39600 From: Date: Thu Dec 9, 2004 3:06am Subject: Re: [dsg] Concept and Reality in Primary Texts Hi, Joop - In a message dated 12/9/04 4:21:05 AM Eastern Standard Time, jwromeijn@y... writes: > Dear all > > A quote I already used in a discussion with Rob M some monts ago > about 'ontology' > > A very important remark of Ven. Nyanaponika in his "Abhidhamma > Studies": > ".. in wat sense can the Abhidhamma be called a philosophy? Let us > take a rough division of philosophy in phenomenology and ontology, > and briefly define them als follows: Phenomenology deals, as the name > implies, with 'phenomena', that is, with the world of internal and > external experiences. Ontology, or metaphysiscs, inquires into the > existence and nature of an essence, or ultimate principle, underlying > the phenomenal world. … The Abhidhamma doubtlessly belongs to the > first of these two divisions of philosophy, that is to phenomenology. > Even that fundamental Abhidhamma term dhamma, which includes > corporeal as well as mental 'things', may well be rendered > by 'phenomena' …" (p. 19/20) > It should be noted that Bhikkhu Bodhi in his introduction to the book > of Ven. Nyanaponika (fourth edition) shows himself more a > ontologist: "If however, we understand ontology in a wider sense as > the philosophical discipline concerned with determining what realyy > exists, with discriminating between the real and the apparent, then > we could justly claim that the Abhidhamma is build upon an > ontological vision." ( p. XVI). > > I prefer Nyanaponika's words -------------------------------------------- Howard: Well, so do I, as I am a rather radical phenomenalist, myself, taking the perspective that only "the experienced" or at least "conditionally able to be experienced" is of any pragmatic concern. (I will lump these two together as "the experiential".) I question that one can even ascribe any meaning to "existence" that is not based in the experiential. For example, and this is a very conventional example, where the "existence" I speak of is far less than ultimate, so please, nobody get in an uproar about it! ;-): When someone says that the sun exists, yet I cannot see it, as the window in this room faces the wrong way, I will not disagree, because existence of an alleged something means to me the possibility of certain experiential events occurring provided that certain other experiential events occur, such as, in this example, "If I, or someone, were outside and were to look up, I, or that other person, would see the sun", or "If I were to look out a different window, I would see the sun", or, to be very fanciful, "If I were to enter the 4th jhana, then fly through space, I could touch the sun with my outstretched hand! ;-) Another example that is less fanciful and also closer to the "paramatthic": Some one tells me the desk top is hard (i.e., hardness exists as a feature of what I conventionally refer to as "the desk top"), and I agree this is so. Why? Because what I mean by the hardness existing is merely, to use conventional language, that if "I" (or "someone") were to "touch the desktop", I (or that someone) would experience hardness (i.e., hardness would arise in the mindstream). The main point I am making is that 'existence' is a term I use for direct experience or the conditioned possibility thereof. That is, any "existence" that is meaningful comes down to the experiential. I never countenance existence independent of the experiential, because such is, in principle, beyond verification or refutation, and is thus merely groundless conceptualization. So, for me, ontology is based in phenomenology. BTW, I put this forward, not to open up a renewed discussion or debate of the virtues and/or deficits in such a radical phenomenalist view, a discussion which by now really wearies me, but just to point out that there are perspectives from which the ontology/phenomenology distinction is not so easily made. ------------------------------------------ > > Metta > > Joop > > ======================== 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) 39601 From: Date: Thu Dec 9, 2004 3:13am Subject: Re: [dsg] Guarding the sense doors (was: Re: kusala and akusala) Hi, James - The points you raise in the following are correct and well made. I also spoke to some extent in this direction, with regard to inputs to which one is particularly vulnerable, but you have corrected here a bit of an excess in my formulation, bring it closer to a middle point. Well done. :-) With metta, Howard In a message dated 12/9/04 8:39:31 AM Eastern Standard Time, buddhatrue@y... writes: > > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@a... wrote: > >Hi, Antony - > > > I mean by 'censor' what you mean by censor. What I said > was "The point > >was not to censor or control what sense data enter the various > sense doors." > >That is correct. The main point is to censor our own mental > reactions. > > Friend Howard and All, > > What we should always keep in mind is that the Buddha was an > ascetic. As such, he did actively censor what his senses > encountered and encouraged the same type of behavior for his > sangha. There are some Vinaya precepts which apply to this: keeping > the eyes lowered when in inhabited areas (eye door), not wearing > colognes, perfumes, or garlands (nose door), not being selective in > which foods to eat (tongue door), not sleeping on high and luxurious > beds or wearing robes made of fine materials (body door), not > listening to music or singing (ear door), and not participating in > idle chatter (mind door). > > As laypeople, we probably break all of these precepts quite > frequently; I know that I do. That is why the householder life > is "dusty". However, even as householders we can take steps to try > to limit the types of things our senses encounter. ===================== 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) 39602 From: ashkenn2k Date: Thu Dec 9, 2004 8:54am Subject: False Identification of Paramattha Dhammas and Realities (Re: [dsg] Conce... Hi Howard Right Thinking as explained in Dispeller of Delusion (Sammohavinodani) 554. In the description of Right Thinking, "escaped from sense desire" is nekkama-sankappo (thinking of reunication); "escape from ill will" is avyapada-sankappo ("thinking of non-ill-will); "escaped from cruelty" is avihimsa-sankappo (thinking of non-cruelty). Herein applied thought of renunication arises destroying and cutting away the foundation of applied thought of sense desire; likewise applied though t of non-ill-will for applied thought of ill-will; and applied thought of non-cruelty applied thought of cruelty..... 555. Herein the meditator, for the purpose of destroying the foundation of applied thought of sense desire, comprehends either the applied thought of sense desire and any other formation. Then at the moment of insight, thinking which is associated with insight arise in him effecting the destroying and the cutting away of the foundation of applied thought of sense desire though substitution by opposite qualities. Pursuing insight, he reaches the path......[My note - the passage is the same just substituting the applied thought of sense desire with ill will and cruetly] Ken O 39603 From: Date: Thu Dec 9, 2004 4:23am Subject: Re: False Identification of Paramattha Dhammas and Realities (Re: [dsg] Conce... Hi, Ken - In a message dated 12/9/04 12:04:44 PM Eastern Standard Time, ashkenn2k@y... writes: > Right Thinking as explained in Dispeller of Delusion (Sammohavinodani) > 554. In the description of Right Thinking, "escaped from sense > desire" is nekkama-sankappo (thinking of reunication); "escape from > ill will" is avyapada-sankappo ("thinking of non-ill-will); "escaped > from cruelty" is avihimsa-sankappo (thinking of non-cruelty). Herein > applied thought of renunication arises destroying and cutting away the > foundation of applied thought of sense desire; likewise applied though > t of non-ill-will for applied thought of ill-will; and applied thought > of non-cruelty applied thought of cruelty..... > > 555. Herein the meditator, for the purpose of destroying the > foundation of applied thought of sense desire, comprehends either the > applied thought of sense desire and any other formation. Then at the > moment of insight, thinking which is associated with insight arise in > him effecting the destroying and the cutting away of the foundation of > applied thought of sense desire though substitution by opposite > qualities. Pursuing insight, he reaches the path......[My note - the > passage is the same just substituting the applied thought of sense > desire with ill will and cruetly] > ==================== Thank you for this. Okay - this presents right thought, not as a single dhamma, but as a group of four dhammas. That's fine. The only thing that is a bit disconcerting is this business of *thinking* of renunciation, non-ill-will, and non-cruelty. It doesn't sound very "paramatthic" to me. Analogically, thinking of hardness is a mental activity involving concept, even though hardness itself is not concept. And thinking of renunciation etc would be of the same sort. This is why I believe that in the context of samma-samkappo, a better translation than "right thinking" is "right intention". The intention or impulse to renunciation or non-ill-will or non-cruelty is, in each case, a momentary paramattha dhamma rather different from the "thinking" of these things. How one translates fro the Pali is incredibly important, I believe. 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) 39604 From: htootintnaing Date: Thu Dec 9, 2004 10:08am Subject: Dhamma Thread ( 164 ) Dear Dhamma Friends, There are 5 groups of cittas. They are grouped into 5 separate entity depending on what type of feeling they have or what kind of vedana cetasika arises with them. 1. 