16400 From: Sarah Date: Mon Oct 21, 2002 9:42pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Way 13, Comm. Hi Rob K, A quick little butting in: --- rjkjp1 wrote: > --- > Dear Nina, > Just one question , I don't have access to any pali texts right now. > What is the pali for 'proximate cause"? > with respect > Robert ... "Immediate occasion (pada.t.thaana.m) means proximate cause. Thus wherever we speak of characteristics, etc, their mutual difference should be understood in this wise." Atthasalini transl PTS p84 In an earlier post I questioned the use of 'proximate cause' for rupas, but I was mistaken and Rob M and Brian are discussing these and I just assume it is the same word used. Eg "Herein primary materiality is of four kinds as the earth element, water element, fire element and air element. Their characteristic, function, and manifestation have been given under the definition of the four elements; but as to the proximate cause, each has the other three as its proximate cause." Vism, XIV,35 ***** As I understand pada.t.thaana literally means 'footprint' from pada-foot. Now I understand better the use of 'footing' in the PTS Netti transl which you also have. 'footing' is translated from pada.t.thaana as in: " 'Investigate yourselves, launch out' are the footing for energy. (The words) 'Devote yourselves in the Enlightened One's Dispensation' are the footing for concentration. (The words) 'Scatter the armies of Mortality as does an elephant a hut of reeds' are the footing for understanding...."(Netti, 40 p65 in transl) ..... Also under the "Mode of conveying Footings"(Netti, 104 p140 in transl): " 'So let his cognizance be guarded': this is the footing for the three kinds of good conduct. 'Having for pasture right intention': this is the footing for quiet. 'Giving right view first place': this is the footing for insight. 'Through knowing rise and fall: this is the footing for the plane of seeing (as the path of Stream Entry). 'Transcending drowsing and lethargy a bhikkhu may': this is the footing for energy. 'Abandon all bad destinations': this is the footing for keeping in being (as the attainment of the three higher paths)." ***** Nina, Jim or others may add further details or corrections. Sarah ====== 16401 From: rikpa21 Date: Mon Oct 21, 2002 10:29pm Subject: On Wisdom Hello fellow DSG'ers, I found this note on wisdom (taken from the Tripitika) from Prof. Richard Hayes appropriate and worthy of wise consideration: "Now as long as we are on the topic of wisdom, let's make it clear that according to the Buddha (as reported in Nandamaanavapucchaa in the Sutta-nipaata) wisdom has nothing whatsoever to do with what one believes. It has nothing at all to do with what one has experienced or how one has experienced it, nothing to do with what one has learnt or how much one has learnt or from whom one has learnt it, and nothing to do with what one has thought about and figured out by oneself. Moreover, wisdom has nothing to do with which vows one has taken or what rituals one performs. "If wisdom is none of these, asks Nanda, then what is it? The Buddha replies that wisdom consists in letting go of worldviews, letting go of traditions and teachings, letting go of rituals and obsessions about which actions are pure and which impure, and letting go of all the internal poisons. Wisdom, he goes on to say, is living in seclusion, not depending in any way on the approval of the rest of society. In other places in the Sutta-nipaata, the Buddha says that wisdom consists in "disarming", that is, letting go of all cudgels, swords and sticks (and, I would guess, uzi machine guns, AK-47 assault rifles, handguns, armoured tank divisions, vials of weapon-grade infectious diseases and nuclear bombs) and beholding all living beings with the same love that a mother has for her only child." 16402 From: Sarah Date: Mon Oct 21, 2002 10:34pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Back from retreat, 1 & 2 Hi Brian, --- Brian Kelley wrote: Thank you for all your comments and apologies for snipping most. > Yes, exactly. Knowing realities as they occur. .... You’ll also like this quote from Nyanaponika in ‘Abhidhamma Studies’: > The study of the Abhidhamma should therefore not be allowed > to degenerate into a mere collecting, counting, and arranging of such > conceptual labels. This would make of Abhidhamma study - though, of > course, not of the Abhidhamma itself - just one more among the many > intellectual "playthings" that serve as an escape from facing > reality, or as a "respectable excuse" with which to evade the hard > inner work needed for liberation. A merely abstract and conceptual > approach to the Abhidhamma may also lead to that kind of intellectual > pride that often goes together with specialized knowledge. ***** Having quoted that, I personally find it very helpful as you’re doing, to consider the details and true nature of paramattha dhammas. For example, to understand a little more about all phenomena as elements (dhatu) helps to lessen the attachment to an idea of self: (Sammohavinodani transl 1760) "Likewise the eye is the eye element; the visible datum is the visible datum element; the seeing is the eye-consciousness element; the state associated therewith beginning with feeling are the mental-datum element. In this way "looking towards and looking away" is stated in terms of these four elements. Herein, what single person looks towards, what person looks away?" ***** Here’s another reference with ‘proximate cause’ from an earlier post of mine: ..... > The Atthasalini (II, Book II, Ch III, 318) and the Visuddhimagga > (XIV, 54) both give the following definition of visible object: > > Visible object has the characteristic of striking the eye, the > function of being the object of eye-sense consciousness, the > manifestation of being the field of visual cognition and the four > Great Elements as proximate cause. ..... All rupas depend on the 4 Great Elements. These 4 along with visible object, odour, flavour and nutritive essence cannot be separated and constitute the smallest unit (kalapa) of rupas. Without the 4 principle or primary rupas, the other 24 derived rupas could not therefore arise, so all other rupas are dependent on them. ***** > Oh, I'm sorry, I forgot to introduce myself. My name is Brian Kelley. > My wife, > Gini, and I live in a rural area of northeastern New York state, in the > foothills of > the Adirondack mountains. Before this introduction to the Abhidhamma, > my > primary area of study has been the Sutta Pitaka. For the past few > years, my > meditation practice has focused on anapanasati and cultivating metta. I > > frequently attend retreats at the Barre Center for Buddhist Studies in > Barre, > Massachusetts (about 3 and a half hours away from where we live). The > focus at BCBS is to integrate scholarly understanding and meditative > insight. ..... It sounds like a nice area and convenient for your retreats. I expect you’ll also have a chance to visit B.Bodhi in New Jersey soon if you wish. ..... > Thanks so much for letting this yogi eavesdrop on your discussions. > ..... A pleasure indeed < more smiles>. May I say that I particularly appreciate your positive and kind attitude with regard to sharing dhamma. Sarah ==== 16403 From: Sarah Date: Tue Oct 22, 2002 0:55am Subject: Re: [dsg] One Sure Way Hi Mo, > From: "Michael Olds" .... I’m glad to read your well-considered points and to hear from you again on DSG (even if indirectly. I am quite sure I cannot emulate Ananda's role, but am happy to give a few wordling comments;-): ...... > A: "N: No, usually the fivefold, sometimes sixfold. The three > abstinences > arise together when the Path is lokuttara, then it is eightfold." > > How does this square with the fact that the fourth of the Satipatthanas, > regarding things from the viewpoint of the Dhamma, culminates in > regarding > things from the viewpoint of the Four Truths (and in the case of the > MahaSatipatthana, the Eightfold Path), and the Four Truths is identical > with Samma Ditthi which includes, as it's fourth element, the Eightfold > Path? ..... I would re-phrase this to suggest that the fourth of the satipatthanas (dhammanupassana) includes all realities such as the cetasikas (apart from vedana) not included in the other 3 satipatthanas as well as all realities under various classifications such as the khandhas. These dhammas are the objects of Samma Ditthi and other kusala mental factors - not viewpoints. When these wholesome qualities, led indeed by samma ditthi, have been fully developed, the Four Truths are realized. As you suggest, this is the ‘culmination’ of satipatthana. As you say, the fourth Truth is the Eightfold Path, but we cannot say the Truths are identical with samma ditthi. ..... > Or, alternatively, if, as it is said here, only the five-fold or sixfold > path is intended, how does this statement square with the fact that this > too > includes Samma Ditthi which includes the Four Truths which includes as > it's > fourth, the Eightfold path. ..... While satipatthana is being developed, the 5 (or 6 at moments of one of the 3 abstinences)fold path is intended, including samma ditthi, but not lokuttara samma ditthi which realizes nibbana and is accompanied by the 7 other Path factors at that moment. ..... > Seeing this, one can see that even if one limits one's "Path" to the one > step, Samma Ditthi, there is sufficient scope to that to take one to the > goal. ..... Samma ditthi has to be assisted by the other path factors; at each moment of samma ditthi, there is also s.sankappa, s.vayama, s.sati and s.samadhi accompanying it. Agreed about the leadership role of s.ditthi. ..... > Again, from another angle, the Satipatthanas are not practiced in > sequence, > but describe a sequence of experiences that evolve into each other so > that, > for example, seeing that one's own body is of precisely the same nature > as > a > decaying corpse, if it is, in fact seen that way, implies seeing sense > experience (vedana), emotions (cita), and the Dhamma, and is at lease a > small taste of Nibbana here and now. ..... Agreed that the Satipatthanas are not a ‘sequence’. Different namas and rupas have to be known over and over again as elements, as phenomena, not self. I agree that as understanding develops of various paramattha dhammas, it becomes apparent that others (not yet experienced) are of the same nature: i.e elements, not-self, impermanent etc. Seeing one’s body ‘as a decaying corpse’ may be just thinking, not understanding of rupas directly. It depends. It may be a moment of samatha which is kusala but not the same as satipatthana. I don’t think we can say that moments of understanding or satipatthana are a ‘small taste o Nibbana here and now’, however. ..... > The way this business of a worldly path and a super-worldly path is > being > understood is off track. Taking just the Satipatthana, which is only one > example, and granting that one who is just beginning, begins from the > worldly path, following the Satipatthana to it's conclusion one arrives > at > The Four Truths which ends in the Magga, which ends with Samma Samadhi, > which ends with Upekkha which, when seen as freedom and when freedom is > seen > as freedom (that is, when the situation has been made conscious), is a > synonym for Nibbana. ..... I don’t think I follow. If there is a moment of satipatthana now, there must be samma ditthi accompanied by samma samadhi at a beginning level. This mundane or worldly path must be accompanied by detachment from the start. ..... > If a path leads to the goal, how can it be regarded as worldly? > It cannot. It is only the attitude of individuals towards that path that > can > be distinguished as worldly or not. (Sariputta does not say: "There is a > worldly path and an Unworldly Path"; he says "there is a taking on of > the > Path which is Worldly and there is a taking on of the Path which is > unworldly," and he goes on to describe it as a matter of attitude.) ..... I agree it depends on the attitude or rather the understanding at any given time. Still, I think the wordly path refers to the path of developing understanding of the truths as opposed to the supramundane path moments which realize nibbana. Even those who have attained levels of enlightenment, the sekkha, are still ‘in training’. Understanding and the other noble qualities continue to develop. ..... >If one > approaches the dhamma, attaining step-by-step each of it's > accomplishments, > with the idea of gain (fame, power, status, etc.) then one has walked > the > worldly path; if at each level of progress one does not exalt the self > or > disparage others but simply evaluates the situation for what it is, > seeing > that there is more to be done and setting out for it's accomplishment, > then > one is walking the path of the Higher Dhamma. ..... At moments of concern with worldly conditions or any other akusala, I don’t understand that any path (mundane or supramundane) is being followed . This can be referred to as wordly understanding, i.e wrong view, but this shouldn’t be confused with mundane or worldly path in the discussion referred to. Only moments of direct understanding of realities can be considered as moments of satipatthana or path (mundane); not moments of wise reflection or consideration. Mo, you’ve studied parts of the Tipitaka extensively and also Pali, I know. I apologise if I appear to be missing your points at all and would be glad for any further clarification. Let me finish with a quote from the Mulapariyaya Sutta commentary below with reference to the aggamagga or ‘Supreme Path’ . Sarah ===== From the commentary to the Mulapariya Sutta: “...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).” “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.” =========================================== 16404 From: Brian Kelley Date: Tue Oct 22, 2002 5:46am Subject: Re: A Question about proximate cause Hi Rob, You wrote: > If you are interested in rupas, Nina's book, "Rupas" is excellent: > > http://www.zolag.co.uk/ebook.html > I have downloaded it and look forward to reading it with great anticipation. (Unfortunately it has joined a long queue of materials I want to read in the near future -- a line that, the more I read, just seems to keep getting longer, not shorter!) > If you are interested in a concise summary, I have compressed Nina's > book into 12 pages. It will be part of the next update of class > notes in ten days time or if you want it sooner, please send me a > note off-line at rob.moult@j... and I will reply with the > attachment. When I downloaded the .pdf files of your class notes, I had difficulty reading them, because the paali words with diacriticals didn't display correctly. I suspect this is a font issue, or more specifically a cross-platform issue -- I use a Macintosh computer (running Mac OS X, 10.2). I realize that I didn't answer your earlier question, to say more about the project I'm working on. As I mentioned, this is my strategy for beginning to learn and memorize the lists in the CMA, by working with them and constructing a hypertext model based on certain of the charts. The way this works: I've made an html page of the chart of the 28 material phenomena, then for each item, link it to an html page with Bhikkhu Bodhi's explanation, and the characteristic, function, manifestation, and proximate cause of each item. I'll do other charts for cetasikas and cittas. The hope is to have them all cross-referenced, so that one can click on any term and be able to get information about related terms. Once all this reference material is ready, my teacher was encouraging me to make an interactive module, in which one could map out a "snapshot" of a mind-moment, taking a real life situation and having the user go through and select which cetasikas, for example, would be present. That's the idea, anyway. With metta, Brian 16405 From: Brian Kelley Date: Tue Oct 22, 2002 5:59am Subject: Re: [dsg] Back from retreat, 1 & 2 Hi Sarah, Thank you for the quotes from Ven. Nyanaponika and from the Visudhimagga. Very helpful indeed. And may I say how refreshing it is to join a list where the discussions are not only ennobling, but also conducted with gentleness and mutual respect. I apologize for the following lengthy snip: > It sounds like a nice area and convenient for your retreats. I expect > you'll also have a chance to visit B.Bodhi in New Jersey soon if you wish. On the last day of the Abhidhamma retreat, Andy mentioned that Ven. Bhikkhu Bodhi has agreed to come up to BCBS to teach a course -- it was speculated that it might even be a longer version of this very Abhidhamma course. I'm very hopeful that, if this does happen, I'll be able to attend. What a marvelous opportunity that would be! With metta, Brian 16406 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Oct 22, 2002 10:02am Subject: Re: [dsg] One Sure Way Dear Mike O, Your point of the four noble Truths is certainly not easy to answer, especially the Truth of cessation. We are studying slowly all the Applications. Jim has given me the Pali text and he will give me also the subco. which is very necessary to understand the Co. When we at last come to that point we shall see how to solve this dilemma. When I look in Ven. Soma's Co, just after Way 14 quoted by Larry: <~Nayassa adhigamaaya: For reaching the right Path. The real Eightfold Path is called the right path. `Verily, this preliminary, mundane Way of the Arousing of Mindfulness made to become (grown or cultivated) is conducive to the realisation of the Supramundane Way.> I hope this clarifies somewhat. I think it is panna from beginning to end, first, on the level of thinking, then, it grows through direct awareness and understanding of whatever appears through the six doors, one at a time. Sammaditthi is, I believe, not the end, but I think you do not take it as the end. It develops together with the other factors. I am first of all concerned with understanding of what appears now. We can think of lokuttara panna and nibbana, but that is only thinking. It is far off, is it not? I really appreciate your keenness to study. I like your text references, and I shall look at them. I am just now rather busy, so that I cannot go into all your points. They are certainly worth discussuing, and I hope others will join in. If you are not a member of dsg, please join, we need people like you :-) with appreciation, Nina. op 21-10-2002 06:16 schreef Sarah op sarahdhhk@y...: Questions from Mo: > > Q: "When arousing of mindfulness is mentioned the 8-fold path is implied. > QUESTION: Does this mean that when satipatthana is practiced the entire > 8-fold path is practiced?" > A: "N: No, usually the fivefold, sometimes sixfold. The three abstinences > arise together when the Path is lokuttara, then it is eightfold." > > How does this square with the fact that the fourth of the Satipatthanas, > regarding things from the viewpoint of the Dhamma, culminates in regarding > things from the viewpoint of the Four Truths (and in the case of the > MahaSatipatthana, the Eightfold Path), and the Four Truths is identical > with Samma Ditthi which includes, as it's fourth element, the Eightfold > Path? > Or, alternatively, if, as it is said here, only the five-fold or sixfold > path is intended, how does this statement square with the fact that this > too > includes Samma Ditthi which includes the Four Truths which includes as > it's > fourth, the Eightfold path. > > Seeing this, one can see that even if one limits one's "Path" to the one > step, Samma Ditthi, there is sufficient scope to that to take one to the > goal. > > Again, from another angle, the Satipatthanas are not practiced in > sequence, > but describe a sequence of experiences that evolve into each other so > that, > for example, seeing that one's own body is of precisely the same nature as > a > decaying corpse, if it is, in fact seen that way, implies seeing sense > experience (vedana), emotions (cita), and the Dhamma, and is at lease a > small taste of Nibbana here and now. > > The way this business of a worldly path and a super-worldly path is being > understood is off track. Taking just the Satipatthana, which is only one > example, and granting that one who is just beginning, begins from the > worldly path, following the Satipatthana to it's conclusion one arrives at > The Four Truths which ends in the Magga, which ends with Samma Samadhi, > which ends with Upekkha which, when seen as freedom and when freedom is > seen > as freedom (that is, when the situation has been made conscious), is a > synonym for Nibbana. > > If a path leads to the goal, how can it be regarded as worldly? > It cannot. It is only the attitude of individuals towards that path that > can > be distinguished as worldly or not. (Sariputta does not say: "There is a > worldly path and an Unworldly Path"; he says "there is a taking on of the > Path which is Worldly and there is a taking on of the Path which is > unworldly," and he goes on to describe it as a matter of attitude.) If one > approaches the dhamma, attaining step-by-step each of it's > accomplishments, > with the idea of gain (fame, power, status, etc.) then one has walked the > worldly path; if at each level of progress one does not exalt the self or > disparage others but simply evaluates the situation for what it is, seeing > that there is more to be done and setting out for it's accomplishment, > then > one is walking the path of the Higher Dhamma. > > Some references: > > See: PTS: Middle Length Sayings, I: #19: Discourse on the Twofold Thought, > pp.148 > PTS: Greater Discourse on the (Ways of) undertaking Dhamma, I.372 > and: Majjhima:114. Sevitabbasevitabba Sutta (Sevitabbaasevitabba), III.45 > Middle Length Sayings: > WP: To Be Cultivated and Not To Be Cultivated, 913 > PTS: Discourse on what is to be Followed and what is not to be Followed, > III.94 16407 From: proctermail Date: Tue Oct 22, 2002 11:46am Subject: Should the Garden be left to Grow? Hi, Firstly a little introduction - i am Sarah's nephew tom. this is my first real excursion into this site and my buddhist knowledge thin so please forgive any ignorance. My first question is essentially one of practicality : I have found that on occasion, and infact the more it is thought about the more occasions in which instances of it can be found, that the action that is taken is often in conflict with mindfulness - for example, when you clean you often find spiders and spiders webs in your house - to remove these hence possibly killing the spiders and destroying their homes in the process is asserting a selfish notion ie clean over a non selfish one of preserve life and allow things to be. It could I guess be argued that if they died in right mindfulness (a prayer for example) then nothing would be disrupted but... I origianally thought of this ages ago and emailed Sarah about it, but it has developed - hence the time taken to post. The same would apply to gardening - should i let it grow? 16408 From: christine_forsyth Date: Tue Oct 22, 2002 2:08pm Subject: Re: Should the Garden be left to Grow? Dear group, Tom's comments raised the old issues of 'sentient' beings, 'kamma' and 'rebirth' for me once again. It is good to 'hear' from you, Tom. Welcome to dsg. I ask similar questions occasionally. [Do you hear snakes making gulping sounds like your Aunt Sarah? - I was just wondering if it is a genetically inherited talent to attract those rare reptiles? ;-) ] Excerpt from post 12552 "Chris: - Keeping on your good side after the mention of B.Bodhi, I won't mention any scepticism about snakes making a 'gulping' sound. If you say it did Sarah, then it did! This brings up a Dhamma focus question (seriously) - Is there a Buddhist scripture relating to "not saving" - this is pertinent for me, having rescued a small lizard caught up in a spider web. I'm not sure if the lizard was grateful, But the spider was furious...no dinner, and having to repair his home... So - was it a good thing...saving another being? or was it a bad thing....depriving a being of sustenance, and damaging his living area? Should we let whatever is happening to another being (human or otherwise) happen? If we intervene, are we just delaying the fruits of their kamma?....Or were we meant to save them?" I, too, ask about the dilemma of 'other beings' from time to time. What to do about spiders, cane toads, frogs, cockroaches, ants, wasps, snakes, lizards, mice, rats and possums that seek to share my outside and inside living space. It is often difficult to discuss - most buddhists don't really take it seriously. Rebirth (if even accepted as a possibility) is not thought of as anything other than another human birth by many buddhists. So the value of the lives of insects, reptiles and other creatures seems to be given lip service only. Only one choice is usually considered when human comfort is involved (and it is mostly comfort, not health) - extermination. Currently, Queensland is undergoing the worst drought in over a hundred years. (There is to be a huge ecumenical Service led by the Archbishop and the State's Premier today in the Cathedral to pray for rain. Inevitably the prayers will be answered - I hope they put in a clause about 'timeliness of response'.) But, on a micro level, the ant population (always the ones with the most initiative, next to humans and rats) are invading my kitchen sink - they can't walk 200 metres to the rapidly drying dam for a drink, I expect. And, besides which, it is shoulder to shoulder with insect eating cattle egrets and ibis out there. The ants are also sending scouts out to locate the sugar bowl, crumbs and any other food sources. Nothing much outside - the grass is brown and crunchy underfoot. The local cattle are being grazed on the roadsides, 'the long paddock'. For anyone who remembers, Rachel the rat has disappeared. I believe prevention is the best choice and if I was starting off in a brand new house it would be easier. This week, because of the dire weather conditions (37 C and not half way through Spring yet) and raging bush fires (one human death so far, 'Others' not collected statistically), I have a tree lopping service coming to cut back many of the trees the 'Others' use as ladders onto/into the roof space. The mother possum is welcome to the sheds - but I would really prefer the rats' relatives to relocate entirely. I understand that scrupulous cleanliness is a given, but when conditions for survival are harsh to extreme outside, this doesn't prevent a clash of species' 'needs and wants' occurring. Should we just put out the 'rat bait' and 'surface spray' and call it 'their results of previous kamma' and 'commonsense' - maybe take up a mantra like 'there is no self - no-one who kills, no-one who dies' ... but if rebirth is truth, and I wipe out a nest of 30,000 ant beings deliberately, would saying 'I tried everything, but they just kept coming to the sink, so I had no choice ...' really wipe out the affects of my kamma? And will we ever get out of samsara if the deliberate killing of an insect is equivalent to killing beings more like 'us'? - an imponderable, I know. Tom, with regards to the garden, I think cutting back shrubs and trees from a Buddhist perspective is O.K. - isn't the precept about not killing applicable only to sentient beings (those who are beathing, and can feel fear)? Though knowingly entirely removing the things which a sentient being needs to sustain life would be another issue, as would garden insecticides and herbicides, so I believe. For more, look under "Animals" in Useful Posts and then follow the links and replies - http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/files/Useful_Posts Welcome again, and hope to 'hear' you regularly, metta, Christine --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "proctermail" wrote: > Hi, > > Firstly a little introduction - i am Sarah's nephew tom. this is my > first real excursion into this site and my buddhist knowledge thin so > please forgive any ignorance. > > My first question is essentially one of practicality : > > I have found that on occasion, and infact the more it is thought > about the more occasions in which instances of it can be found, that > the action that is taken is often in conflict with mindfulness - for > example, when you clean you often find spiders and spiders webs in > your house - to remove these hence possibly killing the spiders and > destroying their homes in the process is asserting a selfish notion > ie clean over a non selfish one of preserve life and allow things to > be. It could I guess be argued that if they died in right mindfulness > (a prayer for example) then nothing would be disrupted but... > > I origianally thought of this ages ago and emailed Sarah about it, > but it has developed - hence the time taken to post. The same would > apply to gardening - should i let it grow? 16409 From: robmoult Date: Tue Oct 22, 2002 2:41pm Subject: Re: A Question about proximate cause Hi Brian, --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "Brian Kelley" wrote: > When I downloaded the .pdf files of your class notes, I had difficulty reading > them, because the paali words with diacriticals didn't display correctly. I > suspect this is a font issue, or more specifically a cross- platform issue -- I use > a Macintosh computer (running Mac OS X, 10.2). Somebody else had a similar problem but it worked okay after they downloaded the latest version of Acrobat Reader (5.05?). Failing that, I could email to you the font file (.ttf format), if you think that it might help. > > I realize that I didn't answer your earlier question, to say more about the > project I'm working on. As I mentioned, this is my strategy for beginning to > learn and memorize the lists in the CMA, by working with them and > constructing a hypertext model based on certain of the charts. The way this > works: I've made an html page of the chart of the 28 material phenomena, > then for each item, link it to an html page with Bhikkhu Bodhi's explanation, > and the characteristic, function, manifestation, and proximate cause of each > item. I'll do other charts for cetasikas and cittas. The hope is to have them all > cross-referenced, so that one can click on any term and be able to get > information about related terms. Once all this reference material is ready, my > teacher was encouraging me to make an interactive module, in which one > could map out a "snapshot" of a mind-moment, taking a real life situation and > having the user go through and select which cetasikas, for example, would be > present. That's the idea, anyway. Wow! What an ambitious project! What is the time frame? I hope that you will be posting your work on a web-page, because even partially completed, it will be an excellent resource. Nina's book "Cetasikas" (available at the Zolag site mentioned earlier) will be an invaluable resource for you. Had you considered adding charts for the 24 conditions (Again, Nina's book on the subject is excellent) and Paticcasamuppada as well? I believe that Bhikkhu Bodhi is planning to relocate from Sri Lanka to your neck of the woods (not sure of the details, Sarah will know) in the near future. I would say that you are lucky, but that would be mana :-) Thanks, Rob M :-) 16410 From: robmoult Date: Tue Oct 22, 2002 4:57pm Subject: Re: Should the Garden be left to Grow? Hi Tom, An imaginary conversation: Friend: Rob! You have shaved your head! Have you decided to become a monk? Rob: No, I have taken up competitive swimming. I read in a magazine that shaving my head will reduce resistance cutting 0.04 sec from my lap time. Friend: Rob, you are 10kg overweight and spend less than one hour a week in the pool. Why don't you focus on the more important issues before thinking about cutting 0.04 sec from your lap time? Killing insects creates bad kamma. However, let us consider the weightiness of the kamma created. The most important consideration in kammic weightiness is the quality of the underlying volition (intention). Are you malciously, sadistically and cruelly, seeking out to kill these insects? If so, that is worse kamma than failing to stop the lawnmower in time before you run over a poor worm. The second consideration is the being that is killed. Killing a virtuous human is more serious than killing a non-virtuous human. Killing a human is more serious than killing an animal. Killing a large animal is more serious than killing a small animal. The bottom line is that if you are like me, before breakfast each day you end up doing ten bad things more weighty than killing an insect. By all means, avoid killing insects if you can. However, don't lose sight of the big picture; the mind is the forerunner of all things; work on your mental states to avoid greed/attachment (lobha), hatred/aversion (dosa) and delusion (moha). Another thing to think about is the incredible power of good kammic actions. Remember the ending of the movie, "Monsters, Inc.", when they discovered that laughter has ten times the energy of screams? A bit of dana (generosity), sila (discipline) or bhavana (meditation) creates lots and lots of good kamma. So rather than focusing on issues such as the killing of insects, perhaps you could focus on "helping an old lady to cross the street". With Metta, Rob M :-) 16411 From: Date: Tue Oct 22, 2002 4:45pm Subject: Way 15, Comm. "The Way of Mindfulness" by Soma Thera http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/bps/misc/wayof.html Commentary continued ñayassa adhigamaya = "For reaching the right path." The Noble Eightfold Path is called the right path. This preliminary, mundane Way of the Arousing of Mindfulness maintained (grown or cultivated) is conducive to the realisation of the Supramundane Way. Nibbanassa sacchikiriyaya = "For the attainment of Nibbana." It is said as follows: For the attainment, the ocular experience by oneself, of the deathless which has got the name "Nibbana" by reason of the absence in it of the lust [vana, literally, sewing, weaving, from the root va, to weave] called craving [tanha]. [Tika] Craving [tanha] sews together [samsibbati] or weaves [vinati] aggregate with aggregate, effect with cause, and suffering with beings. In Nibbana there is no "vana". Or in the man who has attained to Nibbana there is no "vana". [T] Ocular experience by oneself: Sensing without aid from the outside. This way maintained, effects the attainment of Nibbana, gradually. Although by the phrase, "For the purification of beings," the things meant by the other phrases which follows it are attained, the significance of those other phrases that follow the first, is not obvious except to a person familiar with the usage of the Dispensation [sasana yutti kovido]. Since the Blessed one does not at first make people conversant with the usage of the Dispensation and after that teach the Doctrine to them, and as he by various discourses sets forth various meanings, he explained the things which "the only way" effects, with the words "For the overcoming of sorrow and lamentation," and so forth. Or it may be said that the Master explained the things accomplished by "the only way", in this manner, in order to show that every thing which leads to the purification of beings by the "only way" is dependent on the overcoming of sorrow and lamentation; that this overcoming is dependent on the destruction of suffering and grief; and that the destruction of suffering and grief is dependent on the reaching of the right path which is in turn dependent on the attainment of Nibbana. It is a declaration of the method of deliverance, by "the only way." 16412 From: rjkjp1 Date: Tue Oct 22, 2002 6:45pm Subject: Re: Should the Garden be left to Grow? --- Dear Rob., Just one point about cleaning out spider webs. The monks are told that they should keep their surroundings clean and the texts point out spider webs as something that they should clear away when they are cleaning.This of course can be done without killing the spiders. Robert In dhammastudygroup@y..., "proctermail" wrote: > Hi, > > Firstly a little introduction - i am Sarah's nephew tom. this is my > first real excursion into this site and my buddhist knowledge thin so > please forgive any ignorance. > > My first question is essentially one of practicality : > > I have found that on occasion, and infact the more it is thought > about the more occasions in which instances of it can be found, that > the action that is taken is often in conflict with mindfulness - for > example, when you clean you often find spiders and spiders webs in > your house - to remove these hence possibly killing the spiders and > destroying their homes in the process is asserting a selfish notion > ie clean over a non selfish one of preserve life and allow things to > be. It could I guess be argued that if they died in right mindfulness > (a prayer for example) then nothing would be disrupted but... > > I origianally thought of this ages ago and emailed Sarah about it, > but it has developed - hence the time taken to post. The same would > apply to gardening - should i let it grow? 16413 From: rjkjp1 Date: Tue Oct 22, 2002 7:05pm Subject: Re: Practice on DSG ---Dear Christine, Thanks for your interest. In dhammastudygroup@y..., "christine_forsyth" wrote: > From the first post :Meeting with Acharn somporn" > "He said > that reading the texts is one aspect but only by understanding > sabhava -realities - directly can there be proper understanding. > Everything is dhamma , whether it be seeing or hearing, colour or > sound, hardness, heat, even avijja (ignorance) is dhamma. There is no > one,no being there at all but because of wrong view the > characteristics (lakkhana ) which are simply conditioned dhamma are > taken as self. This is very deep and subtle sakkya ditthi shows > itself by clinging to wrong practice. > He said if there is real understanding of sabhava dhamma then there > is no fear of death because there is no self in sabhava." > > Question 1. (a) I wonder if anyone could clarify for me how 'right > practice' > would occur in the everyday life of a buddhist today? (b) or more exactly, how 'wrong practice' in everyday > life of a buddhist today would be defined? ________________ I think right practice is nothing other than the arising of panna which experiences whatever is present. Others might disagree and that is fine.When we read the satipatthana sutta we see that the Buddha classified objects into 4: body, feelings, citta, mind objects. And then we might decide to try to concentrate on some of these : However, does trying to make sati go to certain objects lead to detachment from the idea of self? We might remember that sati is just a cetasika - so ephemeral- can it really be directed and maintained? And the sati that is associated with sammaditthi of the path is the most profound of all - because it penetrates the characteristics of dhammas. On the other hand we may have the accumulations to be more skilled in understanding one of these 4 foundations than the others and so feelings appear more clear in the beginning or citta with lobha (the first under the citta classification). Or the hindrances may be the object that appears most; or visible object. However understanding has to become aware of all dhammas that appear: In the Path of Discrimination Treatise I on Knowledge, Ch 1, Section 1, All), it says: Bhikkhus, all is to be directly known. And what is all that is to be directly known? Eye is to be directly known, visible object is to be directly known, eye-consciousness... eye-contact... any feeling that arises with eye-contact as its condition whether pleasant or painful or neither-painful-nor-pleasant is also to be directly known...Ó """end translation. Acharn Sujin spoke with me on Sunday about choosing objects of satipatthana. She explained that nama and rupa are arising now. When there is choosing there are namas -sankhara khanda - that arise to choose and if there is no awareness of those moments as sankhara then there will continue to be the subtle, perhaps hidden, idea of a self who can choose. But no one can stop this aspect of self view arising - it is only be hearing the profound Dhamma that wise attention will be bought to subtle sakkya ditthi (as it arises) and by that it will slowly be attentuated. I think it is natural that we make wrong efforts -it must be that way because wrong effort is dictated by self view. However at those moments of wrong effort there are namas and rupas appearing and they can be seen - and must be seen if the right way is to be discerned. > Question 2. Many people do not fear death, I don't. I would fear > intense > unrelievable pain (at any time) but also in the dying process. I do > fear violence, but not death itself. Many people > welcome death after an illness, and many others choose death over > continuing on in an unendurable existence - whether there is belief > in any continuance or not. > ------------------------ You ask "Why would 'no fear of death' mean there is 'real understanding of sabhava dhamma'?." referring to what I wrote: "He said if there is real understanding of sabhava dhamma then there is no fear of death because there is no self in sabhava." You are right of course: I saw an interview with Osama Bin Laden when he was said he loved death and hoped for it . No fear of death can arise from many reasons but my statement was meant to indicate that knowing sabhava led to this fearless state; not vice versa.(I wasn't at all clear ). My talk with Acharn Somporn was not easy - he had to keep stopping and simplifying as it was in a mixture of thai and Pali and I have very limited knowledge of both. I am sure he wasn't as clumsy as my report makes him out to be. ---------- > And from the second post "Meeting with Acharn somporn2" :"Avijja and > tanha cannot understand dhamma but they can fool one into thinking > there is understanding. If panna arises then there is no self doing > anything but there is understanding of the moment". > > Question 3. How, then, can one ever know when there is right > understanding ... If avijja and tanha can fool one into thinking > there is. > Everyone acts out of what they think is right understanding. How can > there ever be certainty that one is practicing correctly? By anyone? > Everyone can quote a sutta or com. reference that seems to support > completely different view points, a sort of "Duelling to the Death by > Scripture Quotes". ____________ I think without a firm theoretical understanding vipassana cannot arise, and yet without some direct insight it is difficult to gain firm theoretical understanding: as you pointed out we will be swyaed by whatever sutta or teacher sounds right at the time. It seems a catch 22 bind but we should expect it to be this way. The path is different from anything we have ever done . In many lives lobha has been our friend. In this life it benefited us in manifold ways. Like a good parent it forced us to study hard . . It helped us to find good jobs, learn new languages and make money. It found our girlfriends and wives . It was even a supporting condition for kusala kamma. (we were good because we wanted the results of goodness) But it cannot understand dhammas correctly as they really are. Acharn Sujin said it is so natural that aviija and wrong view arises - they have been accumulated (ayuhana) but at those moments there are namas and rupas appearing and if panna has developed(also ayuhana) the difference between panna and avijja will come to be gradually known. Only by this way can the distinction between satipatthana and imitation awareness be known. If panna doesn't accumulate then avijja and lobha will always grasp whatever practice 'we' are doing at the moment as being right. I think again and again we have to examine whether we are firm to what the Buddha taught. He said that all dhammas are conditioned and not self and so evanescent. I know this is clear to me but I still sometimes wish that sati and panna can be made to appear by 'my' will. I try to hurry it all along. At those times it is easy to have subtle wrong practice but so often there is no awareness of it. So very natural that self view and wrong practice should arise. But if we insist to ourselves that we have right view and practice correctly now then there will be never be investigation that can gradually discern the right path. Robert In the 'Majjhima nikaya' I (no. 43, Mahavedallasutta) Kotthita asked Sariputta: "'But what is intuitive wisdom for, your reverence?' 'Your reverence, intuitive wisdom is for super-knowledge, for apprehending, for getting rid of.' 'But how many conditions are there, your reverence, for bringing right understanding into existence?' 'There are two conditions, your reverence, for bringing right understanding into existence: the utterance of another (person) and wise attention. Your reverence, there are the two conditions for bringing wise attention into existence.'" The other person is the Buddha or his disciples, by listening carefully to the right person, by considering and applying what we have heard are the conditions for right understanding built up. Kotthita then asked sariputta "If right understanding is forwarded, by how many factors, your reverence, does there come to be the fruit of freedom..." Sariputta listed 5 factors: moral habit, hearing true dhama, discussion , calm, and vision. The commentary notes that discussion [with the wise] helps to give up wrong practice. 16414 From: kenhowardau Date: Tue Oct 22, 2002 11:46pm Subject: Re: Practice on DSG Hi Christine, Thanks for this list of questions; pondering over them has impressed upon me that I am barely beginning to find the answers. I think I have missed your meaning in a couple of places but here are a few comments: -------------------- Question 1. (a) I wonder if anyone could clarify for me how 'right practice' would occur in the everyday life of a buddhist today? (b) or more exactly, how 'wrong practice' in everyday life of a buddhist today would be defined? ------------------- Right practice would be mindfulness of presently arising paramattha dhammas. Of course, understanding what this means is a lifetime's work. If we have a practice that is easy to follow, then we can be pretty sure we have a wrong practice. ---------------------- > Question 2. Many people do not fear death, I don't. I would fear intense unrelievable pain (at any time) but also in the dying process. I do fear violence, but not death itself. Why would 'no fear of death' mean there is 'real understanding of sabhava dhamma'?. Many people welcome death after an illness, and many others choose death over continuing on in an unendurable existence - whether there is belief in any continuance or not.> ------------------------ The fear and fearlessness that we many-folk know, are mixtures of thoughts and emotions. We don't know precisely when there is dosa or adosa and we don't know precisely what those cetasikas have as object. I think it is nonetheless relevant for us worldlings to note when we are fearful and when we are not because we then can be reminded of the cetasikas, dosa and adosa and we can reflect on what we understand by those terms. It is also relevant to know whether we have latent tendencies towards fear or fearlessness because that too reminds us of what is accumulated in absolute reality. -------------------------- > Question 3. How, then, can one ever know when there is right understanding ... If avijja and tanha can fool one into thinking there is.> ------------------------ Panna can have panna (or ditthi), as object. I assume this from the Mahacattarika Sutta which says that when a monk knows that right understanding is right understanding and that wrong understanding is wrong understanding then that is his right understanding. Apart from fearlessness of death, how would right understanding of understanding show in daily life? Confidence in the Dhamma? ------------------ > Everyone acts out of what they think is right understanding. How can there ever be certainty that one is practicing correctly? By anyone? Everyone can quote a sutta or com. reference that seems to support completely different view points, a sort of "Duelling to the Death by Scripture Quotes".> ------------------------- Mostly, everyone acts out of what they think is pleasurable but you are making the point that we all come to our own conclusions as to what Dhamma related practices are beneficial. It's all a matter of conditionality, we shouldn't feel pride or shame, we conceptual beings only think we have a say in the matter. One day, instead of just thinking we don't fear death, we will directly know that there is only nama and rupa -- no self that dies. Even then, we are told, a measure of doubt will continue until Stream Entry when the final goal --the true deathlessness -- is seen. ---------------------------- > Question 4. The use of the word 'practice' or 'practise' is often confusing on this List. Different members seem to use the same word but not be referring to the same thing. Sometimes it is used as a noun as in 'the Practice'. This is never quite set out - one is pointed to the the Eight fold Path of practice, but the terms used here seem also to be invested with different meanings. Sometimes it is used as a verb 'when we practise' - though how can this be, when it is also said there is no-one who can 'choose' to do anything, no free-will, no-control, and when it is also said that sakkya-ditthi includes 'clinging to wrong practice.'? 5. Is formal sitting and walking meditation considered to include the idea 'a self' who because of 'lobha' for pleasant feeling is 'clinging to wrong practice'? i.e. sakkya-ditthi. > ----------------------- There is no denying our personality-belief. Where A. Somporn has said, `it shows itself as clinging to wrong practice,' I take that to mean, it shows itself in our preference for conventional reality over absolute reality. We are told that panna, like all conditioned realities, is conditioned by dhammas that are not self. However, we feel threatened by that; we want to attain enlightenment by means of self and so to some extent, we all choose conventional practices. I think the proponents of formal practice agree that it contains the [involuntary] belief in a self who can practise. They say that, in this way, sakkya-ditthi is a means to an end. Others maintain that this is wrong view. (I think there is a sutta (quoted on dsg by Robert K, if I remember correctly), that specifically describes as wrong view, "By self, I shall see not-self.") Like it or not, we have to accept that the true practice is right understanding all the way. Kind regards Ken H 16415 From: rahula_80 Date: Wed Oct 23, 2002 1:00am Subject: Hi, My understanding of Buddhism is that it did NOT teach that the five aggregates (Pali. khandha, Sanskrit. skandha) are mara but clinging to the aggregates. Is my understanding correct? If it is not, please correct me. If it is, please read on. I found these two suttas problematic to my understanding and at least one person, Shakya Aryanatta have accuse Bhikkhu Bodhi of mistranslating the suttas. They are maara sutta.m and maaradhammasutta.m. They are located in Sa.myuttanikaayo, Khandhavaggapali, Raadhasa.myutta.m, Dutiyavaggo. These suttas says that the aggregates are mara. Here are the suttas in Pali. 1. Maarasuttam Saavatthinidaana.m Ekamanta.m nisinno kho aayasmaa raadho bhagavanta.m etadavoca– "`maaro, maaro'ti, bhante, vuccati. Katamo nu kho, bhante, maaro"ti? "Ruupa.m kho, raadha, maaro, vedanaa maaro, saññaa maaro, sa"nkhaaraa maaro, viññaa.na.m maaro. Eva.m passa.m, raadha, sutavaa ariyasaavako ruupasmimpi nibbindati, vedanaayapi nibbindati, saññaayapi nibbindati, sa"nkhaaresupi nibbindati, viñña.nasmimpi nibbindati. Nibbinda.m virajjati; viraagaa vimuccati. Vimuttasmi.m vimuttamiti ñaa.na.m hoti. `Khii.naa jaati, vusita.m brahmacariya.m, kata.m kara.niiya.m, naapara.m itthattaayaa'ti pajaanaatii"ti. Pathama.m. 2. Maaradhammasutta.m Saavatthinidaana.m Ekamanta.m nisinno kho aayasmaa raadho bhagavanta.m etadavoca– "`maaradhammo, maaradhammo'ti, bhante, vuccati. Katamo nu kho, bhante, maaradhammo"ti? "Ruupa.m kho, raadha, maaradhammo, vedanaa maaradhammo, saññaa maaradhammo, sa"nkhaaraa maaradhammo, viññaa.nam maaradhammo. Eva.m passa.m…pe… naapara.m itthattaayaati pajaanaatii"ti. Dutiya.m. Bhikkhu Bodhi's translation of Maraadhammasutta.m At Savatthi, the venerable Radha sitting to oneside said to Blessed One: "Venerable Sir, it is said subject to Mara, subject to Mara. What now venerable Sir is subject to Mara?" "Form, Radha is subject to Mara, Feeling is subject to Mara, Perceptions are subject to Mara, Volitional Formations are Subject to Mara, Consciousness is subject to Mara. He understands: '... there is no more for this state of being." In accusing Bhikkhu Bodhi of mistranslating these suttas, Shakya Aryantta have wrote: >> Herein Bhikkhu Bodhi glosses SN 3.195 and covers up Maradhamma with "subject to Mara", therein translating dhamma as "subject to" to gloss over the fact that the sutta states succinctly that the 5 aggregates are mara, are the dharma of mara (the evil one). Bhikkhu Bodhi glosses this word because of its implication and sutta and attempts pathetically to forgive himself in the footnote in the back without reason saying ::: Bhikkhu Bodhi's footnote to SN 3.195. #248 footnote "In the suttas that follow I translate the suffix -dhamma as "nature" rather than "subject to" Even FL Woodward translates this word (maradhamma) correctly and unglossed as "of the nature of Mara" However, the commentary to this sutta succintly states: maaradhammoti mara.nadhammo "mara's dhamma means shammas of death" Khandhavagga-atthakathaa 2.336 Dutiyavaggassa patthame maaro, maaroti mara.na.m pucchati. yasmaa pana ruupaadivinimutta.m mara.na.m naama natthi, tenassa bhagavaa ruupa.m kho, raadha, maaroti-aadimaaha. dutiye maaradhammoti mara.nadhammo. etenupaayena sabbattha attho veditabboti. << Below are Shakya Aryanatta's translation. Is it correct? If not, why? 1. Maarasutta.m At one time in Savatthi, the venerable Radha seated himself and asked of the Blessed Lord "Mara,Mara I hear said venerable. What pray tell does Mara mean?""Just this, form, Radha is Mara, sensations are Mara, perceptions are Mara, assemblages are Mara, sentience is Mara. Seeing thusly?this is the end of birth, the Brahma-life has been fullfiled, what must be done has been done, he discerns there is nothing further than this very Soul." 2. Maaradhammasutta.m At one time in Savatthi, the venerable Radha seated himself and asked of the Blessed Lord "Mara's dharma, Mara's dharma I hear said venerable. What pray tell does Mara's dharma mean?" "Just this, form, Radha is Mara's dharma, sensations are Mara's dharma, perceptions are Mara's dharma, assemblages are Mara's dharma, sentience is Mara's dharma. Seeing thusly, this is the end of birth, the Brahma-life has been fullfiled, what must be done has been done, he discerns there is nothing further than this very Soul." ----------- Thanks, Rahula 16416 From: rahula_80 Date: Wed Oct 23, 2002 1:01am Subject: Khandha = Mara? Hi, My understanding of Buddhism is that it did NOT teach that the five aggregates (Pali. khandha, Sanskrit. skandha) are mara but clinging to the aggregates. Is my understanding correct? If it is not, please correct me. If it is, please read on. I found these two suttas problematic to my understanding and at least one person, Shakya Aryanatta have accuse Bhikkhu Bodhi of mistranslating the suttas. They are maara sutta.m and maaradhammasutta.m. They are located in Sa.myuttanikaayo, Khandhavaggapali, Raadhasa.myutta.m, Dutiyavaggo. These suttas says that the aggregates are mara. Here are the suttas in Pali. 1. Maarasuttam Saavatthinidaana.m Ekamanta.m nisinno kho aayasmaa raadho bhagavanta.m etadavoca– "`maaro, maaro'ti, bhante, vuccati. Katamo nu kho, bhante, maaro"ti? "Ruupa.m kho, raadha, maaro, vedanaa maaro, saññaa maaro, sa"nkhaaraa maaro, viññaa.na.m maaro. Eva.m passa.m, raadha, sutavaa ariyasaavako ruupasmimpi nibbindati, vedanaayapi nibbindati, saññaayapi nibbindati, sa"nkhaaresupi nibbindati, viñña.nasmimpi nibbindati. Nibbinda.m virajjati; viraagaa vimuccati. Vimuttasmi.m vimuttamiti ñaa.na.m hoti. `Khii.naa jaati, vusita.m brahmacariya.m, kata.m kara.niiya.m, naapara.m itthattaayaa'ti pajaanaatii"ti. Pathama.m. 2. Maaradhammasutta.m Saavatthinidaana.m Ekamanta.m nisinno kho aayasmaa raadho bhagavanta.m etadavoca– "`maaradhammo, maaradhammo'ti, bhante, vuccati. Katamo nu kho, bhante, maaradhammo"ti? "Ruupa.m kho, raadha, maaradhammo, vedanaa maaradhammo, saññaa maaradhammo, sa"nkhaaraa maaradhammo, viññaa.nam maaradhammo. Eva.m passa.m…pe… naapara.m itthattaayaati pajaanaatii"ti. Dutiya.m. Bhikkhu Bodhi's translation of Maraadhammasutta.m At Savatthi, the venerable Radha sitting to oneside said to Blessed One: "Venerable Sir, it is said subject to Mara, subject to Mara. What now venerable Sir is subject to Mara?" "Form, Radha is subject to Mara, Feeling is subject to Mara, Perceptions are subject to Mara, Volitional Formations are Subject to Mara, Consciousness is subject to Mara. He understands: '... there is no more for this state of being." In accusing Bhikkhu Bodhi of mistranslating these suttas, Shakya Aryantta have wrote: >> Herein Bhikkhu Bodhi glosses SN 3.195 and covers up Maradhamma with "subject to Mara", therein translating dhamma as "subject to" to gloss over the fact that the sutta states succinctly that the 5 aggregates are mara, are the dharma of mara (the evil one). Bhikkhu Bodhi glosses this word because of its implication and sutta and attempts pathetically to forgive himself in the footnote in the back without reason saying ::: Bhikkhu Bodhi's footnote to SN 3.195. #248 footnote "In the suttas that follow I translate the suffix -dhamma as "nature" rather than "subject to" Even FL Woodward translates this word (maradhamma) correctly and unglossed as "of the nature of Mara" However, the commentary to this sutta succintly states: maaradhammoti mara.nadhammo "mara's dhamma means shammas of death" Khandhavagga-atthakathaa 2.336 Dutiyavaggassa patthame maaro, maaroti mara.na.m pucchati. yasmaa pana ruupaadivinimutta.m mara.na.m naama natthi, tenassa bhagavaa ruupa.m kho, raadha, maaroti-aadimaaha. dutiye maaradhammoti mara.nadhammo. etenupaayena sabbattha attho veditabboti. << Below are Shakya Aryanatta's translation. Is it correct? If not, why? 1. Maarasutta.m At one time in Savatthi, the venerable Radha seated himself and asked of the Blessed Lord "Mara,Mara I hear said venerable. What pray tell does Mara mean?""Just this, form, Radha is Mara, sensations are Mara, perceptions are Mara, assemblages are Mara, sentience is Mara. Seeing thusly?this is the end of birth, the Brahma-life has been fullfiled, what must be done has been done, he discerns there is nothing further than this very Soul." 2. Maaradhammasutta.m At one time in Savatthi, the venerable Radha seated himself and asked of the Blessed Lord "Mara's dharma, Mara's dharma I hear said venerable. What pray tell does Mara's dharma mean?" "Just this, form, Radha is Mara's dharma, sensations are Mara's dharma, perceptions are Mara's dharma, assemblages are Mara's dharma, sentience is Mara's dharma. Seeing thusly, this is the end of birth, the Brahma-life has been fullfiled, what must be done has been done, he discerns there is nothing further than this very Soul." ----------- Thanks, Rahula 16417 From: Sarah Date: Wed Oct 23, 2002 3:03am Subject: Re: [dsg] On Wisdom Hi Erik, Hope you both and Eath’s nephew are doing well. I’ve just been having a look at Nanda’s Questions, Sutta-Nipata and would like to just add a couple of comments as I understand the sutta. (Someone else like Rob K may pull out the Pali or commentary, but I don’t have access to these.)Thank you for the reference and comments. ***** Ven Saddhatissa’s transl: 1. “To me, Nanda, a wise man is one who has disarmed: he lives in seclusion, without the tremble or the hunger of desire”. ..... S: seclusion, i.e secluded from desire, not from society disarmed, i.e disarmed of attachments and kilesa, not of conventional weapons ..... 2. “I would say this about religious leaders who teach that views and teachings, or deeds and rituals, or anything else will make you pure; I would say that these men, living in this world, have not gone beyond birth and ageing.’ ..... S: views and teachings,or deeds and rituals... i.e wrong views and practices as clung to by worldlings....(this was discussed earlier with regard to other suttas in Sutta Nipata). ..... 