27400 From: nina van gorkom Date: Wed Nov 26, 2003 10:29am Subject: anapanasati 3 a Anapanasati Part 3 a: We should go back to the second tetrad, group of four, of the sutta on Mindfulness of Breathing: V) He trains thus ; he trains thus . (VI) He trains thus ; he trains thus . (VII) He trains thus ; he trains thus . (VIII) He trains thus ; he trains thus , that is, making happiness (píti, also translated as rapture) known, making it plain. Herein, the happiness is experienced in two ways: (a) with the object, and (b) with non-confusion. As regards , the Visuddhimagga (VIII, 227) explains: How is happiness experienced with the object? He attains the two jhånas in which happiness (píti) is present. At the time when he has actually entered upon them the happiness is experienced with the object owing to the obtaining of the jhåna, because of the experiencing of the object. After the jhånacitta has fallen away paññå realizes the characteristic of píti as it is: only a kind of nåma, which is impermanent and not self. We read: ŠHow with non-confusion? When, after entering upon and emerging from one of the two jhånas accompanied by píti, he comprehends with insight that happiness associated with the jhåna as liable to destruction and fall, then at the actual time of insight the happiness is experienced with non-confusion owing to the penetration of its characteristics (of impermanence, and so on). **** Nina. 27401 From: nina van gorkom Date: Wed Nov 26, 2003 10:29am Subject: FW: Co. Mahaaraahulovaadasutta, 25 B Co. Mahaaraahulovaadasutta, 25 B Relevant sutta passage: metta~nhi te, raahula, bhaavana.m bhaavayato For you who are cultivating the mental development of loving kindness, yo byaapaado so pahiiyissati. that which is malevolence will be abandoned... karu.na~nhi te, raahula, bhaavana.m bhaavayato For you who are cultivating the mental development of compassion, yaa vihesaa saa pahiiyissati. that which is harming will be abandoned... mudita~nhi te, raahula, bhaavana.m bhaavayato For you who are cultivating the mental development of sympathetic joy, yaa arati saa pahiiyissati. that which is dislike will be abandoned... upekkha~nhi te, raahula, bhaavana.m bhaavayato For you who are cultivating the mental development of equanimity, yo pa.tigho so pahiiyissati. that which is anger will be abandoned... asubha~nhi te, raahula, bhaavana.m bhaavayato For you who are cultivating the mental development of foulness, yo raago so pahiiyissati. that which is attachment will be abandoned... aniccasa~n~na~nhi te, raahula, bhaavana.m bhaavayato For you who are cultivating the mental development that is the perception of impermanence, yo asmimaano so pahiiyissati. that which is the conceit of ³I am² will be abandoned. ***** Commentary text: tattha bhaavayatoti upacaara.m vaa appana.m vaa paapentassa. Here, as regards the expression, for you who are developing, this means: for you who are developing the conditions for reaching access concentration or attainment concentration. yo byaapaadoti yo satte kopo, so pahiiyissati. As to the words, what is malevolence, this means: what is anger towards a being, that will be abandoned. vihesaati paa.niaadiihi sattaana.m vihi.msana.m. As to the word, vexation, this is injuring living beings with one¹s hands and so on. aratiiti pantasenaasanesu ceva adhikusaladhammesu ca ukka.n.thitataa. As to the word aversion, this is dissatisfaction with regard to secluded lodgings and superior qualities. pa.tighoti yattha katthaci sattesu sa"nkhaaresu ca pa.tiha~n~nanakileso. As to the word anger, this refers to the defilements that cause disturbance everywhere with regard to beings and events. asubhanti uddhumaatakaadiisu upacaarappana.m. As to the word foulness, this refers to access concentration and attainment concentration by means of a bloated corpse and so on. uddhumaatakaadiisu asubhabhaavanaa ca naamesaa vitthaarato visuddhimagge kathitaava. With regard to the bloated corpse etc. , the development of the meditation on foulness has been explained in detail in the Visuddhimagga. raagoti pa~ncakaamagu.nikaraago. As to the word attachment, this is attachment with regard to the five objects of sensual pleasure. aniccasa~n~nanti aniccaanupassanaaya sahajaatasa~n~na.m. As to the expression, perception of impermanence, this refers to perception that arises together with contemplation of impermanence. vipassanaa eva vaa esaa asa~n~naapi sa~n~naasiisena sa~n~naati vuttaa. Or, just insight; although this is not perception, it is called perception because it is under the heading of perception. asmimaanoti ruupaadiisu asmiiti maano. As to the words ³conceit of I am², this is conceit of ³I am² in materiality and so on. English: Here, as regards the expression, for you who are developing, this means: for you who are developing the conditions for reaching access concentration or attainment concentration. As to the words, what is malevolence, this means: what is anger towards a being, As to the word, vexation, this is injuring living beings with one¹s hands and so on. As to the word aversion, this is dissatisfaction with regard to secluded lodgings and superior qualities. As to the word anger, this refers to the defilements that cause disturbance everywhere with regard to beings and events. As to the word foulness, this refers to access concentration and attainment concentration by means of a bloated corpse and so on. With regard to the bloated corpse etc. , the development of the meditation on foulness has been explained in detail in the Visuddhimagga. As to the word attachment, this is attachment with regard to the five objects of sensual pleasure. As to the expression, perception of impermanence, this refers to perception that arises together with contemplation of impermanence. Or, just insight; although this is not perception, it is called perception because it is under the heading of perception. As to the words ³conceit of I am², this is conceit of ³I am² in materiality and so on. **** Nina. 27402 From: nina van gorkom Date: Wed Nov 26, 2003 10:29am Subject: Re: [dsg] Vism. XIV 37, one kamma producing more fruits. Hi Larry, Thispart of the Tiika is in a complicated laguage, and it deals with speculations at that time which are refuted. I do not like the translation of attabhava as selfhood, prefer individuality. As to should be differentiation of the cause, kaara.navisesassa. I can follow the Pali, but I shall not spend too much time on these notes that deal with refutations. Here and there I shall render a part. See below. op 10-11-2003 02:45 schreef LBIDD@w... op LBIDD@w...: 14. 'Here the first-mentioned characteristic of the eye is described according to the kamma that produces a selfhood, and is common to all of it, and this without touching on differentiation is the cause. Larry: The way I read this, the gist of the commentary (note 14) is that the > eye arises because of kamma that produces all the senses or because of > kamma that produces just the eye. The kamma that produces the eye is the > desire to see and the kamma that produces all the senses _incorporates_ > the desire to see. Is that your interpretation of this note? N: I cannot make out much of it, just that people asked whether one kamma can produce more fruits, and it can. L: Also, does this mean we get whatever we desire? N: It solely depends on intricate conditions. There are conditions of the past, we were also in the past pursuing sense objects, and this is a condition that kamma produced our rebirth in a sensuous plane and produced the sense organs so that we can experience sense objects again and again. Nina. 27403 From: nina van gorkom Date: Wed Nov 26, 2003 10:29am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re:object of awareness, 2 Hi Howard, Important issue again. op 24-11-2003 14:13 schreef upasaka@a... op upasaka@a...:> ============================= > I've been thinking over this matter, Nina, and I think I've come to > the nub of my position. It seems to me that experiencing something *as an > object* is only one way of experiencing a thing. In particular, the difference > is > most easily seen with regard to feelings and emotions. There is a difference > between being angry and experiencing anger as an object, there is a difference > between being happy and experincing happiness as an object, and there is a > difference between experiencing a taste or touch etc as pleasant and > experincing > that pleasantness as an object. This difference is the difference between a > "participatory" or non-dual (oh, oh! ;-) mode of experiencing and the > subject-object mode. N:As you say, There is a difference > between being angry and experiencing anger as an object. Anger is angry, it is an experience. What does it experience? Not nothing, an object. The object of anger, whatever it may be, an unpleasant sound, or an event, a story. Anger is not rupa which does not experience anything. As to experiencing anger as an object, a citta arising shortly afterwards can take the previous anger as object, it is still "present". Here is some Abhdidhamma: anger, dosa, is a cetasika. Cetasika arises together with citta and experiences the same object as the citta it accompanies. Feeling arises together with a citta and experiences the same object as the citta. All cetasikas experience, but they experience the object they share with citta each in their own way. Feeling experiences the flavour of the object, thus, it experiences the object. There are two kinds of realities in our life: one kind experiences, and one kind does not experience anything. Nama and rupa, and they have different characteristics. Gradually we can get used to their characteristics, we do not have to name them. There may be conditions for a "participatory mode of experience", but what is that? We are taken in, asbsorbed by the object, and may identify ourselves with it, take it for self. The Abhidhamma helps us to become detached from the object. Detachment is the goal. I do not see the Abhidhamma as promoting a subject object mode (don't let Dan know about the words subject-object!). Subject-object is too loaded for me. Object, in Pali aaramma.na:means foundation, support, a basis for the working of citta and cetasikas. This analysing may not appeal to you, but, I like to stress again, it is for the practice. Abhidhamma is for practice. We all can remind ourselves that we should know and detach, let go immediately. I appreciate such reminders from A. Sujin. Nina. P.S. What is reification? It is not in my dictionary. 27404 From: christine_forsyth Date: Wed Nov 26, 2003 10:45am Subject: Re: [dsg] Pure Mind/Buddha Nature Hello to all in the Luminous Mind corner, Though not able to join in the discussion, I am reading your posts with interest. I am not sure if this article entitled "Luminous Mind" by Bhante Henepola Gunaratana is familiar to people. For what it's worth, it can be found at: http://www.gbvihara.org/Luminousmind.htm metta and peace, Christine ---The trouble is that you think you have time --- --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@a... wrote: 27405 From: christine_forsyth Date: Wed Nov 26, 2003 11:25am Subject: Re: Cetasikas As Designers Or Helpers ( 04 ) Dear Htoo Naing, (Nina) and all, Thank you for your posts on 'Cetasikas as Designers and Helpers'. Sometimes the mention of cetasikas in posts to the Lists, or in Nina's book "Cetasikas", makes it seem to me as if they are descriptions of "strong" flavours in a mind moment. A while ago, I was surprised to be told that what I thought was my 'good mannered' deferring to the superior knowledge of others in a group, as compared to my own beginning understanding, was merely a form of omaana (inferiority conceit). I learned that there existed superiority conceit (atimaana) and equality conceit (maana) as well. If 'comparing' is conceit, does this mean that any recognition of difference between self and other is conceit? I think that it is easy to recognise dosa (anger) when it is strong enough to kill or harm, but I wonder what are some very subtle examples of dosa, lobha, and moha? And the purpose of learning about cetasikas - it's helping us to see the utter anatta-ness of everything? ... just checking .. metta and peace, Christine ---The trouble is that you think you have time --- --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "htootintnaing" wrote: > Dear Dhamma Friends, > > After Permanent Ministers and Flexible Ministers ( Cetasikas ) have > been described, here Destructive Ministers will be delineated. They > destroy the place they home. They put the king Citta into an ugly > portrait. <<>> 27406 From: nordwest Date: Wed Nov 26, 2003 10:55am Subject: Re: [dsg] Photos I think it 's a good idea. When looking at young and old pictures of us, we should always reflect, "Who am I?" Am I this baby, or this kids, of this teenager. or the young man, or the middle aged man, or the old man? We were all once, and we will find that we are none of that, but something completely different. Gassho, Thomas christine_forsyth wrote: Hello Thomas, :-) Thanks for adding your contribution to the Members album, welcome! - it's great to see your happy, friendly face, and I hope it may spur others (new members, long-time members, and returning members) to similar action. Maybe some long-time members might like to update their original photos, perhaps they've finally found that elusive print that shows their 'best' side? - and surely the Dalthorp and Kirkpatrick kids have grown a bit by now?! Another thought - Andrew, has Smokey Joe lost any weight yet? I'm bringing the tape measure this weekend ... :-) metta and peace, Christine ---The trouble is that you think you have time --- 27407 From: nordwest Date: Wed Nov 26, 2003 11:03am Subject: Re: [dsg] Cetasikas As Designers Or Helpers ( 04 ) Dear Htoo Naing, I hope this is not a stupid question, do you think that Hitler, Dshinghis Khan etc. was such Destructives Ministers? Metta, Thomas htootintnaing wrote:Dear Dhamma Friends, After Permanent Ministers and Flexible Ministers ( Cetasikas ) have been described, here Destructive Ministers will be delineated. They destroy the place they home. They put the king Citta into an ugly portrait. 1. Moha He is the leader for all Akusala Cetasikas.It is also called '' Avijja '' that is the opposite of '' Vijja ''( Panna ). All the destructive minds are led by him. It veils the real things and the truth. So, Satta with it will never see real Dhamma. Instead it leads to all the destructive actions. It veils Citta not to see the truth. Then Moha-mounted Citta can do any bad thing with backing of Moha. <.......> 27408 From: Date: Wed Nov 26, 2003 3:16pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Sabhava, Paramattha, Abhidhamma (was: Buddhaghosa..) Hi, Michael - In a message dated 11/26/2003 11:52:39 AM Eastern Standard Time, mbeisert@h... writes: > I prefer the > position taken by Nyanaponika Thera in his book Abhidhamma > Studies which is > very similar to what you are saying. ========================== Yes, that pleased me as well. With metta, Howard 27409 From: Date: Wed Nov 26, 2003 4:01pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Sabhava, Paramattha, Abhidhamma (was: Buddhaghosa..) Michael: "the use of paramatha dhammas to characterize the aggregates only reinforces the realism/substantialism criticism towards the Abhidhamma." Hi Michael, The main difference I see between abhidhamma and madhyamika is that in abhidhamma emptiness is revealed by impermanence. This results in a devaluation of the object and the consequent end of desire for the object. In madhyamika emptiness is revealed in the fabricated nature of the object. This actually enhances the value of the object. Emptiness IS nibbana, the end of suffering. There is no turning away from the world. Life is beautiful. However, because suffering is seen as merely conceptual there can be a problem with ethics. For this reason training in madhyamika is secret. Only given to those who have a comprehensive background in wisely working only for the benefit of others and also accompanied by intensive training in samma samadhi. Larry 27410 From: Date: Wed Nov 26, 2003 4:08pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re:object of awareness, 2 Hi, Nina - In a message dated 11/26/2003 1:29:44 PM Eastern Standard Time, nilo@e... writes: > > Hi Howard, > Important issue again. > op 24-11-2003 14:13 schreef upasaka@a... op upasaka@a...:> > ============================= > > I've been thinking over this matter, Nina, and I think I've come to > > the nub of my position. It seems to me that experiencing something *as an > > object* is only one way of experiencing a thing. In particular, the difference > > is > > most easily seen with regard to feelings and emotions. There is a difference > > between being angry and experiencing anger as an object, there is a difference > > between being happy and experincing happiness as an object, and there is a > > difference between experiencing a taste or touch etc as pleasant and > > experincing > > that pleasantness as an object. This difference is the difference between a > > "participatory" or non-dual (oh, oh! ;-) mode of experiencing and the > > subject-object mode. > N:As you say, There is a difference > > between being angry and experiencing anger as an object. > Anger is angry, it is an experience. What does it experience? Not nothing, > an object. The object of anger, whatever it may be, an unpleasant sound, or > an event, a story. Anger is not rupa which does not experience anything. As > to experiencing anger as an object, a citta arising shortly afterwards can > take the previous anger as object, it is still "present". ---------------------------- Howard: I almost agree with what you say in the foregoing. Anger *is* an experience. But, as an experience, I consider it to be a nondual one. -------------------------------- > Here is some Abhdidhamma: anger, dosa, is a cetasika. Cetasika arises > together with citta and experiences the same object as the citta it > accompanies. Feeling arises together with a citta and experiences the same > object as the citta. ------------------------------- Howard: I do *not* see anger as taking an object, but as an experience arising in response to discerning an object. It is, indeed, *associated* with that object, but anger is not a knowing, vi~n~nana is. When we speak of "the object of ones's anger," what is meant is that object whose discerning resulted in anger and with which the anger is associated by the mind - it is what one is angry *about*. The anger arising with regard to an object does not co-occur with the discerning of that object. From contact with an object, feeling follows (dependent on that contact), and what one feels one obsesses about, and then anger may arise. As far as the suttas are concerned this is basic Buddhism it seems to me. First comes the contact, later the feeling, still later the reaction of craving or aversion. ------------------------ All cetasikas experience, but they experience the > object they share with citta each in their own way. Feeling experiences the > flavour of the object, thus, it experiences the object. > There are two kinds of realities in our life: one kind experiences, and one > kind does not experience anything. Nama and rupa, and they have different > characteristics. Gradually we can get used to their characteristics, we do > not have to name them. > There may be conditions for a "participatory mode of experience", but what > is that? We are taken in, asbsorbed by the object, and may identify > ourselves with it, take it for self. ------------------------------ Howard: That is a different story, and it is not what I mean by "participatory experience". There are two different ways to experience pleasantness, and only one of them is as an object. Moreover, I know from personal experience that the participatory mode of experiencing is possible more generally than as regards affective states: it is in effect whenever there is no sense of self. ----------------------------- The Abhidhamma helps us to become > detached from the object. Detachment is the goal. > I do not see the Abhidhamma as promoting a subject object mode (don't let > Dan know about the words subject-object!). Subject-object is too loaded for > me. > Object, in Pali aaramma.na:means foundation, support, a basis for the > working of citta and cetasikas. ------------------------------ Howard: That's too general for the context we are discussing, as I see it. Concentration is a basis and support for wisdom - that doesn't make concentration the object of wisdom. ----------------------------- > This analysing may not appeal to you, but, I like to stress again, it is for > the practice. Abhidhamma is for practice. ----------------------------- Howard: Naaah! It's for learned conversations, Nina! ;-)) More seriously, I do find elements of Abhidhamma useful as a framework to think about some aspects of the Dhamma, but I don't put anywhere near the same stock in it as you. but, then, you knew that! ;-)) ----------------------------- We all can remind ourselves that > we should know and detach, let go immediately. I appreciate > such reminders > from A. Sujin. ---------------------------- Howard: Yay!! Complete agreement! :-) ---------------------------- > Nina. > P.S. What is reification? It is not in my dictionary. --------------------------- Howard: It is mental "thing making". It mentally creates a separate, self-existent entity where none exists. What is the case is that "internal" reification amounts to I-making, which is something that all Buddhists, but most especially the Theravadins, get upset about, and "external" reification is the primary b^ete noir of the Mahayanists. My take on the matter is that the Buddha had no use for either. =========================== With metta, Howard 27411 From: Michael Beisert Date: Wed Nov 26, 2003 5:12pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Sabhava, Paramattha, Abhidhamma (was: Buddhaghosa..) Hello Larry, Larry: The main difference I see between abhidhamma and madhyamika…. Michael: I appreciate your analysis but don’t feel that I am quite prepared to have a deep debate about those philosophical differences. It is a very controversial subject which could keep us busy for the rest of our lives. And frankly I suspect the others in the list would have little interest as well. I think the Abhidhamma devoid of any substantialist connotations is an excellent tool. I prefer to discard the commentaries of the Abhidhamma that focus on paramatha dhamma and sabhava and to side with Nyanaponika Thera in his assessment of the Abhidhamma: “Now, in what sense can the Abhidhamma be called a philosophy? Let us make a rough division of philosophy into phenomenology and ontology, and briefly characterize them as follows: Phenomenology deals, as the name implies, with "phenomena," that is, with the world of internal and external experience. Ontology, or metaphysics, inquires into the existence and nature of an essence, or ultimate principle, underlying the phenomenal world. In other words, phenomenology investigates the questions: What happens in the world of our experience? How does it happen? Of course, when inquiring into the "what" and "how," philosophy is not satisfied with the surface view of reality as it presents itself to the naive and uncritical mind. Ontology, on the other hand, insists, at least in most of its systems, that the question "how" cannot be answered without reference to an eternal essence behind reality, whether conceived as immanent or transcendent. Particularly in the latter case the question "how" is frequently changed into a "why," containing the tacit assumption that the answer has to be sought somewhere or somehow outside of the given reality. The Abhidhamma doubtlessly belongs to the first of these two divisions of philosophy, that is, to phenomenology.” Metta Michael 27412 From: kenhowardau Date: Wed Nov 26, 2003 7:22pm Subject: Re: Hang-ups, khandhas and crocs......deep breath Dear Sarah and James, --------------- S: > You were worried you might have missed a post concerning Azita's qu on the `positioning' of the khandhas. <...> I wrote recently: http://www.escribe.com/religion/dhammastudygroup/m22944.h tml ------------------- Thank you. As I suspected, it was a post which I had mentally marked, "come back and read this again more carefully." And the rest is history. -------------------- S: > We learn about our great attachment to rupas, vedana (feelings), sanna (perception). There would be no kilesa (defilements) without rupas, vedana and sanna marking the objects for example. -------------------- Yes, I think I see the significance. Changing the subject slightly: sankhara-khandhas are sometimes called 'volitional formations;' (Volition is among their number and so, I suppose, they are all volitional.) Are sanna and vedana any less volitional than the other cetasikas? -------------------- S: > On anapanasati - that post of Jon's which Nina re- sent is a pretty neat summary (imho) if you're still on your surf-board up until departure and Andrew is still giving you trouble;-) ------------------ Yes, I have already come across that post in a couple of places. Along with others like it, it is just too good to leave out of my summary. In fact, I have been spending so much time on Nina's explanation of why the sutta and commentaries are important, that I haven't quite got around to the sutta and commentary quotes themselves. (Oh what a give-away!) ------------------ S: > This is also such a clear description of the `Body in the Body' from a recent post of Nina's with reminders again of the plaintain trunk - no hidden `thingy' or lasting essence inside: Nina: >Contemplating the Body in the Body: now we go to the Co to Satipatthana Sutta --------------------------------- I have made a note of that too, somewhere. I will read it again, soon, with a quiet mind (so to speak). At the moment, I have too many facts spinning in my head. Let this be a lesson to you: preparation of discussion papers (and other thingys), should not be put off until the last minute. ---------------- . . . S: > What did that have to do with khandhas? Well everything that was just experienced while you read the tale consisted of the khandhas to be known;-) Actually, I was just `bonding' with all of you in Qld. Have fun and report back. Metta, Sarah ------------- Thanks, but you are already bonded with us -- there is no need to appear croc-savvy. :-) -------------- S: > p.s MN117-Mahacattarika. Very helpful comments you made. I think the `right understanding' `that has blemishes and so ripens to clinging' refers to direct understanding, not just intellectual. Mundane panna, followed by kilesa including attachment as opposed to supramundance panna. Any other comments or commentary notes here? --------------- I'm sure you're right. What swayed me the other way was the term, "ripens to." It seemed to mean more than "can be taken as an object of." Isn't it the case that no volitional action, that occurs with satipatthana, can condition (ripen to), rebirth (of the five aggregates of clinging)? Ignore that question if it is incomprehensible, I might have my wires crossed. Thanks for your feedback on that post and thanks, too, to James who also kindly responded. I spent hours, James, (literally hours), on my response to your post but couldn't sort my ideas out. With this reminder, I will try again and post it ready or not. Kind regards, Ken H 27413 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Wed Nov 26, 2003 9:38pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Pure Mind/Buddha Nature Hi Michael I know you will ask that :) cheers. Bhavanga citta is deep sleep. Firstly you have to understand the thought process in Abdhidhamma. For eg: we can only be mindful of a pain only after the pain is experience (i.e. since only one object at a time is being cognize, therefore mindfullness is only possible after it has happened as it is another object) Hence we can be mindful of it. In this sense, the whole spectrum of consciouness, we must be mindful - then there is a development of the mind. You said there is no reference in Satipatthana on this, isn't bhavanga citta also a consciousness. it is impt to note bhavanga citta bc it covers 3 out of 17 in a thought process (that is about 18%) rgds Ken O 27414 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Wed Nov 26, 2003 9:59pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Pure Mind/Buddha Nature Hi Howard > I see this matter differently. On the one hand there is > "Luminous,monks, is the mind. And it is defiled by incoming defilements," and on the other hand there is "Luminous, monks, is the mind. And it is freed from incoming defilements." Whether covered by adventitious defilements (as a blackboard is covered by chalk dust or a mirror by dust), or whether it is not so covered, luminous is the mind. The point here, as I see it, is that the defilements do not inhere in the mind as essential characteristics. The mind is luminous one way or the other, and "development" is actually a process of removal, of sweeping away the dust of defilements, leaving the already pure mirror-mind to properly reflect reality. When there is gold ore, the base metals are the base metals, and the gold is the gold, and the process of obtaining gold from the ore is a process of removing the adventitious metals, leaving the gold to be seen as it actually is and was. k: Howard: This position looks like the position that the mind is originally pure which sounds like an essentialism perspective. Bhavanga citta is more appropriate bc it is impermenant and anatta and it reduce the possiblility of an essentialism perspective. Furthermore in Abdhidhamma thought process - bhavanga citta is the start of a sense process, hence it will be either be defile or not. > I also see no reason whatsoever to interpret "Luminous, > monks, is the mind" as referring to a particular type of mindstate, especially one that was never taught by the Buddha in any discourse. There is nothing in the sutta to even hint at such a meaning. k: Yes you are right, you cant find this in any sutta. As I explain earlier to you, there is no way Abdhidhamma going to find concrete material proof for its existence in the Sutta except for inference to it. rgds Ken O 27415 From: nordwest Date: Wed Nov 26, 2003 10:36pm Subject: Why shouldn't we do what pleases us, when there is noone who is? Why shouldn't we do what pleases us, when there is noone who is? Non-daulistic teachings say, that there is no personal Self, we are one with all that is, but we think we are an individual being, which is the wandering process of mind, namely the Thinking, or an illusion. Of course the next question in this topic would be, "Fine, so doing a faulty deed is also an illusion?" - Yes, it is. Totally. Noone is been harmed, because there is noone. It is all a mind-construct. Next question: So why does it even count if I steal, kill, talk or think faulty etc.?" - The answer is, "It does matter in our mind! We instantly think of a common reactions to our deeds. The reaction arises from ourselves, our individual pattern of reactional thinking. It is our mind which reacts greatly to everything, not the world itself, which is empty [not-existing] in it self. - Just think of it as in the movie The Matrix. A great buddhist movie, reality is like that, only that our mind takes the place of the machine-beings. So any faulty deed matters only as long as you haven't won control over this Matrix, as long as you are not enlightened. Until then, every evil deed makes to transmigrate in various states of existences, may they be fortunate or less fortunate in accordance to to deeds (and thoughts) only. A faulty thought is as bad as a faulty deed, there is hardly any difference. Killing and stealing is faulty, there is no way around it. The only thing that can save oneself from transmigrating in unfortunate states is compassion and unconditional love. Those "simple" tools are helpful and create a field of wisdom over time, a field where enlightenment becomes more likely. Yours in the Matrix ;0) Thomas 27416 From: Sarah Date: Thu Nov 27, 2003 0:47am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Buddhaghosa(Suan): To Robert and Michael Hi James, --- buddhatrue wrote: > James: That's okay. Honestly, I was hoping for a breather and that > you had dropped the issue after my last post, but I should have known > better! ;-). Sarah, you are going to exhaust me! ;-))) .... Hope it’s not that bad.....threads are never dead as far as I’m concerned;-)) ..... > James: Yea, the best posts are those that agree! ;-) Seriously, my > posts have been better because I have been using references out the > yin yang…even Pali! Yuck. It is too much; I am not pleased with > myself. I need to lurk more and write less; meditate/practice > mindfulness more and search references less. Don't want to lose good > accumulations through poor choices.;-) .... ;-) Actually, I wasn’t referring to any agreement, but you know this. In appreciation of the ‘kusala’ at work. (That means it’s good;-)). .... > James: Buddhaghosa wrote, "In some instances this path of > purification is taught by insight alone…" Notice the word `alone'. > You are stating the exact opposite of what Buddhaghosa wrote. ..... I appreciate that it may sound like this. However, this refers to the development of the path and realization of nibbana by insight without jhanas as basis, i.e dry-visioned (sukkha-vipassaka). ~Naa.namoli gives this quote from the commentary to the Visuddhimagga (Pm 9-10) to the first reference of ‘insight alone’: >”The words ‘insight alone’ are meant to exclude, not virtue, etc, but serenity (i.e jhana), which is the opposite number in the pair, serenity and insight. This is for emphasis. But the word ‘alone’ actually excludes only that concentration with distinction [of jhana]; for concentration is classed as both access and absorption (see ch 1V, 32). Taking this stanza as the teaching for one whose vehicle is insight does not imply that there is no concentration; for no insight comes about without momentary concentration. And again, insight should be understood as the three contemplations of impermanence, pain, and not-self; not contemplation of impermanence alone’.” < ***** In other words, as you described in your previous post, the eightfold path factors are all developed together, but by conditions, there are variations, such as in jhana development. .... <...> > Sarah: I accept that you and other writers may read passages in a > different light. > > James: That is good because I don't think we are ever going to agree > on this. If you can explain to me how Buddhaghosa didn't really > mean `alone' when he wrote `alone', by only using what is in context > (not additional sources), maybe we can agree. ..... Well, I did give the Tiika (sub-commentary) source. Throughout the texts, including suttas, we read about the pairing or yoking of serenity and insight. We also read about ways of enlightenment such as in AN, Bk of 4s, so I understood the reference to ‘insight alone’ in just this way. Now we’ve started with this first section of the Visuddhimagga, you might like to post the next section from RobertK’s website for further discussion;-) Metta, Sarah ====== 27417 From: Sarah Date: Thu Nov 27, 2003 1:29am Subject: Re: [dsg] Pure Mind/Buddha Nature Hi Michael, Thanks for continuing with this difficult subject: --- Michael Beisert wrote: > Michael: > OK. But lets look again at what the sutta says. In parts: > > ‘Luminous is the mind,’ > So, based on the commentaries this refers to bhavanga citta in a state > of > deep sleep, and bhavanga is pure and luminous. (bhavanga is experiencing > the > rebirth object which was defiled and therefore how can bhavanga be pure > if > it is experiencing a defiled object?) ..... It is not the objects which are 'defiled' but certain kinds of consciousness. The defilements are the cetasikas which accompany the javana cittas. They can take any object, as I'm discussing with Victor. For example, attachment to jhana cittas or objects. The present attachment is the defilement. As I discussed with Ken O, of course the anusayas (latent tendencies) are still 'carried' by all cittas until eradicated, even the 'pure' ones. .... > > ‘and it is freed from incoming defilements’ > So, the sutta refers to ‘it’ which has to be the same mind as before, or > > bhavanga citta. And ‘freed from incoming defilements’ means development > – > bhavana. Therefore the question is: how is the development of bhavanga > citta. .... So, based on the commentaries again (;-)), it refers to the bhavanga citta(s) and it is: “‘Freed’: because of wholesomeness arising at the time of impulsion, without being passionate, hateful or deluded, and because consciousness is accompanied by three wholesome roots, accompanied by wisdom, and thus it is indeed freed of the arising of oncoming defilements.” No development of bhavanga cittas. ‘Freedom’ is the eradication of the unwholesome cittas arising in the javana process andit is the gradual development which leads to this. > Michael: > Yeah, I know that MahaKaccana is considered the father of exegesis in > Theravada but Bhikkhu Bodhi was referring to commentaries on the > Abhidhamma, > not commentaries in general. It is the first time I hear that Abhidhamma > was > recited in the first council. Were does that come from? ..... I’ll sign off and add the most recent letter on this topic which Nina sent to Icaro, quoting some of my comments. (He raised exactly the same point as you - perhaps it’s the Brazilian water - just kidding;-)). I'm not meaning to opt out,(well, maybe somewhat), but you have raised all the BIG issues at one hit and some in the same post, like here;-) I’d be grateful if you’d read it, maybe follow the links and let me know anything else you’d like us to consider. I’m also happy to continue discussing the luminous thread, so let me know how it’s going and thanks again for your comments and tough questions, Michael. Metta, Sarah http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/24626 Subject: Re: [dsg]Abhidhamma dating. Dear Icaro, There are many posts on the subject of the dating of the Abhidhamma. I shall repost part of what Sarah wrote: see below. op 26-08-2003 15:13 schreef icaro franca op icarofranca@y...: > Putting aside legends, the Abdhidhamma was > written circa 300 years after Buddha´s Parinibbana. > It seems a resumed text-book (The Vibbhanga IS a > text-book or primer at its strucutre!)of all dialogs, > meditations, visions, reasonings (dreams and muttering > too!)of the Sangha in all that golden years of Buddha > preaching. Nina quotes posts from Sarah: Nina: The word of the Buddha, the Dhamma and the Vinaya as taught by him, consists of nine divisions which are: Sutta, Geyya, Veyyåkaraùa, Gåthå, Udåna, Itivuttaka, Jåtaka, Abbhuta and Vedalla. See the ‘Expositor’, Atthasåliní, Introductory Discourse, 26. The teachings as compiled (not yet written) literature are thus enumerated in the scriptures as nine divisions, for example in the ‘Middle Length Sayings’ I, no. 22. (Majjhima Nikaya, you can find it in your down load.) Sutta, geyya, etc. are nine divisions (angas) of the Tipitaka, and of these: Veyyåkaraùa or ‘Exposition’ includes the Abhidhamma Piìaka, the suttas without verses, and the words of the Buddha which are not included in the other eight divisions. Post from Sarah: Also from Sarah: QUOTE ***** "The Abhidhamma was in existence during The Buddha’s time. This can be proved from the following passages in the Book of Discipline, vol 111: a)"p.415 "Not given leave means: without asking (for permission). Should ask a question means: if, having asked for leave in regard to Suttanta, she asks about discipline or about Abhidhamma, there is an offence of expiation. If, having asked for leave in regard to Abhidhamm, shes asks about Suttanta or about Discipline, there is an offence of expiation." b) "p.42 "There is no offence if, not desiring to disparage, he speaks, saying: "Look here, do you master suttantas or verses or what is extra to dhamma (i.e. Abhidhamma)and afterwards you will master discipline’; if he is mad, if he is the first wrong-doer." "These passages clearly show that Abhidhamma was in existence during The Buddha’s time because rules about it were laid down by Him. c)"Also in Middle Length Sayings 1, p.270.....Gosinga sal-wood.......Further dhamma...*....Mogallana is a talker on dhamma** Footnotes * "It is Abhidhamma and it is specifically stated in the Burmese Editions.... ** "Moggallana is called chief of those of psychic power, Ai,23. MA ii,256 explains that abhidhamma-men, having come to knowledge of subtle points, having increased their vision, can achieve a supermundane state’. Non-abhidhamma-men get muddled between ‘own doctrine’(sakavaada) and ‘other doctrine’ (paravaada)." d)"Again, at the time The Buddha returned to Sankassanagara from Tavatimsa, the realm of 33 gods, Sariputta, in Sariputta Sutta, unttered the following in praise of The Buddha: "Erst have I never seen Nor heard of one with voice So sweet as his who came From Tusita to teach." (Suttanipata verse No 955, transl by E.M. Hare, p.139) ...... "This verse is also found in Mahaniddesa (Sixth Synod, p.386), where there is a detailed commentary on it. The following is the commentary on the first line: "At the time The Buddha, after having resided for the period of Lent on the Pandukambala Stone at the foot of the Coral tree in Tavatimsa, came down to Sankassanagara.......... "When Sariputta, based on the methods given by The Buddha, preached Abhidhamma to his pupils, The Buddha not only stated that He had expounded the Abhidhamma in Tavatimsa but also narrated this Sariputta Sutta to be left behind as evidence of having done so for the later generations. The Mahaniddesa was included in the Three Councils.> ***** Note:The Bahiranidana is the intro to the Co of the Vinaya by Buddhaghosa. You will have your hands full. I quote these passages because I find that there are many misunderstandings about the dating of the Abhidhamma. This subject comes up all the time, as you will see. And see this one from Sarah today: <“But in the list [of four things] beginning with sutta, sutta means the three baskets which the three Councils recited. ‘Accordance with sutta’ means legitimate by being in accord [with what is explicitly legitimate]. ‘The word of a teacher’ means the commentary.> N: Thus three Baskets, not two. Abhidhamma is included. Nina. ============================================= 27418 From: buddhatrue Date: Thu Nov 27, 2003 2:07am Subject: Re: Buddhaghosa(Suan): To Robert and Michael --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Sarah wrote: > Hi James, Hi Sarah, I am not convinced by a commentary, written by ~Naa.namoli, that states to the extent, "Well, Buddhaghosa didn't really mean `alone' when he wrote `alone', this is what he really meant…". Remember, I asked for in-text support, no outside sources. It is up to Buddhaghosa to explain what he means, not anyone else. It wouldn't have been that difficult, all he would have had to do is written, "In some instances this path of purification is taught by insight as the leading factor." What is so difficult about that? It wouldn't require paragraphs and paragraphs of explanation. Instead he chose to write "alone". I believe there is a reason he chose to write it this way, which I will get to later in this post. And then looking carefully at this commentary, it states that there is often the pairing of insight and concentration and that is what Buddhaghosa was referring to when he wrote `alone'. But even then he didn't really mean alone, he meant without the jhanas, because access concentration is of course necessary. What??? This is pure doublespeak. It is semantic juggling to explain what Buddhaghosa should have written. You write, "We also read about ways of enlightenment such as in AN, Bk of 4s, so I understood the reference to `insight alone' in just this way." Okay, so I am to understand that you knew he meant without the jhanas when he wrote alone, what about the rest of the values he lists? As I previously explained, Buddhaghosa sets up a definitive structure of parallelism* in this introduction where the criteria of `alone' doesn't just apply to insight, it also applies to: jhana and understanding, deeds, virtue, foundations of mindfulness, and efforts. Buddhaghosa sees this as a problem, a question that needs to be answered- Which of these is the path to purification? -so he concludes, "But in the answer to this question it is taught by virtue and the other two." To me, he has created a problem, a question, where none existed, just so that he could answer it…but the answer was there all along. In order to create this question he separated those values, he created different paths to purification, and used sutta quotes as support. Again, I am only looking at what he wrote. I believe that he does state that there are different paths to purification, even though they only really exist in an idealized state, but decides on what he considers to be the one, true path. Metta, James *parallelism: Similarity of construction or meaning of clauses placed side by side, especially clauses expressing the same sentiment with slight modifications… http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=parallelism 27419 From: Sarah Date: Thu Nov 27, 2003 2:17am Subject: Re: [dsg] Sabhava, Paramattha, Abhidhamma (was: Buddhaghosa..) Hi Michael, This post is a little more problematic (for me) as I feel I may be about to step into a mine field.....Thankfully, others far more qualified like Howard and Larry have come in to help with the end of your post where I may have been treading on toes (apologies if so). .... --- Michael Beisert wrote: > Hello Sarah, > Michael: > Explain to me please, all cittas, cetasikas and rupas described in the > Abhidhamma of the Pali Tipitaka are exaustive? I mean do they explain > all > that should be comprehended as paramattha dhamma (ultimate realities). > Could > there be anything missing? Could there be too much, i.e things that are > not > paramatha but have been included? ..... Certainly exhaustive of anything we or anyone else could ever need to know. Yes, all that should be comprehended as paramattha dhammas without any exceptions. For your last question, it depends on your meaning. Concepts are also used to convey meanings about paramattha dhammas. Michael, rather than too much or too little, I think the important thing is the understanding when we read any part of the Tipitaka. As Ken O put it so well in a recent post: ..... >k: Maybe at this point of time, I like to clarify that Abhidamma is not just a scholaristic view of the dhammas which I have in the first instance when I first met it last two years ago. Abhidhamma has it strength in looking at dhamma with the anatta and anicca perspective which cannot be seen or match in any else in any Buddhist book that I have read. Its practicality is only known when we start using it. It is useless without practise bc it was meant for practise. Let me emphasis it again and again, Abhidamma is meant to help us to practise and not otherwise. I am one living example of the fruits of Abhidamma study that provide insight into many of my studies of Buddhist even though I have to admit that I study less than others. In fact I not an avid Abhidhamm studist (in fact I am quite lazy, I rely mostly on pple here to tell me). <...> k: Another impression of Abdhammaist study, is that its interpretations are sometimes very different from the mindset that we derived from our understanding through the study of sutta. I think it is natural, bc we always have our so called comfort arena. If those I find those not acceptable, I will just leave it while those acceptable, I learn it. Everyone of us here got our own liking of practise, .....<..> ***** M: > Second, are there other Abhidhammas from other Buddhist schools? In case yes, do they have exactly the same paramattha dhamma? In case no, do you know if there is a reason for only existing the Pali Abhidhamma? .... I think Howard has answered this and your other questions. Reading B.Bodhi’s comments in context, he’s clearly indicating the distinction between paramatha dhammas as opposed to conventional truths. The former do not depend on ‘conceptual processing’ but arise as a result of numerous conditions and have characteristics which can be directly known. Trust me, you can find some examples in the archives where I don’t agree with BB’s comments, especially when his comments diverge from the commentaries. In the example you gave however, in context, I agree with his point if not the particular choice of words. On the dating of the commentaries, BB writes in the intro: “....a great deal of the canonical Abhidhamma seems to require the Commentaries to contribute the unifying context in which the individual elements hang together as parts of a systematic whole and without which they lose important dimensions of meaning. It is thus not unreasonable to assume that a substantial portion of the commentarial apparatus originated in close proximity to the canonical Abhidhamma and was transmitted concurrently with the latter, though lacking the stamp of finality it was open to modification and amplification in a way that the canonical texts were not.” Metta, Sarah > PS: I will see what I can do about the pictures. Is there only one photo > album? Can you pls. provide the link:) .... Many thanks in advance - left hand side. member album: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup =================================== 27420 From: buddhatrue Date: Thu Nov 27, 2003 2:55am Subject: Re: Sabhava, Paramattha, Abhidhamma (was: Buddhaghosa..) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Michael Beisert" wrote: Michael: > I appreciate your analysis but don't feel that I am quite prepared to have a > deep debate about those philosophical differences. It is a very > controversial subject which could keep us busy for the rest of our lives. > And frankly I suspect the others in the list would have little interest as > well. I think the Abhidhamma devoid of any substantialist connotations is an > excellent tool. I prefer to discard the commentaries of the Abhidhamma that > focus on paramatha dhamma and sabhava and to side with Nyanaponika Thera in > his assessment of the Abhidhamma: Hi Michael, Though in my heart of hearts I would like the Abhidhamma to be phenomenological, since then it could be of some value to me, I don't see how it can be viewed that way. It contains endless lists and classifications of phenomena, most of which cannot be experienced first hand by the unenlightened, supposedly. It has to be taken on faith that they describe actual reality. Nyanatiloka Mahathera described it as "Ten valleys of dry bones." It is more like a pseudo- science textbook than a means to understand phenomena. Metta, James 27421 From: buddhatrue Date: Thu Nov 27, 2003 3:04am Subject: Re: Hang-ups, khandhas and crocs......deep breath --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "kenhowardau" wrote: > Dear Sarah and James, > Thanks for your feedback on that post and thanks, too, to > James who also kindly responded. I spent hours, James, > (literally hours), on my response to your post but > couldn't sort my ideas out. With this reminder, I will > try again and post it ready or not. > > Kind regards, > Ken H Hi Ken H, Hmmm...you definitely have my attention now! ;-) And curiosity piqued. I eagerly await the post. Metta, James 27422 From: htootintnaing Date: Thu Nov 27, 2003 3:34am Subject: Re: Cetasikas As Designers Or Helpers ( 04 ) Dear Christine and Dhamma Friends, There have been many posts on the topic '' Mana ''. Here are my inline text replies to Christine's queries. May you all be free from Mana With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing ------------------------------ --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "christine_forsyth" wrote: > Dear Htoo Naing, (Nina) and all, > Thank you for your posts on 'Cetasikas as Designers and Helpers'. ----------------------------------------------------------- Christine : Sometimes the mention of cetasikas in posts to the Lists, or in Nina's book "Cetasikas", makes it seem to me as if they are descriptions of "strong" flavours in a mind moment. --------------------------------------------------- Htoo : I feel like that as you mentioned, Christine. They are different flavours of mind moments. But, if the word flavour is used for Cetasikas, this may show up Cetasikas are favourable tastes without which there will be tasteless. ---------------------------------------------------- >A while ago, I was surprised to be told that what I thought was >my 'good mannered' deferring to the superior knowledge of others in >a group, as compared to my own beginning understanding, was merely a >form of omaana (inferiority conceit). I learned that there existed >superiority conceit (atimaana) and equality conceit (maana) as well. ------------------------------------------------------- Christine : If 'comparing' is conceit, does this mean that any recognition of difference between self and other is conceit? ------------------------------------------------------- Htoo : I do not believe ' comparing ' is conceit. So '' any recognition of difference between self and other might not be '' conceit ''. ------------------------------------------------------------- > I think that it is easy to recognise dosa (anger) when it is strong > enough to kill or harm, but I wonder what are some very subtle > examples of dosa, lobha, and moha? ----------------------------------------------- Christine : And the purpose of learning about cetasikas - it's helping us to see the utter anatta-ness of everything? ... just checking .. ---------------------------------------------- Htoo : It is a good idea to check. Mana arises on its own when there are conditions. Comparison is just to classify Mana with different names. He is rich and I am poor. I don't have to mind him whatever he is rich or poor. I am standing on my own. ( omaana ) He is rich and I am rich. I don't mind him as I am as rich as he is. ( Maana ) He is poor and I am rich. I don't mind him as he is poor. He shouldn't talk to me directly. He should sit beside me. ( atimaana ) -------------------------------------------------------------------- > metta and peace, > Christine > ---The trouble is that you think you have time --- ------------------------------------------------------------ May you be free from suffering With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing ------------------------------------------------------- > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "htootintnaing" > wrote: > > Dear Dhamma Friends, > > > > After Permanent Ministers and Flexible Ministers ( Cetasikas ) have > > been described, here Destructive Ministers will be delineated. They > > destroy the place they home. They put the king Citta into an ugly > > portrait. > <<>> 27423 From: Sarah Date: Thu Nov 27, 2003 3:37am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Buddhaghosa(Suan): To Robert and Michael Hi James, --- buddhatrue wrote: > I am not convinced by a commentary, written by ~Naa.namoli, ..... Just to clarify: the commentary was not written by ~Naa.namoli. It is the Paramatha-ma~njuusaa (Pm for short), the ancient commentary to the Visuddhimagga and considered as an authoritative text in the Theravada tradition. Extracts are included in notes on difficult lines. Nina is translating other extracts for the main Visuddhimagga thread too. James, no one has to accept these texts. If I have difficulty with a sutta or a different interpretation to others, my inclination is to consider what the ancient commentaries say, as I find a wealth of wisdom in them which is far more reliable than any of my own often misguided views. I don’t find anything illogical here, but I fully accept that you do and respect your comments in this regard. Metta, Sarah ====== 27424 From: htootintnaing Date: Thu Nov 27, 2003 3:49am Subject: Re: [dsg] Cetasikas As Designers Or Helpers ( 04 ) Dear Thomas and all, Was Hitler a minister is my question to you. I am just using simile. Whatever ministers advise, the responsibility resides in the king, who is the head or the leader or the doer. Bad association brings bad things. Ajatasatta was already matured Satta. He was ripe to achieve Bodhi Nana. But as he was associated with Devadattha he did bad things and bad Kamma was brought on. He has been hell being since he left Ajatasatta's life. Lifespan of hell beings is limitless. But if he is released from hell, he will one day arise as Pacchekabuddha. Ajatasatta extremely beleived in The Buddha after he had killed his own father. Ajatasatta did all good things there after. He sponsered the first Buddhist Council. However he did all good things after his unforgivable sin of killing own father ( patricide ), this Kamma Anantariya Kamma brought him down to the hell Mahaavici which is the worst of all hell stations. This happened due to bad association. Asevaala Ca Baalanam, Panditaanam Ca Sevanaa With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing -------------------------- --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, nordwest wrote: > Dear Htoo Naing, > > I hope this is not a stupid question, do you think that Hitler, Dshinghis Khan etc. was such Destructives Ministers? > > Metta, > Thomas > > > htootintnaing wrote:Dear Dhamma Friends, > > After Permanent Ministers and Flexible Ministers ( Cetasikas ) have > been described, here Destructive Ministers will be delineated. They > destroy the place they home. They put the king Citta into an ugly > portrait. > > 1. Moha > > He is the leader for all Akusala Cetasikas.It is also > called '' Avijja '' that is the opposite of '' Vijja ''( Panna ). All > the destructive minds are led by him. It veils the real things and > the truth. So, Satta with it will never see real Dhamma. Instead it > leads to all the destructive actions. It veils Citta not to see the > truth. Then Moha-mounted Citta can do any bad thing with backing of > Moha. > > <.......