62 somanassa cittas (consciousness with mental pleasure) 2. 1 sukha citta (consciousness with physical pleasure) 3. 1 dukkha citta (consciousness with physical pain/displeasure) 4. 2 domanassa cittas (consciousness with mental displeasure) 5. 55 upekkha cittas (consciousness with indifferent feeling) Please refer back to 'citta' portion. 62 somanassa cittas are 1. 4 somanassa lobha mula cittas 2. 1 somansaa santirana citta 3. 1 ahetuka kiriya, hasituppada citta 4.12 kama somanassa cittas ( half of 24 kama sobhana cittas) 5.11 1st jhana cittas ( 3 mundane and 8 supramundane ) 6.11 2nd jhana cittas ( ,, ,, ) 7.11 3rd jhana cittas ( ,, ,, ) 8.11 4th jhana cittas ( ,, ,, ) ---------- 62 somanassa cittas. 1 sukha citta is 'sukha saha gatam ahetuka kusala vipaka kayavinnana citta. 1 dukkha citta is 'dukkha saha gatam ahetuka akusala vipaka kayavinnana citta. 2 domanassa cittas are 1. domanassa saha gatam patigha sampayuttam asankharika citta 2. domanassa saha gatam patigha sampayuttam sasankharika citta 55 upekkha cittas are 1. 4 upekkha saha gatam lobha mula cittas 2. 2 moha mula cittas 3. 8 of 10 pancavinnana cittas after exclusion of 2 kayavinnana cittas 4. 2 sampaticchana cittas 5. 2 santirana cittas 6. 2 ahetuka kiria cittas ( panca- and mano- dvaravajjana cittas ) 7.12 kama upekkha cittas ( half of 24 kama sobhana cittas ) 8.11 5th jhana cittas ( 3 mundane and 8 supramundane ) 9.12 arupavacara cittas ------- 55 upekkha cittas These 121 cittas are dhamma molecules. They fall into 5 groups. 62 somanassa cittas, 1 sukha citta, 1 dukkha citta, 2 domanassa cittas and 55 upekkha cittas. They have five groups because one atom of dhamma in each of cittas has different qualities in different cittas. May you all be free from suffering. With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing PS: Any comments are welcome and any queries are welcome and they will be valuable. If there is unclarity of any meaning, please just give a reply to any of these posts. 39605 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Dec 9, 2004 11:11am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: kusala and akusala. Dear Friend James, op 07-12-2004 22:57 schreef buddhatrue op buddhatrue@y...: > James: Okay, here is where we get to the important issue: Nina, can > you direct your cittas to ignore the input from any of the > doorways? N: I cannot direct cittas, and if I believe so it is the idea of self coming in. J:.... To my understanding, the point of > satipathanna is to gain control of the sense doors. N: The question is how, when, and which dhamma is doing the controlling. Our first issue was: why is Kh Sujin stressing seeing and visible object. Instead of speaking about control of the senses, I would rather keep to this issue. Maybe in this way I clarify what is meant. And we avoid long debates!! I can render what we discussed in India, but it has not sunk in sufficiently yet. I find visible object difficult, this seems to last longer than the other sense objects. And on account of this I am more lost in the ocean of concepts. Kh. Sujin said: we see each other only for a short time, life is short, and this is a bitter medicine, it is the dukkha of life. How short? Shorter than we ever thought. Visible object is only there for an extremely short moment, it falls away and never comes back. It can never be the same any more. When you close your eyes and then open them, something appears that was not there before: visible object, or colour, we can name it anything, but it is just what appears through the eyesense. It is experienced by seeing. When you open your eyes there is seeing, and seeing is dependent on conditions. Nobody can make it arise. It seems that you see people, but that is already thinking, and each moment falls away. When understanding develops it can see dukkha in the deepest sense: the arising and falling away of seeing, visible object, thinking and all dhammas. This must lead to detachment. One cannot force sati to be aware of visible object, but if understanding realizes that sati arises because of its own condiitons, there will be less clinging to it. Understanding that there is no one in visible object is very lonely. But it can be learnt by gradually getting used to the characteristic of visible object. I appreciate more now K.S. IV, Second Fifty, By Migajala §63, the words: Dwelling alone, dwelling alone. ATI transl: Nina. 39606 From: Date: Thu Dec 9, 2004 6:27am Subject: The Problem of Relations Hi, all - I find myself obsessing a bit about this topic. There are many, many relations (and properties), some of which are central to the Dhamma such as relations of conditionality and the properties of anatta and anicca that are clearly "realities" in some sense. But, on the other hand, it is most unclear to me exactly what sort of "things" these actually are and in what sense they are "realities". They arecertainly not phenomena in the same sense as paramattha dhammas. Some would say they are merely concepts. Certainly that are not entities of any sort. I have no problem, myself, with considering them to be important conventional realities, because I don't dismiss conventional realities as such, ipso facto, to be fiction, but others here think differently about concepts. I would appreciate feedback on this matter. 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) 39607 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Dec 9, 2004 11:58am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Roots of Good and Evil. Hello Phil, op 09-12-2004 07:51 schreef plnao op plnao@j...: >> http://www.geocities.com/ekchew.geo/rootsofgoodandevilC5.html > > ("The Roots of Good and Evil" by > Nyanaponika Thera.) N: I use it a lot, I have it as a booklet. It is very good, excellent text quotes. Nina. 39608 From: Date: Thu Dec 9, 2004 8:08am Subject: Re: [dsg] The Problem of Relations In a message dated 12/9/2004 11:33:34 AM Pacific Standard Time, upasaka@a... writes: Hi, all - I find myself obsessing a bit about this topic. There are many, many relations (and properties), some of which are central to the Dhamma such as relations of conditionality and the properties of anatta and anicca that are clearly "realities" in some sense. But, on the other hand, it is most unclear to me exactly what sort of "things" these actually are and in what sense they are "realities". They arecertainly not phenomena in the same sense as paramattha dhammas. Some would say they are merely concepts. Certainly that are not entities of any sort. I have no problem, myself, with considering them to be important conventional realities, because I don't dismiss conventional realities as such, ipso facto, to be fiction, but others here think differently about concepts. I would appreciate feedback on this matter. With metta, Howard Hi Howard 1) I think not just "some" relations are central to the Dhamma...they all are. They all ultimately support each other and form the conditions we experience. 2) Anatta and anicca are not properties or realities. They are an evaluation of the way phenomena operate. I.E., all conditioned things are impermanent, but there is no "thing" of impermanence. All things are not-self. But there is no "thing" of not-self. To say that phenomena are impermanent and no-self is the truth. This is not to say there is a phenomena of impermanence or no-self. Impermanence and no-self are not phenomena, they describe phenomena. There are structures or energy formations that continuously fluctuate based on what other structures/energies are doing. Its all relative. This interacting energy is what is really arises and ceases...or perhaps better thought of as "transforms." This can be called "conditionality." It is this that is impermanent and no-self. (The lack of conditionality is not impermanent because impermanent doesn't apply. There is no 'thing' to be impermanent. But no-self still applies to Nibbana because no 'thing' is still no-self.) 3) I don't believe in conventional or ultimate realities. There are just deeper levels of understanding. One thing is as real as another. TG 39609 From: Date: Thu Dec 9, 2004 9:00am Subject: Re: [dsg] The Problem of Relations Hi, TG - In a message dated 12/9/04 4:15:04 PM Eastern Standard Time, TGrand458@a... writes: > Hi Howard > > 1) I think not just "some" relations are central to the Dhamma...they all > are. They all ultimately support each other and form the conditions we > experience. > ------------------------------- Howard: Yes. Relations in general lie at the core of what is real. When I say that some are central to the Dhamma I only mean that they are prominent in the teaching. -------------------------------- > > 2) Anatta and anicca are not properties or realities. They are an > evaluation > of the way phenomena operate. I.E., all conditioned things are impermanent, > > but there is no "thing" of impermanence. All things are not-self. But > there > is no "thing" of not-self. > ---------------------------------- Howard: Yes, I think that is so. Now there is still a sense in which anatta and anicca are "realities". The sense is that *it is true* that no conditioned dhammas last and no dhammas have self-existence or core. But notice how I have formulated this. There was no mention of properties. There were just denials that point out absences. This, perhaps, helps explain the matter. Anatta and anicca are, indeed, just concepts, but they are important ones that point to absences. --------------------------------- > > To say that phenomena are impermanent and no-self is the truth. This is not > > to say there is a phenomena of impermanence or no-self. Impermanence and > no-self are not phenomena, they describe phenomena. > ----------------------------------- Howard: Yes, they are concepts. But look at how important concepts are. They are essential