25600 From: htootintnaing Date: Fri Sep 26, 2003 11:09am Subject: Re: Question again :To Htoo and,,,,,,,,, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "htootintnaing" wrote: > Dear LC, > > Please see inline text.This is continuation of inline text reply... > > Htoo Naing > > --------------------- LC: > > I do not know if this question is appropriate or not, but Do you > > know any reliable sayadaws who teach samatha before we go on to > > vipassana bhavana ?( LC ) ---------------------------------------- Htoo : There are. But they stay inconspicuously.( Htoo ) --------------------------------------------- > > > I have read some words that stated '' the eighth sense ''. I was > > > shocked to hear that. > > > > I can just imagine you were shocked (^^). > > > > >Anyway, if there is still in doubt about anything, please do not > > hesitate. We all should try to our best. This > > > is study area. So it is called '' Dhamma Study Group ''. Isn't it? > > > > Thanks a lot! > > > > > > from LC 25601 From: nina van gorkom Date: Fri Sep 26, 2003 11:39am Subject: questions about citta. Dear KKT, I try to answer. KKT wrote: You said that << It (ie. Citta) can be aware of another citta or cetasika that has just fallen away >> As I understand there is only one Citta at a time, right? N: Yes. KKT: How could this Citta (which cannot be aware of itself as an actual Citta) be aware of another Citta that has just FALLEN AWAY? N: Can you think of your dosa of yesterday, today, a second ago? You remember, and that is the function of sa~n~naa, a cetasika accompanying each citta. Since there is contiguity-condiiton, no overlap as you say, experiences and remembrances are accumulated from moment to moment. Another example. Seeing sees visible object and after the seeing, viusible object is experienced through the mind-door, and after that there may be many mind-door processes of cittas which think about what was seen. There are conditions for such cittas. Meanwhile, seeing and visible object have fallen away. But different processes follow upon each other extremely rapidly. Nobody can come in between, it has happened already! KKT:We have only one Citta of a time. Thus when one Citta is present, the previous Citta was already finished. There is no << overlap >> between them. Therefore how could the actual Citta be aware of something already finished. N: See above. KKT:I don't see the relation between two successive Cittas. So there is no << in-between >>, no << hole >>, no << gap >>, between two successive Cittas, right? Thus it is not << really incorrect >> to consider the flow of successive Cittas as a << continuous >> flux, is it? N: Yes, this is correct. That is why we all have different inclinations. Citta falls away, but there is a connection in the series of cittas that is our life. Different individuals, different characters. Questions of King Milinda:Book 2, ch 2: Nagasena then explains that we are not the same as the baby we were once, and that still, we developed from babyhood. KKT: What exists in the << deep >> sleep? Is there Cittas, Cetasikas in deep sleep? N: Yes, otherwise we could not stay alive. KKT: With << deep >> sleep I mean << dreamless >> sleep, an << unconscious >> state not very much different from coma. N: This is not an unconscious state, there are cittas called bhavangacittas or life-continuum. As mentioned before, they do not experience an object impinging on one of the six doors, but they have an object: the same as that of the rebirth-consciousness. They keep the continuity in our life. When we wake up all sorts of objects are experienced. Sound or hardness are more evident than citta, this seems to be a hidden reality. But we know that there must be citta when hardness or sound appear. We take all these objects for granted, and the experience of them for granted. Now, I find that we should deeply consider this, so that we can truly understand what citta is, not just by definition. KKT: What exactly is << thought >> in Abhidhamma? I mean << thought >> in the common sense that all of us have the same understanding and usage. N: Different people have different ideas about what thought is, we discussed it here. Some people believe that thought is the thinking activity, citta which thinks. Others believe that thought is the contents of the thinking, thus, the object of thinking. I am inclined to use it in that last named sense. Nina. 25602 From: phamdluan2000 Date: Fri Sep 26, 2003 11:42am Subject: Re: Egypt Diary: A Bunch of Noise Dear James, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "buddhatrue" wrote: < snip > Piety and religious feeling can't be forced from the outside; it has to come from the inside. Everything else is just a bunch of noise. KKT: Including the inner noise that is the story incessantly one talks to oneself :-)) Thank you, James, for your sharings. Best wishes, KKT 25603 From: htootintnaing Date: Fri Sep 26, 2003 11:45am Subject: [dsg] Re: six Councils, to Htoo and Suan. Dear Nina, The Fifth Counsil was performed in Mandalay. The supporter was Upasaka, King Min Don, who was the father of ultimate Myanmar King, King Si Baw in mid-centuary of 19th. The Fourth Council was held in Celon or Srilanka. Round about the 5th Council, Sangha decided it was needed to perform 5th Council. This is not for adding new. But for confirming pronunciation, placing words, grouping them and so on. Tipitaka-wise was not new. But on the slabs were Tipitaka written in Burmese letters in Pali language. The Sixth Council was held in Yangon, the capital of Union of Myanmar, in mid-centuary of 20th. At that time all Tipitaka had been translated into Burmese and all were printed. Today online are translation of the contents of Six Council. In the Six Council, Mahasi Sayadaw '' Bhaddanta Sobana '' acted as Pucchaka ( questioner ) like Venerable Kassapa in The Buddha's time. Mingun Sayadaw '' Bhaddanta Vicittasarabhivansa '' acted as answerer like Venerable Ananda. The supporter was Prime Minister U Nu of Union of Burma ( now, Union of Myanmar ). Sayadaws from different Theravadha countries attended and records are there in Yangon,at Kaba Aye Pagoda- Mahapaasana Cave. With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing -------------------- --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, nina van gorkom wrote: > Dear Htoo and Suan, > I do not know anything about the 5th -sixth council. Was something new > added? Were there conroversies? At the fourth: the teachings were put into > writing? > Nina. > op 24-09-2003 20:20 schreef htootintnaing op htootintnaing@y...: > > > Literature was > > started at the 4 th meeting in Celon or Srilanka. > > > > 5th meeting records are still there in Burma. In the last capital of > > Burmese kingdom called Mandalay ( in northern Burma ). In that city, > > to the northeast is a hill called Mandalay (so the city, which > > origionally was ' Ratanabon ' a compilation of jewel was changed to > > Mandalay ). > > > > At the foot of the hill, there are ( are ) all the records of 5th > > Sangha meeting and all Dhamma preached by The Buddha are there. If > > you have enough time you can go there and check yourself. > > > > 6th meeting was done in Yangon, the capital of today Myanmar. There > > are books related to the 6th meeting. It is the purest source. 25604 From: htootintnaing Date: Fri Sep 26, 2003 0:11pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Question about Citta Dear KKT, Let me answer your question. Dear Nina, forgive me that I answer in place of you. I hope you will also respond on your own.Please see my inline text reply. With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing --------------------- --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "phamdluan2000" wrote: > Dear Nina, > > > Thanks for answering my questions. > > I have many more questions > and I want to proceed slowly > if you don't mind. > > You said that > << It (ie. Citta) can be aware of another citta > or cetasika that has just fallen away >> ------------------ KKT : > As I understand there is > only one Citta at a time, right? > > How could this Citta > (which cannot be aware > of itself as an actual Citta) > be aware of another Citta > that has just FALLEN AWAY?( KKT ) --------------------------- Htoo : See my recent posts today. 7 successive Javana Citta do have the same Arammana, that is the exact Arammana. In case of Manodvara Vithi, there are only 3 kinds of Vithi Citta. They are 1. Manodvara Avajjana Citta 2. Javana Citta 3. Tadaarammana Citta. That's all. Other are Bhavangha Citta. Bhavangha Cittas are resultant Cittas. So they will not know themselves. In this series, the first Citta that can know other Citta is Manodvara Avajjana Citta. As it is Avajjana Citta, it will not know itself. Javana Citta will know what Manodvara Avajjana Citta knows and Tadaarammana Cittas also know the same Arammana. As this Vithi is not Jhana or Phala Vithi, it is followed by Bhavangha Citta. So, the 1st Manodvara cannot know itself. Thus 1. Manodvara 2. 7 Javana 3. 2 Tadaarammana 5. 1 Bhavangha these 11 Cittas are minimal number of Cittas that the knowing process still cannot operate. If ( if ), the Bhavangha is instantaneously stop and Manodvara arises instantaneously, that arising Manodvara will know 12th Citta back including itself. This is the shortest period that Citta can know Citta. But most will be known after zillion of trillion of billion of Cittas have gone away. ( Htoo ) ---------------------------------- KKT : > We have only one Citta of a time. > Thus when one Citta is present, > the previous Citta was already finished. > There is no << overlap >> between them. > Therefore how could the actual Citta > be aware of something already finished.( KKT ) ---------------------------------- Htoo : See above. The earliest will be 12th Citta back. ( Htoo ) ------------------------------------ KKT: > I don't see the relation > between two successive Cittas. > > Thank you, Nina. > > > KKT -------------- Htoo : Nina has said it is '' Anantara Paccaya ''. In a dynasty when the time was in a kingdom, the death of the king immediately cause the Crown Prince to became a king, even though coronation was performed later.( Htoo ) > > =============== > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, nina van gorkom > wrote: > > Dear KKT, > > op 24-09-2003 17:18 schreef phamdluan2000 op phamdluan@a...:> > > > I know that Citta (Consciousness) > > always arises with a set of Cetasikas. > > > > Is there a Citta that exists by itself? > > (ie. without Cetasikas as its objects) > > > N: Impossible. But the accompanying cetasikas are not its objects, > they assist citta to experience an object that presents itself, be > it rupa or nama. > > > > Can Citta (Consciousness) be aware of itself? > > (ie. Citta has only itself as object) > > > N: no. It does not have itself as object. It can be aware of another > citta or cetasika that has just fallen away. When rupa impinges on a > sense-door there are cittas in a process which experience that rupa > which has not fallen away. After that rupa is experienced in a mind- > door process when it has just fallen away. > > With citta as object, it is different, rupa lasts longer than citta, > it can be object during a whole sense-door process of different > cittas, all of which experoence that rupa. Citta falls away > immediately. > > Citta can experience another nama, citta or cetasika, in a mind-door > process. That citta or cetasika which is the object has just fallen > away. > > Your question is good, and I hope it is somewhat clearer now? > An example: you have dosa, aversion, and you know it. That dosa > falls away immediately, and another citta knows that there was dosa, > or it has aversion about the dosa, or it considers with > understanding that dosa is a conditioned reality. It is hard to > realize that cittas fall away so extremely fast, that there are > already other moments of citta which have as object the past dosa. > It just seems to be the same moment, but that is an illusion. People > are discouraged about akusala and believe that there cannot be > awareness of it. First there may be aversion, and then understanding > can be developed about aversion. That is another moment which is > kusala accompanied by panna. We should be grateful to the Buddha for > teaching so many details about dhammas. > Nina. 25605 From: htootintnaing Date: Fri Sep 26, 2003 0:33pm Subject: Re: questions about citta. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, nina van gorkom wrote: > Dear KKT, > I try to answer. > KKT wrote: > You said that > << It (ie. Citta) can be aware of another citta > or cetasika that has just fallen away >> > As I understand there is > only one Citta at a time, right? > N: Yes. > KKT: How could this Citta > KKT: With << deep >> sleep > I mean << dreamless >> sleep, > an << unconscious >> state > not very much different from coma. -------------------------------------------------------------- > N: This is not an unconscious state, there are cittas called bhavangacittas -------------------------------------------------------------- Added by Htoo: Sleeping is not unconsciousness. Sleeping is a state of altered consciousness. In a state of unconsciousness, it is not sleeping. Unconsciousness will depend on the causes. But most of the time will be dominated by Bhavangha Citta. Sometimes Bhavangha Calana and then back to Bhavangha Citta. There may nbe a short series of Vithi Citta but the unscious will not be able to recall all these. With Metta, Htoo Naing ------------------------------------------------------------------- > or life-continuum. As mentioned before, they do not experience an object > impinging on one of the six doors, but they have an object: the same as that > of the rebirth-consciousness. They keep the continuity in our life. > When we wake up all sorts of objects are experienced. Sound or hardness are > more evident than citta, this seems to be a hidden reality. But we know that > there must be citta when hardness or sound appear. We take all these objects > for granted, and the experience of them for granted. Now, I find that we > should deeply consider this, so that we can truly understand what citta is, > not just by definition. > KKT: What exactly is << thought >> in Abhidhamma? > I mean << thought >> in > the common sense that > all of us have the same > understanding and usage. > N: Different people have different ideas about what thought is, we discussed > it here. Some people believe that thought is the thinking activity, citta > which thinks. Others believe that thought is the contents of the thinking, > thus, the object of thinking. I am inclined to use it in that last named > sense. > Nina. 25606 From: christine_forsyth Date: Fri Sep 26, 2003 1:08pm Subject: Re: Egypt Diary: A Bunch of Noise Hello James, Thank you for your posts on Egypt - you sound as if you are experiencing a little culture shock. It would be interesting to write a list of what you find most dissatisfying (and satisfying) about Egypt, put it away in a sealed envelope, and open some time after you have left the country for good. Often, the things we find most irritating are the very things we yearn for years later - the essence and flavour of a country. I hope you are keeping a detailed diary, memory is such an unreliable tool. There are many dsg members who are ex-patriates living semi-permanently in countries they were not born in. (Sarah and Jon in HK, RobK in Japan, some Thai members in the USA, and RobM is living in a Muslim country (Malaysia) like you. I remember the loud speakers from a trip many years ago to Kuala Lumpur). I know that many of the people living in my area (up to 100 different ethnic groups lately) find many things about western culture make them feel miserable and unsettled in the first months. But eventually it becomes more like home. Have you had much of a chance to learn the history (ancient and modern)and some of the language (is there only one?) - which is what makes up a culture and a national identity? Can you tell us a little about the food? Is there a famous Egyptian recipe? and the children, I have been waiting to hear about the little ones in Egypt ... perhaps another post? metta and peace, Christine ---The trouble is that you think you have time --- --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "buddhatrue" 25607 From: phamdluan2000 Date: Fri Sep 26, 2003 1:28pm Subject: Re: questions about citta. Dear Nina, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, nina van gorkom wrote: Dear KKT, I try to answer. KKT wrote: You said that << It (ie. Citta) can be aware of another citta or cetasika that has just fallen away >> As I understand there is only one Citta at a time, right? N: Yes. KKT: How could this Citta (which cannot be aware of itself as an actual Citta) be aware of another Citta that has just FALLEN AWAY? N: Can you think of your dosa of yesterday, today, a second ago? You remember, and that is the function of sa~n~naa, a cetasika accompanying each citta. Since there is contiguity-condiiton, no overlap as you say, experiences and remembrances are accumulated from moment to moment. Another example. Seeing sees visible object and after the seeing, viusible object is experienced through the mind-door, and after that there may be many mind-door processes of cittas which think about what was seen. There are conditions for such cittas. Meanwhile, seeing and visible object have fallen away. But different processes follow upon each other extremely rapidly. Nobody can come in between, it has happened already! KKT:We have only one Citta of a time. Thus when one Citta is present, the previous Citta was already finished. There is no << overlap >> between them. Therefore how could the actual Citta be aware of something already finished. N: See above. KKT:I don't see the relation between two successive Cittas. So there is no << in-between >>, no << hole >>, no << gap >>, between two successive Cittas, right? Thus it is not << really incorrect >> to consider the flow of successive Cittas as a << continuous >> flux, is it? N: Yes, this is correct. That is why we all have different inclinations. Citta falls away, but there is a connection in the series of cittas that is our life. Different individuals, different characters. Questions of King Milinda:Book 2, ch 2: Nagasena then explains that we are not the same as the baby we were once, and that still, we developed from babyhood. KKT: What exists in the << deep >> sleep? Is there Cittas, Cetasikas in deep sleep? N: Yes, otherwise we could not stay alive. KKT: With << deep >> sleep I mean << dreamless >> sleep, an << unconscious >> state not very much different from coma. N: This is not an unconscious state, there are cittas called bhavangacittas or life-continuum. As mentioned before, they do not experience an object impinging on one of the six doors, but they have an object: the same as that of the rebirth-consciousness. They keep the continuity in our life. When we wake up all sorts of objects are experienced. Sound or hardness are more evident than citta, this seems to be a hidden reality. But we know that there must be citta when hardness or sound appear. We take all these objects for granted, and the experience of them for granted. Now, I find that we should deeply consider this, so that we can truly understand what citta is, not just by definition. KKT: What exactly is << thought >> in Abhidhamma? I mean << thought >> in the common sense that all of us have the same understanding and usage. N: Different people have different ideas about what thought is, we discussed it here. Some people believe that thought is the thinking activity, citta which thinks. Others believe that thought is the contents of the thinking, thus, the object of thinking. I am inclined to use it in that last named sense. Nina. KKT: Thank you, Nina. I learn alot from your answer. I try to sum up what we talked to see more clearly. (correct me if I'm wrong) From birth to death of one being, there is a << continuous >> flux of successive Cittas, one of a time. This flux is never interrupted because there is no gap, no hole between two Cittas and even in the seemingly unsconscious states like deepsleep or coma there are still Cittas as life-continuum. This flux of Cittas is taken wrongly for << soul >> or << self >> in other religions just because of its << continuous >> appearence. I have some more questions: __I still don't understand why an actual Citta can't be aware of itself? (Htoo Naing has answered this question and I will read carefully his answer) __Does it mean that it seems impossible for us to << live in the present >> because we can only be aware of the just fallen Citta and Cetasikas? __The notion of << pure mind >> in the sense of a Citta existing alone is impossible since Citta is always accompanied by other Cetasikas? __Same thing for the notion of << empty mind >> which is absurd since the << mind >> is never empty of Cittas and Cetasikas? __In this phrase of Anguttara I,VI This mind (ie. Citta), O monks, is luminous, but it is defiled ... etc. what is the meaning of << luminous >> ? Thank you very much, Nina. Best wishes, KKT 25608 From: phamdluan2000 Date: Fri Sep 26, 2003 1:32pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Question about Citta Dear Htoo Naing, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "htootintnaing" wrote: Dear KKT, Let me answer your question. Dear Nina, forgive me that I answer in place of you. I hope you will also respond on your own.Please see my inline text reply. With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing KKT: Thanks for taking time to answer to my many questions. I will read carefully your answers and if I have some more questions I will ask. Best wishes, KKT 25609 From: Date: Fri Sep 26, 2003 9:34am Subject: Re: [dsg] Personality view vs. Delusion In a message dated 9/26/2003 12:47:30 AM Pacific Daylight Time, sarahdhhk@y... writes: > Hi TG, > > I appreciate your further comments and feedback. I’m not sure if there’s > any difference (other than terminology) in what we’re saying or not. > Hi Sarah TG: Thank goodness Howard replied to you questions because he saved me a ton of time and did a much better job than I could have! I agree very closely with his responses but will add a couple of things and answer your questions on CMA and Visuddhimagga. (Yes, read them about 10 times each...due to poor comprehension skills.) Before starting, my impression is that we agree on some points but language makes it uncertain. On other points, I think there are subtle but important differences. But I suspect our overall "foundational outlook" (within the constraints of the Tripitaka) is very different. Note: I pasted most of Howard's comments after my own. For clarification -- Howard's comments are to Sarah's questions and not to my replies. > Perhaps you could kindly tell me if you disagree with any of these points > before we go on, to clarify: > > 1. ‘People’ is a conventional term, a pa~n~natti referring to the 5 > aggregates. > TG: As Howard replied plus... Concepts are the outgrowths of the minds attempt to turn distinguishable feelings-perceptions into entities. An arahat has overcome that falacious aspect of mentality and is able to use concepts without the concepts having any deluding capabilities... as I understand it. All language is conventional. So if you are referring to the "word" people, the answer is yes, but it applies to all words. What the term "people" refers to is the 5 aggregates (whether one is aware of it or not.) Howard: Almost. It's a conventional term corresponding to mind-constructed phenomena which seem to point to entities; they actually correspond to networks of phenomena interelated by a wide variety of relations, and which function cooperatively and harmoniously so as to give the impression of being entities. > 2. Khandhas repesented by conventional terms such as people and animals > arise and pass away, but the conventional terms are mere designations. > TG: Khandas arise, persist while changing (in other words, there is inertia involved), then pass away. Khandas alter due to conditions, not to some "intrinsic impermanent/atering nature of their own." Conventional terms *as mental concepts* also arise and cease due to conditions. In other words, concepts are basically "imaginations"...and those imaginations are continuously altering due to conditions. > 3. Namas and rupas can be directly experienced and known by pa~n~na > (wisdom) and associated mental factors. > TG: Howard's answer is the way I see it as well. Howard: Okay. But so can concepts/thoughts (though not their alleged referents , the pa~n~natti), be directly experienced. The difference is that the concepts/thoughts are mental constructs, whereas the so-called paramattha dhammas are not mentally constructed - they are the raw materials the mind uses in its constructive (sankharic) activities. > 4. There are no ‘events’ - mere elements or phenomena arising and passing > away. (I’m checking because perhaps I mistakenly took ‘unfolding causal > occurrences’ to refer to something more than the latter - apologies if > this was wrong). > TG: Refer to Howard's answer. Howard: I disagree. Dhammas are exactly events and features of events. If a dhamma is not an event or a feature, then it is a "thing" - an entity, and this is where objective substantialism enters in! There are only occurrences and features of occurrences, all fleeting and conditioned. > 5. Namas and rupas are ‘paramattha dhammas’ (ultimate > realities/actualities). > TG: I would be happier if they were labeled merely as -- "actualities." Not long ago, the best scientific thinking thought that -- matter and energy were separate things. Einstein showed that they were different modes of the "same stuff." I believe Nama and Rupa are also different modes of the same stuff/energies. They flow in and out of each other, construct and alter each other. (This view may be too radical even for Howard. LOL Although, I notice Howard is sometimes talking in terms of "namarupic flux" so maybe he's not so far apart.) Howard: Yes, but "ultimate" only in that they are not mind-constructs; they are elementary as regards sankharic construction; they are the basic sankharic building blocks. But they are all empty of self. They are separated out by vi~n~nana from a namarupic flux; they have no true separate existence on their own, being merely fleeting events separated out *by our minds* from "the flow" for which we haven't got a really good name. (Could that be dhammata/tathata/nibbana-dhatu, the reality that is the experience of an arahant or buddha?) This is how I see the matter. (I know - I've "failed the test"! ;-)) > 6. They are such because they have lakkha.na (characteristics) and > sabhaava (intrinsic quality/particular nature) which can be known. > For example, seeing has a characteristic quite different from hearing and > quite different from the object seen. > TG: Seeing things as having an intrinsic nature is a major stumbling block IMO, and one of the largest defects in abhidhamma interpretation. I think it guarantees that the "holder" of that view will not overcome self/entity-view. Howard's comment is right-on. Howard: They have characteristics/features. But they don't have *intrinsic* nature! They are what they are - and they "are" at all - in dependence on other silmilarly empty phenomena, and,thus, their "natures" are *not* intrinsic. Also, mind-constructs, such as the keyboard-construct (a mental construct) that seems to point to keyboard entity has characteristcs as well, characteristics derived from the phenomena that served as its basis. (Uh, oh - heading for an F- grade!! ;-) > 7. These ‘actualities’ are conditioned, impermanent, unsatisfactory and > anatta. > TG: Perfect. And as Howard adds... Howard: Yep. These basic phenomena/events/conditions are indeed so. And 'anatta' includes not having intrinsic nature. > 8. Wrong views are an impediment. Right views are the forerunner of the > other path factors. > TG: Sounds good also. > 9. Arahants have no more kilesa (defilements) of any kind. Sotapannas have > eradicated all erroneous self and other views. > TG: As I understand it, A streamwinner has only eliminated the "belief in self." For example, he or she would no longer hold theories that support such a view. However, they still "see things" as self. That's why they still have conceit (a self view), and desire for being and ignorance; not to speak of greed and aversion. All of which are "self-view" indicators. They have seen conditionality clearly enough to have irrevocable knowledge that there is no self. But they have not eradicated the perceptual misinterpretation that lead them to seeing things as entities. This depends on whether one sees self view as a "belief-in-self" or as "sense-of-self." I believe a streamwinner has eradicated the belief-in-self but not the sense-of-self. > 10. Finally, I forget if you have CMA (or other AbhidamatthaSangaha > transl) or Vism. If so, do you accept > > a) CMA ch V111, Compendium of Conditionality, 30 > Concept as what is made known > > “...such terms as ‘person’, ‘individual’, and the like, so named > [concepts] on account of the five aggregates..................... > All such different things, though they do not exist in the ultimate sense, > become objects of consciousness in the form of shadows of (ultimate) > things. TG: I would say that the so called "ultimate things" are actually the "shadows of conditions" and that concepts are the shadows of shadows. Therefore, I believe the above statement is flawed due to its way of expressing nama and rupa as substantial. Howard: The terms and the corresponding ideas do. And the ideas are directly experienced as namas within the namarupic flux. > > They are called concepts because they are thought of, reckoned, > understood, expressed, and made known on account of, in consideration of, > with respect to, this or that mode. This kind of concept is so called > because it is made known.â€? > TG: That's reasonable enough, but not really a full accounting of causal factors so its left pretty vague. Howard: Yes. Concepts/vi~n~natti are means for communication, among sentient beings and within one's own thought processing. > b) Vism V111,39 > > “ ‘Life, person, pleasure, pain - just these alone > Join in one conscious moment that flicks by. > Ceased aggregates of those dead or alive > Are all alike, gone never to return. > No (world is) born if (consciousness is) not > Produced; when that is present, then it lives; > When consciousness dissolves, the world is dead; > The highest sense this concept will allowâ€? (Nd 1, 42). TG: I like the statement, but see it as being easily interpreted by folks to mean whatever they want it to mean. I suspect abhidhamma people are seeing it to mean that states fully arise and fully cease every moment. If "abhidhammists" are seeing it that way, they are likely to be projecting a self/entity-view onto states an a "fraction of a second by fraction of a second basis. For example: They may see things as "being real and then being gone, being real and then being gone, etc. To me, that's subtle self and annihilation views continuously at work. I see it as meaning that states are altering every moment and never have any self or substantiality in any way whatsoever. My interpretation of it is not just based on it, but is combined with the rest of the Visuddhimagga and Tripitaka as well. Howard: Hmm! I rather like that! :-) > > See detailed footnote 11 (Nanamoli transl) which details all the kinds of > concepts. > ***** > > TG, again, I greatly appreciate your well-considered comments. Pls let me > know if I have over-looked any points (I’m in a bit of a rush) and which > of the comments above you disagree with (if any;-)). > > With metta, > > Sarah > Thanks for the questions Sarah. Take care. TG 25610 From: buddhatrue Date: Fri Sep 26, 2003 1:48pm Subject: Re: Egypt Diary: A Bunch of Noise --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "christine_forsyth" wrote: > Hello James, > > Thank you for your posts on Egypt - you sound as if you are > experiencing a little culture shock. Hi Christine, Hmmmm...I am puzzled how you came to that conclusion from this post. That wasn't my point at all. I didn't mention a single thing about my culture shock. The point of that post is how over-exposure to religious messages make them lose their effectiveness. How did you get me being culture shocked out of that? Is this your subjective analysis? Are you psychoanalyzing me for hidden meanings? Anyway, along those lines, you speak as someone with personal experience. Have you gone to live in a foreign country? Did you keep a diary there? Did you experience culture shock? How did you deal with it? How do you feel that my experience is similiar/different from your own? I look forward to your answers. Metta, James 25611 From: buddhatrue Date: Fri Sep 26, 2003 1:52pm Subject: Re: Egypt Diary: A Bunch of Noise --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "phamdluan2000" wrote: > Dear James, > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "buddhatrue" > wrote: > > < snip > > > Piety and religious feeling > can't be forced from the outside; > it has to come from the inside. > Everything else is just a bunch of noise. > > > > > KKT: Including the inner noise > that is the story incessantly > one talks to oneself :-)) > > Thank you, James, for your sharings. > > Best wishes, > > KKT Hi KKT, Also very true. Glad you enjoy. Metta, James 25612 From: christine_forsyth Date: Fri Sep 26, 2003 1:55pm Subject: Re: Egypt Diary: A Bunch of Noise James, I was just interested and chatting - not meant to cause offense - no hidden meanings. I think I'll just leave it there. Be well. Christine --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "buddhatrue" wrote: > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "christine_forsyth" > wrote: > > Hello James, > > > > Thank you for your posts on Egypt - you sound as if you are > > experiencing a little culture shock. > > Hi Christine, > > Hmmmm...I am puzzled how you came to that conclusion from this post. > That wasn't my point at all. I didn't mention a single thing about > my culture shock. The point of that post is how over-exposure to > religious messages make them lose their effectiveness. How did you > get me being culture shocked out of that? Is this your subjective > analysis? Are you psychoanalyzing me for hidden meanings? > > Anyway, along those lines, you speak as someone with personal > experience. Have you gone to live in a foreign country? Did you > keep a diary there? Did you experience culture shock? How did you > deal with it? How do you feel that my experience is > similiar/different from your own? I look forward to your answers. > > Metta, James 25613 From: Date: Fri Sep 26, 2003 10:05am Subject: Re: [dsg] Personality view vs. Delusion Hi, TG (and Sarah) - In a message dated 9/26/03 4:40:58 PM Eastern Daylight Time, TGrand458@a... writes: > Hi Sarah > > TG: Thank goodness Howard replied to you questions because he saved me a > ton > of time and did a much better job than I could have! ============================ TG, I'm glad you liked my reply, but I apologize for jumping in before you responded yourself. Sarah, I suggest that you quickly team up with Jon, and then we can have a tag-team wrestling match! ;-)) With WWF (World Wrestling Federation) 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) 25614 From: buddhatrue Date: Fri Sep 26, 2003 2:15pm Subject: Re: Egypt Diary: A Bunch of Noise --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "christine_forsyth" wrote: > James, > > I was just interested and chatting - not meant to cause offense - no > hidden meanings. I think I'll just leave it there. > Be well. > > Christine Hi Christine, No offense taken...just wondering what messages I am putting out there unawares. Just chatting myself. About the children in Egypt, I am not quite sure what you would like to know. As far as I can tell, they are pretty much like kids everywhere...they like to run and play outside. The only difference is that they stay up really late here, like sometimes until 1:00 or 2:00 in the morning playing in the streets. They are like all kids, cute as a button. I will try to take some pictures and send them to you. Egyptian food is rather boring; beans are the staple. They like to eat bread and beans and most meat recipes come from other countries. Metta, James 25615 From: Jim Anderson Date: Fri Sep 26, 2003 2:26pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Concentration and samatha Hi Jon, > Jim > > Very interesting, and thanks very much. I obviously need to spend > some time looking into the Dhs and Atthasalini. My reading to date > has been almost exclusively confined to the Abhidhammattha-Sangaha > and Visuddhi-Magga (apart of course from the many quotes from the > texts themselves that Nina has included in her writings or that are > quoted on this list). I need to spend more time studying all these texts and many more too! > Just going back to your previous post, you point out that: > "The Expositor explains how all these extra dhammas [the aruupino > dhammas] (except citta) are reduced to the list of 52 [cetasikas]. > Samatha is included in the cetasika one-pointedness (ekaggataa)." > > That being so, then the 'samatha' in the excerpts you quote here from > Dhs is the universal (and ethically variable) cetasika more commonly > known as ekaggataa. > > As you will know, the Abhidhammattha-Sangaha also gives a similar > explanation regarding the factors that constitute the bala-s, > indriya-s, path factors (mentioned in your list of 6 below); indeed > the whole 37 bodhi-pakkhiya-dhamma (requisites of enlightenment) are > said to be reducible to 13 cetasikas, and citta. In case you don't know, there is a chart on page 226-7 of Guide to Conditional Relations, Part I that shows the correspondence of the two classification systems of the mental factors for Dhs and Abhidhammatthasangaha. > My question however really related to the 'samatha' of samatha > bhavana as one finds discussed, for example, in the section of the > Abhidhammattha-Sangaha dealing with samatha and vipassana > (kamma.t.thaanasanganavibhaaga, samathasangaha). Of course I am > using the translations, CMA Ch IX and STA Ch 9, but it is clear that > the meaning here is not simply ekaggataa cetasika. Well, on p. 329 I'm reading Bodhi's note that says: "Technically, samatha is defined as the one-pointedness of mind (cittass'ekaggataa) in the eight meditative attainments--...". I find the restriction to the jhaanas to be somewhat misleading as one-pointedness of mind is found in every description of samatha in Dhs and also samatha is present in every state of mind. > To my understanding, all moments of samatha bhavana are > ~naa.nasampayutta.m (accompanied by wisdom), just as all moments of > vipassana bhavana are ~naa.nasampayutta.m. The difference lies in > the level of wisdom and the nature of the object of the wisdom. This may be true, but I wonder if it we could also include the 4 kusala cittas dissociated from knowledge in which samatha can be developed even though the cittas with knowledge is definitely on a higher level and hence much better still for samatha development. > Further, as I understand it, the 'Samaadhi' section of Vism deals > with samatha bhavana while the 'Panna' section deals with vipassana > bhavana. Sounds reasonable to me. > Is what I have just said consistent with the Abhidhamma texts as you > read them, Jim? Not quite and I have given my responses to your above remarks. I was then taken aback when I read your following remarks to Larry: "Developing samatha is different from developing concentration. There is no kusala involved in simply focussing on an object, even an object such as a kasina or the breath." The main disagreement I have with this is that I think that 'developing samatha' and 'developing concentration' are both the same. 'samatha' and 'samaadhi' are just different names for the same dhamma as I tried to show in my previous post. 'samaadhibhaavanaa' is a term that is much more commonly used and even occurs in the Tipitaka than 'samathabhaavanaa' which is rarely used and found mostly in Tikas. Whenever I see something like 'developing concentration' in the texts I automatically assume that it means developing *wholesome* concentration, one-pointedness, calm, call it what you may. I also believe that, even if the ratio of unwholesome cittas to the wholesome ones is 100 or more to 1 in the mind of an aspiring meditator, developing wholesome concentration will allow for the inevitability of the ratio to increase in favour of the kusala cittas at the expense of the akusala ones. Mind you, there will often be times when one or more of the five hindrances (niivara.nas) will intensify and get worse before things got better. Best wishes, Jim 25616 From: yu_zhonghao Date: Fri Sep 26, 2003 2:58pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Personality view vs. Delusion Hi TG and Sarah, This is how I see it: The view "people are the five aggregates" is the personality view. In other words, with personality view, one views viewing oneself and others as the five aggregates. But like you said, personality view has nothing to do with whether people exist or not. Peace, Victor --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, TGrand458@a... wrote: > Hi Sarah [snip] > > "Personality view" has to do with whether there is a view that there is a > self, soul, controler, agent, entity, etc., that persists apart from mere > conditions. Since such a condition does not exist, personality- view is an incorrect > view. However, as you point out next, nama and rupas do exist...and > yes...people are made up of nama and rupas. Therefore...people exist based on that. > People = The 5 Aggregates, and the 12 Fold Chain indicates the systematic > dynamics that power them. I don't think that personality-view, self-view, > identity-view, or whatever term suits you, has anything to do with whether or not > people exist. [snip] 25617 From: orez277 Date: Fri Sep 26, 2003 6:48am Subject: looking for 10 day course in the tradition of u ba khin looking for 10 day course in the tradition of u ba khin in souse india in febuary if u noww somesing ill b gratefull. my all b happy orez 25618 From: yu_zhonghao Date: Fri Sep 26, 2003 3:39pm Subject: Re: Mantras Hi Christine and all, If mantra is interpreted as reminder or recollection that helps allaying fear and agitation with a calming effect, then I would think that mantras do have its place in the Buddha's teaching. For instance, in the discourse Samyutta Nikaya XI.3 Dhajagga Sutta The Top of the Standard http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/samyutta/sn11-003.html the Buddha taught the monks: "But, monks, I tell you this: If, when you have gone to the wilderness, to the foot of a tree, or to an empty dwelling, there should arise fear, terror, or horripilation, then on that occasion you should recollect me thus: 'Indeed, the Blessed One is worthy & rightly self-awakened, consummate in knowledge & conduct, well-gone, knower of the cosmos, unexcelled trainer of those who can be tamed, teacher of devas and human beings, awakened, blessed.' For when you recollect me, monks, any fear, terror, or horripilation you may have will be abandoned. I would think that chanting/singing can be helpful to some for recollection. And chanting/singing "Namo tassa bhagavato arahato sammasambuddhassa" can be seen as a form of recollecting the Buddha. I don't think there are greed or lust in you when you hear the chanting the "Namo tasa bhagavato arahato sammasambuddhassa" and experience calm. Greed or lust is agitating, not calming. Peace, Victor --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "christine_forsyth" wrote: > Dear Group, > > What is the purpose of mantras? Is there any place for mantras > within Theravada Buddhism? I have a zip file of a group > chanting/singing "Namo tassa bhagavato arahato sammasambuddhassa" > and "namo sakyamuni buddha" in a most melodic and calming manner. > Lots of lobha I suppose ... > > metta and peace, > Christine > ---The trouble is that you think you have time --- 25619 From: yu_zhonghao Date: Fri Sep 26, 2003 3:41pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Personality view vs. Delusion Erratum: "In other words, with personality view, one views viewing oneself and others as the five aggregates." should read "In other words, with personality view, one views oneself and others as the five aggregates." --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "yu_zhonghao" wrote: > Hi TG and Sarah, > > This is how I see it: > > The view "people are the five aggregates" is the personality view. > > In other words, with personality view, one views viewing oneself and > others as the five aggregates. > > But like you said, personality view has nothing to do with whether > people exist or not. > > Peace, > Victor 25620 From: Date: Fri Sep 26, 2003 4:12pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Concentration and samatha Jon: "Samatha is in fact kusala mental action (i.e., action that is completed through the mind-door) accompanied by panna. Are you happy with this as a working definition of samatha?" Hi Jon, Not exactly happy but I guess it will do. As a definition it doesn't really say what "developing tranquility" entails except to say that panna has something to do with it, who knows what? Are we talking about skill (kosala) here or some other kind of panna? I'm not familiar with what is meant by "developing tranquility" other than as jhana. Could you give me a little sketch? Larry 25621 From: Date: Fri Sep 26, 2003 4:45pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Vism. XIV, 19 "In the fourth triad, insight-understanding initiated by apprehending one's own aggregates is "interpreting the internal" (6). That initiated by apprehending another's aggregates or external materiality not bound up with the faculties, [that is, inanimate matter], is "interpreting the external". That initiated by apprehending both is "interpreting the internal and external". So it is of three kinds as interpreting the internal, and so on." Hi Nina, Is there any commentary on "external materiality not bound up with the faculties"? Larry 25622 From: Jim Anderson Date: Fri Sep 26, 2003 5:26pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Dhamma Issue no 11. Sexual Misconduct. Hi Sarah, Back in the late 70s I clipped out a small article from a local newspaper that relates to "Girls will be 'marriageable at five years old'." I thought it may be of interest to you and others and have reproduced it below. > In my other post I continued to quote about how a time will come when > there is a life-span of only ten years. Girls will be 'marriageable at > five years old'. Food delicacies will disappear and the 10 kusala > kamma-patha will disappear completely with the 10 akusala kamma-patha very > prevalent. There will be no word for 'moral '(kusala). Those who show no > respect for parents, ascetics and so on will 'enjoy honour and prestige' > (just as in King Pasenadi's dream in the Jataka Tales). "All will be > promiscuous in the world like goats and sheep, fowl and pigs, dogs and > jackals." There will be fierce enmity, hatred, killing. Eventually there > will be a 'turn around' after the seven day 'sword interval'. People will > realise that the addiction to evil ways has led to terrible results and > they start to abstain from taking life and so on. Life spans start to > increase again. Only when they return to eighty thousand years will the > next Buddha, Metteyya appear. AGE OF PUBERTY DROPS 4 MONTHS EVERY 10 YEARS OTTAWA (CP) -- Teenagers are maturing physically earlier and are being pushed into sexual relationships, says a university child psychiatry professor. The age of puberty, when a youth is capable of sexual reproduction, has been gradually decreasing, says Dr. Brian McConnville of Queen's University. Estimates show the average of puberty drops about four months every 10 years. It's 12.5 at present, down from 16.5 in 1860, he says. Moreover, girls begin puberty earlier than boys, Dr. McConnville says. And they begin to develop sexually and start menstruating at 10 years old and earlier. "There have been various theories to explain this, including better overall nutrition." Best wishes, Jim 25623 From: Andrew Date: Fri Sep 26, 2003 5:48pm Subject: More rules, less wisdom? Dear DSG folk This issue came up quite independently of the recent Precepts thread, although I suppose it is partially related. I was reading the Bhaddali Sutta. Bhaddali, it seems, was a bhikkhu who wasn't prepared to follow all the rules. He noted that, in the beginning, the Sangha had few training rules and many Arahants. This had evolved into a situation where there were lots of training rules and not so many Arahants. He asked the Buddha why. Buddha replied: "That is how it is, Bhaddali. When beings are deteriorating and the true Dhamma is disappearing, then there are more training rules and fewer bhikkhus become established in final knowledge ..." To me, Buddha's answer suggests that the Sangha is like everything else - it arises and will pass away. Am I correct in reading the Buddha as saying that an increase in rules/law is a sign of deterioration and accompanied by a waning of wisdom? Is there a message there for western society which has seen a huge increase in the amount of law since World War 2? Or is that going too far? And if so, why? BTW there is a thread in western ethics which considers rules/laws to be impediments to the exercise and development of ethical judgment-making ability. Is the Buddha giving credence to that thread? Sorry to be asking questions all the time instead of providing useful explanations, but I would love to hear some more well-read views on this issue. With metta Andrew 25624 From: lokuttaracitta Date: Fri Sep 26, 2003 7:01pm Subject: Re: Question again :To Htoo and,,,,,,,,, Dear Htoo Naing > > > We can imagine that 45 years ( 16425 days ) preaching and speaking > > > were a lot. The main facts were carried over verbally. Literature was > > > started at the 4 th meeting in Celon or Srilanka. > ---------------------------------------------------- > > Could you give me names of the literateture ?