> 27425 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Thu Nov 27, 2003 5:37am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Concentration and samatha Howard I think, judging from your comments below, that we have been talking at cross-purposes. Apologies if the mistake was on my part. Yes, the context of the discussion has been sati and panna with consciousness [i.e., with only consciousness] as object. As I understand it, any awareness/knowledge of 'seeing something' is not direct awareness/knowledge but is in fact inferred knowledge arrived at by thinking about immediately past moments of consciousness and its object (what you refer to as 'memory of an event'). I hope this clarifies things and helps makes my comments somewhat more comprehensible (please feel free to say so if not): http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/27267 Jon --- upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, Jon - ... > ------------------------------------------------------ > Howard: > There's always awareness only of its object. By "awareness" > here, do > you just mean vi~n~nana, or are you talking about sati or pa~n~na? > I assume you mean vi~n~nana. > ---------------------------------------------------- 27426 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Thu Nov 27, 2003 6:00am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Act of consciousness Herman I know what you mean when you speak about the Buddha's example. However, this raises an interesting question: should we look primarily to the Buddha's example, or should we pay more attention to what he had to say about how he got to where he did, or how we can achieve (in part) what he has experienced? A person wishing to attain to the status, wealth or ability of another will not get far by trying to emulate that other person's actions as a person of status, wealth or ability. It is the means by which that person got where he did that will need to be known and applied. BTW, you say the Buddha preferred silence to speech; nonetheless, he spent an awful lot of time expounding the teachings to others, and urging those others to listen more. He must have thought such talking and listening to be worthwhile. Jon --- Egberdina wrote: > Hi Jon, > > There is no need to reject the suttas. They are stories, and > understanding that they are stories is enough. There is no > hierarchy > amongst stories. There are no "good" stories and "bad" stories, > or "true" stories and "false" stories. They do not have a life of > their own. There is no need to pass judgment on stories. A story , > any story, becomes unravelled with awareness. > > Awareness does not need expounding. It does not need clarification. > > It does not need thinking about. Commentaries to awareness do one > thing, and that is to kill it. > > I need not learn to speak English, Bantu, or Pali, in order to be > silent. The stories of the Buddha that I have read tell me that he > preferred silence to speech, inertness to activity. > > Silence requires no conceptual framework. Neither does knowing. > Knowing arises when it does, and ceases when it does. 27427 From: buddhatrue Date: Thu Nov 27, 2003 6:03am Subject: [dsg] Re: Buddhaghosa(Suan): To Robert and Michael Hi Sarah, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Sarah wrote: > Hi James, > > --- buddhatrue wrote: > > > I am not convinced by a commentary, written by ~Naa.namoli, > ..... > Just to clarify: the commentary was not written by ~Naa.namoli. James: Oh, sorry. I had a feeling that was wrong when I typed it but I had a hard time figuring out what you were referring to and who wrote it by how you cited the source. The only thing I could tell for sure is that Buddhaghosa didn't write it. ;-) It is the > Paramatha-ma~njuusaa (Pm for short), the ancient commentary to the > Visuddhimagga and considered as an authoritative text in the Theravada > tradition. James: It seems like human nature to consider anything 'ancient' as 'authoritative'. That is a flawed view I try to avoid. Ancient or modern, everything should be evaluated on its own merits. Extracts are included in notes on difficult lines. Nina is > translating other extracts for the main Visuddhimagga thread too. > > James, no one has to accept these texts. If I have difficulty with a sutta > or a different interpretation to others, my inclination is to consider > what the ancient commentaries say, James: I don't have that inclination too much. I just consider that my understanding isn't such that I can understand that sutta, and leave it at that. Maybe later I will understand it. Reading notes that someone else has written to explain difficult parts will only lead me to believe I know something when I really don't...then I will be a double fool. It has to come from within. From what I have seen of the commentaries, quoted in this group, they usually go way too far to explain things. It would be best to avoid them altogether. That is how I see it. as I find a wealth of wisdom in them > which is far more reliable than any of my own often misguided views. James: How do you know your views are misguided? Simply because they don't match what is in the commentaries? At some point you have to think for yourself; might as well do that from the start. I > don't find anything illogical here, but I fully accept that you do and > respect your comments in this regard. James: I didn't find the commentary illogical per se, I just think that it is assuming far too much and not looking at the full context of that particular phrase. > > Metta, > > Sarah > ====== Metta, James ps. Does this mean we are done discussing this subject??? ;-) 27428 From: ashkenn2k Date: Thu Nov 27, 2003 6:10am Subject: Re: Sabhava, Paramattha, Abhidhamma (was: Buddhaghosa..) Hi Micheal, Thanks for taking this point of essentialism in Abdhidhamma and interesting what does Abdhidhamma mean by Ultimate reality has intrinsic nature. I am also confounded by this perculiar characteristic bc this mean that Abdhidhamma is a substantialist, and this is contrary to what Buddha taught especially if one look at this link - the Foam Sutta http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/samyutta/sn22-095.html However I like to explain in my own context after reading what Larry provided on the definition of Sabhava. If I am not wrong what Abdhidhamma means intrinsic nature is that it is a nature that is elememtary (Hmm a bit hard to explain). For eg a fire is hot and there is no two word about it. A unpleasant feeling is an unpleasant feeling. We cannot say it is not. This is what I think Abdhidhamma meant about intrinsic nature. Share with me what you think about this explanation. Point out your difference, your views bc any substanlism or essentialism is a no-no in Buddhism. Let us explore this together. kind regards Ken O 27429 From: Date: Thu Nov 27, 2003 2:35am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re:object of awareness, 2 Hi again, Nina - A bit more about anger as taking an object. You wrote the following: > Anger is angry, it is an experience. What does it experience? Not nothing, > an object. The object of anger, whatever it may be, an unpleasant sound, or > an event, a story. Anger is not rupa which does not experience anything. ========================== Anger does not experience something - it is a reaction to experiencing something. Anger is always in *reaction* to some event or events (most often thoughts), but none of these events is the object of the anger in the sense in which it is the object of consciousness - it is merely a triggering condition for the arising of the anger, the underlying cause being far more complex. In fact, it is very frequently the case that the mind is suffused with anger without any particular event having recently occurred that is "the object" of that anger in any sense, the anger having been conditioned by a host of events often well in the past which left an inclination to anger that can be triggered by many passing phenomena. In addition, one moment of anger, together with a perverse feeling of enjoyment with regard to that anger can lead to continued experiencing of anger, but the prior anger, while conditioning the subsequent anger is not an object for it in any sense. I think the carte blanche taking of emotions as namas which "know" objects is mistaken. As I see it, the knowing relation is a very specific kind of relation, and not all mental phenomena bear that relation to other phenomena. 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) 27430 From: Date: Thu Nov 27, 2003 2:39am Subject: Re: [dsg] Pure Mind/Buddha Nature Hi, Ken - In a message dated 11/27/03 1:02:27 AM Eastern Standard Time, ashkenn2k@y... writes: > Hi Howard > > > I see this matter differently. On the one hand there is > >"Luminous,monks, is the mind. And it is defiled by incoming > defilements," and on the other hand there is "Luminous, monks, is > the mind. And it is freed from incoming defilements." Whether covered > by adventitious defilements (as a blackboard is covered by chalk > dust or a mirror by dust), or whether it is not so covered, luminous > is the mind. The point here, as I see it, is that the defilements do > not inhere in the mind as essential characteristics. The mind is > luminous one way or the other, and "development" is actually a > process of removal, of sweeping away the dust of defilements, > leaving the already pure mirror-mind to properly reflect reality. > When there is gold ore, the base metals are the base metals, and the > gold is the gold, and the process of obtaining gold from the ore is a > process of removing the adventitious metals, leaving the gold to be > seen as it actually is and was. > > k: Howard: This position looks like the position that the mind is > originally pure which sounds like an essentialism perspective. > Bhavanga citta is more appropriate bc it is impermenant and anatta > and it reduce the possiblility of an essentialism perspective. > Furthermore in Abdhidhamma thought process - bhavanga citta is the > start of a sense process, hence it will be either be defile or not. > --------------------------------------------------- Howard: Read the sutta, Ken. It is crystal clear - it speaks for itself. (Go "argue" with the Buddha, not with me! ;-) ---------------------------------------------------- > > > > I also see no reason whatsoever to interpret "Luminous, > >monks, is the mind" as referring to a particular type of > mindstate, especially one that was never taught by the Buddha in any > discourse. There is nothing in the sutta to even hint at such a > meaning. > > k: Yes you are right, you cant find this in any sutta. As I explain > earlier to you, there is no way Abdhidhamma going to find concrete > material proof for its existence in the Sutta except for inference to > it. > > > rgds > Ken O > > =========================== 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) 27431 From: ashkenn2k Date: Thu Nov 27, 2003 8:23am Subject: Re: Pure Mind/Buddha Nature Hi Howard > --------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > Read the sutta, Ken. It is crystal clear - it speaks for itself. (Go "argue" with the Buddha, not with me! ;-) > ---------------------------------------------------- k: If Buddha is here, we will have not discussed anything at all, we just ask him, make life easier for everyone :). Gosh sometimes I wish he was here. Yes it is clear but luminious is the mind if interpreted by non-commentarial input will mean there is an underlying pure mind. If you think otherwise, pse kindly comment. Will you think Buddha, will make such a position, if we interpolate with many other suttas where he keep insisting on impermanence and anatta. kind regards Ken O 27432 From: Sarah Date: Thu Nov 27, 2003 8:27am Subject: The last word? (was Buddhaghosa.....) Hi James, A few further explanations (don’t groan;-)). --- buddhatrue wrote: > James: It seems like human nature to consider anything 'ancient' > as 'authoritative'. That is a flawed view I try to avoid. Ancient > or modern, everything should be evaluated on its own merits. ..... I’m usually very uninterested in ancient things - quite hopeless in museums for example. What I was indicating here was that the ‘ancient’ as opposed to modern commentaries have been handed down by the Sangha and accepted as representing the ‘Word of the Buddha’. Whether one will accept any part of the Tipitaka, including the suttas, as representing the ‘Truth’ to be known will depend on whether there is enough confidence in the validity of what one reads or hears to accept this. Obviously for members on this list, there has been a sufficient ‘click’ to accept at least the suttas, including those we find difficult to follow. Like you, if I read one that isn’t clear, it’s seldom a problem for me to leave it aside. In my case, exactly the same applies to the Abhidhamma and commentaries. I feel very fortunate to have access to parts of these, to be able to appreciate them as much as I do and to share a little here and read others doing the same. It doesn’t bother me at all if other friends don’t feel the same way. I was never in the slightest bit concerned about when they were written and so on, because it was the Abhidhamma and commentaries which really made the Tipitaka ‘click’ for me, especially in regard to the teaching on anatta and conditioned dhammas. Different interests and accumulations. I think the Visuddhimagga was the first text I bought, closely followed by the Atthasalini, the commentary to the first book of the Abhidhamma. I’d never heard of Buddhaghosa but found so many answers to questions I had;-) ..... > James: I don't have that inclination too much. I just consider that > my understanding isn't such that I can understand that sutta, and > leave it at that. Maybe later I will understand it. Reading notes > that someone else has written to explain difficult parts will only > lead me to believe I know something when I really don't...then I will > be a double fool. It has to come from within. .... I agree with most of this. I especially agree that one has to be very honest about what is known and not known. This was discussed under sacca parami - the perfection of truth. Believing one knows something one doesn’t is delusion. Whilst on my own I’d just leave a sutta or abhidhamma point aside if it wasn’t clear, in a discussion forum, someone else might refer to a sutta in a way which doesn’t resonate with how I see it. Sometimes it might be helpful to give an explanation from the commentary or the Abhidhamma to consider further. There are no rules. It may surprise you to know that I’ve never been a big reader of the texts. I just read a few lines here and there, nearly always in response to comments or opinions. I think the careful considering and reflecting on what’s been read is most important. ..... >From what I have seen > of the commentaries, quoted in this group, they usually go way too > far to explain things. It would be best to avoid them altogether. > That is how I see it. ..... Just keep an open mind, James. Like now, there’s seeing and thinking, like and dislike, hardness being experienced as one taps the keyboard and so on. Different elements, heat, cold and so on. It doesnt’t matter if one hears about them from a friend, in a sutta or a commentary. The truth can be tested out. As Ken O said, no need to get hung up on words like ‘sabhava’. Just as you’ve implied, it’s one’s ‘own’ understanding that counts. .... > James: How do you know your views are misguided? Simply because they > don't match what is in the commentaries? At some point you have to > think for yourself; might as well do that from the start. ..... I mostly agree with this. We read about how right understanding has to know the nature of wrong views. Indeed it has to know all realities, good and bad. Misguided views can be particularly devious - they always think they’re right. Unless we’re a sotapanna, they are bound to arise and as others like Jon have said many times, one’s own thinking can be a notoriously unreliable guide. You read the suttas because you find they’re a helpful influence. I also find the same with texts like the Visuddhimagga. No rule. ..... > ps. Does this mean we are done discussing this subject??? ;-) ...... Your call ;-) Every time I think we’re done, you pop back;-) Metta, Sarah ===== 27433 From: Date: Thu Nov 27, 2003 8:31am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re:object of awareness, 2 Hi Howard and Nina, Regarding the difference between being angry and observing anger, I think they are both objective in that anger is the object of consciousness but in observing anger the consciousness is accompanied by understanding (pa~n~na). Furthermore, being angry is already past tense. Anger arose with consciousness and then immediately after it ceased it became the object of consciousness. I think this has a tendency to perpetuate itself when, being angry, the consciousness is also accompanied by anger. So, in effect, we are angry at being angry. We can be consciousness of this also, either with or without understanding. Larry 27434 From: Date: Thu Nov 27, 2003 3:34am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Pure Mind/Buddha Nature Hi, Ken - In a message dated 11/27/03 11:25:12 AM Eastern Standard Time, ashkenn2k@y... writes: > Hi Howard > > > >--------------------------------------------------- > >Howard: > > Read the sutta, Ken. It is crystal clear - it speaks for > itself. (Go "argue" with the Buddha, not with me! ;-) > >---------------------------------------------------- > > k: If Buddha is here, we will have not discussed anything at all, we > just ask him, make life easier for everyone :). Gosh sometimes I wish > he was here. Yes it is clear but luminious is the mind if > interpreted by non-commentarial input will mean there is an > underlying pure mind. If you think otherwise, pse kindly comment. > Will you think Buddha, will make such a position, if we interpolate > with many other suttas where he keep insisting on impermanence and > anatta. > > kind regards > Ken O > ============================== If the defilements were intrinsic to the mind, release would be impossible. If the chalk were not covering the blackboard, but were part of the blackboard, there would be no cleaning off of the chalk. If the dust were not just resting upon the surface of the glass, but were an essential part of it, there would be no cleaning of the mirror. The defilements are not intrinsic to the mind, and that is why the mind is luminous, both in the arahant and in the worldling - and that is why the task of liberation is not hopeless. When one doesn't accept the clear and plain meaning of a sutta, but looks for obscure interpretations, that generally suggests an inclination to justify one's preferences, a tendency we all have. With metta, Howard With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 27435 From: Date: Thu Nov 27, 2003 3:37am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re:object of awareness, 2 Hi, Larry - In a message dated 11/27/03 11:33:06 AM Eastern Standard Time, LBIDD@w... writes: > I think this has a tendency to > perpetuate itself when, being angry, the consciousness is also > accompanied by anger. So, in effect, we are angry at being angry. ========================== This can happen, but more often anger is perpetuated because we are "grooving" on that anger, getting a self-righteous or other sort ofperverse kick out of it! With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 27436 From: Htoo Naing Date: Thu Nov 27, 2003 8:42am Subject: How To Get Through The Samsara ( 02 ) Dear Dhamma Friends, Sattas who have attained Arahatta Magga are READY to get through the Samsara. We have lived many many lives, infinite lives. These lives are on the wheel of Lives that is also called Samsara. The wheel is rotating without any interruption. This means that life after life is going on endlessly. If this phenomenon is not recognized, the wheel will be rotating as long as lives exist. Lives have to exist as Kamma dictates. Kamma have to arise, as KAMMA SEEDS are being cultivated. Sattas are cultivating Kamma as they do NOT REALIZE the realities. Realities are realities and they are always true in ultimate sense. These ultimate realities are CITTA , CETASIKA, RUPA, and NIBBANA. CITTA is an ultimate reality. It is the nature that is aware of object or Arammana. It is conscious to sense or object or Arammana. Basing on this character, there is only one Citta. According to its character, it just knows the Arammana. So it is primarily pure, innocent, radiant and luminous. Cittas are in the first group of ultimate realities. However, Citta never arises in isolation but arises with other associated mental factors called CETASIKAS. It is these Cetasikas that give Citta different names. Depending on what Cetasikas accompany, there are 89 Cittas or 89 states of consciousness. Cetasikas are included in the second group of ultimate realities. There are 52 Cetasikas and each has their specific typical character. All 52 Cetasikas have general characters as well. Each Citta and each Cetasika will be delineated in the coming posts. The third group of ultimate realities is RUPA . Rupa are bases. Rupa base for Nama Dhamma both Citta and Cetasika. Rupa also base for Rupa. Rupa have their own characters. Characteristic of Rupa is its changeability. Rupa are subjected to change and they are influenced by Kamma, Citta, Utu, and Ahara. Each of Rupa, Kamma, Utu, Ahara, interactions of Rupa and their four causes will be discussed in the coming posts. The fourth group of ultimate realities is NIBBANA . Nibbana is an absolute peace as all kinds of fire have been extinguished. These kinds of fire are shaping and forming the existing events, happenings and situations. Fire are mental conditioners or Cetasikas. As conditioned, different kinds of Citta has to arise. Kamma have to arise in connection with Citta. Arisen Rupa are further conditioned by Utu and Ahara. And new and new Rupa have to grow in quantity and they proliferate infinitely and endlessly. While fire extinguish, and as sources are no more available, no new Nama ( Citta and Cetasikas ) and no new Rupa arise. As there is no Sankhata Dhatu of Nama and Rupa, the Asankhata Dhatu Nibbana is absolute peace and it is not to be compared with Sankhata Dhatu of Citta, Cetasika, and Rupa. This is the fourth group of ultimate realities Nibbana. Nibbana will be discussed in due course. Sattas are growing Kamma as they do not realize these four ultimate realities. To realize these realities, penetrative wisdom Magga Nana is needed. Here I would like to introduce another Dhamma which is not an ultimate reality but essential to convey the meaning of all realities. It serves as a ' vehicle ' and it is called PANNATTA. Panatta is needed to bring up the necessary information. To do the complete work, Panatta is put into a section and conventional truths are laid down through Panatta so that the complete sense of Satta Loka, Okasa Loka, and Sankhara Lokacan can fully be realized. Panatta will also appear in the coming posts in due course. So far a good summary of Dhamma has been introduced. Before approaching ' how to get through the Samsara ' , it is necessary to understand the Samsara. As mentioned above the Samsara is nothing but the rotating wheel of lives that is arising of life after life without any interruption. In the conventional sense, life has to be defined again. A life is an existence which starts with Patisandhi Citta, persists throughout the lifespan and ends with the end of Cuti Citta. The whole series Patisandhi, Bhavangha ( alternate with Vithi Citta if there is a sense to respond ) , Cuti Citta and associated Cetasikas and Rupa constitute a life. The whole life again is refered to as a Satta in conventional sense. Depending in the characters that constitute a Satta, there are different Sattas. Where they arise is known as Bhumi or plane of existence. Sattas are groupped and according to character of the group, there are 31 plane of existence or Bhumis. Bearing the conventional sense in mind, there is no Satta that does not include in any of 31 Bhumis. There is no extra Bhumi apart from 31 planes of existence. There is no temporary Bhumi or resting Bhumi or resting state for Sattas. This means that any given Satta has to be exactly a member of one of 31 Bhumis. These Bhumis will be discussed in the coming posts. Where are we now ? We are exactly in human realm. Each is rushing through Bhavangha ( Vithi Cittas arise if there arises a sense to respond ) as Patisandhi has arisen. And each of us will end in this very life with Cuti Citta, which again will immediately be followed by next Patisandhi Citta as long as we have not attained Arahatta Magga. Now we know the point where we are. The destination of the Samsara is still unpredictable as the wheel is still rotating. But what can be seen as destination may be one of two options. One of them isNibbana through the gate Cuti Citta of Arahat. Nibbana is not simply annihilation but full of sense and as mentioned above, will appear in the coming posts. Another option as destination is endlessly rotating the wheel of lives. As long as Sattas are growing Kamma, the wheel will be rotating endlessly. It is the readers choice whether to choose Nibbana as their destination or to be in the state of rotating in the wheel of lives as their destination. If they choose the wheel of lives as their ndestination '' How To Get Through The Samsara '' is no more needed to read up. For those who choose Nibbana as their destination will need to learn Dhamma that help get through the Samsara. May all beings get through the Samsara in the shortest way With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing ( htootintnaing@y... ) Moderator journeyToNibbana Yahoo Group 27437 From: Date: Thu Nov 27, 2003 8:46am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re:object of awareness, 2 Larry: "I think this has a tendency to perpetuate itself when, being angry, the consciousness is also accompanied by anger. So, in effect, we are angry at being angry." ========================== Howard: "This can happen, but more often anger is perpetuated because we are "grooving" on that anger, getting a self-righteous or other sort of perverse kick out of it!" Hi Howard, Good call. Can you detect the various elements of this self-righteous kick? I would think pleasant mental feeling would be one. Larry 27438 From: Date: Thu Nov 27, 2003 4:18am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re:object of awareness, 2 Hi, Larry - In a message dated 11/27/03 11:53:23 AM Eastern Standard Time, LBIDD@w... writes: > Howard: "This can happen [anger at anger], but more often anger is > perpetuated > because we are "grooving" on that anger, getting a self-righteous or > other sort of perverse kick out of it!" > > Hi Howard, > > Good call. Can you detect the various elements of this self-righteous > kick? I would think pleasant mental feeling would be one. > > Larry > ============================ I can detect some. For sure pleasant feeling is one of them. Ego is a major one - conceit in the technical sense and in the common meaning of the term. Moral outrage in a decent sense is often one. Another may be excitement, which affords an unwholesome escape from boredom. There is a panoply of factors involved, I think. With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 27439 From: nina van gorkom Date: Thu Nov 27, 2003 10:08am Subject: anapanasati 3 b anapanasati 3 b The Vis. quotes from the Path of Discrimination with regard to the experience of happiness with non-confusion: In a similar way the words of the second tetrad are explained by the Visuddhimagga: (VI) I shall breathe inŠbreathe out experiencing bliss (sukha, pleasant feeling)Š Sukha occurs in three stages of jhåna (of the fourfold system); it does not arise in the highest stage of jhåna where there is equanimity instead of sukha. Sukha accompanies the jhånacitta of the three stages of jhåna and is, after the jhånacitta has fallen away, realized by paññå as impermanent. The realization of the characteristic of impermanence can only occur when the stages of insight knowledge have been developed, beginning with tender insight, as I said before. Thus both jhana and insight have been developed here. As to VI amd VII, experiencing mental formation, citta sankhara, and tranquillizing mental formation: the Vis. VIII, 229, explains that mental formation pertains here to feeling and perception, sanna. The feeling is associated with perception (Vis. VIII, 230). The Vis. quotes here from the Path of Discrimination: ***** Nina. 27440 From: Date: Thu Nov 27, 2003 10:07am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re:object of awareness, 2 Hi Howard, I can't get on-line with my other computer today because of a server problem at MSN and I'm still annoyed. I think what is perpetuating the anger (the "groove") is desire for something that isn't going to happen. Moments of self-righteousness arise occasionally but the driving force behind the anger is just this desire that isn't being fulfilled. When I try to identify the precise experience of desire itself, I can't really find it. Locating a mental object is not so easy. Larry 27441 From: Date: Thu Nov 27, 2003 10:14am Subject: Re: [dsg] anapanasati 3 b The Vis. quotes here from the Path of Discrimination: Hi Nina, I wonder if we could say perception (sanna) is identification? Larry 27442 From: Michael Beisert Date: Thu Nov 27, 2003 10:34am Subject: Re: [dsg] Pure Mind/Buddha Nature Hi Ken, KenO: we can only be mindful of a pain only after the pain is experience (i.e. since only one object at a time is being cognize, therefore mindfullness is only possible after it has happened as it is another object) Michael: I probably know less of the Abhidhamma than you but my understanding it slightly different. There are sense door processes and mind door processes. When you say a pain is experienced I see that as a sense door process. The way you describe it seems that after taking the pain as an object, mindfulness is taken as an object. I don’t see it that way. Mindfulness is not an object but a cetasika which is always present in wholesome states. Therefore after the sense door process has finished (the pain), one or many mind door processes follow, if mindfulness is present as a factor, that citta will be wholesome. The mind door process does not require a rupa. Howard: In this sense, the whole spectrum of consciouness, we must be mindful - then there is a development of the mind. You said there is no reference in Satipatthana on this, isn't bhavanga citta also a consciousness. Michael: Bhavanga is not mentioned in the suttas, it is a creation of the commentaries. I still find it hard to imagine how to become aware of bahavanga. Metta Michael 27443 From: Date: Thu Nov 27, 2003 5:34am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re:object of awareness, 2 Hi, Larry - In a message dated 11/27/03 1:12:33 PM Eastern Standard Time, LBIDD@w... writes: > > Hi Howard, > > I can't get on-line with my other computer today because of a server > problem at MSN and I'm still annoyed. I think what is perpetuating the > anger (the "groove") is desire for something that isn't going to happen. > Moments of self-righteousness arise occasionally but the driving force > behind the anger is just this desire that isn't being fulfilled. > ------------------------------------------------ Howard: Sure. So called self-righteous anger is just one kind. Also, the *thought* of not being able to get on-line keeps repeating, and each repetition spurs further displeasure and anger. BTW, have you ever noticed how, ironically, an unpleasant thought, which one would expect to wish to avoid, keeps on appearing almost as if it were something desirable?!! ;-) We are complex beings, we worldlings! (To speak conventionally.) ------------------------------------------------ When I> > try to identify the precise experience of desire itself, I can't really > find it. Locating a mental object is not so easy. > ------------------------------------------------ Howard: Mmm, depends on what you mean. The desire doesn't wait around for us to grasp it - that's for sure. But don't you know when you want something? So, you know when there is desire, but don't always know its genesis. ------------------------------------------------ > > Larry > ========================= With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 27444 From: buddhatrue Date: Thu Nov 27, 2003 11:14am Subject: Re: Pure Mind/Buddha Nature --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, Ken - > > In a message dated 11/27/03 11:25:12 AM Eastern Standard Time, > ashkenn2k@y... writes: > > > Hi Howard > > > > > > >--------------------------------------------------- > > >Howard: > > > Read the sutta, Ken. It is crystal clear - it speaks for > > itself. (Go "argue" with the Buddha, not with me! ;-) > > >---------------------------------------------------- > > > > k: If Buddha is here, we will have not discussed anything at all, we > > just ask him, make life easier for everyone :). Gosh sometimes I wish > > he was here. Yes it is clear but luminious is the mind if > > interpreted by non-commentarial input will mean there is an > > underlying pure mind. If you think otherwise, pse kindly comment. > > Will you think Buddha, will make such a position, if we interpolate > > with many other suttas where he keep insisting on impermanence and > > anatta. > > > > kind regards > > Ken O > > > ============================== > If the defilements were intrinsic to the mind, release would be > impossible. If the chalk were not covering the blackboard, but were part of the > blackboard, there would be no cleaning off of the chalk. If the dust were not just > resting upon the surface of the glass, but were an essential part of it, > there would be no cleaning of the mirror. The defilements are not intrinsic to the > mind, and that is why the mind is luminous, both in the arahant and in the > worldling - and that is why the task of liberation is not hopeless. > When one doesn't accept the clear and plain meaning of a sutta, but > looks for obscure interpretations, that generally suggests an inclination to > justify one's preferences, a tendency we all have. > > With metta, > Howard > Hi Howard, I completely agree with you. The mind is originally luminous and defilements are not an intrinsic part of the mind, they are like dirt or a film covering the mind which must be removed. Rather than continuing to examine that one sutta, here is another sutta in support, AN, IV 50 "Defilements of Ascetics": "There are, O monks, these four defilements of the sun and moon, defiled by which the sun and moon do not shine, blaze and radiate. What four? Clouds are a defilement of the sun and moon…Snow is a defilement of the sun and moon…Smoke and dust is a defilement of the sun and moon… Rahu lord of the asuras* is a defilement of the sun and moon. …These are the four defilements of the sun and moon, defiled by which the sun and moon do not shine, blaze and radiate. Similarly, monks, there are four defilements of ascetics and Brahmins, defiled by which some ascetics and Brahmins do not shine, blaze and radiate. What four? There are, monks, some ascetics and Brahmins who drink wine and liquor, who do not abstain from drinking wine and liquor. This is the first defilement of ascetics and Brahmins, defiled by which some ascetics and Brahmins do not shine, blaze and radiate. Then there are some ascetics and Brahmins who indulge in sexual intercourse,… Then there are some ascetics and Brahmins who accept gold and silver,… Then there are some ascetics and Brahmins who earn their living by wrong livelihood,… These, monks, are the four defilements of ascetics and Brahmins, defiled by which some ascetics and Brahmins do not shine, blaze and radiate." *Rahu is an asura king dwelling in the sky who periodically abducts the moon and the sun. The myth represents the ancient Indian interpretation of the solar and lunar eclipse. Now, even though this sutta doesn't state `mind' specifically, I think it can be inferred. Surely the Buddha didn't mean that some ascetics and Brahmins have bodies that light up like a light bulb! ;- ) He is referring to the quality of their minds. Each of the defilements, which are actions that come about through greed, lust, and craving in the mind, are described as something that covers the original luminosity of the mind. It isn't a part of it. At least that is how I view this sutta. Metta, James 27445 From: Michael Beisert Date: Thu Nov 27, 2003 0:26pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Pure Mind/Buddha Nature Hi Sarah, Sarah: I’ll sign off and add the most recent letter on this topic which Nina sent to Icaro, quoting some of my comments Michael: Your links were extremely useful. It brought to light some aspects I was unaware. Tks for the trouble in sending all those interesting links. Sarah: I’m also happy to continue discussing the luminous thread. Michael: I think it is better to quit for now. I am still siding with the comments by Thanissaro but think it is not worthwhile pursuing it further. Tks anyway. Metta 27446 From: htootintnaing Date: Thu Nov 27, 2003 1:18pm Subject: Cetasikas As Designers Or Helpers ( 05 ) Dear Dhamma Friends, As described in previous post, Cetasikas have much effect on actions of Citta. Here are more about Cetasikas. Constructive Ministers as I named them, there are altogether 25 Cetasikas working as Constructive Ministers. These 25 Cetasikas are called Sobhana Cetasikas or beautiful Cetasikas. Among them the first 19 Cetasikas are called Kusalacittasadarana Cetasikas. They always arise with any Kusala Citta. 1.Saddha ( Confidence, faith, belief ) He makes the king Citta believes in The Buddha, The Sangha,The Dhamma, Paticcasamuppada and the practice. This belief is not a blind faith but there is a strong reason for this. There is evidence for total belief. It is like confidence. When Saddha arises Citta and all other Cetasikas become clean, clean, active, alert, calm. When Ruby is put in a muddy water, the water becomes clean and clear and radiant with the light of Ruby. 2.Sati ( mindfulness ) He makes the king Citta watches thing actively and makes mindful.So Citta remembers to do things in due course. In the presence of Sati Citta can work according to its will as Sati reminds him to remember things to do. Sati is also an active Cetasika like Saddha. It serves as a watcher. It serves as a reminder. Sati also helps other Cetasikas to remember to do their jobs. 3. Hirika ( shamefulness ) This Constructive Minister hinders the king Citta not to do bad things as doing so probably will face with disgraceful situation. In the presence of Hirika, as it reminds to consider the consequence of the actions, the king Citta will not do bad things. This Cetasika is something like inhibition. It always works with Ottappa. 4. Ottappa ( fearfulness ) this Cetasika makes Citta unwilling to do bad things as doing so will have negative effect and Citta is fearful of that result. This Cetasika like Hirika looks the possible consequences of the actions. And it is frightened by the possible result. So in its presence Citta will not do bad things. It is also a kind of inhibition. But characterwise it is more in the favour of fear than shame. Together with Hirika these two Cetasikas guard the world in the favourable social conditions. Man and woman are attracted to each other and finally lead to sex. But Hirika and Ottappa hinder unnecessary events. The relationship between father and daughter, mother and son, brother and sister, married person and unmarried person etc etc are supported by Hirika and Ottappa so that socially unfavourable things do not happen. These Cetasikas are Loka Pala Dhamma. 5.Alobha ( unattachment, detachment, unbinding, Dana) This Constructive Minister makes the king Citta willing to offer things to Sattas as Citta becomes unattached to those things when Alobha advises him. Alobha is more than unattachment or detachment. It looks directly at receiver as Satta and directs to him. At the same time it no more has likeness to its assumed own properties as his properties. Detach to properties and bend toward to receiver and there is unperceivable flow of energy to the receiver. It works with other 19 Cetasikas especially with Saddha. 6. Adosa ( Metta , loving kindness, unhurting ) This Cetasika advises Citta in order to exert Metta on Sattas. It has non-destructive effect. It urges Citta to have a good moral. In the presence of Adosa, others' well being is always considered. This comprises physical, emotional, psychological and all aspects of other Sattas. Its character is unhurting in nature. It is true friendship. Adosa arise when thinking of others like parents, brothers and sisters, friends, hasbands, wives and any one who are in favour of his or her. Unlike Lobha, Adosa does not have unreleasing binding tying effect. It is real loving kindness. 7. Tatramajjatata ( Balance, Upekkha ) It equalises the strength of all accompanying cetasikas and so it advises Citta as well to work in a state of equilibrium that means it works without extremeness. This Cetasika is like a charioteer. When two horses are drawing the cart, they have to draw equally in terms of strength. Otherwise, the desired direction will never reach. This Cetasika arises in balancing mind. It may be assumed as Upekkha. But it is an active Cetasika. It is not ignorance. It focuses on Dhamma and makes a good balance so that the target direction are being approached. 8.Kayapassaddhi ( coolness or calmness or tranquility of Cetasika ) It has soothing effect on Cetasikas. It calms down mind and causes Cetasikas free from all worries. In its presence all other Cetasikas that accompany it and Citta become well tranquilized and calm. This tranquility helps Kusala Citta to arise and help doing Kusala actions. 9. Cittapassaddhi ( coolness or calmness or tranquility of Citta ) It has soothing effect on Citta. It calms down mind as well and causes Citta free from all worries. When Cittapassaddhi arises Kayapassaddhi also arises. These two Cetasika always arise together and all other Sabbakusalasadarana Cetasikas also arise together. 10. Kayalahuta ( lightness of Cetasikas ) It causes Cetasikas ready to function well. It is lightness of Cetasikas and its presence help Cetasika light and ready to respond according to their functions. 11. Cittalahuta ( Lightness of Citta ) It causes Citta ready to function well. It arises with Kayalahuta Cetasika and other Kusala Cetasikas also arise together. The pair Kayalahuta and Cittalahuta can well be noticed in the mind when people are doing a good deed. 12. Kayamuduta ( tenderness or pliancy of Cetasikas) It causes all Cetasikas to be tender and gentle. it is pliable and flexible formable according to the situation. This Cetasika can also be noticed in the mind of people who are doing meritorious deed. 13. Cittamuduta ( tenderness or pliancy of citta ) It causes Citta to be tender and gentle. And Citta becomes pliable in the presence of this Cetasika. Cittamuduta arises together with Kayamuduta. 14. Kayakammannata ( adaptability or wieldiness of Cetasikas ) It helps Cetasika adapted to other Cetasikas and agree with other Cetasika. It stabilizes existing Cetasikas. 15. Cittakammannata ( adaptability or wieldiness of Citta ) It arises together with Kayakammannata Cetasika but its main function is on Citta. Along with other good Cetasikas these two Cetasika work well in favour of adaptation and stabilization. 16.Kayapagunnata ( proficiency of Cetasikas ) It causes proper functioning of Cetasikas. It helps Cetasikas work proficiently at their specific duty. So Cetasikas work appropriately in its presence. 17. Cittapagunnata ( proficiency of Citta ) It causes proper functioning of Citta. It arises together with Kayapagunnata Cetasika but its main function is focused at Citta. Both work with other good Cetasikas or beautiful Cetasikas. 18. Kayujukata ( rectitude or uprightness of Cetasikas ) It makes all Cetasikas sincere. In its presence all Cetasika works in righteous manner. They all become sincere and honest and functions are rectified. 19. Cittujukata ( rectitude or uprightness of Citta ) It makes Citta sincere. This Cetasika arises together with Kayujukata Cetasika. This pair makes Nama Dhamma work straight forward. But Cittujukata's main function is on Citta. These 19 Cetasikas always arise together in all Kusala Citta. May you all breed these Cetasikas in your inner environment. With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing 27447 From: Sarah Date: Thu Nov 27, 2003 2:24pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Pure Mind/Buddha Nature Hi Michael & Ken O, --- Michael Beisert wrote: > Michael: > Bhavanga is not mentioned in the suttas, it is a creation of the > commentaries. I still find it hard to imagine how to become aware of > bahavanga. ..... Whenever there's any reference to awareness or insight in the texts, i.e. satipatthana, the object is always any object that appears. Any nama or rupa depending on conditions, no selection. So in this sutta, it doesn't mean 'it must be bhavanga citta' (though it may be for some with developed panna). We always need to keep an understanding of satipatthana in mind when reading any of the texts, I think. Metta, Sarah ======= 27448 From: mlnease Date: Thu Nov 27, 2003 3:13pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Pure Mind/Buddha Nature Hi Michael (et al.), --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Michael Beisert" wrote: > Hello Sarah, Thomas and all, > > Sarah: > I don't think there is any mention of us having the `buddha- nature' in the > Tipitaka and Pali commentaries, Thomas. Also, the idea of clearing the > defiled mind to find the [hidden] pure mind is contradictory to what we > read and understand about impermanence and conditioned changing realities. Agreed... > Michael > > The Pabhassara Sutta ( AN I.49-52) can probably shed some light on this > discussion. In this sutta we read: > > "Luminous, monks, is the mind. And it is defiled by incoming defilements." > "Luminous, monks, is the mind. And it is freed from incoming defilements." > > The first statement seems to imply that the mind is naturally pure while the > second seems to imply that the mind is naturally defiled. The mind has to be > pure in order to be defiled and by the same token it has to be defiled in > order to be purified. If the mind were totally pure (or in other words > already had a "Buddha-nature") it would not have to be purified and if it > were totally defiled it would not have to be defiled again. > > So, how to solve this puzzle? It seems to me to be a puzzle only if I assume that mind (citta) is a lasting thing. Citta, as I understand it, is 'colored' instantaneously by its attendant factors which vanish as rapidly as does citta. Purity and impurity arise and subside with mind in an instant, I think. p.s. Nice to meet you... mike 27449 From: Larry Date: Thu Nov 27, 2003 3:25pm Subject: [dsg] Re:object of awareness, 2 Howard: "don't you know when you want something?" Hi Howard, Yes I do, but making the desire itself an object of consciousness is very elusive. Mostly what I notice is associated bodily feeling and concept. Larry btw, I got connected and now I am happy. What's that??? 27450 From: kenhowardau Date: Thu Nov 27, 2003 3:59pm Subject: Re: Hang-ups and Pure Mind/Buddha Nature > Hmmm...you definitely have my attention now! ;-) And > curiosity piqued. I eagerly await the post. > Metta, James Hi James, We were discussing whether there is such a thing as intrinsic essence (sabhava). After hearing the Buddha's explanation of paramattha dhammas, I think yes, some things (nama and rupa), do ultimately exist. You take the view that the whole question is irrelevant. The sutta you quoted had me confused. At first, I assumed it was contrasting the wrong views of the two extremes with the right view of the middle way. So I concluded that you were on the wrong track when you quoted it an authority for the irrelevance of existence. After explaining all this in my usual, plodding way, I finally realised that this sutta was different. Unlike the others I was thinking of, it doesn't describe the extremes in terms of wrong views: "Do I exist? Do I not exist? Do I do both? Neither?" -- that sort of thing. This sutta asks about the existence of 'everything.' To me, 'everything' sounds like 'loka' (the world, the universe). Whenever the Buddha was asked, 'what is the loka,' he explained it could be any of six worlds; the world of eye, eye object, eye consciousness, eye contact, eye feeling; or the world of ear, ear object, . . and so on. So, it seems you were right, this sutta is asking if the things the Buddha taught (eye, eye object etc.,), really exist and if so, in what way. As we have discussed before, I need expert help before I can interpret a sutta with any confidence. What are we to make of the way the Buddha answered the questions? He wasn't interested in discussing the four forms of cosmology but; "Avoiding these two extremes, the Tathagata teaches the Dhamma via the middle: From ignorance as a requisite condition come fabrications. From fabrications as a requisite condition comes consciousness. . . ." So it seems that the notion "dhammas exist," is one of the extreme (non-middle), beliefs. Call me stubborn if you like, but I still think it is correct to say that dhammas exist absolutely (have their own sabhava). After all, we have that sutta quoted by RobertK where the Buddha specifically agrees with the view that dhammas exist. I think, in your sutta, the Buddha is taking intellectual understanding a step closer towards direct understanding: When a dhamma is directly known, there is no concept of its existence (sabhava), there is only sabhava itself. As Ken O has just been saying to Michael: "a fire is hot and there is no two words about it." (Everyone's quoting Ken O lately:-) So this sutta does not change the fact that paramattha dhammas are absolutely real. But we have to remember that direct understanding (satipatthana, the teaching of the Buddha), is completely different from intellectual understanding. After right intellectual understanding has been reached, there has to be a willingness to let go of it and to allow a completely new, direct, way of knowing the world to take its place. That's when existence/non-existence becomes irrelevant. Thanks for quoting that sutta; do you agree that acceptance of sabhava is, at least, a necessary first step? Kind regards, Ken H In support allow me to quote > the Lokayatika Sutta: > > Staying at Savatthi. Then a brahman cosmologist [1] went to the > Blessed One and, on arrival, exchanged courteous greetings with him. > After an exchange of friendly greetings & courtesies, he sat to one > side. As he was sitting there, he said to the Blessed One, "Now, > then, Master Gotama, does everything [2] exist?" > > "'Everything exists' is the senior form of cosmology, brahman." > > "Then, Master Gotama, does everything not exist?" > > "'Everything does not exist' is the second form of cosmology, > brahman." > > "Then is everything a Oneness?" > > "'Everything is a Oneness' is the third form of cosmology, brahman." > > "Then is everything a Manyness?" > > "'Everything is a Manyness' is the fourth form of cosmology, brahman. > Avoiding these two extremes, the Tathagata teaches the Dhamma via the > middle: From ignorance as a requisite condition come fabrications. > From fabrications as a requisite condition comes consciousness. From > consciousness as a requisite condition comes name-&-form. From name- &- > form as a requisite condition come the six sense media. From the si > "Magnificent, Master Gotama! Magnificent! 