23000 From: buddhatrue Date: Thu Jun 19, 2003 3:54am Subject: Re: Present moment Hi Victor, Thank you for the reference to the second sutta. I think this second sutta is authentic, the first one isn't. Carefully reread this second sutta, it doesn't state that the path factors are sequential. It describes them as each containing the other. I could go into a detailed analysis of the first sutta and why I don't believe it is authentic, but you have failed to answer a question for me: If Right View is required at the onset, why did the Buddha encourage the ordination of children, who wouldn't have Right View and would only do what they were told to do? I also have another question for you: Answer this question and I will answer yours. I notice that you ask a lot of question but provide scant answers, of a personal opinion- oriented nature. I don't want to make the effort at personal analysis unless you do also. Metta, James --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "yu_zhonghao" wrote: > Hi James, > > Thank you for your reply. > > How is the discourse Maha-cattarisaka Sutta choppy and illogical? > Besides the part at the end of the discourse, is there any other part > or point of the discourse that you don't agree with? > > In terms of following the noble eightfold path, I do find that Maha- > cattarisaka Sutta illustrate a structural relation of the path > factors. And this shows that following the noble eightfold path is > an integral, structured practice, with right view as the forerunner. > > Another instance of description of the relation of the path factors > can be found in > Samyutta Nikaya XLV.1 > Avijja Sutta > Ignorance > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/samyutta/sn45-001.html > > In the discourse, the Buddha described the progression of the rise of > the path factors. Again, right view is the forerunner. > > Your comment is appreciated. > > Peace, > Victor 23001 From: buddhatrue Date: Thu Jun 19, 2003 4:10am Subject: [dsg] Re: Present moment --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@a... wrote: > =============================== > James, I do agree that this sutta is unusual in certain respects. In > particular, I find odd the beginning portion which goes as follows: > >> > What this segment does is define Right View as a particular > application of sati. It defines it as mindfulness of the first 5 steps of the 8-fold > noble path. Now, it is unusual to define Right View, I think, as an instance of > sati and not as mundane or supramundane > wisdom, especially since sammasati is a path factor of its own, distinct > from Right View. Also, this makes Right View (as sati) a part of what Right View > views, a form of reflexive reference. That, however, isn't so strange - after > all, the fourth noble truth is the 8-fold noble path, and in some places the > 1st factor of that path (which is exactly what we are discussing) is defined as > knowledge of the four noble truths themselves! > All this being the case, it is my impression that the M. Nikaya is one > of the collections that is considered by most "experts" to be most reliable. > There is,of course, a good possibility that many suttas have come down to us > in slightly garbled form, including suttas from this collection. > My own opinion is that a modicum of (what some call "mundane") Right > View must come first, else there would be no beginning to one's practice. Also, > inasmuch as liberating wisdom is the diamond whose sharpness ultimately > uproots the fetters, I see Right View in its supramundane form as coming last. So, > in that sense, pa~n~na is the alpha and omega of the path. > > With metta, > Howard Hi Howard, I am glad that I am not the only one to see the illogic in the beginning formulation of this sutta. Since the path factors all ill- defined, the whole premise falls apart. I believe there was a hidden agenda to this sutta, which was not given by the Buddha, and I may analyze that later, depending on if Victor answers my question (Hint: It is a counter-measure to the then emerging Mahayana thought). If you believe that Right View is required from the onset, answer this question for me: Did the Buddha have Right View prior to enlightenment? Wasn't he attempting to join his Atman with Brahman? Is that Right View, mundane or otherwise? Metta, James 23002 From: nidive Date: Thu Jun 19, 2003 5:28am Subject: Re: Present moment > If Right View is required at the onset, why did the Buddha > encourage the ordination of children, who wouldn't have Right > View and would only do what they were told to do? For the very reason that Right View is required at the onset. It is much easier to cultivate Right View in children. Even so, it is much much easier to cultivate Wrong View in children. A case in point: Palestinian children whose ambition is to be suicide bombers. I think most of us are fed on Wrong View when young. Swee Boon 23003 From: phamdluan2000 Date: Thu Jun 19, 2003 5:44am Subject: Re: Present moment Dear James, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "buddhatrue" wrote: If Right View is required at the onset, why did the Buddha encourage the ordination of children, who wouldn't have Right View and would only do what they were told to do? KKT: I think there is no other answer than that one: One can practice the Dhamma without the need of knowing or even of understanding it because the Dhamma is good in the beginning, in the middle and in the end, it should produce good results, right? The question you raised is also interesting in that one can << condition >> the children with the Dhamma, an idea which is opposed to the maintream idea of education that is the children should be free from all conditionings, especially religious conditionings! Peace, KKT 23004 From: Date: Thu Jun 19, 2003 1:50am Subject: Cessation and Absence Re: [dsg] Sabba Sutta contd;-) Hi again, Victor (and Sarah) - In a message dated 6/18/03 9:03:20 PM Eastern Daylight Time, upasaka@a... writes: > If nibbana is the *cessation* of dukkha (rather than its *absence*), > then it is an event which occurs in time. And then is it not odd to describe > it > as unborn, unmade, unbecome, and unfabricated? [In a sense that I can grasp > but cannot express, I can see absence of dukkha as existing always. But I > cannot grasp *cessation* of dukkha as always existing, being a temporal > event.] > =============================== Just a couple more words to try to clarify what I am saying here. One could give two similes that may serve to illuminate the distinction I'm making between absence and cessation. One of these is the old simile of gold ore. In the gold ore there exists pure gold. That pure gold is already there, and is already empty of the other materials that cover up the gold - so, the other materials are already absent from it. The pure gold can be detected early on, even before the other materials are removed, but it is only fully revealed with their complete removal. Another is the simile of a sky filled with clouds. Above the clouds the sky is already clear, with sun shining brightly, and that clear, sunny sky is already free of the clouds which cover up the sky for those below - the clouds are already absent from the sky itself. At times, there may be a break in the cloud cover, even before the clouds are completely dispersed, giving a glimpse of the glory above, but the sunny sky is only fully revealed with their complete dispersal. Here the pure gold within the gold ore = the sky covered by clouds, yet free of them = absence of dukkha (nibbana) already existing in worldlings and lesser ariyans; the early detecting of the gold = the occasional break in the clouds = the paths and fruits of the lesser ariyans; the complete removal of adventitious minerals = the complete dispersal of the clouds = final cessation of dukkha, the full realization of the absence that is nibbana. 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) 23005 From: Date: Thu Jun 19, 2003 2:03am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Present moment Hi, James - In a message dated 6/19/03 7:12:24 AM Eastern Daylight Time, buddhatrue@y... writes: > Hi Howard, > > I am glad that I am not the only one to see the illogic in the > beginning formulation of this sutta. Since the path factors all ill- > defined, the whole premise falls apart. I believe there was a hidden > agenda to this sutta, which was not given by the Buddha, and I may > analyze that later, depending on if Victor answers my question > (Hint: It is a counter-measure to the then emerging Mahayana > thought). > > If you believe that Right View is required from the onset, answer > this question for me: Did the Buddha have Right View prior to > enlightenment? Wasn't he attempting to join his Atman with Brahman? > Is that Right View, mundane or otherwise? > > Metta, James > > > =============================== All that I said was that one must have a *modicum* of right view to ever begin the path. More strongly, one must have a modicum of right view to even begin "the spiritual search" at all, let alone the Buddha's path. There must be at least an inkling of the truth of dukkha - that all is not quite right, that things are not perfect, that the wheels of the cart are of differing sizes, causing that cart to ride imperfectly. There must be an initial glimpse of the fact that there is reason for dissatisfaction. That is the barest wisp of right view that moves one off ground zero. Thus, awareness of the dukkha whose escape is the very goal of the path is the sine qua non of walking that path. 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) 23006 From: Charles Clifford Date: Thu Jun 19, 2003 6:40am Subject: RE: [dsg] Re: Present moment Hello DSG, The term 'Noble Eightfold Path', because this translation contains the word 'path', unfortunately suggests a linear sequence, i.e., start at a point of origin and traverse a contiguous path until reaching a point of completion. This perception also implies a movement through time, i.e., one started in the past, one is presently traversing, and one will realize the goal in the future. Because of this implicit notion of movement through space/time, this use of the word 'path' is truly an unfortunate metaphor. The use of the word 'path' invites literal interpretations - interpretations which always come up short of the mark. The chosen English metaphor (path) invites misinterpretation. Samma Ditthi, Samma Sankappa, Samma Vaca, Samma Kammanta, Samma Ajiva, Samma Vayama, Samma Sati, and Samma Samadhi are not steps to be followed in a linear sequence. They are mutually interdependent, mutually arising, mutually supporting factors/components. They are not, intrinsically, separate isolates that inherently exist as such. This differentiation into 8 factors is merely a teaching aid - this framework is a profoundly ingenious construct to help us perceive of a means by which we can liberate ourselves and others from suffering. From a practical aspect, for training purposes, these 8 factors/components have traditionally been divided into 3 groups of disciplines: 1.) Moral - vaca, kammanta, ajiva 2.) Concentration - vayama, sati, Samadhi 3.) Wisdom - ditthi, sankappa These 3 groups have also, traditionally, represented 3 successive stages of training. Based on my personal experiences, I recognize who improvements in morality contribute to improvements in concentration, which contribute to improvements in wisdom. The importance of Samma Ditthi stems from the power that our perceptions have to influence our thoughts, speech, and actions. If we perceive a metaphor to be a fact, if we act in accord with a literal interpretation of scripture, one falls short of the mark. As an aside, as a US citizen, living in the 'bible belt', the choice of the word 'right' for representing 'samma' has always repulsed me. The word 'right' implies 'wrong'. The use of the word 'right' paints a black and white, fundamentalist, world-view - a particular religious doctrine is 'right', and thereby a reactionary judgment of other religious doctrines as being 'wrong' is automatically set into play. The term 'right' also promotes a totalitarian perspective, and facilitates totalitarian agenda that drive activities (political, social, economic, etc.). To my mind/heart, the use of the word 'skillful' is preferable to the use of the word 'right' when translating samma into the English language. The word 'skillful' does not have any unwholesome connotations in the English language. -----Original Message----- From: yu_zhonghao [mailto:yu_zhonghao@y...] Sent: Wednesday, June 18, 2003 11:19 AM To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com Subject: [dsg] Re: Present moment Hi James, Thank you for your reply. How is the discourse Maha-cattarisaka Sutta choppy and illogical? Besides the part at the end of the discourse, is there any other part or point of the discourse that you don't agree with? In terms of following the noble eightfold path, I do find that Maha- cattarisaka Sutta illustrate a structural relation of the path factors. And this shows that following the noble eightfold path is an integral, structured practice, with right view as the forerunner. Another instance of description of the relation of the path factors can be found in Samyutta Nikaya XLV.1 Avijja Sutta Ignorance http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/samyutta/sn45-001.html In the discourse, the Buddha described the progression of the rise of the path factors. Again, right view is the forerunner. Your comment is appreciated. Peace, Victor --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "buddhatrue" wrote: [snip] > > Hi Victor, > > Hmmm.this is a very strange sutta indeed. Frankly, I don't believe > the Lord Buddha gave this sutta. It is very choppy, illogical, and > doesn't really focus on one central idea. And that part at the end > of the sutta where the Buddha appears to get very defensive about the > sutta and how no one should oppose it without the risk of "criticism, > opposition, & reproach". That wasn't his style at all. I don't > agree with this sutta. > > Metta, James 23007 From: monomuni Date: Thu Jun 19, 2003 4:41am Subject: Nibbana 1 Friends: Going Out: So have I heard: When seeing the elder Thera Dabba the Mallian sitting cross-legged in the air, burn completely without smoke, ashes or any sooth, thereby entering Parinibbana, the Blessed One, appreciating such unique event, exclaimed: With form fallen apart, with feeling cooled, with perception ceased, with construction silenced, consciousness reach its end. Udana – Inspiration: VIII - 9 Samanera Samahita http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Buddha-Direct : - ] -- A saying of the Buddha from http://metta.lk/ Take delight in heedfulness. Guard your mind well. Draw yourselves out of the evil way just as the elephant sunk in the mud draws himself out. Random Dhammapada Verse 327 23008 From: monomuni Date: Thu Jun 19, 2003 4:49am Subject: Nibbana 2 Friends; Traceless Nibbana: So have I heard: On that very same occasion, the Blessed One, furthermore exclaimed: There is, Bhikkhus, what is unborn, unbecome, uncreated & unconstructed. If, Bhikkhus, there was not this unborn, unbecome, uncreated & unconstructed state, no escape from what is born, become, created & constructed could ever be realized. But since there is what is unborn, unbecome, uncreated & unconstructed, the escape from this born, become, created & constructed state can therefore be realized ... !!! Udana – Inspiration: VIII - 3 Samanera Samahita http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Buddha-Direct : - ] -- A saying of the Buddha from http://metta.lk/ Cut off your affection as though it were an autumn lily, with the hand. Cultivate the very path of peace. Nibbana has been expounded by the Auspicious One. Random Dhammapada Verse 285 23009 From: buddhatrue Date: Thu Jun 19, 2003 6:23am Subject: [dsg] Re: Present moment --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@a... wrote: Hi Howard, I sincerely agree with your answer and your definition of Right View; however, I don't see how this definition, "an inkling of truth", can be equated with panna, which was my original point. If Right View is equated with panna, it cannot be considered as a necessity at the onset of practice, in my opinion. I guess this all comes down to how we define Right View and how we define panna. Seems like everyone is having a different set of definitions that changes daily! ;-). Metta, James > =============================== > All that I said was that one must have a *modicum* of right view to > ever begin the path. More strongly, one must have a modicum of right view to > even begin "the spiritual search" at all, let alone the Buddha's path. There must > be at least an inkling of the truth of dukkha - that all is not quite right, > that things are not perfect, that the wheels of the cart are of differing > sizes, causing that cart to ride imperfectly. There must be an initial glimpse of > the fact that there is reason for dissatisfaction. That is the barest wisp of > right view that moves one off ground zero. Thus, awareness of the dukkha whose > escape is the very goal of the path is the sine qua non of walking that path. > > With metta, > Howard > 23010 From: buddhatrue Date: Thu Jun 19, 2003 6:45am Subject: [dsg] Re: Present moment --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Charles Clifford" wrote: > Hello DSG, > > The term 'Noble Eightfold Path', because this translation contains the > word 'path', unfortunately suggests a linear sequence, i.e., start at a > point of origin and traverse a contiguous path until reaching a point of > completion. This perception also implies a movement through time, i.e., > one started in the past, one is presently traversing, and one will > realize the goal in the future. > > Because of this implicit notion of movement through space/time, this use > of the word 'path' is truly an unfortunate metaphor. The use of the word > 'path' invites literal interpretations - interpretations which always > come up short of the mark. The chosen English metaphor (path) invites > misinterpretation. > > Samma Ditthi, Samma Sankappa, Samma Vaca, Samma Kammanta, Samma Ajiva, > Samma Vayama, Samma Sati, and Samma Samadhi are not steps to be followed > in a linear sequence. They are mutually interdependent, mutually > arising, mutually supporting factors/components. They are not, > intrinsically, separate isolates that inherently exist as such. > > This differentiation into 8 factors is merely a teaching aid - this > framework is a profoundly ingenious construct to help us perceive of a > means by which we can liberate ourselves and others from suffering. > > From a practical aspect, for training purposes, these 8 > factors/components have traditionally been divided into 3 groups of > disciplines: > 1.) Moral - vaca, kammanta, ajiva > 2.) Concentration - vayama, sati, Samadhi > 3.) Wisdom - ditthi, sankappa > > These 3 groups have also, traditionally, represented 3 successive stages > of training. Based on my personal experiences, I recognize who > improvements in morality contribute to improvements in concentration, > which contribute to improvements in wisdom. > > The importance of Samma Ditthi stems from the power that our perceptions > have to influence our thoughts, speech, and actions. If we perceive a > metaphor to be a fact, if we act in accord with a literal interpretation > of scripture, one falls short of the mark. > > As an aside, as a US citizen, living in the 'bible belt', the choice of > the word 'right' for representing 'samma' has always repulsed me. The > word 'right' implies 'wrong'. The use of the word 'right' paints a black > and white, fundamentalist, world-view - a particular religious doctrine > is 'right', and thereby a reactionary judgment of other religious > doctrines as being 'wrong' is automatically set into play. The term > 'right' also promotes a totalitarian perspective, and facilitates > totalitarian agenda that drive activities (political, social, economic, > etc.). To my mind/heart, the use of the word 'skillful' is preferable to > the use of the word 'right' when translating samma into the English > language. The word 'skillful' does not have any unwholesome connotations > in the English language. > Hi Charles, Very well written and I concur. I also agree with your interpretation of the connotative meanings associated with 'Right'. I remember when I first read of Buddhism and I read all of ths 'Right' this and 'Right' that, I was put off. I thought that there is no such thing as a 'Right' as an absolute (smacks of Platonism). I like your alternative suggestion for translation, which I have internalized over the years the meaning but not the actual word you suggest. Thanks. Metta, James 23011 From: Jim Anderson Date: Thu Jun 19, 2003 6:49am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Dating of texts, [...] (Jaataka) Hi Sarah, Here's the discussion that took place on Buddha-L, Feb. 2-4, 1999. I have strung together 7 messages and deleted repetitions [...] of earlier messages. The subject line is: Canonicity of Jaataka. Feb. 2, 1999 1. Richard P. Hayes writes: << A while back I invited people to look at a web-based teaching tool I was using for my course in Theravaada literature. In one of the pages I referred to the Jaataka stories as part of the Pali canon. One of scholars who checked into the site sent me an e-mail saying that the Jaataka *verses* are in the canon, but the stories that go with the verses are not part of the canon itself but are considered to be post-canonical commentarial literature. I have learned to trust the scholar in question, but I would also like to seek the opinions of other Pali scholars and Theravaadins on this matter. (It has been my experience in the past that experts occasionally disagree.) >> 2. Joel Tatelman replies: << Richard, Regarding your query about the canonicity of the Jaataka, all I've ever heard or read is just as your friend put it: the verses are accepted as buddhavacana; the prose portions are regarded as a.t.thakathaa. This is analogous to, say, the Dhammapada and its commentary. It's also true that Theravaadin traditions differ in their asription of canonicity to certain books of the Kuddakanikaaya. I just can't remember which. Doubtless some more learned scholar such as Lance Cousins can clarify this matter. >> Feb. 3, 1999 3. Lance Cousins replies to Richard: << A query from the Bovine chewing his cud in Montreal: [...] That is also my understanding. There are a few pieces of canonical prose in fsact, but the vast bulk was collected later, traditionally by Buddhaghosa, but almost certainly somewhat later. >> 4. John Strong replies: << Richard and Joel: This is also what I've always heard, but, now that I think about it, it seems to me that the picture changes a bit when one considers the perspective of the Pali ninefold or the generally Sanskrit twelvefold classifications of the Buddhavacana, both of which include jaataka. In those listings, "jaataka" seems to mean more than just the verses... doesn't it? >> 5. Jim Anderson replies to Richard: [...] << I have taken it for granted that the Jataka stories are not included in the Tipitaka ever since I acquired my Nalanda edition which has only the gaatha-s. But while I was browsing through some books trying to find out what other scholars had to say on the matter and getting somewhat confused, I wondered if other Pali commentaries might define just what the term "Jaataka" is referring to. In what seems to be an older scheme, there is a ninefold (nava'nga) arrangement of the canonical works, one of the nine being the Jaataka. In Dhammapaala's sub-commentary (.tiika) on the Suma'ngalavilaasinii, there is what appears to be a definition that suggests that the past stories along with their gaatha-s is what a Jaataka refers to. "tathaa sati pi gaathabandhabhaave bhagavato atiitesu jaatiisu cariyaanubhaavappakaasakesu jaatakasa~n~naa." (DA.T Vol. I, p.41 PTS ed.) I have just come across this line and thought it might be relevant. I find it a little hard to translate but it does seem to suggest a connection between a gaatha and the story and maybe the two do go together to form a Jaataka after all. I have yet to figure what the passage is really saying however and I could be a way off in my guess. >> Feb. 4, 1999 6. Lance Cousins replies to John Strong's comments: [...] << It is debated whether the ninefold or twelvefold classification is a memory of an earlier way of ordering of canonical materials or simply describes the different genres within the texts. Certainly, there are jaatakas within the first four nikaayas in this sense. The antiquity of some at least of the specific stories within the Jaataka collection is not in debate because of the artistic representations at Bharhut and Sanchi. However, there are apparently some cases where the verses do not justify the prose story and/or where we find different versions in Sanskrit, etc. Dieter Schlingloff in particular has argued that the early artistic representations sometimes match the canonical verses but not the prose account. >> 7. Lance Cousins resplies to Jim: << Jim Anderson writes: [...] This is part of a discussion arising from the fact that if you define gaathaa as a sutta with verse, veyyaakara.na as a sutta without verse, that would leave no room for the other seven Angas. Off the cuff, I translate: Even although there is composition in verse, the name 'Jaataka' is for which make known the Lord's glorious behaviour in his past births. (supply pa.ti.t.thitaa and sutta-visesesu from earlier in the passage) >> 23012 From: Date: Thu Jun 19, 2003 2:55am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Present moment Hi, James - I think that Right View has (at least) a two aspects. One of these is mundane right view, which includes the "inkling" I refer to plus various levels of correct intellectual understanding, and supramundane Right View, which is pa~n~na, and which is the diamond wisdom that liberates. With metta, Howard In a message dated 6/19/03 9:24:43 AM Eastern Daylight Time, buddhatrue@y... writes: > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi Howard, > > I sincerely agree with your answer and your definition of Right View; > however, I don't see how this definition, "an inkling of truth", can > be equated with panna, which was my original point. If Right View is > equated with panna, it cannot be considered as a necessity at the > onset of practice, in my opinion. I guess this all comes down to how > we define Right View and how we define panna. Seems like everyone is > having a different set of definitions that changes daily! ;-). > > Metta, James > >=============================== > > All that I said was that one must have a *modicum* of right > view to > >ever begin the path. More strongly, one must have a modicum of > right view to > >even begin "the spiritual search" at all, let alone the Buddha's > path. There must > >be at least an inkling of the truth of dukkha - that all is not > quite right, > >that things are not perfect, that the wheels of the cart are of > differing > >sizes, causing that cart to ride imperfectly. There must be an > initial glimpse of > >the fact that there is reason for dissatisfaction. That is the > barest wisp of > >right view that moves one off ground zero. Thus, awareness of the > dukkha whose > >escape is the very goal of the path is the sine qua non of walking > that path. > > > >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) > > > > > > > /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) 23013 From: Date: Thu Jun 19, 2003 3:06am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Present moment Hi, James (and Charles) - In a message dated 6/19/03 9:48:57 AM Eastern Daylight Time, buddhatrue@y... writes: > Hi Charles, > > Very well written and I concur. I also agree with your > interpretation of the connotative meanings associated with 'Right'. > I remember when I first read of Buddhism and I read all of > ths 'Right' this and 'Right' that, I was put off. I thought that > there is no such thing as a 'Right' as an absolute (smacks of > Platonism). I like your alternative suggestion for translation, > which I have internalized over the years the meaning but not the > actual word you suggest. Thanks. > > Metta, James > > =============================== I also understand and sympathize with the reluctance to translate 'samma' as "right". However, the Pali Text Society's dictionary gives "thoroughly, properly, rightly; in the right way, as it ought to be, best, perfectly (opp. miccha)" as the English rendering for 'samma' . I suspect that the word 'samma' is a forerunner to the Latin 'summa', meaning "highest", "peak", or "ultimate", and is related to the modern English word 'summit'. With metta, Howard 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) 23014 From: monomuni Date: Thu Jun 19, 2003 5:03am Subject: Nibbana 3! Friends; Unforced Nibbana: So have I heard: Finally on that self same occasion, teaching on the nature of Nibbana, the Blessed One exclaimed: In dependence, there is instability & unsafety. In independence, there is neither instability nor unsafety. When there is no liable instability, no feeble wavering, there is quiet calm, the stillness of peace! When there is such solid tranquility, then there is no tendency to drift, no attraction, no pull, nor strain of appeal. When there is no attraction, no drift, no bending of mind, then there is no movement, no development, no coming nor going. When there is no coming nor going, no death nor rearising, then neither is there any ceasing nor reappearing. When there is neither ceasing nor reappearing, then there is neither here nor there nor beyond nor in between. This – just this – is the Final End of Suffering. Udana – Inspiration: VIII - 4 Friendship is the Greatest ! The entire Motivation behind all of the Noble Life. Yeah! Samanera Samahita Cypress Hut, Gangamulla Bambarella, Tawalantenna 20838. Central Province. SRI LANKA. Email: monomuni@m... : - ] -- A saying of the Buddha from http://metta.lk/ Put anger away, abandon pride, overcome every attachment, cling not to Mind and Body and thus be free from sorrow. Random Dhammapada Verse 221 23015 From: Charles Clifford Date: Thu Jun 19, 2003 8:51am Subject: RE: [dsg] Re: Present moment Hello James & Howard > Hi Charles, > > Very well written and I concur. I also agree with your > interpretation of the connotative meanings associated with 'Right'. > I remember when I first read of Buddhism and I read all of > ths 'Right' this and 'Right' that, I was put off. I thought that > there is no such thing as a 'Right' as an absolute (smacks of > Platonism). I like your alternative suggestion for translation, > which I have internalized over the years the meaning but not the > actual word you suggest. Thanks. To make certain that credit is given to where it is deserved, it is important for me to point out that I first encountered the use of the adjective 'skillful' as the English translation for 'samma' in Bhante Henepola Gunaratana's book "Eight Mindful Steps to Happiness" ISBN 0-86171-176-9. Christina Feldman, in her article "The Four Noble Truths - Path of Transformation", as published in "Voices of Insight (edited by Sharon Salzberg)" ISBN 1-57062-398-8, uses the English noun/adjective 'wise' as a translation of 'samma.' While a much desired improvement over the use of the noun/adjective/adverb 'right,' the noun/adjective 'wise' is not as appealing to an American audience as the adjective 'skillful.' I also recall encountering the noun/adjective 'noble' as a translation of 'samma', but do not recall the source in which I encountered its use. > > Metta, James > > =============================== > I also understand and sympathize with the reluctance to translate > 'samma' as "right". However, the Pali Text Society's dictionary gives "thoroughly, > properly, rightly; in the right way, as it ought to be, best, perfectly (opp. > miccha)" as the English > rendering for 'samma' . > With metta, > Howard Perhaps the prudent thing to do would be to petition the editor(s) of the Pali Text Society Dictionary to incorporate the adjective 'skillful' into their list of suitable English translations/transliterations for 'samma'. Does anyone know how one could submit such a petition? With metta, Chuck 23016 From: Date: Thu Jun 19, 2003 4:30am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Present moment Hi, Charles (and James) - In a message dated 6/19/03 11:20:25 AM Eastern Daylight Time, cbclifford@e... writes: > Perhaps the prudent thing to do would be to petition the editor(s) of > the Pali Text Society Dictionary to incorporate the adjective 'skillful' > into their list of suitable English translations/transliterations for > 'samma'. > > Does anyone know how one could submit such a petition? > > ============================== For maintaining precision, I really don't think 'skillful' belongs. The word 'kusala' is what means "skillful", and I don't think there is much overlap in meaning between 'kusala' and 'samma'. As I understand it, 'samma' is a superlative. It basically means "highest". 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) 23017 From: yu_zhonghao Date: Thu Jun 19, 2003 10:23am Subject: Re: Present moment Hi James, Following the noble eightfold path is an integral practice. It is not a step by step process in which one develops right view first, then right resolve, then right speech, then right action, then right livelihood, then right effort, then right mindfulness, then right concentration. I believe that both of us don't see it as a step by step process as described above. However, following the noble eightfold path does start with right view, with knowing the four noble truths. It has nothing to do with whether right view is required for ordination. There are different aspects to right view. Right view is the knowledge regarding the fourth noble truths. It is also discerning wrong view as wrong view, right view as right view, unwholesome as unwholesome, wholesome as wholesome. It is possible that one has right view in certain aspects and wrong view in others. Following the noble eightfold path is an integral practice. Both Maha-cattarisaka Sutta and Avijja Sutta illustrate the inter-relation of the path factors in which right view is the forerunner. Remember that the goal is the cessation of dukkha. Noble eightfold path is the way to get there, and it all starts with the knowledge regarding the four noble truths. Peace, Victor --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "buddhatrue" wrote: > Hi Victor, > > Thank you for the reference to the second sutta. I think this second > sutta is authentic, the first one isn't. Carefully reread this > second sutta, it doesn't state that the path factors are sequential. > It describes them as each containing the other. I could go into a > detailed analysis of the first sutta and why I don't believe it is > authentic, but you have failed to answer a question for me: If Right > View is required at the onset, why did the Buddha encourage the > ordination of children, who wouldn't have Right View and would only > do what they were told to do? I also have another question for you: > Answer this question and I will answer yours. I notice that you ask > a lot of question but provide scant answers, of a personal opinion- > oriented nature. I don't want to make the effort at personal > analysis unless you do also. > > Metta, James 23018 From: yu_zhonghao Date: Thu Jun 19, 2003 10:48am Subject: [dsg] Re: Present moment Hi Charles, I don't find that the term "path" or "noble eightfold path" inadequate in terming the fourth noble truth. There is a discourse that might of interest to you. Samyutta Nikaya XII.65 Nagara Sutta The City http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/samyutta/sn12-065.html Peace, Victor --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Charles Clifford" wrote: > Hello DSG, [snip] 23019 From: Date: Thu Jun 19, 2003 7:04am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Present moment Hi, Victor (and James) - In a message dated 6/19/03 1:25:59 PM Eastern Daylight Time, yu_zhonghao@y... writes: > Hi James, > > Following the noble eightfold path is an integral practice. It is > not a step by step process in which one develops right view first, > then right resolve, then right speech, then right action, then right > livelihood, then right effort, then right mindfulness, then right > concentration. > > I believe that both of us don't see it as a step by step process as > described above. > > However, following the noble eightfold path does start with right > view, with knowing the four noble truths. It has nothing to do with > whether right view is required for ordination. > > There are different aspects to right view. Right view is the > knowledge regarding the fourth noble truths. It is also discerning > wrong view as wrong view, right view as right view, unwholesome as > unwholesome, wholesome as wholesome. It is possible that one has > right view in certain aspects and wrong view in others. > > Following the noble eightfold path is an integral practice. Both > Maha-cattarisaka Sutta and Avijja Sutta illustrate the inter-relation > of the path factors in which right view is the forerunner. Remember > that the goal is the cessation of dukkha. Noble eightfold path is > the way to get there, and it all starts with the knowledge regarding > the four noble truths. > > Peace, > Victor > =============================== I agree with you completely on this, Victor. In particular, I agree with your statement "It is possible that one has right view in certain aspects and wrong view in others." I think that it is typical, for example, even for one who has not yet heard the Dhamma in this lifetime, to come to the view that things are not "right" (an informal version of 1st noble truth) and that it is possible (somehow) to "make them right" (a partial grasping of the third noble truth). Both of these, seeing that something is "wrong", and at least suspecting that there is a way out, are needed for one to pursue a spiritual search. Then, if one is fortunate, as we are, one will encounter the Dhamma, and pursue it. 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) 23020 From: nina van gorkom Date: Thu Jun 19, 2003 0:01pm Subject: Perfections, Ch 10, Loving-kindness, no 4 Perfections, Ch 10, Loving-kindness, no 4 The development of satipatthåna is beneficial in all respects. It is beneficial for the development of generosity. It happened that someone was greatly attached to beautiful things and was collecting a great number of them. However, when he had learnt about satipaììhåna and he developed it, he began to see the disadvantage of attachment, especially when he understood the characteristic of renunciation, nekkhamma. Renunciation is not only renunciation to a high degree, the degree of monkhood, but there can also be renunciation in the layman¹s life, that is to say, contentment, the feeling that what one possesses is sufficient. That person felt that he had already enough of the things which are experienced through eyes, ears, nose, tongue, bodysense and mind. He understood that he had too many possessions and that he usually had not wanted to give them away. However, when he realized the disadvantage of clinging to visible object, sound, odour, flavour and tangible object, he began to understand that what he possessed was sufficient, that he should have moderation. He wanted to get rid of what he did not need and he knew that in giving things away for the benefit and happiness of others he would accumulate kusala. If one does not normally develop satipatthåna, one does not know the characteristics of realities which are appearing one at a time as only nåma dhammas and rúpa dhammas. Then other kinds of kusala do not arise easily and there are conditions for akusala to arise more rapidly. However, if someone knows the characteristics of realities that are appearing just as they are, and he knows the characteristic of nåma dhamma as just nåma, not a being or a person, and the characteristic of rúpa dhamma as just rúpa, not a being or a person, his endurance and patience will increase and also other kinds of kusala will further develop. A monk who used to live in Indonesia spoke about an Indonesian woman who had lost her husband because of a young man¹s reckless driving. However, she did not like to take legal action because she did not want to cause unhappiness to someone else. Moreoever, she also expressed the intention to give a scholarship for the education of that young man. This was very difficult for her, but she was able to do so. Such great acts of charity can be performed by someone who has accumulated loving-kindness and compassion. One may wonder whether the action of the Indonesian woman was a perfection developed in daily life. People have accumulated different degrees of kusala. Whether kusala is a perfection or not depends on its strength. When it is a perfection it is a supporting condition leading to the eradication of wrong view. When akusala dhamma is strong it will not be possible to abandon the wrong view which takes realities for beings, people or self. True mettå is extended to beings and people whoever they are and wherever they may be. If someone normally has mettå, he will be ready to assist other people time and again. Therefore, mettå is a ³divine abiding², brahmavihåra, that is, a dhamma which is a sublime way of abiding. 23021 From: nina van gorkom Date: Thu Jun 19, 2003 0:01pm Subject: Abhidhamma in Kraeng Kacang, Ch 4, no 6 Abhidhamma in Kraeng Kacang, Ch 4, no 6 It is thanks to the Abhidhamma that we can learn what we are still ignorant of, otherwise we may believe that we have a great deal of understanding. The Abhidhamma shows how intricate realities and their conditions are. The Abhidhamma explains about the processes of cittas which evolve in a particular order because of the appropriate conditions, without there being a person who can direct them. It depends on the individual to what extent he wants to study the details of the Abhidhamma, but it is beneficial to keep in mind some basic principles. The Abhidhamma teaches that all realities of our daily life are mere elements, each performing their own function and proceeding according to their own conditions. The four great elements (solidity, cohesion, heat and motion) perform each their own function, as is also taught in the Suttas, such as the ³Mahå-Råhulovåda Sutta². We digest our food because these elements perform each their own function. Nobody uses a ladle to push the food through, nobody lights a fire in the stomach so that heat causes our food inside to be digested, as we read in the Commentary to the ³Satipatthåna Sutta². Also cittas perform each their own function. The cittas that arise in processes proceed according to conditions and arise in a specific order. The cetasikas that accompany cittas perform each their own function. Understanding realities as elements each performing their own function, as taught in detail in the Abhidhamma, can be our guiding principle in the development of vipassanå. Sati of satipatthåna has the function of being mindful of an object, and paññå has the function of understanding that object. Right from the beginning we should see them as elements performing their own functions. This leads to abandoning of the idea of "I am practising, I am developing vipassanå". Vipassanå, insight, develops according to its own conditions in different stages. There is no person to be found who meditates or tries to concentrate on specific nåmas and rúpas. We should not have an idea of self who is guiding paññå, right understanding. Sati and paññå can be accumulated, so that there will be conditions again for their arising. We should not underestimate the force of paññå that is accumulated. Acharn Sujin stressed time and again that there are three rounds of understanding of the four noble Truths: sacca ñåna, which is the understanding of the truth (sacca means truth), kicca ñåna, which is the practice of right mindfulness of nåma and rúpa (kicca means function), kata ñåna, the realization of the truth (kata means: what has been done). As to the first round, sacca ñåna, this is the firm understanding of what the four noble Truths are. It is understanding of what dukkha is: the objects appearing at this moment. They are impermanent and thus they are unsatisfactory. The impermanence of realities can be directly understood when satipatthåna is developed. 23022 From: Andrew Date: Thu Jun 19, 2003 4:46pm Subject: Re: Present moment --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "buddhatrue" wrote: > If Right View is required at the onset, why did the Buddha encourage the > ordination of children, who wouldn't have Right View and would only > do what they were told to do? Hi James I don't have the answer to this interesting question but I think it's important to identify "children don't have Right View" as an assumption. Long ago, somebody postulated to me that, in the west, we have the view that children are "empty bottles" to be filled up by their parents (and culture). If the children turn out "bad" then the parents can be rightly blamed for not filling them up with the right stuff. This person suggested that the Buddhist view was different ie children are "part full bottles" with their own accumulations (yes, that word again) etcetera. I don't know if this metaphor adds anything helpful, apart from questioning the idea that children can't have Right View. Metta, Andrew 23023 From: Date: Thu Jun 19, 2003 4:56pm Subject: Mental Objects, 104 Commentary on the Satipatthana Sutta, "The Way of Mindfulness" trans. & ed. Soma Thera, Commentary, Buddhaghosa Thera, Subcommentary (tika), Dhammapala Thera. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/bps/misc/wayof.html The Contemplation of Mental Objects The Factors of Enlightenment 7. Equanimity There are things which condition the enlightenment factor of equanimity and an abundance of right reflection on these is the reason that is conducive to the arising of the non-arisen enlightenment factor of equanimity and for the increase, expansion and the completion by culture of the enlightenment factor when it has risen. Five things lead to the arising of the enlightenment factor of equanimity: The detached attitude towards beings; the detached attitude towards things; the avoiding of persons who are egotistical in regard to living beings and things; association with people who are neutral (impartial) in regard to living beings and things; and the inclination for developing the enlightenment factor of equanimity. The detached attitude towards beings is brought about by reflection on beings as possessors of their own deeds, and by reflection in the highest sense. Reflection on beings as possessors of their own deeds is there when a person thinks thus: "You have been born here by your own deeds in the past and will depart from here and fare according to your own deeds. Who then is the being you are attached to?" Reflection in the highest sense is thinking in the following way: "Really no living being exists. To whom then, can you be attached?" The detached attitude towards things is brought about by reflection on ownerlessness and temporariness. A person thinks thus: "This robe will fade, get old, become a foot-cleaning rag and be after that fit only to be taken up at the end of a stick and flung away. Surely, should there be an owner of this he would not let it come to ruin in this way?" This is the reflection on ownerlessness. To think that this robe cannot last long and that its duration is short, is to reflect on the temporariness of it. These two reflections are applicable in a similar way to the bowl and other things. Persons who are egotistical in regard to living beings are laymen who cherish their own sons and daughters and the like, and recluses who cherish their resident pupils, mates, preceptors and the like. And these persons, if for instance, they are recluses do with their own hands for them whom they cherish, hair-cutting, sewing, robe-washing, robe-dyeing, bowl-lacquering, and so forth. If even for a short time they do not see their cherished ones they look here and there like bewildered deer, and ask, "Where is such and such novice?" or "Where is such and such a young bhikkhu." And if these recluses are requested by others to send a novice or a young bhikkhu to do some work for them, such as hair-cutting, they don't send the novice or young bhikkhu, on the pretense that he is not made to do even his own work, and that if he is made to do the work of others he would get tired. Persons egotistical in this way should be avoided. A person who is egotistical in regard to things is he who cherishes robes, bowls, beakers, walking sticks, staffs and so forth and does not let another even touch these. When asked for a loan of some article he would say: "Even I do not use it; how can I give it?" Persons egotistical in that way, too, should be avoided. A person who is neutral, indifferent, as regards both living beings and things is a person who is detached as regards both living beings and things. The company of such a person should be sought. Inclination for developing this enlightenment factor is the inclining, sloping, and bending of the mind towards equanimity, in all postures of standing and so forth. The completion by culture of the enlightenment factor of equanimity is wrought by the path of awakening. Iti ajjhattam = "Thus internally." The yogi lives contemplating mental objects in mental objects (that is, contemplating mental objects only and nothing else) by laying hold of his own enlightenment factors or another's enlightenment factors or at one time his own enlightenment factors and at another time another's enlightenment factors. Here, origination and dissolution should be known by way of the origination and dissolution of the enlightenment factors. From here on the exposition is just according to the manner already stated. [Tika] The cause of the enlightenment factor of equanimity is the impartial state, the middle state, free from attraction and repulsion. If that freedom from attraction and repulsion exists then there is equanimity; when it does not exist there is no equanimity. This state of freedom from attraction and repulsion is twofold by way of scope: detachment in regard to beings and detachment in regard to things. [T] Repulsion is thrown away even by the development of the enlightenment factor of calm and in order to show just the way of casting out attraction is the instruction beginning with detachment in regard to beings taught. [T] Specially, equanimity is an enemy of lust and so the commentator said: Equanimity is the path of purity of one who is full of lust. [T] The detached attitude towards beings is developed by reflection on the individual nature of moral causation and by reflection on soullessness. By reflection on ownerlessness, the state of not belonging to a soul is brought out and by reflection on temporariness, the impermanence of things is brought out to produce the detached attitude towards inanimate things. 