( LC ) > ------------------------------------------------ > I mean Tipitaka. It is not a name but just a name ( :-) do not be > confused ) ( Htoo ) > ---------------------------- > > > > Why were they not included at the 3 th meeting ? > ------------------------------------------------------------ > There was not any letter or equivalent at that time. ( Htoo ) > ------------------------------------------ Thank you very much . I can understand! From LC 25625 From: rjkjp1 Date: Fri Sep 26, 2003 8:05pm Subject: Re: More rules, less wisdom? --- Dear Andrew, In the case of the sangha the reason the Buddha gradually added more rules to the vinaya was because they were needed, they act as a protection . It is not that the rules decreased the wisdom but rather that as monks with less wisdom joined the sangha more rules became necessary. robertK In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Andrew" wrote: > Dear DSG folk > This issue came up quite independently of the recent Precepts thread, > although I suppose it is partially related. I was reading the > Bhaddali Sutta. Bhaddali, it seems, was a bhikkhu who wasn't > prepared to follow all the rules. He noted that, in the beginning, > the Sangha had few training rules and many Arahants. This had > evolved into a situation where there were lots of training rules and > not so many Arahants. He asked the Buddha why. > Buddha replied: "That is how it is, Bhaddali. When beings are > deteriorating and the true Dhamma is disappearing, then there are > more training rules and fewer bhikkhus become established in final > knowledge ..." > To me, Buddha's answer suggests that the Sangha is like everything > else - it arises and will pass away. > Am I correct in reading the Buddha as saying that an increase in > rules/law is a sign of deterioration and accompanied by a waning of > wisdom? > Is there a message there for western society which has seen a huge > increase in the amount of law since World War 2? Or is that going > too far? And if so, why? BTW there is a thread in western ethics > which considers rules/laws to be impediments to the exercise and > development of ethical judgment-making ability. Is the Buddha giving > credence to that thread? > Sorry to be asking questions all the time instead of providing useful > explanations, but I would love to hear some more well-read views on > this issue. > With metta > Andrew 25626 From: phamdluan2000 Date: Fri Sep 26, 2003 8:26pm Subject: Re: More rules, less wisdom? Dear Andrew, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Andrew" wrote: Dear DSG folk This issue came up quite independently of the recent Precepts thread, although I suppose it is partially related. I was reading the Bhaddali Sutta. Bhaddali, it seems, was a bhikkhu who wasn't prepared to follow all the rules. He noted that, in the beginning, the Sangha had few training rules and many Arahants. This had evolved into a situation where there were lots of training rules and not so many Arahants. He asked the Buddha why. Buddha replied: "That is how it is, Bhaddali. When beings are deteriorating and the true Dhamma is disappearing, then there are more training rules and fewer bhikkhus become established in final knowledge ..." To me, Buddha's answer suggests that the Sangha is like everything else - it arises and will pass away. Am I correct in reading the Buddha as saying that an increase in rules/law is a sign of deterioration and accompanied by a waning of wisdom? < snip > KKT: I think the meaning is very simple. The Buddha wants to say that when there are many people who are apt to become Arahants then there is no need for many rules. But when there are few people apt to become Arahants then it needs more rules to enhance the quality of the trainings. The increase in rules/laws is a sign of the deterioration of the quality of people. It reminds me of some verses in the Tao Teh Ching of Lao Tzu: When the Great Tao was abandoned, There appeared humanity and justice. When intelligence and wit arose, There appeared great hypocrites. When the six relations lost their harmony, There appeared filial piety and paternal kindness. When darkness and disorder began to reign in a kingdom, There appeared the loyal ministers. Peace, KKT 25627 From: christine_forsyth Date: Fri Sep 26, 2003 9:38pm Subject: Re: Egypt Diary: A Bunch of Noise Hello James, Thanks for the offer - I'd like to see some photos of what you are doing in Egypt (maybe a couple would be suitable for the dsg album?), and hear some more of your impressions. metta Christine 25628 From: christine_forsyth Date: Fri Sep 26, 2003 9:40pm Subject: Re: Mantras Hello Victor, I think this is a very good explanation. What you say makes sense to me, and I feel O.K. about the chants now. Thanks. metta, Christine --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "yu_zhonghao" wrote: > Hi Christine and all, > > If mantra is interpreted as reminder or recollection that helps > allaying fear and agitation with a calming effect, then I would > think that mantras do have its place in the Buddha's teaching. For > instance, in the discourse > > Samyutta Nikaya XI.3 > Dhajagga Sutta > The Top of the Standard > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/samyutta/sn11-003.html > I would think that chanting/singing can be helpful to some for > recollection. And chanting/singing "Namo tassa bhagavato arahato > sammasambuddhassa" can be seen as a form of recollecting the Buddha. > > I don't think there are greed or lust in you when you hear the > chanting the "Namo tasa bhagavato arahato sammasambuddhassa" and > experience calm. Greed or lust is agitating, not calming. > > Peace, > Victor 25629 From: connie Date: Fri Sep 26, 2003 11:43pm Subject: Re: Mantras Hi RobM and Christine, While it's something of a stretch to call it mantra, you can also download, by chapter, verse by verse Pali chanting/English reading of the Dhp from http://www.buddhist-book.com/dhammmapada.htm . I kinda wonder about the idea that the Teachings can be all condensed down into a few words, too, but it seems that it worked for Sariputta. The way I was told is that the word Japan encompasses all the land, history, people, etc of that country. So I guess it doesn't even have to be words, but even a rag would work if we looked at it right. OM... or is that "wax-on, wax-off"? connie 25630 From: christine_forsyth Date: Fri Sep 26, 2003 11:35pm Subject: Re: looking for 10 day course in the tradition of u ba khin Hello Orez, Here is a link that may be of assistance: http://www.vri.dhamma.org/ In the first paragraph on Vipassana Meditation, click on "schedule" you will find a list of courses with dates for India. I hope you find what you want. May you be happy also. metta and peace, Christine ---The trouble is that you think you have time --- --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "orez277" wrote: > looking for 10 day course in the tradition of u ba khin in souse india in febuary > if u noww somesing ill b gratefull. > my all b happy > orez 25631 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sat Sep 27, 2003 1:16am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Concentration and samatha Larry --- LBIDD@w... wrote: > Jon: "Samatha is in fact kusala mental action (i.e., action that is > completed through the mind-door) accompanied by panna. > Are you happy with this as a working definition of samatha?" > > Hi Jon, > > Not exactly happy but I guess it will do. As a definition it > doesn't > really say what "developing tranquility" entails except to say that > panna has something to do with it, who knows what? Are we talking > about skill (kosala) here or some other kind of panna? Your observations here are spot on. The definition does not say exactly what the distinguishing characteristic of samatha/tranquility is. (As it stands, in fact, the definition could apply equally to vipassana/insight). The key, as you have noted, is the panna. Yes, this is definitely ‘skill’. It is panna that: - sees danger in the attachment that follows the experiencing of objects through the sense-doors, and - is able to distinguish between kusala and (very subtle) akusala moments of consciousness. As you can see from this description, simply focussing attention on a subject of concentration (even one of ‘the 40’) could not amount to samatha, since no panna is necessary for that. Any disagreement here? Jon PS The second part of your post raises the question of the relationship between samatha bhaavanaa and jhaana. To my understanding, jhaana is the outcome of samatha bhaavanaa. That is to say, tranquillity developed appropriately and to a high degree results in jhaana. Jhaana cannot occur other than by the development of samatha bhaavanaa. There is a sort of parallel here between enlightenment and insight (on the one hand) and samatha and jhana (on the other). As you know, insight/wisdom/panna/mundane path consciousness developed to its highest degree it results in enlightenment/supramundane path consciousness, and this is preceded by ‘change of lineage’ citta as the transition/bridging-moment between the 2 planes of consciousness (mundane and supramundane). Likewise samatha/wholesome concentration appropriately developed to its highest degree results in the arising of ‘jhaana’ consciousness, and is similarly preceded by a moment of ‘change of lineage’ consciousness. > I'm not familiar with > what is meant by "developing tranquility" other than as jhana. > Could you give me a little sketch? 25632 From: htootintnaing Date: Sat Sep 27, 2003 3:59am Subject: [dsg] Re: Dhamma Issue no 11. Sexual Misconduct. Dear Jim, Quite interesting. 5 year old girls are marriageable? In which newspaper? In the last dynasty of Burmese kingdom there was a girl who became a queen at the age of 7. But the king did not consume until she was fully matured. This does not mean 7 year girls marriageable. This girl was given to the king as a present. But what is sure is age of puberty has been dropping. There were some girls who gave birth childs at 15, 14 and so on. These are just isolated phenomena. But there is a possibility that general trend will be dropping regarding sexuality of girls. Htoo Naing --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Jim Anderson" wrote: > Hi Sarah, > > Back in the late 70s I clipped out a small article from a local > newspaper that relates to "Girls will be 'marriageable at five years > old'." I thought it may be of interest to you and others and have > reproduced it below. > > > In my other post I continued to quote about how a time will come > when > > there is a life-span of only ten years. Girls will be 'marriageable > at > > five years old'. Food delicacies will disappear and the 10 kusala > > kamma-patha will disappear completely with the 10 akusala > kamma-patha very > > prevalent. There will be no word for 'moral '(kusala). Those who > show no > > respect for parents, ascetics and so on will 'enjoy honour and > prestige' > > (just as in King Pasenadi's dream in the Jataka Tales). "All will be > > promiscuous in the world like goats and sheep, fowl and pigs, dogs > and > > jackals." There will be fierce enmity, hatred, killing. Eventually > there > > will be a 'turn around' after the seven day 'sword interval'. People > will > > realise that the addiction to evil ways has led to terrible results > and > > they start to abstain from taking life and so on. Life spans start > to > > increase again. Only when they return to eighty thousand years will > the > > next Buddha, Metteyya appear. > > AGE OF PUBERTY DROPS 4 MONTHS EVERY 10 YEARS > OTTAWA (CP) -- Teenagers are maturing physically earlier and are > being pushed into sexual relationships, says a university child > psychiatry professor. > The age of puberty, when a youth is capable of sexual reproduction, > has been gradually decreasing, says Dr. Brian McConnville of Queen's > University. > Estimates show the average of puberty drops about four months every > 10 years. It's 12.5 at present, down from 16.5 in 1860, he says. > Moreover, girls begin puberty earlier than boys, Dr. McConnville > says. And they begin to develop sexually and start menstruating at 10 > years old and earlier. > "There have been various theories to explain this, including better > overall nutrition." > > Best wishes, > Jim 25633 From: gazita2002 Date: Sat Sep 27, 2003 4:15am Subject: to Sarah. Dear Sarah, Just to let you know that 'Conditions' has arrived - anumodana for this, I find this a very valuable book. I have tried to write to you offline, but it keeps returning to me. Maybe you have another email address for non dsg stuff? Because I need to discuss a non dsg item with you, could you pls send me [offline] an address that I can contact you on. Patience, courage and good cheer, Azita. 25634 From: Sarah Date: Sat Sep 27, 2003 4:16am Subject: Re: [dsg] Personality view vs. Delusion Hi Howard (& TG), --- upasaka@a... wrote: > TG, I'm glad you liked my reply, but I apologize for jumping in > before > you responded yourself. > Sarah, I suggest that you quickly team up with Jon, and then we > can > have a tag-team wrestling match! ;-)) > > With WWF (World Wrestling Federation) metta, ..... I think he’s got his own wrestling matches to keep him occupied.... Look f/w to getting back to you both after the weekend (teaching today and hopefully the beach tomorrow to build up some of those badly-needed muscles James once painted into my pic;-)). I’m glad TG and I are tempting you out of seclusion too.....(and no, I never give ‘F’ grades....but I’m not quite sure who is testing and marking here....) Metta, Sarah ===== 25635 From: Star Kid Date: Sat Sep 27, 2003 4:19am Subject: Kamma in Egypt! Dear James, How lucky! You've visited the pyramids and the Egyptian Musuem! Talking about "lucky" you've mentioned it in your previous email. You've written "According to the Buddha that isn't the case at all." What do you mean? Do you mean that the Buddha do not believe in luck? And what is kamma? Why is it important to know about kamma? Please answer the questions, I'm desperate to know the answers. Metta, Sandy. P.S. What did you see in the Egyptian Musuem and in the pyramids? By the way I'm interested in history and I've read alot of things about history in pyramids! 25636 From: Star Kid Date: Sat Sep 27, 2003 4:21am Subject: Some Questions James: I am Philip Chui. I want to ask you some questions about your trip to Eygpt and some questions about Buddhism. So, here are the questions below: 1.Why did you go to Eygpt? 2. Why did the landlord live in a cave? 3. What was the weather like? 4. Did you fnd your lost baggage? Here are some questions about or related to Buddhism. 1. Why did you believe in Buddhism? 2. Why is Buddhism unique? 3. Did the Buddha prove to you that he is real? 4. Why does the Buddha ask for so many fastings and so many limitations for food? 5. Would you go to hell if you don't believe in the Buddha? 6. Did the Buddha help you earn lots of money and become rich? Please answer them when you have time. Thanks if you do. Philip Chui 25637 From: icarofranca Date: Sat Sep 27, 2003 5:22am Subject: Re: [dsg] ICARO´S_DHAMMA_DIARY_-_CHAPTER_ONE_! Dear Sarah: Sarah:" I would say these Dhammas (the four great elements, sensitive phenomena, > etc as you listed last time) are `real' because they have characteristics > and can be directly known." ------------------------------------------------------------- Sarah, you and Nina are right at these point! When I begun my Abhidhamma studies, I followed an easy approach that could directly relate Rupa with Matter, and the "Real" Paramattha Dhammas with concrete beings: so, by consequence,one gets at the last end of such reasonings a clash of reality definitions! A process of development or a vocal intimation aren´t "concrete" things, but they are as real as a Cakku-Dhatu or a feeling of hardness. As posed by you and Nina, this question is more Epistemological ( the nature of our external world knowledge, as the Honourable Bertrand Russell could say!) than Ontological!!! ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Sarah: "Paramattha by definition means > ultimate or actual, I think. " ---------------------------------------------------------- Exact !!! ----------------------------------------------------------- Sarah:" Logic??? No more mutton sceances??" ------------------------------------------------------------------- No more clogged stomach with meat, you see... -------------------------------------------------------------------- Sarah:" I'm very tuned and very appreciative (even if I don't speak Icarish like > Connie;-)). Sounds like bootcamp's going very well with lots of good > paramattha reminders;-)" ------------------------------------------------------------------- Yeah !!!! Sometimes I really miss Connie´s quotes and remarks ( And yours and Nina´s)... and at the occasions I ought to interact with the female group of our squad, I think about the good and oldie Mike Neese being onslaughted by that bunch of violent femmes...HAHAHAHAHAHAH!!!!! Mettaya , Ícaro ;-)) 25638 From: Jim Anderson Date: Sat Sep 27, 2003 5:19am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Dhamma Issue no 11. Sexual Misconduct. Dear Htoo, I'm afraid I didn't make it too clear in my post about the source of "Girls will be 'marriageable at five years old'.". It comes from the Cakkavatti Sutta in the Digha Nikaya and was spoken by the Buddha. Since it refers to a time when the average human life-span will be about ten years, I would think that the meaning of 'marriageable at five years old' would be the age when a girl is old enough to have a baby. This is different from the custom I've read about of very young girls being married in India. Best wishes, Jim > Dear Jim, > > Quite interesting. 5 year old girls are marriageable? In which > newspaper? In the last dynasty of Burmese kingdom there was a girl > who became a queen at the age of 7. But the king did not consume > until she was fully matured. This does not mean 7 year girls > marriageable. This girl was given to the king as a present. But what > is sure is age of puberty has been dropping. There were some girls > who gave birth childs at 15, 14 and so on. These are just isolated > phenomena. But there is a possibility that general trend will be > dropping regarding sexuality of girls. > > Htoo Naing 25639 From: Date: Sat Sep 27, 2003 1:30am Subject: Re: [dsg] Personality view vs. Delusion Hi, Sarah - In a message dated 9/27/03 7:17:08 AM Eastern Daylight Time, sarahdhhk@y... writes: > > Sarah, I suggest that you quickly team up with Jon, and then we > >can > >have a tag-team wrestling match! ;-)) > > > >With WWF (World Wrestling Federation) metta, > ..... > I think he’s got his own wrestling matches to keep him occupied.... > -------------------------------------- Howard: Aww! :-( ------------------------------------- > > Look f/w to getting back to you both after the weekend (teaching today and > hopefully the beach tomorrow to build up some of those badly-needed > muscles James once painted into my pic;-)). > ---------------------------------------- Howard: Sounds great! ---------------------------------------- > > I’m glad TG and I are tempting you out of seclusion too.....(and no, I > never give ‘F’ grades....but I’m not quite sure who is testing and marking > here....) > ------------------------------------- Howard: I never intended the seclusion to be complete - just a pulling back from excess. :-) Actually, I've already become more regular in my meditation, which pleases me. -------------------------------------- > > Metta, > > Sarah > ========================== With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 25640 From: nina van gorkom Date: Sat Sep 27, 2003 10:16am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Dhamma Issue no 11. Sexual Misconduct. Dear Derek, Long ago we discussed samalobha and visamalobho. Samalobha is "normal", ordinary lobha, you do not do harm to others. Lobha we have everyday, time and again. Visama lobha: extraordinary, not ordinary lobha, this is strong and you may harm others. Sama is even, ordinary. Visama is the opposite. Nina. op 26-09-2003 02:35 schreef Derek Cameron op derekacameron@y...: > It occurred to me that in the text itself the three things said to > have increased are adhammaraago visamalobho micchaadhammo. Literally > these three mean something like "unrighteous lust, disagreeable > greed, and wrong dhamma [?]" 25641 From: nina van gorkom Date: Sat Sep 27, 2003 10:16am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Pannatti As A Vehicle Dear Htoo, I like your clear summary, and also Pannatti As A Vehicle. Because pannatti can convey what is real, what is dhamma. We need it in order to understand dhamma. Yes, I missed you but understand that the amount of posts are too much at times. Maybe for the newcomers you could repeat what you explained before about cetasikas as helpers, etc? Nina. op 26-09-2003 18:21 schreef htootintnaing op htootintnaing@y...: > But without Pannatti, everything is hard to be talked. So I posted '' > Pannatta As A Vehicle'. Because it conveys about real Dhamma or > ultimate realities. > > I will be looking forward to hearing your comments on my expression. 25642 From: Date: Sat Sep 27, 2003 10:20am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Concentration and samatha Jon: "As you can see from this description, simply focussing attention on a subject of concentration (even one of 'the 40') could not amount to samatha, since no panna is necessary for that." Hi Jon, This seems fine to me. However, I'm not clear on what you mean by samatha bhavana. What I had in mind is "Sila" (discipline), the first book of Visuddhimagga. Or possibly cultivating the two samatha cetasikas: tranquility of the mental body (feeling, perception, mental formations), and tranquility of consciousness. Cultivating sila would have samatha as a factor but not necessarily a direct object. I'm not exactly sure how samatha is developed in samatha vipassana except possibly as something like "relax and look". But I agree developing any virtuous state requires discriminating wisdom. Larry 25643 From: Date: Sat Sep 27, 2003 10:39am Subject: Re: [dsg] Vism. XIV, 19 (6). The word "abhinivisati" with its noun "abhinivesa" means literally 'to dwell on', and so to adhere, or 'insist'. In the Tipi.taka it always appears in a bad sense and always appears in contexts with wrong view and clinging (see e.g. M.iii, 30-31, Nd. I, 436 and also Ps. quoted above at Ch. I, 140). However, in the Commentaries the word appears also in a good sense as at Ch. XIV, 130, Ch. XXI, 73 and 83f., and at MA.i,250 (cf. "saddha.m nivisati", M.ii,173). In this good sense it is synonymous with "right" interpretation of experience. All the bare experience of perception is interpreted by the mind either in the sense of permanence, pleasure, self, which is wrong because it is not confirmed by experience, or in the sense of impermanence, etc., which is right because it is confirmed by experience (see Ch. XIV, 130). There is no not interpreting experience, and it is a function of the mind that the interpretation adopted is 'dwelt upon', i.e. insisted upon. And so it is this insistence or interpretation in accordance with reality as confirmed by experience that is the "abhinivesa" of the Commentaries in the good sense. For these reasons the words "interpretation", "misinterpretation" and "insistence" have been chosen here as renderings. Hi Nina, Does "insistence" and "interpretation" refer to javana because javana citta is repeated 7 times in citta process? Also, I was wondering if root cittas only arise in javana? Larry 25644 From: icarofranca Date: Sat Sep 27, 2003 0:04pm Subject: ICARO´S DHAMMA DIARY - CHAPTER TWO ! O noble fellows on Dhamma Studies!!! My Military bootcamp doesn´t give me much spare time to post abundantly... so, I will boldly continue my Dhamma Diary at a breadline, but with all the magic of my style!!!!! ICARO´S DHAMMA DIARY - CHAPTER TWO ! "The FLEEEEEECE of a good soldier is a good uniform!" When a sincere and witted person attains the intention to follow the Noble Path, he or she must to get some requisites to go on worthly, without fall on the path´s stumblingblocks or the Kamma´s pitfalls. Lobha, Dosa and Moha wait for the bad tempered or ill- disciplined mind to clinch their claws on all of us! A soldier also, must to get a well-disciplined overview about his resources and the others. So, we will begin with the two main pillars of a well-routed journey on the Buddhistic Noble Path: First, the Majjhima-patipada 1) Mindfulness samma-sati 2) Wisdom samma-ditthi 3) Concentration samma-samadhi 4) Right Thinking samma-samkappa 5) Right Effort samma-vayama These factors are needed to walk the Middle Way, as a good and strong boot for a soldier! The attentive reader will perceive that these five factors are embedded "ab ovo" at the Original Noble Path - The Majjhimapatipada says to us to view the reality around us with awareness, but not to categorize into likes or dislikes. This is not neutral either (Abhyakatta issues are out of context anyway!), but with awareness. And the doughboys and violent grrrrrls that sleep around me at the barracks need out also other things besides a good pair of boots: they need a complete uniform: pants, socks, camouflaged T-shirts, jackets, head coverages, rubberband fixers for the pants´ low ends, and so on... and to keep all this clean, pure and functional. Stay Clean!!! The second pillar of our Dhamma Diary today is... Purity!!! The pure octad (sudda-atthaka)... since everything in this world of Dukkha is related one each other, why not combine these aspects at the best way, to get the best results ? Here we go, Cittajakalpa! First,the avinibhoga + sudda-atthaka group: avinibhoga + viññutti = kayaviññuttinavaka " + vagiviññatti + sadda = vaci-viññutti-dasaka (vocal intimation group) Second, the very interesting Kammaja-action produced group: 5 organs + 2 sexes + jivita + hadaya-vatthu = 9 After, the Cittaja group: 2 viññatti + sadda + 3 mutable qualities = 6, Utuja: avinibhoga + sadda = saddanavaka Aharaja sudda-attaka + lahuta-dvi (corrections are welcome here) Lahuta-di-ekadasaka lightness grouping of eleven Kaya-viññutti-lahuta-di-dvadasaka bodily communication lightness grouping of twelve vaci-viññutti-sadda-lahuta-di-teradasaka ( as I always say to you all, my Pali translation skills are very, very limited... the last expression tied a knot on my understanding! A " 130(?) subtile words for communication or vocal intimation" or something alike!!! corrections are welcome indeed...) Well, Dhamma Students, we can see here at the Theravada Buddhism, good and subtile words and body expression for communication are a kind of Purity of action, as the best knowed Kammaja group:all people want to attain the best Kamma-Phala and keep abroad the bad ones, or to keep mind still and clear at an easily way. The best way to manage this goal is... Purity! Stay Clean! Keeping your closet, bed, clothes and personal life clean and properly fitted will put you far from problems of every kind, making you a worthy recipient for a holy golden fleece or something you like! Wow! What a sermon! After all the fitness conditioning I am taking on I just want to sleep!!!!!! And you all, Dhamma fellows and students of these noble company that stay awake with your eyes widely open, don´t dare to fall at the Niraya´s depths of the infinite muddled boots, where all the failed warriors are waiting for you for an eternal fitness session!!! To escape these ill-fortunated fate, stay tuned for our next Dhamma Diary Chapter: "ICARO´S DHAMMA DIARY CHAPTER THREE: The Noble truths and a tiresome, wearisome, irksome FLOCK of somniferous boys and grrrrls!!!!" Mettaya, Ícaro 25645 From: kenhowardau Date: Sat Sep 27, 2003 2:27pm Subject: Re: [dsg] The Sexual Ethic of the Middle Way (part 1) Hi Jon, ------------- J: > Reading this article, I suspect that Chitt. and I have somewhat different ideas about the factors of the Noble Eightfold Path. ------------- I think you have but not as much as would seem from the opening paragraphs. When the rest of the article is posted, you will see that you are more in tune. ----------------- J: > As regards the factor of Right Action, this is one of the 3 restraints and, like the other 2 restraints, it only arises as a path factor when there is an occasion for restraint from akusala of a particular kind (and when certain other conditions are present). ----------------- The fact that I don't rush out and kill people who are walking past my house doesn't mean I am performing an act of restraint (virati), does it? (Even if it's those brats who kick their football into my garden.) What if there are often snails on my driveway and so, rather than risk crushing them, I delay fetching the newspaper until there is enough sunlight to see where I am walking? Is that more like the real virati? --------------- J: > On the general question of 'sexual ethics', Chittapala says: "Throughout his dispensation Buddha frequently spoke about the dangers of sensual desire, how it can create suffering in this and other lives, and how it is a major obstruction to spiritual development." I think that when the Buddha spoke abut the dangers of sensual desire he was referring to desire of any degree for the objects of all the 5 senses, that is, our old friends visible-object, audible-object, etc., and not specifically to carnal desires/lust. Such desire *is* suffering. ------------- That's very interesting although I'm not sure I understand it. In what way is carnal desire suffering as opposed to the cause of suffering? ------------- J: > Finally, I would hesitate to agree with the idea that all sense-desire is regarded in the texts as an obstacle to spiritual development, since everyone starts from a position of having sense desires and other kilesas in abundance, and their eradication comes only when full enlightenment has been attained. It might be more helpful to consider sense desires as unwholesome tendencies that can be known for what they are, as and when they arise, by developed insight. ------------- I'm beginning to appreciate the importance of that point. Can we assume that dosa is, at least, less likely to become the object of satipatthana than is adosa? My guess is we can't assume anything of the sort. At the intellectual level, it could be argued we are more likely to see the error of our bad ways than the righteousness of our good ways. Perhaps the first signs of right understanding are most likely to be when we realise there is something amiss with our wrong understanding (miccha-ditthi). Or is that going too far? Kind regards, Ken H 25646 From: phamdluan2000 Date: Sat Sep 27, 2003 2:32pm Subject: Re: Mantras --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "connie" wrote: < snip > I kinda wonder about the idea that the Teachings can be all condensed down into a few words, too, but it seems that it worked for Sariputta. KKT: If I have to condense the Teachings in one word, it should be << MIND >> But the Buddha had condensed his Teachings in one phrase. BUDDHISM IN ONE PHRASE There is a section in the Majjhima Nikaya where someone approached the Buddha and asked him whether he could summerize his teachings in one phrase and, if he could, what it would be. The Buddha replied that he could: "Sabbe dhamma nalam abhinivesaya". << NOTHING WHATSOEVER SHOULD BE CLUNG TO >> Then the Buddha emphasized this point by saying that whoever had heard this core-phrase had heard all the Teachings, whoever put it into practice had practiced all the Teachings, and whoever had received the fruits of practicing this point had received all of the fruits of the Buddhist Teachings. From "Heart Wood From The Bo Tree" by Buddhadasa Bhikkhu Peace, KKT 25647 From: Andrew Date: Sat Sep 27, 2003 3:57pm Subject: Re: More rules, less wisdom? --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "phamdluan2000" wrote: > > The increase in rules/laws is > a sign of the deterioration > of the quality of people. > Dear KKT and RobK Thanks for your replies and for pointing out the simplicity of the answer. As usual, I am trying to extrapolate wider than I should. I think I am safe in saying that, generally speaking, the valid need for more rules is a general indication of deterioration, but on the very big assumption that the rule-maker is wise. Buddha certainly satisfies that assumption. I also sense that, in Dhamma, it is preferable for an untaught worldling to follow a wisely given rule rather than blunder on with his or her own discretion in the name of "developing ethical judgement". I suppose it comes down to confidence in the Teachings. Metta Andrew 25648 From: rjkjp1 Date: Sat Sep 27, 2003 5:19pm Subject: Re: More rules, less wisdom? --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Andrew" wrote: > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "phamdluan2000" > wrote: > > > The increase in rules/laws is > > a sign of the deterioration > > of the quality of people. > > > Dear KKT and RobK > Thanks for your replies and for pointing out the simplicity of the > answer. As usual, I am trying to extrapolate wider than I should. I > think I am safe in saying that, generally speaking, the valid need > for more rules is a general indication of deterioration, but on the > very big assumption that the rule-maker is wise. Buddha certainly > satisfies that assumption. > I also sense that, in Dhamma, it is preferable for an untaught > worldling to follow a wisely given rule rather than blunder on with > his or her own discretion in the name of "developing ethical > judgement". I suppose it comes down to confidence in the Teachings. > Metta > Andrew Dear Andrew, I think so. The rules of the Vinaya were laid down by the Buddha for the monks and anyone becoming a monk is obliged to accept those rules. They are under no obligation to be monks and if they don't accept them they can leave the monkhood. The monks life is very different from that of a lay-person. Robertk 25649 From: jonoabb Date: Sat Sep 27, 2003 11:01pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Concentration and samatha Jim Thanks for pointing out the chart in 'Guide to Conditional Relations'. Very useful. I appreciate very much the references you include in your posts, a number of which I am still following up and hope to get back to you on separately. Jim: "Whenever I see something like 'developing concentration' in the texts I automatically assume that it means developing *wholesome* concentration, one-pointedness, calm, call it what you may." Jon: I agree with this, and also that in this sense the 2 terms (samatha and samaadhi) are used interchangeably in the texts. However, this of course does not mean that as a matter of fact the development of concentration can be regarded as the development of samatha, since not all concentration is kusala. As you know, both the cetasika ekaggataa and the other 'concentration factor' cetasikas that assist in making it possible for citta to take the same object repeatedly are a~n~nasamaana (ethically variable) cetasikas or, in the case of 1 of the latter, akusala. The significance of this, as I see it, is that concentration takes its moral flavour from the consciousness it accompanies. In other words, tt is a case of 'if the concentration accompanies a kusala citta then (and only then) it is kusala concentration', rather than 'if the concentration is kusala then the citta will be kusala too'. Hence my comment to Larry, which I now repeat in slightly modified form for better clarity (hopefully): "Simply focussing on an object, even an object such as a kasina or the breath, does not necessarily involve kusala of any kind." So we need to understand in what sense samatha/wholesome samaadhi as mentioned in the texts is kusala. It has to be on account of factors other than the concentration factors that are being developed (i.e., by reason of something other than concentration on a 'right' object). Jim: "I wonder if we could also include [as part of samatha] the 4 kusala cittas dissociated from knowledge in which samatha can be developed even though the cittas with knowledge is definitely on a higher level and hence much better still for samatha development." Jon: I don't know of any textual references directly on point, but I see a conceptual difficulty in this. As far as I know, there is no support in the texts for the idea that kusala that is dissociated-from-knowledge can, if developed, lead to kusala that is associated-with-knowledge. The development of any kind of kusala is largely dependent on the previously-accumulated tendency for the same kind of kusala (and indeed the same relationship pertains for akusala, this is a universally applicable aspect of the teachings, I believe) and also of course the presence of other necessary conditions that 'prompt' the arising of the kusala. Even in the case of insight development the consciousness at the beginning level must be associated-with-knowledge, no matter how weak and fragile the insight moment. It is only by the gradual accumulation of weaker moments of a particular form of kusala that stronger kusala/higher levels of the same kusala can be gained. As I see it, anyway. Corrections welcome. Jon --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Jim Anderson" < jimanderson_on@y...> wrote: > Well, on p. 329 I'm reading Bodhi's note that says: "Technically, > samatha is defined as the one-pointedness of mind (cittass'ekaggataa) > in the eight meditative attainments--...". I find the restriction to > the jhaanas to be somewhat misleading as one-pointedness of mind is > found in every description of samatha in Dhs and also samatha is > present in every state of mind. > > > To my understanding, all moments of samatha bhavana are > > ~naa.nasampayutta.m (accompanied by wisdom), just as all moments of > > vipassana bhavana are ~naa.nasampayutta.m. The difference lies in > > the level of wisdom and the nature of the object of the wisdom. > > This may be true, but I wonder if it we could also include the 4 > kusala cittas dissociated from knowledge in which samatha can be > developed even though the cittas with knowledge is definitely on a > higher level and hence much better still for samatha development. ... > The main disagreement I have with this is that I think that > 'developing samatha' and 'developing concentration' are both the same. > 'samatha' and 'samaadhi' are just different names for the same dhamma > as I tried to show in my previous post. 'samaadhibhaavanaa' is a term > that is much more commonly used and even occurs in the Tipitaka than > 'samathabhaavanaa' which is rarely used and found mostly in Tikas. > Whenever I see something like 'developing concentration' in the texts > I automatically assume that it means developing *wholesome* > concentration, one-pointedness, calm, call it what you may. 25650 From: christine_forsyth Date: Sun Sep 28, 2003 0:13am Subject: [dsg] Re: Fifth Precept,silabbataparamasa Dear Group, A newsletter that may be relevant to the Precepts thread by Ajahn Brahmavamso: http://www.dhammaloka.org.au/publications/HTML/Attachment.html metta and peace, Christine, ---The trouble is that you think you have time--- 25651 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sun Sep 28, 2003 2:37am Subject: Re: [dsg] The Sexual Ethic of the Middle Way (part 1) Ken H Thanks for coming in on this thread. --- kenhowardau wrote: > Hi Jon, ... > The fact that I don't rush out and kill people who are > walking past my house doesn't mean I am performing an act > of restraint (virati), does it? (Even if it's those > brats who kick their football into my garden.) That's right. (I'm sure it comes close to virati though sometimes ;-)).) > What if there are often snails on my driveway and so, > rather than risk crushing them, I delay fetching the > newspaper until there is enough sunlight to see where I > am walking? Is that more like the real virati? That sounds to me like smart (i.e., 'useful') thinking conditioned by your resolution to observe the precepts or by your understanding of the value of avoiding committing wrong action. But I doubt that it would actually be restraint since there is nothing imminent enough to raise the possibility of akusala action. As a matter of interest, it is said that for the arahant there is never any restraint since there is never any inclination to undertake wrong action. So even where a 'situation' presents itself, still there is no virati. > In what way is carnal desire suffering as > opposed to the cause of suffering? It's true that the Buddha spoke about the akusala vipaka that results from committing akusala kamma, as CP refers to in his article, but reflecting along these lines can lead one to the conclusion that the 'antidote' is samatha/the jhaanas. I think the Buddha was at pains to point out continually the impermanence and unsatisfactoriness (dukkha) of all conditioned dhammas, and the need for them to be seen as such as the only way to end suffering forever. > I'm beginning to appreciate the importance of that point. > Can we assume that dosa is, at least, less likely to > become the object of satipatthana than is adosa? My > guess is we can't assume anything of the sort. Right. No rule. Any dhamma. It depends (among other things) on previous accumulated satipatthana as to which dhammas will be the object of satipatthana in this lifetime. > At the > intellectual level, it could be argued we are more likely > to see the error of our bad ways than the righteousness > of our good ways. Perhaps the first signs of right > understanding are most likely to be when we realise there > is something amiss with our wrong understanding > (miccha-ditthi). Or is that going too far? Again, there is no rule. But I think that recognising instances of wrong view for what they are as and when they arise is a very important part of the development of right view, even if that recognition occurs consciously only after the event (and so is not right understanding of the direct kind). In fact, whether we regard the teachings as expounding the gradual development of right view or the gradual elimination of wrong view seems to amount to much the same thing. Thanks for the interesting comments and observations. Jon 25652 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sun Sep 28, 2003 2:59am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Concentration and samatha Larry You asked about my use of the term 'samatha bhaavanaa'. Let's start with samatha. Samatha is one of the kinds of kusala action. Kusala action is action that is accompanied by wholesome consciousness. Wholesome consciousness is consciousness that is rooted in at least 1 of the 3 wholesome roots, that is, the mental factors of alobha (non-attachment), adosa (non-aversion) or amoha (non-ignorance = wisdom/understanding/panna). Kusala can also be classified by the doorway through which the 'action' is completed, that is, body, speech or mind. Kusala can also be classified by the nature of the action, namely, as dana (generosity), sila (restraint, virtuous conduct) or bhaavanaa (mental development). Samatha is kusala that is rooted in adosa or panna*, is completed through the mind-door, is a form of mental development. To take a couple of obvious and easily understood examples: - Metta (loving kindness) - Reflection on the value of performing wholesome deeds (developing kusala) that is correct reflection but that falls short of the direct understanding of a presently arising dhamma Any problems with this description so far? Jon * Note: I think I'm right in not including alobha here, but I'm not 100% sure. Corrections welcome (here and elsewhere) as usual. --- LBIDD@w... wrote: ... > This seems fine to me. However, I'm not clear on what you mean by > samatha bhavana. 