understand it in theory – that there’s no real antidote to kilesa other the understanding that is developed by satipatthana. Everyone has heaps of lobha (and not just in spring when the flowers and birds are out and about), so we’re all equally ‘disadvantaged’ in this regard. I do believe, however, that understanding of the present moment reality can be developed regardless of whether there is lobha or not. Even lobha itself is after all one of the hindrances that are specifically given as objects of satipatthana in the Satipatthana Sutta (section on mind-object), so when it’s present, its characteristic can be known. If on the other hand we have the idea that it can’t be the object of understanding then its characteristic will never be known by direct experience. I thing that proper study of understanding at a theoretical level is the most useful preparation of the soil for the cultivation of the real thing. > I'd be truly lost without my little bag of "upaya" ... No "antidotes" in > the real sense, but a useful reminder of the Path, especially in May, > blackbirds and thrushes singing among droopy cherry blossoms.... So, I > offer all and look forward going out tomorrow looking for more offerings > : ) Have fun! Don’t forget, though, that there’s a lot more kilesa than just the obvious lobha, and there’s a lot more to be understood for what it is, so we are told, than just the kilesas. > Best wishes (and happy May Day) > Lucy Best wishes to you (and thanks, it was) Jon 13075 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sat May 4, 2002 2:07am Subject: Re: [dsg] Prompted/unprompted (was, ADL ch. 6 (18-23)) Larry --- LBIDD@w... wrote: > Hi Jon, > > Thanks for this further clarification. So you are saying the response > has to be suggested by another or one has to talk oneself into it. That's how i would read your original passage from CMA (btw, do you have a reference for it? Thanks.) > Another point, prompting can be by body, speech, or mind (as I recall). > But I can't think of a good example for body. I don't recall having seen this, but it sounds OK. A person could prompt another by giving an indication by hand signal or facial expression, for example, reminding someone to be considerate of another's sensitivities (kusala) or to show strong(er) disapproval (akusala). > Unprompted is said to be more intense but I think this might be a factor > of speed. Unprompted happens immediately (habitual/automatic), but > prompted takes a couple of seconds (for deliberation). Yes, the unprompted has the element of spontenaity. The prompted on the other hand could take a lot longer than a couple of seconds! > Maybe if someone hits you and it takes a couple of seconds before you > decide to be angry, that is dosa prompted by body.??? Well, if someone hit you and I said, "you're not going to let him get away with that, are you", and that made a difference to the level of your response, then there would be an aspect of prompted akusala (prompted by speech) involved. Jon > Larry > ------------ > Jon > Thanks for this definition from CMA. See also the definition from > Nyanatiloka's 'Buddhist Dictionary' below, under the Pali terms > 'asankharika' (umprompted) and 'sasankharika' (prompted), and the > example given in Visuddhimagga. > Just wanted to add the point that the prompted/unprompted classification > applies to all kinds of kusala and akusala cittas (not just dosa citta). > The arising of a tendency unprompted indicates a stronger disposition > towards the tendency (wholesome or unwholesome) in that particular > circumstance. > Note that, on the basis of the Vis. example, your example of dosa on > hearing the daily financial news report may not count as prompted, since > the dosa arises spontaneously and without any prompting as to the nature > of the response. In that situation, it is the kusala response that could > only arise with prompting (in my case, anyway!) > Jon 13076 From: christine_forsyth Date: Sat May 4, 2002 2:31am Subject: Re: [dsg] ADL ch. 6 (18-23) Hi Larry, and All, Dosa is not my favourite kilesa .... it is mostly unpleasant to experience, and I personally have difficulty with it in the forms of frivolous talk, and anger. Particularly coming from another religious tradition where 'righteous anger' was commended..... Chapter 6 on Dosa is a very timely chapter and the hardest one for me so far. I find some of the points a little unrealilstic, others I just find a little unpalatable. But mostly it is difficult for me to understand and put into action what the Teachings regarding dosa require of me. These comments are a little back-to-front ... I am commenting on what I see as a major difficulty for me.... The four kinds of akusala kamma-patha through speech - of which frivolous talk is the one I need to watch the most. Being part of a 'talking profession', I use speech as a tool all day, I analyse and assess situations and behaviour all day. It is too easy to slip from the work role of discussing, assessing and analysing situations and behaviour in a professional manner, to doing it in my personal life.... and to chatter for the sake of chattering. I would regard it more as frivolous talk rather than slander, but I could be fooling myself.... Regarding the sutta on Anger - I've been angry with people many times in my life, particularly with those who intentionally harm others (verbally or physically), or with those who ignore distress when it is within their power and their duty to protect. I find this sutta's description of reactions doesn't match my experience - I don't think my reaction of choice was ever to hope those doing the harming 'weren't handsome', 'didn't sleep well', were 'without prosperity, wealth or fame', or hope that they would have 'an unhappy rebirth'. My reaction was to hope they would stop harming, or that someone would stop them from harming, and that they would live with kindness and in harmony. A part I find unpalatable, though the truth, and something I am prone to, is "When we have aversion we think that other people or unpleasant situations are the cause of our aversion. However, our accumulation of dosa is the real cause that aversion arises time and again. If we want to have less dosa we should know the characteristic of dosa and we should be aware of it when it arises." This is a difficulty for me, because of instantaneous reactions, though I'm trying to deal with these. I don't think being aware of dosa means we should have a passive, let it happen, attitude to cruel or unjust behaviour, whether physical or verbal, do you think? I think it means the problem is mainly with the thoughts and emotional reaction. But that, while endeavouring to stop cruelty and injustice, we should try to do so with understanding of causes (within everyone concerned), awareness of our own feelings, and without creating further injustice. [And I wonder what the difference is between 'indifference' and 'equanimity' ?] With regard to 'prompted' 'unprompted' - nothing much to add, except it could also be seen as referring to something like 'the angry young man' syndrome........ People (in this case, only as an example, a young man) who carry with them a palpable sense or anger or subdued violence, without an immediate discernible cause. Just angry at the world in general, and viewing every occurrence through that filter.... This mail is a bit of a hodge podge, but I'm still thinking, integrating and internally arguing ... :-) metta, Christine --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., LBIDD@w... wrote: > Hi Lucy (& Christine at the end), > > according to "A comprehensive Manual Of Abhidhamma", 'prompting occurs > through inducement by another or by personal deliberation'. So when I > watch 'The Nightly Business Report' and learn that the stock market is > going to keep going down, dosa arises concerning my prospects. But in > walking up and down stairs all day dosa spontaneously arises; I don't > have to be convinced of anything. > > I'm finding that there is a certain satisfaction in identifying dosa but > in identifying lobha there was aversion. Maybe identifying these states > slightly disidentifies us from them. Also I noticed that dosa isn't a > feeling and the object of dosa is neither the dosa nor the unpleasant > feeling. This gives a new perspective in the process of dosa arising > with unpleasant feeling regarding an object. > > Christine, how did you fare with this chapter? > > Larry 13077 From: anders_honore Date: Sat May 4, 2002 4:00am Subject: skilful means in the group Imo, the Buddha never taught a single fixed Dhamma. He taught what was skilful *in relation* to the listener(s) in question, in order to best help them free their minds. Thus his teachings to one person might be different for one person, than to another. The key then, lies in figuring out "what is skilful for me on the path" and then simply discarding that which is not. Not rejecting it, because there might come a time later on when it does become skilful. However, what is the sense of studying the Jhanas, if you haven't even seen a nimitta yet? Here is some excerpts of what I would deem skilful *in relation* to this group: ________________________________ If he recites many teachings, but -- heedless man -- doesn't do what they say, like a cowherd counting the cattle of others, he has no share in the contemplative life. If he recites next to nothing but follows the Dhamma in line with the Dhamma; abandoning passion, aversion, delusion; alert, his mind well-released, not clinging either here or hereafter: he has his share in the contemplative life. (Dhammapada 19-20) ___________________________________ For those who go studying, learning as much as they can about the Dhamma, all I have to say is: What profit is there in counting the treasures of others? 13078 From: anders_honore Date: Sat May 4, 2002 4:05am Subject: On the truth of Buddhism Any view, even if it is supreme, is a fetter binding you to Samsara. Some people here have in the past aired the views about the untruth of Mahayana. This hwoever, is merely a consequence of their own need for affirmation of their own tradition. The Paramatthaka Sutta says: When dwelling on views as "supreme," a person makes them the utmost thing in the world, &, from that, calls all others inferior and so he's not free from disputes. When he sees his advantage in what's seen, heard, sensed, or in precepts & practices, seizing it there he sees all else as inferior. That, too, say the skilled, is a binding knot: that in dependence on which you regard another as inferior. So a monk shouldn't be dependent on what's seen, heard, or sensed, or on precepts & practices; nor should he conjure a view in the world in connection with knowledge or precepts & practices; shouldn't take himself to be "equal"; shouldn't think himself inferior or superlative. 13079 From: anders_honore Date: Sat May 4, 2002 4:19am Subject: Sutta commentary The Dutthatthaka Sutta of the Sutta Nipata says: One whose doctrines aren't clean -- fabricated, formed, given preference when he sees it to his own advantage -- relies on a peace dependent on what can be shaken. ------------------------------- Fabricated doctrines here refers to dcotrines that are of the nature of views and not of true seeing of reality that comes from enlightenment. Of course the minute you become a Buddhist, to avoid giving preference to Buddhist doctrine over non-Buddhist ones is virtually impossibe. In fact, it is needed initially in order to set one up on the Buddhist path. However, for someone solidly grounded in Buddhism, who knows what is means to be mindful and knows about the doctrine of not-self and can work on one's own mind with this, lending preference to this becomes and obstruction. Why? Because he relies on a knowledge that can be shaken, due to its fabricated nature. By giving preference to it, he clings to it, and sustains it, obstructing the realisation of true knowledge. ------------------------------- Because entrenchments in views aren't easily overcome when considering what's grasped among doctrines, that's why a person embraces or rejects a doctrine -- in light of these very entrenchments. ------------------------------- Almost self-explanatory. Because we have the tendency to entrench ourselves in views, we naturally lend preference to one above the other, and thus cling to it. So what can be done to avoid clinging to it? ------------------------------- Now, one who is cleansed has no preconceived view about states of becoming or not- anywhere in the world. Having abandoned conceit & illusion, by what means would he go? He isn't involved. For one who's involved gets into disputes over doctrines, but how -- in connection with what -- would you argue with one uninvolved? He has nothing embraced or rejected, has sloughed off every view right here -- every one. ------------------------------- This part should answer my question above. An Aryan has cast off all views of anything in this world, has no preferences, and through this, he is liberated. 13080 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Sat May 4, 2002 1:13am Subject: RE: what is extreme? Re: [dsg] Re: Study/Meditation Dear Christine, For someone who lived on Oahu before (me), I think you can do the direction thing much better than I can! kom > -----Original Message----- > From: christine_forsyth [mailto:cforsyth@v...] > After this, please never ask me a geographical > question again. :) > First, let's clarify two terms. 1. R.H.S. if > L..A..M. = On the > right hand side, if looking at the map. > 2. L.H.S. if L.O.S. = On the left hand side, if > looking out to sea. > For the rest, you are on your own..... > Hanauma Bay was created by volcanic action 10,000 > years ago when Pele > made her last attempt to find home on Oahu. (and > who can prove > anything different I ask?) It's in Koko Head > Park, out of > Honolulu. So, if you ever get bored with Kauai, > you can start on the > other Islands. > Kauai is to the left of Oahu if looking at the > map - which means Oahu > is on the right, right? Hanauma Bay is on R.H.S. > of Diamond Head, if > L.A.M. and Diamond Head is on the R.H.S. of > Hanauma Bay if L.O.S. > With regard to Hanauma Bay's position relative to > Honolulu - it > is 'down below' Honolulu and a bit to the R.H.S. > if L.A.M. and a bit > to the L.H.S. if L.O.S. > In addition to the fact that I (only > momentarily) mix up Left and > Right, can you understand why I'm never allowed > to navigate on car > journeys with friends or family? :) :) > Personally, I think they miss > out on all sorts of adventures by being so 'stuffy and > conventional'..... :) > kom 13081 From: Lucy Date: Sat May 4, 2002 6:55am Subject: Re: [dsg] Antidotes to lobha Hi Jon > > Hang on -- we're actually talking from the same level here. I'm just trying to explain > the teaching as I understand it in theory - that there's no real antidote to kilesa other > the understanding that is developed by satipatthana. > I misunderstood your use of the words seeing and understanding. I'm more used to reading these words to imply experiential, largely non-conceptual realisations - especially when addressing the uprooting of kilesa - So the way I read your post was along the lines of "the effective way to deal with lobha is to realise enlightenment" - which is very true, of course, but unlikely to happen to this citta-stream in a hurry. Sorry if I got you wrong. > Everyone has heaps of lobha (and not just in spring when the flowers and birds are out > and about), so we're all equally 'disadvantaged' in this regard. I do believe, however, > that understanding of the present moment reality can be developed regardless of whether > there is lobha or not. Even lobha itself is after all one of the hindrances that are > specifically given as objects of satipatthana in the Satipatthana Sutta (section on > mind-object), so when it's present, its characteristic can be known. If on the other > hand we have the idea that it can't be the object of understanding then its > characteristic will never be known by direct experience. > I agree it's useful to know lobha etc. You see it arise ( = it's already been and gone), you examine it inside out, measure it, identify it, give it a name, look for the roots, project the consequences of its manifestation, remember the teachings, recognise that it's a hindrance, etc. .... and then, what do you do ? That was really the gist of my question. How to go about relinquishing the objects of attachment? and relinquishing the tendency to develop attachment? on a moment to moment basis. I know the answer is cultivation, but expedient means can help to keep the mind on the cultivation track, you need to aspire to cultivation and remember to keep it going. At least, in my example of offering hills, if you have an accident and die right there, citta will be pointing in the right direction. At best, you develop a habit of remembering the Path when you're out and about clinging to everything you see. It's all training! > I thing that proper study of understanding at a theoretical level is the most useful > preparation of the soil for the cultivation of the real thing. > The theoretical level on its own doesn't work very well for me, though it may well work for others. This mind needs a lot more field work on all fronts. It may be that in science one acquires a very healthy disrespect for anything "theoretical" and you can't really trust something you always take with a pinch of salt. Now, combined with the lab / field work, it starts making more sense. Glad you enjoyed the holiday - ours is on Monday. Best wishes Lucy 13082 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sat May 4, 2002 7:07am Subject: Re: [dsg] skilful means in the group Anders Nice to have you back with us. And thanks for the Dhammapada passages --- anders_honore wrote: > Imo, the Buddha never taught a single fixed Dhamma. He taught what > was skilful *in relation* to the listener(s) in question, in order to > best help them free their minds. Thus his teachings to one person > might be different for one person, than to another. The key then, > lies in figuring out "what is skilful for me on the path" and then > simply discarding that which is not. Not rejecting it, because there > might come a time later on when it does become skilful. > However, what is the sense of studying the Jhanas, if you haven't > even seen a nimitta yet? > > Here is some excerpts of what I would deem skilful *in relation* to > this group: > ________________________________ > > If he recites many teachings, but > -- heedless man -- > doesn't do what they say, > like a cowherd counting the cattle of others, > he has no share in the contemplative life. > > If he recites next to nothing > but follows the Dhamma > in line with the Dhamma; > abandoning passion, > aversion, delusion; > alert, > his mind well-released, > not clinging > either here or hereafter: > he has his share in the contemplative life. > > (Dhammapada 19-20) > > ___________________________________ > > For those who go studying, learning as much as they can about the > Dhamma, all I have to say is: > > What profit is there in counting the treasures of others? You seem to be equating a person who studies the Dhamma with the person described in Dhp 19 above. However, the person described in Dhp 19 is a person who knows the teachings *but who doesn't do what they say, is heedless*. It is because of not paying any attention to the teachings that he is said to be 'counting the treasure of others' (not because he knows the Dhamma, surely?). Dhp 20 is interesting. It seems to be saying that if one develops the path correctly, one is regarded as living the contemplative life (i.e., regardless of whether one has taken ordination as a monk). Is this your reading also? Jon 13083 From: Lucy Date: Sat May 4, 2002 7:15am Subject: Re: [dsg] ADL ch. 6 (18-23) Hi Larry & Jon Thanks for the clarification - I'll have to remember to look things up in the "Manual", keep on forgetting about it. Also N's wonderful dictionary. It looks like this "prompted" and "unprompted" is another case of the English words not meaning quite what the original intended. If you read "prompted" - next you think it's someone else's fault. As for the "unprompted" - it's nobody's fault. Adding the extended meaning to prompted and unprompted, it's easy to see why the unprompted dosa is the strongest, being the deeper rooted. > I'm finding that there is a certain satisfaction in identifying dosa but > in identifying lobha there was aversion. Maybe identifying these states > slightly disidentifies us from them. Also I noticed that dosa isn't a > feeling and the object of dosa is neither the dosa nor the unpleasant > feeling. This gives a new perspective in the process of dosa arising > with unpleasant feeling regarding an object. > Yeah, you're right there on both counts. It's uncomfortable to identify lobha. With dosa, you feel like shouting "gotcha!". The dosa decreases or even melts away while you're looking at it in this new perspective(s) and the exercise stops you reacting on the spot. But it's harder to distract lobha in the same way. Best wishes Lucy 13084 From: frank kuan Date: Sat May 4, 2002 10:14am Subject: RE: [dsg] Satipatthana and concepts/realities Hi Jon, I appreciate the explanation, but ultimately my confusion with the mindfulnless sutta (MN 10) has to do with lack of distinction between foundation #4 (mindfulness of "mind objects") and the other foundations. In other words, foundation #4 seems to overlap heavily with the other 3 foundations, even though contemplation of "mind-objects" implies a distinct technique worth its own catgeory. Here's an example. Under contemplation of mind (3rd foundation): "He understands mind affected by lust as mind as mind affected by lust..." Under contemplation of "mind-objeccts" (4th foundation) 5 hindrances section: "a monk understands, there is sensual desire in me; or ... there is no sensual desire in me." Is there overlap/redundancy between 3rd and 4th foundation, or is there a distinct difference between those two methods of mindfulness? To me, it seems like foundation #4 is just saying that any of the buddhist concepts/classifications that the buddha taught can be used as a framework or template to do the first 3 foundations of mindulness. Understood in this way, it makes sense to me. But if I treat the 4th foundation as a separate distinct method, as "mind-object" tends to imply, then I just become confounded because of so much overlap with the first 3 foundations. Jon, in your previous post you point out that the 4th foundation is a "real time" operation contemplating dhammas, but ALL FOUR foundations are real time, so again it is not something special to distinguish the 4th foundation. Jon, I appreciate the time you took to explain some of the buddhist classifications that you use to interpret the 4th foundation, but to me, those classificaitons still do not separate the 4th foundation in such a way to make it very distinct, in the same way for example as mindfulness of form and mindfulness of feeling are very distinct. -fk 13085 From: Date: Sat May 4, 2002 10:44am Subject: Re: [dsg] ADL ch. 6 (18-23) Hi Christine, I think 'what the teachings require' of you is just what you wrote, a good close look at what is going on. I think it is important to remember that this isn't a course in self improvement. Just see what is happening and move on. Maybe if you play around with little aversions you will develop a taste for recognition of this quality. I love it. I think it would be helpful for many if others shared their experiences and insight concerning recognition of dosa. Larry 13086 From: asterix_wins Date: Sat May 4, 2002 5:26pm Subject: Re: Sirima, the Courtesan and Compassion dear sarah, Thanks for the wonderful reminder of the Sirima Story,..no matter how many times one reads it..it comes up with a deeper meaning everytime. my confession is that there was desire imagining the 'fresh' new dead human body on public display (Before worms found the way out from it) happy to be back in DSG, lurking... and going through the billions of messages that I have missed., I thought of posting ( thereby making this a contributing post ) this particular message received from a friend, ------------------------ The happiness that you feel when you satisfy a desire is not due to the satisfaction of the desire, but to the momentary cessation of the desire. But the desire returns. Therefore desires can never be satisfied; they can only be overcome, abandoned. -Sangharakshita (Peace is a Fire) -------------------------- rgds, gayan --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Sarah wrote: > Dear Christine, > > As I mentioned in my note to Num about Jivaka, the physician, I was > reminded of your comments on list (and in person when we last met) about > Sirima, the courtesan, who was Jivaka's younger sister. Sometime after I > returned to Hong Kong, I came across the details of her story in the > Vimana Stories (PTS trans of Vimanavatthu and commentary by P.Masefield) > and read these with particular interest after your comments. > > ***** > Christine: > >On the plane, random memories of my reading about death in the > scriptures arose, Two stories stuck uncomfortably in my memory > where the Buddha had acted in a ways I find difficult to understand; > I know that obviously cultural and legal differences (and my > ignorance) come into play. The first was the story of how the Buddha > auctioned the corpse of Sirima the Courtesan......which seems, > well...., horrifyingly brutal...I could only read it once..... > > > And I thought - What is this compassion? Is it really seeking of > your own particular goal for an individual, what you - think is best > for them - rather than immediate comfort, support and kindness? > And detachment is encouraged - with connotations of remaining aloof > from the world and suffering. How is this different from apathy, > indifference? > Shouldn't compassion be a 'doing' thing?.......< end quote> > ***** > > In brief --for others not so familiar with the details-- in the second > part of Sirima's story, we read about how Sirima-- who was exceedingly > beautiful-- became a sotapanna after listening to the Buddha, changed her > lifestyle and from that day gave daily alms to monks in her house. > > The part of the story that Christine found disturbing was that concerning > a young monk who had heard of her great beauty and went to her house with > other monks. Sirima was sick at the time, but was brought into the hall to > pay her respects. Even though she was very sick, the monk was overcome > with lust and unable to eat. That day Sirima died, but the Buddha gave > instructions that the body was not to be burnt and that all the citizens > should come to gaze at it. > > The Buddha made the king auction the body, starting with a high price and > gradually reducing it to nothing. No one was interested to take it. The > Buddha pointed out how even those who would have paid a thousand to spend > one night with Sirima a short while ago would not even take the body as a > gift now. > > What is really interesting as well is that after death, Sirima was reborn > in a heavenly realm and visited `her own' cremation with 500 chariots. > While the Buddha was preaching, she became an anagami in another account > (but no mention in this one).. The young monk became an arahant (in all > accounts) and.84,000 people became enlightened at Sirima's cremation. > > ***** > Let me say straight away, Christine, that there are some parts of the > Tipitaka that are very difficult or disturbing for me to read. I'm > particularly thinking of some of the Peta stories which would be hard for > me to even quote from. I see these as an acquired taste but perhaps we can > say that all parts of the Tipitaka are an acquired taste, the rate of a > acquiring depending on our different accumulations. I know Rob K really > appreciates the Peta stories, for example. > > This is by way of saying that the Vimana stories in general and Sirima's > in particular are very uplifting and inspiring for me and I'm happily > re-reading this one as I write. > ***** > To add a few more details which I appreciate: > > The young monk had lain for four days without eating after being > overwhelmed with lust. "He became witless" and his friends were unable to > help him. The food in his bowl "had become putrid and a mould has sprung > up in his bowl too." > > Unknown to him, Sirima had died and by the fourth day "the body became > bloated and worms oozed out through the openings of nine sores. the > entire body was like a pot containing boiled rice of broken grain". > > After the auction in which no one would take the body, the Buddha said: > > "Behold the painted orb, a body of wounds, a thing compunded, afflicted, > the subject of much imagination, for which there is no enduring stability" > > As I mentioned, at this point, the young monk became an arahant and 84,000 > others reached various stages of enlightenment. > > As I read and reflect on these details, they seem to me to be the act of > extraordinary compassion by the Buddha, who understood the monk's > accumulations so well and also for all the other people who had been so > impressed before by the beauty. Don't we see the beautiful in the foul all > the time as Frank and others were discussing before? > > Meanwhile the deva Sirima, in a `visible body' joined the large number of > people standing round the body that had been hers and recounts the happy > rebirth, how she became a sotapanna and how there was `no miserable > destiny' for her.On the topic of compassion, she says: > > "I was gladdened in heart, elated, when I saw the Sage, the Tathagata, the > most excellent of men and charioteer of the tamable who cuts off craving > and delights in what is skilled, the guide. I salute the one possessing > pity with the highest benefit". > ***** > > I'm not sure if this is helpful to you, Chris, or anyone else, but it is > inspiring for me to read and I thank you for bringing it to my > attention;-) I think it's very helpful indeed to consider what kindness, > compassion, detachment or equanimity really are and I'll be interested to > hear any further comments from anyone.. > > metta, > Sarah > ====== 13087 From: christine_forsyth Date: Sat May 4, 2002 7:06pm Subject: Re: [dsg] skilful means in the group Hi Anders and Jon, Interesting posts. Anders, much the same ideas occurred to me a while back - but I think a proper 'balance' of study and practice tailored to individual needs is important. You may be interested in an essay by Bhikkhu Bodhi addressing this issue. metta, Christine The Case For Study by Bhikkhu Bodhi http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/bps/news/essay05.htm The recent upsurge of interest in Buddhism, both East and West, has been marked by a vigorous practical orientation and a drive to discover the peace and freedom to which the practice of Dhamma leads. This zeal for practice, however, has often been accompanied by another trait which may not be so fruitful, namely, a tendency to neglect or even belittle the methodical study of the Buddha's teachings. The arguments offered in defense of this attitude have already become familiar currency among us. It is said, for example, that study is concerned with words and concepts, not with realities; that it leads only to learning, not to wisdom; that it can change only our ideas but fails to touch us at the deeper levels of our lives. To clinch the case the testimony of the Buddha himself is enlisted, with his famous remarks that to learn much without practicing is like counting the cows of others or like carrying a raft on one's head instead of using it to cross the stream. This contention, to be sure, has its aspect of truth, but also suffers from a one-sided emphasis which may actually thwart rather than aid our progress on the Buddhist path. It is certainly true that learning without practice is fruitless, but the other side of the issue also should be considered. Should a person gather cows if he knows nothing about how to take care of them? Should he try to cross a rough and dangerous river without knowing how to operate a raft? The Buddha himself insisted that his followers learn and transmit the Dhamma both in the letter and the spirit, but rather than appealing to traditional formulations, let us inquire ourselves into the value and function of Dhamma study. The point at issue, it must be stressed, is not study as an academic discipline or the accumulation of a wealth of learning, but the acquisition of a sound and solid working knowledge of the basic Buddhist doctrines. Now to see why this is so essential, we must recall that the entire practice of the proper Buddhist path develops out of the act through which we enter the path -- the going for refuge to the Triple Gem. If we have taken this step honestly, with correct motivation, it implies that we have acknowledged our need for spiritual guidance and have entrusted ourselves to the Buddha as our guide and to his teaching as our vehicle of guidance. By taking refuge in the Dhamma we accept not merely a technique of meditation that we can use at liberty for our own self-appointed purposes, but a profound and comprehensive teaching on the true nature of the human condition, a teaching designed to awaken in us a perception of this truth as the means for reaching the full and final end of suffering. The liberation offered by the Dhamma comes, not from simply practicing meditation in the context of our own preconceptions and desires, but from practicing upon the groundwork of the right understanding and right intentions communicated to us by the Buddha. This cognitive character of the Buddhist path elevates doctrinal study and intellectual inquiry to a position of great importance. Though the knowledge that frees the mind from bondage emerges only from intuitive insight and not from a mass of doctrinal facts, genuine insight always develops on the basis of a preliminary conceptual grasp of the basic principles essential to right understanding, in the absence of which its growth will inevitably be obstructed. The study and systematic reflection through which we arrive at this preparatory right view necessarily involve concepts and ideas. But before we hasten to dismiss Dhamma study as being therefore only a worthless tangle of verbiage, let us consider that concepts and ideas are our indispensable tools of understanding and communication. Concepts, however, can be valid and invalid tools of understanding; ideas can be fruitful or useless, capable of bringing immense benefit or of entailing enormous harm. The object of studying the Dhamma as part of our spiritual quest is to learn to comprehend our experience correctly: to be able to distinguish the valid from the invalid, the true from the false, the wholesome from the unwholesome. It is only by making a thorough and careful investigation that we will be in a position to reject what is detrimental to our growth and to apply ourselves with confidence to cultivating what is truly beneficial. Without having reached this preliminary conceptual clarification, without having succeeded in "straightening out our views," there can indeed be the earnest practice of Buddhist meditation techniques, but there will not be the practice of the meditation pertaining to the integral Noble Eightfold Path. And while such free-based meditation may bring its practitioners the mundane benefits of greater calm, awareness and equanimity, lacking the guidance of right view and the driving power of right motivation, it is questionable whether it can lead to the penetrative realization of the Dhamma, or to its final goal, the complete cessation of suffering. It is almost impossible to give a single word of counsel on the subject of study applicable to all followers of the Dhamma. Needs and interests vary so greatly from one person to another that each will have to strike the balance between study and practice that suits his or her own disposition. But without hesitation it can be said that all who earnestly endeavor to live by the Buddha's teaching will find their practice strengthened by the methodical study of his Dhamma. Such an undertaking, of course, will not be easy, but it is just through facing and surmounting the challenges we meet that our understanding will ripen and mature in the higher wisdom. --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Jonothan Abbott wrote: > Anders > > Nice to have you back with us. And thanks for the Dhammapada passages > > --- anders_honore wrote: > > Imo, the Buddha never taught a single fixed Dhamma. He taught what > > was skilful *in relation* to the listener(s) in question, in order to > > best help them free their minds. Thus his teachings to one person > > might be different for one person, than to another. The key then, > > lies in figuring out "what is skilful for me on the path" and then > > simply discarding that which is not. Not rejecting it, because there > > might come a time later on when it does become skilful. > > However, what is the sense of studying the Jhanas, if you haven't > > even seen a nimitta yet? > > > > Here is some excerpts of what I would deem skilful *in relation* to > > this group: > > ________________________________ > > > > If he recites many teachings, but > > -- heedless man -- > > doesn't do what they say, > > like a cowherd counting the cattle of others, > > he has no share in the contemplative life. > > > > If he recites next to nothing > > but follows the Dhamma > > in line with the Dhamma; > > abandoning passion, > > aversion, delusion; > > alert, > > his mind well-released, > > not clinging > > either here or hereafter: > > he has his share in the contemplative life. > > > > (Dhammapada 19-20) > > > > ___________________________________ > > > > For those who go studying, learning as much as they can about the > > Dhamma, all I have to say is: > > > > What profit is there in counting the treasures of others? > > You seem to be equating a person who studies the Dhamma with the person described in Dhp > 19 above. However, the person described in Dhp 19 is a person who knows the teachings > *but who doesn't do what they say, is heedless*. It is because of not paying any > attention to the teachings that he is said to be 'counting the treasure of others' (not > because he knows the Dhamma, surely?). > > Dhp 20 is interesting. It seems to be saying that if one develops the path correctly, > one is regarded as living the contemplative life (i.e., regardless of whether one has > taken ordination as a monk). Is this your reading also? > > Jon 13088 From: christine_forsyth Date: Sat May 4, 2002 7:58pm Subject: Re: [dsg] ADL ch. 6 (18-23) Actually, Larry, that is an interesting way of looking at life. I have always thought that any buddhist teachings are studied as a gradual path for self improvement (leaving 'not-self' aside). That one of the purposes was to teach us to learn to recognise the causes of suffering, so we may eliminate them. That the three categories of the mind states which lead to suffering are 1) ignorance: holding on to wrong views - the inability to recognize the true nature of reality 2) negative emotions: anger, pride, jealousy, envy, greed, miserliness 3) false desires: of aversion and clinging. You say: "Maybe if you play around with little aversions you will develop a taste for recognition of this quality. I love it." Ummm .... wouldn't that be like playing with fire? Certainly if you mean in the context of recognising what is happening, and so slowing or halting the process of reaction/action, I could agree.... but, at the moment, my aversions seem to be the large economy size and are strongly vying for control of me [there has to be a word other than control :-)]. Guarding the fortress wall, and weakening the power of the invaders to cause bad behaviour is about all I can try - and this does involve recognition. metta, Christine --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., LBIDD@w... wrote: > Hi Christine, > > I think 'what the teachings require' of you is just what you wrote, a > good close look at what is going on. I think it is important to remember > that this isn't a course in self improvement. Just see what is happening > and move on. Maybe if you play around with little aversions you will > develop a taste for recognition of this quality. I love it. > > I think it would be helpful for many if others shared their experiences > and insight concerning recognition of dosa. > > Larry 13089 From: Date: Sat May 4, 2002 8:32pm Subject: Re: [dsg] 4 Ultimate Realities? In a message dated 5/3/2002 1:48:19 AM Pacific Daylight Time, robertkirkpatrick@r... writes: Hi Jon, Howard, Robert Ep., Sarah, Robert, > "Rupa(matter, physical phenomena) that is impermanent, suffering and > subject to change: this > the wise in the world agree upon as existing, and I too say it > exists. Feeling...perception..volitional > formations..consciouness..that is impermanent, suffering and > subject to change..I too say that it exists" endquote > I think the above quote is a "one-sided" view of the Buddha's teaching. Compare it with this quote... “… one who sees the arising of the world as it really is, does not believe in the non-existent of the world. One who sees the cessation of the world as it really is, does not believe in the existence of the world.â€? (The Buddha . . . Samyutta Nikaya, Book II, Ch. 1, 15 (5)) One comment regarding this matter went like this... >A dhamma cannot be changed into something other than what it is > right now, but it lasts for an infinitely brief instant only, no > matter we want it to stay or go. This statement, if I'm understanding it at all, seems to indicate that "dhamma" is a thing...that can't be changed? It sounds like it says...that something is a self for a infinitely brief time and then it is gone. This kind of of approach to dhamma is exactly what I fear the term "Ultimate Reality" inculcates. Yes, I believe the term is important. More to come. TG 13090 From: Date: Sat May 4, 2002 9:12pm Subject: Re: [dsg] 4 Ultimate Realities? In a message dated 5/3/2002 12:18:34 AM Pacific Daylight Time, sarahdhhk@y... writes: > Though insubstantial, each ‘with its own characteristic’, however > fleeting, transient and deceptive. Because there is no understanding of > the ‘paramatha’ nature of these phenomena, like a magical illusion, we’re > deceived and take them for a ‘whole’, for a self of substance. > I would be interested to know how "dhamma's," that are completely dependent on something else (Dependent Arising), are 'with its own characteristic.' How can something have "its own characteristic" if it doesn't have any self at all? The way I see it...it is "something else's characteristic" that is responsible for arisen states/dhammas. But that "something else" had something else responsible for "its" characteristic, and so on and so on indefinitely. I have a hard time imagining how a mind can consider something an "ultimate reality" and not thereby see it as substantial. Howard used the term phantoms. This I think is good. After object-states are broken down into fundamental elements...these elements need to be further broken down by principles (dependent arising, impermanence, unsatisfactory, no-self). And then these elements are not seen as "ultimate realities," but are more likely seen as phantoms. (I am only considering conditioned phenomena here.) TG 13091 From: Lucy Date: Sun May 5, 2002 2:08am Subject: Re: [dsg] ADL ch. 6 (18-23) Hi Larry > I think it would be helpful for many if others shared their experiences > and insight concerning recognition of dosa. > Sorry I'm packing for a week off in Norfolk, no time to add more to the reconition of dosa - an ongoing process. But as recognition brings the question of how to deal with it, I thought this might be an appropriate quote. It's from "A Treatise on the Påramis" by Acariya Dhammapåla (Wheel 409/411): ------------------------------------- "Patience has the characteristic of acceptance; its function is to endure the desirable and undesirable; its manifestation is tolerance or non-opposition; seeing things as they really are is its proximate cause." < .... > The perfection of patience should be considered next: "Patience is the unimpeded weapon of the good in the development of noble qualities, for it dispels anger, the opposite of all such qualities, without residue. It is the adornment of those capable of vanquishing the foe; the strength of recluses and brahmins; a stream of water extinguishing the fire of anger; the basis for acquiring a good reputation; a mantra for quelling the poisonous speech of evil people; the supreme source of constancy in those established in restraint. Patience is an ocean on account of its depth; a shore bounding the great ocean of hatred; a panel closing off the door to the plane of misery; a staircase ascending to the worlds of the gods and Brahmås; the ground for the habitation of all noble qualities; the supreme purification of body, speech and mind." Patience should be further fortified by reflection: "Those who lack patience are afflicted in this world and apply themselves to actions which will lead to their affliction in the life to come." And: "Although this suffering arises through the wrong deeds of others, this body of mine is the field for that suffering, and the action which is its seed was sown by me alone." And: "This suffering will release me from the debt of that kamma." And: "If there were no wrong-doers, how could I accomplish the perfection of patience?" And: "Although he is a wrong-doer now, in the past he was my benefactor." And: "A wrong-doer is also a benefactor, for he is the basis for developing patience." And: "All beings are like my own children. Who becomes angry over the misdeeds of his own children?" And: "He wrongs me because of some residue of anger in myself; this residue I should remove." And: "I am just as much the cause as he for the wrong on account of which this suffering has arisen." And: "All those phenomena by which wrong was done, and those to whom it was done-all those, at this very moment, have ceased. With whom, then, should you now be angry, and by whom should anger be aroused? When all phenomena are non-self, who can do wrong to whom?" --------------------------------------- Hope you don't rush to finish the whole book while I'm away ! Have a nice week Lucy 13092 From: Sarah Date: Sun May 5, 2002 5:57am Subject: Re: [dsg] Iddhi Dear Wynn, Thanks for dropping by;-) Sorry for the delay and hope you're still reading all the posts. ..... --- wynn wrote: > Hi, > > Sorry to interupt. ..... You’re never interrupting and never any need to apologise. Your questions are fine ones, but difficult ones and I’ve been waiting to hear from someone who may know more;-) ..... > Also, I am not sure this is the right place to ask these questions. > Before answering my questions, please take note that I am aware that > supranormal power is NOT a pre-requisite for enlightenment and it is not > necessary to have it all. I am just being curious after readings several > passages about it in several books. > > First Question. > Are the KASINA MEDITATION mentioned in the Tipitaka? ..... I’m glad you wrote that you appreciate that it is NOT a pre-requisite for enligtenment and that you are just curious. I can’t tell you where all the references are off-hand, but someone else may do a search on this. One place in the Tipitaka I know of where there are some fairly detailed notes on kasina and supernormal powers is in the section on “Treatise on success (Supernormal Power) at the end of Patisambhidamagga (Path of discrimination). To give one quote from it (PTS p379): “He goes unhindered through walls, through enclosures, through mountains, as though in open space: naturally he is an obtainer of the space kasina attainment. He adverts: “Through the wall, through the enclosure, through the mountain’; having adverted, he decides with knowledge ‘Let there be space’. there is space. He goes unhindered through the wall, through the enclosure, through the mountain. Just as men naturally not possessed of success (supernormal power) go unhindered where there is no obstruction or enclosure, so too this possessor of success (supernormal power) attained to mastery of will goes unhindered through the wall, through the enclosure, through the mountain, as though in open space.” ***** ..... > > Second Question > Visudhimagga do teaches how to develop supranormal powers. (see > Visudhimagga > Chapter XII & Chapter V, verse 27 onwards) But does the Tipitaka tell us > how? I have never come across it. > > The nearest is this: > > ".......And what is the miracle of psychic power? There is the case > where a > monk wields manifold psychic powers. Having been one he becomes many; > having > been many he becomes one. He appears. He vanishes. He goes unimpeded > through > walls, ramparts, and mountains as if through space. He dives in and out > of > the earth as if it were water. He walks on water without sinking as if > it > were dry land. Sitting cross-legged he flies through the air like a > winged > bird. With his hand he touches and strokes even the sun and moon, so > mighty > and powerful. He exercises influence with his body even as far as the > Brahma > worlds........." (Kevatta Sutta etc.) ..... I don’t know if you read my posts on Sri Lanka study corner, but in those I discussed a little about how Mahinda and the other enlightened followers used these powers, always for the benefit of others. We read in the Vism in detail about the various kasinas and the development of jhanas in general. In Patisambhidamagga (same section as above), we read about the 16 roots of success and how the consciousness is not perturbed by indolence, agitation, greed, ill-will, (wrong) view, zeal and greed, greed for sensual-deaires, defilement and so on. We are talking about very fine and highly developed states of wholesomeness indeed, which are not related by a desire to experience jhanas or supernormal powers or concentration without very clear right understanding of how the ksaina in question conditions calm. ..... > > Third Question > I understand that to have the supernormal power, one must have mastery > over > the 4 jhanas, right? ..... Right. This is clear in both the Vism and Patisambhid. ..... > But, the Visudhimagga said we must have mastery of all the 8 jhanas. But > if > this is true, does that mean that those who have supranormal powers have > mastery of all the 8 jhanas? ..... Sorry, would you give the reference. In Vism, V,27 uner “Limited Space Kasina’ there is a reference to the kasinas as basis of ‘fourfold and of fivefold jhana’. ..... > > How do you explain the levitation perform by the yogis of TM > (Transcendental > Meditation) ..... I don’t try;-) Let me know what you think! Sarah ====== 13093 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun May 5, 2002 6:09am Subject: Re: [dsg] Prompted/unprompted (was, ADL ch. 6 (18-23)) Dear Larry and Jon, I liked your discussion on prompted and unprompted, and I could just add a detail I learnt from A. Sujin. Jhanacittas and lokuttara cittas are always reckoned as sasankharika, prompted. The reason: there have to be first maha-kusala cittas accompanied by pa~n~naa, which actually do the prompting. In Samatha pa~n~naa has to know exactly the conditions for being calm with the meditation subject, so that defilements are subdued. In Vipassana pa~n~naa has to understand clearly and thoroughly the dhamma at that moment as it is: impermanent, dukkha or anatta. I quote from Survey, Ch 20, Associated Dhammas: After explaining that only cittas of the sense-sphere are classified as prompted and unprompted, we read: < The cittas which are of a higher grade , namely, rupavacara cittas, arupavacara cittas, and lokuttara cittas, are not classified by way of asankharika and sasankharika. All of them are prompted, sasankharika. The reason for this is that they are dependent on the appropriate development as a necessary condition for their arising. In this context being sasankharika does not mean that they are weak such as in the case of kamavacara cittas which are prompted, sasankharika. Before rupavacara citta, arupavacara citta and lokuttara citta arise, there must each time be kamavacara citta accompanied by pa~n~naa.