23024 From: kenhowardau Date: Thu Jun 19, 2003 8:36pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Present moment Hello Chuck, I agree with much of what you say, but I'm not sure I understand it in the way it was intended. You wrote: --------------- > The term 'Noble Eightfold Path', because this > translation contains the word 'path', unfortunately > suggests a linear sequence, ----------------- It is one thing that there is a final cessation of suffering (Parinibbana), but, just as importantly, there is a path that leads to it. The Path that leads to Parinibbana is the sole province of the Ariyans, the Noble Ones; we worldling disciples have not entered upon it. Ultimately, there is a Path but there is no Ariyan. The Path is the momentarily arising five khandhas conventionally designated as an Ariyan. The first step on the Path, Stream-entry, is the five khandhas of the Ariyan at the moment of Stream-entry. Of those five khandhas, the sankhara khandha contains thirty-four mental factors (cetasikas), eight of which have supramundane characteristics. These eight supramundane cetasikas are called Path Factors. ----------------- > , this use > of the word 'path' is truly an unfortunate metaphor. > The use of the word > 'path' invites literal interpretations - > interpretations which always come up short of the mark. ----------------- In the suttas, most of the Dhamma is revealed in conventional terminology. Rightly understood, it discloses an ultimate reality which is anything but conventional. -------------- > The chosen English metaphor (path) invites > misinterpretation. > Samma Ditthi, Samma Sankappa, Samma Vaca, Samma > Kammanta, Samma Ajiva, Samma Vayama, Samma Sati, and > Samma Samadhi are not steps to be followed in a linear > sequence. They are mutually interdependent, mutually > arising, mutually supporting factors/components. They > are not, intrinsically, separate isolates that > inherently exist as such. ------------- They are cetasikas and, as such, they are as real as anything can be. When they arise, they do so together in one moment but even within that moment, they condition and support each other. Right Understanding comes first in the sense that the other [Right] cetasikas cannot arise without it. (That's about the extent of my knowledge of the Patthana, I'm afraid.) --------------- > This differentiation into 8 factors is merely a > teaching aid - -------------- I'll leave my comments there, because I'm not sure of the extent to which we agree and disagree. What are your thoughts so far? Kind regards, Ken H 23025 From: rjkjp1 Date: Thu Jun 19, 2003 8:52pm Subject: Re: meditation vs. just thinking about it --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "christine_forsyth" wrote: > Dear Robert, > > In your post about the Kandaraka sutta - regarding Pessa the Elephant > Driver's son - you asked at the end why the Buddha didn't ask Pessa > to stay." I have just read the Kandaraka sutta (MN51). "Soon after the elephant rider's son had left. The Blessed One addressed the bhikkhus: Bhikkhus, if the elephant rider's son had waited some more time until I explained these four persons, he would have amassed, much knowledge." ____________ > I wonder if it could have > been something as simple as the fact that Pessa (like us) had a > living to earn, a boss he was answerable to, a family to get back > to, or an appointment to keep - i.e. other things on his mind? > Perhaps, as Pessa was said to be ripe for enlightenment, the wish to > listen to the true Dhamma taught by a Buddha needs to effortlessly > override,and not be clouded by, the need to be doing things? Pessa > did seem to have a good understanding - but was drawn away by affairs > of the world, the things that he felt he was required to do. > But .. I really don't know - why didn't the Buddha call Pessa back > or encourage him to stay? > ________________ Dear Christine, Perhaps I could leave this for gentle contemplation and add something Andrew quoted: Majjhima nikaya 26, the Ariyapariyesana- sutta "This Dhamma which I have realised is indeed profound, difficult to perceive, difficult to comprehend..." Something else Andrew said is worthy of consideration too, I think. "I then go on to wanting to "steer" that self in an ordained direction. The end result is a rejection of anatta. Presently, I find the truly liberating aspect of the Dhamma is a realization that such things don't really matter. .<..>.. Whatever arises can be a condition for the arising of wisdom in the present moment." In my early years in Buddhism there was so much energy but it was staked to self. http://www.vipassana.info/letter_about_vipassana_iv.htm "Kindred Sayings" (III, Khandha vagga, Middle Fifty, Ch V, par. 99, The Leash) the Buddha said at Savatthi: Just as, monks, a dog tied up by a leash to a strong stake or pillar, keeps running round and revolving round and round that stake or pillar, even so, monks, the untaught many folk... regard body as self, regard feeling, perception, activities, consciousness as self... they run and revolve round and round from body to body, from feeling to feeling, from perception to perception, from activities to activities, from consciousness to consciousness... they are not released therefrom, they are not released from rebirth, from old age and decay, from sorrow and grief, from woe, lamentation and despair... they are not released from dukkha, I declare... ""end sutta Nina: "We then read that the ariyan disciple who does not take any reality for self is released from dukkha. : "" robertk 23026 From: Sarah Date: Thu Jun 19, 2003 10:21pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Chanting and transference of merits to petas Hi PC, --- bodhi dhamma wrote: > Hi Bros. and Sis. in the dhamma, > > I understand that when we chant and do transference of merits to petas, > not all petas can receive our merits. Is it because different groups of > them have different mental faculties and different cittas/cetasikas ? > Next, it is said that when one chants attentively, and fully understand > the content of the Bojjhanga Sutras, Ratana sutra etc.one will be > 'protected' against the evil forces. calamities....etc. How chanting,in > these cases can generate powerful wholesome cittas to counter-act the > unwholesome thoughts prevailing in the mind of the evil beings > ?Alternatively,is it because these evil beings receive(or thought > arising from ) the wholesome merits and thus nulilfy their akusala > cittas ? > > I hope to gather some Abhidhammic aspects of the above,for my > forthcoming class discussion. ..... Really good questions!! Pls take a look at the following posts and ask the writers for any further clarifications. If I have time I’ll come back with some details from one of the Peta stories later perhaps. Paritta (Protection) 22402 Merit, Transfer of 5313, 10722 with metta, Sis.Sarah ======= 23027 From: Sarah Date: Fri Jun 20, 2003 2:13am Subject: Rebirth and Meditation Hi Ken H, You were asking Mike recently about his ideas on rebirth, I think. I was just sorting through our Swiss hiking maps and papers for our trip next week when I came across some of his posts on this very topic from exactly two years ago;-) I had meant to save them and some other posts on return amongst and vaguely recall wandering round in circles looking for them. (Christine, note my folders of maps and papers are like other friends’handbags). Here are some links to these (imho) helpful posts: Mike: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/5779 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/5810 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/5811 Also in the pile of lost posts -- and possibly relevant to some discussions -- are these ones on meditation from our friend Dan who always writes controversial and colourful posts: Dan: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/5785 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/5854 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/5855 I know Dan’s in the process of a move, but if anyone has comments, perhaps he’ll pop in during the summer to respond. With metta, Sarah ====== 23028 From: rjkjp1 Date: Fri Jun 20, 2003 2:32am Subject: Re: Rebirth and Meditation Dear Sarah, Mike and all, I've been reading Voltaire's 'Candice' tonight, so reading Mike's posts is a nice counterpoint. I marvel at the clarity of some of Dan's letters. I hope he'll write more and maybe one day issue an edited collection. Robertk In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Sarah wrote: > > Mike: > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/5779 > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/5810 > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/5811 > > Also in the pile of lost posts -- and possibly relevant to some > discussions -- are these ones on meditation from our friend Dan who always > writes controversial and colourful posts: > > Dan: > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/5785 > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/5854 > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/5855 > > I 23029 From: rjkjp1 Date: Fri Jun 20, 2003 3:03am Subject: Re: Rebirth and Meditation --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "rjkjp1" wrote: > Dear Sarah, Mike and all, > I've been reading Voltaire's 'Candice' tonight, __________ That should have been 'Candide'. While I'm on the subject, an extract: "In short Miss Cunegonde, I have had experience. I know the world. I prevail upon each passenger to tell his story, and if there be one of them that has not cursed his life many a time, that has not frequently looked upon himself as the unhappiest of mortals, I give you leave to throw me into the sea." RobertK 23030 From: Sarah Date: Fri Jun 20, 2003 3:11am Subject: Re: [dsg] Somanassindriya Hi Steve, --- bodhi2500 wrote: > Hi > Just a quick question on the joy faculty/somanassindriya. In the > Patisambhidamagga(p.118) it has: At the moment of stream-entry path > the I-shall-come-to-know-the-unknown faculty is equipped with delight > by the joy faculty... At the moment of stream-entry path all Dhammas > born (at that moment)...are supramundane. > > In the Dispeller of delusion(p.40) it has: The joy faculty, having > sixth as its basis or having no basis, is of three planes. > > What would be the reason that the DoD has the joy faculty as only 3 > planes while it seems the Patisambhidamagga has it as 4 planes? ...... I’ve looked at the references and read your message a few times and am still not clear, but I’ll make a few comments as I don’t think anyone else has. In the Dispeller pasage, planes refer to bhumi and later we read (p158) that the joy faculty is included in the sense sphere, the fine-material sphere and the supramundane sphere. In the Psm passage (p118) which you quote from, I can’t see any reference to ‘4 planes’ (bhumi). I wonder if you might be referring to stages of enlightenment, in which case you’re not comparing like with like, I think. If I’m being particularly dense and missing something, pls let me know and someone else may be able to help further. I’m always impressed by your studies of Psm. I’d be grateful if you’d explain in simple terms what brought you to be considering these particular passages and questions. Metta, Sarah p.s I note that ‘sixth as its basis’ refers to cha.t.thaayatana or mind base (manaayatana). =============== 23031 From: Sarah Date: Fri Jun 20, 2003 4:25am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Rebirth and Meditation Hi RobK (Chuck & All), --- rjkjp1 wrote: > I marvel at the clarity of some of Dan's letters. I hope he'll write > more and maybe one day issue an edited collection. ..... Me too...... and anyone who has spent any time in the archives will know that Rob and I are not marvelling because Dan has ever given us an easy time;-) Ok, I’ve fished out Dan’s alarm classic on meditation - hopefully everyone can smile even if they don’t agree with the sentiments. For balance, I’ve also fished out James’ bath classic which I’m sure we can all appreciate and smile at too. ***** Dan’s alarm classic http://www.escribe.com/religion/dhammastudygroup/m9139.html James’ bath classic http://www.escribe.com/religion/dhammastudygroup/m15573.html ***** Chuck, one example of life never being easy on DSG was when Dan got stuck into my use of skilful for kusala. He comes from your part of the world too;-) This is the first post in a thread and you may like to follow the rest of the discussion between us. (I’m not sure if the subject heading changes or not). Result: I only dare use the word if I’m pretty sure he’s not around. (just kidding, Dan;-)) Chuck, I can assure you that you’d never get any consensus here for any petition on any terminology.....;-) Start of ‘skilful’ discussion http://www.escribe.com/religion/dhammastudygroup/m7081.html ***** Metta, Sarah ===== 23032 From: Date: Fri Jun 20, 2003 1:29am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Rebirth and Meditation Hi, Sarah (and Rob K - and Jon, while I'm at it! ;-), In a message dated 6/20/03 7:29:00 AM Eastern Daylight Time, sarahdhhk@y... writes: > Hi RobK (Chuck &All), > > --- rjkjp1 wrote: > >I marvel at the clarity of some of Dan's letters. I hope he'll write > >more and maybe one day issue an edited collection. > ..... > Me too...... and anyone who has spent any time in the archives will know > that Rob and I are not marvelling because Dan has ever given us an easy > time;-) > > Ok, I’ve fished out Dan’s alarm classic on meditation - hopefully everyone > can smile even if they don’t agree with the sentiments. For balance, I’ve > also fished out James’ bath classic which I’m sure we can all appreciate > and smile at too. > ***** > Dan’s alarm classic > http://www.escribe.com/religion/dhammastudygroup/m9139.html ============================== I've reread this post of Dan's. I agree that it is very well written and very clear. Dan is a bright and literate man. I also don't agree with a word of what the post maintains. As I see it, it presents the life of a Buddhist as no different from that of anyone else, and, identifying "doing" anything with carrying out ritual, it advocates a perspective of randomness as far as progress towards liberation is concerned. To me, this perspective is very far from the Dhamma. But, then, you knew that! ;-) 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) 23033 From: m. nease Date: Fri Jun 20, 2003 5:34am Subject: Re: [dsg] Mental Objects, 104 Hi Larry, What an outstanding passage. Makes me wonder how anyone can doubt the value of the commentaries and subcommentaries. mike ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Thursday, June 19, 2003 4:56 PM Subject: [dsg] Mental Objects, 104 > Commentary on the Satipatthana Sutta, "The Way of Mindfulness" trans. & > ed. Soma Thera, Commentary, Buddhaghosa Thera, Subcommentary (tika), > Dhammapala Thera. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/bps/misc/wayof.html > > The Contemplation of Mental Objects > > The Factors of Enlightenment > > 7. Equanimity 23034 From: nina van gorkom Date: Fri Jun 20, 2003 10:53am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: meditation vs. just thinking about it Dear Sarah, Rob K, Andrew, Kom and all, Sarah asked me whether I had any questions for Bgk, since she will be there half July. I have been reflecting about something Kom wrote: Visakha who was a sotapanna enjoyed her grandchildren and jewelry. We cannot expect to be without lobha now. I often take this as an excuse and forget that Visakha could enjoy with wisdom, being mindful of lobha too. We say that lobha also can and should be object of awareness, but I realize how difficult this is. The perfection of patience is: being patience towards the desirable and the undesirable. I was discussing this with Lodewijk, and he also finds that especially patience towards the desirable is difficult: we have lobha immediately. And then there is the perfection of equanimity, evenmindedness: no lobha, no dosa.In the Way we read about the equanimity enlightenment factor: I was considering impermanence while enjoying the beautiful landscape while hiking, but it is only thinking. It is conditioned by reading and studying. Now Rob K quoted Andrew's post (in his answer to Chris about Pessa) and here is actually the answer: "I then go on to wanting to "steer" that self in an > ordained direction. The end result is a rejection of anatta. > Presently, I find the truly liberating aspect of the Dhamma is a > realization that such things don't really matter. .<..>.. Whatever > arises can be a condition for the arising of > wisdom in the present moment." > >And Rob added: And Sarah wrote to Chris: N: So, as Andrew also says, it does not really matter what arises, it has conditions. Even beneficial reflection: when we enjoy something and remember the suttas where it is said that the enjoyable does not last. We are bound to take such reflection for self, being pleased with it. I have found in the above quotes the answer, but it is useful if A. Sujin could elaborate on this subject in Bgk. With appreciation, Nina. 23035 From: nina van gorkom Date: Fri Jun 20, 2003 10:53am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: thina middha, to Num. Dear Num and smallchap, Num, please, if you have time could you ask Acharn Somporn textual reference for the fact that arahats still have middha? I heard him say this. Smallchap, The Vis it does not say that arahats do not sleep. They rest in the lion's posture. Their bodies are also tired. The Vis states, ... For the arahat middha is not a hindrance. He has middha but it is not a defilement. However, different teachers of old had different opinions. Topics of Abh, p. 61, <...However, the sleep of the one who has destroyed the taints is due to fatigue of the body>, this is re middha. Meanwhile, I read Sarah's post (I was away). A. Somporn in Thailand is well versed in Co and subco. He may have had access to other material as well. If we have a chance we can ask him. Nina. op 16-06-2003 16:57 schreef smallchap op smallchap@y...: > Arahats do not sleep. Thina and middha are eradicated when one > attains arahatship. Visuddhimagga XXII 71. 23036 From: nina van gorkom Date: Fri Jun 20, 2003 10:53am Subject: Abhidhamma in Kraeng Kacang, Ch 4, no 7 Abhidhamma in Kraeng Kacang, Ch 4, no 7 We may ask ourselves why sati does not arise more frequently. The reason is, that sacca ñåna is not yet firm enough, it is not well established so as to condition kicca ñåna, the direct awareness of one nåma or rúpa at a time. Sacca ñåùa is firm understanding of the truth and the right Path, so that one does not deviate from the right Path. We should thoroughly understand the cause of dukkha, clinging. This is the second noble Truth and it has to be known now, when it appears. So long as there is clinging we shall continue being in the cycle of birth and death, there will be no end to dukkha. We should realize it when we cling to an idea of self, and when we cling to satipatthåna. When we engage in a particular practice with the aim to have sati more often, there is wrong practice which causes us to deviate from the right Path. When sacca ñåna gradually develops it can condition the arising of satipattåna, and then kicca ñåna, knowledge of the task, begins to develop. When we are convinced that there is no other way leading to enlightenment but the development of satipatthåna, we shall not deviate from the right Path. The right Path is the fourth noble Truth and this lead to the cessation of dukkha, nibbåna, which is the third noble Truth. Acharn Sujin stressed the importance of the three phases because they make it apparent that sati-sampajañña can only arise when there is a firm foundation knowledge of the objects of satipatthåna and the way of its development. It reminds us that paññå is gradually developed from life to life. The level of intellectual understanding, pariyatti, conditions awareness and understanding of the characteristics of nama and rupa that appear now. This is the beginning of patipatti, the level of practice and this will eventually lead to the realization of the truth, paìivedha. Very gradually nåma can be known as nåma and rúpa as rúpa, and stages of insight can arise, but we do not know when they will arise. It takes many lives, but we should not be impatient. The teachings are still available and we should be grateful for each moment understanding. Paññå can grow, and one day it can become paññå of the level of pativedha, the penetration of the four noble Truths. When lokuttara paññå arises, the unconditioned dhamma, nibbåna, is experienced. Nina 23037 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Fri Jun 20, 2003 11:36am Subject: RE: [dsg] Re: meditation vs. just thinking about it Dear Nina (& Sarah, Rob K, Andrew, et Al), I very much appreciate your post summarizing all the great points that people have made in regard to attachment, pleasant feeling, the reflection on impermanence, and anatta. > -----Original Message----- > From: nina van gorkom [mailto:nilo@e...] > Sent: Friday, June 20, 2003 10:53 AM > To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com > Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: meditation vs. just thinking about it > > > half July. I have been reflecting about something Kom wrote: > Visakha who was > a sotapanna enjoyed her grandchildren and jewelry. We cannot expect to be > without lobha now. I often take this as an excuse and forget that Visakha > could enjoy with wisdom, being mindful of lobha too. The other favorite excuse that I have is hey, these are all by conditions! But then, we can learn for ourselves if these are reflections are with attachment or with wisdom. Can we prevent these reflections? It already happened! > foot-cleaning rag and be after that fit only to be taken up at the end > of a stick and flung away. Surely, should there be an owner of this he > would not let it come to ruin in this way?" This is the reflection on > ownerlessness. To think that this robe cannot last long and that its > duration is short, is to reflect on the temporariness of it. These two > reflections are applicable in a similar way to the bowl and other > things.> > I was considering impermanence while enjoying the beautiful > landscape while > hiking, but it is only thinking. It is conditioned by reading and > studying. I think reflection on the truths are very helpful to me, especially when panna that really sees the impermanence of all things seem so far away, and sati that sees dhamma as dhamma rises so rarely. As long as I understand that thinking is not the path (but is supportive of the path), and hence, there should be an urgency to see truth as it is, then thinking too can be the object of sati. Samatha should be developed too, although we should truly know that it is not the path. Reflections on the dhamma brings peace in daily life for me too. If I neither have the skill to reside in the divine abiding of the jhana, nor the conditions to have knowledge of realities, then thinking about the dhamma is better to taking excessive pleasures in the 5 sensualities. Can we force or want to have these reflections? When we think thus, at the moment, we don't understand the anattaness of all realities, or we are developing attachments which are not based on the 5 sensualities. Reflections on the dhamma come because of one's accumulations which are conditioned by hearing, studying, and association with the wise. kom 23038 From: dwlemen Date: Fri Jun 20, 2003 3:16pm Subject: Whisper Object? Everyone, This may be a silly question, but is a "whisper object" and why does it seem to be associated with sight? I was listening to some of the tapes Sarah arranged for me and this term came up. (btw, Sarah, I'll get to your other message... just way behind in work!) Peace, Dave 23039 From: nina van gorkom Date: Fri Jun 20, 2003 9:15pm Subject: Abhidhamma in Kraeng Kacang, Ch 4, no 8. Abhidhamma in Kraeng Kacang, Ch 4, no 8. On our last morning in Kraeng Kacang, when we had breakfast in the garden, Acharn Sujin first spoke about Dhamma in Thai. She explained that sacca ñåna is not merely theoretical knowledge of the four noble Truths, it includes also awareness of the dhammas one studies. If there can be sati at this moment we begin to have more understanding of all the dhammas we learn through our study and also of the four noble Truths. The right practice leads to detachment, but detachment is against our nature. We have accumulated clinging for aeons. When akusala arises and we believe that we should not be aware of such an object, it conditions the wrong Path. We may be impatient, frustrated, when sati does not often arise, there is a great deal of clinging to "I". We should be very sincere, very honest, to see when we are deluded by our attachment to result, to quick progress. We have to understand that paññå develops when there are the right conditions for its development: association with the right friend in Dhamma, listening, considering, asking questions, applying what one has heard. During our stay in Thailand we experienced the benefit of listening and discussing the Dhamma. It was most valuable to be reminded that when we read Suttas we have to understand dhamma appearing at this moment. In this way the messages contained in the Suttas become very relevant to our personal life. The Buddha taught Dhamma so that we can develop our own understanding. In Kraeng Kacang we had all our meals outside and after dinner, when it was already dark, a small group of us were sitting in a corner under a beautifully carved wooden canopy, discussing again Dhamma. Acharn Sujin reminded us that we should appreciate a moment of right understanding and not wish for more. Such a moment is very precious, it is accumulated so that understanding can grow. We read in the Dhammapada, vs 182: ³Difficult it is to be born human, difficult is the life of a man, difficult it is listening to the true Dhamma, difficult is the arising of enlightened ones.² We can still listen to the Dhamma and consider what we heard, because today the teachings are still available to us. These verses remind us that we should not be neglectful, but use every opportunity to listen, to study and to develop right understanding of what appears now. We were reminded time and again during our discussions that there are dhammas appearing right now and that they can be objects of sati sampajaññå. (end of Chapter, end of this series) Nina. 23040 From: nina van gorkom Date: Fri Jun 20, 2003 9:15pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Dating of texts, [...] (Jaataka) Dear Jim, these discussions are important, I know there is interest on Pali list. I find it somewhat strange if I frwd this, although you gave permission. What do you think? Nina. op 19-06-2003 15:49 schreef Jim Anderson op jimanderson_on@y...: > > Here's the discussion that took place on Buddha-L, Feb. 2-4, 1999. I > have strung together 7 messages and deleted repetitions [...] of > earlier messages. The subject line is: Canonicity of Jaataka. 23041 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Fri Jun 20, 2003 10:01pm Subject: RE: [dsg] Whisper Object? Dear Dave, I bet it said "visible" object! kom > -----Original Message----- > From: dwlemen [mailto:dwlemen@y...] > Sent: Friday, June 20, 2003 3:16 PM > To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com > Subject: [dsg] Whisper Object? > > > Everyone, > > This may be a silly question, but is a "whisper > object" and why does 23042 From: bodhi2500 Date: Fri Jun 20, 2003 10:20pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Somanassindriya Hi Sarah --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Sarah wrote: > In the Dispeller pasage, planes refer to bhumi and later we read (p158) > that the joy faculty is included in the sense sphere, the fine- material > sphere and the supramundane sphere. > > In the Psm passage (p118) which you quote from, I can't see any reference > to `4 planes' (bhumi). > I'm always impressed by your studies of Psm. I'd be grateful if you'd > explain in simple terms what brought you to be considering these > particular passages and questions. > > Metta, > > Sarah > p.s I note that `sixth as its basis' refers to cha.t.thaayatana or mind > base (manaayatana). > =============== Thanks for the reply. I had mistakenly assumed that because the somanassindriya was included in the sense sphere and the Lokuttara sphere, then it would also be included in the rupa and arupa spheres. But as the dispeller and the Vis. state it is only included in the sense, rupa and Lokuttara bhumi What brought me to be considering these passages was the passage in the Patisambhidamagga: At the moment of stream entry path etc all Dhammas born at that moment belong to the Lokuttara, which led me to further investigate those dhammas. Thanks Steve 23043 From: christine_forsyth Date: Sat Jun 21, 2003 1:48am Subject: [dsg] Re: Dating of texts, [...] (Jaataka) Hi Jim, and All, Please forgive my obtuseness - but is the consensus (or, at least, does Lance Cousins' final post indicate) that the Jataka verses and Tales are or are not Canonical? Or that the verses alone are; or that the verses and only some of the Tales are? metta and peace, Christine ---The trouble is that you think you have time --- --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Jim Anderson" wrote: > Hi Sarah, > > Here's the discussion that took place on Buddha-L, Feb. 2-4, 1999. I > have strung together 7 messages and deleted repetitions [...] of > earlier messages. The subject line is: Canonicity of Jaataka. > 23044 From: christine_forsyth Date: Sat Jun 21, 2003 2:41am Subject: Reading the Texts Dear Group, If one were to methodically read through the Tipitaka, is there any recommended order thought to be the best way to tackle the task? I have the Digha, Majjhima, and Samyutta in the Wisdom editions plus Bhikkhu Nyanaponika and Bodhi's Anthology of suttas from the Anguttara (Altivira). metta and peace, Christine ---The trouble is that you think you have time --- 23045 From: Sarah Date: Sat Jun 21, 2003 4:59am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Dating of texts, [...] (Jaataka) warning: long and technical post =============================== Hi Jim (Howard, Nina, Christine & All), Thanks for showing me the interesting messages and for editing them so nicely. I’d like to try to summarise what I understand to date on this question and will be glad of any further comments or input from you or anyone else. I hope I haven't quoted you out of context and apologies for any Pali errors - I've tried to get it right here!! ================================== 1. It’s generally accepted that, as in the case of the Dhammapada, only the verses are part of the Canon. The stories -- both the earlier birth stories (atiita-vatthu) and the stories of the present (paccuppanna-vatthu) which are given a connection (anusandhi) are included in the A.t.hakathaa (commentary). 2. The A.t.thakathaa was probably only completed in the form we know it by Buddhaghosa, or more likely very soon after Buddhaghosa by another commentator in Sri Lanka. Malalasekera in 'The Pali Literature of Ceylon', p126 gives detailed reasons for this conclusion.and suggests that probably the compilation was by an immediate successor of Buddhaghosa such as Culla Buddhaghosa. 3. Evidence from various sources suggests that the birth stories in some form were recited from the outset with the verses. In particular: a) The meaning of Jaataka itself Many of the Jaataka verses on their own without the Cmy do not necessarily show this meaning. Jim wrote: “Aggavamsa (in the Saddaniti) gives two derivations for this word. One takes the 'ka' part to come from the root 'ke' (to sound) giving the verb 'kaayati' (= katheti or pakaaseti -- it explains what has been before (jaata.m = bhuuta.m = atiita.m) in reference to the Blessed One's previous conduct). There is a similar explanation given in Sariputta's Vinaya tika. The second derivation takes the 'ka' as a secondary affix and the word just means 'birth'. It is the first derivation that is applied to the Jataka title and anga. I was thinking that the Cariyapitaka could fit the Jataka criteria.” ============= b)The definition of Jaataka as included in the nava’nga, the ninefold classification of the Buddhavacana, which recurs in the Suttanta, Vinaya and Abhidhamma texts. In these contexts, Jaataka suggests more than just the verses. From the commentary sources we read the following definitions of Jaataka in the nava’nga: >>--- Jim wrote on B-list (Feb4, 1999): “In what seems to be an older scheme, there is a ninefold (nava'nga)arrangement of the canonical works, one of the nine being the Jaataka. In Dhammapaala's sub-commentary (.tiika) on the Suma'ngalavilaasinii,there is what appears to be a definition that suggests that the past stories along with their gaatha-s is what a Jaataka refers to. "tathaa sati pi gaathabandhabhaave bhagavato atiitesu jaatiisu cariyaanubhaavappakaasakesu jaatakasa~n~naa." (DA.T Vol. I, p.41 PTS ed.)” >>Lance Cousins on B-list translates: “Even although there is composition in verse, the name 'Jaataka' is for which make known the Lord's glorious behaviour in his past births. (supply pa.ti.t.thitaa and sutta-visesesu from earlier in the passage)” ============== I’d like to add further from the Baahiranidaana of the Samantapaasaadikaa (Buddhaghosa’s Comy to the Vinaya), under ‘The First Great Convocation’ (31) in definition of Jaataka in the nava’nga: “Apa.n.nakajaatakadiini pa~n~naasadhikaani pa~nca jaatakasataani jaatakan ti veditabba.m” transl as: “The 550 Birth Stories commencing with Apa.n.naka should be known as Jaataka (Birth Stories).” (Note that the Apa.n.naka Jaataka, for example, contains only one verse without reference to the Birth Story.) According to the DPPN, the nava’nga are “grouped according to the subject matter (DA.i.15, 24).” http://www.palikanon.com/english/pali_names/j/jaataka.htm (Later there are occasional examples in the same text of an Elder giving a Jaataka, eg Mahaanaradakassapa Jaataka 544, and 84,000 listeners being enlightened as a result. Surely not just from the pithy verses alone? ) DPPN also states: “The canonical book of the Játakas (so far unpublished) contains only the verses, but it is almost certain that from the first there must have been handed down an oral commentary giving the stories in prose. This commentary later developed into the Játakatthakathá.” http://www.palikanon.com/english/pali_names/j/jaatakatthakathaa.htm =============== c) There are many references to the nava’nga and Jaataka as part of the Khudddakapaatha as recited at the First Council. Therefore, texts included in the nava’ngas are canonical, I assume. See Baahiranidaana, Atthasaalinii etc =============== d) Introduction to the Jaataka In the ‘The Story of the Lineage (Nidaanakathaa)’(Introduction to the Jataka Tales(transl by Mrs Rhys-Davids),a little detail is given at the outset about how ‘The Apa.n.naka and other Births’ were ‘recounted on various occasions by the great illustrious Sage’, how they were ‘collected together and added to the canon of Scripture by those who made the recension of the Scriptures, and rehearsed by them under the name of THE JAATAKA'. The commentator proceeds to write his commentary (i.e the Nidaanakathaa), “a commentary based upon the method of exposition current among the inmates of the Great Monastery.” ================== e) 35 of the Játakas have been included in a separate compilation, called the Cariyá Pitaka, part of the Khuddakanikaaya. ================ f) Accounts of Jaataka stories in the Nikaayas,eg Tittira and Sukha-vihaari Jaatakas in Cullavagga, Mahaasudassana Jaataka in Digha Nikaaya. =================== g) Other texts such as the Culla Niddesa, which refers to five hundred Játakas, (pañcajátakasatáni). 500 was the number seen by Fa Hsien in Ceylon in the fifth century, and obviously highly revered at this time. Malindapa~nha gives numerous acounts and references. Other references in the commentaries to the reciting of a Jaataka by all Buddhas when the need arises. eg Madhuratthavilaasinii (The Clarifier of Sweet Meaning, reciting of Vessantara Jataka and under regulations for all Buddhas: “telling a Jaataka (-story) when a need had arisen (a.t.thuppatti)” Malalaskera agrees with TW Rhys Davids and others about ‘conclusive evidence’ of a separate Jataka book at a very early date and that “a collection called the Jatakas existed at the time of the Council of Vesaali (around 380BC), for that formed one of the portions of the Tipitaka rejected or altered by the dissentient Vesaalian monks. (Diipavamasa vv35)”. ========================= h) Bas-reliefs and rock paintings of the third century BC in India have been found illustrating a number of Játaka stories in Bharhut, Sanchi and Amaraavatii suggesting the existence of a prose collection. =========================== i) References to commentaries being included in ‘buddhavacana’ and thereby the Pali canon. Jim wrote: “I have come across instances of the term 'buddhavacana' being defined as the Tipitaka combined with the commentaries (saa.t.thakatha.m). The commentaries are like companion volumes.” In addition, often a sutta would be given in brief and then one of the chief disciples would explain in greater detail. As I’ve quoted before, Malalasekera writes (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." ********************************************************* In Conclusion, as with many other commentaries, the roots are likely to be based in the original Pali canon as recited at the First Council. While TW Rhys Davids suggests the birth stories are earlier than the verses and handed down in Ceylon in Sinhalese while the verses remained intact in Pali, Malalaskera suggests the original Jaataka book, like the Cariyaa-Pi.taka, consisted only of verses. He also stresses that the verses we have now in the collections are mostly quite unintelligible without the story. As the evidence suggests the Jataka commentary was always shown the greatest respect in Sri Lanka and other Theravada countries, obviously there was no suggestion of any alteration from the Sinhalese and other earlier commentaries. In Cowell’s introduction to the Jataka Stories, we read (and I tend to agree) that as the commentary text as we have it “was merely a redaction of materials handed down from very early times in the Buddhist community, it is not a question of much importance except for Paali literary history. The gaathaas are undoubetedly old, and they necessarily imply the previous existence of the stories, though not perhaps in the exact words in which we now possess them”. With metta, Sarah ======== 23046 From: Sarah Date: Sat Jun 21, 2003 5:53am Subject: RE: [dsg] Whisper Object? Hi Dave, --- Kom Tukovinit wrote: > Dear Dave, > > I bet it said "visible" object! .... That was my guess too. In Thai there’s no ‘v’, a muted ‘b’ and no final ‘l’ sound, so a Thai speaker could well be ‘whispering’ visible object;-) Besides the chance to learn a little Pali and Thai, you also get some free Thai-glish thrown in too;-) Look forward to hearing more.... Metta, Sarah ====== 23047 From: Mom Bongkojpriya (Betty) Yugala Date: Sat Jun 21, 2003 7:00am Subject: Burma trip Dear All Those Interested in the upcoming Burma Trip: Please forgive the delay in getting a final itinerary to you. The proposed itinerary by the company that had done the Sri Lanka trip was rejected since they could not provide more convenient flight connections between the various cities. So, we are now looking at other companies to provide proposed itineraries and prices to us. So, when a new company and itinerary is finalized, I shall let you know immediately. metta, Betty _______________________ Mom Bongkojpriya Yugala 38 Soi 41 Phaholyothin Road Bangkok 10900, Thailand tel: 662-579-1050; 661-826-7160 e-mail: beyugala@k... 23048 From: Date: Sat Jun 21, 2003 7:20am Subject: Doubt and Belief (re: [dsg] Mental Objects, 104) Hi, Mike (and Larry) - In a message dated 6/20/2003 7:34:48 AM Eastern Standard Time, mlnease@z... writes: > Hi Larry, > > What an outstanding passage. Makes me wonder how anyone > can doubt the value > of the commentaries and subcommentaries. > > mike ============================ I think that to doubt the value of the commentaries and subcommentaries in the sense of simply dismissing them as "not Buddha word" is to be a fool. Plain and simple - a fool. However, the Buddha even with reference to his own direct teachings, instructed us to to carefully investigate matters for ourselves, to come to directly see what makes sense as best we can. Certainly this applies to the writings of others, regardless of how *purportedly* advanced those others may be, others who we know for sure are not the Buddha (though some *might* be arahants). And even an arahant, for that matter, might fail to be a clear expositor and, while having complete and perfect insight into the nature of the world (in terms of the tilakkhana and in terms of unimpaired direct vision), may fail to have complete and perfect mundane knowledge. They have not cultivated the paramitas that a Buddha has. As soon as we become nothing but passive recipients of "received word", we have become "true belivers", and we have abrogated the responsibility of being a lamp unto ourselves. Of course, it is also encumbant upon ourselves, and critically so, to take our own understanding as tentative and partial, and as quite possibly flawed, and to always be prepared to revise our understanding when we come to see more clearly. So, as soon as we become unquestioning acceptors of the teachings of other or of our own "beliefs of the moment," we also become fools, plain and simple. At least that is how I see the matter, and how I think we need to caution ourslves. With metta, Howard 23049 From: Jim Anderson Date: Sat Jun 21, 2003 7:50am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Dating of texts, [...] (Jaataka) Dear Nina, I wouldn't normally have thought of forwarding it to the Pali list. I think it might be better to hold off for now and just keep it aside until conditions are suitable eg. somebody raises a question or starts a discussion on the Jatakas and forwarding such a compilation of the thoughts of some academics might be a fitting and helpful contribution, just as I had thought in posting it to DSG. I should mention that I had deleted parts of the original messages which I considered unneccessary to our discussion. Richard P. Hayes had also asked about the canonicity of the Milindapa~nha which I left out. I thought it was important to send some of that 1999 discussion as it is likely that it no longer exists in the archives of that list and by posting some of it here it stands a better chance of being preserved and passed on. Best wishes, Jim > Dear Jim, > these discussions are important, I know there is interest on Pali list. I > find it somewhat strange if I frwd this, although you gave permission. What > do you think? > Nina. > op 19-06-2003 15:49 schreef Jim Anderson op jimanderson_on@y...: > > > > Here's the discussion that took place on Buddha-L, Feb. 2-4, 1999. I > > have strung together 7 messages and deleted repetitions [...] of > > earlier messages. The subject line is: Canonicity of Jaataka. > > > > > > 23050 From: m. nease Date: Sat Jun 21, 2003 8:07am Subject: Re: Doubt and Belief (re: [dsg] Mental Objects, 104) Hi Howard, ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Saturday, June 21, 2003 7:20 AM Subject: Doubt and Belief (re: [dsg] Mental Objects, 104) No arguments here--hope you didn't take my comments to suggest that anyone should "become nothing but passive recipients of "received word"," or "true belivers". mike 23051 From: Date: Sat Jun 21, 2003 9:03am Subject: Re: Doubt and Belief (re: [dsg] Mental Objects, 104) Hi, Mike - In a message dated 6/21/2003 10:07:12 AM Eastern Standard Time, mlnease@z... writes: > No arguments here--hope you didn't take my comments to suggest that anyone > should "become nothing but passive recipients of "received > word"," or "true > belivers". ------------------------------- Howard: No, I certainly did not, and I apologize if anyone draws that inference from what I wrote. You merely praised that particular commentary, and pointed out how much value is to be found in the commentaries. Straightforward, correct, and, in my opinion, unarguable. I expressed agreement with you, but I also added an additional take to offset what might be an approach that some folks might take that I think would be an error. ---------------------------- > > mike =========================== With metta, Howard 23052 From: Date: Sat Jun 21, 2003 9:38am Subject: Re: [dsg] Vism XIV, 3 Hi all, Regarding: "...Understanding knows the object in the way already stated, it brings about the penetration of the characteristics and it brings about, by endeavouring, the manifestation of the path." It occurred to me that perhaps "padhaana" (effort, endeavor) is a near synonym for, or linked to, "hetu" (root cause). In that case "understanding" (panna) would be distinguished by its effect. If the cognition of impermanence inspires one to grab quickly before the object is gone then that is probably not panna. But if the cognition of impermanence diminishes one's desire for the object then that probably is panna. Also the cognition of impermanence could condition path-wise efforts. Larry 23053 From: nina van gorkom Date: Sat Jun 21, 2003 10:04am Subject: FW: reflection on pariyaadaaya .thassanti. Dear all, As I mentioned, I did some research for Pali yahoo, on the passages Jim kindly provided me with. ---------- Van: nina van gorkom Datum: Sat, 21 Jun 2003 09:18:11 +0200 Aan: Pali yahoo Onderwerp: reflection on pariyaadaaya .thassanti. Dear friends, on account of my research I have some reflections on: pariyaadaaya .thassanti. The use of .ttithati, to stay, persevere, helps me to go more deeply into the meaning of the suttas where this phrase occurs. This morning at breakfast my husband and I were listening to the Pu.n.na sutta, SN IV, 88, which I had spoken on tape. The Buddha explained to Pu.n.na about the six objects experienced through the six doorways: visible object, sound, odour, flavour, tangible object and mental object, which are inciting to lust.²If a monk be enamoured of them, if he welcome them, persist in clinging to them...there comes a lure upon him²: ta~nce bhikkhu abhinandati abhivadati ajjhosaaya ti.t.thati...uppajjati nanda (lure)... ajjhosaaya ti.t.thati is an interesting and meaningful variation of pariyaadaaya .thassanti : ajjhosaaya is the gerund of ajjhosati, to be attached. Just as pariyaadaaya which is also a gerund. He persists in clinging. Why not just clinging, why, persits in clinging? This reminds us that clinging is deeply accumulated and very persistent. It cannot be uprooted immediately. Further on we read the negation: naajjhosaaya ti.t.thati, if a monk persists not in clinging... The Buddha taught Pu.n.na about the six objects before he went to the fierce people of Sunaaparanta. Pu.n.na had perfect equanimity. When the Buddha said how he would feel if they would abuse and revile him, he said to the Buddha: ²Kindly indeed are the men of Sunaaparanta...in that they do not smite me a blow with their hands...