for non-arahants to know the way things are. ------------------------------------ > > There are structures or energy formations that continuously fluctuate based > on what other structures/energies are doing. Its all relative. This > interacting energy is what is really arises and ceases...or perhaps better > thought of > as "transforms." This can be called "conditionality." It is this that is > impermanent and no-self. (The lack of conditionality is not impermanent > because > impermanent doesn't apply. There is no 'thing' to be impermanent. But > no-self > still applies to Nibbana because no 'thing' is still no-self.) > --------------------------------------- Howard: This also tends to characterize relations as concepts. They are concepts that serve to illuminate the way things are, but they are not phenomena of any sort themselves. This all seems to say to me that if we think that knowing paramattha dhammas alone provides full knowledge of reality, we are quite wrong. It is starting to look to me that at least for non-arahants, in whom transcendental wisdom has not been fully aroused, concept is absolutely indispensable for understanding what is what. --------------------------------------- > > 3) I don't believe in conventional or ultimate realities. There are just > deeper levels of understanding. One thing is as real as another. > ---------------------------------------- Howard: I think that distinguishing between ultimate and conventional is valid. I see these as different types of experiential content, requiring differing modes of cognition. I see a genuine difference between, for example, hardness and a tree. Both are experiential content, with hardness being more fundamental, not requiring sankharic processing. But I think that to identify paramattha dhammas as realities and sammuti-dhammas as unrealities is an error of overstatement. There may be many sorts of phenomena, all "existing" in various ways. ---------------------------------------- > > TG > ===================== 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) 39610 From: Date: Thu Dec 9, 2004 9:19am Subject: Re: [dsg] The Problem of Relations In a message dated 12/9/2004 2:10:08 PM Pacific Standard Time, upasaka@a... writes: Howard: Yes, they are concepts. But look at how important concepts are. They are essential for non-arahants to know the way things are. Howard, I think that is absolutely true. Although concepts may be irrelevant for an enlightened mind, they are indispensable assets in developing insight and the Buddha utilizes concepts extensively. TG 39611 From: m. nease Date: Thu Dec 9, 2004 2:30pm Subject: Re: Re: [dsg] Re: Sarah: "One path" [Sukin] Hi Howard, ----- Original Message ----- From: "mlnease" To: Sent: Thursday, December 09, 2004 7:44 AM Subject: Fwd: Re: [dsg] Re: Sarah: "One path" [Sukin] >> Thanks for this clarification--so phassa and vedanaa > are 'infected'? > =================== > Yes. As I see it, for a worldling - for any non-arahant, for > that > matter - phassa is the contact of an apparent subject with an > apparent object > through a connecting sense-door, and vedana is "I like" or "I > dislike" or "I am > neutral about". Neither is uninfected. I've given this some thought and this is how it seems to me: Cetasikas such as phassa and vedanaa don't infect and are not infected. Because they're universal they can arise with cittas that are defiled by akusala cetasikas such as moha and lobha etc. So as I see it it is the citta that is defiled, not the cetasikas (though the defilements are cetasikas). Also, since rebirth-linking citta even in the sense-realm (i.e 'favorable') is 'infected' with latent moha and lobha, these (latent) defilements must be the results of akusala kamma. Since kamma strong enough to condition results only occurs in the javana process, this suggests to me that there is some direct correlation between the (akusala) javana process and pa.ticcasamuppaada--exactly what that is I don't know even theorectically yet. I look forward to finding out. Thanks for the impetus to consider this further. mike 39612 From: plnao Date: Thu Dec 9, 2004 3:39pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Guarding the sense doors (was: Re: kusala and akusala) Hi James, and all > As laypeople, we probably break all of these precepts quite > frequently; I know that I do. That is why the householder life > is "dusty". This "dusty" is very helpful - is it your own choice of words, or from a sutta - or ancient commentary? (wink) However, even as householders we can take steps to try > to limit the types of things our senses encounter. A good, recent > example from this group is Phil and his issues with the war in > Iraq. He found that watching and reading the news increased the > defilements in his mind. He studied what the Buddha taught in > regards to this, gave the matter a great deal of thought and effort, > and finally decided to stop watching and reading the news. That was > a very wise choice in my opinion. Thanks, James. It was, for sure. And I'm still doing quite well on the resolve to steer clear of the news. There is no doubt that cutting off the news in a strict, averting the eyes way is helping me here. (One day I was flipping around wtih the TV remote-control - what a fine invention Mara came up with there- and Bush's grinning mug appeared. I quite literally averted my eyes. >Some may think that he should > continue to watch the news and train his mind not to react to what > he sees, and eventually he probably will be able to do that, but why > make things harder than they have to be? Sometimes the best choice > is simply to limit what the senses encounter. Yes, there is a time for it. And the time will pass. Wisdom will know when that is. In the meantime, there will be backslides. There have been a few. The backslides are important. Testing out the water to see if it's safe to swim. Oops. Not yet. That shark is still devouring me. Of course, we have to remember that the visible objects that present themselves in life due so due to conditions. They are vipaka. That might be a point we don't agree on, but that's OK. In any case, good to remember that we can't completely limit what the senses encounter if we have busy daily lives. But, yes, for people who need band-aids, as Sarah put it, a little bit of will power guided by wisdom. > I believe that this is part of what it means to `guard the senses'. > However, it isn't the only part. Guarding the senses also means to > be mindful of what enters the sense doors, determine if what is > entering is increasing the defilements or contributing to a > wholesome state of mind, and direct the mind to not attend to what > increases the defilements and to attend to what increases > wholesomeness. I am still learning about wise attention, yoniso-manasikara. Clearly it is so central to all this. This morning I read this: "Now, friends, what is the cause and condition whereby unarisen hatred arises and arisen hatred becomes stronger and more powerful? A repulsive object. In him who gives unwise attention to a repulsive object, unarisen hatres ill arise, and hatred that has already arisen will grow stronger and more powerful." (AN 3:68) Of course, unwise attention is not something that we can control so completely. You write above "be mindful of what enters the sense doors, determine if what is entering is increasing the defilements or contributing to a wholesome state of mind, and direct the mind to not attend to what increases the defilements and to attend to what increases wholesomeness." You have put it very succinctly, James! However, we should also remember that all this usually happens in a wink of an eye and it would be wishful thinking to think that we (or panna, as I prefer to say) can so easily prevent ourselves from being led astray. But we know we're headed in the right direction when we can at least write what you've written above! And you have cultivated wise attention much more than I have, I imagine, so the above wholesome process goes on a lot more in you than it does in me. Very encouraging James. Thanks again. >This is a completely internal process, in the mind, > and doesn't require a manipulation of one's environment. > > So, in conclusion, I believe that guarding the senses is both an > internal and an external process and that both aspects are needed, > in different combinations at different times, to purify the mind. Yes, well said! Metta, Phil 39613 From: buddhatrue Date: Thu Dec 9, 2004 3:50pm Subject: Re: kusala and akusala. Friend Nina, Thank you so much for replying to my post. It appears that you are quite busy with your writings and travels nowadasy and I sincerely appreciate the efforts you make to reply to my inquiries. I hope that I am not burdening you in any way. Thanks again! Nina: I cannot direct cittas, and if I believe so it is the idea of self coming in. James: But Nina, we already established that there isn't any such thing as "self". You wrote that to me very specifically in your last post. But now you are telling me what a "self" is and is not capable of doing. This appears to be the dichotomy you have in your mind: Self: Can Direct Cittas; Non-Self: Cannot Direct Cittas. How can you have such a clear-cut definition for something that doesn't exist? To my understanding, directing cittas is simply volition that would be a characteristic of the citta itself. Doesn't volition exist in Buddhism? Why do you think that volition requires a "self"? Nina: The question is how, when, and which dhamma is doing the controlling. James: That is a good question. I think the dhamma we are discussing is citta, consciousness. To my understanding, cittas can contain volition. If one asks "Who does the controlling?" that type of question is a non-issue. At a basic (khanda) level, there is no "who" doing