27451 From: Egberdina Date: Thu Nov 27, 2003 5:03pm Subject: [dsg] Re:object of awareness, 2 Hi Larry, Howard, Nina and everyone, I think the conceptual difference between "citta experiences x" and "there is the experience of x", or "citta is the experience of x" is worldwide. The first formulation could be read to suggest that citta is pre- existing, and is sitting there waiting, ready to take on whatever object takes its fancy. The second formulation suggests that there is no citta without an object, which I think coincides more closely with the Buddhist view of things. (though the theoretical bhavanga citta is a spanner in the works) Peace, love and joy Herman --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, LBIDD@w... wrote: > Hi Howard and Nina, > > Regarding the difference between being angry and observing anger, I > think they are both objective in that anger is the object of > consciousness but in observing anger the consciousness is accompanied by > understanding (pa~n~na). Furthermore, being angry is already past tense. > Anger arose with consciousness and then immediately after it ceased it > became the object of consciousness. I think this has a tendency to > perpetuate itself when, being angry, the consciousness is also > accompanied by anger. So, in effect, we are angry at being angry. We can > be consciousness of this also, either with or without understanding. > > Larry 27452 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Thu Nov 27, 2003 5:07pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Pure Mind/Buddha Nature Hi Howard. I do have tendency on the interpretation of the sutta and also my own preferences. I agree that defilements are definitely not intrinsic in the mind, but I think it is equally impt to note that neither is wisdom intrinsic. By the way you interpret, it will mean the mind is intrinsic in wisdom. This will be an essentialism perspective which I think Buddha will not stand for it. All are conditions without substance, so is wisdom. Abdhidhamma perspective is correct, bc everything conditional things are impermanent and anatta (including wisdom). Wisdom is not condition only when one is enlighted. kind regards Ken O 27453 From: buddhatrue Date: Thu Nov 27, 2003 5:53pm Subject: Re: Hang-ups and Pure Mind/Buddha Nature --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "kenhowardau" wrote: Thanks for quoting that sutta; do you agree that > acceptance of sabhava is, at least, a necessary first > step? > > Kind regards, > Ken H Hi Ken H., Hmmm…you are stubborn with this sabhava (intrinsic nature) aren't you? ;-) No, I don't believe that acceptance of sabhava is a necessary first step. Also, I don't believe that acceptance of shunya (emptiness) is a necessary first step. I believe that they are both extreme views. The Buddha taught the view that is in the middle, dependent origination. I know that the human mind has a hard time with this; we usually have to think in terms of polarities: Everything either exists or it doesn't exist, it can't be both. Well, yes it can. I like that sutta too; but honestly, I have a hard time accepting that the cosmologist rejoiced after hearing this explanation of dependent origination just once. He must have been a very open minded cosmologist or the Buddha was a very powerful, persuasive speaker. Long held views are not so easily abandoned, usually. Metta, James 27454 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Thu Nov 27, 2003 7:38pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Pure Mind/Buddha Nature --- Michael Beisert wrote: > Hi Ken, > > KenO: > we can only be mindful of a pain only after the pain is experience > (i.e. > since only one object at a time is being cognize, therefore > mindfullness is > only possible after it has happened as it is another object) > > Michael: > I probably know less of the Abhidhamma than you but my > understanding it slightly different. There are sense door processes and mind door processes. When you say a pain is experienced I see that as a sense door process. The way you describe it seems that after taking the pain as an object, mindfulness is taken as an object. I don’t see it that way. Mindfulness is not an object but a cetasika which is always present in wholesome states. Therefore after the sense door process has finished (the pain), one or many > mind door processes follow, if mindfulness is present as a factor, > that citta will be wholesome. The mind door process does not require a rupa. k: Definitely mind door process does not need a rupa. If my memory does not fail me bhavanga citta can be both a mind door and a sense door proccess. A citta together with its commitant as mindfullness can be an object for the next citta. > In this sense, the whole spectrum of consciouness, we > must be mindful - then there is a development of the mind. You > said > there is no reference in Satipatthana on this, isn't bhavanga citta > also a consciousness. > > Michael: > Bhavanga is not mentioned in the suttas, it is a creation of the > commentaries. I still find it hard to imagine how to become aware > of bahavanga. k: We are now arguing whether bhavanga can be mindful, which lead to development of the mind as spelt out in the sutta. My position is yes. I have explain before to Howard you will not find any material evidence for Abdhidhamma. Also, as I argue with Howard before if we read it without the knowledge of Bhavanga cittas - the whole sutta will be justification of what we call an underlying pure mind which is essentialist. kind regards Ken O 27455 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Thu Nov 27, 2003 7:57pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Pure Mind/Buddha Nature Hi James >support, AN, IV 50 "Defilements of Ascetics" k: When the mind is originally luminious, this means there is a nature, an essence, a substance. It contradicts the principal of anatta. Pse look at the Foam Sutta (i.e. in fact there are still others). Two impt principle must be there, anatta and anicca, when we read any Buddhist materials, be it materials from the suttas or commentaries or modern writers, then our interpretations will result less in bais or preferences. kind regards Ken O 27456 From: Date: Thu Nov 27, 2003 3:11pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Pure Mind/Buddha Nature Hi, Michael - In a message dated 11/27/03 1:40:01 PM Eastern Standard Time, mbeisert@h... writes: > > Hi Ken, > > KenO: > we can only be mindful of a pain only after the pain is experience (i.e. > since only one object at a time is being cognize, therefore mindfullness is > only possible after it has happened as it is another object) > > Michael: > I probably know less of the Abhidhamma than you but my understanding it > slightly different. There are sense door processes and mind door processes. > When you say a pain is experienced I see that as a sense door process. The > way you describe it seems that after taking the pain as an object, > mindfulness is taken as an object. I don’t see it that way. Mindfulness is > not an object but a cetasika which is always present in wholesome states. > Therefore after the sense door process has finished (the pain), one or many > mind door processes follow, if mindfulness is present as a factor, that > citta will be wholesome. The mind door process does not require a rupa. > > Howard: > In this sense, the whole spectrum of consciouness, we > must be mindful - then there is a development of the mind. You said > there is no reference in Satipatthana on this, isn't bhavanga citta > also a consciousness. ----------------------------------------------------- Howard: Michael, I'm confused. Are intending to be quoting me in the foregoing? (I never said that. I don't know who did, but it was not I.) ----------------------------------------------------- > > Michael: > Bhavanga is not mentioned in the suttas, it is a creation of the > commentaries. I still find it hard to imagine how to become aware of > bahavanga. > > Metta > Michael > =========================== 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) 27457 From: Date: Thu Nov 27, 2003 3:16pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re:object of awareness, 2 Hi, Larry - In a message dated 11/27/03 6:28:23 PM Eastern Standard Time, LBIDD@w... writes: > Howard: "don't you know when you want something?" > > Hi Howard, > > Yes I do, but making the desire itself an object of consciousness is > very elusive. Mostly what I notice is associated bodily feeling and > concept. > > Larry > > btw, I got connected and now I am happy. What's that??? > ----------------------------------------- Howard: Mmm ..., good? ;-)) ===================== 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) 27458 From: Date: Thu Nov 27, 2003 3:52pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Pure Mind/Buddha Nature Hi, Ken - In a message dated 11/27/03 8:09:40 PM Eastern Standard Time, ashkenn2k@y... writes: > Hi Howard. > > I do have tendency on the interpretation of the sutta and also my own > preferences. I agree that defilements are definitely not intrinsic > in the mind, but I think it is equally impt to note that neither is > wisdom intrinsic. By the way you interpret, it will mean the mind is > intrinsic in wisdom. This will be an essentialism perspective which > I think Buddha will not stand for it. All are conditions without > substance, so is wisdom. Abdhidhamma perspective is correct, bc > everything conditional things are impermanent and anatta (including > wisdom). Wisdom is not condition only when one is enlighted. > > > > kind regards > Ken O > ============================= Your point is interesting and clever (in the best sense), Ken. The thing is: Why is it that the perfection of wisdom that comes with full enlightenment never is rescinded? Everything that arises must cease - why not that? It seems to me that perfect wisdom, which is the direct and perfect knowing of reality is a potential that becomes an actuality with the removal of the three poisons, which once fully uprooted, never regrow, ther being no basis for their regrowth. Thus wisdom does not require development per se, but rather requires the removal of blinders for it to shine forth. It requires uncovering. I see the path not ultimately as one of creation but of removal, not of acquiring but of releasing. The arahant is never without actualized perfect wisdom in every mindstate, because the perfect, natural state of "minding and being" has been attained, a state which was there from the outset but covered up by the three poisons. If perfect enlightenment were not always present (albeit unactualized), then it would be something that arises, and thus would also have to subsequently cease [Buddhism 101]. If that is essentialism, then I am an essentialist. I stand convicted. 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) 27459 From: nina van gorkom Date: Thu Nov 27, 2003 9:22pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re:object of awareness, anger. Hi Larry, Very well said, Larry. I shall think matter over and see whether I add something for Howard later on. Nina. op 27-11-2003 17:31 schreef LBIDD@w... op LBIDD@w...: > Hi Howard and Nina, > > Regarding the difference between being angry and observing anger, I > think they are both objective in that anger is the object of > consciousness but in observing anger the consciousness is accompanied by > understanding (pa~n~na). 27460 From: nina van gorkom Date: Thu Nov 27, 2003 9:22pm Subject: Re: [dsg] PHOTOS Icaro Hi Christine, I wanted to look at Icaro in Bootcamp but could not navigate. All the time I just get the first 16, but I have to go to the last 16. I am too clumsy. I only had Icaro with the rum, an old one. Nina. op 25-11-2003 20:32 schreef christine_forsyth op cforsyth@v...: > DhammaStudyGroup has four photo albums. 27461 From: christine_forsyth Date: Thu Nov 27, 2003 11:32pm Subject: Re: [dsg] PHOTOS Icaro Hello Nina, Don't worry - I fairly sure that Icaro hasn't put any 'boot camp' photos up for viewing yet. The only two photos that are there, are the 'before' and 'after' drinking rum photos. If you want to look at ALL the photos in the album, click on the particular album you want at: http://photos.groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/lst It will open at the first 16 photos. It will show '1-16' 'next 16' and then 'show all' ....then you click on 'show all' at the top. This will show all the thumbnail photos on one page. You then click on the little one you want to view, and it will enlarge. Icaro - looking forward to boot camp photos, particularly of the 'grrrrrls' :-). metta and peace, Christine ---The trouble is that you think you have time --- --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, nina van gorkom wrote: > Hi Christine, > I wanted to look at Icaro in Bootcamp but could not navigate. All the time I > just get the first 16, but I have to go to the last 16. I am too clumsy. I > only had Icaro with the rum, an old one. > Nina. > op 25-11-2003 20:32 schreef christine_forsyth op cforsyth@v...: > > > DhammaStudyGroup has four photo albums. 27462 From: Sarah Date: Fri Nov 28, 2003 0:06am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Hang-ups, khandhas and crocs......deep breath Hi KenH, A little more on the Mahacattarika sutta - just my best guess for now with limited commentary & Pali assistance and even more limited knowledge;-). --- kenhowardau wrote: > S: > p.s MN117-Mahacattarika. Very helpful comments you > made. I think the `right understanding' `that has > blemishes and so ripens to clinging' refers to direct > understanding, not just intellectual. ..... K:> I'm sure you're right. What swayed me the other way was > the term, "ripens to." It seemed to mean more than "can > be taken as an object of." Isn't it the case that no > volitional action, that occurs with satipatthana, can > condition (ripen to), rebirth (of the five aggregates of > clinging)? Ignore that question if it is > incomprehensible, I might have my wires crossed. ..... It’s not incomprehensible and your wires are not crossed. The phrase is awkward. Let me know if these comments make any sense: The Pali seems to be: “sammaaditthi saasavaa pu~n~naabhaagiyaa upadhivepakkaa atthi”. This is something like: right understanding with asavas , siding (?) with merit , ripening in existence/becoming , as upposed to supramundane understanding without asavas. (hope Nina or someone can help further:-/) BB gives a note which says: “This is mundane right view, a meritorious factor that conduces to a favourable rebirth but cannot by itself isue in a transcendance of conditioned existence.” More to the point in the previous footnote, he tells us: “MA [the comy] says that this is the right view of insight which understands wrong view as an object by penetrating its characteristic of impermanence, etc, and which understands right view by exercising the function of comprehension and by clearing away confusion.” Working back, in footnote 1100 for ‘pubbangamaa’, lit. “the forerunner”, he gives: “MA says that two kinds of right view are forerunners: the right view of insight [as being discussed above], which investigates formations as impermanent, suffering, and non-self; and the righ view of the path, which arises as a consequence of insight and effects the radical destruction of defilements.” Pu~n~na, merit is used for wholesome kammic action, including satipatthana. For arahants, of course there’s no more kammic action. Right view with lokuttara cittas (magga cittas) brings immediate result by way of phala cittas, so no ripening in future rebirths. Now back to your good question: >Isn't it the case that no > volitional action, that occurs with satipatthana, can > condition (ripen to), rebirth (of the five aggregates of > clinging)? .... I need to turn to some hard-core Abhidhamma to understand this better. From the following passage, which RobertK has referred to in part before, I understand that this refers only to ariyan insight/satipatthana and that mundane insight (as in the sutta) continues to add the bricks: Atthasaalinii, translated as ‘The Expositor’ (PTS), Bk1, ch1,p57: “In the triplet of ‘leading to accumulation (Dhs.p2), ‘accumulation’ means ‘that which is accumulated by kamma and corruptions. It is a name for the processes or rebirth and decease. ‘Leading to accumulations’ are ‘those causes which by being accomplished go to, or lead a man, in whom they arise, to that round of rebirth.’ It is a name for co-intoxicant [asava] moral or immoral states. Nibbaana being free from ‘cumulation.’ which is another word for ‘accumulation.’ is called ‘dispersion/’ (namely of the cumulative round of rebirth). ‘Leading to dispersion’ is ‘going towards that dispersion which he has made his object.’ It is a name for the Ariyan Paths. Or, ‘leading to accumulation’ are ‘those states which go about severally arranging (births and deaths in) a round of destiny like a bricklayer who arranges bricks, layer by layer, in a wall.’ ‘Leading to dispersion’ are those states which go about destroying that very round, like a man who continually removes the bricks as they are laid by the mason.....” KenH, these are just a few rough comments that have taken far longer than anticipated too. It needs more fine-tuning, but I’m running late for class and as you’re going away, I’ll send it now and look forward to further comments from you or anyone else. These are good and difficult qus. Metta, Sarah p.s (Btw, this has no bearing on your recent post to James which I haven’t read yet) ============= 27463 From: icarofranca Date: Fri Nov 28, 2003 2:38am Subject: Re: [dsg] PHOTOS Icaro Dear Chris: Chris:" I fairly sure that Icaro hasn't put any 'boot camp' > photos up for viewing yet. The only two photos that are there, are > the 'before' and 'after' drinking rum photos." --------------------------------------------------------------------- Yeah! My Scanner is out of order just now, but today I will try fix it good and well. "Scenes of a Bootcamp" will be delayed till my gears begin to work up again! ---------------------------------------------------------------------- chris:" Icaro - looking forward to boot camp photos, particularly of > the 'grrrrrls' :-).2 ------------------------------------------------------------------- HAHAHAHAHAH!!! First I must take them out of the gruby Grrrrrls hands!!!! But don´t worry: I will return to the Air Base for the final week of Military Instruction and take with me some photos of our grrrrrrls at the bootcamp. And my Dhamma Diary will follow up as usual!!! (I am now the 2nd Lieutennant QCOA Enginner Ícaro... a little step for Man, a greater one for my boots!!!) Mettaya, Ícaro 27464 From: icarofranca Date: Fri Nov 28, 2003 2:45am Subject: Re: [dsg] PHOTOS Icaro Dear Nina: " I wanted to look at Icaro in Bootcamp but could not navigate. All the time I > just get the first 16, but I have to go to the last 16. I am too clumsy. I > only had Icaro with the rum, an old one." -------------------------------------------------------------------- Buddha at the Bamboo´s Grove couldn´t handle a candle for me at all that mud!!!! But don´t worry, Ibu Van Gorkon! I will post the "Scenes of a Bootcamp" as soon as I get my scanner working properly!!! Mettaya, Ícaro 27465 From: ashkenn2k Date: Fri Nov 28, 2003 3:49am Subject: [dsg] Re: Pure Mind/Buddha Nature Hi Howard H: Your point is interesting and clever (in the best sense), Ken. The thing is: Why is it that the perfection of wisdom that comes with full enlightenment never is rescinded? k: A good question. Once enlighment is reach, the wisdom is then beyong conditioning. If Buddha wisdom is conditioned how is Buddha going to expound the dhamma. Buddha standpoint is every clear everything is conditioned and anatta. Until we reach enlightment all is impermanent and anatta. H: It seems to me that perfect wisdom, which is the direct and perfect knowing of reality is a potential that becomes an actuality with the removal of the three poisons, which once fully uprooted, never regrow, ther being no basis for their regrowth. Thus wisdom does not require development per se, but rather requires the removal of blinders for it to shine forth. It requires uncovering. k: If wisdom only requires removal of blinders would mean that there is something behind the curtain of veils. This does not stand in tandem with anatta principle. H: I see the path not ultimately as one of creation but of removal, not of acquiring but of releasing. k: Is is neither acquiring nor releasing. Bc acquiring will mean there is substance to obtain. Wisdom cannot never be release bc it is anatta. We can only be there (the best word I can find to describe attainment of enlightement) when conditions are there. H: The arahant is never without actualized perfect wisdom in every mindstate, because the perfect, natural state of "minding and being" has been attained, a state which was there from the outset but covered up by the three poisons. If perfect enlightenment were not always present (albeitunactualized), then it would be something that arises, and thus would also have to subsequently cease [Buddhism 101]. If that is essentialism, then I am an essentialist. I stand convicted. k: Perfect enlightment is always there as I say many times is saying there is an underlying consciousness. This as I say earlier in my previous post about soul theory. Wisdom is also condition until it arrived beyong condtioning (that is enlightement) If Buddha will talk about anatta so many times, will he then suddenly turn around and say there is Perfect enlightment is always there or luminious mind is always there just that we are too blind to see. That will be a major contradiction of his words. k: Let me share with you some of my personal experience about conditioning. Let talk about today, when there was raining heavily, one of my boss ask me do I need an umbrealla. I was thinking why should I need one, bc raining is a condition so is this body. It is only the body that is wet. Anyway wet is wet :). It also a rupa on another rupa. If there is me involved :), then there will be worries :). So later on I went to do shopping, I was holding a warm material. So warm is warm :). The mind is not affected, its peaceful, it enjoyed freedom. It knows that conditions are just ceasing and arising. It also know this peacefulness is also ceasing and arising. This is the beauty of knowing conditoning in all cittas including wisdom. k: Furthermore why I know this wisdom we have is also a condition. First I have to admit why suddenly I appear in DSG again, bc I was in pain, in grief, in dukkha and I know only Buddhism is the antidote. Then I realise hey I am not practising anymore. I started to read the Thervada suttas again and again. Then again, I was reading Abdhidhammata Sangha, the first three chapters again and again. After that, I combined them together to practise. Then Micheal came out strongly on essentialism, I was still quite unsure then what he was saying about. Until Larry give the link to a website on Nagaruna. On the 3rd para on emptiness was a very interesting one, then combined with what I read on the Foam sutta, suddenly everything becomes clear. I realised everything is conditioned. Any saying about pure mind, luminious mind or Perfect enlightment are just another sabhava. k: Anyway I am still waiting for Micheal response to my two emails one on Sabhava and one on Luminious mind. It always nice talking to both of you especially the challenging questions both of you provided. I dont talk technical terms as I dont analysis Abdhidhamma like many pple here do. I talk about principles of Buddhism. I also like to say I am still learning and I have to thank both of you, and also pple like James and Abdhidhammaist pple here, to provide me an opportunity to learn and that I deeply treasure. Now I understand why Buddha say it is impt to have good companions. Once again many deepest gratitude to everyone here even the lurkers :) Cheers and warmest regards Ken O 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) 27466 From: Sarah Date: Fri Nov 28, 2003 3:49am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Clinging to Wholesome States (was: Buddhaghosa....) Hi Victor, --- yu_zhonghao wrote: > My question was > > > Could you provide some references regarding clinging to wholesome > states? Did the Buddha ever address the problem of clinging to > wholesome states, if there is such problem at all? > > > You provided the reference > Aggregates Sutta > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/samyutta/sn22-048.html > > and said that wholesome states are included in sankhara khandha > translated here as mental fabrications. > > I would not disagree with you on that. But on the other hand, that > is not what I was inquiring. ..... I thought you were asking about clinging to wholesome states and so I pointed out the khandhas subject to clinging. Like now, any of the khandhas, including wholesome states may well be the object of attachment.I also gave other examples such as the great sutta you posted in another thread on clinging. .... <...> > It seems to me that clinging to wholesome states is a specific > problem, .... I’d say clinging is clinging regardless of the object. The problem is in the unwholesome roots, rather than the object. .... >and we agree that > > 1. Generating desire, endeavoring, activating persistence, upholding > & exerting one's intent for the sake of the arising of skillful > qualities that have not yet arisen and for the maintenance, non- > confusion, increase, plenitude, development, & culmination of > skillful qualities that have arisen > > and > > 2. Cultivating, developing, pursuing renunciation-pleasure, > seclusion-pleasure, calm-pleasure, self-awakening-pleasure > > do not refer to clinging to wholesome states. .... Right, as given in the texts. .... > However, I am not sure what you mean by clinging to wholesome states. .... How about now? Is the desire, pleasure, wish, clinging to past, future or present acts of generosity, to wishes for metta, for more awareness, conceit about good deeds and so on wholesome or unwholesome? What about delight and attachment to keeping good sila, to not breaking precepts and so on. So many examples can be given, but only rt understanding can know if it’s attachment. Whilst performing a good deed, an act of kindness or consideration or generosity, there’s bound to be attachment to the good deed, to the pleasant wholesome feeling, to the calm and so on repeatedly in between the nobler moments. It’s very natural. Only an arahant has no more attachment. I’m not sure we’re on the same track here, Victor, but I know you’ll let me know if this doesn’t pass;-) In any case, I’ve appreciated reflecting on this subject. Metta, Sarah ===== 27467 From: Star Kid Date: Fri Nov 28, 2003 3:52am Subject: More questions for James James: Thanks for your advice, anyway, just a few more questions to ask, yeah? 1. How did you know that I am being mean to my sister? 2. The Buddha says that we shouldn't kill, even the insects and small animals, because they are all living creatures. But if we don't kill the germs and insects, our food and drinking water would be polluted, and human beings would be extinct. What kind of philosophy is this? 3. Anyway, why is there a big door ramp at each Buddhist temple? Thanks for answering. Philip 27468 From: Star Kid Date: Fri Nov 28, 2003 3:53am Subject: Do you remember me? Hi James I am Janet, Do you remember me? I'm Philips younger sister.How long is it since I sent you letters? Perhaps start from May or June. I have some questions to ask you: 1 Are you aways sending letters to Philip? How is he behaving? 2 When did you start beleive in Buddha? 3 Do you know much about Buddha? What do you like most ? If you have time, please write to me. Janet (age 9) 27469 From: buddhatrue Date: Fri Nov 28, 2003 5:23am Subject: [dsg] Re: Pure Mind/Buddha Nature --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Kenneth Ong wrote: > Hi James > > >support, AN, IV 50 "Defilements of Ascetics" > > k: When the mind is originally luminious, this means there is a > nature, an essence, a substance. It contradicts the principal of > anatta. Pse look at the Foam Sutta (i.e. in fact there are still > others). Two impt principle must be there, anatta and anicca, when > we read any Buddhist materials, be it materials from the suttas or > commentaries or modern writers, then our interpretations will result > less in bais or preferences. > > > > kind regards > Ken O Hi Ken O, I don't think that `luminous mind' or `buddha nature' is incompatible with anatta. It depends on how you view anatta. It seems to me that you believe that anatta means that when you take everything apart, break down the five aggregates, then absolutely nothing is left. This isn't anatta, this is nihilism. Anatta means that there isn't a lasting soul or essence, there isn't an individual, there isn't a personality…everything that is thought of as, "This is me; this is who I am; this is mine" is incorrect. The original nature of the mind is pure awareness, and this pure awareness is luminous. The original nature of the mind is pure wisdom because then all phenomena (dharmas) are known. It is only through ignorance that individuality springs into being. The original mind is luminous and undifferentiated. What does this mean? What is it like? How does it look? How can such a thing be? These are all questions that the ego-centered mind tries to understand but cannot. Personally, I have only had brief glimpses at it, and then it is gone, and then my ego-centered mind tries to figure out the experience but cannot. I don't know what to tell you, really. You have to know it for yourself. Metta, James 27470 From: Star Kid Date: Fri Nov 28, 2003 5:42am Subject: Hope you don't mind my quesions!: ) Dear James, How are you? You maybe remember me from last year, I asked you questions about Monks and Buddhism. My name is Anne-Catherine and i go to German Swiss International School in Hong Kong. I read some of your letters to Phillip and they have really inspired me a lot, through your anwers and examples which you have mentioned in your letters. It seems you understand him quite well, how so? Do you have any relation with his character and does Phillip remind you of your childhood? There are more questions waiting for you: 1. Mrs Abbott just told me a minute ago that you are working in Eygpt, why did you choose to work and live in Egypt? 2. If I may ask, are you Buddhist? If you are, why did you choose to be buddhist? And isn't Eygpt a Muslim country, so why are you in Egypt? 3. By curiosity, where did the Buddhism begin and how did this religion spread? Thank you for taking your spare time reading my letter. I can't wait for your rely. Anne-Catherine : ) 27471 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Fri Nov 28, 2003 6:37am Subject: Re: [dsg] Inherent characteristics of rupa Michael This is a follow-up to the passage from CMA quoted in my earlier reply. Below is the additional part I referred to but did not have ready to quote. It contains the reference to the masochist that you mentioned. (As I said before, however, this is the translator's commentarial summary; I'm not sure to what extent the material is directly from the commentaries.) You also mentioned Geshe Michael Roach. That name is familiar to those of us who remember Erik's posts on this list. Erik mentioned GMR a number of times. If I'm not mistaken, he has done a translation of the Tibetan Abhidhamma. Do you happen to know if it has been published? Jon CMA IV, 17 Guide << << << It should be noted that while the resultant cittas are governed by the nature of the object the javanas are not, but vary in accordance with the temperament and proclivities of the experiencer. Even when the object is extremely desirable, the javanas may occur in the mode of indifference as wholesome or unwholesome cittas accompanied by equanimity; for example, and the sight of the Buddha a sceptic may experience cittas accompanied by doubt, while at the sight of a beautiful woman a meditative monk may experience wholesome cittas accompanied by knowledge and equanimity. It is even possible for javanas accompanied by aversion and displeasure to arise towards a very desirable object. Again, towards an undesirable object, the javanas may occur in the mode normally appropriate for a desirable object. Thus a masochist may respond to physical pain with cittas rooted in greed and accompanied by joy, while a meditative monk may contemplate a decaying corpse with wholesome cittas accompanied by knowledge and joy. >> >> >> --- Michael Beisert wrote: > Hello Jon, Howard, ... > I don't know if you are familiar with Geshe Michael Roach? Out of ... > again). Second, in relation to kusala/akusala and > pleasant/unpleasant, the > Abhidhammattha also mentions that the combinations are not always > straight > forward. Take for example the situation of a masochist which will > experience > pleasure through an akusala rupa/action. 27472 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Fri Nov 28, 2003 6:43am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Concentration and samatha Larry As I think I mentioned in a previous post, among the 121 different cittas are some that have exactly the same combination of cetasikas (for example, the 10 vipaka cittas are each accompanied by the 7 'universal' cetasikas only). To my understanding, the different cittas are different in respects other than just the accompanying cetasikas. While they have in common the characteristic of being chief in experiencing their object, they also have an individual characteristic that makes them distinct from each other. Seeing consciousness sees visible-object; it cannot experience sound, and so on. Jon --- Larry wrote: ... > My resultant > understanding is that consciousness simply cognizes and the 121 > consciousnesses are the same consciousness with 121 combinations of > the 52 cetasikas and the rupas. Consciousness of consciousness > _itself_ would be consciousness of mere cognizance without the > quality of a cetasika or rupa. I don't see that being explored in > Theravada. So I would conclude that, as in the Satipatthana Sutta, > consciousness of consciousness is actually consciousness of a mind > state composed of cetasikas. I had thought, like you I think, that > the 121 consciousnesses were actually 121 different > consciousnesses, but apparently this is not the case. 27473 From: Date: Fri Nov 28, 2003 2:59am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Pure Mind/Buddha Nature Hi, Ken - In a message dated 11/28/03 6:51:00 AM Eastern Standard Time, ashkenn2k@y... writes: > Hi Howard > > H: Your point is interesting and clever (in the best sense), Ken. The > thing is: Why is it that the perfection of wisdom that comes with > full enlightenment never is rescinded? > > k: A good question. Once enlighment is reach, the wisdom is then > beyong conditioning. If Buddha wisdom is conditioned how is Buddha > going to expound the dhamma. Buddha standpoint is every clear > everything is conditioned and anatta. Until we reach enlightment > all is impermanent and anatta. > ----------------------------------------- Howard: So here you are proposing something conditioned changing its nature to something unconditioned. Is that not novel? ------------------------------------------ > > H: It seems to me that perfect wisdom, which is the direct and > perfect knowing of reality is a potential that becomes an actuality > with the removal of the three poisons, which once fully uprooted, > never regrow, ther being no basis for their regrowth. Thus wisdom > does not require development per se, but rather requires the removal > of blinders for it to shine forth. It requires uncovering. > > k: If wisdom only requires removal of blinders would mean that > there is something behind the curtain of veils. This does not stand > in tandem with anatta principle. > ------------------------------------------ Howard: I think the problem here lies with what "wisdom" is. This is an instance, in my opinion, where Abhidhamma muddies the waters. I'll say more about this at the end. ----------------------------------------- > > > H: I see the path not ultimately as one of creation but of removal, > not of acquiring but of releasing. > > k: Is is neither acquiring nor releasing. Bc acquiring will mean > there is substance to obtain. Wisdom cannot never be release bc it > is anatta. We can only be there (the best word I can find to > describe attainment of enlightement) when conditions are there. > > H: The arahant is never without actualized perfect wisdom in > every mindstate, because the perfect, natural state of "minding and > being" has been attained, a state which was there from the outset > but covered up by the three poisons. If perfect enlightenment were > not always present (albeit unactualized), then it would be something > that arises, and thus would also have to subsequently cease > [Buddhism 101]. If that is essentialism, then I am an essentialist. > I stand convicted. > > k: Perfect enlightment is always there as I say many times is > saying there is an underlying consciousness. This as I say earlier > in my previous post about soul theory. Wisdom is also condition > until it arrived beyong condtioning (that is enlightement) If > Buddha will talk about anatta so many times, will he then suddenly > turn around and say there is Perfect enlightment is always there or > luminious mind is always there just that we are too blind to see. > That will be a major contradiction of his words. > > k: Let me share with you some of my personal experience about > conditioning. Let talk about today, when there was raining heavily, > one of my boss ask me do I need an umbrealla. I was thinking why > should I need one, bc raining is a condition so is this body. It is > only the body that is wet. Anyway wet is wet :). It also a rupa on > another rupa. If there is me involved :), then there will be > worries :). So later on I went to do shopping, I was holding a warm > material. So warm is warm :). The mind is not affected, its > peaceful, it enjoyed freedom. It knows that conditions are just > ceasing and arising. It also know this peacefulness is also ceasing > and arising. This is the beauty of knowing conditoning in all > cittas including wisdom. > > k: Furthermore why I know this wisdom we have is also a condition. > First I have to admit why suddenly I appear in DSG again, bc I was > in pain, in grief, in dukkha and I know only Buddhism is the > antidote. Then I realise hey I am not practising anymore. I > started to read the Thervada suttas again and again. Then again, I > was reading Abdhidhammata Sangha, the first three chapters again and > again. After that, I combined them together to practise. Then > Micheal came out strongly on essentialism, I was still quite unsure > then what he was saying about. Until Larry give the link to a > website on Nagaruna. On the 3rd para on emptiness was a very > interesting one, then combined with what I read on the Foam sutta, > suddenly everything becomes clear. I realised everything is > conditioned. Any saying about pure mind, luminious mind or Perfect > enlightment are just another sabhava. > ----------------------------------------------- Howard: I understand you, Ken, and I most assuredly empathize. But I think what you are saying is valid only if "wisdom" is understood in a particular way (the "Abhidhammic way"! ;-), which I think is an error. More below on this. ---------------------------------------------- > > k: Anyway I am still waiting for Micheal response to my two emails > one on Sabhava and one on Luminious mind. It always nice talking to > both of you especially the challenging questions both of you > provided. I dont talk technical terms as I dont analysis > Abdhidhamma like many pple here do. I talk about principles of > Buddhism. I also like to say I am still learning and I have to > thank both of you, and also pple like James and Abdhidhammaist pple > here, to provide me an opportunity to learn and that I deeply > treasure. Now I understand why Buddha say it is impt to have good > companions. > > Once again many deepest gratitude to everyone here even the > lurkers :) > > Cheers and warmest regards > Ken O > > ============================= Ken, Abhidhamma takes wisdom/insight/pa~n~na to be a special mental function. I do not understand it that way. If perfect wisdom were an actual, positive phenomenon that arises, then it would have to cease as well. I do not see how that could be questioned and still accept the Buddha's teaching of anicca - whatever arises, ceases. As I see it, 'wisdom' is a conventional term to describe the natural, unobscured functioning of the mind, the natural functioning of discernment (vi~n~nana) and perception/recognition (sa~n~na). When one sees clearly, without obscuration, how phenomena actually arise and are and cease, that is mind functioning naturally, without obscuration - that is mind functioning "with wisdom". Sunlight naturally lights up whatever moves along the surface of the earth unless it is obscured by a cloud cover. When the clouds part a little, there is some visibility, when they part more, there is increased visibility, and when they disperse entirely, then there is complete visibility. Insights do come and go - they are the content of various mindstates that come and go. When defilements (obscurations) are weakened, due to some degree of awakening or by being held in abeyance by strong mindfulness and concentration, energetic investigation can result in (relatively) clear seeing, and an "insight" arises. An insight is a moment of clear seeing, a peeking through the darkness by a ray of light, a moment of relatively normal functioning. When defilements are gone fully, all discernment is without obscuration. Wisdom, and enlightenment, and nibbana itself, for that matter, are not positive presences, but are absences. It is not that the state of perfect enlightenment and freedom is something special to be obtained. Our current state, having been in effect without beginning, is special in a negative sense - it is an abnormal, sick state. The Buddha was called the great physician because he provided us with medicine to cure our *illness*. We are so used to this sick state of malfunctioning, we have been ill for so long, that we tend to not even realize that we are ill. We tend to think we are "normal," but that special, magnificent states that go beyond "just normal" are achievable. I think this is a backwards point of view. We are not "normal". We are ill. We need to take the Buddha's medicine. 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) 27474 From: buddhatrue Date: Fri Nov 28, 2003 8:11am Subject: Re: Pali and monk questions --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Star Kid wrote: > > Dear James, > I hope you are keeping well! Well, thank you > for answering my questions and here are my new ones: > 1:How is the language Pali like? Do anyone in the > world speak it today? > 2:Where do most Buddhist monks live? ( I mean as in > the type of shelter they live in) > 3:Are there special rules that Buddhist monks have to > obey which are different from normal people? > That's all! > Metta, > Janice Hi Star Kid Janice! Yes, I am keeping well. Thanks for asking. Here are some answers to your questions: 1:How is the language Pali like? Do anyone in the world speak it today? Answer: Well, here are some examples of Pali with English translations: Etaü santaü, etaü paõãtaü, yadidaü sabbasaïkhàrasamatho sabbåpadhipañinissaggo taõhakkhayo viràgo nirodho nibbànaü. "This is peaceful, this is excellent, namely the stilling of all preparations, the relinquishment of all assets, the destruction of craving, detachment, cessation, extinction". Yathà yathà và pan'assa kàyo paõihito hoti tathà tathà naü pajànàti, "in whatever way his body is disposed, so he understands it". Hatthesu, bhikkhave, sati àdànanikkhepanaü pa¤¤àyati, pàdesu sati abhikkamapañikkamo pa¤¤àyati, pabbesu sati sammi¤janapasàraõaü pa¤¤àyati, kucchismiü sati jighacchà pipàsà pa¤¤àyati. "When there are hands, monks, a taking up and putting down is apparent; when there are feet, a going forward and coming back is apparent; when there are joints, a bending and stretching is apparent; when there is a belly, hunger and thirst is apparent." No one speaks Pali in the world today. It is a dead language. Some people learn to translate and write in Pali, to study Buddhist documents, but they can't really speak it to hold conversations and such. 2:Where do most Buddhist monks live? (I mean as in the type of shelter they live in) Answer: They live in the Buddhist temple. 3:Are there special rules that Buddhist monks have to obey which are different from normal people? Answer: Yes, they must obey 227 additional rules, in addition to the five, eight, and ten precepts for lay people (five precepts for all Buddhists and 8/10 precepts for all Buddhists during retreats and staying at a Buddhist temple.) These rules are listed in the Vinaya Pitaka. Hope these answer your questions. Take care and study hard in school! Metta, James 27475 From: htootintnaing Date: Fri Nov 28, 2003 8:39am Subject: Cetasikas As Designers Or Helpers ( 06 ) Dear Dhamma Friends, Out of 25 Constructive Ministers or beautiful Cetasikas, 19 have been described in the previous post. There left 6 beautiful Cetasikas. They are Virati( abstinence ) Cetasikas, Appamanna (endless ) Cetasikas, and Panna Cetasika. Virati Cetasikas are those Cetasikas that help Citta avoid doing bad things. There are three Cetasikas in this group of Virati Cetasika. They are Sammakammanta, Sammavaca, and Sammaajiva Cetasika. Three Virati Cetasikas are 20. Sammakammanta ( right action ) This Constructive Minister advises the king Citta not to do bad things. It has the character of abstinence. This Cetasika is also a kind of inhibition like Hirika and Ottappa. But the main function of this Cetasika is inhibiting doing of bad things at Kayadvara or body- door. While Hirika and Ottappa are considering the consequences, Sammakammanta consider the wickedness, the badness of the actions at the body and it inhibit doing bad things. 21.Sammavaca ( right speech ) This Cetasika is like Sammakammanta Cetasika. This Constructive Minister advises the king Citta not to tell wrong speech, not to tell lies, and not to express wrong thing verbally. It is also a kind of inhibition but it focuses on the verbal actions. 22. Sammaajiva ( right living , right livelihood ) This Constructive Minister makes the king Citta to live on right living or right livelihood. This Cetasika is also a kind of inhibition. But it considers pureness of livelihood. Living on occupations which are performed under the influence of Sammakammata and Sammavaca is the chief character of Sammaajiva. There are two Appamanna Cetasikas. They are Karuna and Mudita. 23. Karuna ( pitiness, compassion ) This Constructive Minister makes citta to have pity on Sattas. This Cetasika is compassion. It considers on Sattas who are in the state of unfulfilment, Sattas who are in dangers, who are suffering, who are lacking in something and so on. This Cetasika assists in producing helping hand to others who are in needs of something. 24. Mudhita ( happiness on wealthiness of others ) This Minister makes citta to have a good mood on the events of other people success and achievement. He is happy to hear other people success. He is happy to know that other people are at good conditions. This Cetasika is enemy for Issa or jealousy. Issa and Mudita never co-exist in a Citta. Panna Cetasika is the most important of all Cetasikas in Dhamma. There is only one Cetasika in this group. 25. Pannindriya ( Panna or Wisdom ) This Minister is Prime Minister. This Cetasika makes the king Citta think to see and to realise things in depth. He has a power of realization. He has a power of analysis. He has a power of penetration. He has a good insight into the matter in question. If Prime Minister is present and functioning well all other accompanying Cetasikas work well and all are well organized. This Cetasika is like a wise man or a wise minister that present the pros and cons of all to the king Citta. This Cetasika is the chief of all Cetasikas in Rupa and Arupa Jhana, Magga Citta, and Phala Citta. Without this Pannindriya Cetasika there will not arise any Jhana Citta or any Magga Citta or any Phala Citta. All these Constructive Ministers mostly work together and they all are beautiful Cetasikas. May you all well breed these beautiful Cetasikas With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing 27476 From: buddhatrue Date: Fri Nov 28, 2003 8:53am Subject: Re: The Buddha --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Star Kid wrote: > > Dear James, > > I do agree with you with what you wrote to Philip, > how people have good results and they start to relax > thinking that this will stay like that forever. But > unexpectedly things just change. > > Did the Buddha have a large number of people following > him? > Did the Buddha teach them what is right and what is > wrong? > If they did something wrong, will they be punished? > > Metta, > Sandy Hi Star Kid Sandy! I am glad that you realize that things change. Most people know that bad things change, and wait for them to go away, but they usually don't consider that good things go away also. Trying to keep away the bad and hold onto the good our whole lives creates suffering. Okay, let me answer your questions: Question: Did the Buddha have a large number of people following him? Answer: Yes. He started out with only five followers but that number grew to thousands. I don't know the exact numbers because they didn't keep records like that back then. Question: Did the Buddha teach them what is right and what is wrong? Answer: Yes he did. And they taught each other also. Question: If they did something wrong, will they be punished? Answer: It depended on how bad a thing they did. If it was a minor infraction and they confessed the infraction to the entire sangha, then they wouldn't be punished. But if it was a significant infraction, they would have to go to a meeting of the sangha and then they would be put on probation. Four infractions would lead to immediate expulsion from the sangha (kicked out): sexual-intercourse, murder, theft, or falsely claiming supernormal abilities. Hope this answers your questions. Take care and study hard in school! Metta, James 27477 From: yu_zhonghao Date: Fri Nov 28, 2003 9:10am Subject: [dsg] Re: Clinging to Wholesome States (was: Buddhaghosa....) Hi Sarah and all, Thank you for providing some examples on what you mean by clinging to wholesome states, such as: 1. The desire, pleasure, wish, clinging to past, future or present acts of generosity. 2. Wishes for metta, for more awareness, conceit about good deeds. 