² He spoke in a similar way when the Buddha asked him how he would feel if they would beat him strike him and stab himwith a sword, and even kill him. The Buddha had first explained about ultimate realities, paramattha dhammas, all objects that can be experienced through the six doors. In the ultimate sense there are no persons that can hurt one, only different objects experienced through the six doors. Pu.n.na attained arahatship while in Sunaaparanta. This research on pariyaadaaya helped me to be attentive to the phrases where it occurs and similar phrases with ti.t.thati. It is a reminder of the persistence of clinging. Vipassana, understanding of all objects through the six doors has to be developed life after life, this is the only way that clinging can be eradicated. Nina. 23054 From: rjkjp1 Date: Sat Jun 21, 2003 1:16pm Subject: Re: Reading the Texts --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "christine_forsyth" wrote: > Dear Group, > > If one were to methodically read through the Tipitaka, is there any > recommended order thought to be the best way to tackle the task? > I have the Digha, Majjhima, and Samyutta in the Wisdom editions plus > Bhikkhu Nyanaponika and Bodhi's Anthology of suttas from the > Anguttara (Altivira). > >___ Dear Christine, No order for me but I like to read over the salayatana section of the samyutta nikaya often, Volume 4 of the PTS - not sure pages of ven. Bodhis trans. Robertk 23055 From: Sarah Date: Sat Jun 21, 2003 4:22pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Reading the Texts Hi RobK and Christine, --- rjkjp1 wrote: > No order for me but I like to read over the salayatana section of > the samyutta nikaya often, Volume 4 of the PTS - not sure pages of > ven. Bodhis trans. ..... I would have said just the same;-) The Salayatana section is the first part of vol 2 in the Bodhi trans. (p1133 onwards). It's the section Victor, Howard and I have been discussing. I'd be glad if either of you joined in, esp. when we go away. I mentioned the 'Numerical Discourses' the other day because it's a neat, slim volume and easier to read and make sense of perhaps for someone pretty new to Buddhism. What do you think, Chris? Other small collections like Nyantiloka's 'The Buddha's Path to Deliverance' and 'The Word of the Buddha' shoud be highly recommended too I think. Also Nyanamoli's 'the Life of the Buddha'- all directly from the texts. Perhaps others might give their suggestions or preferred order too of the Nikayas. I'd be curious to hear. Metta, Sarah 23056 From: Jim Anderson Date: Sat Jun 21, 2003 4:24pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Dating of texts, [...] (Jaataka) Hi Christine, From my reading, I think the general consensus is that (if you take 'canonical' to be what belongs to the Tipitaka proper) the Jataka book contains the verses only while the stories that go with the verses belong to its commentary (Jaataka-a.t.thakathaa). Sarah has since posted an interesting summary with more information and points of view from other writers on the subject. Best wishes, Jim > Hi Jim, and All, > > Please forgive my obtuseness - but is the consensus (or, at least, > does Lance Cousins' final post indicate) that the Jataka verses and > Tales are or are not Canonical? Or that the verses alone are; or > that the verses and only some of the Tales are? > > metta and peace, > Christine > ---The trouble is that you think you have time --- 23057 From: Jim Anderson Date: Sat Jun 21, 2003 5:29pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Dating of texts, [...] (Jaataka) Hi Sarah, > warning: long and technical post > =============================== > > Hi Jim (Howard, Nina, Christine & All), > > Thanks for showing me the interesting messages and for editing them > so nicely. > > I'd like to try to summarise what I understand to date on this > question and will be glad of any further comments or input > from you or anyone else. > I hope I haven't quoted you out of context and apologies for any > Pali errors - I've tried to get it right here!! > ================================== I thought your long summary was interesting and certainly well-worth reading. I'd like to comment on the following quote from me in 3 (i): > i) References to commentaries being included in 'buddhavacana' and > thereby the Pali canon. > > Jim wrote: "I have come across instances of the term 'buddhavacana' > being defined as the Tipitaka combined with the commentaries > (saa.t.thakatha.m). I think I have probably erred on this point. I was relying on memory alone when I wrote that and when I saw you quoting me just now I thought I'd better start looking for some commentarial references to back it up. Unfortunately, I haven't been able to find anything and have some doubt that I will. So I'd advise you to disregard that point of mine for now. Mind you, I don't think it unreasonable to consider the commentaries to belong to the buddhavacana if you interpret the 'buddha-' part in a wider sense to include the arahants (many of whom were responsible for the a.t.thakathas in the first 500 years) and the fact that it contains a good deal spoken by the Buddha himself eg. the Jataka stories. Best wishes, Jim 23058 From: kenhowardau Date: Sat Jun 21, 2003 8:51pm Subject: Re: Rebirth and Meditation Hi Sarah, I reread those conversations between Mike and Herman, and appreciated them, thank you. It is good to occasionally dare to face the unthinkable - - to face the possibility that the Dhamma is not ultimate truth and that the Buddha and the Ariyans were not what they claimed to be. (!!!) Whenever I consider the alternatives to the Dhamma (the various eternalisms and annihilationisms), I am struck by their total lack of credibility. Their flaws are so glaringly obvious. The reality of the present moment, is the only reality that stands up to critical investigation. Given that, what can go wrong? What is the worst-case scenario? Let's imagine that no good comes from good action and no bad from bad action. So what? There is still only the present moment and no being to be harmed by anything. As it happens, the Buddha tells that there are, in fact, fruits of good and bad actions and so we are inspired to live the good life. Kind regards, Ken H --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Sarah wrote: > Hi Ken H, > > You were asking Mike recently about his ideas on rebirth, I think. I was > just sorting through our Swiss hiking maps and papers for our trip next > week when I came across some of his posts on this very topic from exactly > two years ago;-) 23059 From: christine_forsyth Date: Sat Jun 21, 2003 9:56pm Subject: Sound Files Dear Group, Here are some Sound Files that may be of use. Some are chants and singing, but the majority are Dhamma Talks (do Buddhists use the word Sermon?) All the links worked today. :-) metta and peace, Christine ---The Trouble is that you think you have time--- Pali and English chants of precepts and homages, guided meditations: http://www.vipassana.com/audio_files/index.php Talks by Rodney Smith, Christina Feldman, Sharon Salzberg and James Baraz: http://www.seattleinsight.org/onlineclasses.htm Talks by Ajahn Brahmavamso et al. (about 90), Bhikkhu Bodhi (about 18), Ven. Dr. K. Sri Dhammananda (2), Ven. Ajahn Yantra Amaro (2) http://watthai.net/sounds.htm Forty three audio talks by various well known lay and ordained buddhists:(Christopher Titmuss, Sylvia Boorstein, Joseph Goldstein, Rodney Smith, Ajahn Amaro, Jack Cornfield and lots more) http://www.dharmastream.org/dharmatalks.html Seventy five audio talks by Ajahn Brahamavamso, Ajahn Sister Vayama, Ajahn Nyanadhammo http://www.dhammaloka.org.au/audio.html A variety of Pali Chanting (P), Mantra (M) and various Songs (S) that have become familiar to participants of the family camps at Amaravati Monastery ...and something called "The Singing Chickens - a loose look at the Buddha's first sermon" Click on 'Downloads' 'Sounds' http://www.buddhamind.info/leftside/index.htm 23060 From: christine_forsyth Date: Sat Jun 21, 2003 10:19pm Subject: Websites for General Dhamma and Abhidhamma articles and books. Dear Sarah, and All, I often find articles are a great help - general articles on Theravada Buddhism can be found at: http://www.budsas.org/ebud/ebidx.htm Additiional articles, including BPS wheel booklets, and the Canon can be found at the Theravada Text Archives at Access to Insight: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/index.html Anders Honore (who I think you said was travelling in Thailand presently) has an excellent site with writings catalogued under separate traditions: http://hjem.get2net.dk/civet-cat/index.htm The book by Nyanatiloka Thera - "Word of the Buddha" is available on- line at http://www.enabling.org/ia/vipassana/Archive/N/Nyanatiloka/WOB/ (I have a borrowed copy of Path to Deliverance" (Nyanatiloka) - I think it is only available in hard copy from a bookshop.) And an edited cut 'n paste of Abhidhamma url's from the Useful Posts: Article: Abhidhamma and Practice http://www.abhidhamma.org/abhidhamma_and_practice.htm Article: Be here now http://www.abhidhamma.org/be%20here%20now.htm Article: 'Abhidhamma Notes' http://www.dhammastudy.com/Introduction.html Article: Understanding Reality http://www.abhidhamma.org/understanding%20reality.html Article: 'Some Introductory Notes on Abhidhamma' http://www.baynet.net/~arcc/dhamma/abhi1.html The Abhidhamma Philosophy (about nine pages) http://www.buddhanet.net/abhidh01.htm Fourteen essays by members of a group of lay people who studied the Abhidhamma "The Abhidhamma Papers" http://www.samatha.org/publications/ Article: Abhidhamma and Vipassana http://www.abhidhamma.org/sitagu%20sayadaw.htm e-books online: http://www.vipassana.info/contents-vipassana.htm e-Books in multiple formats on-line: http://www.zolag.co.uk/ Articles and books graded as to level of difficulty: http://www.dhammastudy.com/engindex.html And anytime is a good time for wandering around in the dsg 'Useful Posts'. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/files/Useful_Posts metta and peace, Christine ---The trouble is that you think you have time --- 23061 From: nina van gorkom Date: Sat Jun 21, 2003 11:37pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Dating of texts, for other lists. Dear Jim, It is all right Jim, just as you think fit. I better leave it to you. Not so long ago we discussed the Jatakas on Pali list and there was a question about verses and stories, and someone wondered what was canonical. I'll let you know when it comes up again, best wishes and many thanks, Nina. op 21-06-2003 16:50 schreef Jim Anderson op jimanderson_on@y...: > I wouldn't normally have thought of forwarding it to the Pali list. I > think it might be better to hold off for now 23062 From: nina van gorkom Date: Sat Jun 21, 2003 11:37pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Dating of texts, [...] (Jaataka) Dear Sarah and Jim, I am extremely grateful for all the references re origins of the texts. Most beneficial and worth while. May it help everybody to have more confidence in all the Tipitaka texts and commentaries, Nina. op 21-06-2003 13:59 schreef Sarah op sarahdhhk@y...: > 1. It’s generally accepted that, as in the case of the Dhammapada, only > the verses are part of the Canon. 23063 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sun Jun 22, 2003 3:12am Subject: Re: [dsg] Concepts & Ultimate Realities (archery corner) Howard --- upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, Jon - ... -------------------------------------------------------- Howard: ... I see the process of thought creation as one which is done in a "consciousness process", but one in which the level of discernment is what is called "subliminal" these days. Thoughts are mental constructs, and that constructing does involve mental discernment, if nothing else to hold onto the "proto-thought" so far constructed, rather like a sculptor holds onto his/her clay or stone . But there is no (usual) conscious awareness of any step except the last at which the thought discernment is at the level of clarity that we call "being conscious" in everyday parlance. As far as whether or not that last step is part of the constructive phase, or is purely observational, I just don't know. I suspect that it is discernment only, without sankharic construction going on, and similar to that of an initial stage of discerning a sight or sound, but I don't know this for a fact, and certainly don't insist on it. Thjat last step *might* include the hammering in the the final nail. ----------------------------------------------------- To my mind, the important thing here, and something on which we seem to agree ;-)), is that thoughts are nothing other than mental constructs. This distinguishes them from sense-door objects which, as we also agree, are not merely mental constructs but are dhammas that arise and are experienced by consciousness. As constructs of consciousness, thoughts do not arise to be experienced by consciousness. As regards your description of the thinking process (as perceived by us), I do think we need to keep in mind that insight is concerned with the *nature* of dhammas that are *presently arising*, more so than with the process by which they have come to arise or to be object of consciousness. So while details of processes are important to learn about, in that this kind of knowledge is a necessary part of the foundation for awareness /insight, the processes themselves are not the object of insight. The practical significance of this is that while thoughts and sense-door objects share in common the fact that both are object of a moment consciousness, that is where the similarity ends. Furthermore, this similarity is of no real consequence as far as the question of insight is concerned, since the 'nature' of a dhamma is not wrapped up in the fact of its being the object of consciousness at that moment. Nama can be object of consciousness just as much as rupa, yet their natures as to be experienced by insight are quite different. ------------------------------------------------------------ Howard: That's exactly what I mean. I am speaking only phenomenologically. I am not presuming "physical objects out there" that have properties such as hardness; if there are such things, I am not talking about them. ------------------------------------------------------------ I agree there's no need to presume hardness as being 'out there', but neither should one presume the other way and equate it with thoughts in the sense of being mind-created. --------------------------------------------------------------- Howard: I agree completely. This is why I said "SEEM to refer". There is an inherent defect in concepts. They tend to fool by nature. (Nonetheless they are useful.) ---------------------------------------------------------------- Inherent defect in concepts? Who's giving concepts a hard time now? ;-)). Again, I would suggest that any perceived 'defect' is in the mind of the perceiver/creator of the concept, and is not inherent in the concept itself. The enlightened being thinks in concepts too, but there is no inherent defect there, surely. > ----------------------------------------------------- > H: But they [the objects of the sense-door consciousness] are > kamma-created, which ultimately means they are cetana-created. But, > yes, they are not mental constructs in the same way that thoughts > are. > ------------------------------------------------------ ... -------------------------------------------------------- Howard: I'm speaking only phenomenologically, Jon. I'm not hypothesizing about what might exist (ultimately) beyond experience. -------------------------------------------------------- Understood, but that still doesn't make sense-door objects kamma-created, as I see it. It is here that the> > individual's kamma/vipaka comes into play. Kamma is a condition for > sense-door consciousness to experience a particular rupa, and this > sense-door consciousness is a moment of vipaka consciousness. > 'Vipaka' refers to the consciousness that experiences, not the rupa > that is experienced; in no sense does the rupa thereby become kamma > created (according to my understanding of the standard reading of the > texts). ------------------------------------------------------ Howard: I am only addressing momentary discernment and its internal object, not alleged external entities. ------------------------------------------------------ Yes, this is the focus of the teachings. But without some background info, i.e., with only our innate ignorance and wrong view to go on, our perception of momentary discernment and its internal object is bound to be severely skewed. ----------------------------------------------------------- Howard: Aside from the fact that I find the phenomenalist view attractive and that it clarifies much in the Dhamma for me (though not necessarily for anyone else), it is more the other way around. It is obvious to me that whatever is actually experienced is "internal", and anything "external" is merely hypothesized (and quite possibly concept-only), and it is this that makes me a phenomenalist. --------------------------------------------------------- But there is no inconsistency, as I see it, in regarding 'whatever is actually experienced is "internal", and anything "external" is merely hypothesized', on the one hand, and acknowledging the *possibility* that whatever is actually experienced, for example the sense-door objects, arise in this world due to conditions that do not include their being the object of someone's experience. --------------------------------------------------------- Howard: It seems to me that "the teachings" put enormous emphasis on how our mind, its predispositions, its accumulations, and its defilements radically effect the nature and quality of our perception. All the magic show similes, all the talk of seeing things other than how they are (such as seeing the impermanent as permanent) are examples of this. -------------------------------------------------------- It depends what you mean by perception. I think the parts of the teachings you refer to here are talking about the mind-door moments that follow the moments of sense-door experience, rather than the actual moment of sense-door experience themselves. ------------------------------------------------------ Howard: Well, I do agree that the beginning stage of a 5-sensory perception is "pristine", but even as soon as sa~n~na comes into play, the mind is involved in a "mixing operation" of past experience with current experience. ------------------------------------------------------- Just on a technicality here, sanna is said to accompany every citta, including the moments of 5 sense-door perception, although its function there is simply to mark the object. So I think the 'mixing operation' you mention is something that happens in the mind-door processes that follow the sense-door process. Let's not forget that these 'pristine' moments, although soon to be sullied by kusala/akusala tendencies, are still arising at a sufficiently furious pace right now to give the impression of continuous experience through all 5 doors simultaneously. To my understanding, awareness can take successive cittas of a particular kind, for example successive moments of eye-door consciousness, as its object notwithstanding that each lasts only for a moment and is quickly superseded by thinking about the visible object that has just been experienced. In other words, awareness is not something that 'catches' single moments of consciousness, or mental factors, or rupas (or whatever), let alone consecutive moments of different phenomena, but rather is aware of multiple moments of a single kind of fundamental phenomena -- whether that be consciousness, or a particular mental factor or rupa -- even though there are many moments between each such moment and many other kinds of fundamental phenomena arising. ... =============================== I find this is an interesting conversation, Jon. Thank you. :-) Me too, Howard. Thanks for the opportunity to reflect on these areas. Jon 23064 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sun Jun 22, 2003 5:55am Subject: Re: Doubt and Belief (re: [dsg] Mental Objects, 104) Howard This may surprise you, but I essentially agree with what you say below ;-)). In particular, I agree with what you say about those who are mere passive recipients of the "received word". Perhaps we differ only in the importance of finding out what exactly is the "received word", something that I find is a never-ending task in that the more I understand from the texts, the more I see there is in the texts to be learnt. On the question of the need to "take our own understanding as tentative and partial, and as quite possibly flawed", I would say that this understates the extent of our ignorance and wrong view, but this is a matter of emphasis rather than substance, and I endorse your comments here overall. Thanks for sharing these thoughts and setting out the position so clearly. Jon --- upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, Mike (and Larry) - ... > ============================ > I think that to doubt the value of the commentaries and > subcommentaries in the sense of simply dismissing them as "not > Buddha word" is to be a fool. Plain and simple - a fool. > However, the Buddha even with reference to his own direct > teachings, instructed us to to carefully investigate matters for > ourselves, to come to directly see what makes sense as best we can. > Certainly this applies to the writings of others, regardless of how > *purportedly* advanced those others may be, others who we know for > sure are not the Buddha (though some *might* be arahants). And even > an arahant, for that matter, might fail to be a clear expositor > and, while having complete and perfect insight into the nature of > the world (in terms of the tilakkhana and in terms of unimpaired > direct vision), may fail to have complete and perfect mundane > knowledge. They have not cultivated the paramitas that a Buddha > has. > As soon as we become nothing but passive recipients of > "received word", we have become "true belivers", and we have > abrogated the responsibility of being a lamp unto ourselves. Of > course, it is also encumbant upon ourselves, and critically so, to > take our own understanding as tentative and partial, and as quite > possibly flawed, and to always be prepared to revise our > understanding when we come to see more clearly. So, as soon as we > become unquestioning acceptors of the teachings of other or of our > own "beliefs of the moment," we also become fools, plain and > simple. At least that is how I see the matter, and how I think we > need to caution ourslves. > > With metta, > Howard 23065 From: Sarah Date: Sun Jun 22, 2003 6:24am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Rebirth and Meditation Hi Howard, --- upasaka@a... wrote: > > Dan’s alarm classic > > http://www.escribe.com/religion/dhammastudygroup/m9139.html > ============================== > I've reread this post of Dan's. I agree that it is very well > written > and very clear. Dan is a bright and literate man. I also don't agree > with a > word of what the post maintains. As I see it, it presents the life of a > Buddhist > as no different from that of anyone else, and, identifying "doing" > anything > with carrying out ritual, it advocates a perspective of randomness as > far as > progress towards liberation is concerned. To me, this perspective is > very far > from the Dhamma. But, then, you knew that! ;-) ..... ;-) I know most people here will also agree with you too.... Hopefully Dan will respond himself one sunny day if he wishes..... I certainly agree that being 'bright and literate' has nothing to do with whether the message is right or wrong (or skilful or unskilful;-)) Metta, Sarah ====== 23066 From: Date: Sun Jun 22, 2003 8:31am Subject: Re: [dsg] Concepts & Ultimate Realities (archery corner) Hi, Jon - In a message dated 6/22/2003 5:12:17 AM Eastern Standard Time, jonoabb@y... writes: > Just on a technicality here, sanna is said to accompany every citta, > including the moments of 5 sense-door perception, although its > function there is simply to mark the object. So I think the 'mixing > operation' you mention is something that happens in the > mind-door > processes that follow the sense-door process. ========================== As you noted, there is close to no disagreement between us on the current topic. The only tiny portion of your post that I will address here is what I quote above, and I do so to clarify my meaning for you. I see sa~n~na as playing a dual role. The primary role is indeed played at every mind-moment, serving to make a "mark". The secondary may not occur with every mind moment - it provides a "looking back" or memory function which compares current features with previously saved "sa~n~na marks" serving a recognitional/perceptual function, and it is this matching of current features to past notings that I referred to as a "mixing operation" of past experience with current experience. This looking back and comparing is the very beginning of the conceptual process as I understand it. It may well be that this function of sa~n~na occurs, as you say, in the mind-door processes. Actually that makes complete sense. With metta, Howard 23067 From: Charles Clifford Date: Sun Jun 22, 2003 9:35am Subject: [dsg] Re: Reading the Texts --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Sarah wrote: > Hi RobK and Christine, > > --- rjkjp1 wrote: > > > No order for me but I like to read over the salayatana section of > > the samyutta nikaya often, Volume 4 of the PTS - not sure pages of > > ven. Bodhis trans. > ..... > I would have said just the same;-) The Salayatana section is the first > part of vol 2 in the Bodhi trans. (p1133 onwards). It's the section > Victor, Howard and I have been discussing. I'd be glad if either of you > joined in, esp. when we go away. > > I mentioned the 'Numerical Discourses' the other day because it's a neat, > slim volume and easier to read and make sense of perhaps for someone > pretty new to Buddhism. What do you think, Chris? Other small collections > like Nyantiloka's 'The Buddha's Path to Deliverance' and 'The Word of the > Buddha' shoud be highly recommended too I think. Also Nyanamoli's 'the > Life of the Buddha'- all directly from the texts. > > Perhaps others might give their suggestions or preferred order too of the > Nikayas. I'd be curious to hear. > > Metta, > > Sarah > Hello Everyone, I highly recommend the following booka to start one's studies because they both contain very important suttas, as well as illuminating commentaries on the teachings: "The First Discourse of the Buddha", Dr. Rewata Dhamma, Wisdom Publications, ISBN 0-86171-104-1 "The Four Foundational of Mindfulness", Venerable U Silananda, Wisdom Publications, ISBN 0-86171-092-4 Whatever suttas one takes up, it is highly adviseable to also study as many commentaries associated with that sutta that are available. Studying a sutta by itself, without the aid of commentaries, is very challenging, and not as productive a use of one's time as when authentic commentaries are available to aid us. By authentic, I mean those that contribute to the cultivation of samma ditthi, a.k.a., skillful understanding. Of course, when balancing the demands on your time, the cultivation of morality, metta, mindfulnes and vipassana should take precedence over sutta study, as these will result in a far greater contribution towards the manifestation of samma ditthi then sutta study by itself can. With metta, Chuck 23068 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Sun Jun 22, 2003 9:57am Subject: RE: [dsg] Whisper Object? Ah, yes, Other quick lessons on Thai-glish: 1) The consonent at the end of a word is strictly optional, dogs and dog are roughly the same thing 2) The l and the r don't sound that much different, and neither do the sh or ch. You should try catching me saying fish. 3) The articles are way superfluous: we don't really need them since it is contextually obvious. This is highly similar to Hawaiian English. 4) You think pali is tough? In Thai, the same words are used with different meanings. For example, mana or conceit, in Thai it means diligence, and many Thais have this name, even though the word has a clear root from pali. Vinnana (consciousness) is roughly equated to souls or ghosts... Hmm.... kom > -----Original Message----- > From: Sarah [mailto:sarahdhhk@y...] > Sent: Saturday, June 21, 2003 5:53 AM > To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com > Subject: RE: [dsg] Whisper Object? > > > Hi Dave, > > --- Kom Tukovinit wrote: > Dear Dave, > > > > I bet it said "visible" object! > .... > That was my guess too. In Thai there’s no ‘v’, a muted ‘b’ and no final > ‘l’ sound, so a Thai speaker could well be ‘whispering’ visible object;-) > Besides the chance to learn a little Pali and Thai, you also get some free > Thai-glish thrown in too;-) > > Look forward to hearing more.... > > Metta, > > Sarah > ====== 23069 From: nina van gorkom Date: Sun Jun 22, 2003 11:38am Subject: Re: [dsg] Vism XIV, 3 Dear Larry, op 21-06-2003 18:38 schreef LBIDD@w... op LBIDD@w...: > Regarding: "...Understanding knows the object in the way already stated, > it brings about the penetration of the characteristics and it brings > about, by endeavouring, the manifestation of the path." > > It occurred to me that perhaps "padhaana" (effort, endeavor) is a near > synonym for, or linked to, "hetu" (root cause). In that case > "understanding" (panna) would be distinguished by its effect. N: It is viriya cetasika, and this is different according as it arises with different cittas. In this case viriya and panna condition one another by way of conascent condition and other conditions. L: If the > cognition of impermanence inspires one to grab quickly before the object > is gone then that is probably not panna. N: Right, it is desire and thus counter productive. L:But if the cognition of > impermanence diminishes one's desire for the object then that probably > is panna. N: It is a degree of panna, it sees that what is gone immediately is not attractive. L:Also the cognition of impermanence could condition path-wise > efforts. N: it is not a matter of "I have to have endeavour or effort", panna takes the lead, but there are many stages to be developed, even after the realization of the arising and falling away of nama and rupa. We have read: about, by endeavouring, the manifestation of the path> There is endeavour; it is necessary to have endurance, courage, fervor (atapi sampajano satima), patience, to be aware again and again, developing understanding. One has to be like a hero. But: not with an idea of self who has endeavour. Think of the Bodhisatta's courage, as we read in the perfections, in the ³Exposition of Jatukannin¹s Questions² (Khuddaka Nikåya) that Jatukannin had heard that the Buddha was courageous and that he therefore was called a hero, víra... We read: Appreciating your endeavour to study the Visuddhimagga, Nina. 23070 From: Date: Sun Jun 22, 2003 5:05pm Subject: Way 105, Mental Objects Commentary on the Satipatthana Sutta, "The Way of Mindfulness" trans. & ed. Soma Thera, Commentary, Buddhaghosa Thera, Subcommentary (tika), Dhammapala Thera. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/bps/misc/wayof.html The Contemplation of Mental Objects The Factors of Enlightenment The Four Truths Having explained thus the contemplation of mental objects by way of the seven factors of enlightenment, the Master said, "And further," and so forth, in order to explain the meditation by way of the Four Truths. Idam dukkhanti yathabhutam Pajanati = "A bhikkhu understands: 'this is suffering,' according to reality." He puts aside craving, and understands all things of the three planes of becoming as suffering, according to nature. He understands according to nature the previous craving that produces and makes to arise that very suffering. He understands the non-occurrence of both suffering and its origin, according to nature, as Nibbana. He understands, according to nature, the Noble Path which penetrates suffering, abandons origination, and realizes cessation. The rest of the explanation of the Noble Truths is in the Path of Purity [Visuddhi Magga]. Iti ajjhattam = "Thus, internally." He lives contemplating mental objects in mental objects, having laid hold of his own four truths or the four truths of another or at one time his own four truths and at another time another's four truths. In this explanation of the truths, the origination and dissolution of the four truths should be understood according to nature by way of arising and stopping. From here on the explanation is according to the manner already stated. With this have been stated the following twenty-one subjects of meditation: Breathing, Modes of Deportments, the Method of the Thirty-two Parts of the Body, the Determination of the Four Modes of Materiality (or the Four Elements), the Nine Cemetery Contemplations, Contemplation of Feeling, Contemplation of Consciousness, the Laying Hold on the Hindrances, the Laying Hold on the Aggregates, the Laying Hold on the Sense-bases, the Laying Hold on the Enlightenment Factors, and the Laying Hold on the Truths. The Cemetery Contemplations are counted separately. The Contemplation on Breathing, the Thirty-two Parts and the Nine Cemetery Contemplations, these eleven, are subjects of meditation which produce full absorption. The Digha-bhanaka (Reciter of the Long Collection of Discourses) Maha Siva, however, says that the Nine Cemetery Contemplations are here stated by way of the contemplation of Misery. Therefore according to his view only two subjects, Breathing and the Thirty-two Parts, produce full absorption; the rest produce only partial absorption. Yo hi koci bhikkhave ime cattaro satipatthane evam bhaveyya = "O bhikkhus, if anyone develops the Four Arousings of Mindfulness in this manner." If any bhikkhu or bhikkhuni or upasaka or upasika cultivates mindfulness from the beginning according to the method taught here. Titthantu bhikkhave = "O bhikkhus, let alone." This together with what follows, was said by way of the average person capable of being trained. But concerning the person of keen intelligence it was stated as follows: Instructed in the morning, he will attain in the evening; instructed in the evening, he will attain in the morning. The Blessed One pointed out the teaching thus: "Bhikkhus, my Dispensation leads to Deliverance in this way," closed the instruction that is crowned with Arahantship in twenty-one places and uttered the following words: "This is the only way, o bhikkhus, for the purification of beings, for the overcoming of sorrow and lamentation, for the destruction of suffering and grief, for reaching the right path, for the attainment of Nibbana, namely the Four Arousings of Mindfulness." ---------------------------------------------------- 23071 From: Date: Sun Jun 22, 2003 5:41pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Vism XIV, 3 Hi Nina, Vism XIV, 3: Understanding knows the object in the way already stated, it brings about the penetration of the characteristics and it brings about, by endeavouring, the manifestation of the path." L: It occurred to me that perhaps "padhaana" (effort, endeavor) is a near synonym for, or linked to, "hetu" (root cause). In that case "understanding" (panna) would be distinguished by its effect. N: It is viriya cetasika, and this is different according as it arises with different cittas. In this case viriya and panna condition one another by way of conascent condition and other conditions. ----------- L: So padhaana _is_ right effort as "endeavour". If there is no right effort, there is no panna. Correct? What if there is ordinary consciousness of impermanence that later, by being remembered, conditions the arising of right effort. Does that later right effort 'make' the original ordinary consciousness panna, or is the remembered conscousness of impermanence panna, or is all consciousness, sooner or later, panna? Larry 23072 From: nina van gorkom Date: Sun Jun 22, 2003 9:17pm Subject: Perfections, Ch 10, loving-kindness, no 5 Perfections, Ch 10, loving-kindness, no 5 We read in the ³Basket of Conduct² that the citta of the Great Being, the Bodhisatta, could without difficulty become established in peacefulness, because he could quickly extend loving-kindness even towards his enemies. Someone may at times be irritated about others, he may believe that particular persons obstruct his own welfare in various ways. However, if someone accumulates kusala and he has the determination to eradicate defilements, his citta will without difficulty become established in peacefulness. He will quickly be able to extend mettå even to his enemies. If we become angry with someone, we should know that anger arises only for a short moment and then falls away already, and that there can be mettå instead. When we have accumulated the perfections we can become like the Bodhisatta who could without difficulty be established in mettå and extend it quickly towards his enemies. We should verify for ourselves whether we are angry with someone else for a long time or not. If we can have mettå instead, it shows that we have accumulated the inclination to eradicate defilements. Loving-kindness, mettå, is one of the divine abidings, brahmavihåras. There are four of them: loving-kindness, mettå, compassion, karunå, sympathetic joy, muditå and equanimity, upekkhå. Mettå is adosa cetasika, the reality of non-hate or non-aversion. Compassion is karunå cetasika, which arises when one assists someone else so that he is free from suffering and trouble. Sympathetic joy is muditå cetasika, which arises when one rejoices in someone else¹s happiness. Equanimity, upekkhå, is tatramajjhattatå cetasika, evenmindedness which is the reality without attachment or aversion. It arises when one understands that there is from birth to death no being, no person, no self. When mettå, adosa cetasika, arises one is at that moment free from hate or aversion. When karunå cetasika arises, one is concerned about someone who suffers and wants to assist him. When someone else is happy because of gain, honour or praise, and one also rejoices in his happiness, there is muditå cetasika. When one has no lobha or dosa and when one is evenminded and impartial towards all beings, there is tatramajjhattatå cetasika, which is the brahmavihåra of upekkhå, equanimity. If someone wants to extend mettå towards a person who conducts himself in an unpleasant and irritating way, he should, to begin with, develop adosa cetasika, the reality that is free from anger. 23073 From: rjkjp1 Date: Sun Jun 22, 2003 10:03pm Subject: Present moment --- > A discussion with a friend Dear RobertK, you have > family and teach classes. Are there any conflicts? How long can you > go on like this? _________ These are great questions. I think when there is a (belief in) 'self' then conflicts are inevitable. Then there is always 'me' trying to do or get something. I used to have the idea: first get the mind nice and still and then ponder at leisure the changing patterns. However, this is caught up in a subtle idea that `mind' somehow exists. There is no Mind but there are only rapidly changing phenomena. It is natural that mental states are involved in concepts but in between there can be, sometimes, little flashes of insight that know the characteristic of paramattha dhamma (any of the khandhas such as seeing or sound or feeling, or hardness, or greed). Ronald Graham, a well-known mathematician said "You can do mathematics anywhere. I once had a flash of insight into a problem in the middle of a back somersault with a triple twist on my trampoline ( in the "The man who loved only numbers"). Of course panna (wisdom ) of vipassana is much faster than that as it is seeing dhammas directly (not conceptualizing about them). Too, the thinking process has to be known, and it can't be known if one always turns away from it to tries to manufacture something else that one thinks is better or purer. If there are conflicts then this shows that one is trying to force, and not accepting the present moment as it is. The only way out is to insight such moments and see what is really present - Which one will see is some dhamma conditioned by tanha (desire) for a result. That tanha is part of dependent origination and no matter how much it feels like wholesome effort will actually hinder insight - unless it is seen as it is. Also I must confess that I err on the lazy side and take things pretty easy. When I hear people ask A. Sujin "How do I practice?" her reply is very careful. In some ways it can't really be answered because such a question shows there is already a hidden idea of self who can do something. There are dhammas arising even while such questions are been asked and if there is enough understanding then sati can arise to be aware of the moment. It is always about this moment - according to A. Sujin. But that sort of answer doesn't satisfy tanha (desire) which always wants results now. RobertK 23074 From: rjkjp1 Date: Sun Jun 22, 2003 10:06pm Subject: Present moment2 --- > Dear Group, more discussion: What practical method, step by step, do you need to follow in order > to catch those 'little flashes of insight' and to lengthen their > duration enough in order for 'wisdom and sati' to take control, such > that Tanha would not have a chance to arise? > > I have read a lot about 'bare attention', 'direct seeing without > thinking', 'experiencing ultimate realities without thinking and/or > conceptualizing'. But there is a big gap between the > concepts/lectures and the actual application. ___________ When you are reading this reply now what is present? What realities? there is seeing and colour- can there be some direct study of these dhammas right now? There is also feeling - is it MY feeling or is there a little understanding that begins to understand it is just a conditioned phenomena with no owner. Or is there a little confusion about what was said? If so what is the actual nature of confusion? A. Sujin stresses on parami (perfections). She says they are the supports that assist wisdom do its job. For example if we are still stingy with regard to material things then how could we come to the stage of letting go of the idea of self completely. In the Maha-samaya sutta of the Digha nikaya it says "Those who have gone to the Buddha for refuge Will not go to the plane of woe. On discarding the human body,They will fill the hosts of the devas."" Perhaps for many buddhist, like it or not, the next life may be in the deva world where some of the parami cannot be perfected (because no obstacles). And we should take this seriously. Whatever trials and tribulations come in life they should be warmly regarded as a great chance to develop patience (khanti) parami or whatever other parami is suitable. ------------------------------------------- > > BTW Have you known of any real person who's achieved Arahat-magga > this way? ? ___________________ Actually I stopped wondering like this years ago because I think it is always motivated by tanha. What we can know about a teacher - beyond speculation- is whether they point to the present moment in a way that helps us to begin to insight such moments. The rest is wishful thinking. The Anguttara nikaya commentary tells the story of one teacher, after the Buddhas time, who had many pupils all of whom attained arahatship. But he himself was still a wordling - not even a sotapanna. However, he understood the tipitaka very, very well; knew the letter and the meaning and so was a great teacher (Angutara nikaya Ekakanipata pali (the book of the ones) Nivaranapphahana-vagga (abandoning of hindrances) 6th sutta; about the Thera Gamantapabbharavasi mahasivatthera ). RobertK --- End forwarded message --- 23075 From: rjkjp1 Date: Sun Jun 22, 2003 10:09pm Subject: Present moment3 More discussion: > Dear robertk, The present state is moving/changing continuously; it seems like > a 'flow' of events. Thoughts arise and disappear, feeling changes in > kind and location-- sometimes in the body, some other time it is > mental. As this complex process of events flow through time, life is > diminishes. Everything seems to be significant only at the 'present > moment'-- and yet, this present moment is empty, void, meaningless. > How sad! ________ Not sad! It only might seem that way when we think about the present moment- Insighting the present moment without thinking about it is a refuge that can't be taken by anyone. In the samyutta Nikaya (III, Khandha-vagga, The First Fifty, Ch 5, On Being an Island to oneself 2: "Monks, be islands to yourselves, be your own refuge, having no other; let the Dhamma be an island and a refuge to you, having no other. Those who are islands to themselves... should investigate to the very heart of things: "What is the source of sorrow, lamentation, pain, grief and despair? How do they arise?" Here, monks the uninstructed worldling... regards the body as self, the self as having body, body as being in the self, or the self as being in the body. Change occurs in this man's body, and it becomes different. On account of this change and difference, sorrow, lamentation, pain, grief and despair arise.""" (repeats with feelings, perceptions, mental formations, consciousness.) ""BUT seeing the body's impermanence, its changeability, its waning, its ceasing, he says, "formerly as well as now, all bodies were impermanent and unsatisfacory, and subject to change." Thus, seeing this as it really is, with perfect insight, he abandons all sorrow, lamentation, pain, grief and despair. He is not worried at their abandonment, but unworried lives at ease, and thus living at ease he is said to be "assuredly delivered." """ It is a long process and can't really be hurried but has much comfort all the way. _________________________________ > , do you mean to say that my every living moment should be devoted > to developing parami/kusala dhamma and that's all what matters? I > guess you're right; yet my 'tanha' makes me feel unsatisfied to some > degree. ____________ Too idealistic, I think, to say every living moment should be devoted to kusala. Dhammas arise by conditions: akusala such as desire and aversion and ignorance have been accumalted (ayuhana) for countless lives and so they must arise- there is no self who can stop them. Learning about the teachings means that there will be gradually less tendency to misinterpret them as "MY akusala" - then they can be known as they are. Understanding has its own timeframe in which to develop, and patience is the first parami.If we try to force understanding or kusala this is because of an idea of a subtle self who can control. RobertK --- End forwarded message --- 23076 From: Sarah Date: Mon Jun 23, 2003 0:45am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Dating of texts, [...] (Jaataka) Hi Jim (Nina, RobK & All), Thx for your kind comments. --- Jim Anderson wrote: > > Jim wrote: "I have come across instances of the term 'buddhavacana' > > being defined as the Tipitaka combined with the commentaries > > (saa.t.thakatha.m). > > I think I have probably erred on this point. I was relying on memory > alone when I wrote that and when I saw you quoting me just now I > thought I'd better start looking for some commentarial references to > back it up. Unfortunately, I haven't been able to find anything and > have some doubt that I will. So I'd advise you to disregard that point > of mine for now. Mind you, I don't think it unreasonable to consider > the commentaries to belong to the buddhavacana if you interpret the > 'buddha-' part in a wider sense to include the arahants (many of whom > were responsible for the a.t.thakathas in the first 500 years) and the > fact that it contains a good deal spoken by the Buddha himself eg. the > Jataka stories. ...... Actually, I meant to ask you if you had any references in mind, but didn’t wish to trouble you too much;-) I agreed with the point (which is why I included it of course;-)). I also meant to add some textual support I had in mind for your comments in the summary, but was very conscious that the summary was getting quite long. Originally I put a footnote to Lance's last comments too, but deleted this for the same reason. In the series I wrote before from the Bahiranidana I quoted passages like the ones in the Atthasaalini (The Expositor, Introductory Discourse, pp6 onwards) which refer to the Kathaavatthu, expounded by Tissa, as being ‘buddhavacana’. Also, suttas given by Mahakaccana and others being ‘buddhavacana’ after the Buddha made it clear he gave his approval for this. Then with the entire Abhidhamma, even though expounded by Sariputta. (Nina has also quoted some of the passages recently I think). The same would therefore also apply, imho, to texts such as the Petakopadesa and Nettippakarana attributed to Maha Kaccana and said to be approved by the Buddha. In the intro to The Guide (Netti), p xi, Dhammapala’s comy is quoted with criterion with regard to a text, ‘approved by the Buddha’ - “any text not in contradiction (when examined) under the four Principal appeals to authority is the criterion. And the “Guide-Treatise” has, like the Petakopadesa, come down (to us) by way of the unimpeachable succession of teachers...” Other interesting comments follow. Of course, everything is up for debate and I know I’m risking opening a Pandora’s box here as I’m trying to tidy up any ends before my trip. I know RobertK has also read the Jatakas very thoroughly and has a lot of confidence in their value and authenticity. I think he’s written before about them before both here and elsewhere and may like to add more. Thanks again for your help, Jim. If you come across other references that you may have had in mind, I’d be interested to hear. Nina, thank you also for your feedback. Metta, Sarah ====== 23077 From: christine_forsyth Date: Mon Jun 23, 2003 1:19am Subject: about The Buddha Dear Group, It has been said that the Buddha took four incalculably long periods of time plus one hundred thousand aeons to develop the wisdom to become a Buddha. If one aeon is billions of years, then an unimaginable length of time passed after He made the aspiration to become a Samma Sambuddha, until the target was achieved. One wonders how He managed to keep on track. [One also wonders how ordinary beings are ever going to find liberation, if this Great Being took so long.] Was there rememberance in each re-becoming, even from the beginning, of past lives and of having made the aspiration? Did he ever go astray? I often think it would be a great help if each could remember the useless, damaging, unprofitable lives that had been lived previously ... surely that would be the best teaching tool. I know this isn't how things are, or how things can ever be - just papanca. metta and peace, Christine ---The trouble is that you think you have time --- 23078 From: buddhatrue Date: Mon Jun 23, 2003 2:14am Subject: Re: about The Buddha Hi Christine, These are very good questions. I will offer my perspective. The Lord Buddha didn't have recollection of his manifold past lives until right before his final enlightenment. It wasn't like he could see the whole trail of his lives, strung out behind him like a lengthy lesson, and he could learn from each of them as he progressed. It was learning from each of life`s lessons as they arose. It also isn't necessary for each of us to have a remembrance of our many past lives in order to proceed. The Law of Karma is such that if a person doesn't learn from one lesson, that lesson is going to be repeated again and again until the necessary lesson is learned. Allow me to quote a relevant text: Every experience has something to teach us, something to make us learn. Whenever we fail to learn, the same experience is given to us again and again, till we learn the lesson from it. This scientific kind of a process is what is known as the Law of Karma. « Swami Shantanand Sarawathi » Karma, like evolution, is the natural order of the universe. When lessons aren't learned, history is going to repeat itself over and over again, on an individual, group, national, and world level. When the lesson is learned, there is a natural evolving, physical and spiritual. Evolution and karma doesn't always, naturally lead to perfection, more often it leads to extinction. Each of the manifold past lives of the Buddha weren't progressive, there were numerous cul- de-sacs and dead-ends along the way which required a different approach, a different evolution. It was through numerous right actions and right efforts that eventually the Buddha grew to have right view. It shouldn't take us as long as it took him because he taught the correct path to follow. Metta, James 23079 From: phamdluan2000 Date: Mon Jun 23, 2003 7:54am Subject: Re: about The Buddha Dear Christine, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "christine_forsyth" wrote: Dear Group, It has been said that the Buddha took four incalculably long periods of time plus one hundred thousand aeons to develop the wisdom to become a Buddha. If one aeon is billions of years, then an unimaginable length of time passed after He made the aspiration to become a Samma Sambuddha, until the target was achieved. One wonders how He managed to keep on track. [One also wonders how ordinary beings are ever going to find liberation, if this Great Being took so long.] Was there rememberance in each re-becoming, even from the beginning, of past lives and of having made the aspiration? Did he ever go astray? I often think it would be a great help if each could remember the useless, damaging, unprofitable lives that had been lived previously ... surely that would be the best teaching tool. I know this isn't how