3. “There are some who have let go of world-views of teaching traditions of thoughts. They have let go of religious practices and rituals, they have left all the different forms behind and they have a total understanding of attachments. For them there are no inner poison-drives. These, truly, are the ocean-crossers.” ..... S: world-views, i.e conventional wrong views. religious practices and rituals, attachment to these as eradicated by sotapanna Understanding of attachments, i.e cause of suffering, fully developed right understanding as learnt, experienced and directly developed no poison-drives, i.e living alone, living in seclusion with sense-doors guarded, kilesa eradicated = arahants. ..... Sarah ===== --- rikpa21 wrote: > > Hello fellow DSG'ers, > > I found this note on wisdom (taken from the Tripitika) from Prof. > Richard Hayes appropriate and worthy of wise consideration: > > "Now as long as we are on the topic of wisdom, let's make it clear > that according to the Buddha (as reported in Nandamaanavapucchaa in > the Sutta-nipaata) wisdom has nothing whatsoever to do with what one > believes. It has nothing at all to do with what one has experienced > or how one has experienced it, nothing to do with what one has > learnt or how much one has learnt or from whom one has learnt it, > and nothing to do with what one has thought about and figured out by > oneself. Moreover, wisdom has nothing to do with which vows one > has taken or what rituals one performs. > > "If wisdom is none of these, asks Nanda, then what is it? The Buddha > replies that wisdom consists in letting go of worldviews, letting go > of traditions and teachings, letting go of rituals and obsessions > about which actions are pure and which impure, and letting go of all > the internal poisons. Wisdom, he goes on to say, is living in > seclusion, not depending in any way on the approval of the rest of > society. In other places in the Sutta-nipaata, the Buddha says that > wisdom consists in "disarming", that is, letting go of all cudgels, > swords and sticks (and, I would guess, uzi machine guns, AK-47 > assault rifles, handguns, armoured tank divisions, vials of > weapon-grade infectious diseases and nuclear bombs) and beholding > all living beings with the same love that a mother has for her only > child." ======================== 16418 From: rikpa21 Date: Wed Oct 23, 2002 6:40am Subject: On Wisdom, the Visuddhimagga, & Buddhadasa Bikkhu --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Sarah wrote: > Hi Erik, > > Hope you both and Eath's nephew are doing well. Yes, we're all doing well, and Eath and our son are doing well, though if there has ever been a test of patience, dealing with a five-year-old monkey with boundless energy has left us both completely exhausted. Thanks for your kind consideration. May you and all beings be well and free from dukkha! :) > I've just been having a look at Nanda's Questions, Sutta-Nipata and would > like to just add a couple of comments as I understand the sutta. (Someone > else like Rob K may pull out the Pali or commentary, but I don't have > access to these.)Thank you for the reference and comments. > ***** > > Ven Saddhatissa's transl: > 1. "To me, Nanda, a wise man is one who has disarmed: he lives in > seclusion, without the tremble or the hunger of desire". > ..... > S: seclusion, i.e secluded from desire, not from society > disarmed, i.e disarmed of attachments and kilesa, not of conventional > weapons Perhaps you missed the Ajarn Hayes' dry wit, as many are prone to do, and taken literally (nitattha) what is meant tongue-in-cheek (neyattha). ;) > ..... > 2. "I would say this about religious leaders who teach that views and > teachings, or deeds and rituals, or anything else will make you pure; I > would say that these men, living in this world, have not gone beyond birth > and ageing.' This could easily imlpy that the entire Visuddhimagga runs counter to what the Buddha taught, which uses views, teachings, deeds, and rituals as a means of purification that leads to release. On that note, just to stir the pot a bit, I find Buddhadasa Bikkhu's sharp critiques of both the Visuddhimagga and the Abhidhamma worthy of careful consideration and dispassionate analysis: "Buddhadasa and Criticism of Theravada Buddhism in Thailand "It appears that in general, Buddhadasa is critical of anything standing in the way of the fulfillment of the primary soteriological purpose of religion. His work is not limited at abroadside attack on traditional interpretations of Buddhist teaching, but also includes thecriticism of various components of Thai Buddhist tradition. He opines that Buddhism has tobe dynamic since once it becomes a sterile system it will lose its vitality. Buddhadasa's criticism of Thai Buddhism is a part of his attempt to return to original Buddhism. Further, it can lead us to a better understanding of the religious situation in Thailand. Traditional Scriptures "From the doctrinal point of view the brunt of Buddhadasa's attack is directed toward Buddhaghosa, one of the greatest Buddhist commentators in the 5th century A.D., who is most acclaimed for providing a commentary and interpretative structure for the Theravada tradition, and the scholastism of the Abhidhamma. "Buddsadasa observes that in Thailand various scriptural commentaries which were later completed replaced the original Pali Text as a source of religious authority, especially Visuddhimagga (the Path of Purity), a classical scriptural commentary of Buddhaghosa which is one of the most important texts of Buddhist study in Thailand. He declares that Visudhimagga is one of the oldest historical evidence showing gradual use of Hindu concepts in interpreting Buddhist teachings. Buddhadasa illustrates this argument through historical evidence, such as Buddha's Own Word, the Suttas in the Tipitaka. "In his book he wrote the title "What is Paticcasam-uppada" (1971) showing the distinction between what he considers the interpretation of Buddhist teaching using Hindu concepts and in the Buddhist sense. He is convinced that uncritical adherence to the Buddhaghosa orthodoxy has obscured a real encounter with the Buddha's dhamma. The criticism of Visuddhimagga implies that Buddhadasa goes against the belief and understanding of not only most Thai Buddhists but also Buddhists in general. Consequently, he is condemned by some groups of monks and laymen as an ungrateful and heretical person who destroys Buddhism. "On the other hand, his book has became an important reference which most of Buddhist students have to take into consideration. Buddhadasa does not stop there, he does what nobody has dared to do, that is, he criticizes the Abhidhamma Pitaka, one of the cardinal tripartite scriptures in the Tipitaka: Abhidhamma, Sutta, and Vinaya Pitaka. It is a fact that most of Thai Buddhist students believe that Abhidhamma is the Buddha's Own Word. They prefer to study this more carefully than the other two scriptures (Sutta and Vinaya), especially since World War II, when the Burmese tradition of studying and practicing Buddhism was introduced into Thailand. "Buddhadasa insists that Abhidhamma was completed about 1300 years after the death of Buddha. He further criticizes that a large part of Abhidhamma is not only in line with Buddha's dhamma but it is also antithetical to the profound Buddhist teaching. "What is Abhidhamma" (1971), is one of Buddhadasa's important research works which refers to many sources of evidence taken from the Tipitaka, including the existing opinion of both eastern and western Buddhist scholars like Phra Nanatilaka (a German monk), Professor T.W Rhys Davids, who established the Pali-Text Society in London, andHary Singh Gour, a well-known Indian scholar. His book is regarded as the most importantoperation on the Thai Theravada Buddhism. As a result of this criticism, Buddhadasa is opposed by some conservative monks and laymen. He is accused of being a great sinner, as daring to criticize the Abhidhamma Pitaka as wrong. However, the Abhidhamma Pitaka has been discredited in the view of many monks and laymen. The prestige of the Abhidhamma has been affected immensely ever since. "Buddhadasa also criticizes the Buddhologists including most eastern and western scholars who write about Buddhism because he feels that their writings contain many non-Buddhist concepts. They generally use Hindu concepts to explain Buddhism, especially the concepts of kamma, birth and rebirth. He acknowledges that it is very difficult to clearly distinguish between Buddhist and Hindu concept through only literal study of doctrine or historical evidences. This is because one of the most difficult points centres on the application of the same word which carries completely different meanings and goals: one meaning (the meaning in Hindu sense) maintaining the "self" or attachment to "self"; whereas another meaning (the meaning in Buddhism) maintains "non-self" and demolishing the idea of "self". This point, for Buddhadasa, is a border line between Buddhist and Hindu conception." I really appreciate Buddhadasa Bikkhu's fearlessly taking on the Establishment in an attempt to help others divest themselves of the dogmatism, sectarianism, speculations, and rites and rituals--all bound up in miccha ditthi, and far removed from the Buddha's actual teachings in the Suttas. Iconoclastically yours, Erik 16419 From: rjkjp1 Date: Wed Oct 23, 2002 6:56am Subject: Re: On Wisdom, the Visuddhimagga, & Buddhadasa Bikkhu --- Dear erik, So glad to hear you are coping with your new new charge. I have been through it and ran away a couple of couple times but as Rob M. has mentioned rearing children can be a practice in itself. So many occasions for khanti (patience)to have the chance e to arise . (And sometimes it doesn't but my suggestion is to be patient with your own impatience - it is no easy job). Sometimes the best I could do was say nothing and just study the charactersic of sound. I was intrigued with these comments and wonder if you agree? "hey generally > use Hindu concepts to explain Buddhism, especially the concepts of > kamma, birth and rebirth." Do you think rebirth and kamma are hindu ideas? Robert In dhammastudygroup@y..., "rikpa21" wrote: > --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Sarah wrote: > > Hi Erik, > > > > 16420 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Oct 23, 2002 10:00am Subject: Perfections Ch 6, Energy, no 9 Perfections Ch 6, Energy, no 9 We read in the ³Anumånasutta², ³Discourse on Measuring in Accordance with² that Mahå- Moggallåna taught the Dhamma and explained to the monks which person is someone who is ³easy to speak to² (susceptible to instruction), and exhorted them to examine themselves as to this 7). He said: Therein, your reverences, a monk should examine himself thus: ³Now, am I of evil desires, in the thrall of evil desires?² If, your reverences, while the monk is reflecting, he knows thus: ³I am of evil desires, in the thrall of evil desires,² then, your reverences, that monk should strive to get rid of those evil, unskilled states. But if, your reverences, that monk, while reflecting, knows thus: ³I am not of evil desires, not in the thrall of evil desires², then he should abide with rapture and delight, training himself diligently day and night in skilled states. The words, ³a monk should examine himself², make it clear to us that someone else cannot examine in detail our akusala to the same extent as we ourselves. We can examine ourselves whether we are today of evil desires, in the thrall of evil desires, and moreover, we should be sincere, truthful to ourselves. If we are of evil desires, we should strive to abandon those evil, unskilled dhammas. Some people do not like to consider their own akusala, but if someone sees the benefit of the development of endeavour for kusala, he should also notice his own akusala. If a person has viriya and makes an effort to examine himself he should be sincere and he should not spare himself. If someone examines himself in this way and strives to give up akusala, he is a person who is ³easy to speak to², susceptible to instruction. A person who is difficult to speak to is the opposite, he does not strive to give up akusala. All this pertains to viriya cetasika. We read in the ³Saddhammapajjotikå², the Commentary to the ³Tuvataka Sutta² (Speedy), in the Mahå-Niddesa, Khuddaka Nikåya, an explanation of the faculty, indriya, of viriya (8: As to the word ³cetasiko², this is used in order to show that energy is always mental and that it is not bodily. There is only mental energy.... Viriya is nåma dhamma which conditions the arising of effort through the body or through citta. Even when we make an effort with the body to do something, we should know that we can make such an effort because of viriya cetasika. The Commentary refers to the Suttas which deal with someone who makes an alley walk, who is walking up and down, so that he is not indolent or sleepy. From the outward appearance this seems to be bodily energy, but in reality it is because of mental energy, viriya cetasika, that effort through the body can arise. The Commentary speaks further on about effort which has developed to the degree of the enlightenment factor of viriya (sambhojjhanga), one of the factors pertaining to the realization of the four noble Truths. The Commentary uses the Påli term viriyårambha. Årambha can mean beginning, attempt or effort. Viriyårambha is viriya cetasika, it is the putting forth of energy, such as effort to apply oneself to the Buddha¹s teachings. We read further on about the characteristic of energy which should be developed 9: Effort is called ³årambha² because it is striving. The term viriyårambha renders the characteristic of that kind of striving. What kind of striving? It is striving by way of escaping from idleness. Onward effort is so called by virtue of reaching a higher and higher state. Exertion is so called by virtue of rising up and keeping going. Endeavour is so called by virtue of special exertion; zeal, of being zealous; vigour, of firmness; fortitude, of bearing (supporting) citta and cetasikas, or of bearing the continuity of kusala by unbroken procedure. These are the characteristics of viriya. It is the escaping from idleness, progressing towards a higher state, continued exertion without stopping, zeal and fortitude by progressing on. Footnotes: 7. A monk who is ³difficult to speak to² does not listen and does not want to be corrected. The monk who is ³easy to speak to² is meek, he listens and is susceptible to instruction. 8. See also the ³Expositor² I, Part IV, Ch 2, 145. 9. See the ³Expositor² I, Part IV, Ch 2, 145-146. 16421 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Oct 23, 2002 10:00am Subject: vimuttatta, to Rahula Dear Rahula, you asked some time ago about vimuttatta, which is: vimutta+ atta, self, being oneself emancipated. Self in conventional sense. I found this in PTS dictionary, and I do not know you had the solution meanwhile. Nina 16422 From: Frank Kuan Date: Wed Oct 23, 2002 2:49pm Subject: right concentration, role of meditation in dhamma practice 37 bodhisattva practices, #29 Higher insight that penetrates right to the essence, Revealing the true way in which things exist, Can only root out our emotional problems If mental quiescence is laid as its base. Thus surpassing the four formless states of absorption We must work to achieve single-minded control, And the full concentration of deep meditation- The Sons of the Buddhas all practice this way. 16423 From: Date: Wed Oct 23, 2002 3:49pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Practice on DSG Christine: "Everyone acts out of what they think is right understanding. How can there ever be certainty that one is practicing correctly? By anyone?" L: According to the logic of abhidhamma, whenever there is sati there cannot be lobha, dosa, or moha, except as object, of that citta. So whatever you think, feel, or do, if it is with sati, you can't go wrong (in that moment). Larry 16424 From: Charles Thompson Date: Wed Oct 23, 2002 4:56pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Perfections Ch 6, Energy, no 9 Help...... I goofed.............. 1. How do I stop getting e-mail. I will be in Thailand for about 30 days beginning Nov 5. 2. How do I make arrangements to meet you in Thailand? Thanks. a student, dhammasaro below deleted......................... 16425 From: Brian Kelley Date: Wed Oct 23, 2002 5:05pm Subject: Re: A Question about proximate cause Hi Rob, You wrote: > Somebody else had a similar problem but it worked okay after they > downloaded the latest version of Acrobat Reader (5.05?). Failing > that, I could email to you the font file (.ttf format), if you think > that it might help. I just checked, and that is the version of Acrobat Reader that I have. If it's not too much trouble, if you could send that font off-list to bkelley1@n..., that would be very helpful, thank you. > Wow! What an ambitious project! What is the time frame? I hope that > you will be posting your work on a web-page, because even partially > completed, it will be an excellent resource. > > Nina's book "Cetasikas" (available at the Zolag site mentioned > earlier) will be an invaluable resource for you. > > Had you considered adding charts for the 24 conditions (Again, > Nina's book on the subject is excellent) and Paticcasamuppada as > well? > > I believe that Bhikkhu Bodhi is planning to relocate from Sri Lanka > to your neck of the woods (not sure of the details, Sarah will know) > in the near future. I would say that you are lucky, but that would > be mana :-) I think of this project (working title: AbhidhammaThing) as an open-ended, ongoing project. I hadn't really thought seriously about making it available publically for a long time. I would want people more familiar with the Abhidhamma than I am to go over it to make sure I didn't get anything wrong... I've now downloaded Ms. van Gorkom's books on Rupas, Cetasikas, and Conditions, and look forward to studying them. Yes, there's going to be a module on the 24 conditions. Heres the basic structure I've outlined: 5 reference sections and 2 interactive sections. Module 1: The 28 Material Phenomena (reference) Module 2: The 52 Mental Factors (reference) Module 3: The 89 (or 121) Mind Moments (reference) Module 4: The Series of 17 Mind Moments (reference) Module 5: The 24 Conditions (reference) Module 6: Examples from daily life (interactive -- a step-by-step "wizard") Module 7: Build your own mind moment, or series (interactive) Eventually I hope to add additional links to all of the modules, linking the material to discourses in the Sutta Pitaka (probably external links to Access to Insight). As I mentioned in an email to Sarah, I've heard that Ven. Bhikkhu Bodhi might be coming to BCBS sometime next year, so I'm very hopeful that I might be able to attend that course. Thanks so much for your continued help and guidance, Rob. With much metta, Brian 16426 From: rikpa21 Date: Wed Oct 23, 2002 9:13pm Subject: Re: On Wisdom, the Visuddhimagga, & Buddhadasa Bikkhu --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "rjkjp1" wrote: Hi Robert, > Dear erik, > So glad > to hear you are coping with your new new charge. I have been through > it and ran away a couple of couple times but as Rob M. has mentioned > rearing children can be a practice in itself. You ain't kiddin'! :) > So many occasions for khanti (patience)to have the chance > e to arise . Exactly the practice I'm most in need of. My lama has ensured that I get as much training in the khanti area as possible (as impatience is perhaps one of my greatest faults), and has for many (many!) years now. From the Dhammapada: "Enduring patience is the highest austerity. 'Nibbana is supreme,' say the Buddhas." In my life, the most difficult endeavor has been bearing the slings and arrows of sometimes outrageous fortune, without allowing the mind to go into the tiolet. In this regard I routinely fail the test. About a couple of months ago I was full of mana regarding progress in the paramita of patience, given difficulties already endured and the dramatically lowered mental disturbances regarding things that used to cause me to wig out. This recent adventure has been just the kick I needed to remind me that between the visa troubles, difficult people (particularly bureaucrats), and general instability of just about everything (job, living situation, etc.), that I am only a very sorry beginner in this area, still. The Dhammapada notes: "Put anger away, abandon pride, overcome every attachment, cling not to Mind and Body and thus be free from sorrow." Of course, one with truly well-developed patience would not have had cause to experience mental agitation: dosa regarding unpleasant situations, ill-will towards others (Dh. 2, 3): "He abused me, he beat me, he defeated me, he robbed me,"—-in those who harbour such thoughts hatred will never cease. He abused me, he beat me, he defeated me, he robbed me,"-—in those who do not harbour such thoughts hatred will cease." Truly words to live by. I recall being pretty agitated and angry there for a while, regarding what I perceived as callous and unreasonable treatment that wound up costing us enormous time and money. But then again, that "problem" actually turned out to be a blessing in disguise for many people, since without that "problem" we wouldn't have an adopted son, Eath would have never met her birth mother (who she'd been looking for for years), and so on. Observing the cause-and-effect present in these experiences, I can trace a direct link back to the fiery dukkha of dosa/vyapada due to lack of sufficient forbearance: lack of forbearance in enduring difficult situations; lack of forbearance in restraining anger and ill-will toward those who appear to be acting oppressively toward "me". In all, a very general, system-wide failure in the forbearance department (of course not helped by being exhausted and travel-cranky from the back & forth between Siem Reap & Phnonm Penh, having my credit cards cancelled on me while I was stuck there and trying to sort that near-disaster out, and just generally running around like a crazy dog trying to get all kinds of legal paperwork sorted out). I like this page on khanti that demonstrates the perfection of khanti by the Buddha in a Jataka story: http://www.geocities.com/ekchew.geo/khanti.htm And some more on khanti: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/bps/wheels/wheel116.html#ch4 My favorite text of all on patience has been Master Shantideva's commentary on the developing the Paramita of Patience. I have found myself referring to it again and again and again, out of necessity. It is said that without the development of khanti, the development of viriya and the higher modes of training is extremely difficult. This past month has been a real spur to train harder in the practice of forbearance, since it's obviously not nearly as developed as it should be if the mind is disturbed so easily. Given this has been the strongest dosa and ill-will experienced in a long time toward anyone, I have begun applying the antidote practice of metta bhavana, and especially attempting to turn the object of dosa into an object of metta, karuna, mudita, and upekkha using my favorite antidote recitation "Mind Training in Eight Verses"--which emphasizes seeing those who appear to oppress us as our most sacred teachers, since they show us the way to developing the greatest austerity, patience, and provide us with an opportunity we would not have otherwise have had to cultivate this critical parami. >(And sometimes it doesn't but my suggestion is to be patient > with your own impatience - it is no easy job). Truly sage advice. I was forced to laugh at myself yesterday when thinking "dammit, when is this patience training going to end already?" :) > Sometimes the best I could do was say > nothing and just study the charactersic of sound. That is an excellent idea. Given the many mental disturbances conditioned by sound lately, I take your suggestion here with gratitude. > I was intrigued with these comments and wonder if you agree? > "hey generally > > use Hindu concepts to explain Buddhism, especially the concepts of > > kamma, birth and rebirth." I think it's generally understood that kamma and rebirth have been a part of the continuum of Indian philosophies that existed long before the time of the Buddha, though in different guises and with different connotations. What I interpret Buddhadasa Bikkhu to be saying here is that the notions of kamma & rebirth are conventional notions applied to non-truly-existing "persons," that some later commentators have misunderstood and perhaps reified (though I'd need a much fuller context on this point to say anything more intelligent, and don't want to misrepresent Buddhadasa Bikkhu's points). > Do you think rebirth and kamma are hindu ideas? Most certainly. They are also Buddhist ideas, not to mention ideas held by many Christians and countless people of various stripes, religious, spiritual, or not. It is, I think, a matter of interpretation. Where I see the Buddhist Dhamma differ from other systems, is that the Buddha taught that kamma and rebirth are mere conventions, and not suggestive of there being a permanent ego- entity, "atta"; and not as "truly established," but rather, as imputed in dependence on impersonal causes and conditions which are themselves empty of independent existence. Cheers, Erik 16427 From: phamdluan2000 Date: Wed Oct 23, 2002 10:10pm Subject: Re: Khandha = Mara? Dear Rahula, --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "rahula_80" wrote: Hi, My understanding of Buddhism is that it did NOT teach that the five aggregates (Pali. khandha, Sanskrit. skandha) are mara but clinging to the aggregates. Is my understanding correct? If it is not, please correct me. If it is, please read on. I found these two suttas problematic to my understanding and at least one person, Shakya Aryanatta have accuse Bhikkhu Bodhi of mistranslating the suttas. They are maara sutta.m and maaradhammasutta.m. They are located in Sa.myuttanikaayo, Khandhavaggapali, Raadhasa.myutta.m, Dutiyavaggo. These suttas says that the aggregates are mara. KKT: I have a remark maybe irrelevant but interesting: The Surangama Sutra, a famous Mahayana Sutra, has a very long chapter describing in detail << the 50 states of Mara caused by the five aggregates >> (each aggregate causes 10 states, thus 10 x 5 = 50) Maybe this chapter of the Surangama Sutra has root from the two above Suttas ? KKT 16428 From: Sarah Date: Wed Oct 23, 2002 10:27pm Subject: Welcome Dhammasaro, (was:Re: [dsg] Perfections Ch 6, Energy, no 9) Hi Dhammasaro (Charles), --- Charles Thompson wrote: > Help...... > > I goofed.............. .... This is a pretty unusual intro to DSG;-) Welcome anyway and hope to hear a little more about you and your interest in Buddhism. Where are you now? .... > > 1. How do I stop getting e-mail. I will be in Thailand for about 30 > days > beginning Nov 5. .... Go to the homepage and in the top right corner it says 'edit my membership'. Click here and change your setting to 'no mail'. You can still read it anytime on the homepage: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup When you want to get mail again, you just switch the setting back to how it was. ..... > 2. How do I make arrangements to meet you in Thailand? ..... I'm not sure if this was meant to be addressed to Nina or anyone from DSG. In any case, as a first step, I suggest you send a note off-list to Rob K, who'll all be in Bkk when you arrive and will be happy to meet up with you and take you to the foundation for any discussion with A.Sujin. Betty, Sukin, Num and a few others from DSG are also in Bkk and will be happy to help. Nina, ourselves and one or two others from DSG will be in Bkk at the very end of the month briefly. Pls send me a note off-list if you have any problems or if I can help further with this.(The same applies to anyone else visiting Bkk). .... > > Thanks. > > a student, > > dhammasaro .... Out of interest, is the 'sar' in your name shortened from sara.na as in 'refuge in the dhamma'? Best regards, Sarah ===== 16429 From: Purnomo . Date: Wed Oct 23, 2002 11:20pm Subject: RE: [dsg] bali blast dear all my friends I am very thank for you. You have helped me that my anger and sad are dukkha. I know that I lost control in the last. I know that we(balinesse) have been missing a life of peace. May we(buddhists) keep our metta. metta, purnomo 16430 From: Purnomo . Date: Wed Oct 23, 2002 11:48pm Subject: cryology dear friends, have you known about a dog for some days was frozen ? we must think that the dog was died. But, it wasn't. After the dog was processed so its temperature normal, it is life. Until now the dog is life. And now a child have been trying to proof of cryology theory. is it possible a man keep living in a temperature when his blood wasn't bleeding ? please see article about cryology in http://www.science-tech.nmstc.ca/english/schoolzone/Info_Science2.cfm metta, purnomo 16431 From: Sarah Date: Thu Oct 24, 2002 1:14am Subject: Re: [dsg] On Wisdom, the Visuddhimagga, & Buddhadasa Bikkhu Oh Erik, You do enjoy rocking the boat and shaking us all up when we’re quietly and cosily leading a peaceful life;-) --- rikpa21 wrote: > --- In > Yes, we're all doing well, and Eath and our son are doing well, > though if there has ever been a test of patience, dealing with a > five-year-old monkey with boundless energy has left us both > completely exhausted. Thanks for your kind consideration. May you > and all beings be well and free from dukkha! :) ..... I can just imagine the change in your lifestyle on the mountain;-) I’ve been working with groups of monkeys (small children with boundless energy) for a long-time, so I know all about the patience tests too. I appreciated the reminders in the latest extract from K.Sujin’s ‘Perfections’. Sometimes we think we don’t have enough energy to cope, but ‘there is only mental energy’ and the question is only whether there is any wholesome energy at these times: “As to the word ‘cetasiko’, this is used in order to show that energy is always mental and that it is not bodily. There is only mental energy.... Viriya is nåma dhamma which conditions the arising of effort through the body or through citta. Even when we make an effort with the body to do something, we should know that we can make such an effort because of viriya cetasika. The Commentary refers to the Suttas which deal with someone who makes an alley walk, who is walking up and down, so that he is not indolent or sleepy. From the outward appearance this seems to be bodily energy, but in reality it is because of mental energy, viriya cetasika, that effort through the body can arise. The Commentary speaks further on about effort which has developed to the degree of the enlightenment factor of viriya (sambhojjhanga), one of the factors pertaining to the realization of the four noble Truths. The Commentary uses the Påli term viriyårambha. Årambha can mean beginning, attempt or effort. Viriyårambha is viriya cetasika, it is the putting forth of energy, such as effort to apply oneself to the Buddha’s teachings.” ***** And now I’m just questioning whether there is enough ‘energy’ (preferably of the wholesome kind) to consider your other comments with regard to Bhuddhadasa’s views. ..... > > 2. "I would say this about religious leaders who teach that > views > and > > teachings, or deeds and rituals, or anything else will make you > pure; I > > would say that these men, living in this world, have not gone > beyond birth > > and ageing.” (Sutta Nipata, Nanda’s questions) > > This could easily imlpy that the entire Visuddhimagga runs counter > to what the Buddha taught, which uses views, teachings, deeds, and > rituals as a means of purification that leads to release. ..... I hope I’m not missing any dry wit here, Erik or ‘tongue-in-cheek’ comments on your part. Just in case, I’ll add a few of my own. What you suggest here would, as I understand, be missing a)the meaning of the sutta which is specifically referring to wrong views etc and b)the entire Visuddhimagga which discusses and elaborates in detail the development of panna (right view) and the knowledge of truths as found in the suttas for those able to appreciate them. In another post, I referred to suttas in the Sutta Nipata: “.... in this sutta (Dutthatthaka Sutta), as in the suttas you quoted from before in Sutta Nipata, let’s be quite clear that the Buddha is referring to wrong views and unwholesome mental states. ‘One whose doctinres aren’t clean’. In the translation by Saddhatissa, we read: “He whose views are mentally. constructed, causally formed, highly esteemed but not pure..”.The next but one sutta, the Paramatthaka sutta, specifically refers in the translation I have to ‘dogmatic view’ and how the ‘brahmin is not led by rule and rite’. These are wrong views or wrong understandings (i.e. the opposite of samma ditthi, the first factor of the noble 8fold Path) that are referred to.” ***** As we can see in the case of just one sutta, the Satipatthana sutta or even just in one phrase like ‘ekaayano’, there is nothing simple about the understanding of the suttas. We all read the suttas with different interpretations. Some of us find it helpful to look at the commentaries by Buddhaghosa and others which have been accepted with the greatest respect by the Theravada sangha since the time they were written down. I also understand the origins of the commentaries and Abhidhamma to date from the Buddha’s own lifetime and from his Teachings and those of his great disciples such as MahaKassapa, Sariputta, MahaKaccayana, Ananda and so on who were entrusted to elaborate as appropriate. In the series on the commentary to the Vinaya, I quoted from Malalasekera (The Pali Literature of Ceylon); “When later the text of the canon came to be compiled, arranged, and edited, some of the expositions found their way into the Pitakas and were given a permanent place therein. Thus we have the Sangiti-suttanta of the Digha Nikaya, ascribed to Sariputta and forming a complete catechism of terms and passages of exegetical nature. Such was also the Sacca-vibhanga (an exposition of the four Noble Truths) of the Majjhima, which later found its proper place in the second book of the Abhidhamma-Pitaka, and also the Madhu-pindika-sutta of Maha-Kaccayana, included in the Majjhima Nikaya. It sometimes happened that for a proper understanding of the text, explanations of a commentarial nature were quite essential; and in such cases the commentary was naturally incorporated into the text and formed part of the text itself.......Then there is the Niddesa, a whole book of commentary on texts now included in the Sutta-nipata; and there are passages clearly of a commentarial nature scattered throughout the Nikayas.” ***** I quite understand that many Buddhists, including well-respected teachers do not accept the commentaries or Abhidhamma, especially when what they read does not conform with their own understanding. They may even wish to ignore the Sutta Nipata for this reason;-) There is nothing new in this at all. One always has the choice of whether to follow one’s own commentary, other modern commentaries or those originating in the Buddha’s time and accepted at various Councils and carefully preserved down the centuries by the Sangha. Any suggestion that an appreciation of the Abhidhamma dates from post WW11 or is restricted to Thailand, however, would be quite wrong as your Tibetan teachers and anyone familiar with the history of Buddhism in other theravada countries would surely know. There may be minor discrepancies amongst various schools with regard to the details of the First Council, but I understand the Abhidhamma was rehearsed at this time, though as we know, the Kathavatthu was rehearsed later as instructed by the Buddha when the relevant issues arose. I have no reason to doubt the authenticity of the ancient manuscripts which Buddhaghosa based his works on (no longer available), but appreciate there will always be controversy. Certainly the commentaries were very well received by the Sangha which I believe still included large numbers of arahants at that time.In the end, as you often remind us, 'the proof is in the pudding'. In my case, I am not a (Buddhist) teacher or scholar and I am not Thai. I was brought up with a very different set of traditions and Establishments. If I can share a little of what has given me the greatest inspiration and confidence in dhamma, however, I’m glad to do so. If the decline of the Teachings accelerates as a result of the discarding of those parts of the Tipitaka which do not conform with the understanding of influential teachers, so be it. In your case, Erik, you have access to the Abhidhamma as taught in various schools by some of the finest and most knowledgable teachers who have encouraged you to understand and see the benefit of it in your daily life. These are opportunities that few others have in this lifetime. We all know you are conventionally very intelligent and gifted. I sincerely hope there is enough spiritual honesty and patience to persevere with the development of understanding as taught in the entire Tipitaka and not to follow the example of discarding those parts which seem too difficult to comprehend or those parts which do not conform with dearly held beliefs about self, kamma and rebirth, for example, when the going gets tough and there is doubt and confusion. As we know, in the decline of the Teachings, the Abhidhamma is the first part of the Tipitaka to be lost. It’s not difficult to see why and how this is so. In one word: Ignorance. ..... > On that note, just to stir the pot a bit, I find Buddhadasa Bikkhu's > sharp critiques of both the Visuddhimagga and the Abhidhamma worthy > of careful consideration and dispassionate analysis: ... > I really appreciate Buddhadasa Bikkhu's fearlessly taking on the > Establishment in an attempt to help others divest themselves of the > dogmatism, sectarianism, speculations, and rites and rituals--all > bound up in miccha ditthi, and far removed from the Buddha's actual > teachings in the Suttas. ..... Erik, I sincerely hope that for the main part you are just stirring the pot.... I really appreciate the opportunity to hear and consider from all parts of the Tipitaka and the commentaries such as the Visuddhimagga. Without this access, I would probably still be following the miccha ditthi path as expounded by many teachers today in the name of courage, fearlessness and daring in ‘taking on the Establishment.’ I never thought I’d be a representative of any ‘Establishment’ but in this case, I’m honoured;-) Sarah ======= 16432 From: rjkjp1 Date: Thu Oct 24, 2002 4:29am Subject: Re: On Wisdom, the Visuddhimagga, & Buddhadasa Bikkhu Daer Erik, With such a complete and excellent reply what is left for me to say.. Robert--- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "rikpa21" wrote: > --- > > Exactly the practice I'm most in need of. My lama has ensured that I > get as much training in the khanti area as possible (as impatience > is perhaps one of my greatest faults), and has for many (many!) > years now. > > From the Dhammapada: "Enduring patience is the highest austerity. > 'Nibbana is supreme,' say the Buddhas." > > In my life, the most difficult endeavor has been bearing the slings > and arrows of sometimes outrageous fortune, without allowing the > mind to go into the tiolet. In this regard I routinely fail the test. > > About a couple of months ago I was full of mana regarding progress > in the paramita of patience, given difficulties already endured and > the dramatically lowered mental disturbances regarding things that > used to cause me to wig out. This recent adventure has been just the > kick I needed to remind me that between the visa troubles, difficult > people (particularly bureaucrats), and general instability of just > about everything (job, living situation, etc.), that I am only a > very sorry beginner in this area, still. > > The Dhammapada notes: "Put anger away, abandon pride, overcome every > attachment, cling not to Mind and Body and thus be free from sorrow." > 16433 From: christine_forsyth Date: Thu Oct 24, 2002 4:42am Subject: Re: Should the Garden be left to Grow? Hi Rob, Tom and all, Rob - I am finding your post hard to understand given that I am learning about death and rebirth being only consecutive moments, how and where does the change in the 'worthiness' of the everchanging stream of cittas occur from being (say) a Bhikkhu [whose murder would carry heavy kamma] to the next moment being reborn as a caterpillar, lizard or spider whose deliberate or indifferent death you consider not worth focusing on compared with 'helping an old lady across the street'? I wonder if you could you please give me the sutta references for "> The second consideration is the being that is killed. Killing a > virtuous human is more serious than killing a non-virtuous human. > Killing a human is more serious than killing an animal. Killing a > large animal is more serious than killing a small animal."> I'm assuming it would be a sutta spoken by the Buddha (and that there would be many such suttas) for such an vital moral and ethical point as to 'who it is not so serious' to harm or kill ... I only know things like Dhammapada 131 "Whoever, seeking his own happiness, harms with the rod pleasure-loving beings gets no happiness hereafter." which the Buddha spoke to children tormenting a snake, and the Metta Sutta "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;" If these distinctions you quote between the greater and lesser seriousness of kammic consequences of actions depending on the virtue, size or species of the living being concerned - would there be distinctions in the within a species? Say hurting/killing a bright intelligent high school graduate compared to a two year old born mentally disabled? hurting/killing a male compared to a female? hurting/killing a unborn fetus compared to a neonate? I have been reading "Attitude to and treatment of the natural world" in 'An Introduction to Buddhist Ethics' by Peter Harvey. "One's present fortunate position as a human is only a temporary state of affairs, dependent on past good karma. One cannot isolate oneself from the plight of animals, as one has oneself experienced it, just as animals have had past rebirths as humans. Moreover, in the ancient round of rebirths, every being one comes across, down to an insect, will at some time have been a close relative or friend, and have been very good to one. Bearing this in mind, one shouldreturn the kindness in the present." metta, Christine --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "robmoult" wrote: > Hi Tom, > > An imaginary conversation: > > Friend: Rob! You have shaved your head! Have you decided to become a > monk? > > Rob: No, I have taken up competitive swimming. I read in a magazine > that shaving my head will reduce resistance cutting 0.04 sec from my > lap time. > > Friend: Rob, you are 10kg overweight and spend less than one hour a > week in the pool. Why don't you focus on the more important issues > before thinking about cutting 0.04 sec from your lap time? > > > > Killing insects creates bad kamma. However, let us consider the > weightiness of the kamma created. The most important consideration > in kammic weightiness is the quality of the underlying volition > (intention). Are you malciously, sadistically and cruelly, seeking > out to kill these insects? If so, that is worse kamma than failing > to stop the lawnmower in time before you run over a poor worm. > > The second consideration is the being that is killed. Killing a > virtuous human is more serious than killing a non-virtuous human. > Killing a human is more serious than killing an animal. Killing a > large animal is more serious than killing a small animal. > > The bottom line is that if you are like me, before breakfast each > day you end up doing ten bad things more weighty than killing an > insect. > > By all means, avoid killing insects if you can. However, don't lose > sight of the big picture; the mind is the forerunner of all things; > work on your mental states to avoid greed/attachment (lobha), > hatred/aversion (dosa) and delusion (moha). > > Another thing to think about is the incredible power of good kammic > actions. Remember the ending of the movie, "Monsters, Inc.", when > they discovered that laughter has ten times the energy of screams? A > bit of dana (generosity), sila (discipline) or bhavana (meditation) > creates lots and lots of good kamma. So rather than focusing on > issues such as the killing of insects, perhaps you could focus > on "helping an old lady to cross the street". > > With Metta, > Rob M :-) 16434 From: Sarah Date: Thu Oct 24, 2002 5:25am Subject: Re: [dsg] ekayana Dear All, I followed all the discussions on ‘ekaayana’ with interest. I believe it’s an important point as it both affects and is influenced by one’s understanding of the sutta. I’d like to summarise what I understand to date, though I appreciate that others may have come to other conclusions: > B.Bodhi wrote: > In any case, ‘ekaayana’ cannot possibly > mean "only," in the sense that Satipatthana is the only way, for the > simple reason that one cannot derive such a meaning from eka + ayana > (one > + going). ..... B.Bodhi mentions, however (MN n135) that ‘virtually all translators understand this as a statement upholding satipa.t.thaana as an exclusive path. Thus Ven Soma renders it: “This is the only way, O bhikkhus,” and Ven. Nyanaponika: “This is the sole way, monks.”.....' ..... My Pali knowledge is too limited to question this point. However, in the PTS Rhys Davids/Stede dict, it mentions “only” as a common meaning as in ‘ekadivasena’ - on the one day only, i.e on the same day (J 1.59) or as meaning one, by oneself, one only, alone, solitary as in ‘ekuddesa’ (Aiii67). For ‘ayana’ the dict. gives 2 meanings of a) “going’, road and b) going to goal and mentions ekayana maggo in this context. Jim wrote: “A literal translation of the phrasing is: "one way, monks, is this path" but because of the compound state of 'ekaayano' there are a number of ways 'eka' can be syntactically related to 'ayano' that allows for some different and equally valid interpretations as given in Soma's commentary translation. This is a good example of the limitations of an English translation in that it can choose only one of these interpretations for a sutta translation.” ***** As I understand, all the various meanings as translated by Ven Soma below are correct and should be understood in the phrase “ekaayano aya.m bhikkave maggo”. In brief, the development of satipatthana is the only way that nibbana can ever be realized. Regardless of whether samatha has been developed and jhanas attained or not, only the development of right understanding and the other factors of the eightfold path can lead to the goal and can fully comprehend the three characteristics of anicca, dukkha and anatta. Furthermore it can only be developed ‘alone’ in the sense of ‘being withdrawn from craving’. The path is only taught by the Buddha or from the Teachings in a Buddha era. Those who have not heard and considered the Teachings cannot develop satipatthana or the various insights. Furthemore, the (mundane)path ‘goes solely’ to Nibbana, by understanding the characteristics and nature of all the various objects (i.e paramattha dhammas)included in the four satipatthanas repeatedly. Sarah ====== _______________________________________________________ From the commentary and sub-commentary notes: "The only way" = The one way [Ekayanoti ekamaggo]. There are many words for "way". The word used for "way" here is "ayana" ("going" or road). Therefore, "This is the only way, O bhikkhus [ekayano ayam bhikkhave maggo]" means here: "A single way ("going" or road), O bhikkhus, is this way; it is not of the nature of a double way [ekamaggo ayam bhikkhave maggo na dvedhapathabhuto]". Or it is "the only way" because it has to be trodden by oneself only [ekeneva ayitabbo]. That is without a companion. The state of being companionless is twofold: without a comrade, after abandoning contact with the crowd, and in the sense of being withdrawn (or secluded) from craving, through tranquillity of mind. Or it is called "ekayana" because it is the way of the one [ekassa ayana]. "Of the one" = of the best; of all beings the Blessed One is best. Therefore, it is called the Blessed One's Way. Although others too go along that way, it is the Buddha's because he creates it. Accordingly it is said: "He, the Blessed One, is the creator of the uncreated path, O Brahman." It proceeds (or exists) only in this Doctrine-and-discipline and not in any other. Accordingly the Master declared: "Subhadda, only in this Doctrine-and-discipline is the Eightfold Way to be found." And further, "ekayana" means: It goes to the one [ekam ayati] -- that is, it (the way) goes solely to Nibbana. Although in the earlier stages this method of meditation proceeds on different lines, in the latter, it goes to just the one Nibbana. And that is why Brahma Sahampati said: Whose mind perceiving life's last dying out Vibrates with love, he knows the only way That led in ancient times, is leading now, And in the future will lead past the flood.[6] As Nibbana is without a second, that is, without craving as accompanying quality, it is called the one. Hence it is said: "Truth is one; it is without a second." Why is the Arousing of Mindfulness intended by the word "way"? Are there not many other factors of the way, namely, understanding, thinking, speech, action, livelihood, effort, and concentration, besides mindfulness? To be sure there are. But all these are implied when the Arousing of Mindfulness is mentioned, because these factors exist in union with mindfulness. Knowledge, energy and the like are mentioned in the analytically expository portion [niddese]. In the synopsis [uddese], however, the consideration should be regarded as that of mindfulness alone, by way of the mental disposition of those capable of being trained. Some [keci], however, construing according to the stanza beginning with the words, "They do not go twice to the further shore [na param digunam yanti]"[7] say, "One goes to Nibbana once, therefore it is ekayana." This explanation is not proper. Because in this instruction the earlier part of the Path is intended to be presented, the preliminary part of the Way of Mindfulness proceeding in the four objects of contemplation is meant here, and not the supramundane Way of Mindfulness. And that preliminary part of the Path proceeds (for the aspirant) many times; or it may be said that there is many a going on it, by way of repetition of practice. In what sense is it a "way"? In the sense of the path going towards Nibbana, and in the sense of the path which is the one that should be (or is fit to be) traversed by those who wish to reach Nibbana. ________________________________________________________ 16435 From: Sarah Date: Thu Oct 24, 2002 6:34am Subject: Re: [dsg] Should the Garden be left to Grow? Hi Tom, --- proctermail wrote: > Hi, > > Firstly a little introduction - i am Sarah's nephew tom. this is my > first real excursion into this site and my buddhist knowledge thin so > please forgive any ignorance. .... Of course Jon and I are delighted to see you here again after a very long break;-) I hope you and family are well and I'm sorry I didn't get to Sussex (or England) in the summer. I'm interested in your question (ignorance is very welcome and common amongst us), like the way you put it and am appreciating Rob M's and Christine's fine replies (in spite of C's attempts to show up my ignorance of gulping snakes - I expect I hear them in my sleep;-)) Anyway, I hope they give you some practical assistance....Let us know. Here in high-rise Hong Kong, the only occasional home critter probs we have are with an occasional cockroach. As there's seldom any food in the place, luckily they soon learn to visit other tastier flats. Yesterday, a student found a catterpillar in a pack of cards and screeched out "there's a horrible worm", whilst raising a foot to stamp on it. To the horror of a few, I very nimbly rescued the poor thing just in time and nursed it til the end of the class when it was taken outside. I expect a few parents will have heard about your wierd aunt's strange friends by now. I remember when we last me, we also had a very good discussion about 'realities'. I hope that when you've sorted out the practical concerns, you'll raise some of the other philosophical ones and also any comments from the Buddhist books you've been reading that make sense or don't make sense. Love to all, Sarah ====== > > My first question is essentially one of practicality : > > I have found that on occasion, and infact the more it is thought > about the more occasions in which instances of it can be found, that > the action that is taken is often in conflict with mindfulness - for 16436 From: rjkjp1 Date: Thu Oct 24, 2002 6:47am Subject: Re: Should the Garden be left to Grow? --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "christine_forsyth" wrote: > Hi Rob, Tom and all, > > Rob - I am finding your post hard to understand given that I am > learning about death and rebirth being only consecutive moments, how > and where does the change in the > 'worthiness' of the everchanging stream of cittas occur from being > (say) a Bhikkhu [whose murder would carry heavy kamma] to the next > moment being reborn as a caterpillar, lizard or > spider whose deliberate or indifferent death you consider not worth > focusing on compared with 'helping an old lady across the street'? > I wonder if you could you please give me the sutta references for > "> The second consideration is the being that is killed. Killing a > > virtuous human is more serious than killing a non-virtuous human. > > Killing a human is more serious than killing an animal. Killing a > > large animal is more serious than killing a small animal."> > > I'm assuming it would be a sutta spoken by the Buddha (and that > there would be many such suttas) for such an vital moral and ethical > point as to 'who it is not so serious' to harm or kill ... >___------ Dear Christine, There are a few places in the texts - mostly the commentaries- where it mentions this:In the kuddakatapatha by Buddhaghosa (translated as Minor readings PTS by nanamoli). there is a comprehensive section on the precepts. on p24 -25 it notes that the blamableness of an action varies according to its degree. hence killing a large animal is worse than killing an insect because of the degree of effort involved and other factors. it has many details. Robert 16437 From: robmoult Date: Thu Oct 24, 2002 8:42am Subject: Re: Should the Garden be left to Grow? Hi Christine, I took my information from the Atthasalini. I am on the road, so it will take a couple of days to give you the specific reference. However, in line with the theme of that message, let me stress that it is the unerlying volition that has the greatest impact on the kammic weight of an action. Christine, I don't understand your question regarding the 'change in worthiness'; can you ask again a different way? Metta, Rob M :-) --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "rjkjp1" wrote: > --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "christine_forsyth" > wrote: > > Hi Rob, Tom and all, > > > > Rob - I am finding your post hard to understand given that I am > > learning about death and rebirth being only consecutive moments, > how > > and where does the change in the > > 'worthiness' of the everchanging stream of cittas occur from being > > (say) a Bhikkhu [whose murder would carry heavy kamma] to the next > > moment being reborn as a caterpillar, lizard or > > spider whose deliberate or indifferent death you consider not worth > > focusing on compared with 'helping an old lady across the street'? > > I wonder if you could you please give me the sutta references for > > "> The second consideration is the being that is killed. Killing a > > > virtuous human is more serious than killing a non-virtuous human. > > > Killing a human is more serious than killing an animal. Killing a > > > large animal is more serious than killing a small animal."> > > > > I'm assuming it would be a sutta spoken by the Buddha (and that > > there would be many such suttas) for such an vital moral and > ethical > > point as to 'who it is not so serious' to harm or kill ... > >___------ > Dear Christine, > There are a few places in the texts - mostly the commentaries- where > it mentions this:In the kuddakatapatha by Buddhaghosa (translated as > Minor > readings PTS by nanamoli). > there is a comprehensive section on the precepts. > on p24 -25 it notes that the blamableness of an action varies > according to its degree. hence killing a large animal is worse > than killing an insect because of the degree of effort involved > and other factors. it has many details. > Robert 16438 From: robmoult Date: Thu Oct 24, 2002 8:51am Subject: Re: Should the Garden be left to Grow? Hi Christine, Kenneth Ong asked the same question recently and I responded on Sep. 22 (message 15838) as follows: The references are from Atthasalini, Book I, Part III, Section V, "Discourse on Courses of Immoral Action" Metta, Rob M :-) --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "robmoult" wrote: > Hi Christine, > > I took my information from the Atthasalini. I am on the road, so it > will take a couple of days to give you the specific reference. > > However, in line with the theme of that message, let me stress that > it is the unerlying volition that has the greatest impact on the > kammic weight of an action. > > Christine, I don't understand your question regarding the 'change in > worthiness'; can you ask again a different way? > > Metta, > Rob M :-) > > --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "rjkjp1" wrote: > > --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "christine_forsyth" > > wrote: > > > Hi Rob, Tom and all, > > > > > > Rob - I am finding your post hard to understand given that I am > > > learning about death and rebirth being only consecutive moments, > > how > > > and where does the change in the > > > 'worthiness' of the everchanging stream of cittas occur from > being > > > (say) a Bhikkhu [whose murder would carry heavy kamma] to the > next > > > moment being reborn as a caterpillar, lizard or > > > spider whose deliberate or indifferent death you consider not > worth > > > focusing on compared with 'helping an old lady across the > street'? > > > I wonder if you could you please give me the sutta references > for > > > "> The second consideration is the being that is killed. Killing > a > > > > virtuous human is more serious than killing a non-virtuous > human. > > > > Killing a human is more serious than killing an animal. > Killing a > > > > large animal is more serious than killing a small animal."