3. Delight and attachment to keeping good sila, to not breaking precepts. Here are some more questions: What does it mean by the desire and wish to past, future or present acts of generosity? What does it mean by the pleasure to past, future or present acts of generosity? What does it mean by the clinging to past, future or present acts of generosity? What does it mean by wishes for metta? for more awareness? What does it mean by conceit about good deeds? What does it mean by delight to keeping good sila, to not breaking precepts? What does it mean by attachment to keeping good sila, to not breaking precepts? How is it bound to be attachment to the good deed, to the pleasant wholesome feeling, to the calm and so on whilst performing a good deed, an act of kindness or consideration or generosity? What are the nobler moments? I've put forth a barrage of questions... Peace, Victor PS. Happy Thanksgiving for all who celebrate this holiday!! --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Sarah wrote: > Hi Victor, > Hi Sarah and all. [snip] > > However, I am not sure what you mean by clinging to wholesome states. > .... > How about now? Is the desire, pleasure, wish, clinging to past, future or > present acts of generosity, to wishes for metta, for more awareness, > conceit about good deeds and so on wholesome or unwholesome? What about > delight and attachment to keeping good sila, to not breaking precepts and > so on. So many examples can be given, but only rt understanding can know > if it's attachment. Whilst performing a good deed, an act of kindness or > consideration or generosity, there's bound to be attachment to the good > deed, to the pleasant wholesome feeling, to the calm and so on repeatedly > in between the nobler moments. It's very natural. Only an arahant has no > more attachment. > > I'm not sure we're on the same track here, Victor, but I know you'll let > me know if this doesn't pass;-) In any case, I've appreciated reflecting > on this subject. > > Metta, > > Sarah 27478 From: buddhatrue Date: Fri Nov 28, 2003 9:20am Subject: Re: More questions for James --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Star Kid wrote: > James: > > Thanks for your advice, anyway, just a few more > questions to ask, yeah? > > 1. How did you know that I am being mean to my > sister? > > 2. The Buddha says that we shouldn't kill, even the > insects and small animals, because they are all living > creatures. But if we don't kill the germs and insects, > our food and drinking water would be polluted, and > human beings would be extinct. What kind of philosophy > is this? > > 3. Anyway, why is there a big door ramp at each > Buddhist temple? > > Thanks for answering. > > Philip Hi Star Kid Philip! You are very welcome for the advice. I hope it helps you. Let me get to your questions: 1. How did you know that I am being mean to my sister? Answer: I just had a feeling. A long time ago, when the Star Kids first started writing, your sister wrote to me after I had written to you. She wrote that she was going to tell your mom about something you had written to me. I could tell that she feels victimized by you and wants you to act right. This is very important to her; much more important than it is to you. She looks up to you but you just consider her a little pest who you can terrorize at will. I can pick up a lot of impressions from people's writing; much more than what they say outright. Call it `reading between the lines' if you will. No one told me if that is what you are wondering. 2. The Buddha says that we shouldn't kill, even the insects and small animals, because they are all living creatures. But if we don't kill the germs and insects, our food and drinking water would be polluted, and human beings would be extinct. What kind of philosophy is this? Answer: The precept is to refrain from killing living beings; that means to do everything possible not to kill. But, as you point out, sometimes killing a living being is necessary for survival. In those instances, it should be done mindfully and with remorse. Even your religion, Christianity, has the commandment of "Thou Shalt Not Kill". Buddhists just take that idea a bit further. 3. Anyway, why is there a big door ramp at each Buddhist temple? Answer: I am not completely sure what you mean. From your description it is probably to make the temple wheelchair accessible. Hope this answers your questions. Take care and study hard in school! Metta, James 27479 From: buddhatrue Date: Fri Nov 28, 2003 9:39am Subject: Re: Do you remember me? --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Star Kid wrote: > > Hi James > I am Janet, Do you remember me? I'm Philips younger > sister.How long is it since I sent you letters? > Perhaps start from May or June. > I have some questions to ask you: > > 1 Are you aways sending letters to Philip? How is he > behaving? > 2 When did you start beleive in Buddha? > 3 Do you know much about Buddha? What do you like most > ? If you have time, please write to me. > > > Janet (age 9) Hi Star Kid Janet! Yes I remember you. I don't remember exactly when you wrote to me; I am very bad about keeping time. Maybe it was in May or June, I don't really know. Okay, let me get to your question: 1 Are you aways sending letters to Philip? How is he behaving? Answer: I send a letter to Philip if he writes to me. You don't need to concern yourself with how he is behaving; you should just think about how you are behaving. 2 When did you start beleive in Buddha? Answer: When I had first started college, when I was about 19 or 20 years old. I am 34 now so it was about 14 or 15 years ago. 3 Do you know much about Buddha? What do you like most? Answer: Honestly, I have been studying Buddhism since I became a Buddhist and I still don't think I know enough about the Buddha. He is an endless topic of fascination and depth. What I like most about the Buddha is that he was a human being, just like me. He made several mistakes along the way looking for the answer to what he was seeking but he never gave up; that is what I try to do with my life also. And I continue to make mistakes along the way ;-). Hope these answer your questions. Take care and study hard in school! Metta, James 27480 From: buddhatrue Date: Fri Nov 28, 2003 10:20am Subject: Re: Hope you don't mind my quesions!: ) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Star Kid wrote: > > Dear James, > > How are you? You maybe remember me from last year, I > asked you questions about Monks and Buddhism. > My name is Anne-Catherine and i go to German Swiss > International School in Hong Kong. > > I read some of your letters to Phillip and they have > really inspired me a lot, through your anwers and > examples which you have mentioned in your letters. It > seems you understand him quite well, how so? Do you > have any relation with his character and does Phillip > remind you of your childhood? > > There are more questions waiting for you: > 1. Mrs Abbott just told me a minute ago that you are > working in Eygpt, why did you choose to work and live > in Egypt? > 2. If I may ask, are you Buddhist? If you are, why did > you choose to be buddhist? > And isn't Eygpt a Muslim country, so why are you in > Egypt? > 3. By curiosity, where did the Buddhism begin and how > did this religion spread? > > Thank you for taking your spare time reading my > letter. I can't wait for your rely. > > Anne-Catherine : ) > Hi Star Kid Anne-Catherine! Yes, I remember you. I am glad that my letters to Philip inspired you. Yes, to some extent I am like Philip and to some extent I am not. I see a bit of everyone in myself though. I can sense things from what people write and I was especially in-tune with Philip because I felt that I am going through some of the same issues that he is currently going through. I don't think that Philip and I had the same childhood because he is much more outspoken than I was; I was a quiet and reflective child and didn't draw a lot of attention to myself like he does. I can be a terror at times in writing, and on the Internet, but in person I am much more subdued. Okay, enough about Philip and me, let me get to your questions (which I see that some of them are still about me ;-): 1. Mrs Abbott just told me a minute ago that you are working in Eygpt, why did you choose to work and live in Egypt? Answer: Call it `temporary insanity'! hehehe…just kidding. The opportunity came along and I felt that it was something I needed to do. That it would teach me something about myself that I needed to know. I was right about that, so far it has taught me a lot about myself. 2. If I may ask, are you Buddhist? If you are, why did you choose to be buddhist? And isn't Eygpt a Muslim country, so why are you in Egypt? Answer: Yes I am Buddhist. I chose to be Buddhist because the teachings of the Buddha are the truth to me. They answer the question as to what is the reason for my existence and how I should live my life to be a better person. Yes, Egypt is predominately a Muslim country. I didn't feel that I needed to live in a Buddhist country. Nowadays, Buddhist countries aren't really all that Buddhist anyway. 3. By curiosity, where did the Buddhism begin and how did this religion spread? Answer: Buddhism began in India and made its way to China, Tibet and other Asian countries. It was spread my monks who traveled and taught what they knew. In those countries Buddhism is a part of the culture now. Since then, Buddhists are found all over the world but Buddhism isn't a part of the culture in the Middle East, Europe, and North/South America. Hope this answers your questions. Take care and study hard in school! Metta, James 27481 From: nina van gorkom Date: Fri Nov 28, 2003 10:42am Subject: Re: [dsg] anapanasati 3 b sanna. Hi Larry, op 27-11-2003 19:14 schreef LBIDD@w... op LBIDD@w...: > The Vis. quotes here from the Path of Discrimination: feeling being cetasikas... , these things are bound up with citta and > are mind functions.> > > I wonder if we could say perception (sanna) is identification? N: It is recognition or remembrance. It marks the object or remembers it. It accompanies each citta experiencing objects through the six doors. Also seeing. When it arises with seeing it does not identify or define seeing. I do not think this word fits in connection with sanna. Nina. 27482 From: nina van gorkom Date: Fri Nov 28, 2003 10:42am Subject: Tiika Vis. 37, part 2, fragments. Tiika Texts 37, part 2, fragments (using Vis. note 14): ...... Etthaahañ cakkhaadiina.m indriyaana.m ki.m ekakammunaa uppatti, udaahu naanaakammunaati? Ubhayathaapiiti poraa.naa. 'Here it may be asked, "Is the arising of the faculties of the eye, etc., due to kamma that is one or to kamma that is different?" Now the ancients say, "In both ways". Tattha naanaakammunaa taava uppattiya.m cakkhaadiina.m visese vattabba.m natthi kaara.nassa bhinnattaa. Herein, firstly, in the case of the arising of an eye, etc., due to kamma that is different there is nothing to be explained since the cause is divided up. Ekakammunaa pana uppattiya.m katha.m nesa.m visesoti? Kaara.nassa bhinnattaa eva. But when their arising is due to kamma that is one, how does there come to be differentiation among them? It is due to dividedness in the cause too. Ta.mta.mbhavapatthanaabhuutaa hi ta.nhaa ta.mta.mbhavapariyaapannaayatanaabhilaasataaya saya.m vicittaruupaa upanissayabhaavena ta.mta.mbhavanibbattakakammassa vicittabhedata.m vidahati. For it is craving, in the form of longing for this or that kind of becoming that, itself having specific forms owing to hankering after the sense-bases included in some kind of becoming or other, contrives, acting as decisive-support, the specific divisions in the kamma that generates such a kind of becoming. Yato tadaahitavisesa.m ta.m tathaaruupasamatthataayogenaanekaruupaapanna.m viya aneka.m visi.t.thasabhaava.m phala.m nibbatteti. As soon as the kamma has acquired the differentiation induced by that [hankering] it generates that effort consisting in appropriate ability, a multiple fruit with differentiated essences, as though it had itself taken on a multiple form. ........ Aya~nca ekassapi kammassa anekindriyahetutaavisesayogo yuttito, aagamanato ca parato aagamissati. And the fact of this differentiating effort on the part of kamma that is one being the cause of the multiple faculties will be dealt with below as to logic and texts. Apica ekasseva kusalacittassa so.lasaadivipaakacittanibbattihetutaa vuccati. Besides, it is told how one kind of consciousness only is the cause of the generation of sixteen kinds of resultant consciousness and so on; Lokepi ekasseva saalibiijassa paripu.n.naaparipu.n.nata.n.dula-aata.n.dulaphalanibbattihetutaa dissateva, ki.m vaa etaaya yutticintaaya. and in the world it is also found that a single paddy seed is the cause of the generation of the ripe, the unripe, the husked, and the unhusked fruit. But what is the use of logical thinking? Yato kammaphala.m cakkhaadiini, kammavipaako ca sabbaso buddhaana.myeva ~naa.nassa visayoti. For the eye, etc., are the fruit of kamma; and kamma-result is exclusively the province of a Buddha's knowledge' (Pm.444). ****** Nina. 27483 From: nina van gorkom Date: Fri Nov 28, 2003 10:42am Subject: anapanasati 3 c anapanasati 3 c The Vis. adds that this tetrad deals with the contemplation of feeling. The Co, the Papa~casuudanii, speaks about a , vedanaa~n~nantara.m. As to the words of the sutta, ³The giving attention completely², the Co explains that attention is not pleasant feeling but it comes under the heading of feeling. The Co repeats what has been stated in the Vis. about experiencing rapture and pleasant feeling with the object and with non-delusion. The Co then states: The Commentary explains that in the same way bliss and citta sankhara, the mental formation, are experienced and that it is thus rightly stated that the monk contemplates feelings in the feelings. The Commentary to the Satipatthana sutta states that contemplating feelings in the feelings should be seen in the same way as contemplating the body in the body: thus, in order to limit the object and ³sifting it out². We read: ****** Nina. 27484 From: Michael Beisert Date: Fri Nov 28, 2003 2:28pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Inherent characteristics of rupa Hi Jon, Jon: You also mentioned Geshe Michael Roach. If I'm not mistaken, he has done a translation of the Tibetan Abhidhamma. Do you happen to know if it has been published? Michael: No, I don't know. I have only listened to some of his audio files and heard about his book - The Diamond Cutter ( I think). And more recently heard some controversies about him. But that would be frivolous talk. Metta Michael 27485 From: nordwest Date: Fri Nov 28, 2003 0:32pm Subject: Please help sick person with your prayers Dear sangha friends, I first like to tell you an update about Sonja, who received blessings from your transvers of spiritual merits. As you may remember, the doctors has given up on her, but she recovered after we recited the Medicine Buddha, the Amitabha Buddha and prayers for her. I got an email yesterday from my family telling that the doctors and helpers don't even recogiinze Sonja anymore, and have no idea what happend: she is extreemly fit and full of life energy again. So my thanks, and deepest bows, to you again for this wonderful Dharma! A good friend of my step-mom has a difficult time with her cancer in the stomach and gets chemo-therapy right now. Maybe you can join my dedications with some (buddha/mantra) recitations and prayers for her, her name is Doris. Thank you very much. Yours in the Dharma, Thomas 27486 From: Star Kid Date: Fri Nov 28, 2003 3:57pm Subject: The Buddha's teaching Dear James, How are you? I hope you are keeping well! Thank you for the inspiring questions about Buddhism! Here are some questions : 1. How long did the Buddha teach his people? 2. How did the Buddha teach his people? 3. Where did the chief monk ' Abbot' come from? That's it! Metta, Janice P.S. Did you get my other letter about two weeks ago? ______________________________________________________ 27487 From: Sarah Date: Fri Nov 28, 2003 4:21pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Clinging to Wholesome States (was: Buddhaghosa....) Hi Victor, --- yu_zhonghao wrote: > Hi Sarah and all, > > Thank you for providing some examples on what you mean by clinging > to wholesome states, such as: > > 1. The desire, pleasure, wish, clinging to past, future or present > acts of generosity. > > 2. Wishes for metta, for more awareness, conceit about good deeds. > > 3. Delight and attachment to keeping good sila, to not breaking > precepts. > > Here are some more questions: .... I'm busy teaching today. Perhaps in the meantime you can try answering your questions first;-) I'm sure you have your own ideas. .... > How is it bound to be attachment to the good deed, to the pleasant > wholesome feeling, to the calm and so on whilst performing a good > deed, an act of kindness or consideration or generosity? .... Just this one - attachment is bound to sneak in at every opportunity. This is its nature. As soon as we open our eyes, there's lobha. Perhaps you can add some links for me to make the point;-) .... > What are the nobler moments? > > I've put forth a barrage of questions... ... What do you think are the nobler moments and yes there were a lot of qus;-) Please let us know the answers;-) .... > PS. Happy Thanksgiving for all who celebrate this holiday!! .... Likewise and thanks for the good wishes. Metta, Sarah ====== 27488 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Fri Nov 28, 2003 5:13pm Subject: RE: [dsg] Hello! Hello, Start Kid Janice, Of course, I remember you. It's good to be talking to you again too, after a long break ;-). I am sorry I din't get back to you sooner, I had been in Thailand for about 4 1/2 weeks, and didn't check email that often. Kamma is not a person. Kamma is the intention (to do something). For example, when you give to another person, you have to have an intention to give for the giving to happen. The intention is (good) kamma. When you lie, you have to have an intention to lie. That intention is (bad) kamma. Kamma is a cause: it will give results in the future. Good kamma brings good results, and bad kamma brings bad results. If we don't like bad results, we'd better have good intention to other beings (good kamma). The Buddha taught about kamma in details, most likely more than in other religion that also teaches about kamma. No, all is left of the Buddha are his teaching, and all the students that follow his teachings. He cannot talk to anybody as there is nothing left of him except for bone fragments and other relics which are often stored in pagodas. Mrs. Abbot just came back from a visit to Burma where she visited a famous pagoda that stores the hairs of the Buddha. I am glad that you are still interested in learning more about Buddhism. It is a teaching that has been so helpful to myself. Metta, kom 27489 From: yu_zhonghao Date: Fri Nov 28, 2003 9:22pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Clinging to Wholesome States (was: Buddhaghosa....) Hi Sarah and all, I am not sure what the answers to those questions should be in the context of what the Buddha taught. If possible I would like to see if any of these examples of "clinging to wholesome states" is addressed in the discourses. Peace, Victor --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Sarah wrote: > Hi Victor, [snip] 27490 From: Sarah Date: Fri Nov 28, 2003 10:09pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Clinging to Wholesome States (was: Buddhaghosa....) Hi Victor, --- yu_zhonghao wrote: > Hi Sarah and all, > > I am not sure what the answers to those questions should be in the > context of what the Buddha taught. If possible I would like to see > if any of these examples of "clinging to wholesome states" is > addressed in the discourses. .... Where did you get the idea that Dhamma-Vinaya only refers to the discourses?;-) As far as I’m concerned, the Buddha taught the TI-pitaka; You don’t accept the discourses I’ve offered, so let me introduce you to some straight Abhidhamma from the Pa.t.thaana, the book of Conditional Relations*. As you know, there are 24 conditions by which all conditioned states arise, including ‘clinging’ or attachment (lobha). The first condition is root condition. Without the root of lobha, it cannot arise. The second condition is object condition: From Analytical Exposition of the Conditions 2. Object Condition “ i) visible object-base is related to eye-consciousnes element and its associated states by object condition............etc vii) ALL states are related to mind-consciousness element and its associated states by object condition. viii) Taking ANY state as object, these states, consciousness and mental factors, arise; these (former) states are related to those (latter) states by object condition.” In other words, all states including wholesome states become object of any mind-consciousness and its co-factors. In case this is not explicit enough, let me give a more detailed quote from the same text: From Faultless Triplet Object 9, 405, ii “Faultless state is related to faulty state by object condition. After having offered the offering, having undertaken the precept, having fulfilled the duty of observance, (one) enjoys and delights in it. Taking it as object, arises, lust, arises wrong views, arises doubt, arises restlessness, arises grief. (One) enjoys and delights in (such acts) formerly well done. Taking it as object, arises lust, arises wrong views, arises doubt, arises restlessness, arises grief. Having emerged from jhaana, (one) enjoys and delights in the jhaana. Taking it (jhaana) as object, arises lust, arises wrong views, arises doubt, arises restlessness. When jhaana has disappeared, (one) regrets it and thereby arises grief.” ..... Of course, for the arahant, there are no faulty (unwholesome) states, and therefore the object cannot condition attachment. Victor, rather than ask for more references or reply and say you don’t accept the Abhidhamma, why not consider whether there is any attachment to wholesome states over the Thanksgiving weekend. Thank you again for conditioning these further reflections;-) With metta, Sarah * “But when, coming to the Great Book (the Pa.t.thaana), he began to contemplate the twenty-four universal causal relations of condition, of presentation, and so on, his [the Buddha’s] omniscience certainly found its opportunity therein. For as the great fish Rimiratipin’ngala finds room only in the great ocean eighty-four thousand yojanas in depth, so his omniscience truly finds room only in the Great Book.” (Introductory Discourse, Atthasaalini). ====== 27491 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Fri Nov 28, 2003 10:12pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Pure Mind/Buddha Nature Hi James > Hi Ken O, > J: I don't think that `luminous mind' or `buddha nature' is > incompatible with anatta. It depends on how you view anatta. It seems to me that you believe that anatta means that when you take everything apart, break down the five aggregates, then absolutely nothing is left. This isn't anatta, this is nihilism. Anatta means that there isn't a lasting soul or essence, there isn't an individual, there isn't a personality…everything that is thought of as, "This is me; this is who I am; this is mine" is incorrect. The original nature of the mind is pure awareness, and this pure awareness is luminous. The original nature of the mind is pure wisdom because then all phenomena (dharmas) are known. It is only through ignorance that individuality springs into being. The original mind is luminous and undifferentiated. k; When I first started Buddhism, I do have this idea. However, pse give me a chance to explain further again even though I may not be good at it. There is something about anatta that is difficult to explain. Buddha is very clever, he say it is neither exsting nor non-existing. He illustrate with examples llike bubble, like foam. It is there but if we start having ideas that there is something there is mind that is luminious, that is there undifferential, an original mind, this will mean it is unconditional, a entity without change will mean an atta. This essence is very differnt from the way I say fire is hot. > > What does this mean? What is it like? How does it look? How can > such a thing be? These are all questions that the ego-centered > mind tries to understand but cannot. Personally, I have only had brief glimpses at it, and then it is gone, and then my ego-centered mind tries to figure out the experience but cannot. I don't know what to tell you, really. You have to know it for yourself. k: Let me be long winded and repeat myself again. As I say Buddha is an extremely clever person, beyond compare, beyond doubt. The theory of his existence and non-existence is beyond conditioned man realm of understanding until at least we reach the first stage of enlightment. He always says it is empty of a self, but he does not say this empty of self is another self bc this will contradicts himself. What is it? We can only know by the words that it is there, have faith in his wisdom. Anything that it is lumnious, a pure mind is just pure speculation. The experience you have is maybe Jhanas (I am not an expert just a guess). I have also experience days of aboslute freedom and joy, nothing affects me, everything as what Herman say pure awareness, just like watching a show goes by. There is no concept of space and time. No you and I. Just the momment. And one of my friend thinks I am a nut and I smile :). Cheers and have a merry day Ken O 27492 From: Sarah Date: Fri Nov 28, 2003 10:37pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Pure Mind/Buddha Nature Hi Ken O, --- Kenneth Ong wrote: > Hi Howard. > Abdhidhamma perspective is correct, bc > everything conditional things are impermanent and anatta (including > wisdom). Wisdom is not condition only when one is enlighted. .... I agree with all your other comments. A couple of times you've mentioned sth to suggest that wisdom is not conditioned when enlightened which is not clear to me. Even lokuttara wisdom and the arahant's wisdom is conditioned, anicca, dukkha and anatta. The ONLY unconditioned dhamma is nibbana (the object of the lokuttara cittas with wisdom). No other exceptions to the rule - all others sankhara. No time to chat. Keep up all your great discussions;-) ;-) Metta, Sarah p.s Sorry to read you've had some difficulties or personal problems. As you say, only the Dhamma can help. . ================================== 27493 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Sat Nov 29, 2003 0:04am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Pure Mind/Buddha Nature Hi Howard H: So here you are proposing something conditioned changing its nature to something unconditioned. Is that not novel? k: It is not novel. Let me try to discuss this issue without Abdhidhamma, my opinion is that one needs an unconditioned mind to explain a conditional mind. As I wrote earlier to James that this existence and non-existence is beyond the conditioned mind to understand, only Buddha who experience the unconditonal state able to explain. This wisdom is beyond conditioning. I believe it is Nibbana however not a total Nibbana bc the body is still conditioned by kamma. If I have not forgotten, somebody did quote something about it, is it a sutta or some Abdhidhamma material. To me, Buddha path is a conditioned mind to Nibbana (i.e. to me it is unconditional mind hence unconditional wisdom) H: I think the problem here lies with what "wisdom" is. This is > an instance, in my opinion, where Abhidhamma muddies the waters. But I think what you are saying is valid only if "wisdom" is understood in a particular way (the "Abhidhammic way"! ;-), which I think is an error. Abhidhamma takes wisdom/insight/pa~n~na to be a special mental function. I do not understand it that way. If perfect wisdom were an actual, positive phenomenon that arises, then it would have to cease as well. I do not see how that could be questioned and still accept the Buddha's teaching of anicca - whatever arises, ceases. k: My stand is that perfect wisdom is beyond conditioning. What we have now is conditioned wisdom so it has to arise and cease. H: As I see it, 'wisdom' is a conventional term to describe the natural, unobscured functioning of the mind, the natural functioning of discernment (vi~n~nana) and perception/recognition (sa~n~na). When one sees clearly, without obscuration, how phenomena actually arise and are and cease, that is mind functioning naturally, without obscuration - that is mind functioning "with wisdom". k: When I look closer at this statement, this sounds Abdhidhamma. Then one see clearly - means that is a cognition of an object (consciousness). How phenomena actually arise and are and cease, that is mind functioning naturally, without obscuration - that is mind functioning "with wisdom". - means that is a mental function. In my context, in order for wisdom to arise to discern, it also must be condition by an unwholestate, or a state of indifference or a wholesome one. Wisdom can also be conditioned by our learning, or right effort. H: Sunlight naturally lights up whatever moves along the surface of the earth unless it is obscured by a cloud cover. When the clouds part a little, there is some visibility, when they part more, there is increased visibility, and when they disperse entirely, then there is complete visibility. Insights do come and go - they are the content of various mindstates that come and go. When defilements (obscurations) are weakened, due to some degree of > awakening or by being held in abeyance by strong mindfulness and concentration, energetic investigation can result in (relatively) clear seeing, and an "insight" arises. An insight is a moment of clear seeing, a peeking through the darkness by a ray of light, a moment of relatively normal functioning. When defilements are > gone fully, all discernment is without obscuration. k: Howard, that is again I think you are refering something behind the back. A presence which I think anatta trying to dispell. Anatta is a very tricky word - to me it is an absence of a self - but it does not point to another self, or to another presence bc all such pointing of another presence will mean we will cling to it, and this will leading to suffering. It is just anatta - a state beyond conditioned mind. We know that Anatta is the word that separates Buddhism and with many teachers at that time. Some of them do spoke about impermenant but they point to a presence. This is what Buddha trying to dispell, any presence will bring a whole mass of sufferings. An absence of presence is the key. Buddha never used a word to describe this presence bc he knows any description will make us cling to it. He leave it as neither existent nor non existent (a very clever man) warmest regards Ken O 27494 From: ashkenn2k Date: Sat Nov 29, 2003 0:55am Subject: [dsg] Re: Pure Mind/Buddha Nature Hi Sarah Sometimes, it is difficult to juggle explaining in ways that is not Abdhidhamma and sometimes it is a mixed up. I know one day someone will ask this question. You said that a lokuttara wisdom and the arahant's wisdom is conditioned, anicca, dukkha and anatta. What are these refering, they are referring to kammic effects. As long as one is still in the condition world, the effects are there. The world loku as you know is beyond the world or supramundane. When we say it is beyond the world or supramundane, to me it is wisdom that is not bound by *conditioned* world, however why it is still bound by anicca, dukkha and anatta to me it is bc of kammic effects. Maybe I should use the word "beyond the conditioned world consciouness" to argue but this is too long to write, too cumbersome. I prefer the word unconditioned wisdom to express lokiya citta to lokuttara citta. Ok maybe next time I used supramundane wisdom to avoid confusion. Or maybe I should use this word unwordly widsom ;-). In my stand, one needs to experience the unconditioned dhamma (Nibbana as an object) in order to explain what is in the condition world. (I think there is a sutta on this where Arahant is in Nibbana but not total Nibbana until the conditioned life time is over due to kamma) Or not Buddha will have a hard time convincing pple that there is a way to liberation (i.e. Nibbana). I always happy if you got more to discuss here bc I not particularly into jhanas or supramundane consciouness bc now to me it is a state too far away to study. Kind regards Ken O 27495 From: buddhatrue Date: Sat Nov 29, 2003 1:22am Subject: Re: Pure Mind/Buddha Nature --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Kenneth Ong wrote: > Hi James Hi Ken O, Both metaphors that the Buddha uses, "foam" and "luminous" are just metaphors. They are not literal descriptions of anything. It seems to me that you are taking them as literal descriptions and you have made up your mind as to what they mean. In the foam sutta, is the Buddha giving a description of anatta and absolute reality? No. He is just giving a strategy for his monks to follow that will lead to dispassion and enlightenment. To quote the summary: "Seeing thus, the well-instructed disciple of the noble ones grows disenchanted with form, disenchanted with feeling, disenchanted with perception, disenchanted with fabrications, disenchanted with consciousness. Disenchanted, he grows dispassionate. Through dispassion, he's released. With release there's the knowledge, 'Released.' He discerns that 'Birth is ended, the holy life fulfilled, the task done. There is nothing further for this world.'" http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/samyutta/sn22-095.html Seeing things thus will lead to disenchantment, and disenchantment will lead to knowledge and release. The Buddha didn't say, " Listen monks and I will give you a description of anatta so that you will know it for yourselves." That isn't possible. It must be known through release of the mind. It is important not to confuse the path with the goal. In the same vein the Buddha used the metaphor of "luminous" to describe the original state of the mind. Luminous doesn't mean that it is a thing or a person or an entity, it is just a metaphorical description. What it really means can't be known until enlightenment. It seems to me that your dispute is with the Buddha. You seem to believe that he has somehow contracted himself by using these two metaphors. Again, I don't know what to tell you. That is what he said. Metta, James Ps. I don't think that my experiences were Jhanas. I don't practice Jhana meditation. Actually, they were probably very similar to yours. In those cases, do you believe that something was added to your mind or do you believe that something was taken away, to make you see things such? 27496 From: Star Kid Date: Sat Nov 29, 2003 3:25am Subject: A Reply to James Hi James, Thank you for replying to my letter, but I have somemore questions to tell you: I had read Philip's letter, when I read his question No.2 about killing. I knew that he had copied a comic book, the name of the comic book is called: Old Master Cue, it is a very populer comic. Well, the answer in the comic is like this: Old Master Cue is just trying to kill a fly, and he went past a woman who believed in Buddha said "We should not kill everything, we shouldn't kill." Then Old Master Cue said "Well, even germs we shouldn't kill?" The woman said "Yes" then Old Master Cue said "So when you are sick, you don't see doctor." Then he continued "Well like you these people should be killed!" Well I think Philip just wanted another answer! Well if you have time to write a reply to my letter, please write back. Janet 27497 From: Star Kid Date: Sat Nov 29, 2003 3:27am Subject: What made the 5 people follow the Buddha? Dear James, Thankyou for the brilliant answers you told me. I was wondering what made the 5 people follow the Buddha and why? Who were the 5 people? I'm really looking forward to the answers! Take care! Metta, Sandy 27498 From: ashkenn2k Date: Sat Nov 29, 2003 3:42am Subject: Re: Pure Mind/Buddha Nature Hi James J: Both metaphors that the Buddha uses, "foam" and "luminous" are just metaphors. They are not literal descriptions of anything. It seems to me that you are taking them as literal descriptions and you have made up your mind as to what they mean. In the foam sutta, is the Buddha giving a description of anatta and absolute reality? No. He is just giving a strategy for his monks to follow that will lead to dispassion and enlightenment. Seeing things thus will lead to disenchantment, and disenchantment will lead to knowledge and release. The Buddha didn't say, " Listen monks and I will give you a description of anatta so that you will know it for yourselves." That isn't possible. It must be known through release of the mind. It is important not to confuse the path with the goal. k: James, if you look further down the sutta on the poem where he say "Form is like a glob of foam; feeling, a bubble; perception, a mirage; fabrications, a banana tree; consciousness, a magic trick this has been taught by the Kinsman of the Sun. However you observe them, appropriately examine them, they're empty, void to whoever sees them appropriately. " That is how he link the subject on his metaphor subjects with empty or anatta. I dont make up my mind on just one sutta. There are so many sutta on anatta. Maybe you will like the Sunna sutta or Anatta- lakkhana sutta. They carried the same meaning in different ways of presenting. Or what your describe different strategy leading to the same path. Sometimes direct (like Sunna Sutta, sometimes metaphor (like the Foam Sutta) but they carried the same meaning, same taste of liberation. If these suttas do not give a meaning of anatta then which sutta will. I have said anatta is a tricky subject. It is only able to describe by absence (not negative), a subtle and clever way of describling it without any hinge on an essence. J: In the same vein the Buddha used the metaphor of "luminous" to > describe the original state of the mind. Luminous doesn't mean that it is a thing or a person or an entity, it is just a metaphorical description. What it really means can't be known until enlightenment. k: As I say again there is no such thing as an original state of mind that mean we are all Buddha previously. Since we are Buddha previously, how do we become in this state. Then it also imply that hey what is the point of being Buddha bc we will to be back to this state again. So there is no orginal state of mind. If you equate a luminous as original state of mind - this will be incorrect. Also is this original state of mind - it is impermanent or permanent. If it is impermanent then why do we to reach it since it brings sorrow, if it is permanent then it should be atta not anatta. Or are you describing this original state of mind as Nibbana since we can't know it until we have reach it. Then Nibbana is in serious trouble bc Nibbana is unconditioning. It is the fruit of liberation from condition to uncondition. How does an unconditional Nibbana reside in a conditional mind. If it reside, then this Nibbana since unconditional will not be unchangeable by condition, it will mean it is a shadow, an underlying essence, it is atta. Dont sound congruent with Buddha stance. J: It seems to me that your dispute is with the Buddha. You seem to > believe that he has somehow contracted himself by using these two > metaphors. Again, I don't know what to tell you. That is what he > said. k: James its ok to have different views. I like to provide you views that are impermanent and anatta. No original mind, no pure mind whatsoever. J: Actually, they were probably very similar to yours. In those cases, do you believe that something was added to your mind or do you believe that something was taken away, to make you see things such? k: James things that make me see such are two: investigating of impermanence and also discernment of anatta as much as I could be mindful in my waking momments. (Whisper - Most of time I just indugle in sensual pleasure, habit are hard to break :) ) Warmest regards Ken O 27499 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sat Nov 29, 2003 5:32am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Vis. XIV 42 Howard --- upasaka@a... wrote: Howard: Jon, you asked me why I need to know *where* hardness is when it is not experienced (there being no actual rock in which to inhere) and yet supposedly has arisen along with an experienced sight (say) and other unexperienced rupas. My answer was that we need to know this to gain some reason to give credence to the claim of such a state of affairs, the arising of a rupa group that is unobservable except supposedly only by a Buddha (according to you, Ken) and that must be taken on faith. Even if this rupa-group claim were correct, the Buddha said to see for ourselves, and *not* accept due to authority, and, perhaps more importantly, why is *this* leaf in the forest among the few in the Buddha's hand?? Does one also need to know that water is two parts hydrogen and one part oxygen to make progress towards freedom? Jon: As far as I'm aware, this matter (the arising of rupas in groups) is not an aspect of the teachings that needs to be 'seen for ourselves' (i.e., proven as a fact by direct knowledge) at this stage. It is simply part of the general body of the scheme of things that we learn about. In this regard the Abhidhamma is no different from the suttas -- it is there to be understood intellectually at first, then reflected upon and so forth. Only the enlightened person has seen for himself everything that needs to be known directly. On the other hand, of course, no-one is suggesting that anything should be taken on faith. That would be of no use whatsoever. Perhaps the reason you have a problem giving credence to the Abhidhamma on the question of rupas arising in groups is that it conflicts with a view you already hold. I would be interested to know whether that view is something you have seen for yourself (or just something you are happy to give credence to). Jon 27500 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sat Nov 29, 2003 5:41am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Pure Mind/Buddha Nature Ken O --- ashkenn2k wrote: > Hi Howard > > H: Your point is interesting and clever (in the best sense), Ken. > The > thing is: Why is it that the perfection of wisdom that comes with > full enlightenment never is rescinded? > > k: A good question. Once enlighment is reach, the wisdom is then > beyong conditioning. If Buddha wisdom is conditioned how is Buddha > going to expound the dhamma. Buddha standpoint is every clear > everything is conditioned and anatta. Until we reach enlightment > all is impermanent and anatta. As Sarah has said in her reply, nibbana is the only unconditioned dhamma; all other dhammas, including panna, are conditioned. The reason why an arahant's wisdom is irreversible is that all latent tendencies for defilements have been eradicated completely. Until the first stage of enlightenment, latent tendencies of all the various defilements are passed on from one moment of consciousness to the next, so the potential for kilesa to arise and be further developed is still there. These latent tendencies are eradicated at the different stages of enlightenment until at arahantship they have all been eradicated. Thus although the arahant's panna is conditioned it is not capable of being reversed. Jon PS Enjoying your posts lately. 27501 From: buddhatrue Date: Sat Nov 29, 2003 7:00am Subject: Re: Pure Mind/Buddha Nature --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "ashkenn2k" wrote: > Hi James . > > k: James, if you look further down the sutta on the poem where he > say > > "Form is like a glob of foam; > feeling, a bubble; > perception, a mirage; > fabrications, a banana tree; > consciousness, a magic trick > this has been taught > by the Kinsman of the Sun. > However you observe them, > appropriately examine them, > they're empty, void > to whoever sees them > appropriately. " > > That is how he link the subject on his metaphor subjects with empty > or anatta. I dont make up my mind on just one sutta. There are so > many sutta on anatta. Hi Ken, It seems that we keep going round and round on this subject. There is no direct clash because you keep repeating what you wrote previously. Even this stanza doesn't prove anything. It is a metaphor. If we want to get technical, foam and bubbles are not empty or void anyway. They contain oxygen; the pressure of the oxygen on the inside against the pressure of the oxygen outside is what makes them round. If they were truly empty and void, they would implode from the outside pressure of the oxygen. So you see, on one level you think you know exactly what the Buddha is describing, on another level it isn't so clear after all. Metaphors are like that; they are not to be taken literally. I don't think that I truly know what anatta is and I don't think that you do either. The only way to know is to become enlightened. Until then, it is important to keep an open mind. Finally, the Buddha describes the mind as luminous. That is his description, not mine. My mind, for the most part, is like `looking though a dark glass darkly' ;-). I don't know exactly what he means and I don't think you do either. The Abhidhamma leads people to believe they know far more than they actually do; that has been my biggest criticism of it thus far. Just keep an open mind. Metta, James 27502 From: buddhatrue Date: Sat Nov 29, 2003 7:56am Subject: Re: A Reply to James --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Star Kid wrote: > > Hi James, > > Thank you for replying to my letter, but I have > somemore questions to tell you: > > I had read Philip's letter, when I read his question > No.2 about killing. I knew that he had copied a comic > book, the name of the comic book is called: Old Master > Cue, it is a very populer comic. Well, the answer in > the comic is like this: Old Master Cue is just trying > to kill a fly, and he went past a woman who believed > in Buddha said "We should not kill everything, we > shouldn't kill." Then Old Master Cue said "Well, even > germs we shouldn't kill?" The woman said "Yes" then > Old Master Cue said "So when you are sick, you don't > see doctor." Then he continued "Well like you these > people should be killed!" > > Well I think Philip just wanted another answer! > Well if you have time to write a reply to my letter, > please write back. > > Janet Hi Star Kid Janet! Hehehe…okay. Thank you for this information. I don't think it really matters where Philip got the question, it is a good question. Since you don't have any questions I guess that is all I have to say! ;-). Take care and study hard in school! Metta, James 27503 From: buddhatrue Date: Sat Nov 29, 2003 8:13am Subject: Re: What made the 5 people follow the Buddha? --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Star Kid wrote: > > Dear James, > > Thankyou for the brilliant answers you told me. > > I was wondering what made the 5 people follow the > Buddha and why? > Who were the 5 people? > > I'm really looking forward to the answers! > > Take care! > Metta, Sandy Hi Star Kid Sandy! When the Buddha was looking for the answer to life's suffering, he had gone deep into the woods to practice austerities with five ascetics. Austerities means that he tried to deny his body all physical comforts whatsoever: he starved himself, didn't bathe, didn't wear clothes, didn't have shelter, meditated/practiced Yoga all day, etc. He was very spiritually advanced so these five ascetics became his followers. However, after several years of this practice he still couldn't find the answer to what he was seeking. Realizing that this practice didn't give him the answer, he found the Middle Way of practice: not denying oneself comforts of all types but not indulging in comforts that are unnecessary either. He began to eat, bathe, wear a robe, etc.. The other ascetics, when they saw him doing this, rejected him as their leader. He didn't care though; he only wanted to find the truth. After regaining his strength, and with the power of his mind, he meditated for seven days and promised himself that he would find the answer to life's suffering or die trying. On the seventh day he became enlightened, he became the Buddha. When he went back to see those five ascetics who had been his followers previously, they knew right away that he had found the answer they had all been seeking. He taught them how he had done it and helped them all to become enlightened also. They were his first disciples. Hope this answers your question. Take care and study hard in school! Metta, James 27504 From: icarofranca Date: Sat Nov 29, 2003 8:21am Subject: Re: Pure Mind/Buddha Nature Dear James James:" The Abhidhamma leads people to > believe they know far more than they actually do; that has been my > biggest criticism of it thus far." ------------------------------------------------------------------- That´s the right and sure point about The Abhidhamma, James! This Pitaka is perhaps THE definitive masterpiece of all Buddhism, but all possible cittas and cetasikas and so on ordered, classified and measured from Dhammasangani to Patthanapali won´t take you along the Noble Path by itself. Take any sutta of the Sutta Nipata, or the Lotus Sutra, for example: whatever it can be,it has the same insights and conceptual structures of all buddhist scriptures, as the own Abhidhamma: but the proper decision to take the Noble Truths and boldly step on the Right Path belongs only to you. Always and ever! Getting the Abhidhamma as a Theoretical Corpus without the right approach to Daily Life is only a futile scholasticism, in my humble opinion! Hooray for Nina Van Gorkon!!!! ------------------------------------------------------------------ James:" Just keep an open mind." ----------------------------------------------------------------- Always and ever, James! Mettaya, Ícaro 27505 From: Date: Sat Nov 29, 2003 3:47am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Pure Mind/Buddha Nature Hi, Ken - In a message dated 11/29/03 3:05:43 AM Eastern Standard Time, ashkenn2k@y... writes: > > H: Sunlight naturally lights up whatever moves along the surface of > the earth unless it is obscured by a cloud cover. When the clouds > part a little, there is some visibility, when they part more, there > is increased visibility, and when they disperse entirely, then there > is complete visibility. Insights do come and go - they are the > content of various mindstates that come and go. When defilements > (obscurations) are weakened, due to some degree of > >awakening or by being held in abeyance by strong mindfulness and > concentration, energetic investigation can result in (relatively) > clear seeing, and an "insight" arises. An insight is a moment of > clear seeing, a peeking through the darkness by a ray of light, a > moment of relatively normal functioning. When defilements are > >gone fully, all discernment is without obscuration. > > k: Howard, that is again I think you are refering something behind > the back. A presence which I think anatta trying to dispell. Anatta > is a very tricky word - to me it is an absence of a self - but it > does not point to another self, or to another presence bc all such > pointing of another presence will mean we will cling to it, and this > will leading to suffering. It is just anatta - a state beyond > conditioned mind. We know that Anatta is the word that separates > Buddhism and with many teachers at that time. Some of them do spoke > about impermenant but they point to a presence. This is what Buddha > trying to dispell, any presence will bring a whole mass of > sufferings. An absence of presence is the key. Buddha never used a > word to describe this presence bc he knows any description will make > us cling to it. He leave it as neither existent nor non existent (a > very clever man) > > ============================= I know what you mean about "something behind the back," but that is not how I mean this. The functioning I'm talking about is the usual functioning of vi~n~nana and sa~n~na, but without impediments. I'm not presuming some eternal, substantial, "pure consciousness thing" lurking in the background at all. The "light" I speak of is just cognitive functioning, and when it is not obscured, everything works as it should. Please don't let my metaphors mislead rather than help. Depite the negative prefix, avijja is the *presence* of defilements, obscurations to mental functioning, and with the removal of the defilements, the mental functioning is no longer disorted, and can be positively described as vijja or pa~n~na. 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) 27506 From: Date: Sat Nov 29, 2003 4:25am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Vis. XIV 42 Hi, Jon - In a message dated 11/29/03 8:33:54 AM Eastern Standard Time, jonoabb@y... writes: > > Perhaps the reason you have a problem giving credence to the > Abhidhamma on the question of rupas arising in groups is that it > conflicts with a view you already hold. I would be interested to > know whether that view is something you have seen for yourself (or > just something you are happy to give credence to). > > =========================== No, I don't think so. My problem is that I see the rupa-group notion as a claim without explanation. First of all, if all the rupas of a group are inexperiencible, then the claim is, in principle, untestable, and requires acceptance on faith. I have no reason to believe the claim, and the lack of actual existence of conventional objects such as rocks, a lack accepted by both of us, is a big part of the problem here. If the rupas arise other than merely as objects of consciousness, which would have to be the case with the entire group arising at one time but only one rupa of the group experienced, it is reasonable to wonder *where and in what sense they arise*. I see both a phenomenalist scheme and a world-of-conventional-objects scheme, as possibly providing a basis for the rupa-group notion, but each has its problems, and if neither of these schemes is accepted, then I see no basis for the rupa-group notion. (The phenomenalist scheme *might* account for unexperienced rupas arising provided that it accepts the occurrence of parallel, subliminal experiencing along with active, surface-level vi~n~nana, but without that, I don't even see how phenomenalism accounts for this business. And the world-of-conventional-objects scheme, while serving rather well as an explanation, is acceptable to neither of us.) Taking neither of these as perspective, I don't even understand what it *means* for the unexperienced rupas to arise. I don't know what it *means*, for example, for an unexperienced hardness or sight to arise.) 