things are, or how things can ever be - just papanca. metta and peace, Christine KKT: Have you ever considered this question: << Who >> or << What >> is that << entity >> that passed through the series of << past >> lives of the Buddha? Another question: Is the actual Dalai Lama, the 14th, the same or different from the 13th Dalai Lama? Peace, KKT 23080 From: Date: Mon Jun 23, 2003 7:57am Subject: Re: [dsg] about The Buddha Hi, Christine - In a message dated 6/23/2003 3:19:16 AM Eastern Standard Time, cforsyth@v... writes: > > Dear Group, > > It has been said that the Buddha took four incalculably long periods > of time plus one hundred thousand aeons to develop the wisdom to > become a Buddha. If one aeon is billions of years, then an > unimaginable length of time passed after He made the aspiration to > become a Samma Sambuddha, until the target was achieved. One > wonders how He managed to keep on track. [One also wonders how > ordinary beings are ever going to find liberation, if this > Great > Being took so long.] ============================ With regard to the last issue you raise: It wasn't that he was a great being who, despite being so great, took extraordinarily long (to reach final enlightenment), but that he *became* such a great being partly due to how long he took. His vow was not "just" to reach complete enlightenment, but to become a Buddha, which requires much more effort, much greater achievement, and for a radically longer period of preparation. Of course, if your intention is to be a future Buddha, then you do, indeed, have your work cut out for you!;-) With metta, Howard 23081 From: buddhatrue Date: Mon Jun 23, 2003 8:20am Subject: Re: [dsg] about The Buddha --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@a... wrote: His vow was not "just" to reach complete enlightenment, but to become a Buddha, which requires much more effort, much greater achievement, and for a radically longer period of preparation. Of course, if your intention is to be a future Buddha, then you do, indeed, have your work cut out for you!;-) > > With metta, > Howard Hi Howard, I have read this before but I have never come across a sutta reference about the 'bundled continuum' that was Gotama having made a vow in a past life to become a Buddha in some future existence eons away. Is there a sutta reference to this? Also, if this is true, then that 'bundled continuum' must have had some knowledge of Arahants, Buddhas, and Silent Buddhas to have made such a vow...and he/she couldn't have made that vow on Earth because humans haven't been around for millions of eons. On what planet or world did he make that vow? Just wondering if you know because you seem very knowledgeable about this vow. Metta, James 23082 From: Date: Mon Jun 23, 2003 8:48am Subject: Re: [dsg] about The Buddha Hi, James - In a message dated 6/23/2003 10:20:23 AM Eastern Standard Time, buddhatrue@y... writes: > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@a... wrote: > His vow was not "just" to reach complete enlightenment, but to > become a Buddha, which requires much more effort, much greater > achievement, and for a radically longer period of preparation. Of > course, if your intention is to be a future Buddha, then you do, > indeed, have your work cut out for you!;-) > > > > With metta, > > Howard > > Hi Howard, > > I have read this before but I have never come across a sutta > reference about the 'bundled continuum' that was Gotama having made a > vow in a past life to become a Buddha in some future existence eons > away. Is there a sutta reference to this? Also, if this is true, > then that 'bundled continuum' must have had some knowledge of > Arahants, Buddhas, and Silent Buddhas to have made such a vow...and > he/she couldn't have made that vow on Earth because humans haven't > been around for millions of eons. On what planet or world did he > make that vow? Just wondering if you know because you seem > very > knowledgeable about this vow. > > Metta, James ================================ I was a fly on the wall of his kuti when he made that vow, as a matter of fact! ;-) I have a book at home (I'm in the Dallas area at the moment, and I forget the title) which discusses the lives of the Buddha and his main disciples. I think that is where I read about this. Supposedly the Buddha made the bodhisatta vow when he was a disciple of an earlier Buddha, but not the one right before Gotama. Given the time scale involved, if we are to believe this, then I would suppose we would have to believe that it occurred on another planet in another galaxy, probably during an earlier kappa. With metta, Howard 23083 From: buddhatrue Date: Mon Jun 23, 2003 9:29am Subject: Re: [dsg] about The Buddha --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@a... wrote: > ================================ > I was a fly on the wall of his kuti when he made that vow, as a matter of fact! ;-) James: Hmmm...not likely to get swatted there, huh? Always taking the safe route! ;-) > I have a book at home (I'm in the Dallas area at the moment, and I forget the title) which discusses the lives of the Buddha and his main disciples. I think that is where I read about this. Supposedly the Buddha made the bodhisatta vow when he was a disciple of an earlier Buddha, but not the one right before Gotama. > Given the time scale involved, if we are to believe this, then I would suppose we would have to believe that it occurred on another planet in another galaxy, probably during an earlier kappa. James: I have read such things in books also but they never seem to quote sutta references. I would like to know where this information came from, if you wouldn't mind looking on your return home I would appreciate it. > > With metta, > Howard Metta, James 23084 From: Date: Mon Jun 23, 2003 11:36am Subject: Re: [dsg] about The Buddha Hi, James - In a message dated 6/23/2003 11:29:47 AM Eastern Standard Time, buddhatrue@y... writes: > James: I have read such things in books also but they never seem to > quote sutta references. I would like to know where this information > came from, if you wouldn't mind looking on your return home > I would > appreciate it. > ======================= Sure. Will do. I suppose one source might be the Jataka Tales, if you give them any credence. Also, I saw somewhere some references to suttas in the M. Nikaya (maybe M 4). I would suspect that the D. Nikaya would be a likely source, if there are any suttas anywhere pertaining to this. With metta, Howard 23085 From: christine_forsyth Date: Mon Jun 23, 2003 2:10pm Subject: Re: [dsg] about The Buddha Hi James, KKT, Howard and all, James: I appreciate your thoughts on this topic. I am not familiar with the 'learning of lessons' idea - my understanding of kamma is that it is action (caused by craving) by thought word or deed, and that there are inescapable consequences of this action (good or bad) - vipaka. Vipaka comes in such varied and unpredictable forms - I'm not sure how one could tell what lesson was being taught {and 'who' by}. For instance, when one's car is damaged by vandals in a public carpark - what does one learn about past actions from that? I think that there is no one-on-one result or trackable history of kamma past or future - just an inevitable process, that may be ameliorated but hardly ever escaped. KKT: I don't think there is a 'who', but it seems from the Teachings, and the explanations I have heard from good friends in the Dhamma [if I am not misunderstanding], that what passes from life to life is just arising and passing bodily and mental phenomena - no ongoing personality, soul or personal identity. While there is craving which is the origin of kamma (good and bad actions of word, thought and deed), re-becoming will be automatic and unavoidable. I am learning on this list that *my* conventional death is no different than *my* death from instant to instant - with its seeming continuity of personality. Perhaps one difference between moment to moment death in this life, and final physical death and rebirth in the next is the obliteration from memory of personal history and identity. Sometimes I almost feel a happiness creeping in at this idea. My original question was about whether the Buddha consciously remembered his past lives. Otherwise, I wonder if the aspiration that was made all those aeons ago caused such a powerful imprint on citta that there was an irresistible compulsion to continue. [As to your question, KKT,about the rebirth of the Dalai Lama/s, I have no comment to make - My understanding of Tibetan teachings is too limited - I understand that they accept that it is possible for humans to search for and authenticate the reappearance of a particular stream of cittas (only ever re-appearing in human form) within a short period after the death of a leader of a particular lineage.] Howard: Thanks Howard - so an 'ordinary' attainment of enlightenment compared to what the Buddha did, is like comparing pre-school to a PhD. Regarding past Buddhas: I think DN14 The Great Discourse on the Lineage speaks of past seven Buddhas as exemplified by Vipassi - a note states a fortunate aeon is one in which one or more Buddhas are born: the present aeon is one of five Buddhas, four of whom have already appeared. Regarding past lives of the Buddha Gotama: I also have an old note (can't attribute it, sorry) saying that 'in the Ghatikara Sutta the Buddha relates to the Venerable Ananda that he was born as Jotipala, in the time of the Buddha Kassapa, his immediate predecessor. The Anathapindikovada Sutta describes a nocturnal visit of Anathapindika to the Buddha, immediately after his rebirth as a Deva. In the Anguttara Nikaya, the Buddha alludes to a past birth as Pacetana the wheelwright.' metta and peace, Christine ---The trouble is that you think you have time --- --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, James - > > In a message dated 6/23/2003 11:29:47 AM Eastern Standard Time, buddhatrue@y... writes: > > > James: I have read such things in books also but they never seem to > > quote sutta references. I would like to know where this information > > came from, if you wouldn't mind looking on your return home > > I would > > appreciate it. > > > ======================= > Sure. Will do. > I suppose one source might be the Jataka Tales, if you give them any credence. Also, I saw somewhere some references to suttas in the M. Nikaya (maybe M 4). I would suspect that the D. Nikaya would be a likely source, if there are any suttas anywhere pertaining to this. > > With metta, > Howard 23086 From: buddhatrue Date: Mon Jun 23, 2003 3:06pm Subject: Re: [dsg] about The Buddha --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "christine_forsyth" wrote: > Hi James, KKT, Howard and all, > > James: I appreciate your thoughts on this topic. I am not familiar > with the 'learning of lessons' idea - my understanding of kamma is > that it is action (caused by craving) by thought word or deed, and > that there are inescapable consequences of this action (good or bad) - > vipaka. Vipaka comes in such varied and unpredictable forms - I'm > not sure how one could tell what lesson was being taught {and 'who' > by}. For instance, when one's car is damaged by vandals in a public > carpark - what does one learn about past actions from that? I think > that there is no one-on-one result or trackable history of kamma past > or future - just an inevitable process, that may be ameliorated but > hardly ever escaped. Hi Christine, Karma isn't random, therein lies whatever lesson to be learned. Your description is atomistic, while mine is holistic, but they are both descriptions for the same thing. I pray that your car is never vandalized. Metta, James 23087 From: nina van gorkom Date: Mon Jun 23, 2003 9:13pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Vism XIV, 3 Dear Larry, op 23-06-2003 02:41 schreef LBIDD@w... op LBIDD@w...: > L: So padhaana _is_ right effort as "endeavour". If there is no right > effort, there is no panna. Correct? N: When there is right view there is also at the same time, by conditions, right effort. L:What if there is ordinary > consciousness of impermanence that later, by being remembered, > conditions the arising of right effort. Does that later right effort > 'make' the original ordinary consciousness panna, or is the remembered > conscousness of impermanence panna, or is all consciousness, sooner or > later, panna? N: What do you mean by ordinary consciousness, I think you use this word for awareness?And ordinary for: not lokuttara? do you mean: first intellectual understanding of impermanence? Can you rephrase your question? Nina. 23088 From: Date: Mon Jun 23, 2003 10:06pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Vism XIV, 3 Hi Nina, You wrote: What do you mean by ordinary consciousness, I think you use this word for awareness?And ordinary for: not lokuttara? do you mean: first intellectual understanding of impermanence? Can you rephrase your question? L: I'm trying to understand the difference between consciousness and understanding as explained in Vism. XIV 3. The only difference in that short explanation is "endeavour". The way I see it, both the consciousness of impermanence and the understanding of impermanence would be conceptual because impermanence is a concept. Maybe this one word "endeavour" is meant to encompass all we have learned about "sampajanna" in the Satipatthana Sutta Commentary? Perhaps we could say "understanding" means "ultimate analysis", distinguishing between ultimate realities and concepts. Exactly how this understanding brings about a life changing (change of lineage) event is the subject of this entire section of the Visuddhimagga. More generally, "understanding" includes many details while "consciousness", in this sense, would have a narrower vision. I don't understand why sanna (perception) can't perceive impermanence. Larry Vism XIV 3: In what sense is it understanding? It is understanding (pa~n~naa) in the sense of act of understanding. What is this act of understanding? It is knowing in a particular mode separate from the modes of perceiving and cognizing. For though the state of knowing is equally present in perception (sa~n~naa), in consciousness (vi~n~na.na), and in understanding (pa~n~naa), nevertheless perception is only the mere perceiving of an object as, say, 'blue' or 'yellow'; it cannot bring about the penetration of its characteristics as impermanent, painful, and not-self. Consciousness knows the object as blue or yellow, and it brings about the penetration of its characteristics, but it cannot bring about, by endeavouring, the manifestation of the [supramundane] path. Understanding knows the object in the way already stated, it brings about the penetration of its characteristics and it brings about, by endeavouring, the manifestation of the path. 23089 From: Date: Mon Jun 23, 2003 11:10pm Subject: subject/object Hi Group, Here's an interesting observation by John Levy (not a buddhist): When I am consciousness of an object, that is, of a notion or a percept, that object alone is present. When I am consciousness of my perceiving, what alone presents itself to consciousness is the notion that I perceive the object: and therefore the notion of my being the perceiver also constitutes an object of consciousness. From this, a most important fact emerges: the so-called subject who thinks, and its apparent object, have no immediate relation. ...the notion, I am reading, does not occur while we are thus absorbed [in reading a book]: it occurs only when our attention wavers....a little reflection will show that even when we are not thus absorbed for any appreciable lapse of time, the subject who afterwards lays claim to the action was not present to consciousness when the action was taking place. The idea of our being the agent occurs to us as a separate thought, which is to say that it forms an entirely fresh object of consciousness. And since, at the time of the occurrence, we were present as neither the thinker, the agent, the percipient, nor the enjoyer, no subsequent claim on our part could alter the position.... If the notions of subject and object are both separate objects of consciousness, neither term has any real significance. An object, in the absence of a subject, cannot be what is normally called an object; and the subject, in the absence of an object, cannot be what is normally called the subject. It is in memory that the two notions seem to combine to form an entirely new notion: 'I am the perceiver or thinker.' Larry 23090 From: Sarah Date: Tue Jun 24, 2003 1:27am Subject: Re: [dsg] about The Buddha Hi James, --- buddhatrue wrote: >> James: I have read such things in books also but they never seem to > quote sutta references. I would like to know where this information > came from, if you wouldn't mind looking on your return home I would > appreciate it. ..... I’m a bit rushed for time, so apologies for just giving links. #Past posts which should cover the question: ***** Bodhisatta 18577, 22341, 22428, 22462 ***** # The texts which I know of which give detailed information are: 1. The Buddhavamsa (Chronicle of Buddhas), the 14th book of the Khuddaka-nikaya, transl by I.B.Horner, PTS 2. The Madhuratthavilaasinii (Clarifier of Sweet Meaning), Comy to the Buddhavamsa, also transl by I.B.Horner, PTS 3. Introduction to the Jatakas which I was referring to recently. Transl by C.Rhys Davids, Srishti pub. Much of it and much more can be found in an excellent book- 4. Buddhism in Translations by Henry Clarke Warren. Our copy is pub by Harvard Uni press. conveniently, this book is on line and you’ll find many of the answers under the first section ‘the story of Sumedha’ (When he was Sumedha, he first made his resolve.) http://www.sacred-texts.com/bud/bits/index.htm Hope this helps and good to see your comments, James. Metta, Sarah ===== 23091 From: Sarah Date: Tue Jun 24, 2003 2:05am Subject: Re: [dsg] about The Buddha Hi Christine, --- christine_forsyth wrote: > >I often think it would be a > great help if each could remember the useless, damaging, unprofitable > lives that had been lived previously ... surely that would be the > best teaching tool. I know this isn't how things are, or how things > can ever be - just papanca. ..... Would it be so easy . Often I remember ‘useless, damaging, unprofitable’ actions from years ago, weeks ago or even yesterday, but I’m not sure that mere thinking or recalling does the trick. For example, on Sunday I really ate too much, overcome by lobha, and felt uncomfortable for the rest of the day. How many times has this happened just in this lifetime and will it be the last? Similarly, we may see others making mistakes, such as my students or your children, but can we prevent it? I’m thinking of your discussion with RobK about Pesa (sp?). Accumulations (Ken H’s favourite word;-)) being what they are, who can stop, change or think their way out? That’s why it takes direct understanding and other path factors to eliminate kilesa (defilements), rather than a course of action or particular set of memories, I think. Of course, reflections are an important support, IF they’re wise ones. Otherwise, it’s just more thinking and papanca, as you say...... Metta, Sarah p.s thx for the helpful lists of links which I’m sure we can recycle many times;-) All- I look forward to reading all the discussions while we're away (almost 3 wks) but I don't expect to have computer access (no internet cafes in the Swiss mountains), so will appreciate any support any of the regulars can give to newcomers, self reminders to trim etc. Jon (without my phobia of noisy bar or airport computers) will be helping Kom to monitor things as usual and hopefully printing out the messages for me to read. AND Hong Kong and China are now officially SARS free, so we should have no airport hassles:-) :-) ====================== 23092 From: Date: Tue Jun 24, 2003 6:21am Subject: Concepts and Characteristics Re: [dsg] Vism XIV, 3 Hi, Larry (and Nina, and all) - In a message dated 6/24/2003 12:06:32 AM Eastern Standard Time, LBIDD@w... writes: > L: I'm trying to understand the difference between consciousness and > understanding as explained in Vism. XIV 3. The only difference in that > short explanation is "endeavour". The way I see it, both the > consciousness of impermanence and the understanding of > impermanence > would be conceptual because impermanence is a concept. =========================== Larry, I'm zero-ing in on one small part of your post that struck me as very important. You wrote that impermance is a concept. I believe this is correct. Yet impermanence is also a characteristic of every dhamma there is except nibbana. Now impermanence, itself, cannot be a dhamma, for it is false (or meaningless) to speak of impermanence as being impermanent. We find ourselves to be in a strange predicament: Anicca, an observable, essential characteristic of all dhammas other than nibbana, is, in fact, concept-only, and thus actually only a nonexistent "something" concocted by the mind. It seems that Abhidhamma leaves many things, critical things, out of its ontology. In Abhidhamma, there are only the (listed) paramattha dhammas. They include rupic and namic presences, but, with the exception of nibbana, no absences. And also no "facts" are included as existents. Anicca is the "fact" that no conditioned dhamma remains. Or we can say that it is a universal characteristic of conditioned dhammas. Now there is something - a characteristic - a property possessed by a dhamma. Perhaps that is something more than concept-only. Yet, where exactly do characteristics fit into the Abhidhammic scheme? What exactly *is* a characteristic? Much of what we call "characteristic" is nothing more than ordinary rupa or cetasika. Hardness is a characteristic (of conventional physical objects), restlessness is a characteristic of mind-moments. Other "characteristics," however, don't seem to fit in. Ironically, the most important characteristics for Buddhists, namely the tilakkhana, are among those that do not fit in. Why, this is all enough to make one go running to Nagarjuna asking for help! ;-)) So ... answers anyone? With metta, Howard 23093 From: Jim Anderson Date: Tue Jun 24, 2003 6:37am Subject: Re: [dsg] Vism XIV, 3 Dear Larry, I thought it might help if I add what the .tiikaa on Vism XIV.3 has to say about "endeavouring". I have interspersed the Pali with a rough translation within your quote. > Vism XIV 3: In what sense is it understanding? It is understanding > (pa~n~naa) in the sense of act of understanding. What is this act of > understanding? It is knowing in a particular mode separate from the > modes of perceiving and cognizing. For though the state of knowing is > equally present in perception (sa~n~naa), in consciousness (vi~n~na.na), > and in understanding (pa~n~naa), nevertheless perception is only the > mere perceiving of an object as, say, 'blue' or 'yellow'; it cannot > bring about the penetration of its characteristics as impermanent, > painful, and not-self. Consciousness knows the object as blue or yellow, > and it brings about the penetration of its characteristics, but it > cannot bring about, by endeavouring [ussakkitvaa], [.tiikaa: ussakkitvaa ti udayabbaya~naa.napa.tipaa.tiyaa aayuuhitvaa. "by endeavouring" -- by accumulating in succession (or gradually?) the knowledge of rise and fall. Note: aayuuhitvaa is a synonym for ussakitvaa and could also have the meanings given in PED under aayuuhati (striving, endeavouring; cultivating, etc.)] > the manifestation of the > [supramundane] path. Understanding knows the object in the way already > stated, it brings about the penetration of its characteristics and it > brings about, by endeavouring, the manifestation of the path. [.tiikaa: attano pana ana~n~nasaadhaara.nena aanubhaavena ussakkitvaa maggapaatubhaava.m paapetu.m. moreover, by endeavouring through its own power not shared by the others, it (is able to) bring about the manifestation of the path.] Best wishes, Jim 23094 From: Date: Tue Jun 24, 2003 6:50am Subject: Re: [dsg] subject/object Hi, Larry - In a message dated 6/24/2003 1:10:46 AM Eastern Standard Time, LBIDD@w... writes: > > Hi Group, > > Here's an interesting observation by John Levy (not a buddhist): > > When I am consciousness of an object, that is, of a notion or a percept, > that object alone is present. When I am consciousness of my perceiving, > what alone presents itself to consciousness is the notion that I > perceive the object: and therefore the notion of my being the perceiver > also constitutes an object of consciousness. From this, a most important > fact emerges: the so-called subject who thinks, and its apparent object, > have no immediate relation. > > ...the notion, I am reading, does not occur while we are thus absorbed > [in reading a book]: it occurs only when our attention wavers....a > little reflection will show that even when we are not thus absorbed for > any appreciable lapse of time, the subject who afterwards lays claim to > the action was not present to consciousness when the action was taking > place. The idea of our being the agent occurs to us as a separate > thought, which is to say that it forms an entirely fresh object of > consciousness. And since, at the time of the occurrence, we were present > as neither the thinker, the agent, the percipient, nor the enjoyer, no > subsequent claim on our part could alter the position.... > > If the notions of subject and object are both separate objects of > consciousness, neither term has any real significance. An object, in the > absence of a subject, cannot be what is normally called an object; and > the subject, in the absence of an object, cannot be what is normally > called the subject. It is in memory that the two notions seem to combine > to form an entirely new notion: 'I am the perceiver or > thinker.' quote> > > Larry =============================== I think that your analysis, with the "self" terminology removed, is basically correct. As I see it the situation is as follows: When there is discernment of an object, all that is present to consciousness, all that is discerned, all that "appears," is only that object. Moments afterwards, there is discerned a fresh memory of that discernment-event, and this is followed by mindstates that separate out the objective pole of that remembered event and the subjective pole, and states in which there is the discursive realization that that event consisted of those two aspects, the subjective and the objective. But at the time the event actually occurred, the only awareness was the awareness of the object. (That's why it is called the object.) Consciousness is not reflexive at a single point in time. The diamond cannot cut itself. In fact, the subjective pole of a discernment event is only discovered subsequently, and, when that occurs, it appears as the objective pole of a subsequent discermment-event. However, I don't agree with you when you conclude "From this, a most important fact emerges: the so-called subject who thinks, and its apparent object, have no immediate relation." I believe that they definitely *do*, but that relation is only *discoverable* subsequently. (Almost immediately, yet still not simulaneously.) With metta, Howard 23095 From: Date: Tue Jun 24, 2003 7:29am Subject: Re: Concepts and Characteristics Re: [dsg] Vism XIV, 3 Hi again, Larry (and all) - Sometimes, and this is one of those times, I think that we give too little credit to concepts. When do we really come to "directly" see impermanence? I think this happens when the mind is powerfuly attentive, concentrated, and mindful: An object is discerned, perhaps through a number of mind-moments, then it is gone, and then there is the noticing, through recollection (and thought), that it just had been present, but now is gone - and so, we "see" that it has ceased. This is all done wordlessly, but not without mentality. (It may then be followed by discursive summation.) If we did not have this conceptuality, this clear comprehension which involves mind, and relates several past events, we would be oblivious to impermanence. So, perhaps we shouldn't be too quick to give short shrift to the conceptual faculty. With metta, Howard 23096 From: christhedis Date: Tue Jun 24, 2003 8:09am Subject: [dsg] Re: meditation vs. just thinking about it --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Sarah wrote: > I'm sure we can all relate to these patterns to greater or lesser extents. > I think that sometimes we have an idea that `we' should be a certain way, > eg more equanimous, or that our behaviour patterns should be different and > improved from usual. However, wishing they are other than they are at this > time will not help us to develop any detachment or acceptance of what is > conditioned already. We think the answer is to follow a course of action > or to find the right recipe to follow in steps, but these courses of > action consist of many different phenomena and it is the bhavana (mental > development) --and in particular the understanding of these phenomena -- > which will help. While we cling to ourselves and to ways of life or > results we think should be in place, the result is likely to be more > rather than less anxiety and disturbance I think. > > As I mentioned at the start, much of the insight which seems apparent may > just be thinking and it helps a lot to be honest enough to see what > beginners we are. This way there won't be the high expectations that life, > with its ups and downs, will be significantly different from usual. The > attachment to particular results can be a real impediment, I think. In > your first question to the list, you asked about being `equanimous in all > situations' and transcending `all worldly attachments'. I think it's > impossible and useless to try and train ourselves like this. It's bound to > be an unnatural imitation of the arahants rather than an understanding and > acceptance of the present reality and our tendencies and inclinations. > > In other words, we have to start at the beginning at the present moment. > So please don't be concerned about problems `practising Buddhism'. Any > practice should make life easier not harder. Trying to be equanimous or to > `extinguish desires' is bound to make life harder and bound to be > motivated by an idea that a `self' can do this. > > I'm not sure if any of these comments are of any help. Please let us know > what you think and what further questions or comments you have. > > Appreciating your open sharing, > > Metta, > > Sarah > ===== > Hi Sarah and others, This reply really helps me a lot I think. The idea that I am making life harder by trying to 'extinguish desires' as a 'self' is something that makes a lot of sense. Sounds so obvious once you've said it, but sometimes it is hard to see the forest for the trees? Regarding meditation, my first training in Vipassana meditation was the 10-day course taught by Goenka. But most places I have gone to since do the walking and sitting meditation (Goenka's is only sitting). The other main difference in techniques I see is that Goenka's meditation focuses on the incoming and outgoing breath through the nose, while the alternate meditation focuses on the rising and falling of the abdomen. I was actually recommended Goenka's version as being 'more scientific'. Does anyone have any advice on which type to practise, is it bad to learn one then switch to another, or is it best just to find out which works best for oneself? Thanks again for all the replies and comments. Chris. 23097 From: abhidhammika Date: Tue Jun 24, 2003 8:22am Subject: Sabba Sutta Commentary: To Sayadaw Yanatharo, Sayadaw Dhammapiyo, Robert K, Sara Dear Sayadaw Yanatharo, Sayadaw Dhammapiyo, Robert Kirpatrick, Sarah, Jon, Nina, Mike, Jim, Christine and all How are you? The following is Sabba Sutta Commentary (the main portion) and notes on it for your perusal in view of criticisms against it by some translators and misuse by some academics. If you need further clarification of my translation or notes, please let me know. Please enjoy the post. With regards, Suan SABBASUTTAVA.N.NANAA 23. Sabbavaggassa pa.thame sabbam vo, bhikkhaveti sabbam naama catubbidham– sabbasabbam, aayatana sabbam, sakkaayasabbam, padesasabbanti. Tattha– "Na tassa addi.t.thamidha-atthi kiñci, atho aviññaatamajaanitabbam; sabbam abhiññaasi yadatthi neyyam, tathaagato tena samantacakkhuu"ti. (mahaani. 156; cuu.lani. dhotakamaa.navapucchaaniddeso 32; pa.ti. ma. 1.121)– Idam sabbasabbam naama. "Sabbam vo, bhikkhave, dese ssaami, tam su.naathaa"ti (sam. ni. 4.24) idam aayatanasabbam naama. "Sabbadhammamuulapariyaayam vo, bhikkhave, dese ssaamii"ti (ma. ni. 1.1) idam sakkaayasabbam naama. "Sabba dhammesu vaa pana pa.thamasamannaahaaro uppajjati cittam mano maanasam …pe… tajjaamanodhaatuu"ti idam padesa sabbam naama. Iti pañcaaramma.namattam padesasabbam. Tebhuumakadhammaa sakkaayasabbam. Catubhuumaka dhammaa aayatanasabbam. Yamkiñci neyyam sabbasabbam. padesasabbam sakkaayasabbam na paapu.naati, sakkaaya sabbam aayatanasabbam na paapu.naati, aayatanasabbam sabbasabbam na paapu.naati. kasmaa? sabbaññutaññaa.nassa ayam naama dhammo aaramma.nam na hotiiti natthitaaya. imasmim pana sutte aayatanasabbam adhippetam. All Sutta Commentary 23. In the phrase "Sabbam vo, Bhikkhave" in the All Suttam, in the All Group, the term "all" is fourfold in terms of comprehensive all (sabbasabbam), the all about reality venues (aayatanasabbam), the all about own individuality (sakkaayasabbam), and partial all. Of those four, the term "all" means comprehensive all in the following verse: "To that Tathaagato, there is nothing invisible in this world, As well, there is nothing unknowable and nothing incomprehensible. Whatever there is to be known, the Buddha knew all. Therefore, he is the Universal Eye." In the statement "Monks, I will teach all to you, listen to it", this all means the all about reality venues. In the statement "Monks, I will teach you the theme of the root of all things", this all means the all about own individuality. In the statement "The first perceptual taking emerges in all the (five) sense objects, which is the mind (cittam), the mind (mano), the mind (maanasam), (skip), the appropriate mental element: this is called the mental element" (Section 184, Vibha`nga Pali), this all means partial all. Here, as stated thus, the five sense objects only are partial all. Those that belong to three domains are the all about own individuality. Those that belong to the four domains are the all about reality venues. Whatever is knowable is comprehensive all. Partial all does not traverse the all about own individuality. The all about own individuality does not traverse the all about reality venues. The all about reality venues does not traverse the comprehensive all. Why? It is because there isn't such a thing that won't make a stimulus to the omniscience wisdom. In this discourse, though, the all about reality venues is required. NOTES Sabbasabbam – comprehensive all contains whatever is knowable in terms of all the realities, characteristics (lakka.naa), and designations (paññatti). Aayatanasabbam – the all about reality venues contains all the ultimate realities in terms of matter, mind, mental associates and nibbaana. Aayatanasabbam does not include characteristics and designations. Sakkaayasabbam – the all about own individuality contains all the worldly realities where transworldly realities (lokuttara dhammaa) including nibbaana are absent. Padesasabbam – partial all contains only immediate number of items according to the situation and context. For example, as in the sentence "You all three, go home!" or "All children, come here!" as when parents would call on them. Pa.thamasammaahaaro – the first perceptual taking is the oldest technical term for the phenomenon of the mind turning to one of the five physical sense stimuli. It is described in the commentaries as the function of attention at the five sense doors (pa`ncadvaaraavajjanakicca). Tebhuumakadhammaa – those that belong to the three domains, which are the sensuous domains (kaamaavacarabhuumi), the material Jhaana domains (ruupaavacarabhuumi), and the immaterial Jhaana domains (aruupavacarabhuumi). Catubhuumakadhammaa – those that belong to the four domains, which are the sensuous domains, the materal Jhaana domains, the immaterial Jhaana domains, and the transworldly domains (lokuttarabhuumi). The transworldly domains contain the four path consciousnesses (maggacittaani), the four fruit (phalacittaani), and their object that is nibbana. Paapu.naati – to traverse, as in the sentence "Partial all does not traverse the all about own individuality." The three sentences that contain the verb "paapu.naati" are better understood if we apply the concept of sets from mathematics to them. There are four sets in terms of Sabbasabba Set, Aayatana Set, Sakkaayasabba Set, and Padesasabba Set. As explained above, numerically, Sabbasabba Set contains Aayatana Set, which contains Sakkaayasabba Set, which contains Padesasabba Set. The bigger sets traverse or exhaust the smaller sets. But, a smaller set cannot cover a bigger set. Therefore, the sentence "Partial all does not traverse the all about own individuality." is true because Padesasabba Set is smaller than Sakkaayasabba Set. Similarly, Sakkaayasabba Set does not traverse Aayatanasabba Set because the former is a subset of the latter (i.e., the former is smaller then the latter) while Aayatanasabba Set does not exhaust Sabbasabba Set because the first set is a subset of the second set. The sentence "In this discourse, though, the all about reality venues is required." allows us to rewrite the phrase "mano ca dhammaa ca" in the Sabba Suttam as "manaayatanam ca dhammaayatanam ca". All we need to do now is to find out what dhammaayatanam means. Dhammaayatanam – the conceptual venues that are the objects of the consciousness venues (manaayatanam). Please keep in mind that I do not limit the use of the term "concept" to designations (paññatti). Therefore, the conceptual venues refer to reality venues. To simplify expressions, I call the five sense objects as percepts while declaring the objects or stimuli of the mental consciousness (manoviññaa.na) to be concepts. In short, I define concepts to mean realities (paramattha dhammaa) as well as designations ((paññatti). But, conceptual venue (dhammaayatanam) does not include designations ((paññatti) according to the teachings on Aayatanam (reality venues) as will be witnessed below. The conceptual venues are described as follows in Section 167, Vibha`nga Pali. 167. Tattha katamam dhammaayatanam? vedanaakkhandho, saññaakkhandho, sa`nkhaarakkhandho, yañca ruupam anidassana- appa.tigham dhammaayatanapariyaapannam, asa`nkhataa ca dhaatu. "There, what is the conceptual venue? The feeling aggregate, the memory aggregate, the activation aggregate, any invisible, intangible matter subsumable under the conceptual venue, and the unconditioned element are the conceptual venues." Translation and Notes By Suan Lu Zaw http://www.bodhiology.org 23098 From: nina van gorkom Date: Tue Jun 24, 2003 10:18am Subject: Perfections, Ch 10, Loving-kindness, no 6 Perfections, Ch 10, Loving-kindness, no 6 The brahmavihåras, divine abidings, of loving-kindness, compassion, sympathetic joy and equanimity are dhammas which are faultless and superior. A person with mettå is faultless and when he extends mettå to someone else he is superior. The practice of the four brahmavihåras is the right practice towards all beings. We read in the ³Atthasåliní² (I, Part V, XIII, The Divine States, 195): ³And as Brahmå divinities live with faultless thoughts, so aspirants associated with these four states live like the Brahmås. Thus because of the meaning of Œdivine¹ and of their faultless nature, they are called ŒDivine States¹.² These four divine abidings lead to calm, to non-disturbance and they are faultless. They are the way leading to purity. There is a particular order in the cultivation of the four brahmavihåras, mettå being the first, since each of them is a supporting condition for the following brahmavihåra [2] . We read in the ³Expositor² (same section, 196) why they are without limits: ³And all of them arise in an immeasurable field, therefore are they called the ŒImmeasurables¹. For beings without limit constitute their field (object).² We should not think that we have developed mettå already sufficiently when we have slightly less anger or when we have mettå for just a few people. This is not enough. When we meet other people, we should know that we should extend to them, as the occasion demands, mettå, compassion, sympathetic joy or equanimity, and that there should be no limits to their extension. We should not restrict the extension of the brahmavihåras to only particular persons. We can verify for ourselves whether we are ready to further develop the brahmavihåras and to extend them to others all the time. If we can increasingly develop them it is the way to live like the Brahmås. . The ³Atthasåliní² (Book I, Part V, Ch XIII, Divine States, 196) uses a smimile for the four Brahmavihåras. Mettå is like a small child, compassion is like a child who is sick, sympathetic joy like a child who is becoming an adolescent and equanimity like a child who manages his own affairs. As regards loving-kindness which is like a baby, everybody wishes for his wellbeing and prosperity in growing up, but we should have loving-kindness not only for small children. Everybody is like a baby one should assist, and in this way we can feel true loving-kindness for all people. However, this is only a simile helping us to understand the characteristic of loving-kindness. Mettå is like the attitude of a mother towards her child who is still a baby and needs her loving care to grow up. Likewise should we as a loving mother support other people. Compassion is like a sick child. A mother who has a sick child should try to take care of it so that it will be cured, so that it is free from suffering and illness. When we see other people, not only children, we wish that they are free from suffering and that is compassion. We should not limit compassion to particular people, it should be unlimited. Sympathetic joy is rejoicing in someone else¹s welfare. This is compared to the joy of parents who have a child who is becoming an adolescent and wish for the child to keep on enjoying the good things of adolescence for a long time. Equanimity is like a child who can manage his own affairs so that he is no longer a burden to his parents, and his parents do not have to exert themselves with regard to each of his actions. This shows us that if one practises the brahmavihåras in the aforesaid ways, one can abandon defilements and develop the paññå which knows what is beneficial and what is disadvantageous. Footnote: 2. We read in the ³Expositor² (I, Part V, XIII, The Divine States, 196) that the person cultivating the brahmavihåras, after he has worked for the good of other beings, cultivates compassion when they are overcome by suffering. Then, after he has seen the prosperity of those who had prayed for welfare and the removal of suffering, he should practice sympathetic joy by rejoicing in their prosperity. Lastly he should practise equanimity, because there is no further work to be done (after practising the first three divine abidings) and he should proceed by way of evenmindedness and impartiality. 23099 From: nina van gorkom Date: Tue Jun 24, 2003 10:18am Subject: Re: [dsg] about The Buddha Dear Christine and all, I appreciate the discussion on the Buddha. I add a few thoughts. op 23-06-2003 23:10 schreef christine_forsyth op cforsyth@v...: > My original question was about whether the Buddha consciously > remembered his past lives. Otherwise, I wonder if the aspiration > that was made all those aeons ago caused such a powerful imprint on > citta that there was an irresistible compulsion to continue. N: In the Mugha Pakkha Jataka (see Perfections, on determination) he remembered a former birth in hell and therefore did not want to become a king. He pretended to be dumb, deaf, and lame. The Bodhisatta listened to former Buddhas and renewed his aspiration time and again. He renewed them while he was developing the perfections performing heroic deeds: "dearer than my eyes is omniscience" and he gave an eye away. People will object to this, but we should read it in such a way so as to receive the message. An example: I have finished the Equanimity perfection translation, and quote: Sutta reference to this: M I, 79 (sutta 12). At times I feel I am in trying circumstances, difficult to find solutions. But, all this is trivial when thinking of the Bodhisatta. This story is a powerful, impressive reminder of developing equanimity in daily life, not complaining to ourselves. If we are openminded to the lesson, we do not think of: is this reasonable or practical, is this historical or not. All such issues and arguments are not important, we can just profit from this message. The Bodhisatta stayed longer in those places where he was pestered and ridiculed a great deal, he wanted to accumulate equanimity. We should see this in the right way: it is not self-vexation. He knew what he could stand, he knew the power of accumulation. Though we do not have to follow this exactly, it can help and inspire us when we remember his example of equanimity. Ch: Thanks Howard - so an 'ordinary' attainment of enlightenment > compared to what the Buddha did, is like comparing pre-school to a > PhD. N: The Buddha had to develop the perfections for an endlessly long time to the highest degree, so as to be able to become a Samma-sambuddha. His chief disciples did not develop the perfections for the same length of time, and his other disciples developed them during a shorter time. Nina. 23100 From: rjkjp1 Date: Tue Jun 24, 2003 2:17pm Subject: Re: Sabba Sutta Commentary: To Sayadaw Yanatharo, Sayadaw Dhammapiyo, Robert K, Sara --- Dear Suan Thank you very much. I understand it well. Someone might find "conceptual venue' as a translation of dhammayatana slightly confusing since most translators use concept for pannati, but since you carefully define the terms it is fine. Sarah is overseas so might not comment for awhile. RobertK In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "abhidhammika" wrote: > >own individuality does not traverse the all about reality > venues. The all about reality venues does not traverse the > comprehensive all. Why? It is because there isn't such a thing that > won't make a stimulus to the omniscience wisdom. > > In this discourse, though, the all about reality venues is required. > 23101 From: Date: Tue Jun 24, 2003 4:13pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Vism XIV, 3 Hi Jim, Thanks a lot. This is exactly what I was looking for. I had assumed "endeavour" was a translation of "padhaana" because ~Nanamoli translates padhaana as endeavour, but padhaana didn't quite make sense in this case. The commentary sorted it out nicely. Larry Vism XIV, 3: ...Consciousness knows the object as blue or yellow, and it brings about the penetration of its characteristics, but it cannot bring about, by endeavouring [ussakkitvaa], Com: [.tiikaa: ussakkitvaa ti udayabbaya~naa.napa.tipaa.tiyaa aayuuhitvaa. Com: "by endeavouring" -- by accumulating in succession (or gradually?) the knowledge of rise and fall. Note: aayuuhitvaa is a synonym for ussakitvaa and could also have the meanings given in PED under aayuuhati (striving, endeavouring; cultivating, etc.)] Vism: the manifestation of the [supramundane] path. Understanding knows the object in the way already stated, it brings about the penetration of its characteristics and it brings about, by endeavouring, the manifestation of the path. Com: [.tiikaa: attano pana ana~n~nasaadhaara.nena aanubhaavena ussakkitvaa maggapaatubhaava.m paapetu.m. Com: moreover, by endeavouring through its own power not shared by the others, it (is able to) bring about the manifestation of the path.] 23102 From: Date: Tue Jun 24, 2003 5:31pm Subject: Re: [dsg] subject/object Hi Howard, I didn't write the analysis of subject and object. I just found it quoted in a book that compared various views on nonduality. What occurred to me was that the relationship "object of consciousness" isn't found in experience. In fact, relationship of any kind isn't really experienced because relationship is concept. Concepts can be true, but truth is a concept. Ugh, here we go again! Maybe the important thing is that "I" is nothing real and "want" is nothing meaningful or permanent. Larry 23103 From: rjkjp1 Date: Tue Jun 24, 2003 5:32pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Vism XIV, 3 --- Dear Jim and larry, I had also thought endeavour was a trans. of padhana - very interesting what the tika says. Thanks for bringing it up. robert In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, LBIDD@w... wrote: > Hi Jim, > > Thanks a lot. This is exactly what I was looking for. I had assumed > "endeavour" was a translation of "padhaana" because ~Nanamoli translates > padhaana as endeavour, but padhaana didn't quite make sense in this > case. The commentary sorted it out nicely. > > Larry > > Vism XIV, 3: ...Consciousness knows the object as blue or yellow, and it > brings about the penetration of its characteristics, but it cannot bring > about, by endeavouring [ussakkitvaa], > > Com: [.tiikaa: ussakkitvaa ti udayabbaya~naa.napa.tipaa.tiyaa > aayuuhitvaa. > > Com: "by endeavouring" -- by accumulating in succession (or > gradually?) the knowledge of rise and fall. Note: aayuuhitvaa is a > synonym for ussakitvaa and could also have the meanings given in PED > under aayuuhati (striving, endeavouring; cultivating, etc.)] > > Vism: the manifestation of the > [supramundane] path. Understanding knows the object in the way already > stated, it brings about the penetration of its characteristics and it > brings about, by endeavouring, the manifestation of the path. > > Com: [.tiikaa: attano pana ana~n~nasaadhaara.nena aanubhaavena > ussakkitvaa maggapaatubhaava.m paapetu.m. > > Com: moreover, by endeavouring through its own power not shared by the > others, it (is able to) bring about the manifestation of the path.] 23104 From: Date: Tue Jun 24, 2003 5:41pm Subject: Re: Concepts and Characteristics Re: [dsg] Vism XIV, 3 Hi Howard, I agree these are all very thorny issues. Maybe we don't need to get rid of concepts. Maybe they can co-exist peacefully with realities. Or maybe concepts are not a problem because they are not real. Or....maybe something else. Larry ------------------------ Howard: Sometimes, and this is one of those times, I think that we give too little credit to concepts. When do we really come to "directly" see impermanence? I think this happens when the mind is powerfuly attentive, concentrated, and mindful: An object is discerned, perhaps through a number of mind-moments, then it is gone, and then there is the noticing, through recollection (and thought), that it just had been present, but now is gone - and so, we "see" that it has ceased. This is all done wordlessly, but not without mentality. (It may then be followed by discursive summation.) If we did not have this conceptuality, this clear comprehension which involves mind, and relates several past events, we would be oblivious to impermanence. So, perhaps we shouldn't be too quick to give short shrift to the conceptual faculty. 