> > > > > > > I'm assuming it would be a sutta spoken by the Buddha (and that > > > there would be many such suttas) for such an vital moral and > > ethical > > > point as to 'who it is not so serious' to harm or kill ... > > >___------ > > Dear Christine, > > There are a few places in the texts - mostly the commentaries- > where > > it mentions this:In the kuddakatapatha by Buddhaghosa (translated > as > > Minor > > readings PTS by nanamoli). > > there is a comprehensive section on the precepts. > > on p24 -25 it notes that the blamableness of an action varies > > according to its degree. hence killing a large animal is worse > > than killing an insect because of the degree of effort involved > > and other factors. it has many details. > > Robert 16439 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Oct 24, 2002 10:04am Subject: Re: [dsg] mara sutta, Rahula Hi Rahula, I really enjoyed your post very much, I like all the Pali you gave us. Maara has many meanigs: the person of Maara, devaputta, and then: kilesa maara, the defilements, and also: all conditioned realities which are impermanent and thus dukkha. Maara is a name that can be used for all that is dukkha. Birth, old age and death are Maara. The PTS dict gives: death, maara can be applied to all conditioned realities: realm of rebirth, opposed to nibbana. Khandha, dhatu, ayatana, they are maara. S, I, Maara Samyutta. Many suttas confirm this, see suttas below that you quoted. op 23-10-2002 10:00 schreef rahula_80 op rahula_80@y...: > > My understanding of Buddhism is that it did NOT teach that the five > aggregates (Pali. khandha, Sanskrit. skandha) are mara but clinging > to the aggregates. > Here are the suttas in Pali. > > 1. Maarasuttam > > Saavatthinidaana.m Ekamanta.m nisinno kho aayasmaa raadho > bhagavanta.m etadavoca– "`maaro, maaro'ti, bhante, vuccati. Katamo nu > kho, bhante, maaro"ti? "Ruupa.m kho, raadha, maaro, vedanaa maaro, > saññaa maaro, sa"nkhaaraa maaro, viññaa.na.m maaro. Eva.m passa.m, > raadha, sutavaa ariyasaavako ruupasmimpi nibbindati, vedanaayapi > nibbindati, saññaayapi nibbindati, sa"nkhaaresupi nibbindati, > viñña.nasmimpi nibbindati. Nibbinda.m virajjati; viraagaa vimuccati. > Vimuttasmi.m vimuttamiti ñaa.na.m hoti. `Khii.naa jaati, vusita.m > brahmacariya.m, kata.m kara.niiya.m, naapara.m itthattaayaa'ti > pajaanaatii"ti. Pathama.m. > > 2. Maaradhammasutta.m > > Saavatthinidaana.m Ekamanta.m nisinno kho aayasmaa raadho > bhagavanta.m etadavoca– "`maaradhammo, maaradhammo'ti, bhante, > vuccati. Katamo nu kho, bhante, maaradhammo"ti? "Ruupa.m kho, raadha, > maaradhammo, vedanaa maaradhammo, saññaa maaradhammo, sa"nkhaaraa > maaradhammo, viññaa.nam maaradhammo. Eva.m passa.m…pe… naapara.m > itthattaayaati pajaanaatii"ti. Dutiya.m. > > Bhikkhu Bodhi's translation of Maraadhammasutta.m > > "Venerable Sir, it is said subject to Mara, subject to Mara. What now > venerable Sir is subject to Mara?" > > "Form, Radha is subject to Mara, Feeling is subject to Mara, > Perceptions are subject to Mara, Volitional Formations are Subject to > Mara, Consciousness is subject to Mara. He understands: '... there is > no more for this state of being." N: I would translate straightforward: Mara, but if we think of dukkha mara, it is not wrong to say: subject to. R:Bhikkhu Bodhi's footnote to SN 3.195. #248 footnote > "In the suttas that follow I translate the suffix -dhamma as "nature" > rather than "subject to" > > Even FL Woodward translates this word (maradhamma) correctly and > unglossed as "of the nature of Mara" > However, the commentary to this sutta succintly states: > > maaradhammoti mara.nadhammo "mara's dhamma means dhamma of death" > > Khandhavagga-atthakathaa 2.336 > > Dutiyavaggassa patthame maaro, maaroti mara.na.m pucchati. > yasmaa pana ruupaadivinimutta.m mara.na.m naama natthi, tenassa > bhagavaa ruupa.m kho, raadha, maaroti-aadimaaha. dutiye > maaradhammoti mara.nadhammo. etenupaayena sabbattha attho > veditabboti. << N: ...in this way (etenupaayena) the meaning should be completely understood. > Below are Shakya Aryanatta's translation. Is it correct? If not, why? > > 1. Maarasutta.m > > At one time in Savatthi, the venerable Radha seated himself > and asked of the Blessed Lord "Mara,Mara I hear said venerable. What > pray tell does Mara mean?""Just this, form, Radha is Mara, sensations > are Mara, perceptions are Mara, assemblages are Mara, sentience is > Mara. Seeing thusly?this is the end of birth, the Brahma-life has been > fullfiled, what must be done has been done, he discerns there is > nothing further than this very Soul." > 2. Maaradhammasutta.m > > At one time in Savatthi, the venerable Radha seated himself > and asked of the Blessed Lord "Mara's dharma, Mara's dharma I hear.... N: The tr is OK only the end I am not so happy with: soul, seems like a self. I try to analyse: naapara.m itthattaayaa': na apara.m: not further. apara.m: future state, further. itthattaayaa: ittthatta.m: in the present state of becoming, life in these conditions. This is info of PTS, but it is not complete I am sure. Maybe the experts know more about it (hint). We meet this phrase often in the suttas. I would translate as: there is no more future life. Ittha means here, but we have to be careful to connect this with itthattaayaa. Other derivation: ittha.m, thus, in this way. Itthatta.m: ittha.m-tta (ttha is used to make an adjective abstract sometimes), the present state, this life. Now more about the sutta: Why was it spoken? To remind us that the five khandhas, such as hardness now, feeling now, thinking now are conditioned realities, dukkha maara. But we do not know maara. In order to escape mara there is only one way: to be aware of them when they appear just now, because there is maara now. When panna has further developed the noble Truth of dukkha can be realized. When we know mara as mara we can conquer mara. Meanwhile: each sutta reminds us of the truth of this moment. As Ken H recently said: I also want to quote from Rob K's post (Somporn 2) what A. Sujin said. It is so true that tanha and avijja always fool us. They are just like mara fooling us, they are in disguise and pretend to be understanding: Nina. 16440 From: proctermail Date: Thu Oct 24, 2002 1:54pm Subject: Re: Should the Garden be left to Grow? Hi Christine and group, Thanks for your comments - you have elaborated the question well and given me more to think about. Your problem of ants is similar to another I have - slugs. It is very wet here and even my carpet gets wet when it rains so slugs are encouraged to come inside. I agree that prevention in is probably an acceptable way forward - I removed as many slugs as I could find and then placed salt in the likely places where they got in - hopefully I have discouraged them not killed them and have had less of a problem since. There is prob some negative kamma invilved but it could be worse - perhaps leave a bowl of water outside for the ants (though this may encourage!). I guess I realise that the garden has to be cut back but i once killed a frog inadvertantly whilst strimming. It is also interesting what you say about sentient beings as we think of plants as living and dying and returning to the earth to be reborn in another format but I guess thats a whole different discussion topic! tp --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "christine_forsyth" wrote: > Dear group, > > Tom's comments raised the old issues of 'sentient' beings, 'kamma' > and 'rebirth' for me once again. > > It is good to 'hear' from you, Tom. Welcome to dsg. I ask similar > questions occasionally. [Do you hear snakes making gulping sounds > like your Aunt Sarah? - I was just wondering if it is a genetically > inherited talent to attract those rare reptiles? ;-) ] > Excerpt from post 12552 "Chris: - Keeping on your good side after the > mention of B.Bodhi, I > won't mention any scepticism about snakes making a 'gulping' sound. > If you say it did Sarah, then it did! > This brings up a Dhamma focus question (seriously) - Is there a > Buddhist scripture relating to "not saving" - this is pertinent for > me, having rescued a small lizard caught up in a spider web. I'm not > sure if the lizard was grateful, But the spider was furious...no > dinner, and having to repair his home... So - was it a good > thing...saving another being? or was it a bad thing....depriving a > being of sustenance, and damaging his living area? Should we let > whatever is happening to another being (human or otherwise) happen? > If we intervene, are we just delaying the fruits of their > kamma?....Or were we meant to save them?" > > I, too, ask about the dilemma of 'other beings' from time to time. > What to do about spiders, cane toads, frogs, cockroaches, ants, > wasps, snakes, lizards, mice, rats and possums that seek to share my > outside and inside living space. It is often difficult to discuss - > most buddhists don't really take it seriously. Rebirth (if even > accepted as a possibility) is not thought of as anything other than > another human birth by many buddhists. So the value of the lives of > insects, reptiles and other creatures seems to be given lip service > only. Only one choice is usually considered when human comfort is > involved (and it is mostly comfort, not health) - extermination. > Currently, Queensland is undergoing the worst drought in over a > hundred years. (There is to be a huge ecumenical Service led by the > Archbishop and the State's Premier today in the Cathedral to pray for > rain. Inevitably the prayers will be answered - I hope they put in a > clause about 'timeliness of response'.) But, on a micro level, the > ant population (always the ones with the most initiative, next to > humans and rats) are invading my kitchen sink - they can't walk 200 > metres to the rapidly drying dam for a drink, I expect. And, besides > which, it is shoulder to shoulder with insect eating cattle egrets > and ibis out there. The ants are also sending scouts out to locate > the sugar bowl, crumbs and any other food sources. Nothing much > outside - the grass is brown and crunchy underfoot. The local cattle > are being grazed on the roadsides, 'the long paddock'. > For anyone who remembers, Rachel the rat has disappeared. > I believe prevention is the best choice and if I was starting off in > a brand new house it would be easier. This week, because of the dire > weather conditions (37 C and not half way through Spring yet) and > raging bush fires (one human death so far, 'Others' not collected > statistically), I have a tree lopping service coming to cut back many > of the trees the 'Others' use as ladders onto/into the roof space. > The mother possum is welcome to the sheds - but I would really prefer > the rats' relatives to relocate entirely. > I understand that scrupulous cleanliness is a given, but when > conditions for survival are harsh to extreme outside, this doesn't > prevent a clash of species' 'needs and wants' occurring. > Should we just put out the 'rat bait' and 'surface spray' and call > it 'their results of previous kamma' and 'commonsense' - maybe take > up a mantra like 'there is no self - no-one who kills, no-one who > dies' ... but if rebirth is truth, and I wipe out a nest of 30,000 > ant beings deliberately, would saying 'I tried everything, but they > just kept coming to the sink, so I had no choice ...' really wipe > out the affects of my kamma? And will we ever get out of samsara if > the deliberate killing of an insect is equivalent to killing beings > more like 'us'? - an imponderable, I know. > > Tom, with regards to the garden, I think cutting back shrubs and > trees from a Buddhist perspective is O.K. - isn't the precept about > not killing applicable only to sentient beings (those who are > beathing, and can feel fear)? Though knowingly entirely removing the > things which a sentient being needs to sustain life would be another > issue, as would garden insecticides and herbicides, so I believe. > For more, look under "Animals" in Useful Posts and then follow the > links and replies - > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/files/Useful_Posts > Welcome again, and hope to 'hear' you regularly, > metta, > Christine > --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "proctermail" wrote: > > Hi, > > > > Firstly a little introduction - i am Sarah's nephew tom. this is my > > first real excursion into this site and my buddhist knowledge thin > so > > please forgive any ignorance. > > > > My first question is essentially one of practicality : > > > > I have found that on occasion, and infact the more it is thought > > about the more occasions in which instances of it can be found, > that > > the action that is taken is often in conflict with mindfulness - > for > > example, when you clean you often find spiders and spiders webs in > > your house - to remove these hence possibly killing the spiders and > > destroying their homes in the process is asserting a selfish notion > > ie clean over a non selfish one of preserve life and allow things > to > > be. It could I guess be argued that if they died in right > mindfulness > > (a prayer for example) then nothing would be disrupted but... > > > > I origianally thought of this ages ago and emailed Sarah about it, > > but it has developed - hence the time taken to post. The same would > > apply to gardening - should i let it grow? 16441 From: Date: Thu Oct 24, 2002 3:25pm Subject: Way 16, Comm. "The Way of Mindfulness" by Soma Thera http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/bps/misc/wayof.html Continuing commentary on: "for the attainment of Nibbana" Further, this is an expression of praise of "the only way". Just as the Blessed One by way of eight characteristics expressed praise in the Cha Chakka Sutta, and by way of nine characteristics in the Ariyavamsa Sutta, just in the same way he expressed praise of this "only way", through the seven characteristics contained in the words "For the purification of beings", and so forth. Why did he utter talk of praise of this kind? For the purpose of bringing out the interest of these bhikkhus. The Blessed One thought: "Having heard the utterance of praise, these bhikkhus will believe that his way casts out the four onrushings [cattaro upaddave harati], namely sorrow produced by distress of heart [hadaya santapabhutam sokam], lamentation characterised by confused talk [vaca vipallabhutam paridevam], suffering produced by disagreeable bodily feeling [kayikam asatabhutam dukkham], and grief produced by disagreeable thought [cetasikam asatabhutam domanassam] and that it brings the three extraordinary spiritual attainments of purity, knowledge, and Nibbana [visuddhim ñanam Nibbananti tayo visese avahati] and will be convinced that this instruction should be studied (imam dhammadesanam uggahetabbam], mastered [pariyapunnitabbam], borne in mind [dharetabbam], and memorized [vacetabbam], and that this way should be cultivated [imañca maggam bhavetabbam]." Cattaro Satipatthana = "The Four Arousings of Mindfulness." Four in relation to classes of objects of mindfulness. Why did the Buddha teach just Four Arousings of Mindfulness and neither more nor less? By way of what was suitable for those capable of being trained. In regard to the pair of the dull-witted and the keen-witted minds among tamable persons of the craving type and the theorizing type, pursuing the path of quietude [samatha] or that of insight [vipassana] in the practice of meditation, the following is stated: For the dull-witted man of craving type the Arousing of Mindfulness through the contemplation of the gross physical body is the Path to Purity; for the keen-witted of this type, the subtle subject of meditation on the feeling. And for the dull-witted man of the theorizing type the Path to Purity is the Arousing of Mindfulness through a subject not too full of distinctions, namely, consciousness [citta]; for the keen-witted of this type, the subject which teems with distinctions, namely the contemplation on things of the mind -- mental objects [dhammanupassana]. For the dull-witted man, pursuing quietude, the First Arousing of Mindfulness, body-contemplation, is the Path to Purity, by reason of the feasibility of getting at the mental reflex; for the keen-witted of this type, because he does not continue to stay in the coarse, the second Arousing of Mindfulness, the contemplation on feeling, is the Path to Purity. And for the dull-witted man pursuing the path of insight, the subject of meditation without many distinctions, the contemplation on consciousness, is the Path to Purity; and for the keen-witted of this type the contemplation on mental objects which is full of distinctions. 16442 From: robmoult Date: Thu Oct 24, 2002 4:07pm Subject: Re: Should the Garden be left to Grow? Hi Tom, A quick clarification; according to Buddhism, plants do not have consciousness (citta) and therefore one cannot be reborn as a plant and plants are not reborn. Metta, Rob M :-) --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "proctermail" wrote: > Hi Christine and group, > It is also interesting what you say about sentient beings as we think > of plants as living and dying and returning to the earth to be reborn > in another format but I guess thats a whole different discussion > topic! > > tp > 16443 From: Date: Thu Oct 24, 2002 4:18pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Way 16, Comm. Hi all, Are the 7 characteristics mentioned here: "just in the same way he expressed praise of this "only way", through the seven characteristics contained in the words "For the purification of beings", and so forth." the same as the 4 onrushings and the 3 extraordinary spiritual attainments mentioned here: "Having heard the utterance of praise, these bhikkhus will believe that his way casts out the four onrushings [cattaro upaddave harati], namely sorrow produced by distress of heart [hadaya santapabhutam sokam], lamentation characterised by confused talk [vaca vipallabhutam paridevam], suffering produced by disagreeable bodily feeling [kayikam asatabhutam dukkham], and grief produced by disagreeable thought [cetasikam asatabhutam domanassam] and that it brings the three extraordinary spiritual attainments of purity, knowledge, and Nibbana [visuddhim ñanam Nibbananti tayo visese avahati] and will be convinced that this instruction should be studied (imam dhammadesanam uggahetabbam], mastered [pariyapunnitabbam], borne in mind [dharetabbam], and memorized [vacetabbam], and that this way should be cultivated [imañca maggam bhavetabbam]." L: Also, I couldn't figure out which of the arousings are for samatha and which for vipassana. Body is for samatha, but is that because it is for a craving type or a dull witted type? Oh, I see. Craving is subdued (?) by samatha and theorizing (papanca ?) is purified (?) by vipassana. I don't think I have the right terms here. Could someone elaborate? What does samatha do for craving? What is meant by "theorizing" and how does vipassana affect it? Larry 16444 From: Date: Thu Oct 24, 2002 4:33pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Should the Garden be left to Grow? Christine, Maybe you could read this and give us a summary: http://jbe.gold.ac.uk/4/schm1.html Larry 16445 From: Charles Thompson Date: Thu Oct 24, 2002 5:18pm Subject: Re: Welcome Dhammasaro, (was:Re: [dsg] Perfections Ch 6, Energy, no 9) Sawasdee Khun Sarah, et al Please forgive my abrupt entry onto your forum. No doubt you observed my frustration. For some reason, I could not log on to Yahoo. So I went the DSG e-mail route. My most abject apologies. Now, to your queries: 1. >This is a pretty unusual intro to DSG;-) Welcome anyway and hope to hear a >little more about you and your interest in Buddhism. Ans: Thank you for your welcome. I reside about 45 minutes west of San Antonio, Texas, USA. (That explains the brashness? ) Retired about six years ago to help my sister with our ailing mother in San Antonio after residing on the east coast of USA since the sixties. Went to Thailand initially in 1989 on business. In time met Thai-Americans. Thru their day-to-day behaviour induced me to investigate Buddhism. None tried to convert me!!! So, now in this moment I appreciate the Teachings. And, consider this old bag of bones a Buddhist. Definitely not a Pali scholar. Just try to learn from your messages. 2. Where are you now Ans: I am visiting friends just outside Philadelphia, PA, USA. Will fly out of their airport on the current planned trip to Thailand. 3. >I'm not sure if this was meant to be addressed to Nina or anyone from DSG. >In any case, as a first step, I suggest you send a note off-list to Rob K, > who'll all be in Bkk when you arrive and will be happy to meet up with >you and take you to the foundation for any discussion with A.Sujin. Betty, >Sukin, Num and a few others from DSG are also in Bkk and will be happy to >help. Ans: It was addressed to you. But, appreciate you and Robert replying. I will send e-mail off-list. 4. >Nina, ourselves and one or two others from DSG will be in Bkk at the very >end of the month briefly. Pls send me a note off-list if you have any >problems or if I can help further with this. Ans: Thanks for being understanding. Hope to meet yawl (Texan for "you all" ). 5. >Out of interest, is the 'sar' in your name shortened from sara.na as in >'refuge in the dhamma'? Ans: I understood it to mean a student of the Dhamma. I suspect it is an American English corruption of the Thai of a Pali word. My upajjhaya (sp) gave it to me. Perhaps, you may be able to give the correct Pali spelling and meaning. metta, Chuck 16446 From: christine_forsyth Date: Thu Oct 24, 2002 9:06pm Subject: Slugs, cockroaches and the first Precept, - there is a way :) Hi Tom, Sarah and All, I think an alternative strategy may be suggested in this article. :) Employ the slugs and provide them with comfortable living quarters. :) And Sarah, I think you once politely expressed grave doubts about my 'cockroach eating' gecko.... Truth will out eventually! :) I feel validated and justified. :) (I think this might be a bit long, but it's a one-off). metta, Christine http://www.n2.net/cschneid/Newsletters/2000/Oct_2000.html "It wasn't just the hideous pink-and-gray color scheme. Or even the loose tiles. The thing that Martyn Robinson hated most about his bathroom was the mold. Dark spots speckled the grout and a fuzzy, gray film clung to the shower curtain. No sooner had he scrubbed it off, back it came. "It was Mold City," says Robinson, a naturalist at the Australian Museum in Sydney. Hardly surprising, really. Robinson and his partner Lynne McNairn had chosen to live in an old, two- story, brick-and-fab house in Narraweena, a soggy suburb to the north of Sydney. The bedrock is so close to the surface that when it rains, water oozes out of the ground and turns the garden into a bog. Damp comes with the territory, and in a poorly ventilated bathroom, mold was inevitable. It was one long battle against the fuzzy fungus until, one day, Robinson decided to take on domestic help. He started with one, then three, and eventually a whole army of cleaners. They were small, cost only bed and board, and didn't use nasty chemicals around the house. They were slugs: a motley crew of striped ones, red ones and big, fat gray ones. As a naturalist, Robinson is keen to experiment with biological controls of all sorts. Since he settled in Narraweena, he has offered houseroom to a whole menagerie of creatures in return for their doing a few chores. His ultimate aim is to build up a trouble-free staff of animals that can be left alone to get on with the job. Already, he has turned up previously hidden talents among some of the local fauna. The slugs were his first employees. "Some slugs love mould. They thrive on it," says Robinson. "I noticed a few came into the house and headed for the bathroom. A friend of mine had seen slugs eating mold in his house so I thought I'd test it out." Worried that the molluscs would never make it across the vast expanse of carpet that lay between them and the bathroom, he gathered them up and carried them to their new home. "Lo and behold, it worked. They kept the mould down. They didn't get rid of it completely but we only needed to do a little work. They are particularly good at cleaning grout, silicone sealer and other hard-to-reach places," he says. Slugs have a strong homing instinct, foraging in the damp night air and spending the deadly desiccating daylight hours in a cool, moist retreat. Robinson provided his new staff with comfortable lodgings in the shape of a little ceramic pot perforated with stars and crescent moons--the sort more usually used to waft perfumed oils around the place. "They soon learnt that was home," he says. Each night, the slugs crawled out of the moons and stars and slithered off on their fungal foray. At daybreak, they crept home where they were safe from bare feet and torrents of hot water. In the breeding season, the slugs took a break from housework, heading down the drain and out of the vent pipe to seek a sweetie in the garden. After a brief romantic interlude, some came back, unable to resist Robinson's increasingly furry shower curtain. Those that failed to return were replaced with new recruits from the garden. Since he took on his first few slugs, Robinson has tried out several species, hoping to find the perfect home help. The leopard slug is a good mold-grazer, but tends to slip out of the bathroom at night to explore the house. "You might step on it during its nightly wanderings, so it wasn't ideal," says Robinson. The little striped slug--not so little at 3 to 5 centimeters long--was better. It has a healthy appetite for mold and goes about the job as energetically as a slug can. The red triangle slug, which can grow up to 10 centimeters, was a bit too picky. "It will eat mold but it won't go on the ground. It's good for shower curtains but won't clean the other parts of the bathroom." The best slug for the job turned out to be Limax flava, the much-maligned great gray slug familiar in European gardens and introduced to Australia. L. flava is a big, beefy slug, 9 centimeters at full stretch, so it eats a lot of mold. But it's also pretty sluggish, for want of a better word, and doesn't wander far at night, so there's little risk of finding one squashed into the carpet the next morning. It was time to downsize the staff. The celestial slug house has gone, and the slimmed-down workforce consists of three small stripy slugs. "They are small enough to fit in the groove of the sliding door without getting squashed," says Robinson. "Occasionally they get fed up and crawl down the drain, but generally they do a good job." Robinson has been well and truly bitten by the slug bug and hopes other people will give them a try. "It's an alternative for those who can't be bothered scrubbing or who don't like chemicals," he says. "They don't remove all the mold, but they do keep it down to an acceptable level." For those who don't exactly delight in the sight of fat gray slugs in the bath, he is working on a range of designer slugs in fetching bathroom colors. With Sydney's warm, damp climate--and especially on Robinson's boggy patch of land--there's plenty of work for a large household staff. Keeping down cockroaches, for instance. Roaches come in all sizes, from the thumb-sized Periplaneta species to the smaller but more persistent Blattella germanica. "They're a problem--for other people," says Robinson. His house is so well protected, he sees about one cockroach a month. The first line of defense is a colony of leaf- tailed geckos--prickly-looking lizards with flat, leaf-shaped tails. These particular geckos don't have sticky feet and can only cling by their claws to rough surfaces. They live outside on the brickwork, where they are active at night. "They form a sort of moat of geckos that insects have to get past before they can make it into the house," says Robinson. Any that do get in, risk an encounter with the "lounge lizards", secretive skinks that skulk by day behind the couch. The skinks emerge in the evening to hunt a whole range of unwelcome guests, including cockroaches, spiders and silverfish. "You hardly notice they are there. But they'll eat anything that's moving on the ground," says Robinson. Cockroaches might be unpleasant, but termites are a householder's worst nightmare. Given half a chance, they'll eat the house--unless something eats them first. In Narraweena, termites have a natural enemy in the little black ant. If the ants come across a band of termite workers, they'll follow them down into their galleries where they'll eat termites at every stage of development from egg to adult. Above ground, any termite king or queen setting out to found a new nest is fair game. If they land anywhere near the ants they're done for--and that's one fewer nest to worry about. Robinson and McNairn are happy to share their home with a few black ants in exchange for a termite-free house, although the ants themselves can become a nuisance. "They'll eat our food too-- from the sugar to breakfast cereals--and they get everywhere. You might find them living in the teapot, for instance. But we tolerate them. They patrol the places a human cleaner can't get to," says Robinson. Scuttling insects and stationary eggs are relatively easy to deal with, but in Australia it's hard to avoid flying insects, especially mosquitoes. And mosquitoes are really scary these days, in case you haven't noticed. Most people keep them out with wire screens. Robinson's insect screens are woven from silk and tailor- made by orb spiders. Webs on either side of the ramp leading to the first-floor entrance create an insect-screened corridor to the house. Golden orb spiders are best for this job. They build fairly permanent webs, and although they don't always build them in the right place or at the right angle, the webs can be moved into position by carefully detaching the supporting strands and fastening them to a more suitable twig or stem. Garden orb spiders do their bit too, but they have a serious drawback--they build a new web each night, eating the old one the following morning. "This means we sometimes walk straight into a web at night that wasn't there during the day," says Robinson. There are plenty of pests left to keep a whole range of wildlife fed, from dragonflies to bats, to fish and frogs which live in the garden's pools and ponds, even insect-eating sundews and pitcher plants, which thrive on the boggy ground. And about this time of year, the anti-mosquito task force is swelled by the arrival of several species of Toxorhynchites--unusually large mosquitoes with glittering iridescent bodies and wings. There are dozens of species of Toxorhynchites around the world and they share one endearing habit: as larvae they have a voracious appetite for the young of other mosquitoes. The adult insects suck plant sap and nectar, not blood, and they lay their eggs in small pools, containers filled with rainwater, tree holes and even waterlogged footprints in the lawn. The offspring of other mosquitoes don't have much of a chance. A single Toxorhynchites larva can eat its way through 400 smaller mosquito larvae before it reaches adulthood. "Although we've still got plenty of mosquitoes, there are fewer than there might have been," says Robinson. Apart from their battery of biological controls, Robinson and McNairn restrict their fight against pests to mechanical methods--squashing snails, for instance--or at most, sloshing ecologically friendly soapy water over bad infestations of scale insects. The result is a garden filled with native species, from mud-burrowing spiny crayfish to seven species of insect-eating lizard. Native honeybees, rescued from a fallen tree, nest in two hives that Robinson has provided, each potentially giving him a liter of lemony-tasting honey a year. Native wasps have moved into other artificial nest sites--and keep down harmful caterpillars. "We provide what the animals want, and they come," says Robinson. "And the more diversity there is, the less likely we are to have pests. Pests may get used to chemicals, but they never get used to being eaten." And there's a bonus. There's always a ready supply of new additions to the household staff. "We'll probably never have a scrupulously clean and tidy house but we have one that's comfortable, entertaining and doesn't give us too much work." For anyone thinking of following Robinson's example, it's probably best to check that it's OK with any other humans living in the house. Fortunately, McNairn shares Robinson's enthusiasm. "I like having the critters around," she says. "They make our life interesting, and generally you don't even know they are there. They just quietly get on with their jobs and every now and then you see one of the geckos or slugs and think, that's nice, they're still here." Unless they are spiders, that is. "There was a bit of a problem when a large banded huntsman spider I'd introduced to the garden took up residence in a drawer," admits Robinson. "When Lynne went to take out her favorite gray jumper, part of it moved under her hand," he recalls. Her piercing scream persuaded him to put the spider at the farthest part of the garden. "It never returned," he says, "probably because its sound receptors are still ringing.. .." 16447 From: rahula_80 Date: Thu Oct 24, 2002 10:54pm Subject: Re: [dsg] mara sutta, Rahula Hi Nina, Thanks for your wonderful reply. Thanks again, Rahula 16448 From: rahula_80 Date: Thu Oct 24, 2002 11:00pm Subject: Re: vimuttatta, to Rahula Hi, Yes, the PTS dictionary gave, "having an emancipated self". But Lance Cousins said PTS is in error on this point. In buddha-L, he wrote: Vimuttattaa .thita.m. .Thitattaa santusita.m. Santusitattaa na paritassati. So the first sentence corresponds to Sanskrit: vimuktatvaat sthitam and so on. There is no atta/aatman here at all; it is the ablative singular of the suffix tta = tva. Bhikkhu Bodhi is indeed vindicated. I have explain in an earlier post why I don't understand this. I am just starting to learn Pali. Maybe that's is why I don't understand. So please show me step by step. From that post: According to Pali Primer by Lily de Silva, Lesson 9 The suffix -tvaa is added to the root of the verb or verbal base with or sometimes without the connecting vowel -i- to form the gerung, absolutive or the indeclinable particle. So, shouldn't it be rendered, vimucitvaa, never vimuttattaa. (muc + i + tvaa)? Also, vimutta + tta = vimuttatta, NOT vimuttattaa. Right? If not, can you explain how vimuttattaa is derived? I just couldn't figure out how to get "vimuttattaa" from "vimutta". ===== So, I was wondering how one get vimuttattaa gramatically from vimutta. Thanks, Rahula 16449 From: christine_forsyth Date: Thu Oct 24, 2002 11:10pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Should the Garden be left to Grow?/Larry Larry: Thanks for the link, but I think I'll pass on summarising the article. The conclusion is quite helpful in giving an overview of the authors arguements and findings. My understanding of non-harming of living beings arises out of putting myself in their place, of knowing they want happiness just as I do, and they fear pain just as I do. The main thrust of my desiring understanding of the Buddha's teaching on this, is to know the sure base of spiritually appropriate behaviour in daily life Though I am a strong supporter of the environmental movement, particularly of the protection and preservation of huge tracts of diverse flora and fauna in the National Parks system in Australia, my current interest in the "Should the Garden be left to Grow?" thread is from the perspective of trying to understand how the Theravada Tradition values all Sentient beings, and how kamma, and rebirth are interwoven in this teaching. Though Ecological Ethics would no doubt be a robust,and interesting discussion ... :) metta, Christine --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., LBIDD@w... wrote: > Christine, > > Maybe you could read this and give us a summary: > http://jbe.gold.ac.uk/4/schm1.html > > Larry 16450 From: christine_forsyth Date: Thu Oct 24, 2002 11:49pm Subject: Re: Should the Garden be left to Grow?/RobK Dear RobK, Thanks for the info. but as I don't have access to a copy of Kuddakatapatha by Buddhaghosa, and unless there is a link, I am unable to read further. My understanding is that the Blessed One taught that Kamma is wholesome or unwholesome volitions (intention), I don't understand why the degree of physical effort has a bearing ... I would certainly have to expend large amounts of effort to kill any goanna or a carpet snake whether with a garden spade or a machete. (Of course, I wouldn't do such a thing, even to certain egg and chicken stealing individuals I have known). It would take a huge mental and physical effort (as they're scary and quite strong, snakes can bite, and goannas, in addition, have claws and are agile). I once had a goanna,chased by a dog, run straight up my legs and body as if I were a tree. Lots of deep scratches, screams, agitated body motions and shouts directed at the dog by everyone present.:)) But, gently touching a button to send nuclear missiles to wipe out a city of 600,000 human beings and statistically uncounted 'others' would not require much physical effort at all. It may not take much mental effort either, particularly if they were regarded as a target, a part of an evil terrorist conspiracy and therefore much less virtuous than someone of my own political, religious and ethnic group... I wonder what time period Buddhaghosa come from? Is one expected to accept the writings of Buddhaghosa in the same way that the Suttas, Vinaya, and Abhidhamma are accepted by devout Theravadin Buddhists? metta, Christine --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "rjkjp1" wrote: > --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "christine_forsyth" > wrote: > > Hi Rob, Tom and all, > > > > Rob - I am finding your post hard to understand given that I am > > learning about death and rebirth being only consecutive moments, > how > > and where does the change in the > > 'worthiness' of the everchanging stream of cittas occur from being > > (say) a Bhikkhu [whose murder would carry heavy kamma] to the next > > moment being reborn as a caterpillar, lizard or > > spider whose deliberate or indifferent death you consider not worth > > focusing on compared with 'helping an old lady across the street'? > > I wonder if you could you please give me the sutta references for > > "> The second consideration is the being that is killed. Killing a > > > virtuous human is more serious than killing a non-virtuous human. > > > Killing a human is more serious than killing an animal. Killing a > > > large animal is more serious than killing a small animal."> > > > > I'm assuming it would be a sutta spoken by the Buddha (and that > > there would be many such suttas) for such an vital moral and > ethical > > point as to 'who it is not so serious' to harm or kill ... > >___------ > Dear Christine, > There are a few places in the texts - mostly the commentaries- where > it mentions this:In the kuddakatapatha by Buddhaghosa (translated as > Minor > readings PTS by nanamoli). > there is a comprehensive section on the precepts. > on p24 -25 it notes that the blamableness of an action varies > according to its degree. hence killing a large animal is worse > than killing an insect because of the degree of effort involved > and other factors. it has many details. > Robert 16451 From: christine_forsyth Date: Thu Oct 24, 2002 11:57pm Subject: Re: Should the Garden be left to Grow?/RobM Hi Rob, Sorry for the confusion. What I was trying to say, and I'm not sure if this will be any clearer, is that my intellectual understanding of what this "I" is, is: [from Nyanatiloka] a continually self- consuming process of arising and passing bodily and mental phenomena.' Taking that as the definition of a sentient being - then death is the temporary end of a temporary phenomena. The organic life ceases but the continually arising processes, well ... continue arising and changing ... rather relentlessly. It is not quite the same process of mental phenomena that was the Bhikkhu, but it is not completely different now that it is a dog or a caterpillar. My example using a Bhikkhu being killed, and then the processes taking another form of a caterpillar or dog, was just to say it was the outer form that your quote seemed to invest with worth, the ever decaying rupa. I was asking in a garbled way why there were different values given to a living process of cittas and cetasikas, dependent on size, outer form and perceived virtue ... it doesn't seem logical to have an Order of Precedence. Either All Beings are important or none are. Given the doctrine of Anatta - "none" would seem a more consistent answer - but my heart votes for "All". I am happy to put it in the 'too hard basket' for a while if the Buddha said it - but if it isn't mentioned until many hundreds of years after his parinibbana, then I wonder why? Happy to be corrected. metta, Christine --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "robmoult" wrote: > Hi Christine, > > I took my information from the Atthasalini. I am on the road, so it > will take a couple of days to give you the specific reference. > > However, in line with the theme of that message, let me stress that > it is the unerlying volition that has the greatest impact on the > kammic weight of an action. > > Christine, I don't understand your question regarding the 'change in > worthiness'; can you ask again a different way? > > Metta, > Rob M :-) 16452 From: christine_forsyth Date: Fri Oct 25, 2002 0:08am Subject: Re: Should the Garden be left to Grow?/Tom Hi Tom, How lovely to hear of your rescue of the slugs. Please keep it up, you are doing a very good thing. I do leave water outside in the day time mainly for the dog - but I notice ants can drown in steep sided bowls, or in the tidal wave caused by a lapping dog. And cane toads like to sit in the bowl, and as they have poison glands, have been known to unintentionally kill fowls and dogs by poisoning the water. According to Theravada Buddhism, animals are sentient beings which are subject to the same kammic laws as humans. Hence a being may be born into the animal plane, which is considered to be below the human as a result of unwholesome kamma. Plants are said not have the type of consciousness (vinnana) inherent in a sentient being, therefore rebirth as a plant or tree is not possible. [Though I did in passing see a reference to plants having one-facultied consciousness but am not sure what that is exactly ...] It is sad about the frog, but you didn't know it was there, you didn't choose to harm it, and so there was no 'intention'. Personally, I think treating animals and insects with loving- kindness and compassion is the only choice for those who accept rebirth as the Buddha taught it. In the Saccasamyutta The Five Destinations Repetition Series 103 (2) Passing Away as Humans "Then the Blessed One took up a little bit of soil in his fingernail and addressed the bhikkhus thus: 'What do you think, bhikkhus, which is more: the little bit of soil in my fingernail or the great earth?' 'Venerable sir, the great earth is more. The little bit of soil that the Blessed One has taken up in his fingernail is trifling. Compared to the great earth, the little bit of soil that the Blessed has taken up in his fingernail is not calculable, does not bear comparison, does not amount even to a fraction.' 'So too, bhikkhus, those beings are few who, when they pass away as human beings, are reborn among human beings. But those beings are more numerous who, when they pass away as human beings, are reborn in the animal realm" ... metta, Christine --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "proctermail" wrote: > Hi Christine and group, > > Thanks for your comments - you have elaborated the question well and > given me more to think about. Your problem of ants is similar to > another I have - slugs. It is very wet here and even my carpet gets > wet when it rains so slugs are encouraged to come inside. I agree > that prevention in is probably an acceptable way forward - I removed > as many slugs as I could find and then placed salt in the likely > places where they got in - hopefully I have discouraged them not > killed them and have had less of a problem since. There is prob some > negative kamma invilved but it could be worse - perhaps leave a bowl > of water outside for the ants (though this may encourage!). > > I guess I realise that the garden has to be cut back but i once > killed a frog inadvertantly whilst strimming. > > It is also interesting what you say about sentient beings as we think > of plants as living and dying and returning to the earth to be reborn > in another format but I guess thats a whole different discussion > topic! > > tp > > --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "christine_forsyth" > wrote: > > Dear group, > > > > Tom's comments raised the old issues of 'sentient' beings, 'kamma' > > and 'rebirth' for me once again. > > > > It is good to 'hear' from you, Tom. Welcome to dsg. I ask similar > > questions occasionally. [Do you hear snakes making gulping sounds > > like your Aunt Sarah? - I was just wondering if it is a genetically > > inherited talent to attract those rare reptiles? ;-) ] > > Excerpt from post 12552 "Chris: - Keeping on your good side after > the > > mention of B.Bodhi, I > > won't mention any scepticism about snakes making a 'gulping' sound. > > If you say it did Sarah, then it did! > > This brings up a Dhamma focus question (seriously) - Is there a > > Buddhist scripture relating to "not saving" - this is pertinent for > > me, having rescued a small lizard caught up in a spider web. I'm > not > > sure if the lizard was grateful, But the spider was furious...no > > dinner, and having to repair his home... So - was it a good > > thing...saving another being? or was it a bad thing....depriving a > > being of sustenance, and damaging his living area? Should we let > > whatever is happening to another being (human or otherwise) happen? > > If we intervene, are we just delaying the fruits of their > > kamma?....Or were we meant to save them?" > > > > I, too, ask about the dilemma of 'other beings' from time to time. > > What to do about spiders, cane toads, frogs, cockroaches, ants, > > wasps, snakes, lizards, mice, rats and possums that seek to share > my > > outside and inside living space. It is often difficult to discuss - > > > most buddhists don't really take it seriously. Rebirth (if even > > accepted as a possibility) is not thought of as anything other than > > another human birth by many buddhists. So the value of the lives > of > > insects, reptiles and other creatures seems to be given lip service > > only. Only one choice is usually considered when human comfort is > > involved (and it is mostly comfort, not health) - extermination. > > Currently, Queensland is undergoing the worst drought in over a > > hundred years. (There is to be a huge ecumenical Service led by > the > > Archbishop and the State's Premier today in the Cathedral to pray > for > > rain. Inevitably the prayers will be answered - I hope they put in > a > > clause about 'timeliness of response'.) But, on a micro level, the > > ant population (always the ones with the most initiative, next to > > humans and rats) are invading my kitchen sink - they can't walk > 200 > > metres to the rapidly drying dam for a drink, I expect. And, > besides > > which, it is shoulder to shoulder with insect eating cattle egrets > > and ibis out there. The ants are also sending scouts out to locate > > the sugar bowl, crumbs and any other food sources. Nothing much > > outside - the grass is brown and crunchy underfoot. The local > cattle > > are being grazed on the roadsides, 'the long paddock'. > > For anyone who remembers, Rachel the rat has disappeared. > > I believe prevention is the best choice and if I was starting off > in > > a brand new house it would be easier. This week, because of the > dire > > weather conditions (37 C and not half way through Spring yet) and > > raging bush fires (one human death so far, 'Others' not collected > > statistically), I have a tree lopping service coming to cut back > many > > of the trees the 'Others' use as ladders onto/into the roof space. > > The mother possum is welcome to the sheds - but I would really > prefer > > the rats' relatives to relocate entirely. > > I understand that scrupulous cleanliness is a given, but when > > conditions for survival are harsh to extreme outside, this doesn't > > prevent a clash of species' 'needs and wants' occurring. > > Should we just put out the 'rat bait' and 'surface spray' and call > > it 'their results of previous kamma' and 'commonsense' - maybe > take > > up a mantra like 'there is no self - no-one who kills, no-one who > > dies' ... but if rebirth is truth, and I wipe out a nest of 30,000 > > ant beings deliberately, would saying 'I tried everything, but they > > just kept coming to the sink, so I had no choice ...' really wipe > > out the affects of my kamma? And will we ever get out of samsara > if > > the deliberate killing of an insect is equivalent to killing beings > > more like 'us'? - an imponderable, I know. > > > > Tom, with regards to the garden, I think cutting back shrubs and > > trees from a Buddhist perspective is O.K. - isn't the precept about > > not killing applicable only to sentient beings (those who are > > beathing, and can feel fear)? Though knowingly entirely removing > the > > things which a sentient being needs to sustain life would be > another > > issue, as would garden insecticides and herbicides, so I believe. > > For more, look under "Animals" in Useful Posts and then follow the > > links and replies - > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/files/Useful_Posts > > Welcome again, and hope to 'hear' you regularly, > > metta, > > Christine > > --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "proctermail" > wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > > > Firstly a little introduction - i am Sarah's nephew tom. this is > my > > > first real excursion into this site and my buddhist knowledge > thin > > so > > > please forgive any ignorance. > > > > > > My first question is essentially one of practicality : > > > > > > I have found that on occasion, and infact the more it is thought > > > about the more occasions in which instances of it can be found, > > that > > > the action that is taken is often in conflict with mindfulness - > > for > > > example, when you clean you often find spiders and spiders webs > in > > > your house - to remove these hence possibly killing the spiders > and > > > destroying their homes in the process is asserting a selfish > notion > > > ie clean over a non selfish one of preserve life and allow things > > to > > > be. It could I guess be argued that if they died in right > > mindfulness > > > (a prayer for example) then nothing would be disrupted but... > > > > > > I origianally thought of this ages ago and emailed Sarah about > it, > > > but it has developed - hence the time taken to post. The same > would > > > apply to gardening - should i let it grow? 16453 From: Sarah Date: Fri Oct 25, 2002 0:41am Subject: Re: Welcome Dhammasaro, (was:Re: [dsg] Perfections Ch 6, Energy, no 9) Sawasdee Khun Chuck;-), --- Charles Thompson wrote: > Sawasdee Khun Sarah, et al > > Please forgive my abrupt entry onto your forum. No doubt you observed > my > frustration. For some reason, I could not log on to Yahoo. So I went > the > DSG e-mail route. My most abject apologies. .... No problem, we're used to all kinds of entry here;-) I think I'll keep Erik's super post on patience with all its helpful links handy for when Yahoo next gives me a BIG TEST (fingers crossed, we haven't had a list close-down for a very long time and at least I haven't lost an account like Rob K...) ..... > Ans: Thank you for your welcome. I reside about 45 minutes west of San > > Antonio, Texas, USA. > (That explains the brashness? ) ..... I think no comment is safest . We may all be a little biased by one well-known representative these days. On the otherhand, we have a very dear friend whom Nina and ourselves have known a very long time and she has recently retired back to Texas too. She's a sometimes-lurker on DSG. ..... >Retired about six years ago to > help > my sister with our ailing mother in San Antonio after residing on the > east > coast of USA since the sixties. .... I'm sure they both appreciate the move. ..... > Went to Thailand initially in 1989 on business. In time met > Thai-Americans. > Thru their day-to-day behaviour induced me to investigate Buddhism. > None > tried to convert me!!! So, now in this moment I appreciate the > Teachings. > And, consider this old bag of bones a Buddhist. > > Definitely not a Pali scholar. Just try to learn from your messages. .... Likewise... ..... > Ans: I am visiting friends just outside Philadelphia, PA, USA. Will > fly > out of their airport on the current planned trip to Thailand. .... > Ans: It was addressed to you. But, appreciate you and Robert replying. > I > will send e-mail off-list. ... Good, Rob will be able to fill you in on all the schedules and I'm sure you'll find any discussions interesting. I hope you'll be able to join us at the end of the month, perhaps too. .... > Ans: Thanks for being understanding. Hope to meet yawl (Texan for "you > > all" ). .... That will be a pleasure (Queen's English for "it may turn out that we're from different planets, but at all costs, let's keep this polite";-)) Actually, Pinna, our other Texan friend will be in Bkk at the beg. of Dec, so depending on how long you have..... ..... > Ans: I understood it to mean a student of the Dhamma. I suspect it is > an > American English corruption of the Thai of a Pali word. My upajjhaya > (sp) > gave it to me. Perhaps, you may be able to give the correct Pali > spelling > and meaning. ..... That would have to be for the Thai and Pali experts here- not me. Thanks for all the good-hearted info and replies, Chuck. How long have you been following/looking in on DSG? Which areas are of most interest. If you're busy packing or cutting back the garden, it can wait til Bkk;-) Thanks again, Sarah ======= 16454 From: Sarah Date: Fri Oct 25, 2002 1:51am Subject: Re: [dsg] Tibetan Book of the Dead in Rupa Class Hi Rob M, I meant to get back on this before: --- robmoult wrote: > Hi All, > > In this week's class, a student commented, "In the Tibetan Book of > the Dead, it says that when a person dies, the first element to fail > is the earth element and, because of that, they are unable to hold > up a cup with their hand. Yet according to what you have said, it is > the wind element that supports a hand in holding up a cup." .... From the following two quotes, I read the elements as being very inter-dependent and the predominant ones to be different for different movements such as falling and supporting. So both your comments may be correct: ***** From Satipatthana commentary and sub-commentary. See also Sammohavinodani and other commentaries for other examples: 1. “ In raising up the foot A [paduddharane] two processes [dhatuyo]: extension [pathavi] and cohesion [apo], are low, weak [omatta honti dubbala], and the other two processes: caloricity [tejo] and oscillation [vayo] are high, powerful [adhimatta honti balavatiyo]; so, too, in stretching out the foot B [atiharane] and in shifting away the foot C [vitiharane]. But in dropping down the raised foot D [vossajjane], and likewise in keeping the foot on the ground E [sannikkhepane] and in pressing the foot against the ground F [sannirumbhane] the first two processes are high and powerful and the second, low and weak. There, the material and mental phenomena in A do not occur in B; those in B do not occur in C; those in C do not occur in D; those in D do not occur in E; those in E do not occur in F. These phenomena after coming into existence in the form of several sections, links, and parts, break quickly just in those places, crackling like sesamum seeds thrown into a heated pan. In this matter, who is the one that goes forward, or whose going forward is there? In the highest sense (paramatthato) what takes place is the going, the standing, the sitting down and the lying down of the processes. With material form in the several divisions (groups or parts), One conscious state arises And quite another ceases, In sequence, like a river's flow, These states (of mind and matter) go. (aññam uppajjate cittam aññam cittam nirujjhati avicimanusambandho nadi soto va vattati]. ..... 2. “Or stretching out is the carrying of a foot (near) to the place where the other foot is set and shifting away is the carrying of a foot further to a point beyond the place on which the other foot is. Since the process of cohesion with (its cognate process) extension coming (as a servant or follower) behind it [pathavi dhatuya anugata apodhatu] is the condition for dropping down [vossajjane paccayo], cohesion and extension are in preponderance by reason of capability in the action of dropping down. The nature of cohesion is most gravid and so in the laying down of an upraised foot extension is subordinate to cohesion. Because of their incapacity to drop down what is upraised the processes of caloricity and oscillation are called low in this connection. Since the process of extension with (its cognate process) cohesion coming (as a servant or follower) behind it [apodhatuya anugata pathavidhatu] is the condition for the keeping (of a foot) on the ground, extension and cohesion are in preponderance by reason of capability, in the keeping (of a foot) on the ground. In keeping the foot on the ground too, as in the state of something fixed, cohesion is subordinate to extension owing to the excessive functioning of the latter process. Cohesion is subordinate to extension also by way of the contactual action of the process of extension in pressing the foot against the ground.” ***** Sarah p.s I liked the points you made to Tom very much. ===== 16455 From: rjkjp1 Date: Fri Oct 25, 2002 4:44am Subject: Re: Should the Garden be left to Grow?/RobK --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "christine_forsyth" wrote: > Dear RobK, > My understanding is that the Blessed One > taught that Kamma is wholesome or unwholesome volitions (intention), > I don't understand why the degree of physical effort has a > bearing ... > I would certainly have to expend large amounts of effort to kill any > goanna or a carpet snake whether with a garden spade or a machete. > (> dog by everyone present.:)) > But, gently touching a button to send nuclear missiles to wipe out a > city of 600,000 human beings and statistically uncounted 'others' > would not require much physical effort at all. It may not take much > mental effort either, particularly if they were > regarded as a target, a part of an evil terrorist conspiracy and > therefore much less virtuous than someone of my own political, > religious and ethnic group... ___________ Dear Christine, I think your comparison of the gentle touch of the nuclear button doesn't take into account a few factors. To build a nuclear missile takes a period of time during which there are akusala cittas arising . It is not only the person who pushes the button who makes akusala kamma but also those who order it. And the number of beings is said to be a factor by Buddhaghosa not only the amount of effort expended ( I didn't make that clear). You wrote to RobM that . "Either All Beings are important or none are. " In the suttas the Buddha says that ones parents are equivalent to Brahma gods and that killing a parent will ensure tthat one is born in hell next life. The same goes for wounding a buddha or killing an arahant. Whereas kiling other humans may or may not cause one to be reborn in hell. Why? Because there are many factors that determine the seriousness of an action . It all sounds reasonable to me - I don't think that killing a mosquito is as bad as killing a human for instance . > I wonder what time period Buddhaghosa come from? Is one expected > to accept the writings of Buddhaghosa in the same way that the > Suttas, Vinaya, and Abhidhamma are accepted by devout Theravadin > Buddhists? _______ Buddhaghosa was born about a thousand years after the Buddha. . Whether one belives in the Tipitaka or the commentaries is conditioned by various factors; nothing is really expected. Some Buddhists have valued the commenatries and so they have been preserved since the time of the buddha and are recited at the Buddhist councils. In the future it will come to occur that less people will value them and so they will disapear. It is all predicted. Robert > 16456 From: Date: Fri Oct 25, 2002 2:42am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Should the Garden be left to Grow?/RobK Hi, Robert - In a message dated 10/25/02 7:46:02 AM Eastern Daylight Time, rjkjp1@y... writes: > Buddhaghosa was born about a thousand years after the Buddha. . > Whether one belives in the Tipitaka or the commentaries is > conditioned by various factors; nothing is really expected. Some > Buddhists have valued the commenatries and so they have been > preserved since the time of the buddha and are recited at the Buddhist > councils. In the future it will come to occur that less people will value > them and so they will disapear. It is all predicted. > ======================= Exactly *what* is all predicted? That the Buddhasasana will die out, or that the commentaries will come to be ignored? Did the Buddha discuss the commentaries in the Tipitaka? 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) 16457 From: proctermail Date: Fri Oct 25, 2002 9:35am Subject: Re: Should the Garden be left to Grow? Hi Christine, Rob, All I too find the position hard to understand - I have read ( but couldn't qoute) that it is precisely through small actions that the bigger picture is realised. Helping the old lady cross the sreet may seem like the bigger picture but in fact could be argued to be less helpful in the life scheme since it presents no moral dilemma thus there is less learning to be gained from the action. There is an english saying - a penny saved is a penny earnt - the more negative action/thinking that can be removed the greater the cumulative effect. the quote below ' In safety and bliss..' followed by that of the cleaning of cobwebs in the monastry points to cleaning without harming the spiders. However it does also seem to question the notion that humans are 'above' other animals and that the intention of killing a snake, dog or an elephant, for example, is not dissimilar to that of killing a human whereas the social elements of our relationships with other humans makes this more horrific. I also have another question - how and where does good kamma in previous lives come from - ie is it possible that an ant can have a good kammic existence? Thanks tp --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "christine_forsyth" wrote: > Hi Rob, Tom and all, > > Rob - I am finding your post hard to understand given that I am > learning about death and rebirth being only consecutive moments, how > and where does the change in the > 'worthiness' of the everchanging stream of cittas occur from being > (say) a Bhikkhu [whose murder would carry heavy kamma] to the next > moment being reborn as a caterpillar, lizard or > spider whose deliberate or indifferent death you consider not worth > focusing on compared with 'helping an old lady across the street'? > I wonder if you could you please give me the sutta references for > "> The second consideration is the being that is killed. Killing a > > virtuous human is more serious than killing a non-virtuous human. > > Killing a human is more serious than killing an animal. Killing a > > large animal is more serious than killing a small animal."> > > I'm assuming it would be a sutta spoken by the Buddha (and that > there would be many such suttas) for such an vital moral and ethical > point as to 'who it is not so serious' to harm or kill ... > I only know things like Dhammapada 131 "Whoever, seeking his own > happiness, > harms with the rod pleasure-loving beings gets no happiness > hereafter." which the Buddha spoke to children tormenting a snake, > and the Metta Sutta > "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;" > > If these distinctions you quote between the greater and lesser > seriousness of kammic consequences of actions depending on the > virtue, size or species of the living being concerned - would > there be distinctions in the within a species? Say > hurting/killing a bright intelligent > high school graduate compared to a two year old born mentally > disabled? hurting/killing a male compared to a female? > hurting/killing a unborn fetus compared to a neonate? > > I have been reading "Attitude to and treatment of the natural world" > in 'An > Introduction to Buddhist Ethics' by Peter Harvey. "One's present > fortunate position as a human is only a temporary state of affairs, > dependent on past good karma. One cannot isolate oneself from the > plight of animals, as one has oneself experienced it, just as > animals have had past rebirths as humans. Moreover, in the ancient > round of rebirths, every being one comes > across, down to an insect, will at some time have been a close > relative or friend, and have been very good to one. Bearing this in > mind, one shouldreturn the kindness in the present." > > metta, > Christine > > > --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "robmoult" wrote: > > Hi Tom, > > > > An imaginary conversation: > > > > Friend: Rob! You have shaved your head! Have you decided to become > a > > monk? > > > > Rob: No, I have taken up competitive swimming. I read in a magazine > > that shaving my head will reduce resistance cutting 0.04 sec from > my > > lap time. > > > > Friend: Rob, you are 10kg overweight and spend less than one hour a > > week in the pool. Why don't you focus on the more important issues > > before thinking about cutting 0.04 sec from your lap time? > > > > > > > > Killing insects creates bad kamma. However, let us consider the > > weightiness of the kamma created. The most important consideration > > in kammic weightiness is the quality of the underlying volition > > (intention). Are you malciously, sadistically and cruelly, seeking > > out to kill these insects? If so, that is worse kamma than failing > > to stop the lawnmower in time before you run over a poor worm. > > > > The second consideration is the being that is killed. Killing a > > virtuous human is more serious than killing a non-virtuous human. > > Killing a human is more serious than killing an animal. Killing a > > large animal is more serious than killing a small animal. > > > > The bottom line is that if you are like me, before breakfast each > > day you end up doing ten bad things more weighty than killing an > > insect. > > > > By all means, avoid killing insects if you can. However, don't lose > > sight of the big picture; the mind is the forerunner of all things; > > work on your mental states to avoid greed/attachment (lobha), > > hatred/aversion (dosa) and delusion (moha). > > > > Another thing to think about is the incredible power of good kammic > > actions. Remember the ending of the movie, "Monsters, Inc.", when > > they discovered that laughter has ten times the energy of screams? > A > > bit of dana (generosity), sila (discipline) or bhavana (meditation) > > creates lots and lots of good kamma. So rather than focusing on > > issues such as the killing of insects, perhaps you could focus > > on "helping an old lady to cross the street". > > > > With Metta, > > Rob M :-) 16458 From: proctermail Date: Fri Oct 25, 2002 9:39am Subject: Re: Should the Garden be left to Grow? Hi Rob, Is not the effort required not to kill a smaller animal greater than that to kill a bigger? tp --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "rjkjp1" wrote: > --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "christine_forsyth" > wrote: > > Hi Rob, Tom and all, > > > > Rob - I am finding your post hard to understand given that I am > > learning about death and rebirth being only consecutive moments, > how > > and where does the change in the > > 'worthiness' of the everchanging stream of cittas occur from being > > (say) a Bhikkhu [whose murder would carry heavy kamma] to the next > > moment being reborn as a caterpillar, lizard or > > spider whose deliberate or indifferent death you consider not worth > > focusing on compared with 'helping an old lady across the street'? > > I wonder if you could you please give me the sutta references for > > "> The second consideration is the being that is killed. Killing a > > > virtuous human is more serious than killing a non-virtuous human. > > > Killing a human is more serious than killing an animal. Killing a > > > large animal is more serious than killing a small animal."> > > > > I'm assuming it would be a sutta spoken by the Buddha (and that > > there would be many such suttas) for such an vital moral and > ethical > > point as to 'who it is not so serious' to harm or kill ... > >___------ > Dear Christine, > There are a few places in the texts - mostly the commentaries- where > it mentions this:In the kuddakatapatha by Buddhaghosa (translated as > Minor > readings PTS by nanamoli). > there is a comprehensive section on the precepts. > on p24 -25 it notes that the blamableness of an action varies > according to its degree. hence killing a large animal is worse > than killing an insect because of the degree of effort involved > and other factors. it has many details. > Robert 16459 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Oct 25, 2002 10:00am Subject: Perfections Ch 6, Energy, no 10 Perfections Ch 6, Energy, no 10 We read in the Commentary: Another method of exposition:- This viriyårambha is ³striving² in expelling lust, ³onward effort² in cutting the bonds, ³exertion² in escaping from the floods 10, ³endeavour² in reaching the further shore, ³zeal² in being a forerunner, ³ardour² in exceeding the limit, ³vigour² in lifting the bolt (of ignorance), and fortitude² in producing steadfastness.²Verily, let the skin, veins and bones dry up² (11 - thus by virtue of unfaltering effort at such time is the ³state of a man of unfaltering effort². The Commentary explains further that energy does not let go of the desire-to-do, chanda (which is necessary to accomplish something), that it does not give up the task, and does not give in to discouragement with regard to the performing of kusala. It uses a simile of an ox which carries a burden and does not let go of it: Just as if they were to say, ³Get a beast of burden, an ox, to draw a burden from a marshy place not beyond the bullock¹s strength,² and the bullock, pressing the ground with its knees, were to carry the burden and would not allow it to drop on the ground, so energy lifts up and seizes the burden in the matter of doing moral acts. Hence it is said to be ³support of burden². As we read in the Commentary, the teachers of old adviced the monks to examine themselves three times daily. If one cannot do this, then one should do this twice or even only once a day, but it is wrong not to examine oneself at all. When we reflect on the ³Anumana Sutta² and its Commentary, we see that people had different degrees of paññå. Someone who has many defilements is a person who is ³difficult to speak to²; he does not see his own defilements, he only sees those of someone else. We should find out which defilements we have ourselves. If someone never reflected on this or spoke about this with someone else, he should first of all listen to the Dhamma and reflect on what he heard so that he sees the danger of akusala. Then right effort can arise and be a condition for him to examine himself and consider his own akusala before going to sleep. This can be applied by a person who is ³difficult to speak to² and who has many defilements. If someone has already some understanding of the practice of satipatthåna, he can be aware of the reality which appears. Whatever kind of akusala arises, sati can be aware immediately of that characteristic. Then there is another level of paññå, it is paññå which understands the way to know and study the characteristics of realities. After we have studied the Anumana Sutta, how often in a day do we examine ourselves? For someone who habitually develops satipatthåna, sati sampajañña can immediately be aware when akusala citta arises, and he does not need to wait until it is time to examine himself. This is the beginning of the development of satipatthåna, even if one does not know yet realities as nåma and rúpa which are non-self. It is already a degree of sati sampajañña when the characteristic of akusala dhamma is known as it naturally appears. Footnotes: 10. This is the group of defilements of the four floods (oghas): the floods of sensuous desire, of desire for rebirth, of wrong view and of ignorance. 