the controlling; there are only cittas doing the controlling, consciousness. It is a non-personal phenomenon. Nina: Our first issue was: why is Kh Sujin stressing seeing and visible object. Instead of speaking about control of the senses, I would rather keep to this issue. Maybe in this way I clarify what is meant. And we avoid long debates!! James: I'm sorry if I have vexed you but I thought that these subjects were related. I thought that you had already explained sufficiently why Kh Sujin stresses visible object and I decided to let that subject drop. It wasn't a very important subject anyway. However, I had decided to pick up on the last issue that you touched upon, about closing the eyes and controlling the senses, and asked further about that. I did not mean to confuse the issue or to prolong any type of debate with my inquiry. Please accept my sincere apologies; there is no need to continue this discussion if you would rather not. Metta, James 39614 From: Date: Thu Dec 9, 2004 11:15am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Sarah: "One path" [Sukin]n Hi, Mike - In a message dated 12/9/04 5:36:31 PM Eastern Standard Time, mlnease@z... writes: > I've given this some thought and this is how it seems to me: Cetasikas > such > as phassa and vedanaa don't infect and are not infected. Because they're > universal they can arise with cittas that are defiled by akusala cetasikas > such as moha and lobha etc. So as I see it it is the citta that is defiled, > not the cetasikas (though the defilements are cetasikas). > ------------------------------------------- Howard: Your thoughts on this are interesting, Mike, but I'm not certain I agree. You are saying that it is the citta that is defiled due to certain cetasikas being defiled, but not the phassa or vedana. Now, there are two senses to 'citta'. One of these senses is vi~n~nana, the "awareness operation". Now, vi~n~nana I *do* see as infected in the non-arahant, because, for such a "being" it is a knowing that is infected by the sense of subjectivity (or knowing subject/agent). But vi~n~nana is but one link of D.O., and as far as "infection" is concerned, it, like all the other links, performs a store-and-forward (or transmission) function - it is a carrier. Because of the atta-infection tranmitted from avijja through sankhara into vi~n~nana, it cascades from there through all the subsequent links of D.O. chain. The other sense is of "mindstate". But a mindstate is not a paramattha dhamma. It is a collection of co-occuring phenomena - citta, cetasikas, and maybe a rupa as arammana, which means that a citta is not a direct element of experience. To say that it is infected is just a manner of speaking, where it is actually the dhammas that underlie it which are infected. ----------------------------------------- Also, since > > rebirth-linking citta even in the sense-realm (i.e 'favorable') is > 'infected' with latent moha and lobha, > these (latent) defilements must be the results of akusala kamma. Since > kamma strong enough to condition results only occurs in the javana process, > this suggests to me that there is > some direct correlation between the (akusala) javana process and > pa.ticcasamuppaada--exactly what that is I don't know even theorectically > yet. I look forward to finding out. > ---------------------------------------- Howard: I don't think any of us will *really* find out what is what with regard to the Dhamma until there is no longer any sense of a "we" who finds out! That being the case, may we both, and all others here, soon "find out"! ;-) ------------------------------------------ > > Thanks for the impetus to consider this further. > > mike > > ============================ 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) 39615 From: Date: Thu Dec 9, 2004 11:25am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: kusala and akusala. Hi, James (and Nina) - In a message dated 12/9/04 6:52:42 PM Eastern Standard Time, buddhatrue@y... writes: > Nina: I cannot direct cittas, and if I believe so it is the idea of > self coming in. > > James: But Nina, we already established that there isn't any such > thing as "self". You wrote that to me very specifically in your > last post. But now you are telling me what a "self" is and is not > capable of doing. This appears to be the dichotomy you have in your > mind: Self: Can Direct Cittas; Non-Self: Cannot Direct Cittas. How > can you have such a clear-cut definition for something that doesn't > exist? To my understanding, directing cittas is simply volition > that would be a characteristic of the citta itself. Doesn't > volition exist in Buddhism? Why do you think that volition requires > a "self"? > ======================= Two points, James: 1) While I don't think that cetana can outright direct or command content of consciousness, it can frequently and powerfully influence what arises. So, I agree with you on this. 2) But you should re-read Nina's sentence. She wasn't talking of self being involved, but of the *idea* of self being involved. Her point, whether one agrees with it or not, was that the belief that one can direct cittas involves the *idea* of self. 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) 39616 From: m. nease Date: Thu Dec 9, 2004 4:47pm Subject: Knocking Out Akusala Dear Friends, A friend sent this interesting experiment in the practicality of eliminating akusala dhammas by attacking them with the swatter of pa~n~naa or any other kusala: http://www.shockhaber.com/zzzzzzzzzzzzzzz.htm Good luck. mike p.s. No actual beings were killed in the production of this program. ---------- 39617 From: Date: Thu Dec 9, 2004 3:52pm Subject: A Drop More Re: [dsg] The Problem of Relations Hi again, TG - Just another thought or two about anatta, anicca, and about relations. As I think about these a bit more, I do think it may not be wrong to think of them as realities. I think that they are mind-door realities. It occurs to me that any specific instances of anatta and anicca are simply absences. Now "anatta in general" and "anicca in general", of course, are just (well grounded) concepts or abstractions. That's no different from "hardness in general" being just (well grounded) concept, whereas specific occurrences of hardness are experiential realities. Many specific absences are quite real, and directly observable. I think, for example, of silence, particularly a silence following upon a sustained period of great noise. It seems we can hear the silence, but we don't really hear it. It is a mind-door object. Sometimes nibbana, itself, is said to be an absence, though I'm not quite sure that is the correct perspective. In any case, anatta and anicca are indirectly known by inference and directly knowable by wisdom, and this latter alone makes them realities. As concerns relations, I think that it may well make sense to consider that they are events of a sort, specifically types of multi-phenomenal, and often trans-temporal, events. (For an example drawn from Abhidhamma, the co-occuring of cetasikas within a given mindstate is a multi-phenomenal, but single-time event.) I think that every specific relation holding between/among phenomena is exactly a multi-phenomenal event, and often trans-temporal as well. And, like absences, they are all known through the mind door, indirectly through inference or directly by wisdom. 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) 39618 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Dec 9, 2004 9:04pm Subject: Re: [dsg] The Problem of Relations Hi Howard, Visuddhimagga VIII, note 11, gives thewhole list of all the types of concepts. Rob K, also gave this before. I also had a correspondance with Larry about the three characteristics and a passage of the Vis. But it takes time to look it up. It was said that these are bound up with paramattha dhammas. Yes, I found some texts, but I have to finish first Larry's Vis. passage which is long. Besides, my father becomes 104 and we give a house concert in about 8 days. I have to rehearse a lot. Nina. op 09-12-2004 20:27 schreef upasaka@a... op upasaka@a...: > There are many, many > relations (and properties), some of which are central to the Dhamma such as > relations of conditionality and the properties of anatta and anicca that are > clearly "realities" in some sense. But, on the other hand, it is most unclear > to > me exactly what sort of "things" these actually are and in what sense they are > "realities". They arecertainly not phenomena in the same sense as paramattha > dhammas. Some would say they are merely concepts. 39619 From: Date: Thu Dec 9, 2004 5:33pm Subject: Re: [dsg] The Problem of Relations Hi, Nina - In a message dated 12/10/04 12:06:45 AM Eastern Standard Time, vangorko@x... writes: > Hi Howard, > Visuddhimagga VIII, note 11, gives thewhole list of all the types of > concepts. Rob K, also gave this before. > I also had a correspondance with Larry about the three characteristics and a > passage of the Vis. But it takes time to look it up. It was said that these > are bound up with paramattha dhammas. > Yes, I found some texts, but I have to finish first Larry's Vis. passage > which is long. Besides, my father becomes 104 and we give a house concert in > about 8 days. I have to rehearse a lot. > Nina. > ======================= Thank you for this, Nina. The list of kinds of concepts is interesting to me! I will look it up for sure. (I own the Vsdm.) 