28600 From: Date: Fri Jan 2, 2004 4:09pm Subject: Re: [dsg] the 8 inseparables Sarah: "Hmmm..... I agree with this to some extent. At the same time, if we are always looking for novel ways to use the terms which accord with our very limited daily life knowledge and wisdom, we're at risk of never getting a correct theoretical handle on how the terms are intended." Hi Sarah, I agree but I wasn't aiming for novelty but rather a way to find what this concept is point-to in my experience. Otherwise, it will never be more than theory. Larry 28601 From: Date: Fri Jan 2, 2004 4:20pm Subject: Re: [dsg] the 8 inseparables Hi Ken O, I think it is a matter of what is helpful for satipatthana. If you want some salt, you could think, "I want some white hardness called salt" or, " I want some white hardness that is a pure octad produced by temperature called salt." Or maybe you might think, "I want some concept." Larry 28602 From: Egberdina Date: Fri Jan 2, 2004 4:33pm Subject: Re: Selective presentation(was Contraception and the First Precept) Hi Sarah, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Sarah wrote: > However, I think the Udana you quote from above is an excellent example of > how others with their own views may interpret such actions and changes in > a very different manner. > > This is a bit of a hobby-horse of mine at the moment, in case anyone > hasn't noticed;-) I just noticed something. None of the three Udana suttas that I quoted in my last post ie 1.8, 2.8 and 3.6, get a mention on accesstoinsight. To me, such selective presentation of material could indicate the holding of a number of beliefs held by those who run that site. I think that when presenting a case, the whole case needs to be presented, not just the case for the defense. Because we all tend to adhere more or less strongly to our "own" perspective, unless there is a diversity of perspective, there can be no recognition of just how hamstrung attachment to a particular belief makes us. DSG is great in that respect. Plenty of differing views. All the best Herman 28603 From: christine_forsyth Date: Fri Jan 2, 2004 5:16pm Subject: Re: Selective presentation(was Contraception and the First Precept) Hello Herman, and all, I think John Bullitt's reasons are honestly explained in the two links below. The question gets a little more complicated ... like - why are some suttas supporting some practice styles translated and made easily available for the large numbers of westerners enquiring about Buddhism, and some not. Partiality of the translator? oh, no - couldn't be! How do you decide which texts to include on the website? http://www.accesstoinsight.org/faq.html#include ** don't ever expect to see the Third basket of the Canon on ATI. Why don't you have translations of ALL the suttas from the Pali Canon? http://www.accesstoinsight.org/faq.html#gimmemore metta and peace, Christine ---The trouble is that you think you have time --- --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Egberdina" wrote: > Hi Sarah, > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Sarah > wrote: > > However, I think the Udana you quote from above is an excellent > example of > > how others with their own views may interpret such actions and > changes in > > a very different manner. > > > > This is a bit of a hobby-horse of mine at the moment, in case > anyone > > hasn't noticed;-) > > I just noticed something. None of the three Udana suttas that I > quoted in my last post ie 1.8, 2.8 and 3.6, get a mention on > accesstoinsight. To me, such selective presentation of material > could indicate the holding of a number of beliefs held by those who > run that site. > > I think that when presenting a case, the whole case needs to be > presented, not just the case for the defense. Because we all tend to > adhere more or less strongly to our "own" perspective, unless there > is a diversity of perspective, there can be no recognition of just > how hamstrung attachment to a particular belief makes us. > > DSG is great in that respect. Plenty of differing views. > > > All the best > > > Herman 28604 From: rjkjp1 Date: Fri Jan 2, 2004 5:38pm Subject: Re: Contraception and the First Precept --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Egberdina" wrote: > Hi Robert, > > Good to be reading you directly, though I read everything you write. > > It would look from what you wrote, that killing in a Buddhist sense > is rendering the body in such a state that it cannot support > consciousness. > > I am very happy to accept this, and leave it at that. > > The above has raised some questions, purely questions of interest, > not questions of doubt, and if you would see benefit in it, I would > appreciate your, and anyone else's take on the questions. > > In the Buddhist scheme of things, are consciousness and corporeality > (body) necessarily co-dependant? (I'm thinking about beings of an > arupa and rupa nature) > > My understanding of Paticca Samuppada is that the mind precedes the > body, and that the mind is not subject to killing and death. Would > the rendering of a body so that it could not support consciousness > have any effect at all on the Rebirth thought that brought the body > about? > > All the best =========== Dear Herman, According to the texts beings in the arupa plane do not have body and live very long lives - aeons- and there are no killers in these planes. They cannot be killed by accident or murder or sickness. However when the kamma that conditioned rebirth in these realms has ended they are reborn in planes where there are rupa. In our current plane,the human world, live is extremely short and mind is dependent on rupa. If the rupa is rendered so that it is no longer suitable as a support for mind then one dies (as you suggest). Immediately upon death there are conditions for a new consciousness ,conditioned by the previous ones, to arise in another place or plane. Very different from the old life, but conditioned by the last one to some degree. In the human world may have taken birth only for a second and then die- if the rupa that supports consciousness is rendered unfit. Robert > 28605 From: Carl Date: Fri Jan 2, 2004 6:27pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Howard's tree and a little hint ..Continuation of Pannatta Dear Htoo, thank you for you very informative reply to my questions. I have taken the liberty to follow up: But only if you have the time. wrote: > Dear Carl, > Thanks for your question and your interest in Pannatta. Here is my > reply to your letter. > With Metta, > Htoo Naing > ------------------------------------------------------------------- --- > Carl.. Htoo Naing am I correct in thinking thusly: Vision, > seeing the tree, is a mental construct to the full extent that it is > impossible to view the "outside world" as the outside world. > ------------------------------------------------------------------ > > Htoo: When you say ' see a tree ', there have been billions and billions of Cittas have happened. Carl: Thanks, this helps bring the process into perspective. >Htoo: In a series of Vithi Cittas ( conscious mind ), there are 17 >Cittas in total that depend on the present Rupa. At the end of 17 >Cittas, the last Citta and Rupa fall away at the same time...... .......... . ................................... .....(Carl: I have printed out the citta process as you wrote it and keep it close at hand for a reference :)............... >Htoo: Next Manodvara Vithi Cittas follow. In between further >Cakkhuvinnana Vithi Cittas series follow. Carl: I understand we are now at/entering/in the mind-door process with continuation of sense-door (seeing) citta process. (knocking on the mind-door). > Htoo: The sense object is being considered. It is such a shape. >Next series shows it is such a colour. Next series contemplates on >essence of that sight. Next series considers general name for the >sight. Next series looks at specific name for the concept ( tree ) >like pineapple. Next series estimates its age. Next series to some > detailings and billions and billions of Cittas have happened. > > There is no ' We ' in these processes. Brain is just a work >station. Actual sight-consciousness arises at eye or Cakkhayatana >or Cakkhu Pasada or Cakkhu Vatthu. > Carl: Htoo, I have trouble here. You write "Actual sight- consciousness arises at eye or Cakkhayatana or Cakkhu Pasada or Cakkhu Vatthu." I guess I am wondering if a "worldly" flesh-and-blood location can be established for sight-consciousness? I have always located this event (the tree) to take place within the brain-mass (occipatal lobe precisely). Would I be more correct to understand sight (the tree) as occuring on, in or about the eye- organ? >Htoo: The object seems to be taken to us and we see it. Or we go >there to the object and take it. Carl: I do not understand how we "go there to the object"? "That the object seems to be taken to us" seems understandable to me. >Htoo: It is wrong to say, ' the true nature of the *outside world* >is unknowable. Functions of Cittas and Cetasikas are to know >both outside world and inside world. Carl: Yes, I think I understand this at some level. But I remain perplexed. If the *worldly/conventional* vision of "the tree" is produced in the mind, as I have assumed, then there must be a gap (time/distance) between the inside and the outside world? If there is such a gap/separation then the outside world can never be directly experienced even though it is really out there. But perhaps if I come to understand "the tree" as actually appearing directly on or about the eye, then I may understand a direct contact of some kind with "the tree" with no gap? >Htoo: When we are saying Pannatta, actually we are speaking about >ultimate realities. In the ultimate sense there are only Citta, >Cetasika, Rupa and Nibbana. > > Pannatta is not an ultimate realities. But no one will say it is >wrong to say this is a tree and so on. Because it is conventionally >true and very true. Carl: Yes, conventional realities vs ultimate realities Fascinating! :) > There are two kind of Pannatta. Attha Pannatta ( meaning of a > dhamma ) and Sadda Pannatta ( sounding words ). The latter does >have influence by language but not the former. > I hope this matter is clear. > With Unlimited Metta, > Htoo Naing Carl: Thank you so much Htoo Carl 28606 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Fri Jan 2, 2004 7:24pm Subject: RE: [dsg] Re: characteristics - formulation Hi Michael Everything that has a begining has an end [Quote from Matrix]. Regards to your post to Howard that you feel that paramatha dhammas can be disintegrate to further smaller pieces, I am wondering when will this disintegration stops. If basing on your conceptual model, there will be an infinite disintegration. This puzzle me, how is Buddha going to teach his disciples on such a theory. He would say disciples following this feelings, there are sub-feelings, from these sub-feeling there are sub-sub feelings... then on and on. Wouldn't these be very confusing and hard to learn. I do not know how one going to practise satipatthana, when feelings arise, there are sub feeling, sub-sub feelings... no end. The person will be stuck with feelings for an infinite sati-patthana momments. In such a case, I think there is no need for Buddha to teach the other aspects of satipatthana bc feelings will be enough to for one to practise. Please feel free to start this interesting subject again and I like to thank you bc this has been an eye opener for me in learning the middle way kind rgds Ken O 28607 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Fri Jan 2, 2004 7:33pm Subject: Re: [dsg] the 8 inseparables Hi Larry In Abhidhamm, salt is a concept so cannot be an object of satipatthana. whereas when we touch salt, the hardness of salt is an object. When we taste salt, the taste can be an object of satipatthana. These are the gross object we can notice for satipatthana but when it becomes a nutriment, that I cannot help you bc its beyond me :). The ability to know nutriment I think must be someone who has a highly developed insight. kind regards Ken O 28608 From: rjkjp1 Date: Fri Jan 2, 2004 7:47pm Subject: Re: [dsg] the 8 inseparables --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Kenneth Ong wrote: > Hi Larry > > In Abhidhamm, salt is a concept so cannot be an object of > satipatthana. whereas when we touch salt, the hardness of salt is an > object. When we taste salt, the taste can be an object of > satipatthana. These are the gross object we can notice for > satipatthana but when it becomes a nutriment, that I cannot help you > bc its beyond me :). The ability to know nutriment I think must be > someone who has a highly developed insight. > > > kind regards > Ken O > = Very good ken, Still when you take in food, can't you detect different sensations , one senses the difference between eating say a big mac or a salad within a few minutes. It courses through the body, especially in the stomach region. I don't been being able to pinpoint which is exactly nutrition but still there is some understanding, sometimes. robert 28609 From: Date: Fri Jan 2, 2004 8:24pm Subject: Re: [dsg] the 8 inseparables Hi Ken O, We can experience the earth, water, fire, air, color, taste, smell, and nutritional essence of a certain substance, and we can name that substance salt. Seeing that all those experiences are gone before we know it is satipatthana. We experience these experiences one at a time but the rupas exist inseparably, according to abhidhamma. Larry 28610 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Fri Jan 2, 2004 9:51pm Subject: Re: [dsg] the 8 inseparables Hi Larry If am not wrong your qestion is same as Howard previously about free floating rupaville. This I surrender. Previously I guess that if we assume that when the nutriment rupa is experience by citta, the rest of the seven inseparable will ceased to exist bc there is no longer a condition (in this aspect a citta) to carry on their existence. kind rgds Ken O 28611 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Fri Jan 2, 2004 9:53pm Subject: Re: [dsg] the 8 inseparables Hi Howard, The expert in technical terms is Nina not me ;-) so basically what I doing now is guess work. I have the same feeling as you, the way it describe sounds like pannati. But I like to suggest a different approach in looking at it. I feel the problem is the translation of the terms of nutriment A (to indicated rupa nutriment) coincides with the nutritment B (modern science, a pannati). The function of this nutriment A is to substain the body with nutriment B (that was derived from shallowing of food (a pannati also)). That is the best I can guess, I could be wrong. kind regards Ken O 28612 From: rjkjp1 Date: Sat Jan 3, 2004 2:57am Subject: Re: [dsg] the 8 inseparables I should add to this that probably most of the time what appears after eating is likely to be the gross rupas: hardness, heat, distension but nutrition is there too. In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "rjkjp1" wrote: > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Kenneth Ong > wrote: > > Hi Larry > > > > In Abhidhamm, salt is a concept so cannot be an object of > > satipatthana. whereas when we touch salt, the hardness of salt is > an > > object. When we taste salt, the taste can be an object of > > satipatthana. These are the gross object we can notice for > > satipatthana but when it becomes a nutriment, that I cannot help > you > > bc its beyond me :). The ability to know nutriment I think must be > > someone who has a highly developed insight. > > > > > > kind regards > > Ken O > > = > > > Very good ken, > Still when you take in food, can't you detect different sensations , > one senses the difference between eating say a big mac or a salad > within a few minutes. It courses through the body, especially in the > stomach region. I don't been being able to pinpoint which is > exactly nutrition but still there is some understanding, sometimes. > robert 28613 From: Sarah Date: Sat Jan 3, 2004 3:06am Subject: Re: [dsg] Paramatha Dhammas and Concepts Hi Michael & Ken O, I’d like to say how much I’ve appreciated and admired your discussion together. I think it’s very useful and hope you continue when you’ve caught up on some rest and nutrition;-) Thank you....it was a treat to read over breakfast. It reminded me of discussions in the Kathavatthu (Points of Controversy) very much with the controverted points and refutations. --- Michael Beisert wrote: > “There has to be the clear distinction between concepts and ‘paramattha > dhammas’ (ultimate realities). We *think* there are conventional > things. In > truth they don’t exist except in our imaginations.” > > This seems to be a prevalent thinking among the Abhidhamma aficionados. ..... OK, to prove your point and to touch on the conditioned nature of *only* paramattha dhammas, let me quote a little from the Kathavatthu, PTS transl, Bk1, 111, Derivatives (as I believe you mentioned before that you are interested in the Abhidhamma itself): Theravadin - Is the concept of soul (puggala) derived from the corporeal qualities (rupas)? Puggalavadin - Yes. T: But has a soul also any or all of these qualities? P: Nay, that cannot truly be said.... T: Or is the concept of soul derived from feeling, from perception, from mental coefficients, from consciousness? P: Yes (to each aggregate in succession). T: Is any mental aggregate impermanent, conditioned? Does it happen through a cause? Is it liable to perish, to pass away, to become passionless, to cease, to change? P: Yes. T: But has soul also any of these qualities? P: Nay, that cannot truly be said..... **** The same argument applies to table, chair, tree and so on.... To link this to the SN1, Devatasamyutta thread, we read in SN1:76 (6) Does Not Decay: “What decays, what does not decay? .................. “The physical form (rupa) of mortals decays (jaarati), Their name and clan does not decay.” Metta, Sarah ===== M: >The distinction > between concepts and paramatha dhammas, mentioned above, points towards > a > philosophical middle way which is similar to someone with a perfectly > normal > average temperature having the upper body in the freezer and the lower > body > in the oven. <...> >The philosophical middle way proposed by the Buddha is the > application of conditionality to all phenomena without any exclusion > whatsoever. So called paramatha dhammas and concepts have exactly the > same > nature, they are conditioned, subject to arising and cessation. 28614 From: Sarah Date: Sat Jan 3, 2004 3:09am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: anapanasati 9 c Hi KenO, --- ashkenn2k wrote: > Hi Nina > > Sorry to bother you, as I was pasting these notes by you into one file > I seem cannot find anapanasati 9b or the numbering is wrong, 9c should > be 9b. .... I just found 9b by keying in 'anapanasati' in escribe: http://www.escribe.com/religion/dhammastudygroup/m24208.html I know Nina will be delighted to see your interest and help. Anumodana, Sarah ====== 28615 From: Sarah Date: Sat Jan 3, 2004 3:51am Subject: Re: [dsg] the Four Noble Truths Hi Ben, I’m so impressed by all your keen reflections.... These comments will be rather brief and rushed, but pls ask for any further clarifications. --- Benjamin Jerome wrote: > > (I *think* I might use the words attention, awareness, and mindfulness > all > meaning the same thing, hope this does not cause confusion) .... S:I think you are referring to satipatthana.... .... > Is mindfulness brought about by craving? (the below quote seems to say > yes, > and I agree with it) Is this the meaning of using a thorn to remove a > thorn? .... S:Conditions are complicated. In a sense we can say anything or any state can be a condition for sati (mindfulness). For example, without craving, there would have been no birth and no possibility of sati now;-) .... > Is the object of attention/awareness determined? .... S:All realities (namas and rupas) are conditioned. Satipatthana can only have a reality as object. .... > Here is a description of the 4 noble truths in The Way of Mindfulness, > the > Satipatthaana Sutta Commentary by Soma Thera: > > "The mindfulness which lays hold of the [object of satipatthaana] is the > Truth of Suffering; > The previous craving which originates that mindfulness is the Truth of > Origin; > The non-occurance of both that mindfulness and the craving is the Truth > of > Cessation. > The Real Path that understands suffering, casts out the origin, and has > cessation for its object is the Truth of the Way. > Endeavouring in this way by means of the Four Truths one arrives at > peace." > pg.107 > > I found this interpretation gives me a different angle on the 4 Noble > Truths. Notice that here the *object of mindfulness* is not the truth > of > dukkha, but the *mindfulness itself* is the dukkha. .... S:The translation is a little awkward. I take it to refer to the objects of mindfulness [i.e the 5 khandhas]to be dukkha, as realized by the development of satipatthana. .... >And it seems that > what > we pay attention to is determined by craving. ... S:Indirectly only. Craving is the ‘origin’ of dukkha, for the arising of the khandhas and thus the opportunity for sati to be aware. Awareness and craving never arise together, but craving can be the object of awareness. .... > But! thanks to > satipatthaana > we are instructed to use the *noble craving* to pay attention to the > present > moment, and try and be mindful of impermanence. .... S:No ‘noble craving’. Satipatthana is just aware of what appears without selection or paying particular attention. (Otherwise it’s more craving again). .... This requires effort! > This > craving is special and is called Noble (in some sutta I read once) > because > is can lead to insight into the Four Noble Truths. .... S:Insight understands the Truth about craving. Not the other way round. ... > Then I noticed suddenly anger arose! But I recognized > right > away what the cause of the anger was, it was my desire to be mindful of > the > sound of chewing! ... S: ;-) Excellent example, It sounds ridiculous, but as you explain, craving can crave anything!! .... > In this way I saw for myself how wanting leads to anger! And of > course > I was able to abandon such a silly desire, is it not ridiculous to get > angry > because one cannot hear the sound of crunching food in his mouth? .... S: “As kusa-grass, wrongly grasped, Only cuts one’s hand, So the ascetic life, wrongly taken up, Drags one down to hell” (SN2:8, Devaputtasamyutta) Sometimes we have discussions about the dangers of misguided practices. Ben, I hope you will join in some of the SN threads too. .... > My question is, is this the way which leads to the destruction of > craving? > Is it because of seeing grief inside myself caused by wanting that > wanting will gradually fade away? .... S: By understanding whatever conditioned reality appears, whether it’s craving or any other - no selection, no need to accumulate more wanting. ..... >Sometimes it seems like I can > understand > a want and some anxiety it is producing, but it still the wanting > doesn't > cease! .... S: Because it’s anatta. There may be a moment of understanding and sati but it’s never enough. It may be followed immediately by attachment and more anxiety. These are just conditioned states, anatta too. Not Ben’s;-) .... > Lately I really have been noticing... I crave so much for > mindfulness of > present happenings that it causes me anxiety. When you want, you > suffer! ... S: Yes, regardless of the object. Craving for sati or anything else is not the way, but it can be known. It doesn’t last either. .... > What I don't understand is this: if craving ceases, and awareness > is > based on "preference and avoidance" what does attention rest on? ... S: Satipatthana is not based on these. It is based on wise consideration and reflection about realities. .... >What > determines what one pays attention to? .... S: Conditions, including right and wrong views. (Of course, no ‘one’ again.) .... >I have heard the phrases > "choiceless > awareness" and I think "awareness-release". What does this mean? .... S: Choiceless - depending on conditions perhaps? .... >I > don't > understand how mindfulness could "not occur", as the above quotes > describes > in the Truth of Cessation. .... S: No more becoming, final cessation....no more craving, mindfulness or any other states. Excellent questions. My responses here are very rushed and other members may give other comments.I'd be glad to hear further any of your feedback on this or the other posts Jon and I wrote to you (but just if you wish to get back on the threads). Please don’t be put off if there’s a gap anytime before you hear from members - you raise many good and knotty points. Metta, Sarah ===== 28616 From: abhidhammika Date: Sat Jan 3, 2004 7:27am Subject: [dsg] Re: characteristics - formulation: To Mike B And Ken O Dear Michael B, Ken O and all Happy New Year! How are you? Michael wrote: "Ken, I rest my case. I don't think my arguments were good enough to convince you. It is my lack of skill. I wish you be happy and will talk again in the future." I do not think that your main problem was lack of skill in arguments, but lack of correct information on the use of the terms "paramattha" and "sabhaava" in Abhidhamma and commentaries. As Ken O pointed out in his reply to you, the conditionality in the Dependent Origination is merely the conditionality of paramatthas because Dependent Origination teaches how cetasikas, consciousness, and matter condition each other. Michael, in your reply to Ken, you made a mistake of saying that "concepts" (in the sense of non-paramatthas) are conditioned. You would see your mistake when you review the components in Dependent Origination because there is no paññatti dhamma ("concept") among the components of Dependent Origination. Remeber well that there is neither conditionality nor Dependent Origination without paramatthas. To his credit, Ken merely pointed out contradictions in your arguments by using his knowledge of Abhidhamma and commentaries. So when you are ready to talk to him again, you should have done some homework in the correct of use of the terms "paramattha" and and "sabhaava" in Abhidhamma and commentaries. Then, perhaps, Ken O would be more easily convinced of your points. By the way, Kathaavatthu is a good place for you to familiarize yourself with the correct use of the term "paramattha". It is available in English as "Points Of Controversy" by Shew Zan Aung published by Pali Text Society, in which you can also learn how to argue like a Buddhist as the work is the first and oldest Indian logic text as well. Good luck! With regards, Suan Lu Zaw http://www.bodhiology.org --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Michael Beisert" wrote: Hello Ken, Ken, I rest my case. I don't think my arguments were good enough to convince you. It is my lack of skill. I wish you be happy and will talk again in the future. Metta Michael 28617 From: Michael Beisert Date: Sat Jan 3, 2004 7:41am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: characteristics Hello Howard, Howard: But what are any of a hardness or a pleasant feeling or an anger composed of? Michael: I don't know but for the reasons I gave, in my mind they have to be a composite as well. Howard: I'm very much of a yogacarin my self - or, better, a Theravadin with a Yogacarin overlay! ;-)) My phenomenalist take on things makes me a natural vijnanavadin. Michael: Yes, that was my perception. Metta Michael 28618 From: Michael Beisert Date: Sat Jan 3, 2004 7:56am Subject: RE: [dsg] Re: characteristics - formulation Hello Ken, Ken: I am wondering when will this disintegration stops. If basing on your conceptual model, there will be an infinite disintegration. This puzzle me, how is Buddha going to teach his disciples on such a theory Michael: I don't know where it stops and I don't think it is important to know. The Buddha did not teach a theory, in fact he rejected all kinds of ideas, or mental proliferations, as obstacles to the practice. He taught what was necessary to break down our misconceptions to lift the veil of ignorance and give an end to suffering. That's all. And for that purpose the aggregates and the 3 characteristics is more than enough. Ken: I do not know how one going to practise satipatthana, when feelings arise, there are sub feeling, sub-sub feelings... no end Michael: That analysis is not necessary. If you realize the 3 characteristics of feeling with insight that is more than enough. It is really not necessary to try to understand what feelings are composed of. But in my view it is an obstacle to view them as real in the sense of paramatha/sabhava. Metta Michael 28619 From: Dan D. Date: Sat Jan 3, 2004 8:08am Subject: SN II 6(6) -- Kamada [James] Dear James, To respond to a few of your questions... J: "...your position on this matter is perplexing to me. You basically agree with everything I wrote about the importance of the Vinaya and following rules but then state 'And the path is only tread on when there is no effort to follow rules.' What? It seems to me like you are trying to have it both ways." --> Both ways -- that's right. The path is hard to walk, VERY hard; yet, good things can be done even at those times when we have lost sight of the path. J: "Also, I think your definition of `path' is far too narrow. By your definition, only arahants are the ones following the path." --> My definition of 'path' is eightfold: Right view, Right intention, Right speech, Right action, Right livelihood, Right effort, Right mindfulness, and Right concentration. When one of these planks is missing, the path is not tread. [Note: In Atthasalini, Buddhagosa writes of a five-fold 'path' that applies to mundane moments of satipatthana -- 5-fold because the speech, action, livelihood planks are said to not be applicable except when there is explicit restraint. When I speak of 'path', I am also referring to this 5-fold notion.] Buddha also discussed a "Wrong path," consisting of Wrong view, Wrong intention, etc. When one of these micchas appears, the path is the "wrong path". The notoriously fictitious Nadsemaj may have been on the path (Right path) for some moments during his sit, but more likely he was on the wrong path the whole time. Does this mean that sitting quietly in the corner, legs crossed, eyes closed, following Goenka's or Mahasi's or Gunaratana's instructions is a bad thing? Not at all! Nadsemaj would have also been on the wrong path for that whole hour had he been washing dishes, conversing in French, diving off cliffs in Mexico, reading Yamaka in the original Pali, bashing someone's brains out in a drunken brawl, or torturing people to death in torture chambers. But, please, understand that I am not saying that all wrong action is equally wrong. Most wrong action is relatively benign, but some wrong action is horrific. There is suffering and great danger in even the most benign wrong action (the first Noble Truth is relentless!), but benign wrong action is certainly to be preferred over horrific wrong action. In fact, sometimes doing the wrong thing keeps us more in the vicinity of the path than doing other wrong things would. For example, I'd guess that regularly following Mahasi's meditation instructions is more likely to keep us in the vicinity of the path than following Saddam Hussein's torture instructions. The arising of the path (mundane or supramundane) cannot be forced and there are no rules to follow that will cause the path to arise, but there are things we can do that may help us recognize those path moments when they do arise, the conditions that were acting as the moments arise, and the response to that arising and falling. That recognition is called "development" (bhavana). J: "...the path is a gradual one..." --> And How! J: "...that meets people where they are." --> Not sure what you mean by that. If you mean that one can be said to be following the path in a hour when there is continuous string of consciousnesses rooted in lobha/dosa/moha, I'd have to conclude that you are talking about "wrong path." If you mean that the path can arise in the course of pretty much any activity, I'd agree. J: > SN II, 6(6) "Kamada" --> Interesting sutta! I like it. The basic message I get is that the path is very difficult to walk, but that it is possible. The last stanza contains a few colorful lines (but are a little confusing nonetheless): > "Though the path is impassable and uneven, > The noble ones walk it, Kamada. > The ignoble ones fall down head first, > Right there on the uneven path, > But the path of the noble ones is even, > For the noble are even amidst the uneven." Could it be that the "uneven path" is the "wrong path" that the ignoble ones tread, while the "even path" is the "Right path" that the noble ones tread? The part of the commentary you cite doesn't comment on that. But the first two lines: "Though the path is impassable and uneven, The noble ones walk it, Kamada" are a riddle. The commentary seems to take the word "path" in the conventional, JamesHowardsian sense of "sitting in a corner trying to follow Mahasi's instructions is 'the path' even when there is no arising of satipatthana or even of kusala": "Although the noble path is neither impassable nor uneven (duggamo visamo) this is said because there are many impediments in the preliminary portion of the path." Are there 'impediments' in the Right path? Hmmm... There are the anusaya which are bound to arise with great frequency and knock us quickly off the path as long as our path-walking is still in the preliminary portion of the path. Could this be what 'impediments' means here? Or could this "uneven path" be referring to the ignoble's mistaken view of the path (or view of the Wrong path) because "the path of the noble ones is even"? It reads like a koan -- I like it. > Note 149: Spk: This young deva, it is said, had been a meditator in a > previous life, but he had thick defilements and thus could suppress > them only with much effort. Though he did the work of an ascetic, > because his supporting conditions were weak he passed away and took > rebirth in the deva world without having reached the plane of the > noble ones. He came to the Blessed One's presence to proclaim the > difficulty of the ascetic life. > Note 150: Spk: Although the noble path is neither impassable nor > uneven (duggamo visamo) this is said because there are many > impediments in the preliminary portion of the path. > > This wasn't really much of a pep talk by the Buddha but he didn't > give pep talks, he just told it like it is. Yes, meditation is > difficult but the noble ones do it even though it is difficult. > There are no guarantees of success. I identify a lot with Kamada > because meditation is difficult for me also; I believe I have a lot > of defilements. But that is no reason to stop or whine about it, I > just continue to do it. Over the years I have seen slow but steady > progress. --> Now it's my turn to say, "I think your definition of `path' is far too narrow." You are equating "path" with "meditation" in the sense of Mahasi, Goenka, et al. when you read the Kamada sutta? J: "Think what you want and do what you want." --> I'm glad to hear you aren't interested in controlling what I do! Goodness knows how frustrating it would be for you to try to control me. I can't even do that very well myself! J: "I will continue to follow the rules as well as I can because I see the wisdom of them, not because anyone is forcing me to. If you think I am wrong, okay (my parents think I am wrong too so you are in good company! ;-))." --> Wrong? Yes, if you are anything like me (viz., full of lobha/dosa/moha), you will be following the wrong path whether sitting, standing, walking, lying, eating, talking, writing, thinking, etc. Just be aware of what is Right and what is Wrong each moment. With great appreciation, Dan 28620 From: Michael Beisert Date: Sat Jan 3, 2004 8:17am Subject: RE: [dsg] Re: characteristics - formulation: To Mike B And Ken O Hello Suan, Thank you for your comments and I just want to say that I disagree with much of what you say. But I don’t think it would be profitable for both of us to start a discussion on this. Only one point I want to mention. You wrote: “there is no paññatti dhamma ("concept") among the components of Dependent Origination.” Well, but there is sankhara in dependent origination, and paññati is a sankhara. Metta Michael 28621 From: Date: Sat Jan 3, 2004 3:29am Subject: Re: [dsg] the 8 inseparables Hi, Ken - In a message dated 1/3/04 12:55:06 AM Eastern Standard Time, ashkenn2k@y... writes: > > Hi Howard, > > The expert in technical terms is Nina not me ;-) so basically what I > doing now is guess work. I have the same feeling as you, the way it > describe sounds like pannati. But I like to suggest a different > approach in looking at it. I feel the problem is the translation of > the terms of nutriment A (to indicated rupa nutriment) coincides with > the nutritment B (modern science, a pannati). The function of this > nutriment A is to substain the body with nutriment B (that was > derived from shallowing of food (a pannati also)). That is the best > I can guess, I could be wrong. > > > kind regards > Ken O > > ============================== I think that yours is a heroic and clever attempt to redeem the notion. I find myself often straining in the same way to salvage an idea from the Abhidhamma. Your approach is a pretty good one, saying, as I understand you, that the description given is really that of the pa~n~natti "nutriment B". That then leaves the rupa, the allegedly actually existent "nutiment A", to be a condition for the former. The trouble is, as I see it, that there is no evidence of such a scenario in the quoted material whatsoever, and moreover, "nutriment A" is a merely hypothesized but unobserved, hidden essence like the ether of modern times. There was a tendency in ancient civilizations (and somewhat still in modern times) to look for hidden "essences" or "potencies" that account for things. Frequently these were based on conventional notions. Bodily rupas hold together, so there must be a "life force" responsible. Organic masses are maintained and increase so there must be some "nutritive essence" responsible. There is (said to be) rebirth, so there must be a soul that is reincarnated. The body moves, so there must be an animator. The world exists and is maintained, so there must be a Creator/Maintainer. Light travels through empty space, so there must be an ether. I see the Buddha as that most unbelievably innovative of beings who discovered and dared to teach that there are no hidden essences and potencies in things, but, rather, all proceeds from conditionality, the coming together of fleeting, impersonal, and insubstantial phenomenal conditions, as follows: A. Imasmim sati idam hoti: When there is this, that is. Imasuppada idam upajjati: With the arising of this, that arises . B. Imasmim asati idam na hoti: When this is not, neither is that. Imassa nirodha idam nirujjhati: With the cessation of this, that ceases. [S.II.28,65] [This from http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Academy/9280/coarise1.htm#1.] 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) 28622 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Sat Jan 3, 2004 8:46am Subject: RE: [dsg] Re: characteristics - formulation Hi Michael > Michael: > I don't know where it stops and I don't think it is important to > know. The Buddha did not teach a theory, in fact he rejected all kinds of ideas, or mental proliferations, as obstacles to the practice. He taught what was necessary to break down our misconceptions to lift the veil of ignorance and give an end to suffering. That's all. And for that purpose the aggregates and the 3 characteristics is more than enough. k: But Micheal it was Buddha who say this self made up of five aggregates. I have not come across Buddha speaking of sub feelings or sub perceptions. In fact, if you scan through the sutta basket, the mentioned of the five aggregates are very impt for the practise. Hence if Buddha feels there is a sub-feeling, he will have to include it bc it affects the whole sutta basket, the whole practise. When you said that the purpose of aggregates and the 3 characteristics are more than enough, ain't all these you mention same as Abhidhamma. Abhidhamma does not invented a new aggregate or a new characteristic. It elaborated what Buddha taught but maybe the problem is that its elaboration of the five aggregates and the 3 characteristics are too elaborated and they sound as if it is a whole new paradigm of Buddha teachings. To me it is normal for pple to reject the whole of Abhidhamma or part of it, I once was ;-). > Michael: > That analysis is not necessary. If you realize the 3 > characteristics of feeling with insight that is more than enough. It is really not necessary to try to understand what feelings are composed of. But in my view it is an obstacle to view them as real in the sense of paramatha/sabhava. k: I respect your point of view. Abhidhamma is not for everyone. Neither should I convince you of anything. This discussion has been beneficial for me and I have to thank you again for providing this opportunity to explore many aspect of sabhava. Kind regards Ken O 28623 From: nina van gorkom Date: Sat Jan 3, 2004 9:10am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: anapanasati 9 c Dear Ken Ong, I do not know now, since I only kept my own long file. I did not keep the sections, since I made them up myself with numbers. It is likely I made a mistake in the numbering. The last ones were two by Jon (with Rob Ep) and the end is a part of translation with Pali. It is all in archives, only in the beginning I would like to add my correspondance with Michael. Maybe Sarah can help? Or if you can say the first sentence of each one? Nina. op 02-01-2004 16:46 schreef ashkenn2k op ashkenn2k@y...: > Sorry to bother you, as I was pasting these notes by you into one file > I seem cannot find anapanasati 9b or the numbering is wrong, 9c should > be 9b. 28624 From: Date: Sat Jan 3, 2004 4:27am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: characteristics - formulation: To Mike B And Ken O Hi, Michael - In a message dated 1/3/04 11:18:23 AM Eastern Standard Time, mbeisert@h... writes: > Hello Suan, > > Thank you for your comments and I just want to say that I disagree with much > > of what you say. But I don’t think it would be profitable for both of us to > start a discussion on this. Only one point I want to mention. > > You wrote: “there is no paññatti dhamma ("concept") among the components of > Dependent Origination.â€? Well, but there is sankhara in dependent > origination, and paññati is a sankhara. > > Metta > Michael > ============================ Michael, there is a terminological discrepancy involved here which you may not be aware of. What I mean (and I suspect what you mean) by 'pa~n~natti' is an idea - a mental construct - a mental, sankharic construct that arises via the mind door and which is intended to "point" to something (its alleged referent). But what others here seem to mean by 'pa~n~natti' is that alleged referent! (And since that alleged referent typically doesn't actually exist, "it" never arises nor ceases,"it" has no characteristics, etc, etc.) When we say "concept" (I believe you should be included in this "we"), we mean an actual mental event, something that occurs in the mind, but others here don't mean that at all, but mean the alleged referent of that.There is tremendous confusion when some us mean different but related things by the same term!! 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) 28625 From: Date: Sat Jan 3, 2004 6:29am Subject: On the Momentariness of Mind States Hi, all - On another list, Htoo and Jeff have been discussing vittaka and vicara. With regard to that I posted the following: ****************************************** Nyanatiloka's dictionary gives the following: _______________________________ > vitakka-vicára: 'thought-conception and discursive thinking', (or 'applied > and sustained thought') are verbal functions (vací-sankhára: s. sankhára) of > the mind, the so-called 'inner speech ('parole interieure'). They are > constituents of the 1st absorption (s. jhána), but absent in the higher absorptions. > >> (1) "Thought-conception (vitakka) is the laying hold of a thought, giving >> it attention. Its characteristic consists in fixing the consciousness to >> the object.(2) "Discursive thinking (vicára) is the roaming about and moving >> to and fro of the mind.... It manifests itself as continued activity of mind" >> (Vis.M. IV). > (1) is compared with the striking against a bell, (2) with its resounding; (1) with the seizing of a pot, (2) with wiping it. (Cf. Vis . IV.). -------------------------------------------------------------- Ayya Khema described vitakka as the mind hitting against the meditation object, and vicara as the mind rubbing against it, having already made the contact. It seems to me that these are ongoing functions. I wonder what sort of action can be performed during a single mind moment. At times I have to wonder whether the idea of a cetasika lasting for only a single mind moment really makes sense - or, perhaps, it is the notion of a mind moment as instantaneous that is the problem. ********************************************** The more I think about this, the more I think that it is the notion of mind states as necessarily momentary/instantaneous that is the problem. That notion, propagated primarily by the Sautrantikas, has also been adopted to some considerable extent by Theravada and by Mahayana. But it strikes me as being an erroneous and unnecessary notion. While there may well be mind states that are instantaneous, it doesn't seem credible that they all are. Some basic activities require time for their execution and cannot be momentary. One such, from its description, is vicara. Other possible candidates for non-instantaneous functions are wrong and right view, stinginess, regret, doubt, and, especially, concentration. (How is concentration on a single object executed momentarily, when, in fact, concentration is the *maintaining* of awareness on a single object over a period of time? If one answers that concentration is the inclination within a single mind state for the subsequent state to take the same object, well, that is a clever move to make in the debate game, but not good enough I believe. The inclination towards concentration is not the same as concentration.) The bottom line, as I see it, is that there is nothing sacrosanct about instantaneity nor discreteness (and "sharp edges"). The characteristic of impermanence does not require a discrete, stop-motion, movie-frame reality for it to be operative. All that it requires is that nothing arising from conditions remains indefinitely. If A is present on some occasion, there will be some future occasion when it is not present. That is all that is required for impermanence to hold. The issue I am discussing here is separate from that of the issue of the distinction between paramattha dhammas and pa~n~natti. Paramattha dhammas are events and conditions that are actually and directly observable independent of conceptual construction and projection. Whether they occur "in the moment" or with duration is a separate issue. 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) 28626 From: buddhatrue Date: Sat Jan 3, 2004 11:57am Subject: Re: SN II 6(6) -- Kamada [James] Hi Dan, (Hmm…seems like your pleasant sense of humor has turned a bit sour. I may be hesitant to continue further.) Dan: My definition of 'path' is eightfold: Right view, Right intention, Right speech, Right action, Right livelihood, Right effort, Right mindfulness, and Right concentration. When one of these planks is missing, the path is not tread. [Note: In Atthasalini, Buddhagosa writes of a five-fold 'path' that applies to mundane moments of satipatthana -- 5-fold because the speech, action, livelihood planks are said to not be applicable except when there is explicit restraint. When I speak of 'path', I am also referring to James: Well, then, you and I have the same definition of path! (Except I don't agree with Buddhaghosa's new interpretation.) I think where we differ is in application. Dan: Does this mean that sitting quietly in the corner, legs crossed, eyes closed, following Goenka's or Mahasi's or Gunaratana's instructions is a bad thing? Not at all! Nadsemaj would have also been on the wrong path for that whole hour had he been washing dishes, conversing in French, diving off cliffs in Mexico, reading Yamaka in the original Pali, bashing someone's brains out in a drunken brawl, or torturing people to death in torture chambers. James: First, I personally don't appreciate the parallelism of this statement that compares meditation practice with such horrific violence! I consider it hurtful and unfair. Second, if Nadsemaj has Right View, Right Intention, Right Speech, Right Action, Right Livelihood- the cultivation of what is correct, good, beneficial, non- harming, and moral- than his sitting in meditation would not be following the wrong path. I have never advocated that just anyone should sit in meditation, without the proper instruction, motivation, view, and moral training, these factors must go along with the cultivation of Right Effort, Right Mindfulness, and Right Concentration (meditation). That is why I have been emphasizing Vinaya and Sila so strongly! If Right View and Sila are not present a person might as well not attempt to meditate; it would be fruitless and potentially harmful. The Eightfold Path is not just a `pie-in- the-sky' idealism; it is a description of mundane and supramundane specific actions to take with one's body and with one's mind leading to Nibbana. Dan: For example, I'd guess that regularly following Mahasi's meditation instructions is more likely to keep us in the vicinity of the path than following Saddam Hussein's torture instructions. James: Again, quite unnecessary parallelism. Dan: The arising of the path (mundane or supramundane) cannot be forced and there are no rules to follow that will cause the path to arise, but there are things we can do that may help us recognize those path moments when they do arise, the conditions that were acting as the moments arise, and the response to that arising and falling. That recognition is called "development" (bhavana). James: Here is that `mini-meditation' theory again. I have been giving this theory quite a lot of thought lately since I have never encountered it before joining this group. (Where does it come from?) I would suspect that if a person cultivates strong enough Right View, Right Intention, Right Speech, Right Action, and Right Livelihood; but doesn't choose to strongly cultivate Right Effort, Right Concentration, and Right Mindfulness; that spontaneous moments of wholesome mind states would arise in the midst of unwholesome mind states during everyday activities. And if the person recognized these mind states and purposefully cultivated them to occur more, and discouraged the arising of unwholesome mind states, they would increase in number. This isn't necessarily a bad thing to be doing but it isn't what the Buddha taught. Specifically, I don't believe it would lead to enlightenment. The problem would be that the level of panna (insight/wisdom) wouldn't be raised to a sufficient power to penetrate the three characteristics of all conditioned phenomena. People who practice this technique would probably just generate abundant good kamma and be reborn in a deva realm. The root of suffering, craving arising from ignorance, is very deep and very pervasive. Just thinking good thoughts isn't going to get rid of it. At the most it will simply suppress it until a later time. This is my take on it. If you don't agree, okay. Dan: The commentary seems to take the word "path" in the conventional, JamesHowardsian sense of "sitting in a corner trying to follow Mahasi's instructions is 'the path' even when there is no arising of satipatthana or even of kusala" James: LOL! Oh yes, didn't you know? Howard I wrote that commentary in our previous lives as bhikkus! Hehehe…just kidding. If you don't want to believe it that is okay. I just offered it as an explanation for what I believe. You don't have to believe what I believe. Dan: Now it's my turn to say, "I think your definition of `path' is far too narrow." You are equating "path" with "meditation" in the sense of Mahasi, Goenka, et al. when you read the Kamada sutta? James: No, I am not equating meditation as being the entirety of the path. All factors of the path must be present or the Buddha wouldn't have discovered them and taught them. The Buddha didn't just concoct the path like one comes up with a new recipe. When he reached enlightenment he instantly knew the Four Noble Truths which included the Eightfold Path. He didn't have to think it up. It is the truth eternal. Dan: I'm glad to hear you aren't interested in controlling what I do! Goodness knows how frustrating it would be for you to try to control me. I can't even do that very well myself! James: Maybe you should try meditation? ;-))) (Sorry, couldn't resist! ;-) Dan: Wrong? Yes, if you are anything like me (viz., full of lobha/dosa/moha), you will be following the wrong path whether sitting, standing, walking, lying, eating, talking, writing, thinking, etc. Just be aware of what is Right and what is Wrong each moment. James: I think I will take things a bit more into my hands, thank you. Your outlook seems rather hopeless to me. Metta, James 28627 From: nina van gorkom Date: Sat Jan 3, 2004 0:27pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Kamma Dear Rob M, welcome back, good to have you back :-). Your question on kamma. op 15-12-2003 22:08 schreef robmoult op rob.moult@j...: > >> R: ... It is therefore not correct to say that incidents >>> that happen to you arise because of kamma condition. Incidents > are >>> not mental states. Incidents that happen to you arise because of > a >>> complex set of conditions, but it would seem that it is not >>> appropriate to talk of kamma when discussing incidents. >>> >>> People do talk of incidents happening "because of kamma". Is this >>> incorrect? >> N: I find Sarah's expression that a situation can be a shorthand > for dhammas >> helpful. There were many posts about this. Jon remarked that > praise and >> blame etc. are used in the Tipitaka to denote results of kamma. > When we >> analyse different moments it is more complex of course. > > ===== > > Not understood. Please provide some details. Again:< it is not >>> appropriate to talk of kamma when discussing incidents. >>> >>> People do talk of incidents happening "because of kamma". Is this >>> incorrect?