25653 From: Sarah Date: Sun Sep 28, 2003 4:00am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Fifth Precept,silabbataparamasa Hi Christine, --- christine_forsyth wrote: > Dear Group, > > A newsletter that may be relevant to the Precepts thread by Ajahn > Brahmavamso: > http://www.dhammaloka.org.au/publications/HTML/Attachment.html ..... Would you kindly share your impressions on the article in this regard? I'd be very interested to hear these. Metta, Sarah ===== 25654 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sun Sep 28, 2003 4:02am Subject: Re: [dsg] Concentration and samatha Jim A hasty correction, and apology. Your comment below about samatha not being limited to cittas associated-with-knowledge is of course correct, metta being but one example (as I mentioned in my subsequent post to Larry). My answer was directed to samatha bhavana that leads to jhaana. Since all jhaana cittas are associated-with-knowledge, then the cittas by which that is developed must also be associated-with-knowledge, as I understand it. But that wasn't the context of your comment, I know. Sorry for the confusion. Jon --- jonoabb wrote: ... > Jim: "I wonder if we could also include [as part of samatha] the 4 > kusala cittas > dissociated from knowledge in which samatha can be developed even > though the cittas with knowledge is definitely on a higher level > and hence > much better still for samatha development." > > Jon: I don't know of any textual references directly on point, but > I see a > conceptual difficulty in this. As far as I know, there is no > support in the texts for > the idea that kusala that is dissociated-from-knowledge can, if > developed, > lead to kusala that is associated-with-knowledge. > > The development of any kind of kusala is largely dependent on the > previously-accumulated tendency for the same kind of kusala (and > indeed the > same relationship pertains for akusala, this is a universally > applicable aspect > of the teachings, I believe) and also of course the presence of > other > necessary conditions that 'prompt' the arising of the kusala. Even > in the case > of insight development the consciousness at the beginning level > must be > associated-with-knowledge, no matter how weak and fragile the > insight > moment. It is only by the gradual accumulation of weaker moments > of a > particular form of kusala that stronger kusala/higher levels of the > same kusala > can be gained. 25655 From: buddhatrue Date: Sun Sep 28, 2003 4:05am Subject: Re: Kamma in Egypt! --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Star Kid wrote: > Dear James, > > How lucky! You've visited the pyramids and the > Egyptian Musuem! Talking about "lucky" you've > mentioned it in your previous email. You've written > "According to the Buddha that isn't the case at all." > What do you mean? Do you mean that the Buddha do not > believe in luck? And what is kamma? Why is it > important to know about kamma? > > Please answer the questions, I'm desperate to know > the answers. > > Metta, > Sandy. > > P.S. What did you see in the Egyptian Musuem and in > the pyramids? By the way I'm interested in history and > I've read alot of things about history in pyramids! Hi Starkid Sandy! Well, it is nice to write to you again. I hope that you are well and studying hard. Yes, I am in the Land of the Pharaohs, Egypt, and I have visited the pyramids and the Egyptian Museum; and I plan to revisit them again when the weather cools a bit. I am not sure which letter you are referring to but I probably did write that. According to Buddhism, there isn't any such thing as luck. Whatever happens to a person is the result of actions that have occurred in the past, not because of any superstitious belief that actions can be influenced. So if you have a lucky rabbit's foot or a lucky pair of socks, forget it! You just have some furry feet… or is that stinky feet? hehehe. They don't have any magical powers. Kamma is important to know because it is important to know that your actions have consequences. If you want good things to happen to you, you have to do good things; if you do bad things, realize that bad things are going to happen to you. Kamma isn't magic or superstition, it is the way the universe operates…in all of its big ways and in its small ways. In the Egyptian Museum I got to see King Tut and his treasures; did you know that he was a boy king? I also got to see a lot of mummies and real, ancient hieroglyphics. At the pyramids I got to climb on the pyramids and see some camels around them. Next time I go I hope to go inside the pyramids and ride a camel around them; there is also a laser/light show I plan to see some evening when they light up the pyramids and tell the stories of the Pharaohs. Take care and study hard. Metta, James 25656 From: robmoult Date: Sun Sep 28, 2003 4:17am Subject: Introduction to the Abhidhamma - Slides 9-12 for comment The "Character" of the Abhidhamma Slide Contents ============== Philosophy - Defines reality, nature of the universe and nature of knowledge Science - Classifies and models Psychology - Focuses on personal experience Ethics - "Avoid evil, do good, purify the mind, that is the teaching of the Buddhas." Speaker Notes ============= Philosophy - The Abhidhamma defines the four ultimate realities; consciousness, mental factors, physical factors and Nibbana. The Abhidhamma defines the nature of the universe; impermanence, unsatisfactoriness and non-existence of self. The Abhidhamma looks at the nature of the mind and the controlling influences; greed, attachment and delusion. Science - The Abhidhamma lists classes and categories. We should avoid temptation to treat the Abhidhamma as an intellectual exercise (analysis paralysis). The Abhidhamma helps us to "see things as they truly are" in the present moment. Psychology - The Abhidhamma is really the science of the mind; in today's terms, this is called Psychology. The focus of the Abhidhamma is on personal experience. Ethics - The title of the first book of the Abhidhamma has been translated as "Buddhist Psychological Ethics". In the Cula- Malunkyovada Sutta, the Buddha was asked a number of theoretical questions; the Buddha refused to answer because the Buddha's teaching is practical in nature. The Buddha's teaching focuses on ethics. In this Sutta, the Buddha gives the analogy of a man pierced with a poison arrow who refuses to allow the surgeon to remove the arrow until he is told the name, height, caste, etc. of the archer who shot the arrow. The man would die before he could learn all of these things. The mission of science is to create a model for the universe. The mission of the Abhidhamma is to free us from suffering. 25657 From: Sarah Date: Sun Sep 28, 2003 4:18am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Mantras Hi KKT, --- phamdluan2000 wrote: > KKT: If I have to condense > the Teachings in one word, > it should be << MIND >> ..... Could you elaborate on why? ..... > > But the Buddha had condensed > his Teachings in one phrase. > > > BUDDHISM IN ONE PHRASE > > There is a section in the Majjhima Nikaya > where someone approached the Buddha > and asked him whether he could summerize > his teachings in one phrase and, > if he could, what it would be. > The Buddha replied that he could: > > "Sabbe dhamma nalam abhinivesaya". > > << NOTHING WHATSOEVER SHOULD BE CLUNG TO >> > > Then the Buddha emphasized this point by saying that > whoever had heard this core-phrase > had heard all the Teachings, > whoever put it into practice > had practiced all the Teachings, and > whoever had received the fruits of practicing this point > had received all of the fruits of the Buddhist Teachings. > > From "Heart Wood From The Bo Tree" by Buddhadasa Bhikkhu .... Does he give a reference? Is there no mention of the tri-lakkana first? Metta, Sarah ====== 25658 From: christine_forsyth Date: Sun Sep 28, 2003 5:25am Subject: [dsg] Re: Mantras Hello Sarah, KKT and all, It is probable that the Ven. Ajahn Buddhadasa was referring to this excerpt from the Cuulatanhaasankhaya Sutta Majjhima Nikaya 37 "The Shorter Discourse on the Destruction of Craving" when Sakka, ruler of gods, asked: "Venerable sir, how in brief is a bhikkhu liberated by the destruction of craving, one who has reached the ultimate end, the ultimate security from bondage, the ultimate holy life, the ultimate goal, one who is formost among gods and humans?" "Here, ruler of gods, a bhikkhu has heard that nothing is worth adhering to. When a bhikkhu has heard that nothing is worth adhering to, he directly knows everything; having directly known everything, he fully understands everything; having fully understood everything, whatever feeling he feels, whether pleasant or painful or neither- painful-nor-pleasant, he abides contemplating impermanence in those feelings, contemplating fading away, contemplating cessation, contemplating relinquishment. Contemplating thus, he does not cling to anything in the world. When he does not cling, he is not agitated. When he is not agitated, he personally attains Nibbana. He understands:"Birth is destroyed, the holy life has been lived, what had to be done has been done, there is no more coming to any state of being.' I think it comes from Verse 3 in this sutta. (See a couple of mentions in this verse 3 'Here ruler of the gods' ...etc. below "sabbe dhamma nalam abhinivesaya' with the 'ati' ending.) 3. Idha devànaminda bhikkhuno sutaü hoti: sabbe dhammà nàlaü abhinivesàyàti. Eva¤ca taü devànaminda bhikkhuno sutaü hoti: sabbe dhammà nàlaü abhinivesàyàti, so sabbaü dhammaü abhijànàti. Sabbaü dhammaü abhi¤¤àya sabbaü dhammaü parijànàti. http://www.metta.lk/tipitaka/2Sutta-Pitaka/2Majjhima- Nikaya/Majjhima1/037-culatanhasankhaya-p.htm metta and peace, Christine ---The trouble is that you think you have time --- --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Sarah wrote: > Hi KKT, > > --- phamdluan2000 wrote: > > > KKT: If I have to condense > > the Teachings in one word, > > it should be << MIND >> > ..... > Could you elaborate on why? > ..... > > > > But the Buddha had condensed > > his Teachings in one phrase. > > > > > > BUDDHISM IN ONE PHRASE > > > > There is a section in the Majjhima Nikaya > > where someone approached the Buddha > > and asked him whether he could summerize > > his teachings in one phrase and, > > if he could, what it would be. > > The Buddha replied that he could: > > > > "Sabbe dhamma nalam abhinivesaya". > > > > << NOTHING WHATSOEVER SHOULD BE CLUNG TO >> > > > > Then the Buddha emphasized this point by saying that > > whoever had heard this core-phrase > > had heard all the Teachings, > > whoever put it into practice > > had practiced all the Teachings, and > > whoever had received the fruits of practicing this point > > had received all of the fruits of the Buddhist Teachings. > > > > From "Heart Wood From The Bo Tree" by Buddhadasa Bhikkhu > .... > Does he give a reference? Is there no mention of the tri-lakkana first? > > Metta, > > Sarah > ====== 25659 From: christine_forsyth Date: Sun Sep 28, 2003 5:56am Subject: [dsg] Re: Fifth Precept,silabbataparamasa Hello Sarah and all, After I wrote http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/25396 the Precepts Thread turned almost immediately to discussing silabbata- paramasa - attachment to mere rules and ritual. I was surprised by the fact that some members seemed to find aiming at keeping all the five precepts obsessive, and warned that it may not be the path. I guess I had been expecting encouragement and agreement. In the event, that was forthcoming from only a couple (whom I thank) but the majority of the thread seemed to leap to negative conclusions about my understanding and aims. The part in Ajahn Brams's newsletter that I found interesting is this: "The Pali work in question is UPADANA, literally meaning 'a taking up'. It is commonly used indicating a 'fuel', which sustains a process, such as the oil in a lamp being the fuel/upadana for the flame. It is related to craving (TANHA). For example, craving is reaching out for the delicious cup of coffee, Upadana is picking it up. Even though you think that you can easily put the cup of coffee down again, though your hand is not superglued to the cup, it is still Upadana. You have picked it up. You have grasped. Fortunately not all Upadana is un-Buddhist. The Lord Buddha only specified four groups of Upadana: 'taking up' the five senses, 'taking up' wrong views, 'taking up' the idea that liberation may be attained simply through rites and initiations, and 'taking up' the view of a self. There are many other things that one may 'take up' or grasp, but the point is that only these four groups lead to rebirth, only these four are fuel for future existence and further suffering, only these four are to be avoided.Thus taking up the practice of compassion, taking up the practice of the Five Precepts or the greater precepts of a monk or nun, and taking up the practice of meditation - these are not un-Buddhist and it is mischievous to discourage them by calling them 'attachments'. Keeping the Five Precepts is, in fact, a letting go of coarse desires like lust, greed and violence. Practising compassion is a letting go of self-centredness and practising meditation is letting go of past, future, thinking and much else." metta and peace, Christine ---The trouble is that you think you have time --- 25660 From: Sarah Date: Sun Sep 28, 2003 6:02am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Mantras Hi Christine & KKT, --- christine_forsyth wrote: > Hello Sarah, KKT and all, > > It is probable that the Ven. Ajahn Buddhadasa was referring to this > excerpt from the Cuulatanhaasankhaya Sutta Majjhima Nikaya 37 "The > Shorter Discourse on the Destruction of Craving" when Sakka, ruler of > gods, asked: > "Venerable sir, how in brief is a bhikkhu liberated by the > destruction of craving, one who has reached the ultimate end, the > ultimate security from bondage, the ultimate holy life, the ultimate > goal, one who is formost among gods and humans?" > "Here, ruler of gods, a bhikkhu has heard that nothing is worth > adhering to. When a bhikkhu has heard that nothing is worth adhering > to, he directly knows everything .... Yes, this sounds right. These are the same lines I was discussing recently with Andrew. Of course there has to be a very clear understanding of ‘everything’ (sabbe dhamma) that are not worth adhering to - ie 5 aggregates, 12 ayatanas, 18 elements (see MA note 396 in BB transl.) The note continues to summarise the commentary: “MA explains........He ‘directly knows’ them as impermanent, suffering, and not self, and ‘fully understands’ them by scrutinising them in the same way. ‘Contemplating impermanence,’ etc, is accomplished by the insight knowledges of rise and fall and of destruction and disappearance. ‘He does not cling’ to any formation by way of craving and views, does not become agitated because of craving, and personally attains Nibbana by the extinguishing of all defilements.” Thx for your help. May we all learn to appreciate the deep meaning like Sakka. Metta, Sarah ====== 25661 From: phamdluan2000 Date: Sun Sep 28, 2003 6:51am Subject: [dsg] Re: Mantras Dear Sarah, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Sarah wrote: Hi KKT, > KKT: If I have to condense > the Teachings in one word, > it should be << MIND >> ..... Could you elaborate on why? ..... KKT: At first glance Buddhism should be seen as a path to ease and to cure human sufferings. There are bodily and mental sufferings. Bodily sufferings are unavoidable but mental sufferings are optional. To cure mental sufferings a profound knowledge of the real nature and the workings of human mind reveals necessary. This is why we study Abhidhamma here. The same thing for the Zen school of which the purpose is to find deep down in human mind its real nature they call Buddha-nature of which upon the finding could liberate man from his mental sufferings. In Zen Buddha-nature is equated with Nibbana. This is the reason why I choose the word Mind as my << one-word mantra >> :-)) As for the reference of the phrase, I think Christine has found it in the Majjhima 37. Peace, KKT 25662 From: Larry Date: Sun Sep 28, 2003 10:08am Subject: [dsg] Re: Concentration and samatha Hi Jon, Okay, I understand what you mean now: the category of developing tranquility includes developing loving kindness and any other wholesome state because tranquility arises in all wholesome states. Would you like to comment on Howard's point about the tranquility of a murderer? Larry 25663 From: Jim Anderson Date: Sun Sep 28, 2003 10:03am Subject: Re: Supportive spiritual community of lay buddhists [Re: [dsg] Pali puzzles] Hi Sarah, > I hadn't forgotten our thread, but these are difficult topics for me and I > may be out of my depth... These are difficult topics for me too! I should mention that I will not be able to continue much longer with this and other threads and this message could very well be my last one on this topic as Wednesday is the day that I will break off from list discussions for a long while and I will also be leaving that day to spend two weeks in Orillia with my mother and relatives. > ..... > --- Jim Anderson wrote: > > The kind of pa~n~naa that is being developed in Vism is > > insight-knowledge, but there are other kinds too such as sutamayaa > > pa~n~naa that seems to me to have a connection with a deep > > understanding of Pali or the Buddha's language. > .... > I'm not sure. When we read about the 3 kinds of understanding inc. > sutamayaapa~n~naa (understanding bsed on what is heard) in VismX1V, 14, I > understood them all to be referring to insight-knowledge and this being > the reason they are included here. Whilst I agree that of course there can > be other kinds of pa~n~naa, such as with samatha development, I would have > thought most/all(?) instances of sutamayaa pa~n~naa in suttas and > commentaries referred to satipatthana development (??). I've only had a > quick look so far at Nina's commentary notes on this and also Dispeller > 2066f and there's much I'm unclear on. Nina may be able to add more or > perhaps you can elaborate further for me. I think that insight-knowledge properly belongs to bhaavanaamayaa pa~n~naa. When we read about the four factors conducive to the growth of wisdom, I think it is reasonable to assume that listening to/reading the Buddha's teachings and reflecting on them (wise attention) belong to the sutamaya kind of understanding. > In an earlier post, Num summarised from the Patisambhidamagga: > ***** > "Path of Discrimination / Patisambhidamagga #3 > Mahavagga, matika and atthakathan~a_n.akathamatika. > > 1) Sutamayan~a_n.a (suta: listening, maya: attain, success, nana: > knowledge) > Matika: knowledge in remembering dhamma from listening is sutamayan~ana. > Atthakatah: Knowledge attained through listening (sutamayan~a_n.a). Suta > here refers to teaching of the Buddha. Knowledge attained by listening to > the teaching is sutamayan~ana. It can also refer associated dhamma of > listening for example phassa. Knowledge in associated dhamma of listening > is sutamayan~ana. Then the commentary gives the definition of knowledge > (n~ana). > > < penetration as its characteristic, like the penetration of an arrow by a > skillful archer. Illumination of the object as its function, as it were a > lamp. Non-confusion as its manifestation, as it were a hunter gives > guidance to one who is getting in the forest. And samadhi as its proximate > cause.">> > ***** Thanks for Num's summary. One problem I have is: how does pa~n~naa apply to conventional realities (concepts) when the characteristic of pa~n~naa is given in Vism as the penetration of the intrinsic nature of dhammas as this definition indicates an application to ultimate realities only. I find the above alternative characteristic of 'unfaltering (khalita) penetration' interesting as it might apply to conventional realities. I'll have to look into this later. > Whilst I'm not sure that I agree that a deep knowledge of Pali necessarily > leads to any pa~n~naa, I have no doubt it is very useful. I have known > people, inc. K.Sujin herself, who do not have a deep knowledge of Pali but > a lot of insight, in my view, into the teachings. I have also known quite > a few Pali scholars with an apparent 'deep knowledge' of the language, but > also an ability, in my view, to miss the essence of the teachings, so I'm > somewhat wary of making this connection. Presumably you'd say that in the > latter cases there is not a deep knowledge of the language? I'd go so far as to say that the majority of Pali scholars (including myself) do not possess what I would call a 'deep knowledge of the language' although it may appear that way to non-scholars or outsiders. I think the deepest knowledge of the language would be found with Buddhas and Arahants. I appreciated Nina's comments regarding K. Sujin and Pali. > ..... > >I was also thinking of > > a comparison of the money-changer's knowledge of money with the > > expert's knowledge of Pali. I think I may have a very hard time trying > > to convince you, especially if you don't agree that the Pali language > > and the teachings presented in that language (concepts) can be a focus > > for pa~n~naa. > .... > Of course, if we read and comprehend the teachings in Pali or any > language, the concepts considered (about realities) can of course be a > condition for insight. If not, we wouldn't read or consider. Certainly, > too, I agree with you and Suan that inevitably much is lost in any > translation which can only ever be as good as the translator's > understanding of the text. I very much agree that a translation can only be as good as the translator's understanding of the text. You hit it right on! > But, I think you are saying something more and we may have to let it be;-) > ..... > > One of the five things in the explanation of 'attha' in the > > Discrimination of Meaning is the "meaning of what is spoken" > > (Dispeller, 1944). And similarly for 'dhamma' in the Discrimination of > > Law there is "what is spoken" (1945). Would you not consider these to > > be concepts? However, these only form part of the explanation of the > > two discriminations and I'm sure they would go well beyond concepts > > too. I think the translations 'meaning' and 'law' don't adequately > > give the full range of the applied meanings of 'attha' and 'dhamma' in > > these discriminations and should probably be best left untranslated. > .... > As I've said, I know very little about the discriminations and this will > come up soon in Vism with tika notes. But no, I understand them to only > refer to deep penetrative knowledge of realities - directly penetrating > 'what is spoken' - causes, meanings, conditions and so on. I'd better not > speculate further;-) Okay, maybe we should leave it at that. > > I think it's much better to study the teachings in the Buddha's own > > language. Recently, I've been thinking of translations as being > > counterfeits. They should never be taken as equivalents of the > > original. I never did put much faith in translations and I will > > probably never be a translator myself. It's a good thing that the Pali > > has been kept alive and well. Think of how much worse off we'd all be > > if there had been a dominant mindset that > > considered translations to be exact equivalents of the originals and > > the Pali had been discarded and obliterated many centuries ago. > ..... > I agree with all this, though perhaps I wouldn't use such a strong word as > 'counterfeit'. I think for Pali experts to share what they read is a > priceless gift and a very difficult task. I'm not suggesting you should be > a translator, Jim - I think developing one's 'own' understanding is always > the most important thing. I agree that the word 'counterfeit' is quite strong but I haven't been able to come up with a more appropriate word so far. I don't mean that translations are necessarily misleading. One advantage of reading a text in Pali is that you can make important connections with the Pali terms used which often gets lost in the translation except for the more obvious terms like concentration, wisdom, etc. Also, if you want to investigate a particular term you won't get very far with the limitations of the English one. > ..... > > > Could it mean foremost in terms of being the no 1. language (rather > > than > > > most common) as we read in the next para about how other languages > > change > > > but "only this Magadha tongue correctly called the perfect (brahma) > > usage, > > > the noble usage, does not change."??? And it then goes on to talk > > about > > > why the Buddha used this language relating to the above: > > > > I was thinking along those lines also. > .... > Interesting!! - would the Pali allow this? I'm not sure. I'd have to study up on it. The 4 discriminations is a subject that I have yet to take up in detail. > .... > > Yes, I've been reading about their solitary lifestyles. Like Reg, I > > also lived for the first ten years without electricity. I also have a > > lot of experience staying in small tents during my long periods of > > travel when I was much younger. > ..... > And now we have Azita thinking of cutting off all lines;-) Not sure how > you'll all exchange notes.... I decided against cutting off the phone line at this time. However, I will proceed with my plan to break off list discussions for a few months and hopefully during this time I'll be able to get down to serious business with some of my Pali study projects. > Also, appreciating your input on the 5th precept thread, Jim. Thanks for your 2 responses. I hope to respond to them shortly. Best wishes, Jim 25664 From: nina van gorkom Date: Sun Sep 28, 2003 11:35am Subject: Re: [dsg] Vism. XIV, 19 Dear Larry, I have been considering external rupa, and I remember how difficult to understand also external citta, etc. (of someone else) when we came accross it in the Mahasatipatthanasutta, you remember? This text is clearer to me: just rupa such as hardness of the table, rupa outside. The Co has nothing on this but has a very good comment on vipassana. I want to translate it, but will finish first 17 and 18, so that we understand better that panna is also skill in detriment, and how it knows a remedy when akusala arises. I cannot be quick, but I can always add the relevant text so that people do not lose the thread. It won't hurt to return to the former text. Nina. op 27-09-2003 01:45 schreef LBIDD@w... op LBIDD@w...: .... That initiated > by apprehending another's aggregates or external materiality not bound > up with the faculties, [that is, inanimate matter], is "interpreting the > external". > > Is there any commentary on "external materiality not bound up with the > faculties"? 25665 From: nina van gorkom Date: Sun Sep 28, 2003 11:35am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Egypt Diary: A Bunch of Noise Hi KKT, You give me a good reminder here!! We cling so much the stories we are thinking about, hold on to them, never stop. But it is only thinking, nothing else. Thank you, Nina. op 26-09-2003 20:42 schreef phamdluan2000 op phamdluan@a...: > KKT: Including the inner noise > that is the story incessantly > one talks to oneself :-)) 25666 From: nina van gorkom Date: Sun Sep 28, 2003 11:35am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: six Councils, to Htoo and Suan. Dear Htoo, Thank you for the information. I read that there were controversies about the texts of the sixth council. I do not know details. Nina. op 26-09-2003 20:45 schreef htootintnaing op htootintnaing@y...: > Dear Nina, > > The Fifth Counsil was performed in Mandalay. The supporter was > Upasaka, King Min Don, who was the father of ultimate Myanmar King, > King Si Baw in mid-centuary of 19th. ...... 25667 From: nina van gorkom Date: Sun Sep 28, 2003 11:35am Subject: Re: [dsg] ICARO ´S_DHAMMA_DIARY_-_CHAPTER_ONE_! Dear Icaro, I liked your diary very much. Looking forward to Ch Two. How do you manage to get at a computer? Is it allowed? I admire you that you keep up with Dhammasangani in the midst of harsh training and the eating of mutton. You do not forget paramattha dhammas, even when there is stomach trouble. Keep courage and good cheer, best wishes, Nina. op 27-09-2003 14:22 schreef icarofranca op icarofranca@y...: Sarah:" Logic??? No more mutton sceances??" > > No more clogged stomach with meat, you see... > 25668 From: nina van gorkom Date: Sun Sep 28, 2003 11:35am Subject: FW: Co. Mahaaraahulovadasutta, 14 B. Commentary Mahaaraahulovadasutta, 14 B. Relevant Sutta passage: Addasaa kho aayasmaa saariputto aayasmanta.m Raahula.m a~n~natarasmi.m rukkhamuule nisinna.m palla'nka.m aabhujitvaa uju.m kaaya.m pa.nidhaaya parimukha.m sati.m upa.t.thapetvaa. Disvaana aayasmanta.m Raahula.m aamantesi : aanaapaanasati.m Raahula bhaavana.m bhaavehi, aanaapaanasati Raahula bhaavitaa bahuliikataa mahapphalaa hoti mahaanisa.msaa ti. The venerable Sariputta saw the venerable Rahula seated at the foot of that tree, cross-legged and body upright with mindfulness established before him. Having seen the venerable Rahula, he addressed him: "Cultivate the development of mindfulness on in and out breathing, Rahula. The development of mindfulness on in and out breathing, Rahula, is of great fruit and profit." Commentary text 14 B: atha kasmaa aanaapaanassatiya.m niyojesi? nisajjaanucchavikattaa. Then, why did he exhort him to develop Mindfulness of Breathing? Because it is suitable for a sitting posture. thero kira ``etassa bhagavataa ruupakamma.t.thaana.m kathita''nti anaavajjitvaava It is said that the Thera had not observed that the Buddha had spoken about the meditation subject of materiality to Rahula. yenaakaarena aya.m acalo anobaddho hutvaa nisinno, He thought that for Rahula who was seated in that way, steadfast and immovable, idamassa etissaa nisajjaaya kamma.t.thaana.m anucchavikanti cintetvaa evamaaha. that subject of meditation in such sitting posture was suitable for him, and thus he spoke to him in that way. tattha aanaapaanassatinti assaasapassaase pariggahetvaa tattha catukkapa~ncakajjhaana.m nibbattetvaa As regards the word, aanaapaanasati, mindfulness of breathing, he explained: "After you have comprehended inbreathing and outbreathing, and with this subject attained the fourth or the fifth stage of jhana, vipassana.m va.d.dhetvaa arahatta.m ga.nhaahiiti dasseti. and you have developed insight, you should reach arahatship." mahapphalaa hotiiti kiivamahapphalaa hoti? As to the words, it is of great fruit, how is it of great fruit? idha bhikkhu aanaapaanassati.m anuyutto Here, the monk who is intent on mindfulness of breathing, sabbaasave khepetvaa arahatta.m paapu.naati. eradicates all defilements and reaches arahatship. tathaa asakkonto mara.nakaale samasiisii hoti, If he cannot do this , there will be at the end of life the extinction of all defilements **. tathaa asakkonto devaloke nibbattitvaa If he cannot do this, he will be reborn in a deva plane, dhammakathikadevaputtassa dhamma.m sutvaa arahatta.m paapu.naati, and when he has heard Dhamma from a deity (son of a deva) who is a speaker of Dhamma, he will attain arahatship. tato viraddho anuppanne buddhuppaade paccekabodhi.m sacchikaroti, If this fails because the appearance of a Buddha has not taken place, he will realize the awakening of a solitary Buddha. ta.m asacchikaronto buddhaana.m sammukhiibhaave baahiyattheraadayo viya khippaabhi~n~no hoti, If he cannot realize this, he can, being in the presence of Buddhas, attain higher knowledge *** quickly, such as the Elder Baahiya and others. eva.m mahapphalaa. Thus it is of great fruit. mahaanisa.msaati tasseva vevacana.m. As to the expression ³mahaanisa.msaa², of great benefit, this is a synonym of ³mahapphalaa², of great fruit². ***** English: Then, why did he exhort him to develop Mindfulness of Breathing? Because it is suitable for a sitting posture. It is said that the Thera had not observed that the Buddha had spoken about the meditation subject of materiality to Rahula. He thought that for Rahula who was seated in that way, steadfast and immovable, that subject of meditation in such sitting posture was suitable for him, and thus he spoke to him in that way. As regards the word, aanaapaanasati, mindfulness of breathing, he explained: "After you have comprehended inbreathing and outbreathing, and with this subject attained the fourth or the fifth stage of jhana, and you have developed insight, you should reach arahatship." As to the words, it is of great fruit, how is it of great fruit? Here, the monk who is intent on mindfulness of breathing, eradicates all defilements and reaches arahatship. If he cannot do this , there will be at the end of life the extinction of all defilements **. If he cannot do this, he will be reborn in a deva plane, and when he has heard Dhamma from a deity (son of a deva) who is a speaker of Dhamma, he will attain arahatship. If this fails because the appearance of a Buddha has not taken place, he will realize the awakening of a solitary Buddha. If he cannot realize this, he can, being in the presence of Buddhas, attain higher knowledge *** quickly, such as the Elder Baahiya and others. Thus it is of great fruit. As to the expression ³mahaanisa.msaa², of great benefit, this is a synonym of ³mahapphalaa², of great fruit². ______ * There are more versions: the Burmese edition has: acalo anabandho. The PTS edition has: acalaasanabandho hutvaa, motionless, glued to his seat. ** samasiisi, who attains two ends simultaneously, who at the end of his life eradicates all defilements. *** The subcommentary glosses: ³the six higher knowledges². These include higher spiritual powers. The sixth one is the eradication of all defilements. ******** Nina. 25669 From: buddhatrue Date: Sun Sep 28, 2003 1:00pm Subject: Re: Some Questions --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Star Kid wrote: > > James: > > I am Philip Chui. I want to ask you some questions > about your trip to Eygpt and some questions about > Buddhism. So, here are the questions below: Hi Philip, Good to hear from you again. I hope that you are being nice to your sister and teachers. Here are some answers to your questions: 1.Why did you go to Eygpt? Answer: I like to travel and I wanted the experience of living in another country. The Egypt opportunity came up and it seemed like a good opportunity at the time. Sometimes you have to go really far away so that you can have a fresh perspective on where you have been. 2. Why did the landlord live in a cave? Answer: He really didn't live in a cave; he lived underneath the apartment building. It is kind of like a cave because it has a dirt floor and only three walls. He lives there because he is very poor and his employer is blind to the inequality in the situation. Rather than giving him and his family an empty apartment, he makes him and his family live in the basement because they are of a lower social class. It is not a nice situation and I moved from that apartment building. 3. What was the weather like? Answer: It is hot and a little muggy. 4. Did you fnd your lost baggage? Answer: Yes, it was found at the French airport and sent on to me in Cairo. I got all of my stuff. Thanks for asking. Here are some questions about or related to Buddhism. 1. Why did you believe in Buddhism? Answer: It makes sense to me. I see the wisdom and the truth of the Four Noble Truths. 2. Why is Buddhism unique? Answer: I think I have answered this for you before. Buddhism is unique from all other religions because of its teaching of non-self. No other religion has this teaching. 3. Did the Buddha prove to you that he is real? Answer: Yes. His teachings prove to me that he is very real. 4. Why does the Buddha ask for so many fastings and so many limitations for food? Answer: Food is a significant part of our lives and the ways that we eat and think about food will affect our thoughts and outlook on life. In other words, if we eat like greedy pigs, we will more than likely start to think like greedy pigs. If we eat sensibly and mindfully, we will start to think in a sensible and mindful way. 5. Would you go to hell if you don't believe in the Buddha? Answer: Buddhists don't believe in an eternal Hell, like in Christian/Jewish ideology. But they do believe in hell-like existences. I am not sure if disbelief in the Buddha will result in a hell-rebirth or not. If that disbelief is accompanied by doing bad behavior and having disregard for other people, then it probably would land a person in hell. 6. Did the Buddha help you earn lots of money and become rich? Answer: Not really. I could probably be more rich if I wasn't a Buddhist. Morality isn't too lucrative nowadays...but much more fulfilling in other ways. Please answer them when you have time. Thanks if you do. Philip Chui Hope these answer your questions. Thank you for your nice letter and study hard in school. Metta, James 25670 From: gazita2002 Date: Sun Sep 28, 2003 4:42pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Egypt Diary: A Bunch of Noise Dear Nina and KKT, Ooooo! I so relate to this, sometimes it becomes so noisy inside that there is nothing else but the noise. Patience, courage and good cheer. Azita --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, nina van gorkom wrote: > Hi KKT, > You give me a good reminder here!! We cling so much the stories we are > thinking about, hold on to them, never stop. But it is only thinking, > nothing else. Thank you, > Nina. > op 26-09-2003 20:42 schreef phamdluan2000 op phamdluan@a...: > > > KKT: Including the inner noise > > that is the story incessantly > > one talks to oneself :-)) 25671 From: Date: Sun Sep 28, 2003 5:06pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Vism. XIV, 19 Hi Nina, Regarding interpreting another's aggregates or external materiality we so often think interpreting our own aggregates is the only important or knowable object but we can know other's aggregates and external materiality are impermanent, unsatisfactory, and not self. We can know this by bodily and vocal intimation if not direct mind reading (which I think we are all capable of to a limited extent, especially if we know each other well). Larry 25672 From: Sarah Date: Mon Sep 29, 2003 0:01am Subject: Re: Supportive spiritual community of lay buddhists [Re: [dsg] Pali puzzles] Hi Jim, I’d just like to wish you a good trip to Orillia and a useful and wise ‘cut-off’ time with your various endeavours. If you feel inclined to send us an e-postcard or diary entry, we’d be glad, but understand if you’d prefer to cut all contact. I’m glad you’re not cutting the line - one never knows what emergencies may crop up. I agree with all your comments about Pali in your last note to me and esp. those concerning the ‘deepest knowledge of the language’. Hence, the references to nirutti patisambhida, I think. also, I agree w/all yr comments about the limitations of translations and appreciate all your encouragement & help in this regard. Just one comment only and it can wait til your return for any possible further discussion: --- Jim Anderson wrote: > Thanks for Num's summary. One problem I have is: how does pa~n~naa > apply to conventional realities (concepts) when the characteristic of > pa~n~naa is given in Vism as the penetration of the intrinsic nature > of dhammas as this definition indicates an application to ultimate > realities only. .... Exactly (as I see it) - that is, when we’re talking about insight pa~n~naa, only ultimate realities can be known (i.e the objects). The teaching is about paramattha dhammas and the intrinsic nature of these - anicca, dukkha and anatta. ..... >I find the above alternative characteristic of > 'unfaltering (khalita) penetration' interesting as it might apply to > conventional realities. I'll have to look into this later. ..... I’ll look f/w (as will Larry, Nina & all I know) to any further comments you have on the Vism or other passages on your return, Jim. I’ve much appreciated our discussions and I’ve learnt quite a bit - even if it is to know more about how very little we really understand of the teachings and the mixed bunch of mental states which are apparent when we see a glimmer of this ignorance;-) With metta, Sarah p.s thx for the ‘70s n/p article which seemed to have been written to support the sutta lines discussed;-) ===== 25673 From: Sarah Date: Mon Sep 29, 2003 2:37am Subject: Re: [dsg] Personality view vs. Delusion Hi TG & Howard (& Toby), --- TGrand458@a... wrote: > TG: Thank goodness Howard replied to you questions because he saved me > a ton > of time and did a much better job than I could have! .... S: You also gave careful consideration to the points and ‘person’ quotes and very helpfully incorporated Howard’s comments into your response so I can reply to you both together;-) [...] TG: >Before starting, my impression is that we agree > on some > points but language makes it uncertain. On other points, I think there > are > subtle but important differences. But I suspect our overall > "foundational > outlook" (within the constraints of the Tripitaka) is very different. .... S: Gives plenty of scope for discussion;-) Hopefully ‘within the constraints of the Tripitaka’ includes the Abhidhamma?? Where you both agree with my points (I think about half) or with minor reservations, I’ll happily put aside for now. Actually I had thought there’d be more agreement, but as Christine found, there are no guarantees of this on DSG;-) ..... > > 2. > TG: Khandas arise, persist while changing (in other words, there is > inertia > involved), then pass away. Khandas alter due to conditions, not to some > > "intrinsic impermanent/atering nature of their own." .... S: Hmm - not sure about ‘inertia’ ( even if we refer to 4 phases of rupa or 3 phases of citta, I’m not sure about ‘inertia’??) Conditions are so complex. Impermanence is a characteristic of all paramattha dhammas - what arises, falls away. I think we could have a full discussion just on these two details. Perhaps you’d like to add more of your thoughts if so. ..... TG:>Conventional terms > *as mental > concepts* also arise and cease due to conditions. .... S: Back to the ‘constraints of the Tripitaka”, could you give a reference for this? .... TG: In other words, > concepts > are basically "imaginations"...and those imaginations are continuously > altering > due to conditions. ..... S: The cittas which think or imagine are altering as you say, but if there is no thinking, there are no ‘people’, ‘computers’ and so on. .... > Howard: > I disagree. Dhammas are exactly events and features of events. .... S: Reference please! ..... H: >If a > dhamma is not an event or a feature, then it is a "thing" - an entity, > and > this > is where objective substantialism enters in! There are only occurrences > and > features of occurrences, all fleeting and conditioned. .... S: I see you both like ‘occurrences’;-) I think I need to see a reference to discuss further. A dhamma is a dhatu (element), but has its own particular nature. .... > > 5. > TG: I would be happier if they were labeled merely as -- "actualities." > Not > long ago, the best scientific thinking thought that -- matter and energy > were > separate things. Einstein showed that they were different modes of the > "same > stuff." I believe Nama and Rupa are also different modes of the same > stuff/energies. They flow in and out of each other, construct and alter > each other. ... S: References please! I don’t think we should mix scientific ideas;-) .... TG: > (This view may be too radical even for Howard. LOL Although, I notice > > Howard is sometimes talking in terms of "namarupic flux" so maybe he's > not so far > apart.) .... S: ..and if you’re too radical for Howard.....!! (I think he blows a little hot and cold with the namarupic flux.....but I note he knows when he’s stepping out of the ‘Tripitaka constraints’;-)) .... > > 6. > TG: Seeing things as having an intrinsic nature is a major stumbling > block > IMO, and one of the largest defects in abhidhamma interpretation. I > think it > guarantees that the "holder" of that view will not overcome > self/entity-view. > Howard's comment is right-on. > > Howard: > They have characteristics/features. But they don't have *intrinsic* > nature! They are what they are - and they "are" at all - in dependence > on > other > silmilarly empty phenomena, and,thus, their "natures" are *not* > intrinsic. > Also, mind-constructs, such as the keyboard-construct (a mental > construct) > that > seems to point to keyboard entity has characteristcs as well, > characteristics > > derived from the phenomena that served as its basis. (Uh, oh - heading > for an > > F- grade!! ;-) .... S: Where to start? If we say that a characteristic of seeing consciousness is to experience visible object and that seeing is anicca and so on, why should these characteristics or distinct features as discussed throughout the Tipitaka (not just the Abhidhamma) be seen as stumbling blocks or lead to self-views? On the contrary, understanding the ‘nature’ or characteristics of various dhammas is essential to understanding anatta as I see it. If we talk about characteristics of concepts such as ‘keyboard’, it’s OK, but the meaning is different from the ‘fundamental’ or ‘inherent’ characteristics of paramattha dhammas. Have you got a reference which suggests concepts have lakkana (characteristics)? [If there’s one reference or sutta for all qus, that would be convenient.....] ... > > 9. > TG: As I understand it, A streamwinner has only eliminated the "belief > in > self." For example, he or she would no longer hold theories that > support such a > view. However, they still "see things" as self. That's why they still > have > conceit (a self view), and desire for being and ignorance; not to speak > of > greed and aversion. All of which are "self-view" indicators. ... S: I discussed this area recently with Toby. I’m not sure if we agree here or not. If Toby is reading this, I’d be grateful for his comments. ..... TG:>They have > seen > conditionality clearly enough to have irrevocable knowledge that there > is no > self. But they have not eradicated the perceptual misinterpretation > that lead > them to seeing things as entities. .... S: I disagree with this last point. No more ‘misinterpretation’ as I see it and no more erroneous ‘seeing things as entities’. Reference please! ..... TG: > This depends on whether one sees self view as a "belief-in-self" or as > "sense-of-self." I believe a streamwinner has eradicated the > belief-in-self but not > the sense-of-self. .... S: Perhaps you’d elaborate or give examples of ‘sense-of-self’? We may not have any disagreement here. ... > > 10. > TG: I would say that the so called "ultimate things" are actually the > "shadows of conditions" and that concepts are the shadows of shadows. .... S: You mean you’re correcting the Abhidamattha Sangaha? LOL -just kidding - I know it’s not accepted by everyone;-( I think this is back to whether one accepts the Abhidhamma as part of the Tipitaka as summarised in this text. do you have any reference where it is suggested that namas and rupas or paramattha dhammas or khandhas or dhatus are ‘shadows of conditions’? .... TG: > Therefore, I > believe the above statement is flawed due to its way of expressing nama > and > rupa as substantial. .... S: It is not just in the Abhidhamma, but also in the suttanta that we are urged to know namas and rupas/khandhas and so on. There has been a lot of discussion on this point such as in posts under ‘concepts and realities’ in UP. Also this link on ‘paramattha’ may be relevant. http://www.palikanon.com/english/wtb/n_r/paramattha.htm .... > Howard: > The terms and the corresponding ideas do. And the ideas are directly > > experienced as namas within the namarupic flux. .... S: How can ideas be experienced as namas?? .... 