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) 39620 From: sarah abbott Date: Thu Dec 9, 2004 10:55pm Subject: Re: [dsg] The Problem of Relations Hi Howard, --- upasaka@a... wrote: > > Thank you for this, Nina. The list of kinds of concepts is > interesting > to me! I will look it up for sure. (I own the Vsdm.) > ... See also the many posts under 'Concepts' in UP which include this list from the Vism and Abhidammattha Sangaha, such as this one: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/3494 Metta, Sarah ====== 39621 From: sarah abbott Date: Thu Dec 9, 2004 11:55pm Subject: Re: False Identification of Paramattha Dhammas and Realities (Re: [dsg] Conce... Hi Howard, --- upasaka@a... wrote: > Howard: > Yes, it is. And it is a reality, is it not? But it is not, > itself, a > paramattha dhamma, is it? > ------------------------------------- .... S: the ti-lakkhana are characteristics of realities or of paramattha dhammas. They cannot be known apart from those dhammas (realities). .... > Certainly relations do not hold independently of what are related > by > them. The relations are also not identical with what they relate. The > relations > are not imagined. They are, thus, "realities". > But they also are not paramattha dhammas. .... S: These are excellent points/questions. Let me give the example I quoted before again and then add a little more this time: Quote from U Narada's introduction to the Patthana translation (PTS): "Just as the hotness of chilli is inherent in it and cannot exist apart from it and as the sweetness of sugar is inherent in it and cannot exist apart from it, so also, the conditioning forces inherent in the (conditioning) states cannot exist apart from those states. For example, in root condition, the force of greed, which is one of the six roots, cannot exist apart from that state. Here the root conditioning state is greed and the conditioning force of greed is also greed. Therefore, the force and the state which possesses that force cannot be considered apart from each other." **** S: Greed leads to more greed. We all know that. It accumulates by natural decisive support and other supporting conditions. We refer to these conditions using various concepts to explain how and why greed leads to more greed and to show that this is the nature of such dhammas. In truth, however, there is nothing apart from the conditioning states (here the presently arising greed) and the conditioned ones (here the greed that follows as a consequence). To give another example. We know that cittas (moments of consciousness) follow each other in succession and as we read in the texts, this is by anantara paccaya(proximity condition). Here anatara paccaya is a concept which refers to the nature or characteristics of cittas to succeed each other. In other words, looking at the list of concepts in Vism or CMA, it is a concept of the existent based on the existent. It is a concept about the characteristics of these particular paramattha dhammas (realities) to be conditioned, function and manifest in this way. There is nothing existing or real apart from the conditioning and conditioned states. Even when we come to arammana paccaya which we know includes concepts, we are still talking about the nature of paramattha dhammas. Cittas in the mind door process either experience realities or conceptualise about imaginary objects. The imaginary objects, as you know, are never experienced as realities. The relation merely explains the manner in which the cittas and cetasikas at such a time are conditioned to experience objects, i.e no thinking without an object. .... >There is no khandha > that the > relation of contiguity, for example, belongs to. That relation is > neither > rupa nor vedana nor sankhara nor sa~n~na nor vi~n~nana. .. .... S: Contiguity condition/relation(samanantara paccaya) is identical with anantara paccaya above. Htoo has written about the niyamas or fixed law/natural order of all dhammas. One of these is citta niyama which concerns the sequence of cittas (consciousness) which cannot be altered. The relation or niyama is merely a way of describing the cittas and cetasikas (4 or the 5 khandhas), to explain one of the ways in which they are conditioned to arise. The conditioned nature is an integral aspect of all dhammas (apart from nibbana) and is clearly comprehended directly (not by thinking or calculating) at the second stage of insight. To stress, there is no relation apart from the relating and related realities (paramattha dhammas) here. ... > --------------------------------- > Howard: > The issue is relations, not the related dhammas.... ... S: There is no relation apart from the relating and related dhammas. See above. ... > More problematical is the status of something like > anatta/impersonality. It is either reality or concept, correct? ... S: Or an aspect of reality, like the keyboard I'm using is an aspect or characteristic of the computer. There are also other 'parts' which are integral to its composition. We can't say the keyboard is the computer just as we can't say anatta is a reality or paramattha dhamma on its own. (Nina said she had more from the Vism/Tika to add on this area). ... >If > concept, then, as some here > view concept, it is nothing at all. ... S: Not a concept. ... >If reality, then where does it fit > in? It > does not occur on any list of cetasikas, it is not a rupa, it is not a > citta, > and it is not nibbana. That exhausts the Abhidhammic categories, does it > not? > Something's wrong here! ;-)) ... S: Nothing's wrong, fear not;-)) It fits in to each of those cetasikas, rupas, cittas and nibbana. It is an aspect of all of them, just like dukkha and anicca (apart from nibbana) and just as nama is an aspect of some and rupa an aspect of others. .... > Howard: > You wish to exclude the conventional dhammas, which, by the way, > the > Buddha in the suttas, often included when using the term 'dhamma', ... S: When dhamma includes concepts or conventional dhammas it is never in the context of dhammas to be penetrated or directly known. This is why it's important to read suttas such as the Sabba Sutta carefully and to understand the way conventional terms are used in the Mulapariyaya and other suttas as some of us have been saying. [And......for those bold enough to question the homepage description, this is why we have 'realities' rather than just 'dhammas' there. I think dhammas (realities) would be best and I may be suggesting it at the next Board Meeting, on the beach I hope - looking sunny for Sunday here, if a bit chilly for the waves;-).] Howard, I think all your comments on this whole thread are very useful. I'm glad to consider this area more. I'm snipping now as I have a lot of posts I'm behind on and I've probably written too much already. please repost any of your other concerns/comments in reply if they haven't been addressed. Metta, Sarah ========== 39622 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri Dec 10, 2004 0:08am Subject: ‘Cetasikas' study corner 69- Perception/Sa~n~naa (p) Dear Friends, 'Cetasikas' by Nina van Gorkom http://www.vipassana.info/cetasikas.html http://www.zolag.co.uk/ Questions, comments and different views welcome;-) ========================================== [Ch.3 Perception(sa~n~naa)contd] ***** Saññå accompanies lokuttara citta which experiences nibbåna and then saññå is also lokuttara. Nibbåna cannot be attained unless conditioned realities are known as they are: as impermanent, dukkha and anattå. We read in the Gradual Sayings (Book of the Tens, Chapter VI, §6, Ideas) about ten kinds of saññå which are of great fruit and are leading to the ‘deathless’, which is nibbåna. The Påli term saññå is here translated as ‘idea’. We read about the ten ‘ideas’ which should be developed: -Monks, these ten ideas, if made to grow and made much of, are of -great fruit, of great profit for plunging into the deathless, for ending -up in the deathless. What ten ideas? -The idea of the foul, of death, of repulsiveness in food, of distaste -for all the world, the idea of impermanence, of dukkha in -impermanence, of not-self in dukkha, the idea of abandoning, of -fading, of ending. -These ten ideas, monks, if made to grow… are of great profit for -plunging into the deathless, for ending up in the deathless. ***** [Ch.3 Perception(sa~n~naa)to be contd] Metta, Sarah ====== 39623 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri Dec 10, 2004 0:31am Subject: Re: [dsg] Dhamma Thread ( 149 ) Dear Htoo, I said I'd get back to you at the beginning of the week, but the list has been very busy and I'm behind on a lot of intended posts. I'm also only slowly catching up now. I appreciate all your DT posts (though as I said before, I personally prefer kings and ministers to atoms and molecules, but that's just me. I also glaze over when I see ontology and phenomenology.. in the context of Dhamma). Just a few comments for now. In this message you wrote: --- htootintnaing wrote: > If 8 lobha mula cittas are well understood, this will be very > valuable to differentiate between joy of lobha mula cittas and joy of > other sobhana cittas. If not careful, even in the middle of > mahakusala cittas vithi vara, lobha mula cittas can arise and the joy > or piti in lobha mula citta may micmic piti of sobhana cittas. .... S: I think this paragraph is a clear description of why it can be helpful to consider these various classifications and details which may seem tedious to us at times;-). If they help us to have a little more understanding of anatta, of conditioned dhammas, of presently arising lobha or of how little is really known, they can be very useful indeed. In a post 2 or 3 days ago to Bhante V, I also quoted from one of your DT's about chanda. You may have missed it. (Let me know off-list if you wish to find it and have trouble). We were discussing non-concrete (anipphanna) rupas before and you kindly followed a couple of links to old posts and Nina provided more references to show they are indeed paramattha dhammas. [Mike, that reference you pointed out in CMA on this is incorrect and BB has said it will be changed for the next edition. Besides the links I gave to Htoo last time on this, pls both see