11. The Buddha spoke these words when sitting under the Bodhi-tree before attaining Buddhahood. He would not move even if his skin, veins and bones would dry up. 16460 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Oct 25, 2002 10:00am Subject: Re: [dsg] ekayana, summary Dear Sarah and Jim, I think Sarah gave an excellent summary of the discussions on One Way, with notes from Co and subco. I really enjoyed reading this very much, and so useful to see it again together. We still have a few things to solve. Jim collected six possibilities, erasing no. 6, but saying that of the others there are still things not clear. Please, Jim, what is not clear yet? Which matters we still have to investigate? I think we should further study and discuss such points. It is important. With appreciation, Nina. op 24-10-2002 14:25 schreef Sarah op sarahdhhk@y...: > For Ekayana’ the dict. gives 2 meanings of a) “going’, road and b) going to > goal and mentions ekayana maggo in this context. > > Jim wrote: “A literal translation of the phrasing is: "one way, monks, is > this > path" but because of the compound state of 'ekaayano' there are a number > of > ways 'eka' can be syntactically related to 'ayano' that allows for some > different and equally valid interpretations as given in Soma's commentary > translation. This is a good example of the limitations of an English > translation in that it can choose only one of these interpretations for a > sutta translation. > ***** Sarah: As I understand, all the various meanings as translated by Ven Soma below > are correct and should be understood in the phrase “ekaayano aya.m > bhikkave maggo. > > In brief, the development of satipatthana is the only way that nibbana can > ever be realized. ... > > The path is only taught by the Buddha or from the Teachings in a Buddha > era. Those who have not heard and considered the Teachings cannot develop > satipatthana or the various insights. Furthemore, the (mundane)path ‘goes > solely’ to Nibbana, by understanding the characteristics and nature of all > the various objects (i.e paramattha dhammas)included in the four > satipatthanas repeatedly. > > Sarah > ====== > _______________________________________________________ > From the commentary and sub-commentary notes: > > "The only way" = The one way [Ekayanoti ekamaggo]. There are many words > for "way". The word used for "way" here is "ayana" ("going" or road). > Therefore, "This is the only way, O bhikkhus [ekayano ayam bhikkhave > maggo]" means here: "A single way ("going" or road), O bhikkhus, is this > way; it is not of the nature of a double way [ekamaggo ayam bhikkhave > maggo na dvedhapathabhuto]". > > Or it is "the only way" because it has to be trodden by oneself only > [ekeneva ayitabbo]. That is without a companion. The state of being > companionless is twofold: without a comrade, after abandoning contact with > the crowd, and in the sense of being withdrawn (or secluded) from craving, > through tranquillity of mind. > > Or it is called "ekayana" because it is the way of the one [ekassa ayana]. > "Of the one" = of the best; of all beings the Blessed One is best. > Therefore, it is called the Blessed One's Way. Although others too go > along that way, it is the Buddha's because he creates it. Accordingly it > is said: "He, the Blessed One, is the creator of the uncreated path, O > Brahman." It proceeds (or exists) only in this Doctrine-and-discipline and > not in any other. Accordingly the Master declared: "Subhadda, only in this > Doctrine-and-discipline is the Eightfold Way to be found." And further, > "ekayana" means: It goes to the one [ekam ayati] -- that is, it (the way) > goes solely to Nibbana. Although in the earlier stages this method of > meditation proceeds on different lines, in the latter, it goes to just the > one Nibbana.... > As Nibbana is without a second, that is, without craving as accompanying > quality, it is called the one. Hence it is said: "Truth is one; it is > without a second." > > Why is the Arousing of Mindfulness intended by the word "way"? Are there > not many other factors of the way, namely, understanding, thinking, > speech, action, livelihood, effort, and concentration, besides > mindfulness? To be sure there are. But all these are implied when the > Arousing of Mindfulness is mentioned, because these factors exist in union > with mindfulness. Knowledge, energy and the like are mentioned in the > analytically expository portion [niddese]. In the synopsis [uddese], > however, the consideration should be regarded as that of mindfulness > alone, by way of the mental disposition of those capable of being trained.> > Some [keci], however, construing according to the stanza beginning with > the words, "They do not go twice to the further shore [na param digunam > yanti]"[7] say, "One goes to Nibbana once, therefore it is ekayana." This > explanation is not proper. Because in this instruction the earlier part of > the Path is intended to be presented, the preliminary part of the Way of > Mindfulness proceeding in the four objects of contemplation is meant here, > and not the supramundane Way of Mindfulness. And that preliminary part of > the Path proceeds (for the aspirant) many times; or it may be said that > there is many a going on it, by way of repetition of practice. > > In what sense is it a "way"? In the sense of the path going towards > Nibbana, and in the sense of the path which is the one that should be (or > is fit to be) traversed by those who wish to reach Nibbana. 16461 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Oct 25, 2002 10:57am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: vimuttatta, to Rahula Dear Rahula, Shall I bring this to the Pali yahoo list, if you like? It is complicated. it depends on your permission, I can say, a friend asked... Nina. op 25-10-2002 08:00 schreef rahula_80 op rahula_80@y...: > Yes, the PTS dictionary gave, "having an emancipated self". But Lance > Cousins said PTS is in error on this point. > > In buddha-L, he wrote: > > Vimuttattaa .thita.m. .Thitattaa santusita.m. Santusitattaa na > paritassati. > > So the first sentence corresponds to Sanskrit: vimuktatvaat sthitam > and so on. There is no atta/aatman here at all; it is the ablative > singular of the suffix tta = tva. Bhikkhu Bodhi is indeed vindicated. > > I have explain in an earlier post why I don't understand this. I am > just starting to learn Pali. Maybe that's is why I don't understand. > So please show me step by step. > The suffix -tvaa is added to the root of the verb or verbal base with > or sometimes without the connecting vowel -i- to form the gerung, > absolutive or the indeclinable particle. > > So, shouldn't it be rendered, vimucitvaa, never vimuttattaa. (muc + i > + tvaa)? > > Also, vimutta + tta = vimuttatta, NOT vimuttattaa. Right? If not, can > you explain how vimuttattaa is derived? > > I just couldn't figure out how to get "vimuttattaa" from "vimutta". > 16462 From: rjkjp1 Date: Fri Oct 25, 2002 7:20pm Subject: Predicted?left to Grow?/RobK --- Dear Howard, Thanks for the question. I think we read often in the tetxs how all things = are impermanent and that eventually the teachings of the Buddha and his disciples will be lost until another sasana begins in the distant futur= e. The Buddha said that because of creating the Bhikkhuni Sangha this sasana would last only five hundred years. But because of the eight rules the commentaries say it would last 5000 years. Other commentaries say that the rehearsal of the texts at the first council made it possible to last 5000 years. I find the commentaries reliable, others doubt them but if the commentaries are wrong then according to the Tipitaka the true Dhamma of the Buddha is now already lost. At the first council, led by Mahakassapa they recorded the Tipitaka and also the ancient commentaries: In the Atthasalini: from the introductory discourse it notes that the commentary to the Abhidhamma was recited at this time: "The ancient commentary therof was sang By the First council, Mahakassapa Their leader, and later again by seers, Mahinda bought it to the peerless isle, Ceylon,.."endquote The "Dispeller of Delusion" ((431): For there are three kinds of disappearance: disappearance of theoretical understanding (pariyatti), disappearance of penetration (pativedha) and disappearance of practice (patipatti). Herein, pariyatti is the three parts of the Tipitaka; the penetration is the penetration of t= he Truths; the practice is the way.... It says of the Scriptures first the Book of the Patthana (Conditional Relations) of the Abhidhamma disappears, and then successively the other Books of the Abhidamma. After that the Books of the Suttanta will successively disappear. "But when the two Pitakas [2] have disappeared, while the Vinaya Pitaka endures, the teachings (sasana) endure. " But sooner or later the Vinaya too disapears. It doesn't specifically say when the commentaries will go but I assumed that if the Tipitaka is declining then the commentaries to these works must also be disappearing: In the Gradual Sayings (Book of the Twos, Ch II, § 10) the Buddha said: Monks, these two things conduce to the confusion and disappearance of true Dhamma. What two? The wrong expression of the letter (of the text) and wrong interpretation of the meaning of it. For if the letter be wrongly expressed, the interpretation of the meaning is also wrong..... Monks, these two things conduce to the establishment, the non- confusion, to the non-disappearance of true Dhamma. What two? The right expression of the letter and right interpretation of the meaning.= For if the letter be rightly expressed, the interpretation of the meaning i= s also right.... ""endquote The commentaries (attha -meaning) are specifically recorded so as to make plain the meaning of the texts. If they are not studied it becomes easier for people to interpret the suttas according to their own opinions and so the wrong interpretation of the Tipitaka may occur. Thus knowing this we become encouraged not to neglect the development of insight, we are fortunate to be in a time when the Dhamma is still available. The teachings show us there is no self in any dhamma but if there is not application of effort to see this now then when? Robert In dhammastudygroup@y..., upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, Robert - > > In a message dated 10/25/02 7:46:02 AM Eastern Daylight Time, > rjkjp1@y... writes: > > > Buddhaghosa was born about a thousand years after the Buddha. . > > Whether one belives in the Tipitaka or the commentaries is > > conditioned by various factors; nothing is really expected. Some > > Buddhists have valued the commenatries and so they have been > > preserved since the time of the buddha and are recited at the Buddhist > > councils. In the future it will come to occur that less people will val= ue > > them and so they will disapear. It is all predicted. > > > ======================= > Exactly *what* is all predicted? That the Buddhasasana will die out, > or that the commentaries will come to be ignored? Did the Buddha discuss the > commentaries in the Tipitaka? > > With metta, > Howard 16463 From: robmoult Date: Sat Oct 26, 2002 4:59am Subject: Questions for Nina (or others) Hi Nina, In your book on Conditional Relations (Page 24), you say, "The "Atthasalini" (Expositor II, Book II, Part I, Ch III,333,334) explains that the rupas which can be experienced through the senses become objects "by virtue of deliberate inclination" or "by virtue of intrusion". Is it correct to say that rupas that become objects "by virtue of deliberate inclination" are prompted (sankharika) and that the mind shifts to them "by one's wish" (see Page 25 of your text)? Is it therefore also correct to say that rupas that become objects "by virtue of intrusion" are unprompted (asankharika) and that the mind shifts to them due to "the excess of the new object (again Page 25 of your text)? On an unrelated topic, I have question regarding the beautiful sense sphere functional cittas (#47-#54). It is my understanding that these cittas only arise in the javana stage of Arahants (being functional, they don't generate kamma). However, I note that half of these are "not associated with wisdom". Is it possible for an arahant to have cittas "not associated with wisdom"? I thought that in the javana stage of an Arahant's thought process, the cetana was replaced by panna, yet half of these cittas are without panna. Nina, I am behind schedule and owe you a reply to your last message. Thanks, Rob M :-) 16464 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sat Oct 26, 2002 5:29am Subject: Re: [dsg] third insight knowledge Nina --- Nina van Gorkom wrote: > Dear Num, Rob K, Sarah, Jon, ... > This ~naana is insight, direct experience, not thinking. How > can the five khandhas be experienced all at the same time? Also the Vis. > text about > this is difficult to understand. The feeling khandha can be understood > at one > moment, the sa~n~naa khandha at another moment. How can they be > understood in a group? > > Num: A.Sujin mentioned this that at this level the nana is very weak, > one can know > what is nama or rupa but very briefly. The santati makes us see khandha > as a > kalapa. A.Supee added that to know just a single moment of the mind or > rupa at a > time is a nana of the Buddha, not even his great disciples. I, too, find this interesting. The key seems to be that it is associated with panna that is weak. My guess is that what is being referred to here is the fact that, even when there is the direct experience of a dhamma, if the general level of awareness is weak (as we know it in fact is), there is still the idea of a person at such moments. In terms of paramattha dhammas, this I suppose means that there are moments of awareness (kusala) and moments of 'ordinary' (akusala) perception of the world arising alternately, with the latter predominating. This may be why it is said that when awareness is weak it can be difficult to see it for what it is, since it may manifest as moments of just a glimmer of direct experience of a dhamma, hardly distinguishable from moments when awareness is totally absent. Jon 16465 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sat Oct 26, 2002 5:42am Subject: Re: [dsg] Is Light a Rupa? Howard --- upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, Jon (and Rob) - ... << ... I don't think that it is 100% correct that there is no seeing in total darkness. In such circumstances, we see darkness, itself, it seems to me - we see black. It seems to me that so long as we are a) conscious, and b) attending to vision, there is seeing.>> I’m not saying you are wrong here, Howard, but I just don’t see how, if there is total darkness, it’s possible to tell whether there is in fact seeing or not. Sure, the eyes will be wide open, there will be the intention to see and perhaps also the feeling of the contact of the air against the surface of the eyeball, so it will no doubt *seem like* there is seeing darkness; but if in fact there is no recognizable object and not even any light being perceived, then I don't think we can say for sure that seeing is taking place. But I don’t suppose anything turns on this ;-)). <> This is because there is still seeing going on despite the fact that our attention is fully directed elsewhere (seeing is a matter of vipaka, and so not something that is within our power to determine to happen or not at any given moment). <<[or] when, in a lighted room, … we are asleep , if the room is plunged into complete darkness we often will notice that, our attention shifting to the sense of sight …, and our being awakened.>> This I think would be because even when we are asleep, unless we are in the deep sleep that occurs when only bhavanga cittas arise, sense-door experiences may continue, at a ‘subconscious’ level. Jon 16466 From: robmoult Date: Sat Oct 26, 2002 6:44am Subject: Re: Should the Garden be left to Grow?/RobM Hi Christine, --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "christine_forsyth" wrote: > Hi Rob, > > Sorry for the confusion. What I was trying to say, and I'm not sure > if this will be any clearer, is that my intellectual understanding > of what this "I" is, is: [from Nyanatiloka] a continually self- > consuming process of arising and passing bodily and mental > phenomena.' > Taking that as the definition of a sentient being - then death is the > temporary end of a temporary phenomena. The organic life ceases but > the continually arising processes, well ... continue arising and > changing ... rather relentlessly. It is not quite the same process of > mental phenomena that was the Bhikkhu, but it is not completely > different now that it is a dog or a caterpillar. > My example using a Bhikkhu being killed, and then the processes > taking another form of a caterpillar or dog, was just to say it was > the outer form that your quote seemed to invest with worth, the ever > decaying rupa. I was asking in a garbled way why there were different > values given to a living process of cittas and cetasikas, dependent > on size, outer form and perceived virtue ... it doesn't seem logical > to have an Order of Precedence. Either All Beings are important or > none are. Given the doctrine of Anatta - "none" would seem a more > consistent answer - but my heart votes for "All". > I am happy to put it in the 'too hard basket' for a while if the > Buddha said it - but if it isn't mentioned until many hundreds of > years after his parinibbana, then I wonder why? > Happy to be corrected. > > metta, > Christine There are many sources of Dhamma: 1. The Suttas (Monks' memories of the words of the Buddha) 2. The ancient commentaries (Buddhaghosa, etc.) 3. Modern commentaries (Nina, Bhikkhu Bodhi, etc.) Of course, in case of discrepencies, the Suttas take precedence above the others, but that does not imply that the others are not of great value and contain truths not contained in the Suttas. It would appear from recent messages that the issue of relative kammic weight of killing animals / size of animals is not in the Suttas but appears in the ancient commentaries. Here is my interpretation of the underlying logic: A virtuous person can be considered to be closer to enlightenment than a non-virtuous person. Therefore, the killing of a virtuous person creates more weighty kamma than killing a non-virtuous person. A human has the potential of enlightenment whereas an animal generally does not (though I think that there may be a story of a frog gaining enlightenment while listening to the Buddha - I'm not sure how this would work). Killing a being with the potential of enlightenment creates more kamma than killing a being not capable of enlightenment (i.e. an animal). When comparing the kammic weight of killing humans, nthere is an ethical quality at the centre. When considering the relative weight of killing large vs. small animals, I think that the emphasis turns from ethical (closeness of the victim to enlightenment) to practical (amount of effort expended to commit the act). It is certainly tougher to catch a fly than to catch an elephant, but catching and killing are separate acts. If I had in front of me an immobilized fly and an immobilized elephant, it would require litte effort to kill the fly, but I doubt that I could do more than annoy the elephant (unless I had weapons with me). I cannot imagine the effort required to kill an elephant with my bare hands (nor do I want to think about this). So in summary, death is not final (as you mentioned above), however causing death creates kamma, and when considering the kamma created, not all killing is equal. Again, I want to restate that the kammic weight of an action depends on the underlying volition. Type of being / size of animal are secondary factors. We should certainly avoid killing insects, but given the limited time we have being born as a human, I think that it is important to first focus our efforts on the "bigger issues". I'm starting to repeat myself. Christine, are we making progress, moving in circles or getting further into left field? Metta, Rob M :-) 16467 From: robmoult Date: Sat Oct 26, 2002 6:50am Subject: Re: Should the Garden be left to Grow? Hi Tom, In a recent posting to Christine, I wrote, "It is certainly tougher to catch a fly than to catch an elephant, but catching and killing are separate acts. If I had in front of me an immobilized fly and an immobilized elephant, it would require little effort to kill the fly, but I doubt that I could do more than annoy the elephant (unless I had weapons with me). I cannot imagine the effort required to kill an elephant with my bare hands (nor do I want to think about this)." Does this help? Metta, Rob M :-) --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "proctermail" wrote: > Hi Rob, > > Is not the effort required not to kill a smaller animal greater than > that to kill a bigger? > > tp 16468 From: Jim Anderson Date: Sat Oct 26, 2002 6:03pm Subject: Re: [dsg] ekayana, summary Dear Nina, I will have to get back to you at a later date on this topic as I'm taking a break from list participation. I've turned to other mundane matters such as preparing for the upcoming winter (mostly replenishing my stockpile of firewood). I also feel a need to go into seclusion for awhile. Just touching briefly on the 'only' in the only way, I looked it up in the dictionary and read that it is derived from one + ly. One of the meanings of the suffix -ly is 'having the qualities of '. I agree that further study and discussion is needed on the points pertaining to 'ekaayano'. I should also mention that the subcommentaries mention at least 4 meanings for 'eka' -- a numeral (sa"nkhyaaya.m), companionless (asahaaye), the best (se.t.thatthe), and (an)other (a~n~natthe). I thought of 'this path is the best way' as another interpretation. Best wishes, Jim << Dear Sarah and Jim, I think Sarah gave an excellent summary of the discussions on One Way, with notes from Co and subco. I really enjoyed reading this very much, and so useful to see it again together. We still have a few things to solve. Jim collected six possibilities, erasing no. 6, but saying that of the others there are still things not clear. Please, Jim, what is not clear yet? Which matters we still have to investigate? I think we should further study and discuss such points. It is important. With appreciation, Nina. >> 16469 From: Date: Sat Oct 26, 2002 9:51pm Subject: Why 4 Satipatthana Dear group, I think the distinctions made in this section of the commentary are key to understanding the rest of the sutta. In addition, they are definitely new to me and answer a long standing puzzlement on why there are these seemingly not quite connected four foundations. In that light here is the entire commentary and sub-commentary which I will be sending again in smaller pieces throughout the week: Cattaro Satipatthana = "The Four Arousings of Mindfulness." Four in relation to classes of objects of mindfulness. Why did the Buddha teach just Four Arousings of Mindfulness and neither more nor less? By way of what was suitable for those capable of being trained. In regard to the pair of the dull-witted and the keen-witted minds among tamable persons of the craving type and the theorizing type, pursuing the path of quietude [samatha] or that of insight [vipassana] in the practice of meditation, the following is stated: For the dull-witted man of craving type the Arousing of Mindfulness through the contemplation of the gross physical body is the Path to Purity; for the keen-witted of this type, the subtle subject of meditation on the feeling. And for the dull-witted man of the theorizing type the Path to Purity is the Arousing of Mindfulness through a subject not too full of distinctions, namely, consciousness [citta]; for the keen-witted of this type, the subject which teems with distinctions, namely the contemplation on things of the mind -- mental objects [dhammanupassana]. For the dull-witted man, pursuing quietude, the First Arousing of Mindfulness, body-contemplation, is the Path to Purity, by reason of the feasibility of getting at the mental reflex; for the keen-witted of this type, because he does not continue to stay in the coarse, the second Arousing of Mindfulness, the contemplation on feeling, is the Path to Purity. And for the dull-witted man pursuing the path of insight, the subject of meditation without many distinctions, the contemplation on consciousness, is the Path to Purity; and for the keen-witted of this type the contemplation on mental objects which is full of distinctions. Or it may be said that these Four Arousings of Mindfulness are taught for casting out the illusions [vipallasa] concerning beauty, pleasure, permanence, and an ego. The body is ugly. There are people led astray by the illusion that it is a thing of beauty. In order to show such people the ugliness of the body and to make them give up their wrong idea, the First Arousing of Mindfulness is taught. Feeling is suffering. There are people subject to the illusion that it gives pleasure. In order to show such people the painfulness of feeling and to make them give up their wrong idea, the Second Arousing of Mindfulness is taught. Consciousness is impermanent. There are people who, owing to an illusion, believe that it is permanent. To show them the impermanence of consciousness and to wean them of their wrong belief, the Third Arousing of Mindfulness is taught. Mental objects are insubstantial, are soulless, and possess no entity. There are people who believe by reason of an illusion that these mental things are substantial, endowed with an abiding core, or a soul, or that they form part of a soul, an ego or some substance that abides. To convince such errant folk of the fact of the soullessness or the insubstantiality of mental things and to destroy the illusion which clouds their minds, the Fourth Arousing of Mindfulness is taught. [Tika] Drawing distinctions, it is said: Body and feeling are the cause of zest [assadassa karana]. For the rejection of that zest of body, by the dull-witted [manda] man of the craving type [tanhacarita], the seeing [dassana] of the ugly [asubha] in the body, the coarse object [olarika arammana], which is the basis of craving [tanha vatthu], is convenient. To that type of man the contemplation on corporeality, the First Arousing of Mindfulness, is the Path to Purity [Visuddhi Magga]. For the abandoning of that zest, by the keen-witted [tikha] man of the craving type, the seeing of suffering in feeling, the subtle object [sukhuma arammana], which is the basis of craving, is convenient, and for him the contemplation on feeling, the Second Arousing of Mindfulness, is the Path to Purity. [T] For the dull-witted man of the theorizing type [ditthi carita] it is convenient to see consciousness [citta] in the fairly simple way it is set forth in this discourse, by way of impermanence [aniccata], and by way of such divisions as mind-with-lust [saragadi vasena], in order to reject the notion of permanence [nicca sañña] in regard to consciousness. Consciousness is a special condition [visesa karana] for the wrong view due to a basic belief in permanence [niccanti abhinivesa vatthutaya ditthiya]. The contemplation on consciousness, the Third Arousing of Mindfulness, is the Path to Purity of this type of man. [T] For the keen-witted man of the theorizing type it is convenient to see mental objects or things [dhamma], according to the manifold way set forth in this discourse, by way of perception, sense-impression and so forth [nivaranadi vasena], in order to reject the notion of a soul [atta sañña] in regard to mental things. Mental things are special conditions for the wrong view due to a basic belief in a soul [attanti abhinivesa vatthutaya ditthiya]. For this type of man the contemplation on mental objects, the Fourth Arousing of Mindfulness, is the Path to Purity. [T] Consciousness and mental objects constitute the outstanding conditions of theorizing. Consciousness is such a condition because it is a decisive factor in the belief in permanence. Mental objects are such conditions because these are decisive factors in the belief in a soul. [T] Consciousness and mental objects are decisive factors of craving as well as of theorizing. And body and feeling are decisive factors of theorizing as well as of craving. Yet to point out that which is stronger in body and feeling, namely, craving, and that which is stronger in consciousness and mental objects, namely, theorizing, distinctions have been drawn. [T] "Because he does not continue to stay in the coarse": The keen-witted man pursuing the path of quietude lays hold of the gross subject of meditation, but he does not stay in that. He lays hold of feeling, the subtle subject of meditation, by way of the factors of absorption [jhana] after attaining to and emerging from the absorption reached with the material body as subject. [T] Since the heart of the man pursuing the path of insight takes to the contemplation of subtle consciousness and mental object, these have been spoken of as the Path to Purity for the man, dull-witted or keen-witted, pursuing insight. Further these Four Arousings of Mindfulness were taught not only for the purpose of casting out the four illusions, but for getting rid of the four floods, bonds, outflowings, knots, clingings, wrong courses, and the penetration of fourfold nutriment, too. This is according to the method of exegesis in the Nettipakarana. In the commentary it is said that by way of remembering and of meeting in one thing, the Arousing of Mindfulness is only one; and that it is fourfold when regarded as a subject of meditation. [T] "By way of remembering": by way of the reflection of actions of skill, and so forth, of body, speech, and thought. [T] "Meeting in one thing" = union in the one-natured Nibbana. To a city with four gates, mental objects coming from the East with goods produced in the east enter by the east gate... men coming from the South... men coming from the West... and men coming from the North with goods produced in the north enter by the north gate. Nibbana is like the city. The Real Supramundane Eightfold Path is like the city-gate. Body, mind, feelings and mental objects are like the four chief directions in space. Like the people coming from the East with goods produced in the east are those who enter Nibbana by means of body-contemplation through the Real Supramundane Path produced by the power of body-contemplation practiced in the fourteen ways. Like the people coming from the South... are those who enter... by means of feeling-contemplation... practiced in the nine ways. Like the people coming from the West... are those who enter... by means of consciousness-contemplation... practiced in the sixteen ways. Like the people coming from the North... are those who enter... by means of mental-object-contemplation... practiced in the five ways. [T] On account of the cause or on account of the sameness of entry into the one Nibbana, the Arousing of Mindfulness is said to be just one thing. The meeting in the one Nibbana of the various Arousings of Mindfulness is called the meeting in the one thing on account of participation in that one Nibbana or on account of their becoming all of a kind. 16470 From: Date: Sat Oct 26, 2002 10:08pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Way 16, Comm. "For the dull-witted man, pursuing quietude, the First Arousing of Mindfulness, body-contemplation, is the Path to Purity, by reason of the feasibility of getting at the mental reflex." Hi all, Can anyone explain about the 'Path to Purity"? Is that the same as the 7 stage visuddhimagga and are there two basic approaches to it, by tranquility or by insight? Also, any speculations on what is "getting at the mental reflex"? Larry 16471 From: christine_forsyth Date: Sat Oct 26, 2002 11:04pm Subject: Re: Should the Garden be left to Grow? Hi RobM, and RobK, Tom and All, Probably we are beginning to repeat ourselves, or are using different words to maintain the same position. :) Staying with this for a while though: It seems to me that rebirth is being de-valued or ignored - as if this life (particularly this physical form) is the only one to judge by. The meaning from your last posts seems to be that the commentaries say Size matters (and species too), and therefore, effort, but this is not in the Suttas? The caterpillar or a mosquito would be easy to kill, but they are not a living tabula rasa with no past and all their history yet to be written. How do you know the insect isn't just settling a kammic debt from the past and is really a Bodhisatta Caterpillar or Mosquito? :) I don't think the sequence of rebirths on the road to Deliverance is a rising straight line graph is it? My understanding is that it is more like being in a washing machine, swirled up and down and around without control. (I agree with you Tom when you ask, "Is not the effort required NOT to kill a smaller animal greater than that to kill a bigger?" Particularly if meditating and you have ears, arms and legs bare for irritatingly whining mosquitos ... So easy to swat, So hard not to. Remember when next tempted to kill a mosquito, spider or cockroach - to use repellent, window screens or even catch the little one in a computer disc box and carry it outside to release. Perhaps killing when there are non-harming alternatives would carry a greater kammic weight? :)) Maybe I need to understand more about cittas, and how to tell which are akusala, and what conditions them. I don't understand about what seems to be a 'diffusion of kammic responsibility' in the case of pushing the nuclear button. It would seem to me that most people with a factory job would not be conscious that they were making a nuclear missile, and would not be planning to kill. They would only know that they have to make so many 'widgets' for Brown Bros. by 5.00 p.m. or they wouldn't be getting home to the family dinner on time. Brown Bros. would be making tail flukes for Anderson and Company. Anderson and Company would be assembling other bits that had come in from fifty small businesses. and sending them on to Jamiesons Defense Industries etc. etc. None of the workers or companies involved would be intending to blow apart people and towns in the as yet unarisen 2016 War between two (unnamed) countries over the watering rights of cattle. But the one who pushed the button would, as would the one who gave the order to push the button. So I am still quite taken with kamma as volition, intention. Another meaning from previous posts seems to be that Position Matters. Even if you don't know it and you harm an important Being, or even if you harm a violent, evil, attacking parent - you are in deep trouble. Thinking along these lines makes the supposed 'fairness' of kamma a little shaky. > There are many sources of Dhamma: > 1. The Suttas (Monks' memories of the words of the Buddha) > 2. The ancient commentaries (Buddhaghosa, etc.) > 3. Modern commentaries (Nina, Bhikkhu Bodhi, etc.) > Of course, in case of discrepencies, the Suttas take precedence > above the others, but that does not imply that the others are not of > great value and contain truths not contained in the Suttas. I think the essence of my concern is this: I believed there was only one source of correct original Teachings - the Buddha. That these teachings are precious, not easily come by. I believed that the suttas were accepted universally as undeniable Word of the Buddha, concise and often packed with meaning, and that others may be able to unpack, elucidate and explain the context in which the sutta was spoken and what the Buddha meant. I did not believe that this meant they could add competely new teachings. Or that they could change meanings, or add extra factors. I agree that neither Nina nor Bhikkhu Bodhi do this. But I think it is possible that other commentators, teachers and writers of buddhist books do. I did not know that the suttas are only the memories of monks. (Somehow I thought that the actual words of the Buddha had been meticulously preserved. This was why I was so moved when at Aluvihara and when hearing the heroic stories of reciting the Teachings until death from Sri Lanka.) Suttas as 'monk's memories' would put things in a new light. Anyone who has been in a traffic accident will know the completely different recollections that witnesses have only an hour or two after the event. Memory, even of well intentioned good people, whether cleric or not, is unreliable. Wouldn't this mean there is actually no point in quoting suttas and commentaries - because who knows what was really said, and whether a crucial word here and there has been accidentally or deliberately added, changed, forgotten or left out ... Maybe it would be better just to understand the general thrust of the Teachings and then explore from one's own and others understanding and experience - which is what many people who value experience and do not value study say anyway. That we rely too much on Old Books. (They mean the Pali Canon.) I believed that by teaching for forty-five years the Blessed One repeatedly covered all that was necessary for us to know to find Liberation. I believed that there were no other unrevealed truths held in the closed fist of the Teacher, given only to favoured disciples, or left to be discovered by others throughout time. It was resting safely in the arms of the Tipitaka that informed my practice - not knowing them as the certain, unchallengeable base, the litmus test, throws one back on endless philosophical discussions and debate where, finally, personal preference is the arbiter of truth and reality. A perpetual agnosticism. much to think about, metta, Chrisine --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "robmoult" wrote: > Hi Tom, > > In a recent posting to Christine, I wrote, "It is certainly tougher > to catch a fly than to catch an elephant, but catching and killing > are separate acts. If I had in front of me an immobilized fly and an > immobilized elephant, it would require little effort to kill the > fly, but I doubt that I could do more than annoy the elephant > (unless I had weapons with me). I cannot imagine the effort required > to kill an elephant with my bare hands (nor do I want to think about > this)." > > Does this help? > > Metta, > Rob M :-) > > > --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "proctermail" wrote: > > Hi Rob, > > > > Is not the effort required not to kill a smaller animal greater > than > > that to kill a bigger? > > > > tp 16472 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sun Oct 27, 2002 2:04am Subject: Re: [dsg] Elements of Thinking/Contemplation in Vipassana Bhavana Howard If I understand you correctly, Howard, you are saying that at less developed levels of understanding there must be a limiting/choosing of the object, while at more developed levels the limiting/choosing drops away. I know this is a common perception among those who follow a ‘directed attention’ strategy, but I believe it may be a questionable approach. If ‘limiting/choosing’ the object is not what the Buddha in fact taught, then this practice could never lead to right understanding. I do believe it’s possible from the beginning for there to be awareness that arises without any limiting or choosing of the object of awareness. Jon --- upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, Jon - > > In a message dated 10/19/02 8:10:58 AM Eastern > Daylight Time, > jonoabb@y... writes: > > > Howard > > > > In your post below you say of 'informal > meditation': > > < arises clearly without > > "getting > > lost".>> > > > > “Seeingâ€? here is another word for “attending > toâ€?. But if you think about > > it, there cannot be “attending toâ€? something > without a clear idea of what > > the “somethingâ€? is. Even when we call it > “whatever arisesâ€?, there has to > > be an idea of what that might possibly be, and so > there is, in effect, it > > seems to me, a specifying or limiting of the > object at that moment of > > directed attention. > > > > Jon > > > ======================= > For you and me this is so, very much so. The > more advanced and adept > we become, the less true I believe it is. > > With metta, > Howard 16473 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sun Oct 27, 2002 2:14am Subject: Re: [dsg] Meditation and Satipatthana Nina --- Nina van Gorkom wrote: > Dear Jon, > I appreciate very much your reminders of the > practice in this post. I just > have one question about dhammanusati, recollection > of dhamma as a subject of > samatha. There cannot be satipatthana often, infact, > it seldom arises for > me. There can be pondering on the Dhamma with kusala > citta, without direct > awareness. However, aversion with tiredness or > aversion because of finding > the matter difficult is also bound to arise. Can it > not happen (without > trying) that there are moments of samatha? And then, > this does not exclude > that some moments of awareness can arise too in > between. Nobody can choose > anything. Samatha and satipatthana could alternately > arise. ... Thanks for reminding me about dhammanusati as a subject of samatha (this was not in my mind when writing to Larry, as our conversation was very much in the context of references in the Satipatthana Sutta). I agree that discussions about the dhamma, considering what has been discussed, and the like with kusala citta are indeed instances of dhammanusati of samatha (and are, by the way, a good example of samatha being a strong supportive condition for the arising of satipatthana). As you say, this kind of kusala can happen without trying; it is ‘daily life’ samatha. Thanks for the good reminders in the rest of your post, and also the useful comments in the post from Rob K. On the subject of nightly recitation before going to sleep, I would see this as one of those things that may or may not be kusala, depending on the precise mind-state of the person at the time. We cannot really make any generalisation about it. Jon ... > S. : The recitation we do every night before going > to sleep is > the paying of respect to the Buddha. This is a > meritorious > action of the level of siila, because it is kusala > performed > through body and speech. But for kusala citta with > calm of the > level of samatha it is not sufficient to merely > recite words, > but it is also necessary to recollect, to ponder > over the > excellent qualities of the Buddha." endquote > She then explains a little more about Buddhanusati. > > > A good reminder not to have desire for the > Recollections, as being so > kusala. > Nina. 16474 From: Sarah Date: Sun Oct 27, 2002 3:57am Subject: Re: [dsg] ekayana, summary Dear Jim, --- Jim Anderson wrote: > Dear Nina, > > I will have to get back to you at a later date on this topic as I'm > taking a > break from list participation. I've turned to other mundane matters such > as > preparing for the upcoming winter (mostly replenishing my stockpile of > firewood). I also feel a need to go into seclusion for awhile. ..... I’d like to just butt in here to say that I’ve found all your contributions to date in the Way corner to be very helpful indeed. I sincerely hope you manage to follow some of the threads and continue to ‘chip’ in from time to time whenever it is convenient or you feel inclined to do so after your break. Stockpiles of firewood take me back to childhood memories.....they’re a very rare sight in Hong Kong! I'm sure you need quite a stockpile, if this is your main source of heating for an Ontario winter. ..... >Just > touching > briefly on the 'only' in the only way, I looked it up in the dictionary > and > read that it is derived from one + ly. One of the meanings of the suffix > -ly > is 'having the qualities of '. I agree that further study and discussion > is > needed on the points pertaining to 'ekaayano'. I should also mention > that > the subcommentaries mention at least 4 meanings for 'eka' -- a numeral > (sa"nkhyaaya.m), companionless (asahaaye), the best (se.t.thatthe), and > (an)other (a~n~natthe). I thought of 'this path is the best way' as > another > interpretation. ..... One thing for sure is, as you suggested before, ‘ekaayano’ suggests many meanings whereas when using an English translation, only one can be stressed.Thank you for checking/confirming the 'one-ly'. With thanks and appreciation, Sarah ===== 16475 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sun Oct 27, 2002 4:34am Subject: Re: [dsg] Meditation and Satipatthana Howard --- upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, Jon - ... << Jon, do you find this explanation of the difference (or lack of difference) between dhammanupassana and the others completely adequate? (Actually, isn't it more a matter of establishments of mindfulness than of insight? The Satipatthana Sutta is not called the Vipassanapatthana Sutta.)>> I think it's fairly clear from the text of the Satipatthana Sutta itself that what is being talked about is the insight that leads to enlightenment, and not something lesser than/other than that. Consider, for example, the following extracts from the opening and closing passages to the sutta: "This is the only way, O bhikkhus, … for reaching the right path, for the attainment of Nibbana, namely, the Four Arousings of Mindfulness." and "O bhikkhus, should any person maintain the Four Arousings of Mindfulness in this manner …, then by him one of two fruitions is proper to be expected: Knowledge (Arahantship) here and now; or, if some form of clinging is yet present, the state of Non-Returning (the Third Stage of Supramundane Fulfillment).” <> I think it goes without saying that there was a particular reason for each of the 4 arousings/foundations, but since the first 3 foundations do not cover all the paramattha dhammas that can be object of satipatthana, it hardly seems necessary to look for any explanation beyond that. (To my mind, the more interesting question would be why the paramattha dhammas are divided into these particular 4 categories -- i.e., why not some other 4, or why not more or less). <> I agree that the factors comprising the 1st foundation are presented more in conventional terms than are the factors that make up the 4th, which are more in terms of paramattah dhammas, but I ouldn't see this as calling for the conclusion that you suggest. Quite apart from the fact that I am happy to accept the commentarial position as a working hypothesis, I don’t find in the text of the sutta itself the kind of support for your theory that I would expect to see. Compare, for example, the following passage from the (3rd) section on Contemplation of Consciousness: "Here, O bhikkhus, a bhikkhu understands the consciousness with lust, as with lust; …” with this passage from the (4th) section on Contemplation on Mental Objects: "Here, O bhikkhus, when sensuality is present, a bhikkhu knows with understanding: 'I have sensuality,'…” The former is given more in terms of paramattha dhammas (i.e., is less conceptual) than the latter. Jon 16476 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sun Oct 27, 2002 4:42am Subject: Re: [dsg] Meditation and Satipatthana Larry --- LBIDD@w... wrote: > Hi Jon, > > Two points: > > 1. Way 11 tika: "just the contemplation of material > form (corpreality), > of feeling, consciousness or mental objects, > constitutes the cultivation > of the Arousing of Mindfulness " > > L: there are many ways of arousing mindfulness, > these discussions here > are one of them. I would see the kind of exposure to and consideration of the teachings that this list allows for as a necessary basis for the arousing mindfulness, and I would of course agree that there are any number of different ways of getting that exposure (and reflecting usefully on what has been heard). I would not regard these factors as ‘ways of arousing mindfulness’, but this may be more a difference of terminology than of substance. > 2. You wrote: "satipatthana is a matter of the > *understanding of things > as they truly are*, and this is not something that > can be reduced to a > technique of any kind. It does not mean that the > 'how to' is a matter of > whatever anyone finds 'works' for them." > > L: I think the commentary points out that there are > different ways of > understanding satipatthana. I agree as a means of > understanding > realities is valid, but for me it is basically a > means of letting go of > the proliferation of attachment. As such, I would > say technique does > play a role and different techniques are more > suitable for different > people. This discussion is a technique, in my view. I’m not sure what part of the commentary you have in mind here – do you have a reference? As I said above, I believe hearing the teachings and reflecting on what has been heard, constantly and repeatedly, is a necessary condition for everyone, regardless of how they get to hear and reflect. Jon 16477 From: Sarah Date: Sun Oct 27, 2002 5:43am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Should the Garden be left to Grow? Dear Chris, Robs M&K, Tom & All, Let me add just a few relevant brief quotes from the Khuddakapatha commentary which Rob K prompted me to look at again. There is a lot of detail relating to all the precepts. ***** 1.Definition of killing: “When in the case of such a breathing thing someone perceives it as a breathing thing, then ‘killing breathing things’ is his choice to kill occurring in either the body door or the speech door, and originating the active process of severing the life faculty.” ..... comment: As Rob M has stressed, the strength required for an act of killing, relates to the volition and it is the volition, the cetana, that is referred to by kamma. Effort, viriya, is also a mental factor, so any comments relating to degree of effort in this context, relate to the akusala (unwholesome) viriya accompanying the akusala cetana and other factors. ***** 2.Weight of kamma: “ ‘By blamability’: in the case of breathing things beginning with animals that are devoid of special qualities, killing of breathing things is (relatively) less blamable in the case of a small one and more blamable in the case of one with a large physical frame. Why? Because of the greatr magnitude of the means (needed); and when the means are equal,(it depends) on the greater magnitude of the object, (namely, the breathing thing.) But in the case of human beings, etc, endowed with special qualities, killing-breathing-things is (relatively) less blamable in the case of one with small special qualities; and when there is equality of special qualities and of the physical frame, then the lesser blamableness should be understood to reside in the (relative) mildness of the defilements and of the active process adopted, and the greater blamablenes in their greater violence.” .... comment: This has to be read in the light of the first point.In other words,it refers to the intention, the effort and degree of akusala, not to the physical strength. Someone referred to the Godfather’s nod before, for example, or we’ve all been following the details of the Sniper killings and so I think this is apparent. Kamma is very, very complex (only to be fully understood by a Buddha). Earlier there was another section discussing the intricacies of one or multiple victims and one or multiple killers. There are always many inter-related points and details. ***** 3. It is NOT physical strength.... “ ‘By means’:in the case of killing-breathing-things there are six kinds of means: with one’s own hand, by command, by missile, by fixed contrivance, by (magical) science, and by supernormal power.” In the case of a command: “...responsibility for the action lies with both the one giving the command and the one commanded: with the former from the moment of his giving the command, and with the latter from the moment of the death.” (Many other details are given. For example,if the object is mistaken, if the being doesn’t die from the blow but from sickness afterwards, if the being dies from a second blow given by someone else etc etc....Also interesting details are given about laying traps, such as a pit, and when one is relieved from responsibility - “It is only according as roots interlock with roots in that place and it thus once more becomes firm ground that he is freed (from potential responsibility)”). ***** 4. Benefits of abstention from killing: “(As to fruit) the fruits of abstention from killing-breathing-things are such things as excellence of limbs, excellence of height and girth, excellence of speed, sure-footedness, elegance, malleability, pureness, courage, great strength, clarity of speech, popularity in the world, and assembly without schisms, untimorousness, unpersecutedness, immunity from death by others’ violence, constant support, beauty of form, beauty of shape, unafflictedness, sorrowlessness, non-separation from those dear and beloved, longevity, and so on.” .... Comment: Hope this is encouraging;-)) The only way to really understand the value of abstention from any kind of akusala (unwholesomeness) is by understanding the mind when these states arise, rather than being unduly concerned about results (usually with attachment or aversion. From Nina’s translation of K.Sujin’s Perfections, under viriya (today’s installment), we read: “For someone who habitually develops satipatthåna, sati sampajañña can immediately be aware when akusala citta arises, and he does not need to wait until it is time to examine himself. This is the beginning of the development of satipatthåna, even if one does not know yet realities as nåma and rúpa which are non-self. It is already a degree of sati sampajañña when the characteristic of akusala dhamma is known as it naturally appears.” ***** In the same extract, I found the following reminder helpful of the ox simile for developing kusala viriya (wholesome energy): “The Commentary explains further that energy does not let go of the desire-to-do, chanda (which is necessary to accomplish something), that it does not give up the task, and does not give in to discouragement with regard to the performing of kusala. It uses a simile of an ox which carries a burden and does not let go of it: Just as if they were to say, ‘Get a beast of burden, an ox, to draw a burden from a marshy place not beyond the bullock’s strength,’ and the bullock, pressing the ground with its knees, were to carry the burden and would not allow it to drop on the ground, so energy lifts up and seizes the burden in the matter of doing moral acts. Hence it is said to be ‘support of burden’.” ***** Thanks to all for reminders and encouragement for the ‘performing of kusala’. Sarah ===== 16478 From: rjkjp1 Date: Sun Oct 27, 2002 7:07am Subject: Re: Should the Garden be left to Grow? --- Dear Christine and all, I'm in Cambodia at the moment so have no way to access the commentary by Buddhaghosa about killing . I'd like to stress though that he gives many details that help us consider the relative weight of kamma. None of this is meant to be absolute as that will depend on complex factors that vary so much in any one situation. When the texts talk about effort is is helpful to consider it in terms of citta, cetasika and rupa. And as rupa cannot make effort we understand more about the mental factor of effort. \ _____ Christine: . It would seem to me that most people > with a factory job would not be conscious that they were making a > nuclear missile, and would not be planning to kill. _____ yes this right. In the commentaries it says that if one has no intention to kill - and how could one if they didn't know it was a missile - then there is no akusala kamma. _______ if you harm a violent, evil, attacking parent - you are in > deep trouble. Thinking along these lines makes the > supposed 'fairness' of kamma a little shaky. ______ Good point. Actually the commentaries do distinguish along these lines. They say that - to help us consider - that if one murdered both parents then the killing of the mother is normally more weighty because she is the one who nurtures the child in the womb and later. But if the mother is of bad character and the father is good then it could be that the kiling of the father had more weight. Again these are not absolutes and the reason to give these examples is to help us understand the diversity of kamma and its results. As Rob M said it is not that all kamma has equal weight. There is the experience of objects through the five sense all day long and the experience of these is vipaka. It is very variable and it can be known to some degree that this variety comes about because of different kamma done in the past. (Even though there is no way to know the exact kamma). Even for example we kill two mosquitos on the same day within minutes of each other the weight of the kama will be different depending on the menatl factors that are associted with it. One might be killed with only a slight intention and not much hate and teh next with more intention. Both are still serious breaches of kamma that can bring unwholesome results but still not identical. In the case of 2 different people the difference will be even greater. One might kill thinking that to kill mosquitos is a good thing to help rid the world of them. Thus with wrong view. Whereas another could be a government worker whose duties occasionally call for him to to clean the waterways of mosquito eggs. But he knows this is wrong. In the later case if he has the chance to change jobs he will. ----------------- Christine: Particularly if meditating and you have ears, arms and legs bare for > irritatingly whining mosquitos ... So easy to swat, So hard not to. > Remember when next tempted to kill a mosquito, ______ I think I havent knowingly killed a mosquito for 18 years ', including a stay in mai-sai where they were bíting and known to carry malaria. But that is because they don't bother me that much so there are enough conditions to keep sila. On the other hand when Alex's school (in Japan) was swept by worms the nurses tested everyone and Alex(my son) was one of many who had worms. They sent home a note saying he had to take medicine to kill the worms. I could have argued and refused and had the case taken to the admistation authorities but it would have bought pressure to bear on Alex as the only Gaijin (foreign) boy in the school (over a thousand students). Also I had noticed him itching around the anus and wanted it cleared. I consented. It really reminded me of what Buddhaghosa said (I think in the Visudhimagga)that one might have a limited sila where one does not break it under normal conditions but one might break it for wife or children. The one who is really wise of course- who has penetrated realities deeply - could not even have the thought to break sila even if it meant they were about to die. BTW it is my first time in Phnom Penh and what a lovely city it is - I am really impressed with the amenities and wide open roads in the city, nice parks and smiling people. Lots of opportunites to give tips too to people who really need it and plenty of polite beggars who need it even more. My driver took me to the shooting range today and I indulged my boyishness with an UZI and a AK47. Declined the offer of a live chicken (extra 10 dollars) or cow ($150)to shoot at. Have just left a very luxurious spa where they have spa pools, sauna steam room, massage and cinema room - attendants everywhere (not used to being dressed by a man though) - as much tea, coffee, hot chocolate, coke, fanta etc as you want - and all for 10 dollars! Robert In dhammastudygroup@y..., "christine_forsyth" wrote: > Hi RobM, and RobK, Tom and All, > > Probably we are beginning to repeat ourselves, or are using different > words to maintain the same position. :) Staying with this for a > while though: It seems to me that rebirth is being de-valued or > ignored - as if > this life (particularly this physical form) is the only one to judge > by. The meaning from your last posts seems to be that the > commentaries say Size matters (and species too), and therefore, > effort, but this is not in the Suttas? > > Wouldn't this mean there is actually no point in quoting suttas and > commentaries - because who knows what was really said, and whether a > crucial word here and there has been accidentally or deliberately > added, > changed, forgotten or left out ... Maybe it would be better just to > understand > the general thrust of the Teachings and then > explore from one's own and others understanding and experience - > which is what many people who value experience and do not value study > say > anyway. That we rely too much on Old Books. (They mean the Pali > Canon.) I > believed that by teaching for forty-five years the Blessed One > repeatedly > covered all that was necessary for us to know to find Liberation. I > 16479 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Oct 27, 2002 7:52am Subject: Re: [dsg] Questions for Nina (or others) Dear Rob M, do not worry about being behind schedule, you are so often traveling. I always appreciate your posts, no matter they are belated. op 26-10-2002 13:59 schreef robmoult op rob.moult@j...: > In your book on Conditional Relations (Page 24), you > say, "The "Atthasalini" (Expositor II, Book II, Part I, Ch > III,333,334) explains that the rupas which can be experienced > through the senses become objects "by virtue of deliberate > inclination" or "by virtue of intrusion". > > Is it correct to say that rupas that become objects "by virtue of > deliberate inclination" are prompted (sankharika) and that the mind > shifts to them "by one's wish" (see Page 25 of your text)? Is it > therefore also correct to say that rupas that become objects "by > virtue of intrusion" are unprompted (asankharika) and that the mind > shifts to them due to "the excess of the new object (again Page 25 > of your text)? N: we cannot call rupas prompted and unprompted, this is only for cittas and cetasikas. Depending on accumulated inclinations cittas can be prompted or unprompted. Rupas are not accumulated and they do not accumulate, they do not know anything. > On an unrelated topic, I have question regarding the beautiful sense > sphere functional cittas (#47-#54). It is my understanding that > these cittas only arise in the javana stage of Arahants (being > functional, they don't generate kamma). However, I note that half of > these are "not associated with wisdom". Is it possible for an > arahant to have cittas "not associated with wisdom"? I thought that > in the javana stage of an Arahant's thought process, the cetana was > replaced by panna, yet half of these cittas are without panna. N: The javanacittas of the arahats are not always accompanied by panna, for example when they do not explain Dhamma, when they greet someone else, they may speak without panna. But not without sati and other sobhana qualities. The classification itself is half-half, but this does not mean that in real life half of the time the cittas are without panna. Who can count? Cetana is not replaced by panna, cetana; as you know, it arises with each citta. But in this case it does not generate new kamma. Nina. 16480 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Oct 27, 2002 7:52am Subject: Re: [dsg] third insight knowledge op 26-10-2002 14:29 schreef Jonothan Abbott op jonoabb@y...: >> Num: A.Sujin mentioned this that at this level the nana is very weak, >> one can know >> what is nama or rupa but very briefly. The santati makes us see khandha >> as a >> kalapa. A.Supee added that to know just a single moment of the mind or >> rupa at a >> time is a nana of the Buddha, not even his great disciples. > Jon: I, too, find this interesting. The key seems to be that it is associated > with panna that is weak. My guess is that what is being referred to here > is the fact that, even when there is the direct experience of a dhamma, if > the general level of awareness is weak (as we know it in fact is), there > is still the idea of a person at such moments. Nina: But when there is the idea of person it would not be at the same time as awareness? Jon: In terms of paramattha dhammas, this I suppose means that there are > moments of awareness (kusala) and moments of 'ordinary' (akusala) > perception of the world arising alternately, with the latter > predominating. > > This may be why it is said that when awareness is weak it can be difficult > to see it for what it is, since it may manifest as moments of just a > glimmer of direct experience of a dhamma, hardly distinguishable from > moments when awareness is totally absent. N: Still, it is important to know the difference, because if we know it, A.Sujin said, sati can be developed. We have to know the characteristic of sati of satipatthana. We have to go on discussing this point, I believe. In the case of the third stage of insight (still tender insight), it must be clear that a moment with sati is different from a moment without sati. At that stage no thought of a person when nama or rupa appears, because panna knows alreadfy nama as nama and rupa as rupa. What do you think about this? Could Rob K. perhaps take this up with A. Sujin? Nina. 16481 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Oct 27, 2002 7:52am Subject: Re: [dsg]luminous, pure (pandaram) Dear Sarah, Jim, Suan and all, We studied with Jim and Suan (having such a good time) the text about citta which is luminous or resplendent, pabhassara, namely the bhavangacitta, which is called defiled because of the upakilesas arising afterwards.