> Not incorrect, we can talk more in general, conventional sense, not in the precise sense of abhidhamma. So, in one day there may be an accident, a great loss, a calamity of nature, and we say: how is that possible so much akusala vipaka. Not incorrect. When more precise we can analyse a situation into different moments of seeing, hearing, thinking. Thinking with like and dislike is not vipaka, but these follow very closely. Words of blame: seeing (when it is on computer screen), knowing the meaning of the words, this is not vipaka and after that feeling upset, that is akusala. Cittas are so fast, and only after the event we could say that there was akusala vipaka, and then we start to cry over spilt milk. As you like to say, and I remembered it, (you had it from the chief reverend) both views are correct. It depends from what angle we look at it. Nina. 28628 From: Michael Beisert Date: Sat Jan 3, 2004 0:47pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: characteristics - formulation: To Mike B And Ken O Hello Howard, Howard: What I mean (and I suspect what you mean) by 'pa~n~natti' is an idea - a mental construct - a mental, sankharic construct that arises via the mind door and which is intended to "point" to something (its alleged referent). But what others here seem to mean by 'pa~n~natti' is that alleged referent! (And since that alleged referent typically doesn't actually exist, "it" never arises nor ceases,"it" has no characteristics, etc, etc.) When we say "concept" (I believe you should be included in this "we"), we mean an actual mental event, something that occurs in the mind, but others here don't mean that at all, but mean the alleged referent of that. Michael: Thanks for the clarification. Yes I am considering paññati as a mental fabrication. To say that the referent object really does not exist but only exists in the mind is equivalent to an idealistic position. And this kind of idea, that things do not exist, is one of the extremes rejected by the Buddha. All things exist as compounded and conditioned phenomena, even that referent is a compounded and conditioned phenomena, which has the same nature as the mental fabrication which arises based on that referent which is also compounded and conditioned. I find it quite amazing that the most prevalent interpretation of the abhidhamma stating that there are paramatha dhammas, which are true existents, inevitably forces one to take this idealistic position of saying that so called conventional realities, i.e., all the rest which are not paramatha dhammas, do not exist. If paramatha dhammas are the only things that truly exist then all the rest cannot exist. This is a very odd position to be in because it is at the same time the two extremes rejected by the Buddha, existence and non-existence. Metta Michael 28629 From: m. nease Date: Sat Jan 3, 2004 1:45pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: characteristics Hi Michael, ----- Original Message ----- From: "Michael Beisert" To: Sent: Friday, January 02, 2004 1:28 AM Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: characteristics > Hello Mike, > > Mike: > The only point I meant to make had to do with sabhaava being (perhaps) the > distinguishing characteristic of what can vs. cannot be the object of > satipa.t.thaana, as opposed to denoting some kind of essence or reality in a > western philosophical sense. I think we might agree that the latter is not > a particularly useful avenue of discussion. > > Michael: > Seems we are more or less back to where we started. As I mentioned before, > in my view, the distinguishing characteristic that one hopes to unveil > through insight are dukkha, anicca and anatta, not sabhava. I agree that insight into the three chracteristics is essential. The question remains, into what dhammas can insight arise? > I don't know > what you mean by 'western philosophical sense'. I meant, more generally that questions of existence, non-existence and so on are beside this question, in my opinion. > My argument against > paramatha dhammas/sabhava has been influenced by the thinking of the > madhyamaka philosophy which is not western. My suggestion was (and remains) that, philosophy (eastern or western) aside, the issue is not the ultimate existence or non-existence of a dhamma, but whether or not that dhamma can be the basis of insight, according to buddhadhamma. That is, that the foundations of minfulness are said to have sabhaava not because they are ultimately real, but because they (alone) can be the bases of insight. mike 28630 From: Egberdina Date: Sat Jan 3, 2004 1:46pm Subject: Re: On the Momentariness of Mind States Hi Howard and everyone, I agree strongly with your post. I think there is a good comparison between what you say, and the problems associated with the wholesale adoption of Newtonian mechanics. There comes a point in the reduction of observations to ever smaller observations that an uncertainty principle kicks in. You cannot know the velocity of a particle as well as its location, for example. As you say, one cannot know what function a mindstate is performing if a single snapshot is taken. And if you relate two discrete snapshots to each other, and identify them as belonging to the "same" sequence, whether in time or in terms of causality or other, you have said nothing at all about the function of the mindstates, but everything about the observer and the criterion of selection. I think there are also huge problems associated with the dictum that only one observation in the same medium can be made. Time, that close friend of instantaneinity and discreteness, is constructed from change, and change can never be established from a single observation. Clearly, the experience of change requires a comparison between two states at least. If impermanence is seen to be a mark of all phenomena, then citta-vithi as a theoretical model needs some work. All the best Herman --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, all - > > On another list, Htoo and Jeff have been discussing vittaka and > vicara. With regard to that I posted the following: > > ****************************************** > Nyanatiloka's dictionary gives the following: > > _______________________________ > > > vitakka-vicára: 'thought-conception and discursive thinking', (or 'applied > > and sustained thought') are verbal functions (vací-sankhára: s. sankhára) of > > the mind, the so-called 'inner speech ('parole interieure'). They are > > constituents of the 1st absorption (s. jhána), but absent in the higher absorptions. > > >> (1) "Thought-conception (vitakka) is the laying hold of a thought, giving > >> it attention. Its characteristic consists in fixing the consciousness to > >> the object.(2) "Discursive thinking (vicára) is the roaming about and moving > >> to and fro of the mind.... It manifests itself as continued activity of mind" > >> (Vis.M. IV). > > > (1) is compared with the striking against a bell, (2) with its resounding; > (1) with the seizing of a pot, (2) with wiping it. (Cf. Vis . IV.). > -------------------------------------------------------------- > Ayya Khema described vitakka as the mind hitting against the > meditation object, and vicara as the mind rubbing against it, having already made the > contact. It seems to me that these are ongoing functions. I wonder what sort of > action can be performed during a single mind moment. At times I have to > wonder whether the idea of a cetasika lasting for only a single mind moment really > makes sense - or, perhaps, it is the notion of a mind moment as instantaneous > that is the problem. > ********************************************** > The more I think about this, the more I think that it is the notion of > mind states as necessarily momentary/instantaneous that is the problem. That > notion, propagated primarily by the Sautrantikas, has also been adopted to > some considerable extent by Theravada and by Mahayana. But it strikes me as being > an erroneous and unnecessary notion. While there may well be mind states > that are instantaneous, it doesn't seem credible that they all are. Some basic > activities require time for their execution and cannot be momentary. One such, > from its description, is vicara. Other possible candidates for > non-instantaneous functions are wrong and right view, stinginess, regret, doubt, and, > especially, concentration. (How is concentration on a single object executed > momentarily, when, in fact, concentration is the *maintaining* of awareness on a single > object over a period of time? If one answers that concentration is the > inclination within a single mind state for the subsequent state to take the same > object, well, that is a clever move to make in the debate game, but not good > enough I believe. The inclination towards concentration is not the same as > concentration.) > The bottom line, as I see it, is that there is nothing sacrosanct > about instantaneity nor discreteness (and "sharp edges"). The characteristic of > impermanence does not require a discrete, stop-motion, movie-frame reality for > it to be operative. All that it requires is that nothing arising from > conditions remains indefinitely. If A is present on some occasion, there will be some > future occasion when it is not present. That is all that is required for > impermanence to hold. > The issue I am discussing here is separate from that of the issue of > the distinction between paramattha dhammas and pa~n~natti. Paramattha dhammas > are events and conditions that are actually and directly observable > independent of conceptual construction and projection. Whether they occur "in the > moment" or with duration is a separate issue. > > With metta, > Howard > 28631 From: Date: Sat Jan 3, 2004 9:19am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: characteristics - formulation: To Mike B And Ken O Hi, Michael - In a message dated 1/3/04 3:47:51 PM Eastern Standard Time, mbeisert@h... writes: > Michael: > Thanks for the clarification. Yes I am considering paññati as a mental > fabrication. To say that the referent object really does not exist but only > exists in the mind is equivalent to an idealistic position. > ----------------------------------------------------- Howard: I don't think so. Idealism says that *all* objects are mind-constructed/projected. I do not say that hardness, for example, is constructed by the mind, but only that it's occurrence is as an object of awareness and not as something independent of awareness. The Buddha has said that vi~n~nana and namarupa are mutually dependent. ------------------------------------------------------ And this kind of > > idea, that things do not exist, is one of the extremes rejected by the > Buddha. ---------------------------------------------------- Howard: I do not maintain that nothing exists. Some things do, and some don't. And many of those that don't exist "truly", still do exist conventionally. It is a conventional truth that the tree in my garden exists, that you exist, and that I exist. I would be insane to deny this. But these are only conventional existents, not actualities. (In this regard, please look at my previous post entitled "Existence". ---------------------------------------------------- All things exist as compounded and conditioned phenomena, even that > > referent is a compounded and conditioned phenomena, which has the same > nature as the mental fabrication which arises based on that referent which > is also compounded and conditioned. > > > I find it quite amazing that the most prevalent interpretation of the > abhidhamma stating that there are paramatha dhammas, which are true > existents, inevitably forces one to take this idealistic position of saying > that so called conventional realities, i.e., all the rest which are not > paramatha dhammas, do not exist. If paramatha dhammas are the only things > that truly exist then all the rest cannot exist. This is a very odd position > > to be in because it is at the same time the two extremes rejected by the > Buddha, existence and non-existence. > =========================== Michael, let's take as an example one of my favorite conventional objects, the tree in my garden. I look out the window now and I "see" it. But do I really? What I actually see, I believe, is a visual object/sight (the entire objective content of the visual experience), and this is quickly followed by a series of mental operations which include, via sa~n~na, carving out a particular pattern that is matched to a mental construct passed along in the mental stream and marked as "tree". When I then "walk out back," the sight is an entirely different one, and yet I seem to see "that same tree". This is how our conceptual faculty operates. What actually corresponds to what I call "the tree in my garden" is an *incredibly* complex of complexes of multi-layered constructs built from a vast network of direct impressions through several sense doors, including level upon level of more elementary concepts, and all that superimposed on a particular occasion of seeing. The so called tree in my garden, a supposedly existing external "thing," is never encountered, but only seems to be. It is a well grounded, merely conventional existent. Just as Heraclitus said that one never steps twice in the same river, one never sees twice the same tree! And this is not because the tree is an existing thing that changes, but because the tree, itself, is never seen at all, even once, except conventionally. The immense multitude of interrelated conditions and phenomena underlying our mental tree-constructs have been truly and actually observed, but that is all. 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) 28632 From: Date: Sat Jan 3, 2004 11:31am Subject: Correction Re: [dsg] Re: characteristics - formulation: To Mike B And Ken O Hi all - Please correct my syntax in the following by inserting the bracketed material where indicated: > What actually corresponds to what I call "the tree in my garden" is an > *incredibly* complex [mental structure composed] of complexes of multi-layered > constructs built from a vast network of direct impressions through several > sense doors, including level upon level of more elementary concepts, and all that > superimposed on a particular occasion of seeing. /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) 28633 From: Andrew Date: Sat Jan 3, 2004 4:53pm Subject: Extolling, disparaging & teaching Dhamma Hi folks I have just read the Exposition of Non-Conflict (Aranavibhanga Sutta, MN139)and found some aspects of the Buddha's exposition to the monks perplexing. Maybe someone has some thoughts on these points: 1. Buddha said "One should know what it is to extol and what it is to disparage, and knowing both, one should neither extol nor disparage but should teach only the Dhamma". This seems to imply that teaching Dhamma never involves extolling or disparaging. The sutta gives examples of extolling and disparaging which take the form of "those who do X are on the right way" and "those who do Y are on the wrong way". Teaching Dhamma takes the form of "the doing of X is a state without suffering and it is the right way". Was Buddha simply telling the monks that they should discuss/debate doctrinal points in non-inflammatory language? Or can we read something deeper into this? Is this authority for the view that Dhamma is purely descriptive rather than prescriptive [an oldie but a goodie]? 2. Buddha also said "one should not insist on local language, and one should not override normal usage". This is explained along the lines of, if I say "tomato sauce" and you say "ketchup", I should not insist that only "tomato sauce" is correct. That doesn't seem very profound, does it - and yet it is. Language can be very divisive eg the battle in Norway earlier last century between 2 dialects of Norwegian that saw people sacked for pronouncing the word "snow" differently. I can only imagine that the Sangha had a smattering of "grammar-dictators" at the time, people who were attached to their language/dialect and wanted to impose it on others? Flexibility helps condition non-conflict. Even on humble DSG, I think, this can be displayed by not insisting on the use of English or Pali terms, for example. I hope you have found these thoughts of interest. Metta Andrew 28634 From: gazita2002 Date: Sat Jan 3, 2004 6:07pm Subject: SN I.1 (1) for Sarah Dear Sarah, While reading these passages on the beauty of devas, I thought of the Shwedagon Temple in Myanmar, as I had told people back here that if there is a heaven then it may well look like the S.T. Fill it with the splendid devas - o my!!! But [hello Christine], I understand that, supposedly, towards the end of their lives, devas begin to 'dim' and lose their grand splendor and some even know where they will be reborn. mmmmmm, nasty. Just 2 points here. Firsly, imagine how much conceit a deva may possibly accumulate when they seem forever to be praising each other and telling ea other about their wondrous good deeds, not to mention how beautiful they all are. Secondly, imagine in the last few days losing all that beauty and knowing you may be going somewhere awful!!! very nasty. These are just the musings of an overworked pediatric nurse, who comes home from work covered in all sorts of strange things put there by small children. 'err, what's that?' and I love my job. patience, courage and good cheer, and remember the 'tick tack tick tack' Azita ps. I watched from my window, Num run past that hotel we stayed at in Yangon. We didn't know it was him at the time, we just commented that it did'nt look like a Burmese person, bigger and jogging. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Sarah wrote: > Hi Christine, (James & All), > > I greatly appreciated all the posts on SN1, ......... Anyway, a few bits to add here: ... Snip ....... > All the devas and devatas in these stories have `excesive splendour, being > of variegated colours and shapes' and so on. They are always asked what > great deeds they performed as humans which have resulted in `such > complexion' and `shining majesty' which `radiates in all directions'. ....more snipping.... Mahamoggalana could see the good and bad deeds performed and usually > the devatas also knew the deeds performed. > > We read that `O adorned one' and so on indicate the `distinctive > splendour' and excellent `existence', `for just as a glittering golden > ornament, put together by a well trained master of his craft even, and > itself inlaid with gems and jwels that blaze forth in a network of divers > rays, shines, but not exclusively, even so does this individual > personality, shining to its four corners....' and so on. > > Just looked at the clock. Time to run as Num used to say... > > Metta, > > Sarah > ===== > > > 28635 From: yu_zhonghao Date: Sat Jan 3, 2004 6:44pm Subject: Re: [dsg] the Four Noble Truths Hi Ben, I think you've got some interesting questions. I would encourage you to visit some monasteries and find a Dhamma teacher of virtue, concentration, and wisdom. The Dhamma teacher can help you with your questions. Peace, Victor --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Benjamin Jerome" wrote: > To everyone, > > I have some thoughts and questions about the Dhamma. [snip] 28636 From: Egberdina Date: Sat Jan 3, 2004 7:00pm Subject: Two to tango (was Re: Contraception and the First Precept) Hi Christine and everyone, I've been spending a bit of time on this one :-) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "christine_forsyth" wrote: > Dear Group, > > [To deliberately kill a living being (i.e. to complete an unwholesome > course of action - akusala kamma patha) five constituent factors must > be fulfilled. > There must be: > - A living being > - Knowledge that there is a living being > - Desire to kill > - Effort to kill > - Consequential death] > I wonder how it can be known with any firm certainty that a state of affairs is attributable entirely to desire, intention and effort to bring that state of affairs about. I'm watching some cricket at the moment, and I'm always amused by the commentators exclaiming "What a great ball" or "What a great shot" or "What a great catch" as though it was all due to the intention, desire and effort of the player in focus, and not to the contribitory effort or negligence of the other players involved. Dukkha is a mark of all conditioned phenomena, precisely because desire, intention and effort to bring an exact state of affairs about is never guaranteed of that result. I may repeatedly swing a piece of 4 by 2 at an assailant, fully desiring, intending and efforting to kill her, but what the consequences of all that are have very much to do with how well my intended victim ducks and weaves. Never mind the medical neglicence that may finish her off if she is unfortunate enough to require attention from an expert. (I am certainly not referring to allied health and nursing here Hi Azita :-) It is in the thinking and rethinking that the story of "what I have done" is produced, me thinks. Wouldn't it be a form of pride to claim a state of affairs as being entirely the product of one's own desire, intention and effort? All the best Herman 28637 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sun Jan 4, 2004 0:35am Subject: Re: [dsg] tanha and intention Hi, Nina Yes, self is always there but, as we know, if there are also moments of panna, however weak they may be, understanding will gradually grow, so no need to worry! Even weak panna is fast enough ;-)). The moments with panna may be imperceptible, but we have the confidence that the if the correct cause is developed the results will follow. Over time, it can be seen whether there has been any wearing away of the adze-handle. (There are no other indicators, as far as I know. This is another topic, perhaps.) Self will be there all the way until enlightenment, so we need not be discouraged by its presence! But as you say it’s good to recognise more how subtly it works its way. Yes, it’d be good to hear from Kom and Mike on these areas. Jon --- nina van gorkom wrote: N: What about a hardly perceptible selection, say, as I just was talking about to Howard, of awareness of akusala citta. That is a good point for Bgk!!! We know that it is very necessary to be aware of akusala, but as you say, it has fallen away. We need fast panna! It is no good to skip akusala and it is no good to select akusala as object of awareness. What subtle tricks tanha plays us all the time. I like to hear more about this, even before Bgk, and others may too. If Kom and Mike have time it would be very beneficial, they have also good ideas. I think that A. Sujin would say: self behind it all. She lets you feel this and then I can't help laughing. Jokes again! Nina. 28638 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sun Jan 4, 2004 0:55am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: characteristics Michael I've been enjoying the spirited exchanges between you and Ken O (and Howard). I think I now understand your position more clearly (although still am not in agreement with it ;-)). I appreciated your comment in a post to Ken O that the purpose of the teachings of the Buddha was not ontological but the end of suffering. I'm sure that keeping this in mind helps in gaining a better understanding of the teachings. At the same time, and as you have also commented, a correct intellectual understanding is crucial because any misconception held is bound to manifest as some from of wrong view/practice. So we need to continue to discuss and analyse. Michael: Then, to be consistent with your approach, you should also disregard the commentaries to the Canon because those are certainly not ‘words spoken by the Buddha.’ Show me a sutta where the Buddha affirms that the aggregates are paramatha and have sabhava. Those ideas come from the commentaries. Jon: The commentaries hold a special place in the Theravadin tradition. They are accorded great authority, not so much because of the authority of the individual compilers but because they have received the endorsement of the Great Councils. They are the voice of the 'Thera's' for whom 'Theravada' takes its name. Michael: I probably didn’t express myself correctly. My problem is with stating ‘own’ characteristics. As if the characteristic would be something intrinsic to that thing. Jon: A 'characteristic' must, to my understanding, be a characteristic *of something*, in the present context, of dhammas. It is dhammas that are to be known by panna, and what panna knows is the characteristic *of dhammas*. Different dhammas have different characteristics; instances of the same dhamma have the same characteristic. In fact, it is only by its characteristic(s) that anything can be known, and this is so regardless of whether the thing in question is seen as being permanent and unconditioned or as impermanent and conditioned. Michael: This is wrong view because it falls into reification. Jon: I think it's important to remember that right view/wrong view comes down to right or wrong view *of dhammas* and, in particular, of the presently arising dhamma. To my reading, the suttas are concerned with the development of the understanding of the true nature of dhammas, to be developed in respect of a presently arising dhamma. A correct understanding of what the Buddha taught about characteristics is of course necessary for the development of right view and the overcoming of wrong view. Michael: Characteristics are subject to conditionality as well and therefore cannot be intrinsic. In the conditioned world there is absolutely nothing that is not subject to conditions, and if something is subject to conditions it cannot exist by its own power. Words like paramatha and sabhava do not apply in the conditioned world. Jon: I do question your assumptions here. To say that characteristics are subject to conditionality, in the same way as are the things to which they pertain (if I have understood you correctly), seems to be according to the characteristic the same status as the thing to which the characteristic pertains. That doesn't seem right to me (that would make the characteristic a thing too!). A characteristic exhibited by something is by definition a quality or feature *of/pertaining to* the thing. It cannot be separate from, or arise or exist independently of, the thing to which it pertains; in this sense the characteristic is intrinsic to the thing it pertains to. I would be very surprised if you could find a dictionary definition that indicates otherwise. Moreover, things that are conditioned and impermanent exhibit characteristics by which they can be known, just as something that was unconditioned and permanent could do. Thus I do not see any inconsistency between 'exhibiting a characteristic' and 'conditioned nature'. The 2 are not in any sense mutually exclusive.. But it seems to me that all this is to some extent semantics. The important thing surely, as I know you agree, is the development of the path taught by the Buddha, which I understand to mean the development of insight into the true nature of dhammas. By such development, different dhammas are known by panna to be different dhammas, and different instances of the same dhamma are known by panna to be instances of the same dhamma. Nama is known as nama (and not rupa), rupa as rupa (and not nama); kusala is known as kusala (and not akusala), akusala as akusala (and not kusala); seeing consciousness is known as seeing consciousness (and not visible-object), visible-object as visible-object (and not seeing consciousness); and so on. This to me is the practical application of what we are here discussing. And also of course that all conditioned dhammas are known as having the characteristics of anicca/dukkha/anatta. Jon 28639 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sun Jan 4, 2004 1:04am Subject: Re: [dsg] The present moment Herman Thanks for sharing these thoughts. I appreciate your non-conventional take on things ;-)). Of course, one always comes back to the vital question of what I will call the application, that is to say, in terms of your post here, How does there come to be 'a glimpse the present in terms of itself'? How does one come to be 'free of intention'? In your follow-up post to Howard, you offer the following words of inspiration from Samyutta Nikaya I.10 Arañña Sutta: <<< Standing to one side, a devata addressed the Blessed One with a verse: Living in the wilderness, staying peaceful, remaining chaste, eating just one meal a day: why are their faces so bright & serene? [The Buddha:] They don't sorrow over the past, don't long for the future. They survive on the present. That's why their faces are bright & serene. From longing for the future, from sorrowing over the past, fools wither away like a green reed cut down. >>> Inspiring words, I agree. But my earlier question then becomes, How does there come to be no sorrowing over the past, no longing for the future, just surviving on the present? I know you will have some thoughts on this, and I look forward to hearing them ;-)). Many thanks for the New Year wishes in your other post. And the best to you, too. Jon --- Egberdina wrote: > Hi everyone, (that includes me) > > There are two types of present moment. > > One is the PRESENT as experienced in terms of the PAST. This > present > is not a given, but is constructed entirely on intention. Intention > is based in the past to maintain it in the future. It is always > based on self-view. The purpose of this type of present moment is > indeed to maintain in the future the self-view that lies at it's > origin. This type of present moment is always accompanied by > conflict and anxiety, because it requires much effort to maintain > the illusion of the reality of what is not real. When the conflict > and anxiety become greater than the craving for the next moment > with > self view, the opportunity has arisen to not intend a future moment > based on the past, and thus obtain a glimpse of the > > Present in terms of itself. This moment is given, unchangeable, > timeless. It has no content. It is free of anxiety and conflict. > > This moment is not intended, but is there when there is no > intention. > > The Buddha praised a lifestyle in which it was possible to become > free of intention. The only consequence that follows from ignoring > his recommendations is the continuation of the past-future life > that > is craved for. Anxiety and conflict and lip service to the Triple > Gem can go on forever. 28640 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sun Jan 4, 2004 1:18am Subject: Re: [dsg] Latent tendecies Howard Regarding your query about the citta process, there is the following entry in the Appendix to Nyanatiloka's 'Buddhist Dictionary': <<< citta-víthi, Citta vithi, as well as all terms for the various functions within the processes of conseiousness, such as ávajjana-citta, sampaticchana, santírana, votthapana, javana, tadárammana, bhavanga, cuti: none of these terms is found in the Sutta Canon. except javana, in Pts.M. Even in the Ahh. Canon (e.g. Patth) only javana and bhavanga are twice or thrice briefly mentioned. The stages, however, must have been more or less known. Cf. e.g Patth: "Cakkhu-viññánam tam sampayuttaká ca dhammá (= cetasiká) mano-dhátuyá (performing the sampaticchana-function), tam sampayuttakánañ ca dhammánam (cetasikánani) anantara-paccayena paccayo. Mano-dhátu ... manoviññána-dhátuya (performing the santírana and votthapana function).... Purimá purimá kusalá dhammá (javaná) pacchimánam pacchimánam kusalánam dhammánam (javanacittánam) anantara-paccayena paccayo... avyákatánam dhammánam (tadárammana- and bhavanga-cittánam....)." >>> I see it as a case of the commentaries making explicit what is implicit in the suttas (which after all is the function of a commentary). Jon --- upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, Robert - > ... I'm talking about all the bhavanga cittas, and javana > cittas, and registration cittas etc, etc. > ... > The Thought Process > 1 Atita Bhavanga (Past Bhavanga) > 2 Bhavanga Calana (Vibrating Bhavanga) > 3 Bhavanga Upaccheda (Arrest Bhavanga) > 4 Avajjana (Sense-door consciousness) > 5 Panca Viññana (Sense consciousness) > 6 Sampaticchana (Receiving consciousness) > 7 Santirana (Investigating consciousness) > 8 Votthapana (Determining consciousness) > 9,10,11,12,13,14,15 JAVANA > 16,17 Tadalambana Registering consciousness) 28641 From: Jeffrey S. Brooks Date: Sat Jan 3, 2004 10:57pm Subject: Re: 4 Sati Suttas? Thank-you Sarah for the clarification and the suggested reading. I was hopeful though that there was yet another Sati sutta, and it would turn out to be even more clearly committed to jhana. I'll study your suggested Sutta thought and see where it takes me. Blessings, Jeff Brooks --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "christine_forsyth" wrote: > Hello Jeff, Sarah and all, > > Enjoying your discussion. Perhaps when Sarah referred to the 4 > Satipatthanas she was meaning the Four Foundations of Mindfulness > themselves - Kayanupassana (constant observation of the body), > Vedananupassana (constant observation of sensation), cittanupassana > (constant observation of the mind), and Dhammanupassana (constant > observation of the contents of the mind). > > Jeff - with your enthusiasm for all things Jhana, you may be > interested in AN VIII.63 the Sankhitta Sutta 'In Brief (Good Will, > Mindfulness, & Concentration)' > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/anguttara/an08-063.html > Thanissaro says: "This discourse is important in that it explicitly > refers to the practice of the four frames of reference (the four > foundations of mindfulness) as a form of concentration practice, > mastered in terms of the levels of jhana." > > Just a brief look, so this is not comprehensive, but in the > Satipatthaanasamyutta there are 104 suttas (some repetition) in > the "Connected Discourses on the Establishments of Mindfulness" > (Wisdom. Bhikkhu Bodhi). A small number of Thanissaro's translations > of these suttas are on-line at: > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/samyutta/index.html#Maha > > MN 119 Kayagata-sati sutta 'Mindfulness immersed in the Body' > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/majjhima/mn119.html > > metta and peace, > Christine > ---The trouble is that you think you have time --- > > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Jeffrey S. Brooks" > wrote: > > Hello Sarah, in my last post forgot to ask you about the following > > comment you made. I am only familiar with the three following Sati > > Suttas? > > > > Anapanasati Sutta (MN 118) > > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/majjhima/mn118.html > > Maha-satipatthana Sutta (DN. 22) > > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/digha/dn22.html > > Satipatthana Sutta (MN 10) > > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/majjhima/mn010.html > > > > > > Is there another one that I should be aware of? > > > > Best regards, > > > > Jeff Brooks > > 28642 From: Jeffrey S. Brooks Date: Sat Jan 3, 2004 11:03pm Subject: Re: vitakka and vicára Thank-you Htoo Naing, it seems you and I have won the field, and now we may retire to our jhana. Best regards, Jeff Brooks --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "htootintnaing" wrote: > Dear Jeff, > > What a good question that you made. Yes this matter need to be > clarified. That translation as thoughts are not enough for Vitakka > and Vicara. But when Cetasikas are studied in detail this matter will > become clear. > > With Metta, > > Htoo Naing <........> 28643 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sun Jan 4, 2004 1:41am Subject: Re: [dsg] the 8 inseparables Larry --- LBIDD@w... wrote: > Nina: "Why not use the Abhidhamma terms straight?" > > Larry: Daily life, Nina, daily life. These terms are meaningless > jargon if we can't relate them to daily life. Yes, but giving these terms our own meaning is not the way to relate them to daily life ;-)) Besides, not everything we study has a direct 'daily life' counterpart. Sometimes the relationship will be difficult to see (such as the rupa that is nutritive essence). Even such often-mentioned cetasikas as phassa/contact and ekagatta/concentration can only be appreciated at an intellectual level. Part of the problem lies in the fact that our conventional notions of these things is vastly different from the meaning of the term as used in the teachings. This can make it difficult to consider on its own merits what is found in the teachings. > I disagree with what you said > about salt. Salt is a nutritional substance, an example of the 8 > inseparables, produced by temperature. It is a mineral; not a > plant. It depends if you are talking in purely conventional terms. For the reasons just discussed, nutritional essence as 1 of the 8 inseparables cannot be related the items on your dinner table in particular. This may be confusing (exasperating, even), but careful reflection helps keep the 2 frames of reference from becoming confused. Jon 28644 From: christine_forsyth Date: Sun Jan 4, 2004 2:32am Subject: Theft of a flowers' scent Hello All, Speaking of devas :-) I'm looking for a particular sutta and can't put my finger on it. I attended a Dhamma discussion with friends this afternoon. One of the topics was the second Precept about abstaining from taking what is not given. At one point, I recalled a sutta about a deva and a bhikkhu and the theft of a flowers' scent. This statement was met by ... is there such a thing as 'polite derision'? :-) It is a bit odd though, don't you think? One doesn't steal a scent - scents float around in the air, not belonging to anyone. Does anyone know where I can find the sutta, and more importantly, what could be the point of such a teaching? metta and all, Christine ---The trouble is that you think you have time --- 28645 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sun Jan 4, 2004 2:40am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: characteristics Michael I hope you don’t mind if I come in on this thread. I would like to make some comments about the five khandhas, rupas and conventional objects. M: If we can realize that more concrete conditioned dhammas can be divided into parts, one can infer that the breakdown into parts is a characteristic of all conditioned dhammas. If you say hardness cannot be subdivided there is an assumption that this is as far as it goes, and that implies some kind of enduring thing in that hardness which does not allow for further reduction, and that in my view is almost the same as arguing for an essence. J: I think I can see where you are coming from here. You see conventional matter/objects as being instances of 'more concrete conditioned dhammas', and rupas as being the supposed basic components of conventional matter/objects. If that were so, then I would understand your logic in suggesting that rupas could be further broken down. However, I believe rupas are something else altogether. Rupas are an aspect of the actuality of the present moment. The visible-object presently being experienced through the eye-door is a rupa, as is the audible-object presently being experienced through the ear door. They are separate and distinct rupas. However, they are not the 'objects' that, by thinking, we perceive to be seen or heard through those sense-doors, nor are they a sub-set of those 'objects'. In terms of the dhamma, those supposed objects have no existence, and are purely mind-created. In an earlier post to Ken O you said: M: Can there be further reduction [of the five khandhas] beyond cetasikas? There has to be otherwise the cetasika is not conditioned and becomes a paramatha with some kind of essence, and this contradicts dependent origination. Apples and oranges are not the same but they are also conditioned and can be reduced. How far can they be reduced? Modern science is still struggling with this, so there is no answer. J: Modern science of course is not struggling with dhammas/khandhas/cetasikas, but with conventional objects. I have no problem with the proposition that conventional objects can be reduced endlessly, but that has no application as regards rupas, because there is no particular correlation between the two (i.e., conventional objects and rupas). That is why some of us have difficulty seeing your arguments regarding conditions and essence. I hope I have at least identified the source of the difference here, even though I know you will have difficulty agreeing ;-)). Jon --- Michael Beisert wrote: Hello Howard, ... I generally agree with what you say, and from what I saw in your messages so far I think we have much more to agree on than to disagree. The only exception I would make in relation to this message is that I don’t see a reason why the so called paramatha dhammas, like your example of hardness, cannot be divided into parts. ... If we can realize that more concrete conditioned dhammas can be divided into parts, one can infer that the breakdown into parts is a characteristic of all conditioned dhammas. If you say hardness cannot be subdivided there is an assumption that this is as far as it goes, and that implies some kind of enduring thing in that hardness which does not allow for further reduction, and that in my view is almost the same as arguing for an essence. 28646 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sun Jan 4, 2004 2:47am Subject: Re: [dsg] cetasikas which produce rupas Nina Thanks very much for coming in on this. I agree that cetasikas have a big role to play, acting in association with the citta they accompany. Particularly interesting among the passages you have quoted is that relating to jhana condition. The examples are very 'everyday life'! Jon PS Thanks also for your many other posts full of interesting information and comments. I am amazed at your output! I do wish I had time to join in your threads more. --- nina van gorkom wrote: N: Nyanaponika Abh. Studies, Appendix 3, the Factors of Absorption. He deals with jhanafactors, and jhana-condition taken also in a wider sense (also akusala), not just absorption in samatha. They have an intensifying influence on the other accompaying cetasikas and the simultaneous corporeal phenomena.< It is their presence that enables a state of consciousness to produce corporeal phenomena> (Co and subco to Khandha Vibhanga). p. 65, jhana-condition: without it one cannot: <1. shoot birds and animals, 2, what and whose form it is, 3. to take one straight step forward correctly, for, if at the beginning the foot was pointed eastwards, it would point southwards in the middle and westwards at the end of the step. Or else, while taking the step forward, the mind would take another object and forget about the step altogether.4. To pronounce one word correctly. This shows how swiftly the mind is distracted and changed...> What pointed reminders for everyday life, even when walking or pronouncing words!!! Nina. 28647 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Sun Jan 4, 2004 2:49am Subject: Re: [dsg] Theft of a flowers' scent Hi Christine Initally I have rejected the offers by RobK to go to Bkk. After a few thoughts, if the lodging cost is not too high, it could be a possibility. Could you kindly telling how much does one nite stay in Bkk in the hotel that the group plan to stay (in US or baht). Once I have the basic cost of the hotel, then it will be possible to know whether I can make this trip or not since the airfare is relatively cheap (about US$140) When does the discussion starts on 27 Jan (morning or afternoon) should I arrive on 26 Jan or 27 Jan. I remember it ends on 31 Jan. Is the group plans to stay a few more days for recreation or not. thanks and regards Ken O 28648 From: ashkenn2k Date: Sun Jan 4, 2004 2:57am Subject: Re: Theft of a flowers' scent Hi all sorry supposedly to be off-list arghhhhhhhh, technology one click and.......... kind rgds Ken O --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Kenneth Ong wrote: > Hi Christine > > Initally I have rejected the offers by RobK to go to Bkk. > > After a few thoughts, if the lodging cost is not too high, it could > be a possibility. > > Could you kindly telling how much does one nite stay in Bkk in the > hotel that the group plan to stay (in US or baht). Once I have the > basic cost of the hotel, then it will be possible to know whether I > can make this trip or not since the airfare is relatively cheap > (about US$140) > > When does the discussion starts on 27 Jan (morning or afternoon) > should I arrive on 26 Jan or 27 Jan. I remember it ends on 31 Jan. > Is the group plans to stay a few more days for recreation or not. > > > > thanks and regards > Ken O 28649 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sun Jan 4, 2004 2:59am Subject: Re: [dsg] What the Buddha taught Herman H: It can be said that what a person says is what they teach. Their sayings reflect their beliefs. But a far better indicator of what a person believes is what they do. What a person does is a teaching of what they believe. J: This is an acute observation and generally true I believe. However, to my mind it does not hold true in the case of a perfectly enlightened being. Can give specific instances of the Buddha's words not matching his deeds, and what is your theory as to the reason for the difference? H: ... Clearly, the Buddha is teaching, by doing, the value of seclusion and inactivity. Is seclusion and inactivity the Dhamma? Of course not. But seclusion and inactivity is, by the Buddha's example, creating the opportunity for insight into the Dhamma, whether wet, dry or otherwise to arise. J: Now this is something different from your opening proposition. What you are saying here is that by observing how a person acts we can learn how he came to be how he is. I think there is a danger in this approach. To give an obvious illustration, it would be misguided to think we could learn how to become wealthy or successful by observing how wealthy or successful people act. Surely we would be better off listening to what advice they have to pass on. Besides, in his discourses the Buddha frequently urged his listeners to *listen* more, but never to *observe* him. Should we ignore this advice? ;-)) Jon 28650 From: rjkjp1 Date: Sun Jan 4, 2004 2:59am Subject: Re: [dsg] Theft of a flowers' scent Ken, We can probably arange for you to stay at the foundation for free. Hotels are as cheap as you want or as expensive. I used to stay in $2.50 a night ratholes - and great fun it was- but graduated to 3star a few years back (about $30). Sarah and Nina will be staying in 5star near the foundation but a little steep for me. rob dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Kenneth Ong wrote: > Hi Christine > > Initally I have rejected the offers by RobK to go to Bkk. > > After a few thoughts, if the lodging cost is not too high, it could > be a possibility. > > Could you kindly telling how much does one nite stay in Bkk in the > hotel that the group plan to stay (in US or baht). Once I have the > basic cost of the hotel, then it will be possible to know whether I > can make this trip or not since the airfare is relatively cheap > (about US$140) > > When does the discussion starts on 27 Jan (morning or afternoon) > should I arrive on 26 Jan or 27 Jan. I remember it ends on 31 Jan. > Is the group plans to stay a few more days for recreation or not. > > > > thanks and regards > Ken O 28651 From: rjkjp1 Date: Sun Jan 4, 2004 3:05am Subject: Re: Theft of a flowers' scent Dear Christine, from Nina van Gorkom: ""When we study cittas more in detail it will help us to know ourselves. We should know not only the coarse lobha but also the degrees of lobha which are more subtle. The following sutta gives an example of lobha which is more subtle. We read in the 'Kindred Sayings' (I, Sagatha-vagga IX, Forest Suttas,par.14): A certain monk was once staying among the Kosalese in a certain forest-tract. Now while there that monk, after he had returned from his alms-round and had broken his fast, plunged into the lotus-pool and sniffed up the perfume of a red lotus. Then the deva who haunted that forest-tract, moved with compassion for that monk, desiring his welfare, and wishing to agitate him, drew near and addressed him in the verse: 'That blossom, water-born, thing not given, You stand sniffing up the scent of it. This is one class of things that may be stolen. And you a smell-thief must I call, dear sir.' The Monk : 'Nay, nought I bear away, I nothing break. Standing apart I smell the water's child. Now for what reason am I smell-thief called? One who does dig up water-lilies, one Who feeds on lotuses, in motley tasks Engaged: Why have you no such name for him?' The Deva : 'A man of ruthless, wicked character, Foul-flecked as is a handmaid's dirty cloth: With such the words I say have no concern. But this it is meet that I should say (to you): To him whose character is void of vice, Who ever makes quest for what is pure: What to the wicked but a hair-tip seems, To him does great as a rain-cloud appear....' We should also know the more subtle lobha which arises when we enjoy a fragrant smell or beautiful music. It seems that there are no akusala cittas when we do not harm others, but also the more subtle lobha is akusala; it is different from generosity which is kusala. We cannot force ourselves not to have lobha, but we can get to know the characteristic of lobha when it appears. Not only the suttas, but the Vinaya (Book of Discipline for the monks) also gives examples of lobha which is more subtle. Each part of the teachings, the Vinaya, the Suttanta and the Abhidhamma can help us to know ourselves better. When we read the Vinaya we see that even the monks who lead a life of contentment with little, still have accumulated conditions for lobha. Every time there was a case where monks deviated from their purity of life, a rule was laid down in order to help them to be more watchful. Thus we can understand the usefulness of the rules, which go into even the smallest details of the monk's behaviour. The rules help the monk to be watchful even when performing the most common actions of daily life such as eating, drinking, robing himself and walking. There are rules which forbid seemingly innocent actions like playing in the water or with water (Pacittiya 53), or teasing other monks. Such actions are not done with kusala cittas, but with akusala cittas."" http://www.vipassana.info/nina-abhi-05.htm In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "christine_forsyth" wrote: > Hello All, > > Speaking of devas :-) > I'm looking for a particular sutta and can't put my finger on it. I > attended a Dhamma discussion with friends this afternoon. One of the > topics was the second Precept about abstaining from taking what is > not given. At one point, I recalled a sutta about a deva and