my old post #31743. BB agreed with the conclusions, post #33803. Interesting - re this last post, it also includes a section on dhammaayatana which you (Htoo) and I have discussed before. Dhammaayatana is coming up in my present thread with Howard. In BB's quote I give from CMA in this post, the details are correct and I pointed out they are incorrect in the Nyantiloka dict. They are also incorrect I believe in one of the footnotes to the Sabba Sutta in BB's transl of SN. I may mention this when I have a chance.It's an important point when it comes to the understanding of realities (paramattha dhammas) as opposed to concepts as discussed here at length;-). Oh gosh, htoo, looking at your other message to me, I need to reply to it in context. A couple more brief points here: DT 87. You mention the enemies of lobha are alobha, adosa, amoha, ahirika and anottapa. Surely hiri and ottapa? OOps - I need to call my mother back. I've just become a great-aunt!! Get back to you soon. Metta, Sarah =========== 39624 From: buddhatrue Date: Fri Dec 10, 2004 0:35am Subject: Re: kusala and akusala. Friend Howard (and Nina), Howard: 1) While I don't think that cetana can outright direct or command content of consciousness, it can frequently and powerfully influence what arises. So, I agree with you on this. James: I think that we agree also; really, I am having trouble finding the right words to express what I mean. I seem to take the meaning of words from the context in which they are used, but others seem to think that words have an intrinsic meaning. For example, I can use the word `control' and mean a type of control in a conventional sense that is not absolute, while others see the word `control' and immediately start thinking, "ATTA BELIEF! ATTA BELIEF! RED ALERT! RED ALERT!" ;-)) The words have become like hidden landmines and I can barely find a safe word to express my thoughts. Howard: But you should re-read Nina's sentence. She wasn't talking of self being involved, but of the *idea* of self being involved. Her point, whether one agrees with it or not, was that the belief that one can direct cittas involves the *idea* of self. James: I was aware of the content of Nina's sentence. With Nina, in this thread, I am using the Socratic Method, the method of asking questions until the basis for one's thoughts is revealed. I am not trying to debate or to be a `smart ass', I genuinely want to know why she believes this. However, I think I am getting on her nerves with this method of inquiry so it may end soon! ;-)) I really want to know why Nina believes that the directing of cittas translates into a belief in self. The Buddha said that we can determine that the five khandas are not `self' because we cannot say, "Let them be thus'. So, to my way of thinking, a belief in self means that one believes they have absolute control over the five khandas. I don't believe that, and yet I still believe in the value of guarding the senses and directing the senses. For example, I know that I cannot say, "Let my body be like Arnold Schwarzenegger's" and then it will instantly be. But I know that I can change my diet, live at the gym, take steroids (bad idea!) and then my body could become, possibly, like Arnold Schwarzenegger's. Conversely, I cannot say, "Let my mind be free of its defilements. Let me know nibbana!" and then it will instantly be. But I know that if I follow the Eightfold Path, which includes Sila, Samadhi, and Panna, I could possibly know nibbana. I know this because the Buddha said it is possible and I have faith in his teaching. Metta, James 39625 From: buddhatrue Date: Fri Dec 10, 2004 0:54am Subject: Guarding the sense doors (was: Re: kusala and akusala) Friend Phil, Phil: This "dusty" is very helpful - is it your own choice of words, or from a sutta - or ancient commentary? (wink) James: It is from a sutta, that is why I put it in quote marks, and I happen to like it also: "Before my Awakening, when I was still an unawakened Bodhisatta, the thought occurred to me: 'The household life is crowded, a dusty road. Life gone forth is the open air. It isn't easy, living in a home, to lead the holy life that is totally perfect, totally pure, a polished shell. What if I, having shaved off my hair & beard and putting on the ochre robe, were to go forth from the home life into homelessness?' http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/majjhima/mn036.html Phil: But we know we're headed in the right direction when we can at least write what you've written above! And you have cultivated wise attention much more than I have, I imagine, so the above wholesome process goes on a lot more in you than it does in me. James: Oh Phil, you flatter me. However, I was simply parroting what the Buddha taught (After all, I have read many suttas) and that doesn't reveal anything about the skill of my mental processes. Phil: Very encouraging James. Thanks again. James: You're quite welcome! :-) Metta, James 39626 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri Dec 10, 2004 1:11am Subject: Re: [dsg] Dhamma Thread ( 133 ) Dear Htoo, My nephew and partner have just had a little girl, Amelia. My mother is thrilled to be a great grand-mother! Now back to our discussion. --- htootintnaing wrote: > > Actually they do not arise and do not pass away. What arise and pass > away are these 4 rupa's host. That is 18 salakkhana rupas. .... All conditioned dhammas arise and pass away. The 4 lakkhana rupas - well, see Nina's Vism text she sent. We can't talk about the arising and falling away of lakkhanas I think. This is like Howard's qu - they cannot be said to have the ti-lakkhana themselves, but are aspects of other realities. ... > > Vinattis again. Does it arise and pass away? Need to check. ... S: Yes - all other conditioned dhammas. ... I do not > think vinatti arise and pass away. But vinatti do exist. What arise > and pass away are these 2 vinatti's host that is 18 salakkhana rupas. > > Akasa. Does it arise? Does it pass away? Need to check. I do not > think akasa arises and passes away. What arise and pass away are > akasa's host. .... S: It's also a conditioned dhamma, an element, indirectly conditioned by the same conditions that determine the rupas and falling away as they do. Tell me if you found anything different. .... > > Let us think imaginably. There is the space that astronauts float > around. There are two masses. One is the earth and another is Mar. > The earth did arise. The earth will soon pass away. It is soon. It > will pass away soon. Mar did arise. Mar will one day pass away and > disappear. But the space between the earth and Mar never arise, never > pass away. You might think that that space is real. Actually it is > not. Space does not arise and does not pass away. What arise and pass > away are akasa's host. But akasa does exist and it is a reality. .... S: I find it more helpful to think of akasa as a dhatu, an element or as a subtle rupa included in dhammaayatana. All elements arise and pass away (apart from nibbana of course). Lots of posts on akasa in U.P. I'm trying to avoid pulling out texts now. ... > > Again 3 lahutadis. They do not arise and pass away. Only their host > arise and pass away. But all 3 lahutadi rupas are realities. My idea > seems saying 10 rupa do not exist. No. They are realities and they do > exist. But they do not arise and do not pass away. .... S: If you still think this after Nina's and my earlier posts, let me know and I'll try to find more refs. .... > > The problem is the word 'exist'. Someone may point out what I meant > by 'exist'. When the appropriate can be discovered, I might change to > that word. > > 18 salakkhana rupas , 18 nipphanna rupas arise and fall away. They > have 17 times the life of a citta. ... S: Yes. ... > > 10 rupas exist. But they do not arise and do not fall away. How do > you think? Any previous discussion on these? ... S: sabbe sankhara anicca. Sabbe sankhara includes these rupas. From the comy to Abhidammattha Sangaha: "All this materiality (i.e 28 rupas), in as much as it is without motivations, has causal conditions, is associated with the taints, is conditioned.....etc". .... By the way, on dukkha and your earlier comments which I can't find now, but I know other friends questioned. I think you might have been right. You said, I believe, that the lokuttara cittas are not included in dukkha in the 4 Noble Truths. I heard K.Sujin explain the same, saying this was because these cittas couldn't be known prior to being experienced or sth along those lines. Other bits in brief: DT97 you say that if ditthi has been eradicated by sotapatti magga nana, all following lobha cittas will be accompanied by mana (conceit). I think you mean, *may* be accompanied by mana, but definitely not by ditthi. DT110 you say (and have said before) that adosa cetasika is metta. I prefer to say that metta is adosa cetasika, because adosa isn't necessarily metta. For example, there can be adosa without other beings as object and then it can't be called metta as I understand. Btw, DT134, I'm interested in aniyati yogii - very interested in this post and term. I'm not familiar with it, pls say more. I'll leave it there for now. Pls know I really appreciate the DT thread, even though I'm often way behind with it;-). Metta, Sarah ======= 39627 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri Dec 10, 2004 1:42am Subject: Re: Di.t.thijukamma, was Re: [dsg] Sanna/Ken O Dear Mike & Nina, Mike, you've made some great contributions of late, esp. one on dosa to KenO & Hugo I thought (#39312). Also on habitual kamma. K.Sujin stresses that for kamma to be kamma patha, it's not just one moment, but so many accumulated kammas. --- "m. nease" wrote: > > Nibbaana arises for only one moment, I think (when 'it' would > naturally be > > 'marked' by sa~n~naa as