10b) > TG: I like the statement, but see it as being easily interpreted by > folks to > mean whatever they want it to mean. I suspect abhidhamma people are > seeing > it to mean that states fully arise and fully cease every moment. If > "abhidhammists" are seeing it that way, they are likely to be projecting > a > self/entity-view onto states an a "fraction of a second by fraction of a > second basis. For > example: They may see things as "being real and then being gone, being > real > and then being gone, etc. To me, that's subtle self and annihilation > views > continuously at work .... S: I don’t think so, but I do understand the teachings throughout the Tipitaka to be referring to ‘actual’ phenomena which arise and pass away and thus ‘die’ immediately. I think there’s a (subtle) distinction. Commentary note to the passage I quoted from the Vism: ‘The words “just these alone” mean that it is unmixed with self (attaa) or permanence’ (Pm242). ‘ “When consciousness dissolves, the world is dead”: just as in the case of death-consciousness, this world is also called “dead” in the highest (ultimate) sense with the arrival of any consciousness whatever at its dissolution, since its cessation has no rebirth-linking (is “cessation never to return”). Nevertheless, though this is so, “the highest concept will allow (pa~n~natti paramathiyaa)” - the ultimate sense will allow this concept of continuity, which is what the expression of common usage “Tissa lives, Phussa lives” refers to, and which is based on consciousness (momentarily) existing along with a physical support; this belongs to the ultimate sense here, since, as they say, “It is not the name and surname that lives” (Pm. 242 and 801). ..... TG: > Thanks for the questions Sarah. Take care .... Thx for the detailed responses. I’ve had to snip some because of length. Look f/w to any further comments or Tipitaka references. As this has got rather long and unwieldy, you're welcome to break it up into different threads or just pick out anything of interest. Metta, Sarah ====== 25674 From: Sarah Date: Mon Sep 29, 2003 2:56am Subject: Re: [dsg] Personality view vs. Delusion Hi Larry & KKT, --- LBIDD@w... wrote: > KKT: "A pen or a computer is > conventional reality (concept) > but I can << grasp >> the pen > or touch the computer ..... S: what is <> or <> when you think it is a pen or computer? .... KKT: > while I am sure I never can > experience a Citta or Cetasika. ..... S: not <>, but sati and Panna can be aware and know anger, confusion, seeing, hearing, and so on now. .... KKT: > Why? > Because I read somewhere that > in a blinking of eye there are > more than one billion Cittas! > What do you think?" .... S: This is thinking. At the moment of awareness, there’s no <> .... L: >Sarah > might want to pitch in something here. She is the one to ask why a > concept is non-arising. ..... S: If there is no thinking about <> or <> then where is the<>? In other words, it is the thinking which arises according to conditions, not the concept of <> or <>. Metta, Sarah p.s Larry - I'll try to get back on a couple of other posts tomorrow. ====== 25675 From: christine_forsyth Date: Mon Sep 29, 2003 3:56am Subject: Self-sacrifice Dear Group, Is self-sacrifice viewed positively in Theravada Buddhism? Does Buddhism have an equivalent to the Christian verse, "'Greater love has no man than this, that he lay down his life for his friends."? I recall a couple of the Jatakas showing animals giving their lives voluntarily to help others - but what of the Suttas? I seem to vaguely recall a sutta where bandits wanted to pick one of a group to kill, and volunteering oneself to save the others wasn't seen as commendable. Buddhadatta's dictionary shows self-sacrifice (m.) attapariccaaga. metta and peace, Christine ---The trouble is that you think you have time --- 25676 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Mon Sep 29, 2003 4:13am Subject: Vism.EngPali.XIV, 16, 17, 18 "The Path of Purification" (Visuddhimagga) ch. XIV [How many kinds of understanding are there?] [katividhaa pa~n~naati dhammasabhaavapa.] 16. 9. In the third triad, it is increase that is called "improvement". That is twofold as the elimination of harm and the arousing of good. Skill in improvement is skill in these, according as it is said: 'Herein, what is skill in improvement? When a man brings these things to mind both unarisen unprofitable things do not arise and arisen unprofitable things are abandoned in him; or when he brings these things to mind [440] both unarisen profitable things arise and arisen profitable things advance to growth, increase, development, and perfection in him. Whatever here is understanding, act of understanding ... [for words elided see Dhs. 16] ... non-delusion, investigation of states, right view, is called skill in improvement' (Vbh. 325-26). 16. tatiyattike aayo naama vuddhi, saa duvidhaa anatthahaanito atthuppattito ca. tattha kosalla.m aayakosalla.m. yathaaha -- ``tattha katama.m aayakosalla.m? ime me dhamme manasikaroto anuppannaa ceva akusalaa dhammaa na uppajjanti, uppannaa ca akusalaa dhammaa pahiiyanti, ime vaa panime dhamme manasikaroto anuppannaa ceva kusalaa dhammaa uppajjanti. uppannaa ca kusalaa dhammaa bhiyyobhaavaaya vepullaaya bhaavanaaya paaripuuriyaa sa.mvattantiiti, yaa tattha pa~n~naa pajaananaa ... pe0 ... amoho dhammavicayo sammaadi.t.thi, ida.m vuccati aayakosalla''nti (vibha0 771). 17. Non-increase is what is called "detriment". That also is twofold as the diminution of good and the arousing of harm. Skill in detriment is skill in these, according as it is said: 'Herein, what is skill in detriment? When a man brings these things to mind, both unarisen profitable things do not arise ... ' (Vbh. 326) and so on. 17. apaayoti pana avuddhi, saapi duvidhaa atthahaanito ca anatthuppattito ca. tattha kosalla.m apaayakosalla.m. yathaaha ``tattha katama.m apaayakosalla.m? ime dhamme manasikaroto anuppannaa ceva kusalaa dhammaa na uppajjantii''tiaadi (vibha0 771). 18. But in either of these cases any skill in means to cause the production of such and such things, which skill occurs at that moment and is aroused on that occasion, is what is called "skill in means", according as it is said: 'And all understanding of means thereto is "skill in means"' (Vbh. 326). 18. sabbattha pana tesa.m tesa.m dhammaana.m upaayesu nibbattikaara.nesu ta.mkha.nappavatta.m .thaanuppattika.m kosalla.m upaayakosalla.m naama. yathaaha -- ``sabbaapi tatrupaayaa pa~n~naa upaayakosalla''nti (vibha0 771). So it is of three kinds as skill in improvement, in detriment, and in means. eva.m aayaapaayaupaayakosallavasena tividhaa. 25677 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Mon Sep 29, 2003 4:26am Subject: Vism.EngPali.XIV, 19 "The Path of Purification" (Visuddhimagga) Ch. XIV 19. 10. In the fourth triad, insight-understanding initiated by apprehending one's own aggregates is "interpreting the internal"(6). That initiated by apprehending another's aggregates or external materiality not bound up with the faculties, [that is, inanimate matter], is "interpreting the external". That initiated by apprehending both is "interpreting the internal and external". So it is of three kinds as interpreting the internal, and so on. 19. catutthattike attano khandhe gahetvaa aaraddhaa vipassanaa pa~n~naa ajjhattaabhinivesaa. parassa khandhe baahira.m vaa anindriyabaddharuupa.m gahetvaa aaraddhaa bahiddhaabhinivesaa. ubhaya.m gahetvaa aaraddhaa ajjhattabahiddhaabhinivesaati eva.m ajjhattaabhinivesaadivasena tividhaa. (6). The word "abhinivisati" with its noun "abhinivesa" means literally 'to dwell on', and so to adhere, or 'insist'. In the Tipi.taka it always appears in a bad sense and always appears in contexts with wrong view and clinging (see e.g. M.iii, 30-31, Nd. I, 436 and also Ps. quoted above at Ch. I, 140). However, in the Commentaries the word appears also in a good sense as at Ch. XIV, 130, Ch. XXI, 73 and 83f., and at MA.i,250 (cf. "saddha.m nivisati", M.ii,173). In this good sense it is synonymous with "right" interpretation of experience. All the bare experience of perception is interpreted by the mind either in the sense of permanence, pleasure, self, which is wrong because it is not confirmed by experience, or in the sense of impermanence, etc., which is right because it is confirmed by experience (see Ch. XIV, 130). There is no not interpreting experience, and it is a function of the mind that the interpretation adopted is 'dwelt upon', i.e. insisted upon. And so it is this insistence or interpretation in accordance with reality as confirmed by experience that is the "abhinivesa" of the Commentaries in the good sense. For these reasons the words "interpretation", "misinterpretation" and "insistence" have been chosen here as renderings. 25678 From: htootintnaing Date: Mon Sep 29, 2003 4:39am Subject: Cetasikas As Designers Or Helpers ( 01 ) Dear Dhamma Friends, Everybody has one and the only one mind ( from science point of view ). Actually mind has as army of soldiers ( mental factors ) led by the general ( Citta ) or the king or the leader. When citta works like a king, accompanying cetasikas work as ministers. Ministers advise the king and the king does all the action. So, for everything, the king is responsible. There are four sets of ministers. 1.Permanent ministers(Sabbacittasadarana Cetasikas) 2.Flexible ministers(Pakinnaka Cetasikas) 3.Destructive ministers(Akusala Cetasikas) 4.Constructive ministers(Kusala Cetasikas) Cetasikas cannot perceive senses,which is function of citta.But their accompaniment makes the citta different names. So they can be conferred designers. Cetasikas help citta, advise citta, drive citta and do have many effects on citta. But citta behaves itself and always leads all the mental bodies. The existence of Cetasikas is hard to be aware of if one has not learned about it. Mind is made up of Citta and Cetasikas. They come in a series without any interruption. As Citta is the leader, there always is a Citta but they are not the same and each Citta only lives just a moment ( one billionth of a blink ). In a continuous flux of Cittas, each Citta is accompanied by different combinations of Cetasikas. It is these Cetasikas that make known Citta with different names. Actually from the view point of its character, there is one and only one Citta. Citta is pure. It is clean. It is luminous. It is radiant. It is free of sins and free of all Akusala. This is its origionality. But as Cetasikas always accompany him, its pureness has gone and there arise different Cittas good and bad. We can strive to obtain Citta to be back into its normality as the purest. To do this is to eliminate all Cetasikas. This again seems to be impossible. But there is a possibility that these Cetasikas can be totally stopped if arising of Citta can be stopped. Citta arises due to condition. Deconditioning will finally lead to a state when there is no more chance of arising of Citta as at the time after '' Cuticitta of Arahats''. To eliminate Cetasikas needs to understand them first. All events and happenings are related to Citta and Cetasikas. So the way of liberation is also connected with Citta and Cetasikas again. May you all have a clearer view on Cetasikas. With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing 25679 From: kenhowardau Date: Mon Sep 29, 2003 4:56am Subject: Re: [dsg] The Sexual Ethic of the Middle Way (part 1) Hi Jon, I gave an example of what I thought might be virati (restraint). You replied: " . . . . I doubt that it would actually be restraint since there is nothing imminent enough to raise the possibility of akusala action." --------------- Thanks for pointing that out. My assumption was that the possibility for akusala action would have be one that arose against the actor's wishes. After all, a criminal who breaks into a house and then changes his mind about murdering the inhabitants can hardly expect to be treated as a hero. But maybe he is, at the moment of changing his mind, making a supreme effort. By comparison, most law-abiding citizens are simply doing what comes naturally -- nothing difficult or heroic at all. --------------- J: > As a matter of interest, it is said that for the arahant there is never any restraint since there is never any inclination to undertake wrong action. So even where a 'situation' presents itself, still there is no virati. --------------- Yes, that is interesting. He has no further need of restraint: 'the good life has been lived: done is what had to be done.' The criminal, resisting his own homicidal urges, is, in his way, living the good life -- doing what still needs to be done. Whereas the law-abiding citizen, sitting harmlessly in front of television, might be 'living on stale fare' (as I think it is called in one of the suttas) -- complacently living off good kamma accumulated in previous lifetimes. ----------------- KH: > > In what way is carnal desire suffering as > opposed to the cause of suffering? J: > It's true that the Buddha spoke about the akusala vipaka that results from committing akusala kamma, as CP refers to in his article, but reflecting along these lines can lead one to the conclusion that the 'antidote' is samatha/the jhaanas. I think the Buddha was at pains to point out continually the impermanence and unsatisfactoriness (dukkha) of all conditioned dhammas, and the need for them to be seen as such as the only way to end suffering forever. ----------------- Oh yes, I should have realised that was what you meant. Thanks for spelling it out. :-) Kind regards, Ken H 25680 From: Sarah Date: Mon Sep 29, 2003 5:59am Subject: Re: [dsg] Self-sacrifice Hi Christine, I’ll leave others to answer the first parts of yr question. I wonder if that bandit sutta we often hear referred to is in the Tipitaka at all? --- christine_forsyth wrote > Buddhadatta's dictionary shows self-sacrifice (m.) attapariccaaga. .... pariccaaga - 5 kinds of sacrifice necessary for a Bodhisatta to make: wife, children, kingdom, life, limb DhAiii 441. Also comy to Buddhavamsa, Clar. of Sweet meaning, 1 Jewel Walk, p79 “When I had fulfilled all the thirty perfections, had made the five great sacrifices, and from the conduct on behalf of kinsmen, from the conduct for the sake of the world, had reached the summit of the (various kinds of ) conduct - wisdom, and had given great gifts for hundreds for a week , and the earth had quaked seven times, I deceasing from individuality as Vessantara, was reborn for a second time in tusita-abode.” Metta, Sarah P.S. Thx for your further clarification on A.Brahmavamso’s article. ===== 25681 From: Date: Mon Sep 29, 2003 3:07am Subject: Re: [dsg] Personality view vs. Delusion Hi, Sarah - In a message dated 9/29/03 5:39:37 AM Eastern Daylight Time, sarahdhhk@y... writes: > >Howard: > > I disagree. Dhammas are exactly events and features of events. > .... > S: Reference please! > ..... > H: >If a > >dhamma is not an event or a feature, then it is a "thing" - an entity, > >and > >this > >is where objective substantialism enters in! There are only occurrences > >and > >features of occurrences, all fleeting and conditioned. > .... > ========================= Just look at them: Contact, feeling, recognition, volition, concentration, odor, taste, hardness - I see these as events/features. That is what these "things" are to me. I need no reference to see these this way, and I think that to see them as "things" is to reify, and impose the concepts of self, separateness, and stasis. 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) 25682 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Mon Sep 29, 2003 7:11am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Concentration and samatha Larry --- Larry wrote: > Hi Jon, > > Okay, I understand what you mean now: the category of developing > tranquility includes developing loving kindness and any other > wholesome state because tranquility arises in all wholesome states. Just two minor refinements to the above. First, samatha includes loving kindness and any other wholesome *purely mental* state. As I explained in my previous post, it is a form of wholesome mental 'action'. It does not need any action through body or speech to be completed (unlike, say, dana/giving). Secondly, we are talking about moments of samatha consciousness and not necessarily its development, which brings in certain other issues. I think it's important to realise that people of any or no religious belief can have samatha moments when, for example, they consider helping another out of regard for the person's welfare, ponder on the value of living a wholesome life, plan how to perform some act of generosity or support for another, reflect on the law of cause and effect, consider ways of helping someone in need, and the like. Insofar as kusala is involved in each case, these could all be aspects of samatha. So there may well be (and most likely are) moments of samatha in our normal daily life. Pondering over things we read on, or are thinking of posting to, this list would be an obvious candidate (Dhammanussati). Anything you don't agree with here? Jon PS Sorry, but I've not been able to find the passage on Howard's point about the tranquility of a murderer. Please post a reference if you'd like to discuss. Thanks. 25683 From: Date: Mon Sep 29, 2003 3:11am Subject: Re: [dsg] Personality view vs. Delusion Hi, Sarah - In a message dated 9/29/03 5:39:37 AM Eastern Daylight Time, sarahdhhk@y... writes: > S: ..and if you’re too radical for Howard.....!! (I think he blows a > little hot and cold with the namarupic flux.....but I note he knows when > he’s stepping out of the ‘Tripitaka constraints’;-)) > ========================== Flattery *will* get you somewhere, Sarah - but not quite far enough! ;-)) With baskets of metta, Howard P.S. Are you choosing the Sanskrit spelling 'T-r-i-p-i-t-a-k-a' because you think you're encountering Mahayanist heresy? ;-)) /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) 25684 From: Date: Mon Sep 29, 2003 3:38am Subject: Re: [dsg] Personality view vs. Delusion Hi, Sarah - In a message dated 9/29/03 5:39:37 AM Eastern Daylight Time, sarahdhhk@y... writes: > >Howard: > > They have characteristics/features. But they don't have *intrinsic* > >nature! They are what they are - and they "are" at all - in dependence > >on > >other > >silmilarly empty phenomena, and,thus, their "natures" are *not* > >intrinsic. > >Also, mind-constructs, such as the keyboard-construct (a mental > >construct) > >that > >seems to point to keyboard entity has characteristcs as well, > >characteristics > > > >derived from the phenomena that served as its basis. (Uh, oh - heading > >for an > > > >F- grade!! ;-) > .... > S: Where to start? If we say that a characteristic of seeing consciousness > is to experience visible object and that seeing is anicca and so on, why > should these characteristics or distinct features as discussed throughout > the Tipitaka (not just the Abhidhamma) be seen as stumbling blocks or lead > to self-views? On the contrary, understanding the ‘nature’ or > characteristics of various dhammas is essential to understanding anatta as > I see it. > ---------------------------------------------------- Howard: It's a matter of emphasis, Sarah, and of language. The emphasis strongly suggests an adherence to discretist, self-existence view. The word 'intrinsic' clinches it. Both connotation and denotation are dangerous. See the following: *************************** Main Entry: in·trin·sic Pronunciation: in-'trin-zik, -'trin(t)-sik Function: adjective Etymology: Middle French intrinsèque internal, from Late Latin intrinsecus, from Latin, adverb, inwardly; akin to Latin intra within —more at INTRA- Date: 1642 1 a : belonging to the essential nature or constitution of a thing b : being or relating to a semiconductor in which the concentration of charge carriers is characteristic of the material itself instead of the content of any impurities it contains 2 a : originating or due to causes within a body, organ, or part b : originating and included wholly within an organ or part — compare EXTRINSIC 1b - in·trin·si·cal·ly /-zi-k(&-)lE, -si-/ adverb ********************************* I particularly draw your attention to "belonging to the essential nature or constitution of a thing" and to "originating and included wholly within an organ or part". Compare this with the following definition of 'extrinsic' : "originating from or on the outside". The Buddhist position, of course, is a middle-way one which is neither intrinsic nor extrinsic. Both of those extremes are grounded in a substantialist sense. ---------------------------------------------------------------- > > If we talk about characteristics of concepts such as ‘keyboard’, it’s OK, > but the meaning is different from the ‘fundamental’ or ‘inherent’ > characteristics of paramattha dhammas. > ----------------------------------------------------- Howard: Not all that different. The characteristics of a tree, such as its hardness, are determined by the dhammas that we take to be its parts. Some Greek philosophers would no doubt say that hardness is intrinsic to a tree! The characteristics of paramattha dhammas, and their very (fleeting) "existences", are determined by the conditions that led to their arising. The difference is that of macroscopic vs microscopic, sankharic-construction vs arising only from non-sankharic conditions, and direct apprehension vs indirect apprehension. What is important in all cases is the dependent origination and emptiness. ------------------------------------------------- > > Have you got a reference which suggests concepts have lakkana > (characteristics)? [If there’s one reference or sutta for all qus, that > would be convenient.....] ------------------------------------------------------ Howard: This is evident. If they had no characteristics there would be no way of distinguishing them! We *do* distinguish concepts. One doesn't need scriptural references for everything. If we did, wed have to carry a pocket book of suttas around with us to live on this planet. ======================== 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) 25685 From: Date: Mon Sep 29, 2003 3:56am Subject: Re: [dsg] Personality view vs. Delusion Hi, Sarah - In a message dated 9/29/03 5:39:37 AM Eastern Daylight Time, sarahdhhk@y... writes: > >Howard: > > The terms and the corresponding ideas do. And the ideas are directly > > > >experienced as namas within the namarupic flux. > .... > S: How can ideas be experienced as namas?? > =========================== What!? One could ask how cittas can be experienced as namas! Ideas *are* namas. What should they be experienced as? Not rupas. That's all there is, Sarah - namas, rupas, and absences (most especially nibbana). That's all there is. If we experience ideas - and we certainly do (!), then they are either namas, rupas, or absences (including nibbana). Unfortunately, not only do we experience ideas, we take them much too seriously. They are, after all, *only* ideas! With metta, Howard P.S. I replied to your post to TG and me by means of several short posts, each addressing a separate aspect of your post. I don't think there is is too much more that won't simply be repetitive that I can add. I hope these few short posts have clarified my positions. (Now back to meditating. ;-) /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) 25686 From: sukinder Date: Mon Sep 29, 2003 7:58am Subject: Sutta and interpretation. Dear All, The Sutta about the monk, one of two brothers, who was having a hard time to understand the Buddha's teachings. The Buddha then gives him a cloth to rub a stone (?) and he came to recognize impermanence. Can someone direct me to it? At the Sat. discussions Shakti made reference to it and I unknowingly, identified this as the 'Simile of the Cloth'. Shakti, I hope you are reading this. Now that was one mistake needing correction and now I wonder if my interpretation is also not wrong. What I said was, I can relate the above case to my own tendency to moha, and I am sure others can also. That there will often be times when one is listening or reading the Dhamma, but there is no understanding at all. It seems at those times, as if the words are just bouncing off one's ears. So I believe, that in the case of this particular monk, there were conditions for such moha to arise almost *all* the time! Only because there was lots of accumulated panna as anussya, that when he did get the chance to reflect on impermanence, which he must have done quite a bit in previous lives, then he was reminded of its real significance and meaning. Later on to Ivan, I also added that the fact that this monk did not make the *wrong* interpretation, which would have been a reflection of 'wrong view', showed at least that the main obstacle to Vipassana, was not there to say anything about the lack of intelligence!! Am I on the right track. If no, I would like to hear a more accurate interpretation. Thanks everyone in advance. Mike, would like to hear your views, long time no hear from you. :-) Best wishes, Sukin. 25687 From: nina van gorkom Date: Mon Sep 29, 2003 10:38am Subject: Dhamma Issue 12, the Buddha's Last Meal. Chapter 12 The Buddha¹s Last Meal Introduction. The Buddha¹s last meal, on the day of his final passing away, was offered by Cunda the Smith. People have been wondering whether this meal contained meat and different explanations have been given to the term ³súkara maddava² used to designate this meal. This Issue deals with its meaning. We read in the Commentary to the ³Mahåparinibbåna Sutta² that the deities of the four great continents and their twothousand surrounding islands infused nutritive essence into the food. Therefore, it was not able to be properly digested by anyone else but the Buddha. We read in the Commentary to the ³Cunda Sutta², Commentary to the ³Verses of Uplift², that, for this reason, the Buddha had the remains of this food buried in a pit and that he gave an explanation for this. He wanted to release Cunda from the blame of others who might give the wrong explanation of the fact that the remains were not given to the monks or to other people. Afterwards the Buddha spoke to Ånanda that Cunda might have remorse but that this should be dispelled by telling him that it was of great gain that he had offered the last meal to the Buddha. Ånanda should tell Cunda: ²There are two offerings of food which are of equal fruition, of equal outcome, exceeding in grandeur the fruition and result of any other offerings of food. Which two? The one partaken of by the Tathågata on becoming fully enlightened, in unsurpassed, supreme enlightenment; and the one partaken of by the Tathågata on coming to pass into the state of Nibbåna wherein the elements of clinging do not arise. By his deed has the venerable Cunda accumulated that which makes for long life, beauty, wellbeing, glory, heavenly rebirth, and sovereignty!² [1] ****** Issue of Analysis: Was the ³delicate pig², ³súkara maddava², the Buddha consumed on the day of his final passing away (parinibbåna) porc? Conclusion regarding the analysis of this issue: It was porc¹s meat. The sources which support this conclusion: 1. The Commentary to the ³Mahåparinibbåna Sutta², in the ³Sumaògala Vilåsiní², Commentary to the Dialogues of the Buddha. 2. The Commentary to the Cunda Sutta, in the ³Paramatthadípaní², Commentary to the ³Verses of Uplift². 3. The ³Clarifier of the Sweet Meaning², ³Madhuratthavilåsiní², Commentary to the ³Chronicle of Buddhas², Buddhavaósa. The explanation of the reason for this conclusion: Different teachers have different opinions about the ³súkara maddava² that the Buddha consumed on the day of his final passing away. They explain it as: young bamboo shoots eaten by swine, truffles eaten by them, soft-boiled rice or an alchemistic elixir. However, the Commentaries clearly explain that ³súkara maddava² is pig¹s meat. In the Commentary to the ³Mahåparinibbåna Sutta² (Ch 4, translated by Yang-Gyu An) it is said: ³Pork stew (súkaramaddava): the fresh meat (pavattamamsa) from a prize pig that is neither too young nor too old. That, people say, is both tender and succulent. The meaning is that he had it prepared and carefully cooked. But some teachers say that Œsúkaramaddava¹ is the name of a recipe for cooking soft-boiled rice with the five liquid products of the cow, just as cow¹s milk is the name of a beverage. Others say that Œsúkaramaddava¹ is the name for a kind of elixir.² The Commentary to the Cunda Sutta (translated by Peter Masefield) states: ³It is said in the Great Commentary that Œsúkaramaddava¹ is the already available meat of the pig that is tender and succulent. Some, however, say that Œsúkaramaddava¹ is not pig¹s meat (but rather) bamboo shoots that pigs (súkarehi) have trampled upon (maddita), others that it is a mushroom that has come into being at a spot that pigs (súkarehi) have trampled upon (maddita), whilst still others proclaim that Œsúkaramaddava¹ is the name for a certain elixir. For it was this, they say, that Cunda, the Smith¹s son, gave out of a desire to have the Teacher live for a long time, hoping, ŒSurely he will remain a while longer once he has consumed this¹, after coming to hear that the Lord was to attain parinibbåna that same day.² The ³Clarifier of the Sweet Meaning², the Commentary to the ³Chronicle of Buddhas², in the Exposition of ³The Differences between the Buddhas², relates what is the regulation for all Buddhas. Among the thirty regulations, we read about the twentyninth: ³Partaking of the flavour of meat on the day of the final nibbåna.² This clearly states that the ³súkaramaddava² the Buddha consumed on the day of his final passing away was meat. The súkaramaddava (pig¹s meat) was not poisonous food, but it was delicate food and when the Buddha had eaten it, it enabled him to walk on foot to the city of Kusinåra. We read in the Commentary to the ³Mahåparinibbåna Sutta² : ³ Cunda prepared the súkaramaddava with an elixir, thinking, ŒLet the Blessed One not attain parinibbåna¹. And the deities of the four great continents and their twothousand surrounding islands infused nutritive essence into it.² The same Commentary explains the words of the Sutta text: ³Bhuttassa ca súkara-maddavenå², and after he had eaten from the súkara-maddava, a dire sickness fell upon him...² We read: ³It happened to him when he had eaten, but not because he had eaten [2] . If he had not eaten, the pains would have been too strong [3] ; but because he had eaten the succulent food, his pain was slight, which is why he was able to walk on foot.² ****** Footnotes 1. I wrote the Introduction, and for the translation of the text I used the ³Wheel², no 67-69, B.P.S. Sri Lanka. 2. The Buddha had pains and dysentery after the meal. But the pains were not caused by the porkstew. 3. Yang-Gyu An translates: ³If it had happened when he had not eaten, it would have been too painful.² ******** translated from Thai. Nina 25688 From: nina van gorkom Date: Mon Sep 29, 2003 10:38am Subject: Re: [dsg] Vism. XIV, 19 Hi Larry, 27-09-2003 19:39 schreef LBIDD@w... op LBIDD@w...: > > Does "insistence" and "interpretation" refer to javana because javana > citta is repeated 7 times in citta process? In this text it refers to right interpretation, to vipassana pañña, not just to the repetition of javana. Also clinging arises in javana, seven times. L: Also, I was wondering if > root cittas only arise in javana? N: They can also arise as mahaavipaakacittas, such as rebirth and also as retention, tadaaramma.na-cittas. Nina. 25689 From: nina van gorkom Date: Mon Sep 29, 2003 10:38am Subject: Visuddhimagga. Tiika 17 Vis:XIV, 17. Non-increase is what is called detriment. That also is twofold as the diminution of good and the arousing of harm. Skill in detriment is skill in these, according as it is said: 'Herein, what is skill in detriment? When a man brings these things to mind, both unarisen profitable things do not arise ... ' (Vbh. 326) and so on. 17. apaayoti pana avuddhi, saapi duvidhaa atthahaanito ca anatthuppattito ca. tattha kosalla.m apaayakosalla.m. yathaaha ``tattha katama.m apaayakosalla.m? ime dhamme manasikaroto anuppannaa ceva kusalaa dhammaa na uppajjantii''tiaadi (vibha0 771). Tiika17: words: apeta (apeti): gone away, without mati (f): wisdom, opinion, thought matta: as much as, like, just as samattha: skilled, proficient nirujjati: vanish, cease Tiika text: 17. vuddhilakkha.naa aayato apetattaa apaayo, avuddhi. Detriment is being without the characteristic of increase, without improvement, it is non-increase. tattha kosallanti tasmi.m atthahaanianatthuppattilakkha.ne apaaye kosalla.m kusalataa apaayakosalla.m. As to the words, skill in these, mean: skill in detriment concerning the characteristic of the diminution of benefit and the arousing of harm, that what is profitable, skill in detriment. tampi paa.livaseneva dassetu.m ``ime dhamme''tiaadi vutta.m. ³These dhammas etc.² * is said, in order to show that this is also according to the text. tattha ida.m vuccatiiti yaa imesa.m kusaladhammaana.m anuppajjananirujjhanesu, akusaladhammaana.m vaa uppatti.t.thitiisu pa~n~naa, Herein this is called, means: understanding concerning the non-arising and cessation of profitable dhammas and the arising and maintenance of unprofitable dhammas, ida.m apaayakosalla.m naamaati vuccati. this is called skill in detriment. aayakosalla.m taava pa~n~naa hotu, apaayakosalla.m katha.m pa~n~naa naama jaataati? Let only skill in improvement be understanding, but why does skill in detriment come to be called understanding? eva.m ma~n~nati ``apaayuppaadanasamatthataa apaayakosalla.m naama siyaa''ti, ta.m pana tassa matimatta.m. He thinks thus: Proficiency concerning the arousing of detriment may be called skill in detriment, and therefore it is just the understanding of it. kasmaa? pa~n~navaa eva hi ``mayha.m eva.m manasi karoto anuppannaa kusalaa dhammaa nuppajjanti, uppannaa nirujjhanti. Why? It is truly understanding when one knows: ²When I pay attention in this way knowing that unarisen profitable dhammas do not arise, and that arisen profitable dhammas dwindle away, anuppannaa akusalaa dhammaa uppajjanti, uppannaa pava.d.dhantii''ti pajaanaati, and that unarisen unprofitable dhammas arise, and arisen unprofitable dhammas increase. so eva.m ~natvaa anuppanne akusale na uppaadeti, uppanne pajahati. When he understands this, unarisen unprofitable dhammas do not arise, and those which have arisen cease, anuppanne kusale uppaadeti, uppanne bhaavanaapaaripuuri.m paapeti. unarisen profitable dhammas arise, and he brimgs those that have arisen to perfection through development. eva.m apaayakosallampi pa~n~naa evaati. Thus also skill in detriment is truly understanding. **** English: Detriment is being without the characteristic of increase, without improvement, it is non-increase. As to the words, skill in these, mean: skill in detriment concerning the characteristic of the diminution of benefit and the arousing of harm, that what is profitable, skill in detriment. ³These dhammas etc.² * is said, in order to show that this is also according to the text. Herein this is called, means: understanding concerning the non-arising and cessation of profitable dhammas and the arising and maintenance of unprofitable dhammas, this is called skill in detriment. Let only skill in improvement be understanding, but why does skill in detriment come to be called understanding? He thinks thus: Proficiency concerning the arousing of detriment may be called skill in detriment, and therefore it is just the understanding of it. Why? It is truly understanding when one knows: ²When I pay attention in this way knowing that unarisen profitable dhammas do not arise, and that arisen profitable dhammas dwindle away, and that unarisen unprofitable dhammas arise, and arisen unprofitable dhammas increase. When he understands this, unarisen unprofitable dhammas do not arise, and those which have arisen cease, unarisen profitable dhammas arise, and he brimgs those that have arisen to perfection through development. Thus also skill in detriment is truly understanding. _____ * In paying attention to these dhammas. ****** Nina. 25690 From: nina van gorkom Date: Mon Sep 29, 2003 10:38am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: questions about citta. Dear KKT, op 26-09-2003 22:28 schreef phamdluan2000 op phamdluan@a...: > I have some more questions: > > __I still don't understand why > an actual Citta can't be aware of itself? > (Htoo Naing has answered this question > and I will read carefully his answer) N: Object-condition is one of the conditions for citta. When it arises it has straightaway an object, it could not arise without having an object. The object is other than that citta. KKT: __Does it mean that it seems > impossible for us to << live in the present >> > because we can only be aware > of the just fallen Citta and Cetasikas? N: It depends how one defines the present. It citta that is only just fallen away is still present. Its characteristic appears and you can prove it. We do not have to count moments. See my example about the dosa. KKT: __The notion of << pure mind >> > in the sense of a Citta existing alone > is impossible since Citta is always > accompanied by other Cetasikas? >> __In this phrase of Anguttara I,VI > > This mind (ie. Citta), O monks, > is luminous, but it is defiled ... etc. > > what is the meaning of << luminous >> ? N: Pure. Here it refers to the bhavangacitta: no defilements yet, citta is not yet involved in the objects which impinge and on account of which defilements arise. In other texts we see that also other kinds of citta are called pure, see archives of dsg. Num and Sarah wrote about this. Citta experiences an object, it clearly knows an object, and citta itself is not defilement, defilements which can accompany it are specific cetasikas. Luminous mind, we had many debates with Rob Ep. In the Mahayana tradition as you know nibbana is called luminous mind. You referred to Zen for this. Suan also wrote about this subject. KKT: __Same thing for the notion of > << empty mind >> which is absurd > since the << mind >> is never > empty of Cittas and Cetasikas? N: It is empty of the self, it is anatta. Also the word su~n~natta, empty, is used for anatta. And references are in the Middle length Sayings. III, no. 121-130, in the Sunnnattavagga. Nina. 25691 From: connie Date: Mon Sep 29, 2003 11:46am Subject: Re: Self-sacrifice Hi, Christine and Sarah ~ I think the bandit thing comes from the Vsm on metta and might not be a sutta... Suppose a person is sitting in a place with a dear, a neutral and a hostile person, himself being the fourth; then bandits come to him and say 'Venerable Sir, give us a bhikkhu', and on being asked why, they answer, 'So that we may kill him and use the blood of his throat as an offering'. That's all I have of it. peace, connie 25692 From: buddhatrue Date: Mon Sep 29, 2003 0:15pm Subject: Re: Dhamma Issue 12, the Buddha's Last Meal. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, nina van gorkom wrote: > > Chapter 12 > > The Buddha¹s Last Meal > > Introduction. > > The Buddha¹s last meal, on the day of his final passing away, was offered by Hi Nina, I don't believe that you write these dhamma issues but I do take exception to this one about the Buddha's last meal. This dhamma issue states "We read in the Commentary to the ³Mahåparinibbåna Sutta² that the deities of the four great continents and their two thousand surrounding islands infused nutritive essence into the food. Therefore, it was not able to be properly digested by anyone else but the Buddha." Not only is this foreign idea not supported whatsoever by the text, it doesn't make any sense. Allow me to quote from the Mahaparinibbana Sutta: 4.20 And after having eaten the meal provided by Cunda, the Lord was attacked by a severe sickness with bloody diarrhea, and with sharp pains as if he were about to die. [128] But he endured all this mindfully and clearly aware, and without complaint. Then the Lord said: `Ananda, let us go to Kusinara.' `Very good Lord', said Ananda. Having eaten Cunda's meal (this I've heard), He suffered a grave illness, painful, deathly; From eating a meal of `pig's delight' Grave sickness assailed the Teacher. Having purged, the Lord then said: `Now I'll go to Kusinara town' 419 And this dhamma issue also goes on to state, "The súkaramaddava (pig¹s meat) was not poisonous food, but it was delicate food and when the Buddha had eaten it, it enabled him to walk on foot to the city of Kusinåra." Huh? It gave him bloody diarrhea and pains as if he were about to die, I would not call that delicate food. Additionally, they got it wrong because the Buddha didn't even make it to the town of Kusinara. He had to stop twice along the way to rest from sickness and decided to take his parinibbana just outside of the town of Kusinara, he didn't make it to the city proper. Ananda was upset by this and said to the Buddha, "Lord, may the Blessed Lord not pass away in this miserable little town of wattle- and-daub, right in the jungle in the back of beyond!..." The Buddha chastised Ananda for saying this and sent him on to the town of Kusinara to inform the townspeople that the Buddha was passing away just outside of their town. These facts run contrary to the idea that the food was blessed by devas and allowed the Buddha to walk by foot to the town; he was very sick the entire way and he didn't even make it to the town...he died in the jungle. Frankly, I think the commentaries have it really wrong about this one. Do you have any input? Metta, James 25693 From: christine_forsyth Date: Mon Sep 29, 2003 0:41pm Subject: Re: Self-sacrifice Hello Sarah, Connie, and all, Thanks for your posts. ... (even though Sarah mentioned the V.. word. :-)) You were right Connie, it isn't a sutta, it's in the Visuddhimagga IX.41 "Suppose this person is sitting in a place with a dear, a neutral, and a hostile person, himself being the fourth; then bandits come to him and say 'Venerable sir, give us a bhikkhu, and on being asked why, they answer 'So that we may kill him and use the blood of his throat as an offering', then if that bhikkhu thinks 'Let them take this one, or this one', he has not broken down the barriers. And also if he thinks 'Let them take me but not these three', he has not broken down the bariers either. Why? Because he seeks the harm of him whom he wishes to be taken and seeks the welfare of the others only. But it is when he does not see a single one among the four people to be given to the bandits and he directs his mind impartially towards himself and towards those three people that he has broken down the barriers. Hence the Ancients said: "When he discriminates between The four, that is himself, the dear, The neutral, and the hostile one, Then "Skilled" is not the name he gets, Nor "Having Amity At Will", But only "Kindly Towards Beings", Now when a bhikkhu's barriers, Have all the four been broken down, He treats with equal amity The whole world with its deities; Far more distinguished than the first Is He Who Knows No Barriers." Hard to think in this way, hard to turn from the way one has been trained, hard to shake off the values admired in our society, hard to not feel impelled to try to rescue others from fear and pain, to alleviate and comfort them in their suffering by offering oneself ... sounds sort of apathetic somehow, or even lacking in courage. I wonder why this wouldn't just be clinging to self disguised by high sounding words? "Kindly Towards Beings" sounds pretty good to me ... metta and peace, Christine ---The trouble is that you think you have time --- --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "connie" wrote: > Hi, Christine and Sarah ~ > > I think the bandit thing comes from the Vsm on metta and might not be a > sutta... > > Suppose a person is sitting in a place with a dear, a neutral and a > hostile person, himself being the fourth; then bandits come to him and > say 'Venerable Sir, give us a bhikkhu', and on being asked why, they > answer, 'So that we may kill him and use the blood of his throat as an > offering'. > > That's all I have of it. > > peace, > connie 25694 From: christine_forsyth Date: Mon Sep 29, 2003 1:19pm Subject: Re: Sutta and interpretation. Hiya Sukin, Have a look at a previous post by RobK: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/24981 Looking forward to seeing you (and all) soon,:-) metta, Chris --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "sukinder" wrote: > Dear All, > > The Sutta about the monk, one of two brothers, who was having a hard > time to understand the Buddha's teachings. The Buddha then gives him a > cloth to rub a stone (?) and he came to recognize impermanence. Can > someone direct me to it? At the Sat. discussions Shakti made reference > to it and I unknowingly, identified this as the 'Simile of the Cloth'. > Shakti, I hope you are reading this. > Now that was one mistake needing correction and now I wonder if my > interpretation is also not wrong. > 25695 From: robmoult Date: Mon Sep 29, 2003 3:25pm Subject: Re: Cetasikas As Designers Or Helpers ( 01 ) Hi Htoo, Interesting post. Will this be a series? I have inserted some questions / comments. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "htootintnaing" wrote: > Everybody has one and the only one mind ( from science point of > view ). ===== I'm not sure what you mean here. ===== Actually mind has as army of soldiers ( mental factors ) led > by the general ( Citta ) or the king or the leader. When citta works > like a king, accompanying cetasikas work as ministers. Ministers > advise the king and the king does all the action. So, for > everything, the king is responsible. > > There are four sets of ministers. > > 1.Permanent ministers(Sabbacittasadarana Cetasikas) > 2.Flexible ministers(Pakinnaka Cetasikas) > 3.Destructive ministers(Akusala Cetasikas) > 4.Constructive ministers(Kusala Cetasikas) > > Cetasikas cannot perceive senses,which is function of citta.But their > accompaniment makes the citta different names. So they can be > conferred designers. Cetasikas help citta, advise citta, drive citta > and do have many effects on citta. But citta behaves itself and > always leads all the mental bodies. ===== According to CMA, the functions of citta are: - As an agent, citta is that which cognizes an object - As an instrument, citta is that by means of which the accompanying mental factors cognize the the object - As an activity, citta is itself nothing other than the process of cognizing the object I suspect that you are taking your "King and retinue" analogy from Atthasalini (p90). Buddhaghosa used this analogy to stress the inseparabality of citta and cetasika, but I am concerned that you are extending the metaphor beyond its intended usage. Specifically, though citta is the forerunner (only for worldly phenomena - interesting enough, for transcendental phenomena, understanding is the forerunner), I am not clear what you mean by, "citta behaves itself and always leads all the mental bodies." ===== > The existence of Cetasikas is hard to be aware of if one has not > learned about it. Mind is made up of Citta and Cetasikas. They come > in a series without any interruption. As Citta is the leader, there > always is a Citta but they are not the same and each Citta only lives > just a moment ( one billionth of a blink ). ===== I don't think that it possible to be aware of a cetasika as distinct from the associated citta? This section could be misinterpreted as saying that cetasika follow citta in a series and that citta is the leader of the series. ===== > > In a continuous flux of Cittas, each Citta is accompanied by > different combinations of Cetasikas. It is these Cetasikas that make > known Citta with different names. Actually from the view point of its > character, there is one and only one Citta. > > Citta is pure. It is clean. It is luminous. It is radiant. It is free > of sins and free of all Akusala. This is its origionality. But as > Cetasikas always accompany him, its pureness has gone and there arise > different Cittas good and bad. ===== Again, I am concerned that one might infer that one could be aware of a citta as distinct from its concommitant cetasikas. What do you mean by "from the view point of character"? ===== > > We can strive to obtain Citta to be back into its normality as the > purest. To do this is to eliminate all Cetasikas. This again seems to > be impossible. But there is a possibility that these Cetasikas can be > totally stopped if arising of Citta can be stopped. ===== Again, I have a problem with the implication that cetasikas can be treated as distinct from citta (i.e. eliminated). ===== > Citta arises due to condition. Deconditioning will finally lead to a > state when there is no more chance of arising of Citta as at the time > after '' Cuticitta of Arahats''. To eliminate Cetasikas needs to > understand them first. All events and happenings are related to Citta > and Cetasikas. So the way of liberation is also connected with Citta > and Cetasikas again. ===== What is meant by "deconditioning"? This could be interpreted as suggesting that parinibbana as the goal; the Buddha always said that the attainment of nibbana, not parinibbana was the goal. I salute your effort - I will interested in your feedback on my comments. Metta, Rob M :-) 25696 From: robmoult Date: Mon Sep 29, 2003 3:33pm Subject: Introduction to the Abhidhamma - Slides 13-16 for comment Why do people study the Abhidhamma? Slide Contents ============== A stick figure of a man: Study ----- Leg: Nature of mind - Greed (lobha) - Hatred (dosa) - Delusion (moha) Leg: Characterisitics of existence - Impermanence (anicca) - Suffering (dukkha) - No Self (anatta) Lower Torso: Five Aggregates - How the mind and the body interact Practice -------- Arm: Giving (Dana) - Do good Arm: Virtue (Sila) - Avoid evil Upper Torso (with a heart): Meditation (Bhavana) - Purify the mind Realization ----------- Head: Wisdom (Pañña) Speaker Notes ============= The foundation of the Abhidhamma is an understanding of the nature of reality. This includes the nature of mind, the three characteristics of existence and the realities which constitute a being – the five aggregates. Abhidhamma provides a framework for the understanding of our everyday experience and this understanding is a condition for the arising of insight. The mind plays a central role in Buddhism. The first verses of the Dhammapada: "Mind is the forerunner of all evil states. Mind is chief; mind-made are they. If one speaks or acts with a wicked mind, because of that, suffering follows one, even as the wheel follows the hoof of the draught-ox. Mind is the forerunner of all good states. Mind is chief; mind-made are they. If one speaks or acts with a pure mind, because of that, happiness follows one, even as one's shadow that never leaves." "Avoid evil, do good, purify the mind, that is the teaching of the Buddhas." Abhidhamma is the study of the mind, and this will lead to a more effective practice and eventually a "trained mind". The Bhumija Sutta (Mn126) explains that results are obtained, not because of strong desire for results, but rather because of proper practice. The practice of dana, sila and bhavana will lead to wisdom. Abhidhamma is meant for practical use in following the Eightfold Path, rather than for abstract theorizing. We start by studying the nature of reality. We follow this with putting the theory into practice through dana, sila and bhavana. The correct practice will lead us to realization or wisdom. 25697 From: Date: Mon Sep 29, 2003 3:49pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Concentration and samatha Hi Jon, Everything you wrote seems alright to me. The question about the tranquility of a murderer refers to feelings of tranquility which may arise while intending, committing, or resulting from the commission of an akusala act. Is this tranquility kusala or akusala? Howard only mentioned this in passing and I don't know if anyone responded; the reference was to Jeffrey Dahmer, a famous murderer in the U.S. I agree tranquility is only mental. There is no tranquility of rupa. Since we are discussing kusala I might ask what is so wholesome about understanding (panna) the arising and passing of dhammas? Scientists and gamblers do this all the time. Larry 25698 From: Date: Mon Sep 29, 2003 4:07pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Vism. XIV, 19 L: "Also, I was wondering if root cittas only arise in javana? N: "They can also arise as mahaavipaakacittas, such as rebirth and also as retention, tadaaramma.na-cittas." H Nina, Thanks for your replies. In these two cases of root cittas there is no kamma result, correct? Is that because there is no intention or just because they only arise once and are too weak to produce kamma? Also, do you think the word "abhinivisati" refers to javana or some other kind of process? Larry Vism. XIV, 19, n.6: The word "abhinivisati" with its noun "abhinivesa" means literally 'to dwell on', and so to adhere, or 'insist'. In the Tipi.taka it always appears in a bad sense and always appears in contexts with wrong view and clinging (see e.g. M.iii, 30-31, Nd. I, 436 and also Ps. quoted above at Ch. I, 140). However, in the Commentaries the word appears also in a good sense as at Ch. XIV, 130, Ch. XXI, 73 and 83f., and at MA.i,250 (cf. "saddha.m nivisati", M.ii,173). In this good sense it is synonymous with "right" interpretation of experience. All the bare experience of perception is interpreted by the mind either in the sense of permanence, pleasure, self, which is wrong because it is not confirmed by experience, or in the sense of impermanence, etc., which is right because it is confirmed by experience (see Ch. XIV, 130). There is no not interpreting experience, and it is a function of the mind that the interpretation adopted is 'dwelt upon', i.e. insisted upon. And so it is this insistence or interpretation in accordance with reality as confirmed by experience that is the "abhinivesa" of the Commentaries in the good sense. For these reasons the words "interpretation", "misinterpretation" and "insistence" have been chosen here as renderings. 25699 From: Date: Mon Sep 29, 2003 1:54pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Concentration and samatha Hi, Larry (and Jon) - In a message dated 9/29/03 6:53:24 PM Eastern Daylight Time, LBIDD@w... writes: > > Hi Jon, > > Everything you wrote seems alright to me. The question about the > tranquility of a murderer refers to feelings of tranquility which may > arise while intending, committing, or resulting from the commission of > an akusala act. Is this tranquility kusala or akusala? Howard only > mentioned this in passing and I don't know if anyone responded; the > reference was to Jeffrey Dahmer, a famous murderer in the U.S. > > I agree tranquility is only mental. There is no tranquility of rupa. > > Since we are discussing kusala I might ask what is so wholesome about > understanding (panna) the arising and passing of dhammas? Scientists and > gamblers do this all the time. > > Larry > > ============================== Larry, Jon did give a reply to my post as follows: ********************************* Howard --- upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, Jon (and Jim) - > Lists aside, wouldn't it be appropriate to say that while > Jeffrey > Dahmer was enjoying a large, satisfying dinner, his calm mindstates > were akusala? > ;-) The point, it seems to me, is that evil actions can instill > delightful > calm in some people, and that calm is certainly unwholesome. > > With metta, > Howard I'm sure you're right here. But unwholesome mindstates are the norm for everyone, it's just that there can be considerable differences in degree, so it shouldn't be assumed that the concentration of upright, law-abiding folks like you and me (hopefully) is kusala rather than akusala, even where the object is one we regard as a 'kusala' object. Sounds tough, I know, but better to face up to the size of the problem than assume (wrongly) a better case ;-)) Jon ****************************************** With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 25700 From: connie Date: Mon Sep 29, 2003 6:42pm Subject: Re: Self-sacrifice Thanks, Christine, for the rest of the Vissuddhimagga bandit thing. I was going to say that not clinging to self would be Buddhist self-sacrifice, with the idea that whatever we attain or eradicate is good for everyone else, too but if there's no self to begin with... So, the Skilled one just keeps sitting there extending metta and the bandit just picks someone? Then, someone starts reciting the Simile of the Saw. That's the one where it seems like everytime I mention it, someone says "I don't think we have to be doormats to be good Buddhists" or something about 'boundary issues' and the conversation kind of stops. I don't even know what boundary issues means... must be those barriers. But didn't Sariputta say something about being a doormat, or was it 'like the earth'? Maybe the bandit gets overwhelmed by all the metta and decides these doormats must know something worth listening to or just gets all frieked out when no one acts scared and starts thinking "I'd better get out of here while I still can." peace, connie 25701 From: Date: Mon Sep 29, 2003 7:27pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Concentration and samatha Thanks for the reference, Howard. Larry 25702 From: robmoult Date: Mon Sep 29, 2003 8:35pm Subject: Advice on Discussion Topics Hi Friends, Each Sunday morning, I teach an introductory Abhidhamma class at the local temple. For the past two years, I have been using the Abhidhamma as a structure to present Dhamma topics (see my class notes in the Files section). After my class, another teacher (Bro. Teo) covers "intermediate Abhidhamma". Most of the people in the class have repeated the course at least twice (through there are some newcomers). I am starting to hear comments such as, "we've heard this before...", so I want to change my approach to teaching starting in January (new class). Rather than using the Abhidhamma as a jumping off point for Dhamma topics, I am thinking about using Dhamma topics as jumping off points for Abhidhamma topics. For example, each week, I would start with a practical question and then incorporate as much Abhidhamma as I can in the answer. Here is a partial list (in no particular order) of practical questions that would form the theme of Abhidhamma talks. I seek your advice / input as to additional questions that I could use as the basis for Dhamma talks (my emphasis is on PRACTICAL Abhidhamma, I will leave the theory to Bro. Teo). 1. What is the Abhidhamma 2. What happens when I die? 3. How does kamma work? 4. What is good and evil? 5. What are the steps to attain Nibbana? 6. What is the relationship between Buddhism and Science? 7. What is the benefit of studying Abhidhamma? 8. How do I apply anatta in daily life? 9. How does thinking occur? 10. What happens when I practice samattha meditation? 11. What happens when I practice vipassana meditation? 12. Is there free will? 13. What is the role of faith in Buddhism? 14. What is the role of rites and rituals in Buddhism? 15. What is the Buddhist perspective on life (right view)? 16. How do I control anger? 17. How do I control attachment? 18. How do I cultivate loving-kindness? 19. How do I cultivate generosity? 20. What is mindfulness? 21. What does "dependent origination" mean? 22. What are the five aggregates? 23. What are the four noble truths? 24. What does it mean to take precepts? 25. How do I cultivate karuna, mudita and upekkha? Some of these topics may take two weeks to cover properly, so I am looking for five to ten more topics so that I have a one year syllabus. Thanks for your input... Metta, Rob M :-) 25703 From: Sukinderpal Singh Narula Date: Mon Sep 29, 2003 8:45pm Subject: Re: Sutta and interpretation. Hi Rob K., Christine (and Shakti), Chris, thanks for the reference. But I am now trying to locate the original story and can't find it. However from the little that has been mentioned in Robert's post, I get the impression that the lesson Culapantaka learnt may not have been 'impermanence'. So my guess is probably wrong. Robert, can you please give a more detailed explanation of your own understandings? The mention in your post of the commentary to the Abhidhammattha Sangaha, does not to me, seem to particularly point to this question. Appreciate all assistance. Metta, Sukin --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "christine_forsyth" wrote: > Hiya Sukin, > > Have a look at a previous post by RobK: > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/24981 > > Looking forward to seeing you (and all) soon,:-) > > metta, > Chris > 25704 From: bodhi2500 Date: Mon Sep 29, 2003 9:10pm Subject: Re: Self-sacrifice Hi Christine, All Christine wrote: > Dear Group, > > Is self-sacrifice viewed positively in Theravada Buddhism? Does > Buddhism have an equivalent to the Christian verse, "'Greater love > has no man than this, that he lay down his life for his friends."? > I recall a couple of the Jatakas showing animals giving their lives > voluntarily to help others - but what of the Suttas? I don't know if this helps but I found this verse from the Samyutta Nikaya, Devatasamyutta 78 > Love "What should he not give who loves the good? What should a mortal not relinquish? What should one release when its good, But not release when its bad?" "A person should not give himself away; He should not relinquish himself. One should release speech that is good, But not speech that is bad." Commentary > One should not give oneself away by becoming the slave of another, but an exception is made for all bodhisattas, So too except for all bodhisattas, one should not relinquish oneself to lions, tigers, etc. Steve 25705 From: nina van gorkom Date: Mon Sep 29, 2003 9:17pm Subject: Saturday discussions in Bkg, to SUKIN Dear Sukin, You complain about moha, good reminder, I have a lot of it too. As to attending discussions: you could make notes, this always keeps me awake! And we all will benefit too. And possibly keep your own tape recorder running at the same time. Then you can check your own tape at home, no need to wait. Looking forward to your notes, Nina. Sarah wrote to Sukin: > Re your comments on the Sat discussion - can you just > send the para as it is (or slightly edited if you > like) to DSG so others can join in or read? ... I know Nina also would like > to encourage you to do this and is more likely to give > a helpful reply then as well;-) Good qus for everyone > to consider and interesting points. 25706 From: Sarah Date: Mon Sep 29, 2003 10:34pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Sutta and interpretation. Hi Sukin, --- Sukinderpal Singh Narula wrote: > Chris, thanks for the reference. But I am now trying to locate the > original story and can't find it. ..... I also wrote a little more about it in this post (to Howard) which might be useful: http://www.escribe.com/religion/dhammastudygroup/m21006.html For more details, also see this entry from Dict of Pali Proper Names: http://www.palikanon.com/english/pali_names/c/cuula_panthaka_th.htm ..... I think the point is that we all have very different inclinations and accumulations - some like to study Pali in depth, others the Abhidhamma, others the suttas and so on. Some can memorise or recount what they read easily, whilst others like you find it helpful to listen to tapes. However busy you are or whatever problems you face, you still get to the Foundation regularly for discussions and consider the teachings very deeply in your daily life. Culapantaka didn’t have his brother’s ability to memorise even a few lines and even though his bother was an arahant, he wasn’t able to appreciate what Culapantaka needed to hear. Only the Buddha knew. Culapantaka became an arahant with all the Patisambhidas (Discriminations). This is why I’d never like to suggest that everyone needs to study Pali, read the Abhidhamma texts, chant stanzas or anything else that is contrary to one’s inclinations. It’s also why I appreciate it when A.Sujin just reminds us to be aware of the present realities - the namas and rupas appearing now, regardless of whether we are being alert or forgetful, clear or confused, fast or slow and so on. It’s good to appreciate how much moha and other akusala this is even in a Dhamma discussion, I think. I believe this is also the wonder of the Buddha’s teachings, i.e that they are equally applicable to everyone and there are always present phenomena to be known, whatever the circumstances. We never know what will arise by conditions and can appreciate the truth of anatta in this regard. I like your comments very much, Sukin. Look f/w to more. Like you, I’d also be glad to hear further comments from Mike, RobK and anyone else. Metta, Sarah ===== 25707 From: Sarah Date: Mon Sep 29, 2003 11:36pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Dhamma Issue 12, the Buddha's Last Meal. Dear Nina (& James), --- nina van gorkom wrote: > > Chapter 12 > > The Buddha1s Last Meal [....] > Issue of Analysis: Was the 3delicate pig2, 3súkara maddava2, the Buddha > consumed on the day of his final passing away (parinibbåna) porc? > Conclusion regarding the analysis of this issue: It was porc1s meat. .... I.B. Horner also came to this conclusion in her comments in the introduction to the ‘Clarifier of Sweet Meaning’ (transl of comy to Buddhavamsa). She wrote: “ ‘ma”msarasabhojana’, meal consisting of a flesh-product....Not in PED as a compound, though of course all 3 elements appear. The importance of the compound is that it is here said it is ‘dhammataa’, regulation, for all Buddhas that on the day of the parinibbaana there is a partaking of, or eating, ‘bhojana’, a meat or flesh, ‘ma”msa’, product, ‘rasa’. The conclusion therefore seems inescapable, even if ‘rasa’ were translated as flavour or taste, that the last meal a Buddha ate was a meat-meal or a meal in which there was meat in ome form. Therefore, this passage provides evidence that suukara-maddava, the Buddha Gotama’s last meal, should not be translated as sometimes it has been as “truffles”, but rather as tender, ‘maddava’, (flesh or meat) from a boar.......Indeed, DA ii 568, 1.13-14 is quite clear: ‘suukarassa pavatta-ma”msa.m’, meat of a boar available (in the market). DA.T ii 218 further explains: ‘vanavaraahassa muduma”msa’, the soft flesh of a forest boar or wild hog. UdA 399 agrees with DA ii 568 and while ascirbing this interpretation to the Mahaa-a.t.takathaa, also gives different interpretations made by “some”, ‘keci’, and by “others”, ‘a~n~ne’, both of which appear to substantiate RhD’s “truffles”. See also Miln 175 for Gotama’s last meal before the awakening and the last before his parinibbaana.” **************** Metta, Sarah p.s James, I think you raised a very good point. Perhaps we need to look at the Pali with someone’s help. M.Walshe gives this transl which also makes it sound as if the meal was the cause: “having eaten Cunda’s meal (this I’ve heard), He suffered a grave illness, painful, deathly; From eating a meal of ‘pig’s delight’ Grave sickness assailed the Teacher. Having purged, the Lord then said: ‘Now I’ll go to Kusinaaraa town.’” As Nina quoted from the PTS comy: “ “And when he had eaten, because of the pork stew (suukaramaddava)’: It happened to him when he had eaten, but not because he had eaten. If it had happened when he had not eaten, it would have been too painful; but because he had eaten the succulent food, his pain was slight, which i why he was able to walk on foot.” An example, perhaps, of how we never know the conditions at work or what would have happened without certain factors?? ====== 25708 From: Sarah Date: Tue Sep 30, 2003 0:21am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Self-sacrifice Hi Christine, --- christine_forsyth wrote: > Hello Sarah, Connie, and all, > > Thanks for your posts. ... (even though Sarah mentioned the V.. > word. :-)) .... OOps! I need a little reminder card next to my computer of ‘pet peeves’ - the V word for you, ‘intrinsic’ for Howard, ‘accumulations’ for Mike (??), ‘reality’ for TG, ‘rupa’ for James, ‘wholesome’ for mums, ‘skilful’ for Dan and so on...... Anyway, as you’re smiling about it now, let me mention that when we were last in Bkk I raised the difficulty of the ‘V’ Jataka for many with K.Sujin and gave some details. Her simple comment was that without the ‘V’ Jataka or lifetime and details as given, none of us would be here discussing the teachings. Metta, Sarah p.s Steve, thx for the SN sutta reference. I understand that only a Bodhisatta would perform these acts with sufficient wisdom. Did you go to the last Cooran weekend? What did you find of interest? ====== 25709 From: Sarah Date: Tue Sep 30, 2003 1:54am Subject: Re: [dsg] Personality view vs. Delusion Hi Larry (& TG), --- LBIDD@w... wrote: > If a car is seen as arising then the insight > knowledges apply. If a car is seen as non-arising, insight knowledges > don't apply but the car can't be found and its identity is very tenuous. > This is tantamount to insight knowledge in that it leads to > nonattachment. .... Do you think this is the same kind of insight knowledge or understanding we’re reading about in Vism such as in the ‘penetrating the individual essences of states’ and understanding of nama and rupa? .... >If we avoid saying either "exists" or "doesn't exist" in > either case, the ethical viability of kamma is preserved and we don't > stray into the extremes of nihilism or eternalism. .... ?? ..... > One point I would like to add is that "reality" is actually a > translation of "dhamma". It might be worth considering whether > conventional reality (concept) is less "real" than ultimate reality. > Both realities are ungraspable. ..... On the contrary, I understand both ultimate realities and concepts are very graspable. BUT, concepts only ‘exist’ when cittas think about them as shadows or imaginations. They seem to be real, but if we don’t think about them, they are never experienced. .... > > Also, a question for you and Sarah: in terms of self-view, I was > wondering how abhidhamma, or the suttas, analyze subjectivity when it > manifests as "identifying-with". For example, I can be subjectively > angry or objectively angry. Anger can be an object of consciousness > which is not angry. ..... Anger has its particular characteristics which can be known when it arises (as you say, as object of consciousness immediately following its falling away). Someone may look and sound angry, but only panna can know its exact nature when it arises. For others, it is just thinking about it. ..... >Is lobha, dosa, moha as root consciousness > personality view? ..... There is some controversy about the term personality view. I take it you’re referring to sakkaya-ditthi, translated in Nyantiloka’s dict as personality view? Personality view (sakkaya-ditthi) is always rooted in lobha. BUT, not all lobha-mula-cittas are accompanied by sakkaya-ditthi. Same with conceit. Remember from ADL, that 4 types of lobha-mula-citta arise with wrong views and 4 without? The sotapanna still has the 4 without, inc. conceit which can arise with any of these. Also, moha is a root with all unwholesome cittas. .... >Is "identifying-with" the same as root consciousness? > Is alobha, adosa, amoha as root consciousness personality view? Is sati > personality view? .... I think that ‘identifying-with’ would usually refer to micha- ditthi - a cetasika accompanying the lobha-mula-citta. Only panna can know, however, whether there is ditthi, maana, equanimity, lobha or what state at any given moment. Consciousness rooted in alobha, adosa and amoha cannot be accompanied by unwholesome factors such as sakkaya ditthi. So sati and sakkaya ditthi cannot arise together, but it’s characteristic can be the object of subsequent cittas with sati. Metta, Sarah ===== 25710 From: Sarah Date: Tue Sep 30, 2003 2:05am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Question again :nibbana Dear Htoo, I thought the following was a very clear explanation. I was curious (because I don't remember having seen) the part about even pannatti causing the bending of nama. Certainly they are objects of nama and condition nama by arammana-paccaya (object condition). Very helpful. --- htootintnaing wrote: > Nibbana is Nama Dhamma. Citta is Nama Dhamma. Cetasika is Nama > Dhamma. Rupa is Rupa Dhamma. Pannatti is not an ultimate reality. > > Citta arises. It passes away. It takes an object.And it can be taken > as an object.It is Nama Dhamma. It is one of ultimate realities. > > Cetasikas arise. They pass away. They also take an object along with > Citta. They can be taken as objects.They are Nama Dhamma. They are > some of ultimate realities. > > Rupa arise. They pass away. They cannot take any object. But they can > be taken as objects.They are Rupa Dhamma. They also are some of > ultimate realities. > > Nibbana does not arise. Nor does it pass away. It cannot take any > object. But it can be taken as an object. As you said it causes > bending of Citta or Cetasika. So it is Nama Dhamma.It is one of > ultimate realities. > > Panatti does not arise. It does not pass away. It cannot take any > object. It is not an ultimate reality. But it can be taken as an > object. Even though it can cause bending of Nama ( Citta and > Cetasika ) it is not Nama Dhamma ( this may not fit with definition > of Nama ). It is not Rupa Dhamma as well. ***** Metta, Sarah ====== 25711 From: Sarah Date: Tue Sep 30, 2003 2:18am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Question again :nibbana Hi LC, Good to see all your fine qus and contributions too;-) --- lokuttaracitta wrote: > Regarding "store-consciousness" or something like that, All I can > say now from my experiences is that " attachement to self " tends to > creep into practioners in a very subtle level and give a kind of > fatal damage to their spritual development as Buddhists once "latent > citta" or " store-consciousness " is assumed as a kind of paramattha > dhamma. .... I agree! .... That is why "authentic" maha-yana traditions including Vajra- > yaha ( Dont feel shocked!) have been interpreting the definition of > such conciousnesses with the utmost care. Theravadin's( Shoud I > say "Buddha's" (^^)? ) stoic attitude toward such a citta should be > highly appreciated. .... Hence it is truth of ‘anatta’ which sets the teachings apart from all others. You asked about ‘paritta’ and you’ll find more detail in UP (glad you find it useful;-)) under paritta or protection. Paritta texts are commonly recited in countries such as Sri Lanka and there are special parita ceremonies, usually recited by bhikkhus in Pali and with other ceremonial passing of thread, pouring of water and so on. Sometimes these may last all night. Typical examples of verses recited are the metta sutta, the mangala sutta, the ratana sutta, the dasadhamma sutta, khandha paritta and many others. You can get a thin book, such as Piyadassi Thera’s “Book of Protection” from BPS or elsewhere (?). Others may know more. Metta, Sarah ===== 25712 From: Sarah Date: Tue Sep 30, 2003 2:25am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Mantras Hi KKT, Thank you for your explanations: --- phamdluan2000 wrote: > > KKT: If I have to condense > > the Teachings in one word, > > it should be << MIND >> .... > KKT: At first glance > Buddhism should be seen > as a path to ease and > to cure human sufferings. > > There are bodily and > mental sufferings. > > Bodily sufferings are > unavoidable but mental > sufferings are optional. > > To cure mental sufferings > a profound knowledge of > the real nature and the > workings of human mind > reveals necessary. > > This is why we study > Abhidhamma here. .... I agree. I'd just add that I think all phenomena need to be known - rupas as well as namas. Without understanding rupas, I doubt it's possible to really understand namas or to distinguish between them. What do you think? I think the Zen understanding - finding the 'real nature' or 'buddha-nature', equated with nibbana as you explain is different. Hence my question about whether the (Theravada) Teachings can be condensed into <>...... How about <>?? Metta, Sarah ===== 25713 From: christine_forsyth Date: Tue Sep 30, 2003 2:50am Subject: Re: Advice on Discussion Topics Hello RobM, and all, If I were coming to your lectures, I would be hoping to hear something about the process of bondage - how we become entangled - and about freedom - how we become unentangled or don't get tangled in the first place. And what part 'contact' plays and how it all works. Confused, aren't I ? :-) Or, rather, feeling harassed, obsessed and assailed by the stories my mind spins out, fed by perceptions, likes and dislikes. As you can probably tell, I've been reading the 'The Ball of Honey' MN 18 Madhupindika Sutta "Dependent on eye & forms, eye-consciousness arises. The meeting of the three is contact. With contact as a requisite condition, there is feeling. What one feels, one perceives (labels in the mind). What one perceives, one thinks about. What one thinks about, one complicates. Based on what a person complicates, the perceptions & categories of complication assail him/her with regard to past, present, & future forms cognizable via the eye." And I'd also be interested in anything about 'ignorance', what exactly it is, why don't we recognise the extent of it in ourselves, and how we know if we are digging it out. Maybe this is all covered under one of the other headings? metta and peace, Christine ---The trouble is that you think you have time --- --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "robmoult" wrote: > Hi Friends, > > Each Sunday morning, I teach an introductory Abhidhamma class at the > local temple. For the past two years, I have been using the > Abhidhamma as a structure to present Dhamma topics (see my class > notes in the Files section). After my class, another teacher (Bro. > Teo) covers "intermediate Abhidhamma". > > Most of the people in the class have repeated the course at least > twice (through there are some newcomers). I am starting to hear > comments such as, "we've heard this before...", so I want to change > my approach to teaching starting in January (new class). > > Rather than using the Abhidhamma as a jumping off point for Dhamma > topics, I am thinking about using Dhamma topics as jumping off > points for Abhidhamma topics. For example, each week, I would start > with a practical question and then incorporate as much Abhidhamma as > I can in the answer. > > Here is a partial list (in no particular order) of practical > questions that would form the theme of Abhidhamma talks. I seek your > advice / input as to additional questions that I could use as the > basis for Dhamma talks (my emphasis is on PRACTICAL Abhidhamma, I > will leave the theory to Bro. Teo). > 1. What is the Abhidhamma > 2. What happens when I die? > 3. How does kamma work? > 4. What is good and evil? > 5. What are the steps to attain Nibbana? > 6. What is the relationship between Buddhism and Science? > 7. What is the benefit of studying Abhidhamma? > 8. How do I apply anatta in daily life? > 9. How does thinking occur? > 10. What happens when I practice samattha meditation? > 11. What happens when I practice vipassana meditation? > 12. Is there free will? > 13. What is the role of faith in Buddhism? > 14. What is the role of rites and rituals in Buddhism? > 15. What is the Buddhist perspective on life (right view)? > 16. How do I control anger? > 17. How do I control attachment? > 18. How do I cultivate loving-kindness? > 19. How do I cultivate generosity? > 20. What is mindfulness? > 21. What does "dependent origination" mean? > 22. What are the five aggregates? > 23. What are the four noble truths? > 24. What does it mean to take precepts? > 25. How do I cultivate karuna, mudita and upekkha? > > Some of these topics may take two weeks to cover properly, so I am > looking for five to ten more topics so that I have a one year > syllabus. > > Thanks for your input... > > Metta, > Rob M :-) 25714 From: Sarah Date: Tue Sep 30, 2003 3:11am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: six Councils, to Htoo and Suan. Dear Nina (Htoo & Suan). --- nina van gorkom wrote: > > Dear Htoo, > Thank you for the information. I read that there were controversies > about > the texts of the sixth council. I do not know details. .... I think this article gives quiet a good and fair summary of the councils - all the details seemed accurate as far as I know. (It doesn't mention the recent controversies you raise.) I've seen more details, but forget where. Others like Christine or Connie might know. Metta, Sarah ===== 25715 From: Sarah Date: Tue Sep 30, 2003 3:23am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: six Councils, to Htoo and Suan. Dear Nina and all, This is the link for the article I liked that I missed out;-) http://acl.arts.usyd.edu.au/~hudson/buddhism_2.htm Another helpful article with more detail, by Ven Dr Rewatta Dhamma is this one: http://www.urbandharma.org/udharma/councils.html Metta, Sarah ==== 25716 From: buddhatrue Date: Tue Sep 30, 2003 4:13am Subject: Re: [dsg] Dhamma Issue 12, the Buddha's Last Meal. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Sarah wrote: > Dear Nina (& James), > > An example, perhaps, of how we never know the conditions at work or what > would have happened without certain factors?? > ====== Hi Sarah, Could you please explain what you mean here? I believe there has to be some agreement on the cause of events or there is no reason to even learn the dhamma. With your posit, the causes for nothing could be determined and nothing could be understood...there would be no reason for the Buddha, the Dhamma, and the Sangha. Everything would be provisional for each person's determination; in other words, total chaos and anarchy. Metta, James 25717 From: Larry Date: Tue Sep 30, 2003 6:43am Subject: Re: Advice on Discussion Topics Hi Rob, Here's a practical question for discussion: How do we better understand present experience? Another one: What is the result of better understanding present experience? Or: What is failing to understand present experience? And: What is the result of failing to understand present experience? To answer this you could discuss what is understanding (panna), what is involved in understanding, how does understanding work, what is improvement (bhavana), what is involved in improvement, how does it work, what is the relationship between understanding and the fruits of understanding, how does that work, what is not understanding, what are the fruits of not understanding, etc. To begin with, I would like to know how to improve my ability to _identify_ my present experience. I can usually identify large movements like "thinking" or "feeling" but I have trouble finding specific desires, aversions, bewilderments or seeing how recognition occurs, what is involved in that, and the role of concept in present experience. Any thoughts? [How does thinking work?] Larry 25718 From: htootintnaing Date: Tue Sep 30, 2003 7:31am Subject: Re: Cetasikas As Designers Or Helpers ( 01 ) Dear Rob M, Thanks for your interest. Actually this is an old post round about 10300 Msg. There were few replies on this subject of 5 post. Nina suggested me to post on these subjects as there have been many newcomers in this forum. I must ( MUST ) admit that the idea of the king and ministers is just my thought. I do not know about 'Atthasalini'. I have read a lot. Most are Burmese versions and Pali. I did not recognise 'Atthasalini ' in Burmese version when I read about Cetasikas. But when I got reply letter on this subject, I was really surprised. I remember that post contained ' fortred or something '. Anyway, 1. permanent 2. flexible 3. constructive 4. destructive are my own words, I am sure. But there might be overlapping with ideas already printed. See my inline text reply to your questions. With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing ------------------------ --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "robmoult" wrote: > Hi Htoo, > > Interesting post. Will this be a series? > > I have inserted some questions / comments. > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "htootintnaing" > wrote: > > Everybody has one and the only one mind ( from science point of > > view ). > > ===== > > I'm not sure what you mean here.( Rob M ) > > ===== I mean there is body and mind. So, mind is mind. There is never two minds in a body at the same moment.( Htoo ) ------------------------------------------ > > Actually mind has as army of soldiers ( mental factors ) led > > by the general ( Citta ) or the king or the leader. When citta > works > > like a king, accompanying cetasikas work as ministers. Ministers > > advise the king and the king does all the action. So, for > > everything, the king is responsible. > > > > There are four sets of ministers. > > > > 1.Permanent ministers(Sabbacittasadarana Cetasikas) > > 2.Flexible ministers(Pakinnaka Cetasikas) > > 3.Destructive ministers(Akusala Cetasikas) > > 4.Constructive ministers(Kusala Cetasikas) > > > > Cetasikas cannot perceive senses,which is function of citta.But > their > > accompaniment makes the citta different names. So they can be > > conferred designers. Cetasikas help citta, advise citta, drive > citta > > and do have many effects on citta. But citta behaves itself and > > always leads all the mental bodies. > > ===== > > According to CMA, the functions of citta are: > - As an agent, citta is that which cognizes an object > - As an instrument, citta is that by means of which the accompanying > mental factors cognize the the object > - As an activity, citta is itself nothing other than the process of > cognizing the object > > I suspect that you are taking your "King and retinue" analogy from > Atthasalini (p90). Buddhaghosa used this analogy to stress the > inseparabality of citta and cetasika, but I am concerned that you > are extending the metaphor beyond its intended usage. Specifically, > though citta is the forerunner (only for worldly phenomena - > interesting enough, for transcendental phenomena, understanding is > the forerunner), I am not clear what you mean by, "citta behaves > itself and always leads all the mental bodies." > > ===== > > > The existence of Cetasikas is hard to be aware of if one has not > > learned about it. Mind is made up of Citta and Cetasikas. They > come > > in a series without any interruption. As Citta is the leader, > there > > always is a Citta but they are not the same and each Citta only > lives > > just a moment ( one billionth of a blink ). > > ============================ > > I don't think that it possible to be aware of a cetasika as distinct > from the associated citta? > > This section could be misinterpreted as saying that cetasika follow > citta in a series and that citta is the leader of the series. ( Rob M ) > > =============================== Distinct is that Cetasika each has their own character. I said come in a series. Yes. Citta after Citta and then Citta after Citta. That is series. I didn't mean there is a rail of Citta and Cetasikas where Citta is an engine ( leading car in the trail ) and Cetasikas are following in successive order. I said accompanied. It is something like moving of X-line along Y-axis rather than moving of Y-line along the Y-axis with arrow head at the top, in which the arrow is Citta and line represent all Cetasikas that follow. As X-line is moving all points on the X-line are moving equally. If a Citta arises, at the same time Cetasikas arise. It is these Cetasikas that make Citta named. But as Citta has the chief function of knowing the object or recognition of the object it is called the leader. Leadership is one of the characteristics of Citta. This does not mean, Citta is going first and all Cetasikas are following him. No, not in this way. ( Htoo ) ======================================== > > In a continuous flux of Cittas, each Citta is accompanied by > > different combinations of Cetasikas. It is these Cetasikas that > make > > known Citta with different names. Actually from the view point of > its > > character, there is one and only one Citta. > > > > Citta is pure. It is clean. It is luminous. It is radiant. It is > free > > of sins and free of all Akusala. This is its origionality. But as > > Cetasikas always accompany him, its pureness has gone and there > arise > > different Cittas good and bad. =============================== > Again, I am concerned that one might infer that one could be aware > of a citta as distinct from its concommitant cetasikas. > What do you mean by "from the view point of character"?