> end quote. Nina. op 04-05-2002 05:45 schreef Jonothan Abbott op jonoabb@y...: > Larry > > --- LBIDD@w... wrote: >> Hi Lucy (& Christine at the end), >> >> according to "A comprehensive Manual Of Abhidhamma", 'prompting occurs >> through inducement by another or by personal deliberation'. So when I >> watch 'The Nightly Business Report' and learn that the stock market is >> going to keep going down, dosa arises concerning my prospects. But in >> walking up and down stairs all day dosa spontaneously arises; I don't >> have to be convinced of anything. > > Thanks for this definition from CMA. See also the definition from > Nyanatiloka’s > ‘Buddhist Dictionary’ below, under the Pali terms ‘asankharika’ (umprompted) > and > ‘sasankharika’ (prompted), and the example given in Visuddhimagga. > > Just wanted to add the point that the prompted/unprompted classification > applies to all > kinds of kusala and akusala cittas (not just dosa citta). The arising of a > tendency > unprompted indicates a stronger disposition towards the tendency (wholesome or > unwholesome) in that particular circumstance. > 13094 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun May 5, 2002 6:09am Subject: Sivaka sutta and co. , Pali corner. Dear friends, I posted this for the Pali study group, but Sarah asked me to post it also for dsg. I am just studying, and I meet many puzzles. I will be delighted if someone will correct me. For an E mail this is too long, but O.K., I post it all together. Sarah and Num helped me already with their suggestions, and Robert K. with his extract of B. Bodhi. Nina. SN XXXVI.21 The Siivakasutta with the commentary and subcommentary. (extracted from the Burmese CSCD disk, vers. 1.1) 3. a.t.thasatapariyaayavaggo 1. siivakasutta.m sivaka sutta with the translation by Ven. Nyanaponika: 269. eka.m samaya.m bhagavaa raajagahe viharati ve.luvane kalandakanivaape. atha kho mo.liyasiivako paribbaajako yena bhagavaa tenupasa"nkami; upasa"nkamitvaa bhagavataa saddhi.m sammodi. sammodaniiya.m katha.m saara.niiya.m viitisaaretvaa ekamanta.m nisiidi. Once the Blessed One dwelled at Rajagaha in the Bamboo-Grove Monastery, at the Squirrel's Feeding Place. There a wandering ascetic, Moliya Sivaka by name, called on the Blessed One, and after an exchange of courteous and friendly words, sat down at one side. ekamanta.m nisinno kho mo.liyasiivako paribbaajako bhagavanta.m etadavoca -- ``santi, bho gotama, eke sama.nabraahma.naa eva.mvaadino eva.mdi.t.thino -- `ya.m ki~ncaaya.m purisapuggalo pa.tisa.mvedeti sukha.m vaa dukkha.m vaa adukkhamasukha.m vaa sabba.m ta.m pubbekatahetuu'ti. idha bhava.m gotamo kimaahaa''ti? Thus seated, he said: "There are, revered Gotama, some ascetics and brahmans who have this doctrine and view: 'Whatever a person experiences, be it pleasure, pain or neither-pain-nor-pleasure, all that is caused by previous action.' Now, what does the revered Gotama say about this?" ``pittasamu.t.thaanaanipi kho, siivaka, idhekaccaani vedayitaani uppajjanti. saamampi kho eta.m, siivaka, veditabba.m yathaa pittasamu.t.thaanaanipi idhekaccaani vedayitaani uppajjanti; lokassapi kho eta.m, siivaka, saccasammata.m yathaa pittasamu.t.thaanaanipi idhekaccaani vedayitaani uppajjanti. "Produced by (disorders of the) bile, there arise, Sivaka, certain kinds of feelings. That this happens, can be known by oneself; also in the world it is accepted as true. tatra, siivaka, ye te sama.nabraahma.naa eva.mvaadino eva.mdi.t.thino -- `ya.m ki~ncaaya.m purisapuggalo pa.tisa.mvedeti sukha.m vaa dukkha.m vaa adukkhamasukha.m vaa sabba.m ta.m pubbekatahetuu'ti. ya~nca saama.m ~naata.m ta~nca atidhaavanti, ya~nca loke saccasammata.m ta~nca atidhaavanti. tasmaa tesa.m sama.nabraahma.naana.m micchaati vadaami. "Now when these ascetics and brahmans have such a doctrine and view that 'whatever a person experiences, be it pleasure, pain or neither-pain-nor-pleasure, all that is caused by previous action,' then they go beyond what they know by themselves and what is accepted as true by the world. Therefore, I say that this is wrong on the part of these ascetics and brahmans." ``semhasamu.t.thaanaanipi kho, siivaka...pe0... vaatasamu.t.thaanaanipi kho, siivaka...pe0... sannipaatikaanipi kho, siivaka...pe0... utupari.naamajaanipi kho, siivaka...pe0... visamaparihaarajaanipi kho, siivaka...pe0... opakkamikaanipi kho, siivaka...pe0... kammavipaakajaanipi kho, siivaka, idhekaccaani vedayitaani uppajjanti. saamampi kho eta.m, siivaka, veditabba.m. yathaa kammavipaakajaanipi idhekaccaani vedayitaani uppajjanti; lokassapi kho eta.m, siivaka, saccasammata.m. Produced by (disorders of the) phlegm... of wind... of (the three) combined... by change of climate... by adverse behaviour... by injuries... by the results of Kamma -- (through all that), Sivaka, there arise certain kinds of feelings. That this happens can be known by oneself; also in the world it is accepted as true. yathaa kammavipaakajaanipi idhekaccaani vedayitaani uppajjanti; Nina: according as some feelings arise as the results of kamma, tatra, siivaka, ye te sama.nabraahma.naa eva.mvaadino eva.mdi.t.thino -- `ya.m ki~ncaaya.m purisapuggalo pa.tisa.mvedeti sukha.m vaa dukkha.m vaa adukkhamasukha.m vaa sabba.m ta.m pubbekatahetuu'ti. ya~nca saama.m ~naata.m ta~nca atidhaavanti ya~nca loke saccasammata.m ta~nca atidhaavanti. tasmaa tesa.m sama.nabraahma.naana.m micchaati vadaamiiti. Ny: "Now when these ascetics and brahmans have such a doctrine and view that 'whatever a person experiences, be it pleasure, pain or neither-pain-nor-pleasure, all that is caused by previous action,' then they go beyond what they know by themselves and what is accepted as true by the world. Therefore, I say that this is wrong on the part of these ascetics and brahmans.² eva.m vutte, mo.liyasiivako paribbaajako bhagavanta.m etadavoca -- `abhikkanta.m, bho gotama, abhikkanta.m, bho gotama ...pe0... upaasaka.m ma.m bhava.m gotamo dhaaretu ajjatagge paa.nupeta.m sara.na.m gata'''nti. When this was spoken, Moliya Sivaka, the wandering ascetic, said: "It is excellent, revered Gotama, it is excellent indeed!... May the revered Gotama regard me as a lay follower who, from today, has taken refuge in him as long as life lasts." ``pitta.m semha~nca vaato ca, sannipaataa utuuni ca. visama.m opakkamika.m, kammavipaakena a.t.thamii''ti.. pa.thama.m. Nina: , was said. the first sutta. @a.t.thakathaa rahogatavaggo dutiyo. The second part on solitude. 3. a.t.thasatapariyaayavaggo N: The chapter on the hundred and eight. 1. siivakasuttava.n.nanaa The Commentary on the Sívaka Sutta 269. tatiyavaggassa pa.thame mo.liyasiivakoti siivakoti tassa naama.m. cuu.laa panassa atthi, tasmaa mo.liyasiivakoti vuccati. paribbaajakoti channaparibbaajako. N: With reference to the first sutta of the third chapter. : is his name; however, he has a topknot and therefore he is called . , namely, the wanderer who is clothed. pittasamu.t.thaanaaniiti pittapaccayaani. vedayitaaniiti vedanaa. tattha pittapaccayaa tisso vedanaa uppajjanti. katha.m? N: , meaning, with bile as condition. , said with reference to feelings. In this case three feelings arise conditioned by bile. How? ekacco hi``pitta.m me kupita.m dujjaana.m kho pana jiivita''nti daana.m deti, siila.m samaadiyati uposathakamma.m karoti, evamassa kusalavedanaa uppajjati. N: Someone says, and (therefore) he performs generosity, observes morality, keeps the observance day, and thus, in his case wholesome feelings arise. ekacco``pittabhesajja.m karissaamii''ti paa.na.m hanati, adinna.m aadiyati, musaa bha.nati, dasa dussiilyakammaani karoti, evamassa akusalavedanaa uppajjati. N: Someone says, < I shall produce medicine to cure the bile>, and thus, he kills living beings, he steals, lies, performs the ten evil deeds, and hence, in his case unwholesome feelings arise. ekacco ``ettakenapi me bhesajjakara.nena pitta.m na vuupasammati, ala.m ya.m hoti. ta.m hotuu''ti majjhatto kaayikavedana.m adhivaasento nipajjati, eva.m assa abyaakatavedanaa uppajjati. N: Someone says, < the bile is not allayed no matter by what medicine that is produced. I have enough of it, so be it. > While he with equanimity endures the bodily feeling he lies down, and in his case indeterminate feelings arise. **** saamampi kho etanti ta.m ta.m pittavikaara.m disvaa attanaapi eta.m veditabba.m. saccasammatanti bhuutasammata.m. N: < Also by one¹s own experience indeed this (can be known)>, meaning: when he has seen whatever disorder in his bile-condition he should also know this by his own experience. , meaning: it is accepted as what has happened. lokopi hissa sariire sabalava.n.nataadipittavikaara.m disvaa ``pittamassa kupita''nti jaanaati. N: Also in the world, when people have noticed in his body a serious disorder with bilious hue and appearance, etc. they know, tasmaati yasmaa saama~nca vidita.m lokassa ca saccasammata.m atidhaavanti, tasmaa. semhasamu.t.thaanaadiisupi eseva nayo. N: , meaning, they go beyond what is known by one¹s own experience and is agreed upon in the worldf) therefore. The same method goes for feelings arisen because of phlegm, and so on. ettha pana sannipaatikaaniiti ti.n.nampi pittaadiina.m kopena samu.t.thitaani. utupari.naamajaaniiti visabhaagaututo jaataani. N: Here again, as to the words < arisen because of the union of bodily humours>, also with reference to (the other of) the three factors of bile, etc. , they have originated from anger. As to the words, < arisen because of change of climate>, they have arisen because of climate that is not ordinary. ja"ngaladesavaasiina~nhi anupadese vasantaana.m visabhaago utu uppajjati, anupadesavaasiina~nca ja"ngaladeseti eva.m malayasamuddatiiraadivasenaapi utuvisabhaagataa uppajjatiyeva. tato jaataati utupari.naamajaataani naama. N: For those who live in a waste land a climate that is not ordinary (to them) arises when they live in the countryside, and for those who live in the countryside a climate that is not common (to them) arises when they live in a wasteland or also at the shore of a body of water with (sandy) dust and so on. Feelings arising from change of climate originates from (all ) that. visamaparihaarajaaniiti mahaabhaaravahanasudhaako.t.tanaadito vaa avelaaya carantassa sappa.da.msakuupapaataadito vaa visamaparihaarato jaataani. N: , by carrying a heavy load or by pounding lime and so on, or for a person who travels at an unfavorable time, who is then bitten by a snake or gadfly or falls into a well and so on, that means arisen because of inattentive care of the body. ***** opakkamikaaniiti ``aya.m coro vaa paaradaariko vaa''ti gahetvaa ja.n.nukakapparamuggaraadiihi nippothanaupakkama.m paccaya.m katvaa uppannaani. N: , meaning, arisen, when people have arrested someone of whom they believe that he is a bandit or an adulterer, and when they injure him by means of beating him with knees, elbows or a club, and so on. eta.m bahi upakkama.m labhitvaa koci vuttanayeneva kusala.m karoti, koci akusala.m, koci adhivaasento nipajjati. N: As to those who have received such outward injury, someone, as in the aforesaid manner, performs kusala , another person commits akusala and another person again lies down enduring it patiently. kammavipaakajaaniiti kevala.m kammavipaakato, jaataani. tesupi hi uppannesu vuttanayeneva koci kusala.m karoti, koci akusala.m, koci adhivaasento nipajjati. eva.m sabbavaaresu tividhaava vedanaa honti. N: , meaning, solely arisen because it is the result of kamma. Also with reference to these feelings that have arisen, someone, as in the aforesaid manner, performs kusala, another person commits akusala and another person again lies down enduring it patiently. tattha purimehi sattahi kaara.nehi uppannaa saariirikaa vedanaa sakkaa pa.tibaahitu.m, kammavipaakajaana.m pana sabbabhesajjaanipi sabbaparittaanipi naala.m pa.tighaataaya. imasmi.m sutte lokavohaaro naama kathitoti. N: Here, with reference to the feelings arisen from the seven causes mentioned before, the feelings connected with the body can be warded off, but as to the feelings that are the results of kamma, all medicines and all ways of protection are not suitable for warding them off. In this sutta conventional language has been used. @.tiikaa 3. a.t.thasatapariyaayavaggo 1. siivakasuttava.n.nanaa N: subcommentary to the Sivaka Sutta 269. cuu.laa pana assa mahatii atthi savisesaa, tasmaa ``mo.liyasiivako''ti vuccati. channaparibbaajakoti kambalaadinaa kopiinapa.ticchaadakaparibbaajako. N: He has as a distinction a large topknot, and therefore he is called Sivaka with the topknot. , meaning, a wanderer with a woollen cloth etc. covering his private parts. pittapaccayaaniiti pittahetukaani . ``tisso vedanaa''ti vatvaa taasa.m sambhava.m dassetu.m``katha''ntiaadi vutta.m. N: , meaning, caused by bile. After having said , it was said and so on, in order to show their origination. kusalavedanaa uppajjati pittapaccayaa. pittabhesajja.m karissaamiiti bhesajjasambhara.nattha~nceva tadattha.m aamisaki~njakkhasambhara.nattha~nca paa.na.m hanatiiti yojanaa. majjhatto bhesajjakara.ne udaasiino. N: Conditioned by bile arises wholesome feeling. As to the words , this means, having prepared the ingredients of the medicine, having prepared the ingredients of the material of pollen for that purpose, , is the exegesis. With equanimity he is indifferent with regard to the production of medicine. tasmaati yasmaa pittaadipaccayahetukanti attano ca lokassa ca paccakkha.m atidhaavanti ye sama.naa vaa braahma.naa vaa, tasmaa tesa.m micchaa. N:, meaning, in as far as (feelings) caused by bile and so on, are evident to oneself and the world, the recluses and brahmans who go beyond this are therefore wrong. pittaadiina.m ti.n.nampi samodhaanasannipaate jaataani sannipaatikaani. N: Also with regard to the three factors including bile and so on, arisen from the combination of bodily humours, (it is said,) arisen from bodily humours. purimautuno visadiso utuvipari.naamoti aaha ``visabhaagaututo jaataanii''ti . N: Not similar to the former climate, with the words (the Buddha) said:< arisen from uncommon climate>. anudako thaddhaluukhabhuumivibhaago ja"ngaladeso, vuttavipariyaayena anupadeso veditabbo. malaya.m himasiitabahulo, itaro u.nhabahulo. N: A wasteland, unfavourable land that is without water, harsh and rough earth, (whereas) the countryside should be understood as contrary to the aforesaid. With dust and very cold, or else a great deal of heat. attano pakaticariyaana.m visama.m kaayassa parihara.navasena, jaataani pana asayhasahanaadesaakaalacara.naadinaa veditabbaaniiti aaha``mahaabhaaravahanaa''tiaadi. N: Because of inattentive care of the body by unnatural behaviour, arisen because of traveling at the wrong place and time and so on, that are difficult to endure, and should thus be known; therefore, he said:< carrying a heavy load> and so on. parassa upakkamato nibbattaani opakkamikaaniiti aaha -- ``aya.m coro vaa''tiaadi. kevalanti baahirapaccaya.m anapekkhitvaa kevala.m teneva. N: Originated because of an attack by someone else, with the expression, , he used the words and so on. , meaning, not having expected a condition from outside, therefore, he used the word solely (arisen because of kamma). tenaaha``kammavipaakatova jaataanii''ti. sakkaa pa.tibaahitu.m patiikaarena. N: Therefore he said, . They (arisen because of the other conditions) can be warded off because of being master of them. lokavohaaro naama kathito pittasamu.t.thaanaadisama~n~naaya lokasiddhattaa. kaama.m sariirasannissitaa vedanaa kammanibbattaava, tassaa pana paccuppannapaccayavasena evamaya.m lokavohaaroti vutta~nceva gahetvaa paravaadapa.tisedho katoti da.t.thabba.m. N: This sutta is spoken from the standpoint of worldly convention; (the feelings) arisen from bile, and so on, are designated in the manner of worldly convention. The feelings connected with the sensuous body are actually produced by kamma, but by way of the present condition there is thus this worldly convention; accepting what is thus said, it should be understood that the opponents doctrine is refuted. siivakasuttava.n.nanaa ni.t.thitaa. N: The subcommentary to the Sivaka sutta is concluded. **** Nina. 13095 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun May 5, 2002 6:09am Subject: bones Dear Sarah, I am catching up Email after a week's absence, combining some reactions to posts. I was so touched by your example of taking up a bone of Alan Driver at his cremation, after Kh. Sujin requested you to do this. You realized: no more Alan, only hardness appeared. It is just like in the suttas. Those who had accumulated pa~n~naa could attain enlightenment, realizing the hardness as only a dhamma, impermanent, dukkha and anatta, one of these characteristics at a time. Such an example makes the difference between concept and reality so clear. When we read about it, it is different from experiencing it in a situation where we are confronted with the death of a dear person. Such a poignant reminder. A moment of realizing dhamma as dhamma and then sadness again, different moments. It is so natural. Now it also becomes clearer why we read in the Satipatthana Sutta about corpses, parts of the body, breathing. They are all reminders of daily life, making it clear that there are only dhammas each with their own characteristic. If there would not be colour or visible object, could we know that here is Alan's bone? If tangible object does not appear, do we know that we touch a bone? Different moments of paramattha dhammas appearing, and they do appear, and our thoughts on account of them, with lobha, dosa, moha, or with pa~n~naa. As Kom said, in theory we may understand the difference between paramattha dhamma and concept, but, how in practice, how about this moment? I also want to say that Jon's reminder is very helpful that here in dsg we can remind each other of the reality appearing at the present moment. To Christine, about dosa: the sutta does not state that we should wish nasty things to our enemy, on the contrary. The Buddha wanted to remind us here of the disadvantages of dosa: sleeping badly, becoming ugly, running the risk of an unhappy rebirth. Nina. 13096 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sun May 5, 2002 6:14am Subject: Re: [dsg] Right Concentration - Rob Ep - beware/incredibly long Rob E --- Robert Epstein wrote: > Dear Jon, > Well, I meant to answer you simply and somewhat in accord, but I wound up going on > a tremendous rant. In the interest of science, I have not attempted to edit it. > I hope there is something of value in there. > > Below is the post as it was written, a few minutes ago: I'm glad you decided to let it go as written. It contains many useful areas for discussion. I hope you don't mind if I select only a few to come back on. A. Jhanas and the true nature of realities I think the crux of our differences can be found in this passage from your post: > When we talk about the jhanas, and other 'practiced states' which clearly cause > specific changes to consciousness and the mind, and give rise to changes in the > way in which self and reality are perceived, it seems easier for me to see this as > a real mark of progress on the path. It seems to be your view that the jhanas are a practice or technique for experiencing directly the true nature of realities. I realise that this is a view shared by many, perhaps by a majority of those practising Buddhism today. It's also most people's instinctive view when they first hear about jhana as part of the dhamma. But is it something the Buddha said directly, or is it something that people readily infer from the suttas because it accords with their intuitive view (after all, it's so easy to go with our instincts and ignore the contrary evidence)? I would be interested to know whether you can you point to a passage in the Tipitaka that positively supports this proposition. B. Contemplating objects vs. direct experience of realities You gave a description of contemplating a prized piano, as an analogy of there being direct awareness of a reality (dhamma) of the present moment. However, the 2 are not the same. What you describe there is simply a form of *thinking about*, not the *direct experience of*, something. So if as you suggest that process were to be 'applied to one reality after another', it would not lead to anything that I would associate with the development of satipatthana. C. Sitting vipassana You refer to long periods (3 years) sitting in vipassana meditation leading to obvious changes in one's sense of self. Can you point to any instance in the texts of the Buddha recommending such a practice, or any mention at all of 'sitting vipassana meditation'. D. 'Right' and 'wrong' approaches You say: > To read the Suttas with great care > and to contemplate their meaning with great intent is also a form of meditation. > I just don't make the distinctions between 'right' approaches and 'wrong' ones > that you do. Of course I believe that there are wrong paths and pitfalls, but I > don't think that legitimate meditation, Sutta study, or discernment of everyday > realities as they arise, are among them. These are not pitfalls, they are > pathways. What would be your criteria for identifying right paths from wrong paths and pitfalls? E. Satipatthana Sutta references You say: > But I don't see the real rationale for this kind of > suspicion of the special efforts which seem to have been clearly described by the > Buddha in the Satipatthana Sutta, in his discussions of the jhanas, etc. I can't really comment unless I know what passages you are referring to here, Rob. Can you give a reference, please. Thanks. I can only say at this stage that I'm not aware I have cast suspicion on any aspect of the Satipatthana Sutta. I'm sorry not to say a lot more in this post, but I think that the best way to discuss differences is in the context of excerpts from the teachings, rather than simply exchanging personal views. So I hope you can give me some references to look at and discuss. Thanks. Jon > =========== > > I think it would be great to establish common ground, and I appreciate your wish > to identify where we can stand together. That would make an even more useful > ground from which to depart on issues where we may have some differences. > > Let me contemplate what you said: > > are we at least in agreement that the crux of the development of > > insight is the knowing of the true nature of the realities of the present > > moment, and that this includes any reality of any present moment, regardless of > > the nature of the reality (nama or rupa, wholesome or unwholesome, internal or > > external), on the basis that all realties are taken as being permanent, > > satisfactory and self (in one of the 3 aspects), yet in reality are not so? > > First let me agree in my own language and see if that accords with the above: I > think that knowing the true nature of the experienced moment, and thus gaining > insight into the nature of the experiencing mind, is the goal of all discernment. > > Let's say we were to see that a prized piano, which we are attached to, is really > only a succession of sensations and qualities of hardness, smoothness, concept, > memory, etc., and we began to discern these 'realities' for what they were. > > What would be the result? That piano, which we were attached to, would begin to > lose its attraction, as it was deconstructed into simple elements of experience. > > If we also get direct insight into the piano's impermanence, if we see that the > original finish has become worn, that the piano keys are old and yellowing, this > done with discernment and not nostalgia can also lessen attachment and ignorance. > We begin to trade in the cherished object for the simple realities of what exists > in this actual moment. Likewise, we begin to see that the piano has no fixed > identity as we thought it did, and that it is not an 'entity' that we can hold > onto. > > There can also be no satisfaction in holding onto an object that has changed, is > subject to further change, and will eventually perish. > > In being attached to the piano, we had made it part of our self-identity, and had > established our own entity by establishing its entity as part of us. So our own > sense of entity, of self, is somewhat let go and relaxed by letting go of the > concept of the piano to which we were attached. > > I can see this process, applied to one reality after another, as they arise, as > gradually wittling away at the sense of personal self which is the source-concept > of all suffering. > > However, I also believe that there are experiences to be discerned which dissolve > the sense of personal self more directly. And I think that somehow these sorts of > discernments do not always seem to be included in the 'realities' to be discerned. > > You have said in the past that seeing the 'anatta-ness' of the mind or personal > self is not really part of the practice because these 'concepts' are empty and > cannot be directly discerned, or something to that effect, am I correct? So one > is left to contemplate the reality of objects that arise for perception or > mentation, rupas and namas. To me, the rupas and namas are only artifacts of the > bodymind's apprehension of experience, and are secondary to the apprehension of > that which experiences. But then we get into consciousness as something beyond > the cittas, and that whole realm of awareness..... And I guess that is the > potential trap if one tries to discern the 'mind' or 'self' apart from individual > namas and rupas. > > So, as I say above, the letting go of attachment through seeing the three > unwholesome or delusory attributes of arising objects, and their breakdown into > individual moments of actual apprehension of qualities, seems to me to be > something we can agree upon as a core activity. But I am left somewhat > unsatisfied by this, as it doesn't seem to me to directly access the gradual > evolution, transformation of the overall state of the practitioner. As Buddha > says, as one moves to higher levels of wisdom and refinement, the overall > experience of being alive is quite transformed, as one's false sense of self and > all the clingings associated with it are gradually loosened and eventually > dropped. As more kusala develops and akusala becomes less and less present, the > experience of living must be quite different in quality. I find it hard to > understand the direct relationship of all these changes to the simple discernment > of namas and rupas, which seems more like a kind of perceptual purity than a > transformation of mind and personality. Does this simple though immensely > difficult act, in itself, lead to the transformative evolution of all the kandhas? > > > When we talk about the jhanas, and other 'practiced states' which clearly cause > specific changes to consciousness and the mind, and give rise to changes in the > way in which self and reality are perceived, it seems easier for me to see this as > a real mark of progress on the path. My former teacher and friend, who went off > to sit in Vipassana meditation for almost three years straight, came back with > obvious changes to his sense of self. He had through direct and uninterrupted > focus, discerned 'realities' and shed an enormous amount of the mental and > emotional junk which he had had before. He was visibly and demonstrably altered > and didn't have the kind of reactivity he had had before. He had gained > enormously in his ability to be in the moment without clinging and to discern > realities directly. His Theravadan teachers approved of him, and basically > certified his transformation. > > My question is what kind of involvement causes one to make great progress. We may > not awaken in this lifetime, but I would think we want to be clear about what > maximizes our potentiality for ending suffering and reaching our goal. It is also > clear to me that those of you who are committed, dedicated to Abhidhamma, have a > way of working, a method and a path, that is effective in discerning realities and > thus gradually freeing the mind. In other words, though it is a philosophy of > everyday discernment without external strivings or special exercises, it is still > a form of meditation as far as I am concerned, and takes its place in the > legitimate forms of mediatation that exist. To read the Suttas with great care > and to contemplate their meaning with great intent is also a form of meditation. > I just don't make the distinctions between 'right' approaches and 'wrong' ones > that you do. Of course i believe that there are wrong paths and pitfalls, but I > don't think that legitimate meditation, Sutta study, or discernment of everyday > realities as they arise, are among them. These are not pitfalls, they are > pathways. > > So to say that 'there should be no special effort necessary' to discern realities, > still seems to me to be a philsophical bias against meditation. When the rubber > meets the road, you really think that making a special effort outside of everyday > living and the study of the Suttas is a mistake and perhaps a negative influence, > since it may produce 'special states' that will seem like they are discerning when > in fact they are not. But I don't see the real rationale for this kind of > suspicion of the special efforts which seem to have been clearly described by the > Buddha in the Satipatthana Sutta, in his discussions of the jhanas, etc. > > To say that he was addressing those who were already well versed in the jhanas, > and that it was a sort of coincidence then that he instructed them about what to > do with those states, seems to me to be too dismissive of the amount of weight > that he accorded to these practices. Do you really think that the Buddha's > disciples were practicing the jhanas on their own initiative, and that the Buddha > did not accept and promote this practice? Even if we admit that we are too busy > and too unconcentrated to engage in jhana meditation, to say that samatha is not > an important component of the path seems again to fly in the face of the Buddha's > own words. > > I have offered an alternative possibility, that samatha can be developed through > concentration on the Dhamma and through concentrated discernment in everyday life, > just as insight can, and that wisdom can develop in many different ways *if the > right principles are adhered to* in whatever the practice is. > > Our only real argument is whether the 'special practices' such as studied > meditation and the states of consciousness they produce are inherently in a less > natural, lower position in Buddhism than everyday discernment, Sutta study and the > advice of a wise spiritual friend. It seems that Abhidhamma has discarded > meditation for reasons of its own philosophy, and has discounted the immense role > that is has played in the entire history of Buddhism. When Buddha sat under the > Bodhi tree and reached the full flowering of enlightenment, he was clearly in > meditation. Do you not agree? Yet you regularly go back to the position that > meditation is both unnecessary and in some ways undesireable. > > Again, I think that the intention to discern arising realities in everyday life is > just as much a meditation technique as the jhanas. There is no inherent > difference in value between them, unless one happens to think that one is more > effective than the other. I have said before, and still feel, that both are the > ideal combination. But it makes no sense to me that concentrated time spent in > meditation will yield an impure or unwholesome effect *if it is done properly*, > any more than everyday discernment will yield an unwholesome effect if it is done > in accord with the intentions of the Dhamma. If it is done with force or > attachment, everyday discernement could be just as harmful and deluding as sitting > in meditation, so I don't see the inherent difference in their potentiality. > Again, it seems like a philosophical prejudice to me, and I don't, haven't been > able to figure out, what Abhidhamma gains by having that view, or where that view > actually arises from philosophically. It doesn't seem to register with me, or > else I have never heard a proper explanation. What I usually hear in this regard > is 'why should a special effort be expended' when it is the moment as it arises in > life that is to be discerned, as if meditation is not part of life, and as if the > intention to discern anything doesn't spoil the naturalness of the moment in any > case. > > We should accept the fact that just following the Dhamma obscures the naturalness > of the moment anyway, and what we are doing is specialized whether it is > Abhidhamma study or meditation or anything else that has an underlying 'special > intention' to it. That is why i said in another post that we are stuck 'using the > false concept of self to get rid of the false concept of self.' I think that > accepting this is a good starting point, and not pretending that anything we do is > going to be 'natural'. > > Well, I've said too much, and perhaps not enough, but I hope it will be the basis > of a good honest dialogue that can get to the heart of the truth. Where that > truth lies remains to be revealed, as we are all more or less treading water in > this sea of delusion. > > May all creatures have a moment of insight soon, if not actual liberation. > > Robert Ep. 13097 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sun May 5, 2002 6:20am Subject: Re: [dsg] 4 Ultimate Realities? Howard Thanks for the very careful and detailed analysis you give below. Let me add a few comments of my own. --- upasaka@a... wrote: > > --- TGrand458@a... wrote: > In the Samyutta Nikaya the Buddha describes > > the 5 Khandhas > > as... > > > > > > "...form should be seen as a bursting bubble, feeling should be seen as a > > > > > lump of foam, perception should be seen as a mirage, mental formations > > should > > > > > > be seen as a plantian tree (coreless), consciousness should be seen as a > > > conjurers trick..." > > > > > > Doesn't sound to me like the Buddha wants them to be thought of as > > ultimate > > > realities. Seems like he wants them to be seen as unsubstantial as > > humanly > > > possible. Calling them "ultimate realities" seems to against that grain > > to > > > me. I wonder if seeing them as ultimate realities embeds a type of > > > substantiality and self view that is counter-productive to detaching from > > > > > conditions (non-attachment). I understand the reasoning behind > > describing > > > them as ultimate realities, I'm just not sure its a very good idea? > > > > > > TG … > ========================== > I think that TG makes an excellent point (as will not surprise you, > Jon! ;-) I agree, Howard. I have appreciated TG's recent posts. > I have long bristled at the term 'paramattha dhamma'. The actual > experiences subsumed by the concept of 'paramattha dhamma' are, speaking > precisely, actual elements of experience as opposed to imagined self-existent > things "out there". Could we say that 'paramattha dhamma' is the term used to refer to the underlying phenomena of which any given moment of experience is actually comprised. > For example, the experience of 'red' per se is a function > of consciousness, and, when we can isolate it, it *seems* that way. I'm not sure if it's correct to talk about "the experience of 'red' per se" as a description of the experiencing of visible data through the eye-door, any more than it would be to talk about "the experience of 'music' per se" as a description of the experiencing of audible data through the ear-door. In either case, there is just there is just the experiencing of the visible/audible data by the consciousness concerned. In any event, I think that 'isolating' red or the experience of red would no longer be the direct experience of the visible data. > But the > experience of 'a red fire engine' always seems to be the experience of some > self-existent thing "out there", a thing which has 'red' as a characteristic. > A conceptual dhamma is always something imagined to be "out there". But, on > close examination of an alleged red fire engine, for example, all that one > actually comes upon are the direct experiences of 'red' and other colors, > 'hardness', various shapes, etc, plus the thoughts of water, fires, etc. It > is these internally experienced phenomena subsumed by 'the red fire engine', > actually experienced without additional fabricating activity of the mind, > which are the so-called "paramattha dhammas" involved. At the moment of seeing that precedes or accompanies the concept of 'red fire engine' there is only the experience of visible data followed by thinking about the visible data and previous experiences. So the paramattha dhammas of the moment are seeing, visible object and thinking. > But the name > 'paramattha dhamma' and, even worse, the English 'ultimate reality' do strike > me as substantialist and terribly misleading. What these things are are > actual elements of direct experience. They are fleeting and conditioned > things-in-relation (except for nibbana), more like phantoms and shadows than > separate, self-existent "ultimate realities". I'm not sure in what sense you would see visible or audible data as being 'phantom' or 'a shadow'. The fact that these phenomena are conditioned and last for only a brief moment doesn't mean that they lack characteristics of their own capable of being discerned by consciousness accompanied by panna (termed 'individual essence'). Do you see a necessary contradiction in these 2 attributes (conditionality vs. own essence)? > There's GOT to be a better > term! ;-) What's in a name? I think an awful lot. THIS name we are discussing > is, in my estimation, injurious to correct understanding, and injurious to > the public image of Abhidhamma and, more generally, Theravada. I'll pass on the appropriateness of the name. There are lots of names that seem at first acquaintance to be an odd choice. Perhaps that says something about our level of understanding?? Jon 13098 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sun May 5, 2002 6:29am Subject: Re: [dsg] skilful means in the group Christine Thanks for the essay by Bhikkhu Bodhi (and for your own comments). Your ability to come up with an appropriate article never ceases to amaze me! Jon --- christine_forsyth wrote: > Hi Anders and Jon, > > Interesting posts. Anders, much the same ideas occurred to me a > while back - but I think a proper 'balance' of study and practice > tailored to individual needs is important. You may be interested in > an essay by Bhikkhu Bodhi addressing this issue. > > metta, > Christine > > The Case For Study by Bhikkhu Bodhi > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/bps/news/essay05.htm > > The recent upsurge of interest in Buddhism, both East and West, has > been marked by a vigorous practical orientation and a drive to > discover the peace and freedom to which the practice of Dhamma leads. ... 13099 From: wynn Date: Sun May 5, 2002 7:26am Subject: Re: [dsg] Iddhi Hi, > ..... > Sorry, would you give the reference. In Vism, V,27 uner "Limited Space > Kasina' there is a reference to the kasinas as basis of 'fourfold and of > fivefold jhana'. > ..... Thank you so much for your reply. Well, I found it in Chapter XII Description of Direct-Knowledge- The Supernormal Powers It is mentioned in the first 15-20 passage of that chapter See especially, passage 2 and 4 Regards, Wynn 13100 From: Date: Sun May 5, 2002 3:39am Subject: Re: [dsg] 4 Ultimate Realities? Hi, TG - In a message dated 5/5/02 4:13:21 AM Eastern Daylight Time, TGrand458@a... writes: > I would be interested to know how "dhamma's," that are completely dependent > on something else (Dependent Arising), are 'with its own characteristic.' > How can something have "its own characteristic" if it doesn't have any self > > at all? > > The way I see it...it is "something else's characteristic" that is > responsible for arisen states/dhammas. But that "something else" had > something else responsible for "its" characteristic, and so on and so on > indefinitely. > ========================== This is exactly it! No core or self or self-nature at all in any conditioned dhamma: When exactly the right assembly of conditions has occurred, with none missing, the conditioned dhamma arises, but should any one of these conditions be missing, the dhamma does *not* arise. So, in what sense are any characteristics or even the bare existence of a conditioned dhamma inherent in itself, in this which is totally dependent on other things that are, themselves, equally empty. There are characteristics, yes, but not *own* characteristics, nor borrowed. They are inherent in nothing, not in themselves, not in anything else. Empty phenomena, rolling on. Phantoms chasing phantoms. Foam bubbling upon foam. Nothing to hold onto, all ungraspable, without anchor and footing. Nothing to do but *let go*. It seems to me that if, in trying to see the impersonality of all dhammas, an essential enterprise (!), one is led to a belief in ultimate dhammas with own-being, then one has traded one aspect of atta-view for another. It also seems to me that a mere intellectual understanding of the truth that all dhammas other than nibbana arise in dependence on causes and conditions still misses a full understanding of anatta. I think that the truth of anatta is more fully realized when one contemplates the sheer "magic" and wonder of the arising of conditioned phenomena. One moment dhamma D is not to be seen. Then a group of ghostly conditions fleetingly traverse the stage of awareness, and suddenly, where there was no dhamma D, there it is, as if by a conjurer's power, and, then, poof, it's gone once again! What an extraordinary magic show, especially because this display of empty ephemera *looks* to us like something substantial! 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) 13101 From: Date: Sun May 5, 2002 4:26am Subject: Re: [dsg] 4 Ultimate Realities? Hi, Jon - In a message dated 5/5/02 9:22:26 AM Eastern Daylight Time, jonoabb@y... writes: > Howard > > Thanks for the very careful and detailed analysis you give below. Let me > add a few > comments of my own. > > --- upasaka@a... wrote: > > > --- TGrand458@a... wrote: > > In the Samyutta Nikaya the Buddha describes > > > the 5 Khandhas > > > as... > > > > > > > > "...form should be seen as a bursting bubble, feeling should be seen > as a > > > > > > > lump of foam, perception should be seen as a mirage, mental > formations > > > should > > > > > > > > be seen as a plantian tree (coreless), consciousness should be seen > as a > > > > conjurers trick..." > > > > > > > > Doesn't sound to me like the Buddha wants them to be thought of as > > > ultimate > > > > realities. Seems like he wants them to be seen as unsubstantial as > > > humanly > > > > possible. Calling them "ultimate realities" seems to against that > grain > > > to > > > > me. I wonder if seeing them as ultimate realities embeds a type of > > > > substantiality and self view that is counter-productive to detaching > from > > > > > > > conditions (non-attachment). I understand the reasoning behind > > > describing > > > > them as ultimate realities, I'm just not sure its a very good idea? > > > > > > > > TG > … > > ========================== > > I think that TG makes an excellent point (as will not surprise > you, > > Jon! ;-) > > I agree, Howard. I have appreciated TG's recent posts. > > > I have long bristled at the term 'paramattha dhamma'. The > actual > > experiences subsumed by the concept of 'paramattha dhamma' are, speaking > > precisely, actual elements of experience as opposed to imagined > self-existent > > things "out there". > > Could we say that 'paramattha dhamma' is the term used to refer to the > underlying > phenomena of which any given moment of experience is actually comprised. > ------------------------------------------------- Howard: This is not bad. Though I don't agree to any *underlying* phenomena - there is just the experience itself. I can know nothing beynd that. ------------------------------------------------- > > > For example, the experience of 'red' per se is a function > > of consciousness, and, when we can isolate it, it *seems* that way. > > I'm not sure if it's correct to talk about "the experience of 'red' per se" > as a > description of the experiencing of visible data through the eye-door, any > more than it > would be to talk about "the experience of 'music' per se" as a description > of the > experiencing of audible data through the ear-door. In either case, there > is just there > is just the experiencing of the visible/audible data by the consciousness > concerned. > ----------------------------------------------------- Howard: I understand you, and you make an important point. What I should have spoken of is not "the experience of 'red' per se", but, rather, "the experience, per se, that we come to think of as 'red' ". ----------------------------------------------------- > > In any event, I think that 'isolating' red or the experience of red would > no longer be > the direct experience of the visible data. > ------------------------------------------------------- Howard: Isolating the mere visual experience would be, and that is what I meant but didn't express well at all. Isolating it *as red* would, indeed, already go beyond "the direct experience of the visible data". ------------------------------------------------------- > > > But > the > > experience of 'a red fire engine' always seems to be the experience of > some > > self-existent thing "out there", a thing which has 'red' as a > characteristic. > > A conceptual dhamma is always something imagined to be "out there". But, > on > > close examination of an alleged red fire engine, for example, all that > one > > actually comes upon are the direct experiences of 'red' and other colors, > > > 'hardness', various shapes, etc, plus the thoughts of water, fires, etc. > It > > is these internally experienced phenomena subsumed by 'the red fire > engine', > > actually experienced without additional fabricating activity of the mind, > > > which are the so-called "paramattha dhammas" involved. > > At the moment of seeing that precedes or accompanies the concept of 'red > fire engine' > there is only the experience of visible data followed by thinking about the > visible data > and previous experiences. So the paramattha dhammas of the moment are > seeing, visible > object and thinking. > ------------------------------------------------------ Howard: That's fine. I have no problem with that denotation of the term 'paramattha dhamma'. It is the usual connotation that troubles me, and other terms, such as 'self-nature' sometimes associated with it.. ----------------------------------------------------- > > > > But the name > > 'paramattha dhamma' and, even worse, the English 'ultimate reality' do > strike > > me as substantialist and terribly misleading. What these things are are > > actual elements of direct experience. They are fleeting and conditioned > > things-in-relation (except for nibbana), more like phantoms and shadows > than > > separate, self-existent "ultimate realities". > > I'm not sure in what sense you would see visible or audible data as being > 'phantom' or 'a > shadow'. The fact that these phenomena are conditioned and last for only a > brief moment > doesn't mean that they lack characteristics of their own capable of being > discerned by > consciousness accompanied by panna (termed 'individual essence'). Do you > see a necessary > contradiction in these 2 attributes (conditionality vs. own essence)? > ------------------------------------------------------- Howard: The problem I have here is with the adjectival phrase "of their own" in the sentence "The fact that these phenomena are conditioned and last for only a brief moment doesn't mean that they lack characteristics of their own capable of being discerned by consciousness accompanied by panna (termed 'individual essence')." Everything about these phenomena, including their very existence, arises in total dependence on conditions, all of which are equally empty of own-being. What arises in total dependence on other conditions does not have own-being, and inasmuch as these other conditions are equally without own-being, the emptiness is thoroughgoing. ---------------------------------------------------------- > > > There's GOT to be a better > > term! ;-) What's in a name? I think an awful lot. THIS name we are > discussing > > is, in my estimation, injurious to correct understanding, and injurious > to > > the public image of Abhidhamma and, more generally, Theravada. > > I'll pass on the appropriateness of the name. There are lots of names that > seem at first > acquaintance to be an odd choice. Perhaps that says something about our > level of > understanding?? > ---------------------------------------------------- Howard: Well, there is always a "perhaps". But that shouldn't put an end to our considerations. ----------------------------------------------------- > > Jon > ========================== 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) 13102 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Sun May 5, 2002 0:36pm Subject: FW: Letter sent from India Dear Group, Sarah asked me if I could post (part of) this letter, so here it is! Note that I didn't come up with the points, my sister did. kom -----Original Message----- From: Kom Tukovinit [mailto:kom@a...] Sent: Tuesday, April 23, 2002 11:31 PM To: Valaphorn Katai Cc: Valaluck Tukovinit; Jeff Tukovinit Subject: Letter sent from India Dear Sister, I have just finished the letter that you copied me from India. Let me first mention to you that I appreciated the letter tremendously. ... Let me summarize what you wrote about why rebirth and kamma seems to make sense: 1.. Different people are endowed with different situations in life. Some are richer, more famous, more honored, and happier than other people, and it doesn't seem to be exactly attributable to their being smart, working hard, being more educated, etc. 2.. Different people have different habits and reactions to different things. Why do they react to things in a certain way? Attributing to the upbringing, family ties, etc., doesn't seem to explain all the different situations. 3.. Regardless of what people do, they all seem to experience unhappiness in life in one way or another. They grow old, get sick, and die. They want things that they cannot get. They can never be satisfied. Life appears to be completely meaningless. 4.. If there is no rebirth, what's the point of doing good? Why don't just do things that would bring us the maximum happiness, the most convenient way, regardless of how it impacts other people? You propose the following consequences if there are rebirths: 1.. Nothing is permanent. Our bodies are not permanent. Our consciousness is not permanent. What "we" have is completely temporarily. We will certainly leave this life and is reborn into the next, with the situation in life appropriate to the cause of that rebirth. As long as there are causes for rebirth, we will continue being reborn. 2.. What we experience in this life (seeing bad/good, hearing bad/good, etc.) are results of past deeds. If there is cause, there is certainly effects, and the effects must be appropriate to the cause. 3.. Our abilities and innate skills depend on what we were skilled at in the previous lives. 4.. Our habits are conditioned by the habits that we have accumulated (and is accumulating). 