a > bhikkhu and the theft of a flowers' scent. This statement was met > by ... is there such a thing as 'polite derision'? :-) > It is a bit odd though, don't you think? One doesn't steal a scent - > scents float around in the air, not belonging to anyone. Does anyone > know where I can find the sutta, and more importantly, what could be > the point of such a teaching? > > metta and all, > Christine > ---The trouble is that you think you have time --- 28652 From: christine_forsyth Date: Sun Jan 4, 2004 3:08am Subject: Ken O :-) Hello Ken O, Darn technology! :-) But never mind, yours was just a simple post - I've seen actually embarrassing things end up on the discussion lists because of viruses posting personal opinions from private folders. I'll write off-list. cheers, Chris --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "ashkenn2k" wrote: > Hi all > > sorry supposedly to be off-list arghhhhhhhh, technology one click > and.......... > > kind rgds > Ken O 28653 From: Michael Beisert Date: Sun Jan 4, 2004 3:10am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: characteristics Hello Jon, Jon: I do question your assumptions here. To say that characteristics are subject to conditionality, in the same way as are the things to which they pertain (if I have understood you correctly), seems to be according to the characteristic the same status as the thing to which the characteristic pertains. That doesn't seem right to me (that would make the characteristic a thing too!). A characteristic exhibited by something is by definition a quality or feature *of/pertaining to* the thing. It cannot be separate from, or arise or exist independently of, the thing to which it pertains; in this sense the characteristic is intrinsic to the thing it pertains to. Michael: Yes, I agree that a characteristic cannot be separated or arise independently of the characterized. But the argument that the characteristic is intrinsic to the characterized is substantialism and this contradicts the principle of dependent origination. If there is an essence in a thing, that thing will not be subject to conditions, an essence is not affected by conditions. To avoid this fall into substantialism it makes more sense to think of characteristic and characterized as being mutually interdependent. Jon: The important thing surely, as I know you agree, is the development of the path taught by the Buddha ….. Michael: Yes, the development of the path is key, fully agree on that. Metta Michael 28654 From: Sarah Date: Sun Jan 4, 2004 3:29am Subject: Re: [dsg] Theft of a flowers' scent Hi KenO. --- Kenneth Ong wrote: > Hi Christine > > Initally I have rejected the offers by RobK to go to Bkk. > > After a few thoughts, if the lodging cost is not too high, it could > be a possibility. .... We'd all be delighted if you can join us in Bkk. As Rob said, you could probably stay a few days at the Foundation or if the room is booked at a cheap hotel nearby. I know you'd help keep the discussions very lively too;-) Hope to meet you very much. Metta, Sarah ===== 28655 From: Egberdina Date: Sun Jan 4, 2004 3:29am Subject: Re: Theft of a flowers' scent Hi Rob and everyone, This one is meant just as a joke, I just can't resist it :-) Does the number of stars relate to the height of the beds at all? Cheers and enjoy your gettogether Herman --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "rjkjp1" wrote: > Ken, > We can probably arange for you to stay at the foundation for free. > Hotels are as cheap as you want or as expensive. I used to stay in > $2.50 a night ratholes - and great fun it was- but graduated to > 3star a few years back (about $30). Sarah and Nina will be staying > in 5star near the foundation but a little steep for me. > rob 28656 From: Sarah Date: Sun Jan 4, 2004 3:48am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: SN II 6(6) -- Kamada [James] Hi James & Dan, --- buddhatrue wrote: > Hi Dan, > > (Hmm…seems like your pleasant sense of humor has turned a bit sour. > I may be hesitant to continue further.) .... I think you're having a very good discussion and touching on many interesting points which we're all appreciating. I even printed out some parts for my brother who shares your (James's) allergy to too much Pali;-) I hope you will continue. James, let me assure you that this is very mild and good-humoured for Dan;-) He is also very selective in whom he addresses, so please take it in good faith. Dan, a great New Year gift to have you around;-) As you both indicate, the Kamada sutta is an interesting one. Metta, Sarah ====== 28658 From: christine_forsyth Date: Sun Jan 4, 2004 4:11am Subject: Re: Theft of a flowers' scent Dear Robert, and all, Great! Thanks Robert! - now I can email it to the Doubting Thomases (i.e. doubting Klaas and doubting Andy). Lobha is involved with all stealing, of course. One of the other members of the Brisbane discussion group felt that breaking this Precept really revealed a person's belief in a Self. i.e. needing to satisfy one's own important craving, even though it meant possibly depriving someone else of something, in either an unethical or illegal manner. I have now found the sutta on p. 303 of Bhikkhu Bodhi's Connected Discourses 1 The Book with Verses (Sagaathaavagga) Vanasamyutta 14 The Thief of Scent. Pretty tough last verse reply from a Devataa though, after the Bhikkhu asks the Devataa: "Surely, spirit, you understand me, And you have compassion for me. Please, O spirit, speak to me again, Whenever you see such a deed." [the devataa] "We do't live with your support, Nor are we your hired servant. You, bhikkhu, should know for yourself The way to a good destination." [n. 557] I think it shows that the bhikkhu was trying to shift responsibility for strictly guarding the sense doors from himself to the devataa, and the devataa refused to get involved. The note 557 says "The devataa, it is said, thought: "This bhikkhu might become negligent, thinking he has a deity looking after his welfare. I won't accept his proposal." I hope Bhikkhus are expected to have a much higher standard than we lay people - or I'll start to feel guilty using up all the rose- scented bath salts I got for Christmas. :-) It seems the devas aren't only within their designated Samyuttas. I've found quite a number of devatta in the Bhikkhunisamyutta, the Vangisasamyutta, Vanasamyutta, the Sakkasamyutta, the Khandasamyutta, the Ghandhabbasamyutta, the Salaayatanavagga, the Moggallaanasamyutta, the Indriyasamutta, the Sotaapattisamyutta, and the Saccasamyutta. It is a bit difficult to find them being such a large part of the teaching of the Dhamma - not having seen one, it is not something verifiable from experience. When I could think of them as a 'dressing up' the Teachings (like the Herald Angels), but not necessarily real, I felt more comfortable - and I don't feel inclined to accept them on blind faith - something else for the 'too hard' basket, I guess. metta and peace, Christine ---The trouble is that you think you have time --- --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "rjkjp1" wrote: > Dear Christine, > from Nina van Gorkom: We read in the 'Kindred > Sayings' (I, Sagatha-vagga IX, Forest Suttas,par.14): > http://www.vipassana.info/nina-abhi-05.htm 28659 From: rjkjp1 Date: Sun Jan 4, 2004 4:28am Subject: Re: Theft of a flowers' scent --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "christine_forsyth" < > I hope Bhikkhus are expected to have a much higher standard than we > lay people - or I'll start to feel guilty using up all the rose- > scented bath salts I got for Christmas. :-) > It seems the devas aren't only within their designated Samyuttas. > I've found quite a number of devatta in the Bhikkhunisamyutta, the > Vangisasamyutta, Vanasamyutta, the Sakkasamyutta, the Khandasamyutta, > the Ghandhabbasamyutta, the Salaayatanavagga, the > Moggallaanasamyutta, the Indriyasamutta, the Sotaapattisamyutta, and > the Saccasamyutta. > It is a bit difficult to find them being such a large part of the > teaching of the Dhamma - not having seen one, it is not something > verifiable from experience. ======== Dear Christine, What can I say, it all seems so realistic to me. Good deeds bring their results, why should all good results be limited to this small human realm we see in front of us. Such a big universe. Laypeople live very different lives from Bhikkhus, we take pleasure in sense objects. Even sotapanna like Visakkha wear expensive clothes, live lives of luxury; and even some sakadagami may enjoy sexual relations. However, these suttas remind us laypeople to develop awareness also of subtle clinging. It is the only way. Not by trying to be something other than we are, but by learning about what we really are: simply conditioned nama and rupa. Not so strange or mystical, but because of self-view it is all made very complicated. Still trying to find a babysitter so I can go to bangkok. Now KenO is coming it gets even more interesting. robk 28660 From: rjkjp1 Date: Sun Jan 4, 2004 4:30am Subject: Re: Theft of a flowers' scent Herman, Appreciate your well wishing -couldn't get the joke though? rob In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Egberdina" wrote: > Hi Rob and everyone, > > This one is meant just as a joke, I just can't resist it :-) > > Does the number of stars relate to the height of the beds at all? > > Cheers and enjoy your gettogether > > > Herman > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "rjkjp1" > wrote: > > Ken, > > We can probably arange for you to stay at the foundation for free. > > Hotels are as cheap as you want or as expensive. I used to stay in > > $2.50 a night ratholes - and great fun it was- but graduated to > > 3star a few years back (about $30). Sarah and Nina will be staying > > in 5star near the foundation but a little steep for me. > > rob 28661 From: Philip Date: Sun Jan 4, 2004 5:00am Subject: How do you practice the Paramitas and Factors of Awakening Hello everyone. What advice would you give a beginner about how to approach the Paramitas in one's daily life? I'll be practicing the Mahayana 6. (Actually, I lean more towards Theravada in most things, but the 6 seem clearer to start with than 10!) Do you usually focus on one when you sense you need to make progress in that area, or keep a balanced awareness of all of them?I realize, of course, that the practice of one supports the others, but do you use a kind of selective focus? The same question goes for the 7 Factors of Awakening. (Sapta- Bodyanga) What role do they play in your practice? I sense that they serve more as a gauge to look in on how we're doing, and a helpful tool for balancing. (e.g, using one of more of the rousing factors when feeling sluggish, or a calming factor when feeling agitated.) I sense that the Paramitas and Factors of Awakening are very important. Really taking the Eightfold Path off the page and putting it into practice - that's how it feels to me anyways. Thanks for any guidance you can give me based on your experience. With Metta, Philip 28662 From: htootintnaing Date: Sun Jan 4, 2004 5:48am Subject: Re: Theft of a flowers' scent Dear Christine and all, When I followed this thread, I only found the related reply at 8th reply by Robert K. Dear Robert, may I ask you here who was that Bhikkhu? He was not an ordinary Bhikkhu, Wasn't he? Deva here was female Deva, I think. I am looking forward to hearing from you. With Metta, Htoo Naing ---------------------------------------------------------------------- --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "christine_forsyth" wrote: > Hello All, > > Speaking of devas :-) > I'm looking for a particular sutta and can't put my finger on it. I > attended a Dhamma discussion with friends this afternoon. One of the > topics was the second Precept about abstaining from taking what is > not given. At one point, I recalled a sutta about a deva and a > bhikkhu and the theft of a flowers' scent. This statement was met > by ... is there such a thing as 'polite derision'? :-) > It is a bit odd though, don't you think? One doesn't steal a scent - > scents float around in the air, not belonging to anyone. Does anyone > know where I can find the sutta, and more importantly, what could be > the point of such a teaching? > > metta and all, > Christine > ---The trouble is that you think you have time --- 28663 From: Sarah Date: Sun Jan 4, 2004 5:52am Subject: Re: [dsg] Kamma Dear Nina, (RobM & All), --- nina van gorkom wrote: > When more precise we can analyse a situation into different moments of > seeing, hearing, thinking. Thinking with like and dislike is not vipaka, > but > these follow very closely. Words of blame: seeing (when it is on > computer > screen), knowing the meaning of the words, this is not vipaka and after > that > feeling upset, that is akusala. Cittas are so fast, and only after the > event > we could say that there was akusala vipaka, and then we start to cry > over > spilt milk. ..... So true;-) I’m glad you’ve given these examples. Praise and blame and so on -- we’re all susceptible and have so little understanding of just what vipaka is most the time. And indeed the akusala vipaka may just be in our imagination -- we think we saw or heard something unpleasant, but as you say, the thinking about the words and the upset, annoyance or anger* follows so quickly. There is so little understanding of the accumulated tendencies as being the problem at these times. We all interpret what we see in different ways and so often misunderstand each other as a result as well. With more understanding and detachment towards what is conditioned, there is less dependence on praise and blame and the other worldly conditions. Gradually, our susceptibility to these will be worn away, but not by wishing that it be so, only by awareness and insight into conditioned dhammas. Not Nina’s or Sarah’s at all. We walked up a beautiful and remote mountain today and afterwards we were all tired. My brother made a couple of comments that may have been made affectionately, but they seemed rather sharp and for a while afterwards, I was still dwelling on the ‘story’ of these comments, even though I could tell myself how foolish it was to do so, especially after such a lovely outing in beautiful weather;-) We see all the time how conditioned dhammas are, not in anyone’s control. Now I’m smiling at the foolishness of such papanca, but soon there are bound to be more foolish stories again. They are so very common and show such deep attachment to oneself -- to what is heard, seen, touched, tasted and even smelt as we read about in the sutta. Metta, Sarah *SN2:3 Maagha At Savatthi. Then when the night had advanced, the young deva Magha, of stunning beauty, illuminating the entire Jeta’s Grove, approached the Blessed One. Having approached, he paid homage to the Blessed One, stood to one side, and addressed the Blessed One in verse**: “Having slain what does one sleep soundly? Having slain what does one not sorrow? What is the one thing, O Gotama, Whose killing you approve?” “Having slain anger, one sleeps soundly; Having slain anger, one does not sorrow; The killing of anger***, O Vatrabhu, With its poisoned root and honeyed tip: This is the killing the noble ones praise, For having slain that, one does not sorrow.” **Spk: “Maagha is a name for Sakka....” ***anger (kodha) ============= 28664 From: buddhatrue Date: Sun Jan 4, 2004 6:10am Subject: [dsg] Re: SN II 6(6) -- Kamada [James] Hi Sarah and Dan, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Sarah wrote: I hope you will continue. James, let me assure you that this is very mild > and good-humoured for Dan;-) He is also very selective in whom he > addresses, so please take it in good faith. Dan, a great New Year gift to > have you around;-) As you both indicate, the Kamada sutta is an > interesting one. > > Metta, > > Sarah > ====== Oh, sorry; I guess I jumped the gun a little bit. It's just that some of the descriptions were very shocking to me; not that I am that squeamish really, I recently saw "Freddie vs. Jason" (Arabic subtitles ;-)), a very bloody movie, but I know that it is just pretend. I guess descriptions of the real thing bother me more. Sorry Dan...don't be scared away!;-)) Metta, James 28665 From: gazita2002 Date: Sun Jan 4, 2004 6:20am Subject: Re: Theft of a flowers' scent- Herman Dear Herman, I thought your joke was quite clever. Esp. so given that one of the 10 precepts is to refrain from sleeping on high and luxurious beds. IMO the number of stars relate to how polite one has to be. Coming from the backblocks of Down Under - a sheep shearers daughter - I feel a tad uncomfortable in anything over 3 stars!!! However, I am a smell thief, often stopping to smell the gardenias which grow outside the city library. I have stopped picking them though. patience, courage and good cheer, Azita. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "rjkjp1" wrote: > Herman, > Appreciate your well wishing -couldn't get the joke though? > rob > > In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Egberdina" > wrote: > > Hi Rob and everyone, > > > > This one is meant just as a joke, I just can't resist it :-) > > > > Does the number of stars relate to the height of the beds at all? > > > > Cheers and enjoy your gettogether > > > > > > Herman 28666 From: rjkjp1 Date: Sun Jan 4, 2004 6:32am Subject: Re: Theft of a flowers' scent Dear Htoo, I think the bhikkhu was still a worldling, the devata (female deva) was concerned least his intoxication led to negligence. Robk In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "htootintnaing" wrote: > Dear Christine and all, > > When I followed this thread, I only found the related reply at 8th > reply by Robert K. > > Dear Robert, may I ask you here who was that Bhikkhu? He was not an > ordinary Bhikkhu, Wasn't he? Deva here was female Deva, I think. > > I am looking forward to hearing from you. > > With Metta, > > Htoo Naing > > ------------------------------------------------------------------- --- > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "christine_forsyth" > wrote: > > Hello All, > > > > Speaking of devas :-) > > I'm looking for a particular sutta and can't put my finger on it. > I > > attended a Dhamma discussion with friends this afternoon. One of > the > > topics was the second Precept about abstaining from taking what is > > not given. At one point, I recalled a sutta about a deva and a > > bhikkhu and the theft of a flowers' scent. This statement was met you have time --- 28667 From: rjkjp1 Date: Sun Jan 4, 2004 6:38am Subject: Austerity Dear group, These verses were spoken by Mara "those engaged in austerity and scrupulousness, those protecting their solitude, and those settled on form, delighting in the world of devas: Indeed these mortals instruct rightly in regard to the other world." Bodhi page 162 Sagathavagga Devaputtasamyuatta 370 Robk 28668 From: Dan D. Date: Sun Jan 4, 2004 7:20am Subject: Re: SN II 6(6) -- Kamada [James] Dear James, The three main points I want to make are: (i) the path is wholesome through and through and is obscured from an unwholesome mind; (ii) following the path is difficult (as Kamada complained) but not impossible (as the Buddha reassured him); and (iii) knowledge and wisdom of the way cannot be forced by adherence to rules and rituals. The first of these points seems obvious, but there is a subtlety that is important to consider. Consciousness of the path arises and falls, arises and falls. When it arises, there is no lobha/dosa/moha; and only when it arises can it be said that a person is "on the path." When a mind that is harboring dosa or lobha or moha is said to be "following the path", that path is cannot be the Buddha's. The second point seems even more obvious, but sometimes it is easy to lose sight of the difficulty of following the path. Buddha discusses this point frequently in the suttas, but perhaps never in more stark terms than in MN 21: "Bhikkhus, even if bandits were to sever you savagely limb by limb with a two-handed saw, he who gave rise to a mind of hate towards them would not be carrying out my teachings." Nadsemaj may have been sincerely trying to follow the path when he sat quietly in the corner following Mahasi's instructions, but he gave rise to minds of hate, greed, and delusion. Whenever the lobha/dosa/moha arise, there is no carrying out of the Buddha's teachings, no following the path. The third point is subtler, deeper, and closer to the heart. It assaults everything we hold dear, and the natural response to hearing it is to resist vehemently. The desire of the Self to think of itself as "good", "sincere", "basically doing the right thing", "on the right track", etc. is incredibly strong. A few years ago, I read an article in the paper about a guy who had recently been arrested for armed robbery and assault. He was a violent man who had been in trouble with the law on numerous occasions for his violence. His take on the matter? "I'm basically a nice guy, as my friends will tell you." Most people don't think of such violent people as "nice", but the Self *loves* to create shiny images of itself and then polish the images at every opportunity. People really do love themselves tremendously and forgive themselves for any number of things that they would never tolerate in others. Until we can come to grips with just how frequently we stumble and how difficult it is to follow the path, the assessment of the progress we are making is bound to be grossly inflated, delusional. That is why I write things like "... if you are anything like me (viz., full of lobha/dosa/moha), you will be following the wrong path whether sitting, standing, walking, lying, eating, talking, writing, thinking, etc." At those times when the fog lifts momentarily, I am astounded at how much akusala I generate in a day and at how little real understanding arises. I know that such talk may sound discouraging and negative, but to realize just how strong of a grip lobha/dosa/moha exert is refreshing and liberating. Gradually there is the realization that the Self that the mind constructs and polishes is really not worth clinging to. As the realization of the strength of Mara's grip grows and develops, moments of mudita, karuna, and metta grow in strength and abundance because it is recognized that others are also caught tight in Mara's grip. But this understanding can't develop when lobha/dosa/moha are taken as part of the Buddha's path. Somehow, what I intended to write this morning didn't come out! We've been discussing what is and what is not the path, but I wanted to extend the discussion to some of the startling sights that are seen from that path. This will have to be postponed until later today (or within the next few days). The next 23 weeks or so are pretty busy for me, and I'll have to bow out again after we wrap up this thread. In the meantime, thank-you James for such pleasant and well considered discussion (excepting the "sour" comment, of course!). I've enjoyed it. Dan 28669 From: Dan D. Date: Sun Jan 4, 2004 7:28am Subject: Re: Theft of a flowers' scent I had to chuckle at his joke. "High beds" and the eight precepts and all... Also, I too have stayed in a number of those rat holes in Bkk. They really are rat holes, and a higher bed might elevate someone just enough to be safe from those small (well ... not SO small), non- paying guests. Dan > Herman, > Appreciate your well wishing -couldn't get the joke though? > rob > > In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Egberdina" > wrote: > > Hi Rob and everyone, > > > > This one is meant just as a joke, I just can't resist it :-) > > > > Does the number of stars relate to the height of the beds at all? > > > > Cheers and enjoy your gettogether > > > > > > Herman 28670 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Sun Jan 4, 2004 7:35am Subject: Re: [dsg] the 8 inseparables Hi Howard Howard: I think that yours is a heroic and clever attempt to redeem > the notion. I find myself often straining in the same way to salvage an> idea from the Abhidhamma. Your approach is a pretty good one, saying, as I understand you, that the description given is really that of the pa~n~natti "nutriment B". That then leaves the rupa, the allegedly actually existent "nutiment A", to be a > condition for the former. The trouble is, as I see it, that there > is no evidence of such a scenario in the quoted material whatsoever, and moreover, "nutriment A" is a merely hypothesized but unobserved, hidden essence like the ether of modern times. k: Below are quotes of texts I got from Nina paccaya materials <> <> >Howard: There was a tendency in ancient civilizations (and somewhat still in modern times) to look for hidden "essences" or "potencies" that account for things. Frequently these were based on conventional notions. Bodily rupas hold together, so there must be a "life force" responsible. Organic masses are maintained and increase so there must be some "nutritive essence" responsible. There is (said to be) rebirth, so there must be a soul that is reincarnated. The body moves, so there must be an animator. The world exists and is maintained, so there must be a Creator/Maintainer. Light travels through empty space, so > there must be an ether. k: for that I surrender ;-) bc basically this is the logic of Abhidhamma. As you always said "I dont buy it", nonetheless this is Abhidhamma Ripley's show << Believe It or Not >> kind regards Ken O 28671 From: abhidhammika Date: Sun Jan 4, 2004 7:55am Subject: Re: characteristics - formulation: To Mike B And Ken O Dear Michael B and all How are you? Michael wrote: "I just want to say that I disagree with much of what you say." In my original post, I wrote: "So when you are ready to talk to him (Ken O) again, you should have done some homework in the correct of use of the terms "paramattha" and "sabhaava" in Abhidhamma and commentaries. Then, perhaps, Ken O would be more easily convinced of your points." Michael, I never expected you to agree with what I said. That is one reason that I asked you to do your homework before you are ready to talk to Ken O again. Perhaps, when you have done your homework in the correct use of the terms "paramattha" and "sabhaava", you might even come to agree with what I wrote. You never know! As our understanding of things also depends on conditions, when conditions change by means of learning more, your understanding of what I wrote may also change from disagreement to agreement. This, of course, depends on your willingness to study more. Dependent Origination everywhere! By the way, understanding is a paññaa cetasika and, therefore, a paramattha. As understanding is always in the process of being developed by conditions such as learning, observing, experimenting, here we have an example of a paramattha undergoing change and being conditioned. As you have been insisting on following the Buddha's teachings, I trust that you will also be consistent in that insistence in terms of developing your understanding of things by learning more and more - in this case, by getting correct information on the use of the terms "paramattha" and "sabhaava" in Abhidhamma and commentaries. What I am getting at here is that genuine critical statements should be made only by making efforts to understand properly the things we want to criticize. We need to first do justice to the things we want to find fault with. In your case, if you want to criticize commentaries, then you ought to understand their language properly. Without making efforts to understand the language of commentaries such as "paramattha" or "sabhaava", any of your criticisms would become meaningless and become the wrong speech (micchaavaacaa). By doing so, you are asserting yourself to be better than Aacariya Buddhaghosa and unknown ancient Buddhist ascetics represented by him. As such, your behavior is amount to showing off your conceit and disrespect before the people who have great respect for Aacariya Buddhaghosa and his standard commentaries. You also wrote: " But I don't think it would be profitable for both of us to start a discussion on this." Do not worry, Michael. I never have any intention of starting a discussion on this with you. If I had, I could have done so long time ago. The reason I wrote my post was that I thought the thread between you and Ken O reached the end. You also wrote: "Well, but there is sankhara in dependent origination, and paññati is a sankhara." You must be joking! Where did you get that information? In the formula "Avijjaa paccayaa sankhaaraa ...", sankhaaraa is another term for "cetanaa" which is a cetasika and, therefore, a paramattha. Sankhaara in the above formula roughly means activations or deliberate or intentional actions. In the five aggregates, sankhaarakhandhaa refers to cetasikas with cetanaa as the head (cetanaasiisena). That is why I keep telling you to do your homework in the use of the terms of paramatthas. Please do not forget to read Kathaavatthu to familiarize yourself with the correct use of the term "paramattha". Kathaavatthu is the work of Arahant Mahaa Moggliputtatissa based on the Buddha's initial outlines. With regards, Suan Lu Zaw http://www.bodhiology.org --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Michael Beisert" wrote: Hello Suan, Thank you for your comments and I just want to say that I disagree with much of what you say. But I don't think it would be profitable for both of us to start a discussion on this. Only one point I want to mention. You wrote: "there is no paññatti dhamma ("concept") among the components of Dependent Origination." Well, but there is sankhara in dependent origination, and paññati is a sankhara. Metta Michael 28672 From: Date: Sun Jan 4, 2004 3:13am Subject: A Semantic Analysis (Re: [dsg] Re: characteristics) Hi, Jon and Michael - In a message dated 1/4/04 3:57:08 AM Eastern Standard Time, jonoabb@y... writes: > Michael: > Characteristics are subject to conditionality as well and therefore > cannot be intrinsic. In the conditioned world there is absolutely > nothing that is not subject to conditions, and if something is > subject to conditions it cannot exist by its own power. Words like > paramatha and sabhava do not apply in the conditioned world. > > Jon: > I do question your assumptions here. To say that characteristics are > subject to conditionality, in the same way as are the things to which > they pertain (if I have understood you correctly), seems to be > according to the characteristic the same status as the thing to which > the characteristic pertains. That doesn't seem right to me (that > would make the characteristic a thing too!). > > A characteristic exhibited by something is by definition a quality or > feature *of/pertaining to* the thing. It cannot be separate from, or > arise or exist independently of, the thing to which it pertains; in > this sense the characteristic is intrinsic to the thing it pertains > to. I would be very surprised if you could find a dictionary > definition that indicates otherwise. > > Moreover, things that are conditioned and impermanent exhibit > characteristics by which they can be known, just as something that > was unconditioned and permanent could do. Thus I do not see any > inconsistency between 'exhibiting a characteristic' and 'conditioned > nature'. The 2 are not in any sense mutually exclusive.. > =============================== I think that much of this discussion is merely semantic. Please look at the following: ___________________________________ Main Entry: in·trin·sic Pronunciation: in-'trin-zik, -'trin(t)-sik Function: adjective Etymology: Middle French intrinsèque internal, from Late Latin intrinsecus, from Latin, adverb, inwardly; akin to Latin intra within —more at INTRA- Date: 1642 1 a : belonging to the essential nature or constitution of a thing b : being or relating to a semiconductor in which the concentration of charge carriers is characteristic of the material itself instead of the content of any impurities it contains 2 a : originating or due to causes within a body, organ, or part b : originating and included wholly within an organ or part — compare EXTRINSIC 1b - in·trin·si·cal·ly /-zi-k(&-)lE, -si-/ adverb Pronunciation Key © 2001 by Merriam-Webster, Incorporated Merriam-Webster Privacy Policy ______________________________________________ In particular, please compare 1a and 2 (a & b). Definition 1a of 'intrinsic' is "belonging to the essential nature or constitution of a thing ." This makes an intrinsic characteristic of something merely the means/characteristic by which to distinguish it from something else. Certainly we can distinguish hardness from unpleasantness and from heat, for example. Thus, this sense of 'intrinsic' doesn't strike me as problematical. Definition 2 of 'intrinsic' oddly pertains to bodily organs - but I render it here more generally as the following: "originating or due to causes within a thing itself b : originating and included wholly within a thing itself . The sense that is emphasized in definition 2 is that of source of origin of a characteristic/condition rather than locus of residing. When two people use the expression 'intrinsic characteristic', but one of them in the sense of 1a and the other in the sense of 2, there will be confusion unless it is specified who means what. Speaking conventionally: The hardness of a table *is* a hardness OF that table; it resides in that table, and it is intrinsic to it in sense 1a.. However, the hardness of the table arises from the mind that created the table pa~n~natti to begin with, or, more conventionally, it arises from the materials that were put together to produce the table; the table and its hardness arose together from what is non-table, and, in that sense, sense 2 of 'intrinsic', the hardness is not intrinsic to the table. Now, why am I speaking about a conventional object, a table, in the previous paragraph? Because it becomes odd to talk about the distinguishing characteristic of a paramattha dhamma. The distinguishing characteristic/condition of hardness is hardness. The distinguishing characteristic/condition of pleasantness is pleasantness. Paramattha dhammas *are* characteristics/conditions. The nature of hardness is hardness. The nature of visual consciousness is visual consciousness. That is all there is to say. Relations hold among such things, of course, and these can be pointed out. There is that to say. Now, let us talk about the *existence* of a paramattha dhamma - a hardness, warmth of some degree felt in some part of the body, a sound, a sight, or concentration, say. Each of these dhammas is a characteristic/condition. Is it a characteristic that is intrinsic to itself in the sense of its locus being in itself? Well, yes, but that is a rather strange thing to say, because it is nothing *but* that characteristic/condition. It *is* intrinsic to itself in sense 1a, but tautologically so. On the other hand, it does *not* arise from itself! It arises in dependence on the coming together of a group of other conditions without which it would have no existence whatsoever. So it is not intrinsic to itself in sense 2. 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) 28673 From: Date: Sun Jan 4, 2004 3:17am Subject: Re: [dsg] Latent tendecies Thank you, Jon! With metta, Howard In a message dated 1/4/04 4:19:49 AM Eastern Standard Time, jonoabb@y... writes: > Howard > > Regarding your query about the citta process, there is the following > entry in the Appendix to Nyanatiloka's 'Buddhist Dictionary': > > <<< > citta-víthi, > Citta vithi, as well as all terms for the various functions within > the processes of conseiousness, such as ávajjana-citta, > sampaticchana, santírana, votthapana, javana, tadárammana, bhavanga, > cuti: none of these terms is found in the Sutta Canon. except javana, > in Pts.M. Even in the Ahh. Canon (e.g. Patth) only javana and > bhavanga are twice or thrice briefly mentioned. > > The stages, however, must have been more or less known. Cf. e.g > Patth: > "Cakkhu-viññánam tam sampayuttaká ca dhammá (= cetasiká) mano-dhátuyá > (performing the sampaticchana-function), tam sampayuttakánañ ca > dhammánam (cetasikánani) anantara-paccayena paccayo. Mano-dhátu ... > manoviññána-dhátuya (performing the santírana and votthapana > function).... Purimá purimá kusalá dhammá (javaná) pacchimánam > pacchimánam kusalánam dhammánam (javanacittánam) anantara-paccayena > paccayo... avyákatánam dhammánam (tadárammana- and > bhavanga-cittánam....)." > >>> > > I see it as a case of the commentaries making explicit what is > implicit in the suttas (which after all is the function of a > commentary). > > Jon > /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) 28674 From: christine_forsyth Date: Sun Jan 4, 2004 8:23am Subject: Re: Theft of a flowers' scent - Htoo Hello Htoo, and all, Bhikkhu Bodhi in his notes to the Vanasamyutta (p.473) "An identical story, including the verses, is at Ja No. 392 (III. 307-10), with the Bodhisatta in the role of the bhikkhu. Spk: When she saw the bhikkhu sniff the lotus, the devataa thought: "Having received a meditation subject from the Buddha and entered the forest to meditate, this bhikkhu is instead meditating on the scent of flowers. If his craving for scent increases it will destroy his welfare. Let me draw near and reproach him." I have read Jataka 392 (III. 307-10) Bhisapuppha-Jaataka (E.W. Cowell 1897). "The lesson ended, the Master declared the Truths, and identified the Birth - at the end of the Truths, the Brother was established in the fruit of the First Path:- "At that time the goddess was Uppalavannaa, the ascetic was myself." metta and peace, Christine ---The trouble is that you think you have time--- --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "rjkjp1" wrote: > Dear Htoo, > I think the bhikkhu was still a worldling, the devata (female deva) > was concerned least his intoxication led to negligence. > Robk > In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "htootintnaing" > wrote: > > Dear Christine and all, > > > > When I followed this thread, I only found the related reply at 8th > > reply by Robert K. > > > > Dear Robert, may I ask you here who was that Bhikkhu? He was not > an > > ordinary Bhikkhu, Wasn't he? Deva here was female Deva, I think. > > > > I am looking forward to hearing from you. > > > > With Metta, > > > > Htoo Naing 28675 From: shakti Date: Sun Jan 4, 2004 9:19am Subject: Re: [dsg] Theft of a flowers' scent - to KenO Dear Ken, I'm happy to hear that you may join the group in Bangkok. I too am hoping to go and am trying to finalize plans. I usually stay at the Holiday Inn on Silom Road (across the river from the foundation) and pay around $45.00. This is a special rate that I get from a consolidator and would be happy to send you the contact if this interests you. Let me know. I probably won't arrive in Bangkok til the 27th or 28th. Hope to meet you there. Shakti Kenneth Ong wrote: Hi Christine Initally I have rejected the offers by RobK to go to Bkk. After a few thoughts, if the lodging cost is not too high, it could be a possibility. Could you kindly telling how much does one nite stay in Bkk in the hotel that the group plan to stay (in US or baht). Once I have the basic cost of the hotel, then it will be possible to know whether I can make this trip or not since the airfare is relatively cheap (about US$140) When does the discussion starts on 27 Jan (morning or afternoon) should I arrive on 26 Jan or 27 Jan. I remember it ends on 31 Jan. Is the group plans to stay a few more days for recreation or not. thanks and regards Ken O 28676 From: Michael Beisert Date: Sun Jan 4, 2004 9:56am Subject: RE: [dsg] Re: characteristics - formulation: To Mike B And Ken O Hello Suan, Suan: "Well, but there is sankhara in dependent origination, and paññati is a sankhara." You must be joking! Where did you get that information? In the formula "Avijjaa paccayaa sankhaaraa ...", sankhaaraa is another term for "cetanaa" which is a cetasika and, therefore, a paramattha. Sankhaara in the above formula roughly means activations or deliberate or intentional actions. In the five aggregates, sankhaarakhandhaa refers to cetasikas with cetanaa as the head (cetanaasiisena). That is why I keep telling you to do your homework in the use of the terms of paramatthas. Michael: Maybe you can help me with my homework and explain what is pannatti then. I remember in your previous post you said it is not part of dependent origination. What is it then? I would really apreciate. Suan: Please do not forget to read Kathaavatthu to familiarize yourself with the correct use of the term "paramattha". Kathaavatthu is the work of Arahant Mahaa Moggliputtatissa based on the Buddha's initial outlines Michael: I will try to get hold of a copy. But could you give me directions where in the book I can find relevant information to the understanding of paramatha/sabhava? It's a big book and it will be easier if I could have some directions. Suan: As such, your behavior is amount to showing off your conceit and disrespect before the people who have great respect for Aacariya Buddhaghosa and his standard commentaries. Michael: In the book 'Wings to Awakening' (Part III: The Basic Factors; F. Concentration and Discernment) Thanissaro Bhikkhu wrote the following: "Some Theravadins insist that questioning the commentaries is a sign of disrespect for the tradition, but it seems to be a sign of greater disrespect for the Buddha -- or the compilers of the Canon -- to assume that he or they would have left out something absolutely essential to the practice." He is writing about the Jhanas but the same commentary could be made about paramatha/sabhava which, as you well know, do not appear in the suttas. So, between showing more respect to Buddhaghosa or the Buddha, I stay with the Buddha. Metta Michael _________________________________________________________________ Check your PC for viruses with the FREE McAfee online computer scan. http://clinic.mcafee.com/clinic/ibuy/campaign.asp?cid=3963 28677 From: Larry Date: Sun Jan 4, 2004 10:39am Subject: Re: [dsg] the 8 inseparables Hi Jon, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Jonothan Abbott wrote: > Larry > > --- LBIDD@w... wrote: > Nina: "Why not use the Abhidhamma terms > straight?" > > > > Larry: Daily life, Nina, daily life. These terms are meaningless > > jargon if we can't relate them to daily life. > > Yes, but giving these terms our own meaning is not the way to relate > them to daily life ;-)) Larry: What is the way? > > Besides, not everything we study has a direct 'daily life' > counterpart. Sometimes the relationship will be difficult to see > (such as the rupa that is nutritive essence). Even such > often-mentioned cetasikas as phassa/contact and > ekagatta/concentration can only be appreciated at an intellectual > level. Part of the problem lies in the fact that our conventional > notions of these things is vastly different from the meaning of the > term as used in the teachings. This can make it difficult to > consider on its own merits what is found in the teachings. > > > I disagree with what you said > > about salt. Salt is a nutritional substance, an example of the 8 > > inseparables, produced by temperature. It is a mineral; not a > > plant. > > It depends if you are talking in purely conventional terms. For the > reasons just discussed, nutritional essence as 1 of the 8 > inseparables cannot be related the items on your dinner table in > particular. This may be confusing (exasperating, even), but careful > reflection helps keep the 2 frames of reference from becoming > confused. > > Jon Larry: We seem to be forgetting that these rupas are inseparable. Where else would we find them if not on the dinner table and as parts of our body and in the world (plants etc.)? They arise apart from any consciousness that may cognize them, even the consciousness produced ones (I think?). That I, and perhaps you, don't have the wisdom to directly experience nutritional essence is a different matter all together. We can still recognize the 8 inseparables in daily life and be mindful of them to the limit of our abilities. Larry 28678 From: nina van gorkom Date: Sun Jan 4, 2004 0:13pm Subject: Re: [dsg] the study of Abhidhamma and rupas. Dear Larry and Howard, op 02-01-2004 00:52 schreef LBIDD@w... op LBIDD@w...: L quotes: > Nina: "Why not use the Abhidhamma terms straight?" > Larry: Daily life, Nina, daily life. N: This is the context of what I said: L: These terms are meaningless jargon > if we can't relate them to daily life. N: That is what I am trying to do all the time, but what I find it so very difficult, Larry. People keep on thinking that all these rupas are conventional terms, and how to bring home that they are realities? I think daily life without the Abhidhamma is so chaotic. The Abhidhamma is very precise, teaches in detail about nama and rupa. For most people the teaching about cittas is more acceptable than the teaching about rupas. With rupas it may seem that there is a conflict between science and the teaching of the Abhidhamma, they may not see that there *is no conflict*. People can pursue their interests in the field of science, but at the same time develop understanding of nama and rupa. Misunderstandings arise if one confuses conventional notions with paramattha dhammas, and especially, if one does not see the goal of the Dhamma: detachment. In fact, notions of minerals, chemistry etc. will not lead to the end of dukkha. Seeing both nama and rupa as they are will lead to the end of dukkha. We are not only deluded about nama but also about rupa. We should not neglect rupa. Howard had a good question, but now I give only part: Chemists are not interested at detachment, Howard. To answer this and other questions about notions of science and Abhidhamma, let us go to the Mahaarahulovaada sutta and the Discourse on the Elephant's Footprint I quoted many times, but to which we should frequently return. The Discourse on the Elephant's Footprint teaches about rupas as elements. Not elements in the sense of chemistry, but as realities devoid of self. We should never forget the difference. Thus, no conflict with science, but only through the Abhidhamma we learn the meaning of element as non-self. There are inward rupas (ajjhatta), of the body, and outward rupas (bahiddhaa), of what we call nature or dead matter. We should also consider outward rupas, that is beneficial for detachment. Let us leave aside for a moment the question of phenomenology. We can also consider rupas as originating from four factors. Those of the body originate from four factors. Those which are not of the body:when it is not from kamma, citta, nutrition, from what else? From the Great Element of Fire or heat. Sariputta did not speak about concepts, he illustrated with calamities of nature rupas outside, those that are not of the body. They are to be reckoned with. If we look at the colour of our body, it can be produced by the four factors, but we cannot catch such differences now. If we look outside, there is colour, produced only by the element of heat. That is the difference. We find nama and rupa very important, but we should learn to see them as mere elements, mere nothings. The suttas and also commentaries use figurative language to explain what is really there (for a moment!): paramattha dhammas. We have to go back many centuries to try to understand their way of explaining. But it is worth while! Also Dhammasangani uses many daily examples, such as flavours of different roots, roots we do not know about today. Or sounds of musical instruments that many people may not know about today. The root of the problem is this: study of Abhidhamma should go hand in hand with satipatthana, otherwise we get the wrong grasp (the snake really bites), lost in speculations. If there is a beginning of awareness of what appears, be it visible object, or cold, without naming, it will gradually change our outlook, also concerning the rupas which are still unobserved. Why? Because we learn to go straight to reality, past all those concepts and names which are just helping to denote reality. Even a very poor beginning of awareness, interspersed with countless moments of thinking *about* dhammas, makes all the difference. Repeat: even though many rupas *seem* to be concepts (pannattis, different from realities, in the Abhidhammic sense), we learn to understand that they are real. The difference between reality and concept will become clearer. The same goes for cittas. We gain great confidence when we learn for example, that the real cause of dosa is within us, not the other people, that the cause is clinging to self, expectations, but also, we gain more confidence in what the abhidhamma teaches about (still) unobserved cittas (bhavanga), about their ephemeral nature, about the cittas arising in processes. About citta nyama, a certain fixed order of them, and not one citta lasting longer than another one. Thus, we shall be more inclined to keep on studying what is taught by the Theravada tradition, inspite of matters we do not yet grasp. Now there are too many subjects at a time, and I want to keep to one subject, otherwise the study cannot be thorough enough. Let us follow Larry's thread. Nutrition comes later, and I like to take up the dialogue with you again, paying attention to the Sutta on Right Understanding, probing into it whether the Buddha meant a concept or not when he said physical sustenance (appropriate after Victor's post). I start preparations for Bgk and will have less time. Moreover, Lodewijk said that he will throw my computer out of the window. Nina. 28679 From: nina van gorkom Date: Sun Jan 4, 2004 0:13pm Subject: rupas and scientifical notions. Dear Larry, Cheerio, back again with your good questions. L:I disagree with what you said > about salt. Salt is a nutritional substance, an example of the 8 > inseparables, produced by temperature. It is a mineral; not a plant. N: Let us look at the list of rupas in the Dhammasangani: it is not there. It is again a conventional term for a conglomeration of different units of rupas. There is no salt classified as one of the inseparables (avinibhoga rupas). Yes, such rupas are not of the body, outward. Produced by the element of heat. L: Salt is a nutritional substance, It is a mineral; not a plant. N:Agreed, no conflict at all. L: I'm not very happy with plants not being considered to be alive. N: I do not want to see you unhappy. I care a lot about nature and plant life. We are members of the World Nature Foundation and also of the Dutch Association for the Protection of Nature (a million members), and also of two regional associations for the protection of nature. Plant life etc. is again a conventional notion, but this does not mean we do not care! Let us look at the Tiika: The text has dead matter, mata rupa. Let us not fall over this. There is a difference between what is produced by kamma and what is not. We call something dead matter, but the meaning is: not produced by kamma. We should not fall over this term. Plants do not have cittas, they originate from heat. We give them earth and water, and also these are conglomerations of rupas produced by heat. We take care of plants (we love them), but at the same time we learn what is really there: different rupas that can be experienced through the sense-doors. And this will eventually lead to the end of dukkha. Nina. 28680 From: nina van gorkom Date: Sun Jan 4, 2004 0:13pm Subject: author's rights, etc. Dear Ken Ong, I answer you on dsg, because we need help from our good friends here. I appreciate your enthusiasm and all your help to explain Abhidhamma. You greatly encourage me too by your example. I like your good cheer when in conversation with others. This is contaminating! K:Was you or Jon who asked for all these anapanasati posts into one single document and I have save them all in one document. N: Thanks, but I could not open it, I have an iMac. I have the whole doc myself, but never sent it to Zolag web. Reason: I meant it as very informal for discussion, but, since I quote from Nanamoli's book, I do not know what is allowed. Rob K, Rob M and others know about percentages allowed as quotes, but I do not know. Also: pali accents, these only come out correctly if the whole thing goes to Zolag Web first. If you use this just for friends I do not think there are problems. K: I admire you and your publisher spirit of giving pple to download free ebook. This is very rare but not even B Bodhi does not do that. I also like to ask you whether all your materials in this file copyrighted by you. N: I do not care about copy rights, no problem, only I do not want people to change my texts, that is all. K: It is very difficult to find commentaries in English hence now I am collecting as many as possible. If in future (maybe years later) I print them for free distribution or put on my website, but do this action infringe on your copyright. N: Not at all. In general: what is on Zolag or Rob K's web: let people use it and download it as they like. It is there free for everybody. We all share the Dhamma, nobody's property. K: With regards to Bkk trip, could I know how much a respectable hotel (near your foundation) cost a night to stay. Or where are the rest of the gang going to stay and how much it cost. If the cost is acceptable to my budget, I may made a trip to Bkk. N: It is better to ask Jaran, but he often travels for his work. There is a spare room at the foundation, maybe someone can help you. Ken, I just wrote to our friend Betty about this, awaiting her answer on dsg. Also: Azita is the greatest in finding good low budget hotels. Her accumulation is fewness of wishes and this comes naturally with her. Admirable. I conclude with a quote from your advice to Howard about jhana I find precious also for myself: I hope you can make it, with great appreciation for all your efforts, Nina. 28681 From: nina van gorkom Date: Sun Jan 4, 2004 0:13pm Subject: Tiika Vis. 59, Life faculty Tiika Vis. 59, Life faculty Vis. 59: 12. The life faculty has the characteristic of maintaining conascent kinds of matter. Its function is to make them occur. It is manifested in the establishing of their presence. Its proximate cause is primary elements that are to be sustained. And although it has the capacity consisting in the characteristic of maintaining, etc., yet it only maintains conascent kinds of matter at the moment of presence, as water does lotuses and so on. Though states (dhamma) arise due to their own conditions, it maintains them, as a wet-nurse does a prince. And it occurs itself only through its connexion with the states that occur, like a pilot; it does not cause occurrence after dissolution, because of its own absence and that of what has to be made to occur. It does not prolong presence at the moment of dissolution because it is itself dissolving, like the flame of a lamp when the wick and the oil are getting used up. But it must not be regarded as destitute of power to maintain, make occur, and make present, because it does accomplish each of these functions at the moment stated (cf. Dhs. 635). 