( Rob M ) ======================================= Here, for example, Dosa is a Cetasika and destruction is its character. Citta itself does not have destructive character. Citta is to know the object. Even though they arise together and cannot be separable, character- wise they are separate entities. So said there are Citta, Cetasika, Rupa and Nibbana as ultimate realities or Paramattha Sacca. ( Htoo ) ============================================ > > We can strive to obtain Citta to be back into its normality as the > > purest. To do this is to eliminate all Cetasikas. This again seems > to > > be impossible. But there is a possibility that these Cetasikas can > be > > totally stopped if arising of Citta can be stopped. > =========================== > Again, I have a problem with the implication that cetasikas can be > treated as distinct from citta (i.e. eliminated).( Rob M ) ========================= Character-wise, yes.This is contemplation. Citta origionally is pure. We all most of the time do not have Dosa.Right. No one can have Dosa successively moment by moment continuing days, weeks, months, and years.If stay for a long time, we might have died from heart stopping. But all notice that when Dosa comes or arise, Citta becomes ugly, shaking, shocking, quivering, shivering, tremulous. This Dosa can ( CAN ) be eliminated temporarily. But it is impossible to eliminate all Cetasikas. The idea I put was Citta origionally is pure, if no Cetasika,Citta will be pure again. This will happen only when all Cittas stop to arise. No more Citta, no more Cetasikas, then the purest and calmest come as a state called Nibbana. ( Htoo ) ========================== > > Citta arises due to condition. Deconditioning will finally lead to > a > > state when there is no more chance of arising of Citta as at the > time > > after '' Cuticitta of Arahats''. To eliminate Cetasikas needs to > > understand them first. All events and happenings are related to > Citta > > and Cetasikas. So the way of liberation is also connected with > Citta > > and Cetasikas again. =========================== > What is meant by "deconditioning"? > > This could be interpreted as suggesting that parinibbana as the > goal; the Buddha always said that the attainment of nibbana, not > parinibbana was the goal. ( Rob M ) =================================== Deconditioning means removal or eradication of the all causes. You are right. Dead right. Buddhists' goal is Nibbana and not Parinibbana. Nibbana is a separate topic to be discussed later on. ( Htoo ) =================================== > > I salute your effort - I will interested in your feedback on my > comments. > > Metta, > Rob M :-) ================================== You are really welcome. But as Christine always says the problem is that you think you have time. Whenever I have got enough time, I will put my effort to help people to be on the right path. I have got some off-line mails. Some talked there are many different ways to Nibbana and so on. But I do not argue on that but I always try to help people. If some resist I do not put them into disasters. There are many sorts of people. The Buddha helped countless Sattas. Still there are many many left. Even in His life time, The Buddha could not put some on the right path like '' Sunakkhatta '' who finally followed Miccha-Ditthi Titthi ( misbeliever ). Ruby always shines even in mud. May all beings have right view on Dhamma. With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing 25719 From: robmoult Date: Tue Sep 30, 2003 7:43am Subject: Re: Advice on Discussion Topics Hi Christine, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "christine_forsyth" wrote: > If I were coming to your lectures, I would be hoping to hear > something about the process of bondage - how we become entangled - > and about freedom - how we become unentangled or don't get tangled in > the first place. And what part 'contact' plays and how it all works. > Confused, aren't I ? :-) Or, rather, feeling harassed, obsessed and > assailed by the stories my mind spins out, fed by perceptions, likes > and dislikes. As you can probably tell, I've been reading the 'The > Ball of Honey' MN 18 Madhupindika Sutta ===== One of my favourites - I intend to spent some time on this as I explain dependent origination (how we get caught up in samsara and how to get out of it). ===== > And I'd also be interested in anything about 'ignorance', what > exactly it is, why don't we recognise the extent of it in ourselves, > and how we know if we are digging it out. ===== Ignorance would be a major theme of "What is the Buddhist perspective on life (right view)?" Looking forward to more ideas! Metta, Rob M :-) 25720 From: robmoult Date: Tue Sep 30, 2003 7:45am Subject: Re: Advice on Discussion Topics Hi Larry, I love it! Great suggestion! Metta, Rob M :-) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Larry" wrote: > Hi Rob, > > Here's a practical question for discussion: How do we better > understand present experience? Another one: What is the result of > better understanding present experience? Or: What is failing to > understand present experience? And: What is the result of failing to > understand present experience? 25721 From: htootintnaing Date: Tue Sep 30, 2003 7:56am Subject: Re: Advice on Discussion Topics Dear Rob M, Here are good topics. Sue ( suelynnloh ) has onced asked about Moha and Avijja and the discussion was on triplegem forum. 1.Difference between Moha and Avijja 2.Does Akusala co-exist Kusala? 3.Is it possible that Nama exist on their own without any Rupa? 4.Asannasatta Rupa Brahma and where is their Citta? 5.Do Brahma go to Apaya Bhumi directly? 6.How do Arahats use their time before Parinibbana? 7.Is Anicca Anatta or is Dukkha Anatta? Which one is Anatta? 8.What is the object of Arahatta Magga Citta? 9.Are all Tilekkhana seen at the same time? 10.When or where is the distinction between previous life and present life? 11.Can animal reborn at Deva realms? 12. Are there animals at Deva realms ( horse cart driven by Martali )? 13.Are there 4 Rupa Jhana or 5 Rupa jhana? 14. What is Vicara and what is the difference between Vitakka and Vicara? 15.What is Saddha? 16.All Kusala Cittas are accompanied by Saddha. If so, what about non- Buddhists giving their possession as offering to other people or group as charity? 17. Is Miccha-Ditthi Akusala? 18. Are all non-Buddhists commiting Akusala because of their Miccha- Ditthi? 19. What is Samma-Ditthi? Is it Vitakka or anything else? 20.Do Visuddhi Magga come one after another? 21.Are Sotapana free from Akusala? If so, what are possible Akusala in them and compare them with those of Puthujana? 22.Why don't Brahmas have Tadaarmmanacitta? 23.What are Manodvaravithicittas and Visayapavatti? 24.Can Arahats experience Nibbana before Parinibbana? In which way? 25.Why do Dvi-Pancavinnana have only 7 Cetasikas? 26.Do Mana and Dosa arise together? And many more.... May my contribution make you put forward effort searching the right answer and teach the students of Abhidhamma. With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing ---------------------- --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "robmoult" wrote: > Hi Friends, > > Each Sunday morning, I teach an introductory Abhidhamma class at the > local temple. For the past two years, I have been using the > Abhidhamma as a structure to present Dhamma topics (see my class > notes in the Files section). After my class, another teacher (Bro. > Teo) covers "intermediate Abhidhamma". > > Most of the people in the class have repeated the course at least > twice (through there are some newcomers). I am starting to hear > comments such as, "we've heard this before...", so I want to change > my approach to teaching starting in January (new class). > > Rather than using the Abhidhamma as a jumping off point for Dhamma > topics, I am thinking about using Dhamma topics as jumping off > points for Abhidhamma topics. For example, each week, I would start > with a practical question and then incorporate as much Abhidhamma as > I can in the answer. > > Here is a partial list (in no particular order) of practical > questions that would form the theme of Abhidhamma talks. I seek your > advice / input as to additional questions that I could use as the > basis for Dhamma talks (my emphasis is on PRACTICAL Abhidhamma, I > will leave the theory to Bro. Teo). > 1. What is the Abhidhamma > 2. What happens when I die? > 3. How does kamma work? > 4. What is good and evil? > 5. What are the steps to attain Nibbana? > 6. What is the relationship between Buddhism and Science? > 7. What is the benefit of studying Abhidhamma? > 8. How do I apply anatta in daily life? > 9. How does thinking occur? > 10. What happens when I practice samattha meditation? > 11. What happens when I practice vipassana meditation? > 12. Is there free will? > 13. What is the role of faith in Buddhism? > 14. What is the role of rites and rituals in Buddhism? > 15. What is the Buddhist perspective on life (right view)? > 16. How do I control anger? > 17. How do I control attachment? > 18. How do I cultivate loving-kindness? > 19. How do I cultivate generosity? > 20. What is mindfulness? > 21. What does "dependent origination" mean? > 22. What are the five aggregates? > 23. What are the four noble truths? > 24. What does it mean to take precepts? > 25. How do I cultivate karuna, mudita and upekkha? > > Some of these topics may take two weeks to cover properly, so I am > looking for five to ten more topics so that I have a one year > syllabus. > > Thanks for your input... > > Metta, > Rob M :-) 25722 From: robmoult Date: Tue Sep 30, 2003 7:57am Subject: Re: Cetasikas As Designers Or Helpers ( 01 ) Hi Htoo, Your clarifications help a lot. Thanks - looking forward to the next in the series! Metta, Rob M :-) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "htootintnaing" wrote: > Dear Rob M, > > Thanks for your interest. Actually this is an old post round about > 10300 Msg. There were few replies on this subject of 5 post. Nina > suggested me to post on these subjects as there have been many > newcomers in this forum. 25723 From: htootintnaing Date: Tue Sep 30, 2003 8:05am Subject: [dsg] Re: six Councils, to Htoo and Suan. Dear Sarah, Thank you very much for your links about 5th and 6th Buddhists Council. With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing ----------------------- --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Sarah wrote: > Dear Nina and all, > > This is the link for the article I liked that I missed out;-) > http://acl.arts.usyd.edu.au/~hudson/buddhism_2.htm > > Another helpful article with more detail, by Ven Dr Rewatta Dhamma is this > one: > http://www.urbandharma.org/udharma/councils.html > > Metta, > > Sarah > ==== 25724 From: robmoult Date: Tue Sep 30, 2003 8:09am Subject: Re: Advice on Discussion Topics Hi Htoo, Thanks for the suggestions. Most of the people in the class are parents who have dropped their kids off at Sunday School. Most of them do not open any Abhidhamma text outside of class and most are not keen readers. Your questions are interesting to be sure (some have got me wondering - why doesn't a brahma have registration cittas?). However, I am looking for broad topics that would be of interest to a non-academic Buddhist that allow me to introduce a range of points from the Abhidhamma. One area that is not covered by my questions is rupa. My problem is forming a question (something that others would care about) that involves rupa as a main part of the answer. Any ideas for a "rupa question" or other more broad questions? Metta, Rob M :-) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "htootintnaing" wrote: > Dear Rob M, > > Here are good topics. > > Sue ( suelynnloh ) has onced asked about Moha and Avijja and the > discussion was on triplegem forum. > > 1.Difference between Moha and Avijja > 2.Does Akusala co-exist Kusala? > 3.Is it possible that Nama exist on their own without any Rupa? > 4.Asannasatta Rupa Brahma and where is their Citta? > 5.Do Brahma go to Apaya Bhumi directly? > 6.How do Arahats use their time before Parinibbana? > 7.Is Anicca Anatta or is Dukkha Anatta? Which one is Anatta? > 8.What is the object of Arahatta Magga Citta? > 9.Are all Tilekkhana seen at the same time? > 10.When or where is the distinction between previous life and present > life? > 11.Can animal reborn at Deva realms? > 12. Are there animals at Deva realms ( horse cart driven by Martali )? > 13.Are there 4 Rupa Jhana or 5 Rupa jhana? > 14. What is Vicara and what is the difference between Vitakka and > Vicara? > 15.What is Saddha? > 16.All Kusala Cittas are accompanied by Saddha. If so, what about non- > Buddhists giving their possession as offering to other people or > group as charity? > 17. Is Miccha-Ditthi Akusala? > 18. Are all non-Buddhists commiting Akusala because of their Miccha- > Ditthi? > 19. What is Samma-Ditthi? Is it Vitakka or anything else? > 20.Do Visuddhi Magga come one after another? > 21.Are Sotapana free from Akusala? If so, what are possible Akusala > in them and compare them with those of Puthujana? > 22.Why don't Brahmas have Tadaarmmanacitta? > 23.What are Manodvaravithicittas and Visayapavatti? > 24.Can Arahats experience Nibbana before Parinibbana? In which way? > 25.Why do Dvi-Pancavinnana have only 7 Cetasikas? > 26.Do Mana and Dosa arise together? 25725 From: nina van gorkom Date: Tue Sep 30, 2003 10:24am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Dhamma Issue 12, the Buddha's Last Meal. Dear James, op 29-09-2003 21:15 schreef buddhatrue op buddhatrue@y...: Allow me to quote from the > Mahaparinibbana Sutta: > > 4.20 And after having eaten the meal provided by Cunda, the Lord was > attacked by a severe sickness with bloody diarrhea, and with sharp > pains as if he were about to die. [128] But he endured all this > mindfully and clearly aware, and without complaint. Then the Lord > said: `Ananda, let us go to Kusinara.' `Very good Lord', said Ananda. > Having eaten Cunda's meal (this I've heard), > He suffered a grave illness, painful, deathly; > From eating a meal of `pig's delight' > Grave sickness assailed the Teacher. > Having purged, the Lord then said: > `Now I'll go to Kusinara town' 419 > > And this dhamma issue also goes on to state, "The súkaramaddava > (pig¹s meat) was not poisonous food, but it was delicate food and > when the Buddha had eaten it, it enabled him to walk on foot to the > city of Kusinåra." Huh? It gave him bloody diarrhea and pains as if > he were about to die, I would not call that delicate food. N: I have two sutta translation: the Wheel and BPS, these do not have: bloody diarrhea." Yes, severe pains even unto death. J: Additionally, they got it wrong because the Buddha didn't even make > it to the town of Kusinara. He had to stop twice along the way to > rest from sickness and decided to take his parinibbana just outside > of the town of Kusinara, he didn't make it to the city proper. N: the Co only said: after eating the sukkaramaddava he was able to walk on foot, it is not said: to Kusinara. The food itself was not the condition for the pains, the word condition, paccaya, that is used here in the Pali text of the Co is rather strong. I think the point merely is: thanks to the meal he could at least walk on, even though the pains were very strong and he had to rest many times. The meal was not poison, on the contrary, it was of benefit. J: Frankly, I think the commentaries have it really wrong about this > one. Do you have any input? N: I do not have much input. I hope others have. I read a verse added about the sharp pain even unto death and here is an interesting point about Buddhaghosa's way of editing: in a footnote: Buddhaghosa said: "It should be understood that these are verses by the Theras who held the council." It shows how conscientious he was. In the same Co, about the Four Great References, we read about the ways of checking what is true. The three great Councils are mentioned. "The word of the teacher" means the commentary [established by the 500 monks at the first great council]. This tells us something about the way Buddhaghosa worked. And a few times he mentioned: this is my own opinion. Nina. 25726 From: nina van gorkom Date: Tue Sep 30, 2003 10:24am Subject: Re: [dsg] Vism. XIV, 19 Hi Larry, op 30-09-2003 01:07 schreef LBIDD@w... op LBIDD@w...: > N: "They can also arise as mahaavipaakacittas, such as rebirth and also > as > retention, tadaaramma.na-cittas." L: Thanks for your replies. In these two cases of root cittas there is no > kamma result, correct? Is that because there is no intention or just > because they only arise once and are too weak to produce kamma? N: They are vipaka, thus, not producing result, they themselves are results. Also sobhana results can be accompanied by roots. L: Also, do you think the word "abhinivisati" refers to javana or some > other kind of process? N: See my other post. You had a question before about rupa impinging on a sense-base and the bhavangastream which is then interrupted so that a process begins. Is there anything else not clear? I partly answered it before. This weekend we shall probably away for a week, I try to finish off work. Nina. 25727 From: christine_forsyth Date: Tue Sep 30, 2003 0:41pm Subject: Re: Self-sacrifice Hello Connie, You make me smile. :-) And, as far as I can tell, the Simile of the Saw is about the importance of Right Speech using an example of *extreme* duress. "Monks, even if bandits were to carve you up savagely, limb by limb, with a two-handled saw, he among you who let his heart get angered even at that would not be doing my bidding. Even then you should train yourselves: 'Our minds will be unaffected and we will say no evil words. We will remain sympathetic, with a mind of good will, and with no inner hate. We will keep pervading these people with an awareness imbued with good will and, beginning with them, we will keep pervading the all-encompassing world with an awareness imbued with good will -- abundant, expansive, immeasurable, free from hostility, free from ill will.' That's how you should train yourselves." http://www.vipassana.com/canon/majjhima/mn21.php I'm sure we are not supposed to just lie there like a roast leg of lamb with a 'Bless you my son" look on our faces, while someone saws pieces from us with a carving knife and fork. Your 'metta' idea might work ... but then, it might not either. Running might be a good idea ... and what's wrong with begging for mercy? Screaming for help could be cathartic and may bring the cavalry ... or maybe the whole gang of bhikkhus suddenly leaping on the bandit delegate (compassionately, and with loving-kindness, of course) could work. After all, it would be saving him from incurring terrible vipaka ... :-) But, then again, I think we will do just what we will do at the time, who can tell ... metta and peace, Christine ---The trouble is that you think you have time --- --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "connie" wrote: > Thanks, Christine, for the rest of the Vissuddhimagga bandit thing. > > I was going to say that not clinging to self would be Buddhist > self-sacrifice, with the idea that whatever we attain or eradicate is > good for everyone else, too but if there's no self to begin with... > > So, the Skilled one just keeps sitting there extending metta and the > bandit just picks someone? Then, someone starts reciting the Simile of > the Saw. That's the one where it seems like everytime I mention it, > someone says "I don't think we have to be doormats to be good Buddhists" > or something about 'boundary issues' and the conversation kind of stops. > I don't even know what boundary issues means... must be those barriers. > But didn't Sariputta say something about being a doormat, or was it > 'like the earth'? > > Maybe the bandit gets overwhelmed by all the metta and decides these > doormats must know something worth listening to or just gets all frieked > out when no one acts scared and starts thinking "I'd better get out of > here while I still can." > > peace, > connie 25728 From: christine_forsyth Date: Tue Sep 30, 2003 0:44pm Subject: Re: Self-sacrifice Thanks Steve - clearly a difference in emphasis in Buddhism to that of Christianity. If we don't 'own' a 'self', than there is nothing noble about sacrificing 'one self' for 'another'. I expect the emotions involved in offering to die in the place of someone else are a great mixture of noble and not so noble. No doubt 'attachment' plays a big role. And biology - both animals and humans often seem compelled to die protecting their offspring. (I'm SO glad it's only bodhisattas who have the right to 'relinquish' themselves to lions and tigers.:-)) metta and peace, Christine ---The trouble is that you think you have time--- --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "bodhi2500" wrote: > Hi Christine, All > > Christine wrote: > > Dear Group, > > > > Is self-sacrifice viewed positively in Theravada Buddhism? Does > > Buddhism have an equivalent to the Christian verse, "'Greater love > > has no man than this, that he lay down his life for his > friends."? > > I recall a couple of the Jatakas showing animals giving their lives > > voluntarily to help others - but what of the Suttas? > > I don't know if this helps but I found this verse from the Samyutta > Nikaya, Devatasamyutta 78 > > > Love > "What should he not give who loves the good? > What should a mortal not relinquish? > What should one release when its good, > But not release when its bad?" > > "A person should not give himself away; > He should not relinquish himself. > One should release speech that is good, > But not speech that is bad." > > Commentary > One should not give oneself away by becoming the slave > of another, but an exception is made for all bodhisattas, So too > except for all bodhisattas, one should not relinquish oneself to > lions, tigers, etc. > > Steve 25729 From: Date: Tue Sep 30, 2003 9:07am Subject: Re: [dsg] Personality view vs. Delusion Hi Sarah Will reply to your full massage on this subject later but wanted to reply to the below statement in your response to Larry. In a message dated 9/30/2003 1:54:58 AM Pacific Daylight Time, sarahdhhk@y... writes: > There is some controversy about the term personality view. I take it > you’re referring to sakkaya-ditthi, translated in Nyantiloka’s dict as > personality view? > > Personality view (sakkaya-ditthi) is always rooted in lobha. BUT, not all > lobha-mula-cittas are accompanied by sakkaya-ditthi. Same with conceit. > Remember from ADL, that 4 types of lobha-mula-citta arise with wrong views > and 4 without? The sotapanna still has the 4 without, inc. conceit which > can arise with any of these. Also, moha is a root with all unwholesome > cittas. > TG: On this very critical and subtle point, you have either misquoted Nyanatiloka's Dictionary, or you have a different version than I have. In my version, Nyanatiloka translates sakkaya-ditthi as "Personality-belief." He proceeds to explain that this "belief" comes about by associating 'the 5 aggregates as 'self' in one of the 4 ways... Nyanatiloka's Dictionary: "There are 20 kinds of Personality-belief, which are obtained by applying 4 types of the belief to each of the 5 groups of existence: (1-5) the belief to be identical with corporeality, feeling, perception, mental formations or consciousness, (6-10) to be contained in them, (11-15) to be independent of them, (16-20) to be the owner of them." This clearly represents (to me) the gross 'belief-in-self' and not the more subtle 'self-views' or 'sense-of-self' that arises as part of the normal perceptual processes. The above 20 types of "personality-belief" would be those found in people grasping after 'theories of self' such as most other religions and philosophies do. The reason that I (and presumably you) are not streamwinners is because we are still 'subject to those beliefs.' We have not 100% eradicated the possibility that they can arise in the future. TG 25730 From: yu_zhonghao Date: Tue Sep 30, 2003 4:39pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Personality view vs. Delusion Hi Sarah and all, Some points to share: 1. Seeing yourself as the five aggregates is the self-view. 2. It is you and only you who can eat, for instance, the dimsum (if you do eat them), for yourself, not eating. Eating is not you. Likewise, it is you and only you who can understand, for instance, the Buddha's teaching, for yourself, not panna. And panna is not you. 3. The conditioned can be categorized either as nama or rupa. Excrement is conditioned. Peace, Victor --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Sarah wrote: > Hi TG, > > I appreciate your further comments and feedback. I'm not sure if there's > any difference (other than terminology) in what we're saying or not. > > Perhaps you could kindly tell me if you disagree with any of these points > before we go on, to clarify: > > 1. `People' is a conventional term, a pa~n~natti referring to the 5 > aggregates. > > 2. Khandhas repesented by conventional terms such as people and animals > arise and pass away, but the conventional terms are mere designations. > > 3. Namas and rupas can be directly experienced and known by pa~n~na > (wisdom) and associated mental factors. > > 4. There are no `events' - mere elements or phenomena arising and passing > away. (I'm checking because perhaps I mistakenly took `unfolding causal > occurrences' to refer to something more than the latter - apologies if > this was wrong). > > 5. Namas and rupas are `paramattha dhammas' (ultimate > realities/actualities). > > 6. They are such because they have lakkha.na (characteristics) and > sabhaava (intrinsic quality/particular nature) which can be known. > For example, seeing has a characteristic quite different from hearing and > quite different from the object seen. > > 7. These `actualities' are conditioned, impermanent, unsatisfactory and > anatta. > > 8. Wrong views are an impediment. Right views are the forerunner of the > other path factors. > > 9. Arahants have no more kilesa (defilements) of any kind. Sotapannas have > eradicated all erroneous self and other views. > > 10. Finally, I forget if you have CMA (or other AbhidamatthaSangaha > transl) or Vism. If so, do you accept > > a) CMA ch V111, Compendium of Conditionality, 30 > > Concept as what is made known > "...such terms as `person', `individual', and the like, so named > [concepts] on account of the five aggregates..................... > All such different things, though they do not exist in the ultimate sense, > become objects of consciousness in the form of shadows of (ultimate) > things. > > They are called concepts because they are thought of, reckoned, > understood, expressed, and made known on account of, in consideration of, > with respect to, this or that mode. This kind of concept is so called > because it is made known." > > b) Vism V111,39 > > " `Life, person, pleasure, pain - just these alone > Join in one conscious moment that flicks by. > Ceased aggregates of those dead or alive > Are all alike, gone never to return. > No (world is) born if (consciousness is) not > Produced; when that is present, then it lives; > When consciousness dissolves, the world is dead; > The highest sense this concept will allow" (Nd 1, 42). > > See detailed footnote 11 (Nanamoli transl) which details all the kinds of > concepts. > ***** > > TG, again, I greatly appreciate your well-considered comments. Pls let me > know if I have over-looked any points (I'm in a bit of a rush) and which > of the comments above you disagree with (if any;-)). > > With metta, > > Sarah > ===== > > --- TGrand458@a... wrote: > > "Personality view" has to do with whether there is a view that there is > > a > > self, soul, controler, agent, entity, etc., that persists apart from > > mere > > conditions. Since such a condition does not exist, personality- view is > > an incorrect > > view. However, as you point out next, nama and rupas do exist...and > > yes...people are made up of nama and rupas. Therefore...people exist > > based on that. > > People = The 5 Aggregates, and the 12 Fold Chain indicates the > > systematic > > dynamics that power them. I don't think that personality-view, > > self-view, > > identity-view, or whatever term suits you, has anything to do with > > whether or not > > people exist. > > > > The conditions that generate what we call a person do occur. People and > > > > animals and plants actually do arise. There is just no self that arises > > along > > with those conditions. > [....] > 25731 From: yu_zhonghao Date: Tue Sep 30, 2003 4:43pm Subject: nama or rupa? Hi all, I have a question: Is exrement nama or is it rupa? Peace, Victor 25732 From: Date: Tue Sep 30, 2003 4:48pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Personality view vs. Delusion Hi Sarah, My view on concept and reality is that it doesn't make any difference whether we analyze a belief in a self as a nonarising concept or as an arising phenomenon. If we analyze correctly the result is the same: enlightenment. A concept cannot be found anywhere and an impermanence also cannot be found anywhere. A concept or impermanence can be desired but neither can be permanently held, i.e., grasped. The trick is to not stray into extreme views of eternalism or nihilism. These are equivalent to asserting concepts exist or don't exist; or asserting impermanences exist or don't exist. A middle way is necessary in order to see the ethical consequences of kamma without reifying a self. As far as I know there is no official insight knowledge that recognizes and understands concepts but this knowledge must be assumed in order to say anything about concept and reality. So, at most, perhaps we could say it is implicit. Whatever it is, we have to figure it out for ourselves. The ancient commentators, post-Buddhaghosa, began to develop it*, as did Mahayana commentators, but there is no consensus view on concept. My point is it doesn't matter what view you take if it results in letting go of obsessions. If you think a car is a phenomenon you can look at its impermanence. If you think a car is a concept you can look at its nonarising, unfindable aspect. Either way, there is nothing to hold on to. But cars crash, ruin the environment, and take you to the store; so there is your kamma. What I was wondering about self view and experience is why does anger as root consciousness running through javana seem like "me"? Larry ps: *An interesting essay on concept in Theravada is Warder's "The Concept of Concept" in the Journal of Indian Philosophy, published several years ago. It is only about 15 pages and would make a good addition to the files section. If you are interested you might be able to get permission to copy it there. Otherwise,you might be able to find it in a university library. 25733 From: Date: Tue Sep 30, 2003 4:53pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Vism. XIV, 19 Hi Nina, No more questions for now. If anything comes up, I'll ask when you get back. Larry 25734 From: Jim Anderson Date: Tue Sep 30, 2003 5:02pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Fifth Precept,silabbataparamasa Hi Sarah, Thanks again for your responses and thanks also for the many interesting quotes you provided. What I'm looking for in particular is a sutta reference where the Buddha clearly lays down the five precepts for lay people to follow in a way similar to the laying down of the ten precepts for samaneras in the Vinaya Mahavagga. But now I'm about to cut away from list discussions for a few months so there's no need for a response now. Best wishes, Jim > Hi again Jim & all on this thread, > > Three posts in one day to you.....comments only *if* anyone wishes;-) > I'm just adding more quotes which may be relevant. > > --- Jim Anderson wrote: > Hi again, > > > > I was interested in seeing if I could find any passages where the > > Buddha explicitly refers to the five as training-precepts > > (sikkhaapadaani) and found one at AN IX.20 (Velaama Sutta) in a > > dialogue with Anathapindaka: > > > ***** > Also: > Dispeller, 14Classification of the Training Precepts, 1905 > > 1905 "Now in the classification of the Training Preepts next to that, > pa~nca (five) is the division by number. Sikkhaapadaani (training > precepts): precepts to be trained in; 'portions of training' is the > meaning. Furthermore, all the profitable states handed down above [S: in > earlier sections] are trainings (sikkhaa) because they should be trained > in.. but any factor among the five factors of virtuous conduct is a basis > (pada) for those trainings in the sense of foundation; thus because of > being the bases for trainings (sikkhaana.m padattaa), they are precepts > (bases) of training....... 25735 From: Jim Anderson Date: Tue Sep 30, 2003 5:15pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Concentration and samatha Hi Jon, Thanks for your correction and earlier message. No need to apologize. I'm afraid I don't have enough time to respond as I'm getting ready to leave tomorrow but will consider what you have written and maybe get back to you on these matters in a few months time. I have uploaded a new Pali text file (zvism14.txt) to the files section of DSG. This one replaces the first one (now deleted) and contains the entire Chapter XIV of the Visuddhimagga with ~Naa.namoli's numbering system. Best wishes, Jim > Jim > > A hasty correction, and apology. > > Your comment below about samatha not being limited to cittas > associated-with-knowledge is of course correct, metta being but one > example (as I mentioned in my subsequent post to Larry). > > My answer was directed to samatha bhavana that leads to jhaana. > Since all jhaana cittas are associated-with-knowledge, then the > cittas by which that is developed must also be > associated-with-knowledge, as I understand it. > > But that wasn't the context of your comment, I know. > > Sorry for the confusion. > > Jon 25736 From: robmoult Date: Tue Sep 30, 2003 5:24pm Subject: Re: nama or rupa? Hi Victor, Nama is consciousness / mental states. Excrement is clearly rupa; rupa born of temperature. I am curious - what prompted such a question? Metta, Rob M :-) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "yu_zhonghao" wrote: > I have a question: > > Is exrement nama or is it rupa? 25737 From: yu_zhonghao Date: Tue Sep 30, 2003 5:59pm Subject: Re: nama or rupa? Hi Rob, I am curious as well. I thought maybe some would say excrement is concept. Now, is excrement paramatha dhamma, the ultimate reality?? Peace, Victor --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "robmoult" wrote: > Hi Victor, > > Nama is consciousness / mental states. > > Excrement is clearly rupa; rupa born of temperature. > > I am curious - what prompted such a question? > > Metta, > Rob M :-) > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "yu_zhonghao" > wrote: > > I have a question: > > > > Is exrement nama or is it rupa? 25738 From: Date: Tue Sep 30, 2003 2:33pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: nama or rupa? Hi, Victor (and Rob) - In a message dated 9/30/03 9:00:00 PM Eastern Daylight Time, yu_zhonghao@y... writes: > > Hi Rob, > > I am curious as well. I thought maybe some would say excrement is > concept. > > Now, is excrement paramatha dhamma, the ultimate reality?? > > Peace, > Victor > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "robmoult" > wrote: > >Hi Victor, > > > >Nama is consciousness / mental states. > > > >Excrement is clearly rupa; rupa born of temperature. > > > >I am curious - what prompted such a question? > > > >Metta, > >Rob M :-) > > > >--- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "yu_zhonghao" > > wrote: > >>I have a question: > >> > >>Is exrement nama or is it rupa? > > > > ============================= My answer is the following: All the *characteristics* of this supposed substance you inquire about, including its odor, texture, solidity, color, etc are rupas that are experienced, typically in close temporal proximity to each other. The *idea* (or *concept*) of a single thing/entity/substance serving as substrate for such properties, and produced in a particular manner, and called "excrement", is a nama - I view concepts as namas, and the alleged *thing/entity/substance*, itself, which that idea/concept purports to point to is not anything at all that is ever experienced, but is a mere designation - it is pa~n~natti. That is my take on the issue. BTW, I also wonder why you chose that particular notion instead of, for example, water, or lemons, or fingernails, or paper. 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) 25739 From: m. nease Date: Tue Sep 30, 2003 7:00pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: nama or rupa? Friends, Sorry to drop in like this--of course, excrement is pa.n.natti. mn p.s. For practical purposes, pa.n.natti is excrement, too. ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Tuesday, September 30, 2003 6:33 PM Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: nama or rupa? > Hi, Victor (and Rob) - > > In a message dated 9/30/03 9:00:00 PM Eastern Daylight Time, > yu_zhonghao@y... writes: > > > > > Hi Rob, > > > > I am curious as well. I thought maybe some would say excrement is > > concept. > > > > Now, is excrement paramatha dhamma, the ultimate reality?? > > > > Peace, > > Victor > > > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "robmoult" > > wrote: > > >Hi Victor, > > > > > >Nama is consciousness / mental states. > > > > > >Excrement is clearly rupa; rupa born of temperature. > > > > > >I am curious - what prompted such a question? > > > > > >Metta, > > >Rob M :-) > > > > > >--- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "yu_zhonghao" > > > wrote: > > >>I have a question: > > >> > > >>Is exrement nama or is it rupa? > > > > > > > > > ============================= > My answer is the following: All the *characteristics* of this supposed > substance you inquire about, including its odor, texture, solidity, color, > etc are rupas that are experienced, typically in close temporal proximity to > each other. The *idea* (or *concept*) of a single thing/entity/substance serving > as substrate for such properties, and produced in a particular manner, and > called "excrement", is a nama - I view concepts as namas, and the alleged > *thing/entity/substance*, itself, which that idea/concept purports to point to is not > anything at all that is ever experienced, but is a mere designation - it is > pa~n~natti. That is my take on the issue. > BTW, I also wonder why you chose that particular notion instead of, > for example, water, or lemons, or fingernails, or paper. 25740 From: yu_zhonghao Date: Tue Sep 30, 2003 7:12pm Subject: [dsg] Re: nama or rupa? Hi Howard, I am not asking whether the odor, texture, solidity, or color of excrement is nama or rupa. Neither am I asking whether the concept of excrement is nama or rupa. My question was: Is excrement nama or rupa? Rob gave a straightforward answer that excrement is rupa. Excrement is what we have to deal with from time to time, if not daily. Now, is excrement the ultimate reality? Peace, Victor [snip] > My answer is the following: All the *characteristics* of this supposed > substance you inquire about, including its odor, texture, solidity, color, > etc are rupas that are experienced, typically in close temporal proximity to > each other. The *idea* (or *concept*) of a single thing/entity/substance serving > as substrate for such properties, and produced in a particular manner, and > called "excrement", is a nama - I view concepts as namas, and the alleged > *thing/entity/substance*, itself, which that idea/concept purports to point to is not > anything at all that is ever experienced, but is a mere designation - it is > pa~n~natti. That is my take on the issue. > BTW, I also wonder why you chose that particular notion instead of, > for example, water, or lemons, or fingernails, or paper. > > With metta, > Howard 25741 From: yu_zhonghao Date: Tue Sep 30, 2003 7:22pm Subject: [dsg] Re: nama or rupa? Hi mn, Really?? Excrement is idea, concept?? And idea, concept is excrement?? Where does that idea, concept come from?? Peace, Victor --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "m. nease" wrote: > Friends, > > Sorry to drop in like this--of course, excrement is pa.n.natti. > > mn > > p.s. For practical purposes, pa.n.natti is excrement, too. 25742 From: robmoult Date: Tue Sep 30, 2003 8:19pm Subject: [dsg] Re: nama or rupa? Hi Victor (and all); It would be a travesty if we allowed this to degenerate into an issue of semantics. I believe that we are all in agreement that excrement is: - a very large number of kalapas (groups of rupas; rupas are paramattha dhammas, kalapas are not) - a name (concept / pannatii) Metta, Rob M :-) 25743 From: phamdluan2000 Date: Tue Sep 30, 2003 8:31pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Mantras Dear Sarah, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Sarah wrote: Hi KKT, < snip > How about <>?? KKT: A very good << one-word >> mantra. KKT 25744 From: yu_zhonghao Date: Tue Sep 30, 2003 10:16pm Subject: [dsg] Re: nama or rupa? Hi Rob, So excrement is a very large number of groups of rupas, a very large number of groups of ultimate realities/paramattha dhammas?? But at the same time excrement is a concept?? Peace, Victor --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "robmoult" wrote: > Hi Victor (and all); > > It would be a travesty if we allowed this to degenerate into an > issue of semantics. I believe that we are all in agreement that > excrement is: > - a very large number of kalapas (groups of rupas; rupas are > paramattha dhammas, kalapas are not) > - a name (concept / pannatii) > > Metta, > Rob M :-) 25745 From: Sukinderpal Singh Narula Date: Tue Sep 30, 2003 10:41pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Sutta and interpretation. Hi Sarah and Nina, Thank you Sarah for directing me to the entry in the Dict of Pali Proper Names and to a post of yours. Nina, I am seeing some benefit in keeping a notebook and taking notes, so I will probably start taking one to the Sat. discussions.:-) Sarah, though I do not have the accumulations to book study, I think that it is very useful and I hope that the regular reading of posts on dsg, will condition some effort in the future, to take a more serious approach to the Texts. Of course at this stage, the best thing for me is listening to K. Sujin. She makes everything so clear, using daily life as example to express what I would otherwise not be able to directly understand if I were to read the original texts alone. But even this I do relatively little, especially when I compare to many people in Thailand, who make the effort to get up very early to listen to her radio programs. I think there are many, many conditions involved in deciding how at any given moment there will be any understanding, be it of the intellectual or practice level. This is one reason why I think, that any real appreciation of the Buddha's teachings *must* be a natural and daily life, without any thought of time, place and idea of formal practice coming in the way to distort the perception. We are who we are, conditioned to be this way from the infinite past. Only maggacitta arising for the first time at the level of Sotapanna, makes any 'real' difference to our outlook, conditioning any radical change of mental, verbal and bodily behavior. But even a Sotapanna is not rid of the attachments to sense pleasure and still basically lives her life as she did before enlightenment with regard to day to day activities. This I believe is because she cannot decide to do otherwise! Conditions are at work beyond her control as much as it is for all of us. So I believe that for us putthujanas, it would be a mistake not to take this into consideration. How can one expect to be without greed, aversion and ignorance after just hearing some words of the Buddha? Only wrong thinking and wrong view I believe will lead one to the idea that there are certain modes of behavior more conducive to understanding. Only *thinking* can get in the way of understanding the present moment. And the beauty about the Buddha's teachings is that even this 'thinking' is conditioned and can be known!! When, where, how are just concepts, behind which is the process of 'thinking'. Better to know this than to be taken by the ideas themselves. However, not all thinking is useless. There are some wholesome reflections and not all thinking point to 'wrong practice'. Some are kusala, as in metta, dana, karuna etc. The kind of thinking which I find particularly harmful, is one that leads one to believe in the idea of better, time, place and even mental make up for the development of panna. What many may not realize is that all this instead of leading to more detachment and appreciation of Anatta, may lead to a greater attachment to self and wrong view. Of course, there are many conditions at work, to decide which direction events will flow and I certainly can't single out one factor and say whether someone is at any moment moving in the right direction or not. But I think Right View and the ability to distinguish between concept and reality is of primary importance! I've already said too much. Didn't intend to write all this, but conditions...!! I don't want to be in the position where I have to respond to a whole lot of objections coming from many people. :-( I'll end here. With metta, Sukin. > ..... > I also wrote a little more about it in this post (to Howard) which might > be useful: > > http://www.escribe.com/religion/dhammastudygroup/m21006.html > > For more details, also see this entry from Dict of Pali Proper Names: > > http://www.palikanon.com/english/pali_names/c/cuula_panthaka_th.htm > ..... 