5.. The situation where it seems that when somebody is doing bad, but they are getting good result is only because right now, they are enjoying the results of good deeds that they have done in the past, but they certainly would receive the results of what they are doing now. 6.. The consequences are scary. We are mostly doing something for ourselves, sometimes at the expense of others. These certainly would give bad results. Good results will be few since we are mostly doing things for ourselves. Hence, you propose 1.. Abstain from doing unwholesome things 2.. Do good 3.. Purify our mind / improve our mental states and most importantly, 1.. do this in *daily* life, not just occasionally 2.. do this as soon as possible, not only when we gets old (since we don't know when we are going to die) This list allows me make helpful reflections and brought me joy. I agree with many many of them. Appreciative, kom 13103 From: Date: Sun May 5, 2002 8:01pm Subject: Re: [dsg] ADL ch. 6 (18-23) Thanks Lucy. Good quote. You have a good week too. Somehow I don't think patience is necessary in the recognition of dosa. Nothing is suffered though there may be ongoing but interesting unpleasantness. Larry 13104 From: robertkirkpatrick.rm Date: Sun May 5, 2002 8:06pm Subject: Re: [dsg] 4 Ultimate Realities? --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., TGrand458@a... wrote: > In a message dated 5/3/2002 12:18:34 AM Pacific Daylight Time, > sarahdhhk@y... writes: > > > > Though insubstantial, each ‘with its own characteristic’, however > > fleeting, transient and deceptive. Because there is no understanding of > > the ‘paramatha’ nature of these phenomena, like a magical illusion, we’re > > deceived and take them for a ‘whole’, for a self of substance. > > > > I would be interested to know how "dhamma's," that are completely dependent > on something else (Dependent Arising), are 'with its own characteristic.' > How can something have "its own characteristic" if it doesn't have any self > at all? > > The way I see it...it is "something else's characteristic" that is > responsible for arisen states/dhammas. But that "something else" had > something else responsible for "its" characteristic, and so on and so on > indefinitely. > > I have a hard time imagining how a mind can consider something an "ultimate > reality" and not thereby see it as substantial. > > Howard used the term phantoms. This I think is good. After object-states > are broken down into fundamental elements...these elements need to be further > broken down by principles (dependent arising, impermanence, unsatisfactory, > no-self). And then these elements are not seen as "ultimate realities," but > are more likely seen as phantoms. (I am only considering conditioned > phenomena here.) > > TG > >_______ Dear TG, Two questions. Are these fundamental elements similar to or the same as paramattha dhammas? How are these fundamental elements broken down in practice? best wishes robert 13105 From: Robert Date: Sun May 5, 2002 8:42pm Subject: Monkish mathematician Dear Group, A book I'm reading "The man who loved only numbers' about Paul Erdos (pronounced air-dish) has some interesting bits. He published over a thousand top level articles and was the leading mathematician of the later part of the 20th century(died 1996). celibate his entire life, never cooked, owned almost nothing except what fitted in his suitcase (didn't have a house and stayed with friends all over the world)- he gave most of his stipends to different charities as soon as he received them. He had no interests other than mathematics and worked 19hour days every day (fortified by Benzedrine and caffeine). he could solve problems anywhere and even in the middle of a convesation might be considering one. One of his best friends , Ronald Graham, while less productive worked while playing "You can do mathematics anywhere. I once had a flash of insight into a problem in the middle of a back somersault with a triple twist on my trampoline" (you get computer insights in the same way, Howard?) this was contrated with erdos who was rather sedentary- at least physically. best wishes robert 13106 From: Date: Sun May 5, 2002 5:21pm Subject: Re: [dsg] 4 Ultimate Realities? In a message dated 5/5/2002 8:08:24 PM Pacific Daylight Time, robertkirkpatrick@r... writes: > Howard used the term phantoms. This I think is good. After > object-states > > are broken down into fundamental elements...these elements need to > be further > > broken down by principles (dependent arising, impermanence, > unsatisfactory, > > no-self). And then these elements are not seen as "ultimate > realities," but > > are more likely seen as phantoms. (I am only considering > conditioned > > phenomena here.) > > > > TG > > > >_______ > Dear TG, > Two questions. > Are these fundamental elements similar to or the same as paramattha > dhammas? > How are these fundamental elements broken down in practice? > best wishes > robert > Hi Robert, The "fundamental elements" I am referring to are the "conditioned paramattha dhammas." A nice listing of them is found near the beginning of the Patisambhidamagga (Path of Discrimination) where they are broken down into 201 states (dhammas). This is the "object-field" upon which insight is cultivated. Dependent arising, impermanence, unsatisfactoriness, and no-self insight should be applied to these states. I have found the Patisambhidamagga and the Visuddhimagga to be very valuable assistants in helping to understand how the Suttas are directing to "break down delusion." (Not that much has been broken down mind you.) This passage of Howard's is awesome... >>>It seems to me that if, in trying to see the impersonality of all dhammas, an essential enterprise (!), one is led to a belief in ultimate dhammas with own-being, then one has traded one aspect of atta-view for another. It also seems to me that a mere intellectual understanding of the truth that all dhammas other than nibbana arise in dependence on causes and conditions still misses a full understanding of anatta. <<< Analyzing states into constituent elements (conditioned paramattha dhammas, if you rather), is just the slightest minor stage to overcoming delusion IMO. If the mind gets stuck in this stage it really hasn't made much progress. Like Howard says, its just trading one aspect of self-view for another. Larry asked a couple of weeks ago about the importance of impermanence. Impermanence contemplation is critical IMO. The constituent elements need be seen as impermanent, the cause of the impermanence needs to be investigated, analyzed, and seen. The results of impermanence needs to be investigated, analyzed, and seen...over and over and over and over for years and years or whatever it takes until phenomena can be "completely seen through" as merely empty states (like phantoms) just altering based on relative conditions (more empty states). As I understand it, when this has been done long enough, the mind will "reject conditions" as being utterly unsatisfactory (due to the impending and definite death of any and all things the mind can be attached to) and will "launch toward unconditions/no-conditions." As Howard mentions, intellectual understanding alone is not sufficient. Mindfulness also needs to be applied so that impermanence is known by means of "actual arisen dynamically interacting states," and not solely by conceptualization (which is merely an imagination.) I have really enjoyed all your excellent responses to this topic. TG 13107 From: Sarah Date: Sun May 5, 2002 10:38pm Subject: Sri Lanka corner -3rd and final Dear All, Last time I quoted from the Mahavamsa (PTS translation) about the spread of the Teachings by Mahinda in Sri Lanka and the establishing of holy sites in Anaradhapura. The text continues with the arrival of Samghamitta and the Bo tree. The king of Lanka, Devanampiyatissa, sent his nephew and minister, Arittha, to King Asoka in India to request that the Bo tree and the theri Samghamitta be brought to Lanka. King Asoka was grieved but agreed. With a great company of princes and bhikkhus around the Bo tree in Bodh Gaya, there was a miracle when “from its south bough the branches vanished, leaving a stump four cubits long”. The Bo tree severed the south bough itself and roots and branches sprung from it and later new shoots. King Asoka wept and lamented at the parting of the Bo tree too, but meanwhile King Devanampiyatisa prepared for its arrival in Sri Lanka. Two weeks after its arrival, it was brought to Anuradhapura, to the place where former Bo trees (from former Buddha eras) had stood. We read that when the king let the tree leave his hands: “It rose eighty cubits into the air, and floating thus it sent forth glorious rays of six colours. Spreading over the island, reaching the Brahma world, these lovely rays lasted till sunset. Ten thousand persons, who were filled with faith by reason of this miracle, gaining the spiritual insight and attaining to arahantship, received the pabbaja. "When the great Bodhi-tree at sunset was come down from (its place in the air) it stood on the earth under the constellation Rohini. Then did the earth quake. The roots growing over the brim of the vase struck down into the earth, closing in the vase. When the great Bodhi-tree had taken its place all the people who had come together from (the country) round, worshipped it with offerings of perfume, followers and so forth.” ***** The Bo tree we visit today in Aunradhapura is the same tree as this one and apparently it is the oldest historic tree in the world. The original Bo tree in Budh Gaya was destroyed about 20years after the branch sapling was brought to Lanka. We read in the Mahavamsa how the original Bo tree was ‘killed’ by King Asoka’s 2nd wife in a fit of jealousy over the King worshipping the tree at her expense. The one in Lanka has been carefully preserved until now.The first time I visited it with Nina and K.Sujin in 1977, we walked around with monks we knew and as Nina reminded me recently ‘there was a sea of white lotuses’ around the tree, especially arranged. At that time, a new sprout had recently grown from the tree. Nina has written a detailed account of this visit to Sri Lanka and the discussions that took place in "Pilgrimage in Sri Lanka' which can be found at: http://www.zolag.co.uk/ ..... Continuing with the Mahavamsa, We read that Arittha, the king’s nephew became an arahat as did many of the women mentioned before who were ordained and lived with theri Samghamitta. Many viharas, monasteries, cetiyas and so on were established and we read that “Devanampiyatissa, king of Lanka, rich in merit and insight, caused to be carried out, even in the first year, as a friend to virtue, and his whole life through he heaped up works of merit. Our island flourished under the lordship of this king; forty years did he hold sway as king.” ..... He was succeeded by his younger brother, Uttiya, and during Uttiya’s reign, Mahinda and Samghamitta "passed into nibbana”. We read in the Mahavamsa about various invasions and kings who did not support the Sangha and how the Teachings were threatened many times. There were also natural disasters and famines. About 150 years-- and 7 kings later--In 150BC, King Dutthagamini restored the respect for the Sanga, built the stupas, including the ‘the great Thupa’ (with Sakka’s help), Ruvanveli which contains the relics and is the centre of worship in Anuradhapura today, along with Jetawanarama and Thuparamana (which enshrines the collarbone discussed last time). We read about large numbers of bhikkhus who came to visit and pay respects from ‘various (foreign) countries when the foundation stones were laid for the 'Great Thupa'. It’s not clear how they all travelled, but most must surely have made long and arduous trips overland and by sea. 80,000 bhikkhus came rom Rajagaha (where the 1st council was held). 60,000 from the Jetavana vihara (where so many suttas were taught). 280,000 bhikkhus came from Kashmir, 30,000 from Kosambi,460,000 came from Pallava (Persia?), 30,000 from Alexandria, 30,000 From Bodh Gaya and so the list goes on with at least double the number I’ve mentioned here. (I can give a full and detailed list if anyone wishes - I've just mentioned the places I know without cross-checking for now). “Among all those bhikkhus who were met in that assembly those alone who had overcome the asava, as it is told, were ninety-six kotis.” Large numbers of lay followers and bhikkhus became enlightened and “eighteen thousand bhikkhus and fourteen thousand bhikkhunis attained to arahantship” when “the true doctrine took place”. ..... Later we read about how King Dutthagamani died listening to dhamma and “casting a glance at the Great Thupa, closed his eyes as he lay”. we also read how this king will be the ‘first disciple of the sublime Metteyya’. We read “He who, holding the good life to be the greatest (good), does works of merit, passes, covering over much that perchance is evil-doing (Niyatapaapaka.m) into heaven as into his own house; therefore will the wise man continually take delight in works of merit.” ***** The Mahavamsa concludes soon after this. We know that in29BC, the Fourth council was held in Lanka in order to commit the Tipitaka in its entirely to writing. This was supported by King Vattagamani. It was recited by Thera maharakkhita and 500 bhikkhus and written down on palm leaves. This work was done in a cave called the Aloka lena or Aluvihara (near Matale) which we’ll be visiting. Because of this preservation in writing of the Tipitaka, we are able to read it today. I’m sure we’ll be visiting this special spot again and I now have so much more appreciation and respect for this remarkable work that was undertaken with such compassion. ***** Thankyou to those who've been reading patiently. Hope it's been interesting. There are a lot of details and names in the text and it's not easy reading at times, so I apologise if I've made any mistakes with the details or skipped important parts. Sarah ====== 13108 From: Sarah Date: Sun May 5, 2002 11:59pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Iddhi Hi Wynn, --- wynn wrote: > Thank you so much for your reply. > > Well, I found it in Chapter XII > Description of Direct-Knowledge- The Supernormal Powers > > It is mentioned in the first 15-20 passage of that chapter > > See especially, passage 2 and 4 ..... Sorry, I still can't see the refernce to 'mastery of all the 8 jhanas' after a very quick skim through. So could you give the exact ref and quote please. There is a reference to 'eight factors' in X11, 18, but these are factors such as faith, energy, mindfulness, concentration etc which support the consciousness 'being directed to the realization by direct knowledge of states realizable by direct-knowledge'. Sometimes I know references are made to variations of the 4th jhana such as arupa jhanas and in my earlier reference it discussed how the 4 jhanas can be classified as 5, but I really very ignorant about these areas. Sarah ===== 13109 From: Sarah Date: Mon May 6, 2002 0:11am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Sirima, the Courtesan and Compassion Dear Gayan, --- asterix_wins wrote: > dear sarah, > > > Thanks for the wonderful reminder of the Sirima Story,..no matter how > many times one reads it..it comes up with a deeper meaning everytime. ..... I find the same. ..... > my confession is that there was desire imagining the 'fresh' new dead > human body on public display (Before worms found the way out from it) ..... Well, this is very interesting and honest;-) Perhaps you'd care to add further comments. I'm quite sure for many of the curious onlookers there would have been conditions for lobha at first too and perhaps this was just the point: i.e showing the object of desire rotting before the eyes. ..... > > happy to be back in DSG, lurking... and going through the billions of > messages that I have missed., ..... There's a big price to pay for ignoring DSG for too long and you're just finding out, it seems;-) Hope to hear more comments on posts you find of interest amongst 'the billions';-) I remember there have been occasional pali questions directed to you, too;-) ..... Thank you also for your apt quote below. So very true, desire can never be satisfied, so we better work together to look at how they can be 'overcome'. Thanks for popping in, Gayan...hope to see more of you on list and 'live' in Sri Lanka if you can make the appointment;-). Sarah ===== > I thought of posting ( thereby making this a contributing post ) this > particular message received from a friend, > > ------------------------ > > The happiness that you feel when you satisfy a desire > is not due to the satisfaction of the desire, > but to the momentary cessation of the desire. > > But the desire returns. > Therefore desires can never be satisfied; > they can only be overcome, abandoned. > > -Sangharakshita (Peace is a Fire) > -------------------------- 13110 From: anders_honore Date: Mon May 6, 2002 4:07am Subject: Re: [dsg] Right Concentration - Rob Ep - beware/incredibly long --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Jonothan Abbott wrote: > Rob E > C. Sitting vipassana > You refer to long periods (3 years) sitting in vipassana meditation leading to obvious > changes in one's sense of self. Can you point to any instance in the texts of the Buddha > recommending such a practice, or any mention at all of 'sitting vipassana meditation'. The Satipatthana Sutta: "There is the case where a monk -- having gone to the wilderness, to the shade of a tree, or to an empty building -- sits down folding his legs crosswise, holding his body erect and setting mindfulness to the fore [lit: the front of the chest]. Always mindful, he breathes in; mindful he breathes out. " And all the other foundations too. 13111 From: anders_honore Date: Mon May 6, 2002 4:09am Subject: Re: [dsg] skilful means in the group --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "christine_forsyth" wrote: > Hi Anders and Jon, > > Interesting posts. Anders, much the same ideas occurred to me a > while back - but I think a proper 'balance' of study and practice > tailored to individual needs is important. You may be interested in > an essay by Bhikkhu Bodhi addressing this issue. ¨ True, I am not advocating non-study, but merely stating that it is not essential, and there is a fine line between studying that which is relevant to one's own path, and counting the treasures of others. Of course, it does not come down to what you read or don't read, but how you respond to that. 13112 From: wynn Date: Mon May 6, 2002 4:27am Subject: Re: [dsg] Iddhi Hi, Passage 2: ......................If a meditator wants to begin performing the transformation by supernormal power describe as "Having been one, he becomes many", etc., he must achieve the eight attainments in each of the eight kasinas ending with the white kasina. He must also have complete control of his mind in the following fourteen ways: (i) in the order of the kasinas, (ii) in 'the reverse order of the kasiisas, (iii) in the order and reverse order of. the kasinas, (iv) in the order of the jhanas, (v) in the reverse order of the jhanas, (vi) in the order and reverse order (if the jhanas, (vii) skipping jhanas, (viii) skipping kasinas, (ix) skipping jhtanas an(l kasinas, (x) transposition of factoi s, (xi) transposition of object, (xii) transposition of factors and object, (xiii) definition of factors, and (xiv) definition of object. Passage 4: Attaining again and again from the first jliana up to the base consisting of neither perception nor non-perception is called in the order of the jhanas. (v) Attaining again and again from the base consisting of neither perception nor non-perception back to the first .Ihana is caller] in the reverse order of the jhanas. (vi) Attaining in forward and reverse order, from the first jhana tip to the base consisting of neither perception nor non-perception and from the base consisting of neither perception nor non-perception back to the first jhana is called in the order and reverse order of the jhanas. Regards, Wynn 13113 From: Robert Date: Mon May 6, 2002 4:50am Subject: Ultimate realities Dear TG, Thanks, I get a better picture now. I thought that you objected to the term paramattha dhamma but I see you don't - which I think is a good thing as the Visuddhimagga uses it. Just to ask a little more: what are the conditions for 'conditioned paramattha dhammas'? Perhaps you could write generally and give a few examples as well. kind regards robert Hi Robert, The "fundamental elements" I am referring to are the "conditioned paramattha dhammas." A nice listing of them is found near the beginning of the Patisambhidamagga (Path of Discrimination) where they are broken down into 201 states (dhammas). This is the "object-field" upon which insight is cultivated. Dependent arising, impermanence, unsatisfactoriness, and no-self insight should be applied to these states. I have found the Patisambhidamagga and the Visuddhimagga to be very valuable assistants in helping to understand how the Suttas are directing to "break down delusion." (Not that much has been broken down mind you.) This passage of Howard's is awesome... >>>It seems to me that if, in trying to see the impersonality of all dhammas, an essential enterprise (!), one is led to a belief in ultimate dhammas with own-being, then one has traded one aspect of atta-view for another. It also seems to me that a mere intellectual understanding of the truth that all dhammas other than nibbana arise in dependence on causes and conditions still misses a full understanding of anatta. <<< Analyzing states into constituent elements (conditioned paramattha dhammas, if you rather), is just the slightest minor stage to overcoming delusion IMO. If the mind gets stuck in this stage it really hasn't made much progress. Like Howard says, its just trading one aspect of self-view for another. Larry asked a couple of weeks ago about the importance of impermanence. Impermanence contemplation is critical IMO. The constituent elements need be seen as impermanent, the cause of the impermanence needs to be investigated, analyzed, and seen. The results of impermanence needs to be investigated, analyzed, and seen...over and over and over and over for years and years or whatever it takes until phenomena can be "completely seen through" as merely empty states (like phantoms) just altering based on relative conditions (more empty states). As I understand it, when this has been done long enough, the mind will "reject conditions" as being utterly unsatisfactory (due to the impending and definite death of any and all things the mind can be attached to) and will "launch toward unconditions/no-conditions." As Howard mentions, intellectual understanding alone is not sufficient. Mindfulness also needs to be applied so that impermanence is known by means of "actual arisen dynamically interacting states," and not solely by conceptualization (which is merely an imagination.) I have really enjoyed all your excellent responses to this topic. TG Howard used the term phantoms. This I think is good. After > object-states > > are broken down into fundamental elements...these elements need to > be further > > broken down by principles (dependent arising, impermanence, > unsatisfactory, > > no-self). And then these elements are not seen as "ultimate > realities," but > > are more likely seen as phantoms. (I am only considering > conditioned > > phenomena here.) > > > > TG > > > >_______ > Dear TG, > Two questions. > Are these fundamental elements similar to or the same as paramattha > dhammas? > How are these fundamental elements broken down in practice? > best wishes > robert > Hi Robert, The "fundamental elements" I am referring to are the "conditioned paramattha dhammas." A nice listing of them is found near the beginning of the Patisambhidamagga (Path of Discrimination) where they are broken down into 201 states (dhammas). This is the "object-field" upon which insight is cultivated. Dependent arising, impermanence, unsatisfactoriness, and no-self insight should be applied to these states. I have found the Patisambhidamagga and the Visuddhimagga to be very valuable assistants in helping to understand how the Suttas are directing to "break down delusion." (Not that much has been broken down mind you.) This passage of Howard's is awesome... >>>It seems to me that if, in trying to see the impersonality of all dhammas, an essential enterprise (!), one is led to a belief in ultimate dhammas with own-being, then one has traded one aspect of atta-view for another. It also seems to me that a mere intellectual understanding of the truth that all dhammas other than nibbana arise in dependence on causes and conditions still misses a full understanding of anatta. <<< Analyzing states into constituent elements (conditioned paramattha dhammas, if you rather), is just the slightest minor stage to overcoming delusion IMO. If the mind gets stuck in this stage it really hasn't made much progress. Like Howard says, its just trading one aspect of self-view for another. Larry asked a couple of weeks ago about the importance of impermanence. Impermanence contemplation is critical IMO. The constituent elements need be seen as impermanent, the cause of the impermanence needs to be investigated, analyzed, and seen. The results of impermanence needs to be investigated, analyzed, and seen...over and over and over and over for years and years or whatever it takes until phenomena can be "completely seen through" as merely empty states (like phantoms) just altering based on relative conditions (more empty states). As I understand it, when this has been done long enough, the mind will "reject conditions" as being utterly unsatisfactory (due to the impending and definite death of any and all things the mind can be attached to) and will "launch toward unconditions/no-conditions." As Howard mentions, intellectual understanding alone is not sufficient. Mindfulness also needs to be applied so that impermanence is known by means of "actual arisen dynamically interacting states," and not solely by conceptualization (which is merely an imagination.) I have really enjoyed all your excellent responses to this topic. TG 13114 From: Sarah Date: Mon May 6, 2002 5:41am Subject: Re: [dsg] On the truth of Buddhism Dear Anders, Delighted to see you around...hope the study pressures have eased. --- anders_honore wrote: > Any view, even if it is supreme, is a fetter binding you to Samsara. ..... Thanks for your quotes from the Sutta Nipata and in particular, the Dutthatthaka and Paramatthaka suttas on views. I know we’ve discussed these areas before, but I’d like to stress that here the views are ‘not pure’. In other words, they are wrong views (micha ditthi), included amongst the many kinds discussed in the Brahmajala Sutta ‘net of views’. When you say any view is a fetter, binding you to Samsara, I would suggest it should be any view other than right understanding of the 5fold or 8fold Path. At these moments there is just a little less ‘binding’ or adding of bricks to Samsara, even though even these phenomena are conditioned and impermanent too. I’d like to requote an earlier post I wrote when Erik raised the same point with the Nyantiloka dictionary references to ditthi at the end: ***** QUOTE FROM EARLIER POST Sarah: There has been some discussion about the meaning of ditthi (di.t.thi). Erik: “... Re: the term "ditthi", I think Mike mentioned it referring to "miccha ditthi" but teachers I respect have taught me that any view at all is considered ditthi, to be discarded. Right View is the equivalent of no-view, it is beyond taking any position at all, as the sutta Herman quoted notes. What need is there for ditthi (speculation) of any kind when there is direct knowledge?” Sarah: I also understand ditthi to usually refer to miccha ditthi and when we read about speculative views (as in Aggivacchagotta Sutta, M72 or Brahmajala Sutta), it is these miccha ditthi that are being referred to (*see dictionary notes below). When there is samma ditthi (right view), there is of course no speculation involved, but instead the direct knowledge (or panna, understanding) of paramatha dhammas (highest truths): ******************** "Bhikkhus, just as the dawn is the forerunner and first indication of the rising of the sun, so is right view the forerunner and first indication of wholesome states. For one of right view, bhikkhus, right intention springs up. For one of right intention, right speech springs up. For one of right speech, right action springs up. For one of right action, right livelihood springs up. For one of right livelihood, right effort springs up. For one of right effort, right mindfulness springs up. For one of right mindfulness, right concentration springs up. For one of right concentration, right knowledge springs up. For one of right knowledge, right deliverance springs up. Anguttara Nikaya 10:121" ******************** END QUOTE A:> Some people here have in the past aired the views about the untruth > of Mahayana. This however, is merely a consequence of their own need > for affirmation of their own tradition. ..... I’m certainly not going to buy into this one....;-)) Good try! Look forward to further discussion. Sarah ======= *From Nyantiloka’s dictionary we read: ditthi (lit. 'sight'; Ö dis, to see): view, belief, speculative opinion, insight. If not qualified by sammá, 'right', it mostly refers to wrong and evil view or opinion, and only in a few instances to right view, understanding or insight (e.g. ditthi-ppatta, q.v.; ditthi-visuddhi, purification of insight; ditthi-sampanna, possessed of insight). Wrong or evil views (ditthi or micchá-ditthi) are declared as utterly rejectable for being a source of wrong and evil aspirations and conduct, and liable at times to lead man to the deepest abysses of depravity, as it is said in A. I, 22: "No other thing than evil views do I know, o monks, whereby to such an extent the unwholesome things not yet arisen arise, and the unwholesome things already arisen are brought to growth and fullness. No other thing than evil views do I know, whereby to such an extent the wholesome things not yet arisen are hindered in their arising, and the wholesome things already arisen disappear. No other thing than evil views do I know, whereby to such an extent human beings at the dissolution of the body, at death, are passing to a way of suffering, into a world of woe, into hell." Further in A. I, 23: "Whatever a man filled with evil views performs or undertakes, or whatever he possesses of will, aspiration, longing and tendencies, all these things lead him to an undesirable, unpleasant and disagreeable state, to woe and suffering." From the Abhidhamma (Dhs) it may be inferred that evil views, whenever they arise, are associated with greed (s. Tab. I. 22, 23, 26, 27). Numerous speculative opinions and theories, which at all times have influenced and still are influencing mankind, are quoted in the sutta-texts. Amongst them, however, the wrong view which everywhere, and at all times, has most misled and deluded mankind is the personality-belief, the ego-illusion. This personality-belief (sakkáya-ditthi), or ego-illusion (atta-ditthi), is of 2 kinds: eternity-belief and annihilation-belief. Eternity-belief (sassata-ditthi) is the belief in the existence of a persisting ego-entity, soul or personality, existing independently of those physical and mental processes that constitute life and continuing even after death. Annihilation-belief (uccheda-ditthi), on the other hand, is the belief in the existence of an ego-entity or personality as being more or less identical with those physical and mental processes, and which therefore, at the dissolution at death, will come to be annihilated. - For the 20 kinds of personality-belief, see sakkáya-ditthi. Now, the Buddha neither teaches a personality which will continue after death, nor does he teach a personality which will be annihilated at death, but he shows us that 'personality', 'ego', 'individual', 'man', etc., are nothing but mere conventional designations (vohára-vacana) and that in the ultimate sense (s. paramattha-sacca) there is only this self-consuming process of physical and mental phenomena which continually arise and again disappear immediately. - For further details, s. anattá, khandha, paticcasamuppáda. "The Perfect One is free from any theory (ditthigata), for the Perfect One has seen what corporeality is, and how it arises and passes away. He has seen what feeling ... perception ... mental formations ... consciousness are, and how they arise and pass away. Therefore I say that the Perfect One has won complete deliverance through the extinction, fading away, disappearance, rejection and casting out of all imaginings and conjectures, of all inclination to the 'vain-glory of 'I' and 'mine." (M. 72). The rejection of speculative views and theories is a prominent feature in a chapter of the Sutta-Nipáta, the Atthaka-Vagga. The so-called 'evil views with fixed destiny' (niyata-miccháditthi) constituting the last of the 10 unwholesome courses of action (kammapatha, q.v.), are the following three: (1) the fatalistic 'view of the uncausedness' of existence (ahetukaditthi), (2) the view of the inefficacy of action' (akiriyaditthi), (3) nihilism (natthikaditthi). (1) was taught by Makkhali-Gosála, a contemporary of the Buddha who denied every cause for the corruptness and purity of beings, and asserted that everything is minutely predestined by fate. (2) was taught by Púrana-Kassapa, another contemporary of the Buddha who denied every karmical effect of good and bad actions: "To him who kills, steals, robs, etc., nothing bad will happen. For generosity, self-restraint and truthfulness, etc. no reward is to be expected." (3) was taught by Ajita-Kesakambali, a third contemporary of the Buddha who asserted that any belief in good action and its reward is a mere delusion, that after death no further life would follow, that man at death would become dissolved into the elements, etc. For further details about these 3 views, s. D. 2, M. 60; commentarial exposition in WHEEL 98/99, P. 23. Frequently mentioned are also the 10 antinomies (antagáhiká micchá-ditthi): 'Finite is the world' or 'infinite is the world' ... 'body and soul are identical' or 'body and soul are different' (e.g. M. 63). In the Brahmájala Sutta .(D.1), 62 false views are classified and described, comprising all conceivable wrong views and speculations about man and world. See The All-Embracing Net of Views (Brahmájala Sutta), tr. with Com. by Bhikkhu Bodhi (BPS). Further s. D. 15, 23, 24, 28; M. 11, 12, 25, 60, 63, 72, 76, 101, 102, 110; A. II, 16; X, 93; S. XXI, XXIV; Pts.M. Ditthikathá,. etc. Wrong views (ditthi) are one of the proclivities (s. anusaya), cankers (s. ásava), clingings (s. upádána), one of the three modes of perversions (s. vipallása). Unwholesome consciousness (akusala citta), rooted in greed, may be either with or without wrong views (ditthigata-sampayutta or vippayutta); s. Dhs.; Tab I. On right view (sammá-ditthi), s. magga and M. 9 (Trans. with Com. in 'R. Und.'). ====================================================== 13115 From: Sarah Date: Mon May 6, 2002 6:02am Subject: Re: [dsg] Iddhi Dear Wynn, --- wynn wrote: > Hi, > > Passage 2: > > ......................If a meditator wants to begin performing the > transformation by supernormal power describe as "Having been one, he > becomes > many", etc., he must achieve the eight attainments in each of the eight > kasinas ending with the white kasina. > ..... Thank you for the reference. Now I’m following your point. Here, I assume the eight attainments refer to samapatti and perhaps these 2 quotes from Nyantiloka’s dictionary help here: 1. “samápatti: 'attainments', is a name for the 8 absorptions of the fine-material and immaterial spheres to which occasionally is added as 9th attainment, attainment of extinction (nirodhasamápatti) Cf. jhána.” 2. From jhana section: “...The 4 absorptions of the immaterial sphere (s. above 5-8) still belong, properly speaking, to the 4th absorption as they possess the same two constituents. The 4th fine-material absorption is also the base or starting point (pádaka-jhána, q.v.) for the attaining of the higher spiritual powers (abhiññá, q.v.). In the Abhidhamma, generally a fivefold instead of a fourfold division of the fine-material absorptions is used: the 2nd absorption has still the constituent 'discursive thinking' (but without thought-conception), while the 3rd, 4th and 5th correspond to the 2nd, 3rd and 4th, respectively, of the fourfold division (s. Tab. I, 9- 13) . This fivefold division is based on sutta texts like A . VIII, 63 . For the 8 absorptions as objects for the development of insight (vipassaná), see samatha-vipassaná. - Full details in Vis.M. IV-X.” ***** Hope that clarifies. Is there any particular reason for your questions or curiosity about iddhi? I keep thinking of iddlies and dosas, the S.Indian disheswith lots of lobha even though I’m not even hungry;-) Hope to hear from you more often, Wynn Sarah ===== > Passage 4: > > Attaining again and again from the first jliana up to the base > consisting of > neither perception nor non-perception is called in the order of the > jhanas. > (v) Attaining again and again from the base consisting of neither > perception > nor non-perception back to the first .Ihana is caller] in the reverse > order > of the jhanas. (vi) Attaining in forward and reverse order, from the > first > jhana tip to the base consisting of neither perception nor > non-perception > and from the base consisting of neither perception nor non-perception > back > to the first jhana is called in the order and reverse order of the > jhanas. .................................................................................................................. 13116 From: Date: Mon May 6, 2002 4:36am Subject: Re: [dsg] Monkish mathematician Hi, Robert - In a message dated 5/5/02 11:46:48 PM Eastern Daylight Time, robertkirkpatrick@r... writes: > > Dear Group, > A book I'm reading "The man who loved only numbers' about Paul Erdos > (pronounced air-dish) has some interesting bits. He published over a > thousand top level articles and was the leading mathematician of the later > part of the 20th century(died 1996). celibate his entire life, never > cooked, owned almost nothing except what fitted in his suitcase (didn't > have > a house and stayed with friends all over the world)- he gave most of his > stipends to different charities as soon as he received them. He had no > interests other than mathematics and worked 19hour days every day > (fortified > by Benzedrine and caffeine). he could solve problems anywhere and even in > the middle of a convesation might be considering one. One of his best > friends , Ronald Graham, while less productive worked while playing "You > can > do mathematics anywhere. I once had a flash of insight into a problem in > the > middle of a back somersault with a triple twist on my trampoline" (you get > computer insights in the same way, Howard?) this was contrated with erdos > who was rather sedentary- at least physically. > best wishes > robert > > =========================== Actually, I spend all my time doing somersaults to avoid all the flak flying by in the midst of the current departmental war at my college! ;-) As far as computer insights are concerned, I'm really less of a computer scientist than a mathematician, as was Erdos. A main area of his was graph theory, which was a long time interest of mine as well. The difference between him and me is that he was a mathematical arahant, and I am the lowliest of mathematical woldlings!! Oh ... yes, and one more thing - he was celibate. ;-)) 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) 13117 From: anders_honore Date: Mon May 6, 2002 10:08am Subject: Re: [dsg] On the truth of Buddhism --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Sarah wrote: > Dear Anders, > > Delighted to see you around...hope the study pressures have eased. a bit yes. > --- anders_honore wrote: > > > Any view, even if it is supreme, is a fetter binding you to Samsara. > ..... > Thanks for your quotes from the Sutta Nipata and in particular, the > Dutthatthaka and Paramatthaka suttas on views. I know we've discussed > these areas before, but I'd like to stress that here the views are `not > pure'. In other words, they are wrong views (micha ditthi), included > amongst the many kinds discussed in the Brahmajala Sutta `net of views'. > When you say any view is a fetter, binding you to Samsara, I would suggest > it should be any view other than right understanding of the 5fold or 8fold > Path. At these moments there is just a little less `binding' or adding of > bricks to Samsara, even though even these phenomena are conditioned and > impermanent too. > When there is samma ditthi (right view), there is of course no > speculation involved, but instead the direct knowledge (or panna, > understanding) of paramatha dhammas (highest truths): When we talk of direct knowledge, it is not of views, imo. Okay, I'll rephase, all views falling within these negations as well as those of the Kalama and Salha Suttas are fetters preventing ultimate freedom: ************************ Then Ven. Pavittha said to Ven. Musila, "Musila, my friend, putting aside conviction, putting aside preference, putting aside tradition, putting aside reasoning through analogies, putting aside an agreement through pondering views: Do you have truly personal knowledge that, 'From birth as a requisite condition come aging & death'?" (Samyutta Nikaya XII.68) ************************ "Come, Salha, do not be satisfied with hearsay or with tradition or with legendary lore or with what has come down in scriptures or with conjecture or with logical inference or with weighing evidence or with a liking for a view after pondering it or with someone else's ability or with the thought 'The monk is our teacher.' When you know in yourself 'These things are unprofitable, liable to censure, condemned by the wise, being adopted and put into effect, they lead to harm and suffering,' then you should abandon them. (Anguttara Nikaya III.66) ************************* 13118 From: onco111 Date: Mon May 6, 2002 11:42am Subject: Re: Monkish mathematician Hi Robert, Paul Erdos was truly an astounding man. The number of papers he published is far beyond what anyone could write on his own. His secret? Sheer brilliance. Often he would get a call or visit from a mathematician (or two), who had been struggling for months on a difficult a problem. He'd hear the problem, think about it for a minute or two, and offer a novel and elegant solution. Then, the other mathematician would write the paper up and put Erdos' name on it because it could not be otherwise. There used to be a theorem in mathematics about how prolific a worker he was. It is a theorem about how the "Erdos number." Erdos' Erdos number was 0. A person who wrote a paper with Erdos has an Erdos number of 1. A person who wrote a paper with someone who wrote a paper with Erdos has an Erdos number of 2. And so on. The theorem is that no published research mathematician has an Erdos number higher than 2. Dan > Dear Group, > A book I'm reading "The man who loved only numbers' about Paul Erdos > (pronounced air-dish) has some interesting bits. He published over a > thousand top level articles and was the leading mathematician of the later > part of the 20th century(died 1996). celibate his entire life, never > cooked, owned almost nothing except what fitted in his suitcase (didn't have > a house and stayed with friends all over the world)- he gave most of his > stipends to different charities as soon as he received them. He had no > interests other than mathematics and worked 19hour days every day (fortified > by Benzedrine and caffeine). he could solve problems anywhere and even in > the middle of a convesation might be considering one. One of his best > friends , Ronald Graham, while less productive worked while playing "You can > do mathematics anywhere. I once had a flash of insight into a problem in the > middle of a back somersault with a triple twist on my trampoline" (you get > computer insights in the same way, Howard?) this was contrated with erdos > who was rather sedentary- at least physically. > best wishes > robert 13119 From: onco111 Date: Mon May 6, 2002 11:53am Subject: Re: [dsg] On the truth of Buddhism Hi Anders, Nice to hear from you... > > When there is samma ditthi (right view), there is of course no > > speculation involved, but instead the direct knowledge (or panna, > > understanding) of paramatha dhammas (highest truths): > > When we talk of direct knowledge, it is not of views, imo. Okay, I'll > rephase, all views falling within these negations as well as those of > the Kalama and Salha Suttas are fetters preventing ultimate freedom: I think you would wholly agree that Buddha did not teach that there is no such thing as Right View. He also explicitly and forcefully taught that there is indeed such a thing as Right View; and the thing he called "Right View" is markedly different from the plethora of things he called "wrong view" [miccha ditti] or simply "view" [ditthi]. When there is direct knowledge, there is no delusion, panya, Right View; how could it be otherwise? Dan 13120 From: onco111 Date: Mon May 6, 2002 0:35pm Subject: Re: skilful means in the group > True, I am not advocating non-study, but merely stating that it is > not essential, and there is a fine line between studying that which > is relevant to one's own path, and counting the treasures of others. Study is certainly essential, but, then, it depends on what you mean by "study." Reading lots of things without understanding or considering or applying to daily life is of little utility (if any); developing an addiction to pleasant and inspirational Dhamma talks is of little utility (if any). But what of listening/reading/studying with yoniso manasikara? These are the two conditions Buddha explicitly mentions for the establishment of mindfulness. Essential. > Of course, it does not come down to what you read or don't read, but > how you respond to that. Perhaps not so much how you respond to that, but whether it helps condition satipatthana. There is no substitute for hearing and considering the good Dhamma and observing and studying it in everyday life. There are so many opportunities to study Dhamma in the day, so many... Each moment is an opportunity for study. No need to wait for a cushion or a book. Realities arise and pass away each moment. Study them now. Reading and listening provide such good conditions for the arising of study and discernment throughout the day. It was surely true in the Buddha's day--just look at how many suttas end with the listeners becoming Sotapanna or Arahant on the spot! ... from proper digestion of the truth, not from close digestion and consideration of gobbeldy- gook. What is heard or read does matter. It is hard enough to discern Dhamma without muddling the picture by putting equal weight on all readings, discourses, and views. Dan 13121 From: onco111 Date: Mon May 6, 2002 0:52pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Right Concentration - Rob Ep - beware/incredibly long Hi Anders, Interesting exchange with Jon. I hope you don't mind my butting in briefly... Jon: Can you point to any instance in the texts of the Buddha recommending such a practice, or any mention at all of 'sitting vipassana meditation'. Anders: The Satipatthana Sutta: "There is the case where a monk -- having gone to the wilderness, to the shade of a tree, or to an empty building -- sits down folding his legs crosswise, holding his body erect and setting mindfulness to the fore [lit: the front of the chest]. Always mindful, he breathes in; mindful he breathes out. " And all the other foundations too. ----------------- Yes, I think we all agree that one case in which mindfulness can be established is when a monk sits cross-legged under a tree with body erect. But is this a recommendation of sitting in order to establish mindfulness or is it just part of a list of activities in which mindfulness can be established? In the Satipatthana sutta we also read about a wide array of other activities in which sati can arise -- could it be that the point is that sati can arise in all our everyday activities, that we needn't wait until we have a specific set of external, physical conditions (quiet wood, cool shade of tree, crossed legs, etc.) to allow sati to arise. It can arise during walking, sitting, eating, peeing, extending the arm, sitting under a tree with cross-legs, looking at a corpse, etc. Every moment (even when sitting with crossed legs!) is an opportunity for study, contemplation, sati. Don't be tempted to think that satipatthana must be limited to a set of recommended physical conditions! "Practice now, without delay, or you will regret it later." Dan 13122 From: rikpa21 Date: Mon May 6, 2002 6:40pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Right Concentration - Rob Ep - beware/incredibly long --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "onco111" wrote: > Hi Anders, > Interesting exchange with Jon. I hope you don't mind my butting in > briefly... > > Jon: Can you point to any instance in the texts of the Buddha > recommending such a practice, or any mention at all of 'sitting > vipassana meditation'. > > Anders: The Satipatthana Sutta: "There is the case where a monk -- > having gone to the wilderness, to the shade of a tree, or to an empty > building -- sits down folding his legs crosswise, holding his body > erect and setting mindfulness to the fore [lit: the front of the > chest]. Always mindful, he breathes in; mindful he breathes out. " > > And all the other foundations too. > > ----------------- > Yes, I think we all agree that one case in which mindfulness can be > established is when a monk sits cross-legged under a tree with body > erect. But is this a recommendation of sitting in order to establish > mindfulness or is it just part of a list of activities in which > mindfulness can be established? Hi Dan & Anders (Anders, thank you for your recent spate of posts reminding us of the importance of discarding views). Dan, I think this topic's been covered in some detail before here, but that never means it isn't worth covering again. Just looking at my own experience, the entire message of what the Buddha was teaching would have been lost on me, because without sitting meditation none of the factors said to lead to the stated aim of the Dhamma have arisen without this most basic of practices, expounded in all versions of the Satipatthana Sutta as well as the Anapanasati Sutta. The kind Theravada Ajarns who taught me walking meditation, eating meditation, etc., always use sitting meditation on either the breath or the rising and falling of the stomach as the root practice that precedes any instructions on walking, eating, or any other "daily activity" type of meditation (though walking, standing, lying meditation all have their special conditions as well, and I was advised to inform my family members when I was practicing these meditations to let them know I was in practice mode to avert suspicions I'd gone completely bonkers). In other words, walking, standing, lying down forms are all branch practices that depend on a mind stabilized through the root practice of training first in seated meditation observing the body. Sitting meditation and observing body, especially by way of the breath, are listed as the first practices by the Buddha in the Satipatthana Sutta. Their prominence there and location isn't an accident. Just because there are other objects to observe with mindfulness-- such as feelings, mind, and dhammas--in no way indicates that one can dispense with this most elementary of practices designed to concentrate and unify the mind. To dispense with this practice would indicate that one has truly mastered mindfulness in all situations, and one is completely beyond the need for seeking out the most favorable conditions for insight, such as a secluded spot, sitting cross-legged, spine erect, etc., and that one can retain true, unbroken mindfulness in all situations as they arise, and at a deep, not superficial, level, observing their characteristics with true panna, not believing one is observing those characteristics via pannati! In other words, at a deep enough level to directly observe their characteristics (and not a conceptual simulacrum of what one believes is their true nature based on the repetition of the anatta and anicca mantras), which is the entire point of practice in samma sati. > In the Satipatthana sutta we also > read about a wide array of other activities in which sati can arise -- > could it be that the point is that sati can arise in all our everyday > activities, that we needn't wait until we have a specific set of > external, physical conditions (quiet wood, cool shade of tree, > crossed legs, etc.) to allow sati to arise. It can arise during > walking, sitting, eating, peeing, extending the arm, sitting under a > tree with cross-legs, looking at a corpse, etc. Every moment (even > when sitting with crossed legs!) is an opportunity for study, > contemplation, sati. Sati could potentially arise without first training the mind in seated meditation. Just as some are born kings, I imagine there are great beings who, due to the power of previous karma, have the capacity to realize the fruits of the Noble Path without this program of "basic training" laid out by the Buddha. But how many are born kings of Jamudvipa? And who in particular was the Buddha addressing when laying out this basic set of practices? The great beings who realized the essence of the Dhamma on a single explanation? Why would he have wasted his precious time explaining these practices to such great beings? What are the odds of being born one of the Dhamma-kings? And what are the odds of realizing the heart-essence of the Dhamma if the mind never reaches state of unbroken concentration to where it can discern the flow of constantly changing dhammas with true precision regarding their characteristics? If one cannot retain unbroken mindfulness and clear comprehension of all dhammas arising and passing away, whether those of the body, feelings, mind, in all situations, no matter how difficult, then in my opinion, one has fallen into the trap of merely believing one is experiencing samma sati when in fact there is no clear comprehension, no real mindfulness; one is merely toying with their conceptual stand-ins. I believe it is necessary to establish an unbroken stream of concentrated awareness that clearly discerns the characteristics of dhammas without break, moment to moment. In my experience this sort of skill at observing extremely rapid processes like this has no basis for development without first training in seated meditation, which in my own experience has provided the best set of conditions for this type of unbroken and clear comprehension. With practice this concentration grows stronger, not weaker; comprehension grows clearer, not more occluded. I have observed this not only in my own practice, but have heard the same repeated on many occasion by those who've practiced these instructions under the guidance of competent teacher to the point that these instructions begin to "click."