59. sahajaruupaanupaalanalakkha.na.m jiivitindriya.m, tesa.m pavattanarasa.m, tesa~n~neva .thapanapaccupa.t.thaana.m, yaapayitabbabhuutapada.t.thaana.m. santepi ca anupaalanalakkha.naadimhi vidhaane atthikkha.neyeva ta.m sahajaruupaani anupaaleti udaka.m viya uppalaadiini. yathaasaka.m paccayuppannepi ca dhamme paaleti dhaati viya kumaara.m. saya.m pavattitadhammasambandheneva ca pavattati niyaamako viya. na bha"ngato uddha.m pavattati, attano ca pavattayitabbaana~nca abhaavaa. na bha"ngakkha.ne.thapeti, saya.m bhijjamaanattaa. khiiyamaano viya va.t.tisneho diipasikha.m. na ca anupaalanapavattana.t.thapanaanubhaavavirahita.m, yathaavuttakkha.ne tassa tassa saadhanatoti da.t.thabba.m. Tiika: words: anupaalati: to maintain pavattati: to occur, yaapati: to keep going yaapeti: to support thapeti: to establish, maintain uppala (n): lotus .thiti: establishment, persistence sabbakaala.m: always 439. Sahajaruupaanupaalanalakkha.nanti attanaa sahajaataruupaana.m anupaalanalakkha.na.m. As to the expression, the characteristic of maintaining conascent kinds of matter, this means the characteristic of maintaining as if it were its own the conascent materiality. .....( follows footnote 25.) Tesanti sahajaruupaana.m. As to the expression (its function is causing the occurrence) , namely, of the conascent materiality. Pavattana.m yaapana.m. thapana.m .thitihetutaa. By causing them to occur, to support them and establish them. By being the cause of their establishment. Attanaa anupaalanavasena yaapetabbaani pavattetabbaani bhuutaani etassa pada.t.thaananti The primary elements that are to be supported and made to occur because it maintains them as if they were its own, are its proximate cause, yaapayitabbabhuutapada.t.thaana.m. and thus, its proximate cause is primary elements that are to be sustained. Anupaalanalakkha.naadimhiiti aadi-saddena pavattanarasaadimeva sa"nga.nhaati. As to the expression, (the capacity consisting) in the characteristic of maintaining and so on, with the words, , he combines (its characteristic) together with its function of making them occur. Atthikkha.neyevaati anupaaletabbaana.m atthikkha.neyeva. As to the words, only at the moment of presence, this means, only at the moment of presence of the material phenomena that are to be maintained. Asati anupaaletabbe uppalaadimhi ki.m udaka.m anupaaleyya. If there is no lotus that has to be protected, what would the water protect? * Yadi kammajaana.m .thitihetumantarena .thiti na hoti, jiivitindriyassa ko .thitihetuuti aaha ³sayan²ti-aadi. If there is nothing that causes the persistence of the kamma-born materiality meanwhile, who would cause the persistence of the life-faculty, and thus he said, ³it occurs itself and so on (only through its connexion with the states that occur)². Yadi kammajaana.m .thaana.m jiivitindriyapa.tibaddha.m, If the status of the kamma-born materiality is dependent on the life-faculty, atha kasmaa sabbakaala.m na .thapetiiti aaha ³na bha"ngato²ti-aadi. then how could it at all times cause their subsistance and thus, he said, (it does not cause occurence) after the moment of dissolution. Tassa tassa anupaalanaadikassa saadhanato. Because accomplishes each of these functions of maintaining, and so on **. Ta.m saadhana~nca jiivamaanataavisesassa paccayabhaavato. And the accomplishment is being the condition for distinguishing what is living. English: As to the expression, the characteristic of maintaining conascent kinds of matter, this means the characteristic of maintaining as if it were its own the conascent materiality. .....( follows footnote 25.) As to the expression (its function is causing the occurrence) , namely, of the conascent materiality. By causing them to occur, to support them and establish them. By being the cause of their establishment. The primary elements that are to be supported and made to occur because it maintains them as if they were its own, are its proximate cause, and thus, its proximate cause is primary elements that are to be sustained. As to the expression, (the capacity consisting) in the characteristic of maintaining and so on, with the words, , he combines (its characteristic) together with its function of making them occur. As to the words, only at the moment of presence, this means, only at the moment of presence of the material phenomena that are to be maintained. If there is no lotus that has to be protected, what would the water protect? * If there is nothing that causes the persistence of the kamma-born materiality meanwhile, who would cause the persistence of the life-faculty, and thus he said, ³it occurs itself and so on (only through its connexion with the states that occur)². If the status of the kamma-born materiality is dependent on the life-faculty, then how could it at all times cause their subsistance and thus, he said, (it does not cause occurence) after the moment of dissolution. Because accomplishes each of these functions of maintaining, and so on **. And the accomplishment is being the condition for distinguishing what is living. ________ * Thus, both the kamma-born materiality and life-faculty have to be present. **: As said in the Vis. passage: ***** Nina. 28682 From: Benjamin Jerome Date: Sun Jan 4, 2004 1:53pm Subject: Re: [dsg] tanha and intention Jonothan Abbott wrote: >Satipatthana is not something to be 'done', but then that > is true of other kusala mindstates too (in fact it's true of any > mindstate). > > ...it's not a matter of 'paying attention', since that implies something 'to > be done', and also a conscious selection of the (perceived) presently > occurring object, whereas in fact that object has fallen away long > before it can be attended to. > I don't understand. Why is "doing" a problem? Metta, Ben 28683 From: christine_forsyth Date: Sun Jan 4, 2004 2:53pm Subject: Re: Austerity Dear Robert, and all, Part of this verse spoken by Mara sounds just like what the Buddha would teach. I can understand that we should not be 'settled on form,delighting in the world of devas', but Austerity is a name for restraint, the ascetic practices (dhutaanga) that burn up the defilements. In the Devatasamyutta 58 (8) The Deviant Path, "Austerity and the holy life - That is the bath without water." i.e. 'internal bath' of the mind as opposed to the brahmin 'washing away of sins' with water. Scrupulousness in the Oxford dictionary is 'being very conscientous, painstakingly careful and thorough, strictly honest or honourable'. Solitude is one of the three kinds is bodily detachment - (kaya-viveka) abiding in solitude free from alluring sensuous objects. Can't see anything wrong with these, it DOES sound as if, in this respect, 'these mortals instruct rightly in regard to the other world.' metta and peace, Christine ---The trouble is that you think you have time --- --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "rjkjp1" wrote: > Dear group, > These verses were spoken by Mara > "those engaged in austerity and scrupulousness, > those protecting their solitude, and those settled on form, > delighting in the world of devas: > Indeed these mortals instruct rightly in regard to the other world." > > Bodhi page 162 Sagathavagga Devaputtasamyuatta 370 > Robk 28684 From: Dan D. Date: Sun Jan 4, 2004 3:06pm Subject: Re: Austerity Dear Christine, In this verse, I'd take the first line to refer to those who see rules and rituals as liberating (silabbataparamasa -- like the Pharisees in Jesus' eyes, to use another Christian analogy!). Also, "protecting solitude" is quite distinct from "abiding in solitude." Oh, that voice of Mara is alluring! Dan P.S. Thanks for the interesting sutta, Rob. > Part of this verse spoken by Mara sounds just like what the Buddha > would teach. I can understand that we should not be 'settled on > form,delighting in the world of devas', but Austerity is a name for > restraint, the ascetic practices (dhutaanga) that burn up the > defilements. In the Devatasamyutta 58 (8) The Deviant > Path, "Austerity and the holy life - That is the bath without water." > i.e. 'internal bath' of the mind as opposed to the brahmin 'washing > away of sins' with water. Scrupulousness in the Oxford dictionary > is 'being very conscientous, painstakingly careful and thorough, > strictly honest or honourable'. Solitude is one of the three kinds is > bodily detachment - (kaya-viveka) abiding in solitude free from > alluring sensuous objects. Can't see anything wrong with these, it > DOES sound as if, in this respect, 'these mortals instruct rightly in > regard to the other world.' > > metta and peace, > Christine > ---The trouble is that you think you have time --- > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "rjkjp1" wrote: > > Dear group, > > These verses were spoken by Mara > > "those engaged in austerity and scrupulousness, > > those protecting their solitude, and those settled on form, > > delighting in the world of devas: > > Indeed these mortals instruct rightly in regard to the other world." > > > > Bodhi page 162 Sagathavagga Devaputtasamyuatta 370 > > Robk 28685 From: yu_zhonghao Date: Sun Jan 4, 2004 4:41pm Subject: Re: Austerity Hi Rob K, Let me quote the passage regarding the Blessed One's reply to the verses spoken by Mara the Evil One: Then the Blessed One, having understood, "This is Mara the Evil One," replied to Mara the Evil One in verse: "Whatever forms exist here or beyond, And those of luminous beauty in the sky, All these, indeed, you praise, Namuci, Like bait thrown out for catching fish." * Peace, Victor *Bhikkhu Bodhi (trans.), The Connected Discourses of the Buddha : a new translation of the Samyutta Nikaya, p. 163 --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "rjkjp1" wrote: > Dear group, > These verses were spoken by Mara > "those engaged in austerity and scrupulousness, > those protecting their solitude, and those settled on form, > delighting in the world of devas: > Indeed these mortals instruct rightly in regard to the other world." > > Bodhi page 162 Sagathavagga Devaputtasamyuatta 370 > Robk 28686 From: christine_forsyth Date: Sun Jan 4, 2004 4:52pm Subject: Re: Austerity - sílabbata-parámása Hello Dan, and all, Ahh, sílabbata-parámása, again! 'clinging to mere rules and ritual'. Would you say that the five moral rules (pa~nca-sila) are expected to be followed by all virtuous Buddhist lay-persons to the best of their ability - not as commandments, but as training rules? Aren't the Precepts, together with Dana, the cornerstone of Sila for the beginner in Buddhism? Simply because one believes the Buddha gave them as a minimum standard to adhere to, and sees them as a beacon to guide one through the temptations of the world, doesn't mean there is 'clinging to mere rules and ritual'. I have noticed in previous discussions of Precepts that as soon as a person mentions that the Precepts are important and keeping them is desirable, someone always mentions Silabbata-paramasa. There is a difference. I see and hear enough of ignorant human nature everyday to know the bottomless depths of unwholesomeness. Humans are not naturally moral, kind or compassionate if it interferes with their own desires, or even if it merely takes effort. Wholesome behaviour isn't going to happen by some sort of osmosis. It is an actual training and the effort is in knowing the Precepts and then engaging in the act of abstaining from breaking them when the desire and the opportunity arises. There should surely be encouragement of each other to keep the precepts, rather than, as it sometimes seems, the de-valuing implication that they are a part of judgmental dogmatic fundamentalism, or superstition. To Jivaka (On Being a Lay Follower) "As he was sitting there he said to the Blessed One: "Venerable sir, to what extent is one a lay follower?" "Jivaka, when one has gone to the Buddha for refuge, has gone to the Dhamma for refuge, and has gone to the Sangha for refuge, then to that extent is one a lay follower." "And to what extent, venerable sir, is one a virtuous lay follower?" "Jivaka, when one abstains from taking life, from stealing, from sexual misconduct, from lying, and from fermented & distilled drinks that lead to heedlessness, then to that extent is one a virtuous lay follower." http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/anguttara/an08-026.html Nyanatiloka gives the definition of Silabbata-paraamaasa as: "sílabbata-parámása and -upádána: 'attachment (or clinging) to mere rules and ritual', is the 3rd of the 10 fetters (samyojana, q.v.), and one of the 4 kinds of clinging (upádána, q.v.). It disappears on attaining to Stream-entry (sotápatti)." s. upádána is "What is the clinging to mere rules and ritual? The holding firmly to the view that through mere rules and ritual one may reach purification: this is called the clinging to mere rules and ritual." metta and peace, Christine ---The trouble is that you think you have time --- --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Dan D." wrote: > Dear Christine, > In this verse, I'd take the first line to refer to those who see > rules and rituals as liberating (silabbataparamasa -- like the > Pharisees in Jesus' eyes, to use another Christian analogy!). > > Also, "protecting solitude" is quite distinct from "abiding in > solitude." > > Oh, that voice of Mara is alluring! > > Dan > > P.S. Thanks for the interesting sutta, Rob. 28687 From: buddhatrue Date: Sun Jan 4, 2004 5:14pm Subject: Re: SN II 6(6) -- Kamada [James] Hi Dan and All, Today something interesting happened in my class that I want to share. We were discussing the phrase "worldly strivings" in the poem "The World Is Too Much With Us" by Wordsworth. Since English is not these students's first language, I have to use various ways to explain the meanings of words. After explaining `worldly strivings' I gave the students some examples ( i.e. working for money, buying a house, car, getting married, having kids, etc.) then I asked the class to give me some examples of non-worldly strivings to see if they understood. Students gave examples like praying, enjoying nature, etc. Then one female student said "meditation", I agreed and continued the discussion when one of the male students interrupted, "That doesn't do anything. That doesn't work." Then the two students started to get into a rather heated exchange about it (DSG flashback ;-)). I was amazed because neither of these students practice meditation, they are both Islamic, but they both had very strong views on the subject and were each convinced that they were right. To solve the dispute they asked my opinion about it. I told them that yes I believe in the value of meditation and that I practice it. That pleased the female student and displeased the male student but it ended the discussion. To these students, the teacher is always right!! ;-)) This reminded me that people form opinions about meditation even if they have never done it. Actually, before I began to practice, I thought the whole idea was ridiculous. Dan, have you practiced meditation? If so, did you have a qualified teacher? Did you practice the methods of Vipassana as taught by Goenka or the other teachers you mentioned? Some people practice but then give up because it is too difficult and they don't see immediate results. Some people can't stay awake. Some people only do it sporadically and therefore don't see great results (I tend to fall too often into this category). But, it can be done. As the Buddha said, "They concentrate even what is hard to concentrate." Again, I don't agree with your definition of path. Your prose is quite beautiful, compelling, well constructed and articulate, but I don't agree with your message. The Buddha described the path as good in the beginning, good in the middle, and good in the end. This obviously suggests a progression. To you path is either on/off, path/no path; and the only ones who would be on are arahants who have destroyed the three poisons, the rest of us are off. To you there is no beginning, middle, or end. Hmmm…why bother? The goal of meditation is to destroy the three poisons lobha/dosa/moha (see, I can use Pali too! ;-)) they don't have to be completely destroyed before one begins the practice. Now, about the sutta quote: MN 21: "Bhikkhus, even if bandits were to sever you savagely limb by limb with a two-handed saw, he who gave rise to a mind of hate towards them would not be carrying out my teachings." This is a metaphor that is not to be taken literally and contains a touch of hyperbole for a specific purpose. If you take this statement literally that would mean that the only way to follow the Buddha's teachings would be if bandits sawed your limbs off and you didn't feel any hate toward them. Gosh, I don't think membership in that sangha would be on the rise! ;-) And there would be a lot of crippled bhikkhus crawling around. That is not what the Buddha intended. They Buddha simply wanted to emphasize that hate and anger is not justifiable for any reason. So, did that mean that all of the monks in his sangha met this criteria? Probably not or it would have been an initiation procedure. Talk about hazing! ;-) (Okay, I will stop with the jokes.) My main point is that this statement is not to be taken literally and should not form your entire impression of the Buddha's path. I will wait for your later post. Glad my `sour' comment didn't scare you off. Metta, James 28688 From: Dan D. Date: Sun Jan 4, 2004 5:47pm Subject: Re: Austerity - sílabbata-parámása C: "I have noticed in previous discussions of Precepts that as soon as a person mentions that the Precepts are important and keeping them is desirable, someone always mentions Silabbata-paramasa." ... Ahh... But when that person is Mara, and he is speaking in praise of the person's adherence to the rites and rituals, could it be other than Silabbataparamasa? Dan 28689 From: Egberdina Date: Sun Jan 4, 2004 7:43pm Subject: Re: The present moment Hi Jon, Always happy to expound and expand, as long as my head stays about the same size :-) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Jonothan Abbott wrote: > Herman > Of course, one always comes back to the vital question of what I will > call the application, that is to say, in terms of your post here, How > does there come to be 'a glimpse the present in terms of itself'? > How does one come to be 'free of intention'? > I understand the following to be so. Seeing, hearing, feeling, smelling, tasting, thinking are all known through their changing or absence. By closing the eyelid, seeing is established as different to all the other things that could be happening. By turning the head, the change in hearing establishes hearing as different to all the other things. Touching hands is different to hands not touching, and so touching is established. And so on, and so on. The six senses come to be known by their negation. Negation is action. The senses come to be known through action. How does one come to know intention? By non-intention. Easier said then done. For me, the limpet state of attachment to the senses that is the waking state (which is the foundation for the conducting of the affairs of daily life) totally prevents even a dim realising that the waking state is created by intention towards it. Happily, all intention is followed by action, and action is easier to apprehend. When one ceases the gross movements of the body, the interaction with other bodies, and prevents the senses from feeding themselves, one becomes aware of a flood of intention to act. By a continuation of the regime of inactivity, the flood becomes a stream becomes a trickle. By extrapolation, I imagine the trickle will become a drip etc etc. When intention towards "the present moment", which has actually been called into existence by that very intention, dries up, the opportunity arises to experience the present moment in terms of itself. I'm out of time, sorry, gotta do some gross body movements on someone else's computer and interact with their body. All the best Herman > In your follow-up post to Howard, you offer the following words of > inspiration from Samyutta Nikaya I.10 Arañña Sutta: > > <<< > Standing to one side, a devata addressed the Blessed One with a > verse: > Living in the wilderness, > staying peaceful, remaining chaste, > eating just one meal a day: > why are their faces > so bright & serene? > > [The Buddha:] > They don't sorrow over the past, > don't long for the future. > They survive on the present. > That's why their faces > are bright & serene. > From longing for the future, > from sorrowing over the past, > fools wither away > like a green reed cut down. > >>> > > Inspiring words, I agree. But my earlier question then becomes, How > does there come to be no sorrowing over the past, no longing for the > future, just surviving on the present? > > I know you will have some thoughts on this, and I look forward to > hearing them ;-)). > > Many thanks for the New Year wishes in your other post. And the best > to you, too. > > Jon > > --- Egberdina wrote: > Hi everyone, (that > includes me) > > > > There are two types of present moment. > > > > One is the PRESENT as experienced in terms of the PAST. This > > present > > is not a given, but is constructed entirely on intention. Intention > > is based in the past to maintain it in the future. It is always > > based on self-view. The purpose of this type of present moment is > > indeed to maintain in the future the self-view that lies at it's > > origin. This type of present moment is always accompanied by > > conflict and anxiety, because it requires much effort to maintain > > the illusion of the reality of what is not real. When the conflict > > and anxiety become greater than the craving for the next moment > > with > > self view, the opportunity has arisen to not intend a future moment > > based on the past, and thus obtain a glimpse of the > > > > Present in terms of itself. This moment is given, unchangeable, > > timeless. It has no content. It is free of anxiety and conflict. > > > > This moment is not intended, but is there when there is no > > intention. > > > > The Buddha praised a lifestyle in which it was possible to become > > free of intention. The only consequence that follows from ignoring > > his recommendations is the continuation of the past-future life > > that > > is craved for. Anxiety and conflict and lip service to the Triple > > Gem can go on forever. > > > 28690 From: Egberdina Date: Sun Jan 4, 2004 9:47pm Subject: Re: Theft of a flowers' scent- Herman Hi Azita, Good to hear from you. I'd reckon you'd have a tale or two from your younger days. Vicki and I spent an excellent week in Cairns at the beginning of November. We'd move there tomorrow if we could work up there without wearing clothes :-). We were so unwound, it wasn't funny ($55 a night for the two of us in a self-contained unit at Holloways Beach. The bed was reeeaaaalll high :-)). All the enjoyment bit us on the bum when we got back to the reality of Bathurst (6 degrees when we drove back in at night). I was full on depressed for two weeks. Still, I'd do it all again in a flash. Perhaps next time we could meet. All the best Herman --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "gazita2002" wrote: > Dear Herman, > I thought your joke was quite clever. Esp. so given that one > of the 10 precepts is to refrain from sleeping on high and luxurious > beds. > IMO the number of stars relate to how polite one has to be. > Coming from the backblocks of Down Under - a sheep shearers daughter - > I feel a tad uncomfortable in anything over 3 stars!!! > However, I am a smell thief, often stopping to smell the > gardenias which grow outside the city library. I have stopped > picking them though. > > patience, courage and good cheer, > Azita. > > 28691 From: Sarah Date: Sun Jan 4, 2004 10:12pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: SN II 6(6) -- Kamada [James] Hi James, --- buddhatrue wrote: > Oh, sorry; I guess I jumped the gun a little bit. .... Oh, that was a mild one from you too. It's a very good discussion;-) If you ever have a rainy holiday in Cairo, you might like to trace Dan’s posts from the start - he’s our poster boy for Reform;-);-) Here is a taste of classic Dan that I can find quickly: Dan on meditation: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/7753 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/13149 If you ever think for a moment that Dan gave others of us an easier time, check out his posts and the following thread on: Discouraging 1.1 series, starting in May 2001, I think. Oh, shudder...:-/ Light Relief: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/8673 Metta, Sarah ===== 28692 From: christine_forsyth Date: Sun Jan 4, 2004 10:14pm Subject: Two to tango (was Re: Contraception and the First Precept) Hello Herman, and All, Herman: I've been spending a bit of time on this one :-) C: Oh, no! Chris quivers in terror :-) I have a tough enough time when you just do a stream of consciousness post, Herman. :-) ========================= Christine: > [To deliberately kill a living being (i.e. to complete an unwholesome > course of action - akusala kamma patha) five constituent factors must > be fulfilled. > There must be: > - A living being > - Knowledge that there is a living being > - Desire to kill > - Effort to kill > - Consequential death] ========================== Herman: I wonder how it can be known with any firm certainty that a state of affairs is attributable entirely to desire, intention and effort to bring that state of affairs about. Christine: Glad you asked this Herman (really!). (What is it that 'knows'? I always wanted to ask someone that. :)) - it made me check some texts. I looked in Narada's 'A Manual of Buddhism' p.99, and the wording is slightly different. He states: "The following five conditions are necessary to complete this evil of killing:- i a being ii consciousness that it is a being, iii intention of killing iv effort, and, v consequent death His wording seems a little clearer, don't you think? Puts 'intention' in instead of 'desire'. I don't think anyone claims that there aren't other 'conditions' occuring all the time and impacting on the incident. Many, many conditions - but intention (kamma) initiates the action. ======================== Herman: I'm watching some cricket at the moment, and I'm always amused by the commentators exclaiming "What a great ball" or "What a great shot" or "What a great catch" as though it was all due to the intention, desire and effort of the player in focus, and not to the contribitory effort or negligence of the other players involved. Christine: Well, clearly, it wasn't due to the great form of The Australian Captain.:-) ============================== Herman: Dukkha is a mark of all conditioned phenomena, precisely because desire, intention and effort to bring an exact state of affairs about is never guaranteed of that result. Christine: Mmmm ... but even it it did, the dukkha is also in the 'not lastingness' and 'uncontrollability' of anything - relationships, things, life, experiences. ============================== Herman: I may repeatedly swing a piece of 4 by 2 at an assailant, fully desiring, intending and efforting to kill her, but what the consequences of all that are have very much to do with how well my intended victim ducks and weaves. Never mind the medical neglicence that may finish her off if she is unfortunate enough to require attention from an expert. (I am certainly not referring to allied health and nursing here Hi Azita :-) Christine: There have been instances of culpability in all professions. No-one you know, of course.:-) My profession doesn't react too well to 'victim blaming', though. And the 'victim's' vipaka is another thing I wrestle with ... Herman: It is in the thinking and rethinking that the story of "what I have done" is produced, me thinks. Christine: I agree - but 'the story' as I've painfully begun to learn on dsg, isn't reality. Nevertheless, without the intention to kill this incident wouldn't have even begun, so couldn't have ended in the way it did. I note the term 'consequent' death is used by Narada. So, irrespective of whether the person died on the first blow - or two weeks later from an injury induced blood-clot - it is a consequence of the 'intention' to kill. And the Buddha's definition of kamma was 'intentional (volitional) action'. And, if we are talking about kamma/vipaka, I don't think it has anything to do with judging oneself. It appears to roll on regardless of our own excuses, justifications, and boasting. ============================ Herman: Wouldn't it be a form of pride to claim a state of affairs as being entirely the product of one's own desire, intention and effort? Christine: Maybe stupidity? - if you deliberately killed someone, would you go around claiming you did? :-) Probably more like delusion/ignorance , I would think. But say it happened in a 'legitimate' way, if you were a soldier, it might be conceit. But having an opinion after the fact doesn't affect the results of kamma, does it? ============================ All the best Herman =========================== and to you Metta and peace, Christine ---The trouble is that you think you have time --- --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Egberdina" 28693 From: Sarah Date: Mon Jan 5, 2004 0:04am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: SN II 6(6) -- Kamada [James] Hi Dan, James & All in the SN study corner, --- "Dan D." wrote: > J: > SN II, 6(6) "Kamada" > D:> --> Interesting sutta! I like it. The basic message I get is that the > path is very difficult to walk, but that it is possible. > > The last stanza contains a few colorful lines (but are a little > confusing nonetheless): > J:> > "Though the path is impassable and uneven, > > The noble ones walk it, Kamada. > > The ignoble ones fall down head first, > > Right there on the uneven path, > > But the path of the noble ones is even, > > For the noble are even amidst the uneven." > D:> Could it be that the "uneven path" is the "wrong path" that the > ignoble ones tread, while the "even path" is the "Right path" that > the noble ones tread? The part of the commentary you cite doesn't > comment on that. .... I don’t have access to any more of the commentary than the part James quoted from BB either. (I’d be grateful if Nina or anyone else were able to assist further in this regard). Just a few more speculations of my own here. Before the first stage of enlightenment (sotapatti magga), the path is uneven in the sense that wrong views can lead one astray at any time in between moments of satipatthana. For the noble ones, even though there is akusala arising (unless an arahant), no more wrong view and no more falling back or down. Max, 7 lives. .... D:>But the first two lines: "Though the path is > impassable and uneven, > The noble ones walk it, Kamada" are a riddle. The commentary seems to > take the word "path" in the conventional, JamesHowardsian sense > of "sitting in a corner trying to follow Mahasi's instructions > is 'the path' even when there is no arising of satipatthana or even > of kusala": .... Hmmm. You might be going a bit far there;-) Although there are many ‘impediments’ and falls before sotapatti magga in between the arising of satipatthana, the ariyans have overcome these. .... D:>"Although the noble path is neither impassable nor uneven > (duggamo visamo) this is said because there are many impediments in > the preliminary portion of the path." Are there 'impediments' in the > Right path? Hmmm... .... Different moments. In between moments of satipatthana. .... D:>There are the anusaya which are bound to arise > with great frequency and knock us quickly off the path as long as our > path-walking is still in the preliminary portion of the path. Could > this be what 'impediments' means here? Or could this "uneven path" be > referring to the ignoble's mistaken view of the path (or view of the > Wrong path) because "the path of the noble ones is even"? It reads > like a koan -- I like it. .... Yes, I take it to be referring to wrong views. I’m also looking at the lines before: “they concentrate* even what is hard to concentrate, [O Kaamada, “ said the Blessed One] “Who delight in calming the faculties. Having cut through the net of Death, The noble ones, O Kaamada go their way.” *samadaahanti: see dict entry- Samadahati (p. 684) [san+adahati1] to put together S I.169. jotin s. to kindle a fire Vin IV.115; cittan s. to compose the mind, concentrate M I.116; .....pp. samahita. ***** In the following sutta, SN2:7 Pa~ncaalaca.n.da, we read: “Even in the midst of confinement* they find it, [O Pa~ncaalaca.n.da,” said the Blessed One,] “The Dhamma for the attainment of Nibbaana- Those who have acquired mindfulness, Those perfectly well concentrated.”** *confinement (sambaadha) referring to confinement by the five hindrances. **BB’s n152 - “The ‘Dhamma for the attainment of Nibbana’ (dhamma.m nibbaanapattiyaa) is presumably the Noble Eightfold Path. Spk-p.t: ....The Buddha’s reply is intended to show that the first form-sphere jhana is a mere fragment of the infinite and immeasurable qualities of a Buddha. By mindfulness (sati) he refers to the mindfulness of insight and of the noble path. Well concentrated (susamaahita) signifies both mundane and supramundane concentration.” In other words, as I understand it, with awareness & insight(sati), the mind(citta) is well composed/concentrated. (Ye sati’n... su sammà te susamàhitàti). I’ll be glad to hear any further comments from anyone. Metta, Sarah ====== 28694 From: Sarah Date: Mon Jan 5, 2004 0:57am Subject: RE: [dsg] Re: characteristics - formulation: To Mike B And Ken O Hi Michael (& Suan), Whilst agreeing with all Suan’s comments in your discussion, I’m sure that none of us could fail to be impressed by your courtesy, restraint and open attitude;-) I appreciate and respect these qualities and your contributions very much. --- Michael Beisert wrote: > Suan: > Please do not forget to read Kathaavatthu to familiarize yourself > with the correct use of the term "paramattha". Kathaavatthu is the > work of Arahant Mahaa Moggliputtatissa based on the Buddha's initial > outlines > > Michael: > I will try to get hold of a copy. But could you give me directions where > in > the book I can find relevant information to the understanding of > paramatha/sabhava? It's a big book and it will be easier if I could have > > some directions. .... Here is the summary of the very first discussion to see if it interests you: “1. Of the Existence of a Personal Entity. Controverted Point. That the ‘person’ is known in the sense of a real and ultimate fact. (S:paramattha dhamma). From the commentary- The Theravadin questions a Puggalavadin (one who believes in the existence of a personal entity, soul, or perduring immortal essence in man) concerning his position. Who among the eighteen schools of thought were Puggalavadins? In the Saasana the Vajjiputtakas and Sammitiyas, and many other teachers besides, not belonging to the Saasana. ‘Person’(puggala) means soul, being, vital principle. ‘Is known’: is approached and got at by the understanding, is cognized. ‘Real’: not taken as an effect of magic or mirage, actual. ‘Ultimate’(paramattho): highest sense, not taken from tradition, or hearsay. ‘Known’ as one of the fifty-seven ultimates of our conscious experience (i.e 5 aggregates, 12 sense organs and objects, 18 elements, 22 controlling powers). ***** Actually, it’s not such a big book and very compelling reading,I find. I think most DSG members would enjoy it as the discussions are really so similar to ours here;-) It’s quite incredible given the time difference, but then the knotty points during the Buddha’s time are the same today. I typed out another short refutation the other day. I’d be happy to type out the first one which follows this introduction and summary, if anyone would like it. It’s quite short again. ..... > Michael: > In the book 'Wings to Awakening' (Part III: The Basic Factors; F. > Concentration and Discernment) Thanissaro Bhikkhu wrote the following: > > "Some Theravadins insist that questioning the commentaries is a sign of > disrespect for the tradition, but it seems to be a sign of greater > disrespect for the Buddha -- or the compilers of the Canon -- to assume > that > he or they would have left out something absolutely essential to the > practice." .... And yet we read many examples where the Buddha encourages his disciples to elaborate on his teachings. This is how the entire suttanta became the ‘word of the Buddha’. We see many examples of Mahakaccayana, Sariputta, Ananda, Mahakassapa and others giving detailed explanations to brief summaries given by the Buddha, such as MN18, Madhupindika sutta. Some of these elaborations are contained in the Tipitaka itself and some are contained in the ancient commentaries compiled and preserved by these first disciples or those that followed, such as Mahinda, the great arahant who took the entire teachings and commentaries to Sri Lanka with him, resulting in the Sinhala versions (closed to further additions after the first century I believe) which Buddhaghosa, Dhammapala and others relied on. Btw, we read in various ancient commentaries about how the Abhidhamma (for the most part) was rehearsed at the First Council. I was recently told me that according to the comy to the DN, the Abhidhamma pitaka was rehearsed after AN at this time. Metta and appreciation, Metta, Sarah ==== 28695 From: Dan D. Date: Mon Jan 5, 2004 1:02am Subject: Re: SN II 6(6) -- Kamada [James] Hi James, Just a few comments on your post, and then a few additional stand- alone posts... ..... J: "Then one female student said 'meditation', I agreed and continued the discussion when one of the male students interrupted, 'That doesn't do anything. That doesn't work.' Then the two students started to get into a rather heated exchange about it..." --> Did you happen to ask them what they meant by 'meditation.' There are sure a lot of different ideas about just what that word means. .... J: "Again, I don't agree with your definition of path. Your prose is quite beautiful, compelling, well constructed and articulate, but I don't agree with your message. The Buddha described the path as good in the beginning, good in the middle, and good in the end. This obviously suggests a progression. To you path is either on/off, path/no path; and the only ones who would be on are arahants who have destroyed the three poisons, the rest of us are off. To you there is no beginning, middle, or end. Hmmm…why bother?" --> I address these points in subsequent posts. .... J: "Now, about the sutta quote: MN 21: 'Bhikkhus, even if bandits were to sever you savagely limb by limb with a two-handed saw, he who gave rise to a mind of hate towards them would not be carrying out my teachings.' This is a metaphor that is not to be taken literally and contains a touch of hyperbole for a specific purpose. If you take this statement literally that would mean that the only way to follow the Buddha's teachings would be if bandits sawed your limbs off and you didn't feel any hate toward them. Gosh, I don't think membership in that sangha would be on the rise! ;-) And there would be a lot of crippled bhikkhus crawling around. That is not what the Buddha intended. They Buddha simply wanted to emphasize that hate and anger is not justifiable for any reason. So, did that mean that all of the monks in his sangha met this criteria? Probably not or it would have been an initiation procedure. Talk about hazing! ;-) (Okay, I will stop with the jokes.) My main point is that this statement is not to be taken literally and should not form your entire impression of the Buddha's path." --> A couple of comments: (1) The quote doesn't say anything about needing to saw off your arms to follow the path! It only says that you can't say you are following the path at those moments when dosa arises -- no excuses! (2) The comment is certainly to be taken literally. It just wouldn't be right for that bhikkhu to defile the Buddha's teachings by claiming to follow Him even at those times when he was hateful -- even if he had an understandable reason for that hatred. On the Buddha's path, there is no room for hatred. .... J: "I will wait for your later post. Glad my `sour' comment didn't scare you off." --> It really takes quite a lot to scare me off. Metta, Dan 28696 From: Dan D. Date: Mon Jan 5, 2004 1:04am Subject: An anology Dear James (and whomever else might be peeking in), An analogy: I've been listening to a series of 32 recorded lectures on the music of J.S. Bach by Robert Greenberg -- a composer, teacher, and superstar lecturer at San Francisco Conservatory of Music. In his discussion about cantata 140, Greenberg tells of a little insight he has into composing: "What do you think composers think about? Do you think they just think, 'Oh, please, Lord, let me have an inspiration!'? Oh, no. If that was what you were waiting for, you would write one piece every ten years, because we all know that divine inspiration is oh-so-choosy in its time and place. Now, one has to be a craftsperson." Of course, Bach was quite a master at his craft -- both performance and composition. His technical expertise was unrivalled during his time, as was his knowledge of musical theory and his knowledge of the music of other composers. When "divine inspiration" struck, the music he composed was astounding. However, without having first put in all the countless of hours of preparation and developing technical mastery, he would not have been able to do anything of note when that divine inspiration struck. "Whoa! I feel so inspired to do something, but what.......... Hmmm... I know! I'll write some music! ... Let's see... that bottom line on the treble clef is E and the next line is G. If I play those at the same time, it sounds kind of nice ... harmony! Sigh, the inspiration's gone... Honey, what's on the tube tonight?" He'd have missed a wonderful opportunity to perform some truly beautiful work because he was not prepared to perform when the time presented itself. At other times, he might have been touched by divine inspiration and not even really noticed it: "Whoa! I suddenly feel great... I wonder if Christoph wants to grab a beer with me..." So it goes with development of insight too. Of course, insight ("divine inspiration") cannot be forced -- even by reading the whole Tipitika and meditating for 25 hours per day. But when it comes, what will you be able to do with it? Will it register as insight and move you an inch along the long, long path? Or will you not even be able to recognize it? There can be no movement along the path unless the difference between path and not-path can be discerned.* That discernment will not take hold unless there is first a well- considered and correct understanding of samma-ditthi (Right view) and samma-vayama (Right effort). A critical component of "Right" for all the path factors is that the view, effort, etc. is free from lobha/dosa/moha because the Buddha's path precludes akusala-rooted consciousness. At this point, it is critical to understand that I do not mean that the *person* must be free from lobha/dosa/moha before the path can be discerned, only that lobha/dosa/moha cannot arise in the mind that treads the path. This may seem like a funny paradox, but it really isn't. Minds arise and fall with great rapidity. Some of them are rooted in lobha/dosa/moha; some of them are not. Progress along the path is made only by a mind not rooted in lobha/dosa/moha. Does this mean that only arahants can make progress on the path? Not in the least bit -- unless you are thinking in terms of "I", as in: "'I' am not an arahant, so 'I' am not free from moha. Therefore, according to Dan, 'I' cannot make progress on the path. He says that only a mind free from moha can even discern the path, and only an arahant's mind is free from moha." Step back from this 'I' for a moment and consider that "the mind" is really just a way to refer to a long, long series of "minds" that arise and fall from moment to moment. Some of these minds (or mind moments, or cittas, if you will) are free from lobha/dosa/moha -- even in you and me! Only when these minds arise can we make progress on the path. This realization is essential to real progress on the path. (Note: Although akusala cittas cannot discern the path, most kusala cittas do not either; but this is a topic for another day!) ------------ * By "path", I am referring to the mundane path. Dan 28697 From: Dan D. Date: Mon Jan 5, 2004 1:06am Subject: Views along the way Dear James (and whomever else might be peeking), When there is a well-considered understanding of the path* as being strictly limited to kusala cittas (and a limited class of those as well), there is naturally more attention paid to understanding how to distinguish between kusala and akusala cittas as they arise and pass away. With practice, though, the distinguishing improves and there is a realization: "OH............MY............GOD! I'm just a bundle of akusala! One after another -- akusala, akusala, akusala, akusala, ... Ha, ha!" What an invigorating, lightening insight! What a joy! But as progress on the path inches forward over the long haul -- an occasional moment or two of a Buddhist version of Greenberg's "divine inspiration" -- the view from the path gradually changes. After my first intensive meditation retreat in Thailand**, my teacher gave me a book called "Practicing Insight on Your Own." I devoured the book. The chapter entitled "Gauging the Results of the Practice" (based on Vism. XX and XXI) really grabbed my eye: "Hmmm... How much progress did I make during my stay? Oh, this and this and this are familiar. I must be right at such-and-such stage now." It was a wondrous two weeks -- so calm and peaceful and happy! During the stay, I kept hearing about how the various cool phenomena that occur in the course of such a retreat are really not the path and are quite likely to distract the meditator from the path. Then, I saw them all organized in my little book (or Vism XX 105ff.) as vipassanupakkilesa (imperfections of insight): 1. illumination, 2. rapture, 3. tranquility, 4. bliss, 5. confidence, 6. energy, 7. awareness, 8. knowledge, 9. equanimity, 10. attachment. But how can these be called 'imperfections' when they sound and feel so wonderful? Simply because it is WAY easy to become attached to them and miss the path because of the distraction. These phenomena are so enticing that one learns to cultivate them. What is difficult to discern is that the cultivation of these phenomena is driven by lobha, and lobha is such a convincing teacher that it can convince you it is leading you down the path! These phenomena are not 'bad' or 'wrong' in and of themselves, but attachment to them is a great hindrance and a difficult one to discern and overcome (I know several, very experienced people who might chide me for making such blasé understatement!). Once those barriers are overcome, what's the view like for the meditator progressing on the path? Vism discusses them in some degree of detail in chapter XXI: bhangañana (knowledge of dissolution -- I wrote a post about this awhile back, but misspelled it as bhavangañana [or some similar absurdity]) bhayañana (knowledge of fear) adinavañana (knowledge of danger) nibbidañana (knowledge of disgust) muñcitukamyatañana (knowledge of desire for deliverance) Don't these sound fun? (Almost as much fun as that (seemingly) wet blanket post I sent you the other day -- the one that you thought was turning sour...) The descriptions in Vism get even jucier: For bhayañana? "...formations...appear to him in the form of a great terror, as lions, tigers, leopards, bears, hyenas, spirits, ogres, fierce bulls, savage dogs, rut-maddened wild elephants, hideous venomous serpents, thunderbolts, charnel grounds, battlefields, flaming coal pits, etc., appear to a timid man who wants to live in peace." For adinavañana? "The three kinds of becoming appear like charcoal pits full of glowing coals, the four primary elements like hideous venomous snakes, the five aggregates like murderers with raised weapons, the six internal bases like village-raiding robbers, the seven stations of consciousness and the nine abodes of beings as though burning, blazing and glowing with the eleven fires, and all formations appear as a huge mass of dangers destitute of satisfaction or substance, like a tumor, a disease, a dart, a calamity, an affliction." For nibbidañana? "...he becomes dispassionate towards, is dissatisfied with, takes no delight in the manifold field of formations belonging to any kind of becoming, destiny, station of consciousness, or abode of beings." For muñcitukamyatañana? "Just as a fish in a net, a frog in a snake's jaws, a jungle fowl shut into a cage, a deer fallen into the clutches of a strong snare, a snake in the hands of a snake charmer, an elephant stuck fast in a great bog, a royal naga in the mouth of a supanna, the moon inside Rahu's mouth (!), a man encircled by enemies, etc. -- just as these are desirous of being delivered, of finding an escape from these things, so too this meditator's mind is desirous of being delivered from the whole field of formations..." By the sound of it, these insights are horrific. Misery, hopelessness, despair -- how depressing! But when these stages are really reached, the response is a peaceful dedication to treading the path as the way to get free from the world of formations, and there is not any dosa-rooted reaction like hopelessness, despair, or depression, and there is no elated reaction of "Awesome! It's exciting to be such and advanced meditator." Next comes sankharupekkhañana (knowledge of equanimity) and finally the liberating insights. What is the purpose of all this description? James, you asked about how the path can be like a path if it's only a momentary, now-it's- there/now-it's-not type of thing. I guess the way to explain it is to just say that when you tread the path for a moment or two, you might move forward an inch or two. Afterwards, you remember what you saw. People take notes on and talk about the view from different points on the path. One can spend hours and weeks and months and years searching for the path. Then, they find it for a moment or two and inch forward just a tad. What a wonderful moment! But it is hard (and wrong) to think of all the many, many other moments of effort as being wasted. Even if the overwhelming majority of time is spent in wrong effort (a couple years ago, we had a brief, light-hearted (but serious) discussion about whether kamma was 99.99% akusala or 99.999%), I believe that Right Effort can only be recognized after many, many avenues of wrong effort have been thoroughly explored. Also, training in the fundamentals (pariyatti, precepts, Mahasi- or Goenka-style meditation) is of inestimable value for preparing the mind for recognizing, registering, and solidifying insight. In addition, training in the fundamentals tends to make people better citizens. Dan ------------------- * By "path", I am referring to the mundane path. ** This was the first of many intensive meditation retreats in Thailand and the U.S., following Mahasi-style and Goenka-style instructions (not at the same time, of course). 