25746 From: yu_zhonghao Date: Tue Sep 30, 2003 11:10pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Sutta and interpretation. Hi Sukin and all, Is excrement a concept or reality? Peace, Victor --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Sukinderpal Singh Narula" wrote: [snip] > moment moving in the right direction or not. But I think Right View and > the ability to distinguish between concept and reality is of primary > importance! [snip] > With metta, > Sukin. 25747 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Tue Sep 30, 2003 11:27pm Subject: Re: [dsg] The Sexual Ethic of the Middle Way (part 1) Ken H --- kenhowardau wrote: > Hi Jon, ... > My assumption was that the > possibility for akusala action would have be one that arose > against the actor's wishes. After all, a criminal who > breaks into a house and then changes his mind about > murdering the inhabitants can hardly expect to be treated > as a hero. > > But maybe he is, at the moment of changing his mind, > making a supreme effort. By comparison, most law-abiding > citizens are simply doing what comes naturally -- nothing > difficult or heroic at all. Yes, I agree. What you've just said highlights the fact that the greater an individual's accumulated tendencies for wholesome action, the less opportunity/need there will be for restraint on his part (all other things being equal). And of course, those developed wholesome accumulated tendencies will include the accumulated tendency for restraint, so should the need arise he will be relatively better equipped to avoid wrong action anyway. As you say, the person is doing what comes naturally, in the sense that relatively less effort is required for his/her conduct to remain virtuous. ... > The criminal, resisting his own homicidal urges, is, in > his way, living the good life -- doing what still needs > to be done. Whereas the law-abiding citizen, sitting > harmlessly in front of television, might be 'living on > stale fare' (as I think it is called in one of the > suttas) -- complacently living off good kamma > accumulated in previous lifetimes. Yes. The person who is 'sitting harmlessly doing [whatever/nothing]' could in fact be doing so with rather a lot of akusala (wrong view, for example). Or just with 'everyday' akusala (which, as you know, is not considered 'harmful' in terms of the potential for development of the path). Or with some kusala moments, if his/her accumulated tendencies are such. The person could equally be someone who is living a 'smart' lifestyle (like with the snails). Again, there could be akusala of varying degrees or some moments of kusala, depending on the accumulated tendencies. But in either case, unless there is the effort for kusala at the level of satipatthana, then any relatively 'safe' situation will be very short-lived. In this regard we are indeed fortunate that it requires no more than just a basic level of understanding about the underlying dhammas to make some progress in this lifetime towards eventual release from the cycle. Thanks for the opportunity to reflect on this. Jon 25748 From: phamdluan2000 Date: Tue Sep 30, 2003 11:32pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Mantras Dear Sarah, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Sarah wrote: Hi KKT, < snip > I agree. I'd just add that I think all phenomena need to be known - rupas as well as namas. Without understanding rupas, I doubt it's possible to really understand namas or to distinguish between them. What do you think? KKT: I'm intrigued by this phrase << Without understanding rupas, I doubt it's possible to really understand namas >> Could you elaborate, Sarah? But don't hurry up, take your time. Thanks, Sarah. KKT 25749 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Tue Sep 30, 2003 11:45pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Concentration and samatha Larry --- LBIDD@w... wrote: > Hi Jon, > > Everything you wrote seems alright to me. Just to make sure we are on the same page here, are you quite comfortable with the idea of samatha as a form of kusala (mental) action that occurs naturally in ordinary daily life, that is to say, quite apart from any notion of 'developing samatha'? This is fairly key to everything that follows. I think it's useful to consider aspects of daily life that do or could involve instances of this kind of kusala (i.e., samatha). Perhaps you wouldn't mind suggesting 1 or 2 yourself (real or hypothetical). Others may also be interested to ponder on this. Jon PS 1. > The question about the > tranquility of a murderer refers to feelings of tranquility which > may > arise while intending, committing, or resulting from the commission > of > an akusala act. Is this tranquility kusala or akusala? Howard only > mentioned this in passing and I don't know if anyone responded; the > reference was to Jeffrey Dahmer, a famous murderer in the U.S. If we are talking about an observable 'calmness', that may be indicative of a level of concentration which, as we have discussed, is a skill that can be developed in akusala mode (and more easily of course than it can in kusala mode). In other words, there need not be any kusala involved. PS. 2 > Since we are discussing kusala I might ask what is so wholesome > about understanding (panna) the arising and passing of dhammas? > Scientists and gamblers do this all the time. Sorry, I'm not quite with you here. Do you mean of a *presently arisen* dhamma? Would you mind clarifying in what sense you see this as being so. Thanks. 25750 From: Sukinder Date: Wed Oct 1, 2003 0:07am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Sutta and interpretation. Hi Victor, :-) Concept! Metta, Sukin ----- Original Message ----- From: "yu_zhonghao" To: Sent: Wednesday, October 01, 2003 1:10 PM Subject: [dsg] Re: Sutta and interpretation. > Hi Sukin and all, > > Is excrement a concept or reality? > > Peace, > Victor > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Sukinderpal Singh Narula" > wrote: > [snip] > > moment moving in the right direction or not. But I think Right > View and > > the ability to distinguish between concept and reality is of > primary > > importance! > [snip] > > With metta, > > Sukin. 25751 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Wed Oct 1, 2003 0:48am Subject: Re: [dsg] Concentration and samatha Jim Many thanks for the work done on the Vism Pali text and for uploading it to the 'Files' section. Much appreciated! Looking forward to hearing again from you after your period off. Jon --- Jim Anderson wrote: > Hi Jon, > > Thanks for your correction and earlier message. No need to > apologize. > I'm afraid I don't have enough time to respond as I'm getting ready > to > leave tomorrow but will consider what you have written and maybe > get back to you on these matters in a few months time. > > I have uploaded a new Pali text file (zvism14.txt) to the files > section of DSG. This one replaces the first one (now deleted) and > contains the entire Chapter XIV of the Visuddhimagga with > ~Naa.namoli's numbering system. > > Best wishes, > Jim 25752 From: yu_zhonghao Date: Wed Oct 1, 2003 1:11am Subject: [dsg] Re: Sutta and interpretation. Hi Sukin, So excrement is concept?? Really?? Where does that concept come from?? Peace, Victor --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Sukinder" wrote: > Hi Victor, > > :-) > Concept! > > Metta, > Sukin > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "yu_zhonghao" > To: > Sent: Wednesday, October 01, 2003 1:10 PM > Subject: [dsg] Re: Sutta and interpretation. > > > > Hi Sukin and all, > > > > Is excrement a concept or reality? > > > > Peace, > > Victor 25753 From: Sukinder Date: Wed Oct 1, 2003 1:45am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Sutta and interpretation. Hi Victor, > So excrement is concept?? Really?? Where does that concept come > from?? From thinking *about*, what is seen, smelt,...touched...:-(. Metta, Sukin 25754 From: christine_forsyth Date: Wed Oct 1, 2003 2:24am Subject: [dsg] Re: Sutta and interpretation. Hello Victor and Sukin, I'm glad you are having this strange conversation about excrement - I was wondering what exactly a concept is and found the UP on this subject a bit beyond me. Is there a definition of what concept means in Abhidhammat? Buddhadatta says concept is sankappa, which is a synonym for vitakka. 1. sankappa is 'thought' 2 vitakka is 'thought' or 'thought conception' And the english dictionary gives the meanings of concept as: 1. A general idea derived or inferred from specific instances or occurrences. 2. Something formed in the mind; a thought or notion. From what Sukin says, I understand a concept to be a a 'named whole', made up of (in the case of excrement) the paramattha dhammas colour, smell and softness/hardness. Close or not close?? metta and peace, Christine ---The trouble is that you think you have time --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Sukinder" wrote: > Hi Victor, > > > So excrement is concept?? Really?? Where does that concept come > > from?? > > From thinking *about*, what is seen, smelt,...touched...:-(. > > Metta, > Sukin 25755 From: robmoult Date: Wed Oct 1, 2003 3:58am Subject: [dsg] Re: Sutta and interpretation. Hi Christine, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "christine_forsyth" wrote: > I'm glad you are having this strange conversation about excrement - I > was wondering what exactly a concept is and found the UP on this > subject a bit beyond me. Is there a definition of what concept > means in Abhidhammat? The sense-door citta process takes rupa as object. Following the sense-door citta process, there are a few bhavanga cittas and then a mind-door citta process that takes the same rupa as object. After a few more bhavanga cittas, another mind-door citta process takes place that takes a concept as an object. A concept is an object of a mind-door process. Even before the activity of naming takes place, a concept arises. The pattern is something like this: - reproduce object at sense door (rupa as object) - Construction of the whole picture (concept as object) - Perception of colour (concept as object) - Conception of shape (concept as object) - Designation as flower (concept as object) - Judgement as rose (concept as object) - Classification as red rose (concept as object) You mentioned that you have been reading the Honeyball Sutta. Consider the following: Part I ====== "Dependent on the eye and forms, eye consciousness arises. The meeting of the three is contact. With contact as a condition there is feeling." Part I lists the purely objective natural reaction occurring as part of the seeing process (Naturally arising phenomena). Part II ======= "What one feels, that one perceives. What one perceives, that one thinks about. What one thinks about, that one mentally proliferates." Part II shows how, based on feeling, one reacts to the natural process of seeing (One's reaction to naturally arising phenomena). Part III ======== "With what one has mentally proliferated as the source, perceptions and notions tinged by mental proliferation beset a man with respect to past, future and present forms cognizable though the eye." Part III gives the impact of our reaction. We take the "ultimate reality" (things as they truly are) and obscure it with added layers of concepts to create what we think is reality (papanaca - conceptual proliferation). Does this help? Metta, Rob M :-) 25756 From: Date: Wed Oct 1, 2003 3:27am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: nama or rupa? Hi, Victor - In a message dated 9/30/03 10:14:08 PM Eastern Daylight Time, yu_zhonghao@y... writes: > Hi Howard, > > I am not asking whether the odor, texture, solidity, or color of > excrement is nama or rupa. > > Neither am I asking whether the concept of excrement is nama or > rupa. ---------------------------------------------------- Howard: As part of a complete and proper answer and explanation as I wished to give it, regardless of exactly how you framed your question and what sort of answer is satisfying to you, I dealt with the foregoing issues of what is rupa and what is nama with regard to this. I *also* said that "the alleged *thing/entity/substance*, itself, which that idea/concept purports to point to [i.e., your intended referent of the word 'excrement'] is not anything at all that is ever experienced, but is a mere designation - it is pa~n~natti." I did not literally say "excrement is pa~n~natti," because, in this context I wanted to speak precisely, and not informally. To have said "excrement is pa~n~natti" would by the very means of applying an adjective to a noun implied the existence of a thing named by that noun. I wanted to avoid a statement of the same sort as "the self is the five khandhas" or "the self is not the five khnadhas". To speak of something and ascribe properties to it without even circumscribing ones words is to imply the existence of such an entity. You evidently wanted a slogan-type answer such as "excrement is rupa" or "... is nama" or "... is pa~n~natti". I didn't choose to frame my response in such terms. ----------------------------------------------------- > > My question was: > > Is excrement nama or rupa? > ----------------------------------------------------- Howard: I answered the question as truthfully as I could, without accepting the presumption of existence in the question. I did the best I could in answering a question of the sort: "Have you stopped beating your wife - yes or no?" ------------------------------------------------------- > > Rob gave a straightforward answer that excrement is rupa. > > Excrement is what we have to deal with from time to time, if not > daily. > > Now, is excrement the ultimate reality? > > Peace, > Victor > ============================ 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) 25757 From: buddhatrue Date: Wed Oct 1, 2003 7:44am Subject: [dsg] Re: Self-sacrifice --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Sarah wrote: > Hi Christine, > > --- christine_forsyth wrote: > Hello Sarah, > Connie, and all, > > > > Thanks for your posts. ... (even though Sarah mentioned the V.. > > word. :-)) > .... > OOps! I need a little reminder card next to my computer of `pet peeves' - > the V word for you, `intrinsic' for Howard, `accumulations' for Mike (??), > `reality' for TG, `rupa' for James, Hi Sarah! LOL! Too true! ;-) Metta, James 25758 From: yu_zhonghao Date: Wed Oct 1, 2003 9:03am Subject: [dsg] Re: nama or rupa? Hi Howard and all, What presumption of existence about excrement are you talking about?? Are you saying that excrement does not exist?? If excrement does not exist, then what does one go to the toilet for? What is that alleged thing/substance/entity?? Peace, Victor --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, Victor - [snip] 25759 From: yu_zhonghao Date: Wed Oct 1, 2003 9:26am Subject: [dsg] Re: Sutta and interpretation. Hi Sukin, So excrement come from thinking about what is seen, smelt, touched...?? What is it that is seen, smelt, touched?? Is this what is been seen, smelt, and touched reality or concept? Does concept comes in solid or liquid form? Does concept gives off a smell? Peace, Victor --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Sukinder" wrote: > Hi Victor, > > > So excrement is concept?? Really?? Where does that concept come > > from?? > > From thinking *about*, what is seen, smelt,...touched...:-(. > > Metta, > Sukin 25760 From: Date: Wed Oct 1, 2003 6:01am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: nama or rupa? Hi, Victor - In a message dated 10/1/03 12:15:59 PM Eastern Daylight Time, yu_zhonghao@y... writes: > Hi Howard and all, > > What presumption of existence about excrement are you talking > about?? Are you saying that excrement does not exist?? If > excrement does not exist, then what does one go to the toilet for? > > What is that alleged thing/substance/entity?? > > Peace, > Victor > ============================ I can't be any clearer about this Victor. I'm surprised you don't get my position by this time, but, then, I've never completely grasped yours either. I guess we'll have to leave it at that. (A self-serving slogan for each of us would, of course, be "I don't have a position," but I don't believe that. I know I still have opinions, held tentatively and lightly, I hope! ;-) 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) 25761 From: nidive Date: Wed Oct 1, 2003 10:23am Subject: Re: Sutta and interpretation. Hi Victor & all, The smell of excrement is reality. The sight of excrement is reality. The taste of excrement is reality. The touch of excrement is reality. The sound of excrement is reality. Caged in the Prison of the Five Senses, to ask if excrement is a reality or not, that is beyond sanity. Regards, Swee Boon --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "yu_zhonghao" wrote: > Hi Sukin and all, > > Is excrement a concept or reality? > > Peace, > Victor > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Sukinderpal Singh Narula" > wrote: > [snip] > > moment moving in the right direction or not. But I think Right > View and > > the ability to distinguish between concept and reality is of > primary > > importance! > [snip] > > With metta, > > Sukin. 25762 From: yu_zhonghao Date: Wed Oct 1, 2003 10:30am Subject: [dsg] Re: Sutta and interpretation. Hi Sukin and all, I am not sure if excrement is from thinking about what is seen, smelt, touched... However, I do know that excrement is waste matter discharged from the body; especially waste (as feces) discharged from the alimentary canal.* In the Satipatthana Sutta, the Buddha taught that to remain focus on the body in and of itself, "a monk reflects on this very body from the soles of the feet on up, from the crown of the head on down, surrounded by skin and full of various kinds of unclean things: 'In this body there are head hairs, body hairs, nails, teeth, skin, flesh, tendons, bones, bone marrow, kidneys, heart, liver, pleura, spleen, lungs, large intestines, small intestines, gorge, feces, bile, phlegm, pus, blood, sweat, fat, tears, skin-oil, saliva, mucus, fluid in the joints, urine.'" ** This is how I see it: This body, with all kinds of unclean things, feces, urine, pus, etc internally or externally, is the "ultimate reality" to be reflected on. I am not sure how excrement, the feces, the urine, is concept and can be thought out. I would rather and usually go to the bathroom and discharge them in the toilet. Peace, Victor * http://www.webster.com ** http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/majjhima/mn010.html --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Sukinder" wrote: > Hi Victor, > > > So excrement is concept?? Really?? Where does that concept come > > from?? > > From thinking *about*, what is seen, smelt,...touched...:-(. > > Metta, > Sukin 25763 From: yu_zhonghao Date: Wed Oct 1, 2003 10:40am Subject: Re: Sutta and interpretation. Hi Swee Boon, What is excrement then?? So excrement is neither reality nor concept? If so, how is the smell of something that is neither reality nor concept a reality? Likewise for sight, taste, touch, and sound. If excrement is concept, then how is the smell of concept reality? Likewise for sight, taste, touch, and sound. Peace, Victor --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "nidive" wrote: > Hi Victor & all, > > The smell of excrement is reality. > The sight of excrement is reality. > The taste of excrement is reality. > The touch of excrement is reality. > The sound of excrement is reality. > > Caged in the Prison of the Five Senses, to ask if excrement is a > reality or not, that is beyond sanity. > > Regards, > Swee Boon 25764 From: christine_forsyth Date: Wed Oct 1, 2003 0:22pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Sutta and interpretation. Hello RobM, Yes, I get it.:-) At least for the moment. Thanks for the clear straightforward explanation. Retaining the understanding is another matter. I wonder if there is such a thing as Dhamma-alzheimers? metta and peace Christine ---The trouble is that you think you have time --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "robmoult" > > A concept is an object of a mind-door process. Even before the > activity of naming takes place, a concept arises. The pattern is > something like this: > - reproduce object at sense door (rupa as object) > - Construction of the whole picture (concept as object) > - Perception of colour (concept as object) > - Conception of shape (concept as object) > - Designation as flower (concept as object) > - Judgement as rose (concept as object) > - Classification as red rose (concept as object) > > Does this help? > > Metta, > Rob M :-) 25765 From: robmoult Date: Wed Oct 1, 2003 2:47pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Sutta and interpretation. Hi Christine, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "christine_forsyth" wrote: > Yes, I get it.:-) At least for the moment. Thanks for the clear > straightforward explanation. Retaining the understanding is another > matter. I wonder if there is such a thing as Dhamma-alzheimers? A woman is standing on one side of a large creek wanting to get to the other side. She stands there psyching herself up, "I can do it!" - this state of mind is not deep-rooted and easily forgotten. While she is standing there, a man arrives. He takes a few steps back, runs and jumps over the creek. The woman's state of mind is now, "I know it can be done. I have seen it done". This state of mind is firmly rooted and not easily forgotten. After a while, she makes the effort herself and jumps over the stream. Her mind is now, "I have experienced it." This state of mind is impossible to uproot because it is now "part of her". In other words, things memorized and theorized can be forgotten easily whereas things experienced become part of you. Look at your own mental states. Is it not clear that what you take for reality is in fact constantly changing. One day, you see a friend and a pleasant feeling arises. Later in the day, you hear that this friend was saying nasty things about you behind your back. The next day, you see the same friend and an unpleasant feeling arises. It is the same visible object (one day apart), but you "see" it differently. Is it not clear that your own perceptions of what is real are in fact deeply coloured by your own mental proliferations: Dependent on the eye and forms, eye consciousness arises. The meeting of the three is contact. With contact as a condition there is feeling. What one feels, that one perceives. What one perceives, that one thinks about. What one thinks about, that one mentally proliferates. With what one has mentally proliferated as the source, perceptions and notions tinged by mental proliferation beset a man with respect to past, future and present forms cognizable though the eye. When observed in this manner, is it not clear that concepts (non- ultimate realities) are what we take as real after the mind starts working on them? Metta, Rob M :-) 25766 From: Sarah Date: Wed Oct 1, 2003 2:56pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Sutta and interpretation. Hi Swee Boon, --- nidive wrote: > Hi Victor & all, > > The smell of excrement is reality. > The sight of excrement is reality. > The taste of excrement is reality. > The touch of excrement is reality. > The sound of excrement is reality. > > Caged in the Prison of the Five Senses, to ask if excrement is a > reality or not, that is beyond sanity. ..... Very good to see you around again;-) Metta, Sarah ======= 25767 From: robmoult Date: Wed Oct 1, 2003 3:06pm Subject: Introduction to the Abhidhamma - Slides 17-21 for comment Do People Really Exist? Slide Contents ============== M: By what name shall I know you, Sir? N: My companions call me Nâgasena. But the name and the person to whom the name refers do not really exist. M: If Nâgasena and the person do not exist, to whom do people offer alms and who receives these offerings? Since you receive them, you really exist. N: Your Majesty, did you come to this monastery on foot or by chariot? M: I came by chariot. N: Well then, what is a chariot? Is the horse the chariot? Is the wheel the chariot? Is the axle the chariot? Is the carriage the chariot? M: I must answer "No" to all of your questions. N: Is there a thing called chariot beside the horse, the wheel, the axle, the carriage, etc.? M: There is no chariot beside the horse, the wheels, the axle and the carriage. Just a combination of these things has been named a chariot. N: Very well, your Majesty, you should understand Nâgasena as you understood the chariot. Speaker Notes ============= "The Questions of King Milinda" was written in the first century BC. The book takes the form of questions from a philosopher king, King Milinda, to a Buddhist monk, Nâgasena. King Milinda was based on King Menander, a famous historical figure. King Menander was a Greek who ruled Bactria (present day Afghanistan) between 150 - 110 BC, about 200 years after Alexander the Great conquered the area. The Bactrians later became Buddhist. In fact, it is in Bactaria that the first statues of the Buddha (obviously with a Greek influence) were created in the first century AD. Prior to this, the Buddha was represented by footprints, an empty throne or a stupa. The dialogue above takes place when they first meet and illustrates the idea that concepts do not ultimately exist and apparent realities can be broken into ultimate realities. According to the Visuddhi Magga (Path of Purification), "… So in many hundred Suttas there is only mentality-materiality which is illustrated, not a being, not a person. Therefore, just as when the component parts (of a chariot) such as axles, wheels, frame, poles… are arranged in a certain way, there comes to be the mere conventional term 'chariot', yet in the ultimate sense, when each part is examined, there is no chariot… so too, when there are the five khandhas of clinging there comes to be the mere conventional term 'a being', 'a person', yet in the ultimate sense, when each component is examined, there is no being as a basis for the assumption 'I am' or 'I'; in the ultimate sense there is only mentality-materiality. The vision of one who sees in this way is called correct vision." 25768 From: yu_zhonghao Date: Wed Oct 1, 2003 3:49pm Subject: Re: Introduction to the Abhidhamma - Slides 17-21 for comment Hi Rob, The view that "there are no people" is a wrong view. The view that a being is composed of the five aggregates is a wrong view. There are beings in the world. Peace, Victor --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "robmoult" wrote: > Do People Really Exist? 25769 From: yu_zhonghao Date: Wed Oct 1, 2003 4:10pm Subject: Re: Introduction to the Abhidhamma - Slides 17-21 for comment Hi Rob, I think these passages are relevant: "And what is aging and death, what is the origin of aging and death, what is the cessation of aging and death, what is the way leading to the cessation of aging and death? The aging of beings in the various orders of beings, their old age, brokenness of teeth, grayness of hair, wrinkling of skin, decline of life, weakness of faculties -- this is called aging. The passing of beings out of the various orders of beings, their passing away, dissolution, disappearance, dying, completion of time, dissolution of the aggregates, laying down of the body -- this is called death." "And what is birth, what is the origin of birth, what is the cessation of birth, what is the way leading to the cessation of birth? The birth of beings into the various orders of beings, their coming to birth, precipitation [in a womb], generation, manifestation of the aggregates, obtaining the bases for contact -- this is called birth." "And what is being, what is the origin of being, what is the cessation of being, what is the way leading to the cessation of being? There are these three kinds of being: sense-sphere being, fine-material being and immaterial being." http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/majjhima/mn009.html Visuddhi Magga is to be read with a grain of salt. Peace, Victor [snip] > > According to the Visuddhi Magga (Path of Purification), "… So in > many hundred Suttas there is only mentality-materiality which is > illustrated, not a being, not a person. Therefore, just as when the > component parts (of a chariot) such as axles, wheels, frame, poles… > are arranged in a certain way, there comes to be the mere > conventional term 'chariot', yet in the ultimate sense, when each > part is examined, there is no chariot… so too, when there are the > five khandhas of clinging there comes to be the mere conventional > term 'a being', 'a person', yet in the ultimate sense, when each > component is examined, there is no being as a basis for the > assumption 'I am' or 'I'; in the ultimate sense there is only > mentality-materiality. The vision of one who sees in this way is > called correct vision." 25770 From: Date: Wed Oct 1, 2003 4:16pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Concentration and samatha Hi Jon, I am comfortable with the idea that tranquility arises in daily life but I am not so sure it is always wholesome. The most obvious example would be sleep. Another example would be the tranquility that arises with satisfaction on completing an intended activity: having washed the dishes, I briefly feel relaxed (tranquil) and satisfied. I don't know where you are going with this argument but I wonder if we need to define "wholesome". Perhaps we would need two definitions: one conventional and another buddhistic. Also, I don't see tranquility as being particularly associated with concentration. The idea of concentration being EXclusive rather than INclusive lends itself to buddhist ideas of less is better and none is best. Nibbana is peace and tranquility is a measure of peace. Concentration seems to be a way of maximizing peace by minimizing hindrances and ultimately, path factors. Understanding (panna) seems to be a way of making a radical change in one's orientation (the so called "change of lineage" consciousness) that permanently eliminates the hindrances. This amounts to the peace of nibbana but not necessarily the peace of concentration, which seems to be something of a speciality item not on everyone's menu. Maybe the reason the Buddha so often recommended the peace of concentration is because it was something people could do and also no one is really convinced that nibbana is desirable, so this is a way of demonstrating the benefits of peace. Why do you think samma samadhi is part of the 8-fold path? Larry -------------------- Jon: "Just to make sure we are on the same page here, are you quite comfortable with the idea of samatha as a form of kusala (mental) action that occurs naturally in ordinary daily life, that is to say, quite apart from any notion of 'developing samatha'? This is fairly key to everything that follows. I think it's useful to consider aspects of daily life that do or could involve instances of this kind of kusala (i.e., samatha). Perhaps you wouldn't mind suggesting 1 or 2 yourself (real or hypothetical). Others may also be interested to ponder on this." 25771 From: robmoult Date: Wed Oct 1, 2003 6:03pm Subject: Re: Introduction to the Abhidhamma - Slides 17-21 for comment Hi Victor, In your previous post, you stated, "The view that "there are no people" is a wrong view. The view that a being is composed of the five aggregates is a wrong view. There are beings in the world." I was going to ask you for sources to support this position and you appeared to read my mind and sent the following: --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "yu_zhonghao" wrote: > "And what is aging and death, what is the origin of aging and death, > what is the cessation of aging and death, what is the way leading to > the cessation of aging and death? The aging of beings in the various > orders of beings, their old age, brokenness of teeth, grayness of > hair, wrinkling of skin, decline of life, weakness of faculties -- > this is called aging. The passing of beings out of the various > orders of beings, their passing away, dissolution, disappearance, > dying, completion of time, dissolution of the aggregates, laying > down of the body -- this is called death." > > "And what is birth, what is the origin of birth, what is the > cessation of birth, what is the way leading to the cessation of > birth? The birth of beings into the various orders of beings, their > coming to birth, precipitation [in a womb], generation, > manifestation of the aggregates, obtaining the bases for contact -- > this is called birth." > > "And what is being, what is the origin of being, what is the > cessation of being, what is the way leading to the cessation of > being? There are these three kinds of being: sense-sphere being, > fine-material being and immaterial being." > > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/majjhima/mn009.html Victor, you then took exception to the Visuddhi Magga quote below: > > According to the Visuddhi Magga (Path of Purification), "… So in > > many hundred Suttas there is only mentality-materiality which is > > illustrated, not a being, not a person. Therefore, just as when > the > > component parts (of a chariot) such as axles, wheels, frame, > poles… > > are arranged in a certain way, there comes to be the mere > > conventional term 'chariot', yet in the ultimate sense, when each > > part is examined, there is no chariot… so too, when there are the > > five khandhas of clinging there comes to be the mere conventional > > term 'a being', 'a person', yet in the ultimate sense, when each > > component is examined, there is no being as a basis for the > > assumption 'I am' or 'I'; in the ultimate sense there is only > > mentality-materiality. The vision of one who sees in this way is > > called correct vision." Sorry, Victor, I am confused. When I read the Sammaditthi Sutta (Mn9), I do not see where it implies that beings are other than the five aggregates. You said, "The view that a being is composed of the five aggregates is a wrong view." Please explain. In your opinion, is a "being" more than the five aggregates, less than the five aggregates or a different set of aggretgates? Or, are you following that early school (can't remember the name) who believed that a "being" was another paramattha dhamma? Metta, Rob M :-) 25772 From: rjkjp1 Date: Wed Oct 1, 2003 8:30pm Subject: kamma DEAr Nina, On the question of whether each javana moment is kamma here is an interesting piece: "It is stated in the Kathavatthupakarana-atthakatha that there is a relationship between citta and kamma. If mind be distracted, no kamma can be performed. Yada cittam bhajjamanam hoti tada kammaam bhajjamanam hotiti attho." P147 The life and work of Buddhaghosa by B.C Law robertk 25773 From: Sukinderpal Singh Narula Date: Wed Oct 1, 2003 10:36pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Sutta and interpretation. Hi Victor, Firstly I would like to say that I really appreciate your presence in this = group. Even when our views differ, I find your statements to be good reminder of the danger of holding onto views, esp. those that originate from and further solidify `self-view'. Actually *all* views it seems, originate from self-view, no?! With regard to this, I therefore think that = to take `beings' as being ultimately real is to risk being drawn further away from the real understanding of Anatta. I understand that ignorance is quite predominant in everyone, and this is made worse by `clinging' to views. And though I believe that the study of Abhidhamma, the knowledge about ultimate realities, is absolutely essential for any real appreciation of Buddhadhamma, I think most of us have a tendency to *cling* to our particular perspective and subsequently papancize. And here I believe, is where wise friends like you can come in to give us good reminders. But I do not quite agree with your position with regard to the status of `excrement' and `beings', and following are my remarks to your statements. I am combining both of your posts to me to save time, as I do not want to stay too long in front of this computer. (I just had my shop painted last night, and I feel quite uncomfortable with the smell.) > So excrement come from thinking about what is seen, smelt, > touched...?? What is it that is seen, smelt, touched?? In the seen there is only the seen, likewise in the smelt and touched. Apart from this, there is thinking. However this is *not* my experience, as I, like you, take excrement to be real all the time and I perceive shape and form and infer smell and texture (and probable taste ;-( ) to that `imaginary' thing! This is the way of the worldlings like us. But at least we have been given the chance through the Buddha's teachings, to know intellectually, that this is *not* so in the ultimate sense. And if conditions are ripe, I believe that we can and do get a glimpse of this fact. > Is this what is been seen, smelt, and touched reality or concept? I believe that you are pre-supposing the existence of `things' out there and attributing characteristics of experience on to that thing. In other words you have failed to see that `seeing' is only an element, and have instead taken that which is seen to be `something' waiting to be experienced by a `self'. Do you see the danger of holding such a view? Because no matter how you then view experiencing of `objects' out there, even if this is with the understanding that there is only one citta = arising at a time to experience an object, the experience will still be tie= d to `self', as originating from some fixed entity. Of course all this is just thinking, and I may be wrong about your understanding…. > Does concept comes in solid or liquid form? It is precisely because concepts are pre-supposed to exist, that the question about them being `solid or liquid' arises. See how concepts, wrongly understood lead to further reliance on other concepts?! > Does concept gives off a smell? See how you take for granted that concepts are real and then end up qualifying `smell', a reality, onto it? I think maybe this is what Mike was= trying to show in his remark made on this thread, (correct me if I am wrong Mike), that there is `smell' a reality, but ideas about the smell `excrement' a concept, is like excrement coming out as a product of ignorance in the case of worldlings like you and me…?! > I am not sure if excrement is from thinking about what is seen, > smelt, touched... > > However, I do know that excrement is waste matter discharged from > the body; especially waste (as feces) discharged from the alimentary canal.* Conventional so called `common sense' understanding is fine and scientific knowledge is fine too. As long as we understand them to be for convenience in communication, and just living in the conventional world. But see from your own example above, how for example `alimentary canal' is taken so matter of factly? This is how I believe the whole of the scientific community strives to be further caught in `illusion' in the name of the `quest for truth' which they will never get an inch closer to. This being an illustration of taking `concepts= ' to be real and further reliance on more and more concepts to explain and justify one's position. The understanding of Satipatthana is crucial, and so the correct interpretation of the sutta from which you quote below. > In the Satipatthana Sutta, the Buddha taught that to remain focus on > the body in and of itself, "a monk reflects on this very body from > the soles of the feet on up, from the crown of the head on down, > surrounded by skin and full of various kinds of unclean things: 'In > this body there are head hairs, body hairs, nails, teeth, skin, > flesh, tendons, bones, bone marrow, kidneys, heart, liver, pleura, > spleen, lungs, large intestines, small intestines, gorge, feces, > bile, phlegm, pus, blood, sweat, fat, tears, skin-oil, saliva, > mucus, fluid in the joints, urine.'" ** I do not have the Sutta with me, but I believe an important part of the Sutta which everyone who wants to overlook does so, is the part that states to the effect, that "this self or being or person, is taken just for= convenience as a means to reflect and know the ultimate realities which the consciousness apprehends within this `body'." In other words, because it is only here within this mind/matter continuum that wrong view of self originates, that the *right* can be known. And what is this Right View? That all there is are the cittas, cetasikas and rupa. Aside from this, nothing does, all being concept only! So similarly the different organs of the body, are precisely where wrong view originates, ie. we take them to be my (or other) kidney, hair, blood etc. And so it is here that we then need to `correct' our perception and hence view, *not* by then simply denying their existence, but by seeing what is then the underlying realities when these experiences occur! > This is how I see it: > This body, with all kinds of unclean things, feces, urine, pus, etc > internally or externally, is the "ultimate reality" to be reflected on. As above! ;-) But of course, when you say `unclean', then there can be reflection on asubha as well, and in this case, the object can be both `concept' and reality, I think. Or is there a subtle difference between foulness and asubha?? > I am not sure how excrement, the feces, the urine, is concept and > can be thought out. I would rather and usually go to the bathroom > and discharge them in the toilet. That's my experience too!:-) Got to rush out for some fresh air. Best wishes, Sukin. 25774 From: Sarah Date: Thu Oct 2, 2003 0:31am Subject: Re: [dsg] Dhamma Issue 12, the Buddha's Last Meal. Hi James, --- buddhatrue wrote: S:> > An example, perhaps, of how we never know the conditions at work or > what > > would have happened without certain factors?? > > ====== > > Hi Sarah, > J:> Could you please explain what you mean here? .... It was a bit of a ‘throwaway comment’. What I meant was that in effect, only a Buddha with his omniscient powers fully comprehends all the details of kamma and other condititions at work at anytime. In another thread we were talking about Culapantaka (Little Wayman) and how even his arahant brother didn’t know what he needed to hear. In the example of the Buddha’s last meal, (assuming the commentary is correct for now;-)), only the Buddha would have known the great results which would follow the offering by Cunda and how it was as a result of this delicacy that he was able to take further steps and so on. He also knew everyone would assume the meal to be the cause of sickness and blame Cunda if he didn’t speak out. In a similar (simplistic) manner, perhaps we assume a certain food or activity to be the cause of some ache or disability or sickness when in fact we may have been far sicker without it. We really understand so very little about the complex conditions and results at any time. .... >I believe there has to > be some agreement on the cause of events or there is no reason to > even learn the dhamma. With your posit, the causes for nothing could > be determined and nothing could be understood...there would be no > reason for the Buddha, the Dhamma, and the Sangha. Everything would > be provisional for each person's determination; in other words, total > chaos and anarchy. ..... LOL - I’m not sure it’s quite that drastic;-) A lot can be known and understood about causes and conditions in theory and practice. We read and consider the value of the TripleGem and test out the value of all kinds of wholesome states. We also read that only a Buddha can fully comprehend the detailed workings of kamma and fully understand different determinations and accumulations. Phenomena are intricately conditioned, but this doesn’t mean all these conditions can ever be fully known (or need to be for liberation). No chaos, but no universal omniscience either. Hope this clarifies. I’ve appreciated your comments on this thread and in particular on this very important sutta. Metta, Sarah ===== 25775 From: bodhi dhamma Date: Thu Oct 2, 2003 1:05am Subject: advice on discussion topics Dear Bro. Rob Your message No:25702 dated 30-9-2003 refers. Nice to know that you are going to revise the abdhimma topics for the forecoming session.As a sunday dhamma teacher for several years, I myself do feel that it is necessary, especially when the majority of the students in your class have attended two years ( in fact right from the beginning ). It is natural to hear the comments, please treat these as valuable feedback. Before deciding on the topics, it would be good to know the students' background (marketing segment ) . I had attended your class several times and you are right that they are housewives who drop in the class before picking up their children home. Many of them, as you mentioned, seldom investigate further( in dhamma studies) after leaving the class. For the non-academic laities like those , I would suggest to teach the popular dhamma topics that the common buddhists like best. Since your intention is to teach Abhidhamma, why not "inject"/ incorporate the abhidhammic concepts into popular topics of dhamma ? I would like to suggest the followings for your class : 1) Abhidhammic aspect of rebirth ( patisandi citta ....etc) 2) 31 planes of existence ( other forms of beings and their cittas.. etc) 3) Significance of buddhist chanting (many laities here like chanting. to explain to them the arising of wholesome thought /cittas..etc) 4) Transference/sharing of merits ( how it works...from cittas/ abhidhamma point of view). 