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) 27507 From: yu_zhonghao Date: Sat Nov 29, 2003 10:11am Subject: [dsg] Re: Clinging to Wholesome States (was: Buddhaghosa....) Hi Sarah and all, Regarding the idea "clinging to wholesome states", you provided references from the Abhidhamma Pitaka, but not from the discourses. So the question remains: Is the problem, if there is indeed such a problem, "clinging to wholesome states" or any of its examples addressed in the discourses? If it is addressed in the discourses, how is it addressed? The question Where did you get the idea that Dhamma-Vinaya only refers to the discourses? is a whole different issue. I wrote about my impression on Abhidhamma Pitaka in message#27190 in response to Sukin: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/27190 As far as I am concerned, whether I accept Abhidhamma Pitaka or not has nothing to do with whether the idea "clinging to wholesome states" or any of its examples is addressed in the discourses. Regarding your advice to consider whether there is any attachment to wholesome states, I don't see it as grounded on the Buddha's teaching. On the other hand, I do see that sensuality/sensual pleasures and attachment to sensuality/sensual pleasures are addressed in many discourses. From my personal experience and understanding, I see that attachment to sensuality/sensual pleasures is unwholesome, unskillful, that sensuality/sensual pleasures has drawback. Peace, Victor --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Sarah wrote: > Hi Victor, [snip] 27508 From: Htoo Naing Date: Sat Nov 29, 2003 10:51am Subject: How To Get Through The Samsara ( 03 ) Dear Dhamma Friends, The Samsara or the wheel of life has been rotating indefinitely. As Sattas ( beings ) do not realize realities ( Paramattha Dhamma ), they are cultivating new and new Kamma on daily basis and even at most of mind moments. As Kamma are arising, they dictate to arise their specific resultant Dhamma according to the law of Kamma. Lives have to exist as Kamma dictate ,and in this way the Samsara or wheel of life is endlessly rotating. To stop the wheel or to get through the Samsara is not to cultivate any new Kamma. This is only possible at the moment of arising of Arahatta Magga and thereafter. Before we attain Arahatta Magga Nana, we will be cultivating Kamma seeds through performing good and bad actions. We can at least stop most of bad actions by strictly keeping Sila or moral conduct. Through Sila, most bad actions will be under control if Sila is kept to its purest form. Even though there are many kinds of Sila, 5 precepts will at least help attaining higher Nana in lay people. Sila alone is not enough in preventing doing bad things. Sattas may be doing bad things unapparently and inconspicuously in their mind. Most unnotice this phenomenon that they are committing bad Kamma in their mind. Even though most immoral actions have been under control, there are still ongoing cultivation of bad Kamma by proliferating in their mind. These have to be knocked down with a good concentration or Samadhi. Samadhi can be obtained through the practice of meditation. Just concentration or Samadhi is still not enough if there is no Vijja Nana or penetrative wisdom. This can only be attained through the practice of Vipassana meditation. Vipassana meditation is the practice of Mahasatipatthana, which is a special mindfulness or Sati on Dhamma matter. Mahasatipatthana is not just a simple Sati. This Cetasika Sati has different names in Vipassana meditation. Sati is one of component of Cetasikas that work as Bodhipekkhiya Dhamma in endeavouring to attain higher Panna through Vipassana meditation. Practising Vipassana meditation will help the meditator understand the realities through Vipassana Nana or wisdom. If realities are DIRECTLY realized, new Kamma will not be cultivated. This will totally stop arising of linking consciousness or Patisandhi Citta. Then the wheel of life is stopped to rotate and the Satta concerned gets through the Samsara. May all beings practise Vipassana meditation in order to get through the Samsara. With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing Moderator / JourneyToNibbana Yahoo Group 27509 From: Larry Date: Sat Nov 29, 2003 10:55am Subject: Re: [dsg] anapanasati 3 b sanna. Hi Nina, This is a fine distinction but I agree. Identification and recognition are different. I notice that B. Bodhi defines sakkaaya as identity in SN. I take this to mean "identity" is specifically associated with the idea of permanence. To recognize Jon is simply to match this appearance with that appearance. To identify Jon is to think this appearance is the same appearance as that appearance. Larry --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, nina van gorkom wrote: > Hi Larry, > op 27-11-2003 19:14 schreef LBIDD@w... op LBIDD@w...: > > > The Vis. quotes here from the Path of Discrimination: > feeling being cetasikas... , these things are bound up with citta and > > are mind functions.> > > > > I wonder if we could say perception (sanna) is identification? > N: It is recognition or remembrance. It marks the object or remembers it. It > accompanies each citta experiencing objects through the six doors. Also > seeing. When it arises with seeing it does not identify or define seeing. I > do not think this word fits in connection with sanna. > Nina. 27510 From: Larry Date: Sat Nov 29, 2003 11:12am Subject: Re: Concentration and samatha Hi Jon, The question is, can you notice the difference between eye consciousness and ear consciousness irrespective of the difference between visible data and sound? In other words, we are looking at consciousness as an object of consciousness. I have been looking more closely into this and I have noticed that the closer I look, the less I see. The only "nama" I can be definitely conscious of is bodily feeling. That doesn't sound right. What's going on here?? Larry --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Jonothan Abbott wrote: > Larry > > As I think I mentioned in a previous post, among the 121 different > cittas are some that have exactly the same combination of cetasikas > (for example, the 10 vipaka cittas are each accompanied by the 7 > 'universal' cetasikas only). > > To my understanding, the different cittas are different in respects > other than just the accompanying cetasikas. While they have in > common the characteristic of being chief in experiencing their > object, they also have an individual characteristic that makes them > distinct from each other. Seeing consciousness sees visible-object; > it cannot experience sound, and so on. > > Jon 27511 From: Larry Date: Sat Nov 29, 2003 11:38am Subject: Re: Clinging to Wholesome States (was: Buddhaghosa....) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "yu_zhonghao" wrote: > Hi Sarah and all, > > Regarding the idea "clinging to wholesome states", you provided > references from the Abhidhamma Pitaka, but not from the discourses. > So the question remains: > Is the problem, if there is indeed such a problem, "clinging to > wholesome states" or any of its examples addressed in the > discourses? > > If it is addressed in the discourses, how is it addressed? Hi Victor, I recently read in a sutta (which I now can't find) that the Buddha said there could be clinging to neutral feeling, which is characterized as "peaceful". The antidote to this is to notice that neutral feeling is impermanent. The argument Sarah gave, that any dhamma (except nibbana) could be an object of a desirous consciousness, seems reasonable to me. The main qualification would be the difference between an object of consciousness and a cetasika that accompanies consciousness. Desire cannot _accompany_ a consciousness that is accompanied by a wholesome volition. You can't enter jhana with desire but you could desire jhana immediately after it has ceased in the general window of what is called "the present". Of course one could desire the concept of jhana or even nibbana, but that is slightly different, though more often the case. Larry 27512 From: icarofranca Date: Sat Nov 29, 2003 0:00pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Clinging to Wholesome States (was: Buddhaghosa....) Dear Sarah Respectfully butting in... ------------------------------------------------------------- Sarah:"so let me introduce you to > some straight Abhidhamma from the Pa.t.thaana, the book of Conditional > Relations*. > > As you know, there are 24 conditions by which all conditioned states > arise, including `clinging' or attachment (lobha). The first condition is > root condition. Without the root of lobha, it cannot arise. The second > condition is object condition:" --------------------------------------------------------------- Today we are reaching fully at the apple core! In my Abhidhamma readings, I have even kept the mental image of a "Supermarket of many kinds of Wholesome Consciousness" at certain passages of Pathaana. At the Pathaana you get the 24 Paccayas and their combinations with Kusala and Akusala, Hetu and Ahetu Dhammas, almost as goodies on a market stand, ready to get catched up for anyone interested. You can get it all at the alobha side, and reach the Buddha´s viewpoint that even such marvelous Dhammas are essentially Dukkha, Anicca and Anatta. Only Nibbana is the Dhamma that stands at the other shore! ------------------------------------------------------------------ sarah: "(...)why not consider whether there is any attachment to > wholesome states over the Thanksgiving weekend." ---------------------------------------------------------------- Good Idea!!!!! ---------------------------------------------------------------- Sarah:" Thank you again for conditioning these further reflections;-) > > With metta, > > Sarah > > * "But when, coming to the Great Book (the Pa.t.thaana), he began to > contemplate the twenty-four universal causal relations of condition, of > presentation, and so on, his [the Buddha's] omniscience certainly found > its opportunity therein. For as the great fish Rimiratipin'ngala finds > room only in the great ocean eighty-four thousand yojanas in depth, so his > omniscience truly finds room only in the Great Book." (Introductory > Discourse, Atthasaalini)." --------------------------------------------------------------------- So mote will be...snif! Snif! Mettaya, Ícaro 27513 From: yu_zhonghao Date: Sat Nov 29, 2003 2:38pm Subject: Re: Clinging to Wholesome States (was: Buddhaghosa....) Hi Larry, At this point, my question is: Is the problem, if there is indeed such a problem, "clinging to wholesome states" or any of its examples addressed in the discourses? And If it is addressed in the discourses, how is it addressed? I don't know exactly what you read in the discourse. I would suggest you provide some quote and reference so others can examine it. Thanks. Peace, Victor --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Larry" wrote: [snip] 27514 From: Date: Sat Nov 29, 2003 4:41pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Clinging to Wholesome States (was: Buddhaghosa....) Hi Victor, Here is a example of clinging to wholesome states. Larry http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/majjhima/mn106.html When this was said, Ven. Ananda said to the Blessed One: "There is the case, lord, where a monk, having practiced in this way -- 'It should not be, it should not occur to me; it will not be, it will not occur to me. What is, what has come to be, that I abandon' -- obtains equanimity. Now, would this monk be totally unbound, or not?" "A certain such monk might, Ananda, and another might not.' "What is the cause, what is the reason, whereby one might and another might not?" "There is the case, Ananda, where a monk, having practiced in this way -- (thinking) 'It should not be, it should not occur to me; it will not be, it will not occur to me. What is, what has come to be, that I abandon' -- obtains equanimity. He relishes that equanimity, welcomes it, remains fastened to it. As he relishes that equanimity, welcomes it, remains fastened to it, his consciousness is dependent on it, is sustained by it (clings to it). With clinging/sustenance, Ananda, a monk is not totally unbound." "Being sustained, where is that monk sustained?" "The dimension of neither perception nor non-perception." "Then, indeed, being sustained, he is sustained by the supreme sustenance." "Being sustained, Ananda, he is sustained by the supreme sustenance; for this -- the dimension of neither perception nor non-perception -- is the supreme sustenance. There is [however] the case where a monk, having practiced in this way -- 'It should not be, it should not occur to me; it will not be, it will not occur to me. What is, what has come to be, that I abandon' -- obtains equanimity. He does not relish that equanimity, does not welcome it, does not remain fastened to it. As does not relish that equanimity, does not welcome it, does not remain fastened to it, his consciousness is not dependent on it, is not sustained by it (does not cling to it). Without clinging/sustenance, Ananda, a monk is totally unbound." 27515 From: Carl Date: Sat Nov 29, 2003 5:57pm Subject: Re: New Member --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "rjkjp1" wrote: > Nice to have you here Carl, > The five aggregates (khandhas) are ultimate realities(paramattha > dhamma), and citta (vinnana) is one of the five. What is only > conventionally real is person or being. Person or being are the > shadow of what is really there. > RobertK > In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Carl" wrote: > > (...Snip)Anyway, I find > it appealing that "reality" may depend upon and be born by "non- > > reality". I am sure I must have my wires crossed somewhere :) > > It is an honor to be here. Carl c7: Thank you Robert for your welcome and response to my ponderings. And thank all of you for your kind welcomes. Blue! Welcome to you also and Thanks. It may be the wet/dry Lotus that causes me wonderment. Perhaps I can be more lucid? You got your "paramattha dhammas" over here and over there you got your "conventional realities". Well, to me, it seems all convoluted, in that "paramattha dhammas" are only known by "conventional realities" and "conventional realities" are merely an imaginary shadow of "paramattha dhammas". i.e. *I* can feel *hardness*. Without *I*, what is to feel? Hardness is a paramattha dhamma. *I* is a conventional reality. It takes two to tango (so to speak). (No *I*) + (No *Hardness*) = (No dance). It seems as two extremes to me (paramatthma dhammas Vs conventional reality). So perhaps the middle way is, as new member "Blue" offered, the way of the Lotus? Neither wet nor dry, but just a Lotus? Anyway, I like the feeling of being convoluted! Reality depending on unreality depending on reality depending on......... Again, thanks for all the welcomes. This is indeed a place for me to learn and study in depth the Dhamma. Just a little more about me. I am married, Living in the USA, Retired, 60 years old, Overweight, been a Buddhapup for about 10 years, started "consciousness training" about thirty five years ago through many self-help psyc paperbacks. I am methodical, analyitical, a poor speller and a rather slow learner. I have particapated in other Buddhist boards in the past. And awww heck! I just posted my picture. It is wonderful to see the members pictures posted for this group. I hope all members would be interested in posting their picture! Thanks c7carl 27516 From: Egberdina Date: Sat Nov 29, 2003 6:31pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Act of consciousness Hi Jon, As a general statement, I think we are discussing the idea of learning / teaching from two very different perspectives. I accept that in a conventional sense, learning is the acquiring of a conceptual framework. But I do not think this applies to Buddhism learning. Learning in a Buddhist sense is not an acquiring, but an undoing, a getting rid of conceptual frameworks. However, to achieve the same status / state as the Buddha, one doesn't go about getting what he got, or getting rid of what he got rid of. To get rid of what the Buddha got rid of, we would first need to acquire that. To reach the state of the Buddha we need to become aware of what *WE* believe, not what we believe the Buddha believed. I would not say that the thrust of the Buddha's example and teaching is development or evolution. For me, the opposite is true. The Buddha's teaching as a whole does not exist as such. Specific insights are applied in specific circumstances to cut through specific thickets of belief. The Buddha's example and teaching does not set out to replace an overall incorrect conceptual framework with an overall correct conceptual framework. That would be insanity. I accept a place for the suttas , the Abhidhamma and the commentaries. There is no limit to what can function as a trigger for a moment of insight. But the touchstone for what is happening at this moment is never a book. What is happening at this moment can never be described in words. To describe in words what is happening at this moment is to loose this moment. The moment instead becomes those words. Such moments have no reality. I don't doubt that the Buddha spoke when he thought it could cut through some specific thicket. That is quite different to believing that the Buddha can speak directedly to anyone through a book. To believe that it is possible to find out what is happening at this moment through the written words of another is stretching it a bit. With regards to what I believe we should do: 1]As little as possible. 2]Do not select what will be your teacher. All the best Herman --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Jonothan Abbott wrote: > Herman > > I know what you mean when you speak about the Buddha's example. > However, this raises an interesting question: should we look > primarily to the Buddha's example, or should we pay more attention to > what he had to say about how he got to where he did, or how we can > achieve (in part) what he has experienced? > > A person wishing to attain to the status, wealth or ability of > another will not get far by trying to emulate that other person's > actions as a person of status, wealth or ability. It is the means by > which that person got where he did that will need to be known and > applied. > > BTW, you say the Buddha preferred silence to speech; nonetheless, he > spent an awful lot of time expounding the teachings to others, and > urging those others to listen more. He must have thought such > talking and listening to be worthwhile. > > Jon > > --- Egberdina wrote: > Hi Jon, > > > > There is no need to reject the suttas. They are stories, and > > understanding that they are stories is enough. There is no > > hierarchy > > amongst stories. There are no "good" stories and "bad" stories, > > or "true" stories and "false" stories. They do not have a life of > > their own. There is no need to pass judgment on stories. A story , > > any story, becomes unravelled with awareness. > > > > Awareness does not need expounding. It does not need clarification. > > > > It does not need thinking about. Commentaries to awareness do one > > thing, and that is to kill it. > > > > I need not learn to speak English, Bantu, or Pali, in order to be > > silent. The stories of the Buddha that I have read tell me that he > > preferred silence to speech, inertness to activity. > > > > Silence requires no conceptual framework. Neither does knowing. > > Knowing arises when it does, and ceases when it does. > > > 27517 From: Carl Date: Sat Nov 29, 2003 7:26pm Subject: Re: More questions for James --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Star Kid wrote: > James: > ....(snip)............ > 2. The Buddha says that we shouldn't kill, even the > insects and small animals, because they are all living > creatures. But if we don't kill the germs and insects, > our food and drinking water would be polluted, and > human beings would be extinct. What kind of philosophy > is this? > Philip Hi Philip, thought i'd just comment on your excellent question. First, about the extinction of human beings.... So what? We become extinct... big deal! Now about the critters and disease and killing. This story helped me alot: There was a community of learning monks that were taught to revere life and would not kill any living creature. The creatures took up residence in the bathroom. Spiders, flys, crawling bugs. It was moist there and attracted all kinds of crawling and flying creatures.. A great place for critters to live (especially the spiders). Fungus grew upon the walls and served as hiding places for many creatures. It became a home for any crawling creature that needed a home. Needles to say, having to go to the bathroom was not a pleasent experience for the student monks. Many monks were bitten, caught diseases or recieved rashes from the creatures that lived in the bathroom. When the teachers of the student monks began to notice the sickness,disease and rashes on the students the teachers asked, why are you sick? We see rashes, disease and swollen bites on and in your bodies. You student monks seem most unclean. Then it was explained to the teachers that the bathroom was the cause of their diseases, swollen bites and rashes. And they insisted that they were not unclean and not to blame for their unclean conditions. For they had been taught not to kill. At this point the teacher picked up a bamboo stick and began beating the students saying, ........such fools as you!!! get into that bathroom and clean it up! Sweep the walls, scour the floors, scrub the toilets and sinks. There was no mention of killing. Cleaning the bathroom was the only intention. 27518 From: rjkjp1 Date: Sat Nov 29, 2003 7:30pm Subject: Re: New Member "rjkjp1" > wrote: > > Nice to have you here Carl, > > The five aggregates (khandhas) are ultimate realities(paramattha > > dhamma), and citta (vinnana) is one of the five. What is only > > conventionally real is person or being. Person or being are the > > shadow of what is really there. > > -------- > dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Carl" wrote: > c7: Thank you Robert for your welcome and response to my ponderings. > > Perhaps I can be more lucid? You got your "paramattha dhammas" over > here and over there you got your "conventional realities". Well, > to me, it seems all convoluted, in that "paramattha dhammas" are > only known by "conventional realities" and "conventional realities" > are merely an imaginary shadow of "paramattha dhammas". ______________ Thanks for putting up your photo Carl. When the texts say that person or being are only conventionally true it means that they have no reality at all, they are only useful as terms to represent the five khnadhas "as with the assembly of parts the word chariot is countenanced, So, when the aggregates are present, A being: is said in common usage."(samyutta I, 135) These, Citta, are merely names, expressions, turns of speech, designations in common use in the world. And of these a Tathagata makes use indeed, but he does not misapprehend them" Digha 9. The suttas often use such words as I and my and man, woman, and we can too, but we need to know that they are mere concepts. "Such forms as woman or man are local forms of speech. ..In those who have not fully understood what a physical base is there comes to be the misinterpretation "this is really a woman.."But since this is mere concept, which depends on states made to occur in such ans such a wise , one who sees and knows the dependent origination does not interpret it as ultimate meaning"Note 4 visud. vii (pm) ---------------------- > i.e. *I* can feel *hardness*. Without *I*, what is to feel? > Hardness is a paramattha dhamma. *I* is a conventional reality. > It takes two to tango (so to speak). (No *I*) + (No *Hardness*) = > (No dance). _______ I appreciate your questions Carl and so I give a detailed answer. In the Samyuttanikaya Nidana Moliyaphagguna p541 bodhi) "'With the six bases (salayatana)as condition contact comes to be'. Ven. Moliyaphagguna: 'Venerable sir, who makes contact?' Buddha: 'I do not say 'One makes contact'. If I should say 'One makes contact' in that case this would be a valid question.....In this case the valid answer is 'With the six sense bases as condition, contact[comes to be]; with contact as condition feeling'. Moliyaphagguna: 'venerable sir, who feels?.." endquote And so the sutta carries on with venerable Moliyaphagguna searching for a self in the Paticcasamuppada. He feels that there should be 'someone' who craves, 'someone' who clings, who feels, who ages, who has sorrow, who dies. The Buddha says (SN 12:35 Bodhi p.575) that with the eradication of ignorance such ideas and vacillations as "what now are volitional formations (sankhara) , and for 'whom' are there volitional formations? or'Volitional formations are one thing, the one for whom there are these volitional formations is another'--all these are abandoned, cut off at the root...."endquote. Thus there is no I who experiences hardness but rather because of conditions coming together there is the experience of hardness. This `being' is simply a puppet with manifold parts – all coming together in different combinations – lasting for an instant and then falling away again. Because the conditions that make up each moment are often similar "we" look and feel somewhat the same from moment to moment – and this is one aspect of how continuity deludes. ""Therefore, just as a marionette is void, soulless and without curisosity, and while it works and stands merely through the combination of strings and wood yet it seems as if it had curiosity and interestedness, so too this materiality (rupa)- mentality (nama) is void, soulless and without curiosity, and while it walks and stands merely through the combination of the two together, yet it seems as if it had curiosity and interestedness." Visuddhimagga xviii31 The conditions that make up what we think of as a human being are of course more complex than a marionette, and hence more difficult to fathom. The first steps, of this very long untanglement, are about identifying, with right wisdom, the various characteristics of the different phenomena that comprise this `being' this manisfestion of paticcasamuppada. Usually we think "I'm interested or bored or excited or calm, or sad or happy or wise or confused or making effort or being negligent. But there are only different elements performing different functions - and they have no agenda: "[The] uninterestedness becomes evident to him though seeing rise and fall according to condition owing to his discovery of the inability of states to have mastery exercised over them. Then he more thoroughly abandons the self view"visuddhimagga xx102 The characteristic of not-self becomes evident to him through seeing rise according to conditions owing to his discovery that states have no curiosity and have their existence depending upon conditions" xx102 "All the formed bases(eye base, ear base, tongue base etc) should be regarded as having no provenance and no destination. On the contrary, before their rise they had no individual essence and after their fall their individual essences are completely dissolved. And they occur without mastery being exercisable over them since they exist in dependence on conditions and in between the past and the future. "XV15 This is deep Dhamma that can only be heard during the time of a Buddhasasana. RobertK 27519 From: nordwest Date: Sat Nov 29, 2003 0:12pm Subject: Correlation of the Self, the Mind, Consciousness and Enlightenment Correlation of the Self, the Mind, Consciousness and Enlightenment The Mind has different levels of consciouness: The grosser levels, which are easy to see for us. The subtle levels are well hidden, some can be seen in meditation, or when you have attained some of the many samadhis (constant mediative concentration levels). The Mind has the pure consciouness, a very different consiousness than the bodily one, because only it has the potential to enable the Mind to perfect enlightenment. This potential is often called the "buddha-nature." IN my opinion the buddha-nature is not a conscious level, but only the potential to become a buddha, but tis is a personal definiton maybe. So let us not go into discussion this please. It's only words, and they don't come easy with such terms. The Dalai Lama for example says, that the grosser andsubtle levels all die away in death, and that there only "the being" stays. This is, for me, a not very satisfying answer/definiton. This very Buddha-Nature-Consciouness is not defiled from the patterns of habits of the Mind, it stays pure, but is limited to the Mind and it's thoughts. This iswhy all masters would say, that the Buddha nature is the only thing which doesn't change. And of course we all know the buddhas words, "This is real, which is not subjet to change." So, again, this is the Pure Consciouness. The mind itself may be defiled, but this very very subtle level of consciouness remains clear. The perception of everything is doen with this Pure Consciouness. Theyes, mouth, ears, ...all your senses, are entirely useless. So why do we have ears and eyes then? We havecreated those bodily senses out of our wrong indentification with the body. Again, the mind creates the environment, which is empty and the body which is empty too. The body is a creation in accordance with the spiritual limitations of mind, based on the individual karma. The mind is: Thoughts, habits, various grosser and subtle levels of bodily consciouness, the pure consciouness whit its buddha-nature. The Self is: The Mind. -- Nothing else, but the Mind with all its components. Some of the components are matter of change. Those ones can be eradicated, like in the process of death. So the process of death is similiar to a radical enlightenment process. Unfortunately the habits stay the mind due to karmic bondage. And so the mind isunable to free itself in death. What happens in enlightenment: (1) We try to stop the coarse thinking. This is control over the habits, daily things. This habit-Thinking is nothing but grosser levels of consciouness. (2) We also try in mediation to make the subtle levels stop to move. It is the stopping of the thinking in subtle ways. Those are visions, subtle habits, the ego, bondage to the bodily senses etc. (3) As soon as the grosser and subtle levels become less active, this we may can the wonde of samadhi - similiar to a constant meditation all day long - the Mind is enabled to perceive the world how it really is. It stops believing in the bodily senses and turns over to conscious perception, which is our natural way of perception. Again, this is done by the Pure Consciouness. Thus it becomes little by little the Pure Mind. (4) Seeing the world with the six senses of the Pure Mind is pure Enlightenment. What is the Self then? It is The Pure Mind with the pure consciouness. This is the original Self. You may say, it is stripped down to what it originally was, namely PURE. The confusion we have in definitons is, as I see it, that we see no "not-changing-thing" within ourselves, because we believe that we perceive the world thorugh the bodily senses. Actaully we really think that the eyes enable us to see colors, which is most ridiculous, because in meditation we close our eyes and yet still see memories and pictures. This proves that the dream state is the same illusion as the awake state. Both are created by the mind, in thoughts, and the senses are no instrument of perception at all. Only our deep believe in the bodily senses limits our conscious perception of this, what is. Gassho, Thomas 27520 From: rahula_80 Date: Sat Nov 29, 2003 9:14pm Subject: Islam and Buddhism Hi, I would like to bring to your attention of the book, "Islam and Buddhism" by Harun Yahya, a well known Muslim preacher. The book is also available online. http://www.hyahya.org/buddhism01.php I am hoping that a Buddhist(s) especialy those who are interested in comparative religions studies between Buddhism and Islam, would come forward to clarify the misunderstanding / misrepresentations found in that book. Truly yours, Rahula 27522 From: Carl Date: Sat Nov 29, 2003 11:11pm Subject: Phonetic Glossary How do i pronounce Pali! I need a glossory that is phonetic. I may never understand pali. But if i could be firm in my enuncation of Pali it would be cool. I just want to know how to say the word. Not a Pali glossary, just a simple pronunciation of that glossery. ...c7 27523 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sat Nov 29, 2003 11:25pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Vis. XIV 42 Howard You said: <> I think you have put your finger on the nub of the matter here, Howard. It is the issue of Rupas as present object of consciousness vs. Rupas as dhammas that arise in this plane of existence regardless of whether they are object of someone's experience via one of the 5 sense-doors. I do understand your concern about whether the latter can be directly known by us, but I frankly don’t see how that affects the bigger question of whether or not that is in fact the way things are. As I've said before, if your position is simply that it is unknowable by you or me at our present level of development (which I agree with), that would not in itself be any basis for doubting the truth of the assertion if made by, for example, the Buddha. Hence my suggestion that you perhaps hold some views to the contrary. As to what it means for rupas to arise in this plane of existence, consider the rupas that we take for our body. At any given moment (including this very moment) most of those rupas, for example, the ones we take for our internal organs, or the back of our head, are not the object of anyone's 5 sense-door consciousness. Yet do they not still arise? According to the teachings, they are conditioned by one or more of the 4 conditions of kamma, citta, temperature and nutriment, and by virtue of that condition/those conditions they arise (or not) regardless. Does this strike you as not being credible? The alternative scenario is that the rupas we take for our body arise only when they are the object of someone's consciousness. As I understand that proposition, this would mean that, for example, the rupas we take for Howard cease to arise entirely in this plane of existence whenever that bundle of rupas-taken-as-Howard is in a deep sleep alone in a room, and would only resume arising when 'he' awoke or when someone came into the room. Does this seem to you the more credible of the 2 alternatives? Jon --- upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, Jon - Howard: ... My problem is that I see the rupa-group notion as a claim without explanation. First of all, if all the rupas of a group are inexperiencible, then the claim is, in principle, untestable, and requires acceptance on faith. I have no reason to believe the claim, and the lack of actual existence of conventional objects such as rocks, a lack accepted by both of us, is a big part of the problem here. If the rupas arise other than merely as objects of consciousness, which would have to be the case with the entire group arising at one time but only one rupa of the group experienced, it is reasonable to wonder *where and in what sense they arise*. I see both a phenomenalist scheme and a world-of-conventional-objects scheme, as possibly providing a basis for the rupa-group notion, but each has its problems, and if neither of these schemes is accepted, then I see no basis for the rupa-group notion. (The phenomenalist scheme *might* account for unexperienced rupas arising provided that it accepts the occurrence of parallel, subliminal experiencing along with active, surface-level vi~n~nana, but without that, I don't even see how phenomenalism accounts for this business. And the world-of-conventional-objects scheme, while serving rather well as an explanation, is acceptable to neither of us.) Taking neither of these as perspective, I don't even understand what it *means* for the unexperienced rupas to arise. I don't know what it *means*, for example, for an unexperienced hardness or sight to arise.) With metta, Howard 27524 From: yu_zhonghao Date: Sat Nov 29, 2003 11:41pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Clinging to Wholesome States (was: Buddhaghosa....) Hi Larry, Sarah, and all, Yes, the Buddha indeed taught about emerging from grosser meditative states and entering into more refine one. I would like to draw your attention to the following discourses. Anguttara Nikaya IX.41 Tapussa Sutta To Tapussa http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/anguttara/an09-041.html Anguttara Nikaya IX.35 Gavi Sutta The Cow http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/anguttara/an09-035.html Note that in both discourses, the Buddha described a progression in attaining meditative states. Each meditative state does provide sustenance. As an analogy: Think of enjoying sensual pleasures such as enjoying watching shows, listening to music, smelling perfume, eating delicious food, having sex etc as playing in mud. That is what majority of the people in the world like to do: enjoy sensual pleasures, or metaphorically, playing in mud. And they don't realize that the mud is unclean, dirty. Think of a ladder leading out of the mud. Climbing the ladder is like practicing meditation. Holding on to the rungs and reaching a certain height above the mud is like attaining a certain meditative state. And to climb the ladder out of the mud, one has to hold on to the rungs. The higher one can climb, the higher the meditative state one can attain. The rungs do support one on the ladder. However, being on the ladder is by no mean the final safety just like being in any meditative state is by no mean the final Unbinding: It is impossible for one to hold on to the rungs forever. To reach to safety, one could either climb all the way up the ladder or miss the last couple rungs if one is sure of reaching to safety. Climbing takes work and might not be easy!! However, joy and pleasure comes with elevated views. To reach safety, one needs to climb up the ladder. To climb up, one needs to hold onto the rung firmly before one lets go of it to reach the next higher rung. As the final safety is reached, the ladder is let go of. So if the wholesome states refer to the meditative states, then what is the connotation of the idea "clinging to wholesome states"? Shall one not climb the ladder at all and just stay in the mud? Or shall one climb the ladder out of the mud by holding onto the rung firmly before letting go of it to reach the next higher rung? In other words, shall one not to practice meditation at all and just keep being attached to sensual pleasures? Or shall one renounce sensual pleasures and meditate, firmly established in one meditative state before moving on to the next higher one? The analogy is by no mean perfect. However, I want to use it to illustrate an aspect of progression in meditative practice as well as the relationship between meditation and sensual pleasures. Thank you for the reference. It prompted me to look into what the Buddha taught on meditative practice. Peace, Victor --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, LBIDD@w... wrote: > Hi Victor, [snip] 27525 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Sat Nov 29, 2003 11:44pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Pure Mind/Buddha Nature Hi James > > It seems that we keep going round and round on this subject. There > is no direct clash because you keep repeating what you wrote > previously. Even this stanza doesn't prove anything. It is a > metaphor. If we want to get technical, foam and bubbles are not > empty or void anyway. They contain oxygen; the pressure of the > oxygen on the inside against the pressure of the oxygen outside is > what makes them round. If they were truly empty and void, they > would implode from the outside pressure of the oxygen. So you see, on one level you think you know exactly what the Buddha is describing, on another level it isn't so clear after all. Metaphors are like that; they are not to be taken literally. I don't think that I truly know what anatta is and I don't think that you do either. The only way to know is to become enlightened. Until then, it is important to keep an open mind. > k: You are right to say we should keep an open mind. Hmm okay forget about this foam sutta as it keeps a metaphor, how about the other two sutta I quote to you. One can only truly understand anatta only when one reach supramundane stage (to be techinically correct bc I was question by two person - so dont want to be qn again). When you understand Anatta, the whole concept of Buddhism will change. Your faith of dhamma suddenly grow tremenduously and you will smile bc you realise that Buddha is really supreme in wisdom. And also you will realise all are just conditions :) and then you realise that you dont need to qn the Abdhidhamma and ancient commentaries anymore. To me it is the most effective knife that cuts the root of moha. j: Finally, the Buddha describes the mind as luminous. That is his > description, not mine. My mind, for the most part, is like > `looking though a dark glass darkly' ;-). I don't know exactly what he means and I don't think you do either. The Abhidhamma leads people to believe they know far more than they actually do; that has been my biggest criticism of it thus far. Just keep an open mind. k: One of the impression Abdhidhamma gives its reader that don't understand it, "hey this sound like a engineer textbook, Buddhist text should be simple to read like the sutta." Honestly speaking, I have a Abdhidhamma book called "A Book of Analysis" - it is so technical that I always fall asleep reading it, hence I have give up reading it. I prefer its commentary (Dispeller of Delusion) which is much more readable. k: Only as you say, lets have an open mind. forget about the commentary, let relook at the sutta again. Buddha said "Luminous, monks, is the mind. And it is defiled by incoming defilements. The uninstructed run-of-the-mill person doesn't discern that as it actually is present, which is why I tell you that -- for the uninstructed run-of-the-mill person -- there is no development of the mind." Luminious means that the *color* of the mind is radiant. It just describe a *color* just like fire is red. It does not imply any other thing. It is defile by incoming defilements means it is being affected by unwholesome factors (lobha etc). In other words. it just said the mind which is luminious is now being defile by defilements - an unwholesome state of mind. "The uninstructed run-of-the-mill person doesn't discern that as it actually is present" means no mindfulness hence no development of the mind "Luminous, monks, is the mind. And it is freed from incoming defilements. Again Buddha say luminious is the mind - simple and straight forward. It just hey the mind is radiant, thats all. The second sentence means it is a wholesome state bc an absence of defilements could mean a wholesome state of mind. "The well-instructed disciple of the noble ones discerns that as it actually is present, which is why I tell you that -- for the well-instructed disciple of the noble ones -- there is development of the mind." - means mindfulness - there is development of the mind k: I asked you, is there in any sentence in this sutta say that the mind is pure in the first place or it is pointing to an orignal state of mind. It just say luminiuos is the mind - just the color of the mind, no other connotation. Luminous does not mean pure, it only means illuminated, radiant, or shiny. Any color can be luminous. Furthermore, the sutta states clearly that this luminious mind can be defiled means it can be affected by defilements, what can be affected is conditioned, what is conditioned is impermanent. Therefore it will mean the sutta is not saying any thing about a pure mind or an orginal state mind as both such minds are supposedly to be unconditional. Kind regards Ken O 27526 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sat Nov 29, 2003 11:44pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Consciousness as object Larry To my understanding, the characteristic of dhammas cannot be seen by doing what you describe here. No amount of looking at things will unveil the true nature of dhammas; only the arising of sati/panna can achieve this. The conditions for that arising do not include the intention to examine things more closely. That kind of conventional 'effort' is not the effort of right effort. We should not expect that book knowledge/intellectual understanding of, for example, the difference between different kinds of consciousness will allow us to directly perceive those differences. We need to be true to ourselves in terms of the extent to which sati and panna have been developed to date and, accordingly, what information has direct application for us in that regard and what information is useful as 'background briefing' only. To answer your question then, for me it's pretty much all background briefing stuff;-)). Jon --- Larry wrote: > Hi Jon, > > The question is, can you notice the difference between eye > consciousness and ear consciousness irrespective of the difference > between visible data and sound? In other words, we are looking at > consciousness as an object of consciousness. I have been looking > more > closely into this and I have noticed that the closer I look, the > less > I see. The only "nama" I can be definitely conscious of is bodily > feeling. That doesn't sound right. What's going on here?? > > Larry 27527 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sat Nov 29, 2003 11:49pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Act of consciousness Herman I don’t want to spoil your Sunday, but I think we are largely in agreement here. Especially, I agree with you on the danger of replacing one conceptual framework with another. I believe that the conceptual framework we hold to can be displaced only insofar as things (dhammas) come to be seen as they truly are. Regarding your final paragraph, I believe that progress in seeing things as they truly are comes not by doing but by understanding, and that what is to be understood is some aspect (i.e., any aspect, without selection) of the present moment. But, and this may be our main difference, I believe the conditions under which that understanding can arise are quite specific and need to be understood intellectually in the first place if there is to be any chance of them being fulfilled. This to me is where the teaching of the Buddha comes in. I do not think we are smart enough to figure this game out on our own, whatever the present level of our progress along the path. Look forward to hearing you further on any points of disagreement. Jon --- Egberdina wrote: > Hi Jon, > > As a general statement, I think we are discussing the idea of > learning / teaching from two very different perspectives. I accept > that in a conventional sense, learning is the acquiring of a > conceptual framework. > > But I do not think this applies to Buddhism learning. Learning in a > Buddhist sense is not an acquiring, but an undoing, a getting rid > of conceptual frameworks. > > However, to achieve the same status / state as the Buddha, one > doesn't go about getting what he got, or getting rid of what he got > rid of. To get rid of what the Buddha got rid of, we would first > need to acquire that. To reach the state of the Buddha we need to > become aware of what *WE* believe, not what we believe the Buddha > believed. > > I would not say that the thrust of the Buddha's example and > teaching > is development or evolution. For me, the opposite is true. The > Buddha's teaching as a whole does not exist as such. > Specific insights are applied in specific circumstances to cut > through specific thickets of belief. The Buddha's example and > teaching does not set out to replace an overall incorrect > conceptual > framework with an overall correct conceptual framework. That would > be insanity. > > I accept a place for the suttas , the Abhidhamma and the > commentaries. There is no limit to what can function as a trigger > for a moment of insight. But the touchstone for what is happening > at > this moment is never a book. What is happening at this moment can > never be described in words. To describe in words what is happening > at this moment is to loose this moment. The moment instead becomes > those words. Such moments have no reality. > > I don't doubt that the Buddha spoke when he thought it could cut > through some specific thicket. That is quite different to believing > that the Buddha can speak directedly to anyone through a book. To > believe that it is possible to find out what is happening at this > moment through the written words of another is stretching it a bit. > > With regards to what I believe we should do: > 1]As little as possible. > 2]Do not select what will be your teacher. > > All the best > > > Herman 27528 From: christine_forsyth Date: Sun Nov 30, 2003 0:43am Subject: Re: New Member - Anatta/Puppets Dear RobertK, (Carl), and all, I just arrived back from the Dhamma weekend at Cooran and was glad to read your valuable post to Carl - thank you. I can't hear explanations of these truths often enough, it is SO important to understand Anatta correctly, and, as you know, has been difficult (for me) to do so in the past. Thank you for your kind and patient explanations - I sometimes feel I am the one with the wooden head, not the puppet - looking forward to any future posts you may care to make. As Nyanatiloka Thera says in his Dictionary of Buddhist Terms:"the anattá-doctrine has been clearly and unreservedly taught only by the Buddha, wherefore the Buddha is known as the anattá-vádi, or 'Teacher of Impersonality'. Whosoever has not penetrated this impersonality of all existence, and does not comprehend that in reality there exists only this continually self-consuming process of arising and passing bodily and mental phenomena, and that there is no separate ego-entity within or without this process, he will not be able to understand Buddhism, i.e. the teaching of the 4 Noble Truths (sacca, q.v.), in the right light. He will think that it is his ego, his personality, that experiences suffering, his personality that performs good and evil actions and will be reborn according to these actions, his personality that will enter into Nibbána, his personality that walks on the Eightfold Path. Thus it is said in Vis.M. XVI: "Mere suffering exists, no sufferer is found; The deeds are, but no doer of the deeds is there; Nibbána is, but not the man that enters it; The path is, but no traveler on it is seen." "Whosoever is not clear with regard to the conditionally arisen phenomena, and does not comprehend that all the actions are conditioned through ignorance, etc., he thinks that it is an ego that understands or does not understand, that acts or causes to act, that comes to existence at rebirth .... that has the sense-impression, that feels, desires, becomes attached, continues and at rebirth again enters a new existence" (Vis.M. XVII, 117). [We had a brief discussion on the "sabbe sankhaaraa aniccaa.ti; sabbe sankhaaraa dukkhaa.ti; sabbe DHAMMAA anattaa.ti" in the Dhp. 279, but couldn't readily locate the sutta at the time. Steve (Bodhi2500) had interesting comments to make concerning the commentary to the Dhp.]. Nyanatiloka continues: "While in the case of the first two characteristics it is stated that all formations (sabbe sankhárá) are impermanent and subject to suffering, the corresponding text for the third characteristic states that "all things are not-self" (sabbe dhammá anattá; M. 35, Dhp. 279). This is for emphasizing that the false view of an abiding self or substance is neither applicable to any 'formation' or conditioned phenomenon, nor to Nibbána, the Unconditioned Element (asankhatá dhátu)." http://www.budsas.org/ebud/bud-dict/dic_idx.htm metta and peace, Christine ---The trouble is that you think you have time --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "rjkjp1" wrote: > "rjkjp1" > > wrote: > > > Nice to have you here Carl, > > > The five aggregates (khandhas) are ultimate realities (paramattha > > > dhamma), and citta (vinnana) is one of the five. What is only > > > conventionally real is person or being. Person or being are the > > > shadow of what is really there. > > > -------- > > dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Carl" wrote: > > c7: Thank you Robert for your welcome and response to my > ponderings. > > > > > Perhaps I can be more lucid? You got your "paramattha dhammas" > over > > here and over there you got your "conventional realities". Well, > > to me, it seems all convoluted, in that "paramattha dhammas" are > > only known by "conventional realities" and "conventional realities" > > are merely an imaginary shadow of "paramattha dhammas". > ______________ > > Thanks for putting up your photo Carl. When the texts say that person > or being are only conventionally true it means that they have no > reality at all, they are only useful as terms to represent the five > khnadhas > "as with the assembly of parts the word chariot is countenanced, > So, when the aggregates are present, A being: is said in common > usage."