(ANI, 51-52, and co, and subco). The good parents and teachers (bhavangacitta) get a bad name because of the naughty children (defilements): In the Co to the Path of Discrimination, Understanding of Mindfulness Workers (satokari ~naa.na), definitions of citta have been given, hadaya,heart, etc. One of these is phandara.m, pure: Remarks: still question marks, I would appreciate suggestions. I did not understand the simile of the Gnages river, maybe what is water of that river is just water of that river, it cannot be changed. Citta has as its task just knowing an object, citta itself is not defilement. This helps us too to understand that citta is an inner ayatana and cetasikas are outer ayatana. We have to separate their characteristics. Could Rob K. perhaps take this up again? Nina. op 25-09-2002 15:49 schreef Sarah op sarahdhhk@y...: > > 1. Citta, vi~n~nana and mano > =========================== > These all refer to consciousness in different contexts. In the Atthasalini > transl (PTS p 185f) we read about citta being used to refer to the > ‘variegated nature’ of consciousness, mano being used to stress the > knowing of the ‘measure’ of an object and vinnana is used when referring > to the khandhas. There is no ‘store-consciousness. 16482 From: Date: Sun Oct 27, 2002 3:16am Subject: Re: [dsg] Elements of Thinking/Contemplation in Vipassana Bhavana Hi, Jon - In a message dated 10/27/02 4:04:56 AM Eastern Standard Time, jonoabb@y... writes: > Howard > > If I understand you correctly, Howard, you are saying > that at less developed levels of understanding there > must be a limiting/choosing of the object, while at > more developed levels the limiting/choosing drops > away. > > I know this is a common perception among those who > follow a ‘directed attention’ strategy, but I believe > it may be a questionable approach. If > ‘limiting/choosing’ the object is not what the Buddha > in fact taught, then this practice could never lead to > right understanding. > > I do believe it’s possible from the beginning for > there to be awareness that arises without any limiting > or choosing of the object of awareness. > > Jon > ========================= Jon, what you say here confuses me. It seems to be the exact *opposite* of what you wrote below. And you seem to be interpreting what I am saying as the exact opposite of what I mean as well. You said the following: *********************** Howard In your post below you say of 'informal meditation': <> “Seeingâ€? here is another word for “attending toâ€?. But if you think about it, there cannot be “attending toâ€? something without a clear idea of what the “somethingâ€? is. Even when we call it “whatever arisesâ€?, there has to be an idea of what that might possibly be, and so there is, in effect, it seems to me, a specifying or limiting of the object at that moment of directed attention. Jon ********************************* In fact, it was exactly my point that it *is* possible to be aware of simply whatever arises, without preselection or limi tation. My point was that it is possible by means of a trained readiness of mind and attention to be mindful and clearly comprehending of whatever should happen to arise at any moment. However, it is more difficult for the untrained mind to do this than the trained mind. That's all. With metta, Howard > > --- upasaka@a... wrote: >Hi, Jon - > > > >In a message dated 10/19/02 8:10:58 AM Eastern > >Daylight Time, > >jonoabb@y... writes: > > > >>Howard > >> > >>In your post below you say of 'informal > >meditation': > >>< >arises clearly without > >>"getting > >>lost".>> > >> > >>“Seeingâ€? here is another word for “attending > >toâ€?. But if you think about > >>it, there cannot be “attending toâ€? something > >without a clear idea of what > >>the “somethingâ€? is. Even when we call it > >“whatever arisesâ€?, there has to > >>be an idea of what that might possibly be, and so > >there is, in effect, it > >>seems to me, a specifying or limiting of the > >object at that moment of > >>directed attention. > >> > >>Jon > >> > >======================= > > For you and me this is so, very much so. The > >more advanced and adept > >we become, the less true I believe it is. > > > >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) 16483 From: Date: Sun Oct 27, 2002 9:09am Subject: Re: [dsg] ekayana, summary Dear Jim, Please don't go into seclusion. We need you. It appears that you, Sarah, Nina, and I are the only ones actually engaging this sutta. Nina is stubborn, Sarah is defensive, and I am impulsive and abrasive. You are the only level headed one among us. This sutta and commentary is arguably the most important in the entire exegetical corpus. It is up to us to shoulder the burden and try to bring to light as much clear understanding as we possibly can. This work could be beneficial to countless beings throughout the ages even if we miss here and there. Don't let this precious opportunity pass; it may not arise again for many lifetimes. DON'T GO JIM! Larry 16484 From: Date: Sun Oct 27, 2002 11:10am Subject: Re: [dsg] Meditation and Satipatthana Hi Jon, In response to my statement, "I think the commentary points out that there are different ways of understanding satipatthana.", you wrote, "I'm not sure what part of the commentary you have in mind here – do you have a reference?" I've kind of lost track of what we were talking about but I probably had in mind something like the 4 satipatthana that break down into the 21 practices plus the 5, or so, ways of understanding "one" (eka) and the, at least, 2 ways of understanding "way" (yana). I think what I was trying to get you to say is something like this, "I would not regard these factors as 'ways of arousing mindfulness', but this may be more a difference of terminology than of substance." That's close enough for me. Thanks. Larry 16485 From: robmoult Date: Sun Oct 27, 2002 1:29pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Questions for Nina (or others) Hi Nina, Thanks for your understanding on my tardiness. --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > In your book on Conditional Relations (Page 24), you > > say, "The "Atthasalini" (Expositor II, Book II, Part I, Ch > > III,333,334) explains that the rupas which can be experienced > > through the senses become objects "by virtue of deliberate > > inclination" or "by virtue of intrusion". > > > > Is it correct to say that rupas that become objects "by virtue of > > deliberate inclination" are prompted (sankharika) and that the mind > > shifts to them "by one's wish" (see Page 25 of your text)? Is it > > therefore also correct to say that rupas that become objects "by > > virtue of intrusion" are unprompted (asankharika) and that the mind > > shifts to them due to "the excess of the new object (again Page 25 > > of your text)? > N: we cannot call rupas prompted and unprompted, this is only for cittas and > cetasikas. Depending on accumulated inclinations cittas can be prompted or > unprompted. Rupas are not accumulated and they do not accumulate, they do > not know anything. I am still confused. I appreciate that rupas cannot be prompted, but I took the term "deliberate inclination" to refer to the citta which takes the rupa as object. Your book reads: ... the rupas which can be experienced through the senses become objects "by virtue of deliberate inclination" or "by virtue of inclusion". Is it correct for me to summarize this as: Rupas which can be sensed can become objects by virtue of deliberate inclination (prompted) or by virtue of intrusion (unprompted). Thanks, Rob M :-) 16486 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sun Oct 27, 2002 2:09am Subject: Re: [dsg] "Your duty is the contemplation" Larry The 3 quotes from the sutta you mention here refer to the goal or outcome of the development of satipatthana, and the commentarial passages are likewise descriptions or elaborations of those goals/outcomes. They do not I think describe the development of satipatthana itself. Thus, for example, the term ‘purification of beings’ refers to the abandoning of the taints (not, the purification of beings is to be achieved by abandoning the taints). The *means to* the purification of beings is the development of satipatthana as found in the body of the sutta – see the opening and closing words of the sutta ("This is the only way, O bhikkhus, for the purification of beings, …”). So I don’t think we can really draw any particular conclusions about the nature of satipatthana itself just from these descriptions. Jon --- LBIDD@w... wrote: > "This is the only way, o bhikkhus, for the > purfication of beings, for > the overcoming of sorrow and lamentation, for the > destruction of > suffering and grief..." > > Hi Jon, I think the commentary on these words > relates to our discussion. > > FOR THE PURIFUICATION OF BEINGS: Purification is > achieved by abandoning > the taints (sensual desire, desire for permanent > being, views, and > ignorance). I understand from Num's comments on Psm. > that ignorance (and > views) are also manifestations of desire. How this > abandoning comes > about is as it may be, but I think for many people > the discipline of > formal practice prompts understanding (panna). > > FOR THE OVERCOMING OF SORROW AND LAMENTATION: Here > analytical knowledge > or understanding spontaneously arose upon hearing a > verse. The tika says > this could not have happened without the previous > development of wisdom > (panna) through contemplating form, feeling, > consciousness or dhammas. > This suggests to me that satipatthana is more > contemplative than I > thought, but I still would be averse to thinking of > it as academic or > scholarly. > > FOR THE DESTRUCTION OF SUFFERING AND GRIEF: Here > extreme physical pain > is suppressed and insight is developed. This also > seems to depend on > previous discipline and contemplation. > > L: So I guess my 'feel' for the contemplative nature > of satipatthana is > expanded to include both ongoing contemplation and a > moment's insight, > but I think the develpment of purity by abandoning > desires is a good > element to bring to the bavana. I notice the desire > to understand isn't > a taint but I don't exactly see why not. I would > think all desire is > ultimately based on a 'self' view. Maybe desire to > understand is > included in the views taint. If so, where does that > leave the practice? > Let go of the desire to understand but continue to > contemplate? > > Larry 16487 From: Date: Sun Oct 27, 2002 4:50pm Subject: Way 17, Comm "The Way of Mindfulness" by Soma Thera Continuing commentary on, [why] "the Four Arousings of Mindfulness" http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/bps/misc/wayof.html Or it may be said that these Four Arousings of Mindfulness are taught for casting out the illusions [vipallasa] concerning beauty, pleasure, permanence, and an ego. The body is ugly. There are people led astray by the illusion that it is a thing of beauty. In order to show such people the ugliness of the body and to make them give up their wrong idea, the First Arousing of Mindfulness is taught. Feeling is suffering. There are people subject to the illusion that it gives pleasure. In order to show such people the painfulness of feeling and to make them give up their wrong idea, the Second Arousing of Mindfulness is taught. Consciousness is impermanent. There are people who, owing to an illusion, believe that it is permanent. To show them the impermanence of consciousness and to wean them of their wrong belief, the Third Arousing of Mindfulness is taught. Mental objects are insubstantial, are soulless, and possess no entity. There are people who believe by reason of an illusion that these mental things are substantial, endowed with an abiding core, or a soul, or that they form part of a soul, an ego or some substance that abides. To convince such errant folk of the fact of the soullessness or the insubstantiality of mental things and to destroy the illusion which clouds their minds, the Fourth Arousing of Mindfulness is taught. 16488 From: Date: Sun Oct 27, 2002 5:10pm Subject: Re: [dsg] "Your duty is the contemplation" Hi Jon, I think my point was that there is more contemplation involved in satipatthana than I thought. This must relate to the recollection of the dhamma aspect of 'sati'. But you are correct in saying that abandoning desires isn't spelled out as part of satipatthana, at least not in the quotes I gave. I accidentally infered that from my own experience. Interestingly one question I raised concerning abandoning desire in general and the desire to understand in particular was answered, at least partially, when I stumbled across something in CMA concerning 'chanda' (desire to do) which is different from lobha (greed or lust). Chanda is ethically variable, so it can be either kusala or akusala, and could accompany sati. Larry 16489 From: Date: Sun Oct 27, 2002 5:24pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Way 17, Comm "To convince such errant folk of the fact of the soullessness or the insubstantiality of mental things and to destroy the illusion which clouds their minds, the Fourth Arousing of Mindfulness is taught." Hi all, I find it remarkable that it is emphasized again that dhammanupassana is taught to destroy the illusion of self. I can hardly wait to find out what is going on with this. Larry 16490 From: Date: Sun Oct 27, 2002 2:48pm Subject: Ugliness (Re: [dsg] Way 17, Comm) Hi, Larry - As part of the following there is: "The body is ugly. There are people led astray by the illusion that it is a thing of beauty. In order to show such people the ugliness of the body and to make them give up their wrong idea, the First Arousing of Mindfulness is taught." As far as I'm concerned, saying that the body is ugly is nonsense. It may, under some circumstances be seen as ugly, and under other circumstances as lovely. This is all in the mind. The reality is that the body is just so. It is as it is. It is a conceptual composite of dhammas, of mutliple experienced phenomena. Pointing out that there is decay in the body, that there are fluids that may not seem pleasant, that there are odors that are experienced as unpleasant - all that, is merely corrective skillful means to lessen our tendency to crave the body, to cling to it, to adore it. But the body is not objectively ugly, and aversion is no better than craving. With metta, Howard In a message dated 10/27/02 7:51:34 PM Eastern Standard Time, LBIDD@w... writes: > > "The Way of Mindfulness" by Soma Thera > > Continuing commentary on, [why] "the Four Arousings of Mindfulness" > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/bps/misc/wayof.html > > Or it may be said that these Four Arousings of Mindfulness are taught > for casting out the illusions [vipallasa] concerning beauty, pleasure, > permanence, and an ego. > > The body is ugly. There are people led astray by the illusion that it is > a thing of beauty. In order to show such people the ugliness of the body > and to make them give up their wrong idea, the First Arousing of > Mindfulness is taught. > > Feeling is suffering. There are people subject to the illusion that it > gives pleasure. In order to show such people the painfulness of feeling > and to make them give up their wrong idea, the Second Arousing of > Mindfulness is taught. > > Consciousness is impermanent. There are people who, owing to an > illusion, believe that it is permanent. To show them the impermanence of > consciousness and to wean them of their wrong belief, the Third Arousing > of Mindfulness is taught. > > Mental objects are insubstantial, are soulless, and possess no entity. > There are people who believe by reason of an illusion that these mental > things are substantial, endowed with an abiding core, or a soul, or that > they form part of a soul, an ego or some substance that abides. To > convince such errant folk of the fact of the soullessness or the > insubstantiality of mental things and to destroy the illusion which > clouds their minds, the Fourth Arousing of Mindfulness is taught. > > > /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) 16491 From: Date: Sun Oct 27, 2002 8:41pm Subject: Re: Ugliness (Re: [dsg] Way 17, Comm) Hi Howard, I think I generally agree with you, but I'm not sure if the Buddha would. I think he would say aversion and disgust are better than delight. I seem to vaguely recall getting that impression from many suttas. I don't think there is a real question of whether the body is objectively ugly. Certainly the cemetery meditations are meant to inspire disgust but I don't see how mindfulness of breath or body movement would, unless additional concepts were brought to bear. The main thrust of the argument seems to be to disengage attachment to the body which is really a new tack for me as far as my own practice goes. More and more I'm coming to appreciate that "sati" really means recollection of Buddhadhamma. What sati most generally recollects when practicing satipatthana is mindfulness (sampajanna) but it could well recollect other aspects of the Dhamma such as whatever might inspire nonattachment. Where have you been? We've missed you. Larry 16492 From: Date: Sun Oct 27, 2002 4:34pm Subject: Re: Ugliness (Re: [dsg] Way 17, Comm) Hi, Larry - In a message dated 10/27/02 11:41:59 PM Eastern Standard Time, LBIDD@w... writes: > > Hi Howard, > > I think I generally agree with you, but I'm not sure if the Buddha > would. I think he would say aversion and disgust are better than > delight. I seem to vaguely recall getting that impression from many > suttas. > ------------------------------------------------ Howard: Could be. I guess the point is that neither is any good! ;-)) ------------------------------------------------ I don't think there is a real question of whether the body is> > objectively ugly. > > Certainly the cemetery meditations are meant to inspire disgust but I > don't see how mindfulness of breath or body movement would, unless > additional concepts were brought to bear. The main thrust of the > argument seems to be to disengage attachment to the body which is > really a new tack for me as far as my own practice goes. > > More and more I'm coming to appreciate that "sati" really means > recollection of Buddhadhamma. What sati most generally recollects when > practicing satipatthana is mindfulness (sampajanna) but it could well > recollect other aspects of the Dhamma such as whatever might inspire > nonattachment. > > Where have you been? We've missed you. > ---------------------------------------------- Howard: Thank you! That's very nice to hear. Well, I posted a couple today, and I posted once two days ago. The problem is that I'm a moderator of another list on which there have been some recent problems which were quite demanding and called for considerable attention on my part. --------------------------------------------- > > Larry > ======================= 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) 16493 From: Purnomo . Date: Sun Oct 27, 2002 10:07pm Subject: Re: [dsg] cryology >From: "Purnomo ." >Reply-To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com >To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com >Subject: [dsg] cryology >Date: Thu, 24 Oct 2002 06:48:55 +0000 > >dear friends, > >have you known about a dog for some days was frozen ? we must think that >the >dog was died. But, it wasn't. After the dog was processed so its >temperature >normal, it is life. Until now the dog is life. And now a child have been >trying to proof of cryology theory. > >is it possible a man keep living in a temperature when his blood wasn't >bleeding ? > >please see article about cryology in >http://www.science-tech.nmstc.ca/english/schoolzone/Info_Science2.cfm > > >metta, > >purnomo > > 16494 From: Robert Epstein Date: Sun Oct 27, 2002 10:43pm Subject: Re: "Your duty is the contemplation" Hi Larry. I am jumping in here after an absence, and may have to jump right back out again, but I am intrigued by this discussion of sati. It seems to me that mindfulness must take place in the moment and must not be dependent upon a thought process. Otherwise it would be an intellectual or conceptual realization rather than a real awareness of the object of consciousness. I see mindfulness as a direct understanding of that which is perceived in the moment and therefore it must accompany and be part of the moment itself. Any other properties that may follow upon it would have to be secondary results and not the sati itself. I don't know if this is either redundant or misinformed, but I'd be interested in your [and Howard's] response. Best, Robert Ep. ======================================= --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., LBIDD@w... wrote: > Hi Jon, > > I think my point was that there is more contemplation involved in > satipatthana than I thought. This must relate to the recollection of the > dhamma aspect of 'sati'. But you are correct in saying that abandoning > desires isn't spelled out as part of satipatthana, at least not in the > quotes I gave. I accidentally infered that from my own experience. > > Interestingly one question I raised concerning abandoning desire in > general and the desire to understand in particular was answered, at > least partially, when I stumbled across something in CMA concerning > 'chanda' (desire to do) which is different from lobha (greed or lust). > Chanda is ethically variable, so it can be either kusala or akusala, and > could accompany sati. > > Larry 16495 From: Robert Epstein Date: Sun Oct 27, 2002 10:50pm Subject: Re: Way 17, Comm Again, it would seem to me, perhaps ignorantly, that the arousing of mindfulness cannot have the purpose of seeing the negative qualities of the objects of mindfulness, but to see them 'as they are'. One cannot merely see them 'as they are' and also see them as objects of distaste at the same time. Moreover it seems to me that the illusions one would be seeing and 'casting out' are objects of 'aversion'. Is it good to promote aversion? I understand that aversion is merely the opposite side of the coin of attachment. If this is the case, it would be better to practice pure mindfulness that sees things 'in their pure immediacy' without any appelations, either good or bad, since such appelations are undoubtedly bound to be concepts. And mindfulness reveals the actuality of the object in the moment, not merely another version of its conceptual formation. If mindfulness sees the momentary arising of reality in its purity without adding appelations or conceptual constructs of any kind -- which is what I see as mindfulness -- then it will not be necessary to cast anything aside, for no accompanying illusory definitions of what arises will be present, not in a true moment of mindfulness. Therefore, mindfulness is not a means to an end, it is the vehicle but also guarantees the result. When mindfulness is present, then knowledge of the object and not illusion must also be present, and there can be no delusion about what is perceived in that moment. Interested if you think I am off the mark here. Robert Ep. ======================= --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., LBIDD@w... wrote: > "The Way of Mindfulness" by Soma Thera > > Continuing commentary on, [why] "the Four Arousings of Mindfulness" > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/bps/misc/wayof.html > > Or it may be said that these Four Arousings of Mindfulness are taught > for casting out the illusions [vipallasa] concerning beauty, pleasure, > permanence, and an ego. > > The body is ugly. There are people led astray by the illusion that it is > a thing of beauty. In order to show such people the ugliness of the body > and to make them give up their wrong idea, the First Arousing of > Mindfulness is taught. > > Feeling is suffering. There are people subject to the illusion that it > gives pleasure. In order to show such people the painfulness of feeling > and to make them give up their wrong idea, the Second Arousing of > Mindfulness is taught. > > Consciousness is impermanent. There are people who, owing to an > illusion, believe that it is permanent. To show them the impermanence of > consciousness and to wean them of their wrong belief, the Third Arousing > of Mindfulness is taught. > > Mental objects are insubstantial, are soulless, and possess no entity. > There are people who believe by reason of an illusion that these mental > things are substantial, endowed with an abiding core, or a soul, or that > they form part of a soul, an ego or some substance that abides. To > convince such errant folk of the fact of the soullessness or the > insubstantiality of mental things and to destroy the illusion which > clouds their minds, the Fourth Arousing of Mindfulness is taught. 16496 From: Sarah Date: Sun Oct 27, 2002 11:08pm Subject: Re: [dsg]luminous, pure (pandaram) Dear Nina & All, --- Nina van Gorkom wrote: > In the Co to the Path of Discrimination, Understanding of Mindfulness > Workers (satokari ~naa.na), definitions of citta have been given, > hadaya,heart, etc. One of these is phandara.m, pure: ..... As we discussed before, pandaram is not synonymous with pabhassara.In Pali, I believe the meaning is quite different. You may like to review Jaran’s and my posts from our discussions in Bkk when we pulled out all the relevant texts: http://www.escribe.com/religion/dhammastudygroup/m6522.html http://www.escribe.com/religion/dhammastudygroup/m6682.html I remember Suan also gave a helpful translation which will be in Useful Posts under ‘luminous’ (I couldn’t find it just now in escribe): http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup So I understand pandaram is sometimes used as a definition of citta as you say. ..... > because the upakilesas (N:defilements arising with the citta) which go > to > it, citta becomes defiled. Even akusala citta is called pandara.m > because > akusala comes (N:comes after?) from that citta (N:bhavangacitta?). > Just > as > the Ganges river streams from the Ganges river... (N: ?). The reason is > that > the characteristic of citta is experiencing an object, and thus it is > not > defiled by upakilesas, and citta is by nature (sabhava) pure. When it is > accompanied by upakilesas which defile it, it is still called pandara.m, > pure.> ..... I wrote before :“I understand the reason that all cittas are considered ‘pandaram’ is because they ‘spring’ from the bhavanga cittas....” This is like rivers flow from a source, collecting impurities as they flow on. The last sentence you write/translate above is just as we discussed. From my earlier post: “4) Pandaram sometimes refers to bhavanga cittas and kusala citta only: In the Atthasalini reference given several times (Atth, 140,)where it says “cittas are pandara meaning pure. pandara refers to bhavanga cittas.....”, we found there was an extra line in the Thai translation not included in the PTS translation and this follows the Pali: “ ‘O Monks, cittas are pure, but they become tainted with upakilesa that come in, thus.’ Kusala cittas are pandara since they come from cittas (i.e. bhavanga cittas) like the Ganges river flows from the (source of) the Ganges river and the Godhaavarii river flows from the Godhaavarii river.” (Jaran’s transl.)” ***** > Remarks: still question marks, I would appreciate suggestions. I did not > understand the simile of the Gnages river, maybe what is water of that > river > is just water of that river, it cannot be changed. Citta has as its task > just knowing an object, citta itself is not defilement. This helps us > too to > understand that citta is an inner ayatana and cetasikas are outer > ayatana. > We have to separate their characteristics. ..... Just so, I think. K.Sujin stressed this point about citta. I understand the water becomes tainted, like the gold in the other sutta which Jaran refers to. From Jaran’s account of the same discussions: ..... “According to a pali expert and A. Sujin, the word 'luminous' (in thai "bo-ri-suth") is from two different pali words: pandara and pabhassara. Pandara is refers to all cittas, wholesome, unwholesome, vipaka, bhavanga, kiriya because it is another name (of 11 or 13 names) of citta. Citta has many names because it can be consider in many different ways (aspects or nayas). Cittas are pandara because they are intrinsically pure (compared other dhammas such as cetasikas).” ..... Also from Jaran’s post: ..... “1. From Commentary dhamasa.mga.niiva.n.nanaa cittuppaataka.n.thava.n.nanaa, it says: In nittesavara, cakkhuvi~n~naana is said to be pandara because of its base, kusala citta is pandara because itself is pure, akusala citta is pandara because it 'flows' (comes) from bhavanga citta (which is pure, in the human realm), and all vipaka cittas are pure because of their bases (like that of cakkhuvi~n~naana). Here pandara refers to all cittas because pandara is one of more than 10 _definitions_ of citta. Above only emphasizes that cittas are pure (compared to cetasikas) in many different ways, and akusala cittas are pure because they come from pure bhavanga cittas.” ***** Jaran gave many more helpful details in his post referred to. I also liked his conclusion given in part here: “We try very hard to interprete all the passages in this 84000 verses so that they are ALL in 100 % agreement. A. Sujin always says that it is almost impossible to do unless the reader understands what's the purpose of the passage and to whom it was intended, and it is impossible to know all that. Therefore, she said never take one passage (or part of it) and interprete it literally and hold on to that interpetation. More importantly, she said one should know one's own limit of understanding....” ***** I hope Suan, Rob K, Jaran or Jim will add more. Also, Rob Ep, remember this is your favourite topic;-) Sarah ====== 16497 From: Sarah Date: Sun Oct 27, 2002 11:47pm Subject: Way- Rob Ep, we need you;-) Hi Rob Ep, A pleasant surprise to see your posts on the Way just as I was thinking of you (see the latest luminous thread;-)). --- Robert Epstein wrote: > Hi Larry. > I am jumping in here after an absence, and may have to jump right back > out again, but I am intrigued by this discussion of sati. ..... Good that you’re ‘intrigued’, not good that you’re already thinking of jumping out again. We’d all be glad to have you hang around longer. As it is, Larry is complaining about the present active members in the ‘Way’ corner, apart from Jim who is also giving some ‘seclusion’ signals: Larry wrote: “Nina is stubborn, Sarah is defensive, and I am impulsive and abrasive.” ..... Now he may be what he says, but of course Nina is not stubborn and I’m never defensive. What us? Whatever gave him that idea? Patient and consistent, that’s us!!;-)) Seriously, we’ll be glad for any moral or other support from you and Howard in the corner and Larry, I hope your post has encouraged Jim with its kind comments. Rob (& also Victor), I’m very glad indeed that life has returned to normal in Washington D.C. and Emmy can go to play school without the extra anxieties which none of us need to learn about dukkha. The homeroom teacher of two of my students was killed in the Bali blast. His wife, also a teacher at the same school in Hong Kong, went to have dinner with her sister and left him drinking with his friends. I had a little helpful discussion with my students as a result, anyway. Sarah ====== 16498 From: Sarah Date: Mon Oct 28, 2002 1:50am Subject: All Creatures Frail or Firm... Hi Chris and All. --- christine_forsyth wrote: >I was asking in a garbled way why there were different > values given to a living process of cittas and cetasikas, dependent > on size, outer form and perceived virtue ... it doesn't seem logical > to have an Order of Precedence. Either All Beings are important or > none are. Given the doctrine of Anatta - "none" would seem a more > consistent answer - but my heart votes for "All". ..... I gave some quotes from the commentary to the Khuddakapatha yesterday which has been discussed with regard to the complexity of kamma. This always relates to the mental states of the ‘instigator’ but will be conditioned by many factors, as will the results of the kamma. The text also contains the commentary to the Metta discourse with a wealth of useful information I’d quite forgotten about, though this used to be one of my favourite and most often referred to texts;-). Without detailed commentary notes, it’s so easy to misunderstand this sutta. To give an example: We read: “Whatever breathing beings there are, No matter whether frail or firm, With none excepted......” ..... what do frail or firm mean? “Herein they thirst (tasanti), thus they are frail (tasaa); this is a designation for those with craving and for those with fear. They stand (ti.t.thanti), thus they are firm (thaavaraa); this is a designation for Arahants, who have abandoned craving and fear. There is no one of them that is an exception, thus they are ‘with none excepted (anavasesaa); all, is what is meant.” ***** We read about how the monks involved were already ‘with skill in good’, referring to ‘being established in virtue’ and with highly developed samatha and vipassana. They were ready to attain metta jhana and maintain metta ‘unboundedly (aparimaa.na.m) by means of the object consisting of boundless creatures or by means of remainderless extension in a single being’. The ‘lovingkindness jhana mindfulness’ is ‘pursued’ in all positions - standing, walking, sitting and lying down. What I find interesting in the context of recent discussions, are the following lines from the commentary on the last stanza of the verse: “...And now, since loving kindness in near to (wrong) view of self because it has creatures for its object, he therefore completed the teaching with the following stanza: ‘But he that traffics not with views (Is virtuous with perfected seeing Till, purged of greed for sense-desires, He will surely come no more to any womb.’ He did this as a preventative against (their straying into) the thicket of (speculative) views (see MNi,8) by showing those bhikkhus how the Noble Plane is reached through making that same loving kindness jhana the basis for insight.” ***** Comment: this reminds me of Nina’s series of posts on anapanasati. Whatever level of jhana is attained, still the various paramattha dhammas (absolute realities) have to be the object of insight and the development of insight is always the goal. ..... The commentary continues: “The meaning is this. After emerging from the abiding in loving kindness jhana, which was specified thus ‘This is Divine Abiding here, they say’, (he discerns) the (non-material-form ideas there (in that jhana) consisting in thinking(vitakka) and exploring(vicara) and the rest(piti, sukha, cittas’ekaggata), (which he defines as ‘name’(namas), he discerns the ideas of (material) form there, which he defines as ‘form’(rupas).By means of this delimitation of name and form (nama and rupa) ‘he traffics not with views’(di.t.thi.n ca anupagamma), (avoiding that by discerning) in the way stated thus ‘A heap of mere determinations; No creature can be found herein’ (Si,135), till he eventually becomes virtuous (siilavaa) with the kind of virtue that is supramundane since he is now perfected (sampanno) in the right view belonging to the Path of Stream Entry, which is called seeing (dassanena), and which is associated with that supramundane virtue. After that.......he reaches Arahantship and attains extinction.” Later we read “There the bhikkhus maintained loving kindeness in being, and making that the basis, they established insight (into the three general characteristics of impermanence, suffering, and not-self) till all of them reached Arahantship, the highest fruit, in that same Rains, and they were able to hold the Pavarana Ceremony in purity.” ***** We learn about and need to develop all kinds of kusala (wholesomeness), but the highest or purest are moments of satipatthana when namas and rupas are discerned as not-self. Sarah ====== 16499 From: Date: Mon Oct 28, 2002 6:47am Subject: Re: Ugliness (Re: [dsg] Way 17, Comm) Hi Howard, A quick thought before I dash to work. Considering that the body is objectively, or ultimately, neither ugly nor beautiful is mindfulness of body form in mindfulness of dhamma mode. Larry 16500 From: Date: Mon Oct 28, 2002 2:29am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: "Your duty is the contemplation" Hi, Rob (and Larry) - I think each of you is right in some respects and wrong in some respects. When Larry writes "I think my point was that there is more contemplation involved in satipatthana than I thought.", I agree that in at least part of the insight cultivation discussed in the Satipatthana Sutta, thinking is crucially involved, mostly in the 1st foundation. When you write that mindfulness occurs in the moment, I agree. (However, periods of thinking that one should remain mindful are conditions, I believe, for the arising of sati.) I do not, however, see sati as a direct understanding. To some extent, sampaja~n~na (clear comprehension) is that, and that often occurs together with sati, but only pa~n~na is fully a clear and direct comprehension. I see sati as "merely" the operation of precisely attending to what is present, or, negatively, not getting mentally "lost". With metta, Howard In a message dated 10/28/02 1:44:24 AM Eastern Standard Time, epsteinrob@Y... writes: > > Hi Larry. > I am jumping in here after an absence, and may have to jump right back > out again, but I am intrigued by this discussion of sati. It seems to > me that mindfulness must take place in the moment and must not be > dependent upon a thought process. Otherwise it would be an > intellectual or conceptual realization rather than a real awareness of > the object of consciousness. > > I see mindfulness as a direct understanding of that which is perceived > in the moment and therefore it must accompany and be part of the moment > itself. Any other properties that may follow upon it would have to be > secondary results and not the sati itself. > > I don't know if this is either redundant or misinformed, but I'd be > interested in your [and Howard's] response. > > Best, > Robert Ep. > > ======================================= > > --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., LBIDD@w... wrote: > >Hi Jon, > > > >I think my point was that there is more contemplation involved in > >satipatthana than I thought. This must relate to the recollection of the > >dhamma aspect of 'sati'. But you are correct in saying that abandoning > >desires isn't spelled out as part of satipatthana, at least not in the > >quotes I gave. I accidentally infered that from my own experience. > > > >Interestingly one question I raised concerning abandoning desire in > >general and the desire to understand in particular was answered, at > >least partially, when I stumbled across something in CMA concerning > >'chanda' (desire to do) which is different from lobha (greed or lust). > >Chanda is ethically variable, so it can be either kusala or akusala, and > >could accompany sati. > > > >Larry > > > /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) 16501 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Oct 28, 2002 10:02am Subject: Re: [dsg] temperaments Dear Larry and all, Thank you very much Larry, to give all the texts about different temperaments. Now I quote from . The patriarch of Cambodia, in the main temple of Phom Phen, asked A. Sujin about the different temperaments: End quote. N: I just heard on tape that satipatthana is not *doing* something, and that one should begin to understand the characteristics of nama and rupa that appear. Sound may appear, you do not have to think: now I should be aware of the rupa of sound which is included in Mindfulness of Dhammas, rupakkhandha. Or hearing arises and performs its function of hearing, not a self who hears. We do not have to think, now I have to be aware of the citta which hears, included in Mindfulness of Citta. Also with regard to the perversions, the Commentary indicates which of the different Applications are helpful for the elimination of which perversion. We have all the perversions, and thus we need all four Applications of Mindfulness. I believe that selecting of objects is contraproductive. Nina. Larry: For the dull-witted man > of craving type the Arousing of Mindfulness through the contemplation of > the gross physical body is the Path to Purity; for the keen-witted of > this type, the subtle subject of meditation on the feeling. And for the > dull-witted man of the theorizing type the Path to Purity is the > Arousing of Mindfulness through a subject not too full of distinctions, > namely, consciousness [citta]; for the keen-witted of this type, the > subject which teems with distinctions, namely the contemplation on > things of the mind -- mental objects [dhammanupassana]. 16502 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Oct 28, 2002 10:02am Subject: Perfections, Ch 6, Energy, no 11 Perfections, Ch 6, Energy, no 11 As we read in the ³Anumana Sutta²: If, your reverences, while the monk is reflecting, he knows thus: ³I am of evil desires, in the thrall of evil desires,² then, your reverences, that monk should strive to get rid of those evil, unskilled states. But if, your reverences, that monk, while reflecting, knows thus: ³I am not of evil desires, not in the thrall of evil desires², then he should abide with rapture and delight, training himself diligently day and night in skilled states. We should study with awareness the characteristics of realities as they naturally appear. It depends on conditions what degree of sati sampajañña arises, it may be of the degree of merely reflecting on the akusala that one has committed during the day, or it may be of the degree of immediate awareness of whatever reality appears. Some people who develop satipatthåna may desire a result of their practice. They are striving with all their energy, because they believe that in this way the result of their practice will materialize quickly. However, since they are trying very hard they become tired and they have to stop doing so. The result of the development of satipatthåna cannot be made to occur soon. The development of satipaììhåna is awareness of the characteristics of realities as they naturally appear in daily life, and only in this way can they be understood as anattå. If one is expecting a result of one¹s practice and tries to hasten its arising, it is not the development of satipatthåna. A person of about eighty years old who had listened to Dhamma lectures at different places deeply considered the development of satipatthåna. Although he was an elderly person, he was full of energy to listen to the Dhamma and to consider what he had heard. When he heard a radio program on the introduction to vipassanå, he wrote down the address of the ³Dhamma Study and Support Foundation² and made an effort to go to the Foundation in order to perform kusala by offering a donation. He left his house at nine in the morning and arrived at the Foundation at two in the afternoon. Here we see the viriya of an elderly person who spent such a long time to reach the Foundation, who had no time for lunch and had to exert himself in many different ways. The perfection of viriya should be developed in daily life. In the performing of kusala, viriya is essential, because one should go against the current of akusala, against the stream of attachment to comfort and well-being, and in this way kusala can be accomplished. If one develops satipatthåna in daily life and paññå which knows the characteristics of realities has been further developed, there will be the right conditions for the realization of the four noble Truths. When the right conditions are present, the result will naturally occur and this is not difficult. However, the conditions leading to this result are difficult to develop: one should gradually consider and study with awareness the characteristics of nåma and rúpa, as they appear through the sense-doors and the mind-door. This is a very gradual process, and there should be viriya, energy, to be aware again and again, to be aware very often, since this is the only way for paññå to be able to penetrate the arising and falling away of the characteristics of nåma and rúpa. At this very moment realities are arising and falling away, but if there is no study with awareness and if one does not begin to understand the characteristics of nåma dhammas and rúpa dhammas, it will not be possible to realize the arising and falling away of dhammas. The cause which can bring such a result has to be developed time and again, life after life. 16503 From: forsyth_1981 Date: Mon Oct 28, 2002 2:51pm Subject: Home again, changes, plus Tom Hello everyone, plus Tom, I'm glad to see someone else with a relative on the list, Tom. I'm Christine's daughter, Sarah F. I was in London in mid September for a few days catching up with high school friends. After that I went to the US to see friends who had been exchange students at Uni. of Queensland. Now I'm back home in Brisbane again. I'm slowly finishing an IT degree. I work part-time for my Dad here in Brisbane and very occasionally in Hong Kong and Darwin. How about you Tom? Have you finished studying yet? Do you live in London? I usually 'lurk' and hardly ever post to the List, but I thought I'd say g'day. I'm enjoying the 'animals and insects' thread - I agree with kindness and not harming. Though I think animals have the ability to do 'bad' and 'good' actions, not only be prisoners of instinct. The 'bad' is mainly abusing power (like humans). I can remember when I was 'playgroup' age and it was Mum's turn to have it at our place - our goose and gander (who were as tall as we three and four year olds) stalked and ambushed the kids while the mothers' were having a cup of tea inside. There was screaming pandamonium. (both kids and mothers!). The geese were as tall or taller than us with huge wing spans and deafening trumpetings, and seemed to flap and peck and honk just for the fun of creating chaos. Life is a bit strange since I came back to Brisbane. Nothing seems the same as before I left. I was only away a month, so it hasn't really changed that much. I seem to be different and have grown apart from many of my friends. I don't think they've noticed though. I mention this because I read buddhism teaches that everything changes, all the time, so maybe that means 'inside' a person - feelings, attitudes - as well as 'outside' - others, events, things? On the brighter side, at least the bad things don't hang around. Like end of Semester exams and no social life! I've only read a little on Buddhism so far, but I can see parts in my own day to day life where it makes sense. Mum is going to loan me 'Buddhism in Daily Life' by Nina van Gorkom after the exams, as I'll be working up in Darwin for a couple of weeks. Bye for now, Sarah F 16504 From: Date: Mon Oct 28, 2002 5:36pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: "Your duty is the contemplation" Hi Rob, I pretty much agree with you about the conventional understanding of sati but I was basing my comments about the contemplative nature of satipatthana on the commentary on the first few lines of the satipatthana sutta. We haven't really gotten to the clear comprehension aspect yet. I would definitely recommend that you read this slowly and carefully. As I say, it is certainly changing my understanding of satipatthana. For some good research into the meaning of "sati" see Rob Moult's email http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/16007 This brings out the ethical and 'recollection' aspect of sati which is also something new (to me). Also, here is a good essay by Ven. Dhammavuddho Thero which I just read. It gives a similar treatment. http://www.thebuddhistsociety.org.uk/sama_sati_02.htm Ven. Dhammavuddho renders 'mindfulness' as sampajanna and 'sati' as recollection.We haven't gotten to sampajanna yet in the commentary, so I can't say very much about it except that it's starting to look like sati remembers to be mindful among other things. As for the debate on whether concepts are present during satipatthana, I think that is pretty much a dead issue. Although others may disagree. The intention behind saying concepts are not an object of satipatthana is meant to bring one into the present moment, rather than lost in thought. I completely agree with this but it also seems obvious to me that concepts are part of every citta process on the level of mundane experience. Beside that the object of jhana is a concept and jhana is an object of satipatthana plus nibbana as part of the 4 noble truths is a concept when they are an object of satipatthana because satipatthana is a mundane path (pre-nibbana). And really the whole tenor of the synopsis section of the commentary makes it clear, to me at least, that satipatthana is not only attentive and 'in the moment' but is concerned with basic conceptual issues of the Buddhadhamma. Not to mention that the basic knowledge of panna, the 3 characteristics, (anicca, dukkha, anatta) are all concepts. So concepts are all over the place. But they aren't real; that's the main point. Hope you stick around and are able to catch up on some of this reading. Best wishes, Larry 16505 From: Date: Mon Oct 28, 2002 6:24pm Subject: Re: [dsg] temperaments Hi Nina, I disagree. I think the selecting of an object can be very useful. Even the Kuru washer women would ask, "which arousing of mindfulness do you cultivate, dearie". But if you are satisfied with not selecting, then you should stay with that. The way of it used to be that a person would go to a preceptor and ask him or her which one to cultivate but the preceptors have ended up telling everyone the same thing; practice anapanasati. I do agree that we should practice all 4 and I think the Anapanasati Sutta tells how to do that with the breath. I also think Howard's idea of an evolutionary path is valid. As Jim demonstrated in the thread on "in Arahatship, in 21 places" it seems rasonable that each of the 21 practices in satipatthana leads [eventually] to arahantship. However as mindfulness of dhammas would appear to be necessary to reach the sotapanna path moment, because mindfulness of dhammas eradicates belief in a self and the end of sakkayaditthi occurs at that stage (sotapanna), so, somehow one has to get from the first foundation to the fourth. However, that is not to say that "Body" is only for beginners. I think attachment to body is deeper than belief in a 'self', which is, after all, a mere concept. But there is a lot to consider here so I'm still studying it. Larry 16506 From: rjkjp1 Date: Tue Oct 29, 2002 5:57am Subject: Re: [dsg] third insight knowledge ---Dear Nina, I'll take this up in the next meeting. But this saturday Khun Sujin is speaking in Thai on saturday. So it won't be till the following saturday that I have a chance. with respect RobertIn dhammastudygroup@y..., Nina van Gorkom wrote: > the difference, because if we know it, > A.Sujin said, sati can be developed. We have to know the characteristic of > sati of satipatthana. We have to go on discussing this point, I believe. > In the case of the third stage of insight (still tender insight), it must be > clear that a moment with sati is different from a moment without sati. At > that stage no thought of a person when nama or rupa appears, because panna > knows alreadfy nama as nama and rupa as rupa. > What do you think about this? > Could Rob K. perhaps take this up with A. Sujin? > Nina. 16507 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Oct 29, 2002 10:02am Subject: Re: [dsg]prompted, unprompted Dear Rob M, Please omit prompted and unprompted in your summary, these will confuse people. The Expositor gives examples in conventional terms about different ways objects present themselves. When you read on about the examples you will see. When making a summary without examples, it may also confuse others. Examples of experience through the bodysense of one element at a time are given by the Expositor. This is ahetuka vipakacitta and is never prompted or unprompted. This is only used in the classifications of lobha-mula-citta, dosa-mula-citta and maha-kusala citta, maha-vipakacitta and maha-kiriyacitta.Thus, it is not suitable to use the terms prompted and unprompted in the context of object-condition. The examples are not easy to understand, and maybe it would be better not to use this passage in a summary. What do you think? Nina. op 27-10-2002 22:29 schreef robmoult op rob.moult@j...: > > Your book reads: > ... the rupas which can be experienced through the senses become > objects "by virtue of deliberate inclination" or "by virtue of > inclusion". > > Is it correct for me to summarize this as: > Rupas which can be sensed can become objects by virtue of deliberate > inclination (prompted) or by virtue of intrusion (unprompted). 16508 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Oct 29, 2002 10:02am Subject: Re: [dsg]luminous, pure (pandaram) Dear Sarah, Thank you very much, this is very helpful, also that you included Jaran's translation. Now I better understand the simile of the Ganges. It was the first time I went to the Patis. text itself. Thai borisud is Pali parisuddha: sudh means clean. This, I believe, has a root different from pabhassara: baas: shining, and pa.ndara: white or pale. Different roots but the meaning more or less the same. op 28-10-2002 08:08 schreef Sarah op sarahdhhk@y...: > I wrote before :“I understand the reason that all cittas > are considered ‘pandaram’ is because they ‘spring’ from the bhavanga > cittas....” This is like rivers flow from a source, collecting impurities > as they flow on. The last sentence you write/translate above is just as we > discussed. > >> “ ‘O Monks, cittas are pure, but they become tainted with upakilesa that > come in, thus.’ Kusala cittas are pandara since they come from cittas > (i.e. bhavanga cittas) like the Ganges river flows from the (source of) > the Ganges river and the Godhaavarii river flows from the Godhaavarii > river.” (Jaran’s transl.)” > ***** 16509 From: robmoult Date: Tue Oct 29, 2002 11:55am Subject: Re: [dsg]prompted, unprompted (also to Sarah) Hi Nina, I will delete the terms "prompted" and "unprompted". I see that they are not appropriate. I am really enjoying summarizing your "24 Conditions" for my class on Sunday. I agree that examples really help make things clearer. I also find that similies are useful in understanding how the various conditions work. Last year, Sayadaw U Silananda ran a ten day course on Abhidhamma here in Malaysia. I missed it, but I got a copy of his handouts. There are some interesting charts on the 24 conditions in his handouts and one of them is a list of similies for each condition (title of similie only, no explanation). Fortunately, I found another book, "The Essence of Buddha Abhidhamma" by Dr. Mehm Tin Mon, which gives all the similies. Our Abhidhamma class has contributed to help reprint this book and Dr. Mehm Tin Mon himself will be using this book to conduct a ten-evening Abhidhamma class here in Malaysia from Nov 11 - 19 (I am trying to arrange my schedule to be able to attend). Nina, do you have a copy of this book? If you are interested, I could probably get one to you via Sarah / Jon / Christine (I am hoping to meet with them in Hong Kong on Nov 27, before they fly to Bangkok). Sarah, can you check with the other DSGrs who are going to Bangkok and find out how many copies of "The Essence of Buddha Abhidhamma" might be needed? It is quite a good reference; quite readable (lots of examples), 450 pages, same structure as the Abhidhammatthasangaha but unlike the CMA it does not contain the Pali verses. Thanks, Rob M :-) --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Nina van Gorkom wrote: > Dear Rob M, > Please omit prompted and unprompted in your summary, these will confuse > people. The Expositor gives examples in conventional terms about different > ways objects present themselves. When you read on about the examples you > will see. When making a summary without examples, it may also confuse > others. Examples of experience through the bodysense of one element at a > time are given by the Expositor. This is ahetuka vipakacitta and is never > prompted or unprompted. This is only used in the classifications of > lobha-mula-citta, dosa-mula-citta and maha-kusala citta, maha- vipakacitta > and maha-kiriyacitta.Thus, it is not suitable to use the terms prompted and > unprompted in the context of object-condition. > The examples are not easy to understand, and maybe it would be better not to > use this passage in a summary. What do you think? > Nina. > > > op 27-10-2002 22:29 schreef robmoult op rob.moult@j...: > > > > Your book reads: > > ... the rupas which can be experienced through the senses become > > objects "by virtue of deliberate inclination" or "by virtue of > > inclusion". > > > > Is it correct for me to summarize this as: > > Rupas which can be sensed can become objects by virtue of deliberate > > inclination (prompted) or by virtue of intrusion (unprompted). 16510 From: Frank Kuan Date: Tue Oct 29, 2002 1:41pm Subject: early buddhism a modern invention? Any buddhist scholars want to confirm or comment on this article? http://www.nytimes.com/2002/10/26/national/26BELI.html 16511 From: Date: Tue Oct 29, 2002 3:40pm Subject: Way 18, Comm. "The Way of Mindfulness" by Soma Thera http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/bps/misc/wayof.html Commentary continued on: [why] four arousings of mindfulness [Tika] Drawing distinctions, it is said: Body and feeling are the cause of zest [assadassa karana]. For the rejection of that zest of body, by the dull-witted [manda] man of the craving type [tanhacarita], the seeing [dassana] of the ugly [asubha] in the body, the coarse object [olarika arammana], which is the basis of craving [tanha vatthu], is convenient. To that type of man the contemplation on corporeality, the First Arousing of Mindfulness, is the Path to Purity [Visuddhi Magga]. For the abandoning of that zest, by the keen-witted [tikha] man of the craving type, the seeing of suffering in feeling, the subtle object [sukhuma arammana], which is the basis of craving, is convenient, and for him the contemplation on feeling, the Second Arousing of Mindfulness, is the Path to Purity. [T] For the dull-witted man of the theorizing type [ditthi carita] it is convenient to see consciousness [citta] in the fairly simple way it is set forth in this discourse, by way of impermanence [aniccata], and by way of such divisions as mind-with-lust [saragadi vasena], in order to reject the notion of permanence [nicca sañña] in regard to consciousness. Consciousness is a special condition [visesa karana] for the wrong view due to a basic belief in permanence [niccanti abhinivesa vatthutaya ditthiya]. The contemplation on consciousness, the Third Arousing of Mindfulness, is the Path to Purity of this type of man. [T] For the keen-witted man of the theorizing type it is convenient to see mental objects or things [dhamma], according to the manifold way set forth in this discourse, by way of perception, sense-impression and so forth [nivaranadi vasena], in order to reject the notion of a soul [atta sañña] in regard to mental things. Mental things are special conditions for the wrong view due to a basic belief in a soul [attanti abhinivesa vatthutaya ditthiya]. For this type of man the contemplation on mental objects, the Fourth Arousing of Mindfulness, is the Path to Purity. [T] Consciousness and mental objects constitute the outstanding conditions of theorizing. Consciousness is such a condition because it is a decisive factor in the belief in permanence. Mental objects are such conditions because these are decisive factors in the belief in a soul. [T] Consciousness and mental objects are decisive factors of craving as well as of theorizing. And body and feeling are decisive factors of theorizing as well as of craving. Yet to point out that which is stronger in body and feeling, namely, craving, and that which is stronger in consciousness and mental objects, namely, theorizing, distinctions have been drawn. [T] "Because he does not continue to stay in the coarse": The keen-witted man pursuing the path of quietude lays hold of the gross subject of meditation, but he does not stay in that. He lays hold of feeling, the subtle subject of meditation, by way of the factors of absorption [jhana] after attaining to and emerging from the absorption reached with the material body as subject. [T] Since the heart of the man pursuing the path of insight takes to the contemplation of subtle consciousness and mental object, these have been spoken of as the Path to Purity for the man, dull-witted or keen-witted, pursuing insight. 