28698 From: christine_forsyth Date: Mon Jan 5, 2004 1:07am Subject: Re: How do you practice the Paramitas and Factors of Awakening Hello Philip, Have you had a look at the posts on the Paramis (Perfections) in the Useful Posts yet? See what you think ... click on: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/files/ and scroll down to the 'P's. metta and peace, Christine ---The trouble is that you think you have time --- --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Philip" wrote: > Hello everyone. > > What advice would you give a beginner about how to approach the > Paramitas in one's daily life? I'll be practicing the Mahayana 6. > (Actually, I lean more towards Theravada in most things, but the 6 > seem clearer to start with than 10!) > Do you usually focus on one when you sense you need to make > progress in that area, or keep a balanced awareness of all of them? I > realize, of course, that the practice of one supports the others, but > do you use a kind of selective focus? > The same question goes for the 7 Factors of Awakening. (Sapta- > Bodyanga) What role do they play in your practice? I sense that they > serve more as a gauge to look in on how we're doing, and a helpful > tool for balancing. (e.g, using one of more of the rousing factors > when feeling sluggish, or a calming factor when feeling agitated.) > > I sense that the Paramitas and Factors of Awakening are very > important. Really taking the Eightfold Path off the page and putting > it into practice - that's how it feels to me anyways. > > Thanks for any guidance you can give me based on your experience. > > With Metta, > Philip 28699 From: buddhatrue Date: Mon Jan 5, 2004 1:23am Subject: [dsg] Re: SN II 6(6) -- Kamada [James] Hi Sarah, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Sarah wrote: > Hi James, > > --- buddhatrue wrote: > > Oh, sorry; I guess I jumped the gun a little bit. > .... > Oh, that was a mild one from you too. James: Don't remind me. ;-)) It's a very good discussion;-) > > If you ever have a rainy holiday in Cairo, you might like to trace Dan's > posts from the start - he's our poster boy for Reform;-);-) > > Here is a taste of classic Dan that I can find quickly: > > Dan on meditation: > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/7753 > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/13149 James: Thank you for these links to previous posts by Dan. Now I think I have the answer to the question I asked in my last post on this thread. It seems that Dan has practiced intensive meditation and that he did have adequate teachers, unfortunately he didn't listen to them. He thought he knew it all and disregarded their advice. That is potentially very dangerous. It is so easy at the beginning of meditation practice, when one begins to experience fantastic things like overwhelming calm, lights, visions, etc., to think that they are making real progress. My meditation teacher told me to ignore such things and that they didn't mean anything, I followed his advice and I eventually saw that they didn't mean anything. It seems like Dan realized this to some extent in hindsight but he needed to realize it during the actual practice. He began extremely attached to the calm, like it was a drug…he needed that `fix'. He failed to reach the point of knowing what is and what is not important during the actual meditation: "While engaged in noticing, the meditator either by himself or through instructions from someone else, comes to this decision: "The brilliant light, and the other things experienced by me, are not the path. Delight in them is merely a corruption of insight. The practice of continuously noticing the object as it becomes evident -- that alone is the way of insight. I must go on with just the work of noticing." This decision is called purification by knowledge and vision of what is path and not- path."http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/bps/misc/progress.html#ch5 I don't meditate because of the calm or visions or anything else it gives me. If I had become addicted to the calm, I would probably be a much more faithful meditator! As it is, that allure wore off. I meditate because I feel instinctively that I need to; it is hard to explain really. I couldn't tell you specifically what good it does me or even if I am making progress. My progress is extremely slow. I suspect that if Dan picked up the practice and disregarded the calm he experienced, he would be right back at where he left off. If is unfortunate that he wasted so much time stuck at one point but he should have listened to his teacher. Now he has become disgusted with the practice and preaches against it. Oh well, that happens. > > If you ever think for a moment that Dan gave others of us an easier time, > check out his posts and the following thread on: > Discouraging 1.1 series, starting in May 2001, I think. Oh, shudder...:-/ > > Light Relief: > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/8673 James: This was extremely funny! Growing up in Missouri I could identify with a lot here. (And I don't think that Dan is giving me a difficult time.) > > Metta, > > Sarah > ===== Metta, James 28700 From: Sarah Date: Mon Jan 5, 2004 1:27am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Austerity Hi RobK & Victor, It’s good to see more friends contributing to the Samyutta Nikaya threads. (For anyone new to DSG, we’re looking at any suttas from SN2, Devaputtasamyutta for now and working through the samyuttas). --- yu_zhonghao wrote: > Hi Rob K, > > Let me quote the passage regarding the Blessed One's reply to the > verses spoken by Mara the Evil One: > > > Then the Blessed One, having understood, "This is Mara the Evil > One," replied to Mara the Evil One in verse: > > "Whatever forms exist here or beyond, > And those of luminous beauty in the sky, > All these, indeed, you praise, Namuci, > Like bait thrown out for catching fish." > * > *Bhikkhu Bodhi (trans.), The Connected Discourses of the Buddha : a > new translation of the Samyutta Nikaya, p. 163 .... For those without BB’s translation, there is a footnote 198 to this verse: “Namuci is a name of Mara, which Spk-p.t (the sub-commentary) explains as meaning ‘he does not free’ (na muci): va.t.tadukkhato aparimuttapaccayattaa namuci; ‘He is called Namuci because he does not let one get free from the suffering of the round.’ Spk paraphrases the Buddha’s remark: ‘Just as a fisherman throws out bait at the end of a hook for the purpose of catching fish, so, by praising these forms, you throw them out in order to catch living beings.’” In an earlier verse we read: “Even by howling along the wretched jackal Remains a vile beast, never the lion’s peer.” In other words, imitation of actions and appearances does not lead to enlightenment!! (Christine, did you see n193 on austerity and scrupulousness? “Spk explains his [Makkhali’s] austerity (tapa) as bodily mortification and his scrupulousness (jigucchaa) as the loathing of evil [Spk-pt: the undertaking of the vow of nudity, etc, in the belief that this is the way to eliminate evil]....” Metta, Sarah ============================================= 28701 From: Sarah Date: Mon Jan 5, 2004 1:38am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Theft of a flowers' scent- Herman Hi Azita, Christine & All smell thieves, --- gazita2002 wrote: > Still smiling at some classic Azita lines snipped for now;-) > However, I am a smell thief, often stopping to smell the > gardenias which grow outside the city library. I have stopped > picking them though. .... Christine, I've never understood the sutta given to be relating to the 2nd precept (as you introduced it), but to what is appropriate for a monk and a good reminder for us all about attachment in everyday life. Now as for picking those gardenias, that's another matter and I'm glad to hear this has stopped, Azita. But then, of course, it might again come back to knowledge about it being a wrong action and I can see plenty of grey area here too..... Metta, Sarah ======= 28702 From: Philip Date: Mon Jan 5, 2004 5:23am Subject: Re: How do you practice the Paramitas and Factors of Awakening Thanks Christine! I hadn't caught on to that resource. If I find a post that I would like to ask for clarification on, is it all right to bring it back up on to the board? With Metta, Philip --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "christine_forsyth" wrote: > Hello Philip, > > Have you had a look at the posts on the Paramis (Perfections) in the > Useful Posts yet? > See what you think ... click on: > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/files/ > and scroll down to the 'P's. > > metta and peace, > Christine > ---The trouble is that you think you have time --- > > > 28703 From: Sarah Date: Mon Jan 5, 2004 5:40am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: How do you practice the Paramitas and Factors of Awakening Hi Philip, --- Philip wrote: > > Thanks Christine! I hadn't caught on to that resource. If I find a > post that I would like to ask for clarification on, is it all right > to bring it back up on to the board? ... May I butt in and say that would be great. Any post or thread from the archives is always open for further discussion. On the Paramis (Perfections), please also take a look at Nina's clear book and read about as few or many of them as you like. Again, she and others would be glad to give further clarification or comments: http://www.abhidhamma.org/perfections%20of%20enlightenment.htm It's good to hear of your interest. We'll look forward to the posts you bring up with interest;-) Metta, Sarah ====== 28704 From: Date: Mon Jan 5, 2004 0:45am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: SN II 6(6) -- Kamada [James] Hi, Sarah (and Dan ... and James) - In a message dated 1/5/04 3:06:56 AM Eastern Standard Time, sarahdhhk@y... writes: > I don’t have access to any more of the commentary than the part James > quoted from BB either. (I’d be grateful if Nina or anyone else were able > to assist further in this regard). Just a few more speculations of my own > here. > > Before the first stage of enlightenment (sotapatti magga), the path is > uneven in the sense that wrong views can lead one astray at any time in > between moments of satipatthana. For the noble ones, even though there is > akusala arising (unless an arahant), no more wrong view and no more > falling back or down. Max, 7 lives. > ------------------------------------------------------ Howard: What path? Must be the conventional path of practice (which is exactly what I take the Noble Eightfold Path to be). ------------------------------------------------------ > .... > D:>But the first two lines: "Though the path is > >impassable and uneven, > >The noble ones walk it, Kamada" are a riddle. The commentary seems to > >take the word "path" in the conventional, JamesHowardsian sense > >of "sitting in a corner trying to follow Mahasi's instructions > >is 'the path' even when there is no arising of satipatthana or even > >of kusala": > --------------------------------------------------- Howard: A bit of a disclaimer here, Dan: 1) I don't like or follow the Mahasi labeling approach to meditating, and 2) Although some folks seem to think that Right View is the whole of the path, I think the path is truly 8-fold and is *not* just meditation (i.e. Right Effort, Right Mindfulness, and Right Concentration). [Oh, and Dan - when "sitting in a corner," must one be on a stool wearing a dunce cap? Is that the picture? ;-) Or ... is the picture of a serene Buddha seated in full lotus better?] -------------------------------------------------- > .... > Hmmm. You might be going a bit far there;-) > > Although there are many ‘impediments’ and falls before sotapatti magga in > between the arising of satipatthana, the ariyans have overcome these. > ------------------------------------------------------ Howard: Yes, I'll buy that, Sarah.The path is still difficult and uneven, but definitely walkable for an ariyan, since even a stream enterer has "caught a wave", with only the traditional 7 lifetimes remaining. ----------------------------------------------------- > .... > D:>"Although the noble path is neither impassable nor uneven > >(duggamo visamo) this is said because there are many impediments in > >the preliminary portion of the path." Are there 'impediments' in the > >Right path? Hmmm... > .... > Different moments. In between moments of satipatthana. > -------------------------------------------------- Howard: And in those in-between moments the path is still being walked! The sutta, itself, states "Though the path is impassable and uneven, The noble ones walk it, Kamada." So, the ariyans, according to the sutta, itself, can negotiiate the path, but it is a path that is impassable (obviously only in the sense of being very difficult of passage) and uneven, and, thus, certainly a conventional path of practice, not a pristine, in-the-moment piece of perfection. ------------------------------------------------- > .... > D:>There are the anusaya which are bound to arise > >with great frequency and knock us quickly off the path as long as our > >path-walking is still in the preliminary portion of the path. Could > >this be what 'impediments' means here? Or could this "uneven path" be > >referring to the ignoble's mistaken view of the path (or view of the > >Wrong path) because "the path of the noble ones is even"? It reads > >like a koan -- I like it. > .... > Yes, I take it to be referring to wrong views. > ---------------------------------------------------- Howard: When one is knocked off the path, one is no longer on the path. That's certainly true. But the path, *itself*, is said to be impassable and uneven. It is not said that the path is passable and even, but it is difficult to *remain* on the path except for ariyans, and when off the path there is impassability and unevenness. Again, what is said is "Though the path is impassable and uneven, The noble ones walk it, Kamada." ------------------------------------------------------------ > > I’m also looking at the lines before: > > “they concentrate* even what is hard to concentrate, > [O Kaamada, “ said the Blessed One] > “Who delight in calming the faculties. > Having cut through the net of Death, > The noble ones, O Kaamada go their way.â€? > > *samadaahanti: see dict entry- > Samadahati (p. 684) [san+adahati1] to put together S I.169. jotin s. to > kindle a fire Vin IV.115; cittan s. to compose the mind, concentrate M > I.116; .....pp. samahita. > ***** > In the following sutta, SN2:7 Pa~ncaalaca.n.da, we read: > > “Even in the midst of confinement* they find it, > [O Pa~ncaalaca.n.da,â€? said the Blessed One,] > “The Dhamma for the attainment of Nibbaana- > Those who have acquired mindfulness, > Those perfectly well concentrated.â€?** > > *confinement (sambaadha) referring to confinement by the five hindrances. > **BB’s n152 - “The ‘Dhamma for the attainment of Nibbana’ (dhamma.m > nibbaanapattiyaa) is presumably the Noble Eightfold Path. > Spk-p.t: ....The Buddha’s reply is intended to show that the first > form-sphere jhana is a mere fragment of the infinite and immeasurable > qualities of a Buddha. By mindfulness (sati) he refers to the mindfulness > of insight and of the noble path. Well concentrated (susamaahita) > signifies both mundane and supramundane concentration.â€? > > In other words, as I understand it, with awareness &insight(sati), the > mind(citta) is well composed/concentrated. > (Ye sati’n... su sammà te susamà hità ti). > > I’ll be glad to hear any further comments from anyone. > Metta, > > Sarah > ============================= With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 28705 From: buddhatrue Date: Mon Jan 5, 2004 7:39am Subject: Re: SN II 6(6) -- Kamada [James] Hi Dan, Dan: --> Did you happen to ask them what they meant by 'meditation.' There are sure a lot of different ideas about just what that word means. James: No, I didn't happen to ask them that. I was trying to teach a poem and didn't want the subject to veer off into a discussion about meditation (And believe me, they would probably rather discuss anything else in the world except Wordsworth! ;-)). I would just imagine that they had the typical notion of meditation: someone sitting cross legged with the eyes closed, or partially closed, not moving. I think most of the different ideas you suggest have to do with what is happening in the person's mind and not with the appearance of the act. To try and determine if the students meant vipassana, jhana, or samatha meditation with a classroom of sixteen/seventeen-year-olds would just be asking for trouble! ;-) Dan: (1) The quote doesn't say anything about needing to saw off your arms to follow the path! James: If you take it literally it sure does. But actually the sawing would have to be done by someone else, specifically bandits. And it would have to be a two-handed saw. Dan: It only says that you can't say you are following the path at those moments when dosa arises -- no excuses! James: Now, here is where we are going to differ a bit and will be a good illustration of why I don't like to use Pali words. The Pali word dosa can signify various strengths of this emotion. Dosa can just be simple aversion (which all of us experience in a multitude of different ways every second…until enlightened), dosa is also anger which is a much stronger version of aversion, and dosa also means hatred which is the strongest version of aversion (Frankly, I am not sure, technically, which is stronger: anger or hate, but I am guessing hate. Guess it would depend on the situation). The Buddha said in the quote "…he who gave rise to a mind of hate towards them would not be carrying out my teachings." Now, you take this to mean just any moment of aversion "dosa" would mean that one isn't following his teachings anymore. Like if my wrist hurts while typing this post and I feel aversion to that, I am now off the path. I think you have gone overboard with this kind of thinking. By your standards, absolutely no one would be following the path except the enlightened. Dan: The comment is certainly to be taken literally. James: No it isn't, it is a hypothetical metaphor. Okay, first, how would anyone know how they would react when this happens? Personally, I don't think I would feel hate, I would probably feel afraid and in pain; but I'm not sure. Do you know how you would feel? Would anyone know how they would feel? Second, the Buddha is presenting this hypothetical metaphor as a teaching aid. He would not be telling this to bhikkhus who are already enlightened. There would be no reason. Obviously he is directing this statement to those who still harbor some hate in their minds. He is not just matter-of-factly describing one who follows his teachings and one who doesn't, he is trying to compel and explain to those bhikkhus who need to hear it that hate is never appropriate; at least that is how I see it. Dan: It just wouldn't be right for that bhikkhu to defile the Buddha's teachings by claiming to follow Him even at those times when he was hateful -- even if he had an understandable reason for that hatred. On he Buddha's path, there is no room for hatred. James: Okay, this I do agree with. I just don't think it is right to make the mental leap from hatred to all occurrences of dosa. Metta, James 28706 From: abhidhammika Date: Mon Jan 5, 2004 7:41am Subject: Re: characteristics - formulation: To Mike B And Ken O And Sarah Dear Michael, Sarah and all How are you? Happy New Year to Sarah. Michael wrote: "Maybe you can help me with my homework and explain what is pannatti then. I remember in your previous post you said it is not part of dependent origination. What is it then? I would really apreciate." Paññatti is a subject one can look at from many angles, but I will only touch on the subject without consulting the Buddha's own Suttams and other traditional Pali texts. We have two truths conveyed by the terms "sammuti saccaa" and "paramattha saccaa". Sammuti saccaa is conventional truth while paramattha saccaa is real or actual truth. Coventional truth is truth by convention, or truth through the processes of naming or labeling. Real or actual truth is truth by observation, experience, or experiment. Paññatti belongs to conventional truth. As an example, the term "anger" is a paññatti because it is a name of a phenomenon that can arise in us. It is a conventional truth because the native speakers of English understand what it is whenever they hear the sound "anger" or read the word "anger". And they can also look it up in an English dictionary. However, the phenomenon anger is a paramattha because it can actually arise in us when we are provoked, for example. Here, please remember that anger is an emergent phenomenon that can arise only when there are relevant conditions such as provocations or insult and injury. And when those relevant conditions disappear, anger also DISAPPEARS. Our minds do not carry anger around like we carry our credit cards around when shopping at the supermarket or on the Internet. Now, paññatti or conventional truths are regarded as the most important things in any society. Every human being is required to learn conventional truths ever since they can recognize the first sound or learn the first word. The world's education systems are entirely based on conventional truths or paññatti. Some individuals go even extra lengths to master languages other than their native ones. For example, I studied English as a degree subject with the British lecturers at the university for four years. And to get that priviledge, I needed to have already understood English well. Otherwise, no admission to enrol in the English degree course at the university. I mentioned these to stress the importance of paññatti or conventional truths in human societies in the secular worldly context. On the othe hand, paramattha saccaaa or the real or actual truths are mainly the preserve of the scientific circles and real-life Buddhist scholars and practitioners. I used the expression "real-life Buddhist scholars and practitioners" to keep out speculative academics who study Buddhism in the departments of religious studies for personal gains such as a doctorate degree and employment. Professors David Kalupahana and Peter Harvey, Dr Peter Masefield and the like belong to speculative academics for personal secular gains. They are also what I call "Neo-Rhys-Davidsites" who think it fashinable to criticize Aacariya Buddhaghosa and standard Theravada commentaries. While it is easier to speculate on and talk about paññatti or conventional truths, if because of constant exposure, it is far more difficult to take to the practice of observing, experiencing and experimenting paramattha dhammas, the real or actual phenomena. That is why I often write that the filed of Buddhist studies is currently in the wrong hands represented by the likes of Professor David Kalupahana and other neo-Ryhs-Davidsites from the speculative religious departments. Scientists must expand their interest and eventually take over the field of genuine Buddhist studies so that paramattha dhammaa, the real phenomena, can be studied with the advantage of latest available technologies and scientific practices - in addition to traditional training mehtods, of course. Recap: the term "anger" is a paññatti while anger as a cetasika is a paramattha. While the term "anger" in English will change to different sounds or letters from language to language, the paramattha anger as a cetasika will not change between different humans or human societies or nations or even among different life-forms. Next time you hear a dog bark, please also remember to observe it displaying anger. The characteristic of anger in the dog would be barkning in an threatening infriendly manner, for example. Can you observe other characteristics of the dog showing anger? I hope the above brief exposition of paññatti helps. As for the directions regarding Kathaavatthu, please read Sarah's kind posting of excerpts of translation. Sarah, please continue posting of those translations for all to read. Michael also quoted the following from Sayadaw Thanissaro Bhikkhu: ""Some Theravadins insist that questioning the commentaries is a sign of disrespect for the tradition, but it seems to be a sign of greater disrespect for the Buddha -- or the compilers of the Canon -- to assume that he or they would have left out something absolutely essential to the practice." Sarah has also answered in that regard as well. Please read it. I will only add the following. I am a scientist as well as a Pali scholar, and my scientific background forced me to experiment the methods found in Aacariya Buddhaghosa's commentaries. They work! What I am getting at is that instead of speculative questioning, it is far more fruitful to experiment the instructions found in the commentaries. I am aware of the fact that speculative scholars and academics tend to resent Theravada commentaries, but it is usually because the commentaries do not fit in with their own personal preconceptions, usually Veda-leaning prejudices in particular as prevalent among neo- Rhys-Davidsites, notably, Dr Peter Masefiled, and Professor Peter Harvey. And those neo-Rhys-Davidsites got away only by translating Suttam Pali passages inaccurately, which can, of course, be due to their honest immature Pali scholarship as well. By the way, Pali commentaries are formidable and very unsuitable for those with immature Pali scholarship, so resentment of them is very understandable. With regards, Suan Lu Zaw http://www.bodhiology.org --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Michael Beisert" wrote: Hello Suan, Suan: "Well, but there is sankhara in dependent origination, and paññati is a sankhara." You must be joking! Where did you get that information? In the formula "Avijjaa paccayaa sankhaaraa ...", sankhaaraa is another term for "cetanaa" which is a cetasika and, therefore, a paramattha. Sankhaara in the above formula roughly means activations or deliberate or intentional actions. In the five aggregates, sankhaarakhandhaa refers to cetasikas with cetanaa as the head (cetanaasiisena). That is why I keep telling you to do your homework in the use of the terms of paramatthas. Michael: Maybe you can help me with my homework and explain what is pannatti then. I remember in your previous post you said it is not part of dependent origination. What is it then? I would really apreciate. . . < snip> Metta Michael 28707 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Mon Jan 5, 2004 9:18am Subject: Re: [dsg] An anology Hi Dan Thanks for this analogy. This identifies my own experience in Buddhism. Previously when I was learning and practising Buddhism even though there are some similarities between what I learn and what I learn now, however to me something was amiss in what I learn previously, there is a feeling that I am not going to the root of eradicating ignorance and there was a constant hunger for the "eureka". I keep searching for this eureka and finally end up with "divine inspiration" from DSG. My humble thanks to all in DSG (all include non-Abhidhammists pple) kind regards Ken O 28708 From: buddhatrue Date: Mon Jan 5, 2004 9:22am Subject: Re: Views along the way Hi Dan, Dan: Once those barriers are overcome, what's the view like for the meditator progressing on the path? Vism discusses them in some degree of detail in chapter XXI: bhangañana (knowledge of dissolution -- I wrote a post about this awhile back, but misspelled it as bhavangañana [or some similar absurdity]) bhayañana (knowledge of fear) adinavañana (knowledge of danger) James: Well, there is something about the Vism that I do agree with! I don't like to talk about it, because I don't want to discourage anyone from meditating, but I do lately experience varying degrees of these very strong, negative `knowledges' during and after meditation. That is probably why I don't meditate as often anymore… it really scares me to death!! Actually, the year before last (I think) I started to have very realistic `meditation visions' during non-meditation times of an entity I identified as Mara which terrified me. After some posts to this group and some very frantic off-list posts to Sarah and Howard, I decided to see a meditation monk about the matter. He knew right away what it was and told me to ignore it. I haven't had the visions or experiences since then, thank goodness! But meditation itself, for me now, does bring up these feelings of fear and danger. I know I need to push forward and get through this but I am rather scared often. I am taking it real slow at this point. You are probably very correct to point this out to me and others. Those who choose to seriously meditate should know what they can expect. I had some idea myself but I continued on anyway; nothing could have stopped me. Dan: For bhayañana? "...formations...appear to him in the form of a great terror, as lions, tigers, leopards, bears, hyenas, spirits, ogres, fierce bulls, savage dogs, rut-maddened wild elephants, hideous venomous serpents, thunderbolts, charnel grounds, battlefields, flaming coal pits, etc., appear to a timid man who wants to live in peace." James: Yep, been there, done that. Actually, still there. Dan: For adinavañana? "The three kinds of becoming appear like charcoal pits full of glowing coals, the four primary elements like hideous venomous snakes, the five aggregates like murderers with raised weapons, the six internal bases like village-raiding robbers, the seven stations of consciousness and the nine abodes of beings as though burning, blazing and glowing with the eleven fires, and all formations appear as a huge mass of dangers destitute of satisfaction or substance, like a tumor, a disease, a dart, a calamity, an affliction." James: Kinda yes, kinda no for me. Mainly no. Dan: For nibbidañana? "...he becomes dispassionate towards, is dissatisfied with, takes no delight in the manifold field of formations belonging to any kind of becoming, destiny, station of consciousness, or abode of beings." James: Not there for me. Dan: For muñcitukamyatañana? "Just as a fish in a net, a frog in a snake's jaws, a jungle fowl shut into a cage, a deer fallen into the clutches of a strong snare, a snake in the hands of a snake charmer, an elephant stuck fast in a great bog, a royal naga in the mouth of a supanna, the moon inside Rahu's mouth (!), a man encircled by enemies, etc. -- just as these are desirous of being delivered, of finding an escape from these things, so too this meditator's mind is desirous of being delivered from the whole field of formations..." James: Not there either for me. Dan: when these stages are really reached, the response is a peaceful dedication to treading the path as the way to get free from the world of formations, and there is not any dosa-rooted reaction like hopelessness, despair, or depression, James: I must not really be there then because I do have some dosa- rooted reactions. Is this from the Vism also or your commentary? Dan: Next comes sankharupekkhañana (knowledge of equanimity) and finally the liberating insights. James: HA! This is a long way off for me!. Dan: I believe that Right Effort can only be recognized after many, many avenues of wrong effort have been thoroughly explored. Also, training in the fundamentals (pariyatti, precepts, Mahasi- or Goenka-style meditation) is of inestimable value for preparing the mind for recognizing, registering, and solidifying insight. In addition, training in the fundamentals tends to make people better citizens. James: I agree! Metta, James 28709 From: Dan D. Date: Mon Jan 5, 2004 9:30am Subject: MN 21 recap MN 21: 'Bhikkhus, even if bandits were to sever you savagely limb by limb with a two-handed saw, he who gave rise to a mind of hate towards them would not be carrying out my teachings.' My selective recap of the discussion (ignoring all of what James wrote except for the part where he says he agrees with me): Dan: It only says that you can't say you are following the path at those moments when dosa arises -- no excuses! Dan: It just wouldn't be right for that bhikkhu to defile the Buddha's teachings by claiming to follow Him even at those times when he was hateful -- even if he had an understandable reason for that hatred. On he Buddha's path, there is no room for hatred. James: Okay, this I do agree with. I just don't think it is right to make the mental leap from hatred to all occurrences of dosa. ..... --> I believe you are right that the MN quote uses 'hate' instead of simply 'dosa', but I think there is also no room for even subtle instances of dosa on the Buddha's path. Dan 28710 From: Dan D. Date: Mon Jan 5, 2004 10:04am Subject: [dsg] Re: SN II 6(6) -- Kamada [Howard] Dear Howard, My sentence -- "The commentary seems to take the word "path" in the conventional, JamesHowardsian sense of "sitting in a corner trying to follow Mahasi's instructions is 'the path' even when there is no arising of satipatthana or even of kusala" -- contains some unfair characterizations of your stance, which you rightly point out. It was out of line of me to even attempt to characterize your position like that, and even worse that I got it wrong! I apologize. Comments on the rest of your post are interspersed. > Howard: > A bit of a disclaimer here, Dan: > 1) I don't like or follow the Mahasi labeling approach to meditating, > and > 2) Although some folks seem to think that Right View is the whole of > the path, I think the path is truly 8-fold and is *not* just meditation (i.e. > Right Effort, Right Mindfulness, and Right Concentration). ...... H: "Oh, and Dan - when 'sitting in a corner,' must one be on a stool wearing a dunce cap? Is that the picture? ;-) Or ... is the picture of a serene Buddha seated in full lotus better?" --> Sometimes the sitting is with a dunce cap (when moha arises) and sometimes more like a serene Buddha (at those moments uncontaminated by moha). I think if we are really honest with ourselves, most of the time a duncecap would be a more fitting image for what we are doing than the image of a serene Buddha, don't you think? [Ugh! Even at those moments when moha recedes, it still isn't really like a Buddha because the wisdom has just not been developed to that extent.] .... Dan: [citing the commentary to Kamada sutta]: "Although the noble path is neither impassable nor uneven (duggamo visamo) this is said because there are many impediments in the preliminary portion of the path." Are there 'impediments' in the Right path? Hmmm... Sarah: Different moments. In between moments of satipatthana. Howard: And in those in-between moments the path is still being walked! --> I have such a difficult time understanding what you mean here, Howard. It sounds very much like you are saying that you can be on the path even when lobha/dosa/moha arise. I just don't see how, for example, dosa can be included as a component of Right Intention or Right Effort. Great to 'see' you, Howard. Happy New Year! Dan 28711 From: Dan D. Date: Mon Jan 5, 2004 10:10am Subject: Re: [dsg] An anology Hi Ken, It's good to hear from you on this thread. I'm glad you found the analogy post helpful. I also want to express my appreciation to all in DSG. Thanks! It continues to be a great ride in a masterfully managed discussion group. Dan wrote: > Hi Dan > > Thanks for this analogy. This identifies my own experience in > Buddhism. Previously when I was learning and practising Buddhism > even though there are some similarities between what I learn and what > I learn now, however to me something was amiss in what I learn > previously, there is a feeling that I am not going to the root of > eradicating ignorance and there was a constant hunger for the > "eureka". I keep searching for this eureka and finally end up with > "divine inspiration" from DSG. My humble thanks to all in DSG (all > include non-Abhidhammists pple) > > > > > kind regards > Ken O > > > > > 28712 From: nina van gorkom Date: Mon Jan 5, 2004 10:16am Subject: Re: [dsg]process cittas Dear Jon, op 04-01-2004 10:18 schreef Jonothan Abbott op jonoabb@y...: > Citta vithi, as well as all terms for the various functions within > the processes of conseiousness, such as ávajjana-citta, > sampaticchana, santírana, votthapana, javana, tadárammana, bhavanga, > cuti: none of these terms is found in the Sutta Canon. except javana, > in Pts.M. Even in the Ahh. Canon (e.g. Patth) only javana and > bhavanga are twice or thrice briefly mentioned. This was a quote from Nyanatiloka (below). In in Pts.M there are not all the terms, but, very specifically there are the cittas performing their functions in a process. Classified as dhatus. Nina. 28713 From: Dan D. Date: Mon Jan 5, 2004 10:49am Subject: Re: Views along the way Dear James, These higher levels of vipassana arise only when understanding has progressed to the extent that there is no dosa- or lobha-rooted reaction to the phenomena that present themselves. This only happens after seeing clearly the rise and fall of various phenomena from moment to moment: "And his seeing of rise and fall becomes evident to him as the truth of the path: 'This is the mundane path'." [Vism XX 100]. When there is understanding of rise and fall of phenomena, "the characteristic of not-self becomes evident to him through seeing rise according to condition owing to his discovery that states have no curiousity and that their existence depends on conditions." The "discovery that states have no curiosity" means that when there is understanding of 'what is and what is not the path' (which, by the way, is the title of Vism chapter XX), the phenomena do not appear interesting, attractive, repulsive or any other way that inspire curiosity or interest, including lobha or dosa. Vism discusses this explicitly in case of the not-so-fun sounding (but in truth liberating) ñana. For example, in XXI.32 (the section on knowledge of fear): "But does the knowledge of appearance as terror fear or does it not fear? It does not fear. For it is simply the mere judgement that past formations have ceased, present ones are ceasing, and future ones will cease. Just as a man with eyes looking at three charcoal pits at a city gate is not himself afraid, since he only forms the mere judgement that all who fall into them will suffer no little pain..." The knowledge of fear arises because the vision of the fearfulness of formations is so vivid. At the same time, though, this clear vision (vipassana) can only arise when the detachment from formations is sufficiently strong that there will not be a dosa response. If there is a dosa response, then the ñana is not really attained, and the insight is either tender or absent. Dan 28714 From: Michael Beisert Date: Mon Jan 5, 2004 11:04am Subject: RE: [dsg] Re: characteristics - formulation: To Mike B And Ken O And Sarah Hello Suan, Thank you for your rather comprehensive explanation. There is a point though that I would appreciate to have some additional clarifications. You define paramatha as ‘real or actual phenomena or truth.’ The definition of real, provided by Dictionary.com is as follows: Being or occurring in fact or actuality; having verifiable existence. True and actual; not imaginary, alleged, or ideal. Philosophy: Existing objectively in the world regardless of subjectivity or conventions of thought or language. Existing objectively means having actual existence or reality. And I think that definition ties up with your explanation of pannatti. Pannatti is that which is subjective, in accordance with conventions, or in other words the opposite of real. One could also say that pannatti is not real? If paramatha is real and pannatti is the opposite of paramatha then it makes sense to assume that pannatti is not real. Is that how you would define it? Now, can you please elaborate a little bit more, in accordance with your understanding, about what are the qualities that makes a phenomena ‘exist objectively, to have actual existence or reality’. Metta Michael 28715 From: Date: Mon Jan 5, 2004 6:46am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: SN II 6(6) -- Kamada [Howard] Hi, Dan - In a message dated 1/5/04 1:08:43 PM Eastern Standard Time, dalthorp@s... writes: > > Dear Howard, > My sentence -- "The commentary seems to take the word "path" in the > conventional, JamesHowardsian sense of "sitting in a corner trying to > follow Mahasi's instructions is 'the path' even when there is no > arising of satipatthana or even of kusala" -- contains some unfair > characterizations of your stance, which you rightly point out. It was > out of line of me to even attempt to characterize your position like > that, and even worse that I got it wrong! I apologize. > ------------------------------------------------- Howard: It's nothing! I just felt I should give a bit of a correction to what seemed to be conveyed. No problem at all, Dan. ------------------------------------------------- Comments on > > the rest of your post are interspersed. > > >Howard: > > A bit of a disclaimer here, Dan: > > 1) I don't like or follow the Mahasi labeling approach to > meditating, > >and > > 2) Although some folks seem to think that Right View is the > whole of > >the path, I think the path is truly 8-fold and is *not* just > meditation (i.e. > >Right Effort, Right Mindfulness, and Right Concentration). > ...... > > H: "Oh, and Dan - when 'sitting in a corner,' must one be on a stool > wearing a dunce cap? Is that the picture? ;-) Or ... is the picture > of a serene Buddha seated in full lotus better?" > > --> Sometimes the sitting is with a dunce cap (when moha arises) and > sometimes more like a serene Buddha (at those moments uncontaminated > by moha). I think if we are really honest with ourselves, most of the > time a duncecap would be a more fitting image for what we are doing > than the image of a serene Buddha, don't you think? > -------------------------------------------------- Howard: Oh, sure! Compared to the state of an arahant we are way lowlier than mere dunces. But in terms of picturing meditation in terms of its purpose and in terms of the ideal, I think that the "sitting in the corner" terminology was less than uplifting. That's all. -------------------------------------------------- > > [Ugh! Even at those moments when moha recedes, it still isn't really > like a Buddha because the wisdom has just not been developed to that > extent.] > > .... > Dan: [citing the commentary to Kamada sutta]: "Although the noble > path is neither impassable nor uneven (duggamo visamo) this is said > because there are many impediments in the preliminary portion of the > path." Are there 'impediments' in the Right path? Hmmm... > > Sarah: Different moments. In between moments of satipatthana. > > Howard: And in those in-between moments the path is still being > walked! > > --> I have such a difficult time understanding what you mean here, > Howard. It sounds very much like you are saying that you can be on > the path even when lobha/dosa/moha arise. I just don't see how, for > example, dosa can be included as a component of Right Intention or > Right Effort. > -------------------------------------------------- Howard: Due to prior right intention, kusala states and kusala conventional actions are still to follow, even at a moment that one is not "doing well," and in that sense one is still on the path. Right after a not-so-lofty state, due to the repeated intention to be mindful, there may well arise a clear awareness of that just-passed akusala state, including its akusala nature, its impermanence, and its conditioned, insubstantial, and impersonal status. And that akusala state thereby becomes a part of the path. One works with what is there, not with what one would like to be there. Remember, I am not speaking of the path as a momentary matter, but as a conventional path walked along for lifetimes. ------------------------------------------------- > > > Great to 'see' you, Howard. Happy New Year! > Dan > > -------------------------------------------------- Howard: Thanks, Dan. Likewise! Have a wonderful and peaceful year of progress in all things, but especially in the Dhamma. ========================= With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 28716 From: Egberdina Date: Mon Jan 5, 2004 2:11pm Subject: Two to tango (was Re: Contraception and the First Precept) Hi Christine, I would like to persevere with some of this. Fear not :-) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "christine_forsyth" wrote: > Hello Herman, and All, > So, irrespective of whether the person died on the first blow - or > two weeks later from an injury induced blood-clot - it is a > consequence of the 'intention' to kill. And the Buddha's definition > of kamma was 'intentional (volitional) action'. > And, if we are talking about kamma/vipaka, I don't think it has > anything to do with judging oneself. It appears to roll on regardless > of our own excuses, justifications, and boasting. > ============================ It is my understanding that intentions and actions come about precisely because judgements are being made. Judgements proceeding from wrong view lead to wrong intention to wrong action, judgements proceeding from right view lead to right intention to right action, and no judgement leads to no intention to no action. Quite happy to be corrected (or denounced), by the way :-) > Herman: Wouldn't it be a form of pride to claim a state of affairs as > being > entirely the product of one's own desire, intention and effort? > Christine: Maybe stupidity? - if you deliberately killed someone, > would you go around claiming you did? :-) Probably more like > delusion/ignorance , I would think. But say it happened in > a 'legitimate' way, if you were a soldier, it might be conceit. But > having an opinion after the fact doesn't affect the results of kamma, > does it? > ============================ Yes, I agree. The initial activity proceeds from the initial opinion, belief, judgement. How one dresses it up afterwards will not alter the initial activity. But I really wonder how kamma can play a role for one who suspends judgement? All the best Herman > =========================== > and to you > Metta and peace, > > Christine > ---The trouble is that you think you have time --- > 28717 From: Egberdina Date: Mon Jan 5, 2004 2:31pm Subject: Re: An anology Hi Dan, Any analogy with J.S. Bach in it has my full and undivided attention. Your analogy would be perfect if the path was a path of accumulating all the right bits, leading to a perfect construction. Bach's opus certainly fits the bill. My take on the path is that it is precisely the opposite, discarding bits to end up with what is left when there are no bits. I could be wrong, though :-) All the best Herman --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Dan D." wrote: > Dear James (and whomever else might be peeking in), > > An analogy: I've been listening to a series of 32 recorded lectures > on the music of J.S. Bach by Robert Greenberg -- a composer, teacher, > and superstar lecturer at San Francisco Conservatory of Music. In his > discussion about cantata 140, Greenberg tells of a little insight he > has into composing: "What do you think composers think about? Do you > think they just think, 'Oh, please, Lord, let me have an > inspiration!'? Oh, no. If that was what you were waiting for, you > would write one piece every ten years, because we all know that > divine inspiration is oh-so-choosy in its time and place. Now, one > has to be a craftsperson." Of course, Bach was quite a master at his > craft -- both performance and composition. His technical expertise > was unrivalled during his time, as was his knowledge of musical > theory and his knowledge of the music of other composers. > When "divine inspiration" struck, the music he composed was > astounding. However, without having first put in all the countless of > hours of preparation and developing technical mastery, he would not > have been able to do anything of note when that divine inspiration > struck. "Whoa! I feel so inspired to do something, but what.......... > Hmmm... I know! I'll write some music! ... Let's see... that bottom > line on the treble clef is E and the next line is G. If I play those > at the same time, it sounds kind of nice ... harmony! Sigh, the > inspiration's gone... Honey, what's on the tube tonight?" He'd have > missed a wonderful opportunity to perform some truly beautiful work > because he was not prepared to perform when the time presented > itself. At other times, he might have been touched by divine > inspiration and not even really noticed it: "Whoa! I suddenly feel > great... I wonder if Christoph wants to grab a beer with me..." > > So it goes with development of insight too. Of course, insight > ("divine inspiration") cannot be forced -- even by reading the whole > Tipitika and meditating for 25 hours per day. But when it comes, what > will you be able to do with it? Will it register as insight and move > you an inch along the long, long path? Or will you not even be able > to recognize it? There can be no movement along the path unless the > difference between path and not-path can be discerned.