(samyutta I, 135) > These, Citta, are merely names, expressions, turns of speech, > designations in common use in the world. And of these a Tathagata > makes > use indeed, but he does not misapprehend them" Digha 9. > > The suttas often use such words as I and my and man, woman, and we > can too, but we need > to know that they are mere concepts. > "Such forms as woman or man are local forms of speech. ..In those who > have not fully understood what a physical base is there comes to be > the misinterpretation "this is really a woman.."But since this is > mere concept, which depends on states made to occur in such ans such > a wise , one who sees and knows the dependent origination does not > interpret it as ultimate meaning"Note 4 visud. vii (pm) > > ---------------------- > > > i.e. *I* can feel *hardness*. Without *I*, what is to feel? > > Hardness is a paramattha dhamma. *I* is a conventional reality. > > It takes two to tango (so to speak). (No *I*) + (No *Hardness*) = > > (No dance). > _______ > I appreciate your questions Carl and so I give a detailed answer. In > the Samyuttanikaya Nidana Moliyaphagguna p541 bodhi) > "'With the six bases (salayatana)as condition contact comes to be'. > Ven. Moliyaphagguna: 'Venerable sir, who makes contact?' > Buddha: 'I do not say 'One makes contact'. If I should say 'One makes > contact' in that case this would be a valid question.....In this case > the > valid answer is 'With the six sense bases as condition, contact [comes > to > be]; with contact as condition feeling'. > Moliyaphagguna: 'venerable sir, who feels?.." endquote > > And so the sutta carries on with venerable Moliyaphagguna searching > for a self in the Paticcasamuppada. He feels that there should be > 'someone' who craves, 'someone' who clings, who feels, who ages, who > has > sorrow, who dies. The Buddha says (SN 12:35 Bodhi p.575) that with the > eradication of ignorance such ideas and vacillations as "what now are > volitional formations (sankhara) , and for 'whom' are there volitional > formations? or'Volitional formations are one thing, the one for whom > there > are these volitional formations is another'--all these are abandoned, > cut > off at the root...."endquote. > > Thus there is no I who experiences hardness but rather because of > conditions coming together there is the experience of hardness. > > > This `being' is simply a puppet with manifold parts – all coming > together in different combinations – lasting for an instant and then > falling away again. > > Because the conditions that make up each moment are often > similar "we" look and feel somewhat the same from moment to moment – > and this is one aspect of how continuity deludes. > > ""Therefore, just as a marionette is void, soulless and without > curisosity, and while it works and stands merely through the > combination of strings and wood yet it seems as if it had curiosity > and interestedness, so too this materiality (rupa)- mentality (nama) > is void, soulless and without curiosity, and while it walks and > stands merely through the combination of the two together, yet it > seems as if it had curiosity and interestedness." Visuddhimagga > xviii31 > The conditions that make up what we think of as a human being are of > course more complex than a marionette, and hence more difficult to > fathom. The first steps, of this very long untanglement, are about > identifying, with right wisdom, the various characteristics of the > different phenomena that comprise this `being' this manisfestion of > paticcasamuppada. > > Usually we think "I'm interested or bored or excited or calm, or sad > or happy or wise or confused or making effort or being negligent. > But there are only different elements performing different > functions - and they have no agenda: > > "[The] uninterestedness becomes evident to him though seeing rise and > fall according to condition owing to his discovery of the inability > of states to have mastery exercised over them. Then he more > thoroughly abandons the self view"visuddhimagga xx102 > > The characteristic of not-self becomes evident to him through seeing > rise according to conditions owing to his discovery that states have > no curiosity and have their existence depending upon conditions" xx102 > > "All the formed bases(eye base, ear base, tongue base etc) should be > regarded as having no provenance and no destination. On the contrary, > before their rise they had no individual essence and after their fall > their individual essences are completely dissolved. And they occur > without mastery being exercisable over them since they exist in > dependence on conditions and in between the past and the future. "XV15 > > This is deep Dhamma that can only be heard during the time of a > Buddhasasana. > RobertK 27529 From: buddhatrue Date: Sun Nov 30, 2003 2:36am Subject: Re: Pure Mind/Buddha Nature Hi Ken O, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Kenneth Ong wrote: > Hi James k: You are right to say we should keep an open mind. Hmm okay forget about this foam sutta as it keeps a metaphor, how about the other two sutta I quote to you. James: What about them? If you want to discuss them then tell me exactly what about them you want me to discuss. I get the impression that you think I am not familiar with the teaching of anatta. Believe me, I am familiar with it. It is the most subtle and profound teaching that the Buddha taught that only one of the highest wisdom can comprehend. When I first joined this group, I was amazed at how easily members threw this term around, like they were discussing something as ordinary as toothpaste. They seemed to know something that I didn't so I began an intense study of anatta, which included discussions in this group. What I discovered is that those who say they know don't really know. They just act like they know. After the death of the Buddha and the death of the arahants, there appeared several schools of thought about anatta, each convinced that they knew what it meant and that the others didn't. I don't subscribe to any of those schools; I just plain admit that I don't know what it means. And guess what, if I ever do find out what it means I won't discuss it in this group. Then I won't need to discuss anatta, I will be anatta. Really, it is not a subject appropriate to discussion. K: One can only truly understand anatta only when one reach supramundane stage (to be techinically correct bc I was question by two person - so dont want to be qn again). When you understand Anatta, the whole concept of Buddhism will change. Your faith of dhamma suddenly grow tremenduously and you will smile bc you realise that Buddha is really supreme in wisdom. And also you will realise all are just conditions :) and then you realise that you dont need to qn the Abdhidhamma and ancient commentaries anymore. To me it is the most effective knife that cuts the root of moha. James: Hmm…you sound a bit like a religious zealot here. I knew people who would tell me, "If you will just accept Jesus Christ as your Savior you will see the wisdom of the Bible and you will always be happy." But I could see that they were not happy. They were feeding me a line of bull. Now you tell me that if I just truly understand anatta I will be a true Buddhist, accept the Abhidhamma and ancient commentaries and that I will smile (be happy). Again, I have to look at the source. Ken, are you truly happy? Do you practice what you preach and know what you claim? It seems to me that you are projecting a desire for yourself. k: One of the impression Abdhidhamma gives its reader that don't understand it, "hey this sound like a engineer textbook, Buddhist text should be simple to read like the sutta." Honestly speaking, I have a Abdhidhamma book called "A Book of Analysis" - it is so technical that I always fall asleep reading it, hence I have give up reading it. I prefer its commentary (Dispeller of Delusion) which is much more readable. James: Thanks for the advice but I get all the Abhidhamma I can handle by simply reading the posts of this group. My issue isn't that I don't understand the writings about the Abhidhamma, I just don't agree with them. I have been through this all before in this group though so there is no reason to go into it again. I mentioned it because those who adhere to the Abhidhamma seem to believe that they understand anatta easily, because it is presented in the Abhidhamma in a conceptual framework that is easily grasped. My opinion is that anatta is not so easily understood. k: Only as you say, lets have an open mind. forget about the commentary, let relook at the sutta again. Buddha said "Luminous, monks, is the mind. And it is defiled by incoming defilements. The uninstructed run-of-the-mill person doesn't discern that as it actually is present, which is why I tell you that -- for the uninstructed run-of-the-mill person -- there is no development of the mind." Luminious means that the *color* of the mind is radiant. It just describe a *color* just like fire is red. It does not imply any other thing. James: Ken, you are taking a metaphor in a literal way again. Luminous cannot describe the *color* of the mind because the mind doesn't have any color. Do you think that if you split open your head you are going to see light shining out or something? LOL! Color is wave patterns of light that reflect off of objects. The mind isn't an object and light doesn't reflect off of it. Obviously the Buddha meant something else by the description of `Luminous'. k: It is defile by incoming defilements means it is being affected by unwholesome factors (lobha etc). In other words. it just said the mind which is luminious is now being defile by defilements - an unwholesome state of mind. "The uninstructed run-of-the-mill person doesn't discern that as it actually is present" means no mindfulness hence no development of the mind "Luminous, monks, is the mind. And it is freed from incoming defilements. Again Buddha say luminious is the mind - simple and straight forward. It just hey the mind is radiant, thats all. The second sentence means it is a wholesome state bc an absence of defilements could mean a wholesome state of mind. "The well-instructed disciple of the noble ones discerns that as it actually is present, which is why I tell you that -- for the well-instructed disciple of the noble ones -- there is development of the mind." - means mindfulness - there is development of the mind k: I asked you, is there in any sentence in this sutta say that the mind is pure in the first place or it is pointing to an orignal state of mind. It just say luminiuos is the mind - just the color of the mind, no other connotation. Luminous does not mean pure, it only means illuminated, radiant, or shiny. Any color can be luminous. Furthermore, the sutta states clearly that this luminious mind can be defiled means it can be affected by defilements, what can be affected is conditioned, what is conditioned is impermanent. Therefore it will mean the sutta is not saying any thing about a pure mind or an orginal state mind as both such minds are supposedly to be unconditional. James: Luminous does suggest purity to me. Pure light is luminous, pure gold is luminous, pure silver is luminous, etc. If anything is corrupted or dirty it usually can't be described as luminous. And different colors can be shiny, if they have a reflective surface, but they cannot be described as luminous. Luminous implies something that appears to have its own light source of some sort. Of course I am just looking at the standard uses of metaphors, which I believe the Buddha used quite frequently. Kind regards Ken O Metta, James 27530 From: Egberdina Date: Sun Nov 30, 2003 3:11am Subject: [dsg] Re: Act of consciousness Hi Jon, Dang, a near perfect weekend spoiled by concensus with Jon Abbott :-) I know it is not useful for others to hear of my personal experiences, but I need to throw some in to show why I would question your paragraph, thus: > But, and this may be our main difference, I believe the conditions > under which that understanding can arise are quite specific and need > to be understood intellectually in the first place if there is to be > any chance of them being fulfilled. One evening, about eight years ago, whilst reclining in a chair after a days work, out of the blue, a realisation that there was no Herman Hofman in control of Herman Hofman's life hit home. I sat in that chair belly-laughing for a full ten minutes. That realisation was the funniest thing. But ..... once real, always real. I would find it impossible, and also undesirable, to trace this insight back to other insights and create some causal chain out of it. I can honestly say that I was not a student of Buddhism at the time, and anything I would have read about anatta previously would have gone right over my head. I believe that the resolution of conflict comes out of conflict. With clear hindsight, I can say that the view of an agent self is untenable in any culture. Again with hindsight, I can see how the investment of great amounts of energy is required to maintain the view of a separate self by needing to repress or obfuscate anything to the contrary. Eventually, the growing cognitive dissonance between what is believed and what is real launches a small spark of reality into awareness. This may happen a thousand times before the spark takes hold, but eventually it does. I agree that intelligence does not lead to enlightenment. That the Buddha became enlightened is not a tribute to his teachers, but a tribute to reality. All the best Herman --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Jonothan Abbott wrote: > Herman > > I don't want to spoil your Sunday, but I think we are largely in > agreement here. > > Especially, I agree with you on the danger of replacing one > conceptual framework with another. > > I believe that the conceptual framework we hold to can be displaced > only insofar as things (dhammas) come to be seen as they truly are. > > Regarding your final paragraph, I believe that progress in seeing > things as they truly are comes not by doing but by understanding, and > that what is to be understood is some aspect (i.e., any aspect, > without selection) of the present moment. > > But, and this may be our main difference, I believe the conditions > under which that understanding can arise are quite specific and need > to be understood intellectually in the first place if there is to be > any chance of them being fulfilled. > > This to me is where the teaching of the Buddha comes in. I do not > think we are smart enough to figure this game out on our own, > whatever the present level of our progress along the path. > > Look forward to hearing you further on any points of disagreement. > > Jon > > --- Egberdina wrote: > Hi Jon, > > > > As a general statement, I think we are discussing the idea of > > learning / teaching from two very different perspectives. I accept > > that in a conventional sense, learning is the acquiring of a > > conceptual framework. > > > > But I do not think this applies to Buddhism learning. Learning in a > > Buddhist sense is not an acquiring, but an undoing, a getting rid > > of conceptual frameworks. > > > > However, to achieve the same status / state as the Buddha, one > > doesn't go about getting what he got, or getting rid of what he got > > rid of. To get rid of what the Buddha got rid of, we would first > > need to acquire that. To reach the state of the Buddha we need to > > become aware of what *WE* believe, not what we believe the Buddha > > believed. > > > > I would not say that the thrust of the Buddha's example and > > teaching > > is development or evolution. For me, the opposite is true. The > > Buddha's teaching as a whole does not exist as such. > > Specific insights are applied in specific circumstances to cut > > through specific thickets of belief. The Buddha's example and > > teaching does not set out to replace an overall incorrect > > conceptual > > framework with an overall correct conceptual framework. That would > > be insanity. > > > > I accept a place for the suttas , the Abhidhamma and the > > commentaries. There is no limit to what can function as a trigger > > for a moment of insight. But the touchstone for what is happening > > at > > this moment is never a book. What is happening at this moment can > > never be described in words. To describe in words what is happening > > at this moment is to loose this moment. The moment instead becomes > > those words. Such moments have no reality. > > > > I don't doubt that the Buddha spoke when he thought it could cut > > through some specific thicket. That is quite different to believing > > that the Buddha can speak directedly to anyone through a book. To > > believe that it is possible to find out what is happening at this > > moment through the written words of another is stretching it a bit. > > > > With regards to what I believe we should do: > > 1]As little as possible. > > 2]Do not select what will be your teacher. > > > > All the best > > > > > > Herman > > > 27531 From: yu_zhonghao Date: Sun Nov 30, 2003 9:25am Subject: Re: Pure Mind/Buddha Nature Hi James, Ken O, and all, Is what the Buddha taught regarding the conditioned being not self hard to understand? If it is hard to understand, why? We might want to ask ourselves, "Is what I find hard to understand in fact what the Buddha taught?" As I see it, most of time it is the preconception/misconception about what the Buddha taught that one finds hard to understand, not what the Buddha taught. One such preconception/misconception that has been around is the idea "there is no self". I would think that if one finds what the Buddha taught that the conditioned is not self is hard to understand, it is not because one finds what the Buddha taught esoteric but because one finds it hard to reconcile what the Buddha taught as it is with the one's own preconception about what the Buddha taught is. The problem is that instead of giving up the preconception, one often seeks to reinforce it. Giving up the preconception can be difficult because it might not be comfortable to do so. In the process of giving up one's preconception, the question and thought that might come up is: "Is that all there is to what the Buddha taught? It just can not be that simple!" I would also quote this from Dhammapada When you see with discernment, 'All fabrications are inconstant' -- you grow disenchanted with stress. This is the path to purity. When you see with discernment, 'All fabrications are stressful' -- you grow disenchanted with stress. This is the path to purity. When you see with discernment, 'All phenomena are not-self' -- you grow disenchanted with stress. This is the path to purity. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/khuddaka/dhp/20.html Please note that purity is the goal, and seeing with discernment and growing disenchanted with stress is the path to that goal. Seeing with discernment and growing disenchanted with stress is not the goal in and of itself, but the path to the goal of purity.* Peace, Victor * I would also quote what Thanissaro Bhikkhu wrote: These insights are part of the path, and not the goal at the end of the path. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "buddhatrue" wrote: > Hi Ken O, [snip] 27532 From: yu_zhonghao Date: Sun Nov 30, 2003 9:27am Subject: Re: Pure Mind/Buddha Nature Here is the link to the quote below: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/modern/thanissaro/notself.html Peace, Victor --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "yu_zhonghao" wrote: > Hi James, Ken O, and all, [snip] > * I would also quote what Thanissaro Bhikkhu wrote: > > These insights are part of the path, and not the goal at the end of > the path. > 27533 From: htootintnaing Date: Sun Nov 30, 2003 9:45am Subject: Re: Phonetic Glossary Hi C7carl, Atta = At Ta ( Not At Hta or At Tha ) Anatta = Anat Ta Anicca = Aneik Sa ( Anake Sa, not Hsa or Sha ) C must be pronounced as a soft ' C ' as ' Sa ' Example of soft ' C ' Centre = Sen Ter, that ' C ' is pronounced as ' Sa '. In English strong ' C ' is pronounced as ' K ' Cat = Kat Dukkha = Doke Kha Sukha = Thu Kha ( ' Thin ' for slim is pronounced as ' Th ' so does all word with ' S ' must be pronounced as ' Th ' as in ' thin ' for a slim lady. Nibbana = Nake Ban Na ( each phonene must not be closed with 'k' or 'n' or so on as in English ) Panna = Pan Nya or Pin Nya or Pyin Nya ( Not Pan Na ) Vinnana = Wein Nya Na Sanna = Thin Nya or Than Nya Vedana = Way Da Na Sankhara = Than Kha Ra or Thin Kha Ra Pathama = Pa Hta Ma Catuttha = Ca Toke Hta ( soft ' C ' & all 'Th ' in Pali are pronounced as ' Hta ' ) Paramattha = Pa Ra Mat Hta ( ' Th ' is pronounced as ' Hta ' ) Sacca = Thit Sa ( ' S ' in Pali pronounces ' Tha ' as in 'thin' and ' C ' in Pali pronounces ' Sa 'as in centre Citta = Seik Ta ( Sate Ta ) Cetasika = Say Ta Thi Ka Avijja = Aweik Zar ' V ' in Pali pronounce '' Wa '' so in this case Aweik and all ' J ' in Pali pronounce '' Za '' Paccaya = Pit Sa Ya or Pyit Sa Ya / Pat Sa Ya or Phat Sa Ya The word ' a ' as vowel is in between a and i or English Bhava = Ba Wa Jati = Zar Ti Jara = Za Yar Vyadhi = Byar Di ( here 'V ' pronounces as V in English or B ) Samannantara = Tha Man Nan Ta Ra Sahajata = Tha Ha Zar Ta Indriya = Ein Dri Ya or In Dri Ya Nissaya = Neik Tha Ya ( not close with end sound of 'k' ) Chattha = Sat Hta ' Ch ' in Pali pronounces as strong ' S ' ' Ch ' in Pali pronounces like ' S ' of section (Eng) Pacchima = Pit Hsi Ma or Pat Hsi Ma Consonents are 1 . K in Kamma ( Kam Ma ) 2 . Kh in Khandha ( Khan Dar ) 3 . G in Ghandha ( Gan Da ) 4 . Gh in Sangha ( Than Gha ) 5 . Ng in 6 . C in Candha ( San Dar/ ' C ' is soft in Pali ) 7 . Ch in Chattha ( Sat Hta / Ch is strong ' S ' like 'S' of section ) 8 . J in Javana ( Za Wa Na / ' J ' in Pali pronounces ' Za ' Vijja ( Weik Zar / ' V ' is Wa and ' J ' is Za in Pali ) 9 . Jh in Jhana ( Zar Na / ' Jh ' pronounces Za ) Majjhima ( Mit Zi Ma or Mit Zhi Ma ) 10. N in Nana ( Nya Na / the first N pronounces Nya and the second N pronounces Na ) Panna ( Pan Nya/ this 'N ' pronounces Nya But most N pronounce Na ) 11. T in Tisarana ( Ti Tha Ra Na / ' S ' is Tha in Pali ) Atta ( At Ta ) 12. Th in Thina ( Hti Na / Th in Pali pronounces Hta ) Atthi ( At Hti / strong ' T ' in English ) 13. D in Pasada ( Pa Tha Da / ' s ' pronounces Tha in Pali ) 14. Dh in Samadhi ( Tha Ma Dhi / ' S ' is Tha ) 15. N in Natthi ( Nat Hti / Th is Pali is Hta ) 16. P in Pathama ( Pa Hta Ma / Th is pronounced as ' Hta ' ) 17. Ph in Phassa ( Phat Tha / ' S ' pronounce Tha in Pali ) 18. B in Bala ( Ba La ) 19. Bh in Bhava ( Ba Wa /Here B is strong ' B ' ' V ' in Pali pronounces ' Wa ' ) 20. M in Pancama ( Pin Sa Ma or Pyin Sa Ma / ' C ' here is soft ' C ' like ' C ' of centre ) 21. Y in Yekkha ( Yet Kha / not end with 't' in pronunciation ) 22. R in Rupa ( Ru Pa ) 23. L in Sila ( Thi La / ' S ' in Pali pronounces ' Th ' ) To be continue-- With Unlimited Metta Htoo Naing ------------------ --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Carl" wrote: > How do i pronounce Pali! I need a glossory that is phonetic. I > may never understand pali. But if i could be firm in my enuncation > of Pali it would be cool. I just want to know how to say the > word. Not a Pali glossary, just a simple pronunciation of that > glossery. ...c7 27534 From: Date: Sun Nov 30, 2003 5:29am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Vis. XIV 42 Hi, Jon - In a message dated 11/30/03 2:27:21 AM Eastern Standard Time, jonoabb@y... writes: > Howard > > You said: > < to arise. I don't know what it *means*, for example, for an > unexperienced hardness or sight to arise.>> > > I think you have put your finger on the nub of the matter here, > Howard. It is the issue of Rupas as present object of consciousness > vs. Rupas as dhammas that arise in this plane of existence regardless > of whether they are object of someone's experience via one of the 5 > sense-doors. > > I do understand your concern about whether the latter can be directly > known by us, but I frankly don’t see how that affects the bigger > question of whether or not that is in fact the way things are. > ------------------------------------------------ Howard: What is not directly knowable is at best inferable, and should not be assumed as unquestionably true, and, in any case, cries out for justification. ----------------------------------------------- As> > I've said before, if your position is simply that it is unknowable by > you or me at our present level of development (which I agree with), > that would not in itself be any basis for doubting the truth of the > assertion if made by, for example, the Buddha. Hence my suggestion > that you perhaps hold some views to the contrary. > > As to what it means for rupas to arise in this plane of existence, > consider the rupas that we take for our body. At any given moment > (including this very moment) most of those rupas, for example, the > ones we take for our internal organs, or the back of our head, are > not the object of anyone's 5 sense-door consciousness. Yet do they > not still arise? According to the teachings, they are conditioned by > one or more of the 4 conditions of kamma, citta, temperature and > nutriment, and by virtue of that condition/those conditions they > arise (or not) regardless. Does this strike you as not being > credible? > > The alternative scenario is that the rupas we take for our body arise > only when they are the object of someone's consciousness. As I > understand that proposition, this would mean that, for example, the > rupas we take for Howard cease to arise entirely in this plane of > existence whenever that bundle of rupas-taken-as-Howard is in a deep > sleep alone in a room, and would only resume arising when 'he' awoke > or when someone came into the room. Does this seem to you the more > credible of the 2 alternatives? > > Jon > ============================== Jon, to me hardness or an odor or a sight are contents of certain experiences (their objective aspects). As I see it, a hardness or an odor or a sight, if it is something other than that, must occur "somewhere," especially when it arises allegedly unobserved. (BTW, what *is* an unobserved sight? What does it mean for a sight not to be seen? The very language contradicts itself!) You seem to be saying that unobserved rupas occur in "Rupaville"! ;-) I say that if, as common sense asserts, there is an external material world of objects such as trees, rocks, air, grass, animal bodies, human bodies, planes, trains, and automobiles, then that is Rupaville! (This easily accounts for rupas occurring in groups.) But if not, I see there being proposed some unseen and unspecified "rupa realm," an amazing abstraction. If rupas are not features and functions of external physical "things," and they also are not the objective aspects of certain acts of consciousness, then they are disembodied ghosts hanging out in some ghost realm waiting to be somehow contacted by mind. Now, I can see so-called unexperienced rupas as potentials consisting of many, but not yet all, of the conditions needed for the arising in consciousness of a rupa, so that, for example, the occurrence of the sequence of phenomena we call "touching the back of our skull" results in the arising of a hardness, but prior to the occurrence of that sequence of phenomena occurring, that hardness is only a potential. (Some conditions have been met, but not enough.) This would be *one* way of explaining the matter. An objective external world of physical objects would be another. There may well yet be others that are far better than either of these. I have my preference, but I don't insist on it. What I do think is reasonable to insist on, however, is that a claim be backed up by a plausible and verifiable explanation. It seems to me that Abhidhamma and Abhidhammikas are extraordinarily detailed on many points, but at certain critical junctures, get very lax, showing a willingness to say "somehow", or to say "The Abhidhamma says it, so it must be so. Just wait until you have the ability to see it - many millenia from now". 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) 27535 From: Date: Sun Nov 30, 2003 5:42am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Consciousness as object Hi, Jon - In a message dated 11/30/03 2:44:32 AM Eastern Standard Time, jonoabb@y... writes: > Larry > > To my understanding, the characteristic of dhammas cannot be seen by > doing what you describe here. No amount of looking at things will > unveil the true nature of dhammas; only the arising of sati/panna can > achieve this. The conditions for that arising do not include the > intention to examine things more closely. That kind of conventional > 'effort' is not the effort of right effort. > > We should not expect that book knowledge/intellectual understanding > of, for example, the difference between different kinds of > consciousness will allow us to directly perceive those differences. > We need to be true to ourselves in terms of the extent to which sati > and panna have been developed to date and, accordingly, what > information has direct application for us in that regard and what > information is useful as 'background briefing' only. > > To answer your question then, for me it's pretty much all background > briefing stuff;-)). > > Jon > ========================= I agree with much that you say here, Jon. Now ... what, according to the Buddha, *are* the conditions needed for the arising of sati/panna? Are you saying that they do not include cultivating the practice of attending to the arising and ceasing dhammas? Do they also not include cultivating greater mental concentration and energy? Do they include none of these because nothing can be cultivated? You wrote "We should not expect that book knowledge/intellectual understanding of, for example, the difference between different kinds of consciousness will allow us to directly perceive those differences." I very much agree with you on this. So, what else, then, does the Buddha say should be done? Something? Nothing? Is there a practice according to the Buddha? The eightfold noble path you have often said is the co-arising of eight factors, and not a training program. Did the Buddha provide a training program? If there is no program of practice, what conditions the arising ofthe factors of enlightenment? Merely good luck?? ;-)) 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) 27536 From: nina van gorkom Date: Sun Nov 30, 2003 11:39am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re:panna cetasika, 1. Dear Howard, Your simile about the clouds that obscure the light is like the Expositor II. Path Consciopusness, (p. 313). Nibbana is like the moon, and just before the lokuttara cittas arise, gotrabhu, adoption, takes nibbana as object, but it does not eradicate: it cannot . But the Path-consciousness < follows it without a break, and arises piercing and bursting the mass of greed, hate and delusion never before pierced and burst.> This happened never before. Further on: Ignorance is one of the latent tendencies, it is deeply rooted, lying dormant in each citta. Only lokutttara panna can eradicate latent tendencies. Panna cannot become lokuttara panna at once, it has to be developed, starting from intellectual understanding. There are many degrees of it. Panna is a cetasika, conditioned by the citta and accompanying cetasikas, and conditioning them. That is the benefit of studying cetasikas, we begin to have more udnerstanding of conditions. It is natural to be ignorant, moha accompanies each akusala citta. It is a root, a cetasika. It is not difficult to notice that there are more akusala cittas than kusala cittas in our life. Panna is a sobhana cetasika, it is a root that is sobhana. Panna does not come naturally, there are very few kusala cittas arising, and even less with understanding. In the Abhidhamma it is taught that there is moha (ignorance, translated here as dullness) with each akusala citta, most important. See Part II, Bad States (p. 90) the long list of cetasikas accompanying akusala citta, and among them dullness. Ignorance is the beginning of the Dependent Origination. We are in this cycle and have the latent tendency of ignorance. It is so stubborn, it keeps on darkening our view. We have to investigate the abhidhamma in our life, otherwise, what is the use of studying it? We can investigate for ourselves whether there is ignorance with each akusala citta. For example, when I am praised, I feel happy, and this happy feeling arises with conceit and attachment. I forget the true nature of realities, I forget that conceit is akusala, that there is no point in rejoicing in praise. I forget that there are no people, only conditioned realities. The Suttanta teaches about kusala and akusala and gives us many precious reminders. The Abhidhamma adds subtle details and greatly assists us in knowing ourselves, in developing understanding of the present reality, so that eventually latent tendencies can be eradicated. If panna were not a cetasika that can and should be developed, what is the use of the eightfold Path, what is the use of the Buddha's teaching? Panna has to be developed together with the other Path factors which are also cetasikas. Dhammasangani § 16: The function of panna (Atth I, 123): Because of ignorance it is often unclear what object is experienced by citta and cetasikas, but panna investigates, discerns, discriminates. It has to search and research on and on. I agree that akusala is sickness, as you wrote, but panna is the medicine to cure it. Not immediately, it takes patience. (to be continued) Nina. op 28-11-2003 16:59 schreef upasaka@a... op upasaka@a...: > Ken, Abhidhamma takes wisdom/insight/pa~n~na to be a special mental > function. I do not understand it that way. If perfect wisdom were an actual, > positive phenomenon that arises, then it would have to cease as well. I do not > see how that could be questioned and still accept the Buddha's teaching of > anicca - whatever arises, ceases. As I see it, 'wisdom' is a conventional > term to > describe the natural, unobscured functioning of the mind, the natural > functioning of discernment (vi~n~nana) and perception/recognition (sa~n~na). > When one > sees clearly, without obscuration, how phenomena actually arise and are and > cease, that is mind functioning naturally, without obscuration - that is mind > functioning "with wisdom". 27537 From: htootintnaing Date: Sun Nov 30, 2003 0:17pm Subject: Phonetic Glossary ( 01 ) Consonents in Pali Language( the spoken language )are 1 . K in Kamma ( Kam Ma ) Jivaka ( Zi Wa Ka / J is pronounced as Za in Pali ) 2 . Kh in Khandha ( Khan Dar ) Sukha ( Thu Kha / 'S' in Pali pronounces 'Th' ) 3 . G in Gandha ( Gan Da ) Caga ( Sar Ga / C here is soft C as in centre pronounces ' Sa ' ) 4 . Gh in Ghana ( Gar Na / Gh is strong G ) Sangha ( Than Gha ) 5 . Ng in Sangaha ( Sang Ga Ha/ here Ng is a closing sound ) 6 . C in Candha ( San Dar/ ' C ' is soft in Pali ) Paticca ( Pa Teik Sa / ,, ) 7 . Ch in Chattha ( Sat Hta / Ch is strong ' S ' like 'S' of section ) Th in Pali pronounces Hta ) in Tiriccha ( Ti Reik Hsa or Ti Reik Sa ) 8 . J in Javana ( Za Wa Na / ' J ' in Pali pronounces 'Za ' in Vijja ( Weik Zar / ' V ' is Wa and J is Za ) 9 . Jh in Jhana ( Zar Na / ' Jh ' pronounces Za ) in Majjhima ( Mit Zi Ma / ,, ) 10. N in Nana ( Nya Na / the first N pronounces Nya and the second N pronounces Na ) in Panna ( Pan Nya/ this 'N ' pronounces Nya But most N pronounce Na ) 11. T in Tisarana ( Ti Tha Ra Na or Ti Sa Ra Na / S and Th for pronunciation is interchangeable ) in Atta ( At Ta ) 12. Th in Thina ( Hti Na / Th in Pali pronounces Hta ) in Atthi ( At Hti / strong ' T ' in English ) 13. D in Diganikaya ( Di Gha Ni Ka Ya ) in Pasada ( Pa Tha Da / ' s ' pronounces Tha in Pali ) 14. Dh in Dhatu ( Dhar Tu / Dh is strong ' D ' ) in Samadhi ( Tha Ma Dhi / ' S ' is Tha ) 15. N in Natthi ( Nat Hti / Th is Pali is Hta ) in Thina ( Hti Na / Th is pronounces Ht ) 16. P in Pathama ( Pa Hta Ma / Th is pronounced as ' Hta ' ) in Rupa ( Ru Pa ) 17. Ph in Phassa ( Phat Tha or Phat Sa ) in Vehapphala ( Way Hat Pha La / ' V' pronounces Wa ) 18. B in Bala ( Ba La ) in Photthabba ( Phut Htat Ba ) 19. Bh in Bhava ( Ba Wa /Here B is strong B ) in Lobha ( Law Bha/ ,, ) 20. M in Maha ( Ma Har ) in Pancama ( Pin Sa Ma or Pyin Sa Ma / ' C ' here is soft ' C ' like ' C ' of centre ) 21. Y in Yekkha ( Yet Kha / not end with 't' in pronunciation ) in Sappaya ( That Pa Ya / Sat Pa Ya ) 22. R in Rupa ( Ru Pa ) in Ahara ( Ahar Ra ) 23. L in Lakkhana ( Lat Kha Na / No ending or closing sound in Pali ) in Sila ( Thi La or Si La ) 24. V in Vanna ( Wun Na or Wan Na ) in Tava ( Tar Wa ) 25. S in Satta ( That Ta ~ this is equally pronounced Sat Ta ) in Phassa ( Phat Sa or Phat Tha ) 26. H in Hirika ( Hi Ri Ka ) in Ehi ( Aye Hi ) 27. Sv in Svakkhato ( Swat Kha Taw or Thwet Kha Taw ) in Disva ( Di Swar or Di Thwar ) 28. Tv in Tvan ( Twan ) in Gantvana ( Gan Twar Na ) 29. Dv in Dvipanca ( Dwi Pan Sa/ S in Centre ) in Pancadvara ( Pan Sa Dwar Ra/ S in Centre ) 30. Py in Pyakate ( Pya Ka Te ) in Yamakapyatiha ( Ya Ma Ka Pya Ti Ha ) 31. Vy in Vyadhi ( Bya Dhi ) in Assavya ( Assa Byar ) Vowels sounds are 1. a in Adhipati ( A Di Pa Ti / like 'a' in ago ) in Asava ( Aa Sa Wa ) in Ahara ( Aa Ha Ra or Aha Ra ) a in Kaya ( Kaa Ya / '-ya' Ya ) in Asava ( Aa Sa Wa/ '-sa' Sa and '-va' Wa ) in Marana ( Ma Ra Na ) a in Vedana ( Way Da Nar/ In '-na ' Nar ) in Sanna ( San Nyar / '-na ' Nyar in Sankhara ( San Khar Rar / '-kha' Khar or Khaa ) No strong form in Pali like Car Bar Far War of English words 2. i in Piti ( Pii Ti / '-ti ' Ti ) in Samadhi ( Sa Ma Dhi/ '-dhi' Dhi ) in Vyadhi ( Byar Dhi/ '-dhi' Dhi ) i in Piti ( Pii Ti / 'Pi-' Pii this sound ( vowel ) is like di-tek of Detect English word ) in Vithi ( Wii Hti / 'Vi-' Wii ,, ) in Hina ( Hii Na / 'Hi-' Hii ,, ) 3. u in Sukhuma ( Su Khu Ma ) in Phusana ( Phu Sa Na ) in Guru ( Gu Ru ) u in Sukara ( Suu Ka Ra / 'Su-' Suu is like Duration 'dju' ) in Gupa ( Guu Pa / 'Gu-' Guu ,, ) in Una ( Uu Na / 'U-' Uu ,, ) 4. e in Desana ( Day Sa Na / 'De-' Day like the first sound of Radar in Cetana ( Say Ta Na / 'Ce-' Say is S of Centre ) in Vedana ( Way Da Na / 'Ve-' Way like the Radar..see above ) e in Ehi ( Aye Hi / Like Radar ) 5. o in Passo ( Pat Saw or Pat Thaw/ '-so' like saw in English ) in Phasso ( Phat Saw or Phat Thaw / see above ) in Sabhavo ( Sa Bhar Waw ) 6. o in Photthabba ( Phut Htat Bar/ 'Phot-' Phut is like put of English word ) in Gottrabhu ( Gut Tra Bu / like Good ) in Vojjita ( Wut Zi Tar / ,, ) 7. an in Vanna ( Wan Na ) in Gandha ( Gan Dha ) in Chandha ( Hsan Dha, or San Dha / Sis strong S ) an in Anga ( An Ga or In Ga ) in Sankhara ( San Kha Ra ) in Vankaba ( Wan Ka Bar ) 8. akk in Sakka ( Sat Ka ) agg in Agga ( At Ga ) 9. acc in Sacca ( Sat Ca or Sit Ca ) ajj in Ajja ( At Za or It Za ) 10. ann in Panna ( Pan Nyar ) in Sanna ( San Nyar ) 11. att in Atta ( At Ta ) atth in Attha ( At Hta ) 12. add in Sadda ( Sat Da ) 13. addh in Saddha ( Sa dar or Sat Dar ) 14. ant in Santa ( San Ta ) anth in Santhana ( San Htar Na ) anda in Sanda ( san Da ) andha in Gandha ( Gan Dha ) amm in Samma ( Sam Mar ) 15. app in Kappa ( Kap Pa ) abb in Sabba ( Sab Ba ) amb in Amba ( Am Ba ) 16. all in Mallika in Moggallana 17. icc in Kicca ( Keik Ca ), Amicca ( Aa Mit Ca ) icch in Vicikiccha ( Wii Ci Keik Hsar ), Miccha ( Mit Hsar ) ijj in Mijja ( Mit Za ) 18. inc in Kinca ( Kein Ca ) 19. ukk in Dukkha ( Doke Kha ) 20. unna in Unna ( Ohn Na ) in Punna ( Pohn Nya ) 21. okk in Vimokkha ( Wi Mauk Kha ) 22. and many other possible vowel sound. 27538 From: blue lan Date: Sun Nov 30, 2003 5:48am Subject: Re: [dsg] Islam and Buddhism Hi, I am a new number here, a Taiwannees. After I get this interesting title about [ Islam and Buddhism ], i conneted and enter that book, and read it. Firstly, i think it's not a good book and some of them wrong and misleading the way Buddha taught and misunderstand the meaning of worship by the picture of Buddha, although the Buddha didnnot all agree that we have the Buddha statues. Yes, i am little upset. Because i had read their Qur'an, and i think Islam is good for peple who could not have chance to know the Buddha, and people who belive it could still have the goodnees to fellow. After I read the writing style again, compare some of other Islam books in the net, finally, my upset is gone. Because, their writing style seems [ yes or no], just according the Qur'an. Somehow , i just think that it would be one of the ways Islam people see, know, and understand things and people in the earth. So they and we live in different culture and diferent value. Why do I write this note? I think we need to pay more compassion and learn more the Buddha had taugh and then leading them and let them regcognize that the Buddha did not deny gods, or the god; however the Buddha say that gods are beings, and they also live under ignorance ( twelve links of dependent arising). Blue rahula_80 wrote: Hi, I would like to bring to your attention of the book, "Islam and Buddhism" by Harun Yahya, a well known Muslim preacher. The book is also available online. http://www.hyahya.org/buddhism01.php I am hoping that a Buddhist(s) especialy those who are interested in comparative religions studies between Buddhism and Islam, would come forward to clarify the misunderstanding / misrepresentations found in that book. Truly yours, Rahula 27539 From: buddhatrue Date: Sun Nov 30, 2003 0:52pm Subject: Re: Pure Mind/Buddha Nature --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "yu_zhonghao" wrote: > Hi James, Ken O, and all, > > Is what the Buddha taught regarding the conditioned being not self > hard to understand? If it is hard to understand, why? We might > want to ask ourselves, "Is what I find hard to understand in fact > what the Buddha taught?" > > As I see it, most of time it is the preconception/misconception > about what the Buddha taught that one finds hard to understand, not > what the Buddha taught. One such preconception/misconception that > has been around is the idea "there is no self". Hi Victor, This is one of the schools of thought about the matter. I wouldn't say that I belong to this school of thought, but it is very pragmatic and practical, which adds to its appeal. The only drawback I see is that a teaching strategy of this type doesn't become too effective if it is viewed as only a teaching strategy with no real validity behind it. Take for example this stanza that you quote from the Dhammapada: When you see with discernment, 'All phenomena are not-self' -- you grow disenchanted with stress. This is the path to purity. There is obviously a division between discerning that `all phenomena are not-self' and the final goal of purity (nibbana). However, it would seem highly illogical that the path and the goal are complete opposites or unrelated. If the path is viewing things as `non-self' than the goal might be a true realization of 'non-self'. Right? For example, if you want to teach someone to cook you don't have them practice hoop shots, you have them practice cooking. The path and the goal are related in most teaching situations. Of course this is a completely different matter and I understand that. However, what you are proposing isn't really any easier to understand, in my opinion. Metta, James 27540 From: christine_forsyth Date: Sun Nov 30, 2003 1:40pm Subject: Re: Phonetic Glossary Hi Carl, and all, In addition to the helpful phonetic glossary posts by Htoo Naing, you may find the following of interest: If you join the All Things Pali yahoo.group at: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Pali/ and then click onto their Files section: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Pali/files/ scroll down to the fourth item from the bottom of the page - you will see a file called palwvm zip This consists of MP3 Sound files and has pronunciations of 600 Pali words, recorded by Ven. Mettavihari. Initially it takes 6 or 7 minutes to download, but if you 'save as' to your desktop (or a folder) future access is quick and easy. There is also a listing in the All Things Pali group Files section of the 1000 most most frequently occurring words in the Pali Canon. As well, click on this link and scroll down to a written explanation of the The Pronunciation of Pali: http://www.abhidhamma.org/wobpref.htm#998977 metta and peace, Christine ---The trouble is that you think you have time --- --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Carl" wrote: > How do i pronounce Pali! I need a glossory that is phonetic. I > may never understand pali. But if i could be firm in my enuncation > of Pali it would be cool. I just want to know how to say the > word. Not a Pali glossary, just a simple pronunciation of that > glossery. ...c7 27541 From: nina van gorkom Date: Sun Nov 30, 2003 9:06pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Consciousness as object Dear Jon and Larry, I appreciate both Larry's question and your answer. I like the reminder: We need to be true to ourselves in terms of the extent to which sati and panna have been developed to date ... Excellent. Nina. op 30-11-2003 08:44 schreef Jonothan Abbott op jonoabb@y...: > Larry > > To my understanding, the characteristic of dhammas cannot be seen by > doing what you describe here. No amount of looking at things will > unveil the true nature of dhammas; only the arising of sati/panna can > achieve this. The conditions for that arising do not include the > intention to examine things more closely. That kind of conventional > 'effort' is not the effort of right effort. > > We should not expect that book knowledge/intellectual understanding > of, for example, the difference between different kinds of > consciousness will allow us to directly perceive those differences. > We need to be true to ourselves in terms of the extent to which sati > and panna have been developed to date and, accordingly, what > information has direct application for us in that regard and what > information is useful as 'background briefing' only. > > To answer your question then, for me it's pretty much all background > briefing stuff;-)). 27542 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Sun Nov 30, 2003 11:26pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Pure Mind/Buddha Nature Hi James James: Hmm…you sound a bit like a religious zealot here. I knew > people who would tell me, "If you will just accept Jesus Christ as > your Savior you will see the wisdom of the Bible and you will > always be happy." But I could see that they were not happy. They were feeding me a line of bull. Now you tell me that if I just truly understand anatta I will be a true Buddhist, accept the Abhidhamma and ancient commentaries and that I will smile (be happy). Again, I have to look at the source. Ken, are you truly happy? Do you practice what you preach and know what you claim? It seems to me that you are projecting a desire for yourself. k: James, I am happy (bc I don't know what you mean by truly , for me the only way to be truly happen is only one has attain Enlightment) bc living in Buddhism has make me happy. Accepting teaching is one thing, accepting blindly is another thing, living it is also another thing. You say to be open minded but are you ;-). Are you willing to throw down your concepts and try the ancient ways of Abdhidhamma and its commentaries. You may think I am bullshiting, giving you a load of nonsense but pse dont be too soon to judge. I started Buddhism not on Thervada path, I was a Mahayanist who also believed in the orignal state of mind, pure mind. I have to say nothing compares to Thervada and Abdhidhamma. J: I mentioned it because those who adhere to the Abhidhamma seem to believe that they understand anatta easily, because it is presented in the Abhidhamma in a conceptual framework that is easily grasped. My opinion is that anatta is not so easily understood. k: Yes Anatta is a profound subject. I dont think anyone here claim they truly understand Anatta. The gist to repeat anatta again and again as though like brushing our teeth, is bc it is the crux of Buddhism. That is why it is impt to repeat it again and again and discusss it again and again. Hence it gives an impression that we truly know it. We may not know it but at least we are living it and that matters. How can I claim living it - bc I used the way stated in the suttas, using it again and again for the living moment that I can be mindful of, and that is how I experience a minute bit of it (does not equate truly know it bc that is enlightenment) > James: Luminous does suggest purity to me. Pure light is > luminous, pure gold is luminous, pure silver is luminous, etc. If anything is corrupted or dirty it usually can't be described as luminous. And different colors can be shiny, if they have a reflective surface, but they cannot be described as luminous. Luminous implies something that appears to have its own light source of some sort. k: Who say that anything that is diry cannot be luminous, your definition of luminious appear to have its own source of light, I have have a slightly dirty bulb but it can still be luminous. How about those luminious fishes, even though some of them have transparent body that are illuminated, but there are some of them have organs in their body that are dirty. They are luminous on the outside but inside they are also as filthy as us. kind regards Ken O 27543 From: Sarah Date: Mon Dec 1, 2003 0:21am Subject: Re: [dsg] How To Get Through The Samsara ( 02 ) Dear Htoo & All, I greatly enjoy your series on Cetasikas - it’s a very imaginative and colourful way of presenting these mental factors as Ministers. I always smile when I read them. Anumodana. They’re very helpful indeed as long as the metaphors are not taken literally, as James would remind us;-) I also appreciated this post (no2) from this series. For example: --- Htoo Naing wrote: > Realities are realities and they are always true in ultimate sense. > These ultimate realities are CITTA , CETASIKA, RUPA, and NIBBANA. > > CITTA is an ultimate reality. It is the nature that is aware of object > or Arammana. It is conscious to sense or object or Arammana. Basing on > this character, there is only one Citta. According to its character, it > just knows the Arammana. So it is primarily pure, innocent, radiant and > luminous. Cittas are in the first group of ultimate realities. > > However, Citta never arises in isolation but arises with other > associated mental factors called CETASIKAS. It is these Cetasikas that > give Citta different names. Depending on what Cetasikas accompany, there > are 89 Cittas or 89 states of consciousness. Cetasikas are included in > the second group of ultimate realities. There are 52 Cetasikas and each > has their specific typical character. All 52 Cetasikas have general > characters as well. Each Citta and each Cetasika will be delineated in > the coming posts. > > The third group of ultimate realities is RUPA . Rupa are bases. Rupa > base for Nama Dhamma both Citta and Cetasika. Rupa also base for Rupa. > Rupa have their own characters. Characteristic of Rupa is its > changeability. Rupa are subjected to change and they are influenced by > Kamma, Citta, Utu, and Ahara. Each of Rupa, Kamma, Utu, Ahara, > interactions of Rupa and their four causes will be discussed in the > coming posts. > > The fourth group of ultimate realities is NIBBANA . Nibbana is an > absolute peace as all kinds of fire have been extinguished. These kinds > of fire are shaping and forming the existing events, happenings and > situations. Fire are mental conditioners or Cetasikas. As conditioned, > different kinds of Citta has to arise. Kamma have to arise in connection > with Citta. Arisen Rupa are further conditioned by Utu and Ahara. And > new and new Rupa have to grow in quantity and they proliferate > infinitely and endlessly. ..... S: I think it’s very helpful that you keep giving these reminders and clearly understanding the first three conditioned ultimate realities is essential to realizing nibbana. In other Buddhist traditions it is stressed that ‘the entire dependently originating world -both physical and mental - has a merely conceptual existence’ (from the article Larry gave us the link to -). From this, it would seem there is no differentiation then between ultimate realities (except nibbana) and conventional truths and sound is no more ‘real’ than a tree. The latter is not in accordance with the Tipitaka (or experience), however, as I understand. Furthermore, concepts such as trees are not conditioned. Only cittas, cetasikas and rupas are conditioned. The Dependent Origination is about the conditioned nature of realities. Thank you again, for clearly stating these truths. One question, I do have however is when you write: H: > Another option as destination is endlessly rotating the wheel of lives. > As long as Sattas are growing Kamma, the wheel will be rotating > endlessly. It is the readers choice whether to choose Nibbana as their > destination or to be in the state of rotating in the wheel of lives as > their destination. If they choose the wheel of lives as their > ndestination '' How To Get Through The Samsara '' is no more needed to > read up. For those who choose Nibbana as their destination will need to > learn Dhamma that help get through the Samsara. .... In paramatha dhamma terms, what do you mean here by choice and who does the choosing? Are these conditioned realities too? Thank you again for all your other helpful posts, Metta, Sarah p.s. Thank you for posting your comprehensive Pali glossary. When we were recently in Myanmar, our Myanmar friends took a little time to get used to our pronunciation of Pali terms and vice versa as both Thai and Burmese have their own pronunciations of some sounds which are different from the Sinhalese. Looking at your glossary, I esp. notice the difference for these consonants - ‘c’ which you pronounce ‘s’, ‘j’ as ‘z’, ‘th’ as ‘ht’ [as in your name;-)], ‘v’ as ‘w’ [common in thai too], ‘s’ as ‘th’, ‘v’ as ‘b’. Thank you. ======================== 27544 From: Sarah Date: Mon Dec 1, 2003 1:01am Subject: Re: [dsg] Pure Mind/Buddha Nature Hi Christine, Glad to see you back and look forward to more tit-bits from you all. I hope Steve will add some of his comments and Dhp comy references on ‘sabbe DHAMMA anatta’ etc here and everyone’s got their instructions for posting;-) Meanwhile, I was glad to see you contributing to this thread;-) --- christine_forsyth wrote: > Hello to all in the Luminous Mind corner, > > Though not able to join in the discussion, I am reading your posts > with interest. > I am not sure if this article entitled "Luminous Mind" by Bhante > Henepola Gunaratana is familiar to people. > For what it's worth, it can be found at: > http://www.gbvihara.org/Luminousmind.htm .... I only just got round to reading the article which I don’t remember having seen before (but sometimes [well, often] I forget). I note that you’re careful to indicate this time that you’re just offering for consideration and it doesn’t necessarily reflect your views, and I appreciate this;-) There was a lot of good information and a couple of wrong conclusions -- to my mind -- about the bhavanga cittas. I thought Mike’s comment was far more ‘correct’, so I’ll re-quote that instead: >Mike: It seems to me to be a puzzle only if I assume that mind (citta) is a lasting thing. Citta, as I understand it, is 'colored' instantaneously by its attendant factors which vanish as rapidly as does citta. Purity and impurity arise and subside with mind in an instant, I think.