23105 From: kenhowardau Date: Tue Jun 24, 2003 9:05pm Subject: Concepts and Characteristics Re: [dsg] Vism XIV, 3 Dear Howard, You wrote to Larry: --------------- > I'm zero-ing in on one small part of your post that struck me as very important. You wrote that impermanence is a concept. I believe this is correct. > --------------- I think you are mistaken in believing that. As a characteristic of each and every conditioned reality, anicca is not a concept at all, it is absolutely real. --------------- > Yet impermanence is also a characteristic of every dhamma there is except nibbana. > --------------- By your reasoning, this implies that dhammas are characteristically conceptual. This would be a major dilemma but they aren't and so it isn't :-) ------------ > Now impermanence, itself, cannot be a dhamma, > ------------- We are told, 'All conditioned dhammas are anicca.' I think that dhammas ARE their characteristics. I don't think it is taught that dhammas are a 'substance' separate from their characteristics. --------------- > for it is false (or meaningless) to speak of impermanence as being impermanent. > -------------- Fair enough. I don't know if it is said anywhere that characteristics have characteristics. If they have, then those characteristics must have characteristics too :-) But, in so far as each characteristic is part of a dhamma, then it must share the universal characteristics of that dhamma. (I think.) -------------- > We find ourselves to be in a strange predicament: Anicca, an observable, essential characteristic of all dhammas other than nibbana, is, in fact, concept-only, and thus actually only a nonexistent "something" concocted by the mind. It seems that Abhidhamma leaves many things, critical things, out of its ontology. > -------------- But this is only your [and possibly Larry's] reasoning. I think most of us say that anicca is real and therefore, there is no predicament at all. ----------- > In Abhidhamma, there are only the (listed) paramattha dhammas. They include rupic and namic presences, but, with the exception of nibbana, no absences. And also no "facts" are included as existents. Anicca is the "fact" that no conditioned dhamma remains. Or we can say that it is a universal characteristic of conditioned dhammas. Now there is something - a characteristic - a property possessed by a dhamma. Perhaps that is something more than concept-only. Yet, where exactly do characteristics fit into the Abhidhammic scheme? What exactly *is* a characteristic? Much of what we call "characteristic" is nothing more than ordinary rupa or cetasika. Hardness is a characteristic (of conventional physical objects), restlessness is a characteristic of mind-moments. Other "characteristics," however, don't seem to fit in. Ironically, the most important characteristics for Buddhists, namely the tilakkhana, are among those that do not fit in. > ----------------- As I understand the above, you can concede that 'specific' characteristics (eg. restlessness and hardness), might be real but you can't concede the same for the three 'universal' characteristics. The reason being that the universals are "absences" and "facts." I think anything can be expressed as an absence -- eg., restlessness, the absence of restfulness. Dukkha, can be seen as the absence of satisfactoryness or the presence of unsatisfactoryness. Anicca can be seen as the presence of the propensity to cease existing. As for "facts"; when we are talking about DIRECT experience, is there any difference between anicca and the fact of anicca? ----------------- > Why, this is all enough to make one go running to Nagarjuna asking for help! ;-)) ---------------- Whoa! No need for that yet :-) Kind regards, Ken H 23106 From: nina van gorkom Date: Tue Jun 24, 2003 9:12pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Sabba Sutta Commentary: To Sayadaw Yanatharo, Sayadaw Dhammapiyo, Robert K, Sara Daer Suan, Thank you very much for your translation and notes, most interesting, Would you please also frwd this to Pali yahoo? I am sure many are interested there. anumodana, Nina op 24-06-2003 17:22 schreef abhidhammika op suanluzaw@b...: The following is Sabba Sutta Commentary (the main > portion) and notes on it for your perusal in view of criticisms > against it by some translators and misuse by some academics. 23107 From: christine_forsyth Date: Wed Jun 25, 2003 2:15am Subject: [dsg] Re: meditation vs. just thinking about it Hi Chris, In the Anapanasati Sutta the Buddha speaks of those who are mindful of in and out breathing, not of a particular point to be mindful of. I think being aware of movement at the abdomen was first taught by Mahasi Sayadaw and then by U Pandita in Burma (Myanmar), whereas traditionally the breath at the nostrils had been the focus. The abdomen is a larger area to be aware of than the nose, and it is said that relative beginners may find this easier - particularly when respiration becomes finer and hard to distinguish. I have not heard that changing from the nose to the abdomen or vice versa is detrimental when you are trying to find what best suits you - but it is said that changing often is not recommended. A site that you may find interesting and helpful: http://www.wildmind.org/ You may have noticed by now that on this list there are many people who do formal sitting, walking and standing meditation, as well as many who don't. metta and peace, Christine ---The trouble is that you think you have time --- --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "christhedis" 23108 From: m. nease Date: Wed Jun 25, 2003 5:33am Subject: Re: [dsg] Vism XIV, 3 Jim (and Larry) Yes, great stuff--interesting how often variations of 'accumulating' seem to be accumulating lately. mike ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Tuesday, June 24, 2003 4:13 PM Subject: Re: [dsg] Vism XIV, 3 Hi Jim, Thanks a lot. This is exactly what I was looking for. I had assumed "endeavour" was a translation of "padhaana" because ~Nanamoli translates padhaana as endeavour, but padhaana didn't quite make sense in this case. The commentary sorted it out nicely. Larry Vism XIV, 3: ...Consciousness knows the object as blue or yellow, and it brings about the penetration of its characteristics, but it cannot bring about, by endeavouring [ussakkitvaa], Com: [.tiikaa: ussakkitvaa ti udayabbaya~naa.napa.tipaa.tiyaa aayuuhitvaa. Com: "by endeavouring" -- by accumulating in succession (or gradually?) the knowledge of rise and fall. Note: aayuuhitvaa is a synonym for ussakitvaa and could also have the meanings given in PED under aayuuhati (striving, endeavouring; cultivating, etc.)] Vism: the manifestation of the [supramundane] path. Understanding knows the object in the way already stated, it brings about the penetration of its characteristics and it brings about, by endeavouring, the manifestation of the path. Com: [.tiikaa: attano pana ana~n~nasaadhaara.nena aanubhaavena ussakkitvaa maggapaatubhaava.m paapetu.m. Com: moreover, by endeavouring through its own power not shared by the others, it (is able to) bring about the manifestation of the path.] 23109 From: Jim Anderson Date: Wed Jun 25, 2003 6:57am Subject: Re: [dsg] Vism XIV, 3 Hi Larry, Robert, and Mike, A note of caution about my rough and likely incorrect translation of the following: << Com: [.tiikaa: ussakkitvaa ti udayabbaya~naa.napa.tipaa.tiyaa aayuuhitvaa. Com: "by endeavouring" -- by accumulating in succession (or gradually?) the knowledge of rise and fall. Note: aayuuhitvaa is a synonym for ussakitvaa and could also have the meanings given in PED under aayuuhati (striving, endeavouring; cultivating, etc.)] >> The Pali doesn't really make a lot of sense to me as it's difficult to determine how "pa.tipaa.tiyaa" (order, succession) fits in and also from further looking up aayuuhati in CPD and although it lists "accumulate" among its meanings it may not apply in that way here as it is considered a transitive in taking an object like kamma. I also checked Cone's dictionary and was surprised to find the following meanings for "ussakkati": moves up, rises; moves forward, advances, progresses -- p.514, with no mention of "endeavour" -- very different from the definitions of PED and CPD! It looks like these terms will need a lot of studying and tracing right back to their roots and prefixes. Best wishes, Jim 23110 From: Date: Wed Jun 25, 2003 8:20am Subject: Re: Concepts and Characteristics Re: [dsg] Vism XIV, 3 Hi, Ken (and Larry) - Let me immediately get to the main point: the nature of characteristics. Abhidhamma countenances two types of dhammas, rupa and nama. That is all. Some characteristics, such as hardness, are rupas. Some characteristics, such as distractedness, are cetasikas, and hence namas. What is impermanence: nama or rupa? Is the cessation of a hardness a nama or a rupa? Is the cessation of distractedness a nama? Clearly it is not a rupa? Is anicca the same as cessation, or is it the fact that now something is present, and then is no longer present? Is that the same as cessation? (Ceasing is an event that occurs at a point in time. But impermanence of a dhamma involves an earlier time at which there was presence of the dhamma and a subsequent time at which there is absence.) And exactly what is cessation, itself - nama or rupa? If some characteristics are neither nama or rupa, are they pa~n~natti? Could they not still be actualities? Isn't impermanence a reality? Are the answers to any of these crystal clear? While we are at it, what about relations? Abhidhamma covers them. Are they namas? Are they rupas? Are they listed as either? If they are neither, are they pa~n~natti or actualities? Are the answers to any of *these* crystal clear? One more question: If some characteristics (like the tilakkhana) are neither nama nor rupa, and if relations (like the relation of conditionality in conditioned genesis) are neither nama nor rupa, and, yet, they are "conditions", then do not "conditions" become the fundamental dhammas, with rupas, cetasikas, and cittas constituting the subclass of those conditions that are directly observable via the six sense doors, and the others specifically requiring the conceptual faculty of mind for their cognizing? And does not this latter premiss then split the objects of the conceptual faculty into two types, concept-only and actualities? And what is pa~n~na and its relationship to clear comprehension, to a purified, clarified, conceptual faculty? One and the same? Or just related in some way? Or totally unrelated? Yes, I know - lots of questions and no answers. But sometimes I think that questions are far more important than answers. Sometimes answers just shut the mind down, and questions open it up. With metta, Howard P.S. What do I personally *suspect* is the case? I *suspect* that conditions include more than namas and rupas, that some of those conditions (including relations and various characteristics) that are neither nama nor rupa are realities cognized only through the mind door, and, specifically, via a clear comprehension which is a purified, clarified, conceptual faculty which, at its level of ultimate purity (the only level in the arahant), is exactly what wisdom is. I *suspect* this, but, of course, there may be a far better account of the issues raised by my questions. I am eager to hear such an account. In a message dated 6/24/2003 11:05:13 PM Eastern Standard Time, kenhowardau@y... writes: > Dear Howard, > > You wrote to Larry: > --------------- > > I'm zero-ing in on one small part of your post > that struck me as very important. You wrote that > impermanence is a concept. I believe this is correct. > > --------------- > > I think you are mistaken in believing that. As a > characteristic of each and every conditioned reality, > anicca is not a concept at all, it is absolutely real. > > --------------- > > Yet impermanence is also a characteristic of every > dhamma there is except nibbana. > > --------------- > > By your reasoning, this implies that dhammas are > characteristically conceptual. This would be a major > dilemma but they aren't and so it isn't :-) > > ------------ > > Now impermanence, itself, cannot be a dhamma, > > > ------------- > > We are told, 'All conditioned dhammas are anicca.' I > think that dhammas ARE their characteristics. I don't > think it is taught that dhammas are a 'substance' > separate from their characteristics. > > --------------- > > for it is false (or meaningless) to speak of > impermanence as being impermanent. > > -------------- > > Fair enough. I don't know if it is said anywhere that > characteristics have characteristics. If they have, then those > characteristics must have characteristics too :-) > > But, in so far as each characteristic is part of a dhamma, then it > must share the universal characteristics of that dhamma. (I > think.) > -------------- > > We find ourselves to be in a strange predicament: > Anicca, an observable, essential characteristic of all > dhammas other than nibbana, is, in fact, concept-only, > and thus actually only a nonexistent "something" > concocted by the mind. It seems that Abhidhamma leaves > many things, critical things, out of its ontology. > > -------------- > > But this is only your [and possibly Larry's] reasoning. > I think most of us say that anicca is real and therefore, > there is no predicament at all. > > ----------- > > In Abhidhamma, there are only the (listed) paramattha > dhammas. They include rupic and namic presences, but, > with the exception of nibbana, no absences. And also no > "facts" are included as existents. Anicca is the "fact" > that no conditioned dhamma remains. Or we can say that it > is a universal characteristic of conditioned dhammas. Now > there is something - a characteristic - a property > possessed by a dhamma. Perhaps that is something more > than concept-only. Yet, where exactly do characteristics > fit into the Abhidhammic scheme? What exactly *is* a > characteristic? Much of what we call "characteristic" is > nothing more than ordinary rupa or cetasika. Hardness is > a characteristic (of conventional physical objects), > restlessness is a characteristic of mind-moments. Other > "characteristics," however, don't seem to fit in. > Ironically, the most important characteristics for > Buddhists, namely the tilakkhana, are among those that do > not fit in. > > ----------------- > > As I understand the above, you can concede that > 'specific' characteristics (eg. restlessness and > hardness), might be real but you can't concede the same > for the three 'universal' characteristics. The reason > being that the universals are "absences" and "facts." > > I think anything can be expressed as an absence -- eg., > restlessness, the absence of restfulness. Dukkha, can be > seen as the absence of satisfactoryness or the presence > of unsatisfactoryness. Anicca can be seen as the > presence of the propensity to cease existing. > > As for "facts"; when we are talking about DIRECT > experience, is there any difference between anicca and > the fact of anicca? > > ----------------- > > Why, this is all enough to make one go running to > Nagarjuna asking for help! ;-)) > ---------------- > > Whoa! No need for that yet :-) > > > Kind regards, > Ken H 23111 From: dwlemen Date: Wed Jun 25, 2003 8:38am Subject: Re: importance of Meditation (my late reply to Sarah) Sarah, OK, I'm back. Again, sorry for the delay. It's been quite a summer! :-) > > DAVE: > > If not, How is it that each individual's basic perception matches? I > > know that we can lump extra stuff onto an object, but the basic > > existence of the object is still there E.g. the moon. It can be a > > god, a piece of cheese, a section of the Earth's inner core, or a > > rememberace of a lost love, but it's there none the less. > ..... > S: Difficult questions as I said! Let's take the moon. When we look at it, > what' s seen? Visible object. If we step on it, what's felt? Hardness. It > isn't that all visible objects are uniform in nature (apart from being > visible objects). If that were so, nothing would ever be identified and we > couldn't survive. So if we look at the moon and there's awareness, there's > no idea of it being a thing or a moon, but what is seen and the > particular visible appearance are just as they've always been and > immediately there are conditions to know it as a moon, even for a baby or > animal without any names or developed associations. If someone else looks > at the moon at the same time, the visible object won't be the same, but > there will be enough in common in 'what is seen' for similar concepts and > identifications to be made. DAVE: I still am not understanding if you are saying that there is really no such thing as the moon or not. When you say "immediately there are conditions to know it as a moon" what do you mean? Are you referring to, perhaps, the difference between what the eye takes in (light, color, motion, etc.) and what the brain then attributes those lights, colors, etc. to be before sending to the mind? If that is the distinction (what the eye takes in, vs. what the mind knows) then I can understand, although I still think that there would be the moon, that exists independently of observation, or understanding. > S: I can see you'd get on well with RobM with your analogies - basically, > different moments as you suggested in a snipped part. It seems it's all > happening at the same time, but hearing and listening (paying attention) > and thinking don't arise at the same moment. When there's a moment of > awareness of one reality, such as hearing or sound, it's clear that > there's no other impingement or idea associated with it. > ..... DAVE: It still sounds like you are talking about conscious awareness being single threaded. And, I can buy that, however, I do think that the brain is taking in the other inputs. So, while I'm focused on seeing the screen, my brain is still absorbing the sounds, smell, feelings, and thoughts. If something comes up that requires focus, my attention to the screen is interupted by the other input. I don't know if what I'm tyring to say/think is Buddhist or not (haven't learned nearly enough to make such a call). But, it does seem to me that, by and large, we are running on "auto-pilot" and our consciousness is just along for the ride, but, because of ego, it thinks it is running the ship, so to speak. But, in this process of my own attempts for understanding, I do want to know how things work from a Buddhist standpoint. From some of the things I've learned so far, I've been amazed at how Buddhism not only "matches" what I have been trying to formulate on my own, but in most cases, as I've better understood Buddhism, I've found that it even better explains it than I was able to before. OK... now to try to answer your questions.... > > Qu: > What are the realities at this moment? DAVE: Not to try to avoid by splitting hairs, but I think it depends on how you are defining "realities." I believe that there are different perspectives from which we can look at reality. For example, at a quantum level, there are strings vibrating and generally mushing around. At a "physical" level, there are causes and effects (be it weather, physics, or biology/chemistry). At a personal level, reality at a moment is the sum of what my consciousness is focused on. > How can awareness be aware of them? DAVE: For the most part, there isn't awareness of them. Physical processes are happening on their own, consciousness is only aware of those sums which have the need for awareness. (btw, I still, at this point, am holding to the idea that the different inputs, like sight, sound, touch, memory, are compiled into a "moon" in pre-awareness and only the "seeing the moon" is what gets bubbled up to consciousness... hence my usage of the term "sum") > Would it be easier for awareness of them to arise if you were sitting > somewhere else in another position? > Why? DAVE: I think so. Not so much for them to "arise" but really for them to "fall away." When meditating, my focus is on my breath. When something else pops up, it is noted and let go. I think that the idea is that, by sitting quetly, I'm reducing the stimulation from all the senses and that is allowing the mind to focus on that one item. The mind should then start to prefer single thoughtedness to every-which-way-at-once-ness. I guess it is like training for anything... if I want to run a marathon, I start in a gym, on a treadmill, in controlled conditions. I can't prepare for a marathon sitting at work, in the car, or whatever. When I want to train the mind, I also need controlled conditions. I hope that makes sense! > > Metta, > > Sarah > ===== Peace (and Metta) to you! Dave 23112 From: nina van gorkom Date: Wed Jun 25, 2003 10:01am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: meditation vs. just thinking about it Dear Christedis, op 24-06-2003 17:09 schreef christhedis op charnett@y...: > I was actually recommended Goenka's version as being 'more > scientific'. Does anyone have any advice on which type to practise, is it > bad to learn one then switch to another, or is it best just to find out > which works best for oneself? N: I would think that one should find out for oneself what is best for oneself. We should also be clear as to our purpose of meditating. What is the goal we have in mind, calm or understanding of the phenomena inside ourselves and outside of ourselves? If the goal is calm, are we clear about it what calm is? Calm is being away from attachment, aversion and delusion, all those negative properties. But this is not easy, we have to discern precisely when there is calm and when there is not. We may easily take subtle attachment for true calm. If the goal is more understanding, there are a few quastions we could ask ourselves: what do I learn, what do I understand? Is there more detachment form the idea of self or is there attachment? Is there attachment to an idea of my practice? We should also know what should be understood: what are the objects of understanding? When do these objects appear, are they of the past, the future or the present? Important questions which must be answered, otherwise one does not know into what direction one is going. All these questions cannot be answered immediately, they have to be pondered on for a long time. Nina. Nina. 23113 From: nina van gorkom Date: Wed Jun 25, 2003 10:01am Subject: Perfections, Ch 10, loving-kindness, no 7 Perfections, Ch 10, loving-kindness, no 7 Most people find the brahmavihåras valuable, but they should verify for themselves whether they truly have loving-kindness, compassion, sympathetic joy and equanimity. We should remember that the development of paññå and the eradication of defilements take an endlessly long time. As we have seen, compassion is intent on removing the suffering of beings. However, since paññå is not of the degree of accomplishment of the Sammasambuddha, we do not fathom the true characteristic of suffering, dukkha. We do not fully grasp that all beings are subject to dukkha because of birth, old age, sickness, death and impermanence. The arising and falling away of realities is the noble Truth of dukkha, this is the real suffering. Real compassion is of another dimension and can only be fulfilled by the Buddha [4]. In our daily life we usually do not realize that beings and people are subject to the suffering which is being in the cycle of birth and death. It is difficult for us to have true compassion, and therefore, there are more opportunities for the arising of mettå. When we see other beings and people, we can extend mettå towards them and assist them with mettå. However, it may happen that other people are beyond help. If we have developed paññå we can have equanimity and evenmindedness. We can have impartiality and equanimity with regard to righteous people as well as people with wrong conduct. This is the perfection of equanimity. For us, compassion and sympathetic joy do not arise so often in daily life, whereas mettå and equanimity are perfections we can develop time and again in daily life. Compassion and sympathetic joy are not classified among the ten perfections. We read in the ³Atthasåliní ² about the four brahmavihåras ((Book I, Part V, Ch XIII, Divine States, 193) : ³...love (mettå) has the characteristic of being a procedure of modes of beneficence; the function or property of bringing good; the manifestation or effect of taking hatred away; the proximate cause of seeing the lovableness of beings. Its consummation (success) is the quieting of ill-will; its failure is the production of lust.² We should remember that kusala and akusala can be very close in appearance. Therefore, we should often realize the characteristics of realities so that we shall know whether we develop kusala or whether akusala arises. We read about compassion: ³Pity (compassion) has the characteristic of evolving the mode of removing pain; the property of not being able to bear [seeing] others suffer; the manifestation of kindness; the proximate cause of seeing the need of those overcome by pain. Its consummation is the quieting of cruelty; its failure is the production of sorrow. ³ We read about sympathetic joy: ³Sympathy has the characteristic of gladness; its property is the absence of envying; its manifestation is the destruction of disaffection (discontentment); its proximate cause is seeing the prosperous state of other beings. Its consummation is the quieting of dislike; its failure is the production of derision (fun).² Sympathteic joy and attachment are very close. When we are thrilled and greatly rejoice in someone else¹s gain, honour and praise, there is bound to be lobha and this is not sympathetic joy. We read about equanimity: ³Equanimity has the characteristic of evolving the mode of neutrality as regards beings; its function is seeing equality in beings; its manifestation is quieting both aversion and attachment; its proximate cause is seeing the heritage of the occurring kamma as ³Beings are the property of their kamma. By its influence they will attain to pleasure, or be free from pain, or not fall from the prosperity already acquired. Its consummation is the quieting of aversion and of attachment; its failure is the production of an unintelligent indifference which is based on the home life.² Footnote: 4. The Bodhisatta wanted to attain Buddhahood so that he could help beings to be free from the cycle of birth and death. It is said in the Commentary to the ŒBasket of Conduct² that the perfections he developed were accompanied by compassion and skilful means. We read: ³ What are their characteristics, functions, manifestations and proximate causes? Firstly, all the paramis, without exception, have as their characteristic the benefitting of others; as their function, the rendering of help to others, or not vacillating; as their manifestation, the wish for the welfare of others, or Buddhahood; and as their proximate cause, great compassion, or compassion and skilful means.² 23114 From: nina van gorkom Date: Wed Jun 25, 2003 10:01am Subject: Re: [dsg] Vism XIV, 3 Dear Jim, Thank you very much, this is very interesting. not common to others: those who do not attain enlightenment? I wonder which others. Nina. op 24-06-2003 15:37 schreef Jim Anderson op jimanderson_on@y...: > [.tiikaa: attano pana ana~n~nasaadhaara.nena aanubhaavena ussakkitvaa > maggapaatubhaava.m paapetu.m. > > moreover, by endeavouring through its own power not shared by the > others, it (is able to) bring about the manifestation of the path.] 23115 From: Jim Anderson Date: Wed Jun 25, 2003 11:10am Subject: Re: [dsg] Vism XIV, 3 Dear Nina, I take "ana~n~nasaadhaara.nena" to mean "(through pa~n~na's own power which is) not common to or shared by the other two (sa~n~naa and vi~n~naa.na). Can you make any sense of the "pa.tipaa.tiyaa" I mentioned in my earlier post? I'm currently thinking of a step-by-step progression starting with knowledge of the rise and fall and on through the higher levels of knowledge leading to change-of-lineage and path-moment but it's hard to read this into the Pali phrase, don't you think? Best wishes, Jim > Dear Jim, > Thank you very much, this is very interesting. > not common to others: those who do not attain enlightenment? I wonder which > others. > Nina. > op 24-06-2003 15:37 schreef Jim Anderson op jimanderson_on@y...: > > > [.tiikaa: attano pana ana~n~nasaadhaara.nena aanubhaavena ussakkitvaa > > maggapaatubhaava.m paapetu.m. > > > > moreover, by endeavouring through its own power not shared by the > > others, it (is able to) bring about the manifestation of the path.] 23116 From: Date: Wed Jun 25, 2003 4:52pm Subject: Re: Concepts and Characteristics Re: [dsg] Vism XIV, 3 Hi Howard and Ken, Regarding the Buddha's ontology (right view of the nature of existence) I thought you might be interested in the following verse from Nagarjuna's Mulamadhyamakakarika and Garfield's comment. This verse refers to "The Discourse of Katyayana" which I think is Kaccayanagotta Sutta SN XII,15, http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/samyutta/sn12-015.html MMK XV, 7: The Victorious One, through knowledge Of reality and unreality, In the Discourse to Katyayana, Refuted both "it is" and "it is not." Garfield: In the Discourse to Katyayana, the Buddha argues that to assert that things exist inherently is to fall into the extreme of reification, to argue that things do not exist at all is to fall into the extreme of nihilism, and to follow the middle way is neither to assert in an unqualified way that things exist nor in an unqualified way that things do not exist. It represents one of the fundamental suttas of the Pali canon for Mahayana philosophy. In the sutta, the Buddha claims that reification derives from the failure to note impermanence and leads to grasping, craving, and the attendant suffering. Nihilism, he claims, is motivated by the failure to note the empirical reality of arising phenomena. It leads to suffering from failure to take life, others, and morality seriously enough. The middle path of conventional existence leads to engagement in the world without attachment. Larry: The question for us is, does this "whether things exist" issue refer to both sides of the concept/reality distinction, and, if so, do we then loose the distinction and consequently the main rational behind the anatta characteristic? Feeling, etc., is not self because "self" is a concept and feeling isn't. Just to complicate things even more, I had a thought today. If we say that the essence or main characteristic of concept is relationship, then what would happen if we say conditional relations (paccaya) function by means of relational thinking? This would mean that dependent arising functions by means of conceptual thinking. Is there a problem with this? Larry 23117 From: Date: Wed Jun 25, 2003 5:02pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Vism XIV, 3 Hi Jim and Nina, Thanks for your additional considerations. I would be interested in any other info or reasoning you come up with concerning the usage of "endeavour" in this paragraph. Is there a sub-commentary? Larry 23118 From: Date: Wed Jun 25, 2003 5:59pm Subject: Re: Concepts and Characteristics Re: [dsg] Vism XIV, 3 Hi, Larry (and Ken) - I find myself somewhat unable at the moment to give a worthwhile reply, Larry. I'm not quite sure why - perhaps it's just that I'm a bit tired at the moment. I think I will wait until I hear from Ken and others on this before I figure out what my two cents will be. ;-) With metta, Howard In a message dated 6/25/2003 6:52:56 PM Eastern Standard Time, LBIDD@w... writes: > Hi Howard and Ken, > > Regarding the Buddha's ontology (right view of the nature of existence) > I thought you might be interested in the following verse from > Nagarjuna's Mulamadhyamakakarika and Garfield's comment. This verse > refers to "The Discourse of Katyayana" which I think is Kaccayanagotta > Sutta SN XII,15, > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/samyutta/sn12-015.html > > MMK XV, 7: The Victorious One, through knowledge Of reality and > unreality, In the Discourse to Katyayana, Refuted both "it is" and "it > is not." > > Garfield: In the Discourse to Katyayana, the Buddha argues that to > assert that things exist inherently is to fall into the extreme of > reification, to argue that things do not exist at all is to fall into > the extreme of nihilism, and to follow the middle way is neither to > assert in an unqualified way that things exist nor in an unqualified way > that things do not exist. It represents one of the fundamental suttas of > the Pali canon for Mahayana philosophy. In the sutta, the Buddha claims > that reification derives from the failure to note impermanence and leads > to grasping, craving, and the attendant suffering. Nihilism, he claims, > is motivated by the failure to note the empirical reality of arising > phenomena. It leads to suffering from failure to take life, others, and > morality seriously enough. The middle path of conventional existence > leads to engagement in the world without attachment. > > Larry: The question for us is, does this "whether things exist" issue > refer to both sides of the concept/reality distinction, and, if so, do > we then loose the distinction and consequently the main rational behind > the anatta characteristic? Feeling, etc., is not self because "self" is > a concept and feeling isn't. > > Just to complicate things even more, I had a thought today. If we say > that the essence or main characteristic of concept is relationship, then > what would happen if we say conditional relations (paccaya) function by > means of relational thinking? This would mean that dependent arising > functions by means of conceptual thinking. Is there a > problem with this? > > Larry 23119 From: nina van gorkom Date: Wed Jun 25, 2003 9:20pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Vism XIV, 3, other options. Dear Jim, just a few thoughts op 25-06-2003 15:57 schreef Jim Anderson op jimanderson_on@y...> > << Com: [.tiikaa: ussakkitvaa ti udayabbaya~naa.napa.tipaa.tiyaa > aayuuhitvaa. > > Com: "by endeavouring" -- by accumulating in succession (or > gradually?) the knowledge of rise and fall. Note: aayuuhitvaa is a > synonym for ussakitvaa and could also have the meanings given in PED > under aayuuhati (striving, endeavouring; cultivating, etc.)] >> > > The Pali doesn't really make a lot of sense to me as it's difficult to > determine how "pa.tipaa.tiyaa" (order, succession) fits in N: I would think of the stages of insight which are reached in succession, before lokuttara maggacitta arises. J:and also > from further looking up aayuuhati in CPD and although it lists > "accumulate" among its meanings it may not apply in that way here as > it is considered a transitive in taking an object like kamma. I also > checked Cone's dictionary and was surprised to find the following > meanings for "ussakkati": moves up, rises; moves forward, advances, > progresses -- p.514, with no mention of "endeavour" -- N: I saw ussakkati having a variant: ussukkati: endeavour. I saw in subco Mahaaraahulovaadasutta the two words: aniccaadisa~n~naaya vipassanaabhaavena ussakkitvaa maggapa.tipaa.tiyaa arahattaadhigamaaya hotiiti by having developed insight with zeal it leads to (is for) the attainment of arahatship by the succession of the Paths (that is, the other lower Paths). Nina. 23120 From: kenhowardau Date: Wed Jun 25, 2003 10:47pm Subject: Concepts and Characteristics Re: [dsg] Vism XIV, 3 Hi Howard, You wrote: -------------- > Let me immediately get to the main point: the nature of characteristics. Abhidhamma countenances two types of dhammas, rupa and nama. That is all. Some characteristics, such as hardness, are rupas. Some characteristics, such as distractedness, are cetasikas, and hence namas. What is impermanence: nama or rupa? > ---------------- I understand a dhamma to have (or to be comprised of), several characteristics. I doubt very much that each characteristic is a separate nama or rupa in its own right. I think the Abhidhamma's explanations of ultimate reality basically parallel conventional science. Lobha and dosa, for example, are like gold and silver, in that they are realities with characteristics -- some that are shared and some that make those realities different from each other. In conventional science, matter can be described in terms of atomic and sub-atomic particles but, if we ask a scientist to say what, ultimately, all matter is composed of, he will say, "the four elemental forces -- gravity, electromagnetism, the strong nuclear force and the weak nuclear force." If we ask the scientist to look further -- into those elemental forces themselves -- he will tell us that, in the absolute, final analysis, there are only laws -- the laws of nature. According to the Tipitaka, realities are similarly composed of elemental forces -- extension, cohesion, heat and motion. The only thing more elemental than the elements themselves, is the Dhamma (the Way; the way things are; the natural law; conditionality). And so we are taught 'to see conditionality everywhere in all things.' -------------------- > P.S. What do I personally *suspect* is the case? I *suspect* that conditions include more than namas and rupas, that some of those conditions (including relations and various characteristics) that are neither nama nor rupa are realities cognized only through the mind door, and, specifically, via a clear comprehension which is a purified, clarified, conceptual faculty which, at its level of ultimate purity (the only level in the arahant), is exactly what wisdom is. -------------------- I gather you are referring to something that is either denied by, or not contemplated in, the Abhidhamma. I look forward to hearing more. Is it a totally new theory of your own, or are we going to hear the 'en word' again? :-) Kind regards, Ken H 23121 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Thu Jun 26, 2003 4:13am Subject: Re: [dsg] Sabba Sutta Commentary: To Sayadaw Yanatharo, Sayadaw Dhammapiyo, Robert K, Sara Suan Many thanks for this useful translation and your supplementary comments. This is very helpful in coming to a better understanding of this sutta. Jon PS Thanks from Sarah, too. --- abhidhammika wrote: > > > > Dear Sayadaw Yanatharo, Sayadaw Dhammapiyo, Robert Kirpatrick, > Sarah, > Jon, Nina, Mike, Jim, Christine and all > > How are you? The following is Sabba Sutta Commentary (the main > portion) and notes on it for your perusal in view of criticisms > against it by some translators and misuse by some academics. > > If you need further clarification of my translation or notes, > please > let me know. > > Please enjoy the post. > > With regards, > > Suan > > > SABBASUTTAVA.N.NANAA 23122 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Thu Jun 26, 2003 4:20am Subject: Re: [dsg] about The Buddha Nina Very interesting material you quote here. Much to think about. As you say, it needs to be understood as it is meant to be. Otherwise it's easy to read it as putting oneself to the test, with idea of self. Jon (Hong Kong airport, waiting to board) --- nina van gorkom wrote: > Dear Christine and all, ... > The Buddha > said, ³I sleep in a cemetery, taking as a pillow the skeleton of a > corpse. I > have evenmindedness with regard to what is clean and what is > dirty.² ... > The Bodhisatta stayed longer in those places where he was pestered > and > ridiculed a great deal, he wanted to accumulate equanimity. We > should see > this in the right way: it is not self-vexation. He knew what he > could stand, > he knew the power of accumulation. Though we do not have to follow > this > exactly, it can help and inspire us when we remember his example of > equanimity. > 23123 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Thu Jun 26, 2003 4:25am Subject: Re: [dsg] Vism XIV, 3 Rob K, Jim, Larry, Howard, Nina and others Many thanks, Larry, for bringing up this section from the Vis. I have been following with interest. Personally, I still find puzzling the reference to vinnana being able to 'bring about the penetration of the characteristics of an object'. Does anyone have any suggestions as to what this refers to exactly? Jon --- LBIDD@w... wrote: > Hi Jim, > > Thanks a lot. This is exactly what I was looking for. I had assumed > "endeavour" was a translation of "padhaana" because ~Nanamoli > translates > padhaana as endeavour, but padhaana didn't quite make sense in this > case. The commentary sorted it out nicely. > > Larry > > Vism XIV, 3: ...Consciousness knows the object as blue or yellow, > and it > brings about the penetration of its characteristics, but it cannot > bring > about, by endeavouring [ussakkitvaa], 23124 From: monomuni Date: Thu Jun 26, 2003 5:45am Subject: The choosing & creating consciousness! Friends: Who created this reality ? Who created this world ? You did !!! By consciously choosing to experience it! Who is the Creator ? Ignorance & Craving for conscious experiences! Consciousness is the choice to notice or to ignore... Exactly here do 2 entirely different 'experiences' or 'worlds' appear from a set of unevenly distributed probabilities, which are predetermined by past actions, choices & conscious experiences. The freedom to choose future (free will) is thereby limited by prior action = kamma, which determines the limited set of possibilities to choose from! Consciousness is thereby the process wherein a: Potential Reality becomes an Actual Reality ... !!! by making the wave-function of quantum mechanical diversity collapse and condense into a single event of occurrence. So do the modern physicists really say. An so have they said for 50 years! This event was before the active choice of consciousness one out of many different possibilities, of many different realities, of many different worlds! The probability has become an actuality! A reality is born - again! The link between mind & matter is thereby established. The funny part is that you also chooses the 'others' reality & they chooses yours!!! This endless momentary show of choices stops when we stop to choose between any possibilities which thereby remain an open, unchosen, uncreated, unconstructed, unborn & unconditioned state called Nibbana ... Friendship is the Greatest ! The entire Motivation behind all of the Noble Life. Yeah! Samanera Samahita Email: monomuni@m... : - ] -- A saying of the Buddha from http://metta.lk/ Though little he recites the Sacred Texts, but acts in accordance with the teaching, forsaking lust, hatred and ignorance, truly knowing, with mind well freed, clinging to naught here and hereafter, he shares the fruits of the Holy life. Random Dhammapada Verse 20 23125 From: monomuni Date: Thu Jun 26, 2003 6:03am Subject: Convergence towards consistence & correspondence Friends: Quantum Mechanics denies both Objectivity & Locality. So do the Buddha-Dhamma! Quantum Mechanics points out a multidimensional potentiality of the world...(s)! So do the Buddha-Dhamma! Quantum Mechanics gives importance to an undivisable minimal 'action' unit. So do the Buddha-Dhamma! Physicists calls this 'reaction unit' Plancks Constant! (E=hf) The Buddha called the same 'action unit' kamma! The very subtle intention or choice to do or not. This minimal action unit may be the treshold energy for mind to affect matter non-locally in both time & space! These at first glance very different formulations of matter and mind respectively, seems to converge towards consistency. This smells of a correspondence, not too far off! A Unified Theory! Of Matter & Mind! Of Quantum Physics & Buddha-Dhamma! Hehehe. We have looked for this for quite long even though it has been here > 50 years. Afterall it is the same phenomenology we talk about so true theories should reach the same conclusions even though from different angles. The mountain has only one very same top whatever way you climb up! : - ] Friendship is the Greatest ! The entire Motivation behind all of the Noble Life. Yeah! Samanera Samahita Cypress Hut, Gangamulla Bambarella, Tawalantenna 20838. Central Province. SRI LANKA. Email: monomuni@m... : - ] -- A saying of the Buddha from http://metta.lk/ The liar goes to a woeful state, and also he who, having done (wrong), says, "I did not." Both after death become equal, men of base actions in the other world. Random Dhammapada Verse 306 23126 From: monomuni Date: Thu Jun 26, 2003 6:17am Subject: Quantum Theory is Abhidhamma! Friends: To be or not to be is not the question but the answer! We have found the enemy! It is Us! We have found the Hidden Variables! (In Quantum Theory) They are Us! Fred A Wolf! Hehehe :-) Modern Physics is not without humor! Remarkable is the quite close similarity of the Quantum Mechanical Theory of Planck, Bohr, Heisenberg, Schroedinger & Bell ao. and the Abhidhamma of the Buddha: Like the two sides of the same coin! The world is 'chosen' or 'created' from a infinite multitude of possibilities = (non-local collapsing wave-functions), right at the moment someone observes it! Paradoxical, counter-intuitive & even Magical! Mind creates or chooses Matter! Plop! Matter is a series of discrete & discontinous appearances in sequetial location! Mind is a series of discrete & discontinous conscious moments in sequential time! In an endless flux without beginning. One cannot come any closer than that. Both realities whether material or mental blinks as a updated computer screen or neon, yet mind blinks 17 times faster than matter Mind is fast, matter is slow. Mind over matter after all. Hehehe ;-) Recommended easy reading for the interested: 'Taking the Quantum Leap' Fred A Wolf. 1981 Harper & Row. San Francisco. ISBN 0062509802 Hold On! If you become dizzy considering this, you are going in the right direction. Keep On! : - ] Friendship is the Greatest ! The entire Motivation behind all of the Noble Life. Yeah! Samanera Samahita Email: monomuni@m... -- A saying of the Buddha from http://metta.lk/ Should one find a good companion to walk with and who is steadfast and upright, one should walk with him with joy so as to overcome all dangers. Random Dhammapada Verse 328 23127 From: Jim Anderson Date: Thu Jun 26, 2003 6:52am Subject: Re: [dsg] Vism XIV, 3, other options. Dear Nina, > Dear Jim, > just a few thoughts > op 25-06-2003 15:57 schreef Jim Anderson op jimanderson_on@y...> > > << Com: [.tiikaa: ussakkitvaa ti udayabbaya~naa.napa.tipaa.tiyaa > > aayuuhitvaa. > > > > Com: "by endeavouring" -- by accumulating in succession (or > > gradually?) the knowledge of rise and fall. Note: aayuuhitvaa is a > > synonym for ussakitvaa and could also have the meanings given in PED > > under aayuuhati (striving, endeavouring; cultivating, etc.)] >> > > > > The Pali doesn't really make a lot of sense to me as it's difficult to > > determine how "pa.tipaa.tiyaa" (order, succession) fits in > N: I would think of the stages of insight which are reached in succession, > before lokuttara maggacitta arises. This is exactly what I have in mind too! I looked to see if there were other occurences of "udayabbaya~naa.napa.tipaa.tiyaa" on the CSCD and apparently this is the only one. But, interestingly, there are two occurrences of "udayabbaya~naa.naadipa.tipaa.tiyaa" (with an "aadi" included) -- one in the same Mahaa.tiikaa and the other in the Saaratthadiipanii (Sp.t). However, I have three versions of the Mahaa.tiikaa and found that the spelling without the 'aadi' is the same in all for the subcommentary on XIV.3. Perhaps other versions (like a Sinhalese one) might show the 'aadi'. It starts to make a lot of sense with the 'aadi' (and so on) for we can certainly read in the successive stages leading up to the path-moment. > J:and also > > from further looking up aayuuhati in CPD and although it lists > > "accumulate" among its meanings it may not apply in that way here as > > it is considered a transitive in taking an object like kamma. I also > > checked Cone's dictionary and was surprised to find the following > > meanings for "ussakkati": moves up, rises; moves forward, advances, > > progresses -- p.514, with no mention of "endeavour" -- > N: I saw ussakkati having a variant: ussukkati: endeavour. > I saw in subco Mahaaraahulovaadasutta the two words: aniccaadisa~n~naaya > vipassanaabhaavena ussakkitvaa maggapa.tipaa.tiyaa > arahattaadhigamaaya hotiiti > by having developed insight with zeal it leads to (is for) the attainment of > arahatship by the succession of the Paths (that is, the other lower Paths). Thanks for pointing out the "maggapa.tipaa.tiyaa" and your translation. Very interesitng. One can easily see that an 'aadi' wouldn't belong here as would seem necessary in the other case. The CPD has two separate entries for "ussakkati" based on two different roots. Cone seems to be following the first one with "to creep out, or up to, rise" whereas PED is mostly following the second one with "to endeavour, strive, etc.". I find the first and Cone's meanings (eg. to progress) to be more acceptable and fitting here. Best wishes, Jim 23128 From: Dan D. Date: Thu Jun 26, 2003 9:03am Subject: Concepts and Characteristics Re: [dsg] Vism XIV, 3 Dear Howard, I'm a bit out of practice, so please be patient with me if my post seems clumsy. I have a working hypothesis (to use one of Mike's delicious phrases). Instead of thinking only of Concept vs. Real Reality, it is sometimes helpful to think of ways of knowing: the inferential or conceptual (anumana-ñana) and direct knowning (pativedha-ñana). An example: Suppose an object is first discerned, then passes away; then, it is noticed through recollection (and thought): "The object that was there has passed away." This is an inferential, conceptual understanding of impermanence. Of course, the realization may well come quicker than the words, but it is still conceptual knowledge, as you note so forcefully in your posts. Sometimes when the mind is sharply concentrated (e.g., as it may be in the course of an intensive meditation retreat), the comparing of the moment now with one that just passed may strongly and clearly suggest the concept "impermanence". Because of the comparing, this too is an inferential knowing of impermanence, even when it seems crystal clear to an extent unprecedented in the course of everyday living. As you also point out, though, the clarity of this conceptual understanding is helpful and should not be given short shrift. In fact, conceptual understanding is essential in the development of insight. At the same time, this very clarity of understanding can be an obstacle if it is mistakenly taken as direct knowing or insight because it is so very easy to take it as "my insight" and think "I am really progressing -- cool!" But knowledge of anicca can also arise directly. How so? Objects are known by their characteristics (lakkhana, rasa, paccupatthana, padatthana, or "characteristic", "function", "manifestation", "proximate cause"). In the example above, the object (paramattha dhamma) may have been the earth element (experienced as hardness) or a feeling of greed (experienced as "sticking, as meat sticks to a hot pan") or some other object. In addition to the familiar, characteristics like "hardness" and "sticking", the characteristic of "impermanence" is shared by all paramattha dhammas (except nibbana). Like the other characteristics, anicca can also be known directly. On that occasion, anicca is the characteristic that is seen. There is no "hardness" or inference of "hardness is anicca". There is no "lobha cetasika" or inference of "lobha cetasika is anicca". For a moment the mind cognizes simply "anicca". But what does the mind see when it sees the characteristic "anicca" in a single moment? We are so used to thinking about anicca inferentially that it does not seem possible to understand anicca *except* inferentially, i.e. by comparing a present moment without an object to a prior moment when the object was there. However, at a time when the mind is sufficiently free from attachment, there is no grasping at characteristics like hardness. "Objects" as we normally think of them are not cognized. Everywhere the attention turns, objects slip away before they are grasped, and the mind does not find a foothold anywhere. "No-foothold" (due to the ephemerality of the dhammas) is a manifestation of anicca that can be realized directly without having to resort to the inference: "It was there; now it's gone. Anicca!" Dan Howard: "Sometimes, and this is one of those times, I think that we give too little credit to concepts. When do we really come to "directly" see impermanence? I think this happens when the mind is powerfuly attentive, concentrated, and mindful: An object is discerned, perhaps through a number of mind-moments, then it is gone, and then there is the noticing, through recollection (and thought), that it just had been present, but now is gone - and so, we "see" that it has ceased." 