16512 From: Date: Tue Oct 29, 2002 4:35pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Way 18, Comm. Way 16: For the dull-witted man, pursuing quietude, the First Arousing of Mindfulness, body-contemplation, is the Path to Purity, by reason of the feasibility of getting at the mental reflex; for the keen-witted of this type, because he does not continue to stay in the coarse, the second Arousing of Mindfulness, the contemplation on feeling, is the Path to Purity. Way 18: [T] "Because he does not continue to stay in the coarse": The keen-witted man pursuing the path of quietude lays hold of the gross subject of meditation, but he does not stay in that. He lays hold of feeling, the subtle subject of meditation, by way of the factors of absorption [jhana] after attaining to and emerging from the absorption reached with the material body as subject. Hi all, I am taking this to mean for the dull or keen-witted man who wants to practice jhana, taking body or feeling as object of jhana is the path to purity. Is this saying that jhana using body or feeling as object qualifies as satipatthana but using a kasina, for example, does not? Or is it just an example of alternate uses of objects of satipatthana? Or what? Larry 16513 From: Date: Tue Oct 29, 2002 6:19pm Subject: Re: [dsg] early buddhism a modern invention? H Frank, I haven't read any of Lopez' books but it looks reasonable to me. I find sociological views to be a little depressing though. For a related book you might check out Michael Carrithers' "The Forest Monks Of Sri Lanka : An Anthropological And Historical Study". In it is a little bit of the story of the Island Hermitage. You'll probably only find it in a large library but I'm sure someday someone will write a fuller account of how it came to be founded by Ven ~Nanatiloka and attracted such outstanding scholar translators as Ven. ~Nanamoli, ~Nanaponika, and Bhikkhu Boddhi, three europeans and an american. I think there is another aspect of the dynamic reforming of Buddhism in Theravada by such as Mahasi Sayadow, S.N. Goenka, and possibly even A. Sujin. Also another book that will be written some day. Larry 16514 From: rjkjp1 Date: Tue Oct 29, 2002 6:44pm Subject: Re: [dsg]prompted, unprompted (also to Sarah) --- Dear Rob, I'll be looking fwd to a copy of that book. Thanks! Robert In dhammastudygroup@y..., "robmoult" wrote: > Hi Nina, > > I will delete the terms "prompted" and "unprompted". I see that they > are not appropriate. > > I am really enjoying summarizing your "24 Conditions" for my class > on Sunday. I agree that examples really help make things clearer. I > also find that similies are useful in understanding how the various > conditions work. Last year, Sayadaw U Silananda ran a ten day course > on Abhidhamma here in Malaysia. I missed it, but I got a copy of his > handouts. There are some interesting charts on the 24 conditions in > his handouts and one of them is a list of similies for each > condition (title of similie only, no explanation). Fortunately, I > found another book, "The Essence of Buddha Abhidhamma" by Dr. Mehm > Tin Mon, which gives all the similies. Our Abhidhamma class has > contributed to help reprint this book and Dr. Mehm Tin Mon himself > will be using this book to conduct a ten-evening Abhidhamma class > here in Malaysia from Nov 11 - 19 (I am trying to arrange my > schedule to be able to attend). > > Nina, do you have a copy of this book? If you are interested, I > could probably get one to you via Sarah / Jon / Christine (I am > hoping to meet with them in Hong Kong on Nov 27, before they fly to > Bangkok). > > Sarah, can you check with the other DSGrs who are going to Bangkok > and find out how many copies of "The Essence of Buddha Abhidhamma" > might be needed? It is quite a good reference; quite readable (lots > of examples), 450 pages, same structure as the Abhidhammatthasangaha > but unlike the CMA it does not contain the Pali verses. > > Thanks, > Rob M :-) > > --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Dear Rob M, > > Please omit prompted and unprompted in your summary, these will > confuse > > people. The Expositor gives examples in conventional terms about > different > > ways objects present themselves. When you read on about the > examples you > > will see. When making a summary without examples, it may also > confuse > > others. Examples of experience through the bodysense of one > element at a > > time are given by the Expositor. This is ahetuka vipakacitta and > is never > > prompted or unprompted. This is only used in the classifications of > > lobha-mula-citta, dosa-mula-citta and maha-kusala citta, maha- > vipakacitta > > and maha-kiriyacitta.Thus, it is not suitable to use the terms > prompted and > > unprompted in the context of object-condition. > > The examples are not easy to understand, and maybe it would be > better not to > > use this passage in a summary. What do you think? > > Nina. > > > > > > op 27-10-2002 22:29 schreef robmoult op rob.moult@j...: > > > > > > Your book reads: > > > ... the rupas which can be experienced through the senses become > > > objects "by virtue of deliberate inclination" or "by virtue of > > > inclusion". > > > > > > Is it correct for me to summarize this as: > > > Rupas which can be sensed can become objects by virtue of > deliberate > > > inclination (prompted) or by virtue of intrusion (unprompted). 16515 From: rahula_80 Date: Tue Oct 29, 2002 8:42pm Subject: Re: Vimuttattaa Hi, I think I am close to solving my problem on vimuttattaa. Vimuttattaa is vimutta + tta. The suffix -tta is added to vimutta. The suffix -tta is used to signify state or quality. The derivatives formed are in the neuter. See "An Elementary Pali Course" by Narada Thera - Lesson XXII (Taddhita - Nominal Derivatives) and "A Practical Grammar of the Pali Language" by Charles Duroiselle - Chapter 13 (Derivation). So, vimuttattaa is the ablative singular of vimuttatta. Therefore, vimuttattaa. But I still have a few questions. 1. So, are vimuttattamhaa and vimuttattasmaa the same as vimuttattaa? 2. See "No Inner Core" by Sayadaw Silananda http://www.buddha.per.sg/dharma01/anatta1.htm Chapter - Misunderstanding Anatta http://www.buddha.per.sg/dharma01/anatta6.htm It says: Another passage mistranslated by Coomaraswamy and Horner is one found : in Visuddhimagga: "buddhatta ... Buddho." They translate it as, "Buddha is awakened Self." But the correct translation of the Pali is, "He is the Buddha because he knows or he has known." The word buddhatta is not a compound so of buddha and atta, but one word, buddha, with the suffix - tta combined with the ablative case termination, a, which means `because of'. The word buddhatta therefore means `because of the state of being one who knows'. And in Pali-English and English-Pali Dictionary http://watthai.net/ratthapala/lexicon.html In English-Pali B http://watthai.net/ratthapala/english-paliB.html It says: because (adv.; conj.) yasmà...tasmà; yato...tato. Often expressed by the suffix -ttà; the word annexed to it is preceeded by Genitive, e.g. tassa gatattà, because he has gone. My question are: 1. Can anyone explain what is the connection between "ablative case termination" and "because of"? 2. If it is the ablative, shouldn't "...vimuttattaa .thitattaa.m....." be translated as "From freed, it is stable......" 3. So, when we add the suffix -ttaa (ablative singular of -tta), do we use "because of" for it? Rahula 16516 From: Sarah Date: Wed Oct 30, 2002 0:09am Subject: Re: Ugliness (Re: [dsg] Way 17, Comm) Hi Howard, It seems like a long time since we’ve ‘touched base’. ..... --- upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, Larry - > > As part of the following there is: "The body is ugly. There are > people > led astray by the illusion that it is a thing of beauty. In order to > show > such people the ugliness of the body and to make them give up their > wrong > idea, the First Arousing of > Mindfulness is taught." > As far as I'm concerned, saying that the body is ugly is > nonsense. ..... Taking what is impure or ugly (asubha) for being pure or beautiful is one of the 4 perversions or distortions(vipallasa) of mind, perception and view,(the others being the taking for permanent what is impermanent, taking for pleasant what is suffering and taking for self what is without self). How can the rupas which make up the body and which decay and rot at each moment, be considered beautiful? I quoted the following sutta before from B.Bodhi’s translation of ‘Distortions of Perception’, AN, 1V, 61 with useful reminders of how ‘mentally deranged’ we are: ..... “Those who perceive the changeful to be permanent, Suffering as bliss, a self in the selfless, And who see in the foul the mark of beauty - Such folk resort to distorted views, mentally deranged, subject to illusions. Caught by Mara, not free from bonds, They are still far from the secure state. Such beings wander through the painful round And go repeatedly from birth to death. But when the Buddhas appear in the world, The makers of light in a mass of darkness, They reveal this Teaching,the noble Dhamma, That leads to the end of suffering. When people with wisdom listen to them, They at last regain their sanity. They see the impermanent as impermanent, And they see suffering just as suffering. They see the selfless as void of self, And in the foul they see the foul. By this acceptance of right view, They overcome all suffering.” ***** >It > may, under some circumstances be seen as ugly, and under other > circumstances > as lovely. This is all in the mind. The reality is that the body is just > so. > It is as it is. It is a conceptual composite of dhammas, of mutliple > experienced phenomena. Pointing out that there is decay in the body, > that > there are fluids that may not seem pleasant, that there are odors that > are > experienced as unpleasant - all that, is merely corrective skillful > means to > lessen our tendency to crave the body, to cling to it, to adore it. But > the > body is not objectively ugly, and aversion is no better than craving. ..... By body, I understand the various rupas which make up what we take for a body to be referred to - each of which should be understood without any perversion of view or perception. “It is as it is”, i.e impure or ugly, impermanent, unsatisfactory and anatta. Understanding phenomena in such a way has to be accompanied by detachment, not attachment or aversion. As you suggest, aversion is just the flip-side of attachment and still accompanied by ignorance. Good to hear from you, Howard and wishing you well with any trials and tribulations from a sympathizer;-) Sarah ====== 16517 From: Sarah Date: Wed Oct 30, 2002 0:22am Subject: Re: [dsg] "paramis are not lost through parinibbana" Dear Antony, I don’t believe anyone replied to your important question here:\ --- Antony Woods wrote: > >Dear dsg, > > I had the thought: > "paramis are not lost through parinibbana" > Any comments? > > I got the idea from the following sutta quote: > > So Ven. Ananda & Cunda the novice went to the Blessed One and, on > arrival, > having bowed down to him, sat to one side. As they were sitting there, > Ven. > Ananda said to him, "Lord, just now Cunda the novice said to me, > 'Venerable > sir, Ven. Sariputta has attained total Unbinding. Here are his bowl & > robes.' It was as if my body were drugged, I lost my bearings, things > weren't clear to me, on hearing that Ven. Sariputta had attained total > Unbinding." > > "But, Ananda, when he attained total Unbinding, did Sariputta take the > aggregate of virtue along with him? Did he take the aggregate of > concentration... discernment... release... the aggregate of knowledge & > vision of release along with him?" > > "No, lord, when he attained total Unbinding, Ven. Sariputta didn't take > the > aggregate of virtue... concentration... discernment... release... the > aggregate of knowledge & vision of release along with him." > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/samyutta/sn47-013.html ***** Parinibbana is the total cessation of all the aggregates or formations. There are no conditions for rebirth at all. See the following extract from Nyantiloka’s dictionary at: http://www.palikanon.com/english/wtb/dic3_n.htm “The 2 aspects of Nibbána are: (1) The full extinction of defilements (kilesa-parinibbána), also called sa-upádi-sesa-nibbána (s. It. 41), i.e. 'Nibbána with the groups of existence still remaining' (s. upádi). This takes place at the attainment of Arahatship, or perfect holiness (s. ariya-puggala). (2) The full extinction of the groups of existence (khandha-parinibbána), also called an-upádi-sesa-nibbána (s. It. 41, A. IV, 118), i.e. 'Nibbána without the groups remaining', in other words, the coming to rest, or rather the 'no-more-continuing' of this physico-mental process of existence. This takes place at the death of the Arahat. - (App.: Nibbána). Sometimes both aspects take place at one and the same moment, i.e. at the death of the Arahat; s. sama-sísí. "This, o monks, truly is the peace, this is the highest, namely the end of all formations, the forsaking of every substratum of rebirth, the fading away of craving, detachment, extinction, Nibbána" (A. III, 32).” ***** Antony, hope this helps and apologies for the delayed response.;-) Let us know if you have further questions about this (or anything else). Sarah ====== 16518 From: Sarah Date: Wed Oct 30, 2002 0:39am Subject: Re: [dsg] ekayana Hi Larry, I haven't seen R.Gethin's account that you and B.Bodhi refer to: --- LBIDD@w... wrote: > Hi all, > > I read Rupert Gethin's account of ekayana magga in "The Buddhist Path to > Awakening" and one point that we missed is concerning the "single, not > double" remark in the commentary. This refers to a forked path and its > attendant doubt. ..... I have a doubt about this comment, however.... (no surprise, I hear you say) I understood the 'single, not double' remark to be referring to lokiya only, not lokiya and lokuttara cittas.....no doubt involved. ..... >Satipattthana overcomes doubt and leads to the end of > doubt because it is a single path (ekayana). .... It's true that it overcomes doubt. It's also true that at moments of satipatthana there is no doubt. .... >Gethin ties this in with > the 'doubt' concerning whether this instruction is a mixed path (lokya > and lokuttara). His point being because there was doubt that was further > evidence that this is a lokiya (mundane) path. ..... I understand the point, but I think he is reading something into the text and commentary that isn't there. Interesting speculation though... Just my two cents' worth on this too;-). Sarah ====== 16519 From: Sarah Date: Wed Oct 30, 2002 0:56am Subject: Re: [dsg] Way 14, Comm. Hi Larry, --- LBIDD@w... wrote: > The Blessed One replied to him as follows: > Besides the wakening factors of the truth, Besides the virtues of the > holy state, > Besides restraint and relinquishment full, I see nothing that can bless > living beings.[14] > > 14. Samyutta Nikaya i, p.54. P.T.S. Edition > > Hi all, > > Does anyone know if this sutta is on-line? Also, what does it mean? .... Our PTS SN went to Rob K in Japan when we bought the B.Bodhi translation, so I can't find it easily to check elsewhere or find on-line(and Rob's not in Japan now). However, what I understand (with no Pali help either) is this: There is nothing else which can overcome suffering Except the development of understanding of the nature of the truth of phenomena In addition to the virtues and sense door restraint, accompanied by the wisdom of the noble states And the total abandonment of attachment, following the Way of Satipatthana. ***** We may think we have no fear and dread of death like Subrahma has. However, while there is clinging to self, there is bound to be fear and dread in various ways to what is occurring or what will occur in future to oneself or those one holds dear. Any comments? Sarah ======= 16520 From: Sarah Date: Wed Oct 30, 2002 1:37am Subject: Re: [dsg] "in Arahatship" Dear Num (& NIna). Thank you for all the very helpful details on ayatana. Your comments all make good sense and Nina’s qu and the point you explained about eyebase being condition for the whole eye-door process, even though it is only doorway for seeing, is the same as I recall from our discussions on these points before with K.Sujin. (Of course, you’ve explained much clearer and in far more detail, thank you). I found your summary below really interesting, especially the point about how rupas (only subtle rupas) being dhammayatana, as only these are present objects in the mind-door process.Even if visible object, for example, is known in the mind-door process, strictly speaking it has already fallen away..... I need to re-read your posts on this topic and all your posts on PTSm very carefully when I have time. (New or confused DSGers may like to check ‘Ayatanas’first in Useful Posts at: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/files/ or in N’s dictionary: http://www.palikanon.com/english/wtb/dic_idx.html) --- sinsk@m... wrote: > ************************ > For the mind-door process: > When the mind-door process is having panntti (concept) as its object: > there are 2 > ayatana (manayatana and dhammayatana). Concept is not an ayatana. > > When the mind-door process is having rupa as its object continues from > the five- > door process: there are 2 ayatanas (manayatana and dhammayatana). The > rupa is > a past object b/c it has completely away with the sense-door process > citta. It’s not > a present object, so cannot be counted as ayatana. > > In a person who can have subtle rupa as his/her object (the subtle rupa > can be > known only through the mind-door). There still only 2 ayatanas but it is > somewhat > different. The cittas in a mind-door process are manayatana, their > accompanies > cetasikas are dhammayatana, and the subtle is also a dhammayatana, b/c > it is a > present object during the mind-door process. So there are 2 different > realities > under the dhammayatana. > > When the mind-door process is having nibbana as its object. There are 2 > ayatanas, and the reason is the same as when the cittas in the mind-door > process > have a subtle rupa as its object. ***** It’s not an easy topic and I’ve seen errors in dictionaries and texts understandably....very deep, but quite important I think. ***** Your summary of the 21 objects discussed in the Way corner was also very clear and helpful for me. You wrote: ***** In abhidhammathahasangaha 21 objects of satipatthana 1) Breathing 2) Modes of deportment (7) 3) Clear comprehension (4) 4) Repulsiveness of the body (32) 5) Major dhatus (4) 6)-14) nine cemetery contemplation 15) Feelings (9 sections in here, all can be categorized into vedana cetasika) 16) Consciousness (16 sections in here, all can be categorized under citta) 17) Hindrances (5) 18) Aggregates (5) 19) Ayatanas (12) 20) Factors of enlightenment (7) 21) Truths (4) 1st-14th: kayanupassanasatipatthana 15th: vedananupassanasatipatthana 16th: cittanupassanasatipatthana 17th-21st: dhammanupassanasatipatthana ***** > I think Robert can give some more detail. (Robert, may I ask you to > make a post > on samasaananana?) > > Have to run. ..... One of you may have to at least give us a clue;-) Appreciate Num and look forward to more of your helpful comments here and in person soon. Have to run too;-) Sarah ===== 16521 From: Sarah Date: Wed Oct 30, 2002 1:50am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Way 17, Comm- Rob Ep Hi Rob Ep, In real brief;-) --- Robert Epstein wrote: > Again, it would seem to me, perhaps ignorantly, that the arousing of > mindfulness cannot have the purpose of seeing the negative qualities of > the objects of mindfulness, but to see them 'as they are'. One cannot > merely see them 'as they are' and also see them as objects of distaste > at the same time. .... Exactly as I understand too, in that there is a difference in seeing them 'as they are' with eventually the characteristics as discussed, and in having distaste or aversion for the nature of these phenomena. (BTW, Larry, I don't understand the tri-lakkhana or any of the characteristics of realities to be concepts....Certainly now, in ignorance, yes, but not to developed panna which discerns the true nature/characteristics.) ..... > > Moreover it seems to me that the illusions one would be seeing and > 'casting out' are objects of 'aversion'. Is it good to promote > aversion? I understand that aversion is merely the opposite side of > the coin of attachment. If this is the case, it would be better to > practice pure mindfulness that sees things 'in their pure immediacy' > without any appelations, either good or bad, since such appelations are > undoubtedly bound to be concepts. And mindfulness reveals the > actuality of the object in the moment, not merely another version of > its conceptual formation. .... I think we're agreed....(watch out, you may be accused of being stubborn or defensive at this rate, Rob;-)) ..... > When mindfulness is present, then > knowledge of the object and not illusion must also be present, and > there can be no delusion about what is perceived in that moment. > > Interested if you think I am off the mark here. .... Larry's a pretty tough cookie to pass, but imho this is spot on. No delusion and no doubt at moments of mindfulness and knowledge, though as Jon and Nina were discussing recently, it can be so brief and slight in the beginning, that there is bound to be delusion and doubt at other times. Always good to hear from you and always appreciate your 'good cheer'. I think this quality helps a lot. Sarah ====== 16522 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Wed Oct 30, 2002 3:28am Subject: Re: [dsg] Way 18, Comm. Larry An interesting but complex passage (like so many in the Satipatthana Sutta and commentaries). In general terms, the sutta doesn't address the development of samatha as such, and I wouldn't read this passage as suggesting about the practice of samatha. To my reading, it refers to and is directed to a person who has already developed jhana, based on any subject whatsoever (this is how I understand the expression 'person pursuing quietude' in the context), and who is also skilled in the development of satipatthana. Jon --- LBIDD@w... wrote: << Way 16: For the dull-witted man, pursuing quietude, the First Arousing of Mindfulness, body-contemplation, is the Path to Purity, by reason of the feasibility of getting at the mental reflex; for the keen-witted of this type, because he does not continue to stay in the coarse, the second Arousing of Mindfulness, the contemplation on feeling, is the Path to Purity. Way 18: [T] "Because he does not continue to stay in the coarse": The keen-witted man pursuing the path of quietude lays hold of the gross subject of meditation, but he does not stay in that. He lays hold of feeling, the subtle subject of meditation, by way of the factors of absorption [jhana] after attaining to and emerging from the absorption reached with the material body as subject. Hi all, I am taking this to mean for the dull or keen-witted man who wants to practice jhana, taking body or feeling as object of jhana is the path to purity. Is this saying that jhana using body or feeling as object qualifies as satipatthana but using a kasina, for example, does not? Or is it just an example of alternate uses of objects of satipatthana? Or what? Larry >> 16523 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Wed Oct 30, 2002 2:55am Subject: Re: [dsg] temperaments Larry I'm appreciating all the discussion that your 'Way' posts are generating. And thanks for the additional comments that you bring up, too. --- LBIDD@w... wrote: > Hi Nina, > > I think the selecting of an object can be very useful. Even > the Kuru washer women would ask, "which arousing of mindfulness do > you cultivate, dearie". Hmm. Are you suggesting that the notion of selecting an object is something you find spelt out (or inferred) in the Satipatthana Sutta or its commentaries? If so, I'd be interested to know which part that is. > The way of it used to be that a person would go to a preceptor and ask > him or her which one to cultivate but the preceptors have ended up > telling everyone the same thing; practice anapanasati. I'm wondering if you're not confusing object of samatha development with object of vipassana development. I do not recall in the texts any reference to monks asking their teachers for objects of vipassana development (but this is sometimes mentioned in the context of samatha). Jon > I do agree that > we should practice all 4 and I think the Anapanasati Sutta tells how to > do that with the breath. I also think Howard's idea of an evolutionary > path is valid. As Jim demonstrated in the thread on "in Arahatship, in > 21 places" it seems rasonable that each of the 21 practices in > satipatthana leads [eventually] to arahantship. However as mindfulness > of dhammas would appear to be necessary to reach the sotapanna path > moment, because mindfulness of dhammas eradicates belief in a self and > the end of sakkayaditthi occurs at that stage (sotapanna), so, somehow > one has to get from the first foundation to the fourth. However, that is > not to say that "Body" is only for beginners. I think attachment to body > is deeper than belief in a 'self', which is, after all, a mere concept. > But there is a lot to consider here so I'm still studying it. > Larry 16524 From: Date: Wed Oct 30, 2002 3:08am Subject: Re: Ugliness (Re: [dsg] Way 17, Comm) Hi, Sarah - In a message dated 10/30/02 3:10:23 AM Eastern Standard Time, sarahdhhk@y... writes: > > Hi Howard, > > It seems like a long time since we’ve ‘touched base’. > -------------------------------------------- Howard: Yes. -------------------------------------------- > ..... > --- upasaka@a... wrote: >Hi, Larry - > > > > As part of the following there is: "The body is ugly. There are > >people > >led astray by the illusion that it is a thing of beauty. In order to > >show > >such people the ugliness of the body and to make them give up their > >wrong > >idea, the First Arousing of > >Mindfulness is taught." > > As far as I'm concerned, saying that the body is ugly is > >nonsense. > ..... > Taking what is impure or ugly (asubha) for being pure or beautiful is one > of the 4 perversions or distortions(vipallasa) of mind, perception and > view,(the others being the taking for permanent what is impermanent, > taking for pleasant what is suffering and taking for self what is without > self). > > How can the rupas which make up the body and which decay and rot at each > moment, be considered beautiful? > ------------------------------------------ Howard: The body, in and of itself, is neither beautiful nor ugly in the sense of good or bad. It is just what it is - unless we cling to it as being a certain way. Generally, what we find physically beautiful in a human or animal body is, when not just culturally determined, probably closely tied to our recognition of that body being vital, fuctioning properly, in good health, and suited to its function. [This last part of "suited to its function" also applies to things other than bodies"] And the opposite is generally true with regard to finding a body to be ugly. It is only here that there lies some objectivity to beauty and ugliness. There is nothing wrong with decay, change, impermanence - unless we cling to a momentary state. All conditioned dhammas fail to remain. There is no problem with that except for our craving for things to be otherwise. As I see it, the closer to being enlightened (or the more one is enlightened), the more delight - free and easy delight - will be taken in all dhammas. But this delight will be a universal, nondiscriminative one. For when a healthy, vital, well functioning body is seen, at the very same time it will be known that it is impermanent and subject to decay and death; so even the "beautiful" is "ugly". One problem is that the words 'beautiful' and 'ugly' are judgemental and carry the connotations of craving and aversion. ------------------------------------------------------ > > I quoted the following sutta before from B.Bodhi’s translation of > ‘Distortions of > Perception’, AN, 1V, 61 with useful reminders of how ‘mentally deranged’ > we > are: > ..... > “Those who perceive the changeful to be permanent, > Suffering as bliss, a self in the selfless, > And who see in the foul the mark of beauty - > Such folk resort to distorted views, > mentally deranged, subject to illusions. > Caught by Mara, not free from bonds, > They are still far from the secure state. > Such beings wander through the painful round > And go repeatedly from birth to death. > But when the Buddhas appear in the world, > The makers of light in a mass of darkness, > They reveal this Teaching,the noble Dhamma, > That leads to the end of suffering. > When people with wisdom listen to them, > They at last regain their sanity. > They see the impermanent as impermanent, > And they see suffering just as suffering. > They see the selfless as void of self, > And in the foul they see the foul. > By this acceptance of right view, > They overcome all suffering.â€? > ***** > >It > >may, under some circumstances be seen as ugly, and under other > >circumstances > >as lovely. This is all in the mind. The reality is that the body is just > >so. > >It is as it is. It is a conceptual composite of dhammas, of mutliple > >experienced phenomena. Pointing out that there is decay in the body, > >that > >there are fluids that may not seem pleasant, that there are odors that > >are > >experienced as unpleasant - all that, is merely corrective skillful > >means to > >lessen our tendency to crave the body, to cling to it, to adore it. But > >the > >body is not objectively ugly, and aversion is no better than craving. > ..... > By body, I understand the various rupas which make up what we take for a > body to be referred to - each of which should be understood without any > perversion of view or perception. “It is as it isâ€?, i.e impure or ugly, > impermanent, unsatisfactory and anatta. Understanding phenomena in such a > way has to be accompanied by detachment, not attachment or aversion. As > you suggest, aversion is just the flip-side of attachment and still > accompanied by ignorance. > ---------------------------------------------- Howard: We basically agree here. I just have reservations with regard to the associations usually made with 'beauty' and 'ugliness'. ---------------------------------------------- > > Good to hear from you, Howard and wishing you well with any trials and > tribulations from a sympathizer;-) > --------------------------------------------- Howard: Thanks! ;-) --------------------------------------------- > > 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) 16525 From: Date: Wed Oct 30, 2002 9:36am Subject: Re: [dsg] Way 14, Comm. Besides the wakening factors of the truth, Besides the virtues of the holy state, Besides restraint and relinquishment full, I see nothing that can bless living beings. Hi Sarah, I did find this at ATI here http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/bps/news/essay37.html When you say, "while there is clinging to self, there is bound to be fear and dread in various ways to what is occurring or what will occur in future to oneself or those one holds dear" I completely agree. And this is a nice summing up: "There is nothing else which can overcome suffering Except the development of understanding of the nature of the truth of phenomena In addition to the virtues and sense door restraint, accompanied by the wisdom of the noble states And the total abandonment of attachment, following the Way of Satipatthana." What I was fishing for is a little more commentary on awakening factors, virtues of the holy state, restraint and relinquishment. Just a sentence or two would be helpful. Thanks, Larry 16526 From: Date: Wed Oct 30, 2002 9:52am Subject: Re: [dsg] ekayana Hi Sarah, Concerning R. Gethin's remark on "single, not double" referring to a forked path and its attendant doubt, to me this has the 'flavor' of ancient commentary but he doesn't give any details. I understood it to mean something like there's no question of whether to take the short cut or the scenic route, or whether to take the high road or the low road. There's only one way (ekayana), satipatthana. I agree tying this into the question of whether it is a mixed path (lokiya/lokutarra) or not is a bit of a stretch and probably his own idea. But the overcoming doubt element is a good point that wasn't in this commentary. Larry 16527 From: Date: Wed Oct 30, 2002 10:15am Subject: Re: [dsg] Way 18, Comm. Way 16: For the dull-witted man, pursuing quietude, the First Arousing of Mindfulness, body-contemplation, is the Path to Purity, by reason of the feasibility of getting at the mental reflex; for the keen-witted of this type, because he does not continue to stay in the coarse, the second Arousing of Mindfulness, the contemplation on feeling, is the Path to Purity. Way 18: [T] "Because he does not continue to stay in the coarse": The keen-witted man pursuing the path of quietude lays hold of the gross subject of meditation, but he does not stay in that. He lays hold of feeling, the subtle subject of meditation, by way of the factors of absorption [jhana] after attaining to and emerging from the absorption reached with the material body as subject. Jon: "To my reading, it refers to and is directed to a person who has already developed jhana, based on any subject whatsoever (this is how I understand the expression 'person pursuing quietude' in the context), and who is also skilled in the development of satipatthana." Hi Jon, This is a good lead. So for the dull-witted jhana practitioner the satipatthana to practice is mindfulness of body and for the keen-witted jhana practitioner the satipatthana to practice is mindfulness of feeling. This fits in with the general theme of assigning satipatthanas to various types and adds another dimension: "body" or "feeling" are not just for dull or keen-witted sensualists, they are also for jhana practitioners. The satipatthanas are separated into samatha and vipassana, body and feeling being primarily focused on developing samatha and mind and dhammas being primarily focused on developing vipassana. However, I'm understanding the samatha here to be simply in the direction of restraint rather than jhana. But this is a gray area for me. Not sure how it works out. Also there is the idea that samatha and vipassana work together in satipatthana. So that is another factor to be worked out; but it hasn't come up in the commentary yet. Larry 16528 From: Date: Wed Oct 30, 2002 10:47am Subject: Re: [dsg] temperaments Hi Jon, I'm glad you revived this thread. I've been having second thoughts about what I said. Basically I don't really understand what A. Sujin is recommending. I've been looking through my books trying to find something on formless meditation but haven't found anything that really jives with her approach. Maybe we should postpone this part of the discussion until we get a little further into the commentary. The question that relates to where we are right now is what are we to do with these ways of understaning the 4 satipatthanas. Everyone is attached to the body, everyone desires pleasant feeling, everyone believes in permanence, everyone believes in a self. That is the problem. The 4 satipatthanas are the solution. What should we do? As for the question of selecting a practice based on one's 'type'. Traditionally it was the guru that did the selecting, not the student. But that seems like a minor point to me. Below is the excerpt in question. Larry -------------- But Sawong: The venerable Patriarch has some questions. If it is true that one cannot choose or select any object for the practice of satipatthåna, how do you explain that, as we read in the commentaries, objects are selected in accordance with a person¹s temperament or character, such as a greedy temperament (tanhå carita) or a speculative temperament (ditthi carita). Furthermore, some people have samatha as their vehicle, they have developed tranquillity and insight, and some have vipassanå as their vehicle, they have developed only vipassanå. In the Commentary to the Satipatthåna Sutta a city with four gates has been compared to nibbåna, and it has been explained that just as people can enter a city with four gates by anyone of these gates, one can attain enlightenment by means of anyone of the four applications of mindfulness, mindfulness of the body, of feeling, of citta and of dhammas. How do we have to understand this? Sujin: Usually when people read in the scriptures about these subjects they desire to know more about this, or they desire to act in a particular way. When they hear about different temperaments, such as a person of an intelligent temperament, a ruminating temperament, or a hateful temperament, they think of themselves as having such or such temperament and they choose a particular way of development which suits their character. However, in reality this subject of the Dhamma has been taught so that it is a condition for the arising of paññå that knows the truth. Only when one develops satipatthåna, paññå can arise and then a person can know what character or temperament he has. Without the development of satipatthåna he does not know realities and he can only guess what kind of temperament he has. There are qualities such as attachment, aversion, ignorance, and also paññå, understanding of the Dhamma. What temperament do we have? This is only thinking and guessing. Everybody has these dhammas. Only when paññå arises and sati is aware we can know the truth about the different characters of each individual, we can know how our accumulated inclinations are the condition for our own temperament. Someone may guess about his temperament and he may believe that he should develop a particular object among the four Applications of Mindfulness. He hopes to obtain a result by this way of practice. However, this is not the right condition for knowing the truth of non-self of realities; it is not the way to know all realities thoroughly. Someone may select an object and fix his attention on that object since he believes that he has such or such temperament and that he should therefore develop this particular Application of Mindfulness. At that moment he neglects awareness of all the objects he is used to taking for self. Of what temperament is a person when attachment arises, when aversion arises or when ignorance arises? All these realities are non-self, anattå. Therefore, the wrong view of self cannot be eradicated by selecting an object someone believes is suitable for his temperament. It is true that in the development of samatha the object of meditation is selected in accordance with someone¹s character. By the development of samatha defilements are subdued so that calm increases. However, the development of vipassanå is different from the development of samatha and it has a different aim, namely, the eradication of ignorance. Ignorance of realities conditions the wrong view which takes realities for self. Therefore, in the development of satipatthåna there should not be any selection of objects of understanding. In the ³Path of Discrimination²(Treatise I on Knowledge, Ch 1, Section 1, All), it has been said: ³Bhikkhus, all is to be directly known. And what is all that is to be directly known? Eye is to be directly known, visible object is to be directly known, eye-consciousness... eye-contact... any feeling that arises with eye-contact as its condition whether pleasant or painful or neither-painful-nor-pleasant is also to be directly known...² Further on all realities are summed up and it is said that all of them should be known thoroughly, not any reality is excepted.>End quote. 16529 From: azita gill Date: Wed Oct 30, 2002 5:38pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Way 14, Comm. heavy going --- Sarah wrote: > Hi Larry, > [snip] > > We may think we have no fear and dread of death like > Subrahma has. > However, while there is clinging to self, there is > bound to be fear and > dread in various ways to what is occurring or what > will occur in future to > oneself or those one holds dear. > > Any comments? > > Sarah > ======= > Yes, I want to comment on this. I feel more uncertain and insecure the more I learn. I see friends, workmates, family, running around seemingly having a 'good time', getting on with their lives, so to speak, whereas I seem to have lost interest and some sort of 'spontaneous joy' about everyday things. Unpleasant feeling, got to be dosa, but it does 'get me down' sometimes. I don't visit friends much anymore, cos I think they just talk s..t [excuse me, but I'm telling it like it is - for me]. And maybe today's just a bad day!!!! > Have been trying to keep up with some of the recent posts, but have found them heavy going and very wordy. re-reading what I've just written has made me feel like a 'whinger', not a good thing if you're Aussie! > On a more positive note, I must comment on a book I'm reading 'The Great Chronicle of Buddhas' by Ven.Mingun Sayadaw, a Burmese monk, now deceased. This pub. has given me a much better idea of how great the Buddhas really are. How extremely hard a Boddisatva has to work to become a Buddha, how immesurably long it takes. > May you all be happy, > Azita 16530 From: James Date: Wed Oct 30, 2002 7:30pm Subject: Rupa Has Dukkha? Hello Friends, I have begun reading "Abhidhamma in daily life" to learn about the Abhidhamma, of which I am quite ignorant, and I have a question. I was told this was the group to post this question. The first chapter states that all conditioned dhammas (Nama and Rupa) have the characteristics of dukkha and anatta, "All conditioned dhammas: citta, cetasika and rupa, are impermanent (anicca). All conditioned dhammas are 'dukkha' since they are impermanent. All dhammas are anatta, not-self " But it states prior to this, "Seeing is, for example, a type of nama; it experiences visible object. Visible object itself is rupa; it does not experience anything." My question is: If rupa doesn't experience anything, how can it have the characteristic of dukkha? I thought that dukkha was a component of the mind…suffering or stress. Is this a different type of dukkha found in rupa? I don't understand how impermanence equals dukkha in an inanimate object. For example, in Spanish, objects are given either the qualities of masculine or feminine. But we know that a book is not really `feminine', nor is a door `masculine'. So how can a book have the characteristic of dukkha (suffering) or a door the characteristic of dukkha (suffering)? I won't even begin to ask about anatta because that is a really confusing aspect when applied to material objects. First I want to understand dukkha and maybe I can then tackle anatta in rupa objects. Does anyone have any input on this question? I feel that I must understand this basic aspect before I delve further into the Abhidhamma. Thank you in advance for any help offered. Metta, James ps. If it does turn out that rupa doesn't really have the characteristic of dukkha, does that mean the entire Abhidhamma is invalid? Or can this be overlooked? 16531 From: Frank Kuan Date: Wed Oct 30, 2002 7:52pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Rupa Has Dukkha? Hi James, Don't take dukkha so personally. Meaning, it's not "I" who suffers, or a "book" that suffers, or a "table" that suffers. It's just suffering. There is suffering, not "I am suffering". See the difference? It helps to think of dukkha, rather than *something or someone* suffering, as a characteristic of being unstable/imperfect/incapable of bringing happiness. No personal identity or personificaiton of an object that suffers needs to be attached. In fact, that's why whatever has the nature of dukkha also has the nature of anatta (not self). -fk --- James wrote: > Hello Friends, > I have begun reading "Abhidhamma in daily life" to > learn about the > Abhidhamma, of which I am quite ignorant, and I have > a question. I > was told this was the group to post this question. > The first chapter > states that all conditioned dhammas (Nama and Rupa) > have the > characteristics of dukkha and anatta, "All > conditioned dhammas: > citta, cetasika and rupa, are impermanent (anicca). > All conditioned > dhammas are 'dukkha' since they are impermanent. All > dhammas are > anatta, not-self " > > But it states prior to this, "Seeing is, for > example, a type of nama; > it experiences visible object. Visible object itself > is rupa; it does > not experience anything." My question is: If rupa > doesn't experience > anything, how can it have the characteristic of > dukkha? I thought > that dukkha was a component of the mind…suffering or > stress. Is this > a different type of dukkha found in rupa? I don't > understand how > impermanence equals dukkha in an inanimate object. > > For example, in Spanish, objects are given either > the qualities of > masculine or feminine. But we know that a book is > not > really `feminine', nor is a door `masculine'. So > how can a book have > the characteristic of dukkha (suffering) or a door > the characteristic > of dukkha (suffering)? I won't even begin to ask > about anatta > because that is a really confusing aspect when > applied to material > objects. First I want to understand dukkha and > maybe I can then > tackle anatta in rupa objects. > > Does anyone have any input on this question? I feel > that I must > understand this basic aspect before I delve further > into the > Abhidhamma. Thank you in advance for any help > offered. > > Metta, James > > ps. If it does turn out that rupa doesn't really > have the > characteristic of dukkha, does that mean the entire > Abhidhamma is > invalid? Or can this be overlooked? > 16532 From: James Date: Wed Oct 30, 2002 7:53pm Subject: Introduction Dear Friends, Oops, I posted a message and then I read the welcome letter to this group. It reads: Dear Dhamma Friend, Welcome to the group. We hope you will take part in and benefit from the exchange of views here. All new members are invited to consider posting a short `Hello'. Other members would be interested to know something about you, your interest in Buddhism and how you found your way here! Okay, this is my Hello to you all. About me: My name is James Mitchell; I live in Phoenix, Arizona, and I am an English/Speech/Debate High School Teacher. I am 33 and white. My Interest in Buddhism: I have been a Buddhist for 15 years or so. I would call myself a Zen Buddhist trapped in the body of a Theravada Buddhist. My outlook is pretty unique; I like to think about Buddhism in modern terms and how it applies to daily life; and I have been known to be a little shocking to inspire thought (but I won't do that here). I help to lead meditation retreats at my Buddhist temple and I once entertained the possibility of becoming a monk but decided against it. I have a rebellious streak that runs contrary to monasticism. How I Found my way here: I was a member of Dhamma List and this group was suggested as a place where I could learn about the Abihdhamma. I was suspended in DL for one week for outrageous, insulting posts and then I quit. I am reformed now and will not do that in this list. I know a lot about Buddhism but I have a lot to learn about life. I hope that this group will welcome me so that I may learn. With Metta, James 16533 From: ven.yanatharo.bikkhu Date: Wed Oct 30, 2002 8:54pm Subject: RE: [dsg] Introduction James, Everybody from DL list are here too. Venerable Yanatharo -----Mensaje original----- De: James [mailto:buddhatrue@y...] Enviado el: Jueves, Octubre 31, 2002 02:54 p.m. Para: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com Asunto: [dsg] Introduction Dear Friends, Oops, I posted a message and then I read the welcome letter to this group. It reads: Dear Dhamma Friend, Welcome to the group. We hope you will take part in and benefit from the exchange of views here. All new members are invited to consider posting a short `Hello'. Other members would be interested to know something about you, your interest in Buddhism and how you found your way here! Okay, this is my Hello to you all. About me: My name is James Mitchell; I live in Phoenix, Arizona, and I am an English/Speech/Debate High School Teacher. I am 33 and white. My Interest in Buddhism: I have been a Buddhist for 15 years or so. I would call myself a Zen Buddhist trapped in the body of a Theravada Buddhist. My outlook is pretty unique; I like to think about Buddhism in modern terms and how it applies to daily life; and I have been known to be a little shocking to inspire thought (but I won't do that here). I help to lead meditation retreats at my Buddhist temple and I once entertained the possibility of becoming a monk but decided against it. I have a rebellious streak that runs contrary to monasticism. How I Found my way here: I was a member of Dhamma List and this group was suggested as a place where I could learn about the Abihdhamma. I was suspended in DL for one week for outrageous, insulting posts and then I quit. I am reformed now and will not do that in this list. I know a lot about Buddhism but I have a lot to learn about life. I hope that this group will welcome me so that I may learn. With Metta, James 16534 From: Sarah Date: Wed Oct 30, 2002 9:41pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Introduction Dear James (& Frank), Welcome to DSG. We have another James lurking, but we’ll sort that out when hopefully we hear from him again. Thank you for giving us all the info about yourself. I’m interested and glad to hear about how you consider Buddhism in terms of applying to daily life and so on. I think we all find out a lot more about the Abhidhamma here and really about all aspects of the Teachings. We all have plenty to learn and I sincerely hope, James, that the shocking/rebellious/outrageous streak doesn’t interfere with this opportunity. (The moderators have the reputation of being pretty tough and mean when it comes to enforcing the guidelines here:-)). I’m sure you have plenty to share as well and this is evident in your first post. We can all benefit a lot from your keen interest. Btw, I think your first questions are really helpful and well-considered and we’ll be very happy to hear more. Nina will also be glad to read of your interest in ADL too. We all welcome different views and understandings too and I think you’ll find there is plenty of tolerance and good humour in this regard. Frank’s given a helpful response and you’ll be doing us all a favour if you encourage him to share more of his wisdom;-) That which is impermanent (nama or rupa) is inherently unsatisfactory =dukkha. For the three meanings of dukkha, at this link, scroll down to Useful Posts and then down to dukkha: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/files/ I think you’ll also find it interesting to read the past posts under anatta and other topics that come up as well. Please also note that we’ve also recently started looking at the commentaries to the Satipatthana Sutta under the ‘Way’ thread. Larry gives the link with each new extract. Anyone is welcome to join in. Best wishes, James. (You're also welcome to contact Jon or myself off-list anytime if you're about to say something outrageous or if it helps you to stay the course;-)) Sarah (p.s Frank: I tried following that other link you posted to the New York Times article, but took one look at the questionnaire one had to fill out first and ran away, I’m afraid.) ================================================== James wrote: >Okay, this is my Hello to you all. About me: My name is James Mitchell; I live in Phoenix, Arizona, and I am an English/Speech/Debate High School Teacher. I am 33 and white. My Interest in Buddhism: I have been a Buddhist for 15 years or so. I would call myself a Zen Buddhist trapped in the body of a Theravada Buddhist. My outlook is pretty unique; I like to think about >Buddhism in modern terms and how it applies to daily life; 16535 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Wed Oct 30, 2002 9:59pm Subject: RE: [dsg] Re: "Your duty is the contemplation" Dear Larry, I understand that you think the issue of realities / concepts is dead. I obviously want to rehash it because I (obviously) think knowing the differences is important. First, some random thoughts, just for you: 1) There are 3 tipitakas in the Theravadan tradition, comprising of approximately 45 volumes. Obviously, each of us probably will need to learn more to gain better understanding of the teachings of the Buddha. 2) There are immense amount of materials about realities, and their distinctions from concepts in the Abhidhamma. The Suttas (except from the commentaries) also have tons of materials on realities, except that they are often mixed in with concepts as well. Why do you think there are so much materials on realities? 3) The Buddha basically said we need to learn about the impermanence, suffering, and anattaness of all things, and invariably, the "things" are then referred to be khandhas. Khandhas are obviously not people, animals, or trees. They are, from classifications everywhere, realities, sacca dhammas. 4) For me, the different levels of wisdom are like, irrefutable (to oneself) proof that the Buddha are right about all these different realities. Irrefutable proof is when one directly experiences, with wisdom, the impermanence, the suffering, and the anattaness of all conditioned dhammas. If I can simply think about the realities, and infer that they are impermanent, suffering, and anatta, then this would be very convenient! Many of us would have been enlightened by now: I think about them everyday... 5) I can think of anger that arose yesterday, but yet, when I am thinking about it now, there is no anger. How could I directly know that anger is impermanent, suffering, and anatta? The only way to directly know anger is when I directly see it appear, and disappear, all because of the different conditions. 6) You may wonder if Satipatthana is all about realities, then why there are many concepts that are mentioned in the Satipatthana itself. But then, there are many answers, none of which may be satisfactory to you... Now, some comments about what you wrote. > -----Original Message----- > From: LBIDD@w... [mailto:LBIDD@w...] > Sent: Monday, October 28, 2002 5:37 PM > To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com > Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: "Your duty is the contemplation" > > > As for the debate on whether concepts are present > during satipatthana, I > think that is pretty much a dead issue. Although > others may disagree. > The intention behind saying concepts are not an > object of satipatthana > is meant to bring one into the present moment, > rather than lost in > thought. I completely agree with this but it also > seems obvious to me > that concepts are part of every citta process on > the level of mundane > experience. It is pretty clear from the Abhidhamma description that there are citta process that experiences realities and not concepts. But on the other hand, because of how fast the processes are, if you are aware of something, then you invariably think about them conceptually. > Beside that the object of jhana is a > concept and jhana is > an object of satipatthana There are arupa jhana where the aramanas are realities, and not concepts. > plus nibbana as part of > the 4 noble truths is > a concept when they are an object of satipatthana > because satipatthana > is a mundane path (pre-nibbana). Nibbana is only experienced by supra-mundane cittas. The 4 noble truths are truly penetrated by wisdom at the point of magga, because prior to that, nibbana as realities are simply unknown to the wisdom. The cittas can definitely have the concept of nibbana as the object, but then you know what my line about satipathanna and its object is... I think concepts can be object of kusala cittas, but to directly know things as impermanence, suffering, and anatta, nothing substitute realities that are just arising now... kom 16536 From: James Date: Wed Oct 30, 2002 10:10pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Rupa Has Dukkha? --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Frank Kuan wrote: > Hi James, > Don't take dukkha so personally. Meaning, it's not > "I" who suffers, or a "book" that suffers, or a > "table" that suffers. It's just suffering. There is > suffering, not "I am suffering". See the difference? (Sorry it took me a while to respond. I have been pondering this post and even called up some friends interested in Buddhism and we discussed it. Sadly, they seem to see the difference in what you are saying, but I do not. They concluded that it is because I take words too literally and that I need to look at what you are saying beneath the words. That this is a Zen-like statement that I don't get. And I thought I was very Zen! :-) Oh well, maybe it will come to me in a flash of insight. You see, the word 'suffering' is Present Progressive and means that an action is repeating continuously. I can see that a table can have the characteristics of: brown, solid, and cool. But I cannot see how a table would be: browning, solidifying, and cooling. Actually, the term 'suffering' used this way seems to defy the reality of impermanence. Suffering for humans is not a permanent feature; it changes, and can be escaped through nibbana. Is it possible for a table to achieve nibbana? Hehehe…j/k Just as when a window breaks it is breaking, but the breaking doesn't last very long. A window can't be breaking and breaking and breaking. I still don't see how a table could be suffering and suffering and suffering; even using this definition.) > It helps to think of dukkha, rather than *something or > someone* suffering, as a characteristic of being > unstable/imperfect/incapable of bringing happiness. (Okay, now here you seem to be saying that the characteristic of dukkha is conditional on the object because it cannot bring satisfaction…it only brings dissatisfaction or suffering. But in this case I am also confused but then how would the Buddha see the table? Would the table then lose its characteristic of dukkha because it wouldn't bring him any suffering. I thought this characteristic had to be absolute and not just conditional. Again, I am very confused) No personal identity or personificaiton of an object that > suffers needs to be attached. (I still think to say that an object 'suffers' is adding a quality of personification to that object. The very word is human-based. But, then again, I may be being too literal. I really do want to understand this subject. I hope that it doesn't sound like I am taking this too personally, but maybe I am. Apologies if that is the case.) In Pema, James In fact, that's why > whatever has the nature of dukkha also has the nature > of anatta (not self). > 16537 From: James Date: Wed Oct 30, 2002 10:25pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Introduction Sarah, Thank you for your kind welcome. I plan to be a good boy and not just write the first thing that pops into my head about subjects. That is what usually gets me into trouble. Thank you for your offer to help edit my posts to make them more politically correct and pleasing. If I have a post I think is questionable, I will send it to you first and you can edit it and post it/or not, as you see fit. I don't want or intend to cause problems here. I have learned from my past mistakes. I drove the moderators of DL to create new rules inspired by me, and then I broke those! :-( *tisk, tisk* I might as well tell you this now because I know you will be flooded with e- mails off-list about me. It's better if I fess up now than later! :-) I also appreciate your kind words about my post. The moderators of DL also considered my posts and participation valuable, or they would have not been so tolerant of me and would have bounced me out long ago. But I had to keep pushing the limits. Unfortunately, I have burned that bridge now and hope not to repeat that mistake again. I am also happy to see that you appreciate a sense of humor. I can almost guarantee that every post of mine will have at least one joke. I cannot help but think of jokes all the time. I am not being disrespectful of the dhamma when I do this; I am showing the joy I have in the dhamma that naturally comes flowing up to the surface. I would sing if I could about the dhamma, but I am not an 'American Idol' calibre singer ;-). Thank you and I feel very happy I discovered this group. With Pema, James --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Sarah wrote: > Dear James (& Frank), > > Welcome to DSG. We have another James lurking, but we'll sort that out > when hopefully we hear from him again. > > Thank you for giving us all the info about yourself. I'm interested and > glad to hear about how you consider Buddhism in terms of applying to daily > life and so on. > > I think we all find out a lot more about the Abhidhamma here and really > about all aspects of the Teachings. We all have plenty to learn and I > sincerely hope, James, that the shocking/rebellious/outrageous streak > doesn't interfere with this opportunity. (The moderators have the > reputation of being pretty tough and mean when it comes to enforcing the > guidelines here:-)). I'm sure you have plenty to share as well and this is > evident in your first post. We can all benefit a lot from your keen > interest. > > Btw, I think your first questions are really helpful and well- considered > and we'll be very happy to hear more. Nina will also be glad to read of > your interest in ADL too. We all welcome different views and > understandings too and I think you'll find there is plenty of tolerance > and good humour in this regard. > > Frank's given a helpful response and you'll be doing us all a favour if > you encourage him to share more of his wisdom;-) That which is impermanent > (nama or rupa) is inherently unsatisfactory =dukkha. > For the three meanings of dukkha, at this link, scroll down to Useful > Posts and then down to dukkha: > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/files/ > > I think you'll also find it interesting to read the past posts under > anatta and other topics that come up as well. > > Please also note that we've also recently started looking at the > commentaries to the Satipatthana Sutta under the `Way' thread. Larry gives > the link with each new extract. Anyone is welcome to join in. > > Best wishes, James. (You're also welcome to contact Jon or myself off-list > anytime if you're about to say something outrageous or if it helps you to > stay the course;-)) > > Sarah > (p.s Frank: I tried following that other link you posted to the New York > Times article, but took one look at the questionnaire one had to fill out > first and ran away, I'm afraid.) > ================================================== > > James wrote: > >Okay, this is my Hello to you all. About me: My name is James > Mitchell; I live in Phoenix, Arizona, and I am an > English/Speech/Debate High School Teacher. I am 33 and white. > > My Interest in Buddhism: I have been a Buddhist for 15 years or so. > I would call myself a Zen Buddhist trapped in the body of a Theravada > Buddhist. My outlook is pretty unique; I like to think about > >Buddhism in modern terms and how it applies to daily life; > > 16538 From: Sarah Date: Wed Oct 30, 2002 10:57pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Way 14, Comm. Hi Larry, --- LBIDD@w... wrote: > Besides the wakening factors of the truth, Besides the virtues of the > holy state, > Besides restraint and relinquishment full, I see nothing that can bless > living beings. > > > Hi Sarah, > > I did find this at ATI here > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/bps/news/essay37.html .... I think we’re getting somewhere now with some good team-work. I had read the essay before when you posted it (and like Azita, found it beautifully written). This time I’ve been able to locate the verses in B.Bodhi’s translation of Samyutta Nikayya under Devaputtasamyutta, p.149 where he gives this translation: “Not apart from enlightenment and austerity, Not apart from restraint of the sense faculties, Not apart from relinquishing all, Do I see any safety for living beings.” ***** Fortunately, he also adds some detailed commentary notes to the verse under note 168, p.390, so I’ll just add one or two as I understand from the notes here: > What I was fishing for is a little more commentary on awakening factors, > virtues of the holy state, restraint and relinquishment. Just a sentence > or two would be helpful .... 