-- particularly in retreat situations,. where one has he chance to really dig in and concentrate without hindering distractions. In my own limited experience, the difference between practicing these exercises and not practicing them is like night and day. Before, and for many years, I used to kid myself into believing that mere study would suffice, that I could somehow grasp the essence of the Dhamma if I read just enough books and "understood" things like anatta. At the insistence of my teachers, however, I grudgingly put into practice seated meditation on the breath, just as prescribed by the Buddha in the Satipatthana Sutta. And within a short while, voila! I discovered that all the assumptions I had about concentration and mindfulness were wrong, that the truths the Buddha spoke of are accessible not to the mind filled with all its desires and aversions and its ignorance, but are only fully comprehended when the hindrances are pacified and these ideas about the Dhamma are stripped of their covering and the mind taken down to the "bare metal", where nama meets rupa, where one directly sees the characteristics of phenomena (in my case the breath or the pleasurable states arising in jhana) up close and impersonal: as fleeting, transient, and fabricated, lacking any innate "essence" or "core"--particularly the collection of transient and impersonal processes the Buddha labeled the five khandas. > Don't be tempted to think that satipatthana must > be limited to a set of recommended physical conditions! It need not be for those who have advanced past the stage where training in clear comprehension, mindfulness, and concentration are so thoroughly established--to the point that one can truly (truly) retain unbroken mindfulness and clear comprehension in the most demanding situations. Since I am not at such a lofty point in my own development of mindfulness, I prefer to heed the Buddha's instructions on this matter and avoid attempting to reinterpret the Buddha's explicit advice in a way that favors my own prejudices, and instead practice what he taught so simply and directly (the exact same teachings passed on to me by my incomparable teachers, fancy that!). That method I have tested thoruoghly and I know it works. Other methods I am not so certain of. Cheers, Erik 13123 From: christine_forsyth Date: Mon May 6, 2002 7:50pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Right Concentration - Rob Ep - beware/incredibly long Dear Anders, Jon, Dan, Eric and All, As you say Eric, this topic has been discussed (or at least alluded to) many times on this and other lists. One thing I don't recall being discussed is whether the Formal Meditation and the Dhamma Study could be a consecutive, but distinctly separate, occurrences in someone's lifetime. That those who think FM is unnecessary, don't realise that their previous involvment actually WAS necessary, and they are getting by on a previously learned skill? There are many people whom I admire and learn from. Some do Formal Meditation (sitting, standing, walking, eating ), and go to Retreats etc., some combine FM and Dhamma Study, some Study and practice mindfullness. Those who do FM feel that it is essential according to the Teachings, and that Dhamma Study is not sufficient even with mindfullness. Those who practice the latter seem to feel FM is harmless, perhaps soothing, but not necessary, according to the Teachings. It is very confusing when coming upon this difference of opinion, especially when many of us gained our first introduction to Buddhism during Dhamma talks after group meditation. I only have a vague knowledge of some list members involvment with FM or Study, but wonder if there is anyone who has NEVER done FM in the past, however long ago, and who obtains satisfying results from Dhamma study and mindfulness only? (For instance, Sarah has told us of her FM practice years ago, and that she doesn't find it a necessary practice now.) Just an idle thought, - could it be that one can get to a 'sufficient' level that is accessible for progress on the Path.... just like riding a bike, you never lose the skill? Have any of those who teach us to study the realities NEVER done any formal meditation? metta, Christine --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "rikpa21" wrote: > --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "onco111" wrote: > > Hi Anders, > > Interesting exchange with Jon. I hope you don't mind my butting in > > briefly... > > > > Jon: Can you point to any instance in the texts of the Buddha > > recommending such a practice, or any mention at all of 'sitting > > vipassana meditation'. > > > > Anders: The Satipatthana Sutta: "There is the case where a monk -- > > having gone to the wilderness, to the shade of a tree, or to an > empty > > building -- sits down folding his legs crosswise, holding his body > > erect and setting mindfulness to the fore [lit: the front of the > > chest]. Always mindful, he breathes in; mindful he breathes out. " > > > > And all the other foundations too. > > > > ----------------- > > Yes, I think we all agree that one case in which mindfulness can > be > > established is when a monk sits cross-legged under a tree with > body > > erect. But is this a recommendation of sitting in order to > establish > > mindfulness or is it just part of a list of activities in which > > mindfulness can be established? > > Hi Dan & Anders (Anders, thank you for your recent spate of posts > reminding us of the importance of discarding views). > > Dan, I think this topic's been covered in some detail before here, > but that never means it isn't worth covering again. > > Just looking at my own experience, the entire message of what the > Buddha was teaching would have been lost on me, because without > sitting meditation none of the factors said to lead to the stated > aim of the Dhamma have arisen without this most basic of practices, > expounded in all versions of the Satipatthana Sutta as well as the > Anapanasati Sutta. <<<>>> 13124 From: Date: Mon May 6, 2002 7:55pm Subject: ADL ch. 7 (1) http://www.budsas.org/ebud/nina-abhidhamma/nina-abhi-00.htm Abhidhamma In Daily Life Chapter 7 (1) IGNORANCE We may know when we have akusala cittas rooted in lobha (attachment) or akusala cittas rooted in dosa (aversion), but do we know when we have akusala cittas rooted in moha (ignorance)? What is the characteristic of moha? We may think someone is ignorant who does not have much education, who does not speak foreign languages, who does not know anything about history or politics. We call someone ignorant who does not know what is happening in the world. Is that the kind of ignorance which should be eradicated? If that were true it would mean that there is more wholesomeness in one's life if one speaks foreign languages or if one knows about history and politics. We can find out that this is not true. In order to understand the characteristic of moha we should know what we are ignorant of when there is moha. There is the world of concepts which in our daily, ordinary language are denoted by conventional terms and there is the world of paramattha dhammas or ultimate realities. When we think of the concept which in conventional language is denoted by 'world', we may think of people, animals and things and we call them by their appropriate names. But do we know the phenomena in ourselves and around themselves as they really are: only nama and rupa which do not stay? The world of paramattha dhammas is real. Nama and rupa are paramattha dhammas. The namas and rupas which appear in our daily life can be directly experienced through the five sense-doors and through the mind-door, no matter how we name them. This is the world which is real. When we see, there is the world of visible object. When we hear, there is the world of sound. When we experience an object through touch there is the world of tangible object. Visible object and seeing are real. Their characteristics can be directly experienced; it does not matter whether we call them 'visible object' and 'seeing', or whether we do not name them at all. But when we cling to concepts which are denoted by conventional terms such as 'tree' or 'chair', we do not experience any characteristic of reality. What is real when we look at a tree? What can be directly experienced? Visible object is a paramattha dhamma, a reality; it is a kind of rupa which can be directly experienced through the eyes. Through touch hardness can be experienced; this is a kind of rupa which can be directly experienced through the body-sense, it is real. 'Tree' is a concept or idea of which we can think, but it is not a paramattha dhamma, not a reality which can be directly experienced. Visible object and hardness are paramattha dhammas and they can be directly experienced, no matter how one names them. The world experienced through the six doors is real but it does not last; it is impermanent. When we see, there is the world of the visible, but it falls away immediately. When we hear, there is the world of sound, but it does not last either. It is the same with the world of smell, the world of flavour, the world of impressions through the body-sense and the world of objects experienced through the mind-door. However, we only seem to know the world of conventional terms, because ignorance and wrong view have been accumulated for so long. Ignorance of paramattha dhammas is the kind of ignorance which should be eradicated; it brings sorrow. The world in the sense of paramattha dhammas is in the teachings called 'the world in the ariyan sense'. The ariyan has developed the wisdom which sees things as they are ; he truly knows 'the world'. We read in the 'Kindred Sayings' (IV, Salayatana-vagga, Kindred Sayings on Sense, Second Fifty, Ch. IV, par. 84, Transitory) that Ananda said to the Buddha: ' "The world! The world" is the saying, lord. Pray, how far, lord, does this saying go?' ' What is transitory by nature, Ananda, is called "the world" in the ariyan sense. And what, Ananda, is transitory by nature? The eye, Ananda, is transitory by nature... objects... tongue... mind is transitory by nature, mind-states, mind-consciousness, mind-contact, whatsoever pleasant feeling, unpleasant feeling or indifferent feeling which arises owing to mind-contact, that also is transitory by nature. What is thus transitory, Ananda, is called "the world" in the ariyan sense.' Someone may think that he can truly know himself without knowing the world as it appears through the six doors. He may think that he knows his anger and attachment, but, in fact, he has not experienced them as they are: only different types of nama and not self. As long as he takes realities for self he does not really know himself and he cannot eradicate defilements. He clings to an idea, to the concept of self; he has not directly experienced any characteristic of reality. It is difficult to know when there are lobha, dosa and moha and it is difficult to be aware also of the more subtle degrees of akusala. When one starts to develop 'insight' one realizes how little one knows oneself. 13125 From: Date: Mon May 6, 2002 7:08pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Ultimate realities In a message dated 5/6/2002 4:55:08 AM Pacific Daylight Time, robertkirkpatrick@r... writes: > Just to ask a little more: what are the conditions for 'conditioned > paramattha dhammas'? Perhaps you could write generally and give a few > examples as well. > kind regards > robert > Hi Robert Conditioning states are the conditions for conditioned states. Once a state is conditioned, it becomes the conditioning state for ensuing conditioned states. This dynamic cycle continues to propagate due to the interacting qualities of the Four Great Elements (as I understand it.) In other words, the conditions for paramattha dhammas are conditioning paramattha dhammas. But I think what your question is trying to ask is what is the original condition?, i.e., what is the origin of the universe? I'm not even working on that problem at this time. LOL >I thought that you objected to the term >paramattha dhamma but I see you don't - which I think is a good thing as the >Visuddhimagga uses it. I am more gratefull than I can express for the Abhidhamma, Visuddhimagga and whatever other extremely rigorous analysis of the Buddha's teaching that has emerged. But I only consider them semi authoritative. These works contain valuable suppliments of the knowledge presented in the Four Great Nikayas. Even Buddhaghosa ends the Visuddhimagga by saying: "...the exposition [Visuddhimagga] as set forth is almost free from errors and flaws..." Regarding paramattha dhamma, it was the translation that I didn't like. I haven't really thought much about whether I care for the term paramattha dhamma or not. In either case, I prefer to use as few Pali terms as possible. Take care. TG 13126 From: Sarah Date: Mon May 6, 2002 11:33pm Subject: Re: [dsg] FW: Letter sent from India Dear Kom & Family, I was very moved by the sharing of dhamma in the Tukovinit family and by the careful considerations and points that your sister raised. Sometimes it can be very difficult to encourage an interest in family members, but your letter inspires me in this regard. I particularly enjoyed reading the practical comments about rebirth and kamma and the following conclusions: --- Kom Tukovinit wrote: > Hence, you propose > 1.. Abstain from doing unwholesome things > > 2.. Do good > > 3.. Purify our mind / improve our mental states > > and most importantly, > 1.. do this in *daily* life, not just occasionally > > 2.. do this as soon as possible, not only when we gets old (since we > don't know when we are going to die) ..... ***** This is a neat summary and reminder for us all, rather like a summary of the Dhammapada. May I suggest we add: 1. Know that it is not *me* or *you* who ‘do good’ or ‘purify the mind’. 2. Know that ‘good’ and ‘bad’ are mental states which depend on many factors outside the control of a*self*. 3. Know that understanding what is ‘good’, what is‘bad’, the value of the former and the danger of the latter, is the key to more ‘good’. 4. The only opportunity for ‘good’ is ever at the present moment. ***** > This list allows me make helpful reflections and brought me joy. I > agree > with many many of them. ..... I hope your family members will add more comments or that you will share more of your translated summaries of their letters and your responses with us, Kom. The simple, direct language is refreshing and perhaps the summaries can be used for others who are not inclined to hear the Pali or detailed explanations for now. Anumodana, Sarah ======== 13127 From: Sarah Date: Tue May 7, 2002 0:14am Subject: Re: [dsg] anicca Hi Howard, I have a couple of your posts which I delayed replying to;-) --- upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, Sarah - > I have heard of no things that are neither conditioned nor > unconditioned. If concepts are neither, then they are nothing at all - ..... As I understand, when the texts discuss the conditioned and unconditioned, they are discussing the phenomena with sabhava that are formed up (sankhata) and not formed up (asankhata). In other words, the phenomena that can be directly known by wisdom (panna). It’s true that accordingly, in an ultimate (paramattha) sense, concepts are nothing at all, illusions conceived by the mind that are so often taken for being *real*. ..... > there > are no concepts, and we waste our time talking about them. ..... Concepts (pannatti) are concepts only. It is not a waste of time using them and talking about them as long as they are not taken for *realities*. If there were an idea, however, that any wisdom will be gained merely by talking about and ‘working out’ the concepts, it would be rather like the analogy of moving the Titanic deck chairs thinking that this in itself might prevent the ‘sinking’ in samsara. ...... >But concepts > are > mind objects, they are constructed, conditioned by multiple senses > including > mind, and not irreducible, but they are mind objects. If there is a > third > category of things that are neither conditioned nor unconditioned, it is > a > category that I have not heard of nor seen mentioned in any sutta. ..... The Buddha makes it clear that often he is using ‘wordly’ language. The end of Nina’s translation of the commentary to the Savaka Sutta just posted, refers to this. Concepts are not included in the 5 khandhas, the ‘All’ to be directly known. ..... >Sabbe sankhara anicca. Ideas, patterns, mind-constructed objects, as well as > all > paramatthadhammas other than nibbana *do not remain*. ..... What are ‘sabbe sankhara’? As I understand, the 5 khandhas or namas and rupas or any of the other classifications of paramattha dhammas. ..... I’ll be glad to look at any other references or comments. At this moment I think we agree that there can be awareness of thinking (thinking which thinks about concepts). Are you sure there can be awareness of the concept itself? Let me finish with one quote from the Vism on sankhara (formations): Vism XX11, 22 “...He brings to bear the faculties, the powers, and the enlightenment factors, and he works over and turns up the same field of formations (sankhara), classed as materiality, feeling, perception, formations, and consciousness, with the knowledge that they are impermanent, painful, not-self, and he embarks upon the progressive series of insights.” Thanks as usual for your points for consideration, Howard. Sarah ===== 13128 From: Sukinder Date: Tue May 7, 2002 3:28pm Subject: RE: [dsg] Right Concentration - Rob Ep - beware/incredibly long Dear Christine, Judging from my experience with FM this lifetime I am inclined to conclude that I have never done it in a previous lifetime. Never enjoyed even one session, eventhough in a span of 5 months I went ahead and attended two 10 day retreats with the idea that FM would lead me out of confusion. On the other hand I am not much of a scholar either, as you know I have a very short attention span and become quite impatient with written words that I don't immediately comprehend. However I have noted that there are times when I read a good post or some sutta reference and while I'm doing that there is much calm and clarity of mind. Also sati arises when in normal everyday activity, I am reminded of some aspect of the teaching relevant to the particular situation. In my opinion ( I await and expect to be corrected, since its not well thought out ) the relevance of theoretical study is when it is understood not as applying to anybody else, but to oneself, better still when the theory is applied to the present situation. Otherwise if it is done with the idea of accumulating, then like Anders has pointed out, it would be a fetter and must be seen for what it is. Once seen for what it is, it is automatically discarded, no one to do the discarding. But "RightView" I believe has a positive and beneficial influence of its own, even when it is still just theory. Why? because it at least replaces "Wrong theoretical View" and there is always a chance that with the right guidance it can be applied to the present moment. Also for a long time I have been with the opinion that people who meditate and who show some degree of wisdom, probably do a lot of study as well. And their particular insights may not be connected to their practice as they think it does, but perhaps to the study they have done. There are as you know, like hens sitting on their eggs, people who have meditated for years and years with the very same competent teachers the former claim to have, who may have acquired the habit and ability to supress their coarse kilesas, but who once you start to talk to them, you can see that they lack real panna. Waiting to be corrected and criticized, or ignored :-) Best wishes, Sukin. -----Original Message----- From: christine_forsyth [mailto:cforsyth@v...] Sent: Monday, May 06, 2002 7:51 PM To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [dsg] Right Concentration - Rob Ep - beware/incredibly long Dear Anders, Jon, Dan, Eric and All, As you say Eric, this topic has been discussed (or at least alluded to) many times on this and other lists. One thing I don't recall being discussed is whether the Formal Meditation and the Dhamma Study could be a consecutive, but distinctly separate, occurrences in someone's lifetime. That those who think FM is unnecessary, don't realise that their previous involvment actually WAS necessary, and they are getting by on a previously learned skill? There are many people whom I admire and learn from. Some do Formal Meditation (sitting, standing, walking, eating ), and go to Retreats etc., some combine FM and Dhamma Study, some Study and practice mindfullness. Those who do FM feel that it is essential according to the Teachings, and that Dhamma Study is not sufficient even with mindfullness. Those who practice the latter seem to feel FM is harmless, perhaps soothing, but not necessary, according to the Teachings. It is very confusing when coming upon this difference of opinion, especially when many of us gained our first introduction to Buddhism during Dhamma talks after group meditation. I only have a vague knowledge of some list members involvment with FM or Study, but wonder if there is anyone who has NEVER done FM in the past, however long ago, and who obtains satisfying results from Dhamma study and mindfulness only? (For instance, Sarah has told us of her FM practice years ago, and that she doesn't find it a necessary practice now.) Just an idle thought, - could it be that one can get to a 'sufficient' level that is accessible for progress on the Path.... just like riding a bike, you never lose the skill? Have any of those who teach us to study the realities NEVER done any formal meditation? metta, Christine --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "rikpa21" wrote: > --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "onco111" wrote: > > Hi Anders, > > Interesting exchange with Jon. I hope you don't mind my butting in > > briefly... > > > > Jon: Can you point to any instance in the texts of the Buddha > > recommending such a practice, or any mention at all of 'sitting > > vipassana meditation'. > > > > Anders: The Satipatthana Sutta: "There is the case where a monk -- > > having gone to the wilderness, to the shade of a tree, or to an > empty > > building -- sits down folding his legs crosswise, holding his body > > erect and setting mindfulness to the fore [lit: the front of the > > chest]. Always mindful, he breathes in; mindful he breathes out. " > > > > And all the other foundations too. > > > > ----------------- > > Yes, I think we all agree that one case in which mindfulness can > be > > established is when a monk sits cross-legged under a tree with > body > > erect. But is this a recommendation of sitting in order to > establish > > mindfulness or is it just part of a list of activities in which > > mindfulness can be established? > > Hi Dan & Anders (Anders, thank you for your recent spate of posts > reminding us of the importance of discarding views). > > Dan, I think this topic's been covered in some detail before here, > but that never means it isn't worth covering again. > > Just looking at my own experience, the entire message of what the > Buddha was teaching would have been lost on me, because without > sitting meditation none of the factors said to lead to the stated > aim of the Dhamma have arisen without this most basic of practices, > expounded in all versions of the Satipatthana Sutta as well as the > Anapanasati Sutta. <<<>>> 13129 From: rikpa21 Date: Tue May 7, 2002 0:48am Subject: Re: [dsg] Right Concentration - Rob Ep - beware/incredibly long --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "christine_forsyth" wrote: > Dear Anders, Jon, Dan, Eric and All, > > As you say Eric, this topic has been discussed (or at least alluded > to) many times on this and other lists. One thing I don't recall > being discussed is whether the Formal Meditation and the Dhamma Study > could be a consecutive, but distinctly separate, occurrences in > someone's lifetime. That those who think FM is unnecessary, don't > realise that their previous involvment actually WAS necessary, and > they are getting by on a previously learned skill? > There are many people whom I admire and learn from. Some do Formal > Meditation (sitting, standing, walking, eating ), and go to Retreats > etc., some combine FM and Dhamma Study, some Study and practice > mindfullness. > Those who do FM feel that it is essential according to the > Teachings, and that Dhamma Study is not sufficient even with > mindfullness. Those who practice the latter seem to feel FM is > harmless, perhaps soothing, but not necessary, according to the > Teachings. It is very confusing when coming upon this difference of > opinion, especially when many of us gained our first introduction to > Buddhism during Dhamma talks after group meditation. Hi Christine, You raise a very good point. I can see how it could be confusing to hear that formal meditation, as explicitly taught by the Buddha in more places than I can count in the Suttas, should be a cause for controversy, IF one accepts the Triptika represents the Buddha's teachings and one accepts that the Buddha's wisdom is non-mistaken. Just by way of personal (without misapprehending the term "person" as a "self" :) anectdote, I have come to see from my own experiences- -under the guidance of my highly trained and eminently qualified teachers of both intensive study (25 years of study and memorization for the Geshe, or Doctorate in Buddhist Philosophy degree, which includes several years of Abhidharma study) and applied meditation-- that the Buddha wasn't suggesting these things willy-nilly, that he had very good reasons for recommending formal meditation practices, techniques, and methods. From everything I've seen so far, I've come to conclude that he had a very good reason for laying out a clear and extensive program that not only initially gets us away from the distractions and into a place conducive to the deeper states of awareness necessary to penetrate the characteristics of dhammas directly, but that he also recommends specific objects of investigation as most conducive to this aim, and that these two components are best applied in tandem, as laid out in places like the Maha-Satipatthana Sutta. In other words, I have come to accept, in the ehipassiko sense, that his recommendations on how to proceed in training in and establishing mindfulness and concentration to the degree necessary to terminate the fetters wasn't arbitrary, but a program designed by one who has already passed that way himself, and validated that in his own experience, and then used that direct experience to instruct those who wish to do the same. The Buddha always enjoined his discilpes to test the Dhamma out in their own experience. In the the most general sense, the Buddha outlined a three-step program involving dana (giving), sila (morality), and bhavana (cultivation). An alternative formulation is the cultivation of sila, samadhi, and panna, which fall under the last category (and overlap with sila) as factors in the development of the path (bhavana). If it is possible to honestly say that one's informal practice has led to the reduction of akusala mental states, such as attachment, aversion, and ignorance, then one is at least headed in the right direction. That is nothing to sneeze at; it is an unmitigated good. But if the aim is the release from all forms of grasping, permanently, then I feel it necessary we stack the deck in our favor as much as possible and engage in the formal practices outlined by the Buddha--under the guidance of highly quaified teachers who have passed that way themselves. Lacking this, it is possible we may get lucky, but the odds are poor if we just look around at the actions of others in this world. And it can't hurt to recall the Buddha's advice to Ananda: that "admirable friends and companions" are not a small part of the Holy Life, nor the half of the Holy Life, but the "whole of the Holy Life", and that the primary and initial factor in developing the path to fruition is association with admirable friends and companions--those who've gone that way before, whose knowledge is that informed by direct exprience of the Buddha's teachings, and not on the fingers pointing at the moon. > I only have a vague knowledge of some list members involvment with FM > or Study, but wonder if there is anyone who has NEVER done FM in the > past, however long ago, and who obtains satisfying results from > Dhamma study and mindfulness only? I would likewise be interesetd in making the acquaintance of those who have realized the fruits of the Dhamma without the intense persistence and great effort embodied in formal practice, who have developed mindfulness, clear comprehension, and concentration to the degree necessary to penetrate the characteristics of dhammas to arrive at knowledge and vision of things as they are. Perhaps if Hui Neng or some of the historical figures from the Sutas were around we might be able to ask them. > (For instance, Sarah has told > us of her FM practice years ago, and that she doesn't find it a > necessary practice now.) Just an idle thought, - could it be that > one can get to a 'sufficient' level that is accessible for progress > on the Path.... just like riding a bike, you never lose the skill? In my experience, no way. You can very quickly lose the ability to maintain mindfulness and clear comprehension without regular supporting practice. > Have any of those who teach us to study the realities NEVER done any > formal meditation? It's possible. Personally, I'd be extremely wary of anyone setting themselves up as teacher who has not done at least several intensive meditation retreats and tasted the fruits of the Dhamma for themselves. I would never find myself able to trust any interpretation of the Dhamma not based on the teacher's direct experience thereof, simply because the dhamma is, as the Buddha said, "ehipassiko" (meaning to be investigated and known directly), unless they follow the texts themselves strictly and are very open about this being a mere repetition of the wording of the texts themselves, with as little personal gloss as possible. Again, the formal practice of Dhamma (let me add formal practice performed correctly) is entirely experiential and its fruits are completely beyond words, concepts, and categories. So to me, treatises like the Abhidhamma represent maps of that inner experience. For example, the Abhidhamma would have been of very little use to me had I not practiced formal meditation beforehand, simply because I'd have had no idea what most of it was referring to. In my case I've used the Abhidhamma as a wonderful tool to unpack meditation experiences after the fact. Had I begun with the Abhidhamma as my guide to meditation, though, I seriously doubt I'd have made much, if any, progress. Just one person's opinion. I hope you find it useful. Cheers, Erik 13130 From: onco111 Date: Tue May 7, 2002 1:59am Subject: Re: Right Concentration - Rob Ep - beware/incredibly long Erik! Delighted to see you, I am! You write: ...secluded spot, sitting cross-legged, spine erect, etc., and that one can retain true, unbroken mindfulness in all situations as they arise... Dan: This "unbroken mindfulness" sounds very peculiar to me. Yes, I've heard it said many times before and have even been deluded into thinking I've experienced it at times. But even when the mind is numb to it, always there is sense consciousness, investigating consciousness, five-door adverting consciousness, mind-door adverting consciousness intervening -- and sati in none of these. This is there to be observed in practice, in FM, in daily life, in study but it does require seeing to see. Sati cannot be unbroken; it rises and falls with consciousness, moment to moment. It cannot be avoided. Some moments it's there, but usually not. This remains true even though concentration may be very prominent and sharp. Seeing this is impossible, though, while there is no discernment of the distinction between concentration and mindfulness. Knowing the distinction is much, much more than hearing the word "mindfulness" and its definition. It must be known in practice, but how can it be known when there is the view that it can be unbroken, in all situations? Erik: Before, and for many years, I used to kid myself into believing that mere study would suffice, that I could somehow grasp the essence of the Dhamma if I read just enough books and "understood" things like anatta. Dan: I think we can agree that reading and putting together arguments is of limited utility. > fleeting, transient, and fabricated, lacking any innate "essence" > or "core"--particularly the collection of transient and impersonal > processes the Buddha labeled the five khandas. Does sati rise and fall too? Or can it be unbroken? To which khanda does sati belong? > It need not be for those who have advanced past the stage where > training in clear comprehension, mindfulness, and concentration are > so thoroughly established--to the point that one can truly (truly) > retain unbroken mindfulness and clear comprehension in the most > demanding situations. Since I am not at such a lofty point in my own development of mindfulness, I prefer to heed the Buddha's > instructions on this matter and avoid attempting to reinterpret the > Buddha's explicit advice in a way that favors my own prejudices, Sadhu, sadhu, sadhu! The conditions for satipatthana? Hearing the true Dhamma and yoniso manasikara. It cannot be forced: "I'm going to make sati arise now by using yoniso manasikara." Not at all! Even if one is inclined to put faith in one's personal control over sankhara, yoniso manasikara arises PRE-javana and colors the subsequent javana process, so it is still something that cannot be forced. Dan 13131 From: onco111 Date: Tue May 7, 2002 2:16am Subject: Re: Right Concentration - Rob Ep - beware/incredibly long Dear Christine, Study realities, study Dhamma. Do it now. No need for books right now. No need for a cushion right now. Plenty of dhammas are arising and passing away. No need to wait for special physical conditions before studying them. If you can continue your studies even while tuned into FM, wonderful! Not such an easy thing to do, though. Trying to force the attention to a particular object that you happen to think is a particularly good object for concentration may make it difficult to really study dhammas, to study Dhamma. If you can continue your studies even while reading a book, wonderful! Not such an easy thing to do, though. Trying to force understanding by simply reading and thinking about and memorizing someone else's words without studying them each moment as they arise and pass away may make it difficult to really study dhammas, to study Dhamma. Dan 13132 From: robertkirkpatrick.rm Date: Tue May 7, 2002 2:27am Subject: Re: Monkish mathematician Dear Dan and Howard, You guys are in a bit of a heroic seeming field - I am just starting a book about John Nash (now a movie - the Beautiful Mind). Best sellers about Mathematicians. And why not! best wishes robert In dhammastudygroup@y..., "onco111" wrote: > Hi Robert, > Paul Erdos was truly an astounding man. The number of papers he > published is far beyond what anyone could write on his own. His > secret? Sheer brilliance. Often he would get a call or visit from a > mathematician (or two), who had been struggling for months on a > difficult a problem. He'd hear the problem, think about it for a > minute or two, and offer a novel and elegant solution. Then, the > other mathematician would write the paper up and put Erdos' name on > it because it could not be otherwise. > > There used to be a theorem in mathematics about how prolific a worker > he was. It is a theorem about how the "Erdos number." Erdos' Erdos > number was 0. A person who wrote a paper with Erdos has an Erdos > number of 1. A person who wrote a paper with someone who wrote a > paper with Erdos has an Erdos number of 2. And so on. The theorem is > that no published research mathematician has an Erdos number higher > than 2. > > Dan > > > Dear Group, > > A book I'm reading "The man who loved only numbers' about Paul Erdos > > (pronounced air-dish) has some interesting bits. He published over a > > thousand top level articles and was the leading mathematician of > the later > > part of the 20th century(died 1996). celibate his entire life, > never > > cooked, owned almost nothing except what fitted in his suitcase > (didn't have > > a house and stayed with friends all over the world)- he gave most > of his > > stipends to different charities as soon as he received them. He had > no > > interests other than mathematics and worked 19hour days every day > (fortified > > by Benzedrine and caffeine). he could solve problems anywhere and > even in > > the middle of a convesation might be considering one. One of his > best > > friends , Ronald Graham, while less productive worked while > playing "You can > > do mathematics anywhere. I once had a flash of insight into a > problem in the > > middle of a back somersault with a triple twist on my trampoline" > (you get > > computer insights in the same way, Howard?) this was contrated with > erdos > > who was rather sedentary- at least physically. > > best wishes > > robert 13133 From: robertkirkpatrick.rm Date: Tue May 7, 2002 2:51am Subject: Wholesome and Unwholesome http://web.ukonline.co.uk/buddhism/igleden1.htm ACTION AND THEIR RESULTS "SOWING AND REAPING" Mrs C. W. Iggleden Tisarana Newsletter, April 1999 There are ten bad actions killing, stealing, unchastely, lying, slandering, harsh language, frivolous talk, covetousness, ill will, false view. 1. The result of killing is: Short life, being subject to disease, constant grief caused by separation from loved ones, and constant fear 2. The result of stealing is Poverty, wretchedness, unfulfilled desires, dependent livelihood 3. The result of unchastely is: Having many enemies, getting undesirable wives or husbands, birth as a female or an eunuch 4. The result of lying is: Being tormented by abusive speech, having the quality of being incredible, and a stinking mouth. 5. The result of slandering is: Dissolution of friendship without sufficient cause, and being ignored by friends. 6. The result of harsh language is: Being detested by others although blameless, and having a harsh voice. 7. The result of frivolous talk is: Disorderliness of the bodily organs, awkward or crooked limbs, and unacceptable speech. 8. The result of covetousness is: Unfulfillment of one's wishes, 9. The result of ill will is: Ugliness, various diseases, and having a detestable nature. 10. The result of false view is: Base attachment, lack of wisdom, dull wit, chronic diseases, and blameworthy ideas. There are ten good actions: generosity, morality, meditation, reverence, service, transference of merit, rejoicing in others' meritorious deeds, hearing the Doctrine, expounding the Doctrine, forming correct views. 1. The result of generosity is: Rebirth in wealthy conditions, or whatever one does one will be successful in the way of wealth. 2. The result of morality is: Rebirth in noble families in states of happiness, and can be the cause of good health and/or having a handsome or beautiful appearance. 3, The result of meditation is: Rebirth in the plane of Form or the Formless Plane, also help in the gaining of higher knowledge and emancipation 4. The result of reverence is: Being born of noble parentage. Those who do not practise reverence, due to conceit, can be reborn in lower states as tiny creatures. 5. The result of service is: Being attended by a large retinue, and having plenty of friends ready to help. 6. The result of transference of merit is: Being able to give in abundance in future births. 7. The result of rejoicing in others' meritorious deeds is: Productive of joy wherever one is reborn. 8/9. The result of hearing and expounding the Doctrine is: Conducive to wisdom. 10. The result of forming correct views is: Making one's views straight or firm (ditthijjukamma) and even when very young being bright and intelligent. Although we use the expression " by chance", there is no such thing as chance because of cause; although sometimes the cause is so remote that it cannot be traced. Rather in the same way as people invest money in order to get "interest", so by our good or bad actions we invest on kamma, and will indeed receive "interest" in just proportion! 13134 From: Date: Mon May 6, 2002 11:25pm Subject: Re: [dsg] anicca Hi, Sarah - Concepts are thoughts. Thoughts are mind objects. What concepts *refer* to, what they subsume, are frequently illusory, imagined, and not existent at all. The concept of a red fire engine is a *thought*. It exists - just as hardness, anger, and smells exist. With metta, Howard In a message dated 5/7/02 3:16:37 AM Eastern Daylight Time, sarahdhhk@y... writes: > Hi Howard, > > I have a couple of your posts which I delayed replying to;-) > > --- upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, Sarah - > > > I have heard of no things that are neither conditioned nor > > unconditioned. If concepts are neither, then they are nothing at all - > ..... > As I understand, when the texts discuss the conditioned and unconditioned, > they are discussing the phenomena with sabhava that are formed up > (sankhata) and not formed up (asankhata). In other words, the phenomena > that can be directly known by wisdom (panna). It’s true that accordingly, > in an ultimate (paramattha) sense, concepts are nothing at all, illusions > conceived by the mind that are so often taken for being *real*. > ..... > > there > > are no concepts, and we waste our time talking about them. > ..... > Concepts (pannatti) are concepts only. It is not a waste of time using > them and talking about them as long as they are not taken for *realities*. > If there were an idea, however, that any wisdom will be gained merely by > talking about and ‘working out’ the concepts, it would be rather like the > analogy of moving the Titanic deck chairs thinking that this in itself > might prevent the ‘sinking’ in samsara. > ...... > >But concepts > > are > > mind objects, they are constructed, conditioned by multiple senses > > including > > mind, and not irreducible, but they are mind objects. If there is a > > third > > category of things that are neither conditioned nor unconditioned, it is > > a > > category that I have not heard of nor seen mentioned in any sutta. > ..... > The Buddha makes it clear that often he is using ‘wordly’ language. The > end of Nina’s translation of the commentary to the Savaka Sutta just > posted, refers to this. Concepts are not included in the 5 khandhas, the > ‘All’ to be directly known. > ..... > > >Sabbe sankhara anicca. Ideas, patterns, mind-constructed objects, as > well as > > all > > paramatthadhammas other than nibbana *do not remain*. > ..... > What are ‘sabbe sankhara’? As I understand, the 5 khandhas or namas and > rupas or any of the other classifications of paramattha dhammas. > ..... > I’ll be glad to look at any other references or comments. At this moment I > think we agree that there can be awareness of thinking (thinking which > thinks about concepts). Are you sure there can be awareness of the concept > itself? > > Let me finish with one quote from the Vism on sankhara (formations): > Vism XX11, 22 > > “...He brings to bear the faculties, the powers, and the enlightenment > factors, and he works over and turns up the same field of formations > (sankhara), classed as materiality, feeling, perception, formations, and > consciousness, with the knowledge that they are impermanent, painful, > not-self, and he embarks upon the progressive series of insights.â€? > > Thanks as usual for your points for consideration, Howard. > > Sarah > ===== > /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 13135 From: wynn Date: Tue May 7, 2002 3:45am Subject: Re: [dsg] Iddhi Hi, > Is there any particular reason for your questions or > curiosity about iddhi? Just curious. I wanted to ask this for sometime already but did not. Recently, a friend ask how to develop supernatural powers. So, I thought of telling him how. But I am not sure whether one needs to have only the four jhanas or all the 8 jhanas. (He asked me jokingly, so I thought of giving him a reply - jokingly also, of coz) > Hope to hear from you more often, Wynn Thanks. Regards, Wynn 13136 From: wynn Date: Tue May 7, 2002 3:53am Subject: Re: [dsg] Iddhi Hi, > From jhana section: "...The 4 absorptions of the immaterial sphere (s. above 5-8) still belong, properly speaking, to the 4th absorption as they possess the same two constituents. < Actually, it is still not clear for me. Here, if we take all the arupa jhanas (5-8) as belonging to the 4th jhana, then do we need the arupas jhana to perform supernormal powers? >The 4th fine-material absorption is also the base or starting point (pádaka-jhána, q.v.) for the attaining of the higher spiritual powers (abhiññá, q.v.).< But this statement is not supported by the Tipitaka nor the commentaries. I am curious whether the 4th Jhana (fine material absorption) is enough for one to be able to perform supernatural powers. I know that when performing supernatural powers, the arupa jhanas are not used at all. But Visudhimagga said one needs all 8 absorption to be able to do it. (though it is not used when performing psychic powers) Thanks, Wynn 13137 From: Date: Tue May 7, 2002 5:25pm Subject: ADL ch. 7 (2) http://www.budsas.org/ebud/nina-abhidhamma/nina-abhi-00.htm Abhidhamma In Daily Life Chapter 7 (2) When there is moha we live in darkness. It was the Buddha's great compassion which moved him to teach people Dhamma. Dhamma is the light which can dispel darkness. If we do not know Dhamma we are ignorant about the world, about ourselves; we are ignorant about good and ill deeds and their results; we are ignorant about the eradication of defilements. The study of the Abhidhamma will help us to know more about the characteristic of moha. The 'Atthasalini' (Book II, Part IX, Ch.1, 249) states about Moha: 'Delusion' (moha) has the characteristic of blindness or opposition to knowledge; the essence of non- penetration or the function of covering the intrinsic nature of the object; the manifestation of being opposed to right conduct or causing blindness; the proximate cause of unwise attention; and it should be regarded as the root of all akusala.... There are many degrees of moha. When we study Dhamma we become less ignorant about realities; we understand more about paramattha Dhammas, about kamma and vipaka. However, this does not mean that we can already eradicate moha. Moha cannot be eradicated merely by thinking about the truth; it can only be eradicated by developing the wisdom which knows 'the world in the ariyan sense' : eye-sense, visible object, seeing-consciousness, ear-sense, sound, hearing-consciousness, and all realities appearing through the six doors. When we study the Abhidhamma we learn that moha arises with all akusala cittas. Lobha-mula-cittas have moha and lobha as roots; dosa-mula-cittas have moha and dosa as roots. There are two types of akusala citta which have moha as their only root, these are moha-mula-cittas. One type of moha-mula-citta is moha-mula-citta accompanied by doubt (in Pali: vicikiccha), and one type is moha-mula-citta accompanied by restlessness (in Pali: uddhacca). The feeling which accompanies moha-mula-cittas is always indifferent feeling (upekkha). When the citta is moha-mula-citta there is no like or dislike; one does not have pleasant or unpleasant feeling. Both types of moha-mula-citta are asankharika (unprompted). The characteristic of moha should not be confused with the characteristic of ditthi (wrong view), which only arises with lobha-mula-citta. When ditthi arises one takes, for example, what is impermanent for permanent, or one clings to the concept of self. Moha is not wrong view, but it is ignorance of realities. Moha conditions ditthi, but the characteristic of moha is different from the characteristic of ditthi. The two types of moha-mula-citta are: 1. Arising with indifferent feeling, accompanied by doubt (Upekkha-sahagatam., vicikiccha- sampayuttam) 2. Arising with indifferent feeling, accompanied by restlessness (Upekkha-sahagatam, uddhacca- sampayuttam) When one has the type of moha-mula-citta which is accompanied by doubt, one doubts about the Buddha, the Dhamma and the Sangha. One doubts whether the Buddha really discovered the truth, whether he taught the Path leading to the end of defilements, whether there are other people who can become enlightened as well. One doubts about past and future lives, about kamma and vipaka. There are many degrees of doubt. When we start to develop insight we may have doubt about the reality of the present moment; we doubt whether it is nama or rupa. For example, when there is hearing, there is sound as well but there can be awareness of only one reality at a time, since only one object at a time can be experienced by a citta. We may doubt whether the reality which appears at the present moment is the nama which hears or the rupa which is sound. Nama and rupa arise and fall away so rapidly and when a precise understanding of their different characteristics has not been developed one does not know which reality appears at the present moment. There will be doubt about the world of paramattha dhammas until panna (wisdom) clearly knows the characteristics of nama and rupa as they appear through the six doors. The 'Atthasalini' (Book II, Part IX, Ch. III, 259) states about doubt: Here doubt means exclusion from the cure (of knowledge). Or, one investigating the intrinsic nature by means of it suffers pain and fatigue (kicchati)- - thus it is doubt. It has shifting about as characteristic, mental wavering as function, indecision or uncertainty in grasp as manifestation, unsystematic thought as proximate cause, and it should be regarded as a danger to attainment. Doubt is different from wrong view (ditthi). When there is ditthi one clings, for example, to the concept that phenomena are permanent or one takes them for self. When vicikiccha (doubt) arises, one wonders whether the mind is different from the body or not, whether phenomena are permanent or impermanent. There is no other way to eradicate doubt but by developing the panna (wisdom) which sees realities as they are. People who have doubts about the person and the teachings of the Buddha may think that doubt can be cured by studying historical events. They want to find out more details about the time the Buddha lived and about the places where he moved about; they want to know the exact time the texts were written down. They cannot be cured of their doubt by studying historical events; this does not lead to the goal of the Buddha's teachings which is the eradication of defilements. 