* That > discernment will not take hold unless there is first a well- > considered and correct understanding of samma-ditthi (Right view) and > samma-vayama (Right effort). A critical component of "Right" for all > the path factors is that the view, effort, etc. is free from > lobha/dosa/moha because the Buddha's path precludes akusala-rooted > consciousness. At this point, it is critical to understand that I do > not mean that the *person* must be free from lobha/dosa/moha before > the path can be discerned, only that lobha/dosa/moha cannot arise in > the mind that treads the path. This may seem like a funny paradox, > but it really isn't. Minds arise and fall with great rapidity. Some > of them are rooted in lobha/dosa/moha; some of them are not. Progress > along the path is made only by a mind not rooted in lobha/dosa/moha. > Does this mean that only arahants can make progress on the path? Not > in the least bit -- unless you are thinking in terms of "I", as > in: "'I' am not an arahant, so 'I' am not free from moha. Therefore, > according to Dan, 'I' cannot make progress on the path. He says that > only a mind free from moha can even discern the path, and only an > arahant's mind is free from moha." Step back from this 'I' for a > moment and consider that "the mind" is really just a way to refer to > a long, long series of "minds" that arise and fall from moment to > moment. Some of these minds (or mind moments, or cittas, if you will) > are free from lobha/dosa/moha -- even in you and me! Only when these > minds arise can we make progress on the path. This realization is > essential to real progress on the path. (Note: Although akusala > cittas cannot discern the path, most kusala cittas do not either; but > this is a topic for another day!) > > ------------ > * By "path", I am referring to the mundane path. > > > Dan 28718 From: yu_zhonghao Date: Mon Jan 5, 2004 3:40pm Subject: Re: SN II 6(6) -- Kamada [James] Hi James and all, I've been reading the exchange between you and Dan and I find it addressing some interesting points regarding the Noble Eightfold Path (the path) and the meditation practice. In this message I would like to share some reflection on what I read in the exchange regarding the path: First of all, the path is not the goal, namely, the Deathless, the Unbinding/Nibbana, the cessation of dukkha. The path leads to the goal, and it is a path of progression. The progression on the path can be seen in two ways: first, in terms of practice; secondly, in terms of spiritual attainment. In terms of practice, the practice of the path is a gradual training. As Bhikkhu Bodhi notes: In the Majjhima Nikaya, the Buddha often expounds the practice of the path as a gradual training (anupubbasikkha), which unfolds in stages from the first step to the final goal……The main paradigm for the gradual training found in the Majjhima Nikaya is that laid out in MN 27 and MN 51……" [1] In terms of attainment, there are ones who are stream-enterers, once- returners, non-returners, and arahants. Stream-enterers, once- returners, and non-returners are characterized in terms of the destruction of five lower fetters (samyojana) of personality/identity view (sakkayaditthi), doubt, grasping of rules and vows, sensual desire, and ill will. [2] And arahants, "with taints destroyed, have live the holy life, done what had to be done, laid down the burden, reached the true goal, destroyed the fetters of being, and are completely liberated through final knowledge." [3] A point of discussion in the exchange is what it means by "on the path" or "following the path." Specifically, a passage from MN 21 is given to show that whenever lust, aversion, and/or delusion arises, there is no carrying out of the Buddha's teachings, no following the path: Bhikkhus, even if bandits were to sever you savagely limb by limb with a two-handled saw, he who gave rise to a mind of hate towards them would not be carrying out my teaching. [4] It seems that we have run into a contradiction: For a stream-enterer or a once-returner, who has been established in the path but has not destroyed the fetters of sensual desire and ill will completely, if bandits were to sever him or her savagely limb by limb with a two-handled saw, it is possible that a mind of hate in him or her would arise towards them. Thus this stream-enterer or once-returner would not be carrying out the Buddha's teaching and would not be on the path. Or have we really? The contradiction only arose if we did not take right effort, a factor of the path into consideration. For a stream-enterer or a once-returner, the evil, unskillful/unwholesome states of ill will and hatred could (or in a stronger sense, would) still arise in mind. However, if it does arise, one of right effort will "generate desire for the abandoning of the arisen evil, unwholesome [unskillful] states" of ill will and hatred; he or she will "make an effort, arouse energy, apply his [or her] mind, and strives." [5] One who gave rise to a mind of hate towards the bandits who severed him or her savagely limb by limb with a two-handled saw is someone who simply let the mind of hate arise without generating desire for the abandoning of the arisen evil, unskillful/unwholesome states. In that sense, he or she gave rise to a mind of hate towards the bandits. In that sense, he or she was without right effort and thus would not be carrying out the Buddha's teaching. In fact, the passage below that immediately follows the previous passage Herein, Bhikkhus, you should train thus: `Our minds will remain unaffected, and we shall utter no evil words; we shall abide compassionate for their welfare, with a mind of loving-kindness, without inner hate. We shall abide pervading them with a mind imbued with loving-kindness; and starting with them, we shall abide pervading the all-encompassing world with a mind imbued with loving- kindness, abundant, exalted, immeasurable, without hostility and without ill will.' That is how you should train, bhikkhus. [6] can be understood that the Buddha was teaching the bhikkhus to develop with right effort the skillful/wholesome states of equanimity ("our minds will remain unaffected), right speech ("we shall utter no evil words") and right resolve/compassion and loving- kindness ("we shall abide compassionate for their welfare, with a mind of loving-kindness, without inner hate"). Peace, Victor MLDB: The Middle Length Discourses of the Buddha: A New Translation of the Majjhima Nikaya, translated by Bhikkhu Nanamoli and Bhikkhu Bodhi. CDB: The Connected Discourses of the Buddha: A New Translation of the Samyutta Nikaya, translated by Bhikkhu Bodhi. [1] MLDB, p. 34-35. [2] MLDB, MN 6, and MN 22. [3] MLDB, MN 22, p. 235. For a stream-enterer, the three lower fetters of personality/identity view (sakkayaditthi), doubt, grasping of rules and vows are destroyed. For a once-returner, lust, hate, and delusion are attenuated with the destruction of the three lower fetters of personality/identity view (sakkayaditthi), doubt, grasping of rules and vows. For a non-returner, all five lower fetters are destroyed. [4] MLDB, p. 223. [5] CDB, p. 1529. [6] MLDB, p. 223. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "buddhatrue" wrote: > Hi Dan and All, > > Today something interesting happened in my class that I want to > share. [snip] 28719 From: buddhatrue Date: Mon Jan 5, 2004 4:17pm Subject: Re: Views along the way Hi Dan, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Dan D." wrote: > Dear James, > These higher levels of vipassana arise only when understanding has > progressed to the extent that there is no dosa... Thank you for your well-thought out comments; please understand that I will not disregard them but don't wish to comment specifically at this time. However, I will probably seek out the advice of a well- established bhikkhu meditation teacher, higher in conduct that both you and me, when I feel that the time is right and needed (as I believe all serious meditators should do). Metta, James 28720 From: Date: Mon Jan 5, 2004 4:18pm Subject: Vism.XIV 60 (1 of 4) "The Path of Purification" (Visuddhimagga) Ch. XIV 60. 13. The heart-basis has the characteristic of being the (material) support for the mind-element and for the mind-consciousness-element. Its function is to observe them. It is manifested as the carrying of them. It is to be found in dependence on the blood, of the kind described in the treatise on the mindfulness of the body (Ch. VIII, 111), inside the heart. It is assisted by the primaries with their functions of upholding, etc.; it is consolidated by temperature, consciousness, and nutriment; it is maintained by life; and it serves as physical basis for the mind-element and the mind-consciousness-element, and for the states associated with them.26 -------------------------- Vism. VIII, 111. This is the heart flesh. As to colour, it is the colour of the back of a red-lotus petal. As to shape, it is the shape of a lotus bud with the outer petals removed and turned upside down; it is smooth outside, and inside it is like the interior of a kosataki (loofah gourd). In those who possess understanding it is a little expanded; in those without understanding it is still only a bud. Inside it there is a hollow the size of a punnaga seed's bed where half a pasata measure of blood is kept, with which as their support the mind element and mind-consciousness element occur. 28721 From: Date: Mon Jan 5, 2004 4:28pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Vism.XIV 60 (1 of 4) Hi all, Here are some definitions of "mind element" and "mind-consciousness element" from Nyanatiloa's "Buddhist Dictionary" http://www.saigon.com/~anson/ebud/bud-dict/dic_idx.htm mano-dhátu: 'mind-element', is one of the 18 elements (s. dhátu II). This term, unlike manáyatana, does not apply to the whole of consciousness, but designates only that special element of consciousness which first, at the beginning of the process of sense-perception, performs the function of advertence (ávajjana; Tab. I, 70) to the sense-object and, then after twice having become conscious of it performs the function of reception (sampaticchana; Tab I- 39,.55) into mind-consciousness. See viññána-kicca. manovinñána-dhátu: 'mind-consciousness element', one of the 18 'elements' (s. dhátu II). This term is generally used as a name for that consciousness-element which performs the functions of investigation (santírana), determining (votthapana), registering (tadárammana), etc. See Tab. I, 40, 41, 56, 71, 72. Larry 28722 From: buddhatrue Date: Mon Jan 5, 2004 4:40pm Subject: Re: SN II 6(6) -- Kamada [James] Hi Victor, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "yu_zhonghao" wrote: > Hi James and all, > > I've been reading the exchange between you and Dan and I find it > addressing some interesting points regarding the Noble Eightfold > Path (the path) and the meditation practice. Thank you for your post. I agree with your detailed and well- considered analysis of this matter. Of course this seemingly `either/or' proposition of the Buddha is not to be considered in a superficial, quick manner. One must consider his audience, his intention, and his supreme insight. We modern-day folks, with nothing to go on but dead scribbles on a blank sheet of paper (or computer screen) are bound to make mistakes when interpreting his messages. I am glad that you have incorporated some other perspectives that are important to consider (and I would suspect that there are even more yet unknown!). Metta, James 28723 From: Dan D. Date: Mon Jan 5, 2004 4:55pm Subject: Re: Views along the way -- correction James, please be more careful in your quotes. For the record, my original sentence reads: "These higher levels of vipassana arise only when understanding has progressed to the extent that there is no dosa- or lobha-rooted reaction to the phenomena that present themselves," which is decidedly different from the sentence you have me writing, viz. "These higher levels of vipassana arise only when understanding has pogressed to the extent that there is no dosa..." It's not fair to clip parts of sentences that are central to the meaning. Dan 28724 From: buddhatrue Date: Mon Jan 5, 2004 5:14pm Subject: Re: Views along the way -- correction Hi Dan, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Dan D." wrote: > James, please be more careful in your quotes. > > For the record, my original sentence reads: "These higher levels of > vipassana arise only when understanding has progressed to the extent > that there is no dosa- or lobha-rooted reaction to the phenomena that > present themselves," which is decidedly different from the sentence > you have me writing, viz. "These higher levels of vipassana arise > only when understanding has pogressed to the extent that there is no > dosa..." It's not fair to clip parts of sentences that are > central to the meaning. >Dan I 100% assure you that I did not intentionally clip your statement in a place where I thought it might benefit my position (not that I have any position on this matter really). You had written a lot of valuable information and I didn't want to clip everything, I wanted to leave a small bit (to inspire others to find the original post and read more perhaps), so I just picked the first pause in the first statement. I honestly didn't plan anything (I don't pay a lot of atention to Pali words to tell you the truth; ask Sarah, I'm allergic to them ;-). If you want to blame anyone blame Sarah and Jon for their strict adherence to clipping procedures. They are Clipping Nazis! ;-)) So anyway, please accept my sincere apology. Metta, James 28725 From: Dan D. Date: Mon Jan 5, 2004 5:49pm Subject: Re: An anology [Herman] Dear Herman, Good point! Dan > Hi Dan, > > Any analogy with J.S. Bach in it has my full and undivided attention. > > Your analogy would be perfect if the path was a path of accumulating > all the right bits, leading to a perfect construction. Bach's opus > certainly fits the bill. > > My take on the path is that it is precisely the opposite, discarding > bits to end up with what is left when there are no bits. > > I could be wrong, though :-) 28726 From: Dan D. Date: Mon Jan 5, 2004 5:55pm Subject: Re: SN II 6(6) -- Kamada [James] Interesting analysis, Victor. You raise some great points. The Ariyans are said to be "on the path" even though they are not free from dosa [in the case of sotapanna and sakadagami]. I don't have time to consider this fully now or to respond properly, so I'll just have to pass the torch to Sarah, RobK, Jonathon, or whoever else may take the bait. Dan --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "yu_zhonghao" wrote: > Hi James and all, > > I've been reading the exchange between you and Dan and I find it > addressing some interesting points regarding the Noble Eightfold > Path (the path) and the meditation practice. > > In this message I would like to share some reflection on what I read > in the exchange regarding the path: > > First of all, the path is not the goal, namely, the Deathless, the > Unbinding/Nibbana, the cessation of dukkha. The path leads to the > goal, and it is a path of progression. The progression on the path > can be seen in two ways: first, in terms of practice; secondly, in > terms of spiritual attainment. > > In terms of practice, the practice of the path is a gradual > training. As Bhikkhu Bodhi notes: > > > In the Majjhima Nikaya, the Buddha often expounds the practice of > the path as a gradual training (anupubbasikkha), which unfolds in > stages from the first step to the final goal……The main paradigm for > the gradual training found in the Majjhima Nikaya is that laid out > in MN 27 and MN 51……" > [1] > > In terms of attainment, there are ones who are stream-enterers, once- > returners, non-returners, and arahants. Stream-enterers, once- > returners, and non-returners are characterized in terms of the > destruction of five lower fetters (samyojana) of > personality/identity view (sakkayaditthi), doubt, grasping of rules > and vows, sensual desire, and ill will. [2] And arahants, "with > taints destroyed, have live the holy life, done what had to be done, > laid down the burden, reached the true goal, destroyed the fetters > of being, and are completely liberated through final knowledge." [3] > > A point of discussion in the exchange is what it means by "on the > path" or "following the path." > > Specifically, a passage from MN 21 is given to show that whenever > lust, aversion, and/or delusion arises, there is no carrying out of > the Buddha's teachings, no following the path: > > > Bhikkhus, even if bandits were to sever you savagely limb by limb > with a two-handled saw, he who gave rise to a mind of hate towards > them would not be carrying out my teaching. > [4] > > It seems that we have run into a contradiction: > > For a stream-enterer or a once-returner, who has been established in > the path but has not destroyed the fetters of sensual desire and ill > will completely, if bandits were to sever him or her savagely limb > by limb with a two-handled saw, it is possible that a mind of hate > in him or her would arise towards them. Thus this stream-enterer or > once-returner would not be carrying out the Buddha's teaching and > would not be on the path. > > Or have we really? > > The contradiction only arose if we did not take right effort, a > factor of the path into consideration. For a stream-enterer or a > once-returner, the evil, unskillful/unwholesome states of ill will > and hatred could (or in a stronger sense, would) still arise in > mind. However, if it does arise, one of right effort will "generate > desire for the abandoning of the arisen evil, unwholesome > [unskillful] states" of ill will and hatred; he or she will "make an > effort, arouse energy, apply his [or her] mind, and strives." [5] > > One who gave rise to a mind of hate towards the bandits who severed > him or her savagely limb by limb with a two-handled saw is someone > who simply let the mind of hate arise without generating desire for > the abandoning of the arisen evil, unskillful/unwholesome states. > In that sense, he or she gave rise to a mind of hate towards the > bandits. In that sense, he or she was without right effort and thus > would not be carrying out the Buddha's teaching. > > In fact, the passage below that immediately follows the previous > passage > > > Herein, Bhikkhus, you should train thus: `Our minds will remain > unaffected, and we shall utter no evil words; we shall abide > compassionate for their welfare, with a mind of loving-kindness, > without inner hate. We shall abide pervading them with a mind > imbued with loving-kindness; and starting with them, we shall abide > pervading the all-encompassing world with a mind imbued with loving- > kindness, abundant, exalted, immeasurable, without hostility and > without ill will.' That is how you should train, bhikkhus. > [6] > > can be understood that the Buddha was teaching the bhikkhus to > develop with right effort the skillful/wholesome states of > equanimity ("our minds will remain unaffected), right speech ("we > shall utter no evil words") and right resolve/compassion and loving- > kindness ("we shall abide compassionate for their welfare, with a > mind of loving-kindness, without inner hate"). > > Peace, > Victor > > MLDB: The Middle Length Discourses of the Buddha: A New > Translation of the Majjhima Nikaya, translated by Bhikkhu Nanamoli > and Bhikkhu Bodhi. > > CDB: The Connected Discourses of the Buddha: A New Translation of > the Samyutta Nikaya, translated by Bhikkhu Bodhi. > > [1] MLDB, p. 34-35. > > [2] MLDB, MN 6, and MN 22. > > [3] MLDB, MN 22, p. 235. > > For a stream-enterer, the three lower fetters of > personality/identity view (sakkayaditthi), doubt, grasping of rules > and vows are destroyed. > > For a once-returner, lust, hate, and delusion are attenuated with > the destruction of the three lower fetters of personality/identity > view (sakkayaditthi), doubt, grasping of rules and vows. > > For a non-returner, all five lower fetters are destroyed. > > [4] MLDB, p. 223. > > [5] CDB, p. 1529. > > [6] MLDB, p. 223. > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "buddhatrue" > wrote: > > Hi Dan and All, > > > > Today something interesting happened in my class that I want to > > share. > [snip] 28727 From: Dan D. Date: Mon Jan 5, 2004 5:57pm Subject: Re: Views along the way -- correction No problem, James. The accept your explanation (except for the part about blaming Sarah and Jon...) and apology with no hard feeling. It's been a pleasure. Dan > I 100% assure you that I did not intentionally clip your statement in > a place where I thought it might benefit my position (not that I have > any position on this matter really). You had written a lot of > valuable information and I didn't want to clip everything, I wanted > to leave a small bit (to inspire others to find the original post and > read more perhaps), so I just picked the first pause in the first > statement. I honestly didn't plan anything (I don't pay a lot of > atention to Pali words to tell you the truth; ask Sarah, I'm allergic > to them ;-). If you want to blame anyone blame Sarah and Jon for > their strict adherence to clipping procedures. They are Clipping > Nazis! ;-)) So anyway, please accept my sincere apology. > > Metta, James 28728 From: nina van gorkom Date: Mon Jan 5, 2004 9:14pm Subject: Re: [dsg] tanha and intention Dear Ben, enjoying your remarks and dialogue. See below. op 04-01-2004 22:53 schreef Benjamin Jerome op bj3682@a...: > > Jonothan Abbott wrote: > >> Satipatthana is not something to be 'done', but then that >> is true of other kusala mindstates too (in fact it's true of any >> mindstate). >> ...it's not a matter of 'paying attention', since that implies something > 'to >> be done', and also a conscious selection of the (perceived) presently >> occurring object, whereas in fact that object has fallen away long >> before it can be attended to. >> >Ben: I don't understand. Why is "doing" a problem? Nina: Let it come by conditions. When trying, when doing, there is an underlying tendency to the self who can do it all. Then we are further away from the goal. Jon spoke of , I could add: even an unnoticed selection. But this is a difficult area, needs many dialogues to be understood. Some people think: O, that is an attitude of just laziness, but that is not so. I would rather say: it requires an endlkess patience, not seeing immediate result. Listening, learning a little more, considering, and yes, developing all paramis in daily life. A lot more to say about this, see this link: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/files/ > and scroll down to the 'P's. Nina. 28729 From: nina van gorkom Date: Mon Jan 5, 2004 9:14pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: SN II 6(6) -- Kamada [James] Hi Sarah, James, Dan, op 05-01-2004 09:04 schreef Sarah op sarahdhhk@y...: >> "Though the path is impassable and uneven, >>> The noble ones walk it, Kamada. >>> The ignoble ones fall down head first, >>> Right there on the uneven path, >>> But the path of the noble ones is even, >>> For the noble are even amidst the uneven." >> > D:> Could it be that the "uneven path" is the "wrong path" that the >> ignoble ones tread, while the "even path" is the "Right path" that >> the noble ones tread? The part of the commentary you cite doesn't >> comment on that. > .... > I don’t have access to any more of the commentary than the part James > quoted from BB either. (I’d be grateful if Nina or anyone else were able > to assist further in this regard). Just a few more speculations of my own > here. Nina: I looked at some old notes from my co: first a footnote reference to Devas, i, 4: Not grasped: Co refers to the samana dhammas, contentment with the requisites, it also includes not returning abuse. Co refers to satipatthana. And uneven: in the beginning panna is weak, and thus there are more dangers. Remarks: defilements are strong, but panna should know these too, and this is difficult. Panna should know all such moments, otherwise we take them for self. Nothing should be skipped. Nina. 28730 From: nina van gorkom Date: Mon Jan 5, 2004 9:14pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: way of study Dear Suan, you are full of humor and good cheer. op 05-01-2004 16:41 schreef abhidhammika op suanluzaw@b...: > By the way, Pali commentaries are formidable and very unsuitable for > those with immature Pali scholarship, so resentment of them is very > understandable. N: And you are very wise, serious and patient. No wonder since you have your psychiatrics practice, applying the Dhamma. I was so impressed by your post on study, and how understanding develops: N: How deep. Worth considering. You indicate some sound principles that are beneficial to apply in any situation where there is dialogue on Dhamma. S: N:Both parties of a dialogue need so much patience. I can learn from you, you do not have any expectations from others. Understanding that it is Dependent Origination everywhere! Wonderful. It is always special when you write something, thank you and with appreciation, Nina. 28731 From: nina van gorkom Date: Mon Jan 5, 2004 9:14pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: How do you practice the Paramitas and Factors of Awakening Dear Philip, I love talking about paramis, that helps me to consider them more. Never enough of them! Nina. op 05-01-2004 14:23 schreef Philip op plnao@j...: > If I find a > post that I would like to ask for clarification on, is it all right > to bring it back up on to the board? 28732 From: nina van gorkom Date: Mon Jan 5, 2004 9:14pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Views along the way Dear James and Dan, These are higher stages of insight that cannot be reached without having developed first the beginning stages. When there is understanding there is nothing that frightens. This higher insight just sees the disadvantages of conditioned dhammas and tends more toward nibbana, the unconditioned dhamma. This is all figurative language to bring home the disadvantage of what arises and falls away. How could there be fear at a moment of understanding? This is always accompanied by calm. Nina. op 05-01-2004 18:22 schreef buddhatrue op buddhatrue@y...: > Dan: For bhayañana? "...formations...appear to him in the form of a > great terror, as lions, tigers, leopards, bears, hyenas, spirits, > ogres, fierce bulls, savage dogs, rut-maddened wild elephants, hideous > venomous serpents, thunderbolts, charnel grounds, battlefields, > flaming coal pits, etc., appear to a timid man who wants to live in > peace." > > James: Yep, been there, done that. Actually, still there. 28733 From: Egberdina Date: Mon Jan 5, 2004 11:29pm Subject: Re: What the Buddha taught Hi Jon, I appreciate your comments muchly. Some more of mine interspersed below. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Jonothan Abbott wrote: > Herman > > H: It can be said that what a person says is what they teach. Their > sayings reflect their beliefs. But a far better indicator of what a > person believes is what they do. What a person does is a teaching of > what they believe. > > J: This is an acute observation and generally true I believe. > However, to my mind it does not hold true in the case of a perfectly > enlightened being. Can give specific instances of the Buddha's words > not matching his deeds, and what is your theory as to the reason for > the difference? The observation also does not hold true in the case of parents versus children :-) I remember often creating appearances in the hope that one of my kids would fall for the appearance. Pretending to go to sleep, fully mindful, fully hoping the little one you are lying next to takes the bait. Pretending to eat while trying to feed them, pretending to be hurt when they hit you (laughing loudly inside), pretending to accept what they say, but knowing that with their attention span the size of a louse's earhole it won't go anywhere etc etc etc. All of these deceptions would, of course, be carried out with the noblest of intentions. I'd be quite interested, purely out of interest, to see some of the examples you have in mind. > > H: ... Clearly, the Buddha is teaching, by doing, the value of > seclusion and inactivity. Is seclusion and inactivity the Dhamma? Of > course not. But seclusion and inactivity is, by the Buddha's example, > creating the opportunity for insight into the Dhamma, whether wet, > dry or otherwise to arise. > > J: Now this is something different from your opening proposition. > What you are saying here is that by observing how a person acts we > can learn how he came to be how he is. > There seem to be a number of suttas relating to how the Buddha got to where he got. From what I have gathered it came down to a determination to not budge until he had found the answers he was looking for. Seven days, whether an exact figure or indicative of some fullness of time, of seated meditation, followed by three night watches (again as above) of piercing analysis. I am not sure of what he did, but I'm pretty sure that he explained it only to folks who were doing what he was doing. > I think there is a danger in this approach. To give an obvious > illustration, it would be misguided to think we could learn how to > become wealthy or successful by observing how wealthy or successful > people act. Surely we would be better off listening to what advice > they have to pass on. As I wrote to Dan earlier on today, if the path was a way of acquiring something, what you say above makes sense. But we are travelling in an opposite direction. Advice on how to become unencumbered will never get one unencumbered. Willingness to ditch some or all of our luggage will forever remain OUR choice. (nb The willingness only) > Besides, in his discourses the Buddha frequently urged his listeners > to *listen* more, but never to *observe* him. Should we ignore this > advice? > As far as I understand, any discussion of what happened to the Buddha or how he did it was addressed to bhikkhus, not a fully- fledged world limpet like myself. For this reason, I much appreciated Victor's recent advice to Ben to seek out bhikkhus-in- the-know to get his very profound questions answered. Bhikkhus do what the Buddha did, and say what the Buddha said. As for me, I do computer network maintenance, love my family, enjoy our exchanges on the Internet, and resist all further conviction that flows from reading the texts, and doing what they suggest. All the best Herman > ;-)) > > Jon > > 28734 From: buddhatrue Date: Tue Jan 6, 2004 0:09am Subject: [dsg] Re: Views along the way Hi Nina (Dan), --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, nina van gorkom wrote: > Dear James and Dan, > These are higher stages of insight that cannot be reached without having > developed first the beginning stages. When there is understanding there is > nothing that frightens. This higher insight just sees the disadvantages of > conditioned dhammas and tends more toward nibbana, the unconditioned dhamma. > This is all figurative language to bring home the disadvantage of what > arises and falls away. How could there be fear at a moment of understanding? > This is always accompanied by calm. > Nina. > Like I stated in my post to Dan, ultimately I will seek the advice of a bhikkhu who practices meditation. It is a little ironic to me, no offense intended, that two people who swear off meditation and don't practice it feel qualified to give advice about it to someone else. To state the obvious, there is a lot more to life than what is written in books. Frankly, at this point, and I could be wrong, I don't see how it could be possible to have `knowledge of fearfulness' and to not experience fear. I am not trying to claim that I have reached any kind of special insight, or trying to impress anyone, I have just described what I have experienced. I have experienced extreme fear during and after meditation when I begin to see more clearly the arising and falling of phenomena. It is scary, what can I say? I choose not to think I am going insane or have a mental disorder, although that is not beyond the realm of possibility. I did a little bit of research on the Internet on this subject, since meditation monks are in scant supply here in Cairo, and this is what I came across, which seems to be in contradiction to what you and Dan are stating: "Having seen how the dissolution of two things -- that is, any object noticed and the insight-thought engaged in noticing it -- takes place moment by moment, the meditator also understands by inference that in the past, too, every conditioned thing (formation) has broken up in the same way, that just so it will break up also in the future, and that at the present it breaks up, too. And just at the time of noticing any formations that are evident, these formations will appear to him in their aspect of fearfulness. Therefore, during the very act of noticing, the meditator will also come to understand: "These formations are indeed fearful." Such understanding of their fearfulness is called "knowledge of the awareness of fearfulness"; it has also the name "knowledge of fear." At that time, his mind itself is gripped by fear and seems helpless. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/bps/misc/progress.html#ch6.6 Please especially note the sentence: "At that time, his mind itself is gripped by fear and seems helpless." That is a pretty good description for what I experience quite often nowadays when I meditate. I am not calm, looking at the arising and falling phenomena, and thinking "Oh, this would be fearful to someone else but not to me because I have no self." I don't even think that would be possible, but I could be wrong. Metta, James 28735 From: christine_forsyth Date: Tue Jan 6, 2004 2:48am Subject: To the foot of a tree ... Dear Group, I arrived home from work this evening, settled down at the computer to read Herman's post (28716) and suddenly there was a power failure. Not a cloud in the sky, no strong wind. no rain - but a compete electricity shutdown for about 30 sq. kms. What to do .. it was still daylight (only 6 p.m.) so, after getting out the matches,candles and torch in case it lasted a few hours, I went to sit outside, at the foot of a tree, and read some dhamma. Cicadas went 'off duty' and crickets started their evening chorale, iridescent flocks of parrots flashed screaming overhead, a gentle breeze was blowing after a hot day, I was content. I didn't notice anything until it happened. A dozen hot jabs all over my feet. I dropped the book, leapt out of the chair, and realised I'd been ambushed by a scavenging party of meat ants. And I wasn't even dead yet. The worst thing was that I had stockings on and a few of the little "darlings" had somehow got inside them before the general signal to attack was broadcast, that made them all bite at once. Shoes were kicked off, modesty went a.w.o.l., stockings stripped off and shaken, but, miraculously, I remembered not to harm them. Were there ants at 'the foot of a tree' in N. India 2600 years ago? And, if so, what did the monks of old do? I mean, a tiger or a lion is avoidable, snakes are a little harder ... but how do you ant-proof yourself? (Metta doesn't seem to work). Bhikkhuni Soma: "Having gone deep into the Grove of the Blind, she sat down at the foot of a tree for the day's abiding." http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/samyutta/sn05-002.html Ven. Bhaddiya Kaligodha: "going to a forest, to the foot of a tree, or to an empty dwelling, would repeatedly exclaim, "What bliss! What bliss!" http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/khuddaka/udana/ud2-10.html Ven. Girimananda: "There is the case where a monk -- having gone to the wilderness, to the shade of a tree, or to an empty building -- reflects thus.." http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/anguttara/an10-060.html metta and peace, Christine ---The trouble is that you think you have time --- 28736 From: Philip Date: Tue Jan 6, 2004 2:49am Subject: [dsg] Re: How do you practice the Paramitas and Factors of Awakening Thank you, Sarah. I'll now retreat for the time being to the archives and Nina's book to school myself on some fundamentals! With Metta, Philip --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Sarah wrote: Hi Philip, > May I butt in and say that would be great. Any post or thread from the > archives is always open for further discussion. > > On the Paramis (Perfections), please also take a look at Nina's clear book > and read about as few or many of them as you like. Again, she and others > would be glad to give further clarification or comments: > http://www.abhidhamma.org/perfections%20of%20enlightenment.htm > > It's good to hear of your interest. We'll look forward to the posts you > bring up with interest;-) > > Metta, > > Sarah > ====== > > 28737 From: htootintnaing Date: Tue Jan 6, 2004 3:55am Subject: Re: vitakka and vicára Dear Jeff, it's been nice to be in Jhana. With Metta, Htoo Naing ---------------------------------------------------------------------- --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Jeffrey S. Brooks" wrote: > Thank-you Htoo Naing, it seems you and I have won the field, and now > we may retire to our jhana. > > Best regards, > > Jeff Brooks > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "htootintnaing" > wrote: > > Dear Jeff, > > > > What a good question that you made. Yes this matter need to be > > clarified. That translation as thoughts are not enough for Vitakka > > and Vicara. But when Cetasikas are studied in detail this matter will > > become clear. > > > > With Metta, > > > > Htoo Naing > <........> 28738 From: buddhatrue Date: Tue Jan 6, 2004 6:58am Subject: Re: Views along the way -- correction Hi Dan, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Dan D." wrote: > No problem, James. The accept your explanation (except for the part > about blaming Sarah and Jon...) and apology with no hard feeling. > > It's been a pleasure. > > Dan Thanks Dan (and the part about blaming Sarah and Jon was a joke. That is why I put the little 'winky face' ;-). Metta, James 28739 From: abhidhammika Date: Tue Jan 6, 2004 7:33am Subject: Paññatti VS Paramattha: To Nina, Mike B And Ken O Dear Nina, Michael B and all How are you? Happy New Year to Nina! Nina, thank you for your kind remarks on my linking of understanding with Dependent Origination. Michael wrote: "Pannatti is that which is subjective, in accordance with conventions, or in other words the opposite of real." The terms "subjective" and "objective" should be handled very judiciously as they have gathered speculative philosophical dusts in the Western literature for a long time. At this stage, I do not intend to engage in comparative discussion between Theravada uses of the terms "paññatti" and "paramattha" and Western intellectual uses of the terms "subjective" and "objective". As the Theravada terms "paññatti" and "paramattha" themselves are already causing you (and everybody else on this list?) enough confusion and trouble, it would be far better for you to focus on understanding those terms the way Theravada thinkers do. It is also worth remembering that Theravada thinkers have been using and understanding the terms "paññatti" and "paramattha" the old way for over two and a half millenniums of years. Therefore, we too can understand the terms "paññatti" and "paramattha" without needing to use the terms "subjective" and "objective". Michael also asked: "One could also say that pannatti is not real? If paramatha is real and pannatti is the opposite of paramatha then it makes sense to assume that pannatti is not real. Is that how you would define it?" What I did define is as follows: "Coventional truth is truth by convention, or truth through the processes of naming or labeling. Real or actual truth is truth by observation, experience, or experiment." Michael, I noticed that you kept describing paññatti as the opposite of paramattha. By doing that, do you realize that what you did was amounting to making a phenomenon conflict with its name? If we use the previous example in my last post, through observation and experiencing, we discover the phenomenon anger and name it "anger". The paramattha anger is the phenomenon for observation while the paññatti anger is a linguistic device for verbalization. Thus, the paññatti anger is merely a linguistic device for verbalization of the paramattha anger. I do not see the benefit in polarizing a paramattha phenomenon and its paññatti name. Of course, there are also paññatti labels for illusions and imaginary things such as the Creator, self, being and the like. We might call this types of paññatti baseless paññatti. A baseless paññatti is a mere name without a supporting phenomenon. Michael also asked: "Now, can you please elaborate a little bit more, in accordance with your understanding, about what are the qualities that makes a phenomena `exist objectively, to have actual existence or reality'." If you recall what I wrote about the paramattha anger in my last post, it is as follows: "However, the phenomenon anger is a paramattha because it can actually arise in us when we are provoked, for example. Here, please remember that anger is an emergent phenomenon that can arise only when there are relevant conditions such as provocations or insult and injury. And when those relevant conditions disappear, anger also DISAPPEARS." Thus, the qualities that make something a paramattha phenomenon is 1. emergence when there are relevant conditions. 2. total disappearance when those relevant conditions disappear. Please also note that I describe anger as a phenomenon that emerges, instead of stating that anger "has" a real existence as though it were a container that contains something. I hope that I have answered your questions without implicating the terms "subjective" and "objective". With regards, Suan Lu Zaw http://www.bodhiology.org --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Michael Beisert" wrote: Hello Suan, Thank you for your rather comprehensive explanation. There is a point though that I would appreciate to have some additional clarifications. You define paramatha as `real or actual phenomena or truth.' < snip> Metta Michael 28740 From: Htoo Naing Date: Tue Jan 6, 2004 8:31am Subject: Contemplation On Own Body ( 01 ) Dear Dhamma Friends, When the serious meditator is trying to concentrate on his breath or at some point in his body, he may fail to do so. He may miss recognizing his body positions. He may go on meditate without full understanding of what are hapening inside and around him. This has to happen because of the characteristic of Tanha or craving. This is human character. We have been looking for what we want since we were born. Even though we did not understand fully what were happening at our own birth, we had to cry because we were looking for breath cravingly. The first breath was gone. There was a sudden change and this could not resist and we had to cry. Then still for a while. Next cry came when there was something which was in need. That crying baby was satisfied with his mom's breast-feed. We were moved here and there and as the environment changed, we had to cry because of difference in the temperature and so on. This again was satisfied by wrapping and so on. Throughout maturition, we have learned to look for things that we want cravingly. Before the age of 7 this happens in nearly all children. If a special maturition does not arise, this will go on and on and clinging binds us with sensual things all the time. This effect of craving and clinging is carried along all the time unnoticed. When we experienced our mind and its hostility at our first meditation activity, we could not resist the movement of the mind as it is looking for the things it wants cravingly. So, not getting the right concentration at earlier attempts is quite understandable. However, we need to fight against this powerful mental enemy ' craving '. When in sitting in meditation, beginners may find their mind frequently follows sensual pleasure. This is the habit of our own mind. It has to be tamed well through Bhavana or mental cultivation. Sometimes quite a wild mind arises through sensual thinking. To tranquilize down these thoughts, we have to contemplate on our own body. When we contemplate on our own body, watching of breath, watching of body position, watching of all activities have to be suspended for a while. There are different ways of contemplation on our own body. May you all practise Kayanupassana Satipatthana ( contemplation on body ). With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing JourneyToNibbana Yahoo Group htootintnaing@y... JourneyToNibbana@g... 28741 From: htootintnaing Date: Tue Jan 6, 2004 9:01am Subject: Re: Paññatti VS Paramattha: To Nina, Mike B And Ken O Dear Suan, Thanks for your post casting a good light on Pannatti anger and Paramattha anger. Objective and subjective may possibly work for the job of Paramattha and Pannatti. Thanks again for your input here. Htoo Naing ---------------------------------------------------------------------- --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "abhidhammika" wrote: > > > Dear Nina, Michael B and all > > How are you? Happy New Year to Nina! > > Nina, thank you for your kind remarks on my linking of understanding > with Dependent Origination. > > Michael wrote: > > "Pannatti is that which is subjective, in accordance with > conventions, or in other words the opposite of real." > > The terms "subjective" and "objective" should be handled very > judiciously as they have gathered speculative philosophical dusts in > the Western literature for a long time. > > At this stage, I do not intend to engage in comparative discussion > between Theravada uses of the terms "paññatti" and "paramattha" and > Western intellectual uses of the terms "subjective" and "objective". > > As the Theravada terms "paññatti" and "paramattha" themselves are > already causing you (and everybody else on this list?) enough > confusion and trouble, it would be far better for you to focus on > understanding those terms the way Theravada thinkers do. > > It is also worth remembering that Theravada thinkers have been using > and understanding the terms "paññatti" and "paramattha" the old way > for over two and a half millenniums of years. > > Therefore, we too can understand the terms "paññatti" and > "paramattha" without needing to use the terms "subjective" > and "objective". > > Michael also asked: > > "One could also say that pannatti is not real? If paramatha is real > and pannatti is the opposite of paramatha then it makes sense to > assume that pannatti is not real. Is that how you would define it?" > > What I did define is as follows: > > "Coventional truth is truth by convention, or truth through the > processes of naming or labeling. > > Real or actual truth is truth by observation, experience, or > experiment." > > Michael, I noticed that you kept describing paññatti as the opposite > of paramattha. By doing that, do you realize that what you did was > amounting to making a phenomenon conflict with its name? > > If we use the previous example in my last post, through observation > and experiencing, we discover the phenomenon anger and name > it "anger". > > The paramattha anger is the phenomenon for observation while the > paññatti anger is a linguistic device for verbalization. > > Thus, the paññatti anger is merely a linguistic device for > verbalization of the paramattha anger. > > I do not see the benefit in polarizing a paramattha phenomenon and > its paññatti name. > > Of course, there are also paññatti labels for illusions and imaginary > things such as the Creator, self, being and the like. We might call > this types of paññatti baseless paññatti. > > A baseless paññatti is a mere name without a supporting phenomenon. > > > Michael also asked: > > "Now, can you please elaborate a little bit more, in accordance with > your understanding, about what are the qualities that makes a > phenomena `exist objectively, to have actual existence or reality'." > > If you recall what I wrote about the paramattha anger in my last post, > it is as follows: > > "However, the phenomenon anger is a paramattha because it can > actually arise in us when we are provoked, for example. Here, please > remember that anger is an emergent phenomenon that can arise only > when there are relevant conditions such as provocations or insult and > injury. > > And when those relevant conditions disappear, anger also DISAPPEARS." > > Thus, the qualities that make something a paramattha phenomenon is > > 1. emergence when there are relevant conditions. > 2. total disappearance when those relevant conditions disappear. > > Please also note that I describe anger as a phenomenon that emerges, > instead of stating that anger "has" a real existence as though it > were a container that contains something. > > I hope that I have answered your questions without implicating the > terms "subjective" and "objective". > > With regards, > > Suan Lu Zaw > > http://www.bodhiology.org > > > > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Michael Beisert" > wrote: > > > Hello Suan, > > Thank you for your rather comprehensive explanation. There is a point > though > that I would appreciate to have some additional clarifications. You > define > paramatha as `real or actual phenomena or truth.' > > < snip> > > > Metta > Michael 28742 From: nina van gorkom Date: Tue Jan 6, 2004 10:32am Subject: Re: [dsg] A Single Excellent Night - and Year Dear Andrew, Thank you for this post. It gives opportunity for more reflection after I answered you last time: You said before: Today Lodewijk and I talked about "Let not a person revive the past > Or on the future build his hopes.... An excellent reminder for insight but what a daily struggle to apply the Dhamma. During our walk Lodewijk and I were speaking about our different accumulations. Lodewijk said that he is always inclined to worry over the future, it causes his nightmares (although after our discussions he dreamt about dosa and how uncontrollable it is). I dwell on the past, what have I done, what did the other person say to me etc. We spoke about clinging to the self at the root of our problems, and expectations we have from others. We may think that we have understood this, but takes time to be really convinced of this truth. We concluded that we cannot change our accumulations (not until enlightenment) but that these should be studied with sati. My life would be very chaotic if I would only think in conventional terms and be without the precision of the Abhidhamma. What a salad of feelings we have, what delusion about the real motives of what we think, of our deeds and speech. We are such a mixture of kusala and akusala, cittas are so fast and without panna we do not know correctly what is what. The Abhidhamma is most helpful, clearly showing cause and effect. The Abhidhamma helps to know our real motives, to detect banner conceit (thanks Herman). The Abhidhamma has to be together with satipatthana, we have to realize that the Abhidhamma is not theory. As Iggleden said in his Intro to the Book of Analysis: So, I would like to add: we should not try to change any of those evil, bad states when they appear, they have arisen already. They are unpleasant, but they are our study material. We should get to know them, they are so real. That is satipatthana in daily life, and that is what we discuss during Dhamma discussions in Thailand. This pertains to the development of the perfection of truthfulness. A friend had a great loss, death of her husband. Lodewijk also said that we cannot prepare for such a loss, but that we can continue to study and consider the Dhamma little by little. To conclude: op 31-12-2003 23:42 schreef Andrew op athel60@t...: I note in particular > it refers to insight seeing presently arisen states correctly. N: That is the essence, but in the beginning there will be mostly moments of thinking. That is all right too, as said, we do not change any reality, face it as it is. When it is thinking, OK, when it is worry, OK, when it is attachment, OK. When we realize that we only have theoretical understanding of the truth of: there is no other person, no me, and that we therefore get into trouble all the time, a sense of urgency can naturally grow. A sense of urgency to develop insight now. We can learn in daily life that there is Dependent Origination everywhere, as Suan remarked. We are in the cycle according to conditions. But there is a way out of it. Nina. Bhaddekaratta Sutta: > "Let not a person revive the past > Or on the future build his hopes; > For the past has been left behind > And the future has not been reached. > Instead with insight let him see > Each presently arisen state; Nina. 28743 From: nina van gorkom Date: Tue Jan 6, 2004 10:32am Subject: Re: [dsg] Vism.XIV 60 (1 of 4)cittas as elements Dear Larry and all, It may be of use to compare with A.D.L. Ch 18. It is very important to remember when studying the old texts. I want to add: The mind element: cittas experiencing object through five doors, thus, these only arise in five sense-door processes. It includes five-door adverting-consciousness, and the two types of receiving-consciousness(one kusala vipaka, one akusala vipaka). manovinñána-dhátu: 'mind-consciousness element: all cittas, except the five sense-cognitions and the three kinds of cittas classified as mind-element. It includes cittas experiencing an object through six doors as well as door-freed cittas, cittas not arising in processes, namely, rebirth-consciousness, bhavanga-cittas, dying-consciousness. The five sense-cognitions are pa~nca-vi~n~naa.na-dhaatu, five-consciousness element. Thus we have: pa~nca-vi~n~naa.na-dhaatu mano-dhaatu, mind element mano-vi~n~naa.na-dhaatu, mind-consciousness element. op 06-01-2004 01:28 schreef LBIDD@w... op LBIDD@w...: > Hi all, > > Here are some definitions of "mind element" and "mind-consciousness > element" from Nyanatiloa's "Buddhist Dictionary" > http://www.saigon.com/~anson/ebud/bud-dict/dic_idx.htm > > mano-dhátu: 'mind-element', is one of the 18 elements (s. dhátu II). > This term, unlike manáyatana, does not apply to the whole of > consciousness, but designates only that special element of consciousness > which first, at the beginning of the process of sense-perception, > performs the function of advertence (ávajjana; Tab. I, 70) to the > sense-object and, then after twice having become conscious of it > performs the function of reception (sampaticchana; Tab I- 39,.55) into > mind-consciousness. See viññána-kicca. > > manovinñána-dhátu: 'mind-consciousness element', one of the 18 > 'elements' (s. dhátu II). This term is generally used as a name for > that consciousness-element which performs the functions of investigation > (santírana), determining (votthapana), registering (tadárammana), > etc. See Tab. I, 40, 41, 56, 71, 72. > 28744 From: nina van gorkom Date: Tue Jan 6, 2004 10:32am Subject: Re: [dsg] Vism.XIV 60 (1 of 4), heartbase 1. Dear Larry and all, elaboration: op 06-01-2004 01:18 schreef LBIDD@w... op LBIDD@w...: > "The Path of Purification" (Visuddhimagga) Ch. XIV > > 60. 