5) Ten paramis ( how to perfect paramis and get rid of defilements that accompany the practice. for example how to perform a higher form of dana ........donating while not thinking about whether the receipient will help you back or not .Cittas involved during that practice/process ) 6) Difference between wisdom and intelligence ( it is common for the laities to mix up these two terms Explain the mental factors of panna and intelligence)..... 7) Wealth, making money, right livelihood from buddhist standpoint. 8) Buddhism and war ( millitary actions and killings) 9 ) How to keep 5 precepts in business/political circles. ( on sila) 10) How to incorporate abhidhamma into daily life ? ( I often hear that abhidhamma is meant for the yogi....that also applicable only during meditation) with metta, P C 25776 From: yu_zhonghao Date: Thu Oct 2, 2003 1:16am Subject: Re: Introduction to the Abhidhamma - Slides 17-21 for comment Hi Rob, I hope you find the passages helpful. The claim "there is no being" is simply false. Seeing and delineating oneself in terms of the five aggregates, whether one is more than the five aggregates, less than the five aggregates, or a different set of aggretgates, or composed of the five aggregates, one sees oneself with a self-view. The Buddha's teaching is not about what oneself, a being, is. It is not about what exists and what does not exist. It is not about what is real, what is concept. It is not an ontology. It is not a metaphysics. The Buddha taught the four noble truths. Buddha's teaching is about dukkha/the imperfect/the unsatisfactory and the cessation of dukkha. Ontological and metaphysical views and line of reasoning might be very fascinating, but they are entangling, obstructive to the goal of the cessation of dukkha. Peace, Victor --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "robmoult" wrote: > Hi Victor, [snip] 25777 From: Sarah Date: Thu Oct 2, 2003 1:38am Subject: Re: [dsg] Personality view vs. Delusion Hi Howard & All, --- upasaka@a... wrote: > What!? One could ask how cittas can be experienced as namas! > Ideas > *are* namas. What should they be experienced as? Not rupas. That's all > there is, .... If we take ideas to be thoughts or that which is conceptualised abut, then they are pa~n~natti (concepts) which RobM just explained very clearly (Thanissaro’s use of ‘ideas’ in translations often has a wider meaning). I think you agree so far, Howard. According to the texts we’ve been considering, pannatti are NOT namas or rupas. Also as RobM has explained, they do not have the characteristics of namas or rupas either. .... > Sarah - namas, rupas, and absences (most especially nibbana). That's all > there > is. If we experience ideas - and we certainly do (!), then they are > either > namas, rupas, or absences (including nibbana). ..... Whilst concepts can be taken as objects by cittas and associated mental states (as you say, ‘we certainly do (!)’, they are never experienced in the sense of being ‘penetrated’ or ‘directly known’ as namas and rupas can be (as discussed in Vism thread). An idea of say ‘a computer’ or’ person’ or ‘butter-ja’ can never be understood. The thinking about it can, however. ..... >Unfortunately, not only > do we > experience ideas, we take them much too seriously. They are, after all, > *only* > ideas! .... Agreement! We experience and cling on to ideas, taking them for being ‘real’ and having value. As you say, they are *only* ideas, of no *intrinsic* (oops!) value at all. ..... [...] >I hope these > few short > posts have clarified my positions. (Now back to meditating. ;-) .... Yes, I understand where we’re in agreement and where there is a difference. Now it may be that *my* meditating confirms what I think is experienced and yours confirms *your* understanding. This is why I suggest we look at references sometimes -not because I’m fussed about the references, but sometimes they are needed as a kind of referee of what the Tipitaka says on the matter;-) Let me add an extract of a quote I gave before which Victor and others may may like to read again as well. We may think about and talk about people and butter-jars, but these concepts are not included in the 5 aggregates or paramattha dhammas to be known (i.e namas and rupas): (In the first chapter in the Kathavatthu (Points of Controversy - the Abhidhamma text, PTS)and its commentary (the Debates Commentary) there is a lot of discussion about commonly used terms. The following quote is from the Commentary (On the Person, p 41)): ***** QUOTE “The teaching of the Exalted One is of two kinds, the highest-meaning teaching consisting of the aggregates, and so forth, and the popular taching consisting of ‘butter-jar,’ and so forth. The Exalted One does not, indeed, overrun consistency. Hence, on the mere expression “there is the person who,” must not command adherence. The highest meaning has been declared by the Teacher, without transgressing the concept. So another wise man also should not, in explaining the highest meaning, overrun a concept. The remaining meanings are clear everywhere. The controversy on ‘person’ is ended.” (see this post for full quote of the passage) http://www.escribe.com/religion/dhammastudygroup/m17026.html Metta, Sarah ======= 25778 From: Sarah Date: Thu Oct 2, 2003 2:10am Subject: Re: [dsg] Personality view vs. Delusion i Howard, It must be a day for me to interrupt your meditations;-), --- upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, Sarah - > Howard: > It's a matter of emphasis, Sarah, and of language. The emphasis > strongly suggests an adherence to discretist, self-existence view. The > word > 'intrinsic' clinches it. Both connotation and denotation are dangerous. .... Perhaps we should just use ‘sabhaava’ or one of the other translations we picked , such as ‘particular qualit’? I think we were quoting Nanamoli’s transl of the vism in this thread, but I forget now. ..... > I particularly draw your attention to "belonging to the essential > > nature or constitution of a thing" and to "originating and included > wholly within > an organ or part". Compare this with the following definition of > 'extrinsic' : > "originating from or on the outside". The Buddhist position, of course, > is a > middle-way one which is neither intrinsic nor extrinsic. Both of those > extremes are grounded in a substantialist sense. > ---------------------------------------------------------------- Actually, I don’t have a problem with ‘intrinsic’ as defined and don’t consider that referring to the ‘nama-ness’ or ‘impermanence’ or ‘quality of experiencing visible object’ when referring to the *essential nature or constitution* of seeing consciousness as being any problem. I understand that for TG and yourself, you are not happy about impermanence, for example, as being referred to as an inherent or essential or intrinsic quality of phenomena. When we refer to ‘sabbe sankhara dhamma anicca’ and so on, surely as Nyantiloka writes in his dict entry under ‘anicca’: “impermanence is a basic feature of all conditioned phenomena, be they material or mental, coarse or subtle, one’s own or external..” Without insight into the ‘basic features’, ‘characteristics’ or sabhaava, starting with the clear distinction of the qualities of namas and rupas, there can be no attainment or deliverance. > ----------------------------------------------------- > Howard: [...] > What is important in all cases is the dependent origination and > emptiness. > ------------------------------------------------- I agreed with most your comments and don’t want to get lost in semantics here either;-) We do however have a fundamental difference of understanding at this point in that I understand the texts to be referring to paramattha dhammas which have the characteristics of anicca, dukkha and anatta and which are dependent on causes and to be known in successive stages of penetrative insight for liberation to take place. By ‘all cases’, I understand you to be including concepts. ..... > > Have you got a reference which suggests concepts have lakkana > > (characteristics)? [If there’s one reference or sutta for all qus, > that > > would be convenient.....] > ------------------------------------------------------ > Howard: > This is evident. If they had no characteristics there would be no > way > of distinguishing them! We *do* distinguish concepts. One doesn't need > scriptural references for everything. If we did, wed have to carry a > pocket book of > suttas around with us to live on this planet. > ======================== ... LOL - we distinguish concepts by thinking about them. Again it is the sanna, vitakka and other mental states that have distinguishing characteristics. Even if we voice out our thoughts and say “H.O.W.A.R.D” or “L.A.R.R.R.Y”, all that is heard are various sounds, only visible objects are seen on the screen and more pannatti on account of these ‘distinguished’ sounds and visible objects. I don’t think I’ve explained very clearly. These are subtle and useful points and I appreciate your deep reflections on them, Howard. Maybe others like RobM or Sukin can add more. Metta, Sarah ===== 25779 From: Sarah Date: Thu Oct 2, 2003 2:47am Subject: particular. specific characteristics...... Hi Howard (& Ken H), For what it’s worth, I thought these comments you made before (post 24714) in a great discussion with Ken H were very good (I mean I agreed;-)). Hardness rupas have particular common qualities, but no two hardness rupas are the same as you explain: ============================ Howard : [...]The error, and I do think it was an error, was to informally think of rupas as self-sufficient in the following sense: I was, for example, thinking of hardness as a unitary, mind-independent rupa constituting *one* thing, and a separate appropriate mind-door vi~n~nana, conditioned to observe that rupa with a certain vedanic taste, and then these two separate phenomena coming together in contact. But, what I think is probably closer to the facts is that hardness is not a single rupa, but is a category of rupas; in any context, a variety of conditions,including one's own kamma, create the potential for the arising/actualization of a *particular* hardness-rupa to be experienced with characteristics, including type and degree of vedanic taste, specific to that hardness-rupa but not necessarily to others. Once certain conditions, arise, the rupa, as a specific potential arammana, arises, and when and if the necessary full complement of conditions has finally arisen, the rupa is actualized by contact. The main point here, putting aside the potentiality-actuality business, which may be problematical or at least debatable, is that there are, even for a single namarupic stream, different hardness rupas that arise, with differing characteristics, and not just the "same" hardness rupa arising at different times and perceived differently at different times.” ***** As Ken H also said (post 24699), the flavour or hardness is inherent in the rupa-arammana. (Rupas are conditioned by kamma, citta, temperature or nutrition, Ken. Those outside such as food or rocks are conditioned by temperature). I also liked the way you (Ken H) wrote in the same thread: “It is important to know that dhammas are absolute -- that their characteristics are independent of how they are reacted to. A rupa that becomes the object of consciousness is inherently pleasant or unpleasant. It depends, not on how it is perceived, but on how it is conditioned (and is conditioned by either kusala kamma or akusala kamma). [S: i.e the experiencing of the object or vipaka cittas. Rupas experienced by one of the 4 causes above - always an intricate set of conditions at work to include other support conditions too]. You continued to write wisely imho, “As a general rule, pleasant sense objects are reacted to with lobha and unpleasant objects with dosa but I think there are a lot of exceptions.....it’s probably just that various other conditions predominate. What is important though, is that we appreciate the absolute nature of dhammas: A rupa may be inherently pleasant even when it is experienced with dosa; or inherently unpleasant even when it is experienced with lobha.” (Ken H, I hope you can add more in your pithy style which is helpful for us all. Btw, I could think of a very good reason to go from the Sunshine coast to the Gold coast for a holiday: quality time with Sue, your wife who never got her proper shower on the ranch and happily teaches whilst you check out the surf;-)) Finally, I want to add this quote which was in one of Jaran’s posts from his translation of a talk of K.Sujin’s: ***** Sujin: “Thinking of dhamma, understanding that there are characteristics and nature to be understood directly is on the right path of directly experience the dhamma. Sometime later after when this knowledge has settled in the mind firmly, sati, even without calling it sati, arises to be aware of the dhamma and its nature. Without having to do anything, making anything arise, but understanding that there are characteristics to be understood, the right understanding begins to develop. This is difficult since we are not familiar with the characteristics of dhamma because of our ignorance. We are more familiar with 'hope', 'ambition', 'desire' and 'work for what we want'.” Metta, Sarah ===== 25780 From: Sarah Date: Thu Oct 2, 2003 3:00am Subject: Re: [dsg] advice on discussion topics Hi PC & RobM, (Good to see you around PC....look forward to hearing more from you;-)). --- bodhi dhamma wrote: > > Before deciding on the topics, it would be good to know the students' > background (marketing segment ) . I had attended your class several > times and you are right that they are housewives who drop in the class > before picking up their children home. Many of them, as you mentioned, > seldom investigate further( in dhamma studies) after leaving the class. .... I’m not adding any more topics, but I’m just wondering whether it might be useful to try and involve these students a little more in the classes. You know they will be with you for the year, so one suggestion might be in the first class to ask everyone to write down one topic or one question on a piece of paper (names optional)for you to look at later and incorporate into your plan for the year. It might be interesting for you to see the areas that come up and help the students to feel the lectures are relevant to their requests and needs and add special interest when their topics come up. (Most will fit into your present framework, I'm sure). Pls ignore if it wouldn’t work for your large audience. Metta, Sarah ======= 25781 From: buddhatrue Date: Thu Oct 2, 2003 3:17am Subject: Re: Dhamma Issue 12, the Buddha's Last Meal. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Sarah wrote: > Hi James, > > --- buddhatrue wrote: > S:> > An example, perhaps, of how we never know the conditions at work or > > what > > > would have happened without certain factors?? > > > ====== > > > > Hi Sarah, > > > J:> Could you please explain what you mean here? > .... > It was a bit of a `throwaway comment'. What I meant was that in effect, > only a Buddha with his omniscient powers fully comprehends all the details > of kamma and other condititions at work at anytime. Hi Sarah, Well, it seems to me that you are going to keep dancing around this issue. I give you specifics and you keep giving me generalities; and the thing is that you are using generalities to support what is a very specific position of the commentaries. Let's get down to brass tacks, I have an interest in disproving the commentaries, any commentaries, because I believe that many of them are wrong…as I have said before. Unfortunately, up to this point my contentions with the commentaries have always been with interpretive issues, which are easy to slip out of when there is any discussion. However, this is one time when the issue is pretty black and white…the Buddha both got sick and died from eating that meal or he didn't…and yet you are trying to say that it is interpretive. It is not interpretive…there is one answer that is correct and the other answer isn't correct. The question is: Which is the correct answer? I find this `interpretive' stance convenient for you because you support the commentaries entirely and don't believe that any of them could be false or misleading. This is a very important point to me because I believe that if I can prove that just one commentary is false, it has to be accepted that they all can be false. After all, if just one teaching of the Buddha is false, they are all false. Since they are all true, the entire teaching is true. The commentaries aren't from the Buddha, remember that. I believe that I have shown, without a reasonable doubt, that this commentary is false. It just doesn't add up no matter how you look at it. It doesn't match what other's said about the Buddha's death and it doesn't match what he himself said about his impending death. Yes, the Buddha did say that people shouldn't blame Cunda for his death and that Cunda shouldn't blame himself, but he didn't say that the meal had nothing to do with his death…He just said that Cunda should consider himself lucky that he gave the Buddha his last meal. Don't you get it? He was being a nice guy up to the very end… diffusing what could have potentially turned into an ugly situation . He didn't say, "Don't blame Cunda because his meal was actually infused with nutrients from devas and will allow me to live a little time more. I was actually going to die anyway and have bloody diarrhea and pains from no cause. Cunda's meal didn't cause that at all" That is a ridiculous conclusion to reach that isn't supported by the text at all. It doesn't take an arahant to have some common sense in evaluating the events of his death. You are saying that only an arahant can know what caused his death…well, isn't that a convenient position? Again, it appears to me that you are trying to slip out of the obvious…the commentaries created a false report to justify some hidden agenda; a more useful discussion would be to determine what that agenda was. Why create this fairy tale? I know that you are not going to concede this point because I know what it would mean. It would unravel a lot that you stand on. Until you present more compelling, SPECIFIC evidence in support of the commentaries' conclusion, I think my point still stands. Let the readers of this post decide the rest for themselves. Metta, James 25782 From: Date: Thu Oct 2, 2003 2:07am Subject: Re: [dsg] Personality view vs. Delusion Hi, Sarah - In a message dated 10/2/03 4:38:47 AM Eastern Daylight Time, sarahdhhk@y... writes: > Whilst concepts can be taken as objects by cittas and associated mental > states (as you say, ‘we certainly do (!)’, they are > never experienced in the sense of being ‘penetrated’ or ‘directly known’ > as namas and rupas can be (as discussed in Vism thread). An idea of say ‘a > computer’ or’ person’ or ‘butter-ja’ can never be understood. The thinking > about it can, however. > =========================== A brief comment, bowing ever so slightly in your direction. I still maintain that concepts are simply ideas, and ideas are mind-door objects, and are namas. But, and this is a big 'but', concepts are not nearly so simple and unitary as a perfunctory, unexamined observation would suggest. For example, to say that we have an idea/concept of 'computer' is not quite so. Many *differing*, and mostly quite vague, 'computer' ideas arise in the mind. One such idea is a mental summing up of *certain* experiences, generally of complex streams of experiences. and other such are summings up (and summonings up!) of yet *other* such experiential streams. All of these embody experiences of a variety of sorts including visual, tactile, and other types, and frequently "topped off" by, if not a verbal expression, then at least by an impulse to same reflecting a mental unification. Ideas and concepts are quite complex, difficult to grasp, multi-formed, multi-layered, and elusive (and illusive!) - but they *are* mind-door objects. I find unacceptable the notion that penetration with wisdom of any mind-door object is impossible. An arahant, or certainly a Buddha, would have the wisdom to understand fully all the nuances and aspects of every arising concept he encounters. Even we poor worldings can grasp many of the multi-layered aspects of our concepts, observing how, for example, "the" tree concept is built of other concepts such as bark, roots, branches (and branching), leaves, etc, and associated notions of birds setting on branches, of bird nests etc, and a further grasping of how, for example, the bark-concept is built of concepts such as dark color, rough texture, and hardness, etc, etc. All this even *we* can see, from our very limited and circumscribed perspectives. When we look and apparently "see" a tree, a concept of tree is arising (or several such arise in a sequence) at the mind-door; it arises (or they arise) as mental reification growing out of a mental proliferation upon sa~n~nic recognitions, recognitions which already sum up a variety of visual clues, and make "matchings" via memory. What is going on is mental function, the creation of mental constructs, and these are knowable by wisdom as to their precise nature, and in full detail, though not to us at our stage with our current limitations 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) 25783 From: Sarah Date: Thu Oct 2, 2003 6:26am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Dhamma Issue 12, the Buddha's Last Meal. Hi James, The Facts as I understand them: 1.I made it clear that I thought you raised a good point at the outset as there did seem to be a discrepancy in the texts. I said that I thought we’d need to look further at the Pali (with assistance) for the verse in question in the sutta. I had no interest in getting into any dispute over it and that wasn’t the point of my post as you know well;-) 2. I mentioned as a general comment that conditions were very complex. 3. You asked me to explain what I meant by this, which I did. I made reference to the commentary, but was not discussing whether it was right or not. I merely said ‘assuming for this discussion’....I could have said ‘assuming for this discussion that the Buddha died from the food’ and the points I made would have been the same. 4. Yes, I have great confidence in the ancient commentaries and as a general rule would always rely on their interpretations before those of my own or of modern scholars. (Of course there are bound to be some errors and occasional differences between say Burmese and Thai texts. One of these was discussed with Suan and B.Bodhi). I have no problem in accepting that many others like yourself take the opposite stand and have an interest in disproving them. 5. I’m very glad that contentions about the commentaries and various interpretive issues are raised here. I think discussion of these points are essential for all of us in developing our understanding and for the future of (Theravada) Buddhism. Who knows, one of us might even change our stance;-) 6. You make a good point about showing ‘one false commentary’. I haven’t reached the same conclusion as you as yet in this case. I think it’s premature and I would be surprised if there really is a conflict in the texts. After all, the commentators would have had an interest in giving not only a correct interpretation, but one that would not be understood to be in conflict with the sutta on a basic point;-) I hope Suan, Derek, Steve or someone will help fish out the Pali and talk us through it: (Parinibbana Sutta, ii 129, Walshe transl p257 4.20) Metta, Sarah ===== 25784 From: christine_forsyth Date: Thu Oct 2, 2003 1:58pm Subject: Re: Sutta and interpretation. Hello RobM, This post is much appreciated. I've read and reasoned out many times before that "Dependent on the eye and forms, eye consciousness arises. The meeting of the three is contact. With contact as a condition there is feeling. What one feels, that one perceives. What one perceives, that one thinks about. What one thinks about, that one mentally proliferates. With what one has mentally proliferated as the source, perceptions and notions tinged by mental proliferation beset a man with respect to past, future and present forms cognizable though the eye." But it always seemed like an abstract formula that had nothing much to do with everyday life. You say: "> When observed in this manner, is it not clear that concepts (non-ultimate realities) are what we take as real after the mind starts working on them?< Yes, this time, with your example of the difference between thinking and experiencing, and differences in the way we feel towards the same object over time, I understand more clearly (while still holding in remembrance the Buddha's caution to Ananda, about the deepness and difficulty of really comprehending it). Thanks Rob. metta and peace, Christine ---The trouble is that you think you have time--- --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "robmoult" 25785 From: buddhatrue Date: Thu Oct 2, 2003 2:18pm Subject: Re: Dhamma Issue 12, the Buddha's Last Meal. Hi Sarah, Thank you so much for enumerating your points. It makes it so much clearer what you are saying and allows me to respond in kind. I have responded in text: The Facts as I understand them: 1.I made it clear that I thought you raised a good point at the outset as there did seem to be a discrepancy in the texts. I said that I thought we'd need to look further at the Pali (with assistance) for the verse in question in the sutta. I had no interest in getting into any dispute over it and that wasn't the point of my post as you know well;-) James: Okay, now I don't want to sound sarcastic, but I am not looking for pats on the head. I want to know if you either agree with my point or disagree with it, not if you think it is a `good point'; I know that `teacher technique' all too well, being a teacher myself. No need to butter me up. Please explain why we need to `look at the Pali' with assistance. What exactly do you think that is going to prove or disprove? It was my understanding that these `dhamma issues' were written by monks well versed in Pali. How many Pali experts need to look at this one issue? I think you are making it a bigger deal than it needs to be. I have to smile at your comment that you didn't intend to get into any dispute about this with me. Just where have you been? This is me we are talking about here…you don't pick the disputes, they will pick you. ;-) 2. I mentioned as a general comment that conditions were very complex. 3. You asked me to explain what I meant by this, which I did. I made reference to the commentary, but was not discussing whether it was right or not. I merely said `assuming for this discussion'....I could have said `assuming for this discussion that the Buddha died from the food' and the points I made would have been the same. James: So, like I said, you were being general, not making any specific points. If you didn't have any specific points to make, and no agenda whatsoever, I don't understand why you chose to respond (well, actually I think I do but I won't say). As I recall my original post was to Nina. Why would you jump in if you have nothing to say one way or the other? (But actually you did…in many subtle ways…but I will pretend for now that you didn't) 4. Yes, I have great confidence in the ancient commentaries and as a general rule would always rely on their interpretations before those of my own or of modern scholars. (Of course there are bound to be some errors and occasional differences between say Burmese and Thai texts. One of these was discussed with Suan and B.Bodhi). I have no problem in accepting that many others like yourself take the opposite stand and have an interest in disproving them. James: Thank you for making your position clear. I guess you are very magnanimous. 5. I'm very glad that contentions about the commentaries and various interpretive issues are raised here. I think discussion of these pointsare essential for all of us in developing our understanding and for thefuture of (Theravada) Buddhism. Who knows, one of us might even change our stance;-) James: These discussions aren't going to get anyone anywhere if there is a constant veneer of `dhamma political correctness' to the discussions. There is nothing wrong with having a position and stating it forthright; that isn't against Buddhism. 6. You make a good point about showing `one false commentary'. I haven't reached the same conclusion as you as yet in this case. I think it's premature and I would be surprised if there really is a conflict in the texts. After all, the commentators would have had an interest in giving not only a correct interpretation, but one that would not be understood to be in conflict with the sutta on a basic point;-) James: Again, unnecessary pat on the head to start with. If you haven't reached the same conclusion just explain why you haven't reached the same conclusion. What reasons do you have? By your own statementws, you haven't made any points. You think a conclusion is premature at this point? Why? Does it have to be discussed for years before any decision is reached? This seems pretty straightforward to me…I want to know what you are thinking and why you are thinking it. This could have been a simple discussion but I feel as if I am pulling teeth to get a straight answer. I hope Suan, Derek, Steve or someone will help fish out the Pali and talk us through it: (Parinibbana Sutta, ii 129, Walshe transl p257 4.20) James: Okay. I feel like this is Dhamma Congress and my proposal has just been tabled…until a later date when it can receive more study. I was never one for politics. Metta, James 25786 From: robmoult Date: Thu Oct 2, 2003 3:28pm Subject: The Perfect Gift Dear Friends, Blood is an anonymous gift. There is no way that the recipient could know who the donor was. Donating blood is a pure act of giving, without any other possible motives. Blood is free from economics. When a gift is opened, the recipient cannot help but think of how much was paid. Unlike other types of gifts, neither the donor nor the recipient attaches an economic value to a gift of blood. Blood is a very personal gift. What could be more personal than blood? Blood cannot be manufactured, except by a human body. During the act of donating, blood is pumped into the sac by the heart of the donor. The recipient always appreciates a gift of blood. Other types of gifts are sometimes left unused or unappreciated. When a person receives blood it is because they really need it; perhaps it is even a case of life or death. You do not need to be wealthy to donate blood, just healthy. I think that we all agree that health is more important than wealth. Let us celebrate our good health and share it with others who are less fortunate (less healthy) than ourselves by donating blood. Metta, Rob M :-) 25787 From: Derek Cameron Date: Thu Oct 2, 2003 3:34pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Dhamma Issue 12, the Buddha's Last Meal. Hi, Sarah, > I hope Suan, Derek, Steve or someone will help fish out the Pali > and talk us through it: (Parinibbana Sutta, ii 129, Walshe transl > p257 4.20) Is this the bit you're interested in? PTS D ii.128 tipitaka.org DN 2.3.190 cundassa bhatta.m bhu~njitvaa kammaarassaati me suta.m aabaadha.m samphusii dhiiro pabaalha.m maara.nantika.m bhuttassa ca suukaramaddavena byaadhippabaalho udapaadi satthuno (virecamaano? viriccamaano? viri~ncamaano?) bhagavaa avoca gacchaamaha.m kusinaara.m nagaranti Derek. 25788 From: robmoult Date: Thu Oct 2, 2003 3:57pm Subject: Re: [dsg] advice on discussion topics Hi PC (and Sarah) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Sarah wrote: > > Before deciding on the topics, it would be good to know the students' > > background (marketing segment ) . I had attended your class several > > times and you are right that they are housewives who drop in the class > > before picking up their children home. Many of them, as you mentioned, > > seldom investigate further( in dhamma studies) after leaving the class. > .... Incorporate the abhidhammic concepts into popular topics of dhamma is exactly the approach that I want to take. Some items in your list of popular dhamma topics would definitely fit under my previous list, such as: - Abhidhammic aspect of rebirth -> What happens when I die - Significance of buddhist chanting -> What is the role of rites and rituals? - Transference/sharing of merits -> What is the role of rites and rituals? However, you have given me some excellent new ideas as well: - How to keep 5 precepts in business? - What is the Buddhist view on war? - 31 planes of existence (this topic is not "practical", but it is very popular, so I will include it in the list) PC, thanks for your suggestions! > I'm not adding any more topics, but I'm just wondering whether it might be > useful to try and involve these students a little more in the classes. You > know they will be with you for the year, so one suggestion might be in the > first class to ask everyone to write down one topic or one question on a > piece of paper (names optional)for you to look at later and incorporate > into your plan for the year. It might be interesting for you to see the > areas that come up and help the students to feel the lectures are relevant > to their requests and needs and add special interest when their topics > come up. (Most will fit into your present framework, I'm sure). > > Pls ignore if it wouldn't work for your large audience. Sarah, this is an excellent suggestion. I will prepare my current list of topics and leave space for ten to twenty more topics to be written in. I will circulate it in my class to get their input. Metta, Rob M :-) 25789 From: Sarah Date: Thu Oct 2, 2003 11:32pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Dhamma Issue 12, the Buddha's Last Meal. Hi James, --- buddhatrue wrote: > Hi Sarah, > > Thank you so much for enumerating your points. It makes it so much > clearer what you are saying and allows me to respond in kind. I have > responded in text: ..... :-) thanks for these. (I’ll try to remember to add ‘pats on the head’ to the list of pet peeves under your name. Let’s see: James - rupa, akusala, Pali experts, pat on the head......) > I have to smile at your > comment that you didn't intend to get into any dispute about this > with me. Just where have you been? This is me we are talking about > here… .... Right...I must have forgotten...LOL...I notice everyone else is much smarter round here;-) .... >you don't pick the disputes, they will pick you. ;-) ..... So it seems.. ... [...] > James: Okay. I feel like this is Dhamma Congress and my proposal has > just been tabled…until a later date when it can receive more study. .... Now that’s a good idea (oops - pet peeves list)....;-) Back to a few other disputes.... Metta, Sarah ======= 25790 From: Sarah Date: Thu Oct 2, 2003 11:42pm Subject: Nina & Yahoo Dear All, Nina hasn't gone away yet, but she's been having problems with yahoo and all the mods having been working hard trying to sort things out for her. For no apparent reason she stopped getting mail from DSG and hasn't been able to send posts either. We've reactivated another yahoo account for her, so hopefully she'll be back soon. I mention this partly in case anyone else has the same problems and also in case anyone's been waiting for an answer. Metta, Sarah ======= 25791 From: Sarah Date: Fri Oct 3, 2003 0:18am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Dhamma Issue 12, the Buddha's Last Meal. Hi Derek (Nina, James, Mike & All), --- Derek Cameron wrote: >(Parinibbana Sutta, ii 129, Walshe transl > > p257 4.20) > > Is this the bit you're interested in? ... Yes, thank you very much. Exactly. > > PTS D ii.128 > tipitaka.org DN 2.3.190 > > cundassa bhatta.m bhu~njitvaa kammaarassaati me suta.m > aabaadha.m samphusii dhiiro pabaalha.m maara.nantika.m > > bhuttassa ca suukaramaddavena > byaadhippabaalho udapaadi satthuno > (virecamaano? viriccamaano? viri~ncamaano?) bhagavaa avoca > gacchaamaha.m kusinaara.m nagaranti .... viriccamaano - purging (present participle of viriccati -to get purged) according to PED. (the wheel transl however gives ‘dauntless’, presumably from viriya -energy??) I have the wheel (sister Vajira & Francis Story) and Walshe translations and both look pretty accurate from my very limited comprehension of the Pali. (James, I note Walshe does use ‘bloody diarrohoea’ as you rightly gave, whilst the wheel one uses ‘dysentery’). The verse (added later) definitely seems to say he got sick ‘from the suukara-maddava (tender pork)’[instr case] after eating the meal provided by Cunda whereas the prose before it just says after eating the meal...he got sick and had the deadly pains etc. Derek (*Mike* or anyone else), do you have anything to add? I’ve got students arriving and am in a rush now. (Just looking for very quick replies - TG, KKT and others - I look f/w to getting back later, after the weekend probably). Thx again for your help in fishing out the Pali- (I had looked but got lost and confused in the maze of symbols I get;-( ) Metta, Sarah ====== 25792 From: Sarah Date: Fri Oct 3, 2003 0:28am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Sutta and interpretation. Hi Sukin, I thought you made some very wise comments in your post to Victor. Your explanation (below) of the extract from the S.sutta was very helpful, I thought. of course, most the world won’t agree with it and that’s fine too;-) When others disagree we can either ignore these comments, try to explain our understanding further, and/or learn from the other viewpoints as you said to Victor. Yes, the reading can be helpful forthe explanations as well - a kind of dana. Look forward to examples from your note-taking at the Sat discussion;-) Anumodana, Sarah ====== Sukinderpal Singh Narula wrote: > I do not have the Sutta with me, but I believe an important part of the > Sutta which everyone who wants to overlook does so, is the part that > states to the effect, that "this self or being or person, is taken just > for= > > convenience as a means to reflect and know the ultimate realities which > the consciousness apprehends within this `body'." In other words, > because it is only here within this mind/matter continuum that wrong > view of self originates, that the *right* can be known. And what is this > > Right View? That all there is are the cittas, cetasikas and rupa. Aside > from this, nothing does, all being concept only! > So similarly the different organs of the body, are precisely where wrong > > view originates, ie. we take them to be my (or other) kidney, hair, > blood > etc. And so it is here that we then need to `correct' our perception and > > hence view, *not* by then simply denying their existence, but by seeing > what is then the underlying realities when these experiences occur! .... 25793 From: Sarah Date: Fri Oct 3, 2003 0:41am Subject: Re: [dsg] Personality view vs. Delusion Hi Larry, Thx for elaborating on your understanding of concepts and reality and your reference to Warder’s article - all of which I read with interest. Perhaps you could post just a paragraph or two sometime. As I just have a few minutes, I’ll just respond to your qu: --- LBIDD@w... wrote: > What I was wondering about self view and experience is why does anger as > root consciousness running through javana seem like "me"? .... As you imply, wrong views don’t arise with anger, but as soon as the anger has passed away, it can subsequently be the object of those self and other wrong views in following javanas rooted in attachment. These follow each other so quickly that it seems like the anger is *Me* as you say. If the anger is followed by javanas with wisdom, then there is no idea of *Me* at all - just conditioned mental factors. So, no *Me* except as object (concept-pannatti) of ditthi. Metta, Sarah p.s Let me know if there was anything else in particular that you wished me to comment on. ===== 25794 From: Sarah Date: Fri Oct 3, 2003 0:49am Subject: Re: [dsg] Personality view vs. Delusion Hi Victor, Thx for your feedback. Pls excuse a rushed reply: --- yu_zhonghao wrote: > Hi Sarah and all, > > Some points to share: > > 1. Seeing yourself as the five aggregates is the self-view. ..... Agree .... > 2. It is you and only you who can eat, for instance, the dimsum (if > you do eat them)or yourself, not eating. .... Disagree (occasionally but not good for the waist-line;-)) .... >Eating is not you. ..... Agree .... > Likewise, it is you and only you who can understand, for instance, > the Buddha's teaching, for yourself, not panna. ..... Disagree ..... >And panna is not > you. ..... Agree ..... > 3. The conditioned can be categorized either as nama or rupa. ..... Agree ..... > Excrement is conditioned. ..... Disagree (Hope we can discuss a lily next time (put in down to my pet peeves if you like);-)) Metta, Sarah ====== 25795 From: Star Kid Date: Fri Oct 3, 2003 1:08am Subject: comment on the diary Dear James, I am Janice Chung and I hope you would still remember me! It was fascinating about the diary you have written " Arrival and Cave Dweller" Here are some questions: Are there any Buddhists besides from you in Egypt? Are there any Buddhist temples there? Do you go to the temple everyday? So far, where have you explored in Cairo? I have been to Cairo with my mom and cousin 2 years ago and it was very amazing to learn about Egypt! That's all! Metta, Janice 25796 From: buddhatrue Date: Fri Oct 3, 2003 1:11am Subject: [dsg] Re: Dhamma Issue 12, the Buddha's Last Meal. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Sarah wrote: > Hi James, > > --- buddhatrue wrote: > Hi Sarah, > > > > Thank you so much for enumerating your points. It makes it so much > > clearer what you are saying and allows me to respond in kind. I have > > responded in text: > ..... > :-) thanks for these. (I'll try to remember to add `pats on the head' to > the list of pet peeves under your name. Let's see: James - rupa, akusala, > Pali experts, pat on the head......) Hi Sarah, Yep, seems easy enough to remember...;-). Leave some space, there might be some more that come up! LOL! Metta, James 25797 From: Star Kid Date: Fri Oct 3, 2003 3:27am Subject: About Buddhism James: I'm Philip. I would like to ask you a few more questions following last letter: 1. How did you know that I should be nice to my sister and my teachers? Did anyone told you that I am being bad to them? 2. Why did your luggage end up in France, when it should be in Cairo, Egypt? 3. Where are you staying now? In a friend's house or in a hotel? 4. Why do monks have to shave their heads and memorise the same words every day, and they must live in a monestary and they can't live like ordinary people? Please tell me. 5. Is Buddhism your first religion? 6. Actually, is the Buddha male or female? 7. Is the Buddha a person? 8. Is the Buddha as popular as soccer players such as David Beckham? Thanks for answering the questions. Philip Chui 25798 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Fri Oct 3, 2003 6:24am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Concentration and samatha Larry --- LBIDD@w... wrote: > Hi Jon, > > I am comfortable with the idea that tranquility arises in daily > life but > I am not so sure it is always wholesome. The most obvious example > would > be sleep. Another example would be the tranquility that arises with > satisfaction on completing an intended activity: having washed the > dishes, I briefly feel relaxed (tranquil) and satisfied. Samatha/tranquillity is the name given to a very specific kind of kusala consciousness, so if it's not wholesome then it can't properly be called samatha/tranquillity as used in the texts. What we may conventionally regard as tranquillity will most likely be akusala consciousness rooted in attachment (such as the pleasant, relaxed feeling you mention). Sleep would be a good example of something that is in fact acccompanied by attachment but that is seen conventionally as perhaps wholesome but at least morally 'neutral'. This is why the development of samatha requires (among other things) knowledge by direct experience of the difference between kusala and the akusala that is subtle attachment or aversion. Nevertheless, there may well be moments of kusala in our daily lives that we are not aware of since they are 'lost' in the ever-present attachment and aversion. That's why I suggested trying to postulate a few. Any instances (real or hypothetical) to mention? ... > Maybe the reason the Buddha so often recommended the peace of > concentration is because it was something people could do and also > no > one is really convinced that nibbana is desirable, so this is a way > of > demonstrating the benefits of peace. Why do you think samma samadhi > is part of the 8-fold path? As you know, I understand the factors of the Noble Eightfold Path to be mental factors (cetasikas) that arise at a moment of path consciousness. Samadhi is one of these. Samadhi is a factor in vipassana bhaavanaa (insight development) and also in samatha bhaavanaa (tranquillity development), but to my understanding the samadhi of samatha bhavana cannot perform the samadhi function for vipassana bhavana. Jon 25799 From: Derek Cameron Date: Fri Oct 3, 2003 8:41am Subject: [dsg] Re: Dhamma Issue 12, the Buddha's Last Meal. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Sarah wrote: > > cundassa bhatta.m bhu~njitvaa kammaarassaati me suta.m > > aabaadha.m samphusii dhiiro pabaalha.m maara.nantika.m > > bhuttassa ca suukaramaddavena > > byaadhippabaalho udapaadi satthuno > > (virecamaano? viriccamaano? viri~ncamaano?) bhagavaa avoca > > gacchaamaha.m kusinaara.m nagaranti > Derek (*Mike* or anyone else), do you have anything to add? Looks good to me, Sarah ... "bhu~njitvaa," having eaten, and "suukaramaddavena," instrumental. So, not only post hoc, but also propter hoc. Derek.