13138 From: Date: Tue May 7, 2002 8:27pm Subject: Re: [dsg] ADL ch. 7 (2) ADL: "There is no other way to eradicate doubt but by developing the panna (wisdom) which sees realities as they are." Greetings dsg, At first I was a little put off by this, thinking I would have to 'see' every single reality before doubt was eradicated; but I reconsidered and decided that isn't necessarily the case. I thought perhaps moha is a little different from lobha and dosa. Seeing lobha and dosa for what they are, arising and subsiding in the moment, one can easily see they are not self, not me and not mine. But how do you see delusion arise? How can light observe darkness? If we color this nonawareness with doubt then it can easily be seen to arise and blossom as bewilderment and perplexity. This also is not self. It does seem a little more difficult to observe, maybe because of its dullness. Anyone else having trouble being clear about obscurity? Larry 13139 From: christine_forsyth Date: Tue May 7, 2002 9:44pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Right Concentration - Rob Ep - beware/incredibly long Hi Eric, Good to read you again. I always find your opinions useful, Eric, troubling... but useful :-) Just when I get settled, you seem to come along to unsettle me again, and cause me to re-consider the comfortable spot I've sorted out for myself. :) I guess I'm like Sukin in a way, even though I had a longer experience with formal meditation. I prefer study and mindfulness...(could this be 'accumulations'?), though the dangers of addiction to book knowledge have been pointed out to me recently by members of this list. And who can say what the future holds? Next time you come a- stirring, we could all be doing Jhana :) :) :) metta, Christine --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "rikpa21" wrote: > Hi Christine, > > You raise a very good point. I can see how it could be confusing to > hear that formal meditation, as explicitly taught by the Buddha in > more places than I can count in the Suttas, should be a cause for > controversy, IF one accepts the Triptika represents the Buddha's > teachings and one accepts that the Buddha's wisdom is non-mistaken. > > Just by way of personal (without misapprehending the term "person" > as a "self" :) anectdote, I have come to see from my own experiences- > -under the guidance of my highly trained and eminently qualified > teachers of both intensive study (25 years of study and memorization > for the Geshe, or Doctorate in Buddhist Philosophy degree, which > includes several years of Abhidharma study) and applied meditation-- > that the Buddha wasn't suggesting these things willy-nilly, that he > had very good reasons for recommending formal meditation practices, > techniques, and methods. > > From everything I've seen so far, I've come to conclude that he had > a very good reason for laying out a clear and extensive program that > not only initially gets us away from the distractions and into a > place conducive to the deeper states of awareness necessary to > penetrate the characteristics of dhammas directly, but that he also > recommends specific objects of investigation as most conducive to > this aim, and that these two components are best applied in tandem, > as laid out in places like the Maha-Satipatthana Sutta. > > In other words, I have come to accept, in the ehipassiko sense, that > his recommendations on how to proceed in training in and > establishing mindfulness and concentration to the degree necessary > to terminate the fetters wasn't arbitrary, but a program designed by > one who has already passed that way himself, and validated that in > his own experience, and then used that direct experience to instruct > those who wish to do the same. > > The Buddha always enjoined his discilpes to test the Dhamma out in > their own experience. In the the most general sense, the Buddha > outlined a three-step program involving dana (giving), sila > (morality), and bhavana (cultivation). An alternative formulation is > the cultivation of sila, samadhi, and panna, which fall under the > last category (and overlap with sila) as factors in the development > of the path (bhavana). > > If it is possible to honestly say that one's informal practice has > led to the reduction of akusala mental states, such as attachment, > aversion, and ignorance, then one is at least headed in the right > direction. That is nothing to sneeze at; it is an unmitigated good. > But if the aim is the release from all forms of grasping, > permanently, then I feel it necessary we stack the deck in our favor > as much as possible and engage in the formal practices outlined by > the Buddha--under the guidance of highly quaified teachers who have > passed that way themselves. > > Lacking this, it is possible we may get lucky, but the odds are poor > if we just look around at the actions of others in this world. And > it can't hurt to recall the Buddha's advice to Ananda: > that "admirable friends and companions" are not a small part of the > Holy Life, nor the half of the Holy Life, but the "whole of the Holy > Life", and that the primary and initial factor in developing the > path to fruition is association with admirable friends and > companions--those who've gone that way before, whose knowledge is > that informed by direct exprience of the Buddha's teachings, and not > on the fingers pointing at the moon. > > > I only have a vague knowledge of some list members involvment with > FM > > or Study, but wonder if there is anyone who has NEVER done FM in > the > > past, however long ago, and who obtains satisfying results from > > Dhamma study and mindfulness only? > > I would likewise be interesetd in making the acquaintance of those > who have realized the fruits of the Dhamma without the intense > persistence and great effort embodied in formal practice, who have > developed mindfulness, clear comprehension, and concentration to the > degree necessary to penetrate the characteristics of dhammas to > arrive at knowledge and vision of things as they are. Perhaps if Hui > Neng or some of the historical figures from the Sutas were around we > might be able to ask them. > > > (For instance, Sarah has told > > us of her FM practice years ago, and that she doesn't find it a > > necessary practice now.) Just an idle thought, - could it be that > > one can get to a 'sufficient' level that is accessible for > progress > > on the Path.... just like riding a bike, you never lose the > skill? > > In my experience, no way. You can very quickly lose the ability to > maintain mindfulness and clear comprehension without regular > supporting practice. > > > Have any of those who teach us to study the realities NEVER done > any > > formal meditation? > > It's possible. Personally, I'd be extremely wary of anyone setting > themselves up as teacher who has not done at least several intensive > meditation retreats and tasted the fruits of the Dhamma for > themselves. I would never find myself able to trust any > interpretation of the Dhamma not based on the teacher's direct > experience thereof, simply because the dhamma is, as the Buddha > said, "ehipassiko" (meaning to be investigated and known directly), > unless they follow the texts themselves strictly and are very open > about this being a mere repetition of the wording of the texts > themselves, with as little personal gloss as possible. > > Again, the formal practice of Dhamma (let me add formal practice > performed correctly) is entirely experiential and its fruits are > completely beyond words, concepts, and categories. So to me, > treatises like the Abhidhamma represent maps of that inner > experience. For example, the Abhidhamma would have been of very > little use to me had I not practiced formal meditation beforehand, > simply because I'd have had no idea what most of it was referring > to. In my case I've used the Abhidhamma as a wonderful tool to > unpack meditation experiences after the fact. Had I begun with the > Abhidhamma as my guide to meditation, though, I seriously doubt I'd > have made much, if any, progress. > > Just one person's opinion. I hope you find it useful. > > Cheers, > Erik 13140 From: christine_forsyth Date: Tue May 7, 2002 9:48pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Right Concentration - Rob Ep - beware/incredibly long Dear Sukin, Thank you for this post. I know very well how frustrating it can be trying to find 'what works' for us individually regarding Dhamma study and practice. Whatever you are doing is working for you and helping me :). The *way* you say things always makes sense to me. I mostly gain some insight from each of your posts - I just wish you would post more often:). My particularly difficulty has been that I study, ask questions, understand the clear explanations - and, then, a few weeks or a month later find myself asking the same questions - not remembering the previous exchange. Eventually it is understood and imprinted on memory - how wonderful it would be to 'know' something the first time - and much more time efficient. :) (I think Dan in his post, is giving me good points regarding studying books and studying realities. And Sarah, you also tried to, a couple of weeks back, and I'm 'almost' hearing you now. :)) Perhaps a test of whether meditation (or dhamma study as well) has *worked* for the individual is, as you say, whether the person has been changed for the better by it. metta, Chris --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "Sukinder" wrote: > Dear Christine, > Judging from my experience with FM this lifetime I am inclined to > conclude that I have never done it in a previous lifetime. Never enjoyed > even one session, eventhough in a span of 5 months I went ahead > and attended two 10 day retreats with the idea that FM would lead > me out of confusion. On the other hand I am not much of a scholar > either, as you know I have a very short attention span and become > quite impatient with written words that I don't immediately comprehend. > However I have noted that there are times when I read a good post > or some sutta reference and while I'm doing that there is much calm > and clarity of mind. Also sati arises when in normal everyday activity, > I am reminded of some aspect of the teaching relevant to the particular > situation. > > In my opinion ( I await and expect to be corrected, since its not well > thought out ) the relevance of theoretical study is when it is understood > not as applying to anybody else, but to oneself, better still when the > theory is applied to the present situation. Otherwise if it is done with > the idea of accumulating, then like Anders has pointed out, it would > be a fetter and must be seen for what it is. Once seen for what it is, > it is automatically discarded, no one to do the discarding. But "RightView" > I believe has a positive and beneficial influence of its own, even when it > is still just theory. Why? because it at least replaces "Wrong theoretical > View" and there is always a chance that with the right guidance it can > be applied to the present moment. Also for a long time I have been with > the opinion that people who meditate and who show some degree of wisdom, > probably do a lot of study as well. And their particular insights may not > be connected to their practice as they think it does, but perhaps to the > study they have done. There are as you know, like hens sitting on their > eggs, people who have meditated for years and years with the very same > competent teachers the former claim to have, who may have acquired the > habit and ability to supress their coarse kilesas, but who once you start > to talk to them, you can see that they lack real panna. > Waiting to be corrected and criticized, or ignored :-) > Best wishes, > Sukin. > 13141 From: christine_forsyth Date: Tue May 7, 2002 9:50pm Subject: Re: Right Concentration - Rob Ep - beware/incredibly long Dear Dan, Yours is such a *simple* post - but so hard to do. I could be facetious here and ask for the "how" method, but I've unsuccessfully been down that road before, never seem to get a "do this" then "do that" answer..... so my current way of studying realities is mindfulness, bare awareness ..... I wish I had never learned 'labelling', so hard to stop .....but one step up from my usual way of operating on 'automatic pilot'. Glad you're back with us Dan, hope you stay quite a while metta, Christine --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "onco111" wrote: > Dear Christine, > Study realities, study Dhamma. Do it now. No need for books right > now. No need for a cushion right now. Plenty of dhammas are arising > and passing away. No need to wait for special physical conditions > before studying them. > > If you can continue your studies even while tuned into FM, wonderful! > Not such an easy thing to do, though. Trying to force the attention > to a particular object that you happen to think is a particularly > good object for concentration may make it difficult to really study > dhammas, to study Dhamma. > > If you can continue your studies even while reading a book, > wonderful! Not such an easy thing to do, though. Trying to force > understanding by simply reading and thinking about and memorizing > someone else's words without studying them each moment as they arise > and pass away may make it difficult to really study dhammas, to study > Dhamma. > > Dan 13142 From: robertkirkpatrick.rm Date: Tue May 7, 2002 10:36pm Subject: Re: Right Concentration - Rob Ep - beware/incredibly long --- Dear Christine, I liked Dan's reply too (saved it in my file). When there is noting there are also dhammas occuring (thinking about dhammas in this case) and so there can be awareness of that. I think nothing to supress or change as the object is the present. Gradually old habits may fall away (or not) as they are seen. If only Dhamma could be reduced to a 'do this ,then that," practice, it would be great; it would be straighforward and we would have left samsara an infinity ago. best wishes robert In dhammastudygroup@y..., "christine_forsyth" wrote: > > Dear Dan, > > Yours is such a *simple* post - but so hard to do. I could be > facetious here and ask for the "how" method, but I've unsuccessfully > been down that road before, never seem to get a "do this" then "do > that" answer..... so my current way of studying realities is > mindfulness, bare awareness ..... I wish I had never > learned 'labelling', so hard to stop .....but one step up from my > usual way of operating on 'automatic pilot'. > Glad you're back with us Dan, hope you stay quite a while > metta, > Christine > > --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "onco111" wrote: > > Dear Christine, > > Study realities, study Dhamma. Do it now. No need for books right > > now. No need for a cushion right now. Plenty of dhammas are arising > > and passing away. No need to wait for special physical conditions > > before studying them. > > > > If you can continue your studies even while tuned into FM, > wonderful! > > Not such an easy thing to do, though. Trying to force the attention > > to a particular object that you happen to think is a particularly > > good object for concentration may make it difficult to really study > > dhammas, to study Dhamma. > > > > If you can continue your studies even while reading a book, > > wonderful! Not such an easy thing to do, though. Trying to force > > understanding by simply reading and thinking about and memorizing > > someone else's words without studying them each moment as they > arise > > and pass away may make it difficult to really study dhammas, to > study > > Dhamma. > > > > Dan 13143 From: christine_forsyth Date: Tue May 7, 2002 11:16pm Subject: Re: Right Concentration - Rob Ep - beware/incredibly long Dear Robert, When I ask for 'method' or 'steps' it is exactly what you have told me in your post that I was after.... Perhaps, I should have asked for 'hints' or 'pointers'? :-) This may seem too simple to many list members, but it is extremely helpful to me. Many thanks. metta, Christine --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "robertkirkpatrick.rm" wrote: > --- > Dear Christine, > I liked Dan's reply too (saved it in my file). When there is noting > there are also dhammas occuring (thinking about dhammas in this case) > and so there can be awareness of that. I think nothing to supress or > change as the object is the present. Gradually old habits may fall > away (or not) as they are seen. > If only Dhamma could be reduced to a 'do this ,then that," practice, > it would be great; it would be straighforward and we would have left > samsara an infinity ago. > best wishes > robert > > > In dhammastudygroup@y..., "christine_forsyth" wrote: > > > > Dear Dan, > > > > Yours is such a *simple* post - but so hard to do. I could be > > facetious here and ask for the "how" method, but I've > unsuccessfully > > been down that road before, never seem to get a "do this" then "do > > that" answer..... so my current way of studying realities is > > mindfulness, bare awareness ..... I wish I had never > > learned 'labelling', so hard to stop .....but one step up from my > > usual way of operating on 'automatic pilot'. > > Glad you're back with us Dan, hope you stay quite a while > > metta, > > Christine > > > > --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "onco111" wrote: 13144 From: Sarah Date: Wed May 8, 2002 0:03am Subject: Re: [dsg] A question on enlightenment Dear Howard (& Christine), Your points below are difficult to answer (hence the delay). S:> > Yes. It's called wrong view which always thinks wrong is right. The > > Tipitaka is full of references. > > ..... > > C:> > >and, if so, how would > > > they ever know? > > ..... S:> > Only panna (wisdom) can know, which is why it is so essential. > > > ---------------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > This is certainly true. However, how does one KNOW that what one > sees > to be the case is a matter of wisdom or of error? As I see it, there is > no > completely certain independent guarantee on this. ..... I’d like to suggest that the only ‘certain independent guarantee’ is the development of panna. At moments of panna, there is no doubt about what is real, what is true and what isn’t. As it develops, right from the start, it is in conformity with what we read in the texts. There is no self ‘doing’ anything or restricting time and place or having any idea of control. Panna begins to understand what are the phenomena to be known (i.e the 5khandhas) and how these are conditioned at this moment. Of course, there is bound to be lots of ignorance and wrong view interspersed for a long while yet, but gradually as panna develops, there are fewer conditions for doubt about what the Buddha taught. This may not be a very satisfactory answer, I know (hence the delay and hesitation in replying). ..... H:>I would suppose that > one > could use certain yardsticks (metre rods?) such as seeing that one has > become > calmer, more loving, less compulsive, less grasping, less aversive etc, > etc. > For stream entry and the more advanced stages, the Buddha laid out > certain > behavioral and personality criteria. All of these, I think, provided, of > > course, that one has confidence in the Buddha, could be used as > indicators > that one is moving in the right direction, but I doubt that one can know > > incontestably. ..... S:As Larry, helpfully pointed out recently (discussion on dosa), the aim as I see it, is not ‘a course in self-improvement’ but a development of wisdom which understands the anatta nature of all conditioned phenomena when they appear without preference or selection. As you say, various defilements are eradicated at various stages of enlightenment, but until then, the deep-rooted anusaya (latent tendencies) can lay dormant for a long time if there are no opportunities or conditions for them to manifest. Who knows what defilements will show if there are really difficult tests to face? In other words, it may seem that one has ‘become calmer, more loving....’ and so on, but this may be the same for those of other religions who perhaps are maturing or living more comfortably, for example. There may also be a lot of attachment to being ‘calmer, more loving....’ and appearing so as well. Again, I would suggest that the only real yardstick --yes I’m still using feet and yards-- of wisdom vs error is the panna (right view or understanding) which knows directly the lakkana (characteristics) of reality at this moment. Sarah p.s I'm trying to recall a couple of relevant suttas and would be glad for any assistance. One is about an arahant that people objected to because of the way he walked and some other habits. Another was about two family members (sisters?) who were very alike and when they died, no one saw any difference, but in fact one was enlightened. Sorry, I can't do better and even these details may be wrong;-)..maybe in AN ---------------------------------------------------- 13145 From: kenhowardau Date: Wed May 8, 2002 0:48am Subject: Re: [dsg] Right Concentration - Rob Ep - beware/incredibly long --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "rikpa21" wrote: > --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "christine_forsyth" > wrote: > > > > As you say Eric, this topic has been discussed (or at least > alluded > > to) many times on this and other lists. Hi Christine, > > You raise a very good point. I can see how it could be confusing to > hear that formal meditation, as explicitly taught by the Buddha in > more places than I can count in the Suttas, should be a cause for > controversy, IF one accepts the Triptika represents the Buddha's > teachings and one accepts that the Buddha's wisdom is non-mistaken. > Hello Erik, We have seen it explained several times on this list that, according to the Tipitaka, the Dhamma can be followed in any of four ways. One of these, the way of bare vipassana, involves no jhana meditation at all. Another, as I understand it, also has vipassana developed by itself, after which there is the cultivation of jhana. Do you recognise these two of the four ways? Apart from jhana meditation, are any formal practices described in the Theravadin texts? (There are some lines in the Satipatthana suttas which, when read in isolation, seem to require mindfulness of activities and postures; are there any others?) Kind regards Ken H 13146 From: Sarah Date: Wed May 8, 2002 1:10am Subject: Re: [dsg] bones Dear Nina, --- Nina van Gorkom wrote: >I was so touched by your example of taking up a bone > of > Alan Driver at his cremation, after Kh. Sujin requested you to do this. > You > realized: no more Alan, only hardness appeared. It is just like in the > suttas. Those who had accumulated pa~n~naa could attain enlightenment, > realizing the hardness as only a dhamma, impermanent, dukkha and anatta, > one > of these characteristics at a time. Such an example makes the difference > between concept and reality so clear. When we read about it, it is > different > from experiencing it in a situation where we are confronted with the > death > of a dear person. Such a poignant reminder. ..... Thank you for your additional comments too.The next day I was given the ashes in an urn to look after on the boat ride. A stream of flower petals were thrown into the river and after quite a long while, I was told to throw the urn in as well. I remember continuing to clutch it ‘for dear life’ and had great resistance to ‘letting go’. There was still some clinging to ‘a part’ of ‘Alan’. I’m reminded of the Mulapariyaya Sutta and the elaboration of wrong views and attachments based on earth (pathavi). In the commentary (B.Bodhi p.46) we read about the reason why “he delights in earth”(pathavim abhinandati): “Having thus shown the (worldling’s) conceiving and delight based upon earth, with these words the Master reveals the reason why he conceives and delights in earth. This is the meaning: If it is asked, “For what reason does the worldling conceive earth? Why does he conceive and delight in earth?” the answer is: “Because it has not been fully understood by him”, i.e. because he has not fully understood the base, therefore (he does so). He who fully understands the earth understands it by the three types of full understanding: the full understanding of the known (~naata.pari~n~naa), the full understanding of scrutinization (tiira.napari~n~naa), and the full understanding of abandoning (pahaanapari~n~naa).” ***** >A moment of realizing dhamma > as > dhamma and then sadness again, different moments. It is so natural. Now > it > also becomes clearer why we read in the Satipatthana Sutta about > corpses, > parts of the body, breathing. They are all reminders of daily life, > making > it clear that there are only dhammas each with their own characteristic. > If > there would not be colour or visible object, could we know that here is > Alan's bone? If tangible object does not appear, do we know that we > touch a > bone? Different moments of paramattha dhammas appearing, and they do > appear, > and our thoughts on account of them, with lobha, dosa, moha, or with > pa~n~naa. As Kom said, in theory we may understand the difference > between > paramattha dhamma and concept, but, how in practice, how about this > moment? ..... Yes, these are good reminders and we never know where our daily life may take us or what dhammas will appear to be known. I remember arriving at the funeral in tears and leaving with a big smile after so many helpful reminders. Indeed it was a very special occasion for me because of this. I have just a little glimmer of appreciation of what a momentous occasion it must have been for the monk who listened to the Buddha with Sirima’s corpse laid out. ..... The commentary to the Mulapariya Sutta continues: “Therein, what is the full understanding of the known? He fully understands the earth element thus: “This is the internal earth element, this the external. This is its characteristic, this its function, manifestation, and proximate cause.” this is full understanding of the known. What is the full understanding by scrutinization? Having known it in this way, he scrutinizes the earth element in forty-two modes as impermanent, suffering, a sickness, etc. this is full undestanding by scrutinization. What is the full understanding by abandoning/ Having scrutinized it in this way, he abandons desire and lust for the earth element through the supreme path (aggamagga). This is full understanding by abandoning. Or , alternatively, the defining of mentality-materiality (naamaruupavavatthaana) is the full understanding of the known; from insight-comprehension of the groups (kalaapasammasana) as far as conformity knowledge (anuloma) is the full understanding by scrutinization; and the knowledge of the ariyan path is the full understanding by abandoning.” ***** Best wishes, Sarah ==================================================== 13147 From: Sarah Date: Wed May 8, 2002 1:37am Subject: Re: [dsg] Iddhi Dear Wynn & All, --- wynn wrote: > Hi, > > > Is there any particular reason for your questions or > > curiosity about iddhi? > > Just curious. I wanted to ask this for sometime already but did not. > Recently, a friend ask how to develop supernatural powers. So, I thought > of > telling him how. But I am not sure whether one needs to have only the > four > jhanas or all the 8 jhanas. > (He asked me jokingly, so I thought of giving him a reply - jokingly > also, > of coz) ..... Thanks for adding this explanation. Many people may wonder what the point of discussing these details are, Surely they are the other ‘treasures’ Anders referred to and an example of irrelevant book study? Although they have no relevance to the realities of ‘my’ daily life, I learn that everyone has different interests and accumulations. Furthermore, for some people, like your friend perhaps, without hearing and considering a lot of detail, they may think it is a straightforward matter to develop the jhanas and supernatural powers and that it’s just a matter of being steered in the right direction. For these people, they may need to hear a lot of detail before there is any comprehension of the extraordinary development of wholesome states that is required at even the stages of samatha prior to the 1st jhana. Furthermore, there may not be any knowledge of what is tuly wholesome at this moment or how a particular object such as a kasina can lead to calm. They may have an idea that it’s simply a matter of concentration on a given object. It may, therefore, be a kindness to point to the details in the texts that indicate this is not so. I realize from your comments that your friend and you are joking and earlier you stressed that you weren’t concerned with these points as being necessary to enlightenment. I’m not sure that I’m able to add more details for your second post as you’ve obviously researched this area more carefully than I have. In other words, it may be beyond 'my limits'. Kom or someone else would probably do better with the more ‘technical’ points ;-) Let us know in the meantime, if your friend has any success in walking through doors and keyholes or flying across mountains;-)) I’ll be glad to hear any of your further comments too. Sarah ===== 13148 From: wynn Date: Wed May 8, 2002 2:45am Subject: Re: [dsg] Iddhi Hi Sarah and all, > For these people, they may need to hear a lot of detail before there is > any comprehension of the extraordinary development of wholesome states > that is required at even the stages of samatha prior to the 1st jhana. I would just want to add that some people want to satisfy their curiosity before they are willing to move on. I would not label them as stubborn because there is nothing wrong being curious. But then....there are things which we aill never know until we are enlightened. Thanks, Wynn 13149 From: onco111 Date: Wed May 8, 2002 2:53am Subject: Re: Right Concentration - Rob Ep - beware/incredibly long Dear Christine, So, you want an instruction manual. It would make things easier, I suppose. Then again, I can't imagine what one would look like because Dhamma is not a path of "do this, do that -- the act of doing these prescribed things will lead to understanding." (Would it be clearer to state that it is not a path of "do this [ritual], do that [ritual] -- the act of doing these prescribed [rituals] will lead to understanding"?) Reading the suttas with this understanding, it becomes clear that the Buddha did not prescribe practices for attaining wisdom. Even the vaunted "instruction manual" Satipatthana sutta reads like a series of descriptions of what sorts of things monks are doing [all sorts of things!] when satipatthana arises: "There is the case where a monk..." sits crosslegged under a tree, spine erect, etc. In 1989 I went to Thailand for my second intensive meditation retreat. After four weeks of rising at 4:00 a.m. and doing everything at a snail's pace (when not sitting on my butt!) until 10:00 at night, I was very happy about the progress and "insights" I had developed. To preserve the gains afterward, I maintained a daily practice of sitting and walking ritual (er, "meditation") religiously for 1-1.5 hours per day. "Oh, this is not enough!" I thought. I had so much faith in the efficacy of the ritual that I wanted to maintain "unbroken awareness" all day long. At that time I was working on an agricultural development project in Guatemala, and I needed to do some work in the fields. I found it difficult to maintain constant awareness, so I carried a little travel alarm clock in my pocket and set the alarm to go off when I started work... "Beep, beep, beep." "Oh, time to establish sati." Push the snooze button. Five minutes later: "Beep, beep, beep." "Oh, yeah, time to establish sati again." "Beep, beep, beep"... And on through the day. Sheer madness! I so craved the peaceful feelings and special experiences of the intensive meditation that I did everything I could to cling to them continously under the guise of "practicing Vipassana in everyday life." Understanding does not arise from ritual or from a recipe book. You cannot force it to arise. Even now there arises craving for a way to say, "Here's what to do..." But the attempts to say such a thing never get off the ground, and the thoughts turn to description of the arising and passing away of dhammas -- there's no other way. I think if you read the suttas with this in mind, you will see that this is also the Buddha's approach to teaching, viz. description rather than prescription. Ritual can be so comforting... It takes great confidence in the Buddha and his Dhamma to abandon clinging to ritual. We must understand his descriptions of reality and the arising and experience of panya and witness them in everyday life. How? There is no "how." Once we define a "how," there is a "who" that does the "how." And born is a superstition about how the who induces a "what" to arise via a how, when really there are just empty phenomena rolling on. Dan > Dear Robert, > > When I ask for 'method' or 'steps' it is exactly what you have told > me in your post that I was after.... Perhaps, I should have asked > for 'hints' or 'pointers'? :-) > This may seem too simple to many list members, but it is extremely > helpful to me. > Many thanks. > > metta, > Christine 13150 From: Sarah Date: Wed May 8, 2002 3:29am Subject: Re: [dsg] Iddhi Dear Wynn, --- wynn wrote: > I would just want to add that some people want to satisfy their > curiosity > before they are willing to move on. I would not label them as stubborn > because there is nothing wrong being curious. ..... I agree with this. We are all curious about many different subjects and like you, I'm curious about many aspects and parts of the Tipitaka that I don't expect to ever be more than a topic of curiosity. Thanks to you, I've now become even more curious about supernatural states;-)) At the same time, while it's natural to be curious, it can cause difficulties if, like the sutta about the arrow, we're determined 'to work out' all the intricacies first or can't 'move on' without them. ..... >But then....there are > things > which we aill never know until we are enlightened. > ..... Now I think we all agree;-) I hope your other questions get answered too. Sarah ==== 13151 From: christine_forsyth Date: Wed May 8, 2002 4:07am Subject: Re: Right Concentration - Rob Ep - beware/incredibly long Dear Dan, Your post, Dan - it was a little like unsweetened yoghurt at first, I knew it was good for me but the taste was a little sharp :-) . It has never occurred to me before that 'wanting a method' is a form of being attached to a 'ritual'. Strong words - craving, clinging, ritual, superstition..... they certainly concentrated my attention":). And I can see the point you are making. The feeling I have when asking for a method is really a searching for security and routine, a repeatable process. And when I look at what I used to do when meditating - the special times, the particular groups of people, the structure of the sessions, the clothes, the cushions, the postures, the statues, the candles, the times of silence, the bells....I guess that could be called a ritual. I appreciate your telling the stories of your experiences in Thailand and Guatemala - they illustrate quite clearly what you are saying about craving and clinging to peaceful feelings and the need for progress, and the lengths we go to satisfy these needs. I find your last two paragraphs most valuable of all. Thank you for sharing them. In particular, for me, I know when I read the last paragraph that the old hurdles of anatta and no-control are back staring me in the face again...... "How? There is no "how." Once we define a "how," there is a "who" that does the "how." And born is a superstition about how the who induces a "what" to arise via a how, when really there are just empty phenomena rolling on." metta, Christine --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "onco111" wrote: > Dear Christine, > So, you want an instruction manual. It would make things easier, I > suppose. Then again, I can't imagine what one would look like because > Dhamma is not a path of "do this, do that -- the act of doing these > prescribed things will lead to understanding." (Would it be clearer > to state that it is not a path of "do this [ritual], do that > [ritual] -- the act of doing these prescribed [rituals] will lead to > understanding"?) Reading the suttas with this understanding, it > becomes clear that the Buddha did not prescribe practices for > attaining wisdom. Even the vaunted "instruction manual" Satipatthana > sutta reads like a series of descriptions of what sorts of things > monks are doing [all sorts of things!] when satipatthana > arises: "There is the case where a monk..." sits crosslegged under a > tree, spine erect, etc. > > In 1989 I went to Thailand for my second intensive meditation > retreat. After four weeks of rising at 4:00 a.m. and doing everything > at a snail's pace (when not sitting on my butt!) until 10:00 at > night, I was very happy about the progress and "insights" I had > developed. To preserve the gains afterward, I maintained a daily > practice of sitting and walking ritual (er, "meditation") religiously > for 1-1.5 hours per day. "Oh, this is not enough!" I thought. I had > so much faith in the efficacy of the ritual that I wanted to > maintain "unbroken awareness" all day long. At that time I was > working on an agricultural development project in Guatemala, and I > needed to do some work in the fields. I found it difficult to > maintain constant awareness, so I carried a little travel alarm clock > in my pocket and set the alarm to go off when I started work... > > "Beep, beep, beep." > "Oh, time to establish sati." Push the snooze button. Five minutes > later: > > "Beep, beep, beep." > "Oh, yeah, time to establish sati again." > > "Beep, beep, beep"... > > And on through the day. Sheer madness! I so craved the peaceful > feelings and special experiences of the intensive meditation that I > did everything I could to cling to them continously under the guise > of "practicing Vipassana in everyday life." > > Understanding does not arise from ritual or from a recipe book. You > cannot force it to arise. > > Even now there arises craving for a way to say, "Here's what to > do..." But the attempts to say such a thing never get off the ground, > and the thoughts turn to description of the arising and passing away > of dhammas -- there's no other way. I think if you read the suttas > with this in mind, you will see that this is also the Buddha's > approach to teaching, viz. description rather than prescription. > Ritual can be so comforting... It takes great confidence in the > Buddha and his Dhamma to abandon clinging to ritual. We must > understand his descriptions of reality and the arising and experience > of panya and witness them in everyday life. > > How? There is no "how." Once we define a "how," there is a "who" that > does the "how." And born is a superstition about how the who induces > a "what" to arise via a how, when really there are just empty > phenomena rolling on. > > Dan > > > > Dear Robert, > > > > When I ask for 'method' or 'steps' it is exactly what you have told > > me in your post that I was after.... Perhaps, I should have asked > > for 'hints' or 'pointers'? :-) > > This may seem too simple to many list members, but it is extremely > > helpful to me. > > Many thanks. > > > > metta, > > Christine 13152 From: Sukinder Date: Wed May 8, 2002 7:55pm Subject: RE: [dsg] Right Concentration - Rob Ep - beware/incredibly long Dear Christine, Next time you think of praising my posts know that there is an infinity of mana accumulated, very hard for panna to arise in between, very little of this has been conditioned... Just kidding;-). Thanks for your post. I liked Dan's post too, I've always enjoyed his posts, not only appreciate his deep understanding but also like his style of expression. Yes every moment is an expression of a dhamma that can be known or ignored, but even that can be known. If one overlooks this moment with the aim of developing understanding in a different place or time, whether one thinks that one has to read more or suppress the hinderances first then I think what is going on is that one is accumulating ignorance, ie., the habit of ignoring the present moment. Taking advantage of your invitation to post more allow me to ramble a bit: K. Sujin has often reminded us not to "overreach", meaning to understand what one is able to, capable of. If in a particular situation one is able only to understand that there is a seeing or a hearing or a thinking or that this is just a kind of "nama", it is good enough. Lobha may condition a moving toward trying to analyze the nama into its different components and then one might try to label the experience in many words, but this is being stuck with words, surely a fetter. It would be very beneficial if one could for instance distinguish between lobha with ditthi and lobha without ditthi, it would in my opinion help to lessen wrong view and increase an appreciation of anatta, but if one does not recognize it instantaneously, I think it just means that sati is not sharp enough, so just let it go. Can we improve the conditions for sati to arise by embarking on a programme of FM? I think that for sati to arise at the level of being able to identify dhammas, there must be panna too. If at the outset one start with the wrong foot, ie. wrong view about what is going on, one will never reach the goal of 'right view'. There are many levels of panna, intellectual right understanding is a level of panna, and if this is all we have, its good enough. And it must be that way. We can't blindly believe and follow can we? Believing ones own line of reasoning is the same as believing another persons line of reasoning and both these have been advised against in the Kalama Sutta. But after developing faith in the Buddha's teachings from realizing the practical application of some of it, I think we can say that it is better to consult Him before deciding to do anything or thinking that we have correct judgement, no?! Hence one reason for studying. But a more important reason I think is that we are so heavily conditioned by all the akusala that we have performed, that we need to be reminded again and again, the power of sati and panna still being very weak. But all this is very conventional talk, it can condition more thinking 'about'. Better be reminded about Dan's post to study dhammas now, this is the best way to study Dhamma. So I think what you are doing is very good, better than me at least, I don't have the capability and energy- meaning accumulated parami, to do as you do, reading, questioning and being so open-minded. Which means that you don't need this letter, but I need feedback from you. Best wishes, Sukin. -----Original Message----- From: christine_forsyth [mailto:cforsyth@v...] Sent: Tuesday, May 07, 2002 9:48 PM To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [dsg] Right Concentration - Rob Ep - beware/incredibly long Dear Sukin, Thank you for this post. I know very well how frustrating it can be trying to find 'what works' for us individually regarding Dhamma study and practice. Whatever you are doing is working for you and helping me :). The *way* you say things always makes sense to me. I mostly gain some insight from each of your posts - I just wish you would post more often:). My particularly difficulty has been that I study, ask questions, understand the clear explanations - and, then, a few weeks or a month later find myself asking the same questions - not remembering the previous exchange. Eventually it is understood and imprinted on memory - how wonderful it would be to 'know' something the first time - and much more time efficient. :) (I think Dan in his post, is giving me good points regarding studying books and studying realities. And Sarah, you also tried to, a couple of weeks back, and I'm 'almost' hearing you now. :)) Perhaps a test of whether meditation (or dhamma study as well) has *worked* for the individual is, as you say, whether the person has been changed for the better by it. metta, Chris --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "Sukinder" wrote: > Dear Christine, > Judging from my experience with FM this lifetime I am inclined to > conclude that I have never done it in a previous lifetime. Never enjoyed > even one session, eventhough in a span of 5 months I went ahead > and attended two 10 day retreats with the idea that FM would lead > me out of confusion. On the other hand I am not much of a scholar > either, as you know I have a very short attention span and become > quite impatient with written words that I don't immediately comprehend. > However I have noted that there are times when I read a good post > or some sutta reference and while I'm doing that there is much calm > and clarity of mind. Also sati arises when in normal everyday activity, > I am reminded of some aspect of the teaching relevant to the particular > situation. > > In my opinion ( I await and expect to be corrected, since its not well > thought out ) the relevance of theoretical study is when it is understood > not as applying to anybody else, but to oneself, better still when the > theory is applied to the present situation. Otherwise if it is done with > the idea of accumulating, then like Anders has pointed out, it would > be a fetter and must be seen for what it is. Once seen for what it is, > it is automatically discarded, no one to do the discarding. But "RightView" > I believe has a positive and beneficial influence of its own, even when it > is still just theory. Why? because it at least replaces "Wrong theoretical > View" and there is always a chance that with the right guidance it can > be applied to the present moment. Also for a long time I have been with > the opinion that people who meditate and who show some degree of wisdom, > probably do a lot of study as well. And their particular insights may not > be connected to their practice as they think it does, but perhaps to the > study they have done. There are as you know, like hens sitting on their > eggs, people who have meditated for years and years with the very same > competent teachers the former claim to have, who may have acquired the > habit and ability to supress their coarse kilesas, but who once you start > to talk to them, you can see that they lack real panna. > Waiting to be corrected and criticized, or ignored :-) > Best wishes, > Sukin. > 13153 From: robertkirkpatrick.rm Date: Wed May 8, 2002 6:54am Subject: Re: [dsg] Ultimate realities --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., TGrand458@a... wrote: > Hi Robert > > Conditioning states are the conditions for conditioned states. Once a state > is conditioned, it becomes the conditioning state for ensuing conditioned > states. This dynamic cycle continues to propagate due to the interacting > qualities of the Four Great Elements (as I understand it.) In other words, > the conditions for paramattha dhammas are conditioning paramattha dhammas. > But I think what your question is trying to ask is what is the original > condition?, i.e., what is the origin of the universe? I'm not even working > on that problem at this time. LOL > ===================== Dear TG, What I was hinting at is that the fundamental elements (paramattha dhammas) are indeed not only conditioned but also conditioning states - (as you say). Impermanence, at least at one level, is an obvious feature of anything. We know seasons change and mountains erode, everyone dies. Everyone senses how feelings change. It is valuable and confirming of the truth to reflect on these matters. On the other hand, deep insights into anicca, conditionality and anatta only happen during advanced stages of vipassana. During those moments the actual characteristics of different dhammas are seen clearly. But before that there must be much study of the characteristics of dhammas - and it is not so clear in the beginning. The theorectical understanding and consideration of anatta and paticcasamuppada helps to remove wrong view and wrong practice at a certain level but if there is no insighting of actual paramattha dhammas(fundamental elements) then whatever we are doing, right or wrong, is still at the level of thinking. That is why the texts are at great pains to explain what is paramattha and what is pannati (concept). It is not especially exciting to repeatedly study (directly) the different dhammas that are appearing, but I believe this is the right way. I think that studying the different dhammas - along with wise reflection about anatta etc - does confirm the truth of them. But doubts aren't fully eradicated until enlightenment. BTW the 4 great elements are conditioning factors but there are many more including those dhammas that are claasified as nama (mentality). THe Dhammapada pradipaya (see p457 of carter) says "to consider the coming into being of rupa on account of ignorance, craving, kamma and nutrition, and also to see the mere characteristics of its instantaneous coming into being, without looking for causative aspect; thus one should consider the rise of rupa in five ways. Likewise to consider the rise of the other 4 khandas in the same way...Thus the rise of the pancakkhanda (five aggregates )is seen in 25 ways. To see that the rise of the khandas is stopped by abolishing the causes:ignorance, craving, kamma and nutrition..in this way the cessation of the agregates should be seen" end quote best wishes robert 13154 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Wed May 8, 2002 7:44am Subject: RE: [dsg] Iddhi Dear Wynn & Sarah: I am snipping a passage from: http://www.dhammastudy.com/paramat7.html I echo Sarah's request that as soon as you can walk through doors, or from one becomes many, do let us know immediately! kom The citta able to develop samatha-bhavana until it is so peaceful from all akusala-dhamma as to attain arupa-jhana is a powerful citta, with the potential to be trained to achieve specific purposes such as to recall former lives, to will clairvoyance to be able to see things in the distance or hidden, to will extrasensory hearing of sounds near and far, to perform miracles such as to walk on water, to travel underground, to fly through the air, to make things materialize etc. But those who are able to develop each specific supernatural qualities must be superbly proficient in all the kasina and the 8 samapatti (the 4 rupa-jhana according to the catuttha-naya and the 4 arupa-jhana) and must train the citta in the following 14 manners (Visuddhimagga Samadhiniddesa Itthividdhaniddesa): 1. kasinanulomato achieving jhana in the right order of kasina; 2. kasinapatilomato achieving jhana in the reverse order of kasina; 3. kasinanulomapatilomato achieving jhana in the right then the reverse order of kasina; 4. jhananulomato achieving jhana in respective order, from the pathama-jhana to the nevasannanasannayatana-jhana; 5. jhanapatilomato achieving jhana in the reverse order of jhana from the nevasannanasannayatana-jhana to the pathama-jhana; 6. jhananulomapatilomato achieving jhana in the right then the reverse order of jhana; 7. jhananukkantakato achieving jhana by skipping levels of jhana but not those of kasina; 8. kasinukkantakato achieving jhana by skipping levels of kasina but not those of jhana; 9. jhanakasinukkantakato achieving jhana by skipping levels of jhana and those of kasina; 10. ankhasankantito achieving jhana transcending the principal elements of jhana; 11. arammanasankantito achieving jhana transcending arammana; 12. ankharammanasankantito achieving jhana transcending both principal elements of jhana and arammana; 13. ankhavavatthapanato achieving jhana by designating the principal elements of jhana; 14. arammanavavatthapanato achieving jhana by designating the arammana of the specific jhana. Any action or conduct that resembles supernatural qualities is not real when the causes do not qualify for the result. A passage in the Visuddhimagga says that it is not possible for the beginner of samatha-bhavana practice, who has not yet trained the citta in these 14 manners, to accomplish these supernatural powers. Of those who practice parikamma-kasina or begin to practice samatha-bhavana, only one in a hundred or a thousand would be able to succeed. Of those who achieved samatha-bhavana or parikamma-kasina, only one in a hundred or a thousand would be able to achieve uggaha-nimitta. And of those who had achieved uggaha-nimitta, only one in a hundred or a thousand would be able to maintain the nimitta and support the citta to be increasingly steadfast until the patibhaga-nimitta arises and the attainment of appana-samadhi. Of those who attained the 8 samapatti, only one in a hundred or a thousand would be able to train the citta in these 14 manners. Of those who train the citta in these 14 manners only one in a hundred or a thousand would be able to perform miracles and of those who can perform miracles only one in a hundred or a thousand would be able to do so instantaneously. > -----Original Message----- > From: Sarah [mailto:sarahdhhk@y...] > > Recently, a friend ask how to develop > supernatural powers. So, I thought > > of > > telling him how. But I am not sure whether one > needs to have only the > > four > > jhanas or all the 8 jhanas. > > (He asked me jokingly, so I thought of giving > him a reply - jokingly > > also, > > of coz) 13155 From: wynn Date: Wed May 8, 2002 8:32am Subject: Re: [dsg] Iddhi Hi Kom, That is what I understand by reading the Visuddhimagga. So, your conclusion is that we need all the jhanas (rupa and arupa) right? Thanks, Wynn 13156 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Wed May 8, 2002 8:39am Subject: RE: [dsg] Iddhi Yes, both rupa and arupa are my readings as well. The confusing part is the 4th rupa jhana (5th, if counting in the 5 ways), is the foundation of iddhi, i.e., it must be accessed before "making a wish", but all the 8 jhanas must be achieved (and incredibly skilled) before the access for the specific purpose is possible. kom > -----Original Message----- > From: wynn [mailto:wewynal@t...] > Sent: Wednesday, May 08, 2002 8:32 AM > To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com > Subject: Re: [dsg] Iddhi > > > Hi Kom, > > That is what I understand by reading the Visuddhimagga. > So, your conclusion is that we need all the > jhanas (rupa and arupa) right? > > Thanks, > Wynn 13157 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Wed May 8, 2002 2:44pm Subject: RE: [dsg] satipatthana/Kom Rob E --- Robert Epstein wrote: > > --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > > > > The Satipatthana Sutta itself gives a detailed explanation of the things that > > comprise > > dhammanupassana. It says (quoting from the translation in 'The Way of > > Mindfulness', > > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/bps/misc/wayof.html): > > > > "And how, O bhikkhus, does a bhikkhu live contemplating mental objects in mental > > objects? > > > > "Here, O bhikkhus, a bhikkhu lives contemplating the mental objects in the > > mental objects > > of the five hindrances, … of the five aggregates of clinging, … of the six > > internal and > > the six external sense-bases, … of the seven factors of enlightenment, … of the > > Four > > Noble Truths." > > > > According to my reading of the texts, these sets are all references to > > paramattha > > dhammas, not concepts. > > > > The commentary to the sutta (same translation) relates each of the 4 foundations > > of > > mindfulness to corresponding dhammas comprising the 5 aggregates (khandhas): > > > > "Further, … in the contemplation on the body, the laying hold of the aggregate > > of > > corporeality or materiality [J: rupa-khandha] was spoken of by the Master; > > "in the contemplation on feeling, the laying hold of the aggregate of feeling > > [J: > > vedana-khandha]; > > "in the contemplation on mind, the laying hold of the aggregate of consciousness > > [J: > > vinnana-khandha]; > > "and now [i.e. in the contemplation on mental objects] … the laying hold of the > > aggregates of perception and formations [J: sanna-khandha, sankhara-khandha], > > Can someone explain to me, please, how 'corporeality', 'materiality', 'feeling', > etc., are not concepts? I can understand that a particular experience of > corporeality, such as hardness or smoothness, would be a primary reality, and that > a particular feeling as well, but it seems to me that these general terms that we > are given to contemplate are general categories that are being referrred to, in > other words: concepts. I don't think it's correct to say that the Satipatthana Sutta gives us general term to contemplate. What it does is to set out the potential scope of the object of satipatthana, namely, all dhammas, and to make it clear that satipatthana is to be developed in relation to any presently-arising dhamma, regardless of time, place or circumstances. When it talks about corporeality/materiality (rupa) or feeling (vedana), it refers to the rupa or vedana of the present moment, a presently arising reality. If there is no such presently arising reality, then it is not to be contemplated i.e., it is not at that moment a potential object of awareness. Whenever one talks about realties one has to make conceptual references, but conceptual references may point to dhammas or they may point to concepts, depending on the intended meaning of the speaker. > If they are concepts, then concepts are included in the objects of contemplation; > if they are not concepts, I would like to have an explanation as to how these can > be directly perceived in the way that primary realities must be: directly in an > actual moment. Paramatha Dhammas must have their own characteristic. But > 'corporeality' *is* a characteristic, not an object. It is a category or a > quality that attends rupas, but it is not a rupa itself. Neither it is an actual > mental event that takes place, so I don't think it can be a nama. In other words, > corporeality as a category of the khandas can only be a concept until filled in > with a specific example which has it as its characteristic. It will never be the > rupa itself, it is the example that has the characteristic that is the rupa. So > it will always be a concept as far as I can see. Yet it is an object of > satipatthana along with the other kandhas? I see the distinction you are making between corporeality (a quality pertaining to something) and rupa (a something), but I don't see that distinction as being intended by the passage on question. The terms 'rupa' and 'corporeality' tend to be used interchangeably in the translations. 