that is one of sa~n~naa's functions)--I don't > see > > why the reviewing after nibbaana might not take a concept (the memory > of > > nibbaana?) as an object--but I really don't know. > N: I think this is what Sarah and I discussed: not so classifiable > object: > navattabbamaarama.na. > Thus, we cannot say it is a concept, it is reality, but reviewed > afterwards > by kaamaavacara citta with pañña, not directly experienced by lokuttara > citta. I should verify this with Sarah. ... S: Yes. A reality. The same characteristic experienced by these kaamaavacara cittas with panna. Also the defilements eradicated etc. It's not thinking. K.Sujin says (and I'm pretty sure I've read it in Dispeller too) that when navattabbamaarama.na is understood with this first example, the other examples can be understood, such as how panna undestands sense objects or namas just fallen away etc etc. Mike, see 'navattabbamaarama.na' in UP. It can refer to realities by way of navattabbaraarama.na, as in these examples, or to concepts as in nimitta experienced by jhanas etc. The sign you and Larry were discussing and the function of sanna. The sign can be either concept or reality. Sanna marks a 'sign' at every moment. Essential for any accumulating rightly or wrongly. Btw, thx for your comment and witty remarks about how you'd LOVE not to mind at all what is conditioned etc and how do you start and the slow motion towards the trees....;-) Another wag!! Nina, thanks for your extra comment and feed back on the letter to BB and the two different stems of jhana. I was hoping you'd point out any mistakes or add any further comments. I've also been appreciating all your Vism and other posts. I'm sure you must be very glad to have had broadband this last week while the list was so busy!! Metta, Sarah p.s Mike, have you heard anything of particular interest on the India recordings? Can you listen to these Buddhists while you do your Nudist work;-) ======== 39628 From: jwromeijn Date: Fri Dec 10, 2004 1:50am Subject: Re: [dsg] Concept and Reality in Primary Texts Dear Howard (and all) Howard: I am a rather radical phenomenalist, myself, taking the perspective that only "the experienced" or at least "conditionally able to be experienced" is of any pragmatic concern. Joop: Well, I'm not, or not exactly. I am a "non-ontologist": we don't know how the world is in a objective sense, we only have theories about the world. And from time to time (I hope) we check that theories to control or they still are correct; or better; if they still are usefull. We to be honest, that was not what Nyanaponika was talking about. He stated that we should understand the Teachtings of the Buddha (and the Abhidhamma) on a phenomenological way, that we should not think that the Buddha was making ontological statements. But in a way we agree again: "hardness" (as one of the four great so- called elements) is not a "element" in the sense of "building block" but an aspect of experiencing things made of material. I don't know if I understand the rest of your message, because your conclusion "So, for me, ontology is based in phenomenology" surprised me. My private definition of "ontology" is: the world exists and is describable in a objective way, even if I don't exist. About such an ontology I had to be agnostic, is that your conclusion too? Another question: what is the conseuence of this for our buddhistic path ? I don't know; on this moment I think: I'm really not a orthodox Theravadin, I'm going to study Mahayana. Metta Joop 39629 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri Dec 10, 2004 1:56am Subject: Re: [dsg] Greetings, new member here. Hi Guy (& RobM & Naresh), You joined us at a very busy time on the list and I really appreciated both your introduction and also RobM's kind welcome. (This helps us a lot, Rob;-)). --- gy_richard wrote: > Just wanted to introduce myself,(as suggested). My name is Guy and I > live in a big bowl of samsara in southern USA. I have been reading > and trying to practice Buddhism on and off for about 20 years now. I > have done a lot of reading, and I admit very little practice, but I > think my motivation is finally set to sit on a daily basis. .... S: We have a few other members from the south. Whereabouts are you? Sounds like you must have considered Buddhism a lot and I hope you find the list useful. ... > In the last 8 months or so I have become very interested in the > Theravada tradition, and feel more of a sense of "time to settle in > and do the work". I sometimes think about where my mind would be > today if I would have stuck to meditation from the start all those > years ago, and do not want to look back on the second have of my life > in the same way. .... S: You'll find some here feel like you and others who might say the opposite - :-/ I'll let you learn about this in due course. .... > > So... I do not pretend to have a vast wealth of knowledge about the > Buddha's teachings and will no doubt benefit more from this group > more than you will from me, but, if I have one piece of advice for > anyone it is this...if you are the type, like me, who fell in love > with the Dhamma and loves to read, but you find yourself putting off > the actual practice of sitting meditation, don't put it off any > longer!! Study without practice, in my opinion, is not Buddhism or > being a Buddhist. So put the books down for a while and sit! Besides, > what's the point of knowing the teachings if we don't put them in to > practice right? .... S: As I hinted, there are many different ideas of what 'practice' means here. Somewhere in UP there is a neat summary from Howard on this, but I can't think under what category (Connie, Chris...any ideas). You could in any case, go to UP and run down the topics to see if there is one of interest. Maybe 'Traditions' or 'Practice' or 'New to the list'. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/files/Useful_Posts Anyway, I look forward to any further comments from you. Pls don't be put off by the volume or dissenting opinions here. Metta, Sarah p.s Naresh, a welcome from me too. You had so many from others that I could see you were well settled. Do you live in South America? Curacao?? Pls keep up your good questions and remember to trim posts!! ============================================================= 39630 From: christine_forsyth Date: Fri Dec 10, 2004 3:46am Subject: Prolific Posters Hello all, For interests sake, I thought I'd see just who our most prolific members are. There are approximately 31 members who have sent in posts to the List from the 1st December, up to this moment, and my estimate (allowing for different time zones and any miscounting) is: Upasaka Howard 83 Nina 55 KenO 52 Hugo 39 Phil 37 RobM 36 Htoo 35 Sarah 33 Larry 31 Mike 29 James 24 Andrew 22 Bhante Vimalaramsi 18 Obviously at only 7, I'm letting the side down quite badly. :-) metta and peace, Christine ---The trouble is that you think you have time--- 39631 From: plnao Date: Fri Dec 10, 2004 4:03am Subject: Re: [dsg] 'Cetasikas' study corner 69- Perception/Sa~n~naa (p) Hello all > We read in the Gradual Sayings (Book of the > Tens, Chapter VI, §6, Ideas) about ten kinds of saññå which are > of great fruit and are leading to the 'deathless', which is nibbåna. > The Påli term saññå is here translated as 'idea'. We read about > the ten 'ideas' which should be developed: > > -Monks, these ten ideas, if made to grow and made much of, are of > -great fruit, of great profit for plunging into the deathless, for ending > -up in the deathless. What ten ideas? > > -The idea of the foul, of death, of repulsiveness in food, of distaste > -for all the world, the idea of impermanence, of dukkha in > -impermanence, of not-self in dukkha, the idea of abandoning, of > -fading, of ending. > > -These ten ideas, monks, if made to grow. are of great profit for > -plunging into the deathless, for ending up in the deathless. I'm confused by this. If sanna is a universal cetasika, performing a vital function to mark an object so that it can be remembered again, how can it be an idea? And these ten ideas, these themes of contemplation, aren't they concepts? I can certainly see the value of them (I was reading about the removal of distracting thoughts through using some similar ones) but I don't see how they relate to a functional cetasika like sanna... Thanks in advance. Metta, Phil 39632 From: jwromeijn Date: Fri Dec 10, 2004 5:02am Subject: Re: [dsg] The Problem of Relations --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > Hi Howard, ... Hallo Howard, Sarah, Nina and all One concrete question: Can one just say 'concept' as abstraction; or had one always to say the 'concept of person x' ? Does a concept exist outside the mind of a person, as such ? I think the answer is no; I think a concept nearly the same as a theory. Metta Joop 39633 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri Dec 10, 2004 5:09am Subject: Re: [dsg] Prolific Posters Hi Chris, --- christine_forsyth wrote: > Obviously at only 7, I'm letting the side down quite badly. :-) .... Does that mean your Cooran report or More Tales from India are in their way? Have you been able to listen to any of the recordings? Any parts of the discussions that were of special interest/significance for you? Metta, Sarah p.s Perhaps we should think of a special 'Stamina Award' for Howard in at no 1.?? ================== 39634 From: htootintnaing Date: Fri Dec 10, 2004 6:44am Subject: Re: [dsg] Prolific Posters Dear Christine, Sarah, Howard and All, Here just to give you a smile, number 1 is Upasaka Howard, number 7 is Htoo, number 13 is Bhante. But I am not superstitious. :-) With Metta, Htoo Naing ---------------------------------------------------------------------- --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > Hi