13. The heart-basis has the characteristic of being the > (material) support for the mind-element and for the > mind-consciousness-element. Its function is to observe them. N: to observe: the Pali has: aadhaarana: the meaning is: being a container, foundation, support, holding up. In the five khandha planes where there are nama and rupa, cittas need a physical base, foundation. They do not arise independently of the body. The five sense-cognitions have the sense bases as physical support, and all the other cittas, namely, mind-element and the mind-consciousness-element (see explanation in the other post) have as support what is called the heartbase, an infinitely tiny rupa arising and falling away. Text: It is manifested as the carrying of them. It is to be found in dependence on > the blood, of the kind described in the treatise on the mindfulness of > the body (Ch. VIII, 111), inside the heart. N: let us first look at the footnote : text: Vism. VIII, 111. This is the heart flesh. As to colour, it is the colour > of the back of a red-lotus petal. As to shape, it is the shape of a > lotus bud with the outer petals removed and turned upside down; it is > smooth outside, and inside it is like the interior of a kosataki (loofah > gourd). In those who possess understanding it is a little expanded; in > those without understanding it is still only a bud. Inside it there is a > hollow the size of a punnaga seed's bed where half a pasata measure of > blood is kept, with which as their support the mind element and > mind-consciousness element occur. N: We have to go back in time centuries and centuries and consider with patience what is meant. What was the intention of the commentators? To see the heartbase as not worth clinging to, not beautiful. It is only the tiniest element performing a function. The last sentence is the core: The reality of that base is expressed by means of conventional terms to help people at that time to understand it correctly. We should not reject the terms used here, but cconsider what is really essential. Blood, inside the heart: we have to understand the rupa dhamma these words stand for. That is what really matters. Returning to Vis. Text:< It is assisted by the primaries with their functions of upholding, etc.> N: It arises from the first moment of life in a decad: the four Great Elements: solidity (earth) as a foundation, cohesion (water) as holding together (preventing falling apart of the conascent rupas), heat (fire) as maturing or maintaining and motion (wind) as distending (resilience). Text: it is consolidated by temperature, consciousness, and nutriment; it is maintained by life; N: So long as we are alive cittas arise, and each citta supports the previously arisen rupas. U. Narada, Conditional Relations: postnascence condition: < Mentality possesses such powerful force that, although it depends on the heart-base,( which is dependent on the blood inside the heart that is a very small part of the body), it is related to the matter produced by the four causes present in the whole body by postnascence condition.> > it serves as physical basis for the mind-element and the > mind-consciousness-element, and for the states associated with them. Nutriment and life: nutriment is one of the eight inseparable rupas arising in each unit of rupa. Not mentioned here but implied: flavour, odour and colour, included in these eight. It is maintained by life: since heartbase is produced only by kamma, there has to be in that unit: life-faculty. As we saw: it maintains kamma produced matter, as a wetnurse. Nina. 28745 From: Michael Beisert Date: Tue Jan 6, 2004 10:57am Subject: RE: [dsg] Paññatti VS Paramattha: To Nina, Mike B And Ken O Hello Suan, Suan: As the Theravada terms "paññatti" and "paramattha" themselves are already causing you (and everybody else on this list?) enough confusion and trouble, it would be far better for you to focus on understanding those terms the way Theravada thinkers do. It is also worth remembering that Theravada thinkers have been using and understanding the terms "paññatti" and "paramattha" the old way for over two and a half millenniums of years. Michael: This is exactly what I am trying to get. What is the understanding of those terms by the ancient Theravada thinkers. But I am sorry to say that I still don’t have a fully clear picture and therefore ask your patience for insisting on this topic. Your definition that ‘Real or actual truth is truth by observation, experience, or experiment’ sounds more like a method than a definition of the truth. Through observation, experience or experiment one may realize the truth but that does not explain what the truth is. So your definition is not very helpful in that respect. Suan: Michael, I noticed that you kept describing paññatti as the opposite of paramattha. By doing that, do you realize that what you did was amounting to making a phenomenon conflict with its name? Of course, there are also paññatti labels for illusions and imaginary things such as the Creator, self, being and the like. We might call this types of paññatti baseless paññatti. Michael: When I opposed paramatha to paññatti I was thinking along the lines of your second paragraph above. So, you are confirming that paññatti also designates things that do not exist. Because illusions or imaginary things do not exist. So paññatti is a mixture of names for things that truly exist (paramattha dhammas) and things that do not exist (illusions and imaginary things). Is this fair? Do you agree that the view of the theravada thinkers is that paramatha dhammas truly exist? What makes a thing really exist according to the ancients? Suan: A baseless paññatti is a mere name without a supporting phenomenon. Michael: But a being: a man, woman, child, animal, etc. can be ‘observed, experienced.’ Therefore it must be true. You see how your definition above of what is truth is inadequate. Suan: Thus, the qualities that make something a paramattha phenomenon is: 1. emergence when there are relevant conditions. 2. total disappearance when those relevant conditions disappear. Michael: But exactly the same can be said of a being. A being arises if the conditions are right and disappears when those conditions cease. But a being is not a paramattha phenomenon. It seems that those qualities are not enough to explain what is a paramatha phenomenon. Sorry to say that the veil of confusion in relation to the thinking of the ancient Theravada thinkers has not dissipated. But maybe as you suggested it is not just me. Maybe I am in good company. Metta Michael 28746 From: christine_forsyth Date: Tue Jan 6, 2004 11:18am Subject: Karunadasa - "Time and Space: The Abhidhamma perspective" Dear Group, You may be interested in reading: "Time and space: The Abhidhamma perspective" The following is the Professor K. N. Jayatilleke Memorial Lecture 2003 by Y. Karunadasa, former director, Postgraduate Institute of Pali and Buddhist Studies. http://www.lankalibrary.com/Bud/time.htm metta and peace, Christine ---The trouble is that you think you have time --- 28747 From: christine_forsyth Date: Tue Jan 6, 2004 0:17pm Subject: Two to tango (was Re: Contraception and the First Precept) Hiya Herman, and all, Herman: I would like to persevere with some of this. Fear not :-) Christine: Fear is just a four letter word, :-) and Fortes Fortuna Adiuvat - Fortune favours the brave. (So they tell me). ======================== Herman: It is my understanding that intentions and actions come about precisely because judgements are being made. Judgements proceeding from wrong view lead to wrong intention to wrong action, judgements proceeding from right view lead to right intention to right action, and no judgement leads to no intention to no action. Quite happy to be corrected (or denounced), by the way :-) Christine: Do things happen that way though? They are the first three steps of The Noble Eightfold Path. The NEP is a description of the Path to be followed to the end of suffering (some discussion on what is Path on another thread). It is the Paticcasamuppada sequence which describes the conditionality and dependent nature of all physical and psychical phenomena. i.e. the 'order' of happening - Ignorance (avijja) condtions Volitional Activities (sankhara) - and sankhara are the kamma-formations or rebirth-producing volitions. Imasmim sati idam hoti: When there is this, that is. Imasuppada idam upajjati: With the arising of this, that arises. Imasmim asati idam na hoti: When this is not, neither is that. Imassa nirodha idam nirujjhati: With the cessation of this, that ceases. [S.II.28,65] ==================== Herman: The initial activity proceeds from the initial opinion, belief, judgement. How one dresses it up afterwards will not alter the initial activity. But I really wonder how kamma can play a role for one who suspends judgement? Christine: Good question. Suspending judgment would be living uncontaminated by ignorance/craving, comment/interpretation, identification/label, no? How would we live our daily life? Is it possible to choose to suspend judgement or has judging happened before we are even aware of it? Isn't there no control, no free- will? :-) :-) Christine ---The trouble is that you think you have time --- 28748 From: christine_forsyth Date: Tue Jan 6, 2004 1:10pm Subject: Lifespan of Devas Dear Group, How old is an old deva? Depends .. "Kingship over human beings is a meager thing when compared with heavenly bliss. "Fifty human years are equal to one day & night among the Devas of the Four Great Kings. Thirty such days & nights make a month. Twelve such months make a year. Five hundred such heavenly years constitute the life-span among the Devas of the Four Great Kings. Now, it is possible that a certain man or woman -- from having observed this Uposatha endowed with eight factors -- on the break-up of the body, after death, might be reborn among the Devas of the Four Great Kings. It was in reference to this that it was said, 'Kingship over human beings is a meager thing when compared with heavenly bliss.' "A human century is equal to one day & night among the Devas of the Thirty-Three. Thirty such days & nights make a month... One thousand such heavenly years constitute the life-span among the Devas of the Thirty-three. Now, it is possible that a certain man or woman -- from having observed this Uposatha endowed with eight factors -- on the break-up of the body, after death, might be reborn among the Devas of the Thirty-three. It was in reference to this that it was said, 'Kingship over human beings is a meager thing when compared with heavenly bliss.' "Two human centuries are equal to one day & night among the Yama Devas... Two thousand such heavenly years constitute the life-span among the Yama Devas... "Four human centuries are equal to one day & night among the Contented Devas... Four thousand such heavenly years constitute the life-span among the Contented Devas... "Eight human centuries is equal to one day & night among the devas who delight in creation... Eight thousand such heavenly years constitute the life-span among the devas who delight in creation... "Sixteen human centuries are equal to one day & night among the devas who have power over the creations of others. Thirty such days & nights make a month. Twelve such months make a year. Sixteen thousand such heavenly years constitute the life-span among the devas who have power over the creations of others. Now, it is possible that a certain man or woman -- from having observed this Uposatha endowed with eight factors -- on the break-up of the body, after death, might be reborn among the devas who have power over the creations of others. It was in reference to this that it was said, 'Kingship over human beings is a meager thing when compared with heavenly bliss.'" http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/anguttara/an03-070.html metta and peace, Christine ---The trouble is that you think you have time --- 28749 From: Egberdina Date: Tue Jan 6, 2004 1:56pm Subject: Re: Paññatti VS Paramattha: To Nina, Mike B And Ken O Hi Suan and everybody, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "abhidhammika" wrote: > > What I did define is as follows: > > "Coventional truth is truth by convention, or truth through the > processes of naming or labeling. > > Real or actual truth is truth by observation, experience, or > experiment." > > Michael, I noticed that you kept describing paññatti as the opposite > of paramattha. By doing that, do you realize that what you did was > amounting to making a phenomenon conflict with its name? > > If we use the previous example in my last post, through observation > and experiencing, we discover the phenomenon anger and name > it "anger". > > The paramattha anger is the phenomenon for observation while the > paññatti anger is a linguistic device for verbalization. > I think this is very good and clear, but then there is always a but, isn't there :-) But...... The problem that has arisen is that certain schools of thought have then taken an experience, say anger, that is experienced and undoubted by everyone, and scholastically subdivided it until there is supposed to be an irreducible "unit" of anger. It is then claimed that only awareness of this irreducible unit of anger can be a basis for insight, and that what every man and woman in the street experiences as anger is really a gross hotch-potch that has lots of other irreducible "units" of other stuff mixed in with it. It is clear to me that anger as an irreducible is arrived at by way of thinking and is thus a concept (not experiencable). There is no way of experiencing whether one is experiencing the one true indivisible anger, or is still dealing with a 2 unit, 17 unit or whatever unit compounded experience. To make claims about the irreducibility of an observation is to be ignorant of the fact that the resolution of an observation is entirely dependent on the quality of the equipment used. And who is going to say they have the ultimate equipment? All the best Herman 28750 From: Date: Tue Jan 6, 2004 9:14am Subject: Karunadasa - "Time and Space: The Abhidhamma perspective" Hi, Christine - So far I've read only about one-fifth of the way through this article, and I've got to say that I am *very* excited by it!! I find myself reading my own thoughts, many of which I have expressed on-list many times!! 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) 28751 From: Date: Tue Jan 6, 2004 9:48am Subject: Re: Karunadasa - "Time and Space: The Abhidhamma perspective" Hi again, Christine - I've now read the whole article, though somewhat quickly. I still think it's an excellent piece of work, but I evaluate his treatment of space as a less-than-successful attempt at having his cake and eating it too! He tries mightily to portray space as merely conceptual in Abhidhamma even though it is given there as a rupa. Points awarded for effort!! ;-)) With metta, Howard P.S. I promise not to post jointly on this to the two lists any further, but to reply on a list only to posts that came from that list. I've posted jointly so far on this article - but no more, I promise, Sarah & Jon. I've done so because Christine was kind enough to give this great article to both lists, and I thought I might express my opinion on both lists. /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) 28752 From: Andrew Date: Tue Jan 6, 2004 3:43pm Subject: Re: [dsg] A Single Excellent Night - and Year --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, nina van gorkom wrote: > What a salad of feelings we > have, what delusion about the real motives of what we think, of our deeds > and speech. We are such a mixture of kusala and akusala, cittas are so fast > and without panna we do not know correctly what is what. ...> As Iggleden said in his Intro to the Book of Analysis: > existence of which he had previously be unaware, with the purpose of finding > out and understanding the motive underlying those thoughts. Behaviour which > he had once thought to be quite proper he will find to have a twisted or > corrupted motive. Dear Nina Thank you for your reflections on reviving the past. I found the above to be very interesting as I find myself more and more examining my thoughts. And yes, they mostly seem to have twisted and corrupted motives. It is strange to reflect on what petty and self-deceiving creatures we are. I help care for Sandra's father who is 89 years old and bedridden with only 30% lung function. The other day, I decided to go into his room and check on him. Before I reached his room, I realised that one of the main things driving me was lobha - a desire to help myself to a lolly from his lolly jar! Quite shocked at this, I deliberately avoided touching the lolly jar. I think it is easy to get depressed and morose about "oneself" when one starts to take a hard look at what's going on in the mind. I find, however, that Abhidhamma stops me from getting depressed about it. Cittas arise and fall so quickly, I realise that there probably were cittas of compassion arising and falling away before those strongly affected by lobha came into play. And it comforts me to think :"okay, it's not easy but at least I'm trying to be honest about the human condition." As you say, it's all good study material. Metta Andrew 28753 From: Date: Tue Jan 6, 2004 3:57pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Vism.XIV 60 (1 of 4)cittas as elements Hi Nina, Thanks for all this extra material. I will go ahead and post the footnote in three parts over three days, then pause to give people time to consider. It's a little difficult to follow at first but if we read it slowly and carefully there's no problem. People might want to save all four parts to refer one to another. Larry 28754 From: Date: Tue Jan 6, 2004 4:14pm Subject: Vism.XIV 60 (2 of 4) "The Path of Purification" (Visuddhimagga) Ch. XIV, paragraph 60 Note 26. ' "The heart-basis ... the support for the mind-element and for the mind-consciousness element"; how is that to be known? (i) From scriptures and (ii) from logical reasoning. 'The scripture is this: "The materiality dependent on which the mind-element and mind-consciousness-element occur is a condition, as a support condition, for the mind-element and the mind-consciousness-element and what is associated therewith" (P.tn. 1,4). If that is so, why is it not mentioned in the Ruupaka.n.da of the Dhammasa.nga.ni (Dhs.583ff.)? Its not being mentioned there is for another reason. What is that? Non-inconsistency of the teaching. For while eye-consciousness, etc., have the eye, etc., as their respective supports absolutely, mind-consciousness does not in the same way have the heart-basis as its support absolutely. And the teaching in the material-basis dyad (vatthu-duka) is given by way of the material support thus, "There is matter that is the physical basis of eye-consciousness, there is matter that is not the physical basis of eye-consciousness" (Dhs. 585) and so on; and if the dyads were stated by way of what had the heart-basis absolutely as its support thus, "There is matter that is the physical basis of mind-consciousness" and so on, then the object dyads (aaramma.na-duka) do not fall into line: for one cannot say: "There is matter that is the object of mind-consciousness, there is matter that is not the object of mind-consciousness". So the physical-basis dyads and object dyads being thus made inconsistent, the teaching would lack unity. That is why the heart-basis is not mentioned, not because it is unapprehendable. [to be continued] ---------------------- Vism XIV 60. 13. The heart-basis has the characteristic of being the (material) support for the mind-element and for the mind-consciousness-element. Its function is to observe them. It is manifested as the carrying of them. It is to be found in dependence on the blood, of the kind described in the treatise on the mindfulness of the body (Ch. VIII, 111), inside the heart. It is assisted by the primaries with their functions of upholding, etc.; it is consolidated by temperature, consciousness, and nutriment; it is maintained by life; and it serves as physical basis for the mind-element and the mind-consciousness-element, and for the states associated with them.26 28755 From: nina van gorkom Date: Tue Jan 6, 2004 9:09pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Paññatti VS Paramattha: To Nina, Mike B And Ken O Dear Suan, I like your clear and concise explanation about "paññatti" and "paramattha". Nina. op 06-01-2004 16:33 schreef abhidhammika op suanluzaw@b...: > It is also worth remembering that Theravada thinkers have been using > and understanding the terms "paññatti" and "paramattha" the old way > for over two and a half millenniums of years. 28756 From: Sarah Date: Tue Jan 6, 2004 11:41pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Paññatti_VS_Paramattha:_To_Nina,_Mike_B_And_Ken_O Dear Suan, Michael & All, --- abhidhammika wrote: > > How are you? Happy New Year to Sarah. .... Thanks, Suan. To you also. It’s good to see your helpful explanations. ... Suan:> As for the directions regarding Kathaavatthu, please read Sarah's > kind posting of excerpts of translation. ... Thanks for this encouragement too. Kathaavatthu, (PTS Points of Controversy), Book 1, 1 The Eight Refutations. The First Refutation, 1) The fivefold Affirmative Presentation [I gave the commentary summary last time] “Theravadin - Is ‘the person’ known in the sense of a real and ultimate fact? Puggalavadin - Yes Th - Is the person known ‘in the same way’ as a real and ultimate fact is known? P - Nay, that cannot truly be said. Th - Acknowledge your refutation: i) If the person be known in the sense of a real and ultimate fact, then indeed, good sir, you should also say, the person is known in the same way as [any other] real and ultimate fact [is known]. ii) that which you say here is wrong, namely, 1) that we ought to say, ‘the person is known in the sense of a real and ultimate fact,’ but 2) we ought not to say, the person is known in the same way as [any other] real and ultimate fact [is known]. iii) If the latter statement 2) cannot be admitted, then indeed the former statement 1) should not be admitted. iv) In affirming the former statement 1), while v) denying the latter 2), you are wrong. ***** Suan:> Sarah, please continue posting of those translations for all to read. ... Let’s see if anyone else would like any more;-) .... Suan:>neo- > Rhys-Davidsites, notably, Dr Peter Masefiled, and Professor Peter > Harvey. And those neo-Rhys-Davidsites got away only by translating > Suttam Pali passages inaccurately, which can, of course, be due to > their honest immature Pali scholarship as well. .... In fairness, I think I should mention how grateful I am for translations by the Rhys-Davids and Masefield. While Mrs R-D’s translations leave much to be desired (!), for those of us without your Pali expertise, for a long time they were our only means of access to texts like some of Samyutta Nikaya and the Dhammasangani. Even this translation of the Katthaavatthu is a joint translation by Mrs R-D and Shwe Zan Aung with the prefatory notes by Mrs R-D. I think Shwe Zan Aung’s collaboration in the final product is very valuable! As for Masefield’s translations, such as the Udana and commentary, Vimana stories and commentary and so on, these are some of the very best, imho, especially as he gives a lot of helpful Pali detail. I appreciate that you are referring to personal interpretations and so on which may be apparent in other texts and notes and terms used. I’m sure we'd agree in this regard. I’m really only familiar with the translations. Metta, Sarah p.s Michael, for the various kinds of pannattis (concepts) and more details, see below: http://www.abhidhamma.org/sujin3.htm The Abhidhammattha Vibhavani (Book 8) distinguishes between six kinds of concepts that are names, nama-pannatti (see Visuddhimagga VIII, note 11). 1. Vijjamana pannattis, concepts which make known what is real, for example the words rupa, nama, vedana (feeling), or sanna (perception) 10. 2. Avijjamana pannattis, concepts which make known what is not real, such as the words Thai or foreigner. These concepts do not represent absolute realities, citta and cetasika which are nama, and rupa. Thai or foreigner are not real in the absolute sense, they are conventional realities, sammutti dhammas. Could akusala citta11 (unwholesome consciousness) be Thai or foreign? Akusala citta is a paramattha dhamma (a reality), it is a dhamma which has its own characteristic, it is not Thai or foreign. 3. Vijjamanena avijjamana pannattis, concepts of the non-existent based on the existent. There is the expression "the person with the six abhinnas."12 The six abhinnas are real but person is not real. Thus this concept stands for what is real and for what is not real. 4. Avijjamanena vijjamana pannattis, concepts of the existent based on the non-existent. There is the expression "woman's voice". The sound is real, but the woman is not real. 5. Vijjamanena vijjamana pannattis, concepts of what is real based on what is real. There is the term cakkhu-vinnana (eye-consciousness). Cakkhu (eye) is a reality, namely the cakkhu-pasada-rupa (eyesense, a reality sensitive to colour or visible object), and vinnana (consciousness) is also a reality, namely the reality which experiences. 6. Avija amanena avijjamana pannattis, concepts of what is not real based on what is not real. There is the expression "the kings son". Both king and son are not real, they are sammutti dhammas, conventional realities. ***** 28757 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Wed Jan 7, 2004 0:11am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re:_Paññatti_VS_Paramattha:_To_Nina,_Mike_B_And_Ken_O Hi Herman > And who is going to say they have the ultimate equipment? > k: Budhha ;-) kind regards Ken O 28758 From: Sarah Date: Wed Jan 7, 2004 0:43am Subject: What a person does...... (was:Contraception and the First Precept) Hi Herman & All, --- Egberdina wrote: Thanks for the other comments and quotes. I’d like to continue to discuss ‘appearances’ as this topic seems to be a hobby horse for both of us. More like a stuck record/MP3 (do they stick??), in my case. In another post (to Jon), you wrote: H: It can be said that what a person says is what they teach. Their sayings reflect their beliefs. But a far better indicator of what a person believes is what they do. What a person does is a teaching of what they believe. ..... I’ve quoted from suttas which suggest we should judge by outer appearances and actions, eg AN, 6s, 123 ‘Don’t Judge Others!’ and the one you gave from Udana 1 about Ven Sangamaji. http://www.sacred-texts.com/bud/udn/udn1.htm Here, I think, you give another helpful example which clearly shows how even bhikkhus seeing and listening to the Buddha were unable to recogize an arhant: H: > As to the question of following precepts, the Udana provides a very > counter-intuitive example. Udana 3.6 tells of a monk who was in the > habit of reviling other monks and calling them outcasts. This was > brought to the attention of the Buddha who found no fault in the > bahaviour, but exclaimed > > "From whom no deceit or pride proceeds, > In whom avarice is annihilated, > Who has got rid of the notion 'this is mine', > Who is passionless and has put away wrath, > Who is freed from all cares, > That Bhikkhu is a Brahmana and a Samana." .... The commentary adds lots of extra detail. ‘A good many monks: many monks; when they saw the elder treating them in that way, they thought that that elder seemed to be one bearing hatred in that he treated them thus, not knowing that, though already an arahant, he made such proclamations on account of impressions not abandoned...’ The Buddha said: “This one treats (the monks) in hat way owing to former habitual practice on his part; his harsh speech is not intentional”. And later, “Monks, it is not as one bearing hatred, with hatred in his heart, with a heart polluted by hatred, by ill will, that this Vaccha treats the monks to talk (reserved) for outcastes; his ill will has been completely rooted out by the path itself. He says “For (the monk) Vacha, monks” and so on, thus indicating that the reason for his treating (them) in that way, despite the fact that he is not bearing hatred, stems from former births” Also, “But what is this that is known as impressions? They say that that which, even in the continuity of one in whom the defilements are wanting, is the mere capacity, built up by defilements cultivated from time without beginning, to constitute the root-cause of conduct similar to conduct on the part of those in whom the defilements have not been abandoned, is a disposition of such a kind. “ The commentary continues to add that the only exception to this rule is the Buddha himself, in whose case the continuity of habitual tendencies from previous defilements disappear, ‘due to which the Tathagata is alone one whose knowledge and vision are without obstruction.’ .... H:> All the best to you, Sarah, and Jon, and keep up the great work with > dsg. ... Thanks for your encouragement, Herman (also Ken O and Dan);-)) Also thanks to all the members for the ‘plenty of differing views’ and ‘diversity of perspective’;-) Metta, Sarah ======== 28759 From: Sarah Date: Wed Jan 7, 2004 2:59am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: moha Hi Dan. You wrote a week or two ago: Dan: I still want to work through the "restlessness" cetasika as it appears in, say, well into an intensive meditation retreat at a time when calm and peaceful lobhamulacittani arise, and how "restlessness" is experienced in sloth-and-torpor moments... .... Yes, good points and I don’t have anything much to add to what Nina writes in ‘Cetasikas’ under uddhacca cetasika: http://www.vipassana.info/cetasikas16.html In particular: "Restlessness Uddhacca, translated as restlessness, agitation, excitement or confusion, is another akusala cetasika which arises with each akusala citta. The Atthasalini (II, Part IX, Chapter I, 250) gives the following definition of uddhacca: It has mental excitement as characteristic like wind-tossed water; wavering as function, like a flag waving in the wind: whirling as manifestation like scattered ashes struck by a stone; unsystematic thought owing to mental excitement as proximate cause; and it should be regarded as mental distraction over an object of excitement." ***** I often reflect on the aspect that when there is no dana, sila or bhavana, even when the mind seems so very tranquil, pleasant and quiet, there is uddhacca, “like wind-tossed water”. Whilst we can clearly see how strong lobha (attachment) is accompanied by agitation which has 'whirling as manifestation', gradually we can understand more about what seem like peaceful states, usually accompanied by lobha and uddhacca too. It helps me understand how and why samatha cannot develop without very keen understanding of wholesome versus unwholesome peace and quiet. Only panna (understanding) can clearly discern whether it is supposed calm with attachment and mental excitement or calm with detachment and steadfastness. No need to pinpoint, but more and more subtle kinds of attachment can be known. With sloth and torpor too - no steadiness or attentiveness for kusala mind-states and actions. Sloth and torpor have ‘sinking of associated states as manifestation’ and I thought of your comments (and Ken O’s) on crossing the flood: >SN I.1 (1) Crossing the Flood was [KenH] Dan:“It is in no way asceticism, nor is it in any way hedonism. The focus is shifted from the things done (follow strict rules or follow sensual desires) to the understanding of the state of mind when things are done.” **** Further to Crossing the Flood and understanding the distinction between steadfastness and restlessness, you might appreciate this quote from the Atthasalini (PTS, The Expositor, Part1V, ch11, p.190): “...It stands having dived and entered into the object - this is ‘solidity.’.......It stands combining associated states in the object - this is ‘solidity.’ It stands having dived and entered into the object - this is ‘steadfastness.’ In the moral portion four states dive into the object - to wit, faith, mindfulness, concentration, understanding. Hence faith has said to be the downard plunge, mindfulness to be the non-floating, concentration to be the grounded stand and understanding to be the sounding penetration. And in the immoral portion three states dive into the object - to wit, craving, opinionativeness and ignorance. Hence they are called the down-plungers [or floods].” We could add, the down-plungers with uddhacca (mental excitement) and no steadfastness. Like others, I liked the Bach analogy post and emphasis on how ‘minds arise and fall with great rapidity’ and‘ “the mind” is really just a way to refer to a long, long series of “minds” that arise and fall from moment to moment.’ I hope you’ll continue;-) Metta, Sarah ====== 28760 From: buddhatrue Date: Wed Jan 7, 2004 3:10am Subject: Whose Abhidhamma? ( Was:Re: Karunadasa - "Time and Space..) Hi Howard, Christine, and All, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi again, Christine - > > I've now read the whole article, though somewhat quickly. I still > think it's an excellent piece of work, but I evaluate his treatment of space as a > less-than-successful attempt at having his cake and eating it too! He tries > mightily to portray space as merely conceptual in Abhidhamma even though it is > given there as a rupa. Points awarded for effort!! ;-)) > > With metta, > Howard Okay, now I am seriously confused! I read this article, "Time and Space: The Abhidhamma perspective" and agree with absolutely everything in it!! I even started to feel very ashamed because the way this professor describes the Abhidhamma it makes perfect sense and no one with any sense should disagree with it…and here I have been spouting off to this group about how it is nonsensical! And yet, in comparison, I think that the Abhidhamma presented in this group (including the writings of Nina), and the Abhidhamma that Y. Karunadasa describes are two different Abhidhammas. Which is the real Abhidhamma??? Karunadasa describes the Abhidhamma as a means of categorizing and understanding experience, and that namas and rupas are ultimate realities in the sense that experience is the ultimate reality, which I completely agree with!! And yet in this group the discription of namas and rupas are ultimate realities in a pseudo- scientific sense as psychological and materialistic realities; which I don't agree with. What is going on here?? Have I been unfairly criticizing something that doesn't deserve to be criticized because of the false interpretations I have received in this group? Or is Karunadasa reinterpreting the Abhidhamma in a way that makes sense but isn't actually present in the system of thought? (Which I believe you are stating here, Howard). And, there is a third possibility: that the Abhidhamma is both right and wrong. That it began as a correct system of thought based on the Buddha's teachings, possibly began by Ven. Sariputta, and then subsequent thinkers who did not properly understand its complicated subtleties misinterpreted the kernel of the original teachings of Abhidhamma until it became an unwieldy conglomeration? I'm seriously confused here! :-/ Metta, James 28761 From: Sarah Date: Wed Jan 7, 2004 3:45am Subject: Re: [dsg] To the foot of a tree ... Hi Christine, Thanks for this good post;-) --- christine_forsyth wrote: > Were there ants at 'the foot of a tree' in N. India 2600 years ago? > And, if so, what did the monks of old do? I mean, a tiger or a lion > is avoidable, snakes are a little harder ... but how do you ant-proof > yourself? (Metta doesn't seem to work). <..> > Ven. Bhaddiya Kaligodha: > "going to a forest, to the foot of a tree, or to an empty dwelling, > would repeatedly exclaim, "What bliss! What bliss!" > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/khuddaka/udana/ud2-10.html ;-) I think ants came before stockings. Ok, for your collection:- ant (kipillikaa) as in Vibh-a (Dispeller, 123): “But it is just as when a line of termites or a line of ants, on being looked at, seems as though it were bound together, yet it is not bound together; for the head or the belly or the feet of one is near to the head of another, the head or belly or the feet of one is near the belly of another, the head or belly or the feet of one is near the feet of another. In the same way indeed, of the material qualities [S:rupas] of fourfold origination [S:kamma, citta, temperature, nutrition], the arising of one or its presence or dissolution is at the moment of arising of another, the arising of one or its presence or dissolution is at the moment of presence of another, the arising of one or its presence or dissolution is at the moment of dissolution of another. Thus should ‘multiple arising and multiple cessation’ be understood here.” Who says the Abhidhamma doesn’t have practical applicability?;-) And so with all the gross and subtle rupas being discussed in other threads, we learn that what we take for body, hair, feet and so on should be understood as representing rupas arising and falling in succession like the line of ants: “But ‘multiple arising and multiple cessation’ should be understood in accordance with materiality of fourfold continuity. For in this body, from the soles of the feet up, from the hair of the head down and confined by the skin, materiality of fourfold origination occurs here and there heaped in a mass.” Metta Sarah p.s. Thanks for answering your Qu so well on the age of devas: --- christine_forsyth wrote: > How old is an old deva? Depends .. > > "Kingship over human beings is a meager thing when compared with > heavenly bliss. > "Fifty human years are equal to one day & night among the Devas of > the Four Great Kings. Thirty such days & nights make a month. Twelve > such months make a year. Five hundred such heavenly years constitute > the life-span among the Devas of the Four Great Kings. 28762 From: Sarah Date: Wed Jan 7, 2004 5:11am Subject: Re: [dsg] the study of Abhidhamma and rupas. Dear Nina, I wrote a longer post a couple of days ago in my draft document, didn't post as I planned to add a quote and cleared out the drafts today, quite forgetting it. Anyway, it was just to thank you for all this detail and to say that these discussions and elaborations from the Vism (sometimes the bitter medicine) are very helpful for me too....just a condition for a tad more detachment from 'my body', 'my life' that we find so precious. --- nina van gorkom wrote: > > if we can't relate them to daily life. > N: That is what I am trying to do all the time, but what I find it so > very > difficult, Larry. People keep on thinking that all these rupas are > conventional terms, and how to bring home that they are realities? > I think daily life without the Abhidhamma is so chaotic. ... I agree. The kilesa may be as apparent as ever, but the gradual straightening of views and 'mini-meditations' have a big impact in daily life. I've been conscious of this as I talk to my brother who sees life more from a sociological/political way - society morals and situations again. .... The Abhidhamma > is > very precise, teaches in detail about nama and rupa. For most people the > teaching about cittas is more acceptable than the teaching about rupas. ... It was like this for a long time for me too. Even then, some cittas were more interesting than others;-) .... <...> > Chemists are not interested at detachment, <...> > The root of the problem is this: study of Abhidhamma should go hand in > hand > with satipatthana, otherwise we get the wrong grasp (the snake really > bites), lost in speculations. ... ;-) ;-) ... >Lodewijk > said that he will throw my computer out of the window. ... Please ask him to have compassion for us;-) Thank you again for all the helpful comments here and in the other detailed posts. I'm sure that for most people it just takes time to assimilate and they need to refer back to it all from time to time, as with your books which get quoted so often now. Metta, Sarah p.s Pls tell Lodewijk that I especially liked his reminder about death, that "we cannot prepare for such a loss, but that we can continue to study and consider the Dhamma little by little." Your discussions on walks sound helpful too. =========================================== 28763 From: Date: Wed Jan 7, 2004 0:47am Subject: Re: [dsg] Whose Abhidhamma? ( Was:Re: Karunadasa - "Time and Space..) Hi, James - In a message dated 1/7/04 6:11:49 AM Eastern Standard Time, buddhatrue@y... writes: > > Hi Howard, Christine, and All, > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@a... wrote: > >Hi again, Christine - > > > > I've now read the whole article, though somewhat quickly. I > still > >think it's an excellent piece of work, but I evaluate his treatment > of space as a > >less-than-successful attempt at having his cake and eating it too! > He tries > >mightily to portray space as merely conceptual in Abhidhamma even > though it is > >given there as a rupa. Points awarded for effort!! ;-)) > > > >With metta, > >Howard > > Okay, now I am seriously confused! I read this article, "Time and > Space: The Abhidhamma perspective" and agree with absolutely > everything in it!! I even started to feel very ashamed because the > way this professor describes the Abhidhamma it makes perfect sense > and no one with any sense should disagree with it…and here I have > been spouting off to this group about how it is nonsensical! And > yet, in comparison, I think that the Abhidhamma presented in this > group (including the writings of Nina), and the Abhidhamma that Y. > Karunadasa describes are two different Abhidhammas. Which is the > real Abhidhamma??? Karunadasa describes the Abhidhamma as a means of > categorizing and understanding experience, and that namas and rupas > are ultimate realities in the sense that experience is the ultimate > reality, which I completely agree with!! And yet in this group the > discription of namas and rupas are ultimate realities in a pseudo- > scientific sense as psychological and materialistic realities; which > I don't agree with. What is going on here?? Have I been unfairly > criticizing something that doesn't deserve to be criticized because > of the false interpretations I have received in this group? Or is > Karunadasa reinterpreting the Abhidhamma in a way that makes sense > but isn't actually present in the system of thought? (Which I > believe you are stating here, Howard). > > And, there is a third possibility: that the Abhidhamma is both right > and wrong. That it began as a correct system of thought based on the > Buddha's teachings, possibly began by Ven. Sariputta, and then > subsequent thinkers who did not properly understand its complicated > subtleties misinterpreted the kernel of the original teachings of > Abhidhamma until it became an unwieldy conglomeration? > > I'm seriously confused here! :-/ > > Metta, James > > ================================ I also love Karunadasa's description of Abhidhamma, which is somewhat similar, I think, to Ven Nyanaponika's. As I said before, most of what he writes in this article sounds to me like my own thoughts! And I think that his evaluation of Abhidhamma is a valid one as an overall view, passing over minor problem areas which I think grew out of the "scientific" world view of the ancients. The only criticism I had was that the author of the article tried to put forward the idea that although Abhidhamma treats space (akasa-dhatu) as a rupa, it doesn't "really" mean it, and that space is really just concept, but, for some reason, should also be called a rupa. I think the author does think that Abhidhamma is slightly "off" on this issue, but he doesn't want to quite say that. In any case, my point of view remains what is was prior to reading this article, namely that Theravadin Abhidhamma is less than perfect, but that overall it is an amazing conceptual edifice that is best understood in pretty much the way Karundasa describes it in this article. The Abhidhamma of the Theravadins, while not IMO the direct word of the Buddha, is largely faithful to his teachings, is *way* better than the eternalist, substantialist, and annihilationist abhidhammic works of other schools, and fits rather harmoniously with the work of Nagarjuna and Vasubandhu in Mahayana. 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) 28764 From: abhidhammika Date: Wed Jan 7, 2004 6:13am Subject: Re: Paññatti_VS_Paramattha:_To_Nina,_Mike_B_And_Ken_O Dear Sarah, Nina, Htoo and all How are you? Sarah wrote: "I appreciate that you are referring to personal interpretations and so on which may be apparent in other texts and notes and terms used. I'm sure we'd agree in this regard. I'm really only familiar with the translations." You are spot-on. Yes, I am referring to their personal interpretations and, in particular, criticism of Aacariya Buddhaghosa and Pali commentaries. My polemics was never towards their efforts in translations of Pali texts. Believe it or not, whenever I found a scholar or an academic criticizing Buddhaghosa, when checked closely, it is usually because Buddhaghosa is always in their way preventing them from leaning towards Veda and/or personal interpretations. Thank you for posting of translations on paramattha and paññatti. With regards, Suan --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Sarah wrote: > Dear Suan, Michael & All, > > --- abhidhammika wrote: > > > How are you? Happy New Year to Sarah. > .... > Thanks, Suan. To you also. It's good to see your helpful explanations. 28765 From: abhidhammika Date: Wed Jan 7, 2004 6:54am Subject: Re: Paññatti VS Paramattha: To Nina, Mike B And Ken O Dear Michael B, Nina, Htoo, Mike Niece, Herman and all How are you? Michael wrote: "Your definition that `Real or actual truth is truth by observation, experience, or experiment' sounds more like a method than a definition of the truth. Through observation, experience or experiment one may realize the truth but that does not explain what the truth is. So your definition is not very helpful in that respect." Believe it or not, the thing called "truth" whose abstract definition you are after does not exist independently of the paramattha dhammaa such as anger, feeling, and matter. And the paramattha anger, paramattha feeling, paramattha matter are best understood by observation, experience and experiment. That is why I defined paramattha saccaa the way I did - like a method or in terms of an operational definition - instead of giving you a definition of "truth". When you get a definition of a particular paramattha dhamma such as anger, for example, it is tantamount to you also getting a definition of what truth is. Please digest the above explanation for now. Remember that truth does not exist by itself on its own. With regards, Suan Lu Zaw http://www.bodhiology.org --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Michael Beisert" wrote: > Hello Suan, 28766 From: Michael Beisert Date: Wed Jan 7, 2004 7:53am Subject: RE: [dsg] Re: Paññatti VS Paramattha: To Nina, Mike B And Ken O Suan (and all,) Thanks for your effort. Not that it has produced many results because you preferred to leave many questions unanswered. But don’t worry in providing those answers because it is quite clear to me what is the thinking of the ancient Theravada commentators. You refrained from giving me a definition of paramatha but the article written by Karudanasa (I presume he is part of your list of trusted scholars – don’t bother to answer) clearly shows what paramatha means: A dhamma in the sense of an elementary constituent is often defined as that which has its own-nature or own-being (sabhava, sakabhava). This has two implications. One is that it represents a specific fact, mental or material, which is not shared by the other dhammas. Hence own-nature is also defined as the characteristic, which is peculiar to a dhamma (avenika-sabhava). The other implication is that since a dhamma has its own nature, its existence is not dependent on the operation of the mind as a conceptual construct. It is not a product of mental interpretation and as such it is an existent having objective reality. Thus; the Abhidharnma theory of reality demands that we make a clear distinction between dhammas, that is, those types of entities that possess ontological ultimacy on the one hand, and pannattis, that is, those entities that exist only as conceptual constructs, on the other. A dhamma is a truly existent thing (sabhava-siddha), whereas a pannatti is a thing merely conceptualized (parikappa-siddha). The former is an existent verifiable by its own distinctive intrinsic characteristic, but the latter, being a product of the mind’s synthetic function, exists only by virtue of thought. It is a mental construct superimposed on things and hence possesses no objective counterpart. The dhammas, as we have already noted, are the entities that have ontological ultimacy. Hence they are often described as paramattha, that is, that which exists in a real and ultimate sense. Those are quite straight forward explanations of what is a paramatha and paññatti. There are many words used in those quotes, like ‘own-nature,’ ‘own-being,’ ‘characteristic peculiar to a dhamma,’ ‘distinctive intrinsic characteristic,’ ‘existence,’ ‘ontological ultimacy,’ ‘truly existing thing,’ ‘exists in a real and ultimate sense.’ All those words only confirm to me what I knew already. Pointing to qualities that the dhammas posses that can only be explained by one attribute. If the dhammas are all that which has been described, they must have an essence, they exist from their own side, by their own power. But this interpretation is not in accordance with the suttas. I said before and say again, there is no paramatha, no sabhava, in the suttas, and paññatti appears in the suttas but with a different meaning than the one used in the Abhidhamma commentaries. Those are all concepts invented by the Commentators. I am not discarding the Abhidhamma. The Abhidhamma is a good tool to understand human psychology but it is very poor in defining Buddhist philosophy. I have to say that from my point of view this thread is closed. I realized from recent messages that my observations have stirred up a lot of emotions. I don’t want to upset people even more. For those who don’t have a strong attachment to their views and want to better understand a philosophical stand which is closer to the teachings of the suttas I suggest to study the Madhyamaka philosophy. For those who have strong attachment to the views expressed by the Abhidhamma commentators, just remember that any strong attachment is a hindrance in the path. May you all be happy and sorry for any disturbances that I may have caused. Metta Michael 28767 From: Date: Wed Jan 7, 2004 2:59am Subject: Truth [Re: [dsg] Re: Paññatti VS Paramattha: To Nina, Mike B And Ken O] Hi, Suan (and all) - In a message dated 1/7/04 9:56:57 AM Eastern Standard Time, suanluzaw@b... writes: > > Dear Michael B, Nina, Htoo, Mike Niece, Herman and all > > How are you? > > Michael wrote: > > "Your definition that `Real or actual truth is truth by observation, > experience, or experiment' sounds more like a method than a > definition of the truth. Through observation, experience or > experiment one may realize the truth but that does not explain what > the truth is. So your definition is not very helpful in that respect." > > Believe it or not, the thing called "truth" whose abstract definition > you are after does not exist independently of the paramattha dhammaa > such as anger, feeling, and matter. > > And the paramattha anger, paramattha feeling, paramattha matter are > best understood by observation, experience and experiment. > > That is why I defined paramattha saccaa the way I did - like a method > or in terms of an operational definition - instead of giving you a > definition of "truth". > > When you get a definition of a particular paramattha dhamma such as > anger, for example, it is tantamount to you also getting a definition > of what truth is. > > Please digest the above explanation for now. > > Remember that truth does not exist by itself on its own. > > With regards, > > Suan Lu Zaw > > http://www.bodhiology.org > =============================== Some thoughts about 'truth': Truth, in everday usage, is a measure of how well a statement matches the way things are, how well it accords with "reality". Now, all statements are verbal expressions of properties supposedly holding of conventional objects or of relations holding among conventional objects. (The very subject-object form of a sentence makes that so.) If the properties or relations are seen to indeed hold, then the statement is "true". Truth and falsehood are properties (of varying degree) of statements and of the ideas they stand for. Now, the notion of 'ultimate truth' is a bit tricky, I think. If the concepts of a statement are seen as shorthands that express complex patterns of relations among direct experiences - that is, if the concepts embodied in the sentence are seen through and are understood to denote entities only in a manner of speaking, then the truth of a true statement is an "ultimate truth". But if the concepts are taken literally as denoting true self-existent, separate entities, then the truth of the statement is at best a relative truth. Actually, in this case, the statement itself becomes merely a murky approximation to an actual assertion that could be unambiguously true or false. Now, sometimes when people speak of Truth (with an upper-case T), they mean "the way things actually are". That is not truth in the "true or false" sense - in the sense of sentential or propositional evaluation. It is not a linguistic matter at all. It is an existential matter, and it is to be known by means of wisdom, by a mind freed, if only for the moment, of defilements. But this use of the word 'truth' is probably a misuse, and might be better rendered by 'actuality' or 'reality'. With true 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) 28768 From: Date: Wed Jan 7, 2004 3:19am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Paññatti VS Paramattha: To Nina, Mike B And Ken O Hi, Michael - In a message dated 1/7/04 10:55:11 AM Eastern Standard Time, mbeisert@h... writes: > All those words only confirm to me what I knew already. Pointing to > qualities that the dhammas posses that can only be explained by one > attribute. If the dhammas are all that which has been described, they must > have an essence, they exist from their own side, by their own power. But > this interpretation is not in accordance with the suttas. I said before and > say again, there is no paramatha, no sabhava, in the suttas, and paññatti > appears in the suttas but with a different meaning than the one used in the > Abhidhamma commentaries. Those are all concepts invented by the > Commentators. I am not discarding the Abhidhamma. The Abhidhamma is a good > tool to understand human psychology but it is very poor in defining Buddhist > > philosophy. > > I have to say that from my point of view this thread is closed. I realized > from recent messages that my observations have stirred up a lot of emotions. > > I don’t want to upset people even more. For those who don’t have a strong > attachment to their views and want to better understand a philosophical > stand which is closer to the teachings of the suttas I suggest to study the > Madhyamaka philosophy. For those who have strong attachment to the views > expressed by the Abhidhamma commentators, just remember that any strong > attachment is a hindrance in the path. > > ============================ Putting aside for the moment such terms as 'sabhava', I would simply ask whether one can distinguish between hardness and anger? If they are distinguishable, then they have (or are) different characteristics/conditions/natures. Hardness is not a separate, self-existent entity - it is a fleeting condition that arises in complete dependence on other equally empty conditions. The same is true for anger. But hardness and anger are not the same, they are distinguishable, and, IN THAT SENSE they each have their own nature. It is "own" nature, because it is a characteristic that is not shared, but it is not "own" in the sense of arising from itself - its origin lies elsewhere. The reality, as I see it, is that characteristics are neither intrinsic nor extrinsic, these being extremes. The reality of the matter is a middle-way reality that is neither of these extremes nor a compromise between them, but is something that can only be fully understood by direct, wise seeing (vijja), and I think that despite some of the terminology used, this is Karunadasa's perspective. 