'Nama-rupa' is often translated as 'mentality-materiality'. I hope this helps. Jon 13158 From: portsofspeech Date: Wed May 8, 2002 4:05pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Mind > You ask if there's a difference between the Thai (forest) schools and the > Burmese/Sri Lankan schools in the interpretation of the teachings on the mind. > > This is an interesting question, but I think more interesting still is the > question of which is the (more) correct interpretation. I say this because, > presumably, we are really only interested in the interpretation that accords > with the original teachings, as best we can ascertain them. > Right. > For this, we need not actually think in terms of Thai, Burmese or whatever, > since there may be correct interpretations to be found somewhere in more than > one tradition. But it is essential to have some familiarity with the original > texts oneself, otherwise there is really no way to answer the question. > Right. But I plan to, in the future, ordain and I know there are some Theravada groups like the Dhammakaya in Thailand who are, by and large, considered to be false teaching. I want to be sure that I don't get into any of those groups, and I've noticed significant differences in the way the various Theravada schools describe the mind. Thanks 13159 From: Date: Wed May 8, 2002 5:25pm Subject: ADL ch. 7 (3) http://www.budsas.org/ebud/nina-abhidhamma/nina-abhi-00.htm Abhidhamma In Daily Life Chapter 7 (3) People in the Buddha's time too were speculating about things which do not lead to the goal of the teachings. They were wondering whether the world is finite or infinite, whether the world is eternal or not eternal, whether the Tathagata (the Buddha) exists after his parinibbana or not. We read in the 'Lesser Discourse to Malunkya (Middle Length Sayings II, no. 63) that Malunkyaputta was displeased that the Buddha did not give explanations with regard to speculative views. He wanted to question the Buddha on these views and if the Buddha should not give him an explanation with regard to these views he would leave the order. He spoke to the Buddha about this matter and the Buddha asked him whether he had ever said to Malunkyaputta: Come you, Malunkyaputta, fare the Brahma-faring under me and I will explain to you either that the world is eternal or that the world is not eternal... or that the Tathagata is... is not after dying... both is and is not after dying... neither is nor is not after dying? We read that Malunkyaputta answered: 'No, revered Sir.'; The Buddha also asked him whether he (Maunkyaputta) had said that he would 'fare the Brahma-faring' under the Lord if the Lord should give him an explanation with regard to these views and again Maunkyaputta answered: 'No, revered sir.' The Buddha then compared his situation with the case of a man who is pierced by a poisoned arrow and who will not draw out the arrow until he knows whether the man who pierced him is a noble, a brahman, a merchant or a worker; until he knows the name of the man and his clan; until he knows his outward appearance; until he knows about the bow, the bowstring, the material of the shaft, the kind of arrow. However, he will pass away before he knows all this. It is the same with the person who only wants to 'fare the Braham-faring' under the Lord if explanations with regard to speculative views are given to him. We read that the Buddha said: 'The living of the Brahma-faring, Malunkyaputta, could not be said to depend on the view that the world is eternal. Nor could the living of the Brahma-faring, Malunkyaputta, be said to depend on the view that the world is not eternal. Whether there is the view that the world is eternal or whether there is the view that the world is not eternal, there is birth, there is aging, there is dying, there are grief, sorrow, suffering, lamentation and despair, the destruction of which I lay down here and now.... Wherefore, Malunkyaputta, understand as not explained what has not been explained by me, and understand as explained what has been explained by me. And what, Malunkyaputta, has not been explained by me? That the world is eternal.. that the world is not eternal has not been explained by me.. And why, Malunkyaputta, has this not been explained by me? It is because it is not connected with the goal, it is not fundamental to the Brahma-faring, and does not conduce to turning away from, nor to dispassion, stopping, calming, super-knowledge, awakening, nor to nibbana. Therefore it has not been explained by me, Malunkyaputta. And what has been explained by me, Malunkyaputta? 'This is dukkha' has been explained by me, Malunkyaputta. 'This is the arising of dukkha' has been explained by me. 'This is the stopping of dukkha' has been explained by me. 'This is the course leading to the stopping of dukkha' has been explained by me. And why, Malunkyaputta, has this been explained by me? It is because it is connected with the goal, it is fundamental to the Brahma-faring, and conduces to turning away from, to dispassion, stopping, calming, super-knowledge, awakening and nibbana... ' Doubt cannot be cured by speculating about matters which do not lead to the goal; it can only be cured by being aware of the nama and rupa which present themselves now. Even when there is doubt it can be realized as only a type of nama arising because of conditions and not self. Thus the reality of the present moment will be known more clearly. 13160 From: rikpa21 Date: Wed May 8, 2002 7:59pm Subject: Re: Right Concentration - Rob Ep - beware/incredibly long --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "onco111" wrote: Hi Dan, > So, you want an instruction manual. It would make things easier, I > suppose. Then again, I can't imagine what one would look like because > Dhamma is not a path of "do this, do that -- the act of doing these > prescribed things will lead to understanding." I find this statement interesting in light of the fact that the entire basis of the Dhamma rests on the fact the all things arise in dependence on other factors. So to suggest otherwise is to directly contradict perhaps the most fundamental of all tenets of Buddhism: that all composed things come from other composed things (and those in turn from other composed things). That prescribed activities such as abandoning unskillful actions and taking up skillful actions (sammapadana--the Four Right Exertions), for example, do not help on the path to understanding! Not only does what you say carry the implication of denying Dependent Origination ("when this arises, that arises; when this ceases, that ceases"), but of kamma as well, since no "prescribed action" can possibly lead to understanding, and prescriptions to avoid evil, do good, and purify the mind have no effect whatsoever on understanding, that Right Understanding just happens--something akin to "spontaneous combustion" (am I getting warm here? :). > (Would it be clearer > to state that it is not a path of "do this [ritual], do that > [ritual] -- the act of doing these prescribed [rituals] will lead to > understanding"?) Reading the suttas with this understanding, it > becomes clear that the Buddha did not prescribe practices for > attaining wisdom. Right, "reading the suttas with that understanding" will lead to you find validation for that preconceived view, since it's possible to take any text and reinterpret it in light of one's own preconceptions. People have been doing this for a very long time indeed--even going so far as to use the Buddha's teachings to justify killing! All this demonstrates is that you can read pretty much anything into a text--any text--and find validation for what you already believe to be true. And that is precisely why formal practice is so vital, because without the experiential verification of the Dhamma (it is, after all, ehipassiko, sandittiko, akalika) that comes about as a result of deep meditation (where the mind is completely undistracted and one can clearly discern the arising and passing away of conditioned dhammas, and all the seven enlightenment factors are brought to their culmination), none of the words the Buddha spoke carry any meaning at all. At best, they are instructions on HOW one should most effectively act to get from suffering sentient being to freedom from suffering. The "Great Physician" did give prescriptions, Dan, and the medicine does work when taken properly. As an aside, all the "pure vipassana" teachers I've encountered here in Thailand in the Theravada tradition emphasize formal meditation, including sitting--especially sitting. The only place I've ever seen formal meditation questioned (or spoken of as not only unnecessary but detrimental!) is right here in DSG, and nowhere else in my limited studies of the Dhamma (even among the intellectual and scholarly giants that populate my own tradition's lineage--including masters of Abhidharma). Not that I'm against questioning orthodoxies. Far from it. Sacred cows really do make the best hamburger. However, the interpretation of the Dhamma you hammer on begs the question, since it's stated with such certainty. Is everyone who meditates formally with the aim of realizing the fruits of the Dhamma wrong? Are all the so-called masters of the various traditions, Theravada, Zen, Tibetan--all emphasizing the same things (formal meditation--samatha & vipassana)--all wet? Evam me suttam (Nava Sutta): "Even though this wish may occur to a monk who dwells without devoting himself to development -- 'O that my mind might be released from effluents through lack of clinging!' - - still his mind is not released from the effluents through lack of clinging. Why is that? From lack of developing, it should be said. Lack of developing what? The four frames of reference, the four right exertions, the four bases of power, the five faculties, the five strengths, the seven factors for Awakening, the noble eightfold path." What I see here 37 factors to be developed. Development is prescriptive, not descriptive. The above passage clearly refutes the idea that one can merely wish for the ending of the effluents, and that the ending of the effluents comes about through development (bhavana). In what way, Dan, does the above lend itself to a "descriptive" interptation? It would appear that saying the Buddha's teachings are purely "descriptive" is just another view, a bond, a fetter. > Even the vaunted "instruction manual" Satipatthana > sutta reads like a series of descriptions of what sorts of things > monks are doing [all sorts of things!] when satipatthana > arises: "There is the case where a monk..." sits crosslegged under a > tree, spine erect, etc. > In 1989 I went to Thailand for my second intensive meditation > retreat. After four weeks of rising at 4:00 a.m. and doing everything > at a snail's pace (when not sitting on my butt!) until 10:00 at > night, I was very happy about the progress and "insights" I had > developed. To preserve the gains afterward, I maintained a daily > practice of sitting and walking ritual (er, "meditation") religiously > for 1-1.5 hours per day. "Oh, this is not enough!" I thought. I found that an hour of mantra recitation (a great support for samatha), followed by tummo yoga (ratcheting up the piti and passadhi factors) preceding anapanasati meditation every day, without fail, was more than sufficient as a formal practice. In fact, many teachers recommend not sitting formally for more than an hour per day. That damned lute-string! But that daily practice did more for my progress and understanding of the Dharma than anything else. Until I began the formal practice of meditation under the right teachers for me, the Dharma was just a bunch of pleasant sounding theory. It was only after engaging in formal practice under the guidance of my teachers that the Dharma came alive for me. > I had > so much faith in the efficacy of the ritual that I wanted to > maintain "unbroken awareness" all day long. I believe I asked for your definition of "ritual" before, Dan, but you never provided me with one. It appears from what you're saying that there is some confusion on the definition of "ritual". The ritual to be avoided is the rityual of mere outer "rites and observances". Buddhism as a whole is filled with wholesome ritual. Chanting, prostrations, etc., all rituals, are practiced regularly in all the wats I've been to, by all the teachers I've studied under, for example. > At that time I was > working on an agricultural development project in Guatemala, and I > needed to do some work in the fields. I found it difficult to > maintain constant awareness, so I carried a little travel alarm clock > in my pocket and set the alarm to go off when I started work... > > "Beep, beep, beep." > "Oh, time to establish sati." Push the snooze button. Five minutes > later: > > "Beep, beep, beep." > "Oh, yeah, time to establish sati again." > > "Beep, beep, beep"... > > And on through the day. Sheer madness! I so craved the peaceful > feelings and special experiences of the intensive meditation that I > did everything I could to cling to them continously under the guise > of "practicing Vipassana in everyday life." It appears as though you've identified the source of your troubles as the clinging to experiences, which is good. But it also appears you've tossed the baby out with the bathwater. Regardless, I find the idea of a "sati" beeper an excellent one! I'll have to find a watch that beeps me every twenty minutes or so as a reminder to maintain appropriate attention. > Understanding does not arise from ritual or from a recipe book. Just like a meal doesn't arise from a recipe book. It takes the appropriate ingredients, cooked according to the recipe, to wind up with a satisfying meal. > You cannot force it to arise. No, but you can dramatically increase the odds by practicing appropriately--and this typically requires the guidance of those signinficantly more experienced than oneself. If it's the peak experience of Nibbana we're looking for, the Buddha, in the "Himavanta Sutta", provides some useful prescriptions: "Monks, it is in dependence on the Himalayas, the king of mountains, that serpents (nagas) grow in body and gain in strength. Having grown in body and gained strength there, they descend to the small lakes. Having descended to the small lakes, they descend to the large lakes... the small rivers... the large rivers... to the great ocean. There they attain greatness & prosperity in terms of the body. "In the same way, it is in dependence on virtue, established on virtue, having developed & pursued the seven factors of Awakening, that a monk attains to greatness & prosperity in terms of mental qualities. And how is it that a monk -- in dependence on virtue, established on virtue, having developed & pursued the seven factors for Awakening -- attains to greatness & prosperity in terms of mental qualities? "There is the case where a monk develops mindfulness as a factor for Awakening dependent on seclusion, dependent on dispassion, dependent on cessation, resulting in relinquishment. He develops analysis of qualities as a factor for Awakening...persistence as a factor for Awakening...rapture as a factor for Awakening...serenity as a factor for Awakening...concentration as a factor for Awakening...equanimity as a factor for Awakening dependent on seclusion, dependent on dispassion, dependent on cessation, resulting in relinquishment. This is how a monk -- in dependence on virtue, established on virtue, having developed & pursued the seven factors for Awakening -- attains to greatness & prosperity in terms of mental qualities." Here's one dictionary definition for "descriptive": "Involving or characterized by description; serving to describe." Here's one of the definitions for "prescriptive": "Making or giving injunctions, directions, laws, or rules." Based on the definitions of the terms, is "there is the case where a monk develops..." descriptive or prescriptive? Does it describe what already is (descriptive)? or does it prescribe (sorry, can't avoid using the word here) a course of action to be taken? > Even now there arises craving for a way to say, "Here's what to > do..." But the attempts to say such a thing never get off the ground, > and the thoughts turn to description of the arising and passing away > of dhammas -- there's no other way. "There's no other way" Dan? "A person who associates himself with certain views, considering them as best and making them supreme in the world, he says, because of that, that all other views are inferior; therefore he is not free from contention (with others)": http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/khuddaka/suttanipata/snp4- 05a.html > I think if you read the suttas > with this in mind, you will see that this is also the Buddha's > approach to teaching, viz. description rather than prescription. If you read the Suttas with any bias you can manufacture support for that bias pretty easily. That goes for just about any text. > Ritual can be so comforting... It takes great confidence in the > Buddha and his Dhamma to abandon clinging to ritual. And views even moreso than ritual. > We must > understand his descriptions of reality and the arising and experience > of panya and witness them in everyday life. > > How? There is no "how." Since you claim there's no how, why are you bothering to tell us? It seems a rather monumental waste of time to talk about Nibbana and freedom from suffering if there isn't any way, no "how", to realize it. Of course you're free to leave the medicine on the shelf and admire the bottle if that's what you truly believe. There are others, though, who prefer to follow the Great Physician's prescriptions and use the medicine he perscribed to overcome their dis-ease. > Once we define a "how," there is a "who" that > does the "how." Until you're an arahant (if you aren't already one just here to pull our legs for the sake of turning the wheel of Dhamma, Dan :), there's always a "who" to work with. There may be moments where that "who" is abandoned on the way, and the fiction is seen for what it is. At least temporarily. But on returning to conventional reality afterward, that nasty latent (anusaya) sense of "I me mine" remains until arahatta-magga- nana. So why not work with that suffering sentient being (that has never, doesn't, and never will exist in the ultimate sense) skillfully? I have heard it's possible to use a thorn to remove a thorn, and it's necessary to use the imputed "self" to remove the view of self. > And born is a superstition about how the who induces > a "what" to arise via a how, when really there are just empty > phenomena rolling on. Indeed, that is all there are--empty phenomena rolling on. It doesn't mean that getting whacked in the kneecaps with a ball-peen hammer hurts any less, though--at least for those who aren't arahants! :) Cheers, Erik 13161 From: Date: Wed May 8, 2002 8:54pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Iddhi Hi Wynn, practicing the four brahma vihara is kind of majic in that it can affect others. Larry -------------- Wynn wrote: Hi Kom, That is what I understand by reading the Visuddhimagga. So, your conclusion is that we need all the jhanas (rupa and arupa) right? Thanks, Wynn 13162 From: Date: Wed May 8, 2002 9:35pm Subject: Re: [dsg] ADL ch. 7 (3) ADL: "And why, Malunkyaputta, has this not been explained by me? It is because it is not connected with the goal, it is not fundamental to the Brahma-faring, and does not conduce to turning away from, nor to dispassion, stopping, calming, super-knowledge, awakening, nor to nibbana." Dear Nina and dsg, Could you comment on the above quote, explaining the terms, their relationship and sequence? Below are some of my own ideas: 1. connected to the goal (pali?), [right view?] 2. Brahma-faring (brahmacariya), the holy life, entered for the purpose of attaining deliverance of mind, MN29, [right intention?] 3. turning away from, disenchantment, (nibbida), culminating stages of insight, Wisdom MN n.265, [right speech?] 4. dispassion (viraga), attainment of supramundane path, Wisdom MN n.265, [right action?] 5. stopping, cessation (niroda), ???, [right livelihood?] 6. calming, peace (upasama, santi), pacification of lobha, dosa, moha, MN 140.28, [right effort?] 7. super-knowledge, direct knowledge (abhinna), directly knowing anicca, dukkha, anatta, Wisdom MN n. 22, [right mindfulness?] 8. awakening (sambodhi), full understanding of 4 noble truths???, [right concentration?] 9. nibbana thanks, Larry 13163 From: Sarah Date: Wed May 8, 2002 10:58pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Right Concentration - Rob Ep - beware/incredibly long Hi Dan & Erik, Priceless;-))) Look forward to plenty more.....it’s just not as ‘colourful’ when you guys aren’t around. Please don’t run off too quickly this time. Sarah ..... Dan:> At that time I was > working on an agricultural development project in Guatemala, and I > needed to do some work in the fields. I found it difficult to > maintain constant awareness, so I carried a little travel alarm clock > in my pocket and set the alarm to go off when I started work... > > "Beep, beep, beep." > "Oh, time to establish sati." Push the snooze button. Five minutes > later: > > "Beep, beep, beep." > "Oh, yeah, time to establish sati again." > > "Beep, beep, beep"... > > And on through the day. Sheer madness! I so craved the peaceful > feelings and special experiences of the intensive meditation that I > did everything I could to cling to them continously under the guise > of "practicing Vipassana in everyday life." Erik:It appears as though you've identified the source of your troubles as the clinging to experiences, which is good. But it also appears you've tossed the baby out with the bathwater. Regardless, I find the idea of a "sati" beeper an excellent one! I'll have to find a watch that beeps me every twenty minutes or so as a reminder to maintain appropriate attention. ===================================================== 13164 From: Sarah Date: Wed May 8, 2002 11:14pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Ultimate realities Dear TG, All your comments and questions are really helpful and practical (as I see them): --- TGrand458@a... wrote: > I would be interested to know how "dhamma's," that are completely > dependent > on something else (Dependent Arising), are 'with its own > characteristic.' > How can something have "its own characteristic" if it doesn't have any > self > at all? ..... If we talk about seeing or hearing as examples,. we know they are dependent on many conditions such as eye base, visible object, contact and so on. Still, seeing has a characteristic -- of experiencing a visible object-- which is different from hearing and different from visible object itself. It also has the characterstic of ‘not self’ as well, common to all realities, and the characteristic of ‘nama’ which is different from ‘rupa’. By ‘own’ there is no suggestion of self, it merely reflects that seeing is different from any other reality. Furthermore, this moment of seeing is different from the next moment of seeing and therefore has its ‘own’ or ‘unique’ characteristic too. ..... > > The way I see it...it is "something else's characteristic" that is > responsible for arisen states/dhammas. But that "something else" had > something else responsible for "its" characteristic, and so on and so on > > indefinitely. ..... Well, this is true. All conditioned phenomena are conditioned by other states/dhammas as you say. Just because ‘seeing’ depends on other factors, does not mean it doesn’t *exist* at the moment of arising, with its particular sabhava or set of characteristics. ..... > I have a hard time imagining how a mind can consider something an > "ultimate > reality" and not thereby see it as substantial. ..... If it’s just by thinking or considering then it’s not direct understanding. At a moment of awareness (with wisdom) however, there is no idea of substance or self. If sati is aware of seeing or hearing, the *reality* is apparent regardless of any term. ..... > Howard used the term phantoms. This I think is good. After > object-states > are broken down into fundamental elements...these elements need to be > further > broken down by principles (dependent arising, impermanence, > unsatisfactory, > no-self). And then these elements are not seen as "ultimate realities," > but > are more likely seen as phantoms. (I am only considering conditioned > phenomena here.) ..... When there is awareness of the *realities*, I don’t think there is any concern about breaking them down or seeing them as phantoms or even as *ultimate* as these all rather suggest thinking only. When seeing is the object of awareness, just the characteristic or *nature* of the particular kind of experiencing is known and so on. ..... In another post you wrote: > >A dhamma cannot be changed into something other than what it is > > right now, but it lasts for an infinitely brief instant only, no > > matter we want it to stay or go. > > This statement, if I'm understanding it at all, seems to indicate that > "dhamma" is a thing...that can't be changed? It sounds like it > says...that > something is a self for a infinitely brief time and then it is gone. > This > kind of of approach to dhamma is exactly what I fear the term "Ultimate > Reality" inculcates. Yes, I believe the term is important. ..... Again, let’s call the dhamma seeing or hearing for now. Seeing that sees at this moment can never be changed into hearing. The seeing has to fall away completely before there can be hearing or any other kind of experiencing.Hence we read so often about the great speed of cittas (consciousness).which experience different objects. Just because seeing is so brief and cannot be any other dhamma by the conditions that brought it ‘to be’, doesn’t mean it is anything other (or more) than a particular kind of element when it arises. By using the term ‘paramattha’ or ‘ultimate’ or ‘absolute’ to refer to a reality, the point being stressed is that it is a reality which is actually experienced and ‘to be known’ as opposed to an idea or concept. It is not the term itself that is of any importance, merely the understanding of these phenomena to which it is pointing. Just a few ideas, but I’m not sure if they help at all. In any case, I’m appreciating all of yours. Sarah ===== 13165 From: Date: Wed May 8, 2002 10:39pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: 4 Ultimate Realities? (Sarah) Hi Sarah. I put the question mark back in the title. ;-) I understand your points and I thank you for them. I just wanted to comment on one point you made suggesting that seeing things as phantoms would in essence be counter-productive. (I deleted the e-mail accidentally.) I think you were pointing out that it is another concept to get in the way of seeing things directly. I began this topic by quoting the Samyutta Nikaya and this is how the Buddha recommended seeing "realities"... Form -- should be seen as -- A Lump of Foam Feeling -- should be seen as -- A Bursting Bubble Perception -- should be seen as -- A Mirage Mental Formations -- should be seen as -- A Plaintain Tree (coreless) Consciousness -- should be seen as -- A Conjurors Trick The way I see it, 'phantoms' fits in pretty well. Perhaps the Buddha saw that certain concepts and even imaginations (based on principles of dependent arising, impermanence, unsatisfactoriness, and no-self) could be used to help free the mind from attachment. Take care. TG 13166 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Wed May 8, 2002 10:47pm Subject: RE: [dsg] Re: Right Concentration - Rob Ep - beware/incredibly long Dear Dan, > -----Original Message----- > From: onco111 [mailto:dalthorp@o...] > > Dan: This "unbroken mindfulness" sounds very > peculiar to me. Yes, > I've heard it said many times before and have > even been deluded into > thinking I've experienced it at times. But even > when the mind is numb > to it, always there is sense consciousness, investigating > consciousness, five-door adverting consciousness, > mind-door adverting > consciousness intervening -- and sati in none of > these. This is there > to be observed in practice, in FM, in daily life, > in study but it > does require seeing to see. Sati cannot be Thank you for this important reminder. Only an arahant has virtually perfect awareness (awareness in most javanas). And even that, in some javanas, there is no sati (hasitupada citta). We don't have perfect awareness in javanas because there is no condition to have them. kom 13167 From: Deanna Shakti Johnson Date: Thu May 9, 2002 4:10am Subject: nibbana - conditioned? Dear All, I want to thank everyone for their very interesting and thought provoking posts. I have been learning alot. Happily I just received numerous books including Abhidhamma in Daily Life and I am trying to work my way thru them. I hope to be able to share more in the discussions. I do have a question - why is nibbana not a conditioned dhamma? If right understanding of dhamma is necessary along with right effort and mindfulness how is it possible that enlightenment is not dependant on anything? I'm confused. Anyone care to shed some light on this for me? Shakti Hi Robert, The "fundamental elements" I am referring to are the "conditioned paramattha dhammas." A nice listing of them is found near the beginning of the Patisambhidamagga (Path of Discrimination) where they are broken down into 201 states (dhammas). This is the "object-field" upon which insight is cultivated. Dependent arising, impermanence, unsatisfactoriness, and no-self insight should be applied to these states. I have found the Patisambhidamagga and the Visuddhimagga to be very valuable assistants in helping to understand how the Suttas are directing to "break down delusion." (Not that much has been broken down mind you.) This passage of Howard's is awesome... >>>It seems to me that if, in trying to see the impersonality of all dhammas, an essential enterprise (!), one is led to a belief in ultimate dhammas with own-being, then one has traded one aspect of atta-view for another. It also seems to me that a mere intellectual understanding of the truth that all dhammas other than nibbana arise in dependence on causes and conditions still misses a full understanding of anatta. <<< 13168 From: Date: Thu May 9, 2002 1:32am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: 4 Ultimate Realities? (Sarah) Hi, TG (and Sarah) - In a message dated 5/9/02 5:40:04 AM Eastern Daylight Time, TGrand458@a... writes: > > Hi Sarah. > > I put the question mark back in the title. ;-) I understand your points > and > I thank you for them. > > I just wanted to comment on one point you made suggesting that seeing > things > as phantoms would in essence be counter-productive. (I deleted the e-mail > accidentally.) I think you were pointing out that it is another concept to > > get in the way of seeing things directly. > > I began this topic by quoting the Samyutta Nikaya and this is how the > Buddha > recommended seeing "realities"... > > Form -- should be seen as -- A Lump of Foam > Feeling -- should be seen as -- A Bursting Bubble > Perception -- should be seen as -- A Mirage > Mental Formations -- should be seen as -- A Plaintain Tree (coreless) > Consciousness -- should be seen as -- A Conjurors Trick > > The way I see it, 'phantoms' fits in pretty well. Perhaps the Buddha saw > that certain concepts and even imaginations (based on principles of > dependent > arising, impermanence, unsatisfactoriness, and no-self) could be used to > help > free the mind from attachment. > > Take care. TG > ========================== As will be no surprise, I completely concur. As I see it, there are (at least) two aspects to coming out from ignorance. One of these is seeing that our ordinary world of experience is, overwhelmingly, concept-only, mind-constructed, and having only concensual reality. The other of these is that what is directly experienced, independent of the mind's conceptual-construction processes, is a gapless stream of impersonal, fleeting, conditioned, interdependent elements of experience no one of which exists at all in-and-of-itself. It seems to me that the noble eightfold path of the Buddha, centered on mindfulness practice as outlined in such teachings as the Satipatthana Sutta and the Anapanasati Sutta, serves to foster both of these, with the awareness of the emptiness of conceptual dhammas and the awareness of the emptiness of paramattha dhammas both flowering forth from the very same practice. With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 13169 From: zipdrive14850 Date: Thu May 9, 2002 5:54am Subject: Re: Right Concentration [Erik -- "beep, beep, beep"] > you've tossed the baby out with the bathwater. Regardless, I find > the idea of a "sati" beeper an excellent one! I'll have to find a > watch that beeps me every twenty minutes or so as a reminder to > maintain appropriate attention. Wonderful, Erik! Let us know how it works out. Regarding your other excellent points, I will get back to them as time allows (it may be two or three days). 13170 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu May 9, 2002 9:55am Subject: Re: [dsg] moha op 08-05-2002 05:27 schreef LBIDD@w... op LBIDD@w...: > ADL: "There is no other way to eradicate doubt but by developing the > panna (wisdom) which sees realities as they are." > L: I thought perhaps moha is a little different from lobha and dosa. Seeing > lobha and dosa for what they are, arising and subsiding in the moment, > one can easily see they are not self, not me and not mine. But how do > you see delusion arise? How can light observe darkness? > > If we color this nonawareness with doubt then it can easily be seen to > arise and blossom as bewilderment and perplexity. This also is not self. > It does seem a little more difficult to observe, maybe because of its > dullness. Anyone else having trouble being clear about obscurity? Hallo Larry, It is difficult to know moha-mula-citta, especially the type without doubt. You find it is easy to see that lobha and dosa are not self, but is it that easy? In theory we know that lobha and dosa come and go and we may understand in theory that they are not self, but are they not all the time my lobha and my dosa? We may not even realize this and here we see the danger of ignorance and wrong view all of us have accumulated. As Robert recently explained, first the difference between nama and rupa have to be realized, and this is a long way. We read in the Suttas about the six worlds, what appears through the six doors, and it may be boring to be aware and study seeing now, visible object now, hearing now, sound now. but this is the only way to see them as only dhammas, not I or mine. As has been explained before, there are several stages of vipassana and we cannot forego any stage. Only when it has become clearer that whatever appears is just dhamma, and that nama dhamma is really different from rupa dhamma, which is realized at the first stage of insight knowledge, following stages can arise. At the fourth stage there is more detachment from the idea of self and this is necessary so that the arising and falling away of dhammas can be directly realized. Thus, we cannot expect to have clear understanding immediately of the nature of moha. We study the present moment, but do we know what the present reality is? It needs a lot of reading and considering before sati and panna can arise because of their own conditions. I very much appreciated Dan's recent posts. I would like to quote one part from it (hope he does not mind it is only part): end quote. Another eason why sati and panna seldom arise became recently clearer to me, since I started now to translate A. Sujin's book on the perfections, paramis, the book I referred to before. I quote: I shall come back later with my translation, little by little, in a very slow pace. As Dan said: so many, many opportunities to study the dhammas that appear, there is gain and loss, praise and blame. Speaking of loss: we go to funerals, but, as Sarah explained with a striking example: we may go in with tears and coming out with a smile because of all the Dhamma reminders. Nina. 13171 From: Date: Thu May 9, 2002 5:11pm Subject: ADL ch. 7 (4) http://www.budsas.org/ebud/nina-abhidhamma/nina-abhi-00.htm Abhidhamma In Daily Life Chapter 7(4) The second type of moha-mula-citta is accompanied by indifferent feeling, arising with restlessness (upekkha-sahagatam, uddhacca-sampayuttam) . Uddhacca is translated 'restlessness' or 'excitement'. Uddhacca arises with all akusala cittas. When there is uddhacca there is no sati (mindfulness) with the citta. Sati arises with each wholesome citta; it 'remembers' what is wholesome. There is sati not only in vipassana, but also when one performs dana (generosity) observes sila (morality), applies oneself to studying or teaching the Buddha's teachings or cultivates samatha. Sati in vipassana is aware of a characteristic of nama or rupa. When there is uddhacca, the citta cannot be wholesome; one cannot at that moment apply oneself to dana, sila or bhavana. Uddhacca distracts the citta from kusala. Uddhacca is restlessness with regard to kusala. Thus, uddhacca is different from what we in conventional language mean by restlessness. Uddhacca arises also with the moha-mula-citta which is accompanied by doubt, since it arises with each akusala citta. The second type of moha-mula-citta, however, is called uddhacca-sampayutta; it is different from the first type of moha-mula-citta which is called vicikiccha-sampayutta. The second type of moha-mula-citta, the moha-mula-citta which is uddhacca-sampayutta, arises countless times a day, but it is difficult to know its characteristic. If one has not cultivated vipassana one does not know this type of citta. When one is forgetful of realities and 'day-dreaming', there is not necessarily this type of citta. When we are 'day-dreaming' there is not only the second type of moha-mula-citta (uddhacca- sampayutta), but also lobha-mula-cittas (cittas rooted in attachment) or dosa-mula-cittas (cittas rooted in aversion). When one is forgetful of realities and the akusala citta is not rooted in lobha or dosa, and the citta is not accompanied by doubt, then there is the second type of moha-mula-citta accompanied by uddhacca. Moha-mula-citta can arise on account of what we experience through the five sense-doors and through the mind-door. When, for example, we have heard sound, moha-mula-citta may arise. When the second type of moha-mula-citta which is uddhacca-sampayutta arises, there is ignorance and forgetfulness with regard to the object which is experienced at that moment. We may not see the danger of this type of citta, since it is accompanied by indifferent feeling. However, all kinds of akusala are dangerous. Moha is dangerous, it is the root of all akusala. When we are ignorant of realities we accumulate a great deal of akusala. Moha conditions lobha; when we do not know realities as they are we become absorbed in the things we experience through the senses. Moha also conditions dosa; when we do not know realities we have aversion when we experience unpleasant things. Moha accompanies each akusala citta and it conditions all ten kinds of akusala kamma-patha which are accomplished through body, speech and mind. Only when there is mindfulness of the realities which appear through the six doors, the panna is developed which can eradicate moha. The sotapanna ('streamwinner', who has attained the first stage of enlightenment) has eradicated the type of moha-mula-citta which is accompanied by vicikiccha (doubt); he has no more doubts about paramattha dhammas, he knows the 'world in the ariyan sense'. He has no doubts about the Buddha, the Dhamma and the Sangha. He has no doubts about the Path leading to the end of defilements. The sotapanna, the sakadagami ('once-returner', who has attained the second stage of enlightenment) and the anagami ('non-returner', who has attained the third stage of enlightenment) still have the type of moha-mula-citta accompanied by uddhacca (restlessness). Only the arahat has eradicated all akusala. Ignorance is not seeing the true characteristic of realities, not knowing the 'four Noble Truths'. Out of ignorance one does not see the first Noble Truth, the Truth of dukkha : one does not realize nama and rupa as impermanent and dukkha. One does not know the second Noble Truth: the origin of dukkha which is craving. Because of clinging to nama and rupa there is no end to the cycle of birth and death and thus there is no end to dukkha. One does not know the Noble Truth of the 'ceasing of dukkha', which is nibbana. One does not know the Noble Truth of 'the way leading to the ceasing of dukkha' which is the Elghtfold Path. The 'Eightfold Path' is developed through vipassana. We read in the 'Kindred Sayings' (lV, Salayatana-vagga, Kindred Sayings about Jambukhadaka, par. 9) that the wanderer asked Sariputta: ' "Ignorance, ignorance!" is the saying, friend Sariputta. Pray, what is ignorance?' 'Not understanding about dukkha, friend, not understanding about the arising of dukkha, the ceasing of dukkha, the way leading to the ceasing of dukkha- - this, friend, is called "ignorance"' "But is there any way, friend, any approach to the abandoning of this ignorance? ' There is indeed a way, friend, to such abandoning.' ' And what, friend, is that way, that approach to the abandoning of this ignorance?' ' It is this ariyan Eightfold Path, friend... ' The ariyan Eightfold Path leads to the eradication of moha. Questions 1. What is ignorance? Why should it be eradicated? 2. How can it be eradicated? 3. When there is doubt (vicikiccha) about realities, is there moha as well? 4. On account of experiences through which doors can moha arise? 13172 From: Robert Epstein Date: Thu May 9, 2002 9:22pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: 4 Ultimate Realities? (Sarah) --- upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, TG (and Sarah) - > > In a message dated 5/9/02 5:40:04 AM Eastern Daylight Time, TGrand458@a... > writes: > > > > > > Hi Sarah. > > > > I put the question mark back in the title. ;-) I understand your points > > and > > I thank you for them. > > > > I just wanted to comment on one point you made suggesting that seeing > > things > > as phantoms would in essence be counter-productive. (I deleted the e-mail > > accidentally.) I think you were pointing out that it is another concept to > > > > get in the way of seeing things directly. > > > > I began this topic by quoting the Samyutta Nikaya and this is how the > > Buddha > > recommended seeing "realities"... > > > > Form -- should be seen as -- A Lump of Foam > > Feeling -- should be seen as -- A Bursting Bubble > > Perception -- should be seen as -- A Mirage > > Mental Formations -- should be seen as -- A Plaintain Tree (coreless) > > Consciousness -- should be seen as -- A Conjurors Trick > > > > The way I see it, 'phantoms' fits in pretty well. Perhaps the Buddha saw > > that certain concepts and even imaginations (based on principles of > > dependent > > arising, impermanence, unsatisfactoriness, and no-self) could be used to > > help > > free the mind from attachment. > > > > Take care. TG > > > ========================== > As will be no surprise, I completely concur. As I see it, there are > (at least) two aspects to coming out from ignorance. One of these is seeing > that our ordinary world of experience is, overwhelmingly, concept-only, > mind-constructed, and having only concensual reality. The other of these is > that what is directly experienced, independent of the mind's > conceptual-construction processes, is a gapless stream of impersonal, > fleeting, conditioned, interdependent elements of experience no one of which > exists at all in-and-of-itself. It seems to me that the noble eightfold path > of the Buddha, centered on mindfulness practice as outlined in such teachings > as the Satipatthana Sutta and the Anapanasati Sutta, serves to foster both of > these, with the awareness of the emptiness of conceptual dhammas and the > awareness of the emptiness of paramattha dhammas both flowering forth from > the very same practice. > > With metta, > Howard nicely put, Howard, and very helpful. robert ep 13173 From: Robert Epstein Date: Thu May 9, 2002 9:51pm Subject: RE: [dsg] satipatthana/Kom Dear Jon, I guess what this particular issue comes down to is whether the Buddha is saying to contemplate these characteristics of realities, or whether to contemplate specific namas and rupas in a given category, and just, as you say, indicating the areas within which the specific instances can be found. I also agree, and think it is an important point, that concepts as such can be pointing towards other concepts or be pointing towards realities, and that concepts that point to realities have a very special usefulness, even though they themselves do not have a real object. They are the only guide we have to direct us towards real objects, other than direct discernment itself. If the Sutta says "...takes hold of the aggregate of...", it is reasonable to say that the Buddha is saying to take an arising example of the aggregate as an object of discernment and see it for what it is. I'm just not sure from the language of the Sutta whether he is saying that or not. Best, Robert Ep. ================ --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > Rob E > > --- Robert Epstein wrote: > > > --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > > > > > > The Satipatthana Sutta itself gives a detailed explanation of the things > that > > > comprise > > > dhammanupassana. It says (quoting from the translation in 'The Way of > > > Mindfulness', > > > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/bps/misc/wayof.html): > > > > > > "And how, O bhikkhus, does a bhikkhu live contemplating mental objects in > mental > > > objects? > > > > > > "Here, O bhikkhus, a bhikkhu lives contemplating the mental objects in the > > > mental objects > > > of the five hindrances, … of the five aggregates of clinging, … of the six > > > internal and > > > the six external sense-bases, … of the seven factors of enlightenment, … of > the > > > Four > > > Noble Truths." > > > > > > According to my reading of the texts, these sets are all references to > > > paramattha > > > dhammas, not concepts. > > > > > > The commentary to the sutta (same translation) relates each of the 4 > foundations > > > of > > > mindfulness to corresponding dhammas comprising the 5 aggregates (khandhas): > > > > > > "Further, … in the contemplation on the body, the laying hold of the > aggregate > > > of > > > corporeality or materiality [J: rupa-khandha] was spoken of by the Master; > > > "in the contemplation on feeling, the laying hold of the aggregate of > feeling > > > [J: > > > vedana-khandha]; > > > "in the contemplation on mind, the laying hold of the aggregate of > consciousness > > > [J: > > > vinnana-khandha]; > > > "and now [i.e. in the contemplation on mental objects] … the laying hold of > the > > > aggregates of perception and formations [J: sanna-khandha, > sankhara-khandha], > > > > Can someone explain to me, please, how 'corporeality', 'materiality', > 'feeling', > > etc., are not concepts? I can understand that a particular experience of > > corporeality, such as hardness or smoothness, would be a primary reality, and > that > > a particular feeling as well, but it seems to me that these general terms that > we > > are given to contemplate are general categories that are being referrred to, > in > > other words: concepts. > > I don't think it's correct to say that the Satipatthana Sutta gives us general > term to > contemplate. What it does is to set out the potential scope of the object of > satipatthana, namely, all dhammas, and to make it clear that satipatthana is to > be > developed in relation to any presently-arising dhamma, regardless of time, place > or > circumstances. > > When it talks about corporeality/materiality (rupa) or feeling (vedana), it > refers to the > rupa or vedana of the present moment, a presently arising reality. If there is > no such > presently arising reality, then it is not to be contemplated i.e., it is not at > that > moment a potential object of awareness. > > Whenever one talks about realties one has to make conceptual references, but > conceptual > references may point to dhammas or they may point to concepts, depending on the > intended > meaning of the speaker. > > > If they are concepts, then concepts are included in the objects of > contemplation; > > if they are not concepts, I would like to have an explanation as to how these > can > > be directly perceived in the way that primary realities must be: directly in > an > > actual moment. Paramatha Dhammas must have their own characteristic. But > > 'corporeality' *is* a characteristic, not an object. It is a category or a > > quality that attends rupas, but it is not a rupa itself. Neither it is an > actual > > mental event that takes place, so I don't think it can be a nama. In other > words, > > corporeality as a category of the khandas can only be a concept until filled > in > > with a specific example which has it as its characteristic. It will never be > the > > rupa itself, it is the example that has the characteristic that is the rupa. > So > > it will always be a concept as far as I can see. Yet it is an object of > > satipatthana along with the other kandhas? > > I see the distinction you are making between corporeality (a quality pertaining > to > something) and rupa (a something), but I don't see that distinction as being > intended by > the passage on question. The terms 'rupa' and 'corporeality' tend to be used > interchangeably in the translations. 