23129 From: buddhatrue Date: Thu Jun 26, 2003 9:39am Subject: Re: Quantum Theory is Abhidhamma! --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "monomuni" > Remarkable is the quite close similarity > of the Quantum Mechanical Theory of Planck, > Bohr, Heisenberg, Schroedinger & Bell ao. > and the Abhidhamma of the Buddha: > Like the two sides of the same coin! > > > The world is 'chosen' or 'created' from a > infinite multitude of possibilities = > (non-local collapsing wave-functions), > right at the moment someone observes it! > Paradoxical, counter-intuitive & even Magical! > Mind creates or chooses Matter! Plop! > Matter is a series of discrete & discontinous > appearances in sequetial location! > Mind is a series of discrete & discontinous > conscious moments in sequential time! > In an endless flux without beginning. > One cannot come any closer than that. > Both realities whether material or mental > blinks as a updated computer screen or neon, > yet mind blinks 17 times faster than matter > Mind is fast, matter is slow. > Mind over matter after all. > Hehehe ;-) > Hi Friend, While the Abhidhamma may actually say this, those who interpret it for general consumption, especially the Abhidhamma-lovers of this group, don't interpret the Abhidhamma in this way. To their way of thinking, nama and rupa are quite separate and not dependent on each other. They even go so far as to state that the highest insight isn't achieved until one sees the difference between nama and rupa. I have long championed the position you state in this post, that mind creates matter and therefore not really seperate, but I wouldn't say that this position is Abhidhamma. This is modern, scientific thought while the Abhidhamma, as far as I can tell, is based on antiquated, unscientific theories. Metta, James 23130 From: Date: Thu Jun 26, 2003 9:47am Subject: Blasphemy and that Old Devil "N" (Re: Concepts and Characteristics) Hi, Ken - In a message dated 6/26/2003 12:47:24 AM Eastern Standard Time, kenhowardau@y... writes: > > Hi Howard, > > You wrote: > > -------------- > > Let me immediately get to the main point: the nature > of characteristics. Abhidhamma countenances two types of > dhammas, rupa and nama. That is all. Some > characteristics, such as hardness, are rupas. Some > characteristics, such as distractedness, are cetasikas, > and hence namas. What is impermanence: nama or rupa? > > ---------------- > > I understand a dhamma to have (or to be comprised of), > several characteristics. I doubt very much that each > characteristic is a separate nama or rupa in its own > right. > > I think the Abhidhamma's explanations of ultimate reality > basically parallel conventional science. Lobha and dosa, > for example, are like gold and silver, in that they are > realities with characteristics -- some that are shared > and some that make those realities different from each > other. ------------------------------- Howard: These are cetasikas, and they are characteristics of the mindstate in which they occur. Besides the cetasikas, there is the citta, itself (the discerning) and the arammana (nama or rupa that is discerned). This mindstate, or bundle consisting of citta, arammana, and cetasikas, being a compound, must be pa~n~natti, no? It is not a single paramattha dhamma, is it? Here one seems to have a problem inmmediately! (But this is a different matter than my main point.) What I was saying was that if, as Abhidhamma asserts, there is naught but nama and rupa, then, unless the tilakkhana (and all other characteristics) are namas or rupas, they must be nothing at at all - mere figments, concept-only! In particular, impermanence and relations, "things" which go beyond single mindstates, must be concept-only! Now, I find that an "unhappy" conclusion. My attempt at a hypothesized solution was to consider that there is a category more general than those of namas and rupas, namely that of "conditions", and that some conditions, such as impermanence and most relations, transcend individual mind-moments. Now, mind you, if it can be shown that there is no problem at all where I seem to see some problems, or if there is a problem, but a much better solution is already provided for within Abhidhamma, I will enthusiastically and gratefully applaud this demonstration! I'm not "looking for trouble", Ken, or trying to cause upset to anyone devoted to that magnificent edifice that Abhidhamma is. I'm just using my mind to attempt to grasp (intellectually only, of course) the way things are. None of this would come up at all were I to restrict my attention only to the Sutta Pitaka and to my "practice," but I wish to investigate issues growing out of Abhidhamma as well. To give proper respect to the Abhidhamma, I feel compelled to not just passively accept what I read or hear as "received word", but to question, investigate, and interrogate others more knowledgeable than myself. --------------------------------- > > In conventional science, matter can be described in terms > of atomic and sub-atomic particles but, if we ask a > scientist to say what, ultimately, all matter is composed > of, he will say, "the four elemental forces -- gravity, > electromagnetism, the strong nuclear force and the weak > nuclear force." > > If we ask the scientist to look further -- into those > elemental forces themselves -- he will tell us that, in > the absolute, final analysis, there are only laws -- the > laws of nature. > > According to the Tipitaka, realities are similarly > composed of elemental forces -- extension, cohesion, heat > and motion. -------------------------------- Howard: Rupas. -------------------------------- > > The only thing more elemental than the elements > themselves, is the Dhamma (the Way; the way things are; > the natural law; conditionality). And so we are taught > 'to see conditionality everywhere in all things.' > > -------------------- > > > P.S. What do I personally *suspect* is the case? I > *suspect* that conditions include more than namas and > rupas, that some of those conditions (including relations > and various characteristics) that are neither nama nor > rupa are realities cognized only through the mind door, > and, specifically, via a clear comprehension which is a > purified, clarified, conceptual faculty which, at its > level of ultimate purity (the only level in the arahant), > is exactly what wisdom is. > -------------------- > > I gather you are referring to something that is either > denied by, or not contemplated in, the Abhidhamma. I > look forward to hearing more. Is it a totally new theory > of your own, or are we going to hear the 'en word' again? > :-) ------------------------------ Howard: I would hope that we can refrain from bringing up that Mahayana devil!!! ;-)) But, inasmuch as you mention N, it happens that his emphasis is *exactly* on the underlying conditionality that you, yourself, refer to as "more elemental than the elements themselves." ------------------------------- > > Kind regards, > Ken H ============================== With metta, Howard 23131 From: Date: Thu Jun 26, 2003 10:03am Subject: Re: [dsg] Vism XIV, 3 Hi, Jon (and all) - In a message dated 6/26/2003 6:25:08 AM Eastern Standard Time, jonoabb@y... writes: > Rob K, Jim, Larry, Howard, Nina and others > > Many thanks, Larry, for bringing up this section from the Vis. I > have been following with interest. > > Personally, I still find puzzling the reference to vinnana being able > to 'bring about the penetration of the characteristics of an object'. > Does anyone have any suggestions as to what this refers to > exactly? > > Jon ================================= Somewhere I've read, possibly by David Kalupahana, of vi~n~nana being described as a "separative awareness". What I believe was meant by that was not only (or even mainly) a subject-object awareness, but very much that of an awareness which "separates" out, distinguishing the object along with parts and aspects of that object, but without the recognitional capacity of sa~n~na. With metta, Howard 23132 From: nina van gorkom Date: Thu Jun 26, 2003 10:04am Subject: Re: [dsg] Vism XIV, 3 Dear Jim, Thank you, that is it, looking at the context. pa.tipaa.tiyaa: see my post. Nina. op 25-06-2003 20:10 schreef Jim Anderson op jimanderson_on@y...: > I take "ana~n~nasaadhaara.nena" to mean "(through pa~n~na's own power > which is) not common to or shared by the other two (sa~n~naa and > vi~n~naa.na). 23133 From: nina van gorkom Date: Thu Jun 26, 2003 10:04am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re:the moon Dear Dave and all, Sarah is away now, and I shall just take out one topic: the moon. See below. Difficult Qu she asked, difficult to answer. it is all a long term matter. op 25-06-2003 17:38 schreef dwlemen op dwlemen@y...: > I still am not understanding if you are saying that there is really > no such thing as the moon or not. When you say "immediately there > are conditions to know it as a moon" what do you mean? Are you > referring to, perhaps, the difference between what the eye takes in > (light, color, motion, etc.) and what the brain then attributes those > lights, colors, etc. to be before sending to the mind? If that is > the distinction (what the eye takes in, vs. what the mind knows) then > I can understand, although I still think that there would be the > moon, that exists independently of observation, or understanding. Nina: We can think of the moon in different ways. We like the moon, we are attached to it. We can think with kusala citta: seeing the image of a hare in it we think of the Sassa Jataka, the Jataka of the Hare, where the Bodhisatta gave away his body, letting himself fall into the fire. We may also be attached to this Jataka, or have aversion. Or full moon: Uposatha day, day of vigilance, five or eight precepts. There is another way of viewing it, as Sarah explained: there are six doorways, and through each doorway the citta experiences the relevant object. Rob K recently mentioned as recommended suttas: Kindred Sayings IV. I think about an often quoted sutta: IV, 52 (Ch 4 on Channa) transitory: Thus, there are six worlds. This does not appeal to everyone, it takes a long time to have more understanding of it. However, this really happens: cittas arise and fall away rapidly, and each citta only takes one object at a time. Each citta is accompanied by remembrance, sanna, which marks the object and therefore there is remembrance of different impressions which seem to be a whole: the moon. We do not deny the importance also of concepts, we cannot function without it. But understanding can be developed of what things really are in the ultimate sense. I quote Rob K to Swee Boon: Intellectual understanding of the six worlds is a foundation for satipatthana, by which you can later on experience the impermanence of realities. We think of wholes, but in between we can remember: only visible object (whispered object :-) ) through eyes, it does not stay; what I see as the moon does not stay. Thus, this is the purpose of knowing six worlds separately: it leads to detachment. It will eventually help to cling less to the idea of my experience, my feelings. Actually it can remind us not to delay the development of satipatthana. We are deluding ourselves all the time when we are taken in by the world. Nina. 23134 From: nina van gorkom Date: Thu Jun 26, 2003 10:04am Subject: Perfections, Ch 10, Loving-kindness, no 8 Perfections, Ch 10, Loving-kindness, no 8 Unintelligent indifference means indifference based on ignorance, moha. When we have ignorance, we do not know realities as they are, and then we shall not understand kamma, which causes realities to arise as its appropriate result. With regard to the expression about equanimity ³based on the home life², this means, based on visible object, sound, odour, flavour and tangible object, thus, the sense objects. When we see what appears through the eyes and we are indifferent, we do not seem to have attachment or aversion, but we should not believe that that is kusala. It is indifference ³based on the home life² because at such moments we do not know the truth. We shall not abandon defilements when we do not listen to the Dhamma and when we do not understand it; when there is no paññå which knows the characteristics of realities as they really are. There is indifference which is the near enemy [5] of the brahmavihåra of equanimity when we do not consider what is right and what is wrong, and we do not investigate the true nature of the realities that are appearing. Someone who saw another person committing wrong actions was upset and he wondered when he would receive the result of his kamma. When someone else objected to his attitude and asked him whether he had mettå or not, he said that he wished the person who committed wrong actions to receive the appropriate results of his actions. However, he should consider what kind of citta motivated his thinking, whether he developed the brahmavihåras of mettå, compassion, sympathetic joy or equanimity. At the moment someone else receives the result of a bad deed, when he is in trouble and distress, or he has to suffer, other people will feel sorry for him. However, at the moment someone is performing akusala kamma, which is the cause of a future result, people forget to realize that then they should sympathize and have loving-kindness for him. If one is not a friend to someone who commits bad deeds, who will be his friend? There is a way to help him to be free from deeds and thoughts which are akusala. If someone is a real friend he can help him to change his unwholesome conduct to wholesome conduct. We should do our utmost to help him, and not leave him to commit akusala and then wait to see the result of his kamma. The person who wanted to see the result of someone¹s akusala kamma, was actually sorry for him when he received an undesirable result. However, he sympathized too late, he should have had loving-kindness at the moment he committed akusala kamma. In the ultimate sense there are no beings or persons, there are only realities which arise, each with their own characteristic. We think of different situations and people with kusala citta or with akusala citta. We should know the difference between kusala and akusala. If we live according to the Dhamma, we shall further develop paññå and all ways of kusala. We shall know immediately at which moment there is no loving-kindness but akusala. Then we shall be able to have loving-kindness immediately for a person who is like an enemy. Footnote: 5. Visuddhimagga IX, 98-101 mentions the near enenmies and the far enemies of the divine abidings. The far enemy is the opposite; in the case of equanimity attachment and aversion are the opposites, the far enemies. The near enemy seems to be close, people erroneously take it for a wholesome quality. In the case of equanimity, the near enemy is ignorance based on the home life, "since both share in ignoring faults and virtues". The Visuddhimagga explains that when seeing visible object, "equanimity arises in the foolish infatuated, ordinary man..." This is not the divine abiding of equanimity which is evenmindedness. **** (end of chapter 10) 23135 From: nina van gorkom Date: Thu Jun 26, 2003 10:04am Subject: Re: [dsg] Vism XIV, 3 op 24-06-2003 07:06 schreef LBIDD@w... op LBIDD@w...: Dear Larry, you bring up many points, but several are solved now when reading what Jim said and our discussions. L:The way I see it, both the > consciousness of impermanence and the understanding of impermanence > would be conceptual because impermanence is a concept. N: See what Ken explained to well about characteristics. quoting an old post by Jon: Jon: L: Maybe this one > word "endeavour" is meant to encompass all we have learned about > "sampajanna" in the Satipatthana Sutta Commentary? N: Sampajanna is panna, aqnd here panna developed through satipatthana. A development, and also zeal plays its part. Perhaps we could say L: "understanding" means "ultimate analysis", distinguishing between > ultimate realities and concepts. N: the beginning, and then it has to develop through all the stages of insight. Exactly how this understanding brings L: I don't understand why sanna (perception) can't > perceive impermanence. N: Yes, it perceives it in its own way, but it is panna which penetrates the true nature of realities. Sanna marks and remembers, arising with each citta. Firm sanna is the proximate cause of satipatthana: you remember what the object of satipatthana is: any nama or rupa that appears. Nina. 23136 From: Date: Thu Jun 26, 2003 10:33am Subject: Re: Concepts and Characteristics Re: [dsg] Vism XIV, 3 Hi, Dan - I find this post of yours to be not less than superb! In a message dated 6/26/2003 11:03:33 AM Eastern Standard Time, dhd5@c... writes: > > Dear Howard, > I'm a bit out of practice, so please be patient with me if my post > seems clumsy. > > I have a working hypothesis (to use one of Mike's delicious phrases). > Instead of thinking only of Concept vs. Real Reality, it is sometimes > helpful to think of ways of knowing: the inferential or conceptual > (anumana-ñana) and direct knowning (pativedha-ñana). An > example: > Suppose an object is first discerned, then passes away; then, it is > noticed through recollection (and thought): "The object that was > there has passed away." This is an inferential, conceptual > understanding of impermanence. Of course, the realization may well > come quicker than the words, but it is still conceptual knowledge, as > you note so forcefully in your posts. Sometimes when the mind is > sharply concentrated (e.g., as it may be in the course of an > intensive meditation retreat), the comparing of the moment now with > one that just passed may strongly and clearly suggest the > concept "impermanence". Because of the comparing, this too is an > inferential knowing of impermanence, even when it seems crystal clear > to an extent unprecedented in the course of everyday living. As you > also point out, though, the clarity of this conceptual understanding > is helpful and should not be given short shrift. In fact, conceptual > understanding is essential in the development of insight. At the same > time, this very clarity of understanding can be an obstacle if it is > mistakenly taken as direct knowing or insight because it is so very > easy to take it as "my insight" and think "I am really progressing -- > cool!" ------------------------------------ Howard: I am in complete agreement with all you wrote above! ------------------------------------ > > But knowledge of anicca can also arise directly. How so? Objects are > known by their characteristics (lakkhana, rasa, paccupatthana, > padatthana, > or "characteristic", "function", "manifestation", "proximate cause"). > In the example above, the object (paramattha dhamma) may have been > the earth element (experienced as hardness) or a feeling of greed > (experienced as "sticking, as meat sticks to a hot pan") or some > other object. In addition to the familiar, characteristics > like "hardness" and "sticking", the characteristic of "impermanence" > is shared by all paramattha dhammas (except nibbana). Like the other > characteristics, anicca can also be known directly. On that occasion, > anicca is the characteristic that is seen. There is no "hardness" or > inference of "hardness is anicca". There is no "lobha cetasika" or > inference of "lobha cetasika is anicca". For a moment the mind > cognizes simply "anicca". > > But what does the mind see when it sees the characteristic "anicca" > in a single moment? We are so used to thinking about anicca > inferentially that it does not seem possible to understand anicca > *except* inferentially, i.e. by comparing a present moment without an > object to a prior moment when the object was there. However, at a > time when the mind is sufficiently free from attachment, there is no > grasping at characteristics like hardness. "Objects" as we normally > think of them are not cognized. Everywhere the attention turns, > objects slip away before they are grasped, and the mind does not find > a foothold anywhere. "No-foothold" (due to the ephemerality of the > dhammas) is a manifestation of anicca that can be realized directly > without having to resort to the inference: "It was there; now it's > gone. Anicca!" -------------------------------- Howard: I also have thought along the very same lines you provide here. It may be correct. I'm just not certain that not-remaining is knowable during one mind-moment. In fact, during one mind-moment, there is just one object. So, as you say, its non-remaining must be a characteristic of that object, a characteristic observed as a feature of the object. Perhaps that is so, perhaps not. I certainly can imagine that there is some characteristic there which is "responsible" for the object's eventual cessation, and that knowing that characteristic is the direct knowing of anicca. Certainly the grammatical negativity of the word 'anicca' shouldn't throw one off from admitting to the possibility of the existence of such a postive feature that can be directly discerned. I admit that your analysis is a plausible one, and a very good (possibly entirely successful) attempt. When and if either of us gets to the stage that wisdom sees right through to the reality, let us please inform the other! ;-) ------------------------------ > > Dan > > > > Howard: "Sometimes, and this is one of those times, I think that we > give too little credit to concepts. When do we really come > to "directly" see impermanence? I think this happens when the mind is > powerfuly attentive, concentrated, and mindful: An object is > discerned, perhaps through a number of mind-moments, then it is gone, > and then there is the noticing, through recollection (and thought), > that it just had been present, but now is gone - and so, we > "see" > that it has ceased." ==================================== With metta, Howard 23137 From: phamdluan2000 Date: Thu Jun 26, 2003 0:03pm Subject: Re: Quantum Theory is Abhidhamma! --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "buddhatrue" wrote: Hi Friend, While the Abhidhamma may actually say this, those who interpret it for general consumption, especially the Abhidhamma-lovers of this group, don't interpret the Abhidhamma in this way. To their way of thinking, nama and rupa are quite separate and not dependent on each other. They even go so far as to state that the highest insight isn't achieved until one sees the difference between nama and rupa. I have long championed the position you state in this post, that mind creates matter and therefore not really seperate, but I wouldn't say that this position is Abhidhamma. This is modern, scientific thought while the Abhidhamma, as far as I can tell, is based on antiquated, unscientific theories. Metta, James KKT: But the Buddha didn't give a << definite >> answer to the question concerning whether nama and rupa are separate or not? http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/digha/dn09.html [The Buddha:] "Potthapada, all those wanderers are blind and have no eyes. You alone among them have eyes. I have taught and declared some teachings to be definite, and some teachings to be indefinite. And what are the teachings that I have taught and declared to be indefinite? [The statement that] 'The cosmos is eternal' I have taught and declared to be an indefinite teachings. [The statement that] 'The cosmos is not eternal'... 'The cosmos is finite'... 'The cosmos is infinite'... 'The soul & the body are the same'... 'The soul is one thing and the body another'... 'After death a Tathagata exists'... 'After death a Tathagata does not exist'... 'After death a Tathagata both exists & does not exist'... 'After death a Tathagata neither exists nor does not exist' I have taught and declared to be an indefinite teaching. And why have I taught and declared these teachings to be indefinite? Because they are not conducive to the goal, are not conducive to the Dhamma, are not basic to the holy life. They don't lead to disenchantment, to dispassion, to cessation, to calm, to direct knowledge, to self-awakening, to Unbinding. That's why I have taught and declared them to be indefinite. Peace, KKT 23138 From: Jim Anderson Date: Thu Jun 26, 2003 0:04pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Vism XIV, 3 Jon, > Rob K, Jim, Larry, Howard, Nina and others > > Many thanks, Larry, for bringing up this section from the Vis. I > have been following with interest. > > Personally, I still find puzzling the reference to vinnana being > able to 'bring about the penetration of the characteristics of an > object'. Does anyone have any suggestions as to what this refers to > exactly? > > Jon I think Dhammapala is probably the best one to turn to for a solution to this puzzle for he asks a very pertinent question: "But how does vi~n~naa.na bring about the penetration of the characteristics?" and the short answer is: "By way of the path seen by pa~n~naa." but it comes with a detailed explanation which I have only just seen and it is not easy to understand right off the bat. So what I'll do is to first present the passage in Pali below in case anyone would like to see it or figure it out (Nina?) while I do. katha.m pana vi~n~naa.na.m lakkha.napa.tivedha.m paapetii ti? pa~n~naaya dassitamaggena. lakkha.naaramma.nikavipassanaaya hi anekavaara.m lakkha.naani pa.tivijjhitvaa pa.tivijjhitvaa pavattamaanaaya pagu.nabhaavato paricayavasena ~naa.navippayuttacittena pi vipassanaa sambhavati, yathaa ta.m pagu.nassa ganthassa sajjhaayane ~naayaagataa pi vaaraa na vi~n~naayanti. lakkha.napa.tivedhan ti ca lakkha.naana.m aarammanakara.namatta.m sandhaaya vutta.m, na pa.tivijjhana.m. -- Vism-m.t; CSCD 2.75; Rewata ed. pp. 947-8 (both agree) Best wishes, Jim 23139 From: yasalalaka Date: Thu Jun 26, 2003 3:05pm Subject: Re: meditation vs. just thinking about it --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "christhedis" wrote: > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Sarah > wrote: > > > > > I'm sure we can all relate to these patterns to greater or lesser > extents. > > I think that sometimes we have an idea that `we' should be a certain > way, > > eg more equanimous, or that our behaviour patterns should be > different and > > improved from usual. However, wishing they are other than they are > at this > > time will not help us to develop any detachment or acceptance of > what is > > conditioned already. We think the answer is to follow a course of > action > > or to find the right recipe to follow in steps, but these courses of > > action consist of many different phenomena and it is the bhavana > (mental > > development) --and in particular the understanding of these > phenomena -- > > which will help. While we cling to ourselves and to ways of life or > > results we think should be in place, the result is likely to be more > > rather than less anxiety and disturbance I think. > > > > As I mentioned at the start, much of the insight which seems apparent > may > > just be thinking and it helps a lot to be honest enough to see what > > beginners we are. This way there won't be the high expectations that > life, > > with its ups and downs, will be significantly different from usual. The > > attachment to particular results can be a real impediment, I think. In > > your first question to the list, you asked about being `equanimous in all > > situations' and transcending `all worldly attachments'. I think it's > > impossible and useless to try and train ourselves like this. It's bound to > > be an unnatural imitation of the arahants rather than an > understanding and > > acceptance of the present reality and our tendencies and inclinations. > > > > In other words, we have to start at the beginning at the present > moment. > > So please don't be concerned about problems `practising Buddhism'. > Any > > practice should make life easier not harder. Trying to be equanimous > or to > > `extinguish desires' is bound to make life harder and bound to be > > motivated by an idea that a `self' can do this. > > > > I'm not sure if any of these comments are of any help. Please let us > know > > what you think and what further questions or comments you have. > > > > Appreciating your open sharing, > > > > Metta, > > > > Sarah > > ===== > > > > Hi Sarah and others, > > This reply really helps me a lot I think. The idea that I am making life > harder by trying to 'extinguish desires' as a 'self' is something that > makes a lot of sense. Sounds so obvious once you've said it, but > sometimes it is hard to see the forest for the trees? > > Regarding meditation, my first training in Vipassana meditation was the > 10-day course taught by Goenka. But most places I have gone to since > do the walking and sitting meditation (Goenka's is only sitting). The > other main difference in techniques I see is that Goenka's meditation > focuses on the incoming and outgoing breath through the nose, while > the alternate meditation focuses on the rising and falling of the > abdomen. I was actually recommended Goenka's version as being 'more > scientific'. Does anyone have any advice on which type to practise, is it > bad to learn one then switch to another, or is it best just to find out > which works best for oneself? > > Thanks again for all the replies and comments. > > Chris. ______________________________Yasa_____________________________ Cristie, There are many methods of Meditation, Visuddhumaggha enumerate 40 objects of meditation. Meditation on the in and out breath, keeping the mind on the place on the upper lip just under the nostrils, where the breath touches as it comes in and goes out, is the frequently used object of meditation, which was used by the Buddha himself. The object of meditation on a selected object of meditation is to help the meditator to brings his concentration to a single point. Therefore, the meditator may select what ever method which is convenient to him. Goenka uses the breath for the same purpose, and he also uses a method which is called scanning, letting the mind touch each and every part of the body…It is supposed to be a very effective method for arriving at Samadhi. The method used by the Burmese school, is the concentration on the rising and falling of the abdomen . It is almost the breath meditation , but with the difference of the centre of observation changed to the abdomen. It is best to select a method, which is convenient to you. But once you have started meditation on any one of the methods you hav e selected, you should stick to it, without changing it. It is not a question of whether it is good or bad to change, but a question of getting results. If you constantly change the method you will get nowhere. It is essential, that you have confidence in what you are going to do. I think I have already made a long post on this to you. You do not seem to have read it. When you begin meditation you cannot speak as if you have already seen the ultimate reality. We are trying to make use of the meditation to eventually understand "no-self", which is the centre of all our problems. Therefore, we should start by understanding that a self exists, and we are going to make this "self" understand what "no-self"is. But, if you start off learning Abhidhamma, to do meditation, it would be a mistake. Because it will confuse you. Buddha conceived Abhidhamma,only after his enlightenment. The Buddha meditated on the tranquillity meditation and went to the highest of the jhana absorptions and coming out of it, turned his mind to insight meditation………….. The Buddha's teachings, which he asked us to follow is that which is in the Suttas, -the discourses.Once you have attained a certain level in you meditation practice, it would be a good exercise to understand Abhidhamma, without trying to study it. Meditation gives the mind a clarity to understand any higher Dhamma. Please go to the following website for very good instruction on meditation. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/thai/kee/condensed.html I hope you will get to read this post, With metta, Yasa 23140 From: bodhi2500 Date: Thu Jun 26, 2003 6:16pm Subject: Concepts and Characteristics Re: [dsg] Vism XIV, 3 Hi Howard, Ken, Larry and Dan I have found 2 passages that may be of relevance to the thread. "These modes, (that is, the 3 characteristics) are not included in the aggregates because they are states without individual essence (asabhaava-dhammaa); and they are not separate from the aggregates because they are unapprehendable without the aggregates. But they should be understood as appropriate conceptual differences (pa~n~natti-visesaa) that are reason for differentiation in the explaining of dangers in the five aggregates, and which are allowable by common usage in respect of the five aggregates" < Visuddhimagga Maha Tika (found in the notes on page 747 of Visuddhimagga) And from `Buddhist Analysis of Matter' by Y.Karunadasa. When a rupa-dhamma originates, it is called rupassa jati; when it subsists (decay), it is called rupassa jarata; when it perishes, it is called rupassa aniccata. In addition to the rupa-dhamma which originates, subsists (decay) and perishes, there are no rupa-dhammas answering to the names :rupassa jati, rupassa jarata and rupassa aniccata. If these characteristics, too, were postulated as real entities, then it would be necessary to postulate another set of (secondary) characteristics to account for their own origination, subsistence and cessation. And these (secondary) characteristics would, in turn, require another set of (secondary secondary) characteristics to account for their origination, etc. In this way it would lead to a process ad infinitum. And it is in order to avoid this problem of infinite regress that the characteristics are not recognized as entities distinct from, and as real as, the dhammas which they characterize. This is the significance of the statement made in the Mohavicchedani: "It is not correct to assume that origination originates, decay decays and cessation ceases, because such an assumption leads to the (fallacy) of infinite regress(anava.t.thaana)" My understanding is the Paramattha Dhammas are dhammas with their own individual essence. If the characteristic are without individual essence, then not being Paramattha Dhammas, can the characteristics ie.impermanance be a direct object of Satipatthana? Steve --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@a... wrote: > > Howard: > >"Sometimes, and this is one of those times, I think that we > > give too little credit to concepts. When do we really come > > to "directly" see impermanence? I think this happens when the mind is > > powerfuly attentive, concentrated, and mindful: An object is > > discerned, perhaps through a number of mind-moments, then it is gone, > > and then there is the noticing, through recollection (and thought), > > that it just had been present, but now is gone - and so, we > > "see" > > that it has ceased." > ==================================== > With metta, > Howard 23141 From: suzakico Date: Thu Jun 26, 2003 11:20am Subject: To add on...to the question to Nina To add to my question, here is a song by Shido-Bunan - a Japanese zen monk: "Without our own self, the one who does the seeing, hearing, and sensing to realize what is going on, this is called the living Buddha" Does this not convey the point - in a way? May all beings be happy! Kio 23142 From: suzakico Date: Thu Jun 26, 2003 11:14am Subject: Inquiry to Nina... As I am just stopping by, I am hopeful not to disturb the flow of the discussion going on here. But as I read the book, A Survey of Paramattha Dhammas perhaps for 4-5 hours worth and 1/3 of it so far, I came back with a question that I appreciate it very much if you can address for me as much as you must have gained great benefit from the book and the interaction with Sujin. Anyway, here is my question: Why is it so necessary to analyze the mind and body phenomena in the way suggested, i.e., dividing by various terms to distinguish them in detail? (This book points out 16 levels of vipassana nana (knowledge). 89-129 types of consciousness (citta), 52 types of mental factor, 28 types of physical phenomenon, etc.) At least for me, this is too cumbersome and makes me feels like losing the holistic picture although this ?gmay?h be beneficial for specifically focused training. (My sense however is that even the training/meditation may be too complex.) Furthermore at least from reading the sutta, it appears that the Buddha never went into such a detail. I realize that once interested and realized the benefit, we may want to explore to the detail and find the joy in such exploration. I just want to get your personal feedback on this concern. By the way, I have some vipassana and Zen background as shown in www.suzaki.has.it . Personally, Zen appeals to me because of its directness. However, without biased/constrained by my background, I would like to not to miss the opportunity to learn from your experience, if you may. With metta, Kio 23143 From: Jim Anderson Date: Thu Jun 26, 2003 6:40pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Vism XIV, 3 Dear Larry, > Hi Jim and Nina, > > Thanks for your additional considerations. I would be interested in any > other info or reasoning you come up with concerning the usage of > "endeavour" in this paragraph. Is there a sub-commentary? > > Larry I think of .tiikaa-s as being subcommentaries and the Paramatthama~njuusaa (Pm or Vism-mh.t) which ~Naa.namoli often gives translations of certain passages from in his footnotes is also called the Mahaa.tiikaa. And I consider the Visuddhimagga to be a commentary on the two verses from the Sa.myuttanikaaya (S I 13) found at the beginning of Vism. From looking at the CPD bibliography there doesn't appear to be a subcommentary on Pm but there are listed 6 other commentaries on Vism, none of which I have seen or have access to. I have already posted further comments on ussakkitvaa. I have been questioning whether "by endeavouring" is the right translation as it appears that ussakkitvaa can be derived from two different roots with different meanings. What remains to be done is to determine which root applies to our "ussakkitvaa". Best wishes, Jim 23144 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Thu Jun 26, 2003 6:52pm Subject: Metta as Perfection, Brahma Viharas Dear Friends, I have been corresponding with a dhamma friend recently about why Metta is a perfection, but Karuna (compassion) and mudita (sympathetic joy) aren't. If we all remember, the perfections are the qualities that need to be developed in order to cross to the other side (nibbana). K. Sujin said the following in her lecture on perfection (this is my translation: please wait for Nina's for the official version!): We should consider why Metta & Upekkha are perfections, but Karuna and Mudita aren't Because we don't have the same level of wisdom as the Buddha, we don't see that all beings are suffering because of birth, aging, sickness, and death. Everything is impermanent, arising, and then falling away, which is the first truth, the truth of suffering. This is true suffering, but nobody sees this truth. Therefore, in our daily life, if we don't see beings as suffering, we should have metta. Therefore, Metta and Upekkha are perfections. Here are my additions (at your own peril!): It makes sense to me how it was explained. Metta can occur whenever we think of beings. But as we don't often see being likes the Bodhisatta (that there are suffering for all beings), compassion cannot arise as often as metta. I think about other people constantly, but I don't think of them as suffering, even if they are, because I do not yet see the true suffering. By thinking of beings kindly, the cittas are less inclined toward the akusala states, and more inclined toward developing other kusala states (including dana, sila, and bhavana) because all these states contribute to the happiness of others and oneself: the cittas are inclined toward all levels of the abhaya, of non-harming. I guess for me, even for somebody like me who works in a situation where I don't have to come in contact with many people, I think about people constantly. All these thinkings are all opportunities to develop metta. On the other hand, I don't think about suffering people, or people receiving their good results (of good deeds) as often. Although both happen, but still, the opportunities to develop metta (when you think of other beings, neither suffering, nor enjoying the results of their good deeds) far more outstrip everything else. If you get here, please do let me know if you disagree. Other feedbacks are welcomed too! kom 23145 From: Date: Thu Jun 26, 2003 7:22pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Vism XIV, 3 Hi Jim, Thanks for the info on commentaries and subcommentaries. I was wondering if you could shed some light on the word that is translated as "penetrate" in this paragraph. This might go toward answering Jon's question on how consciousness can penetrate an object's characteristics. Seemingly sanna can recognize impermanence, consciousness can cognize impermanence, and panna can understand impermanence, but only consciousness and panna can penetrate impermanence and only panna can develop this penetration to a path moment. So what's with penetration? I'm getting a much better idea of what "endeavour" is all about. When you are satisfied, would you give us an expanded translation with notes? Larry 23146 From: Date: Thu Jun 26, 2003 7:33pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Metta as Perfection, Brahma Viharas Hi Kom, I think metta as perfection includes karuna and mudita. Just a thought. Larry 23147 From: Date: Thu Jun 26, 2003 8:29pm Subject: Re: Concepts and Characteristics Re: [dsg] Vism XIV, 3 Hi Steve, I agree these things are puzzling and don't seem to be resolvable, but I think KKT found the answer: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/digha/dn09.html "But why hasn't the Blessed One expounded these things?" "Because they are not conducive to the goal, are not conducive to the Dhamma, are not basic to the holy life. They don't lead to disenchantment, to dispassion, to cessation, to calm, to direct knowledge, to self-awakening, to Unbinding. That's why I haven't expounded them." "And what has the Blessed One expounded?" "I have expounded that, 'This is stress'... 'This is the origination of stress'... 'This is the cessation of stress'... 'This is the path of practice leading to the cessation of stress.' "And why has the Blessed One expounded these things?" "Because they are conducive to the goal, conducive to the Dhamma, and basic to the holy life. They lead to disenchantment, to dispassion, to cessation, to calm, to direct knowledge, to self-awakening, to Unbinding. That's why I have expounded them." Larry 23148 From: nina van gorkom Date: Thu Jun 26, 2003 8:59pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Vism XIV, 3, other options. Dear Jim, right, progress is better. Seems more a natural growth (with the right conditions) and development stage by stage. Nina. op 26-06-2003 15:52 schreef Jim Anderson op jimanderson_on@y...: > The > CPD has two separate entries for "ussakkati" based on two different > roots. Cone seems to be following the first one with "to creep out, or > up to, rise" whereas PED is mostly following the second one with "to > endeavour, strive, etc.". I find the first and Cone's meanings (eg. to > progress) to be more acceptable and fitting here. 23149 From: nina van gorkom Date: Thu Jun 26, 2003 8:59pm Subject: Re: Concepts and Characteristics Re: [dsg] Vism XIV, 3 Dear Dan, good to see you back. Thank you for your well-written post. I just have a remark. op 26-06-2003 18:03 schreef Dan D. op dhd5@c...: > "Objects" as we normally > think of them are not cognized. Everywhere the attention turns, > objects slip away before they are grasped, and the mind does not find > a foothold anywhere. "No-foothold" (due to the ephemerality of the > dhammas) is a manifestation of anicca that can be realized directly > without having to resort to the inference: "It was there; now it's > gone. Anicca!" N: As I understand, anicca is anicca *of* a nama or rupa. And the understanding of this characterstic can only arise after several stages of tender insight have been developed: distinguishing nama from rupa very clearly not just by thinking, knowing them as conditioned realities, not just by thinking. But you probably take this into account also. You just want to point out that understanding understands without words. Thank you, Nina. 23150 From: nina van gorkom Date: Thu Jun 26, 2003 8:59pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Vism XIV, 3, citta knows Dear Jon, I hope you have also a real vacation, doing nothing! I am always delighted to hear from you when you are at airports or in bars. Do you do day hikes, or longer treks? See below. op 26-06-2003 13:25 schreef Jonothan Abbott op jonoabb@y...: > Personally, I still find puzzling the reference to vinnana being able > to 'bring about the penetration of the characteristics of an object'. > Does anyone have any suggestions as to what this refers to exactly? N: It depends how we read this. Not in the same way as panna. Citta knows colour, sound, etc. but it is panna that understands them as non-self. Thus, as it is said in the Co: citta clearly knows an object (ru cheng in Thai). Citta knows real diamants but also knows when they are fakes. It knows barking of a dog, but also when you are imitating the barking, remember from Survey? Nina. 23151 From: Dan D. Date: Fri Jun 27, 2003 4:29am Subject: Concepts and Characteristics Re: [dsg] Vism XIV, 3 Dear Nina, Howard, Steve, Larry, I think you are right in each of your comments, Nina, and of course there is confirmation in the texts: 1. Anicca must be anicca "of" a nama or rupa. As found in Paramattha- mañjusa 825 (XXI, n. 4 in Ñanamoli's "Path of purification"): "These modes, [that is, the three characteristics,] are not included in the aggregates becasue they are states without individual essensce, and they are not separate from the aggreagates because they are unapprehendable wihout the aggregates." 2. Distinct direct understanding of anicca may arise in the stage of insight called "conformity knowledge", as discussed in Abhidhammatha Sangaha (IX, 34, B. Bodhi trans.): "When he thus practices contemplation, owing to the ripening of insight (he feels), 'Now the absorption (of the path) will arise.' Thereupon, arresting the life- continuum, there arises mind-door adverting, followed by two or three (moments of) insight consciousness (vipassanacittani) having for their object any of the characteristics such as impermanence, etc." This is "conformity knowledge", which is the final flashes of insight before supramundane path consciousness. 3. Clear understanding of anicca may also arise in the stage called "equanimity about formations", as suggested by Vism. (XXI, 66): "Now after discerning formations in the various modes,... he still persists in in the triple contemplation." I understand these "modes" and "triple contemplation" as referring to the tilakkhana as aspects of formations. 4. Is that "clear" understanding "direct" in the "one moment" sense I described in the earlier post? Both direct and inferential knowledge arise, I believe. The formations are seen "as limited by rise and fall and circumscribed by them; for contemplation of impermanence limits them thus, 'formations do not exist previous to their rise.'" [Vism. XXI, 68]. This sounds like inferential knowledge. However, thinking about it in the context of bhavanga-ñana, wherein the only aspect of objects that is discerned is their dissolution ("Once his knowledge works keely and formations quickly become apparent, he no longer extends his mindfulness to their arising or presence or occurrence or sign, but brings it to bear only on their cessation as destruction, fall, and breakup." [Vism. XXI, 10]), it becomes apparent that the awareness of objects is not via the manifestation of sign or occurrence (such as cognizing "hardness"), but by their dissolution, i.e. the only characteristic that is observed is the dissolution. This cannot be understanding via "the object was here and now it is gone" because the sign or occurrence of the object was never apprehended. As Vism. XXI, 15 says, "Dissolution is the culminating point of impermanence, and so the meditator contemplating dissolution contemplates the whole field of formations as impermanent, not as impermanent." Pm. 827 elaborates further (Path of purification, XXI, n. 8): "'He contemplates as impermanent' here not by inferential knowledge thus 'Impermanent in the sense of dissolution', like one who is comprehending formations by groups, nor by seeing fall preceded by apprehension of rise, like a beginner of insight; but rather it is after rise and fall have become apparent as actual experience through the influence of knowledge of rise and fall that he then leaves rise aside in the way stated and contemplates formations as impermanent by seeing only their dissolution. But when he sees them thus, there is no trace in him of any apprehension of them as permanent." 