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) 28769 From: buddhatrue Date: Wed Jan 7, 2004 8:27am Subject: [dsg] Whose Abhidhamma? ( Was:Re: Karunadasa - "Time and Space..) Dear Howard, Thank you so much for replying to my plea for help! ;-)) I have responded in text: Howard: I also love Karunadasa's description of Abhidhamma, which is somewhat similar, I think, to Ven Nyanaponika's. James: I am not familiar with Ven Nyanaponika's description of the Abhidhamma. When I joined this group I was assured that Nina was the foremost authority on the Abhidhamma and so I read some of her works and stopped there. Realize that I didn't really know anything about the Abhidhamma before joining this group. Nina's writings left me flat and cold because they emphasize the particulars without an eye on the overall picture. I found them insipid and superficial (Which reflects nothing on what I think of Nina as an individual. She is lovely and inspirational!). But now I feel like I have missed out on something. Like I am back at where I was when I joined this group. I still don't think I truly know the Abhidhamma! Howard: As I said before, most of what he writes in this article sounds to me like my own thoughts! James: And that is why, over time, I have become one of your biggest fans! ;-)) But, I think it is important to not be swayed by personal preference in this regard. Just because something is most like us doesn't mean that it is correct. Howard: And I think that his evaluation of Abhidhamma is a valid one as an overall view, passing over minor problem areas which I think grew out of the "scientific" world view of the ancients. James: Here is where I have problems. I don't believe that people should pick and choose from philosophies, especially religious ones, like one picks items at a salad buffet. ;-) It has to be completely correct and true "as is", like the Buddha's Dhamma is to me, or I am not interested in any part of it as a personal philosophy for myself. However, that may not apply in this case. The kernel may be true and the particulars not. I will have to give it more thought and outside research. Howard: The only criticism I had was that the author of the article tried to put forward the idea that although Abhidhamma treats space (akasa-dhatu) as a rupa, it doesn't "really" mean it, and that space is really just concept, but, for some reason, should also be called a rupa. James: Well, from an experiential point of view, I also consider space a concept. Actually, Taoism is big on emphasizing the usefulness of the "no-thingness" of space. Space cannot be directly experienced; it can only be inferred by the presence of other phenomena. Hmmm…this is a problem. And the Abhidhamma states that space is something that can be experienced? Like an `ether' or something? Well, maybe the Abhidhamma just had a typo? ;-)) Howard:I think the author does think that Abhidhamma is slightly "off" on this issue, but he doesn't want to quite say that. James: Hmmm…I shall have to read it again. I was probably too `stunned' by the time I got to that point! ;-) Howard: In any case, my point of view remains what is was prior to reading this article, namely that Theravadin Abhidhamma is less than perfect, but that overall it is an amazing conceptual edifice that is best understood in pretty much the way Karundasa describes it in this article. James: Okay. But I am still confused. Thank you for your efforts to explain though. Howard: The Abhidhamma of the Theravadins, while not IMO the direct word of the Buddha, is largely faithful to his teachings, is *way* better than the eternalist, substantialist, and annihilationist abhidhammic works of other schools, and fits rather harmoniously with the work of Nagarjuna and Vasubandhu in Mahayana. James: Hmmm…well, your scholarship on this matter is obviously much vaster than my own. However, I am not really interested in scholarship of Buddhism; I am interested in knowing what will deliver me from dukkha (as I believe you are as well). I don't want to read everything; I just want the `facts jack'! ;-). If there is more to the Abhidhamma than what I presently know, which could be of assistance in this regard, I will stick with it. If not, I will drop it like a hot stone. Metta, James 28770 From: Date: Wed Jan 7, 2004 4:49am Subject: Re: [dsg] Whose Abhidhamma? ( Was:Re: Karunadasa - "Time and Space..) Hi, James - In a message dated 1/7/04 11:38:06 AM Eastern Standard Time, buddhatrue@y... writes: > James: Hmmm…well, your scholarship on this matter is obviously much > vaster than my own. > ---------------------------------------------- Howard: That's questionable. My scholarship *may* be a bit broader - I don't know, but I evaluate it as rather superficial. (I'm being quite serious here.) ---------------------------------------------- However, I am not really interested in > > scholarship of Buddhism; I am interested in knowing what will deliver > me from dukkha (as I believe you are as well). I don't want to read > everything; I just want the `facts jack'! ;-). If there is more to > the Abhidhamma than what I presently know, which could be of > assistance in this regard, I will stick with it. If not, I will drop > it like a hot stone. > =========================== While I gain much from aspects of Abhidhamma, particularly as a general conceptual framework, what I depend on as "Buddha word" is (parts of) the Sutta Pitaka, and what I depend on for "deliverance" is the (conventional) path of practice I believe the Buddha taught and is expressed in the Sutta Pitaka. My choice of primary support comes from the Sutta Pitaka. Others may find their main support elsewhere, such as in the Abhidhamma and the ancient Theravadin commentaries, or in modern Theravadin commentaries, or in the Mahayana Sutras and other ancient and modern Mahayanist works, all of which are sources that I consider to be of great value and quite helpful. Each person must choose for his/herself where to draw primary sustenance, what to trust, what to depend on. 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) 28771 From: htootintnaing Date: Wed Jan 7, 2004 9:53am Subject: Re: [dsg] Space element Dear Nina, A question for you here. I agree space is Paramattha Dhamma (ultimate reality ). My question is ' Is space involved in Kalapa? ' Thanks in advance. Htoo --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, nina van gorkom wrote: Steve, See below op 27-12-2002 07:27 schreef Bodhi2500@a... op Bodhi2500@a...: Nina:space is a quality of rupa which delimits the kalapas, groups of rupa. There is space in between them so that they are distinct. It clarifies realities for me. Nina. 28772 From: buddhatrue Date: Wed Jan 7, 2004 10:12am Subject: Re: Paññatti VS Paramattha: To Nina, Mike B And Ken O Hi Michael, Michael: I have to say that from my point of view this thread is closed. I realized from recent messages that my observations have stirred up a lot of emotions. I don't want to upset people even more. James: I hope you won't do that. Please realize that you are not responsible for other people's emotions, only they are responsible for those. If people get upset, which I have noticed too [Hi Suan…], the only thing to consider is if you have done something wrong. Stating your opinion about this matter isn't doing something wrong, it is the purpose of this group. Anyway, I want to comment on something, YOU &^\$%~$#!! ;-))) (just teasing). Michael: `own-nature,' `own-being,' `characteristic peculiar to a dhamma,' `distinctive intrinsic characteristic,' `existence,' `ontological ultimacy,'`truly existing thing,' `exists in a real and ultimate sense.' All those words only confirm to me what I knew already. Pointing to qualities that the dhammas posses that can only be explained by one attribute. If the dhammas are all that which has been described, they must have an essence, they exist from their own side, by their own power. James: I don't think those words should be taken out of context, Karudanasa also writes in the same article: "Analysis shows that the world of experience is resolvable into a plurality of factors; synthesis shows that these factors are not discrete entities existing in themselves but inter-connected and inter—dependent nodes in a complex web of relationships. It is only for the purpose of definition and description that things are artificially dissected. In actuality the world given to experience is a vast network of tightly interwoven relations." http://www.lankalibrary.com/Bud/time.htm So I believe that Karudanasa is using those words in a different sort of way. That they simply mean the most basic phenomena that can be experienced. It all has to do with experience. Now, if the commentaries are misinterpreting or if it is the actual Abhidhamma, I don't know. But I do agree with you that something is amiss in this group's overriding interpretation of these matters. Believe me, you haven't upset people like I have, you should read my "Rupa is Rubbish" thread! ;-)) Metta, James 28773 From: nina van gorkom Date: Wed Jan 7, 2004 10:25am Subject: Re: [dsg] Vism.XIV 60 (1 of 4) program Hi Larry, a good idea, but I have to pull out so many texts that I cannot elaborate on one section a day, if you don't mind. I have to limit myself. Nina. op 07-01-2004 00:57 schreef LBIDD@w... op LBIDD@w...: I will go ahead and post the > footnote in three parts over three days. 28774 From: nina van gorkom Date: Wed Jan 7, 2004 10:25am Subject: FW: Bangkok Meeting Dear Chuck, wonderful if you can join us. attire: informal, as at home, we are like a family. Discussions are very informal, questions come up just like on dsg. But excellent if you can prepare some. Dates: Jan 29, whole day until 4, with lunch annex foundation. Jan 30, and Jan. 31 afternoon with A. Sujin, but mornings can be filled in between all of us. Are you the Chuck I met before at the foundation? Betty is most kind to help us all and can answer any questions you may have. beyugala@k... I put this on dsg, because now people can rejoice in your enthusiasm, it is a way of dana. I hope you can make it, Nina. ---------- Van: "Charles Thompson" Datum: Tue, 6 Jan 2004 19:10:42 -0800 Aan: Onderwerp: Bangkok Meeting Hello, I understand there is a DSG meeting in Bangkok later this month. Also, I understand it is open for all DSG members. Is this correct? If true, I would like info on discussion, date, time, location and attire for this meeting. 28775 From: nina van gorkom Date: Wed Jan 7, 2004 10:25am Subject: Re: [dsg] Vism.XIV 60 (2 of 4), 2 a notes. Hi Larry and all, op 07-01-2004 01:14 schreef LBIDD@w... op LBIDD@w...: > "The Path of Purification" (Visuddhimagga) Ch. XIV, paragraph 60 > > Note 26. ' "The heart-basis ... the support for the mind-element and for > the mind-consciousness element"; how is that to be known? (i) From > scriptures and (ii) from logical reasoning. N: Recap and Elaboration: Book of Analysis: Ch 3, Analysis of the Elements 184: [N: receiving-consciousness]. And: <...also (at the time of) first advertence [N: adverting-consciousness] in all states there arises consciousness... mind element.> Note the word: immediately after. No gap. Further on : To recap: mind-consciousness element: all cittas, except the five sense-cognitions and the three kinds of cittas classified as mind-element. It includes cittas experiencing an object through six doors as well as door-freed cittas, cittas not arising in processes, namely, rebirth-consciousness, bhavanga-cittas, dying-consciousness. In the above quoted text we see the usefulness of remembering mind-element and mind-consciousness element. Thus, processes of cittas are also dealt with also in the Book of Analysis of the Abhidhamma Text Tiika (of footnote 60, 2): > 'The scripture is this: "The materiality dependent on which the > mind-element and mind-consciousness-element occur is a condition, as a > support condition, for the mind-element and the > mind-consciousness-element and what is associated therewith" (P.tn. > 1,4). If that is so, why is it not mentioned in the Ruupaka.n.da of the > Dhammasa.nga.ni (Dhs.583ff.)? Its not being mentioned there is for > another reason. What is that? Non-inconsistency of the teaching. N: Now about general principles to understand the way of reasoning two and a half milleniums of years back. We find reasons for the way of classifications: to help those who are capable of understanding and for the sake of the beauty of the teaching. This is an argument that counts. Why? At that time the teachings were orally transmitted and rehearsed. The great harmony of arrangement helped to do so. That is why we see that sections are numbered as Ones, Twos (dyads), Threes etc. The whole book of Yamaka consists of dyads. We also see this principle in the Suttanta, such as Gradual Sayings: Book of the Ones, Twos, etc. . It is important to see that there are different headings of arrangement of the materials, and that there is non-inconsistency as we read here. The Pali has: desanaabhedo: desanaa: teaching. Bhedo: division or category. Thus literally: in accordance with the way of categorizing the teachings. An example: perception of impermanence: the word sa~n~naa is used here, aniccaa-sa~n~naa. The Co to Mahharaahulovaadasutta explains that this is vipassana, but under the heading of perception or remembrance. There are only *seemingly* contradictions, not in reality. Text: For > while eye-consciousness, etc., have the eye, etc., as their respective > supports absolutely, mind-consciousness does not in the same way have > the heart-basis as its support absolutely. N: In the arupa brahma planes where there is only nama, there is no heartbase. (Next time more on dyads) Nina. 28776 From: nina van gorkom Date: Wed Jan 7, 2004 10:25am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Karunadasa - "Time and Space: The Abhidhamma perspective" Hi Howard, wait until we come with Larry to space. Many confusions generally about it. In the Abh it has a specific meaning and not to do with sky, outer space, etc. What you say about the article (I have no time to read it), it seems that the good professor missed the point. Rahula had to learn about inner space, the rupa dhamma of space. I wrote before: Nina. op 06-01-2004 23:48 schreef upasaka@a... op upasaka@a...: > He tries > mightily to portray space as merely conceptual in Abhidhamma even though it is > given there as a rupa. 28777 From: nina van gorkom Date: Wed Jan 7, 2004 10:25am Subject: Re: [dsg] A Single Excellent Night - and Year Dear Andrew, what a wonderful letter you write here. So human about the lolly jar. Sarah and I keep on reminding each other how common all this is. See below. op 07-01-2004 00:43 schreef Andrew op athel60@t...: I help care for Sandra's father who is 89 years > old and bedridden with only 30% lung function. The other day, I > decided to go into his room and check on him. Before I reached his > room, I realised that one of the main things driving me was lobha - a > desire to help myself to a lolly from his lolly jar! Quite shocked > at this, I deliberately avoided touching the lolly jar. > I think it is easy to get depressed and morose about "oneself" when > one starts to take a hard look at what's going on in the mind. I > find, however, that Abhidhamma stops me from getting depressed about > it. N: I am so glad you write about your daily life and how I appreciate your caring for Sandra's father. You say, Or we may at first be disturbed, but then after reflection and beginning to understand about cittas we are no longer depressed. A: Cittas arise and fall so quickly, I realise that there probably > were cittas of compassion arising and falling away before those > strongly affected by lobha came into play. N: Yes, Sarah and I concluded that we are always a mixture of kusala and akusala. Say, joking, this is often with lobha, but there can also be citta with compassion, wanting to help by way of relaxing the atmosphere ;-). Or, being upset by someone else's mental pain. This is not all compassion, O no. As soon as there is a feeling of being upset we know that there is dosa, we do not like an unpleasant object. But at other moments there can be true compassion, not thinking of ourselves. A: And it comforts me to > think :"okay, it's not easy but at least I'm trying to be honest > about the human condition." > As you say, it's all good study material. N: I like very much what you say here. Such daily life examples I always find helpful. I hope you will give more of them. This is the best way to understand the meaning of Abhidhamma. Nina. P.S. I hope Klaas found the smell thief example helpful. 28778 From: nina van gorkom Date: Wed Jan 7, 2004 10:25am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Views along the way Dear James, I did not like to see you frightened, that is all. It hurts me, especially after your experiences last year. (Yes dosa, but also concern, mixed again!) I did not have anything to swear off. I appreciate samatha and for myself those subjects for every occasion (death, the Buddha, loathsomeness of the body etc) come up naturally. There is the mini meditation, or, even mini-mini-mini meditation. I liked your expression, because that is what it is. It is not much, but it can be accumulated little by little. A penny a day. With your good intuition you will know what I mean, not many words are needed ;-). Now what you say about fear, there is something in it. In Bgk we discussed about really experiencing that there is no self, and someone said it must be frightening. You cannot hold on to anything anymore that you are used to, all that is so familiar. On the other hand, understanding can condition the right balance. Kh. Sujin answered that one has to be very brave, one needs courage to face the truth, and that impressed me. The Bodhisatta was heroic, traversing the round of rebirths and developing understanding leading to awakening. We also have to be heroes, persevering life after life to develop satipatthana. We have good friends who can help us, but in the end we have to go it alone. Nice talking to you, Nina. op 06-01-2004 09:09 schreef buddhatrue op buddhatrue@y...: > It is a little ironic to me, no > offense intended, that two people who swear off meditation and don't > practice it feel qualified to give advice about it to someone else. 28779 From: nina van gorkom Date: Wed Jan 7, 2004 10:25am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: life maintenance Hi Larry, op 01-01-2004 17:10 schreef Larry op LBIDD@w...: > I left out one class of living materiality called the "vital 9" (8 > inseparables + life faculty). What is it? Apparently it is different > from the sense, sex, & heart base decades. N: good you mention it. Kamma also produces groups of rupa all over the body which do not contain the sensebase, sex, & heart base. Then these are the inseparables plus life faculty, which is always a must whenever the group is produced by kamma. L: Also, can you give specific examples of what these terms refer to, > for example, skin, teeth, fat, bone? Otherwise they are too general > and meaningless. N: They are body parts and Buddha referred to these to show firstly that they are not worth clinging to. But then, we should come to the deeper meaning of parts of the body: what is really there? Only rupa elements, impermanent, non-self. By touch hardness is experienced, when we see them, it is actually colour that is experienced. Satipatthana together with the Abhidhamma! L:I am inclined to think the sense decades, including > the body decade, include only the materiality associated with the > specific sensory mechanism, in other words, nerves. N: They include the rupa that is fit or ready for impact plus life-faculty, plus the inseparables. Nerves may be confusing, then we mix medical notions with Abhidhamma. L:Would skin > tissue, and physiognomy in general, be an example of a sex decade? N: Let us say, it reveals it, just like the examples of occupation, posture, etc. L: Do all 4 means of production produce the 8 inseparables in > the "whole" body? N: Yes, but as said, there are nonads, decads, etc. They always contain the four inseparables. L:I am trying to figure out what is living and what > isn't. N: As we discussed before: dead matter is not kamma produced. What is kamma produced has life-faculty, always. L: The 8 inseparables that kamma produces is living materiality. N: They are different from those produced by the element of heat. Now we have to make a distinction. Only in a living body there are units produced by kamma, citta and nutrition. And there are units of eight also in a living body produced by heat. In a non-living body, what we call a rock, there are units produced only by heat. L:Can you give examples of what would be examples of 8-inseparables > produced by kamma, temperature, consciousness, and nutriment? When we say produced by kamma it has to be at least nine rupas. All over the body, impossible to pinpoint. Just like sex faculty: all over the body. Remember the comparison of sex faculty with bodysense that is all over the body. Citta: we come to that: bodily and verbal intimation. But also all the time many pure octads and we do not notice this. L: Please > be specific. If, because of desire, I eat too much pure octad, is the > resulting fat produced by kamma or by consciousness? N: I have to laugh here. During the festive days? We speak now in conventional terms. I am inclined to think of nutrition. But we cannot pinpoint all that. Remember, the different groups produced by the four factors are interlocked and support each other. Jon remarked: You had a good question to Jon: how can it be daily life what we know about the inseparables, also with regard to those we do not observe. Let us talk about colour or visible object, which belongs to the inseparables. I do not speak now about all the other groups of more than eight which also contain colour. Colour is seen, one of the group that impinges on eyesense. The other seven arise together with it, but they are not seen, we do not notice them. But they condition by way of conascence the colour. This means, they condition colours to be so different. There are different intensities of heat or hardness, of the Great Elemennts, this condiitons the colour to be such or such. But we should not speculate about this. Only as background info it helps awareness of colour to be more natural. We do not look for a neutral or grey colour, we understand that colours are all different and appear through the eyes. Defining colours is not seeing, it is thinking, but we see them all. But we do not try to know a special colour. Thus we see that details are helpful, so long as we do not speculate too much about them. Now we can appreciate the examples of Dhammasangani, p. 167: blue, yellow, long, short, oval, square. We see them all, before defining: this is oval. (Sarah, good subject for Bgk). Nina. 28780 From: htootintnaing Date: Wed Jan 7, 2004 10:37am Subject: Re: Howard's tree and a little hint ..Continuation of Pannatta Dear Carl, Sorry for my late reply. I now find your post here. I hope the matter is going to be clear. Please see below. With Metta, Htoo Naing ---------------------------------------------------------------------- --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Carl" wrote: > Dear Htoo, thank you for you very informative reply to my questions. Carl: I have printed out the citta process as you wrote it and keep it close at hand for a reference :)............... Carl: Htoo, I have trouble here. You write "Actual sight- consciousness arises at eye or Cakkhayatana or Cakkhu Pasada or Cakkhu Vatthu." I guess I am wondering if a "worldly" flesh-and-blood location can be established for sight-consciousness? I have always located this event (the tree) to take place within the brain-mass (occipatal lobe precisely). Would I be more correct to understand sight (the tree) as occuring on, in or about the eye-organ? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo : Actual sight-consciousness or Cakkhuvinnana Citta arises at eye. Other continuing process happen at mind-door. Brain is Pannatti. So any part of it is Pannatti. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >Htoo: The object seems to be taken to us and we see it. Or we go >there to the object and take it. Carl: I do not understand how we "go there to the object"? "That the object seems to be taken to us" seems understandable to me. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo : There is no 'we'. If the object is assumed as existing at a specific site, the nature who has the power of knowledge ( Citta ) is said to goes there and take the object. If the idea that the combination of Nama and Rupa or Satta is assumed as existing at a specific site and as the mind know the object at its own home, then the object is seemed to be taken to the mind and the mind takes that object. Does this make sense? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >Htoo: It is wrong to say, ' the true nature of the *outside world* >is unknowable. Functions of Cittas and Cetasikas are to know >both outside world and inside world. Carl: Yes, I think I understand this at some level. But I remain perplexed. If the *worldly/conventional* vision of "the tree" is produced in the mind, as I have assumed, then there must be a gap (time/distance) between the inside and the outside world? If there is such a gap/separation then the outside world can never be directly experienced even though it is really out there. But perhaps if I come to understand "the tree" as actually appearing directly on or about the eye, then I may understand a direct contact of some kind with "the tree" with no gap? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo : There is a gap for nearly all. Here I must ask you what do you mean by ' directly '? 5 senses sense the outside *world* directly. Even the 6th sense can sometimes directly senses the outside *world*. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Carl: Yes, conventional realities vs ultimate realities Fascinating! :) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo : When real Dhamma is directly known, there is no more problem with conventional truth. The Buddha usded the words 'I', 'me' , 'my' , 'mine'. Arahats knew what The Buddha meaned. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Carl: Thank you so much Htoo ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo : We are Dhamma brothers. You are welcome. P.S: Thanks Sarah for your reminder that the message appeared a week ago. I think, I was busy and it was missed as dsg is very active :-)) 28781 From: christine_forsyth Date: Wed Jan 7, 2004 1:33pm Subject: Samyutta Corner - Remedy for festive over-indulgence Dear Group, For those who over-indulged in the holiday season - astute advice from the lips of the Buddha. Don't you just love King Pasenadi? He is so REAL, and if he could transport across two and a half thousand years, he'd be so natural, just like the man next to you in the supermarket line! In the 3 Kosalasamyutta 13 (3) A Bucket Measure of Tood "At Saavatthi. Now on that occasion King Pasenadi of Kosala had eaten a bucket measure of rice and curries. [n.229] Then, while still full, huffing and puffing, the king approached the Blessed One, paid homage to him, and sat down to one side. Then the Blessed One, having understood that King Pasenadi was full and was huffing and puffing, on that occasion recited this verse: When a man is always mindful, Knowing moderation in the food he eats, His ailments then diminish: He ages slowly, guarding his life." Now on that occasion the brahmin youth Sudassana was standing behing King Pasenadi of Kosala. The king then addressed him thus: "Come now, dear Sudassana, learn this verse from the Blessed One and recite it to me whenever I am taking my meal. I will then present you daily with a hundred kahaapanas as a perpetual grant." [n.230] "Yes, sire," the brahmin youth Sudassana replied. Having learned this verse from the Blessed One, whenever King Pasenadi was taking his meal the brahmin youth Sadassa recited: "When a man is always mindful ... He ages slowly, guarding his life.." Then King Pasenadi of Kosala gradually reduced his intake of food to at most a pint-pot measure of boiled rice. [n.231] At a later time, when his body had become quite slim, Kind Pasenadi of Kosala stroked his limbs with his hand and on that occasion uttered this inspired utterance: "The Blessed One showed compassion towards me in regard to both kinds of good - the good pertaining to the present life and that pertaining to the future life." [n. 232] n.232 Spk: The good pertaining to the present life was the slimming of the body; the good pertaining to the future was virtue (sila), on e aspect of which is modertion in eating. metta and peace, Christine ---The trouble is that you think you have time --- 28782 From: Egberdina Date: Wed Jan 7, 2004 1:51pm Subject: Re: Karunadasa - "Time and Space: The Abhidhamma perspective" Hi Christine and everyone, Thank you so much for posting this link. I devoured the article, and with each paragraph the lack of any reference to the concepts of kusala/akusala made the reading all the more agreeable. Maybe you or someone could assist me with the following excerpt: "The other implication is that since a dhamma has its own nature, its existence is not dependent on the operation of the mind as a conceptual construct. It is not a product of mental interpretation and as such it is an existent having objective reality." Does this statement allow for unexperienced dhammas? Are there dhammas without mind? Christine, I really enjoyed the prose of your post re at the foot of the tree. Can't give you any practical help with ants but. Sorry :-) All the best Herman --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "christine_forsyth" wrote: > Dear Group, > > You may be interested in reading: > > "Time and space: The Abhidhamma perspective" > > The following is the Professor K. N. Jayatilleke Memorial Lecture > 2003 by Y. Karunadasa, former director, Postgraduate Institute of > Pali and Buddhist Studies. > > http://www.lankalibrary.com/Bud/time.htm > > metta and peace, > Christine > ---The trouble is that you think you have time --- 28783 From: buddhatrue Date: Wed Jan 7, 2004 2:10pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Views along the way Dear Nina, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, nina van gorkom wrote: > Dear James, > I did not like to see you frightened, that is all. It hurts me, especially > after your experiences last year. (Yes dosa, but also concern, mixed again!) Thank you for your lovely post. Your concern and compassion for me are not, in my estimation, anything to apologize for. Thank you. I am glad that you, and Sarah it seems, like my description of `mini- meditations'; I do believe that they are real and can be accumulated; like `a penny a day' as you state…very cute! ;-). And this may very well be the proper method for the householder, I am not sure. However, I have chosen to push onward and forward, at a very accelerated rate, to find out the answers. My dedication is so strong that at one point I was going to become a monk, but I think I was born in the wrong time-frame for that. Oh well, I am sure you will understand about that also. As far as the fear aspect to my meditation, I don't know. I have been reading contradictory things about that. I like what you write, "On the other hand, understanding can condition the right balance." That is probably true, my understanding is not strong enough at this point so I continue to back down. I am not brave enough yet I don't think. Perhaps with your help and encouraging words some day I will be. Metta, James 28784 From: buddhatrue Date: Wed Jan 7, 2004 2:20pm Subject: Re: Samyutta Corner - Remedy for festive over-indulgence Hi Christine, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "christine_forsyth" wrote: > Dear Group, > > For those who over-indulged in the holiday season - astute advice > from the lips of the Buddha. Hahaha...I am so glad that you introduced this sutta! It is one of my favorites from that section also but I couldn't figure out how to do it! Your transition is brilliant! Metta, James 28785 From: yu_zhonghao Date: Wed Jan 7, 2004 3:11pm Subject: Re: Karunadasa - "Time and Space: The Abhidhamma perspective" Hi all, You may be also interested in reading I. TRANSCENDENTAL DOCTRINE OF ELEMENTS First Part. Transcendental Aesthetic [065] Introduction [065] Section 1. Space [065] Section 2. Time [074] General Observations on the Transcendental Aesthetic [082] in Kant's Critique of Pure Reason translated by Norman Kemp Smith. http://humanum.arts.cuhk.edu.hk/Philosophy/Kant/cpr/ Although the Critique itself has nothing to do with the Buddha's teaching of dukkha and the cessation of dukkha, the part in Transcendental Aesthetic can be an interesting comparison with the Abhidhamma perspective on time and space. And as a whole, Kant's Critique of Pure Reason can be an interesting comparison with the Abhidhamma metaphysics. Peace, Victor --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "christine_forsyth" wrote: > Dear Group, > > You may be interested in reading: > > "Time and space: The Abhidhamma perspective" > > The following is the Professor K. N. Jayatilleke Memorial Lecture > 2003 by Y. Karunadasa, former director, Postgraduate Institute of > Pali and Buddhist Studies. > > http://www.lankalibrary.com/Bud/time.htm > > metta and peace, > Christine > ---The trouble is that you think you have time --- 28786 From: Date: Wed Jan 7, 2004 10:32am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Karunadasa - "Time and Space: The Abhidhamma perspective" Hi, Herman - In a message dated 1/7/04 4:58:30 PM Eastern Standard Time, hhofman@t... writes: > Maybe you or someone could assist me with the following excerpt: > > "The other implication is that since a dhamma has its own nature, > its existence is not dependent on the operation of the mind as a > conceptual construct. It is not a product of mental interpretation > and as such it is an existent having objective reality." > > Does this statement allow for unexperienced dhammas? Are there > dhammas without mind? > ========================== Although I don't believe in the existence of unobserved dhammas (i.e. not the content of any mindstream), I *do* think this quotation does allow for unexperienced dhammas, but also doesn't insist on their existence. It maintains only that every actual condition (paramattha dhamma) exists independently of conceptualization, but it is noncommital as to whether it exists other than as an object of awareness. As I see it, this quoted material just doesn't address that issue. 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) 28787 From: Michael Beisert Date: Wed Jan 7, 2004 4:05pm Subject: RE: [dsg] Re: Paññatti VS Paramattha: To Nina, Mike B And Ken O Hello James, James: So I believe that Karudanasa is using those words in a different sort of way. That they simply mean the most basic phenomena that can be experienced. It all has to do with experience. Michael: My take on the abhidhamma is exactly what you are saying, it should be regarded as part of phenomenology, and that is the way Nyanaponika Thera in his book Abhidhamma Studies interprets it as well. The problem with Karudanasa is that he refers to ontological ultimacy, and this has nothing to do with phenomenology. It goes right into metaphysics and it is in this respect, that I see the Abhidhamma being used poorly. James: Please realize that you are not responsible for other people's emotions, only they are responsible for those. Michael: Yes and no. On a person to person basis it is easier to gauge emotions and know when it is wise to say something or just keep quiet. In a list it is much harder. I try my best to use language in a way which is beneficial to the listener as well. Not always successful I have to concede but I try. In a list as I said it is harder. Metta Michael 28788 From: Charles Thompson Date: Wed Jan 7, 2004 4:35pm Subject: Re: [dsg] FW: Bangkok Meeting Dear Nina, et al A very warm thank you. Unfortunately, I am not that lucky Chuck. A real miss on my part. I do look forward to meeting you and all my many virtual friends from whom I learned so much as your "lurker" member. Peace... metta (maitri), Chuck ----- Original Message ----- From: nina van gorkom To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, January 07, 2004 10:25 AM Subject: [dsg] FW: Bangkok Meeting Dear Chuck, wonderful if you can join us. attire: informal, as at home, we are like a family. Discussions are very informal, questions come up just like on dsg. But excellent if you can prepare some. Dates: Jan 29, whole day until 4, with lunch annex foundation. Jan 30, and Jan. 31 afternoon with A. Sujin, but mornings can be filled in between all of us. Are you the Chuck I met before at the foundation? Betty is most kind to help us all and can answer any questions you may have. beyugala@k... I put this on dsg, because now people can rejoice in your enthusiasm, it is a way of dana. I hope you can make it, Nina. ---------- 28789 From: Michael Beisert Date: Wed Jan 7, 2004 4:50pm Subject: RE: [dsg] Re: Paññatti VS Paramattha: To Nina, Mike B And Ken O Hello James, I forgot to mention in my previous post that prior to getting in contact with Buddhism I had the notion that talk was absolutely cheap, had no consequence whatsoever. It was one, among others, big impacts when I started to learn more. And one of the suttas that I have in the box of the ‘most liked’ is the Ambalatthikarahulovada Sutta – MN 61, where the Buddha advises his son Rahula on the criteria to decide if something is worthwhile saying (doing, thinking as well ) or not. And one of the criteria is not causing affliction to others. Metta Michael >From: "Michael Beisert" >Reply-To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com >To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com >Subject: RE: [dsg] Re: Paññatti VS Paramattha: To Nina, Mike B And Ken O >Date: Wed, 07 Jan 2004 19:05:01 -0500 > >Hello James, > >James: >So I believe that Karudanasa is using those words in a different sort >of way. That they simply mean the most basic phenomena that can be >experienced. It all has to do with experience. > >Michael: >My take on the abhidhamma is exactly what you are saying, it should be >regarded as part of phenomenology, and that is the way Nyanaponika Thera in >his book Abhidhamma Studies interprets it as well. The problem with >Karudanasa is that he refers to ontological ultimacy, and this has nothing >to do with phenomenology. It goes right into metaphysics and it is in this >respect, that I see the Abhidhamma being used poorly. > >James: >Please realize that you are not >responsible for other people's emotions, only they are responsible >for those. > >Michael: >Yes and no. On a person to person basis it is easier to gauge emotions and >know when it is wise to say something or just keep quiet. In a list it is >much harder. I try my best to use language in a way which is beneficial to >the listener as well. Not always successful I have to concede but I try. In >a list as I said it is harder. > >Metta >Michael 28790 From: Michael Beisert Date: Wed Jan 7, 2004 4:54pm Subject: RE: [dsg] What a person does...... (was:Contraception and the First Precept) Hello Sarah, Sarah: I’ve quoted from suttas which suggest we should judge by outer appearances and actions, eg AN, 6s, 123 ‘Don’t Judge Others!’ Michael: I was intrigued by your commenst beacuse I am familiar with some suttas of the Majjhima Nikaya which state exactly the opposite, that someone should be judged by his actions. Do you know where I can find an english version of the sutta from the AN you are referring to? Metta Michael 28791 From: Sarah Date: Wed Jan 7, 2004 5:12pm Subject: RE: [dsg] What a person does...... (was:Contraception and the First Precept) Hi Michael & All, I'm running very late,but wish to quickly make a correction: --- Michael Beisert wrote: > Hello Sarah, > > Sarah: > I’ve quoted from suttas which suggest we should judge by outer > appearances > and actions, eg AN, 6s, 123 ‘Don’t Judge Others!’ ... The above should of course have read: 'we should *NOT* judge..... .... > Michael: > I was intrigued by your commenst beacuse I am familiar with some suttas > of > the Majjhima Nikaya which state exactly the opposite, that someone > should be > judged by his actions. Do you know where I can find an english version > of > the sutta from the AN you are referring to? ..... I've quoted quite a bit from the PTS version of the sutta before (escribe, key in 'judge' or 'Migasala' perhaps) http://www.escribe.com/religion/dhammastudygroup/ Under the title 'Don't Judge Others', it can be found in the very nice 'Numerical Discourses of the Buddha', an Anthology from AN, transl by Nyanaponika and B.Bodhi. We have an inexpensive paperback copy, highly recommended. Must dash, Metta, Sarah ====== 28792 From: dragonwriter2 Date: Wed Jan 7, 2004 6:23pm Subject: Question Re: Stage Hypnotism Hi, Hypnotised subjects of stage hypnotism after the show often report experiencing one of two responses. 1. Being totally aware of their actions but being unable to stop themselves. 2. Total amnesia of the event that occured. How would the teachings of the Abhidhamma explain these responses and stage hypnotism in general. For the Aussie members of the list there's a show "Mind Control" Chnl 9 Tues. 10:30pm which sparked the question. Metta Simon L. 28793 From: rjkjp1 Date: Wed Jan 7, 2004 6:44pm Subject: Re: FW: Bangkok Meeting --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, nina van gorkom wrote: > Dear Chuck, > wonderful if you can join us. attire: informal, as at home, we are like a > family. Discussions are very informal, questions come up just like on dsg. > But excellent if ===== Dear Nina and all, Just a note to say I can't come now: couldn't get a babysitter. Anyway look forward to hearing the tapes. Rob 28794 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Wed Jan 7, 2004 7:50pm Subject: RE: [dsg] Re: Paññatti VS Paramattha: To Nina, Mike B And Ken O Hi Michael In my personal opinion, let discuss this on the basis on the commentary text and lets not put others writings into this discussion. The discussion is focus on the text teaching and not on other scholar opinions. They are good to provide some insight or understanding or another opinion but they are not the authoritive textual books. If we have misunderstanding of theory, then commentary texts are the source and not others. With this framework, then we can discuss whether there is being or not. So far I have discuss with you on commentary and I have also suggested that you look into the commentary and provide quotes from there and support your case that sabhava is a being, uncaused. Is no used going one big round of discussion convincing I am right or you are right without a standard reference for discussion. Hence you will notice that I have consistently in our discussion refer only to the commentary and not others. Truth is definitely subjective and relative, what you think is truth and what I think may differ. So to prove a truth true or not true we should still as I said above basing on commentary, sutta and not others. M: If the dhammas are all that which has been described, > they must have an essence, they exist from their own side, by their own power. But this interpretation is not in accordance with the suttas. I said before and say again, there is no paramatha, no sabhava, in the suttas, and paññatti appears in the suttas but with a different meaning than the one used in the Abhidhamma commentaries. Those are all concepts invented by the Commentators. I am not discarding the Abhidhamma. The Abhidhamma is a good tool to understand human psychology but it is very poor in defining Buddhist > philosophy. k: I have stated the commentarian position that paramatthas exist but they dont exist on their own power. They have instrinic nature or characteristics and this nature (characteristic) only be known only when the paramatthas are conditioned to arise. Khandhas are paramathas, they are irreducible, can you give me a good eg how do khandhas be reduce any further. And I have also said I have not seen Buddha states sub-feeling etc in the sutta. Then can you claim that khandhas are not paramatthas. I have also state earlier that if there are sub-feelings, Buddha will have said it and not leave it unaddress bc five khandhas are one of the key practise in the suttas. If you like to explore the idea on sabhava again, I am most happy. kind regards Ken O 28795 From: nina van gorkom Date: Wed Jan 7, 2004 9:04pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Paññatti VS Paramattha: To Nina, Mike B And Ken O Dear Michael, No, no, I really enjoyed your dialogue with Suan, and I see that you really tried to listen and wanted to do your home work. Don't break this off, because I find I learn from such a dialogue. And nobody will try to convert you!!! Nina. op 07-01-2004 16:53 schreef Michael Beisert op mbeisert@h...: > I realized > from recent messages that my observations have stirred up a lot of emotions. > I don’t want to upset people even more. 28796 From: nina van gorkom Date: Wed Jan 7, 2004 9:04pm Subject: Re: [dsg] the study of Abhidhamma and rupas. Dear Sarah, you are very kind to encourage me. Yes, I am very happy to hear such good things from Lodewijk. When walking such discussions arise quite naturally. Nina. op 07-01-2004 14:11 schreef Sarah op sarahdhhk@y...: > Pls tell Lodewijk that I especially liked his reminder about death, > that "we cannot prepare for such a loss, but that we can continue to study > and consider the Dhamma little by little." Your discussions on walks sound > helpful too. 28797 From: nina van gorkom Date: Wed Jan 7, 2004 9:04pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Space element Dear Htoo, op 07-01-2004 18:53 schreef htootintnaing op htootintnaing@y...: > > A question for you here. I agree space is Paramattha Dhamma (ultimate > reality ). > > My question is ' Is space involved in Kalapa? ' N: As I said, it is around all the groups, kalapas, of rupas, so that they are distinct. Otherwise all those groups would be mixed up. We could compare it with the processes of cittas which are separated by bhavangacittas, otherwise they would be all mixed up, the sense-door processes and the mind-door processes. For some people it may seem very abstract, does it not? In the Atthasalini it is explained in a conventional way to help us, the manifestation of space if what is hollow in the body, cavity of the ear. Rahula had to consider this so that he owuld not cling to the body. When we come to it in the Vis. study with Larry, we shall go deeper into it. Nina. 28798 From: Egberdina Date: Wed Jan 7, 2004 10:49pm Subject: Two to tango (was Re: Contraception and the First Precept) Hi Christine, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "christine_forsyth" wrote: > Hiya Herman, and all, > > Herman: The initial activity proceeds from the initial > opinion, belief, judgement. How one dresses it up afterwards will > not alter the initial activity. > But I really wonder how kamma can play a role for one who suspends > judgement? > > Christine: Good question. Suspending judgment would be living > uncontaminated by ignorance/craving, comment/interpretation, > identification/label, no? How would we live our daily life? Is it > possible to choose to suspend judgement or has judging happened > before we are even aware of it? Isn't there no control, no free- > will? :-) :-) Yeah, I've heard that mentioned. And I'm sure I've said so myself. But it is contrary to all experience. (I've probably changed my take on this more times than I care to remember :-) That there is no self that controls and no self that has free-will is quite different to there not being control and free-will. Free-will is being exercised at each moment. That the choices that are being made mostly have the effect of perpetuating imprisonment within certain beliefs is neither here nor there. There is no inbuilt necessity to see things in any particular way at all, but the choice is made moment to moment. The idea of self comes out of free will, free will does not come out of self. Ask me again tomorrow, and it'll probably be different. All the best Herman > > Christine > ---The trouble is that you think you have time --- 28799 From: rinze randeniye Date: Thu Jan 8, 2004 0:48am Subject: Introduction cum 1st posting on Truth & Paramatthas Dear Friends, I am new to your group and hope that our correspondence will benefit mutually. I came across your group when browsing through the web. I thought that I could be of use here. Please find my response to a posting by Kenneth. Sometimes my positings are quite abrupt and precise! But rest assured they are written in good faith and utmost sincerety K:"Truth is definitely subjective and relative, what you think is truth and what I think may differ." Precisely! And the Truths that is being discussed here are those as seen by Lord Buddha and his Noble Disciples. Therefore there will always be a difference of opinions as long as we do not see the Dhamma as been seen by Lord Buddha! When our differences in opinion narrows down and ultimately coincides with that of Lord Buddha it is then that we understand and see the Dhamma as it should be seen. K:"They(paramatthas) have instrinic nature or characteristics and this nature (characteristic) only be known only when the paramatthas are conditioned to arise." Yes. And one of the conditions is our ignorance of things as they are. Metta Eznir