'Nama-rupa' is often translated as > 'mentality-materiality'. > > I hope this helps. > > Jon 13174 From: Sarah Date: Thu May 9, 2002 10:44pm Subject: Re: [dsg] ADL ch.6 (1-6) Dear Larry & All, I received a few off-list messages yesterday which reminded me of the following paragraph you recently posted from ADL: >THE CHARACTERISTIC OF DOSA 5. We would like to live in a world of harmony and unity among nations and we are disturbed when people commit acts of violence. We should consider what is the real cause of war and discord between people: it is the defilements which people have accumulated. When we have aversion we think that other people or unpleasant situations are the cause of our aversion. However, our accumulation of dosa is the real cause that aversion arises time and again. If we want to have less dosa we should know the characteristic of dosa and we should be aware of it when it arises. ***** I’d like to add one or two comments, a little late I know. Sometimes when we feel we’ve been ‘wronged’ or those dear to us have been ‘badly treated’, it’s particularly hard to really face up to the truth and be brave enough to see “our accumulation of dosa is the real cause...”. We find it so much more appealing to justify the aversion and say the other ‘didn’t understand me’, ‘misinterpreted my intentions’, ‘made the wrong choices’, ‘wasn’t fair’ and any other myriad of reasons. When it is a dear friend or family member, we then so easily say, ‘I don’t mind for myself, but when it’s x, y, or z, then it’s not tolerable’ and so on. Whatever the justifications for dosa, it never creates harmony and there is never any awareness when we’re looking for someone or something else to blame. This doesn’t mean people always treat us (or loved ones) well or fairly or that we should consider that they do. However, when we are objecting and finding ourselves and those we find ‘dear’ so important, we forget about metta, compassion and other noble qualities. We forget about conditions both for the others’ words and actions and also we forget about kamma and other factors which lead us (and our dear ones) to hear ,experience and interpret as we do. Recently there was some discussion about universal metta and extending the Brahma vihara “in all directions to all beings”. You (Larry) referred to how “the only real trick is in the ‘extending’ or ‘pervading’ aspect”. I’d like to suggest-- as some of us discussed at length before-- that anytime we’re with people, or talking to people like now on the internet, there is a good opportunity for metta (kindly wishing others well), for sympathetic joy (rejoicing in others’ good fortune), for compassion (sympathising without any sadness in others’ difficulties) and finally for equanimity (impartiality in its positive sense). If the Brahma viharas are not developed at these moments when there is the opportunity, just a very little at a time, then the highly developed Brahma viharas as jhana objects which are ‘universal’ or ‘all-pervading’ will certainly never be realized. For those who like steps and methods, I’d suggest that first there has to be the clear comprehension and honesty to recognise the attachment , aversion and ignorance when they arise for what they are, so they are not confused with these wholesome states. As Sukin expressed so clearly, “If one overlooks this moment with the aim of developing understanding in a different place or time, whether one thinks that one has to read more or suppress the hindrances first, then I think what is going on is that one is accumulating ignorance, ie,. the habit of ignoring the present moment.” ..... Lucy mentioned that when she reads the Vism it’s difficult to know where (or who) to start having metta for (and the other Brahama viharas). Can we not start --or rather can these noble qualities not start--whenever there are opportunities in daily life, such as now at the computer, in the shop, at the gym or in the office? Isn’t it just the clinging to oneself that hinders the consideration of others? Even if we’re disagreeing with others --such as here on the list-- or using discipline in our work or home, there can be metta and consideration. ***** The Buddha spoke these lines in Udana, 5-1, ‘Dear’ (Masefield trans) after King Pasenadi and Queen Mallika concluded that indeed there was no one dearer than themselves: ‘Having explored all quarters with the mind, one would simply not attain that dearer than the self in any place; thus is the self dear separately to others - therefore one desiring self should not harm another.’ ***** Even when it seems it is the friend or family member we find even dearer, in truth isn't it the self again that is dearest of all? With best wishes for metta and all other noble qualities. Sarah ======== 13175 From: christine_forsyth Date: Fri May 10, 2002 2:55am Subject: Re: [dsg] ADL ch.6 (1-6) Dear Sarah, (Larry) and All, Interesting post, Sarah. The real question for me, accepting that 'our accumulation of dosa is the real cause that aversion arises time and again,' is not blame or pointing the finger at a particular individual. In actual everday hands-on living of our lives, and while understanding that complex conditions bring about suffering - are we to ignore people being wronged, whether it is ourselves, dear ones, or even perfect strangers? Are we not to attempt to assist or protect (in a non-violent way) those we feel are being treated unfairly and suffering? Is there total moral neutrality? Should we speak out about perceived injustices, or should we just say 'It's their fruits of kamma' or 'Uh-huh hurt feelings.. shows lack of advancement in the practice yet, too much dosa,mana, clinging, or not enough ' ? Often, it is easier to preserve silence, than speak out and attract retribution, or risk losing valued friendships.... Non-action, like action, is an intentional choice. And if I don't act, when I could have acted, or if I choose one action instead of another, the results of that action or non-action are my kama-vipaka eventually? Does Buddhism encourage protection of those in need of protection, speaking out about injustices, social action? Does Buddhism have any equivalent of Reverend Marin Niemoellers "First They Came For".... "In Germany, the Nazis first came for the communists, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a communist. Then they came for the Jews, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Jew. Then the came for the trade unionists, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a trade unionist. Then they came for the Catholics, but I didn't speak up because I was a protestant. Then they came for me, and by that time there was no one left to speak for me." Seemingly a dramatic quote of course, compared to an ordinary person being treated unfairly in daily interactions, but it is talking about the importance of making a stand against wrong. Small daily happenings are miniature reflections of what happens on a larger scale nationally and internationally. When the harm being done (as in the categories above) is to a person who is a little different to the majority, or to whom the majority seem to be either opposed or indifferent, how easy it is to magnify their faults and minimise (or be unable to hear or see clearly) the role of those others doing wrong. How easy to look for the approval of the majority(more like us), and feel validated. So what is a Buddhist to do, to live in the world correctly and unselfishly, with loving-kindness, compassion, sympathetic joy, and equanimity regarding others? Watch our own mind states, and be aware when dosa arises. Is that all? Does this mean ignoring the suffering of others when it could be ameliorated or prevented? Extending or pervading metta, but taking no action? What do the Teachings say? metta, Christine --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Sarah wrote: > Dear Larry & All, > > I received a few off-list messages yesterday which reminded me of the > following paragraph you recently posted from ADL: > > >THE CHARACTERISTIC OF DOSA > > 5. We would like to live in a world of harmony and unity among nations > and we are disturbed when people commit acts of violence. We should > consider what is the real cause of war and discord between people: it is > the defilements which people have accumulated. When we have aversion we > think that other people or unpleasant situations are the cause of our > aversion. However, our accumulation of dosa is the real cause that > aversion arises time and again. If we want to have less dosa we should > know the characteristic of dosa and we should be aware of it when it > arises. > ***** > > I'd like to add one or two comments, a little late I know. > > Sometimes when we feel we've been `wronged' or those dear to us have been > `badly treated', it's particularly hard to really face up to the truth and > be brave enough to see "our accumulation of dosa is the real cause...". We > find it so much more appealing to justify the aversion and say the other > `didn't understand me', `misinterpreted my intentions', `made the wrong > choices', `wasn't fair' and any other myriad of reasons. When it is a dear > friend or family member, we then so easily say, `I don't mind for myself, > but when it's x, y, or z, then it's not tolerable' and so on. Whatever the > justifications for dosa, it never creates harmony and there is never any > awareness when we're looking for someone or something else to blame. > > This doesn't mean people always treat us (or loved ones) well or fairly or > that we should consider that they do. However, when we are objecting and > finding ourselves and those we find `dear' so important, we forget about > metta, compassion and other noble qualities. We forget about conditions > both for the others' words and actions and also we forget about kamma and > other factors which lead us (and our dear ones) to hear ,experience and > interpret as we do. > > Recently there was some discussion about universal metta and extending the > Brahma vihara "in all directions to all beings". You (Larry) referred to > how "the only real trick is in the `extending' or `pervading' aspect". > > I'd like to suggest-- as some of us discussed at length before-- that > anytime we're with people, or talking to people like now on the internet, > there is a good opportunity for metta (kindly wishing others well), for > sympathetic joy (rejoicing in others' good fortune), for compassion > (sympathising without any sadness in others' difficulties) and finally for > equanimity (impartiality in its positive sense). > > If the Brahma viharas are not developed at these moments when there is > the opportunity, just a very little at a time, then the highly developed > Brahma viharas as jhana objects which are `universal' or `all- pervading' > will certainly never be realized. For those who like steps and methods, > I'd suggest that first there has to be the clear comprehension and honesty > to recognise the attachment , aversion and ignorance when they arise for > what they are, so they are not confused with these wholesome states. > > As Sukin expressed so clearly, "If one overlooks this moment with the aim > of developing understanding in a different place or time, whether one > thinks that one has to read more or suppress the hindrances first, then I > think what is going on is that one is accumulating ignorance, ie,. the > habit of ignoring the present moment." > ..... > > Lucy mentioned that when she reads the Vism it's difficult to know where > (or who) to start having metta for (and the other Brahama viharas). Can we > not start --or rather can these noble qualities not start--whenever there > are opportunities in daily life, such as now at the computer, in the shop, > at the gym or in the office? Isn't it just the clinging to oneself that > hinders the consideration of others? Even if we're disagreeing with others > --such as here on the list-- or using discipline in our work or home, > there can be metta and consideration. > ***** > The Buddha spoke these lines in Udana, 5-1, `Dear' > (Masefield trans) after King Pasenadi and Queen Mallika concluded that > indeed there was no one dearer than themselves: > > `Having explored all quarters with the mind, one would simply not attain > that > dearer than the self in any place; thus is the self dear separately to > others > - therefore one desiring self should not harm another.' > ***** > Even when it seems it is the friend or family member we find even dearer, > in truth isn't it the self again that is dearest of all? > > With best wishes for metta and all other noble qualities. > > Sarah > ======== 13176 From: onco111 Date: Fri May 10, 2002 3:41am Subject: "ritual" [reply to Erik] Dear Erik et al., I looked up ritual in the dictionary, and I'm pretty much going by the dictionary definition. That definition uses "rite" quite a bit, so let's start there: rite -- 1. a formal ceremony or procedure prescribed or customary in religious or other solemn use. 2. a particular form of system of religious or ceremonial practice. [3 and 4 are specific to Christianity.] 5. any customary observance or practice. I suppose we also need to address the bugaboo word "religion" here. Clearly, it doesn't necessarily refer to something about "churches" or a blind belief in a traffic-directing creator God, although some people may well define their religion by these things. religion -- 1. a set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe,... 2. a specific fundamental set of beliefs and practices generally agreed upon by a number of persons or sects. [3, 4, 5 are not used in the above context and sense] 6. something a person believes in and follows devotedly. ritual -- 1a. an established procedure for a religious or other rite. b. a system of such rites. 2. observance of set forms in public worship. 3. a book of rites or ceremonies. 4. prescribed, established or ceremonial acts or features collectively. 5. any practice or pattern of behavior regularly performed in a set manner. These are generic, all-purpose definitions, and I need to be clear about how I understand the term "ritual." Let's go with: ritual -- a prescribed practice or procedure that a person believes in and follows devotedly, esp. one that pertains to a fundamental set of beliefs concerning the cause and nature of the universe. A few questions: 1. Did Buddha teach ritual as the means or vehicle to liberation? I don't think so. In fact, he taught that adherence to ritual was a fetter to broken. Thus, it would seem strange to read Satipatthana sutta as a list of prescribed practices [rituals]. "...a monk having gone to the forest, to the foot of a tree, or to an empty hut, sits down cross-legged, his body erect and his mindfulness alert. Just mindful he breates in..." -- this is a description, Erik. A prescription would read more like this: "...to establish mindfulness, you should go to the forest, sit down cross-legged, and practice noting the breath." There is a world of difference, and it is not at all subtle. An aside... My meditation teachers have been firm believers in practice, practice, practice and suspicious of book reading. Despite the admonitions about books, I snuck a peek at the Satipatthana sutta after one of my first intensive meditation retreats (must have been 1988 or 1989). I creeped into the library and found Nyanaponika's "Heart of Buddhist Meditation" and opened up to chapter 3 -- The Four Objects of Mindfulness. Nyanaponika discusses the Satipatthana sutta as 'instructions for practice.' I thought, "Cool! A little more detail about what my teachers have been talking about! A little more elaborate than the austere explanations my teachers gave, but basically the same..." Then I read the sutta itself: "...a monk having gone to the forest, to the foot of a tree, or to an empty hut, sits down cross-legged, his body erect and his mindfulness alert. Just mindful he breates in..." At first I was incredulous that anyone could read this as instructions because the clear sense was descriptive without any imperative sense of "do this." "Besides," I thought, "It looks like his mindfulness was already alert when he sat down." For a moment there was the thought that Nyanaponika and my teachers had to be misinterpreting the sutta because it didn't look at all like an instruction manual to me. But my faith in my teachers was stronger than my intuition that there was a mismatch between the text and their interpretation, so I accepted their interpretation ("They must have special insight into Pali and ancient Indian culture to be able to see that this sutta is an instruction manual") and ignored the sutta for many years because it was so difficult to square its plain meaning with the instruction manual interpretation. Besides, I had no idea where to go next or what to do if it wasn't an instruction manual. After being back at practice, practice, practice for a few more years, a teacher recommended studying the Satipatthana sutta as an instruction manual. I gave it a shot, but it was quite daunting. I found it hard enough to master the one or two techniques I'd been working so hard on for so many years. "Now I'm confronted with dozens more practices to do! Ai-yo! It can't be done!" 2. Are some rituals helpful in the development of panya, while others are not? I think rituals can be very beneficial in a number of ways, and that that is why they are so popular at the wats, churches, synagogues, mosques, meditation centers, etc. There is nothing wrong with mantra chanting, yoga, homage to "Buddha rupas", noting the rise and fall of the abdomen while sitting quietly, walking at a snail's pace, etc. Some of these practices were popular long before Buddha, some appeared at the same time, and some appeared only recently. They all yield benefits. Did Buddha offer nothing more than a rehashing of the ancient and ever-popular theme of perform-this-ritual-perfectly-and- you-will-be-saved? The Satipatthana sutta is not just a peculiar variant on that theme. It is a remarkable discourse on how the path of liberation is via satipatthana, not ritual. Satipatthana can arise in the most unusual, unritual-like moments -- like walking, eating, speaking, obeying the calls of nature, passing through a charnel ground, etc. Instead of being an exhortation to turn our every action into a ritual, Dhamma liberates us from the view that ritual is the means to salvation. Ritual can be quite edifying, but we must be on guard against false estimation of its function and purpose. ___________________ -> Dan: (Would it be clearer to state that it is not a path of "do this [ritual], do that [ritual] -- the act of doing these prescribed [rituals] will lead to understanding"?) Reading the suttas with this understanding, it becomes clear that the Buddha did not prescribe practices for attaining wisdom. -> Erik: Right, "reading the suttas with that understanding" will lead to you find validation for that preconceived view, since it's possible to take any text and reinterpret it in light of one's own preconceptions. ** Dan: Certainly, there is a strong tendency for people to wildly twist others' words to match their own preconceptions! [Is this tendency papañca?] But what I'm saying is that if you can open your mind to a different interpretation, you may just find that your own preconceptions may be shattered. At the very least, there is benefit in looking at things from different perspectives.** (I'm experimenting with notation: The "->" is for old stuff; the "**" is for new.) __________________________________ -> Erik (on FM): Evam me suttam (Nava Sutta): "Even though this wish may occur to a monk who dwells without devoting himself to development -- 'O that my mind might be released from effluents through lack of clinging!' -- still his mind is not released from the effluents through lack of clinging. Why is that? From lack of developing, it should be said. Lack of developing what? The four frames of reference, the four right exertions, the four bases of power, the five faculties, the five strengths, the seven factors for Awakening, the noble eightfold path." ** Dan: These are certainly to be developed, with the utmost urgency and total effort. However, they must be developed in the context of the eightfold path, central to which is right view (4NT); otherwise, the development doesn't go in the right direction, doesn't lead to liberation. As an example, consider effort/energy/endeavour which is one of the components of each: the right exertions, the bases of power, the five faculties, the five strengths, the seven factors for Awakening, the noble eightfold path. We read from the Dhammasangani (376): Katamam tasmim samaye viriyindriyam hoti? "What at that time is the faculty of effort/energy/endeavor?" "That which is mental endeavor (viriyarhambo), riddance of lethargy, exerting harder and harder, endeavoring higher and higher, striving, painstaking zeal, utmost exertion, steadfastness, resoluteness, unfaltering endeavor, having sustained desire (chanda) to strive, not relinquishing the task, discharging the task well, effort (viriya) as the faculty of effort, power of effort, wrong effort -- this at that time is the faculty of endeavor." Wrong effort?! Everything sounded pretty good up to that point! This is a description of the viriya cetasika arising with lobha-mula- cittani. It is interesting to read how it differs from the viriya cetasika arising with the sense-sphere kusala cittas: [Dhs. 13] "What at that time is the faculty of effort/energy/endeavor? That which is mental endeavor (viriyarhambo), riddance of lethargy, exerting harder and harder, endeavoring higher and higher, striving, painstaking zeal, utmost exertion, steadfastness, resoluteness, unfaltering endeavor, having sustained desire (chanda) to strive, not relinquishing the task, discharging the task well, effort (viriya) as the faculty of effort, power of effort, right effort -- this at that time is the faculty of endeavor." The only difference is the word "right" in the second paragraph contrasting with the "wrong" of the first. It's fine and dandy to toss around lists of the five this's and the four that's, but it is critical to be able to discern clearly when they are "right" or "wrong" as they arise. This hinges on development of discernment and understanding. Is this done via ritual? I don't think so.** ___________________________ -> Dan: Understanding does not arise from ritual or from a recipe book. -> Erik: Just like a meal doesn't arise from a recipe book. It takes the appropriate ingredients, cooked according to the recipe, to wind up with a satisfying meal. ** Dan: For delighting the senses, there is no substitute for a good recipe, followed correctly! For nourishing the body, there is no need for recipe books. Do we eat for nourishment or delighting the senses? ** __________________________ -> Erik: Here's one dictionary definition for "descriptive": "Involving or characterized by description; serving to describe." Here's one of the definitions for "prescriptive": "Making or giving injunctions, directions, laws, or rules." Based on the definitions of the terms, is "there is the case where a monk develops..." descriptive or prescriptive? Does it describe what already is (descriptive)? or does it prescribe (sorry, can't avoid using the word here) a course of action to be taken? ** Dan: Unclear. If you were to say "There is the case where a monk develops satipatthana by doing such and such," I'd say it sounded prescriptive. But I don't recall having seen that format in the suttas. I have seen something like: "There is the case where a monk discerns such and such when doing such and such." This is descriptive. ** ____________________________ -> Dan: Ritual can be so comforting... It takes great confidence in the Buddha and his Dhamma to abandon clinging to ritual. -> Erik: And views even more so than ritual. ** Dan: Hmmm... I look at them as parts of the same parcel of fetters to be broken at precisely the same moment, and precisely because they are so closely related. Could you elaborate on what you mean? ** Dan 13177 From: Date: Fri May 10, 2002 1:58am Subject: Re: [dsg] ADL ch.6 (1-6)(Protection) Hi Christine you asked in the below post; Does Buddhism encourage protection of those in need of protection. The following is found in Bhikkhu Bodhi's "All-embracing net of views". A Treatise on the Paramis. by Acariya Dhammapala. Bhikkhu Bodhi writes in the intro: "Treatise on the Paramis" which is found in at least two places in the Pali exegetical literature,in a complete version in the Cariyapitaka Atthakatha, and in an abridged version in the Tika or subcommentry to the Brahmajala Sutta. Here we have substituted the more complete version,which is also used in the new subcommentry. The Treatise: (x)How are they to be practiced? (1)The perfection of giving,firstly,is to be practised by benefitting beings in many ways-by relinquishing ones happiness,belongings,body and life to others,by dispelling their fear and by instructing them in the dhamma. (then we jump to the dispelling their fear section) The Giving of fearlessness is the giving of protection to beings when they have become frightened on account of kings,thieves,fire,water,enemies,lions,tigers,other wild beasts,dragons,orges,demons,goblins etc. with Metta S In a message dated 10/05/02 19:56:21 E. Australia Standard Time, cforsyth@v... writes: > Dear Sarah, (Larry) and All, > > Interesting post, Sarah. The real question for me, accepting > that 'our accumulation of dosa is the real cause that aversion arises > time and again,' is not blame or pointing the finger at a particular > individual. In actual everday hands-on living of our lives, and > while understanding that complex conditions bring about suffering - > are we to ignore people being wronged, whether it is ourselves, dear > ones, or even perfect strangers? Are we not to attempt to assist or > protect (in a non-violent way) those we feel are being treated > unfairly and suffering? Is there total moral neutrality? Should we > speak out about perceived injustices, or should we just say 'It's > their fruits of kamma' or 'Uh-huh hurt feelings.. shows lack of > advancement in the practice yet, too much dosa,mana, clinging, or not > enough ' ? Often, it is easier to preserve silence, > than speak out and attract retribution, or risk losing valued > friendships.... > Non-action, like action, is an intentional choice. And if I don't > act, when I could have acted, or if I choose one action instead of > another, the results of that action or non-action are my kama-vipaka > eventually? > Does Buddhism encourage protection of those in need of protection, > speaking out about injustices, social action? > Does Buddhism have any equivalent of Reverend Marin > Niemoellers "First They Came For".... > "In Germany, the Nazis first came for the communists, and I didn't > speak up because I wasn't a communist. > Then they came for the Jews, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a > Jew. > Then the came for the trade unionists, and I didn't speak up because > I wasn't a trade unionist. > Then they came for the Catholics, but I didn't speak up because I was > a protestant. > Then they came for me, and by that time there was no one left to > speak for me." > Seemingly a dramatic quote of course, compared to an ordinary person > being treated unfairly in daily interactions, but it is talking about > the importance of making a stand against wrong. Small daily > happenings are miniature reflections of what happens on a larger > scale nationally and internationally. When the harm being done (as > in the categories above) is to a person who is a little different to > the majority, or to whom the majority seem to be either opposed or > indifferent, how easy it is to magnify their faults and minimise (or > be unable to hear or see clearly) the role of those others doing > wrong. How easy to look for the approval of the majority(more like > us), and feel validated. > So what is a Buddhist to do, to live in the world correctly and > unselfishly, with loving-kindness, compassion, sympathetic joy, and > equanimity regarding others? Watch our own mind states, and be aware > when dosa arises. Is that all? Does this mean ignoring the suffering > of others when it could be ameliorated or prevented? Extending or > pervading metta, but taking no action? What do the Teachings say? > > metta, > Christine > 13178 From: Sarah Date: Fri May 10, 2002 6:06am Subject: Re: [dsg] ADL ch.6 (1-6) Dear Christine, --- christine_forsyth wrote: > Dear Sarah, (Larry) and All, > > Interesting post, Sarah. ..... Thanks Chris;-) You’ve raised pertinent points and questions and I’ll look forward to hearing other comments as I'm out of time. I know these are issues close to the heart for many of us. I’ll be busy as usual over the weekend - losts of students testing ‘my’ metta;-). Have a good restful weekend yourself. Sarah ===== 13179 From: abhidhammika Date: Fri May 10, 2002 8:06am Subject: Kamma In Color: To Joyce, Dhammarati, Howard, Robert Dear Joyce, Venerable Dhammarati, Howard, and Robert How are you? Joyce wrote: "Perhaps you might be willing to pick any Sutta you feel appropriate for the list, or part of one and then model this bringing out what is most essential, the important insights in the Sutta based on your current understanding." Also Venerable Dhammarati wrote: "Do any of the Abhidhammaka friends know of where in the Abhidhamma these four kinds of kamma are mentioned..? …. Please take some time to find and quote from the Abhidhamma on Kamma." Howard also asked: "I find this to be an interesting question you (Dhammarati) raise, and I am interested in hearing the answers." ----------------------------------------------------- Suan Lu Zaw responded as follows. In line with the above requests, I looked into Vitthaara Suttam on four groups of actions. I found this Suttam quite far-reaching. For starter, it contains etiology, the Buddha's answer to the existence of rebirth, the Buddha's concept of action, and the like. To appreciate the beauty of this Suttam on one hand, and to accommodate the requests of the above dhamma friends on the other hand, I decided to write a new modern commentary in English language to complement the existing Pali commentary on this Suttam. Before I wrote a commentary on this Suttam, I also decided to translate the original Suttam afresh into English despite the existence of previous translations done by other scholars. It is my view that there is always room for improvement in translation from one language into another. Fresh translations also give the readers the opportunity to compare different versions and gain new insights. Accordingly, whenever I translate an original Pali work, I do so in such a way as to help future or other scholars to produce even better translations. I do that by making sure that my own translations are syntactically literal and in as natural English as possible. In short, students of Pali and Pali scholars alike can perform "Syntax Walk-through" in my translation and thereby improve or enhance their further understanding of Pali language. Vitthaara Suttam, from which the following translation was made, can be found in Section 233, Kammavaggo, Catukkanipaata, Anguttaranikaayo on Chatthasangayana CD-ROM version 3 produced by Vipassana Research Institute. Those who use Roman edition should see page 230 in Volume 2 of that edition. VITTHAARA SUTTAM ON FOUR GROUPS OF KAMMA Vitthaara Suttam On Four Groups Of Kamma Translated By Suan Lu Zaw Monks, four actions have been declared by me by having personally realized them with extraordinary wisdom. What are the four? Monks, there is dark action having dark result. Monks, there is white action having white result. Monks, there is dark and white action having dark and white result. Minks, there is un-dark and un-white action having un-dark and un-white result, which takes place for depletion of actions. Monks, what is dark action having dark result? Here, monks, some carry out physical action with anger, verbal action with anger, and mental action with anger. Having carried out physical action with anger, having carried out verbal action with anger, and having carried out mental action with anger, he is reborn in the harsh world. Being reborn in the harsh world, harsh contacts touch him. Being touched by harsh contacts, he experiences the really miserable harsh feelings like those beings in hell do. Monks, this is called dark action having dark result. Monks, what is white action having white result? Here, monks, some carry out physical action with dis-anger, verbal action with dis- anger, and mental action with dis-anger. Having carried out physical action with dis-anger, having carried out verbal action with dis- anger, and having carried out mental action with dis-anger, he is reborn in the gentle world. Being reborn in the gentle world, gentle contacts touch him. Being touched by gentle contacts, he experiences the really pleasant gentle feelings like Subhakinha Brahma gods do. Monks, this is called white action having white result. Monks, what is dark and white action having dark and white result? Here, monks, some carry out physical action with anger as well as with dis-anger, verbal action with anger as well as with dis-anger, and mental action with anger as well as with dis-anger. Having carried out physical action with anger as well as with dis-anger, having carried out verbal action with anger as well as with dis- anger, and having carried out mental action with anger as well as with dis-anger, he is reborn in the harsh and gentle world. Being reborn in the harsh and gentle world, harsh as well as gentle contacts touch him. Being touched by harsh as well as gentle contacts, he experiences the mixed feelings of pleasure and misery like human beings, some sensuous gods and some mansion-owning halfway beings do. Monks, this is called dark and white action having dark and white result. Monks, what is un-dark and un-white action having un-dark and un- white result, which takes place for depletion of actions? Here, monks, such activation as to eradicate dark action having dark result, such activation as to eradicate white action having white result, and such activation as to eradicate dark and white action having dark and white result, this activation is called un-dark and un-white action having un-dark and un-white result, which takes place for depletion of actions. Monks, these four actions have been declared by me by having personally realized them with extraordinary wisdom. NOTES ON KEY TERMS The phrase "with anger" is a translation of the Pali compound "sabyaapajjam" which was defined as "sadosam" in the Pali commentary. Sadosam = sa + dosam. Doso is defined as anger in Pali Text Society's Pali – English Dictionary, see page 332. The phrase "with dis-anger" is a translation of the Pali word "abyaapajjam". The opposite of the Pali term "doso" is "adoso". Dis-anger is the literal translation of "adoso". Abyaapajjo is described as a synonym of adoso in Section 33, Dhammasanganii. Hence, I translated abyaapajjam as with dis-anger in order to contrast it with anger in Paragraph Two of the Vitthaara Suttam. In Section 397, Siilakkhandha Pali, Diighanikaayo, we find "bhikkhu averam abyaapajjam mettacittam bhaaveti. Without enmity, and with dis- anger, the monk develops the loving mind". Thus, dis-anger is a technical term to convey love or loving kindness as one of its meanings. It does not refer to the mere absence of anger as when our minds are with greed. Un-dark is a translation of the word "akanha, not dark". Here, un- darkness does not refer to other colors such as whiteness. It means counteracting the very color of darkness. Un-dark means anti-dark. Thus, un-dark action would counteract the dark actions and their dark results. Un-white is a translation of the word "asukka, not white". Here, too, un-whiteness does not refer to darkness or other colors. It means counteracting the very color of whiteness. Un-white means anti-white. Thus, un-white action would counteract the white actions and their white results. . To read the original Suttam in Pali, please follow the following link. http://www.tipitaka.org/tipitaka/s0402m3/s0402m3-frm.html And, please also visit the following link to download and install the Pali font on your computer so that the Pali letters appear on your screen correctly. http://www.tipitaka.org/general/pali.html ------------------------------------------------------------------ NEW MODERN COMMENTARY ON VITTHAARA SUTTAM BY SUAN LU ZAW COMING SOON. ------------------------------------------------------------------- With regards, Suan Lu Zaw http://www.bodhiology.org 13180 From: frank kuan Date: Fri May 10, 2002 9:43am Subject: Re: [dsg] "ritual" [reply to Erik] Hi Dan and Erik, I enjoyed your dialogue, but if we can put aside the argument on the semantics of "descriptive" and "prescriptive", the main issue still boils down to one of practice versus theory. Erik's point: without REGULARLY DOING the meditation practices described/prescribed in the suttas, i.e. 4 this, 5 that, 37 this, understanding of dhamma remains at the level of intellectual understanding and second hand views. It is only through PRACTICE that the understanding of dhamma can become direct realizations. Dan's point: If we follow those dedscriptive/prescriptive practices as a ritual without right view, then we still won't develop realizations. fk: I agree with both points, but now the question to Dan becomes how do you propose to develop right view apart from following doing the strenuous practices (even ritualistically while right view is still under development)? To use a yoga analogy (I do 6 times a week ashtanga yoga practice): There are periods of months where it feels like I'm doing my yoga practice like a ritual, i.e. breathing properly, controlling the bandhas, directing gaze/attention at the appropriate spot at each inhale/exhale/posture. Feels like I'm not making progress for long periods of time, but then one day the practice blossoms and a breakthrough happens. It would not be possible for breakthroughs to happen if I didn't maintain the continuity of daily "ritualistic" practice. In the same way, I don't see how right view can arise apart from the strenuous forms of practice prescribed/described by the Buddha. The path of dhamma is not for the weak, and there are no short cuts. There is a place for book study and intellectual understanding, but if it remains in that realm then it's ultimately useless. -fk 13181 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri May 10, 2002 10:03am Subject: Re: [dsg] dispassion and nibbana op 09-05-2002 06:35 schreef LBIDD@w... op LBIDD@w...: > ADL: "And why, Malunkyaputta, has this not been explained by me? It is > because it is not connected with the goal, it is not fundamental to the > Brahma-faring, and does not conduce to turning away from, nor to > dispassion, stopping, calming, super-knowledge, awakening, nor to > nibbana." > > Dear Nina and dsg, > > Could you comment on the above quote, explaining the terms, their > relationship and sequence? > > 1. connected to the goal (pali?), [right view?] > > 2. Brahma-faring (brahmacariya), the holy life, entered for the purpose > of attaining deliverance of mind, MN29, [right intention?] > > 3. turning away from, disenchantment, (nibbida), culminating stages of > insight, Wisdom MN n.265, [right speech?] > > 4. dispassion (viraga), attainment of supramundane path, Wisdom MN > n.265, [right action?] > > 5. stopping, cessation (niroda), ???, [right livelihood?] > > 6. calming, peace (upasama, santi), pacification of lobha, dosa, moha, > MN 140.28, [right effort?] > > 7. super-knowledge, direct knowledge (abhinna), directly knowing anicca, > dukkha, anatta, Wisdom MN n. 22, [right mindfulness?] > > 8. awakening (sambodhi), full understanding of 4 noble truths???, [right > concentration?] > > 9. nibbana > Dear Larry, I went to the Co. which I have in Thai, not in Pali. As to Brahmafaring, brahma cariya, divine life, can refer to the monk's life, but also to the life of all those who develop the eightfold Path. As you will see, the terms here do not refer to the factors of the eightfold Path. The Buddha does not explain speculative views, because they do not lead to the goal. The Co. explains: But what the Buddha explains leads to the goal, and as the Co states, the opposite applies to what has just been stated: it leads to dispassion, etc. Thus, the goal is the eradication of defilements and reaching the end of rebirth. The development of insight will lead to the abandoning of clinging to self, and all other defilements. Viraga can mean detachment and nirodha extinction. Used in connection with the process of the development of panna, leading to more and more turning away from conditioned dhammas and inclining towards nibbana. Superknowledge: the direct understanding of dhammas as they are, as you indicated under 7. This leads to the realization of the four noble Truths when enlightenment is attained. I now come to Deanna's Q about nibbana: Deanna: I do have a question - why is nibbana not a conditioned dhamma? If right understanding of dhamma is necessary along with right effort and mindfulness how is it possible that enlightenment is not dependant on anything? I'm confused. Anyone care to shed some light on this for me? N: What arises because of conditions has to fall away, all sankhara dhammas are impermanent and thus dukkha, unsatisfactory. If nibbana would be conditioned it would be impermanent and dukkha, but nibbana is the end of dukkha. Enlightenment is not the same as nibbana. It means the attainment of nibbana when the supramundane cittas with panna arise, which have nibbana as its object. The supramundane citta, lokuttara citta itself falls away, it is impermanent and dukkha, but the object it experiences is the unconditioned dhamma. Indeed, many, many conditions are needed for the realization of the four noble Truths at the moment of enlightenment. Right understanding of the reality that appears now, be it hearing, sound or hardness, has to be developed again and again, with courage, without becoming bored. Nina. 13182 From: rickbolton510 Date: Fri May 10, 2002 0:25pm Subject: Virus attachments from this group I am receiving e-mails every day with attachments having the KLEZ virus, including from members of this group. The virus sends itself using the owners 'Outlook' program to everyone on the address list. The subject line will say almost anything. So be aware! I check all my attachments with the Yahoo virus check for free. Good luck all, Rick 13183 From: onco111 Date: Fri May 10, 2002 2:54pm Subject: Re: [dsg] "ritual" [reply to Erik] Hi Frank, It's great to hear from you. I think we are in basic agreement, although not entirely. It is often fruitful to discuss the differences. ______________ -> fk: the main issue still boils down to one of practice versus theory. ** Dan: I think both Erik and I would say that the main issue is Right View, what the characteristics and nature of the path are, and how panya is developed. I'm arguing that satipatthana is conditioned by hearing true Dhamma and yoniso manasikara. I don't think Erik disputes that, but he would throw in some techniques for "practicing satipatthana" specifically. ** > > Erik's point: without REGULARLY DOING the meditation > practices described/prescribed in the suttas, i.e. 4 > this, 5 that, 37 this, understanding of dhamma remains > at the level of intellectual understanding and second > hand views. It is only through PRACTICE that the > understanding of dhamma can become direct > realizations. I fully agree the it is only through PRACTICE (bhavana?) that full understanding of Dhamma can arise. Full, all-out, total effort and practice is needed. However, it must be full, all-out, total Right effort. What distinguishes "Right" effort from "wrong"? Certainly not the format of a ritual. > Dan's point: If we follow those > dedscriptive/prescriptive practices as a ritual > without right view, then we still won't develop > realizations. Right. But I would go one step further and say that viewing descriptions of experiences as prescriptive practices IS viewing them as ritual, and that the view of ritual as effecting liberation is a fetter to be broken. > I agree with both points, but now the question to Dan > becomes how do you propose to develop right view apart > from following doing the strenuous practices (even > ritualistically while right view is still under > development)? I don't have anything against strenuous practices; in fact, I find them very helpful and engage in them regularly. But the question is what are they helpful for? Training the mind, strengthening the mind, protecting the mind from certain types of akusala. These can be great benefits, but they must not be confused with panya nor with satipatthana. They can also be counterproductive if done with a view of self directing the practice or with the view that the self that directs and practices can direct its own destruction by perfecting such a practice or by perfecting the performance of a ritual. > To use a yoga analogy (I do 6 times a week ashtanga > yoga practice): There are periods of months where it > feels like I'm doing my yoga practice like a ritual, > i.e. breathing properly, controlling the bandhas, > directing gaze/attention at the appropriate spot at > each inhale/exhale/posture. Feels like I'm not making > progress for long periods of time, but then one day > the practice blossoms and a breakthrough happens. I'm not sure what you mean when you say "breakthrough." Could you elaborate? > The path of dhamma is not for the weak, and there are > no short cuts. Sadhu (x3)! > There is a place for book study and > intellectual understanding, but if it remains in that > realm then it's ultimately useless. Sadhu (x3 again)! 13184 From: yuzhonghao Date: Fri May 10, 2002 3:32pm Subject: Re: [dsg] "ritual" [reply to Erik] Hi Frank, Dan, Erik and all, To add on what you have said, I would like to say that one can read all about swimming without knowing how to swim. Reading and studying may help, but it really takes practice to learn the skill. Regards, Victor --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., frank kuan wrote: > Hi Dan and Erik, > I enjoyed your dialogue, but if we can put aside the > argument on the semantics of "descriptive" and > "prescriptive", the main issue still boils down to one > of practice versus theory. > > Erik's point: without REGULARLY DOING the meditation > practices described/prescribed in the suttas, i.e. 4 > this, 5 that, 37 this, understanding of dhamma remains > at the level of intellectual understanding and second > hand views. It is only through PRACTICE that the > understanding of dhamma can become direct > realizations. > > Dan's point: If we follow those > dedscriptive/prescriptive practices as a ritual > without right view, then we still won't develop > realizations. > > fk: > I agree with both points, but now the question to Dan > becomes how do you propose to develop right view apart > from following doing the strenuous practices (even > ritualistically while right view is still under > development)? > > To use a yoga analogy (I do 6 times a week ashtanga > yoga practice): There are periods of months where it > feels like I'm doing my yoga practice like a ritual, > i.e. breathing properly, controlling the bandhas, > directing gaze/attention at the appropriate spot at > each inhale/exhale/posture. Feels like I'm not making > progress for long periods of time, but then one day > the practice blossoms and a breakthrough happens. > > It would not be possible for breakthroughs to happen > if I didn't maintain the continuity of daily > "ritualistic" practice. In the same way, I don't see > how right view can arise apart from the strenuous > forms of practice prescribed/described by the Buddha. > > The path of dhamma is not for the weak, and there are > no short cuts. There is a place for book study and > intellectual understanding, but if it remains in that > realm then it's ultimately useless. > > -fk 13185 From: Date: Fri May 10, 2002 4:36pm Subject: Re: [dsg] dispassion and nibbana Nina, thanks for your elucidation and research. I was thinking this might be a step-wise progression that mirrored the eightfold path, but evidently it isn't. best wishes, Larry ----------------- ADL: "And why, Malunkyaputta, has this not been explained by me? It is because it is not connected with the goal, it is not fundamental to the Brahma-faring, and does not conduce to turning away from, nor to dispassion, stopping, calming, super-knowledge, awakening, nor to nibbana." 