5. The direct understanding of anicca only comes in the advanced stages of insight (i.e., after namarupaparecchedañana and knowledge of rise and fall), as discussed Samohavinodani (Dispeller of delusion, §243): "...the characteristic of impermanence does not appear owing to not keeping in mind, not penetrating rise and fall owing to its being concealed by continuity (santati)...But when continuity is dissected by laying hold of rise and fall, the characteristic of impermanence appears in accordance with its true essential nature." So, only when the sense of continuity of consciousness is shattered with knowledge of rise and fall is anicca possible to see directly. The Pm. quote above implies (and I would agree) that the understanding would be inferential until the only characteristic apprehended is dissolution, i.e. direct understanding of anicca does not arise prior to bhavanga-ñana. 6. The real understanding arises without dependence on words. In fact, it arises more rapidly and more penetratingly than words. The words come only as an after thought. Dan 23152 From: m. nease Date: Fri Jun 27, 2003 5:46am Subject: Re: Concepts and Characteristics Re: [dsg] Vism XIV, 3 Hi Dan, Pretty clumsy, all right(!). Actually well-written, I thought--I think you're on the right track. Interestingly, I just ran across this yesterday in Nyanatiloka's Buddhist Dictionary: anicca-saññaa 'perception of impermanence', is defined in the Girimananda Sutta (A.X. 60) as meditation on the impermanence of the five groups of existence. "Though, with a faithful heart, one takes refuge in the Buddha, his Teaching and the Community of Monks; or with a faithful heart observes the rules of morality, or develops a mind full of loving-kindness, far more meritorious it is if one cultivates the perception of impermanence, be it only for a moment" (A.X. 20). See A.VI. 102; A.VII. 48; Ud.IV. 1; S.22. 102. I woke up thinking about this this morning and then read your post. Small world! It doesn't exactly address the issue you and Howard were discussing but I thought it seemed pertinent enough to post. It occurs to me that if he were referring only to thinking about the concept of impermanence, the Buddha would not likely have called it more meritorious than taking refuge, observing sila or developing mettaa. So I'm guessing he's talking about direct, rather than conceptual, insight--what do you think? (By the way, both are good and necessary, I think). Hope we can look forward to seeing more of your correspondence. mike ----- Original Message ----- From: Dan D. To: Sent: Thursday, June 26, 2003 9:03 AM Subject: Concepts and Characteristics Re: [dsg] Vism XIV, 3 23153 From: m. nease Date: Fri Jun 27, 2003 5:56am Subject: Re: [dsg] Vism XIV, 3 Hi Again Nina, ----- Original Message ----- From: nina van gorkom To: Sent: Thursday, June 26, 2003 10:04 AM Subject: Re: [dsg] Vism XIV, 3 L: I don't understand why sanna (perception) can't > perceive impermanence. N: Yes, it perceives it in its own way, but it is panna which penetrates the true nature of realities. Sanna marks and remembers, arising with each citta. Firm sanna is the proximate cause of satipatthana: you remember what the object of satipatthana is: any nama or rupa that appears. Wonderful, thanks--I had forgotten (if I knew) that 'sanna is the proximate cause of satipatthana'--is this from Atthasaalinii(sp?), or...? mike 23154 From: Dan D. Date: Fri Jun 27, 2003 7:06am Subject: Concepts and Characteristics [Mike] Hi Mike, Long time no see! It's good to see you back on the list after a lengthy absense. [Of course, I've been absent from the list for some time as well, so I don't even know how long you've been around this time...] I like your passage from Nyanatiloka and Anguttara. I'd say that "meditation on the impermanence..." sounds ambiguous. Is it direct knowledge or inferential? Either is beneficial, but I agree that the Buddha must be referring to direct knowledge of anicca in the passage from AN. In conventional, non-Buddhist thinking, wouldn't it sound very peculiar to say: "Though, with a faithful heart, one ... develops a mind full of loving-kindness, far more meritorious it is if one cultivates the perception of impermanence, be it only for a moment"? How can you explain such a strange notion? Dan P.S. Have you looked up the other references that Nyanatiloka lists? > in Nyanatiloka's Buddhist Dictionary: > > anicca-saññaa > > 'perception of impermanence', is defined in the Girimananda Sutta (A.X. 60) > as meditation on the impermanence of the five groups of existence. > > "Though, with a faithful heart, one takes refuge in the Buddha, his Teaching > and the Community of Monks; or with a faithful heart observes the rules of > morality, or develops a mind full of loving-kindness, far more meritorious > it is if one cultivates the perception of impermanence, be it only for a > moment" (A.X. 20). > > See A.VI. 102; A.VII. 48; Ud.IV. 1; S.22. 102. 23155 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Fri Jun 27, 2003 7:30am Subject: Re: Quantum Theory is Abhidhamma! Dear James, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "buddhatrue" > group, don't interpret the Abhidhamma in this way. To their way of > thinking, nama and rupa are quite separate and not dependent on each > other. They even go so far as to state that the highest insight > isn't achieved until one sees the difference between nama and rupa. Not at all. There are nama that are dependent on rupa, and there are nama that are not dependent on rupa. There are rupas that are dependent on nama, and there are rupas that are not dependent on nama. The first stage of insight is the distinction of nama and rupa (nama-rupa- paricheta-nana). The reasoning given is that without this stage of insight, the person still holds dear all the khandas (nama & rupa) as being truly theirs (thinking that they are not don't really count). The first stage of insight gives the indisputable prove (to the person) that in our daily experiences, there are nothing beyond the nama and rupa (nothing beyond the dhamma). Anattaness becomes obvious for the very first time. We study the dhamma because it helps us understand the current moment better (and not just by way of thinking about the dhamma and the stories that we have heard). Any studying that is toward this goal is the highest blessing of the Buddha dhamma. Without the teaching, the path, mundane or supramundane, is impossible. The Buddha's teaching is verifiable, dependent on the wisdom of the person, and those that cannot be verified are to us just the best working theory. Being most respectful of the teacher of the abhidhamma, I would urge my dhamma friends to study it the same way as any other teachings we think as the buddha's. We should verify with the sources (and in Theravadan tradition, all 3 tipitikas with the ancient commentaries), but ultimately, the teachings must match the truth. kom 23156 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Fri Jun 27, 2003 7:31am Subject: RE: [dsg] Metta as Perfection, Brahma Viharas Hi Larry, > -----Original Message----- > From: LBIDD@w... [mailto:LBIDD@w...] > Sent: Thursday, June 26, 2003 7:33 PM > > Hi Kom, > > I think metta as perfection includes karuna and > mudita. Just a thought. > Why do you say so? kom 23157 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Fri Jun 27, 2003 8:02am Subject: Paramatha (realities) & Pannatti (concepts) Dear Dave, As Sarah is going away for two weeks, she has asked me to continue with this discussion. I am not Sarah, so you will have to be patient with me... I would like to write about what your wrote to Sarah one topic at a time; otherwise, the email will be really long-winded. > -----Original Message----- > From: dwlemen [mailto:dwlemen@y...] > Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2003 8:39 AM > > S: Difficult questions as I said! Let's take > the moon. When we look > at it, > > what' s seen? Visible object. If we step on it, > what's felt? > Hardness. It > > isn't that all visible objects are uniform in > nature (apart from > being > > visible objects). If that were so, nothing > would ever be identified > and we > > couldn't survive. So if we look at the moon and > there's awareness, > there's > > no idea of it being a thing or a moon, but > what is seen and the > > particular visible appearance are just as > they've always been and > > immediately there are conditions to know it as > a moon, even for a > baby or > > animal without any names or developed > associations. If someone else > looks > > at the moon at the same time, the visible > object won't be the same, > but > > there will be enough in common in 'what is > seen' for similar > concepts and > > identifications to be made. > > DAVE: > I still am not understanding if you are saying > that there is really > no such thing as the moon or not. When you say > "immediately there > are conditions to know it as a moon" what do you > mean? Are you > referring to, perhaps, the difference between > what the eye takes in > (light, color, motion, etc.) and what the brain > then attributes those > lights, colors, etc. to be before sending to the > mind? If that is > the distinction (what the eye takes in, vs. what > the mind knows) then > I can understand, although I still think that > there would be the > moon, that exists independently of observation, > or understanding. > The abhidhamma (and not as explicitly, the sutta) teaches us this, that the objects that the mind cognizes can be separated into two different types: ultimate realities (paramatha dhamma), and concepts (pannatti). Ultimate realities have distinct characteristics, different from other ultimate realities, whereas pannatti has no characteristics at all, and is considered to be non-existent. Take hardness for example. Hardness is a reality. When we come into a dark unfamiliar room, not really seeing, we hit something hard. The hardness appears to the mind. But since the mind doesn't have enough information to form elaborate concepts of what just appeared, we don't know if it is a table, a wall, or other objects. This is how our interactions with our environments mostly work. First ultimate realities appear to the mind, then the mind forms a mental construct (concept, pannatti) about what has just appeared, but this concept doesn't have any characteristics --- only the ultimate realities do. Think about a person. Does a person have a directly experienceable characteristic? We can only directly experience the visible object, the sound, the smell, the touch, and the mind that thinks of the person. The existence of a person, the formation of concepts, are dependent on thinking about what directly appears. Do you ever have the experience where the ultimate realities appear, but yet you don't know what the object is? For example, sitting on a fast moving train, I know that I see, but I don't know what I see. Ultimate reality already appears (visible object), but the mind doesn't have enough direct experiences or opportunities to form a concept around what appears. Going back to the moon and the cheese. What actually happens when we say we see the moon? We only directly experience the visible object, but then we think about what we sees. The only thing that is absolutely provable at the point of seeing is that the visible objects exists, and the seeing mind exists --- every thing else is not proven to us. We then think about what directly appears, and form a concept of the moon. So, from the characteristics of realities perspective, only visible object exists, but not the moon. We may ask ourselves, that this may be so, but does the real moon really exist? If we think about the teachings that all phenomena rise, but they must fall away. What is then the moon? The visible object (that we form concept of being the moon), is it the same today as it was yesterday? How about seeing the moon outside in the clear sky, and the moon in the picture. What are the differences? BTW, pannatti means (I think) mark to make known the object, mark to help carry meanings of the object. Without pannatti, meaning cannot be known. kom 23158 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Fri Jun 27, 2003 8:37am Subject: Single Threading & Serialization Dear Dave, You must be a computer guy... My kind of people ;-). > -----Original Message----- > From: dwlemen [mailto:dwlemen@y...] > Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2003 8:39 AM > > S: I can see you'd get on well with RobM with > your analogies - > basically, > > different moments as you suggested in a snipped > part. It seems it's > all > > happening at the same time, but hearing and > listening (paying > attention) > > and thinking don't arise at the same moment. > When there's a moment > of > > awareness of one reality, such as hearing or > sound, it's clear that > > there's no other impingement or idea associated with it. > > ..... > > DAVE: It still sounds like you are talking about > conscious awareness > being single threaded. And, I can buy that, > however, I do think that > the brain is taking in the other inputs. So, > while I'm focused on > seeing the screen, my brain is still absorbing > the sounds, smell, > feelings, and thoughts. If something comes up > that requires focus, > my attention to the screen is interrupted by the > other input. > > I don't know if what I'm tyring to say/think is > Buddhist or not > (haven't learned nearly enough to make such a > call). But, it does > seem to me that, by and large, we are running on > "auto-pilot" and our > consciousness is just along for the ride, but, > because of ego, it > thinks it is running the ship, so to speak. But, > in this process of > my own attempts for understanding, I do want to > know how things work > from a Buddhist standpoint. From some of the > things I've learned so > far, I've been amazed at how Buddhism not only > "matches" what I have > been trying to formulate on my own, but in most > cases, as I've better > understood Buddhism, I've found that it even > better explains it than > I was able to before. > In the model given in the abhidhamma, the mind experiences one object at a time. When we see, we don't hear. When we think about what we see or what we hear, we neither see nor hear. This maybe contradictory (to some people) to our experiences: this is only because the minds rise and fall away so extremely rapidly that it seems that the hearing and the seeing happen at the same time. The Buddha didn't teach about the interaction of the brains and the sense input, so we stay mostly off this topic. It is not taught, and probably is not essential to attaining nibbana... All ultimate realities are conditioned. They cannot rise without causes, and they must rise when the causes are complete. This is how the mind works. When there are conditions for seeing, seeing must occur. When there are conditions for thinking, thinking must occur. However, not knowing the conditionalities of all things, we have the idea (gross, subtle, or very subtle) that "we" make or will these things to happen. You can move your hands, no? How does that happen? Is it you or there are conditions for the hand to be moved? Do we ever have the situations when we want things happen a certain way, but things go other way anyway? The mind cannot rise without causes, and they must rise when the causes are complete. The mind rises one at a time, conditioned by all other conditioning realities. The Buddha teaching is truly marvelous and amazing. I know no other person who gives teachings that are so true, conceptually and ultimately, on all the different topics (that I can see for myself). The teaching brings knowledge. With knowledge, we can begin to truly turn away from ignorance and wrong-understanding, and eventually from attachment and grief. That is the miracle of the Buddha's teaching. kom 23159 From: Date: Fri Jun 27, 2003 9:02am Subject: Re: Concepts and Characteristics Re: [dsg] Vism XIV, 3 Hi, Dan and all - Just a comment on my personal belief. It seems to me that our physical sense discernments (acts of vi~n~nana via the 5 physical sense doors) are already without error, and that ignorance is expressed only through the mind door. To me, vijja is avijja minus the defilements. To me, sa~n~na cleared of the defilements is pa~n~na. To me, there is no problem with the conceptual faculty per se, but only with the conceptual faculty infected by defilement. I do not think that that the only things that are "real" occur at single mind moments. Specifically, many relations that are quite "real" transcend individual mind moments. To me, seeing directly, with filters of ignorance removed, is the essence of wisdom, and not just seeing only what occurs withina single mind moment. So here, I guess, is where I find problems with Abhidhamma as I understand it. With metta, Howard In a message dated 6/27/2003 6:29:28 AM Eastern Standard Time, dhd5@c... writes: > > Dear Nina, Howard, Steve, Larry, > I think you are right in each of your comments, Nina, and of course > there is confirmation in the texts: > > 1. Anicca must be anicca "of" a nama or rupa. As found in Paramattha- > mañjusa 825 (XXI, n. 4 in Ñanamoli's "Path of purification"): "These > modes, [that is, the three characteristics,] are not included in the > aggregates becasue they are states without individual essensce, and > they are not separate from the aggreagates because they are > unapprehendable wihout the aggregates." > > 2. Distinct direct understanding of anicca may arise in the stage of > insight called "conformity knowledge", as discussed in Abhidhammatha > Sangaha (IX, 34, B. Bodhi trans.): "When he thus practices > contemplation, owing to the ripening of insight (he feels), 'Now the > absorption (of the path) will arise.' Thereupon, arresting the life- > continuum, there arises mind-door adverting, followed by two or three > (moments of) insight consciousness (vipassanacittani) having for > their object any of the characteristics such as impermanence, etc." > This is "conformity knowledge", which is the final flashes of insight > before supramundane path consciousness. > > 3. Clear understanding of anicca may also arise in the stage > called "equanimity about formations", as suggested by Vism. (XXI, > 66): "Now after discerning formations in the various modes,... he > still persists in in the triple contemplation." I understand > these "modes" and "triple contemplation" as referring to the > tilakkhana as aspects of formations. > > 4. Is that "clear" understanding "direct" in the "one moment" sense I > described in the earlier post? Both direct and inferential knowledge > arise, I believe. The formations are seen "as limited by rise and > fall and circumscribed by them; for contemplation of impermanence > limits them thus, 'formations do not exist previous to their rise.'" > [Vism. XXI, 68]. This sounds like inferential knowledge. However, > thinking about it in the context of bhavanga-ñana, wherein the only > aspect of objects that is discerned is their dissolution ("Once his > knowledge works keely and formations quickly become apparent, he no > longer extends his mindfulness to their arising or presence or > occurrence or sign, but brings it to bear only on their cessation as > destruction, fall, and breakup." [Vism. XXI, 10]), it becomes > apparent that the awareness of objects is not via the manifestation > of sign or occurrence (such as cognizing "hardness"), but by their > dissolution, i.e. the only characteristic that is observed is the > dissolution. This cannot be understanding via "the object was here > and now it is gone" because the sign or occurrence of the object was > never apprehended. As Vism. XXI, 15 says, "Dissolution is the > culminating point of impermanence, and so the meditator contemplating > dissolution contemplates the whole field of formations as > impermanent, not as impermanent." Pm. 827 elaborates further (Path of > purification, XXI, n. 8): "'He contemplates as impermanent' here not > by inferential knowledge thus 'Impermanent in the sense of > dissolution', like one who is comprehending formations by groups, nor > by seeing fall preceded by apprehension of rise, like a beginner of > insight; but rather it is after rise and fall have become apparent as > actual experience through the influence of knowledge of rise and fall > that he then leaves rise aside in the way stated and contemplates > formations as impermanent by seeing only their dissolution. But when > he sees them thus, there is no trace in him of any apprehension of > them as permanent." > > 5. The direct understanding of anicca only comes in the advanced > stages of insight (i.e., after namarupaparecchedañana and knowledge > of rise and fall), as discussed Samohavinodani (Dispeller of > delusion, §243): "...the characteristic of impermanence does not > appear owing to not keeping in mind, not penetrating rise and fall > owing to its being concealed by continuity (santati)...But when > continuity is dissected by laying hold of rise and fall, the > characteristic of impermanence appears in accordance with its true > essential nature." So, only when the sense of continuity of > consciousness is shattered with knowledge of rise and fall is anicca > possible to see directly. The Pm. quote above implies (and I would > agree) that the understanding would be inferential until the only > characteristic apprehended is dissolution, i.e. direct understanding > of anicca does not arise prior to bhavanga-ñana. > > 6. The real understanding arises without dependence on words. In > fact, it arises more rapidly and more penetratingly than > words. The > words come only as an after thought. > > Dan 23160 From: nina van gorkom Date: Fri Jun 27, 2003 10:24am Subject: Re: [dsg] Inquiry to Nina... Kiosan, O Genki desu ka? I hope you will stay here, not just passing. Welcome. I appreciate your interest in Survey. See below. op 26-06-2003 20:14 schreef suzakico op suzaki@p...: But as I read the book, A Survey of > Paramattha Dhammas perhaps for 4-5 hours worth and 1/3 of it so far, > I came back with a question that I appreciate it very much if you > can address for me as much as you must have gained great benefit > from the book and the interaction with Sujin. Nina: This is not a book one can read quickly. It is good to start looking up items that you are interested in. Under Samatha: a careful explanation of what meditation is, the difference between samatha and vipassana. Under Realities and Concepts: what are ultimate realities, paramattha dhammas, which are actually the objects of vipassana. The last chapter: about vipassana in daily life. Suzakico: Why is it so necessary to analyze the mind and body phenomena in the > way suggested, i.e., dividing by various terms to distinguish them > in detail? (This book points out 16 levels of vipassana nana > (knowledge). 89-129 types of consciousness (citta), 52 types of > mental factor, 28 types of physical phenomenon, etc.) At least for > me, this is too cumbersome... N: Good question. We need you here on dsg. My experience: more than thirty years ago I lived in Thailand and went straight to A. Sujin, just asking questions. I listened in the morning to her radio programs in Thai, and in this way slowly I became used to the different types of citta, consciousness. It depends on the individual's interest how much details he is interested in, there is no rule. Do not cumber yourself. Some basic knowledge about different cittas , rupas, processes of cittas are beneficial, a good foundation for vipassana. But it is best to start in a very simple way: starting from this moment. Is there no seeing? We have a feeling of self who sees, but is this the truth? After seeing you become attached to what you see, or you have aversion. Are these moments not real? These are properties (cetasikas) arising with types of citta different from seeing. Seeing sees visible object, just what aoppears through the eyes. Visible object is not a person or thing, those are concepts we think of. This thinking is conditioned by association of different experiences that are remembered. Visible object is rupa. So long as we do not distinguish nama from rupa, we cling to a whole, we cling to self. Gradually you learn that cittas are conditioned, conditioned by past experiences, by accumulated inclinations. You experience praise and blame, gain and loss, and these do not stay, they are beyond control. They are conditioned realities. You may come to know that the understanding of different moments is helpful for you personally, in daily life. The aim of learning more about different realities is detachment. First detachment from the idea of self, and later on from all objects (for the arahat). In the Survey it is helpful to read about citta, so that we come to know: if there were no citta, nothing would appear: no seeing, no thinking. All our experiences we find so important are merely different cittas which arise and then fall away very rapidly. Nobody can hold them or slow them down. Nobody can direct different cittas arising in processes in a particular order. A. Sujin helped me to understand simple realities like seeing, hearing, all experiences of objects through six doors. And this is in complete conformity with the suttas. Read for example Kindred Sayings IV. In the course of all these years my interest in details was growing, but this should come naturally, no forcing to absorb all at once. And then: we should know that intellectual understanding, though a foundation, is not direct understanding, vipassana, which is actually the development of right understanding of the eightfold Path. Understanding of the reality, nama or rupa, appearing at the present moment (ima, I liked that kanji). No spectacular progress, andt it is subtle clinging if we wish for that. A. Sujin is most helpful to make us see subtle clinging. I needed many journeys with her and friends to discover that. In the course of years we went in a group of friends to India, and I visited Thailand many times. We have aeons of clinging and ignorance behind us, how can this all be over in a moment? I am just grateful that I was enabled to discover for myself: this is the right Path, and it works. At least I can begin to develop it. But the more we learn, the more we realize: we are at the level of Kindergarten. In the beginning I was at times impatient, but now I am grateful for every little bit of understanding I gain. Also the discussions here in this list help me. S: and makes me feels like losing the > holistic picture although this ?gmay?h be beneficial for > specifically focused training. (My sense however is that even the > training/meditation may be too complex.) N: It is not a matter of focussed training, that would make you cling to a self who can focus. The aim is detachment. Let realities come as they are, and when there are conditions for understanding it will arise without you interfering. The conditions are: association with a good friend in Dhamma, listening and study, wise attention, practice in accordance with what you learnt. S: Furthermore at least from > reading the sutta, it appears that the Buddha never went into such a > detail. N: Also the Abhidhamma is part of the Tipitaka, rehearsed at the first Council. See Useful Posts in the archives under Abhidhamma. In the suttas there are many details about cittas, but in Abh there are more details. If you doubt about Abhidhamma: it is mentioned also in the Vinaya. I hope Christine can help you with useful links, also to "Manual of Abhidhamma" which is good for a start. My book (on line) Buddhism in Daily Life is being translated into Japanese, Rob. K. may tell you more, he lives in Japan. I lived there many years ago, but forgot the language. I found Kanji very suitable for expressing realities, but I forgot it. S: By the way, I have some vipassana and Zen background as shown in > www.suzaki.has.it . Personally, Zen appeals to me because of its > directness. N: When in Japan, I found that there are so many Zen sects. Suzuki became popular in the West (I read some of his books) and now people think that all Zen is only that type. We have to distinguish different types. Vipassana appeals to me because I find it very direct, about simple realities in daily life. It helps me to understand my daily life. But no promise of a quick result, and that is very realistic. Nina. 23161 From: nina van gorkom Date: Fri Jun 27, 2003 10:24am Subject: Re: [dsg] Vism XIV, 3, homework Dear Jim, interesting homework. Next week I have more time to look at it, Nina op 26-06-2003 21:04 schreef Jim Anderson op jimanderson_on@y...: > "By way of the path seen by pa~n~naa." but it > comes with a detailed explanation which I have only just seen and it > is not easy to understand right off the bat. So what I'll do is to > first present the passage in Pali below in case anyone would like to > see it or figure it out (Nina?) while I do. 23162 From: nina van gorkom Date: Fri Jun 27, 2003 10:24am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: meditation etc. , brahmaviharas. Dear Kom, I delayed reacting, but I appreciated your post very much. op 20-06-2003 20:36 schreef Kom Tukovinit op kom@a...: Kom quoted: N:I have been reflecting about something Kom wrote: >> Visakha who was >> a sotapanna enjoyed her grandchildren and jewelry. We cannot expect to be >> without lobha now. I often take this as an excuse and forget that Visakha >> could enjoy with wisdom, being mindful of lobha too. > Kom: The other favorite excuse that I have is hey, these are all by conditions! > But then, we can learn for ourselves if these are reflections are with > attachment or with wisdom. Can we prevent these reflections? It already > happened! N: Usually with attachment, good to be reminded that also such reflection are by conditions, beyond control. I should tell Kio that by vipassana we learn to be more sincere with regard to ourselves. K: I think reflection on the truths are very helpful to me, especially when > panna that really sees the impermanence of all things seem so far away, and > sati that sees dhamma as dhamma rises so rarely. As long as I understand > that thinking is not the path (but is supportive of the path), and hence, > there should be an urgency to see truth as it is, then thinking too can be > the object of sati. Samatha should be developed too, although we should > truly know that it is not the path. > > Reflections on the dhamma brings peace in daily life for me too. (snip) Reflections on the dhamma come > because of one's accumulations which are conditioned by hearing, studying, > and association with the wise. N: I also like your post on the brahmaviharas. N: It is good to be reminded to think with metta, also when we do not meet people often. Yes, it is more with metta than with compassion, true compassion realizes the real dukkha, difficult for us, ordinary beings. But when we actually meet others, it is more difficult to have true metta. Just thinking with metta seems easier, we are less disturbed. But oh, when someone else says something unpleasant! Thanking you for your posts, anumodana, Nina. 23163 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Fri Jun 27, 2003 11:45am Subject: RE: [dsg] Inquiry to Nina... Dear Nina & Kiosan, > -----Original Message----- > From: nina van gorkom [mailto:nilo@e...] > Sent: Friday, June 27, 2003 10:25 AM > N: It is not a matter of focussed training, that would make you cling to a > self who can focus. The aim is detachment. Let realities come as they are, > and when there are conditions for understanding it will arise without you > interfering. The conditions are: association with a good friend in Dhamma, > listening and study, wise attention, practice in accordance with what you > learnt. It is always so helpful to hear about this. Whenever I feel like, hey I should do something more, then I remember about the suttas that the Buddha taught, that his teachings lead to knowledge, comprehension, detachment, enlightenment, and nibbana: whatever else that do not lead to those are not his teachings. Does our "practice" lead to knowledge, comprehension, and detachment? If it leads to the attachment of self, of one who could do, of particular practices / postures and deeds, those too are not the teaching of the Buddha. We should be honest to ourselves (at least!) and know it truly: why do I do what I do? Is it attachment, or is it wisdom? kom 23164 From: Date: Fri Jun 27, 2003 4:16pm Subject: RE: [dsg] Metta as Perfection, Brahma Viharas Hi Kom, Larry: I think metta as perfection includes karuna and mudita. Just a thought. Kom: Why do you say so? Larry: Because karuna and mudita seem so indisputably good. Maybe we could say kindness is the expression of compassion and joy. When we see the suffering of people and see their inner beauty we can't help but be kind to them. Larry 23165 From: Jim Anderson Date: Fri Jun 27, 2003 5:03pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Vism XIV, 3 Dear Larry, > Hi Jim, > > Thanks for the info on commentaries and subcommentaries. I was wondering > if you could shed some light on the word that is translated as > "penetrate" in this paragraph. This might go toward answering Jon's > question on how consciousness can penetrate an object's characteristics. > Seemingly sanna can recognize impermanence, consciousness can cognize > impermanence, and panna can understand impermanence, but only > consciousness and panna can penetrate impermanence and only panna can > develop this penetration to a path moment. So what's with penetration? The Pali word for penetration is pa.tivedha and the verb is pa.tivijjhati. These words are familiar to me as they crop up occasionally but I really don't know much. I think pa.tivedha (also adhigama) is the last part of the three that constitute the saasana, the first two being pariyatti (theoretical study) and pa.tipatti (practice). I would have thought that only pa~n~na could bring about penetration. So it'll be interesting to find out how vi~n~naa.na does it and what are its levels of attainments. Pa.tivedha is a major word and a whole other topic to explore and it seems likely that it is treated in some detail in the Pali texts. > I'm getting a much better idea of what "endeavour" is all about. When > you are satisfied, would you give us an expanded translation with notes? I will probably never be satisfied. Today, I spent some time going into the etymology of "ussakkitvaa" and it is one of those difficult words to untangle. The simplest derivation is with the prefix: ud (up, out) + the root: sakk (go, move) hence: to go or move up or out. Some dictionaries suggest that it is a by-form of ussukkati, a denominative verb from the adj. ussuka but it is very hard to determine its root with any certainty. One possibility might be the root "su" meaning to go. The real breakthrough came when I investigated ussakkitva's cousin, aayuuhitvaa, and found that the Saddaniti explained its verb, aayuuhati, with vaayamati which directly links to the vaayaamo in the right effort of the noble eightfold path. So this supports the meaning of "endeavouring". Now aayuuhati has the meaning of thrust/push forward; exert oneself (acc. to Cone) and thrust/push forward seem to agree in some way with the move up/out (in the basic sense) of ussakkati. I noted that P.M. Tin also uses endeavour in his Vism translation. One problem I have with endeavour is its connotation with beings and I feel that something less personal would be better such as "exerting itself" or "progressing". I like to think of it in terms of plant growth (pushing up/out) with its attainments: the leaves, the flowers, and the fruits. A note: I will be focussing on sitting practice over the next 2 days as it's the 14th and 15th of the half-month. When I first joined this list about 3 years ago, I was doing at least 4 hrs of sitting a day but since then it has drastically fallen off to about an hour a day and I feel that I should start putting back more effort into the practice and have set aside certain days of the month solely for this purpose without having to attend to email or study. Also, until about two weeks ago I had been silent on this list for many months and only came in to answer Nina's question about the dating of texts. I intended that this would just be a short visit, no longer than 2 weeks. Now, I would like to get back to my own list to resume the study of Kaccayana's Pali grammar. I will continue to look in here to see what's going on and make the odd contribution. Best wishes, Jim 23166 From: gazita2002 Date: Fri Jun 27, 2003 7:28pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Inquiry to Nina... --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Kom Tukovinit" wrote: > Dear Nina & Kiosan, > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: nina van gorkom [mailto:nilo@e...] > > Sent: Friday, June 27, 2003 10:25 AM > > > N: It is not a matter of focussed training, that would make you cling to a > > self who can focus. The aim is detachment. Let realities come as they are, > > and when there are conditions for understanding it will arise without you > > interfering. The conditions are: association with a good friend in Dhamma, > > listening and study, wise attention, practice in accordance with what you > > learnt. > > It is always so helpful to hear about this. Whenever I feel like, hey I > should do something more, then I remember about the suttas that the Buddha > taught, that his teachings lead to knowledge, comprehension, detachment, > enlightenment, and nibbana: whatever else that do not lead to those are not > his teachings. Does our "practice" lead to knowledge, comprehension, and > detachment? If it leads to the attachment of self, of one who could do, of > particular practices / postures and deeds, those too are not the teaching of > the Buddha. We should be honest to ourselves (at least!) and know it truly: > why do I do what I do? Is it attachment, or is it wisdom? > > kom Dear Kom, Nina and others, Good for me to read this, esp at this time. A few weeks ago, I did a 'vipassana meditation' course which went over 3 days. 3 days where we never spoke and did things 'mindfully'. Mostly, I did this course out of curiosity, as I've never really been a meditator. I also have a close friend who was a monk for a number of years and continues to meditate daily, so I thought I'd give this a go. I will say that I felt quite calm and peaceful after these few days, as it also gave me plenty of time to reflect on the dhamma that I have learnt over the years, and all those around me were doing things quietly and calmly [it seemed ]. Since then I have 'sat' and quietly watched the breath, also called pranayama in yoga practice. And I must say, I have felt somewhat more peaceful than I normally do. I generally do this as part of my yoga practice, and my question is [based on concern about wrong practice], just how easy is it to get caught up in 'wrong practice'? A rather weird question, I think, but as Kom has said above about wanting to do something, that same thought crossed my mind also, 'there must be something I can do'. Sometimes I've thought 'well if I sit and meditate then at least I'm not out with friends talking about whatever, but rarely the path to enlightenment'. Another question: why can't Nibbana be object of clinging? May we all have patience, courage and good cheer Azita. 23167 From: christine_forsyth Date: Fri Jun 27, 2003 7:34pm Subject: Dualilty/Non-Duality Dear Group, I'm reading around the topic of Duality/Non-Duality as it is considered within the Theravada tradition. I have these references: All of Us Beset by birth, decay, and death. Twelve Dhamma Talks on Practice given on Parappuduwa Nuns Island by Sister Ayya Khema. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/modern/khema/allofus.html#ch6 Dhamma and Non-duality by Bhikkhu Bodhi http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/bps/news/essay27.html Sutta Nipata III.12 Dvayatanupassana Sutta 'The Contemplation of Dualities' http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/khuddaka/suttanipata/snp3-12.html Does anyone have any additional Theravada references? metta and peace, Christine ---The trouble is that you think you have time 23168 From: Date: Fri Jun 27, 2003 7:37pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Vism XIV, 3 Hi Jim, Thanks for your contributions. I couldn't find anything on how consciousness penetrates the three characteristics. My guess is that "penetrate" means directly experiences. Consciousness can directly experience impermanence, suffering and not self, but without understanding. Understanding can experience the three with understanding. Maybe we could say recognition (sanna) is a label maker and when it recognizes it recognizes this label (concept); so there is no direct experience. Nina, do you have any ideas on how consciousness penetrates the three characteristics? Also, what does penetration penetrate? Does the inability of sanna to penetrate cast doubt on the efficacy of mindfulness (sati)? Larry 23169 From: Date: Fri Jun 27, 2003 7:57pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Dualilty/Non-Duality Hi Christine, Here's one I just read. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/samyutta/sn12-015.html SN XII, 15: "By & large, Kaccayana, this world is supported by (takes as its object) a polarity, that of existence & non-existence..." B. Bodhi translates it as "This world, Kaccana, for the most part depends upon a duality..." For a comparative study of nonduality in various Buddhist and Advaita Vedanta systems see "Nonduality, A Study In Comparative Philosophy" by David Loy, very good. Larry 23170 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Sat Jun 28, 2003 1:18am Subject: RE: [dsg] Metta as Perfection, Brahma Viharas Dear Larry, > -----Original Message----- > From: LBIDD@w... [mailto:LBIDD@w...] > Sent: Friday, June 27, 2003 4:16 PM > To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com > Subject: RE: [dsg] Metta as Perfection, Brahma Viharas > > > Hi Kom, > > Larry: I think metta as perfection includes > karuna and mudita. Just a > thought. > > Kom: Why do you say so? > > Larry: Because karuna and mudita seem so > indisputably good. Maybe we > could say kindness is the expression of > compassion and joy. When we see > the suffering of people and see their inner > beauty we can't help but be > kind to them. > I agree with you that the brahma viharas are good states (kusala), although not all kusala states are said to be perfections. We need to keep in mind too that the states have different objects. Metta is loving-kindness, having a being or beings as object. Karuna is compassion, having a suffering being as an object. Mudita is sympathetic-joy, having a being receiving a good result as an object. Upekkha is equanimity, having a being or beings as object. Metta doesn't rise with karuna or mudita or upekkha: the states do not mix for they have different objects, although they have many similar states co-arising with them. We can be kind without seeing the suffering of a person. When a friend comes to visit, we can be a good host because of the kindness (or attachment!) we have toward the guest. If the friend is sad, we may have the compassion to listen to them. If they are happy, we may be joyful about their good results. If they have suffering that we cannot help, we may be equanimous by not falling into akusala states. Yet, all these states don't happen the same time, and all have different aspects of a person as their objects. Metta and Upekkha are perfections because the objects of such states are prevalent in our daily lives, where as the objects of karuna (unless you are a bodhisatta) and equanimity are less frequent. Do you see a differences, or do you not see the differences? kom 23171 From: christine_forsyth Date: Sat Jun 28, 2003 1:44am Subject: Re: [dsg] Dualilty/Non-Duality Hi Larry, Many thanks for this link! I looked it up in Bhikkhu Bodhi's translation that you mentioned. The five paragraphs of the on-line translation have three and a half pages of notes in B.B's translation particularly regarding 'existence' and 'non-existence'. metta and peace, Christine ---The trouble is that you think you have time --- --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, LBIDD@w... wrote: > Hi Christine, > > Here's one I just read. > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/samyutta/sn12-015.html > > SN XII, 15: "By & large, Kaccayana, this world is supported by (takes as > its object) a polarity, that of existence & non-existence..." > > B. Bodhi translates it as "This world, Kaccana, for the most part > depends upon a duality..." > > For a comparative study of nonduality in various Buddhist and Advaita > Vedanta systems see "Nonduality, A Study In Comparative Philosophy" by > David Loy, very good. > > Larry 23172 From: Dan D. Date: Sat Jun 28, 2003 3:41am Subject: Concepts and Characteristics [Howard] Dear Howard, Very interesting, Soto-like comments! (And to think I associated you more with Rinzai... After all, didn't you once mention that Soto was especially susceptible to "substantialist heresies"? I really do need to read and reflect more carefully in the future!) Howard: "Just a comment on my personal belief. It seems to me that our physical sense discernments (acts of vi~n~nana via the 5 physical sense doors) are already without error, and that ignorance is expressed only through the mind door. To me, vijja is avijja minus the defilements. To me, sa~n~na cleared of the defilements is pa~n~na. To me, there is no problem with the conceptual faculty per se, but only with the conceptual faculty infected by defilement." Dan responds: In my view, avijja minus the defilements is kusala, which may be either with pañña or without pañña. Going a step further, "pañña" is a general term that can refer to any of a wide variety of types wisdom -- some of which are liberating and some of which are not. Sure, there is nothing *wrong* with the conceptual faculty per se, but vipassana arises only when the conceptual faculty is transcended for a few, brief moments. These flashes of insight are very brief, jolting, and strikingly different from moments governed by the conceptual faculty. The conceptual faculty is very active prior to and immediately after vipassana, but the vipassana-ñana themselves are simply not accessible by the conceptual faculty, rationation, inference, etc. Still, conceptualization is crucial, because if the concepts are not right, the insights are bound to be corrupted immediately and wisdom will not develop past the most tender, embryonic stage. The anusaya will remain quite safe, as will samsara, which would be in no danger of losing that rational soul. Abhidhamma is that which is understood through vipassana. Howard: "I do not think that that the only things that are "real" occur at single mind moments. Specifically, many relations that are quite "real" transcend individual mind moments. To me, seeing directly, with filters of ignorance removed, is the essence of wisdom, and not just seeing only what occurs withina single mind moment. So here, I guess, is where I find problems with Abhidhamma as I understand it." Dan responds: "Real" is a bit of a bugaboo. Unless you define "real" in a way that is not repugnant to common parlance, it is tough to argue that the moon or conceptual relations aren't real. However, knowing a lot about the moon or developing even the most astouding conceptual facility and using it to construct the most insightful concepts imaginable is just not liberating. Concepts, thinking, inference, clever word games -- these are not liberating. They simply aren't. Dan 23173 From: monomuni Date: Sat Jun 28, 2003 2:36am Subject: What is Clinging ? Friends: What is Clinging (Upadana) ? _______________________________________________________ '"Clinging, Clinging !" is the saying, friend Sariputta, please tell me, What is Clinging ?' 'There are these 4 kinds of clinging, friend: Clinging to Pleasure by Sensing, Clinging to Views and Opinion, * Clinging to Rule, Ritual and cultural Habits, # Clinging to the concept of "Self" claiming 'I Am'. % These, friend, are the 4 Clingings.' 'But, friend, is there any way to break, & to escape these four clingings ?' 'There is, friend, indeed such a Noble 8-fold Way ...' ________________________________________________________ Comments: * Clinging to Views and Opinion: Note that everytime one say: 'I have this View ...' 'I am of this Opinion ...' 'I Judge it to be like this ...' 'I Think it is like this and not like that ...' 'I am of the firm Persuasion, that this only ...' 'My Impression is that ...' 