1.awakening factors:bojjhanga - enlightenment factors 2.virtues of the holy state: tapa - ascetic practices of the bhikkhu nec. for jhana realizations 3. restraint and relinquishment: sense-restraint, i.e purification of virtue and sabbanissagga (relinquishing all)-”everything comprised in formations is relinquished” ***** There is more helpful detail too (but that would run to more than 2 sentences;-).I’m very grateful to you, Larry, for encouraging us all to dig out these details, and not settling for less than the exact notes and references. Sarah ===== 16539 From: robmoult Date: Wed Oct 30, 2002 11:39pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Rupa Has Dukkha? Hi James, Let me see if I can help. Abhidhamma discussions tend to use a lot of Pali words. This is because in the Abhidhamma, words have very specific technial meanings and using common English would lead to confusion. "Dukkha" is an excellent example. "Dukkha" is often translated as "suffering", but this is only one way of looking at "dukkha". I recently read a translation where "dukkha" was translated as "stress" and it opened up new doors of understanding to see "dukkha" in this light (at least it did for me). Another translation of "dukkha", one that is more easily associated with rupa, is "unsatisfactoriness". Why is rupa unsatisfactory? Because it is impermanent (anicca). Do you remember the first "Crocodile Dundee"? There are a lot of Aussies on this list, so I thought that I would throw this in :-). There was a scene where Mick talked about the Aboriginal view of the land, "It was here long before we were and will be here long after we are gone. How can anybody talk about owning it?" As an English teacher, you can probably help me; isn't "suffering" a gerund (can work as a verb or a noun)? Perhaps it helps to think of "dukkha" as a characteristic (noun), not as a verb. How would a Buddha perceive a table? Here is my understanding (it is a bit complex). A Buddha would know (wise attention / yoniso manisakara) that there was a visible object impinging on the eye- sense. He would know that multiple impingements had taken place and that form was constrcted as a concept. He would know that his mind had attached the label "table" to this form. Where does "dukkha" fit in? A Buddha would know that the characteristic of the visible object (rupa) is unsatisfactoriness. James, does this help or are you even more confused? Metta, Rob M:-) --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "James" wrote: > --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Frank Kuan wrote: > > Hi James, > > Don't take dukkha so personally. Meaning, it's not > > "I" who suffers, or a "book" that suffers, or a > > "table" that suffers. It's just suffering. There is > > suffering, not "I am suffering". See the difference? > (Sorry it took me a while to respond. I have been pondering this > post and even called up some friends interested in Buddhism and we > discussed it. Sadly, they seem to see the difference in what you are > saying, but I do not. They concluded that it is because I take words > too literally and that I need to look at what you are saying beneath > the words. That this is a Zen-like statement that I don't get. And > I thought I was very Zen! :-) Oh well, maybe it will come to me in a > flash of insight. You see, the word 'suffering' is Present > Progressive and means that an action is repeating continuously. I > can see that a table can have the characteristics of: brown, solid, > and cool. But I cannot see how a table would be: browning, > solidifying, and cooling. Actually, the term 'suffering' used this > way seems to defy the reality of impermanence. Suffering for humans > is not a permanent feature; it changes, and can be escaped through > nibbana. Is it possible for a table to achieve nibbana? Hehehe… j/k > Just as when a window breaks it is breaking, but the breaking doesn't > last very long. A window can't be breaking and breaking and > breaking. I still don't see how a table could be suffering and > suffering and suffering; even using this definition.) > > It helps to think of dukkha, rather than *something or > > someone* suffering, as a characteristic of being > > unstable/imperfect/incapable of bringing happiness. > (Okay, now here you seem to be saying that the characteristic of > dukkha is conditional on the object because it cannot bring > satisfaction…it only brings dissatisfaction or suffering. But in > this case I am also confused but then how would the Buddha see the > table? Would the table then lose its characteristic of dukkha > because it wouldn't bring him any suffering. I thought this > characteristic had to be absolute and not just conditional. Again, I > am very confused) > No personal identity or personificaiton of an object that > > suffers needs to be attached. > (I still think to say that an object 'suffers' is adding a quality of > personification to that object. The very word is human-based. But, > then again, I may be being too literal. I really do want to > understand this subject. I hope that it doesn't sound like I am > taking this too personally, but maybe I am. Apologies if that is the > case.) > > In Pema, James > > In fact, that's why > > whatever has the nature of dukkha also has the nature > > of anatta (not self). > > 16540 From: robmoult Date: Wed Oct 30, 2002 11:47pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Rupa Has Dukkha? Hi James, I re-read my message and wanted to insert a clarification. --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "robmoult" wrote: > Hi James, > > Let me see if I can help. > > Abhidhamma discussions tend to use a lot of Pali words. This is > because in the Abhidhamma, words have very specific technial > meanings and using common English would lead to confusion. > > "Dukkha" is an excellent example. "Dukkha" is often translated > as "suffering", but this is only one way of looking at "dukkha". I > recently read a translation where "dukkha" was translated > as "stress" and it opened up new doors of understanding to > see "dukkha" in this light (at least it did for me). > > Another translation of "dukkha", one that is more easily associated > with rupa, is "unsatisfactoriness". Why is rupa unsatisfactory? > Because it is impermanent (anicca). > > Do you remember the first "Crocodile Dundee"? There are a lot of > Aussies on this list, so I thought that I would throw this in :-). > There was a scene where Mick talked about the Aboriginal view of the > land, "It was here long before we were and will be here long after > we are gone. How can anybody talk about owning it?" > === Clarification Actually the Buddhist view is the reverse, "Rupa (visible object) lasts an incredibly short time so it doesn't make sense to talk about owning it. A more complicated was of looking at things is that there is no self that is capable of owning anyway. === > As an English teacher, you can probably help me; isn't "suffering" a > gerund (can work as a verb or a noun)? Perhaps it helps to think > of "dukkha" as a characteristic (noun), not as a verb. > > How would a Buddha perceive a table? Here is my understanding (it is > a bit complex). A Buddha would know (wise attention / yoniso > manisakara) that there was a visible object impinging on the eye- > sense. He would know that multiple impingements had taken place and > that form was constrcted as a concept. He would know that his mind > had attached the label "table" to this form. Where does "dukkha" fit > in? A Buddha would know that the characteristic of the visible > object (rupa) is unsatisfactoriness. > > James, does this help or are you even more confused? > > Metta, > Rob M:-) > > --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "James" wrote: > > --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Frank Kuan wrote: > > > Hi James, > > > Don't take dukkha so personally. Meaning, it's not > > > "I" who suffers, or a "book" that suffers, or a > > > "table" that suffers. It's just suffering. There is > > > suffering, not "I am suffering". See the difference? > > (Sorry it took me a while to respond. I have been pondering this > > post and even called up some friends interested in Buddhism and we > > discussed it. Sadly, they seem to see the difference in what you > are > > saying, but I do not. They concluded that it is because I take > words > > too literally and that I need to look at what you are saying > beneath > > the words. That this is a Zen-like statement that I don't get. > And > > I thought I was very Zen! :-) Oh well, maybe it will come to me > in a > > flash of insight. You see, the word 'suffering' is Present > > Progressive and means that an action is repeating continuously. I > > can see that a table can have the characteristics of: brown, > solid, > > and cool. But I cannot see how a table would be: browning, > > solidifying, and cooling. Actually, the term 'suffering' used > this > > way seems to defy the reality of impermanence. Suffering for > humans > > is not a permanent feature; it changes, and can be escaped through > > nibbana. Is it possible for a table to achieve nibbana? Hehehe… > j/k > > Just as when a window breaks it is breaking, but the breaking > doesn't > > last very long. A window can't be breaking and breaking and > > breaking. I still don't see how a table could be suffering and > > suffering and suffering; even using this definition.) > > > It helps to think of dukkha, rather than *something or > > > someone* suffering, as a characteristic of being > > > unstable/imperfect/incapable of bringing happiness. > > (Okay, now here you seem to be saying that the characteristic of > > dukkha is conditional on the object because it cannot bring > > satisfaction…it only brings dissatisfaction or suffering. But in > > this case I am also confused but then how would the Buddha see the > > table? Would the table then lose its characteristic of dukkha > > because it wouldn't bring him any suffering. I thought this > > characteristic had to be absolute and not just conditional. > Again, I > > am very confused) > > No personal identity or personificaiton of an object that > > > suffers needs to be attached. > > (I still think to say that an object 'suffers' is adding a quality > of > > personification to that object. The very word is human-based. > But, > > then again, I may be being too literal. I really do want to > > understand this subject. I hope that it doesn't sound like I am > > taking this too personally, but maybe I am. Apologies if that is > the > > case.) > > > > In Pema, James > > > > In fact, that's why > > > whatever has the nature of dukkha also has the nature > > > of anatta (not self). > > > 16541 From: Uan Chih Liu Date: Wed Oct 30, 2002 11:43pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Rupa Has Dukkha? Hi James and Frank, First of all, thank you, James, for rasing this question up; it forced me to re-examine my understanding of dukkha. I want to make sure I understand this correctly, too. First of all, it says "all conditioned dhammas are 'dukkha'", NOT all conditioned dhammas "have" dukkha. So all conditioned dhammas are not "suffer-ing" (verb.), but all conditioned dhammas are suffering (a noun). And Frank, please help me in this, they are suffering because of our ignorance of seeing things as they really are, because of our clinging to permanence. And as all dhammas are impermanent, they are 'dukkha', as long as our ignorance exists and as long as our clinging exists. Am I getting it right? WL ----- Original Message ----- From: "Frank Kuan" To: Sent: Wednesday, October 30, 2002 7:52 PM Subject: Re: [dsg] Rupa Has Dukkha? > Hi James, > Don't take dukkha so personally. Meaning, it's not > "I" who suffers, or a "book" that suffers, or a > "table" that suffers. It's just suffering. There is > suffering, not "I am suffering". See the difference? > It helps to think of dukkha, rather than *something or > someone* suffering, as a characteristic of being > unstable/imperfect/incapable of bringing happiness. No > personal identity or personificaiton of an object that > suffers needs to be attached. In fact, that's why > whatever has the nature of dukkha also has the nature > of anatta (not self). > > -fk > > --- James wrote: > > Hello Friends, > > I have begun reading "Abhidhamma in daily life" to > > learn about the > > Abhidhamma, of which I am quite ignorant, and I have > > a question. I > > was told this was the group to post this question. > > The first chapter > > states that all conditioned dhammas (Nama and Rupa) > > have the > > characteristics of dukkha and anatta, "All > > conditioned dhammas: > > citta, cetasika and rupa, are impermanent (anicca). > > All conditioned > > dhammas are 'dukkha' since they are impermanent. All > > dhammas are > > anatta, not-self " > > > > But it states prior to this, "Seeing is, for > > example, a type of nama; > > it experiences visible object. Visible object itself > > is rupa; it does > > not experience anything." My question is: If rupa > > doesn't experience > > anything, how can it have the characteristic of > > dukkha? I thought > > that dukkha was a component of the mind.suffering or > > stress. Is this > > a different type of dukkha found in rupa? I don't > > understand how > > impermanence equals dukkha in an inanimate object. > > > > For example, in Spanish, objects are given either > > the qualities of > > masculine or feminine. But we know that a book is > > not > > really `feminine', nor is a door `masculine'. So > > how can a book have > > the characteristic of dukkha (suffering) or a door > > the characteristic > > of dukkha (suffering)? I won't even begin to ask > > about anatta > > because that is a really confusing aspect when > > applied to material > > objects. First I want to understand dukkha and > > maybe I can then > > tackle anatta in rupa objects. > > > > Does anyone have any input on this question? I feel > > that I must > > understand this basic aspect before I delve further > > into the > > Abhidhamma. Thank you in advance for any help > > offered. > > > > Metta, James > > > > ps. If it does turn out that rupa doesn't really > > have the > > characteristic of dukkha, does that mean the entire > > Abhidhamma is > > invalid? Or can this be overlooked? > > > > 16542 From: Sarah Date: Wed Oct 30, 2002 11:53pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Way 14, Comm. heavy going Hi Azita, I don’t have anything much to add - I know you understand all the real reason for feeling discouraged, uncertain and having aversion. You may like to look under Useful Posts under ‘Discouraged?’ I think everyone goes through these phases and they don’t last either;-) We see others having fun and compare with mana or dosa - usually thinking of self rather than any mudita (sympathetic joy) in their good fortune. We have so little understanding of vipaka. Maybe they’re busy thinking the same about you;-) Like you, I socialize very little - we can have useful discussion here. I was so impressed when Frank, for all his playboy tendencies, said that his idea of fun on a Saturday nite was to sit at home reading Samyutta Nikaya. (Hope I got all that about right, Frank). I suggest you just read the posts that are helpful to you at this time, Azita and come back to the ‘heavy’ ones later if you feel inclined to do so. Conditions change and so do the areas of discussion that seem most useful, I find. Ayatanas used to leave me pretty cold and now I follow with great interest......As for bhavanga cittas.....I used to skip the chapter in ADL I remember;-) I wonder if the book you are reading is based on ‘The birth-Stories of the Ten Bodhisattas’- I have the translation of this by Ven Saddhatissa. It’s a slim volume from PTS which you might enjoy too. I’d bring it to show you in Bkk at the end of the month, but I just travel with light hand-luggage and no books for quick get-aways at airports and easy travel. (Rob M- Jon says he’ll just take 3 copies of the abhidhamma text which we can share with Rob K and Nina and show others. Thank you in advance). Anyway, it’s always good to hear your comments. Chris and others may be able to add more useful ones. I expect you’re just very busy before your big trip and working hard, I know. metta, Sarah p.s the Cairns yoga community, esp the Astanga community, all seem to be heading for Hong Kong these days and they all know you. Katrina now. 16543 From: rahula_80 Date: Thu Oct 31, 2002 0:00am Subject: Re: [dsg] mara sutta, Rahula Hi, I try to analyse: > naapara.m itthattaayaa': na apara.m: not further. apara.m: future state, > further. > itthattaayaa: ittthatta.m: in the present state of becoming, life in these > conditions. This is info of PTS, but it is not complete I am sure. > Maybe the experts know more about it (hint). We meet this phrase often in > the suttas. > I would translate as: there is no more future life. Itthatta is ittha + tta (suffix-tta) Used to describe state. But how do we get itthattaayaa from itthatta. 16544 From: Sarah Date: Thu Oct 31, 2002 0:07am Subject: Re: [dsg] Home again, changes, plus Tom Hi Sarah F, Thanks so much for checking in with us again.Sounds like you had a very exciting trip and I hope Tom responds as well and perhaps we can encourage more family members;-). --- forsyth_1981 wrote: > > Life is a bit strange since I came back to Brisbane. Nothing seems > the same as before I left. I was only away a month, so it hasn't > really changed that much. I seem to be different and have grown > apart from many of my friends. I don't think they've noticed > though. I mention this because I read buddhism teaches that > everything changes, all the time, so maybe that means 'inside' a > person - feelings, attitudes - as well as 'outside' - others, events, > things? .... I quite understand how you feel and remember well when I was in my 20s and used to travel and then come back and feel just like you. Perhaps one's interests and priorities change and one tends to associate more with friends who share values and new interests/concerns. As you suggest, even our feelings and attitudes change and sometimes we may just be following old patterns out of attachment and habit, I find. This has always been something of a problem or hindrance for me.I've always been very attached to friends and friendships and even here on DSG I have a hard time when people move on or I lose contact. We learn in Buddhism that the cause of suffering is clinging or attachment and so we try to keep what brings joy and happiness, such as a sight or sound or taste, when already it has fallen away. Hope the exams and work go well, Sarah and perhaps you can read 'Buddh in D.Life' out loud here, asking any qus or making comments as you go along. How nice it would be if you were joining us all in Thailand! Next time, perhaps;-) Sarah A ======== 16545 From: James Mitchell Date: Thu Oct 31, 2002 0:09am Subject: Re: [dsg] Rupa Has Dukkha? Rob, WOW!! I could just kick myself that I didn't find this group earlier! You people are super smart! Yes, this clarifies the issue for me immensely. Now I see what you are saying and what the Abihdhamma is saying about dukkha. It was a problem in my thought process stemming from word translation. I am not confused anymore, thanks to you. You see, I was thinking that ‘dukkha’ had to be an intrinsic quality of rupa; that it had to be a quality separate and independent of the viewer or observer…almost a quality to the sub-atomic level. But with this new definition, which I pray is correct, I can see that the quality of dukkha is a quality that is observant-based. Just as one will see a table as brown, solid, cool, etc…they will also see it, if as brilliant as you Rob, as dukkha or unsatisfactory. So, frogs are green, and slimy, and dukkha; chicks are yellow, and soft, and dukkha; pumpkins are orange, and spooky, and dukkha. (BOO! :-) Makes perfect sense to me now; again, I have the tendency to be too literal. Give me the wrong word and I don’t know up from down. Now, brilliant Rob, if you can just explain the anatta of rupa to me in a way my literal mind can understand, I will be indebted to you for life! :-) With Pema, James ===== Two men look out the same prison bars; one sees mud and the other stars. ~ Frederick Langbridge ~ 16546 From: rjkjp1 Date: Thu Oct 31, 2002 0:06am Subject: Re: Introduction ---Dear James, Thanks for your humorous intro. In a sense the whole dhamma is a rebellion against what we (that is wrong view) have always believed to be true. I think the Abhidhamma and insight are really synonymous ; as even if one is not fully skilled in theoretical knowledge what insight must see is the difference between nama and rupa. And that is the function and outcome of Abhidhamma. For your question on dukkha consider the suttas where the Buddha suggests that what is impermanent must be dukkha - and that applies to rupa as well as nama. Samsara vata (the round of births and deaths ) is the arising and passing of the five khandas (aggregates); so even the most pleasant feeling as regards nama is also dukkha as vipiranara dukkha (sp?) and sankhara dukkha (although not dukkha dukkha). Robert In dhammastudygroup@y..., "James" wrote: > I have a rebellious streak that runs contrary to > monasticism. > > How I Found my way here: I was a member of Dhamma List and this group > was suggested as a place where I could learn about the Abihdhamma. I > was suspended in DL for one week for outrageous, insulting posts and > then I quit. I am reformed now and will not do that in this list. > > > > With Metta, James 16547 From: James Date: Thu Oct 31, 2002 0:30am Subject: Re: [dsg] Rupa Has Dukkha? WL, You are quite welcome for the question. As the saying goes: It is by teaching that we learn best. I am your appreciative student. Thank you for your clarification. Yes, there is a big difference between 'are' and 'have' in this instance. One means an observable characteristic and the other means an intrinsic characteristic. The rest of your post is directed to Frank so I will let him answer when he returns. Why he isn't glued to his computer till all hours of the night like the rest of us, I don't understand! :-) j/k Love, James --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "Uan Chih Liu" wrote: > Hi James and Frank, > First of all, thank you, James, for rasing this question up; > it forced me to re-examine my understanding of dukkha. > I want to make sure I understand this correctly, too. > > First of all, it says "all conditioned dhammas are 'dukkha'", > NOT all conditioned dhammas "have" dukkha. So > all conditioned dhammas are not "suffer-ing" (verb.), but all > conditioned dhammas are suffering (a noun). And Frank, > please help me in this, they are suffering because of our > ignorance of seeing things as they really are, because of our > clinging to permanence. And as all dhammas are > impermanent, they are 'dukkha', as long as our ignorance > exists and as long as our clinging exists. Am I getting it right? > > WL 16548 From: christine_forsyth Date: Thu Oct 31, 2002 0:43am Subject: Re: [dsg] Way 14, Comm. heavy going Hi Azita, No whinging at all, thank you for sharing your feelings with us.:)) They are really very normal and to be expected from time to time - you work in an area where you know life is serious and fragile. You know bad things can happen when least expected, and not to those who on the surface 'deserve' it, that there are no guarantees of safety from the vicissitudes of life. Possibly you are surrounded by people who believe it all happens to others on the TV news. You work where the majority follow a theistic religion, or none at all. Generally they don't feel the same urgency that many practicing Buddhists feel about the precious rarity of a human rebirth and the need not to waste scarce time. I understand what you say about some you know just talking s--t. I'm hanging on until the end of the month when we are all together in Thailand. We'll get such a Zap! of metta and Dhamma discussions from kalyanna-mitta that we should be able to return to Oz refreshed and ready to face daily life again... come what may! I was reading today Bhikkhu Bodhi's 'Association with the Wise'. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/bps/news/essay26.html "The Maha-mangala Sutta, the Great Discourse on Blessings, is one of the most popular Buddhist suttas, included in all the standard repertories of Pali devotional chants. The sutta begins when a deity of stunning beauty, having descended to earth in the stillness of the night, approaches the Blessed One in the Jeta Grove and asks about the way to the highest blessings. In the very first stanza of his reply the Buddha states that the highest blessing comes from avoiding fools and associating with the wise (asevana ca balanam, panditanan ca sevana). Since the rest of the sutta goes on to sketch all the different aspects of human felicity, both mundane and spiritual, the assignment of association with the wise to the opening stanza serves to emphasize a key point: that progress along the path of the Dhamma hinges on making the right choices in our friendships." I admit to feeling a little envious of those who meet another Buddhist face to face even monthly. But then I think, it could be worse, I could have missed finding the Dhamma at all. Much gratitude for dsg, ay sister? much metta, Christine --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., azita gill wrote: > --- Sarah wrote: > Hi Larry, > > [snip] > > > We may think we have no fear and dread of death > like > > Subrahma has. > > However, while there is clinging to self, there is > > bound to be fear and > > dread in various ways to what is occurring or what > > will occur in future to > > oneself or those one holds dear. > > > > Any comments? > > > > Sarah > > ======= > > Yes, I want to comment on this. I feel more > uncertain and insecure the more I learn. I see > friends, workmates, family, running around seemingly > having a 'good time', getting on with their lives, so > to speak, whereas I seem to have lost interest and > some sort of 'spontaneous joy' about everyday things. > Unpleasant feeling, got to be dosa, but it does 'get > me down' sometimes. I don't visit friends much > anymore, cos I think they just talk s..t [excuse me, > but I'm telling it like it is - for me]. And maybe > today's just a bad day!!!! > > Have been trying to keep up with some of the > recent posts, but have found them heavy going and very > wordy. re-reading what I've just written has made me > feel like a 'whinger', not a good thing if you're > Aussie! > > On a more positive note, I must comment on a > book I'm reading 'The Great Chronicle of Buddhas' by > Ven.Mingun Sayadaw, a Burmese monk, now deceased. > This pub. has given me a much better idea of how great > the Buddhas really are. How extremely hard a > Boddisatva has to work to become a Buddha, how > immesurably long it takes. > > May you all be happy, > > Azita > 16549 From: Sarah Date: Thu Oct 31, 2002 0:51am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Vimuttattaa Hi Rahula, --- rahula_80 wrote: > Hi, > > I think I am close to solving my problem on vimuttattaa. .... Glad to hear it. ... Just sth that may be helpful on this: > 2. See "No Inner Core" by Sayadaw Silananda > http://www.buddha.per.sg/dharma01/anatta1.htm > > Chapter - Misunderstanding Anatta > http://www.buddha.per.sg/dharma01/anatta6.htm > > It says: > Another passage mistranslated by Coomaraswamy and Horner is one > found : in Visuddhimagga: "buddhatta ... Buddho." They translate > it as, "Buddha is awakened Self." But the correct translation of > the Pali is, "He is the Buddha because he knows or he has known." > The word buddhatta is not a compound so of buddha and atta, but one > word, buddha, with the suffix - tta combined with the ablative case > termination, a, which means `because of'. The word buddhatta therefore > means `because of the state of being one who knows'. > My question are: > > 1. Can anyone explain what is the connection between "ablative > case termination" and "because of"? .... From Warder p89: “The ablative of cause is very important, and is always used in philosophical statements;- ‘vedanaapaccayaa ta,nhaa, ‘desire is from the sensation cause’, ‘desire is caused by sensation’” Other examples given. On the next page it also mentions that ‘freed from (from slavery etc) is followed by the ablative: “citta.m aasavehi vimuccati’- ‘the mind is freed from the influxes’. ..... > 2. If it is the ablative, > shouldn't "...vimuttattaa .thitattaa.m....." be translated as "From > freed, it is stable......" .... I can’t make any comment on the grammar (and don’t have the rest of the context in front of me). By being freed, it is stable...(referring to the consciousness) (i.e stable or firm from any kilesa) Let me quote the line I mentioned the other day from the metta sutta com on ti.t.thanti: “They stand (ti.t.thanti), thus they are firm (thaavaraa); this is a designation for Arahants, who have abandoned craving and fear.” Back to your original passage: abandoning of attachment -> no new kamma -> no new formations or rebirth -> freedom from suffering -> firm in kusala, abandoned kilesa ->nibbana Rahula, I’m mostly playing with the words and know far less Pali than you. I can see your approach is quite a good way to learn, however (you're teaching me), and appreciate your determination to really understand these key phrases. I will pass your messages to B.Bodhi as requested too. As Nina also suggested, there are Pali scholars on the other list who would give better assistance on Pali grammar, though I personally find it interesting to hear your conclusions and research in the context of dhamma discussion and the meaning of phrases and passages. I think we agree on the interpretation of the passage in question. Best wishes, Sarah ====== 16550 From: christine_forsyth Date: Thu Oct 31, 2002 1:08am Subject: Hello James :) Hi James, May I add my welcome to dsg. :) A couple of small points - there are at least three, maybe four, Robs on the List - we usually differentiate by adding the last initial e.g. Rob M or Rob K. As well, a large number of the members of dsg don't live in the US or Europe - lots also live in Thailand, Japan, Hong Kong, Singapore, Malaysia, Sri Lanka, Bali, Hawaii and Australia - so though it is early morning where you are, it is only early evening or afternoon where a lot of the rest of us are. (7.00 p.m. in Brisbane, Australia on a hot spring night as I listen to the Flying Foxes (fruit bats) in the trees outside.) Enjoying your posts, metta, Christine 16551 From: rahula_80 Date: Thu Oct 31, 2002 1:12am Subject: [dsg] Re: Vimuttattaa Hi Sarah, Thanks. I think you answered my questions well. Thanks again, Rahula 16552 From: robmoult Date: Thu Oct 31, 2002 2:06am Subject: Re: [dsg] Rupa Has Dukkha? Hi James, Sorry about this, but I'm going to mess with your mind a bit. But, if you are into Zen, then you are used to having your mind messed with. It is correct to say that "rupa" has a characteristic of "dukkha", but it is important to understand what is "rupa". Again, we "Abhidhammers" use a Pali term for "rupa" because any English rendering would generate confusion. There are 28 different types of "rupa", including visible object, hardness and sound. Sorry to say that tables, frogs, chicks and pumpkins didn't make the list :-) These things are concepts, not "rupa". My advice is to store this factoid in the back of your mind and come back to it later (when the book discusses rupa). It is easy to see that a table is "not self" (anatta); but what about your own body? We are used to thinking in terms of "my hand" or "my foot". Anatta says that there is no "my" behind the visible object that we label "hand" or the visible object that we label "foot". The bulk of Abhidhamma focuses on analysis; breaking down things into their component parts (especially, the five aggregates). The purpose of this breaking down is to look at each of the fundamental parts (paramattha dhammas) and see that there is "no self" in any of them. Since each of the aggregates are impermanent, conditioned and lacking in self, the concept of a self is an illusion. In the left frontal lobe of the brain is the "orientation association area"; one of the most active parts of the brain. Sensory inputs are routed through this part of the brain where a concept of "self" is created to put everything into context. In other words, our brains are hard-wired to create the illusion of self. Experiments have shown that when Zen masters meditate or Franciscan nuns pray devoutly, bloodflow to that part of the brain reduces dramatically (much less activity) and the subject has super- normal experiences. In other words, once the illusion of "I" is surpressed (and it can be done through mental training), we experience a "higher reality". Though the bulk of the Abhidhamma focuses on analysis, the last part of the Abhidhamma focuses on synthesis; how all these paramattha dhammas condition each other. This last section, conditional relations, is the platform necessary to understand dependent origination. I bring this up because some people prefer to think in an analytic mode while others prefer to work in a synthetic mode. If you are in the latter category, then you must "wait for your candy" until you have fully understood the paramattha dhamma components. Metta, Rob M :-) --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., James Mitchell wrote: > Rob, > > WOW!! I could just kick myself that I didn't find > this group earlier! You people are super smart! Yes, > this clarifies the issue for me immensely. Now I see > what you are saying and what the Abihdhamma is saying > about dukkha. It was a problem in my thought process > stemming from word translation. I am not confused > anymore, thanks to you. > > You see, I was thinking that `dukkha' had to be an > intrinsic quality of rupa; that it had to be a quality > separate and independent of the viewer or > observer…almost a quality to the sub-atomic level. > But with this new definition, which I pray is correct, > I can see that the quality of dukkha is a quality that > is observant-based. Just as one will see a table as > brown, solid, cool, etc…they will also see it, if as > brilliant as you Rob, as dukkha or unsatisfactory. > So, frogs are green, and slimy, and dukkha; chicks are > yellow, and soft, and dukkha; pumpkins are orange, and > spooky, and dukkha. (BOO! :-) > > Makes perfect sense to me now; again, I have the > tendency to be too literal. Give me the wrong word > and I don't know up from down. Now, brilliant Rob, if > you can just explain the anatta of rupa to me in a way > my literal mind can understand, I will be indebted to > you for life! :-) > > With Pema, James > > > ===== > Two men look out the same prison bars; one sees mud and the other stars. > > ~ Frederick Langbridge ~ > 16553 From: kenhowardau Date: Thu Oct 31, 2002 2:51am Subject: Re: [dsg] Way 14, Comm. heavy going > --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., azita gill wrote: > > --- Sarah wrote: > Hi Larry, > > > [snip] > > > > We may think we have no fear and dread of death > > like > > > Subrahma has. > > > However, while there is clinging to self, there is > > > bound to be fear and > > > dread in various ways to what is occurring or what > > > will occur in future to > > > oneself or those one holds dear. > > > > > > Any comments? > > > > > > Sarah > > > ======= > > > Yes, I want to comment on this. I feel more > > uncertain and insecure the more I learn. Hi Sarah, Azita and Christine, Just to add to the comments: Today I was reading the Cambodia Talks that Nina posted some time ago. K Sujin was saying; "However, the panna that is insight knowledge knows all realities through the mind-door. Realities appear one at a time through the mind-door. How does one feel about that? "Jarurin: Perhaps one is frightened. "Sujin: It depends on conditions. It is an experience that never before arose in life, but panna at that moment is able to know that characteristic as nama, and that is vipassana nana. One may be frightened or astonished while thinking why realities appear in this way, because one never thought that the world one is familiar with does, in the ultimate sense, not exist. Usually the whole wide world appears, because one has eyes and ears and thus this world one is familiar with appears. It appears in this way until the time comes when the world appears as empty; then there is only the citta which knows the characteristics of dhammas that appear, and which knows that the realities arise and appear because there are the appropriate conditions. Panna will clearly realize that rupa appears through the sense-door and subsequently through the mind-door. This is according to the truth. "The saying: 'There is nothing, then there is something and after that there is nothing to be found', is according to the truth. " (end quote) Kind regards Ken H 16554 From: rjkjp1 Date: Thu Oct 31, 2002 3:50am Subject: Re: Home again, changes, plus Tom ---Dear sarah, Nice to see both you and Tom on the list. My mother joined a copule of years ago but never got around to reading the posts! In dhammastudygroup@y..., "forsyth_1981" wrote: > I mention this because I read buddhism teaches that > everything changes, all the time, so maybe that means 'inside' a > person - feelings, attitudes - as well as 'outside' - others, events, > things? ______________ In the suttas the Buddha says that for the person unintsructed in the Dhamma because things change (as you say inside and out) they become despondent. But for the wise person because things change they are happy. This is a big subject but basically is because the change -seen with the eye of wisdom- is confirming of the dhamma, and comes with detachment. Robert 16555 From: ajahn_paul Date: Thu Oct 31, 2002 5:38am Subject: Re: [dsg] Rupa Has Dukkha? Hi all, after reading all the post related to this topic, i think the problem is from the very first translation yrs ago. Dukkha always being translated as sufferring, or anything in a negative way. we should think Dukkha in another way,,,, [[[what is causing sufferring]]]. Me and some of the friends here had been already discuss on this issue, but too bad that i cant remember the topic. U can try to find that out, and i think that can help a little! ^^ 16556 From: James Date: Thu Oct 31, 2002 6:32am Subject: Re: Rupa Has Dukkha? Hi Rob M, Hmmmm…just when I am thinking I understand, you pull the rug out from under me! :-) Okay, I guess I have belabored this question enough. I will delve further into the book with only partial understanding of the concepts. Maybe things will get clearer as I go along. That never worked for me in math, but maybe this time I will get lucky. However, I am given new hope with your explanation of the purpose of the left frontal lobe. That information is fascinating and I have never come across that research before. Now I know, if I just don't `get it' after reading the book, I could always opt for a frontal lobotomy! hehehe… Metta, James --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "robmoult" wrote: > Hi James, > > Sorry about this, but I'm going to mess with your mind a bit. But, > if you are into Zen, then you are used to having your mind messed > with. > > It is correct to say that "rupa" has a characteristic of "dukkha", > but it is important to understand what is "rupa". Again, > we "Abhidhammers" use a Pali term for "rupa" because any English > rendering would generate confusion. > > There are 28 different types of "rupa", including visible object, > hardness and sound. Sorry to say that tables, frogs, chicks and > pumpkins didn't make the list :-) These things are concepts, > not "rupa". My advice is to store this factoid in the back of your > mind and come back to it later (when the book discusses rupa). > > It is easy to see that a table is "not self" (anatta); but what > about your own body? We are used to thinking in terms of "my hand" > or "my foot". Anatta says that there is no "my" behind the visible > object that we label "hand" or the visible object that we > label "foot". > > The bulk of Abhidhamma focuses on analysis; breaking down things > into their component parts (especially, the five aggregates). The > purpose of this breaking down is to look at each of the fundamental > parts (paramattha dhammas) and see that there is "no self" in any of > them. Since each of the aggregates are impermanent, conditioned and > lacking in self, the concept of a self is an illusion. > > In the left frontal lobe of the brain is the "orientation > association area"; one of the most active parts of the brain. > Sensory inputs are routed through this part of the brain where a > concept of "self" is created to put everything into context. In > other words, our brains are hard-wired to create the illusion of > self. Experiments have shown that when Zen masters meditate or > Franciscan nuns pray devoutly, bloodflow to that part of the brain > reduces dramatically (much less activity) and the subject has super- > normal experiences. In other words, once the illusion of "I" is > surpressed (and it can be done through mental training), we > experience a "higher reality". > > Though the bulk of the Abhidhamma focuses on analysis, the last part > of the Abhidhamma focuses on synthesis; how all these paramattha > dhammas condition each other. This last section, conditional > relations, is the platform necessary to understand dependent > origination. I bring this up because some people prefer to think in > an analytic mode while others prefer to work in a synthetic mode. If > you are in the latter category, then you must "wait for your candy" > until you have fully understood the paramattha dhamma components. > > Metta, > Rob M :-) > 16557 From: James Date: Thu Oct 31, 2002 6:44am Subject: Re: Hello James :) Hi Christine, Thanks for the welcome. Oops...I didn't know most of the members were outside of the United States. But I guess that does explain the depth of understanding/study evident here that most Americans lack. Thank you also for the Rob explanation. That would have confused me. Side Note: Thanks for the reference to bats. Today is Halloween in the U.S., one of my favorite holidays, and now I have thoughts of bats and pumpkins. Unfortunately, with Rob M's explanation of rupa I am starting to think of them as broken up into a lot of little 'rupa' and they are not even 'bats' or 'pumpkins' anymore. Just a gory mess! :-) Geez! Buddhism is spoiling my favorite holiday! :-) Take care Christine. Metta, James --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "christine_forsyth" wrote: > Hi James, > > May I add my welcome to dsg. :) > A couple of small points - there are at least three, maybe four, Robs > on the List - we usually differentiate by adding the last initial > e.g. Rob M or Rob K. > As well, a large number of the members of dsg don't live in the US > or Europe - lots also live in Thailand, Japan, Hong Kong, > Singapore, Malaysia, Sri Lanka, Bali, Hawaii and Australia - so > though it is early morning where you are, it is only early evening or > afternoon where a lot of the rest of us are. (7.00 p.m. in Brisbane, > Australia on a hot spring night as I listen to the Flying Foxes > (fruit bats) in the trees outside.) > Enjoying your posts, > metta, > Christine 16558 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Oct 31, 2002 10:00am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: third stage of insight Dear Rob K, I have more on the third stage. If hardness appears, and there is some (coarse) awareness, I do not see of what group there is awareness: hardness is in a kalapa of rupas, but the others do not appear. Also, the other khandhas, nama khandhas like feeling or citta do not seem to appear, or is that what does happen? The five khandhas together? But nama is not mixed with rupa at that stage, as I remarked before. Nina. op 23-10-2002 04:05 schreef rjkjp1 op rjkjp1@y...: 16559 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Oct 31, 2002 10:00am Subject: Re: [dsg] Book with similes Dear Rob M, Thank you for your kind offer, but my problem is that I am evermore running out of time. I am doing trs of Perfections as well as Foundation Bulletin with subtle points. I prefer to look at Rob K's copy when in Bgk where I have no computer work. Thanks anyway, Nina. op 29-10-2002 20:55 schreef robmoult op rob.moult@j...: Fortunately, I > found another book, "The Essence of Buddha Abhidhamma" by Dr. Mehm > Tin Mon, which gives all the similies. 16560 From: James Date: Thu Oct 31, 2002 11:04am Subject: Ugliness (Re: [dsg] Way 17, Comm) > ------------------------------------------ > Howard: > The body, in and of itself, is neither beautiful nor ugly in the sense > of good or bad. It is just what it is - unless we cling to it as being a > certain way. Generally, what we find physically beautiful in a human or > animal body is, when not just culturally determined, probably closely tied to > our recognition of that body being vital, fuctioning properly, in good > health, and suited to its function. [This last part of "suited to its > function" also applies to things other than bodies"] And the opposite is > generally true with regard to finding a body to be ugly. It is only here that > there lies some objectivity to beauty and ugliness. > There is nothing wrong with decay, change, impermanence - unless we > cling to a momentary state. All conditioned dhammas fail to remain. There is > no problem with that except for our craving for things to be otherwise. As I > see it, the closer to being enlightened (or the more one is enlightened), the > more delight - free and easy delight - will be taken in all dhammas. But this > delight will be a universal, nondiscriminative one. For when a healthy, > vital, well functioning body is seen, at the very same time it will be known > that it is impermanent and subject to decay and death; so even the > "beautiful" is "ugly". One problem is that the words 'beautiful' and 'ugly' > are judgemental and carry the connotations of craving and aversion. > ------------------------------------------------------ Hi Howard, I agree with you, and with an additional reason. I don't believe that lay people shouldn't be contemplating the body as `ugly' or `unsatisfactory'; I believe this type of meditation is only for monks and only under close supervision. Without the renunciation of a monk, training of a monk, and a qualified teacher handy, such a meditation is likely to lead to self-doubt, low self-esteem, depression, and possibly anorexia nervosa or bulimia . I think it is best just to view the body with equanimity. But I could be wrong. Maybe I am in denial and just don't want to see my body as ugly…after all, I didn't pay for my gym membership for nothing! :-) j/k Metta, James 16561 From: christine_forsyth Date: Thu Oct 31, 2002 11:25am Subject: Re: Practice on DSG Dear KenH, RobK, and all, Thank you for your posts in this thread. I found so much to consider in them. Which is why it is so long before a reply. :) KenH, I appreciated your answers, very clear as usual, and thanks for mentioning the Maha-cattarisaka Sutta. It is at http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/majjhima/mn117.html Many of my questions, one way or the other, come back to the answer of Anatta, Conditions, and No Control. Reminds me of a Terry Pratchett conception of the Solar System in his Discworld books - a flat world balanced on a few of elephants standing on the back of a System Sized Turtle, and from there it's turtles 'all the way down'.... in real life, it's right understanding of anatta, conditions and 'no control' 'all the way down'. I agree with you when you say, "mostly everyone acts out of what they think is pleasurable", but I think many people wouldn't really care if it wasn't pleasurable - if only they were absolutely certain of the way. There seem to be so many nowadays saying 'this is the truth, the others are wrong and have distorted, misunderstood, or added to the Teachings', or 'take the 'best bits' from everywhere - whatever you feel is truth - merge it all together, it's all the same in the end' What you say is considerably harder: "Like it or not, we have to accept that the true practice is right understanding all the way." RobK, you say: "I think right practice is nothing other than the arising of panna which experiences whatever is present." Your post sent me diving to refresh my understanding of Sati and Panna and I surfaced nearly a week later ... [A grasshopper mind is not a structured or organised mind, and may arrive a little after everyone else.] I took out 'Cetasikas' read the chapters on Sati and Panna, and how they were two of the five 'indriyas' or spiritual faculties which should be developed, and went to read up on confidence (saddha ), energy (viriya), and concentration (ekaggata ). After that I followed a few other topics that caught my interest as well... The eightfold path seems to get harder the more I learn, which is sometimes discouraging, especially when I want to see some progress (not necessarily quick) - and when I hear 'guarantees' of progress elsewhere (four weeks sitting in Myanmar and come out a Sotapanna for sure. Imagine that!). "Kotthita then asked sariputta "If right understanding is forwarded, by how many factors, your reverence, does there come to be the fruit of freedom..." Sariputta listed 5 factors: moral habit, hearing true dhama, discussion, calm, and vision. The commentary notes that discussion [with the wise] helps to give up wrong practice." - which I have proven in my own life to be Truth, not sure what 'vision' means here. But I find it hard to understand how, as sati is a cetasika and ephemeral and is therefore not possible to direct or maintain, how then can we choose, direct and maintain mindfulness when hearing profound Dhamma. Isn't Dhamma as much an object as the breath? Or is it something else that is in operation here? metta, Christine 16562 From: Date: Thu Oct 31, 2002 6:32am Subject: Re: Ugliness (Re: [dsg] Way 17, Comm) Hi, James - In a message dated 10/31/02 2:06:03 PM Eastern Standard Time, buddhatrue@y... writes: > Hi Howard, > > I agree with you, and with an additional reason. I don't believe > that lay people shouldn't be contemplating the body as `ugly' > or `unsatisfactory'; I believe this type of meditation is only for > monks and only under close supervision. Without the renunciation of > a monk, training of a monk, and a qualified teacher handy, such a > meditation is likely to lead to self-doubt, low self-esteem, > depression, and possibly anorexia nervosa or bulimia . I think it is > best just to view the body with equanimity. But I could be wrong. > ------------------------------------------------ Howard: I think your monk-layperson distinction is valid, and for the reason you cite, namely constant supervision. Seeing the body as ugly/repulsive can, under careful conditions, serve as an effective skillful means, but with those conditions lacking, it carries the danger of leading to aversion and repression. -------------------------------------------------- > > Maybe I am in denial and just don't want to see my body as ugly…after > all, I didn't pay for my gym membership for nothing! :-) j/k > ---------------------------------------------------- ;-)) ---------------------------------------------------- > > Metta, James > > =========================== 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) 16563 From: Date: Thu Oct 31, 2002 3:27pm Subject: Way 19, Comm. "The Way of Mindfulness"by Soma Thera http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/bps/misc/wayof.html Commentary continued on: [why] four arousings of mindfulness Further these Four Arousings of Mindfulness were taught not only for the purpose of casting out the four illusions, but for getting rid of the four floods, bonds, outflowings, knots, clingings, wrong courses, and the penetration of fourfold nutriment, too. This is according to the method of exegesis in the Nettipakarana. In the commentary it is said that by way of remembering and of meeting in one thing, the Arousing of Mindfulness is only one; and that it is fourfold when regarded as a subject of meditation. [Tika} "By way of remembering": by way of the reflection of actions of skill, and so forth, of body, speech, and thought. [T] "Meeting in one thing" = union in the one-natured Nibbana. To a city with four gates, mental objects coming from the East with goods produced in the east enter by the east gate... men coming from the South... men coming from the West... and men coming from the North with goods produced in the north enter by the north gate. Nibbana is like the city. The Real Supramundane Eightfold Path is like the city-gate. Body, mind, feelings and mental objects are like the four chief directions in space. Like the people coming from the East with goods produced in the east are those who enter Nibbana by means of body-contemplation through the Real Supramundane Path produced by the power of body-contemplation practiced in the fourteen ways. Like the people coming from the South... are those who enter... by means of feeling-contemplation... practiced in the nine ways. Like the people coming from the West... are those who enter... by means of consciousness-contemplation... practiced in the sixteen ways. Like the people coming from the North... are those who enter... by means of mental-object-contemplation... practiced in the five ways. [T] On account of the cause or on account of the sameness of entry into the one Nibbana, the Arousing of Mindfulness is said to be just one thing. The meeting in the one Nibbana of the various Arousings of Mindfulness is called the meeting in the one thing on account of participation in that one Nibbana or on account of their becoming all of a kind. 16564 From: Date: Thu Oct 31, 2002 3:54pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Way 14, Comm. Sarah, thanks for these details. I'm curious to learn more but I have enough stuff floating around in my head. Maybe later. Larry ps: why does sense restraint = purification of virtue? what is the meaning of sense restraint and purification of virtue? thanks L. --------------- 1.awakening factors:bojjhanga - enlightenment factors 2.virtues of the holy state: tapa - ascetic practices of the bhikkhu nec. for jhana realizations 3. restraint and relinquishment: sense-restraint, i.e purification of virtue and sabbanissagga (relinquishing all)-"everything comprised in formations is relinquished" "Besides the wakening factors of the truth, Besides the virtues of the holy state, Besides restraint and relinquishment full, I see nothing that can bless living beings." 16565 From: Date: Thu Oct 31, 2002 4:33pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Way 19, Comm. In the commentary it is said that by way of remembering and of meeting in one thing, the Arousing of Mindfulness is only one; and that it is fourfold when regarded as a subject of meditation. [Tika} "By way of remembering": by way of the reflection of actions of skill, and so forth, of body, speech, and thought. Hi all, Does anyone have the pali version of this? I was wondering if "skill" is a translation of kusala. If so it would reinforce previous research that indicates "sati" is the recollection of ethical considerations. Larry 16566 From: Date: Thu Oct 31, 2002 5:36pm Subject: RE: [dsg] Re: "Your duty is the contemplation" Hi Kom, Good to see you again. I hope you can stick around and can participate in the discussion on the satipatthana sutta commentary. As for the debate that just won't go away, I think we are both headed in the same direction but maybe not on the same track. As I see it the real issue is what is meant by "direct experience". I'm sure we understand this in the same way. The point of contention is that you think there are no concepts involved in a direct experience but I do think concepts are involved. The reason I think so is that experience does not arise in discrete packages. It is a continuous, flowing, inter-related process. That inter-relatedness is necessary in order to make sense out of what is happening. And I would contend that the 'making sense' process always involves concepts. A concept is the only dhamma that _means_ something. Everything else is meaningless, literally. 'Meaning' is relationship and you can't make sense without relationship. Hence, you gotta have concepts. Now that doesn't mean you have to have words floating around in your head all the time. Though all of us do have words floating around in our head most of the time. My theory is that there are nuggets of meaning (concepts without words) that make our brains work [don't try to find this in the abhidhamma]. Anyway, that's not important. Back to 'direct experience'. By 'direct experience' I don't mean, necessarily, a magga citta. What I am mostly interested in is the direct experience that is part of the ordinary satipatthana procedure. I'm afraid there may be some disagreement on what is 'ordinary satipatthana procedure' so it would be very helpful if you could catch up on the commentary and give us your input. Whatever this procedure is, it is other than being absorbed in thinking about concepts. Do you have anything to add to this? I'm out of concepts. Larry 16567 From: James Date: Thu Oct 31, 2002 8:33pm Subject: [dsg] Re: "Your duty is the contemplation" Larry and Kom, If you both don't mind, I would like to jump into this conversation. It is very fascinating and important I believe. Additionally, doing so will help to sort out my thoughts on this issue. So the question is concerning `realities' and `concepts'. As I see this discussion, and I may be incorrect, the question is whether one can experience a `reality' without applying a `concept' to it; or even if one should (concept being language, mental categorization without language, or distinguishing without language). Hmmm…kinda reminds me of the old saying, `Which came first? The chicken or the egg?" Answer: Doesn't matter which came first, they are both dependent on the other to exist. Consequently, I believe that the `direct experience of reality' is dependent on concepts and that concepts are dependent on the direct experience of reality. If a tree falls in the woods and no one is there to hear it, does it make a sound? My answer: No. Why? Because the word `sound' means that someone heard it. If no one is present all the falling tree did was create vibrations in the air, it didn't make a sound. The same can be applied to the issue of `direct experience' without concepts. If a person sees a red car, but does not have the ability to `know' it as `red car', the person didn't see anything. What happened is that light struck the eye, messages were sent to the brain, the mental object of something unknown was formed, the brain didn't apply any concepts, and then the process ended without a single trace that anything happened. Direct experience without concepts is like a tree falling in the woods and no one is there to hear it. For all practical purposes, it didn't fall…nothing happened. Conversely, concepts cannot exist without direct experience. A man who is born without sight will never know what the color `red' looks like. He may approximate the sight of red to other things, like maybe the sound of a trumpet, but he will never know what red is until he has the direct experience of red. So what happens in everyday experience? In my estimation, nama conditions rupa and rupa conditions nama. Perception through the six sense doors (I include ESP) results in a concept being applied to that perception immediately after it is experienced. Additionally, superfluous concepts result in `conditioning' or `controlling' what one perceives. One is not the other, nor do they arise together (like perception and feeling) but they both depend on each other in human experience. So, how does this apply to meditation? Those who believe that vipassana or samatha meditation is supposed to be `the direct experience of reality' without concepts are actually practicing `trance meditation' and not practicing satipatthana. Concepts must be applied to meditation experience or wisdom will not arise. Nothing will arise. It will be like the tree that falls all alone. The formation of wisdom is dependent on both concepts and direct experience during meditation. Actually, that was the secret that the Buddha discovered that no one else had during his lifetime. His method was to make sure that this process was pure. In other words, to make sure that each sensation leads to a `right' concept and that superfluous concepts don't `defile' direct experience. If the Buddha had experienced Nibbana and the steps to get there without concepts, he would not have been able to explain how he got there. Actually, he would not have been able to get there. Concepts followed him the whole way, as did direct experience. Even the highest Jhana, which goes past the experiencing of rupa sensations, and has Nibbana as an object of attention, still has the presence of concepts to allow wisdom to arise. I posit that without concepts, Nibbana could not be realized. Enlightenment is dependent on concepts. This is just my two cents worth from my meditation experience and dhamma study. I am not an expert by any means, just giving my opinion. I am not trying to debate, put-down, or show off either. Just using this opportunity to straightening out my thoughts and maybe discover things I didn't know I knew ;-). With Metta, James --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., LBIDD@w... wrote: > Hi Kom, > > Good to see you again. I hope you can stick around and can participate > in the discussion on the satipatthana sutta commentary. > > As for the debate that just won't go away, I think we are both headed in > the same direction but maybe not on the same track. As I see it the real > issue is what is meant by "direct experience". I'm sure we understand > this in the same way. The point of contention is that you think there > are no concepts involved in a direct experience but I do think concepts > are involved. The reason I think so is that experience does not arise > in discrete packages. It is a continuous, flowing, inter-related > process. That inter-relatedness is necessary in order to make sense out > of what is happening. And I would contend that the 'making sense' > process always involves concepts. A concept is the only dhamma that > _means_ something. Everything else is meaningless, literally. 