13186 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Fri May 10, 2002 8:52pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Kamma In Color Suan Many thanks for your translation of this interesting sutta. I could be wrong, but I am guessing that the 4th kind of kamma refers to moments of mundane or supramundane path consciousness (this being the only kind of kamma that does not conduce to further rebirth in samsara). I look forward to reading your commentary in due course. Jon --- abhidhammika wrote: > > Vitthaara Suttam, from which the following translation was made, can > be found in Section 233, Kammavaggo, Catukkanipaata, Anguttaranikaayo > on Chatthasangayana CD-ROM version 3 produced by Vipassana Research > Institute. Those who use Roman edition should see page 230 in Volume > 2 of that edition. > > > VITTHAARA SUTTAM ON FOUR GROUPS OF KAMMA > > Vitthaara Suttam On Four Groups Of Kamma > > Translated By Suan Lu Zaw > > Monks, four actions have been declared by me by having personally > realized them with extraordinary wisdom. What are the four? Monks, > there is dark action having dark result. Monks, there is white action > having white result. Monks, there is dark and white action having > dark and white result. Minks, there is un-dark and un-white action > having un-dark and un-white result, which takes place for depletion > of actions. > > Monks, what is dark action having dark result? Here, monks, some > carry out physical action with anger, verbal action with anger, and > mental action with anger. Having carried out physical action with > anger, having carried out verbal action with anger, and having > carried out mental action with anger, he is reborn in the harsh > world. Being reborn in the harsh world, harsh contacts touch him. > Being touched by harsh contacts, he experiences the really miserable > harsh feelings like those beings in hell do. Monks, this is called > dark action having dark result. > > Monks, what is white action having white result? Here, monks, some > carry out physical action with dis-anger, verbal action with dis- > anger, and mental action with dis-anger. Having carried out physical > action with dis-anger, having carried out verbal action with dis- > anger, and having carried out mental action with dis-anger, he is > reborn in the gentle world. Being reborn in the gentle world, gentle > contacts touch him. Being touched by gentle contacts, he experiences > the really pleasant gentle feelings like Subhakinha Brahma gods do. > Monks, this is called white action having white result. > > Monks, what is dark and white action having dark and white result? > Here, monks, some carry out physical action with anger as well as > with dis-anger, verbal action with anger as well as with dis-anger, > and mental action with anger as well as with dis-anger. Having > carried out physical action with anger as well as with dis-anger, > having carried out verbal action with anger as well as with dis- > anger, and having carried out mental action with anger as well as > with dis-anger, he is reborn in the harsh and gentle world. Being > reborn in the harsh and gentle world, harsh as well as gentle > contacts touch him. Being touched by harsh as well as gentle > contacts, he experiences the mixed feelings of pleasure and misery > like human beings, some sensuous gods and some mansion-owning halfway > beings do. Monks, this is called dark and white action having dark > and white result. > > Monks, what is un-dark and un-white action having un-dark and un- > white result, which takes place for depletion of actions? Here, > monks, such activation as to eradicate dark action having dark > result, such activation as to eradicate white action having white > result, and such activation as to eradicate dark and white action > having dark and white result, this activation is called un-dark and > un-white action having un-dark and un-white result, which takes place > for depletion of actions. Monks, these four actions have been > declared by me by having personally realized them with extraordinary > wisdom. > > > NOTES ON KEY TERMS > > The phrase "with anger" is a translation of the Pali > compound "sabyaapajjam" which was defined as "sadosam" in the Pali > commentary. Sadosam = sa + dosam. > Doso is defined as anger in Pali Text Society's Pali – English > Dictionary, see page 332. > > The phrase "with dis-anger" is a translation of the Pali > word "abyaapajjam". The opposite of the Pali term "doso" is "adoso". > Dis-anger is the literal translation of "adoso". Abyaapajjo is > described as a synonym of adoso in Section 33, Dhammasanganii. Hence, > I translated abyaapajjam as with dis-anger in order to contrast it > with anger in Paragraph Two of the Vitthaara Suttam. > > In Section 397, Siilakkhandha Pali, Diighanikaayo, we find "bhikkhu > averam abyaapajjam mettacittam bhaaveti. Without enmity, and with dis- > anger, the monk develops the loving mind". > > Thus, dis-anger is a technical term to convey love or loving kindness > as one of its meanings. It does not refer to the mere absence of > anger as when our minds are with greed. > > Un-dark is a translation of the word "akanha, not dark". Here, un- > darkness does not refer to other colors such as whiteness. It means > counteracting the very color of darkness. Un-dark means anti-dark. > > Thus, un-dark action would counteract the dark actions and their dark > results. > > Un-white is a translation of the word "asukka, not white". Here, too, > un-whiteness does not refer to darkness or other colors. It means > counteracting the very color of whiteness. Un-white means anti-white. > > Thus, un-white action would counteract the white actions and their > white results. 13187 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Fri May 10, 2002 9:44pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Antidotes to lobha Lucy --- Lucy wrote: > Hi Jon > I misunderstood your use of the words seeing and understanding. I'm more > used to reading these words to imply experiential, largely non-conceptual > realisations - especially when addressing the uprooting of kilesa - So the > way I read your post was along the lines of "the effective way to deal with > lobha is to realise enlightenment" - which is very true, of course, but > unlikely to happen to this citta-stream in a hurry. Sorry if I got you > wrong. No apology necessary. I believe my posts are easily mis-read in this way, so I’m sure the problem lies with my manner of expression rather than the reader! > I agree it's useful to know lobha etc. You see it arise ( = it's already > been and gone), you examine it inside out, measure it, identify it, give > it a name, look for the roots, project the consequences of its > manifestation, remember the teachings, recognise that it's a hindrance, > etc. .... and then, what do you do ? That was really the gist of my > question. How to go about relinquishing the objects of attachment? and > relinquishing the tendency to develop attachment? on a moment to moment > basis. I’m sure we would all like to have less kilesa (or at least less of the kind of kilesa that we recognise as such). But while less kilesa does indeed result from the development of the path, this doesn’t mean that the development of the path is ‘tied’ in any sense to having less kilesa in our lives now. From my reading, the path is developed if there is awareness of a presently arising reality, whatever that reality may be, and it doesn’t matter whether it is kusala or akusala, nama or rupa, internal or eternal. The reduction of the kilesa is something that occurs as a natural consequence of the development of awareness and the ensuing understanding, but should not be the focus of that development. Having the objective of having less kilesa in our life now is, I believe, to fall into the trap of expectations. It inevitably inclines us to a form of practice that involves suppression in one form or another. > I know the answer is cultivation, but expedient means can help to > keep the mind on the cultivation track, you need to aspire to cultivation > and remember to keep it going. At least, in my example of offering hills, > if you have an accident and die right there, citta will be pointing in the > right direction. At best, you develop a habit of remembering the Path when > you're out and about clinging to everything you see. It's all training! It’s training only if it’s kusala and, in particular, if it’s right view :-). > > I thing that proper study of understanding at a theoretical level is the > most useful > > preparation of the soil for the cultivation of the real thing. > > > The theoretical level on its own doesn't work very well for me, though it > may well work for others. This mind needs a lot more field work on all > fronts. It may be that in science one acquires a very healthy disrespect > for anything "theoretical" and you can't really trust something you always > take with a pinch of salt. Now, combined with the lab / field work, it > starts making more sense. Agreed that the theoretical level on its own is not the development of the path. But a proper theoretical basis is indispensable to the development of the path, I think. > Glad you enjoyed the holiday - ours is on Monday. > > Best wishes > Lucy Thanks. Hope you had a good week away (Norfolk?). Jon 13188 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Sat May 11, 2002 0:02am Subject: RE: [dsg] ADL ch.6 (1-6): indifferent (long) Dear Christine, I think the key to develop the 4-brahma vihara is to know their characteristics, and know how they are different from lobha, dosa, and moha. Without knowing this, when we think we are having metta, karuna, mudita, and upekkha, it may just be wishful thinking out of our attachment to those qualities. Let me list the near enemies of the 4 qualities, from memory (so please check, if you have the opportunities!) Metta has lobha as its near enemy. It is easy to mistake lobha for metta. For example, when we treat somebody kindly who is dear to us, is that metta or lobha? Very difficult to tell. Karuna has dosa as its near enemy. Without hearing the Buddha's teachings, some people mistake dosa (unhappiness for other people's misery) as karuna. When we see a thin, malnourished child, is the wish to do something for the child really driven by our need to drive away the unpleasant feeling (domanassa) or is it driven by karuna? Mudita has lobha as its near enemy. When we see happiness of somebody dear to us, is that by attachment or by mudita? Equanimity has ignorance as its near enemy. Some people mistake ignorance and its associated indifferent feeling as equanimity (often stated as upekkha). Equanimity is the quality of not falling into unwholesome states. When we feel indifferent toward someone's plight, is that lack of metta (and lack of equanimity) or is there a knowledge that we cannot do anything for the person and that each person has kamma as their own? We normally like to think good thing about ourselves (like we have metta, karuna, mudita, and equanmity, especially comparing to other people!), but without knowing these different qualities, then developing them to a high degree is impossible, and a lot of time, thinking that we actually have these qualities are just wishful thinking. The thing is to develop kusala, and to discard akusala. What if we are in a situation that requires us to rebuke somebody to help others? My question would then be, is that rebuke done out of kusala or akusala? Rebuking somebody out of anger to help other people are akusala kamma, and one will certainly suffer the result of that akusala kamma, and enjoy the fruit out of the kusala intention for another. We need to be straight and true to the dhamma: if it is kusala, then it is kusala; if it is akusala, it is akusala. Wishing it some way or another doesn't change the realities. I reiterate the story from Maha-pari-nibbana sutta. The Buddha asked V. Ananda for water (when he was sick) 3 different times, but V. Ananda mentioned to the Buddha that the water was unsuitable for drinking because of recent herd crossing. The Buddha insisted, and V. Ananda eventually found suitable water. The fact that the Buddha couldn't get suitable water was said to be his chasing away his herd from unsuitable water in a previous live. Although he did this out of good intention, but akusala alternated with kusala, and the bad vipaka resulted from the akusala kamma. I believe the Buddha encouraged us to develop all levels of kusala (dana, sila, and bhavana) whenever an opportunity presents itself. He certainly didn't praise akusala or indifferent feeling (out of ignorance). But we also have to remember, all these qualities rise because of conditions. Without hearing the Buddha's teaching, they probably are conditioned by our own accumulations and the people with are associated with. However, with the Buddha's teachings, we can develop them to the finest degree, by hearing detailed teachings about these qualities and their enemies, by considering them in our daily lives, by knowing their benefits and the faults of their opposites, and by knowing them as they truly are: conditioned realities that fall away immediately that is neither self or ours. kom > -----Original Message----- > From: christine_forsyth [mailto:cforsyth@v...] > Sent: Friday, May 10, 2002 2:56 AM > To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com > Subject: Re: [dsg] ADL ch.6 (1-6) > > > Dear Sarah, (Larry) and All, > > Interesting post, Sarah. The real question for > me, accepting > that 'our accumulation of dosa is the real cause > that aversion arises > time and again,' is not blame or pointing the > finger at a particular > individual. In actual everday hands-on living > of our lives, and > while understanding that complex conditions > bring about suffering - > are we to ignore people being wronged, whether > it is ourselves, dear > ones, or even perfect strangers? Are we not to > attempt to assist or > protect (in a non-violent way) those we feel are > being treated > unfairly and suffering? Is there total moral > neutrality? Should we > speak out about perceived injustices, or should > we just say 'It's > their fruits of kamma' or 'Uh-huh hurt feelings.. > shows lack of > advancement in the practice yet, too much > dosa,mana, clinging, or not > enough ' ? Often, it is easier to > preserve silence, > than speak out and attract retribution, or risk > losing valued > friendships.... > Non-action, like action, is an intentional > choice. And if I don't > act, when I could have acted, or if I choose one > action instead of > another, the results of that action or non-action > are my kama-vipaka > eventually? > Does Buddhism encourage protection of those in > need of protection, > speaking out about injustices, social action? > Does Buddhism have any equivalent of Reverend Marin > Niemoellers "First They Came For".... > "In Germany, the Nazis first came for the > communists, and I didn't > speak up because I wasn't a communist. > Then they came for the Jews, and I didn't speak > up because I wasn't a > Jew. > Then the came for the trade unionists, and I > didn't speak up because > I wasn't a trade unionist. > Then they came for the Catholics, but I didn't > speak up because I was > a protestant. > Then they came for me, and by that time there was > no one left to > speak for me." > Seemingly a dramatic quote of course, compared to > an ordinary person > being treated unfairly in daily interactions, but > it is talking about > the importance of making a stand against wrong. > Small daily > happenings are miniature reflections of what > happens on a larger > scale nationally and internationally. When the > harm being done (as > in the categories above) is to a person who is a > little different to > the majority, or to whom the majority seem to be > either opposed or > indifferent, how easy it is to magnify their > faults and minimise (or > be unable to hear or see clearly) the role of > those others doing > wrong. How easy to look for the approval of the > majority(more like > us), and feel validated. > So what is a Buddhist to do, to live in the world > correctly and > unselfishly, with loving-kindness, compassion, > sympathetic joy, and > equanimity regarding others? Watch our own mind > states, and be aware > when dosa arises. Is that all? Does this mean > ignoring the suffering > of others when it could be ameliorated or > prevented? Extending or > pervading metta, but taking no action? What do > the Teachings say? > > metta, > Christine > 13189 From: rikpa21 Date: Sat May 11, 2002 0:13am Subject: Re: [dsg] "ritual" [reply to Erik] --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "onco111" wrote: > Hi Frank, > It's great to hear from you. I think we are in basic agreement, > although not entirely. It is often fruitful to discuss the > differences. > > ______________ > -> fk: the main issue still boils down to one of practice versus > theory. > > ** Dan: I think both Erik and I would say that the main issue is Right > View, what the characteristics and nature of the path are, and how > panya is developed. I'm arguing that satipatthana is conditioned by > hearing true Dhamma and yoniso manasikara. I don't think Erik disputes > that, but he would throw in some techniques for "practicing > satipatthana" specifically. ** > > > > > Erik's point: without REGULARLY DOING the meditation > > practices described/prescribed in the suttas, i.e. 4 > > this, 5 that, 37 this, understanding of dhamma remains > > at the level of intellectual understanding and second > > hand views. It is only through PRACTICE that the > > understanding of dhamma can become direct > > realizations. > > I fully agree the it is only through PRACTICE (bhavana?) that full > understanding of Dhamma can arise. Full, all-out, total effort and > practice is needed. However, it must be full, all-out, total Right > effort. What distinguishes "Right" effort from "wrong"? Certainly not > the format of a ritual. Hi Dan, This seems to be a sticking point in our dialogues--the semantic issue of what constitutes "ritual". Specifically the type of ritual that is ineffective in terms of delivering the fruits of the path. My understanding is that it is *outer* observances of rites (and I include sila in this mix) without the concomitant mental factors those rituals are designed to engender, that is the type of ritual to be abandoned. The best analogy I can come up with at this point is that of the monk who obeys the letter of the Vinaya, who displays all the behavioral characteristics of an arahat on the outside, whose mind is still caught in the grip of attachment, aversion, and ignorance. One may consider Cambodia's infamous Ta Mok ("The Butcher"), who was a monk for ten years until joining in with Pol Pot (after failing the basic Pali exams needed to go further with his Buddhist studies). As far as I know, that's long enough in the robes to be considered a "lo ta" (senior monk), and yet, those years of observing sila apparently had too weak an effect on Ta Mok's understanding that he did not find it inappropriate to oversee the ruthless murder of hundreds of thousands of people. So in this specific case, the ritual observances of the Vinaya seemed to have little effect whatsoever on Ta Mok's understanding, thus substantiating the point that mere outer observances are ineffective. Alternatively, what would have happened had that sila naturally and spontaneously arisen as a side-effect of realizing the fruits of the path? For this reason I think it's important to have a clear understanding of what constitutes silabbataparamasa--that one cannot rely on mere outer rites and observances and expect freedom to arise from outer mimicry absent right understanding. On this point I think we may agree: it's not the shaved head, or the saffron (or burgundy) robes that matter, it's all about the mentality. The path is about cultivating right understanding and the appropriate mental factors: alobha, adosa, amoha, panna, dhamma-vicaya, viriya, piti, passadhi, samadhi, upekkha, to the appropriate balance and degree, and that this constitutes the essence of the Path, that this does not depend on outer obserances, but rather on *inner* observances--on observing the body in & of itself, the feelings in & of themselves, the mind in & of itself, and dhammas in & of themselves. > > Dan's point: If we follow those > > dedscriptive/prescriptive practices as a ritual > > without right view, then we still won't develop > > realizations. > > Right. But I would go one step further and say that viewing > descriptions of experiences as prescriptive practices IS viewing them > as ritual, and that the view of ritual as effecting liberation is a > fetter to be broken. Please see above. If you really want to get technical, the entire Vinaya Pitaka is a set of outer behavioral "ritual" designed to act as a guide and a support for the trainee. It doesn't help everyone, as can be observed using an extreme case like Ta Mok, but it does help create better conditions (such as avoidance of the akusala accumulated through body & speech) for understanding nonetheless. Otherwise, why would the Buddha have laid out so many rules for his disciples? But absent right understanding, it's just more silabbataparamasa. That said, for many, emulation--even outer emulation absent right understanding--can still serve as an excellent way to get the inner part (where it counts--in the mind) into conformance, as long as it's practiced in accordance with ever-increasing understanding, or panna, if you prefer the term. If ritual's done for its own sake, though, without right understanding (or the increasing straightening of views that happens in the course of training), then it is the fetter of silabbataparamasa. Cheers, Erik 13190 From: onco111 Date: Sat May 11, 2002 2:54am Subject: Re: [dsg] "ritual" [reply to Erik] Victor: > To add on what you have said, I would like to say that one can read > all about swimming without knowing how to swim. Reading and studying > may help, but it really takes practice to learn the skill. You raise two important issues here. Certainly, the importance of practice is agreed on by all, and that there is a big distinction between swimming and reading about swimming (as there is between Dhamma and reading about Dhamma). The question is what are the characteristics of right practice. Is satipatthana a skill? Dan 13191 From: onco111 Date: Sat May 11, 2002 4:34am Subject: Silabbataparamasa -- inner vs. outer? Dear Erik, You write: > This seems to be a sticking point in our dialogues--the semantic > issue of what constitutes "ritual". Specifically the type of ritual > that is ineffective in terms of delivering the fruits of the path. I think you hit the nail on the head (but not the knee with a ball- peen hammer!); although rather than calling it a "semantic issue", I'd argue that understanding ritual is a cornerstone of Right View. [Of course, by "understanding" I mean via bhavanamayapanya, not via semantics.] There may be a distinction between "inner" and "outer" ritual as you suggest, but there is a deeper distinction between ritual and non-ritual that lies at the heart of silabbataparamasa as a fetter. I very much appreciate your clear explanation of how the "outer" silabbataparamasa does little to purify the mind. And your explanation applies equally well to "inner" silabbataparamasa. I have a few comments interspersed... > My understanding is that it is *outer* observances of rites (and I > include sila in this mix) without the concomitant mental factors > those rituals are designed to engender, that is the type of ritual > to be abandoned. The best analogy I can come up with at this point > is that of the monk who obeys the letter of the Vinaya, who displays > all the behavioral characteristics of an arahat on the outside, > whose mind is still caught in the grip of attachment, aversion, and > ignorance. Yes, it reminds me of a wonderful quote (from Zen?): "Arahants don't keep precepts; they don't break precepts" [paraphrase]. I read this as meaning that purity of heart leads to purity of action and not the other way around. > So in this specific case, the ritual observances of the Vinaya > seemed to have little effect whatsoever on Ta Mok's understanding, > thus substantiating the point that mere outer observances are > ineffective. Alternatively, what would have happened had that sila > naturally and spontaneously arisen as a side-effect of realizing the > fruits of the path? It would have been an entirely different story... > For this reason I think it's important to have a clear understanding > of what constitutes silabbataparamasa--that one cannot rely on mere > outer rites and observances and expect freedom to arise from outer > mimicry absent right understanding. This is really excellent, Erik. This is a clear statement of why I think it so odd to read the satipatthana sutta as a series of exercises in which we are to try to mimic satipatthana. It's only clear, though, when it is seen that the distinction between outer and inner rites and rituals is transcended when we talk about the Samma's. Critical to development of samma's is understanding that the distinction between ritual and non-ritual is closely related to the distinction between atta and anatta, and between ditthi and samma ditti but that the distinction between inner ritual and outer ritual is not. > Please see above. If you really want to get technical, the entire > Vinaya Pitaka is a set of outer behavioral "ritual" designed to act > as a guide and a support for the trainee. It doesn't help everyone, > as can be observed using an extreme case like Ta Mok, but it does > help create better conditions (such as avoidance of the akusala > accumulated through body & speech) for understanding nonetheless. > Otherwise, why would the Buddha have laid out so many rules for his > disciples? But absent right understanding, it's just more > silabbataparamasa. > That said, for many, emulation--even outer emulation absent right > understanding--can still serve as an excellent way to get the inner > part (where it counts--in the mind) into conformance, as long as > it's practiced in accordance with ever-increasing understanding, or > panna, if you prefer the term. If ritual's done for its own sake, > though, without right understanding (or the increasing straightening > of views that happens in the course of training), then it is the > fetter of silabbataparamasa. I think this is right -- Vinaya without right understanding is silabbataparamasa, and that when there is no understanding, silabbataparamasa is better than no silabbataparamasa. Your explanation is great, but I would modify it just a little to include "inner" silabbataparamasa in the same boat as "outer" silabbataparamasa, to wit: If you really want to get technical, prescribed meditation exercises are behavioral "rituals" designed to act as a guide and a support for the trainee. But absent right understanding, they are just more silabbataparamasa. That said, for many, emulation--even outer emulation [like taking precepts or using Satipatthana sutta as an instruction manual] absent right understanding--can still serve as an excellent way to discipline the inner part, without which understanding cannot develop. If ritual's done for its own sake, though, without right understanding, then it is the fetter of silabbataparamasa. It is a mistake to think that practicing and perfecting following rules will result in wisdom -- the fetter of [outer] silabbataparamasa. It is also a mistake to think that practicing and perfecting meditation techniques will result in wisdom -- the fetter of [inner] silabbataparamasa. Arahants don't establish sati; they don't misunderstand sati. Dan 13192 From: onco111 Date: Sat May 11, 2002 4:50am Subject: [dsg] Re: Right Concentration - [kom] Dear Kom, Thank you for this post. You seem to step in in just the right places with just the right comments. But isn't hasituppadacitta a rootless functional, not a javana? Also, doesn't it seem impossible to even imagine no javanas without sati? Great reminder of how long the path is... Dan > > Dan: This "unbroken mindfulness" sounds very > > peculiar to me. Yes, > > I've heard it said many times before and have > > even been deluded into > > thinking I've experienced it at times. But even > > when the mind is numb > > to it, always there is sense consciousness, investigating > > consciousness, five-door adverting consciousness, > > mind-door adverting > > consciousness intervening -- and sati in none of > > these. This is there > > to be observed in practice, in FM, in daily life, > > in study but it > > does require seeing to see. Sati cannot be > > Thank you for this important reminder. Only an arahant has > virtually perfect awareness (awareness in most javanas). > And even that, in some javanas, there is no sati (hasitupada > citta). We don't have perfect awareness in javanas because > there is no condition to have them. > > kom 13193 From: yuzhonghao Date: Sat May 11, 2002 6:37am Subject: Re: "ritual" [reply to Erik] Hi Dan, Regarding your first question on what are the characteristics of right practice, I would like to ask it as: what is the path* leading to the cessation of dukkha? Regarding your second question "Is satipatthana a skill?" As one of its definitions, the word "skill" means "a learned power of doing something competently: a developed aptitude or ability"** The word "satipatthana" is defined as "intent contemplation and mindfulness, earnest thought, application of mindfulness"*** My answer is: Satipatthana is not a skill, but the skill in satipatthana is. Likewise, Swimming itself is not a skill, but the skill of how to swim is. Regards, Victor *See http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/samyutta/sn45-008.html **See http://www.webster.com/ ***See http://dsal.uchicago.edu/dictionaries/pali/ --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "onco111" wrote: > Victor: > > To add on what you have said, I would like to say that one can read > > all about swimming without knowing how to swim. Reading and > studying > > may help, but it really takes practice to learn the skill. > > You raise two important issues here. Certainly, the importance of > practice is agreed on by all, and that there is a big distinction > between swimming and reading about swimming (as there is between > Dhamma and reading about Dhamma). The question is what are the > characteristics of right practice. > > Is satipatthana a skill? > > Dan 13194 From: manji Date: Sat May 11, 2002 7:04am Subject: RE: [dsg] nibbana - conditioned? I pay homage do the Buddha, the Dhamma, and the Sangha. I take refuge in the Buddha, the Dhamma, and the Sangha. Nibbana is un-conditioned, therefore not dependent. Since it is not dependent and un-conditioned it cannot rise and fall. The clouds come, the clouds go. Walk inside, walk outside. During the day, the sun is always there. When is there an experience of the sun? Although the sun too is conditioned, you can see perhaps that falling away reveals what remains. This is a bit different than conditioning something new. Does the disappearance of the clouds condition the sun? So this is where the "burning up" process of meditation and mindfulness (eightfold path) reveals what remains. The obscuration of nibbana from moha (ignorance). And this moha isn't merely conceptual, and it isn't merely ignorance of what is conceptual (pannati). This whole process of letting go of the results of kamma, reveals more results of kamma, until one day what remains isn't conditioned. And these results of kamma can arise in conventional terms, but here is applied to paramattha dhamma. Letting go, without attachment. Letting go without aversion. Leading to panna (wisdom). So all these results are not self. "What is your original face?" Again, not self. :) Anyways, perhaps this helps. > -----Original Message----- > From: Deanna Shakti Johnson [mailto:deannajohnsonusa@y...] > Sent: Thursday, May 09, 2002 7:11 AM > To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com > Subject: [dsg] nibbana - conditioned? > > > Dear All, > I want to thank everyone for their very interesting and thought provoking > posts. I have been learning alot. Happily I just received numerous books > including Abhidhamma in Daily Life and I am trying to work my way thru > them. I hope to be able to share more in the discussions. > I do have a question - why is nibbana not a conditioned dhamma? If right > understanding of dhamma is necessary along with right effort and > mindfulness how is it possible that enlightenment is not dependant on > anything? I'm confused. Anyone care to shed some light on this for me? > Shakti > > > Hi Robert, > > The "fundamental elements" I am referring to are the "conditioned > paramattha > dhammas." A nice listing of them is found near the beginning of the > Patisambhidamagga (Path of Discrimination) where they are broken down into > 201 states (dhammas). This is the "object-field" upon which insight is > cultivated. Dependent arising, impermanence, unsatisfactoriness, and no- > self > insight should be applied to these states. I have found the > Patisambhidamagga and the Visuddhimagga to be very valuable assistants in > helping to understand how the Suttas are directing to "break down > delusion." > (Not that much has been broken down mind you.) > > This passage of Howard's is awesome... > > >>>It seems to me that if, in trying to see the impersonality of all > dhammas, an essential enterprise (!), one is led to a belief in ultimate > dhammas with own-being, then one has traded one aspect of atta-view for > another. It also seems to me that a mere intellectual understanding of the > truth that all dhammas other than nibbana arise in dependence on causes > and > conditions still misses a full understanding of anatta. <<< 13195 From: manji Date: Sat May 11, 2002 7:07am Subject: RE: [dsg] nibbana - conditioned? Oops... one last remark... The "process" of the "revealing of what remains", this is conditioned. What remains, in the case of nibbanna is un-conditioned. :) -manji- > -----Original Message----- > From: manji [mailto:manji@s...] > Sent: Saturday, May 11, 2002 10:05 AM > To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com > Subject: RE: [dsg] nibbana - conditioned? > > I pay homage do the Buddha, the Dhamma, and the Sangha. > I take refuge in the Buddha, the Dhamma, and the Sangha. > > Nibbana is un-conditioned, therefore not dependent. Since it is not > dependent and un-conditioned it cannot rise and fall. > > The clouds come, the clouds go. Walk inside, walk outside. During the > day, the sun is always there. When is there an experience of the sun? > Although the sun too is conditioned, you can see perhaps that falling > away reveals what remains. This is a bit different than conditioning > something new. > > Does the disappearance of the clouds condition the sun? > > So this is where the "burning up" process of meditation and mindfulness > (eightfold path) reveals what remains. The obscuration of nibbana from > moha (ignorance). And this moha isn't merely conceptual, and it isn't > merely ignorance of what is conceptual (pannati). > > This whole process of letting go of the results of kamma, reveals more > results of kamma, until one day what remains isn't conditioned. And > these results of kamma can arise in conventional terms, but here is > applied to paramattha dhamma. Letting go, without attachment. Letting go > without aversion. Leading to panna (wisdom). So all these results are > not self. > > "What is your original face?" > > Again, not self. :) > > Anyways, perhaps this helps. > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Deanna Shakti Johnson [mailto:deannajohnsonusa@y...] > > Sent: Thursday, May 09, 2002 7:11 AM > > To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com > > Subject: [dsg] nibbana - conditioned? > > > > > > Dear All, > > I want to thank everyone for their very interesting and thought > provoking > > posts. I have been learning alot. Happily I just received numerous > books > > including Abhidhamma in Daily Life and I am trying to work my way thru > > them. I hope to be able to share more in the discussions. > > I do have a question - why is nibbana not a conditioned dhamma? If > right > > understanding of dhamma is necessary along with right effort and > > mindfulness how is it possible that enlightenment is not dependant on > > anything? I'm confused. Anyone care to shed some light on this for > me? > > Shakti > > > > > > Hi Robert, > > > > The "fundamental elements" I am referring to are the "conditioned > > paramattha > > dhammas." A nice listing of them is found near the beginning of the > > Patisambhidamagga (Path of Discrimination) where they are broken down > into > > 201 states (dhammas). This is the "object-field" upon which insight is > > cultivated. Dependent arising, impermanence, unsatisfactoriness, and > no- > > self > > insight should be applied to these states. I have found the > > Patisambhidamagga and the Visuddhimagga to be very valuable assistants > in > > helping to understand how the Suttas are directing to "break down > > delusion." > > (Not that much has been broken down mind you.) > > > > This passage of Howard's is awesome... > > > > >>>It seems to me that if, in trying to see the impersonality of all > > dhammas, an essential enterprise (!), one is led to a belief in > ultimate > > dhammas with own-being, then one has traded one aspect of atta-view > for > > another. It also seems to me that a mere intellectual understanding of > the > > truth that all dhammas other than nibbana arise in dependence on > causes > > and > > conditions still misses a full understanding of anatta. <<< 13196 From: abhidhammika Date: Sat May 11, 2002 7:45am Subject: Re: [dsg] Kamma In Color: To Jon Dear Jon How are you? You wrote: "I am guessing that the 4th kind of kamma refers to moments of mundane or supramundane path consciousness (this being the only kind of kamma that does not conduce to further rebirth in samsara)." Your guess was very close because Commentary on Samkhitta Suttam, on which Vitthaara Suttam was an elaboration, settled on supramundane path consciousness. Thank you for your interest in my new commentary on Vitthaara Suttam. As soon as I finish writing it, I will post it to this list. Won't be long. With regards, Suan --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Jonothan Abbott wrote: > > > > Suan > > Many thanks for your translation of this interesting sutta. > > I could be wrong, but I am guessing that the 4th kind of kamma refers to moments of > mundane or supramundane path consciousness (this being the only kind of kamma that > does not conduce to further rebirth in samsara). > > I look forward to reading your commentary in due course. > > Jon > > --- abhidhammika wrote: > > > > Vitthaara Suttam, from which the following translation was made, can > > be found in Section 233, Kammavaggo, Catukkanipaata, Anguttaranikaayo > > on Chatthasangayana CD-ROM version 3 produced by Vipassana Research > > Institute. Those who use Roman edition should see page 230 in Volume > > 2 of that edition. > > > > > > VITTHAARA SUTTAM ON FOUR GROUPS OF KAMMA > > > > Vitthaara Suttam On Four Groups Of Kamma > > > > Translated By Suan Lu Zaw > > > > Monks, four actions have been declared by me by having personally > > realized them with extraordinary wisdom. What are the four? Monks, > > there is dark action having dark result. Monks, there is white action > > having white result. Monks, there is dark and white action having > > dark and white result. Minks, there is un-dark and un-white action > > having un-dark and un-white result, which takes place for depletion > > of actions. > > > > Monks, what is dark action having dark result? Here, monks, some > > carry out physical action with anger, verbal action with anger, and > > mental action with anger. Having carried out physical action with > > anger, having carried out verbal action with anger, and having > > carried out mental action with anger, he is reborn in the harsh > > world. Being reborn in the harsh world, harsh contacts touch him. > > Being touched by harsh contacts, he experiences the really miserable > > harsh feelings like those beings in hell do. Monks, this is called > > dark action having dark result. > > > > Monks, what is white action having white result? Here, monks, some > > carry out physical action with dis-anger, verbal action with dis- > > anger, and mental action with dis-anger. Having carried out physical > > action with dis-anger, having carried out verbal action with dis- > > anger, and having carried out mental action with dis-anger, he is > > reborn in the gentle world. Being reborn in the gentle world, gentle > > contacts touch him. Being touched by gentle contacts, he experiences > > the really pleasant gentle feelings like Subhakinha Brahma gods do. > > Monks, this is called white action having white result. > > > > Monks, what is dark and white action having dark and white result? > > Here, monks, some carry out physical action with anger as well as > > with dis-anger, verbal action with anger as well as with dis- anger, > > and mental action with anger as well as with dis-anger. Having > > carried out physical action with anger as well as with dis-anger, > > having carried out verbal action with anger as well as with dis- > > anger, and having carried out mental action with anger as well as > > with dis-anger, he is reborn in the harsh and gentle world. Being > > reborn in the harsh and gentle world, harsh as well as gentle > > contacts touch him. Being touched by harsh as well as gentle > > contacts, he experiences the mixed feelings of pleasure and misery > > like human beings, some sensuous gods and some mansion-owning halfway > > beings do. Monks, this is called dark and white action having dark > > and white result. > > > > Monks, what is un-dark and un-white action having un-dark and un- > > white result, which takes place for depletion of actions? Here, > > monks, such activation as to eradicate dark action having dark > > result, such activation as to eradicate white action having white > > result, and such activation as to eradicate dark and white action > > having dark and white result, this activation is called un-dark and > > un-white action having un-dark and un-white result, which takes place > > for depletion of actions. Monks, these four actions have been > > declared by me by having personally realized them with extraordinary > > wisdom. > > > > > > NOTES ON KEY TERMS > > > > The phrase "with anger" is a translation of the Pali > > compound "sabyaapajjam" which was defined as "sadosam" in the Pali > > commentary. Sadosam = sa + dosam. > > Doso is defined as anger in Pali Text Society's Pali – English > > Dictionary, see page 332. > > > > The phrase "with dis-anger" is a translation of the Pali > > word "abyaapajjam". The opposite of the Pali term "doso" is "adoso". > > Dis-anger is the literal translation of "adoso". Abyaapajjo is > > described as a synonym of adoso in Section 33, Dhammasanganii. Hence, > > I translated abyaapajjam as with dis-anger in order to contrast it > > with anger in Paragraph Two of the Vitthaara Suttam. > > > > In Section 397, Siilakkhandha Pali, Diighanikaayo, we find "bhikkhu > > averam abyaapajjam mettacittam bhaaveti. Without enmity, and with dis- > > anger, the monk develops the loving mind". > > > > Thus, dis-anger is a technical term to convey love or loving kindness > > as one of its meanings. It does not refer to the mere absence of > > anger as when our minds are with greed. > > > > Un-dark is a translation of the word "akanha, not dark". Here, un- > > darkness does not refer to other colors such as whiteness. It means > > counteracting the very color of darkness. Un-dark means anti- dark. > > > > Thus, un-dark action would counteract the dark actions and their dark > > results. > > > > Un-white is a translation of the word "asukka, not white". Here, too, > > un-whiteness does not refer to darkness or other colors. It means > > counteracting the very color of whiteness. Un-white means anti- white. > > > > Thus, un-white action would counteract the white actions and their > > white results. > 13197 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Sat May 11, 2002 8:41am Subject: RE: [dsg] Re: Right Concentration - [kom] Dear Dan, That's right. Hasitpadda-citta is the only rootless citta (without the hetu cetasikas) that can occur in Javanas, and occurs only in an arahant only. I think you are absolutely right about the long path. We can see how much sati occurs in a day, and can appreciate how long it would take to become an individual who is perfectly aware... Appreciating your recent posts very much. kom > -----Original Message----- > From: onco111 [mailto:dalthorp@o...] > Sent: Saturday, May 11, 2002 4:50 AM > To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com > Subject: [dsg] Re: Right Concentration - [kom] > > > Dear Kom, > Thank you for this post. You seem to step in in > just the right places > with just the right comments. > > But isn't hasituppadacitta a rootless functional, > not a javana? > > Also, doesn't it seem impossible to even imagine > no javanas without > sati? Great reminder of how long the path is... > > Dan > 13198 From: abhidhammika Date: Sat May 11, 2002 8:41am Subject: Re: [dsg] Iddhi: To Wynn, Sarah, Kom Dear Wynn, Sarah, Kom How are you? I have been following this thread for some time. I got the impression that Wynn could not resolve the issue of which level of Jhaana is adequate for the purposes of iddhi. Can I add something to this thread from another angle? Please allow me to adopt the Fourfold counting of Jhaana stages. Even though there are the four Aruupa Jhaanas in addition to the four Ruupa Jhaanas, all those four Aruupa Jhaanas are the branches of the Fourth Jhaana. They are the fourth Jhaana. Therefore, we can say that the fourth Jhaana is all we need in order to perform iddhi. Having said that, just attaining the fourth Jhaana is not enough for performance of iddhi. Once you got the fourth Jhaana, you needed to explore all branches of the fourth Jhaana. These branches of the fourth Jhaana are none other than Aruupa Jhaanas. In other words, the same fourth Jhaana includes both Ruupa and Aruupa branches. And, unless you have expertise in all branches of the fourth Jhaana, you won't be able to get off the ground iddhi-wise. Therefore, to be on safer grounds, a yogi needed to practice all the Ruupa and Aruupa branches of the fourth Jhaana. Hope I did not add to further confusion! With regards, Suan http://www.bodhiology.org --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., wynn wrote: > > Hi, > > > From jhana section: "...The 4 absorptions of the immaterial sphere (s. > above 5-8) still belong, properly speaking, to the 4th absorption as they > possess the same two constituents. < > > Actually, it is still not clear for me. > > Here, if we take all the arupa jhanas (5-8) as belonging to the 4th jhana, > then do we need the arupas jhana to perform supernormal powers? > > >The 4th fine-material absorption is also the base or starting point > (pádaka-jhána, q.v.) for the attaining of > the higher spiritual powers (abhiññá, q.v.).< > > But this statement is not supported by the Tipitaka nor the commentaries. > > I am curious whether the 4th Jhana (fine material absorption) is enough for > one to be able to perform supernatural powers. > > I know that when performing supernatural powers, the arupa jhanas are not > used at all. But Visudhimagga said one needs all 8 absorption to be able to > do it. (though it is not used when performing psychic powers) > > Thanks, > Wynn 13199 From: Date: Sat May 11, 2002 5:07am Subject: Re: [dsg] ADL ch.6 (1-6): indifferent (long) Hi, Kom - I think you make very important points here. We need be clearly aware of the conceptual distinctions between the Brahma viharas and their near enemies. Then, the other side of the coin is to have direct, clear comprehension of exactly what is experienced at the time that one of the Brahma viharas seems to be in force. I think it is very useful to be particularly mindful on those occasions at which one of them seems to be in effect with regard to a stranger, for that is a likely circumstance for us not to be mistaken. An example in this regard is what happened to me yesterday. I spent yesterday afternoon through to 10 p.m. in the emergency room of a hospital. (I had been experiencing frequent very odd, though, ironically, not completely unpleasant, "episodes" yesterday which are quite difficult to describe. Whatever it was, it was some sort of malfunction. All tests were negative, and the conclusion was that it was probably due to an interaction of grapefruit (!!) with certain prescription medications of mine. I seem to be fine, now, having had no more grapefruit! ;-) In any case, while I was in the E.R., I met two other patients, both lovely gentlemen. One was an Indian man, one year older than I, who was intelligent, learned, and kindly - a teacher of Hindi grammar. He was there because an infection in the external wound from open-heart surgery had developed, and further surgery was likely needed to remove the infection. The other was a great guy, of Greek extraction, who had a recurrence of serious heart trouble, who was on oxygen, and who clearly was having difficulty breathing. He was an amazing, young looking man, 17 years my senior. Despite his problems, his sense of humor was in full force, brilliant, and absolutely charming - a very good person. What I experienced towards these strangers was a welling up of love and compassion, completely free of attachment or pity. The way I felt towards these strangers had the flavor of a "blessing" to me, a gift. It turned an otherwise "unpleasant" experience into something actually wonderful. Yesterday was a good day. Odd, huh? With metta, Howard In a message dated 5/11/02 3:04:13 AM Eastern Daylight Time, kom@a... writes: > > Dear Christine, > > I think the key to develop the 4-brahma vihara is to know > their characteristics, and know how they are different from > lobha, dosa, and moha. Without knowing this, when we think > we are having metta, karuna, mudita, and upekkha, it may > just be wishful thinking out of our attachment to those > qualities. Let me list the near enemies of the 4 qualities, > from memory (so please check, if you have the > opportunities!) > > Metta has lobha as its near enemy. It is easy to mistake > lobha for metta. For example, when we treat somebody kindly > who is dear to us, is that metta or lobha? Very difficult > to tell. > > Karuna has dosa as its near enemy. Without hearing the > Buddha's teachings, some people mistake dosa (unhappiness > for other people's misery) as karuna. When we see a thin, > malnourished child, is the wish to do something for the > child really driven by our need to drive away the unpleasant > feeling (domanassa) or is it driven by karuna? > > Mudita has lobha as its near enemy. When we see happiness > of somebody dear to us, is that by attachment or by mudita? > > Equanimity has ignorance as its near enemy. Some people > mistake ignorance and its associated indifferent feeling as > equanimity (often stated as upekkha). Equanimity is the > quality of not falling into unwholesome states. When we > feel indifferent toward someone's plight, is that lack of > metta (and lack of equanimity) or is there a knowledge that > we cannot do anything for the person and that each person > has kamma as their own? > > We normally like to think good thing about ourselves (like > we have metta, karuna, mudita, and equanmity, especially > comparing to other people!), but without knowing these > different qualities, then developing them to a high degree > is impossible, and a lot of time, thinking that we actually > have these qualities are just wishful thinking. > > The thing is to develop kusala, and to discard akusala. > What if we are in a situation that requires us to rebuke > somebody to help others? My question would then be, is that > rebuke done out of kusala or akusala? Rebuking somebody out > of anger to help other people are akusala kamma, and one > will certainly suffer the result of that akusala kamma, and > enjoy the fruit out of the kusala intention for another. We > need to be straight and true to the dhamma: if it is kusala, > then it is kusala; if it is akusala, it is akusala. Wishing > it some way or another doesn't change the realities. > > I reiterate the story from Maha-pari-nibbana sutta. The > Buddha asked V. Ananda for water (when he was sick) 3 > different times, but V. Ananda mentioned to the Buddha that > the water was unsuitable for drinking because of recent herd > crossing. The Buddha insisted, and V. Ananda eventually > found suitable water. The fact that the Buddha couldn't get > suitable water was said to be his chasing away his herd from > unsuitable water in a previous live. Although he did this > out of good intention, but akusala alternated with kusala, > and the bad vipaka resulted from the akusala kamma. > > I believe the Buddha encouraged us to develop all levels of > kusala (dana, sila, and bhavana) whenever an opportunity > presents itself. He certainly didn't praise akusala or > indifferent feeling (out of ignorance). But we also have to > remember, all these qualities rise because of conditions. > Without hearing the Buddha's teaching, they probably are > conditioned by our own accumulations and the people with are > associated with. However, with the Buddha's teachings, we > can develop them to the finest degree, by hearing detailed > teachings about these qualities and their enemies, by > considering them in our daily lives, by knowing their > benefits and the faults of their opposites, and by knowing > them as they truly are: conditioned realities that fall away > immediately that is neither self or ours. > > kom > /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)