< (Mike, pls add more helpful comments - we need you;-)) Chris, I agree with your appreciation of Robertk’s and other reminders and quotes on anatta. I also think the Nyantiloka entry is a good one. We need to hear these quotes often. My main objection to the article above were not so much the comments on ‘luminous’ which mostly seemed right, but the conclusions at the end which strongly suggest a ‘self’ to do something. I find the quotes you gave to be far more helpful as reminders of anatta: "Mere suffering exists, no sufferer is found; The deeds are, but no doer of the deeds is there; Nibbána is, but not the man that enters it; The path is, but no traveler on it is seen." "Whosoever is not clear with regard to the conditionally arisen phenomena, and does not comprehend that all the actions are conditioned through ignorance, etc., he thinks that it is an ego that understands or does not understand, that acts or causes to act, that comes to existence at rebirth .... that has the sense-impression, that feels, desires, becomes attached, continues and at rebirth again enters a new existence" (Vis.M. XVII, 117). I note that you have no intention of buying into the Luminous controversy and know how to keep your feet dry unlike the recent Crocodile Dundee from Qld. (Btw, we now have some China experts, but they’ve learnt. They’re saying at the outset ‘this is tough’ and ‘call us when you have Star Croc ready for an easy catch’;-)We’re all missing your guy and the party atmosphere already;-( Metta, Sarah ====== 27545 From: Sarah Date: Mon Dec 1, 2003 1:09am Subject: ICARO - Re: [dsg] Re: Clinging to Wholesome States (was: Buddhaghosa....) Hi Icaro, --- icarofranca wrote: > Today we are reaching fully at the apple core! > In my Abhidhamma readings, I have even kept the mental image of > a "Supermarket of many kinds of Wholesome Consciousness" at certain > passages of Pathaana. At the Pathaana you get the 24 Paccayas and > their combinations with Kusala and Akusala, Hetu and Ahetu Dhammas, > almost as goodies on a market stand, ready to get catched up for > anyone interested. > You can get it all at the alobha side, and reach the Buddha´s > viewpoint that even such marvelous Dhammas are essentially Dukkha, > Anicca and Anatta. Only Nibbana is the Dhamma that stands at the > other shore! .... Thanks for your encouragement and confidence in Abhidhamma. I miss you when you're not around (akusala, I know;-(( )this is the only kind of supermarket shopping I like too;-) .... > So mote will be...snif! Snif! ..... Not sure what language this, but I'll assume it's good;-) Icaro, I wrote a couple of other posts to you, but forgot to put your name in the subject and you might not have seen them. When you have time, maybe you can go to escribe: http://www.escribe.com/religion/dhammastudygroup/ key 'icaro' into the search and you should find all posts to you and gossip about you there;-) Anyone else who has been away might like to try this too, especially if you have an unusual name. Metta, Sarah ====== 27546 From: buddhatrue Date: Mon Dec 1, 2003 1:22am Subject: Re: Pure Mind/Buddha Nature --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Kenneth Ong wrote: > Hi James > James: Luminous does suggest purity to me. Pure light is > > luminous, pure gold is luminous, pure silver is luminous, etc. If > anything is corrupted or dirty it usually can't be described as > luminous. And different colors can be shiny, if they have a > reflective surface, but they cannot be described as luminous. > Luminous implies something that appears to have its own light source > of some sort. > > k: Who say that anything that is diry cannot be luminous, your > definition of luminious appear to have its own source of light, I > have have a slightly dirty bulb but it can still be luminous. How > about those luminious fishes, even though some of them have > transparent body that are illuminated, but there are some of them > have organs in their body that are dirty. They are luminous on the > outside but inside they are also as filthy as us. > > > kind regards > Ken O Hi Ken O, To determine the meaning of a metaphor you need to look at how the author intended its use. The Buddha had no experience with light bulbs (dirty or not) and luminous fish- and neither did his audience. The Buddha's time was before electricity and luminous fish are indigenous to the tropics and the deep ocean, not India. You have to consider common usage of the term. The things that would be luminous to the Buddha's audience would be the sun and moon and pure metals like gold and silver. Metta, James 27547 From: Sarah Date: Mon Dec 1, 2003 1:57am Subject: Re: Welcome to dhammastudygroup F/W message to DSG from new member ===================================== Hello Every One, First of very sorry for the late response to the mail. I am Girish P. Pagare (M - 41) from India. I have been attending 10 day meditation courses at Vipassana Research Institute Dhammagiri, Igatpuri in India since last 11 years as taught by Shri S.N. Goenka in the tradition of Sayagyi U Ba Khin. Also practising meditation at home (to some extent). I have read the guidelines for members & would follow the same. With love & Metta to all, Girish. 27548 From: Egberdina Date: Mon Dec 1, 2003 2:13am Subject: Re: Phonetic Glossary Hi Carl, and welcome aboard, You need not worry, there is no correct pronunciation of any word. At best, you will pronounce words the same as the members of groups you might wish to belong to. Or just to be different, you could pronounce them differently to how they are pronounced in groups you don't wish to belong to. Consider how American English, Australian English, New Zealand English, South African English all originated from English English in the last few hundred years. The vocubalary has stayed very similar to the original, but the pronunciation has changed markedly per region. No correct pronunciation anywhere. Perhaps a bit of good old 'strine (Australian English) pali would hit the spot at party's ? All the best Herman --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Carl" wrote: > How do i pronounce Pali! I need a glossory that is phonetic. I > may never understand pali. But if i could be firm in my enuncation > of Pali it would be cool. I just want to know how to say the > word. Not a Pali glossary, just a simple pronunciation of that > glossery. ...c7 27549 From: Sarah Date: Mon Dec 1, 2003 2:15am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: New Member Hi Carl, Many thanks for adding your photo and also for kindly writing to Star Kid Philip. I’ll see him on Friday. --- Carl wrote: > Anyway, I like the feeling of being convoluted! Reality depending on > unreality depending on reality depending on......... .... ;-) Please be patient with us all here. It’s not easy for any of us - too much moha (ignorance) for any of it to be easy. If you keep asking questions and adding your comments, everyone will appreciate it. Sometimes we need to put aside some posts or Tipitaka references and look at them later to appreciate. I know others would agree with this. .... > Again, thanks for all the welcomes. This is indeed a place for me to > learn and study in depth the Dhamma. ..... Thanks to all the members, including yourself, for this. ... > Just a little more about me. I am married, Living in the USA, > Retired, 60 years old, Overweight, been a Buddhapup for about 10 > years, started "consciousness training" about thirty five years ago > through many self-help psyc paperbacks. I am methodical, > analyitical, a poor speller and a rather slow learner. I have > particapated in other Buddhist boards in the past. .... Thanks for this - I’m sure we’d nearly all consider ourselves slow learners here. Hope this ‘Buddhist board’ doesn’t become a past tense;-) Just let us know how we can help keep it in the present. .... > And awww heck! I just posted my picture. It is wonderful to see > the members pictures posted for this group. I hope all members would > be interested in posting their picture! Thanks c7carl .... This is a great encouragement to others (I hope). Look forward to more of your comments. I was going to add a little more on your points, but one steam-roller at a time, I think;-) Metta, Sarah p.s If you would like to look at other steam-roller saved posts from the archives on the subject, pls look under ‘concepts and realities’ at this link: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/files/Useful_Posts Also, the first chapter of Nina's book 'Abhidhamma in Daily Life' might be helpful: http://www.abhidhamma.org/ 27550 From: christine_forsyth Date: Mon Dec 1, 2003 3:11am Subject: October thoughts from Cooran Hi Sarah and all, This Dhamma-discussion weekend at Andrews'property at Cooran had a slightly different cast to previous weekends. Azita was much missed. Klaas who, I think, was originally from Holland - or its "best" part, Friesland (but migrated to Oz in the 50's or 60's ) - made a significant contribution to the discussions on his first visit. Andrew, KenH and some of the other men had known him for many years, so there was the happy atmosphere of a reunion, with lots of reminiscing, threaded throughout the weekend. Klaas is a cat-person, but not allowed to have a cat in his flat. His bed at Cooran was actually in one of the cat areas and he was 'in heaven' with a purring Devon Rex curled up with him all night. I'll leave KenH, Steve and Andrew to mention any of the dhamma discussions that they found significant or had questions about. Particularly why we didn't get past the Introduction to the Anapanasati sutta ...... and whether nibbana is the only unconditioned dhamma. We considered an article by Thanissaro Bhikkhu titled 'Samsara' to remind us all that samsara is the wandering on through the frightful chain of rebirths, not just this one single lifetime where we currently live. Samsara is a process, not a place. It is the answer, not to the question "Where are we?", but to the question "What are we doing?" (i.e. samsara-ing). We touched on what 'keeping the precepts' means - i.e. if one is sitting in Dhamma discussions, not guzzling alcohol, commiting mayhem or frolicking with wild, wild women (or men) - this doesn't mean one is presently keeping at least three of the precepts. Keeping the precepts is 'abstaining' from breaking them - and this can only happen when the opportunity to break them is successfully resisted. KenH, through the intention to 'save' and 'not harm', created 'The Great March Fly Debacle' with the help of an almost empty sugar jar, and the world's fastest snatching of flies. This led to some interesting discussions about non-harming, the vipaka of flies, the kamma of KenH, why every march fly on the property was attracted to him (some inventive answers here :-)), and what are the chances of splinting a particular flys' middle left hand leg. The answer is 'two - Buckleys and none'. :-) There was a discussion on an article by Maurice Walshe (translator of the Digha Nikaya) about Dana - "Giving from the Heart" about intention and recipients (which also included a very interesting remark about the Vesantara Jataka :-)). There was definitely not consensus on the Buddhist idea of some recipients being more worthy than others to receive gifts, or the fact that more beneficial vipaka would be generated by givng to one person rather than another. We sat around the campfire on Saturday night (expertly built by KenH, ably assisted by Steve), and tried to encourage one of our number to explain the fire sermon and what nibbana was, but this dwindled down to nine of us sitting companionably around the fire, gazing into its depths, silently sipping tea. metta and peace, Christine ---The trouble is that you think you have time 27551 From: bodhi2500 Date: Mon Dec 1, 2003 3:25am Subject: Re: [dsg] Pure Mind/Buddha Nature/Anatta Hi Sarah, All Here is a tit-bit from the cooran weekend. Sarah wrote: > Glad to see you back and look forward to more tit-bits from you >all. I hope Steve will add some of his comments and Dhp comy >references on `sabbe DHAMMA anatta' etc All Dhamma are without a soul (Sabbe Dhammaa anattaa) When this, with wisdom, one discerns, Then one is disgusted with ill; This is the path to purity. Tattha sabbe dhammaati pa~ncakkhandhaa eva adhippetaa. There "all dhammas" 5 Khandhas only is meant. My comment was that to say that the Dhammapada quote says that Nibbana is anatta is not quite correct, because in Dhammapada 279, when the Buddha says All Dhammas are anatta, he is only referring to the 5 khandhas. My understanding of the passage is that the Buddha said this passage with reference to discerning with wisdom the 5 aggregates as anatta, which is the path to purity. To say that "Sabbe dhammaa anattaa" includes Nibbana we would have to quote the same passage but from a different part of the Canon. Commentary on "sabbe dhammaa anattaa" from Samyutta Khandhavagga> Sabbe dhammaa anattaati sabbe catubhuumakadhammaa anattaa. All dhammas are anatta = all dhammas of the 4 planes are anatta. Which would include Nibbana. Here is the complete commentary to Dhammapada279> Tattha sabbe dhammaati pa~ncakkhandhaa eva adhippetaa. Anattaati 'maa jiiyantu maa miiyantuu'ti vase vattetu.m na sakkaati avasavattana.t.thena anattaa attasu~n~naa assaamikaa anissaraati attho. Sesa.m purimasadisamevaati. Steve. ps. Thanks once again Andrew and Sandra for your hospitality. 27552 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Mon Dec 1, 2003 3:25am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Pure Mind/Buddha Nature Hi James > To determine the meaning of a metaphor you need to look at how the > author intended its use. The Buddha had no experience with light > bulbs (dirty or not) and luminous fish- and neither did his > audience. The Buddha's time was before electricity and luminous > fish are indigenous to the tropics and the deep ocean, not India. You have to consider common usage of the term. The things that would be luminous to the Buddha's audience would be the sun and moon and pure metals like gold and silver. k: James that is what you think the author intend to use it. When we discuss it I give you my position. There also is a position from the commentaries. k: So do you think the metaphor that consciouness is like a magic trick (where Buddha use it in Foam Sutta) is not an accurate description of the mind while luminous is a better word. There are two ways to look at it a. The mind is luminous and anatta (like a magic trick) b. The mind is luminous will mean it is pure in nature. k: For b: I think it is not nice for me to keep on standing on my point. Would you describe this pure in nature, what does it mean, is it anatta, how does it congruent with anatta. kind regards Ken O P.S. Do they have firefly in India at that time? 27553 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Mon Dec 1, 2003 3:33am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Pure Mind/Buddha Nature Hi Victor Actually I am quite uncomfortable to use this word not-self to describe Anatta. To me i prefer to leave it Anatta and not translate it at all. A better definition should be as empty of a self as describe in Sunna Sutta. It is neither self nor no self. It is neither existence nor non-existence. But since I think some dictionary define it as not-self what can I do :). I neither a pali nor an english expert. Cheers Ken O 27554 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Mon Dec 1, 2003 5:17am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Act of consciousness Herman I do not for a moment doubt your experience and what you have told us about it. But it seems to me that the significance of one's experiences in terms of the Buddha's teaching can only be determined by reference to that teaching. So I would see a familiarity with the Buddha's word as essential regardless of one's predisposition or level of attainment. Just my take. Thanks for sharing with us. Jon --- Egberdina wrote: > Hi Jon, > > Dang, a near perfect weekend spoiled by concensus with Jon Abbott > :-) > > I know it is not useful for others to hear of my personal > experiences, but I need to throw some in to show why I would > question your paragraph, thus: > > > But, and this may be our main difference, I believe the > conditions > > under which that understanding can arise are quite specific and > need > > to be understood intellectually in the first place if there is to > be > > any chance of them being fulfilled. > > One evening, about eight years ago, whilst reclining in a chair > after a days work, out of the blue, a realisation that there was no > Herman Hofman in control of Herman Hofman's life hit home. I sat in > that chair belly-laughing for a full ten minutes. That realisation > was the funniest thing. But ..... once real, always real. > > I would find it impossible, and also undesirable, to trace this > insight back to other insights and create some causal chain out of > it. > > I can honestly say that I was not a student of Buddhism at the > time, > and anything I would have read about anatta previously would have > gone right over my head. 27555 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Mon Dec 1, 2003 5:43am Subject: Re: [dsg] The arising of rupas Howard There are many interesting points in your post which I may respond on. However, there is 1 area that I'd like you to clarify, in case I am misunderstanding your position. You say: <> My question is, if the hardness we take for the back of the head is not arising in this world already, how there could be touching the back of the head in the first place (which you say then *results in* the arising of a hardness)? The sequence of phenomena we call "touching the back of the head" is essentially the meeting together of different hardnesses. To make my question quite clear, how, under your theory, could 2 un-observed rupas ever come into contact (e.g., a person is hit on the top of the head by an unseen falling object, a tree is struck by lightening, etc)? Thanks. Jon --- upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, Jon - ... > Jon, to me hardness or an odor or a sight are contents of > certain > experiences (their objective aspects). As I see it, a hardness or > an odor or a > sight, if it is something other than that, must occur "somewhere," > especially when it arises allegedly unobserved. ... 27556 From: buddhatrue Date: Mon Dec 1, 2003 5:51am Subject: [dsg] Re: Pure Mind/Buddha Nature Hi Ken O, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Kenneth Ong wrote: > Hi James P.S. Do they have firefly in India at that time? Yes. Metta, James 27557 From: Date: Mon Dec 1, 2003 1:59am Subject: Re: [dsg] The arising of rupas Hi, Jon - In a message dated 12/1/03 8:45:22 AM Eastern Standard Time, jonoabb@y... writes: > My question is, if the hardness we take for the back of the head is > not arising in this world already, how there could be touching the > back of the head in the first place (which you say then *results in* > the arising of a hardness)? The sequence of phenomena we call > "touching the back of the head" is essentially the meeting together > of different hardnesses. To make my question quite clear, how, under > your theory, could 2 un-observed rupas ever come into contact (e.g., > a person is hit on the top of the head by an unseen falling object, a > tree is struck by lightening, etc)? > > ======================== I understand and sympathize with your question, but I think it presumes a world of external objects that are merely conceptual projections. All that I take for "real" (or, better, "actual") are experiential conditions in some mindstream or other. Prior conditions, provided certain ones of them (and enough of them) have occurred, constitute what we might call a potential rupa (or a potential for a rupa), but a rupa, itself, is the content of an experience occurring in some mindstream. The business about touching the back of one's head or of being struck by lightning are stories, as I see it, but not groundless ones - they are stories which we associate with patterns of actual experiences in various mindstreams. But, as I said, this phenomenalist position, though one which I accept, is not something I know to be true. There could be a hidden, unobservable something lurking behind experience - but it is neither known nor knowable. If I were to somehow learn - I can't imagine how - that "reality" is a true duality consisting of a material world (of some nature - let's say consisting of material events/conditions) and a separate mental world (with which there is, of course, direct mental contact), that somehow these separate worlds come into contact (with the material world appearing to mind in a certain form) so that there are material actualities and there are also the material objects of consciousness that more or less accurately reflect them (for it would seem that the hard matter and the felt hardness are not the same thing), but that each of these separate realms are conditioned, impermanent, insubstantial, impersonal, and unsatisfying, I would say that I had learned something reasonably compatible with the Dhamma. My hesitancy in calling this scheme plausible is the sharp separation between matter and mind, the means of connecting the two up, the complexity of the scheme, and, most of all, the lack of means of ever learning that it is the case. Generally I abide by the principle of not accepting the positive existence of something without evidence, but certainlynot when there *is no means* of verifying the existence. Accordingly, it was reasonable for scientists to give up the notion of ether (filling space, and serving as a medium for transmission of light) when there was no evidence for its existence. How much more reasonable is it to give up the notion of an *external* world of matter when it is *in principle* unverifiable! Touch sensations, warmth and cold sensations, hardness sensations, sights, etc are all experiential - they are not aspects of an external material world. Such a presumed external material world is a dreamed-of hidden something imagined as underlying physical experience; it is concept-only. That's how I see the matter. Can I prove that I'm right in this? Of course not, and I have no inclination to try. 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) 27558 From: htootintnaing Date: Mon Dec 1, 2003 9:52am Subject: Re: [dsg] How To Get Through The Samsara ( 02 ) Dear Sarah, Thanks for your kind reply and showing interest in my posts. I am trying to present clear account in all possible way. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Sarah wrote: > Dear Htoo & All, > > I greatly enjoy your series on Cetasikas - ------------------------------------------- Sarah : In paramatha dhamma terms, what do you mean here by choice and who does the choosing? Are these conditioned realities too? Thank you again for all your other helpful posts, Metta, Sarah ------------------------------------------------- Htoo : Dear Sarah, I would answer indirectly. A baby was adopted by a couple who do not have even a child. He was brought up in their home. He called them as ' Pa Pa ' ( Dad ), and ' Ma Ma ' ( Mom ). He really thought that they were his blood-related parents. But once he was told that his current care givers who were behaving as if they were his parents were actually not of his. Due to this information given by a neighbour, the child realized that they were not his parent ( not his father and his mother ). But he loved them as they brought them up. So he continued using the word ' Pa Pa ' ( Dad ) and ' Ma Ma ' ( Mom ) even though he knew that they were not. There is no ' who ' in Paramattha Dhamma. The choice I used was just a word. If that choice arises, it is actually arising of Adhimokkha Cetasika. It is an ultimate reality. ------------------------------------------------- >p.s. Thank you for posting your comprehensive Pali glossary. When we were recently in Myanmar, our Myanmar friends took a little time to get used to our pronunciation of Pali terms and vice versa as both Thai and Burmese have their own pronunciations of some sounds which are different from the Sinhalese. Looking at your glossary, I esp. notice the difference for these consonants - ?c? which you pronounce ? s?, ?j? as ?z?, ?th? as ?ht? [as in your name;-)], ?v? as ?w? [common in thai too], ?s? as ?th?, ? v? as ?b?. Thank you. ======================== Htoo Naing : P.S : There are international phonetic symbols. We can see the symbols. But the actual sounds will need an audio version of data. I am not good at phonetic. But I can pronounce nearly accurately some difficult sounds. 27559 From: Htoo Naing Date: Mon Dec 1, 2003 10:03am Subject: How To Get Through The Samsara ( 04 ) Dear Dhamma Friends, Those who have a wish to get through the Samsara have a good mind. The pure wish to get through it is switched on by Chandha ( will ). If Chandha exists and this Chandha becomes the head of all accompanying Nama Dhamma, then everything will be sorted out. This is the main key to success for everything including attainment of Nibbana. This Cetasika Chandha should not be underestimated. If Chandha works to its mightiest strength, success is sure and the promising results are to be seen with time. Chandha makes a power for success. It becomes a will power. This will power can give rise to accomplishing everything. Chandha is one of 4 Adhipati Dhamma ( heading Dhamma ). And it also works as Iddhipada Dhamma ( Causal Dhamma of accomplishing ). If the Dhammafarer ( represent for all who are searching for Dhamma ) has Samma Chandha, the right wish and will, this will help him in everything he does. If the Dhammafarer has a wish to get through the Samsara, then he will struggle to overcome all hazzards and hassles everywhere. If Chandha leads him, he will try to collect Dhamma related to the practice which helps get through the Samsara. As the target is Arahatta Magga, which is the noblest Nana, the Dhammafarer is already full of good wish. This helps him to keep at least 5 precepts strictly. And he will do more Sila whenever practicable like keeping 8 precepts on full moon day and dark moon day and possibly mid-waxing moon day and mid-waning moon day. And to the most keeping these Sila for life. If the Dhammafarer stays with Vipassana all the time, keeping 8 precepts will not be too hard to do. Killing is not of Sappurisa ( good-minded people ) even in subtle or inspicuous way. So Panatipata ( avoidance of killing ) has been already kept in good-minded Dhammafarer. Stealing again in any circumstance and situation is not of the Vipassana meditator. Adinnaadana ( avoidance of stealing ) has been kept under strict control. Unlawful sex is not of good-minded people. Even sex in general is not the matter to be practised by the Vipassana meditator. If sex in general not of interest, then unlawful sex or Kamesumicchaacara will never be committed by the Vipassana meditator. Telling lies is not of good-minded people. Especially the Vipassana meditator will not lie in any situation. Moreover, telling unintelligible words like harsh speech, non-sense stories, telling messages that help beloved associate to become dissociated are also not of the Vipassana meditator's practice. Drinking alcohol and taking intoxicants help Akusala Dhamma to arise as they put intelligent wisdom away as ignorance occupies the mind. The desire to be intoxicated is not of the Vipassana meditator's practice. So, the Vipassana meditator if he is serious will be free of breaking 5 precepts in any circumstance and any situation. As his target is Arahatta Magga Nana, he will do Sila as a basis as much as possible. As he is on the practice of Vipassana all the time, he will not wish to make himself or herself to be good-looking or to be more beautiful by taking food which is much more than enough for living. In this way the practitioner of Vipassana has no problem with '' Vikalabojjanna '' or having meal after mid-day. If this can be practised, there will be much much more time to practise Vipassana. As thinking of food, thinking for a variety of cuisine, doing shopping, preparation for cooking and cooking itself, preparation for meal, having meal, washing up everything after meal, and much more make the practitioner less time to practise Dhamma. This precept if practicable is quite helpful. Uccasayana-Mahasayana ( living with luxurious things and or staying above the level where there live senior sounded people stay or staying at high level ) will not be a problem for the Vipassana meditator as this is nothing to do with him. Nicca, Gita, Vadita, Visuka, Dassana, Malagandha, Vilepana, Dadana, Mandana, Vibusana are not to be practised by the Vipassana meditator. Dancing_which is connected with lobha-hooked amusing, listening to music_which drifts the mind away from Vipassana meditation, playing musical instruments_which is connected with wandering spreading mind with lobha-hooked amusing, singing_which is not the practice of the meditator, watching festive entertainment_which drifts away the mind from the meditational object, overusing body beauty things etc etc are not for the meditator and if he is in practice this is also not a problem. As soon as the wish ( Chandha ) arises and according to its dictation, all these Sila things will be practised. It is much much better to obtain Sila from a Venerable or if possible from an Arahatta monk than just avoiding of ill-doing by self. Mr Black does not kill any life. Mr White does not kill any life. But Mr Black avoid in his own preference while Mr White avoid these ill-doings specifically as he has obtained Sila given by a Venerable. In this example, Mr White excels Mr Black in terms of Kusala. So whenever practicable Sila should be obtained from a Venerable monk. Living with Sila makes the individual feel ligher, more plicable, more tender, calmer, more tranquilized and all other Kusala Cetasika or mental factors arise and help him practising Dhamma well. All these Kusala arise from Samma Chandha of the wish that wants to get through the Samsara. As he intends to achieve Arahatta Magga sooner or later, the Dhamma practitioner will start to practise Vipassana meditation as soon as he decides to get through the Samsara. May all beings feel ease and peace and practise Vipassana With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing htootintnaing@y... Moderator of JourneyToNibbana Yahoo Group 27560 From: nina van gorkom Date: Mon Dec 1, 2003 10:10am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re:panna cetasika 2. Hi, Howard, I do not know where to begin, there are so many points. We got stuck with the object of anger. I liked what Larry wrote, being angry about anger. And that it is difficult to always know the object. Cittas with their accompanying cetasikas arise and pass away so fast, and panna cetasika has to be very keen to know realities as they are. Citta cognizes an object and cetasikas also experience that object, but each in their own way. Maybe we stumble over some words like object. Let us take pleasant feeling for a change. Pleasant feeling can arise together with attachment and then it is akusala. We have to verify this in our life. We like a delicious flavour, and there may be pleasant feeling with the citta. It can also be indifferent feeling. We like it, we are attached to it. The flavour is the object. Attachment is a cetasika which likes an object. Attachment is always attachment to something. Pleasant feeling also has that object. We should not think too much about *object*, then we make things too complicated. The object is simply what is cognized, remembered, felt, liked, disliked, etc. There is an object that is experienced right now, and we have to verify this. There is not only pleasant feeling accompanying the citta which likes something, there is also rapture (piti), bliss or enthusiasm. It is difficult to know the difference between pleasant feeling and rapture. It is true, the Abhidhamma makes us realize how little we know. Abhidhamma clears the muddled waters of ignorance, to use your simile but with a different twist. When the citta is kusala, it can also be accompanied by pleasant feeling and rapture. This has to be studied and investigated with patience. Without the Abhidhamma we would have wrong understanding of the Suttanta, and, wrong understanding of the eightfold Path. For example, take the Mindfulness of Breathing. We read here about piti and happy feeling. If we are not careful we may be on the wrong track, thinking that feeling happy and relaxed while concentrating on breathing there are kusala cittas. But here the sutta deals with happy feeling and bliss accompanying jhanacitta, thus, kusala of a high degree. We have to learn the difference between pleasant feeling that is kusala and that is akusala. We read: V) He trains thus ; he trains thus . (VI) He trains thus ; he trains thus . As regards the second tetrad (marked V-VIII), the Visuddhimagga (VIII, 226) comments: (V) He trains thus , that is, making happiness (píti, also translated as rapture) known, making it plain. Herein, the happiness is experienced in two ways: (a) with the object, and (b) with non-confusion. As regards , the Visuddhimagga (VIII, 227) explains: How is happiness experienced with the object? He attains the two jhånas in which happiness (píti) is present. At the time when he has actually entered upon them the happiness is experienced with the object owing to the obtaining of the jhåna, because of the experiencing of the object. After the jhånacitta has fallen away paññå realizes the characteristic of píti as it is: only a kind of nåma, which is impermanent and not self. .. ***** op 27-11-2003 01:08 schreef upasaka@a... op upasaka@a...: From contact with an object, feeling > follows (dependent on that contact), and what one feels one obsesses about, > and then anger may arise. As far as the suttas are concerned this is basic > Buddhism it seems to me. First comes the contact, later the feeling, still > later the reaction of craving or aversion. N: You also studied the Dependent Origination: contact conditions feeling.They are coarising. They arise with each citta. When citta experiences an object through the ears, there is earcontact conditioning feeling at that moment. Not a feeling arising later on, that feeling accompanies another citta with another contact. In the context of the Dependent Origination, see Dictionary Nyanatiloka: The sensorial and the mental impressions [N:contacts] are for the feeling associated therewith a condition by way of co-nascence, association, mutuality, etc. Nina. 27561 From: nina van gorkom Date: Mon Dec 1, 2003 10:10am Subject: anapanasati 4 a anapanasati 4 a We should go back to the third tetrad of the sutta on mindfulness of breathing: (IX) He trains thus ³I shall breathe in experiencing the (manner of) consciousness²; he trains thus ³I shall breathe out experiencing the (manner of) consciousness². (X) He trains thus ³I shall breathe in gladdening the (manner of) consciousness²; he trains thus ³I shall breathe out gladdening the (manner of) consciousness². (XI) He trains thus ³I shall breathe in concentrating the (manner of) consciousness²; he trains thus ³I shall breathe out concentrating the (manner of) consciousness². (XII) He trains thus ³I shall breathe in liberating the (manner of) consciousness²; he trains thus ³I shall breathe out liberating the (manner of) consciousness²- on that occasion, monks, a monk abides contemplating citta in citta, ardent, clearly comprehending, mindful, having put away covetousness and grief regarding the world. I do not say, monks, that there is mindfulness of breathing in one who is forgetful and does not clearly comprehend. That is why on that occasion, monks, a monk abides contemplating citta in citta, ardent, clearly comprehending, mindful, having put away covetousness and grief regarding the world. The Visuddhimagga states: IX: In the third tetrad the experiencing of the (manner of) consciousness must be understood to be through four jhanas. As regards the words in the third tetrad: ³(X) I shall breathe in...breathe out gladdening the (manner of) consciousness², the Visuddhimagga (VIII, 231) states that there is gladdening in two ways, namely through concentration and through insight. We read: ŒHow through concentration? He attains the two jhånas in which happiness (piti) is present. At the time when he has actually entered upon them he inspires the mind with gladness, instils gladness into it, by means of the happiness associated with the jhåna. How through insight? After entering upon and emerging from one of the two jhånas accompanied by happiness he comprehends with insight that happiness associated with the jhåna as liable to destruction and to fall, thus at the actual time of insight he inspires the mind with gladness, instils gladness into it by making the happiness associated with jhåna the object.¹ XI: Concentrating (samaadaha.m) the (manner of) consciousness:"evenly (samam) placing (adahanto) the mind, evenly putting it on its object by means of the first jhana and so on. Or alternatively when, having entered upon those jhanas and emerged from them, he comprehends with insight the consciousness associated with the jhana as liable to destruction and fall, then at the actual time of insight momentary unification of the mind arises through the penetration of the characteristics... ******** Nina. 27562 From: nina van gorkom Date: Mon Dec 1, 2003 10:10am Subject: FW: Co Mahaaraahulovaadasutta 26 B Co Mahaaraahulovaadasutta 26 B : Relevant Sutta Passage: Aana-apaanassati.m, Raahula, bhaavana.m bhaavehi. Rahula, cultivate the development of mindfulness on in and out breathing. Text Commentary: idaani therena pucchita.m pa~nha.m vitthaarento aanaapaanassatintiaadimaaha. Now the Buddha, when he explained in detail the question asked by the venerable Rahula, said, ³Mindfulness of breathing...² and so on. tattha ida.m kamma.t.thaana~nca kamma.t.thaanabhaavanaa ca paa.liattho ca saddhi.m aanisa.msakathaaya sabbo sabbaakaarena This meditation subject, its development and the meaning of the text, has been explained in all aspects together with the exposition of its benefit, visuddhimagge anussatiniddese vitthaaritoyeva. in the section on Recollections in the Visuddhimagga. ima.m desana.m bhagavaa neyyapuggalavaseneva parini.t.thaapesiiti. The Buddha finished this discourse (spoken) for a person who needed guidance *. ****** English: Now the Buddha, when he explained in detail the question asked by the venerable Rahula, said, ³Mindfulness of breathing...² and so on. This meditation subject, its development and the meaning of the text, has been explained in all aspects together with the exposition of its benefit, in the section on Recollections in the Visuddhimagga. The Buddha finished this discourse (spoken) for a person who needed guidance *. ____________ *In the Puggala Pa~n~natti, it is explained that there are four types of persons: One who attains enlightenment quickly at the beginning of a discourse (vipacita~n~nuu). One who attains after a more detailed explanation (uggha.tita~n~nuu). One who needs more guidance (neyyapuggala). One who understands the Dhamma but does not attain enlightenment (padaparama). ******** End of the Commentary to the Mahaaraahulovaadasutta. Nina. 27563 From: Date: Mon Dec 1, 2003 1:16pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re:panna cetasika 2. Hi, Nina - In a message dated 12/1/2003 1:10:07 PM Eastern Standard Time, nilo@e... writes: > From contact with an object, feeling > > follows (dependent on that contact), and what one feels one obsesses about, > > and then anger may arise. As far as the suttas are concerned this is basic > > Buddhism it seems to me. First comes the contact, later the feeling, still > > later the reaction of craving or aversion. > N: You also studied the Dependent Origination: contact conditions > feeling.They are coarising. They arise with each citta. When citta > experiences an object through the ears, there is earcontact conditioning > feeling at that moment. Not a feeling arising later on, that feeling > accompanies another citta with another contact. In the context of the > Dependent Origination, see Dictionary Nyanatiloka: The sensorial and the > mental impressions [N:contacts] are for the feeling associated therewith a > condition by way of co-nascence, association, mutuality, > etc. ============================== I do accept the possibility that some of the dependency links may involve a co-occurrence. In particular, the links of vi~n~nana -> namarupa -> salayatana may well involve co-occurence. In fact, in one sutta, vi~n~nana <-> namarupa is made explicit. So, indeed, it could well be that vedana co-arises along with the object in a mindstate. In fact, I think I was precipitous in thinking that the feeling must follow the contact in time. The fact that we know *what* is felt as pleasant does, indeed, support the simultaneity. (If the feeling occurred afterwards, we might well not know what it is that is felt as pleasant!) So I do accept the co-occurence as a good possibility, backing off from my previous position. However, feeling is felt, and for feeling to arise unfelt makes no sense to me. I would be comfortable with the claim, for example, that the sensation of "very strong, sharp pressure on the body" is felt as unpleasant at the very occasion that that pressure is the object of consciousness, but I would not be comfortable with the claim that the concomitant pleasant feeling is felt only after the actual occurrence of the feeling. To me, the arising of a feeling of pleasantness and feeling something as pleasant are one and the same. When we feel pleasantness is exactly when pleasantness has arisen, whether that is simultaneous with the object eliciting the pleasant feeling or whether it is subsequent to it. With metta, Howard 27564 From: Date: Mon Dec 1, 2003 6:27pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Pure Mind/Buddha Nature/Anatta Steve: "To say that "Sabbe dhammaa anattaa" includes Nibbana we would have to quote the same passage but from a different part of the Canon. Commentary on "sabbe dhammaa anattaa" from Samyutta Khandhavagga> Sabbe dhammaa anattaati sabbe catubhuumakadhammaa anattaa. All dhammas are anatta = all dhammas of the 4 planes are anatta. Which would include Nibbana." Hi Steve ( & Nina ), Here is B. Bodhi's trans. of this commentary: SN, p. 1084, n. 180, Spk: All formations of the three planes (sabbe tebhuumakaa sa.nkhaaraa) are impermanent; all phenomena of the four planes (sabbe catubhuumakaa dhammaa) are nonself. Larry: I looked-up "plane" in CMA and found that there are 4 planes of consciousness and 4 planes of existence. The 4 planes of consciousness are: sense sphere, fine-material sphere, immaterial sphere, and supramundane. The 4 planes of existence are: woeful plane, sensuous blissful plane, fine-material sphere plane, and immaterial sphere plane. I believe? all 4 consciousnesses can arise in all 4 planes. Technically speaking nibbana doesn't have a plane to itself but I suppose we could include it as an object of consciousness in any plane (either planes of consciousness or planes of existence). The intent of the commentary seems to be to include nibbana somehow without actually saying so. How do you see this? It seems a little confusing to me. I don't see any difference between the 3 planes and the 4 planes unless "3 planes" refers to the planes of existence (combining the first 2) and "4 planes" refers to planes of consciousness. Nina, do I have this right? Larry ------------------ Here is the sutta quotation: SN 22 90 When ths was said, the elder bhikkhus said to the Venerable Channa: "Form, friend Channa, is impermanent, feeling is impermannt, perception is impermanent, volitional formations are impermanent, consciousness is impermanent. Form is nonself, feeling is nonself, perception is nonself, volitional formations are nonself, cosciousness is nonself. All formations are impermanent; all phenomena are nonself." Larry: Channa goes on to say he also thinks in this way but the thought "But who is my self" keeps occuring. Ananda then recites the Kaccaanagota Sutta (SN 12 15) which is concerned with the middle way between existence and nonexistence by way of the stream of the rise and fall that is impermanence (my characterization). In this sutta there is the line "he does not take a stand on 'my self'". I think not taking a stand on 'my self' is concerned with the nature of existence as a flow of rise and fall while the anatta characteristic is concerned with the undesirableness of khandhas because they are unsatisfactory (dukkha) because they are impermanent. The Buddha definitely takes a stand on the undesirabeness of [anatta of] the khandhas. I don't see the anatta characteristic as having much to do with either the nature of ego or the nature of existence. The Channa Sutta commentary is a puzzlement. L. 27565 From: kenhowardau Date: Mon Dec 1, 2003 7:03pm Subject: Re: October thoughts from Cooran Christine and RobertK (and Sarah, Nina, anyone interested in Cooran), Thanks for that report Christine, you have an excellent memory for detail -- I had forgotten a lot of it. ---------------------- C: > I'll leave KenH, Steve and Andrew to mention any of the dhamma discussions that they found significant or had questions about. Particularly why we didn't get past the Introduction to the Anapanasati sutta ...... ------------------------- In order to preserve old (and not so old) friendships, we tried to agree as much as possible. But the Anapanasati- sutta does bring conflicting interpretations to a head (ask any dsg member). We didn't get past the intro but, when you think about it, we covered quite a lot of ground. For example: Can an ordinary, non-jhana, mindfulness of breathing be used in a similar, if less effective, manner? No, unless you can be sure your consciousness is kusala. Can the habitual cultivation of a quiet, non-monkey, mind lead to satipatthana? No (with similar proviso plus the knowledge of Dhamma). If we choose to learn the art of jhanna absorption, shouldn't we start by concentrating on an object? No, we should start by keeping the precepts, practising moderation (of eating and sleeping), and otherwise suppressing the five hindrances. If (IF), it is true that anapanasati is not for just anyone, are there other forms of samatha meditation that we can engage in? This prompted the production of a dsg post, 25818, by RobertK, which reads in part: "There are other types of samatha - such as Maranasati (meditation on death)- that are suitable for all times. For example the Anguttara nikaya (Book of the Elevens ii 13 p213 Mahanama) says about Buddhanusati and Dhammanusati and several other samatha objects: ""` you should develop it as you sit, as you stand, as you lie, as you apply yourself to business. You should make it grow as you dwell at home in your lodging crowded with children" "In the Samyutta nikaya V (Sayings on stream entry p347 The great chapter Dhammadina ) 500 rich merchants came to see the Buddha . They asked how they should live their lives. The Buddha suggested that they train themselves thus: ""as to those discourses uttered by the Tathagatha, deep, deep in meaning, transcendental and concerned with the void (about anatta) from time to time we will spend our days learning them. That is how you must spend your days."" (end quote) It's a pity you weren't there, Robert, to field questions. I would like to know how this fits in, if at all, with formal meditation. Also, I suspect that the above way of 'spending our days' should not be understood as; "Later, I will learn Dhamma, now, I will attend to ordinary business," or even; "Now, I will learn Dhamma, later, I will attend to ordinary business." I think, rather, that the admonition describes conditionality and is to be understood here and now in its entirety . (If you know what I mean.) ----------------- C: > . This led to some interesting discussions about non-harming, the vipaka of flies, the kamma of KenH, why every march fly on the property was attracted to him (some inventive answers here :-)), ----------------- There was one answer which I was too modest to suggest (or, tried to suggest but no one would listen): Any keen observer of nature will tell you that march flies will not be shooed away. Like sharks, they might circle at a safe distance but they will always come back for the kill (painful, stinging bite). Other people were gently brushing the marchies away. This was very magnanimous, very Buddhist-like, but it only moved them on to the next person. When they landed on me they got no further (except into a bottle for later release). Admittedly, there were casualties: (Warning: the following confession may disturb some members:) There was one accidental death (despite Christine's medical attention), and there was one, squashed, victim of a temper tantrum. (It does hurt when they bite the back of your heel!) Kind regards, (?) Ken H PS: I won't comment on the subject heading. 27566 From: nina van gorkom Date: Mon Dec 1, 2003 9:30pm Subject: Re: [dsg] October thoughts from Cooran Dear Christine, Thank you very much for your lively and entertaining description. I especially like the samsara-ing. Good reminder. The campfire must have been fun. Nina. op 01-12-2003 12:11 schreef christine_forsyth op cforsyth@v...: > Samsara is a process, not a place. It is the answer, > not to the question "Where are we?", but to the question "What are we > doing?" (i.e. samsara-ing). 27567 From: nina van gorkom Date: Mon Dec 1, 2003 9:30pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Pure Mind/luminous. Dear Ken O and James, This is only to show you that also in olden times there was debate about colour and luminous. Here is an extract of the subcommentary to the sutta, about luminous: @.tiikaa Pabhassarasutta.m with the a.t.thakathaa & Dhammapaala's .tiikaa and translations. N: This consciousness, monks, is luminous, and it is indeed corrupted by oncoming defilements. N: As to the ninth sutta,¾ luminous¾.means clear, pure. N:> With reference to the ninth sutta, „luminous¾ , means very pure because of its natural purity. Therefore he said , . N:< consciousness>, this is the life-continuum. N: But how does there exist indeed a colour of citta? No, there is not. N: Since it has taken on luminosity he spoke of it as a quality obtained in the colour element. He asked, N: Someone else has said that there is no colour for that which is immmaterial, but after he has refuted this and explaining that various texts nevertheless state this of such consciousness because of its natural purity etc. , he made the statement beginning with . N: There, however, it was stated that he spoke thus with reference to the consciousness that is composed, clean and very pure. N: Therefore he said, „ this consciousness also, because of the absence of defilements is , means that life-continuum. Nina. op 01-12-2003 12:25 schreef Kenneth Ong op ashkenn2k@y...: > k: For b: I think it is not nice for me to keep on standing on my > point. Would you describe this pure in nature, what does it mean, is > it anatta, how does it congruent with anatta. 