'Meaning' > is relationship and you can't make sense without relationship. Hence, > you gotta have concepts. > > Now that doesn't mean you have to have words floating around in your > head all the time. Though all of us do have words floating around in our > head most of the time. My theory is that there are nuggets of meaning > (concepts without words) that make our brains work [don't try to find > this in the abhidhamma]. > > Anyway, that's not important. Back to 'direct experience'. By 'direct > experience' I don't mean, necessarily, a magga citta. What I am mostly > interested in is the direct experience that is part of the ordinary > satipatthana procedure. I'm afraid there may be some disagreement on > what is 'ordinary satipatthana procedure' so it would be very helpful if > you could catch up on the commentary and give us your input. Whatever > this procedure is, it is other than being absorbed in thinking about > concepts. Do you have anything to add to this? I'm out of concepts. > > Larry 16568 From: Uan Chih Liu Date: Thu Oct 31, 2002 10:26pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: "Your duty is the contemplation" Hi, I've been following this thread because I was hoping it may provide me some answers to a question that has been bothering me. But thus far, perhaps due to my ignorance, I have not found the answers yet. My question is this: How does one know when insight occurs? How does one know if it is insight, not knowledge, or mere intellectural understanding of something, since we are so heavily influenced by what we've been taught, by school, by religion, and heck, by Buddhism? There are times while I'm contemplating about things, all of sudden, bang, something becomes clear to me. I'm sure everyone experiences that. Does that constitute as an insight or was it merely intellectural understanding or was it merely a concept construed by my mind with so much conviction that I actually thought it was insight? I've found learning and knowledge is my best friend and biggest enemy on my journey for seeking for truth. If anyone can shed some light on this, would appreciate it. A very perplexed being, WL 16569 From: kenhowardau Date: Thu Oct 31, 2002 10:43pm Subject: Re: Practice on DSG Hi again Christine, You were saying: ------------------ > Reminds me of a Terry Pratchett conception of the Solar System in his Discworld books - a flat world balanced on a few of elephants standing on the back of a System Sized Turtle, and from there it's turtles 'all the way down'.... in real life, it's right understanding of anatta, conditions and 'no control' 'all the way down'.> ------------------- I agree; there's no bottom, it's turtles all the way down. That explains what's holding up the earth; but when we are told that understanding of dhamma is conditioned by understanding of dhamma, it's not so easy to accept. We can't resist thinking that, as you say, "initially there has to be some form of "us," understanding has to be initiated by us." ------------------- > I agree with you when you say, "mostly everyone acts out of what they think is pleasurable", but I think many people wouldn't really care if it wasn't pleasurable - if only they were absolutely certain of the way. > ---------------- Those people, like myself, need to understand that, right here and now, there is the opportunity for sila, dana or bhavana. If that's not good enough for us, then what do we *really* want? Kind regards Ken H 16570 From: rahula_80 Date: Thu Oct 31, 2002 10:47pm Subject: Sabbe dhammaa anattaa Hi, How would you translate: sabbe dhammaa anattaa SA says that "sabbe" only pertains the five khandhas. He provide several evidence for this. 1. He disect the phrase this way: Sabbe dhammaa anattaa - Dhammapada 279 sabbe (noun [see SN 4.15], direct object, in accusative. Sabba is nominative, sensory-determinates) dhammaa (proper noun, plural, subject, undeclined in nominative, dharmas) anattaa (adjective, modifying sabba. An [is not] atta' [attan: Soul]). Sabbe "the All" is the subject of Anatta in sabbe dhammaa anatta. Dhammaa is in nominative plural. sabbe (noun [see SN 4.15], direct object, in accusative. Sabba is nominative, 'the all') The 'all' partakes of the Soul; however the Soul does not partake of, is not IN, the 'all'. Sabbe Dharmas are not the Soul (anatta). Is this correct? 2. He quote the Sabba Sutta (The All) Salayatana Vagga, Samyutta Nikaya {S iv 15; CDB ii 1140} "The eye forms, the ear and sounds, the nose and odours, the tongue and tastes, the body and tactile objects, the mind and mental phenomena." 3. He quote Dhammapada Att. 3.406 sabbe dhammaati pañcakkhandhaa And translate it as: "sabbe dharmas (plural) designates the five khandhas" Is the translation correct? 4. Sabba in standalone SN 4.28 "sabbam., bhikkhave, anatta" The 'all', bhikkhus, are not the Soul. The word dhamma is not even in this passage. Dhammaa is not the subject of anatta's modification. Similarly for these two passage: SN 4.21 "sabbam., bhikkhave, addhabhu'tam" Bhikkhus, the 'all' are afflictions. SN 4.19 "sabbam., bhikkhave, a'dittam." Bhikkhus, the 'all' are ablaze. The absurd notion that sabba is an adjective modifying Dhamma is impossible. Firstly Dhamma is in the nominative plural; secondly sabba is the standalone accusative direct object in the cases directly above, namely SN 4.28, which proves that Dhamma is not the direct object of anattaa. Dhamma is in the nominative plural in agreement with sabba, not in the accusative, which would be "dhammam." or plural accusative "dhamme" sabba (nominative) is the direct object of anatta' which is why it occurs as sabbe (accusative plural). Dhamma is not the direct object of this sentence but rather the subject. Dhammapada 277. "Sabbe san.kha'ra' anicca'"ti, yada' pan'n'a'ya passati; atha nibbindati dukkhe, esa maggo visuddhiya'. 'The all' phenomena are impermanent; when this is seen by means of wisdom, one becomes disgusted with suffering. This is the path of clarity. 278. "Sabbe san.kha'ra' dukkha'"ti, yada' pan'n'a'ya passati; atha nibbindati dukkhe, esa maggo visuddhiya'. 'The all' phenomena are suffering; when this is seen by means of wisdom, one becomes disgusted with suffering. This is the path of clarity. 279. "Sabbe dhamma' anatta'"ti, yada' pan'n'a'ya passati; atha nibbindati dukkhe, esa maggo visuddhiya'. 'The all' dharmas are not the Soul; when this is seen by means of wisdom, one becomes disgusted with suffering. This is the path of clarity. Other occurances of Sabba in Sutta SN 2.125 sabbe saªkha'ra' netam. mama nesohamasmi na meso atta'ti 'the all' phenomena are not me, are not who I am, are not my Soul. SN 3.43 sabbe saªkha'ra' anicca' dukkha' viparin.a'madhamma'ti 'the all' phenomena are not everlasting, suffering are dhammas in flux. AN 1.32 sabbe te dhamma' anit.t.ha'ya 'the all' dharmas are not fixed. ----- Can anyone help prove SA wrong? Thanks, Rahula 16571 From: rjkjp1 Date: Thu Oct 31, 2002 11:03pm Subject: Re: Sabbe dhammaa anattaa --- Dear rahula, It is true that at times the word dhamma refers to the five khandas but soetimes it has a wider meaning. Consider the context of this phrase. From memory it comes with the sentences: Sabbe sankhara annicum and sabbe sankhara dukkhum Sankhra in these cases refers to all conditioned phenomena - tehfive khandas. Hence why does the buddha chage this word to dhamma for anatta?It is because dhamma can include the conditioned and unconditioned -ie the five khandas and nibbana. robert In dhammastudygroup@y..., "rahula_80" wrote: > Hi, > > How would you translate: > > sabbe dhammaa anattaa > > SA says that "sabbe" only pertains the five khandhas. > > He provide several evidence for this. > > 1. He disect the phrase this way: > > Sabbe dhammaa anattaa - Dhammapada 279 > > sabbe (noun [see SN 4.15], direct object, in accusative. Sabba is > nominative, sensory-determinates) > > dhammaa (proper noun, plural, subject, undeclined in nominative, > dharmas) > > anattaa (adjective, modifying sabba. An [is not] atta' [attan: Soul]). > Sabbe "the All" is the subject of Anatta in sabbe dhammaa anatta. > > Dhammaa is in nominative plural. > > sabbe (noun [see SN 4.15], direct object, in accusative. Sabba is > nominative, 'the all') The 'all' partakes of the Soul; however the > Soul does not partake of, is not IN, the 'all'. Sabbe Dharmas are not > the Soul (anatta). > > Is this correct? > > 2. He quote the Sabba Sutta (The All) Salayatana Vagga, Samyutta > Nikaya {S iv 15; CDB ii 1140} > > "The eye forms, the ear and sounds, the nose and odours, the tongue > and tastes, the body and tactile objects, the mind and mental > phenomena." > > 3. He quote Dhammapada Att. 3.406 > > sabbe dhammaati pañcakkhandhaa > > And translate it as: > "sabbe dharmas (plural) designates the five khandhas" > > > Is the translation correct? > > 4. Sabba in standalone > > SN 4.28 "sabbam., bhikkhave, anatta" > The 'all', bhikkhus, are not the Soul. > The word dhamma is not even in this passage. Dhammaa is not the > subject of anatta's modification. > Similarly for these two passage: > > SN 4.21 "sabbam., bhikkhave, addhabhu'tam" Bhikkhus, the 'all' are > afflictions. > > SN 4.19 "sabbam., bhikkhave, a'dittam." Bhikkhus, the 'all' are > ablaze. > > > The absurd notion that sabba is an adjective modifying Dhamma is > impossible. Firstly Dhamma is in the nominative plural; secondly > sabba is the standalone > accusative direct object in the cases directly above, namely SN 4.28, > which proves that Dhamma is not the direct object of anattaa. > > Dhamma is in the nominative plural in agreement with sabba, not in > the > accusative, which would be "dhammam." or plural accusative "dhamme" > sabba (nominative) is the direct object of anatta' which is why it > occurs as sabbe (accusative plural). Dhamma is not the direct object > of this sentence but rather the subject. > > > > Dhammapada > 277. "Sabbe san.kha'ra' anicca'"ti, yada' pan'n'a'ya passati; atha > nibbindati dukkhe, esa maggo visuddhiya'. > 'The all' phenomena are impermanent; when this is seen by means of > wisdom, one becomes disgusted with suffering. This is the path of > clarity. > 278. "Sabbe san.kha'ra' dukkha'"ti, yada' pan'n'a'ya passati; atha > nibbindati dukkhe, esa maggo visuddhiya'. > 'The all' phenomena are suffering; when this is seen by means of > wisdom, one becomes disgusted with suffering. This is the path of > clarity. > 279. "Sabbe dhamma' anatta'"ti, yada' pan'n'a'ya passati; atha > nibbindati dukkhe, esa maggo visuddhiya'. > 'The all' dharmas are not the Soul; when this is seen by means of > wisdom, one becomes disgusted with suffering. This is the path of > clarity. > > > Other occurances of Sabba in Sutta > SN 2.125 sabbe saªkha'ra' netam. mama nesohamasmi na meso atta'ti > 'the all' phenomena are not me, are not who I am, are not my Soul. > SN 3.43 sabbe saªkha'ra' anicca' dukkha' viparin.a'madhamma'ti > 'the all' phenomena are not everlasting, suffering are dhammas in > flux. > AN 1.32 sabbe te dhamma' anit.t.ha'ya > 'the all' dharmas are not fixed. > > ----- > > Can anyone help prove SA wrong? > > Thanks, Rahula 16572 From: rahula_80 Date: Thu Oct 31, 2002 11:08pm Subject: Re: Sabbe dhammaa anattaa Hi, It seems that not only SA think thus. See Concentration-Insight Meditation http://www.concentration.org/_insight.html [Dhammakaya Buddhist Meditation Institute Thailand] It says: sabbe dhamma anatta All compounds are devoid of self. Some translate the phrase sabbe dhamma literally as "all phenomena" (both compound and non-compound). This is not true. According to Lord Buddha's Teaching in the Dhammapada Pali text, as interpreted by the original arahant commentators and by the most recent translators (Carter and Palihawadana 1987) 2, the words sabbe dhamma , in this context, refer only to the Five Aggregates . These are sankhara or compounds. Thus, the reference excludes pure, non-compound aspects of nature such as nibbana . ----- 16573 From: rahula_80 Date: Thu Oct 31, 2002 11:28pm Subject: Re: Sabbe dhammaa anattaa Hi, The PTS Dictionary have this: In the entry for Dhamma, it says: ".....Freq. in formula sabbe dhamma anicca (+dukkha anatta: see nicca) "the whole of the visible world, all phenomena are evanescent etc." S III.132 Sabbe dhamma anicca!!! The PTS Dictionary is available online. http://dsal.uchicago.edu/dictionaries/pali/ CAn anyone check this out? 16574 From: James Date: Fri Nov 1, 2002 0:17am Subject: [dsg] Re: "Your duty is the contemplation" WL, What you ask is a very complex and deep question. I am not sure if I am qualified to answer it, but that has never stopped me before! Hehehe.. You write: My question is this: How does one know when insight occurs? How does one know if it is insight, not knowledge, or mere intellectual understanding of something, since we are so heavily influenced by what we've been taught, by school, by religion, and heck, by Buddhism? It seems to me that you are looking at `insight' as the gaining of something, like learning math, science, and history; I posit that `insight' is actually the taking away of something. Insight is when ignorance and craving are removed from the mind so that its inherent wisdom can shine through. Like muddy water stilled or clouds that dissolve in the midday sun, insight is when the obstructions of the mind are removed and the underlying wisdom is clearly seen. Nothing has been added to the mind; `insight'/'wisdom' How does one know that this has/is happening? Well, if you are a full arahant, it is easy to see. The obstructions are clearly gone and reality is clearly seen. You have no doubt and no one could tell you otherwise as to what you have achieved. But what if you are not a full arahant? Then how does one know that the defilements are beginning to be removed? This is a little tricky and my answer may come across as a bit unconventional: A person knows that he/she is on the correct path of Buddhism and making strides because he/she will experience almost constant wavering between dissatisfaction and angst with one's current `insight', and happiness with one's current `insight'. But, the thought is always there and the concern is always there about `insight'. Those who have zero insight, don't worry or think about such things. Yep, you heard me right. Why? Because as the defilements are removed, the goal (nibbana) is more in sight but it is not completely in sight and it is hard to reach. Like the saying goes, it is `so close and yet so far'. And with nibbana being like candy behind a glass counter, we grow even more dissatisfied with what we don't have yet, but extremely excited and happy that we at least see it. Before entering this Buddhist path, the glass was tinted, the candy out of sight, and we felt like we were `missing something' but never quite sure what that `something' was. We stumbled onto Buddhism, saw that it answered a lot of the questions we had, but also discovered that its path is `bitter sweet'. So WL, be rest assured, you have already gained much insight. If you hadn't, the issue of how much insight you have gained would not be important to you. Asking the question would not be important to you. Even belonging to this group would not be important to you. You would live your life for sex, drugs, and rock-n-roll like the rest of the masses. But you don't, so you have gained much insight. The Buddha said that his path was beautiful in the beginning, in the middle and in the end. But he didn't say it was quick, easily understood, easy to follow, or guaranteed for all. Don't evaluate yourself by where you aren't; evaluate yourself by where you have come from. Take care. Metta, James --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "Uan Chih Liu" wrote: > Hi, > I've been following this thread because I was hoping it may > provide me some answers to a question that has been > bothering me. But thus far, perhaps due to my ignorance, > I have not found the answers yet. > > My question is this: How does one know when insight occurs? > How does one know if it is insight, not knowledge, or mere > intellectural understanding of something, since we are so heavily > influenced by what we've been taught, by school, by religion, and > heck, by Buddhism? There are times while I'm contemplating > about things, all of sudden, bang, something becomes clear to me. > I'm sure everyone experiences that. Does that constitute as an > insight or was it merely intellectural understanding or was it merely > a concept construed by my mind with so much conviction that I > actually thought it was insight? I've found learning and knowledge > is my best friend and biggest enemy on my journey for seeking for > truth. If anyone can shed some light on this, would appreciate it. > > A very perplexed being, > WL 16575 From: Sarah Date: Fri Nov 1, 2002 0:22am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Sabbe dhammaa anattaa Hi Rahula, --- rahula_80 wrote: > Hi, > > It seems that not only SA think thus. > > See Concentration-Insight Meditation > http://www.concentration.org/_insight.html > > [Dhammakaya Buddhist Meditation Institute Thailand] > > It says: > > sabbe dhamma anatta > > All compounds are devoid of self. .... I'm in a rush...students about to arrive, but you may like to look at part of this post from the DSG archives from Rob Ed in the meantime. (Btw,I hope people don't think SA refers to me;-)): http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/8280 ***** ">Robert (Eddison): >There are a small number of texts in which impermanence is predicated of *dhammas* (as opposed to sankhaaras), but there is always some term or phrase limiting it to some particular kind of dhamma. For example, the Kathaavatthu has the phrase "all *conditioned* dhammas are impermanent" (sabbe san.khatadhammaa aniccaa); the Vibhanga of the Abhidhamma Pi.taka has simply "dhammas are impermanent" (dhammaa aniccaa), but the context makes it clear that it is the sense bases and sense objects that are being referred to. When the term "dhammas" occurs without any such limiting terms or phrases it is invariably anattaa and not anicca that is predicated of them. The reason for this according to the Commentaries is that "dhammas" in such contexts denotes both conditioned dhammas and the unconditioned dhamma (and the latter is not impermanent). As the Samyutta Commentary states: 'Sabbe san.khaaraa aniccaa' ti sabbe tebhuumakasan.khaaraa aniccaa. 'All formations are impermanent' means all formations on the three levels are impermanent. 'Sabbe dhammaa anattaa' ti sabbe catubhuumakadhammaa anattaa. 'All dhammas are not self' means all dhammas on the four levels are not self. (SA ii 318, Commentary to the Channa Sutta) ["Three levels" means the sensual (kaamabhuumi), the refined material (ruupabhuumi) and the immaterial (aruupabhuumi). "Four levels" means the three already mentioned together with the supramundane level >(lokuttarabhuumi)]" ***** There was also a helpful post ages ago from Gayan (or was it Suan?)as I recall, but I haven't been able to access escribe for 2 or 3 days and can't find it quickly. Must dash. Thanks for raising these important points. Suan or others may have more. Sarah ====== > > Some translate the phrase sabbe dhamma literally as "all phenomena" > (both compound and non-compound). This is not true. According to Lord > Buddha's Teaching in the Dhammapada Pali text, as interpreted by the > original arahant commentators and by the most recent translators > (Carter and Palihawadana 1987) 2, the words sabbe dhamma , in this > context, refer only to the Five Aggregates . These are sankhara or > compounds. Thus, the reference excludes pure, non-compound aspects of > nature such as nibbana . > > ----- 16576 From: rjkjp1 Date: Fri Nov 1, 2002 3:17am Subject: Re: Sabbe dhammaa anattaa --- Dear Rahula, Dhammakaya are well-known in thailand where I am. You might want to do an internet search on the Bangkok post website (a main English newspaper) for background.. Robert In dhammastudygroup@y..., "rahula_80" wrote: > Hi, > > It seems that not only SA think thus. > > See Concentration-Insight Meditation > http://www.concentration.org/_insight.html > > [Dhammakaya Buddhist Meditation Institute Thailand] > > It says: > > sabbe dhamma anatta > > All compounds are devoid of self. > > Some translate the phrase sabbe dhamma literally as "all phenomena" > (both compound and non-compound). This is not true. According to Lord > Buddha's Teaching in the Dhammapada Pali text, as interpreted by the > original arahant commentators and by the most recent translators > (Carter and Palihawadana 1987) 2, the words sabbe dhamma , in this > context, refer only to the Five Aggregates . These are sankhara or > compounds. Thus, the reference excludes pure, non-compound aspects of > nature such as nibbana . > > ----- 16577 From: rjkjp1 Date: Fri Nov 1, 2002 3:41am Subject: Re: Practice on DSG --- Dear Christine, Nice to hear of your considerations; which seem so real to me.Vision actually refers to stages of vipassana - as this sutta covers development from beginning to end. You see the way it works is many people can hear the same Dhamma, but because of complex conditions it is inevitable that they will have different considerations. One might hear the True Dhamma and misinterpret it or even reject it, another might believe it but not consider deeply; another only considers but it doesn't get beyond that stage; another goes deeper and starts to penetrate the characteristics of dhammas. Once some men came to listen to the Buddha. Ananada observed them and wondered why only one of the men paid careful attention . The Buddha talked about their past lives and how this conditioned their behaviour now. He said to Ananda that it is no easy matter to listen (with wise attention) to profound Dhamma and only by accumulating the right conditions is this possible. We cannot control sati or wise attention to arise even when studying Dhamma. Somtimes it does and gradually there will/may be sufficient wisdom to see that - as you say-discussion or listening/studying/considering is crucial to the development of wisdom.Knowing this means that confidence in the teaching grows - and as you further note the factor of saddha (confidence)is needed , along with right energy.None of these factors are controllable but they must arise if the right conditions are nurtured. Even the men who couldn't properly listen to the Buddha will, if they continue to make the effort to attend talks,slowly accumulate wisdom. (Noguarantee of course, conditions are complex - and attitude is so important . Also conditioned). Sometimes confidence wanes but if there can be direct awareness of dhammas- including doubt or confidence - then this will be further confirmation of the conditionality of all dhammas. No one can make confidence stay. Robert In dhammastudygroup@y..., "christine_forsyth" > RobK, you say: "I think right practice is nothing other than the > arising of panna which experiences whatever is present." Your post > sent me diving to refresh > my understanding of Sati and Panna and I surfaced nearly a week > later ... [A grasshopper mind is not a structured or organised mind, > and may arrive a little after everyone else.] I took out > 'Cetasikas' read the chapters on Sati and Panna, and how they were > two of the five 'indriyas' or spiritual faculties which should be > developed, and went to read up on confidence (saddha ), energy > (viriya), and concentration (ekaggata ). After that I followed a > few other topics that caught my interest as well... > The eightfold path seems to get harder the more I learn, which is > sometimes discouraging, especially when I want to see some progress > (not necessarily quick) - and when I hear 'guarantees' of progress > elsewhere (four weeks sitting in Myanmar and come out a Sotapanna > for sure. Imagine that!). > "Kotthita then asked sariputta "If right understanding is > forwarded, by how many factors, your reverence, does there come > to be the fruit of freedom..." Sariputta listed 5 factors: > moral habit, hearing true dhama, discussion, calm, and vision. > The commentary notes that discussion [with the wise] helps to give up > wrong practice." - which I have proven in my own life to be Truth, > not sure what 'vision' means here. > But I find it hard to understand how, as sati is a cetasika and > ephemeral and is therefore not possible to direct or maintain, how > then can we choose, direct and maintain mindfulness when hearing > profound Dhamma. Isn't Dhamma as much an object as the breath? Or is > it something else that is in operation here? > > metta, > Christine 16578 From: abhidhammika Date: Fri Nov 1, 2002 7:15am Subject: Re: Sabbe dhammaa anattaa: To Sarah, Rahula, Robert K Dear Sarah, Rahula, Robert Kirkpatrick How are you? I have been following this thread with interest. Like Robert Kirkpatrick said, Sabbe Dhammaa means both conditioned and unconditioned dhammas as Robert Eddison quoted from Khandha Samyutta commentary where the term "catubhuumakadhammaa" is used. When Section 279 in Dhammapada commentary said "Tattha sabbe dhammaati pancakkhandhaa eva adhippetaa", we need to remember the context indicated by the term "Tattha" (On that occasion, in that context). The context on that occasion was that the Buddha was giving this particular instruction (sabbe dhammaa anattaa, all things are selfless)to those monks who had previously practised specializing in the characteristic of selflessness of the five aggregates. That is why the Dhammapada commentary on Section 279 has to say that "On that occasion, all things means the five aggregates only". Therefore, we cannot justify any interpretation of the phrase "sabbe dhamaa" as a loophole to imply that the five aggregates alone are selfless. The Section 279 of the Dhammapada commentary does not permit us to interpret that selfless things do not include Nibbaana. With kind regards, Suan http://www.bodhiology.org --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Sarah wrote: Hi Rahula, --- rahula_80 wrote: > Hi, > > It seems that not only SA think thus. > > See Concentration-Insight Meditation > http://www.concentration.org/_insight.html > > [Dhammakaya Buddhist Meditation Institute Thailand] > > It says: > > sabbe dhamma anatta > > All compounds are devoid of self. .... I'm in a rush...students about to arrive, but you may like to look at part of this post from the DSG archives from Rob Ed in the meantime. (Btw,I hope people don't think SA refers to me;-)): http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/8280 ***** ">Robert (Eddison): >There are a small number of texts in which impermanence is predicated of *dhammas* (as opposed to sankhaaras), but there is always some term or phrase limiting it to some particular kind of dhamma. For example, the Kathaavatthu has the phrase "all *conditioned* dhammas are impermanent" (sabbe san.khatadhammaa aniccaa); the Vibhanga of the Abhidhamma Pi.taka has simply "dhammas are impermanent" (dhammaa aniccaa), but the context makes it clear that it is the sense bases and sense objects that are being referred to. When the term "dhammas" occurs without any such limiting terms or phrases it is invariably anattaa and not anicca that is predicated of them. The reason for this according to the Commentaries is that "dhammas" in such contexts denotes both conditioned dhammas and the unconditioned dhamma (and the latter is not impermanent). As the Samyutta Commentary states: 'Sabbe san.khaaraa aniccaa' ti sabbe tebhuumakasan.khaaraa aniccaa. 'All formations are impermanent' means all formations on the three levels are impermanent. 'Sabbe dhammaa anattaa' ti sabbe catubhuumakadhammaa anattaa. 'All dhammas are not self' means all dhammas on the four levels are not self. (SA ii 318, Commentary to the Channa Sutta) ["Three levels" means the sensual (kaamabhuumi), the refined material (ruupabhuumi) and the immaterial (aruupabhuumi). "Four levels" means the three already mentioned together with the supramundane level >(lokuttarabhuumi)]" ***** There was also a helpful post ages ago from Gayan (or was it Suan?)as I recall, but I haven't been able to access escribe for 2 or 3 days and can't find it quickly. Must dash. Thanks for raising these important points. Suan or others may have more. Sarah ====== > > Some translate the phrase sabbe dhamma literally as "all phenomena" > (both compound and non-compound). This is not true. According to Lord > Buddha's Teaching in the Dhammapada Pali text, as interpreted by the > original arahant commentators and by the most recent translators > (Carter and Palihawadana 1987) 2, the words sabbe dhamma , in this > context, refer only to the Five Aggregates . These are sankhara or > compounds. Thus, the reference excludes pure, non-compound aspects of > nature such as nibbana . > > ----- 16579 From: Date: Fri Nov 1, 2002 2:46am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Sabbe dhammaa anattaa Hi, Rahula - In a message dated 11/1/02 2:09:24 AM Eastern Standard Time, rahula_80@y... writes: > > Hi, > > It seems that not only SA think thus. > > See Concentration-Insight Meditation > http://www.concentration.org/_insight.html > > [Dhammakaya Buddhist Meditation Institute Thailand] > > It says: > > sabbe dhamma anatta > > All compounds are devoid of self. > > Some translate the phrase sabbe dhamma literally as "all phenomena" > (both compound and non-compound). This is not true. According to Lord > Buddha's Teaching in the Dhammapada Pali text, as interpreted by the > original arahant commentators and by the most recent translators > (Carter and Palihawadana 1987) 2, the words sabbe dhamma , in this > context, refer only to the Five Aggregates . These are sankhara or > compounds. Thus, the reference excludes pure, non-compound aspects of > nature such as nibbana . > > ========================= Any interpretation which views nibbana as atta is, I believe, heretical, and the Dhammakaya Buddhist Meditation Institute's taking that position causes me to wonder about that organization. The Buddha's teachings are generally quite precise, and his using 'sankhara' twice, once with 'anicca' and once with 'dukkha', but then changing to 'dhamma' with regard to 'anatta' is quite unlikely to be unintentional. 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) 16580 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Nov 1, 2002 10:06am Subject: Perfections Ch 6, Energy, no 12 Perfections Ch 6, Energy, no 12 We read in the Commentary to the ³Samvara Jåtaka²(no. 462, Khuddhaka Nikåya): At that time when the Buddha was dwelling in the Jeta Grove, he told the following story about a monk who had ceased to strive. When he was a young man he lived at Såvatthí, and after he had heard the Buddha preach the Dhamma, he gained confidence and became a monk. Fulfilling the tasks imposed by his teachers and preceptors, he learnt by heart both divisions of the Påtimokkha. After five years when he had learnt the meditation subjects he took leave of his teachers and preceptors because he wanted to dwell in the forest. When he came to a frontier village people took confidence in him because of his deportment and built a hut of leaves for him, so that he could dwell in that village. When it was the rainy season, he developed with strenuous endeavour his meditation subject during three months, but when he did not reach attainment, he thought that he himself was the lowest among the four classes of people, namely those who could only understand the theory of the teachings, ³pada parama² (12 . Hence he returned to the Jeta Grove in order to see the Buddha in person and to listen to his delightful Dhamma Discourses. When the Buddha was informed about this he said to that monk, ³The highest fruit in this teaching which is arahatship cannot be realized by someone who is lazy. In the past you were full of energy and easy to teach. Although you were the youngest of all the hundred sons of the King of Vårånasi, you obtained the white umbrella and became the King.² The Buddha then related the story of the past when that monk was King Saóvara. The Buddha spoke about his excellent qualities which caused his brothers and the citizens to pay him honour and to make him King, although he was the youngest of the hundred sons of the King of Vårånasi. King Saóvara spoke to Prince Uposatha, who was his eldest brother and who was in his last life the venerable Såriputta, the following words: ³I never grudge, O Prince, great sages who are seeking what is supreme and ready to pay them honour due with humble mind, I fall before their feet.² Even when the prince with humble mind paid honour, falling at other people¹s feet, he must have had viriya, endeavour to eradicate defilements, such as conceit or attachment to the importance of self, the importance of being a prince, the son of the King of Vårånasi. Here we see that nothing can be accomplished without viriya. Cittas are varied: some people are jealous of those who have knowledge, but they are not envious in other respects. It depends on someone¹s accumulations on account of which kind of object he has envy. If a person has knowledge and understanding other people should have respect for his understanding, but some people are still inclined to be jealous. One needs to have viriya, one needs to have endeavour to see the danger of jealousy and to get rid of it. King Samvara continued with the words: Wise sages who delight in the excellent teaching of those who seek what is excellent, taught me continuously. I, who was intent on what is right and liked to listen, had no envy. I listened to the words of the wise sages who are seeking what is supreme, I did not despise any cousel and was delighted with the teaching. I did not reduce the allowances of the elephant troops and chariotmen, royal guard and infantry, and I paid them the bonus and reward due to them. Great nobles and wise counsellors are waiting on me and giving me assistance so that the city of Vårånasi abounds with rice, fish and drinking water. Merchants who come from different states prosper, and I assist and protect them. Now you know the truth, Uposatha. Because of these words all people could see that the King was endowed with excellent qualities and therefore worthy to be the King of Vårånasi. Footnote: 12. As to the four classes of people: some could attain enlightenment quickly, even at the beginning of a discourse; some could attain after a more detailed explanation; some could attain after having heard many explanations and after having considered the truth again and again; Some could only understand the theory, the words, and did not attain during that life. They are called ³pada parama², those for whom the wprds (pada) are the highest (parama). The monk in the story thought that he was a pada parama. 16581 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Fri Nov 1, 2002 11:43am Subject: RE: [dsg] Re: "Your duty is the contemplation" Dear Larry, > -----Original Message----- > From: LBIDD@w... [mailto:LBIDD@w...] > > Hi Kom, > > As for the debate that just won't go away, I think we are both headed in > the same direction but maybe not on the same track. As I see it the real > issue is what is meant by "direct experience". I'm sure we understand > this in the same way. The point of contention is that you think there I agree about heading in the same direction! > are no concepts involved in a direct experience but I do think concepts > are involved. The reason I think so is that experience does not arise > in discrete packages. It is a continuous, flowing, inter-related > process. What I am saying here is that a citta cognizes only one object at a time. When it is cognizing a reality, it is not cognizing concept, when it is cognizing concept, it is not cognizing realities. It is clearly stated that a single process (vithi) will have only one object (either reality or concept) for the entire process. I was dicussing to the saying that "concepts are part of every citta process on the level of mundane experience." Perhaps we understand "process" in a different manner? > The inter-relatedness is necessary in order to make sense out > of what is happening. And I would contend that the 'making sense' > process always involves concepts. A concept is the only dhamma that > _means_ something. Everything else is meaningless, literally. 'Meaning' > is relationship and you can't make sense without relationship. Hence, > you gotta have concepts. What you are saying here is true in everyday life. We don't refer to things as "what appears to the eye", but we refer to them as "this shape", "object of this function", "a chair." Without conceptualization, we hardly remember what appears. On the other hands, wisdom are separated into 3 (rough) levels: 1) Wisdom by hearing 2) Wisdom by thinking 3) Wisdom by direct experience The 8-fold path (both mundane and supramundane), from the most absolute standpoints, is strictly 3), but 3) cannot occur without 1) or 2). When wisdom at 3) is occuring, it doesn't necessarily mean that the person isn't thinking about what just appears (perhaps wisdom at 2)) immediately afterward. However, wisdom of 1) and 2) alone cannot bring one to the supramundane path: it is the wisdom at 3) (although without 1 and 2!) that does. > > Now that doesn't mean you have to have words floating around in your > head all the time. Though all of us do have words floating around in our > head most of the time. My theory is that there are nuggets of meaning > (concepts without words) that make our brains work [don't try to find > this in the abhidhamma]. The tikas gives and example of direct experience (not necessarily with wisdom) and the conceptualization of what appears: it is applied to seeing. 1) When we first see, only the visible object appears 2) Then we conceptualize on shape and form (clear color, round, etc.) 3) Then we conceptualize on meaning (object that can hold water) 4) Then we verbalize it (a water glass). Another example on hearing somebody speak: 1) When we first hear, only the sound appears 2) Then we conceptualize on the amplititude and the pitch (loud, high, low pitch, etc.) 3) Then we collect the sound into distinct consonants, and words 4) Then we conceptualize on the meaning of the word 5) Then we conceptualize on what the word refers to The process that takes realities to concepts are immensely fast. But on the other hand, it is the process at the reality level that impermanence, suffering, and anattaness can truly (and irrefutably) appear to wisdom. > you could catch up on the commentary and give us your input. Whatever > this procedure is, it is other than being absorbed in thinking about > concepts. Do you have anything to add to this? I'm out of concepts. > My simple idea is that it is the wisdom at the direct level that can truly bring us to the supra-mundane path, but we need wisdom at all level to make this to happen, and we also need kusala of every kind (conceptual or not) to aid us in this... kom 16582 From: rahula_80 Date: Fri Nov 1, 2002 1:12pm Subject: Re: Sabbe dhammaa anattaa Hi, > Dhammakaya are well-known in thailand where I am. You might want to > do an internet search on the Bangkok post website (a main English > newspaper) for background.. > Robert I know they are into some controversy but that is beside the point. 16583 From: phamdluan2000 Date: Fri Nov 1, 2002 1:36pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Sabbe dhammaa anattaa Dear Howard, --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., upasaka@a... wrote: Hi, Rahula - Any interpretation which views nibbana as atta is, I believe, heretical, and the Dhammakaya Buddhist Meditation Institute's taking that position causes me to wonder about that organization. The Buddha's teachings are generally quite precise, and his using 'sankhara' twice, once with 'anicca' and once with 'dukkha', but then changing to 'dhamma' with regard to 'anatta' is quite unlikely to be unintentional. With metta, Howard KKT: A definition of Nibbana from the Udana: O bhikkhus, there is the unborn, ungrown, and unconditioned. Were there not the unborn, ungrown, and unconditioned, there would be no escape for the born, grown, and conditioned. Since there is the unborn, ungrown, and unconditioned, so there is escape for the born, grown, and conditioned. This definition could easily lead one to think that Nibbana is atta since one meaning of atta is that something << exists by itself >> and is << independent >> of other things. If Nibbana is << unborn, ungrown, and unconditioned >> then isn't Nibbana << existing by itself >> and << independent >> of everything? I raise this question not because I want to defend the atta doctrine but because I want to show that this matter is not easily to clinch. Peace, KKT 16584 From: Date: Fri Nov 1, 2002 8:41am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: "Your duty is the contemplation" Hi, Kom(, James, and all) - In a message dated 11/1/02 2:44:40 PM Eastern Standard Time, kom@a... writes: > The tikas gives and example of direct experience (not necessarily with > wisdom) and the conceptualization of what appears: it is applied to seeing. > 1) When we first see, only the visible object appears > 2) Then we conceptualize on shape and form (clear color, round, etc.) > 3) Then we conceptualize on meaning (object that can hold water) > 4) Then we verbalize it (a water glass). > ============================ Kom, I've looked through the entire list of cetasikas, and I do not come upon the conceptual faculty. It would seem to be related to sa~n~na, but is surely not the same as that, if for no other reason than sa~n~na being a universal cetasika. If conceptualization is actually a *group* of cetasikas, exactly which cetasikas are involved. Somethinga as important as concept formation should have a clear formulation somewhere I should think. 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) 16585 From: Date: Fri Nov 1, 2002 8:42am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: "Your duty is the contemplation" Hi again, Kom - I mentioned James by mistake. It was Larry you were writing to. 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) 16586 From: robmoult Date: Fri Nov 1, 2002 2:21pm Subject: New Class Notes On Line! Hi All, Abhidhamma Class Notes have been updated in the "Files" Section of the DSG. Major additions include: - "Inside the Sense Door Thought Process" (from October update) - "Rupa" (summary of Nina's book) - "Reality and Concepts" (summary of Khun Sujin's book) - "Concept and Reality" (partial summary of Bhikkhu Nanananda's book) - "Conditional Relations" (summary of Nina's book) There are reports that one needs version 5.0 of Acrobat reader. Download and enjoy! As always, I welcome criticisms (especially constructive ones!) Thanks, Rob M :-) 16587 From: Date: Fri Nov 1, 2002 2:28pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: "Your duty is the contemplation" Hi James, I agree with everything you said. Anyone who wants to argue about concepts and reality should talk to you. best wishes, Larry 16588 From: rahula_80 Date: Fri Nov 1, 2002 2:31pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Sabbe dhammaa anattaa Hi, > KKT: A definition of Nibbana from the Udana: > > > O bhikkhus, there is the unborn, ungrown, and unconditioned. > Were there not the unborn, ungrown, and unconditioned, > there would be no escape for the born, grown, and conditioned. > Since there is the unborn, ungrown, and unconditioned, > so there is escape for the born, grown, and conditioned. > > > This definition could easily lead > one to think that Nibbana is atta > since one meaning of atta is that > something << exists by itself >> and > is << independent >> of other things. > > If Nibbana is << unborn, ungrown, and unconditioned >> > then isn't Nibbana << existing by itself >> > and << independent >> of everything? "In a psychological sense, a design could be 'unmade' or 'dissolved' by shifting one's attention to its components. Even so, 'what is born' (jaatam), 'become' (bhuutam), 'made' (katam) and 'compounded' (samkhatam) is transformed into a 'not-born', 'not-become', 'not-made' and 'not-compounded' state by a penetrative insight into its causes and conditions. All 'designs' involved in the magic-show of consciousness, which are but dependently arisen, also cease when ignorance and craving are eradicated. The above epithets of Nibbaana are therefore psychological, and not metaphysical, in their import. Where there is no 'putting-together', there is no 'falling-apart'. Hence Nibbaana is also called apalokitam--the 'Non-disintegrating'. It is unfortunate that many scholars, both Eastern and Western, have interpreted metaphysically the two passages trom the Udaana quoted here, bringing out conclusions which are hardly in keeping with the teachings of Anattaa. The widespread tendency is to see in these two passages a reference to some mysterious, nondescript realm in a different dimension of existence, though the Buddha was positive that all existence is subject to the law of impermanence." (from _The Magic of the Mind_, pages 78-79, footnote 2) 16589 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Fri Nov 1, 2002 2:34pm Subject: RE: [dsg] Re: "Your duty is the contemplation" Dear Howard, > -----Original Message----- > From: upasaka@a... [mailto:upasaka@a...] > Sent: Friday, November 01, 2002 1:41 PM > To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com > Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: "Your duty is the contemplation" > > > The tikas gives and example of direct experience (not necessarily with > > wisdom) and the conceptualization of what appears: it is > applied to seeing. > > 1) When we first see, only the visible object appears > > 2) Then we conceptualize on shape and form (clear color, round, etc.) > > 3) Then we conceptualize on meaning (object that can hold water) > > 4) Then we verbalize it (a water glass). > > > ============================ > Kom, I've looked through the entire list of cetasikas, and > I do not > come upon the conceptual faculty. It would seem to be related to > sa~n~na, but > is surely not the same as that, if for no other reason than > sa~n~na being a > universal cetasika. If conceptualization is actually a *group* of > cetasikas, > exactly which cetasikas are involved. Somethinga as important as concept > formation should have a clear formulation somewhere I should think. When I referred to "conceptualization" or "conceptualize", I don't mean it is a specific reality. When the citta cognizes a concept, it conceptualizes, and the other con-ascent cetasikas also conceptualize (or cognize concepts). kom 16590 From: rahula_80 Date: Fri Nov 1, 2002 2:49pm Subject: [dsg] Udana 80 passage Hi, This is written by Bruce Burrill: It appears twice in the Pali texts, in the Udana 80 (Ud VIII.3) and in the Itivuttaka, 37-8. (Itivuttaka 43) The "non" words are in Pali _ajatam_, _abhutam_, _akatam_, _asankhatam_. In the Pali texts when there is a list of words such as we have here, ajatam, abhutam, etc, they can be understood as synonyms. As we can plainly see each of these words starts with an _a_, which is a privative. The privative _a_ in Sanskrit/Pali is very much like the English privative _a_, for example, asexual reproduction -- that is, reproduction without sex. The privative _a_ in Sanskrit/Pali needs not be, as unfortunately it so often is, limited to being translated as "un," "not," or "non." Asankhata: unformed, or better: unconditioned, can be translated as free from conditions, without conditions, not conditioned, conditionlessness. The most important word in this list is _asankhata_. Both nibbana/nirvana and ASANKHATA are defined in the same way: "That which is the destruction of greed, hatred and delusion is nirvana; .. is _asankhata_," S.N. IV 251 and IV 321 and in S.N. IV 359 and S.N. 362, respectively. Each of the other "a" terms of the Udana 80 are used in these forms or in variations to indicate nirvana. The word _asankhata_ tells us that one is no longer conditioned by hatred, greed, and ignorance. The first sentence in our passage reads in Pali: "Atthi [There is] ajatam [unborn], abhutam [unproduced], akatam, [unmade], asankhatam [unconditioned]." It is important to note that ajatam, abhutam, etc are adjectives, not nouns. The noun is implied. So we can ask, There is _what_? What is the implied noun? Since the early texts show that the Buddha did not indulge in a metaphysics of being, but rather was concerned with an ontology of becoming in terms of experiential states, it seems hardly likely that some sort of transcendent, metaphysical "entity" or "reality" are the concepts implied here. To assume that the Udana 80 text is referring to a metaphysical entity is to put this text outside of what the immediate and broader contexts show. As to the question, "There is what," a word meaning "state" or "characteristic" rather than "entity" seems more likely and this is borne out by the Buddha in the Itivuttaka 39: "Whoever, by knowing this state/this characteristic [padam] that is _not conditioned_ [(asankhatam) by greed, hatred, and delusion], their minds released by the extinction of becoming's conduit -- They, delighting in extinction [of hatred, greed, and ignorance], reach the pith of mental states. Those who are 'such' get rid of all becomings." _Ye etad-an~n~aaya padam(ng) asankhatam(ng)...._ or "By knowing this unconditioned state/characteristic..." or "By knowing the state/characteristic that is without conditions [of hatred, greed, and ignorance]...." Let us not forget, unconditioned, asankhata, is a synonym for nirvana, which is to say: By knowing the destruction greed, hatred, and delusion, their minds released.... "The extinction of becoming's conduit" is another expression for nibbana/nirvana. The Itivuttaka, 37-8, contains the central section of Udana 80, and I like very much Rune Johansson's suggestion of translating _ajata_, etc, by "freedom from birth," etc. since such a translations supplies the implied noun via the privative _a_ as in _a_sankhata: === This said by the Blessed One, the Worthy One, was heard by me in this way: "Monks, there is freedom from birth, freedom from becoming, freedom from making, freedom from conditioning. For, monks if there were not this freedom from birth, freedom from becoming, freedom from making, freedom from conditioning, then escape from that which is birth, becoming, making, conditioning, would not be known here. But, monks, because there is freedom from birth, freedom from becoming, freedom from making, freedom from conditioning, therefore the escape from that which is birth, becoming, making, conditioning is known." [Here the Buddha, The Blessed One, offers his own verse commentary on his statement.] This meaning the Blessed One spoke, it is spoken here in this way: That which is born, become, arisen, made, conditioned, And thus unstable, put together of decay and death, The seat of disease, brittle, Caused and craving food, That is not fit to find pleasure in. Being freed of this, calmed beyond conjecture, stable, Freed from birth, freed from arising, freed from sorrow, Freed from passions, the elements of suffering stopped, The conditioning [of greed, hatred and delusion] appeased, This is ease [bliss]. === Or this could be translated as: "There is (a state) without birth, without becoming, without production and without compounding..." It is worth noting that the Buddha's own commentary does not point to a metaphysical entity. 16591 From: rahula_80 Date: Fri Nov 1, 2002 2:54pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Udana 80 passage Hi, Bhikkhu Thanissaro's translation of the two suttas can be found here: Udana VIII.3 (Udana 80) Nibbana Sutta, Total Unbinding (3) http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/khuddaka/udana/ud8-03.html Ittivuttaka 43. {Iti II.16; Iti 37} http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/khuddaka/iti/iti2.html 16592 From: Date: Fri Nov 1, 2002 3:23pm Subject: RE: [dsg] Re: "Your duty is the contemplation" Hi Kom, Thanks for your detailed and informative response. I think we are pretty much in agreement, but here are a few questions and comments: K: What I am saying here is that a citta cognizes only one object at a time. L: I agree, but this is a conceptual way of understanding. In reality there is no *one* anything. Everything is a group process evolving through beginning, middle, and end, and ONLY PARTIALLY PERCEIVED. There either is no wholeness or wholeness is never really perceived. No one experiences the whole of Thailand and no one experiences the whole of red or salty. This is because everything has a potentially limitless identity. Thailand's identity depends on Myanmar which depends on S.E. Asia which depends on earth which depends on solar system etc. etc. etc. The same goes for red or salty. The middle way is the partial way; it is ordinary experience. K: On the other hand, wisdom is separated into 3 (rough) levels: 1) Wisdom by hearing 2) Wisdom by thinking 3) Wisdom by direct experience The 8-fold path (both mundane and supramundane), from the most absolute standpoints, is strictly 3), but 3) cannot occur without 1) or 2). When wisdom at 3) is occurring, it doesn't necessarily mean that the person isn't thinking about what just appears (perhaps wisdom at 2)) immediately afterward. However, wisdom of 1) and 2) alone cannot bring one to the supramundane path: it is the wisdom at 3) (although without 1 and 2!) that does. L: we haven't studied wisdom yet so I don't really know what is going on with it. I am guessing there is a wisdom of the #3 variety that occurs in a very ordinary but weak form either in meditation (satipatthana) practice or at any time in daily life that we actually look at what is going on and see what is there. This is not a profound experience at all, usually, but I think it qualifies as direct experience. In order to be satipatthana the analysis has to lead, at least tenuously, to nibbana, perhaps by something as simple as seeing that this is impermanent or dukkha or anatta, even on a very ordinary, mundane, easily accessible level. I think concepts can help-out here but it is completely different from 'thinking about' or from the internal monologue. K: My simple idea is that it is the wisdom at the direct level that can truly bring us to the supra-mundane path, but we need wisdom at all level to make this to happen, and we also need kusala of every kind (conceptual or not) to aid us in this... L: I agree. Well said. Larry 16593 From: Date: Fri Nov 1, 2002 10:49am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Sabbe dhammaa anattaa Hi, KKT - In a message dated 11/1/02 4:36:32 PM Eastern Standard Time, phamdluan@a... writes: > > Dear Howard, > > > --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., upasaka@a... wrote: > > > Hi, Rahula - > > > Any interpretation which views nibbana as atta is, I believe, > heretical, and the Dhammakaya Buddhist Meditation Institute's taking > that position causes me to wonder about that organization. > The Buddha's teachings are generally quite precise, and his using > 'sankhara' twice, once with 'anicca' and once with 'dukkha', but then > changing to 'dhamma' with regard to 'anatta' is quite unlikely to be > unintentional. > > > With metta, > Howard > > > > > > KKT: A definition of Nibbana from the Udana: > > > O bhikkhus, there is the unborn, ungrown, and unconditioned. > Were there not the unborn, ungrown, and unconditioned, > there would be no escape for the born, grown, and conditioned. > Since there is the unborn, ungrown, and unconditioned, > so there is escape for the born, grown, and conditioned. > > > This definition could easily lead > one to think that Nibbana is atta > since one meaning of atta is that > something <>and > is <>of other things. > > If Nibbana is <> > then isn't Nibbana <> > and <>of everything? > > > I raise this question not because > I want to defend the atta doctrine > but because I want to show that > this matter is not easily to clinch. > > > Peace, > > > KKT > > =========================== Nibbana does formally share elements in common with a self. What makes nibbana not-self is, as I see it, twofold: 1) it is impersonal, and 2) it is an absence, not a presence - it is not pure being or sat (such as is the brahman/atman of the Vedanta). 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) 16594 From: azita gill Date: Fri Nov 1, 2002 4:00pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Way 14, Comm. heavy going --- christine_forsyth wrote: < To Christine, Sarah and KenH, < what wonderful kalyanamita [btw. what is the plural of this word - Q. for Pali scholars] you people are. Your posts have been very helpful and comforting, if living in an empty world can be comforting [sic]. seriously tho. thank you! I tend to be a little shy about exposing the down side of me, but I see words of encouragment are Xly beneficial and will ask for help maybe more often. < Yes, Chris, I do work with some unfortunate people. I feel very helpless about the plight of some of my indigenous clients. I tell myself about conditions, about kamma, about dhamma, and still I find it overwhelming. However, as someone said: Real life is the best test. The best test to see where 'we' are at. < Can someone tell me where Nina's 'Perfections' can be found. I think they are wonderful. < Cheers, Azita 16595 From: James Date: Fri Nov 1, 2002 4:05pm Subject: [dsg] Re: "Your duty is the contemplation" Larry, Thank you for the positive feedback, but please don't encourage people to argue with me!! And please don't send them my way with such a purpose...eeeekkkkk!! hehehe... I am having flashbacks of my prior, group experience! :-) I am trying my best to be non- controversial on this list (though I seem to attract controversy like a magnet...just ask Howard ;-). BTW, I want to post on an original line of thinking I have been having, concerning how fear appears to defile modern-day thinking/wisdom more than craving and desire. Is this allowable in this group or should the discussion follow or relate to the current sutta analysis? I don't want to overstep my bounds. Thank you in advance for your help to keep me on the straight and narrow..:-) Metta, James dhammastudygroup@y..., LBIDD@w... wrote: > Hi James, > > I agree with everything you said. Anyone who wants to argue about > concepts and reality should talk to you. > > best wishes, Larry 16596 From: Date: Fri Nov 1, 2002 11:08am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: "Your duty is the contemplation" Hi, Kom (and anyone else interested) - My point is that concepts/pa~n~natti are mind made, not just nature-given (as are rupas, vedana, etc). My question is what cetasikas, what basic mental functions other than vi~n~nana, are involved in the constructing of pa~n~natti, and how are pa~n~natti maintained and passed on (as templates). When I look outside and see "a tree", what is occurring is a complex juxtaposition of processes, some of which involve the pa~n~natti of 'tree'. How was that pa~n~natti constructed (by means of what cetasikas), how does it get applied to a series of processes of paramattha dhammas, and how is it passed along from mind-state to mind-state? This is a very important topic, because our entire world as we normally experience it, that is - the conventional world, is virtually all concept. Abhidhamma surely must give a complete account of concept formation. With metta, Howard In a message dated 11/1/02 5:37:16 PM Eastern Standard Time, kom@a... writes: > Dear Howard, > > >-----Original Message----- > >From: upasaka@a... [mailto:upasaka@a...] > >Sent: Friday, November 01, 2002 1:41 PM > >To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com > >Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: "Your duty is the contemplation" > > > >>The tikas gives and example of direct experience (not necessarily with > >>wisdom) and the conceptualization of what appears: it is > >applied to seeing. > >>1) When we first see, only the visible object appears > >>2) Then we conceptualize on shape and form (clear color, round, etc.) > >>3) Then we conceptualize on meaning (object that can hold water) > >>4) Then we verbalize it (a water glass). > >> > >============================ > > Kom, I've looked through the entire list of cetasikas, and > >I do not > >come upon the conceptual faculty. It would seem to be related to > >sa~n~na, but > >is surely not the same as that, if for no other reason than > >sa~n~na being a > >universal cetasika. If conceptualization is actually a *group* of > >cetasikas, > >exactly which cetasikas are involved. Somethinga as important as concept > >formation should have a clear formulation somewhere I should think. > > When I referred to "conceptualization" or "conceptualize", I don't mean it > is a specific reality. When the citta cognizes a concept, it > conceptualizes, and the other con-ascent cetasikas also conceptualize (or > cognize concepts). > > 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) 16597 From: rahula_80 Date: Fri Nov 1, 2002 4:19pm Subject: Re: Sabbe dhammaa anattaa Hi, The PTSD is in error on this point. Thanks to the lead pointed out by Sarah. S III 132 is actually Channa Sutta. And Channa Sutta (S III 132) has: Sabbe sa"nkhaaraa aniccaa; sabbe dhammaa anattaa"ti --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "rahula_80" wrote: > Hi, > > The PTS Dictionary have this: > > In the entry for Dhamma, it says: > > ".....Freq. in formula sabbe dhamma anicca (+dukkha anatta: see > nicca) "the whole of the visible world, all phenomena are evanescent > etc." S III.132 > > Sabbe dhamma anicca!!! > > The PTS Dictionary is available online. > http://dsal.uchicago.edu/dictionaries/pali/ > > CAn anyone check this out? 16598 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Fri Nov 1, 2002 4:21pm Subject: RE: [dsg] Re: "Your duty is the contemplation" Dear Larry, > -----Original Message----- > From: LBIDD@w... [mailto:LBIDD@w...] > > > Hi Kom, > > K: What I am saying here is that a citta cognizes only one object at a > time. > > L: I agree, but this is a conceptual way of understanding. In reality > there is no *one* anything. Everything is a group process evolving > through beginning, middle, and end, and ONLY PARTIALLY PERCEIVED. There > either is no wholeness or wholeness is never really perceived. No one > experiences the whole of Thailand and no one experiences the whole of > red or salty. This is because everything has a potentially limitless > identity. Thailand's identity depends on Myanmar which depends on S.E. > Asia which depends on earth which depends on solar system etc. etc. etc. > The same goes for red or salty. The middle way is the partial way; it is > ordinary experience. The example you gave here are all conceptual objects, so I am not sure what you think when this applies to realities. When visible object appears, there is no "wholeness" involved: the visible object (what appears through the eye) appears. There is no one, there is no many, just a phenomenon with its distinct characteristics (sabhava). The details of what appear depend on the faculties of the conditioning dhamma. You can see better if your eyes works well. You can see better if there is penetrative insight about what is being seen. > > K: On the other hand, wisdom is separated into 3 (rough) levels: > > 1) Wisdom by hearing > 2) Wisdom by thinking > 3) Wisdom by direct experience > > L: we haven't studied wisdom yet so I don't really know what is going on > with it. I am guessing there is a wisdom of the #3 variety that occurs > in a very ordinary but weak form either in meditation (satipatthana) Satipatthana from the very weakest form, through the supramundane are of the 3rd type of wisdom. > practice or at any time in daily life that we actually look at what is > going on and see what is there. This is not a profound experience at > all, usually, but I think it qualifies as direct experience. In order to > be satipatthana the analysis has to lead, at least tenuously, to The analysis (the thinking) is a conditioning factor for the 3rd level of wisdom to arise... > nibbana, perhaps by something as simple as seeing that this is > impermanent or dukkha or anatta, even on a very ordinary, mundane, > easily accessible level. I think concepts can help-out here but it is > completely different from 'thinking about' or from the internal > monologue. > kom 16599 From: rahula_80 Date: Fri Nov 1, 2002 4:24pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Sabbe dhammaa anattaa Hi, From > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/82804. Howard: Could you please be more detailed in this reference? From "SN 4" I have no idea of where to look. Anders: I'm pretty sure it's the Samyutta Nikaya I 4. ------ This is Samyutta Nikaya I. 4 Accentisutta.m 4. Saavatthinidaana.m Ekamanta.m thitaa kho saa devataa bhagavato santike ima.m gaatha.m abhaasi– "Accenti kaalaa tarayanti rattiyo, vayogu.naa anupubba.m jahanti; eta.m bhaya.m mara.ne pekkham±no, puññaani kayiraatha sukhaavahaanii"ti. "Accenti kaalaa tarayanti rattiyo, vayogu.naa anupubba.m jahanti; eta.m bhaya.m mara.ne pekkham±no, lokaamisa.m pajahe santipekkho"ti.