'I have this Idea that it is like this and that' etc. It is rooted in Non-Knowledge; Uncertainty; It is caused by not seeing it directly & not having seen it, Having no direct personal experience with it, Not having 'Touched' it, remaining Unassured, Unascertained, still having Doubt about, slightly Confused about ... Which is quite Contrary to: If you have direct knowledge about something, you say right away: I know it to be exactly like that! and not in any regard otherwise! ex: Any dog-owner if asked this question: Do you now what a dog is like, how it looks ? He say without any doubt nor hesitation: Yes I do Know the dog ... And why is that ? It is because he have seen, heard, touched, smelled, etc. phenomena 'Dog' many times in all variations. He have by that got "direct experience" of phenomena 'Dog' ... All other than such 'direct expericence' is: Mental Construction, Projecting an plausible nice 'Idea' into and over a reality, which always is somewhat untrue, and not really as it really is. As the Buddha said: However you imagine & construe it, it is ALWAYS different & otherwise! ________________________________________________________ # Clinging to Rules, Rituals and Habits: (misapprehension of duty) We accumulate numerous 'Habitual unskillfull Tendencies', which arise because we do a certain thing many times. Then - when unaware - we increase the chance to repeat it. The mind do it by itself 'on autopilot'. Even though it now -in this present context- is quite foolish. "Inappropiate Attention" it is called: ex: Unaware we drive our car to the daily work-location, automaticly, even when our planned destination was something else. ex: The monk have learned to sweep as a novice. So he sweeps every day, three times a day, telling himself: 'This is like meditation' not mindfull of the fact that this excessive sweeping, is what really is keeping him from sitting meditation, which he do not fancy, so he uses sweeping as an 'escape act'. ex: The E-Buddhist who habitually sits at computer in morning, in midday, in evening, reading 'empty irrelevant' posts, so he also do not sit to meditate, to train, and therefore never gets direct experience about what he is reading about and gets by that merely 'intellectual' understanding of Dhamma which only is like a 'shadow' in comparison. ex: A man stands and wait for the red traffic light to become green before he crosses the street. Then - unaware - he gets driven down by a runaway car, from behind, right there in the pedestrian area. He thought himself habitually safe, did not pay 'appropiate attention' and did not dare make the here neccessary exception of crossing the street despite of the red light, which would have saved him. A somewhat comic tragedy caused by clinging to 'the rule: red light = always wait'. No, not Always so ! It Depends on everchanging context! ________________________________________________________ % Clinging to idea of 'Self', the theory of a 'Person=Me=I' There is no fixed unchanging 'self'!!! Thats an obervable fact! 'I am my Ego', is an mere assumption not an observation. We are not the same from moment to moment! Neither physically nor mentally are we 'the same', when we are 7 years old compared to when 87 years old. All is changed, yet still we bear the same name ... Therefore we think 'I am the same person, just older' Yet 'Name' is an empty designation of Box #X saying nothing of what is inside the box which is changing. That is: there is no stable definable entity at all, with fixed borders, that we can designate 'me' or 'I'. We are a dynamic proces like a river: Bathing in Ganges river in the morning we touch SOME water. Bathing again in same river in evening, called by the same name, yet we touch some OTHER water! The river can only be defined as this 'flowing water' which is never the same! When the river runs out in the sea it looses its name 'Ganges'. Then the river water is mixed undiscernable with all other water & is just called sea ... Even Exactly so with awakening: When the river of 'Ego assumption' dries out there is no 'you' nor 'me', internal or external, here or there. No reference idea! 'One is neither the same nor another' 'Na ca so, na ca anno' king Milindas Questions. Beyond Blissful: So have I heard: When the Buddha, after 7 days of non-stop sitting meditation in the bliss of Awakening, in a mighty rainstorm while protected by Mucalinda the mighty snake, then, he, the Blessed One, on recognizing the value of that event, exclaimed: Blissful is solitude for one who is content, wise & who see the Dhamma. Blissful is harmlessness towards all beings without exception. Blissful is freedom from any sensual urge whatsoever. Yet, the supreme bliss, is the elimination of the abysmal conceit ""I am"" !!!’ (asmi mana) ... Udana – Inspiration: II – 1 All phenomena are Selfless Sabbe Dhamma Anatta So nothing is lost by giving up 'Self' Since the 'Me' was never there anyway! _____________________________________________________________________ The cessation of clinging causes (re)becoming to cease. The cessation of becoming causes (re)birth to cease. The cessation of birth causes ageing, sickness & death to cease. The cessation of ageing, sickness & death is the end of Misery!! Friendship is truly GREATEST The entire Motivation behind all of the Noble Life. Yeah! Samanera Samahita Cypress Hut, Gangamulla Bambarella, Tawalantenna 20838. Central Province. SRI LANKA. Email: monomuni@m... WWW: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Buddha-Direct : - ] -- A saying of the Buddha from http://metta.lk/ The others know not that in this quarrel we perish; those of them who realise it, have their quarrels calmed thereby. Random Dhammapada Verse 6 23174 From: Samahita Date: Sat Jun 28, 2003 4:29am Subject: Nama-Rupa! Dear James: Nama-Rupa Mind & Matter Naming & Object Consciousness & Form Is both in Abhidhamma & Quantum Mechanics an undivisable continuum like the two ends of the same stick! To speak of any form without inherently including a mind to percieve this form is groundless. Matter without mind cannot be! Image without camera cannot be! Rupa without nama cannot be! One is material & formful & do not know! The other is immaterial & formless & do Know! Both are dependent on the other as they coarise! So separation in the human context cannot be! These Siamese Twins in brevity: Name enjoys Form smiles Name knows Form goes Neither person nor being shows … : - ] 23175 From: Date: Sat Jun 28, 2003 7:49am Subject: Re: [dsg] Dualilty/Non-Duality Hi Christine, I read B. Bodhi's essay on nonduality and one major disagreement I have with it is that Mahayanists and Vedantans understand nonduality as inclusiveness, not unity. This can be summed up with the idea that "the all" is anatta. This idea is applicable to both systems. In Theravada I think we could say nonduality means the middle way between the extremes of eternalism and nihilism. These are not just obscure philosophical beliefs but basic assumptions we live with every day. Nagarjuna is also an exponent of this middle way view. That is the reason why Warder questions whether he is a mahayanist. Both ways of understanding nonduality are focused on anatta but M & V are in the spirit of inclusiveness while T is less effusive and more analytical. Another major difference is that in most Theravada suttas anatta is characterized as an undesirable characteristic while in Mahayana anatta is almost always a saving grace. Most Theravadans ignore this. Larry 23176 From: Date: Sat Jun 28, 2003 8:37am Subject: Re: [dsg] Concepts and Characteristics [Howard] Hi, Dan - I'm only replying to a few points of yours - so I'm putting my remarks first, with your post to follow. One of your points is that avijja with the defilements removed is kusala, but not always wisdom. Maybe so. I just don't know. But to me, when the cloud cover of defilements is removed, nothing more is needed for the sun of wisdom to shine. Another point you make is that the conceptual faculty is quite different from insight. I do agree with that. I was misleading and off-base to put so much emphasis on the conceptual faculty, per se. I should have spoken more generally, I think, of "cognition". I see sa~n~na, conceptuality, and pa~n~na, as all related, but with pa~n~na as a transformed, or - better - sublimated version of these others. Sa~n~na and conceptualizing (vikalpa?) as they are in all but the arahant are faulty functions, defiled by the three poisons. To me, when, even momentarily, the defilements are made ineffective, the doors of perception/cognition are cleaned and operate as wisdom. Then, seeing is direct. But direct seeing doesn't require seeing only "in the moment". There are realities that go beyond point-moments. Consider even something as simple as the relation of "preceding in time", a relation that holds between mindstates, for example. This is an actual relation. But it is empty and ungraspable. It never holds at any time! Event A occurred before event B. At the time that A occurred, there was no event B for it to preceed, and thus the relation did not hold. At the time event B occurs, event A is nonexistent, already gone, and thus the relation does not hold. A relation that holds between things one of which is nonexistent cannot be a relation that holds. Yet it is true that event A preceded event B. Matters are not simple. Things cannot be isolated from each other, separated off; and, if one really looks hard, it becomes clear, I believe, that nothing is graspable. Anatta is extraordinarily deep. With metta, Howard In a message dated 6/28/2003 5:41:44 AM Eastern Standard Time, dhd5@c... writes: > > Dear Howard, > Very interesting, Soto-like comments! (And to think I associated you > more with Rinzai... After all, didn't you once mention that Soto was > especially susceptible to "substantialist heresies"? I really do need > to read and reflect more carefully in the future!) > > Howard: "Just a comment on my personal belief. It seems to me that > our physical sense discernments (acts of vi~n~nana via the 5 physical > sense doors) are already without error, and that ignorance is > expressed only through the mind door. To me, vijja is avijja minus > the defilements. To me, sa~n~na cleared of the defilements is > pa~n~na. To me, there is no problem with the conceptual faculty per > se, but only with the conceptual faculty infected by defilement." > > Dan responds: In my view, avijja minus the defilements is kusala, > which may be either with pañña or without pañña. Going a step > further, "pañña" is a general term that can refer to any of a wide > variety of types wisdom -- some of which are liberating and some of > which are not. Sure, there is nothing *wrong* with the conceptual > faculty per se, but vipassana arises only when the conceptual faculty > is transcended for a few, brief moments. These flashes of insight are > very brief, jolting, and strikingly different from moments governed > by the conceptual faculty. The conceptual faculty is very active > prior to and immediately after vipassana, but the vipassana-ñana > themselves are simply not accessible by the conceptual faculty, > rationation, inference, etc. Still, conceptualization is crucial, > because if the concepts are not right, the insights are bound to be > corrupted immediately and wisdom will not develop past the most > tender, embryonic stage. The anusaya will remain quite safe, as will > samsara, which would be in no danger of losing that rational soul. > > Abhidhamma is that which is understood through vipassana. > > Howard: "I do not think that that the only things that are "real" > occur at single mind moments. Specifically, many relations that are > quite "real" transcend individual mind moments. To me, seeing > directly, with filters of ignorance removed, is the essence of > wisdom, and not just seeing only what occurs withina single mind > moment. So here, I guess, is where I find problems with Abhidhamma as > I understand it." > > Dan responds: "Real" is a bit of a bugaboo. Unless you define "real" > in a way that is not repugnant to common parlance, it is tough to > argue that the moon or conceptual relations aren't real. However, > knowing a lot about the moon or developing even the most astouding > conceptual facility and using it to construct the most insightful > concepts imaginable is just not liberating. Concepts, thinking, > inference, clever word games -- these are not liberating. > They simply > aren't. > > Dan 23177 From: a_doc99 Date: Sat Jun 28, 2003 9:17am Subject: Retreat accommodation Dear everyone: I'm looking for retreat accommodation for 1 whole month in the US. I want to spend 1 month to practice meditation by myself in quite, natural environment. I plan to do it around in August or earlier. If anyone knows a place I'm looking for, please let me know. Thank you. Best regards, A 23178 From: nina van gorkom Date: Sat Jun 28, 2003 10:18am Subject: Re: Concepts and Characteristics Re: [dsg] Vism XIV, 3 Dear Dan, Thank you very much for all the texts quotes and remarks. We see that knowing and understanding the three characteristics is a very gradual process. As I understand from the texts, realizing the arising and falling away of dhammas begins at the third stage of tender insight, but is still coarse. I do not think it is just inferential, it is insight, not thinking. The first three stages of tender insight are called cinta maya pa~n~naa: cinta meaning thinking. As A. Sujin explained, this does not mean that insight is thinking, but, when a stage of insight is reached there are still moments in between of thinking of realities, not yet enough detachment from thinking. Cittas are so fast, processes (vara) succeed one another so fast. And also thinking can be object of insight at such moments. If we take the first stage of tender insight: this is direct understanding of nama as nama, of rupa as rupa, by vipassana panna, even though there is thinking in between the moments of insight. At those moments it is also known what the mind-door is, moments of insight arise in a mind-door process. Everybody could say: nama is different from rupa, but that is not insight. Insight directly realizes the difference, and this is very difficult. At the first stage of maha-vipassana the arising and falling away of dhammas is seen more clearly, understood directly. This is followed by bhanga ~naa.na, when panna turns more to the dissolution of dhammas. At each successive stage there is more detachment from nama and rupa, and as there is more detachment panna knows more clearly. This is what I understood from texts and from A. Sujin's explanations. With appreciation, Nina. op 27-06-2003 13:29 schreef Dan D. op dhd5@c...: > ed with knowledge of rise and fall is anicca > possible to see directly. The Pm. quote above implies (and I would > agree) that the understanding would be inferential until the only > characteristic apprehended is dissolution, i.e. direct understanding > of anicca does not arise prior to bhavanga-ñana. 23179 From: nina van gorkom Date: Sat Jun 28, 2003 10:18am Subject: Re: [dsg] Vism XIV, 3, firm sanna. Dear Mike, op 27-06-2003 14:56 schreef m. nease op mlnease@z...: > > Wonderful, thanks--I had forgotten (if I knew) that 'sanna is the proximate > cause of satipatthana'--is this from Atthasaalinii(sp?), or...? N: I cannot look up the text now, but I heard it years ago (sanna) from A. Somporn. I think we find this in many suttas, such as Gr. S IV, Book of Sevens, Ch I, §6, about the treasure of listening: "...Consider the ariyan disciple who listens much; there is a retaining, a storing of things heard; and those things, lovely in the beginning, lovely in middle, lovely in th end, which set forth in meaning and in detail the divine life, wholly fulfilled, perfectly pure; all those are heard much by him, retained in mind, familiarized by talk, pored over, well penetrated by right view. This is called the treasure of listening..." When there was at first only the oral tradition texts had to be repeated again and again. But for us now: it is the same. We need to hear or read the same things, they have to be hammered in. When will it really sink in? Nina. 23180 From: Dan D. Date: Sat Jun 28, 2003 1:16pm Subject: Re: What is Clinging ? Dear Bhante Samahita, You write: > Note that everytime one say: > > 'I have this View ...' > 'I am of this Opinion ...' > 'I Judge it to be like this ...' > 'I Think it is like this and not like that ...' > 'I am of the firm Persuasion, that this only ...' > 'My Impression is that ...' > 'I have this Idea that it is like this and that' etc. > > It is rooted in Non-Knowledge; Uncertainty; > It is caused by not seeing it directly & not having seen it, > Having no direct personal experience with it, > Not having 'Touched' it, remaining Unassured, > Unascertained, still having Doubt about, > slightly Confused about ... Are you sure? > Which is quite Contrary to: > > If you have direct knowledge about something, > you say right away: > > I know it to be exactly like that! > and not in any regard otherwise! Always? Dan 23181 From: Date: Sat Jun 28, 2003 2:22pm Subject: RE: [dsg] Metta as Perfection, Brahma Viharas Hi Kom, Yes, I see the differences between the 4 brahma viharas. Maybe we should change the books and make them perfections. Larry 23182 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Sat Jun 28, 2003 2:29pm Subject: RE: [dsg] Metta as Perfection, Brahma Viharas Hi Larry, > -----Original Message----- > From: LBIDD@w... [mailto:LBIDD@w...] > Sent: Saturday, June 28, 2003 2:22 PM > To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com > Subject: RE: [dsg] Metta as Perfection, Brahma Viharas > > > Hi Kom, > > Yes, I see the differences between the 4 brahma viharas. Maybe we should > change the books and make them perfections. > I am not sure if you are saying this seriously, or saying this tounge-in-cheek. :-) kom 23183 From: gazita2002 Date: Sat Jun 28, 2003 4:45pm Subject: Re: Quantum Theory is Abhidhamma! --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Kom Tukovinit" wrote: > Dear James, > [snip] > The first stage of insight is the distinction of nama and rupa (nama-rupa- > paricheta-nana). The reasoning given is that without this stage of > insight, the person still holds dear all the khandas (nama & rupa) as > being truly theirs (thinking that they are not don't really count). The first > stage of insight gives the indisputable prove (to the person) that in our > daily experiences, there are nothing beyond the nama and rupa (nothing > beyond the dhamma). Anattaness becomes obvious for the very first > time. > [snip] > kom dear Kom, Thank you for the above. This, for me, is such valuable reading. So clear and precise. A. Sujin regularly speaks about this 1st stage of insight. I keep a book beside my computor [I don't have a printer], in which I enter anything that I think is beneficial, and this has definitely gone in. I understand you are 'standing in' for Sarah, while she is tramping around the Swiss alps. Good work, Kom, so important, I benefit as I'm sure others do also. Patience, courage and good cheer. Azita 23184 From: christine_forsyth Date: Sat Jun 28, 2003 7:31pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Inquiry to Nina... Hi Azita, I thought of you the other day when buying 'the best' cones at the Valley markets. I've put my son onto them as well. Thanks.:-) I don't see how sitting and watching the breath is any different to slowly, and with concentration, doing any other set practice - yoga, tai chi, jogging etc. If you view it as a wellness tool, and it has beneficial effects, why not try it for a while? You are not seeing it as a necessary step for a 'self' to achieve enlightenment, and you would not neglect contact with admirable friends, hearing and reflecting on the true Dhamma, and practice in accordance with the Dhamma. I think if sitting in any form is helpful to you - just do it, don't stress about it. :-) By the way, did we ever sort out the question tossed around at Cooran about 'Is Nibbana another term for annihilation'? I found RobK's post on bhavana to be extremely helpful. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/22897 metta and peace, Christine ---The trouble is that you think you have time --- --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "gazita2002" wrote: > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Kom Tukovinit" > wrote: > > Dear Nina & Kiosan, > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: nina van gorkom [mailto:nilo@e...] > > > Sent: Friday, June 27, 2003 10:25 AM > > > > > N: It is not a matter of focussed training, that would make you > cling to a > > > self who can focus. The aim is detachment. Let realities come as > they are, > > > and when there are conditions for understanding it will arise > without you > > > interfering. The conditions are: association with a good friend > in Dhamma, > > > listening and study, wise attention, practice in accordance with > what you > > > learnt. > > > > It is always so helpful to hear about this. Whenever I feel like, > hey I > > should do something more, then I remember about the suttas that the > Buddha > > taught, that his teachings lead to knowledge, comprehension, > detachment, > > enlightenment, and nibbana: whatever else that do not lead to those > are not > > his teachings. Does our "practice" lead to knowledge, > comprehension, and > > detachment? If it leads to the attachment of self, of one who > could do, of > > particular practices / postures and deeds, those too are not the > teaching of > > the Buddha. We should be honest to ourselves (at least!) and know > it truly: > > why do I do what I do? Is it attachment, or is it wisdom? > > > > kom > > Dear Kom, Nina and others, > Good for me to read this, esp at this time. > A few weeks ago, I did a 'vipassana meditation' course which > went over 3 days. 3 days where we never spoke and did > things 'mindfully'. Mostly, I did this course out of curiosity, as > I've never really been a meditator. > I also have a close friend who was a monk for a number of > years and continues to meditate daily, so I thought I'd give this a > go. I will say that I felt quite calm and peaceful after these few > days, as it also gave me plenty of time to reflect on the dhamma that > I have learnt over the years, and all those around me were doing > things quietly and calmly [it seemed ]. > Since then I have 'sat' and quietly watched the breath, also > called pranayama in yoga practice. And I must say, I have felt > somewhat more peaceful than I normally do. > I generally do this as part of my yoga practice, and my > question is [based on concern about wrong practice], just how easy is > it to get caught up in 'wrong practice'? A rather weird question, > I think, but as Kom has said above about wanting to do something, > that same thought crossed my mind also, 'there must be something I > can do'. Sometimes I've thought 'well if I sit and meditate then at > least I'm not out with friends talking about whatever, but rarely the > path to enlightenment'. > Another question: why can't Nibbana be object of clinging? > May we all have patience, courage and good cheer > Azita. 23185 From: nina van gorkom Date: Sat Jun 28, 2003 9:18pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Vism XIV, 3 Dear Larry, op 28-06-2003 04:37 schreef LBIDD@w... op LBIDD@w...: > Nina, do you have any ideas on how consciousness penetrates the three > characteristics? N: Remember the first sentence Jim translated from the subco: <"But how does vi~n~naa.na bring about the penetration of the characteristics?" and the short answer is: "By way of the path seen by pa~n~naa."> Panna accompanies citta, panna performs its function of pativedha, but citta experiences the same object as panna, it experiences the nama or rupa appearing at that moment as: impermanent, or dukkha, or anatta. Also sanna accompanies that citta and performs its own function of marking that object. L:Also, what does penetration penetrate? N: We speak here again of pativedha. As Jim just explained, there is pannatti, patipatti and pativedha. This is a good question. As we see from the subco, it can mean clear realization of the characteristics, but it can also mean: realization of nibbana. When there is the stage of patipatti, practice, insight is being developed, but when the level of pativedha is reached, there is realization of the truth. During the process enlightenment is attained, panna has first as object: one of the three characteristics, that is seeing the dhamma of that moment as impermanent, or dukkha, or anatta. Panna thoroughly understands, has become accomplished, directly penetrates the true nature of realities. Then in the same process lokuttara magga-citta arises accompanied by panna which is then lokuttara, and has nibbana as object. I will not try to pinpoint exactly when patipatti becomes pativedha. For sure during there is pativedha during the process enlightenment is attained. I shall make an attempt to translate the sentences of the subco Jim has given us, with the risk to make mistakes. Hopefully Jim will correct these later on, but I understand that he will return to Kaccayana's Pali grammar, I was hoping that he would, I am waiting to learn more about this grammar. Nina. 23186 From: kenhowardau Date: Sat Jun 28, 2003 10:39pm Subject: Concepts and Characteristics Re: [dsg] Vism XIV, 3 Hello Howard, After reading the information supplied by Steve and others, I thought my reply had become redundant and decided not to post it. But I see from your message to Dan, that you still feel the Abhidhamma explanation is flawed, and so I am posting this just in case it helps. You were saying: -------------------- > These are cetasikas, and they are characteristics of the mindstate in which they occur. > -------------------- Cittas, cetasikas and rupas have characteristics but I don't think it's relevant to regard any of those dhammas as being the characteristics of the moment in which they arise. I'm sure the Abhidhamma doesn't say they are. ------------------------ > Besides the cetasikas, there is the citta, itself (the discerning) and the arammana (nama or rupa that is discerned). This mindstate, or bundle consisting of citta, arammana, and cetasikas, being a compound, must be pa~n~natti, no? > ---------------------- When citta co-arises with cetasikas and rupas, there is no involvement of concepts at all. (Nor is there any additional dhamma created -- as if the whole were more than the sum of its parts.) It is only when we refer to the co-arising phenomena as a "bundle," "mindstate," "mind-moment' or 'living being," that there are concepts. ----------------- > It is not a single paramattha dhamma, is it? Here one seems to have a problem inmmediately! (But this is a different matter than my main point.) > ------------------ If, the Abhidhamma was, in fact, claiming that mind- moments are conditioned dhammas or that they are concepts with their own characteristics, then yes, there would be a problem. But, as it happens, all is well :-) --------------------- > What I was saying was that if, as Abhidhamma asserts, there is naught but nama and rupa, then, unless the tilakkhana (and all other characteristics) are namas or rupas, they must be nothing at at all - mere figments, concept-only! > ----------------- When it is said that dhammas have their own sabhava (essence), it means, 'they have their own characteristics.' I think it is correct to say that dhammas ARE their characteristics. Steve has given us a quote to the effect that individual characteristics have no sabhava of their own. But this is not a problem -- sabhava doesn't need a sabhava of its own. -------------------- > In particular, impermanence and relations, "things" which go beyond single mindstates, must be concept-only! > ----------------- Anicca, as opposed the *concept* of anicca, exists as a characteristic of any given conditioned dhamma: Outside of that, it has no existence. ------------- > Now, I find that an "unhappy" conclusion. My attempt at a hypothesized solution was to consider that there is a category more general than those of namas and rupas, namely that of "conditions", and that some conditions, such as impermanence and most relations, transcend individual mind-moments. > --------------- In conventional science, heat exists and so do the hot bodies it flows from and the cold bodies it flows to; but the laws of thermodynamics have no separate existence of their own. In the same way, dhammas condition other dhammas but they are irreducible; the conditions themselves have no separate entity. I think you should stick with the Abhidhamma a while longer, Howard; there is no need to go it alone. Kind regards, Ken --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, Dan and all - > > Just a comment on my personal belief. 23187 From: Date: Sat Jun 28, 2003 11:12pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Vism XIV, 3 Hi Nina, Thanks for your answer. Let me repeat it to see if I have it right. Consciousness penetrates the characteristics by being the vehicle thru which panna cetasika functions. They both experience impermanence, or dukkha, or anatta at the same time. Sanna doesn't exactly experience. It marks or recognizes. Ultimately, what is penetrated is the khandhas or grasping of the khandhas. Panna penetrates the khandhas or grasping and realizes nibbana. The khandhas continue for a while, but grasping ceases. Eventually the khandhas cease. I'm looking forward to your translation of the commentary. Have you decided on an alternative to "endeavour"? Larry ----------------------- Nina wrote: L: Nina, do you have any ideas on how consciousness penetrates the three characteristics? N: Remember the first sentence Jim translated from the subco: <"But how does vi~n~naa.na bring about the penetration of the characteristics?" and the short answer is: "By way of the path seen by pa~n~naa."> Panna accompanies citta, panna performs its function of pativedha, but citta experiences the same object as panna, it experiences the nama or rupa appearing at that moment as: impermanent, or dukkha, or anatta. Also sanna accompanies that citta and performs its own function of marking that object. L:Also, what does penetration penetrate? N: We speak here again of pativedha. As Jim just explained, there is pannatti, patipatti and pativedha. This is a good question. As we see from the subco, it can mean clear realization of the characteristics, but it can also mean: realization of nibbana. When there is the stage of patipatti, practice, insight is being developed, but when the level of pativedha is reached, there is realization of the truth. During the process enlightenment is attained, panna has first as object: one of the three characteristics, that is seeing the dhamma of that moment as impermanent, or dukkha, or anatta. Panna thoroughly understands, has become accomplished, directly penetrates the true nature of realities. Then in the same process lokuttara magga-citta arises accompanied by panna which is then lokuttara, and has nibbana as object. I will not try to pinpoint exactly when patipatti becomes pativedha. For sure during there is pativedha during the process enlightenment is attained. I shall make an attempt to translate the sentences of the subco Jim has given us, with the risk to make mistakes. Hopefully Jim will correct these later on, but I understand that he will return to Kaccayana's Pali grammar, I was hoping that he would, I am waiting to learn more about this grammar. 23188 From: christine_forsyth Date: Sat Jun 28, 2003 11:45pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Dualilty/Non-Duality Hello Larry and All, Here is another link (provided by Antony) - a talk on Non-Duality by Ajahn Sumedho http://www.amaravati.fslife.co.uk/english/documents/the_way_it_is/18no d.html He calls non-dualism the 'neither-nor' approach to philosophical questions: "Monistic religion tends to talk about the One, the One God, or the Whole or the Buddha Nature, or the One Mind, and that's very inspiring. We turn to monistic doctrines for inspiration. But inspiration is only one level of religious experience, and you have to outgrow it. You have to let go of the desire for inspiration, or the belief in God or in the Oneness or in the One Mind or the all embracing benevolence or in the universal fairness." Larry: "Another major difference is that in most Theravada suttas anatta is characterized as an undesirable characteristic while in Mahayana anatta is almost always a saving grace. Most Theravadans ignore this". Aren't the Suttas Word of the Buddha? Shouldn't they all be consistent? I hadn't thought that the Theravada suttas saw Anatta as 'undesirable' or 'desirable' - just that that is the way it is. metta and peace, Christine ---The Trouble is that you think you have time--- --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, LBIDD@w... wrote: > Hi Christine, > > I read B. Bodhi's essay on nonduality and one major disagreement I have > with it is that Mahayanists and Vedantans understand nonduality as > inclusiveness, not unity. This can be summed up with the idea that "the > all" is anatta. This idea is applicable to both systems. In Theravada I > think we could say nonduality means the middle way between the extremes > of eternalism and nihilism. These are not just obscure philosophical > beliefs but basic assumptions we live with every day. Nagarjuna is also > an exponent of this middle way view. That is the reason why Warder > questions whether he is a mahayanist. Both ways of understanding > nonduality are focused on anatta but M & V are in the spirit of > inclusiveness while T is less effusive and more analytical. > > Another major difference is that in most Theravada suttas anatta is > characterized as an undesirable characteristic while in Mahayana anatta > is almost always a saving grace. Most Theravadans ignore this. > > Larry 23189 From: monomuni Date: Sun Jun 29, 2003 2:09am Subject: Great Compassion! (Mahakaruna) Friends; The Blessed One’s direct Knowledge of Great Compassion (Mahakaruna) for all beings without exceptions, is one of the six knowledges that is not shared by disciples: Upon the Enlightened Ones, the Blessed Ones who see thus: I am crossed over, while this world has not crossed over! I am released, while this World is bound & enslaved! I am in control, while this world is out of control! I am at ease, while this world is not even in peace! I am content, while this world is frustrated! I am quenched, while this world is on fire! Life in this World is without Satisfaction.. Life in this World is without Protection.. Life in this World is without Certainty.. Life in this World is blinded by Views.. Life in this World is captured by Birth.. Life in this World is obsessed by Sensing... Life in this World is addicted by Craving.. Life in this World is imprisoned by Urge.. Life in this World is haunted by Stress.. Life in this World is dominated by Ageing.. Life in this World is afflicted by Sickness.. Life in this World is struck down by Death.. There descends this Great Compassion: I, having crossed, can guide across! I, being quenched, can extinguish! I, being released, can set free! I, being guarded, can restrain! I, being at ease, can pacify! I, being content, can comfort! I, being capable, can Cure! This is a Blessed One's direct knowledge of Great Compassion! __________________________________________________________ Yeah ! Certainly so ! Source: Path of Discrimination I (71) (exerpt) Patisambhidamagga I [131] What a true solace, relief & escape for all of Us even after 2500 years! May this true Dhamma last long ... Friendship is truly GREATEST The entire Motivation behind all of the Noble Life. Yeah! Samanera Samahita Cypress Hut, Gangamulla Bambarella, Tawalantenna 20838. Central Province. SRI LANKA. Email: monomuni@m... WWW: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Buddha-Direct : - ] -- A saying of the Buddha from http://metta.lk/ As a flower beautiful and brilliant of hue, but without fragrance, even so fruitless is the well-spoken word of one who does not practise it. Random Dhammapada Verse 51 23190 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Sun Jun 29, 2003 7:40am Subject: RE: [dsg] Re: Quantum Theory is Abhidhamma! Dear Azita, > -----Original Message----- > From: gazita2002 [mailto:gazita2002@y...] > Sent: Saturday, June 28, 2003 4:46 PM > I understand you are 'standing > in' for Sarah, while > she is tramping around the Swiss alps. Other dhamma friends and I are keeping tab (minimally) for DSG to keep things going. Our moderators are very energetic and committed to the discussions in this group. I don't think I have that much energy! Thanks for your response. kom 23191 From: yu_zhonghao Date: Sun Jun 29, 2003 9:46am Subject: Re: [dsg] Inquiry to Nina... Hi Azita, If watching the breath in the sense of being mindful of the in-&-out breathing as described in anapanasati sutta is what you have been doing and you have experienced for yourself the calm and peacefulness after few days of meditation, then it is indeed wonderful! Calm and peacefulness are wholesome, skillful qualities that one can see for oneself. It is right effort to generate desire, to endeavor, to activate persistence, to uphold & exert one's intent for the maintenance, non-confusion, increase, plenitude, development, & culmination of skillful qualities that have arisen. Regarding 'wrong practice', what 'wrong practice' are you refering to? And regarding the question: why can't Nibbana be object of clinging? I would reply with a rhetorical question: How can an object of clinging, fabricated, impermanent, dukkha, be the cessation of dukkha, unborn, unmade, unfabricated, unbecome? Your comment is appreciated. Peace, Victor --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "gazita2002" wrote: > > Dear Kom, Nina and others, > Good for me to read this, esp at this time. > A few weeks ago, I did a 'vipassana meditation' course which > went over 3 days. 3 days where we never spoke and did > things 'mindfully'. Mostly, I did this course out of curiosity, as > I've never really been a meditator. > I also have a close friend who was a monk for a number of > years and continues to meditate daily, so I thought I'd give this a > go. I will say that I felt quite calm and peaceful after these few > days, as it also gave me plenty of time to reflect on the dhamma that > I have learnt over the years, and all those around me were doing > things quietly and calmly [it seemed ]. > Since then I have 'sat' and quietly watched the breath, also > called pranayama in yoga practice. And I must say, I have felt > somewhat more peaceful than I normally do. > I generally do this as part of my yoga practice, and my > question is [based on concern about wrong practice], just how easy is > it to get caught up in 'wrong practice'? A rather weird question, > I think, but as Kom has said above about wanting to do something, > that same thought crossed my mind also, 'there must be something I > can do'. Sometimes I've thought 'well if I sit and meditate then at > least I'm not out with friends talking about whatever, but rarely the > path to enlightenment'. > Another question: why can't Nibbana be object of clinging? > May we all have patience, courage and good cheer > Azita. 23192 From: vital Date: Sun Jun 29, 2003 11:14am Subject: I wish all of you I wish that all the people in the world will live in peace and are happy that they have no enmity and pain.... The fact we meet on out way, are facts... we cannot change them The only thing we can do is accept them and try to make the best of it. We can not change other person, we can not change the reality The only thing we can change is ourself, the manner we see te reality and the manner we act. All what we do will rebounce at us... So let do good things.... Give love an friendship to all the living beings we meet now, tomorrow and everyday of our live... We don't have to play a movie, we can be who we are... You can act as you are, dont hide things for others... If you can lose your mask and accept who you are... nothing can disturb you in giving love and friendship to all people. I hope to meet you one day in our lives, till I like to give you all the friendship and power you need... I hope one day I will live in Asia for the rest of my life and help people there who need my help.... Vital http://www.vitalmoors.nl Mr. Vital E.H. Moors homepage: http://www.vitalmoors.nl ----- Original Message ----- From: "nina van gorkom" To: Sent: Sunday, June 29, 2003 6:18 AM Subject: Re: [dsg] Vism XIV, 3 > Dear Larry, > op 28-06-2003 04:37 schreef LBIDD@w... op LBIDD@w...: > > > Nina, do you have any ideas on how consciousness penetrates the three > > characteristics? > N: Remember the first sentence Jim translated from the subco: > <"But how does > vi~n~naa.na bring about the penetration of the characteristics?" and > the short answer is: "By way of the path seen by pa~n~naa."> > Panna accompanies citta, panna performs its function of pativedha, but citta 23193 From: suzakico Date: Sun Jun 29, 2003 11:42am Subject: Re: Inquiry to Nina... Nina san, Kon-nichiwa > I hope you will stay here, not just passing Thank you for the offer! By the way, I used to go to the Netherlands (the place you live now?) quite often. But I am happy that this forum helps the communication so much at ease even if we are so many miles away from each other. (I live in LA) I am reading your books of `survey' and `daily life' I found on the net. In the meantime, if you can respond to my question at your leisure, that would be most helpful. What I am curious first is to know your vivid, or perhaps inspiring moment you had at the earlier/beginning years with A. Sujin. I read some comment from the book on `daily life.' But more specifically, how was your impression/learning from the first meeting? How skillfully did she bring the technical matter/Abidhamma–if I may say so- into the living/daily practice? Any specific event the you can highlight? Even a tiny incident that brought the message to you – verbally or behaviorally -may be very helpful. (If you have written such a story elsewhere, please let me know. So far, I found `survey' and `daily life' on the net) In the last post, you said: "I became used to the different types of citta, consciousness." What was the few specific incidents in your early days that you found the glimpse of dhamma? Then, you said, "it is best to start in a very simple way: starting from this moment. Is there no seeing? We have a feeling of self who sees, but is this the truth? After seeing you become attached to what you see, or you have aversion. Are these moments not real? These are properties (cetasikas) arising with types of citta different from seeing. Seeing sees visible object, just what appears through the eyes. Visible object is not a person or thing, those are concepts we think of. This thinking is conditioned by association of different experiences that are remembered. Visible object is rupa. So long as we do not distinguish nama from rupa, we cling to a whole, we cling to self." The above sentences indicate: the aim is understanding of mind- matter relationship, by dissecting or rather becoming aware of specific happenings that we experience in our daily life (that we were unaware of before). Such insight will enable us to become aware of what is going on – in terms of cause and effect relationship to see the cause of suffering, etc. Such cause and effect relationship lead to the experiential understanding of four noble truths. So, practicing the `process' (may I also say, sila- samadhi-panna?) will lead to elimination of suffering. The question: Did this rephrasing/interretation make sense to you? Or, are you talking something more specific? Also, are you saying conditioned thinking is `always' bad, or at times bad? Any comment? The last point: From just skimming to read Buddhism in Daily Life, it appears that you do not put high importance in `formal' meditation. Was this the case in your beginning of the Path? Did you start to do `formal' meditation later? If so, how and how effective was it? Or, are you suggesting that it depends on people? I realize I already posted many questions. So, I stop here. If you could answer in any way you prefer, I would appreciate it very much! Ogen kide! (bow) Kio 23194 From: Date: Sun Jun 29, 2003 2:04pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Dualilty/Non-Duality Hi Christine, Hmm. I didn't think much of Ajahn Sumedho's talk. I liked the idea of inviting people to open to a stark, plain, rather unpleasant reality without recourse to a remedy but I don't think he said much about duality or nonduality. Plus I thought it was unwise to belittle the religious experience, but in the context of a program instruction I suppose that was expedient. One kind of nonduality I didn't mention is the nonduality of consciousness. In experience, all there is is consciousness. Everything else that supposedly exists (subject/object distinctions, mind/body, even non-consciousness) is inferred. Taking this idea to heart and deeply contemplating it is said to free one from a belief in a self. This is a "skillful means" found in some Mahayana and Vedanta teachings. I don't think this is incompatible with abhidhamma but it comes close to the view that consciousness is self, so Theravada tends to be very sceptical about it. As for the appearance of the undesirability of anatta in the suttas, I guess that's just my idiosyncratic view since it doesn't seem obvious to anyone else. My reasoning is 1) dukkha is undesirable, 2) impermanence is dukkha, 3) what is dukkha is anatta, 4) therefore anatta is dukkha. I believe you will find 2 & 3 in many suttas. I'm sure there is a way of getting out of this problem but maybe it isn't worth pursuing. Larry 23195 From: rjkjp1 Date: Sun Jun 29, 2003 8:20pm Subject: Re: Inquiry to Nina... --- Dear Kio-san, Welcome to dsg and thanks for the great questions to Nina. I give this link which might heklp for your first question about Nina's meeting with A. Sujin http://www.abhidhamma.org/interview%20with%20nina.html#Interview% 20with%20Nina%20van%20Gorkom %20September%201999 Domo arigato gozaimashita robertK In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "suzakico" wrote: > Nina san, Kon-nichiwa > > What I am curious first is to know your vivid, or perhaps inspiring > moment you had at the earlier/beginning years with A. Sujin. I read > some comment from the book on `daily life.' But more specifically, > how was your impression/learning from the first meeting? How > skillfully did she bring the technical matter/Abidhamma–if I may say > so- into the living/daily practice? Any specific event the you can > highlight? Even a tiny incident that brought the message to you – > verbally or behaviorally -may be very helpful. (If you have written > such a story elsewhere, please let me know. So far, I > found `survey' and `daily life' on the net) > 23197 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Mon Jun 30, 2003 6:17am Subject: Re: [dsg] Vism XIV, 3 Howard Thanks for these comments. An interesting hypothesis, but difficult to comment on without the textual references that are relied upon. The function of consciousness is said to be that of knowing the object, and in that regard it is 'chief in knowing'. Beyond that, I've not come across any reference to consciousness as a 'separative awareness'. Jon --- upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, Jon (and all) - ... > ================================= > Somewhere I've read, possibly by David Kalupahana, of vi~n~nana > being described as a "separative awareness". What I believe was > meant by that was not only (or even mainly) a subject-object > awareness, but very much that of an awareness which "separates" > out, distinguishing the object along with parts and aspects of that > object, but without the recognitional capacity of sa~n~na. > > With metta, > Howard 23198 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Mon Jun 30, 2003 6:30am Subject: Re: [dsg] Inquiry to Nina... Kio Welcome to DSG, and thanks for your interesting questions. I know that Nina and others have already replied, but I would just like to comment on one minor point. You say: > Furthermore at least from > reading the sutta, it appears that the Buddha never went into such > a detail. It is true that there is less abhidhamma-type detail in the suttas than in the abhidhamma itself. But what I have learned over the years is that much of what is found in the Abhidhamma is in fact mentioned in passing in the suttas; the detail is elaborated in the Abhidhamma. Thus, in the case of the cittas that make up the sense-door and mind-door processes, these can mostly be traced back to references in the suttas. (There is a useful entry on this particular aspect in the appendix to Nyanitiloka's Buddhist Dictionary -- available online) I hope find the discussion here useful. Jon --- suzakico wrote: > As I am just stopping by, I am hopeful not to disturb the flow of > the discussion going on here. But as I read the book, A Survey of > Paramattha Dhammas perhaps for 4-5 hours worth and 1/3 of it so > far, > I came back with a question that I appreciate it very much if you > can address for me as much as you must have gained great benefit > from the book and the interaction with Sujin. Anyway, here is my > question: > > Why is it so necessary to analyze the mind and body phenomena in > the > way suggested, i.e., dividing by various terms to distinguish them > in detail? (This book points out 16 levels of vipassana nana > (knowledge). 89-129 types of consciousness (citta), 52 types of > mental factor, 28 types of physical phenomenon, etc.) At least for > > me, this is too cumbersome and makes me feels like losing the > holistic picture although this ?gmay?h be beneficial for > specifically focused training. (My sense however is that even the > training/meditation may be too complex.) Furthermore at least from > > reading the sutta, it appears that the Buddha never went into such > a > detail. I realize that once interested and realized the benefit, > we > may want to explore to the detail and find the joy in such > exploration. I just want to get your personal feedback on this > concern. > > By the way, I have some vipassana and Zen background as shown in > www.suzaki.has.it . Personally, Zen appeals to me because of its > directness. However, without biased/constrained by my background, > I > would like to not to miss the opportunity to learn from your > experience, if you may. > > With metta, > Kio 23199 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Mon Jun 30, 2003 6:38am Subject: Re: [dsg] Vism XIV, 3 Jim Thanks for coming in with this passage. It sounds very interesting, and I look forward to hearing more about Dhammapala's comments in due course as, hopefully, we collectively manage to translate the passage you have given. I have had another thought on the original passage in Vism, and that is that the reference to 'bringing about the penetration of the characteristics of an object' has a different meaning in each of the 2 contexts (i.e., vinnana vs. panna). Jon --- Jim Anderson wrote: > Jon, ... > > Personally, I still find puzzling the reference to vinnana being > > able to 'bring about the penetration of the characteristics of an > > object'. Does anyone have any suggestions as to what this refers > to > > exactly? ... > I think Dhammapala is probably the best one to turn to for a > solution > to this puzzle for he asks a very pertinent question: "But how does > vi~n~naa.na bring about the penetration of the characteristics?" > and > the short answer is: "By way of the path seen by pa~n~naa." but it > comes with a detailed explanation which I have only just seen and > it > is not easy to understand right off the bat. So what I'll do is to > first present the passage in Pali below in case anyone would like > to see it or figure it out (Nina?) while I do. ... > Best wishes, > Jim