27568 From: rjkjp1 Date: Mon Dec 1, 2003 11:33pm Subject: Re: October thoughts from Cooran Dear KenH, Christine, Andrew , Steve and all, You have a great group in Queensland. Almost sacreligious for a Kiwi to say, but could I claim some Australian heritage by pointing out that my father was born in Adelaide and met my mother there? Ivan (Australian living in Bangkok) seemed impressed by that. In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "kenhowardau" wrote: > > "There are other types of samatha - such as Maranasati > (meditation on death)- that are suitable for all times. > For example the Anguttara nikaya (Book of the Elevens ii > 13 p213 Mahanama) says about Buddhanusati and > Dhammanusati and several other samatha objects: > > ""` you should develop it as you sit, as you stand, as > you lie, as you apply yourself to business. You should > make it grow as you dwell at home in your lodging > crowded with children" > > "In the Samyutta nikaya V (Sayings on stream entry p347 > The great chapter Dhammadina ) 500 rich merchants > came to see the Buddha . They asked how they should > live their lives. The Buddha suggested that they train > themselves thus: > > ""as to those discourses uttered by the Tathagatha, > deep, deep in meaning, transcendental and concerned > with the void (about anatta) from time to time we will > spend our days learning them. That is how you must > spend your days."" > > (end quote) It's a pity you weren't there, Robert, to > field questions. __ Am booked to stop for a few days in early August in Brisbane, hope Cooran is a rental car drive from there? __ I would like to know how this fits in, > if at all, with formal meditation. Also, I suspect that > the above way of 'spending our days' should not be > understood as; "Later, I will learn Dhamma, now, I will > attend to ordinary business," or even; "Now, I will learn > Dhamma, later, I will attend to ordinary business." I > think, rather, that the admonition describes > conditionality and is to be understood here and now in > its entirety . (If you know what I mean.) > _____ I think no rules (to repeat what Acharn Sujin always says) about these matters. Check to see whether we are really investigating conditionality, or are our actions rooted in subtle wrong view that believes in a self who is doing the investigating. If wrong view is seen it is known, and that is the way it can be given up. If it is not seen as wrong view then it will be clung to and even considered as right view. It is not a matter of time as to how this can be known because it can be known right now. On the other hand it must take a long, long time because avijja (ignorance) is so powerful and is conditioned to arise, no self who can stop it arising. RobertK 27569 From: Sarah Date: Mon Dec 1, 2003 11:40pm Subject: Re: [dsg] FW: Co Mahaaraahulovaadasutta 26 B Dear Nina & All, Thank you for this very thorough series with its wonderful commentary. --- nina van gorkom wrote: > ima.m desana.m bhagavaa neyyapuggalavaseneva parini.t.thaapesiiti. > > The Buddha finished this discourse (spoken) for a person who needed > guidance ______ > *In the Puggala Pa~n~natti, it is explained that there are four types of > persons: One who attains enlightenment quickly at the beginning of a > discourse (vipacita~n~nuu). One who attains after a more detailed > explanation (uggha.tita~n~nuu). One who needs more guidance > (neyyapuggala). > One who understands the Dhamma but does not attain enlightenment > (padaparama). > > ******** > > End of the Commentary to the Mahaaraahulovaadasutta. .... And if Rahula was one who needed detailed guidance (neyyapuggala) after detailed explanations, who are we to think we don't need a lot, lot more detailed guidance? Metta, Sarah ====== 27570 From: Sarah Date: Mon Dec 1, 2003 11:50pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Welcome to dhammastudygroup Hi Girish, Welcome to DSG and thanks for introducing yourself. There are quite a number of people here who have attended courses with Shri S.N. Goenka. I just attended one with Mr Goenka in India 30 yrs ago! Whereabouts do you live in India? I look forward to any of your contributions here and please let us know if you have any questions or comments. It's a very active list these days and I know it can be a bit overwhelming for newcomers. You may need to skip the more technical posts initially. with metta, Sarah p.s For any newcomers who are both new to the list and new to the Dhamma (not Girish), you may like to look at some saved posts under "new to the list" by scrolling down at this link: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/files/Useful_Posts ====== > First of very sorry for the late response to the mail. > I am Girish P. Pagare (M - 41) from India. I have been > attending 10 day meditation courses at Vipassana > Research Institute Dhammagiri, Igatpuri in India since > last 11 years as taught by Shri S.N. Goenka in the > tradition of Sayagyi U Ba Khin. Also practising > meditation at home (to some extent). > > I have read the guidelines for members & would follow > the same. 27571 From: Sarah Date: Tue Dec 2, 2003 0:07am Subject: Re: [dsg] Pure Mind/Buddha Nature/Anatta Hi Steve (& Larry), I’m glad you’re able to join the Cooran weekends. --- bodhi2500 wrote: > Hi Sarah, All > Here is a tit-bit from the cooran weekend. .... I was very interested to read your tit-bit indeed and I’m at a loss for an explanation for what the comy says here; > Commentary to Dhammapada279> > > Tattha sabbe dhammaati pa~ncakkhandhaa eva adhippetaa. > There "all dhammas" 5 Khandhas only is meant. > > My comment was that to say that the Dhammapada quote says that > Nibbana is anatta is not quite correct, because in Dhammapada 279, > when the Buddha says All Dhammas are anatta, he is only referring to > the 5 khandhas. My understanding of the passage is that the Buddha > said this passage with reference to discerning with wisdom the 5 > aggregates as anatta, which is the path to purity. > > To say that "Sabbe dhammaa anattaa" includes Nibbana we would have > to quote the same passage but from a different part of the Canon. > Commentary on "sabbe dhammaa anattaa" from Samyutta Khandhavagga> .... As Narada says: “The commentator interprets dhamma as the ‘aggregates’ (khandhaa). The same interpretation he gives to sa’nkhaara too. If by dhamma is meant sa’nkhaara, there is no reason for the Buddha to make a differentiation in the third verse.” Surely, there couldn’t be a mistake in the comy here??;-) Could it be a mistake in the Pali text? Perhaps Suan or someone can check another Pali text. I agree with your other reference including Nibbana. Look forward to any more of your tit-bits. Metta, Sarah p.s Larry, perhaps the Vism extracts can resume - maybe at a slower pace if that suits Nina. ===== 27572 From: Sarah Date: Tue Dec 2, 2003 0:28am Subject: Re: [dsg] October thoughts from Cooran Hi Christine & Ken H, Many thanks for your reports. KenH, did you write an introduction to the anapanasati sutta? If so, can we see it? How can there be any qu of nibbana not being the only unconditioned dhamma? --- christine_forsyth wrote: > We touched on what 'keeping the precepts' means - i.e. if one is > sitting in Dhamma discussions, not guzzling alcohol, commiting mayhem > or frolicking with wild, wild women (or men) - this doesn't mean one > is presently keeping at least three of the precepts. Keeping the > precepts is 'abstaining' from breaking them - and this can only > happen when the opportunity to break them is successfully resisted. .... ;-) .... > and what are the chances of > splinting a particular flys' middle left hand leg. The answer > is 'two - Buckleys and none'. :-) ..... I’ll have to wait til my Aussie interpreter fills me in. Perhaps it’s the Dutch or ‘double-dutch’ influence.... .... > There was a discussion on an article by Maurice Walshe (translator of > the Digha Nikaya) about Dana - "Giving from the Heart" about > intention and recipients (which also included a very interesting > remark about the Vesantara Jataka :-)). .... As it’s a :-)) one, you’d better share it, Chris. .... >There was definitely not > consensus on the Buddhist idea of some recipients being more worthy > than others to receive gifts, or the fact that more beneficial vipaka > would be generated by givng to one person rather than another. ..... We never know - so many conditions and factors involved. Better to just give when we have a chance and not think about the vipaka.....otherwise, so easily it can be clinging to self again. As I was discussing with Victor (Larry thanks for your help;-)), even whilst giving, there can be clinging to the generosity, to the gift, to ‘me’ or anything. Glad you all had a good weekend and I hope Azita can make it next time too. Metta, Sarah ===== 27573 From: christine_forsyth Date: Tue Dec 2, 2003 1:07am Subject: Re: [dsg] October thoughts from Cooran Hi Sarah and all, Regarding the expression 'Buckley's chance' - there are lots of explanations as to who was the original Buckley - the explanation in this link is as good as any, and probably no more accurate than the others. Buckley's chance = no chance at all. http://www.thisisparramatta.com/pomsinoz/uselessfacts.html ======================================== Christine said: > There was a discussion on an article by Maurice Walshe (translator of > the Digha Nikaya) about Dana - "Giving from the Heart" about > intention and recipients (which also included a very interesting > remark about the Vesantara Jataka :-)). .... Sarah said: > As it's a :-)) one, you'd better share it, Chris. ----------------------------- Christine: O.K. - but only because you asked :-)) - and, seriously, because it is such a relief to me to read Walshe's remarks in this excerpt from "Giving from the Heart" "In point of fact, one of the true benefits to the giver is precisely that the act of spontaneous giving is a very fine way of helping to overcome attachment. And that is the intended point of the Vessantara story. We Westerners think of the unfortunate wife and family the Bodhisatta "sacrificed" (though of course there was happy ending and they came back to him, in the story!), but the intention is to regard them as objects of attachment, to be given up as such. As a matter of fact, despite the popularity of this particular story, modern scholars consider that it was not originally a Buddhist tale at all, and was somewhat unskillfully adapted to provide a "Buddhist" moral." http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/bps/wheels/wheel367.html#heart ================================ metta and peace, Christine ---The trouble is that you think you have time --- --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Sarah wrote: 27574 From: kenhowardau Date: Tue Dec 2, 2003 2:01am Subject: Re: [dsg] October thoughts from Cooran Hi Sarah, -------------- S: > KenH, did you write an introduction to the anapanasati sutta? If so, can we see it? -------------- Sorry, no; I just abridged Nina's series on the sutta. Perhaps Christine and I have used the wrong term; by "introduction" we were referring to the first part of the sutta that describes when the meeting was held and who attended. -------------- S: > How can there be any qu of nibbana not being the only unconditioned dhamma? -------------- I have no idea, this must have been discussed at the other end of the table. :-) Kind regards, Ken H 27575 From: bodhi2500 Date: Tue Dec 2, 2003 2:58am Subject: Re: [dsg] Pure Mind/Buddha Nature/Anatta Hi Larry and All LBIDD@w... wrote: > Here is B. Bodhi's trans. of this commentary: > > SN, p. 1084, n. 180, Spk: All formations of the three planes (sabbe > tebhuumakaa sa.nkhaaraa) are impermanent; all phenomena of the four > planes (sabbe catubhuumakaa dhammaa) are nonself. To my understanding the below are the planes that are being referred to in the above commentary> Patisambhidamagga, Chapter XVIII Planes/Bhumi There are these four planes; sensual-desire sphere, the material sphere, the immaterial sphere, and the unincluded sphere. What is the sensual-desire sphere plane? Making the Avici hell the lower limit and making the paranimmitavasavatti deities the upper limit, the aggregates,principles,bases,materiality,feeling,perception, formations, and consciousness, that are in this interval, have their sphere here, are included here; these are the sensual-desire sphere plane. What is the material-sphere plane? Making the Brahma world the lower limit and the Akanittha(highest) deities the upper limit, the dhammas of cognizance and consciousness- concomitants in one who has attained(that plane by meditation) or who has been reborn(there) or who (as a arahant) is abiding (there) in comfort here and now, which(dhammas) have their sphere here, are included here; these are the material-sphere plane. What is the immaterial-sphere plane? Making the deities of the base consisting of boundless space the lower limit and the deities of the base consisting of neither perception nor nonperception the upper limit, the dhammas of cognizance and consciousness-concomitants in one who has attained or who has been reborn or who is abiding in comfort here and now, which (dhammas) have their sphere here, are included here; these are the immaterial-sphere plane. What is the unincluded plane? The unincluded paths and fruitions of the paths and the unformed principle: there are the unincluded plane. These are the four planes. -- Steve 27576 From: Egberdina Date: Tue Dec 2, 2003 3:44am Subject: Re: Act of consciousness Hi Jon, I mentioned my 10 minute belly laugh at the realisation that there was no Herman Hofman in control of Herman Hofman's life precisely because it was not a Buddhist experience. I was not thinking in a Buddhist framework at the time. I do not think there are any Buddhist, or any other ...ist or ism experiences. Yes, I accept fully that if I wanted to explain whatever was happening in terms of a certain theory, I would need to adopt that certain theory. Do you think it is possible to experience "things" as they are, without reference to or in terms of other "things"? All the best Herman --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Jonothan Abbott wrote: > Herman > > I do not for a moment doubt your experience and what you have told us > about it. > > But it seems to me that the significance of one's experiences in > terms of the Buddha's teaching can only be determined by reference to > that teaching. > > So I would see a familiarity with the Buddha's word as essential > regardless of one's predisposition or level of attainment. > > Just my take. > > Thanks for sharing with us. > > Jon > > --- Egberdina wrote: > Hi Jon, > > > > Dang, a near perfect weekend spoiled by concensus with Jon Abbott > > :-) > > > > I know it is not useful for others to hear of my personal > > experiences, but I need to throw some in to show why I would > > question your paragraph, thus: > > > > > But, and this may be our main difference, I believe the > > conditions > > > under which that understanding can arise are quite specific and > > need > > > to be understood intellectually in the first place if there is to > > be > > > any chance of them being fulfilled. > > > > One evening, about eight years ago, whilst reclining in a chair > > after a days work, out of the blue, a realisation that there was no > > Herman Hofman in control of Herman Hofman's life hit home. I sat in > > that chair belly-laughing for a full ten minutes. That realisation > > was the funniest thing. But ..... once real, always real. > > > > I would find it impossible, and also undesirable, to trace this > > insight back to other insights and create some causal chain out of > > it. > > > > I can honestly say that I was not a student of Buddhism at the > > time, > > and anything I would have read about anatta previously would have > > gone right over my head. > > > 27577 From: Egberdina Date: Tue Dec 2, 2003 3:56am Subject: Re: [dsg] October thoughts from Cooran Hi Sarah, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Sarah wrote: > Hi Christine & Ken H, > > Many thanks for your reports. KenH, did you write an introduction to the > anapanasati sutta? If so, can we see it? How can there be any qu of > nibbana not being the only unconditioned dhamma? How can there be any acceptance of nibbana being the only unconditioned dhamma? I am not looking for an answer based on the say so of another person. What differentiates a conditioned dhamma from an unconditioned dhamma, experience wise? All the best Herman PS Do you remember Axel Rose from Guns'n Roses belting out "November Rain" in his little tight shorts? I wonder if he meant "October Rain" :-) 27578 From: Sarah Date: Tue Dec 2, 2003 5:28am Subject: Re: [dsg] October thoughts from Cooran Hi Herman, --- Egberdina wrote: > How can there be any acceptance of nibbana being the only > unconditioned dhamma? > > I am not looking for an answer based on the say so of another person. ..... You mean you’d rather have my say so than the Buddha’s??;-) I assure you, that anything I might say of any use is what I have learnt from his teachings. I don’t think it’s difficult to appreciate, at least intellectually, that the realities or actualities of life at this moment are changing very rapidly and arising according to an intricate combination of factors. Take feelings, for example. They are changing all the time - pleasant, unpleasant, neutral, pleasant - and depending on what is seen, heard, thought about, the other factors co-arising, the preceding experiences and so on. It’s like this for all other experienced and experiencing actualities. ..... > What differentiates a conditioned dhamma from an unconditioned > dhamma, experience wise? ..... A conditioned dhamma clearly depends on causes to arise. Again, intellectually at least, I think we can appreciate that it is the characteristic of feelings, say, to arise accordingly and to fall away almost immediately. Whilst reading this email, the feeling now is different from a split instant ago and each time we look at a different visible object or consider what’s written there are different feelings again according to so many factors. Being conditioned is part of the ‘nature’ of realities. Obviously, therefore, the experience of the ‘unconditioned’ is quite different in every way to what we’re used to experiencing all day, every day. Good to see your challenging questions again, Herman. Always more to them than meets the eyes;-) I'll be glad to hear your further comments. Metta, Sarah > PS Do you remember Axel Rose from Guns'n Roses belting out "November > Rain" in his little tight shorts? I wonder if he meant "October > Rain" :-) .... No, but I’ve already shown enough memory loss on Buckley for today. Oh well, October, November, December, Axel Rose or April Rain - all concepts (Myanmar was October for anyone who may have forgotten;-)) ======================================================== 27579 From: Date: Tue Dec 2, 2003 1:48am Subject: Experiencing Things As They Are (Re: [dsg] Re: Act of consciousness) Hi, Herman - In a message dated 12/2/03 6:49:05 AM Eastern Standard Time, hhofman@t... writes: > > Hi Jon, > > I mentioned my 10 minute belly laugh at the realisation that there > was no Herman Hofman in control of Herman Hofman's life precisely > because it was not a Buddhist experience. I was not thinking in a > Buddhist framework at the time. > > I do not think there are any Buddhist, or any other ...ist or ism > experiences. > > Yes, I accept fully that if I wanted to explain whatever was > happening in terms of a certain theory, I would need to adopt that > certain theory. > > Do you think it is possible to experience "things" as they are, > without reference to or in terms of other "things"? > > All the best > > > Herman > ========================== With regard to your question to Jon: "Do you think it is possible to experience 'things' as they are, without reference to or in terms of other 'things'?," I would reply that yes, at least that is what Buddhism says! ;-)) More seriously, I do think that phenomena occur due to specific conditions, not "any old" conditions. That being the case, while I don't think that knowing in advance the way things are supposed to be is determinative in seeing how they actually are, and in fact, having specific expectations, unless great care is taken, *might* even falsely influence how things seem to one, I do think that there are specific conditions that need to be established in order for one to come to see things as they actually are, and I have considerable confidence that the Buddha's program of training does lead to those conditions. Part of that training does consist in "right view". While I don't think that merely memorizing what is said to be "right view" is what the path is about, there is the question of what to *look for* in directing the mind. Quite often, we can look with attentive choiceless awareness, and yet miss some important things. As a particular example, without having in mind to be aware of, to *note*, the impermanence of phenomena, though we may see it, yet it may not "register" as such. This is particularly so because the mind has long been in the mold to see permanence where there is impermanence! We tend not to notice change, at least far from adequately. I have found that there is a radical difference in seeing impermanence when I'm "looking" to see it from when I'm not. (And I mean actually seeing cessation and change rather than mentally imposing it.) I was experimenting with this yesterday. I was sitting in the Student Union cafeteria, looking around not at particular things, but at the general flux, the "change of scene," and I found myself *amazed* at the show unfolding, the constant and wide-ranging change. It was fascinating, reminding me of watching a film. I didn't hold onto specific details of "things," but just the characteristic of anicca, of not remaining, and the experience was not the usual one. So I think that keeping in mind what is supposed to be the case, and maintaining readiness to see it, maintaining a directed vigilence, often helps one in genuinely seeing it. With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 27580 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Tue Dec 2, 2003 7:15am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: October thoughts from Cooran Hi Ken H > > Can the habitual cultivation of a quiet, non-monkey, > mind lead to satipatthana? No (with similar proviso plus > the knowledge of Dhamma). k: I think there we should not totally disregard some form of meditation training. Calm is a factor of wisdom and without calm there is no cultivation of 2nd jhanas as indicated in many Suttas. Unless the calm used in the instance used by these suttas meant a different thing in the commentaries. Any good info will be most welcome by any member :). > If we choose to learn the art of jhanna absorption, > shouldn't we start by concentrating on an object? No, we > should start by keeping the precepts, practising > moderation (of eating and sleeping), and otherwise > suppressing the five hindrances. k: The five hindrances can never be suppressed bc they are also conditions, they can only be discerned. They are eradicated through the various jhanas level if I have not forgotten. I will not suggest purposely in moderation in eating and sleeping bc it can be counter productive at times (just my hunch). Any moderation in eating and sleeping is recommended by Buddha only after Sense control is well estabished as in Ganakamoggallana Sutta. kind regards Ken O 27581 From: nina van gorkom Date: Tue Dec 2, 2003 10:12am Subject: annapanasati 4b Anapanasati 4 b: When the yogavacara, the practitioner, concentrates on the meditation subject, in this case, breath, he needs right understanding and also samadhi that concentrates again and again and again, so that it can become access concentration and attainment concentration when he attains jhana. When he can have jhanacitta for many moments, there are no cittas of the sense sphere and no bhavangacittas in between. His concentration on the meditation subject is stable. The word evenly applies to jhana, when there is no disturbance by sense impressions. When he emerges from jhana and he can develop insight, there is momentray concentration with the citta that realizes the happiness of jhana as a dhamma arising and falling away. The Visuddhinmagga speaks about . The Vis. I, note 3 explains that no insight comes about without momentary concentration. As regards the clause: ³(XII) I shall breathe in... breathe out liberating the (manner of) consciousness², the Visuddhimagga explains that this also must be understood as pertaining to jhåna as well as to insight. In the first jhåna one is liberated from the ³hindrances², although they are not eradicated, and in each subsequent stage of jhåna one is liberated from the jhåna-factors, specific cetasikas which are developed in order to eliminate the hindrances. The jhåna-factors are subsequently abandoned when one is no longer dependent on them and one is able to attain a higher and more subtle stage of jhåna. After emerging from jhåna the jhånacitta is comprehended with insight. We read (Visuddhimagga VIII, 233): Œ... at the actual time of insight he delivers, liberates the mind from the perception of permanence by means of the contemplation of impermanence, from the perception of pleasure by means of the contemplation of dukkha (suffering), from the perception of self by means of the contemplation of not self, from delight by means of the contemplation of dispassion, from greed by means of the contemplation of fading away, from arousing by means of the contemplation of cessation, from grasping by means of the contemplation of relinquishment...² ****** Nina 27582 From: nina van gorkom Date: Tue Dec 2, 2003 10:12am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: October thoughts from Cooran Dear Ken H, splendid. I really enjoyed your post and so useful. See below. op 02-12-2003 04:03 schreef kenhowardau op kenhowardau@y...: > > Can an ordinary, non-jhana, mindfulness of breathing > be used in a similar, if less effective, manner? No, > unless you can be sure your consciousness is kusala. N: The most important point for the development of samatha. Panna is needed above all which knows the difference between akusala and kusala. Especially when akusala is subtle it is hard to recognize! Subtle lobha plays us trciks all the time. K: Can the habitual cultivation of a quiet, non-monkey, > mind lead to satipatthana? No (with similar proviso plus > the knowledge of Dhamma). N: If you strive after calm first you will not know akusala, and that has to be known for sure. K: If we choose to learn the art of jhana absorption, > shouldn't we start by concentrating on an object? No, we > should start by keeping the precepts, practising > moderation (of eating and sleeping), and otherwise > suppressing the five hindrances. N: You have to live like a monk! No entertainment and so on. Completely devoted to the meditation subject day and night. K: If (IF), it is true that anapanasati is not for just > anyone, are there other forms of samatha meditation that > we can engage in? This prompted the production of a dsg > post, 25818, by RobertK, which reads in part: N: Quite agreed, these meditations are very beneficial and can be for every occasion. And they can bring us back to the present moment, most important. We recollect the Buddha, and why? Because he taught satipatthana. The most precious thing. We should be most grateful, and we can show this by practising now, at this very moment. K: I would like to know how this fits in, > if at all, with formal meditation. Also, I suspect that > the above way of 'spending our days' should not be > understood as; "Later, I will learn Dhamma, now, I will > attend to ordinary business," or even; "Now, I will learn > Dhamma, later, I will attend to ordinary business." I > think, rather, that the admonition describes > conditionality and is to be understood here and now in > its entirety . (If you know what I mean.) N: Yes, you do not have to wait until you do this or that, that is a delay again. Why not right now? I had to laugh about the flies. Also about the cat that was with Klaas. Thank you very much. I really enjoyed reading such an inspiring post. Nina. 27583 From: nina van gorkom Date: Tue Dec 2, 2003 10:12am Subject: Re: [dsg] sabbe dhammaa anattaa Hi Larry and Steve, op 02-12-2003 03:27 schreef LBIDD@w... op LBIDD@w...: > Steve: "To say that "Sabbe dhammaa anattaa" includes Nibbana we would > have to quote the same passage but from a different part of the Canon. > Commentary on "sabbe dhammaa anattaa" from Samyutta Khandhavagga> > > Sabbe dhammaa anattaati sabbe catubhuumakadhammaa anattaa. All dhammas > are anatta = all dhammas of the 4 planes are anatta. > > Which would include Nibbana." > > Larry: I looked-up "plane" in CMA and found that there are 4 planes of > consciousness and 4 planes of existence. The 4 planes of consciousness > are: sense sphere, fine-material sphere, immaterial sphere, and > supramundane. The 4 planes of existence are: woeful plane, sensuous > blissful plane, fine-material sphere plane, and immaterial sphere plane. > I believe? all 4 consciousnesses can arise in all 4 planes. Technically > speaking nibbana doesn't have a plane to itself but I suppose we could > include it as an object of consciousness in any plane (either planes of > consciousness or planes of existence). N: We should seperate plane of existence and plane of consciousness. I was puzzled too about nibbana being a plane of citta. This is impossible. It is lokuttara dhamma. There are nine: the eight lokuttara cittas and nibbana. Now I translate more of the Co Steve gave: Here is the complete commentary to Dhammapada279> N: This is also about the five khandhas, be cause of the words: do not decay, do not die. But, nobody can control nibbana, has no power over it, thus, nibbana is also anatta. It is beyond doubt. > Larry: Channa goes on to say he also thinks in this way but the thought > "But who is my self" keeps occuring. Ananda then recites the > Kaccaanagota Sutta (SN 12 15) which is concerned with the middle way > between existence and nonexistence by way of the stream of the rise and > fall that is impermanence (my characterization). In this sutta there is > the line "he does not take a stand on 'my self'". N: When he sees the dependent origination he will not believe in I exist or I do not exist. This is the Middle Way. In K IV (see the first sutta) the Buddha also begins with: what is impermanent, can that be a self. Or, what is dukkha can that be a self? Nina. 27584 From: christine_forsyth Date: Tue Dec 2, 2003 11:19am Subject: Re: [dsg] October thoughts from Cooran Dear KenH, and Sarah, :-) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "kenhowardau" wrote: > Thanks for that report Christine, you have an excellent > memory for detail -- I had forgotten a lot of it. @@@@@@@ sarcasm, KenH?? surely not :-)@@@@@@@ >>>>>>> gigantic snip<<<<<<<< > PS: I won't comment on the subject heading @@@@@@@ when is 'not commenting', a comment?@@@@@@@ and --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Sarah wrote: > No, but I've already shown enough memory loss on Buckley for today. Oh > well, October, November, December, Axel Rose or April Rain - all concepts > (Myanmar was October for anyone who may have forgotten;-)) =========================== :-) yes, "anyone" is aware we are in December, and that the Cooran trip was the last weekend in November - but once one has pressed the "send" button, there is no expunging of an incorrect word or action - a bit like kamma really :-) .... (One can only hope that ones gallant list-mates will observe noble silence) [ a forlorn hope with this mob] An interesting (?) point ... there was a discussion in the car going up to Cooran and another, one evening, about incipient Alzheimers ... I was the enthusiastic proponent of Folate as a preventative. Oh well, must go ... off to take a triple dose ... metta and peace, Christine ---The trouble is that you think you have time --- 27585 From: Carl Date: Tue Dec 2, 2003 2:30pm Subject: Re: Phonetic Glossary --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "htootintnaing" wrote: > Hi C7carl, > > Atta = At Ta ( Not At Hta or At Tha ) > > Anatta = Anat Ta > > Anicca = Aneik Sa ( Anake Sa, not Hsa or Sha ) > C must be pronounced as a soft ' C ' as ' Sa ' > >............Snip......................... > > With Unlimited Metta > > Htoo Naing > Thank you Htoo Naing! And thank you Christine-forsyth and Herman for you suggestions and links to the Pali site. The download with a real voice pronouncing many Pali words is great! ..c7carl 27586 From: Carl Date: Tue Dec 2, 2003 2:59pm Subject: Re: New Member RobertK, please excuse my previous post (now deleted ,I think). I was being very shallow and ignorant. Thank you very much for your response to me. It was certainly more than I deserved. The only excuse I can offer for my rude response to you is that I was overwhelmed (by my own ignorance). I have read your post (below) several times now, and I truely appreciate that you were so kind to me. I hope I have not put myself on your bad side. I'll try to behave in the future :) . ........Carl..(the wooden headed puppet) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "rjkjp1" wrote: > "rjkjp1" > > wrote: > > > Nice to have you here Carl, > ______________ > > Thanks for putting up your photo Carl. When the texts say that person > or being are only conventionally true it means that they have no > reality at all, they are only useful as terms to represent the five > khnadhas > "as with the assembly of parts the word chariot is countenanced, > So, when the aggregates are present, A being: is said in common > usage."(samyutta I, 135) > These, Citta, are merely names, expressions, turns of speech, > designations in common use in the world. And of these a Tathagata > makes > use indeed, but he does not misapprehend them" Digha 9. > > The suttas often use such words as I and my and man, woman, and we > can too, but we need > to know that they are mere concepts. > "Such forms as woman or man are local forms of speech. ..In those who > have not fully understood what a physical base is there comes to be > the misinterpretation "this is really a woman.."But since this is > mere concept, which depends on states made to occur in such ans such > a wise , one who sees and knows the dependent origination does not > interpret it as ultimate meaning"Note 4 visud. vii (pm) > > ---------------------- > > > i.e. *I* can feel *hardness*. Without *I*, what is to feel? > > Hardness is a paramattha dhamma. *I* is a conventional reality. > > It takes two to tango (so to speak). (No *I*) + (No *Hardness*) = > > (No dance). > _______ > I appreciate your questions Carl and so I give a detailed answer. In > the Samyuttanikaya Nidana Moliyaphagguna p541 bodhi) > "'With the six bases (salayatana)as condition contact comes to be'. > Ven. Moliyaphagguna: 'Venerable sir, who makes contact?' > Buddha: 'I do not say 'One makes contact'. If I should say 'One makes > contact' in that case this would be a valid question.....In this case > the > valid answer is 'With the six sense bases as condition, contact [comes > to > be]; with contact as condition feeling'. > Moliyaphagguna: 'venerable sir, who feels?.." endquote > > And so the sutta carries on with venerable Moliyaphagguna searching > for a self in the Paticcasamuppada. He feels that there should be > 'someone' who craves, 'someone' who clings, who feels, who ages, who > has > sorrow, who dies. The Buddha says (SN 12:35 Bodhi p.575) that with the > eradication of ignorance such ideas and vacillations as "what now are > volitional formations (sankhara) , and for 'whom' are there volitional > formations? or'Volitional formations are one thing, the one for whom > there > are these volitional formations is another'--all these are abandoned, > cut > off at the root...."endquote. > > Thus there is no I who experiences hardness but rather because of > conditions coming together there is the experience of hardness. > > > This `being' is simply a puppet with manifold parts – all coming > together in different combinations – lasting for an instant and then > falling away again. > > Because the conditions that make up each moment are often > similar "we" look and feel somewhat the same from moment to moment – > and this is one aspect of how continuity deludes. > > ""Therefore, just as a marionette is void, soulless and without > curisosity, and while it works and stands merely through the > combination of strings and wood yet it seems as if it had curiosity > and interestedness, so too this materiality (rupa)- mentality (nama) > is void, soulless and without curiosity, and while it walks and > stands merely through the combination of the two together, yet it > seems as if it had curiosity and interestedness." Visuddhimagga > xviii31 > The conditions that make up what we think of as a human being are of > course more complex than a marionette, and hence more difficult to > fathom. The first steps, of this very long untanglement, are about > identifying, with right wisdom, the various characteristics of the > different phenomena that comprise this `being' this manisfestion of > paticcasamuppada. > > Usually we think "I'm interested or bored or excited or calm, or sad > or happy or wise or confused or making effort or being negligent. > But there are only different elements performing different > functions - and they have no agenda: > > "[The] uninterestedness becomes evident to him though seeing rise and > fall according to condition owing to his discovery of the inability > of states to have mastery exercised over them. Then he more > thoroughly abandons the self view"visuddhimagga xx102 > > The characteristic of not-self becomes evident to him through seeing > rise according to conditions owing to his discovery that states have > no curiosity and have their existence depending upon conditions" xx102 > > "All the formed bases(eye base, ear base, tongue base etc) should be > regarded as having no provenance and no destination. On the contrary, > before their rise they had no individual essence and after their fall > their individual essences are completely dissolved. And they occur > without mastery being exercisable over them since they exist in > dependence on conditions and in between the past and the future. "XV15 > > This is deep Dhamma that can only be heard during the time of a > Buddhasasana. > RobertK 27587 From: Andrew Date: Tue Dec 2, 2003 3:55pm Subject: The Doomed March Fly Dear DSG-ers As usual, Christine and KenH have done a good job describing the most recent Cooran weekend. I wish to add some of my thoughts, taking Sarah's advice to KenH to throw caution to the wind and just send the post regardless of any qualms. It (or refutation of it) may assist understanding. First some background. In my rushed skimming of DSG recently, I read a post of Jon's which I interpreted as saying that, for worldlings, Dhamma study is background reading (rather than direct knowing of dhammas). I agree. Christine has described how, at Cooran, we were beset by march flies - big, slow-flying, slow-to-bite but painful insects many of whom gravitated towards the erudite KenH. His response was to catch them in his hand and place them in a jar for later release. However, one fly was unintentionally injured in some way and did not seem to be able to fly. People wondered what to do. When my attention was drawn to the situation, I had no doubt about what to do. The fly was doomed to be eaten by ants. I was prepared to squash it underfoot. I am not a lover/hater of march flies. I can't honestly say I felt sad/happy. I just thought it was the best thing to do and I was prepared to do it and take the consequences. Christine (a kinder person one could not meet) questioned my solution, referring to a recent DSG discussion on euthanasia (which, I'm sorry, I haven't read). In the end, I did nothing. The fly soon died and was placed in the garden. This no reflection on anyone, I hasten to add, but I felt at the time that we were all mere worldlings discussing the Teachings. We do not comprehend kamma well. It was time to put the Teachings aside and just act. Naturally, later I reviewed the Simile of the Raft and in particular the Mahatanhasankhaya Sutta (MN38 paras 9-14, Bodhi edition page 352) in which the Buddha says "the Dhamma has been taught as similar to a raft, being for the purpose of crossing over, not for the purpose of grasping". Bodhi's note 406 reads "This is said to show the bhikkhus that they should not cling even to the right view of insight meditation". Henry van Zeyst writes "in right thinking all contradictions will cease and there will be immediate action" ie. without the mind deliberating over "choices". MY POINT - I think we all have to remember that, at times, we do what needs to be done. We have to stop intellectualising and just act. Accept the consequences, be they pleasant or unpleasant. Even if it means putting (our worldling view of) the Teachings aside. Did I lack sufficient saddha to stop me from breaking the precept against killing? With metta Andrew 27588 From: Date: Tue Dec 2, 2003 4:47pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Pure Mind/Buddha Nature/Anatta Thanks Steve & Nina for the info on the 4 planes. Larry 27589 From: Date: Tue Dec 2, 2003 4:51pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Pure Mind/Buddha Nature/Anatta Hi Sarah, I thought I would wait until Nina catches up before going on with the Visuddhimagga thread. Larry --------------------- S: "p.s Larry, perhaps the Vism extracts can resume - maybe at a slower pace if that suits Nina." 27590 From: bodhi2500 Date: Tue Dec 2, 2003 6:06pm Subject: Anapanasati Sutta Hi All This section at the beginning of the Anapanasati sutta was briefly discussed at cooran on the weekend> "Monks, this assembly is free from idle chatter, devoid of idle chatter, and is established on pure heartwood: such is this community of monks, such is this assembly. **The sort of assembly that is worthy of gifts, worthy of hospitality, worthy of offerings, worthy of respect, an incomparable field of merit for the world: such is this community of monks, such is this assembly.** A section of this passage also occurs in the Mahanama sutta, in which it is describing Noble disciples> "Furthermore, there is the case where you recollect the Sangha: 'The Sangha of the Blessed One's disciples who have practiced well... who have practiced straight-forwardly... who have practiced methodically... who have practiced masterfully -- in other words, the four types [of noble disciples] when taken as pairs, the eight when taken as individual types -- **they are the Sangha of the Blessed One's disciples: worthy of gifts, worthy of hospitality, worthy of offerings, worthy of respect, the incomparable field of merit for the world.'** Would it be right that all the monks at the anapanasati sutta assembly were at least sotapannas? Steve 27591 From: rjkjp1 Date: Tue Dec 2, 2003 7:03pm Subject: Re: New Member Dear Carl, Thanks for your very kind letter. I understand about your first reaction on reading my response. You were rightly expecting a standard reply but I went on at length. It is just the way things work: on another day I might have given an appropriately pithy reply but at that time I felt like adding a lot (without properly considering what was useful for you). Looking forward to your long presence on the group. Robert In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Carl" wrote: > RobertK, please 27592 From: rjkjp1 Date: Tue Dec 2, 2003 7:13pm Subject: Re: The Doomed March Fly Dear Andrew, Some types of cittas are "unprompted" (asankharika) and some types are "prompted". They can be prompted by internal thoughts etc. or because of the urgings of others. The sotapanna has no more inclination to kill and so probably the abstaining from killing is asankharika - it doesnt need to be prompted and arises instantly. The one who is not sotapanna still has tendencies towards killing so sometimes the abstaining from killing has to be prompted. I think it is good Christine and Ken were around to give such prompting. RobertK In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Andrew" wrote: > Christine has described how, at Cooran, we were > beset by march flies - big, slow-flying, slow-to-bite but painful > insects many of whom gravitated towards the erudite KenH. His > response was to catch them in his hand and place them in a jar for > later release. However, one fly was unintentionally injured in some > way and did not seem to be able to fly. People wondered what to do. > When my attention was drawn to the situation, I had no doubt about > what to do. The fly was doomed to be eaten by ants. I was prepared > to squash it underfoot. I am not a lover/hater of march flies. I > can't honestly say I felt sad/happy. I just thought it was the best > thing to do and I was prepared to do it and take the consequences. > Christine (a kinder person one could not meet) questioned my > solution, referring to a recent DSG discussion on euthanasia (which, > I'm sorry, I haven't read). In the end, I did nothing. The fly soon > died and was placed in the garden. > 27593 From: kenhowardau Date: Tue Dec 2, 2003 7:14pm Subject: Re: October thoughts from Cooran Hi RobertK, ------------ R: > Am booked to stop for a few days in early August in Brisbane, hope Cooran is a rental car drive from there? ------------ Marvellous! We will definitely arrange a meeting -- either in Cooran or in Brisbane or maybe on the coast. (If you won't mention the World Cup, neither will we.) About the four meditations: ------------- R: > I think no rules (to repeat what Acharn Sujin always says) about these matters. Check to see whether we are really investigating conditionality, or are our actions rooted in subtle wrong view -------------- I suppose, if there were rules, there would be no teaching of conditionality; and where would we be then? Kind regards, Ken H --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "rjkjp1" wrote: > Dear KenH, Christine, Andrew , Steve and all, > > You have a great group in Queensland. Almost sacreligious for a Kiwi > to say, 27594 From: kenhowardau Date: Tue Dec 2, 2003 7:20pm Subject: [dsg] Re: October thoughts from Cooran Hi Ken O, ------------ KO: > I think there we should not totally disregard some form of meditation training. ---------- I hope people can forgive me for being too opinionated on this subject. (At the Cooran weekend, I may have been a bit of a pain.) The popular, modern-day, version of meditation is not mentioned in the Tipitaka. Even so, I have to remember there are no rules; we are entitled to sit quietly or we can dance to Guns 'n Roses. I like to think that a correct understanding of meditation (on the Buddha, metta, death and loathsomeness), can condition calm, kusala consciousness when one of those objects comes to mind. Whether or not formal practices can play a part in this process is another matter. ----------- KO: > Calm is a factor of wisdom and without calm there is no cultivation of 2nd jhanas as indicated in many Suttas. Unless the calm used in the instance used by these suttas meant a different thing in the commentaries. Any good info will be most welcome by any member :). ---------- Calm arises with all kusala moments, I think. It certainly arises with wisdom but, even so, wisdom (right understanding), comes first. In janna, right understanding means directly knowing kusala from akusala. In satipatthana, right understanding means directly knowing the characteristics of nama and rupa. Ken, I don't know if you have missed certain discussions on dsg; are you aware that jhana cultivation is not necessary for the development of vipassana? ----------- KO: > The five hindrances can never be suppressed bc they are also conditions, they can only be discerned. ----------- When descriptions of jhana mention "having overcome the hindrances," they are referring to a temporary overcoming. In the fine immaterial sphere, "temporary" can mean countless aeons but the defilements lie latent and, therefore, a return to the lower realms is inevitable. ------------- KO: > They are eradicated through the various jhanas level if I have not forgotten. ------------- Not eradicated, suppressed. It is only the four stages of Path Consciousness that eradicate defilements. ------------- KO: > I will not suggest purposely in moderation in eating and sleeping bc it can be counter productive at times (just my hunch). Any moderation in eating and sleeping is recommended by Buddha only after Sense control is well estabished as in Ganakamoggallana Sutta. ------------- I bow to your superior knowledge in these matters. When I mentioned moderation, I was simply thinking it was among the accumulated tendencies that are required before we can practise jhana concentration. Kind regards, Ken H 27595 From: kenhowardau Date: Tue Dec 2, 2003 7:24pm Subject: [dsg] Re: October thoughts from Cooran Dear Nina, Thank you for saying you enjoyed my Cooran post -- I was worried it might have been a bit over the top. I'm glad you weren't shocked by my treatment of the flies. They are big and their bite has to be felt to be believed -- and, as Billy Connerly remarked on his latest tour of Australia, "it's not even ### March!" :-) Kind regards, Ken H 27596 From: nina van gorkom Date: Tue Dec 2, 2003 9:55pm Subject: Re: [dsg] FW: Co Mahaaraahulovaadasutta 26 B Dear Sarah, Yes, very good reminder. And we can find the guidance all around, if we are openminded enough. Scriptures, commentaries, and above all: good friends in the Dhamma. And then: considering, considering, not obstructing awareness by desire for result. Not forgetting kusala through action, speech and mind. This can keep us busy for the rest of our life. Nina. op 02-12-2003 08:40 schreef Sarah op sarahdhhk@y...: > And if Rahula was one who needed detailed guidance (neyyapuggala) after > detailed explanations, who are we to think we don't need a lot, lot more > detailed guidance? 27597 From: nina van gorkom Date: Tue Dec 2, 2003 9:55pm Subject: Re: [dsg] eyesense. Hi Larry, yes. I concentrate on the eye, smaller than a louse's head, doing its functions. It is a great text!! Really impressive. And just enjoying the Tiika now, but slowly. More about the eyedecad, you will like it. How all these rupas support eyesense and coordinate, and how all other groups of rupa produced by citta, heat and nutrition also support the group produced by kamma. And how the great elements tend to eyesense as if it were a royal prince, by upholding, cohering, maturing (heat!) and movement (wind). In Pali: long compounds and many words I had to look up. Can I make anybody happy in jotting them down, there are a great deal of them? Nina. op 02-12-2003 09:07 schreef Sarah op sarahdhhk@y...: > p.s Larry, perhaps the Vism extracts can resume - maybe at a slower pace > if that suits Nina. 27598 From: Egberdina Date: Tue Dec 2, 2003 10:16pm Subject: Re: [dsg] October thoughts from Cooran Hi Sarah, Thanks for your reply. I appreciate it. You're right, of course, it would be better to hear about Nibbana from those who have been there, done that. And thank you for saying that all you know about it is from the Buddha's say so. A little story aside. When we first emigrated to Australia I was about 13. After three months here we made a cassette recording to send back to the relatives in Holland. Of course all of us kids were showing off with the little English we had learned in that time. I distinctly remember exclaiming on tape "Those kangaroos sure can jump". The truth was that I hadn't seen one yet, but just being in Australia, as opposed to the land of the long yellow cheese (Holland) was enough justification for me to make this little claim. Clearly I had formed (and expressed) a view where there was no foundation for that view. Likewise, when Captain Cook returned to England after "discovering" Australia, he had marvelous accounts of the strangest flora and fauna, mammals with duck-bills, animals that jumped around on their hind legs only, with their young in a pouch etc etc. His audience formed various views (with no other foundation than faith or lack of it), from believing it to be a hoax, to apathy, to busting one's gut to get out there to see it for oneself. We here are students of the Buddha, or hopefully, students of his "discoveries". Armed with our compasses and his maps we are looking for the end of suffering. (This is turning out to be a lot longer than I had hoped. Forbearance please :-)) Back to your original question: Is there any question of nibbana being the only unconditioned dhamma? Well, frankly my dear, yes :-) Until I see that kangaroo jump, that is ! It won't be enough for you to assure me there are kangaroos :-) Unconditioned, does that mean it is always there, or does never arising, never ceasing mean time and space don't apply. Is it experienced, or is it like the ti-lakkhana, matters of insight only, or is it neither here nor there? Is nibbana the same as the vimokkha? Why put a limit on the number of unconditioned dhammas? And so on, and so on. Just for starters :-) I know the calm mind is joyful, so I can wish you that without getting ahead of myself. Thanks. Herman PS I posted a photo of Vick and myself in the second folder in the photos section. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Sarah wrote: > Hi Herman, > > --- Egberdina wrote: > > > How can there be any acceptance of nibbana being the only > > unconditioned dhamma? > > > > I am not looking for an answer based on the say so of another person. > ..... > You mean you'd rather have my say so than the Buddha's??;-) I assure you, > that anything I might say of any use is what I have learnt from his > teachings. > > I don't think it's difficult to appreciate, at least intellectually, that > the realities or actualities of life at this moment are changing very > rapidly and arising according to an intricate combination of factors. Take > feelings, for example. They are changing all the time - pleasant, > unpleasant, neutral, pleasant - and depending on what is seen, heard, > thought about, the other factors co-arising, the preceding experiences and > so on. It's like this for all other experienced and experiencing > actualities. > ..... > > What differentiates a conditioned dhamma from an unconditioned > > dhamma, experience wise? > ..... > A conditioned dhamma clearly depends on causes to arise. Again, > intellectually at least, I think we can appreciate that it is the > characteristic of feelings, say, to arise accordingly and to fall away > almost immediately. Whilst reading this email, the feeling now is > different from a split instant ago and each time we look at a different > visible object or consider what's written there are different feelings > again according to so many factors. Being conditioned is part of the > `nature' of realities. > > Obviously, therefore, the experience of the `unconditioned' is quite > different in every way to what we're used to experiencing all day, every > day. > > Good to see your challenging questions again, Herman. Always more to them > than meets the eyes;-) I'll be glad to hear your further comments. > > Metta, > > Sarah > 27599 From: nordwest Date: Tue Dec 2, 2003 10:20pm Subject: Re: [dsg] The Doomed March Fly Maybe the fly will reach a higher realm, because now so many buddhists reflect upon her... or maybe she had reached perfect enlightenment when been eaten alive by the ants, like the monk who was eaten by the tiger in the jungle.... the ways of karma are unconceiveable. I would rather hope, she profited from it. Thomas Andrew In the end, I did nothing. The fly soon died and was placed in the garden. This no reflection on anyone, I hasten to add, but I felt at the time that we were all mere worldlings discussing the Teachings. We do not comprehend kamma well. It was time to put the Teachings aside and just act. Naturally, later I reviewed the Simile of the Raft and in particular the Mahatanhasankhaya Sutta (MN38 paras 9-14, Bodhi edition page 352) in which the Buddha says "the Dhamma has been taught as similar to a raft, being for the purpose of crossing over, not for the purpose of grasping". Bodhi's note 406 reads "This is said to show the bhikkhus that they should not cling even to the right view of insight meditation". Henry van Zeyst writes "in right thinking all contradictions will cease and there will be immediate action" ie. without the mind deliberating over "choices". MY POINT - I think we all have to remember that, at times, we do what needs to be done. We have to stop intellectualising and just act. Accept the consequences, be they pleasant or unpleasant. Even if it means putting (our worldling view of) the Teachings aside. Did I lack sufficient saddha to stop me from breaking the precept against killing? With metta Andrew