Chris, > > --- christine_forsyth wrote: > > Obviously at only 7, I'm letting the side down quite badly. :-) > .... > Does that mean your Cooran report or More Tales from India are in their > way? > > Have you been able to listen to any of the recordings? Any parts of the > discussions that were of special interest/significance for you? > > Metta, > > Sarah > p.s Perhaps we should think of a special 'Stamina Award' for Howard in at > no 1.?? > ================== 39635 From: htootintnaing Date: Fri Dec 10, 2004 6:53am Subject: Re: [dsg] Dhamma Thread ( 149 ) A couple more brief points here: > DT 87. You mention the enemies of lobha are alobha, adosa, amoha, ahirika > and anottapa. Surely hiri and ottapa? > > OOps - I need to call my mother back. I've just become a great- aunt!! > > Get back to you soon. > > Metta, > > Sarah > =========== ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Dear Sarah, Thanks for your points. Yes. It is obviously 'hiri' and 'ottappa'. Thanks, Htoo Naing 39636 From: htootintnaing Date: Fri Dec 10, 2004 7:52am Subject: Dhamma Thread ( 165 ) Dear Dhamma Friends, There are root dhammas. Roots are giving life to trees. They supply with water, minerals, nutrition. When roots are cut up, trees have to die. In Dhamma there are dhammas that have root qualities. They are called root dhammas or hetu. There are 6 hetus. They are lobha, dosa, moha, alobha, adosa, and amoha. In 24 conditions of dhammas, these 6 dhammas serve as root condition or hetu paccaya for other dhammas that depend on them. According to these 6 hetus, 89 total cittas are grouped into 2 major classes. They are ahetuka cittas and sahetuka cittas. Ahetuka cittas do not have any of these 6 hetus. As they do not have beautiful hetus of alobha, adosa, and amoha, these ahetuka cittas are called asobhana cittas or non-beautiful consciousness. There are 18 ahetuka cittas. 18 ahetuka cittas again have two kinds of citta. They are vipaka cittas or resultant consciousness and kiriya cittas or functional consciousness or inoperational consciousness. There are 15 ahetuka vipaka cittas or 15 rootless resultant consciousness. And there are 3 ahetuka kiriya cittas or 3 rootless functionalm consciousness. Again 15 ahetuka vipaka cittas or 15 rootless resultant consciousness have 2 separate groups. 7 cittas of these 15 cittas are the result of past akusala or unwholesome actions and 8 of these 15 cittas are the result of past kusala or wholesome actions. There are 7 ahetuka akusala vipaka cittas. Be careful that all these 7 cittas are vipaka cittas. They are not akusala cittas. If not clear, just reply this post. These 7 ahetuka akusala vipaka cittas are 1. upekkha saha gatam ahetuka akusala vipaka cakkhuvinnana citta The vedana cetasika has the quality of indifferent feeling that is not good or not bad, not extreme. Cakkhu means 'eye'. Vinnana literally means 'particular knowledge'. This citta particualrly knows light and vision. No other citta can do this job. This citta is called cakkhuvinnana citta or 'eye-consciousness'. This is 'consciousness-at-eye'. It is sight-consciousness. Its quality has been discussed repeatedly in the previous posts. This consciousness arises at eye. So it is called eye-consciousness or cakkhuvinnana citta. It does not have any root dhamma. This citta is the result of bad action in the past. So it is called akusala vipaka citta. Other 6 cittas are 2.upekkha saha gatam ahetuka akusala vipaka sotavinnana citta 3.upekkha saha gatam ahetuka akusala vipaka ghanavinnana citta 4.upekkha saha gatam ahetuka akusala vipaka jivhavinnana citta 5.dukkha saha gatam ahetuka akusala vipaka kayavinnana citta 6.upekkha saha gatam ahetuka akusala vipaka sampaticchana citta 7.upekkha saha gatam ahetuka akusala vipaka santirana citta Cakkhuvinnana citta is eye-consciousness. This has been explained. Sotavinnana citta is ear-consciousness. Ghanavinnana citta is nose-consciousness. Jivhavinnana citta is tongue-consciousness. Kayavinnana citta is body-consciousness. Sampaticchana citta is 'receiving consciousness' Santirana citta is 'investigating consciousness'. These again will be explained in the following posts when we go on to functions of cittas. May you all be free from suffering. With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing PS: Any comments are welcome and any queries are welcome and they will be valuable. If there is unclarity of any meaning, please just give a reply to any of these posts. 39637 From: htootintnaing Date: Fri Dec 10, 2004 8:12am Subject: Dhamma Thread ( 166 ) Dear Dhamma Friends, We are discussing on 89 cittas or 121 cittas and going on different classifications of cittas again. So far we have finished on cittas with different vedana or feeling. They are 62 somanassa cittas or 62 consciousness with mental pleasure, 1 sukha citta, 1 dukkha citta, 2 domanassa cittas or 2 consciousness with mental displeasure, and 55 upekkha cittas or 55 consciousness with indifferent feeling. This is the classification of cittas depending on their accompanying vedana cetasika or feeling. So 62 + 1 + 1 + 2 + 55 = 121 total cittas. We are approaching to another classification. It is classification based on root dhammas or hetu dhamma namely lobha, dosa, moha, alobha, adosa, amoha. In this classification there are 18 ahetuka cittas and 71 sahetuka cittas. Ahetuka means 'without hetu or root' and sahetuka means 'with hetu or root'. In this classification there are 18 ahetuka cittas, 2 ekahetuka cittas, 22 dvihetuka cittas and 47 tihetuka cittas. 18 + 2 + 22 + 47 = 89 total cittas. Eka means 'one' or 'single'. Dvi means 'two' or 'double' and ti means 'three' or 'triple'. So these cittas are cittas without root, cittas with 1 root, cittas with 2 roots and cittas with 3 roots. Regarding 18 ahetuka cittas, we have discussed on 7 ahetuka akusala vipaka cittas. There are 8 ahetuka kusala vipaka cittas. By names they are the same as akusala vipaka and just replace 'akusala' with 'kusala'. Dukkha is replaced by 'sukha' in kayavinnana citta. And there is an extra santirana citta. It is somanassa santirana citta. 1.upekkha saha gatam ahetuka kusala vipaka cakkhuvinnana citta 2.upekkha saha gatam ahetuka kusala vipaka sotavinnana citta 3.upekkha saha gatam ahetuka kusala vipaka ghanavinnana citta 4.upekkha saha gatam ahetuka kusala vipaka jivhavinnana citta 5.sukha saha gatam ahetuka kusala vipaka kayavinnana citta 6.upekkha saha gatam ahetuka kusala vipaka sampaticchana citta 7.somanassa saha gatam ahetuka kusala vipaka santirana citta 8.upekkha saha gatam ahetuka kusala vipaka santirana citta They are eye-consciousness, ear-consciousness, nose-consciousness, tongue-consciousness, body-consciousness, receiving-consciousness, joyous-investigating-consciousness and indifferent-investigating- consciousness all of which are the result of past good kamma or wholesome actions in the past. May you all be free from suffering. With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing PS: Any comments are welcome and any queries are welcome and they will be valuable. If there is unclarity of any meaning, please just give a reply to any of these posts. 39638 From: htootintnaing Date: Fri Dec 10, 2004 8:25am Subject: Dhamma Thread ( 167 ) Dear Dhamma Friends, There are 1. 18 ahetuka cittas ( cittas without any root ) 2. 2 ekahetuka cittas(cittas with only one root) 3. 22 dvihetuka cittas(cittas with 2 roots ) 4. 47 tihetuka cittas (cittas with 3 roots ) Among 18 ahetuka cittas, we have discussed on 15 ahetuka vipaka cittas. There are 3 other ahetuka cittas. These 3 cittas are ahetuka kiriya cittas. Kiriya cittas are functional consciousness and they do not produce or create any kamma by arising of them. Three ahetuka kiriya cittas are 1. upekkha saha gatam ahetuka kiriya pancadvaravajjana citta 2. upekkha saha gatam ahetuka kiriya manodvaravajjana citta 3. somanassa saha gatam ahetuka kiriya hasituppada citta. As their names imply the first 2 cittas are upekkha cittas. They are ahetuka cittas. They are kiriya cittas. These 2 cittas are universal to any being when they are possible to arise. Pancadvaravajjana citta does not arise in asannisattas and arupa brahmas. But hasituppada citta is confined to arahats only. This citta never arise in other beings. This citta is smiling citta of arahats including The Buddha. May you all be free from suffering. With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing PS: Any comments are welcome and any queries are welcome and they will be valuable. If there is unclarity of any meaning, please just give a reply to any of these posts. 39639 From: Date: Fri Dec 10, 2004 4:02am Subject: Re: [dsg] The Problem of Relations [Sarah - Brief] Thanks, Sarah. With metta, Howard In a message dated 12/10/04 1:55:32 AM Eastern Standard Time, sarahprocterabbott@y... writes: > See also the many posts under 'Concepts' in UP which include this list > from the Vism and Abhidammattha Sangaha, such as this one: > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/3494 > /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) 39640 From: plnao Date: Fri Dec 10, 2004 9:46am Subject: Re: [dsg] Dhamma Thread ( 166 ) Hello Htoo > And there is an extra santirana citta. It is somanassa santirana > citta. (snip) > joyous-investigating-consciousness and indifferent-investigating- > consciousness all of which are the result of past good kamma or > wholesome actions in the past. I forget why there is the extra joyous-investigating-consciousness. I could go and check ADL but I will ask you if you don't mind. From the name, I would guess that the object causes joy - so maybe it is some very special object. Now I remember something about Buddha statues, for example. But I have also read somewhere that there is nothing intrinsic in objects that make them wholesome or unwholesome - it all depends on our attention, whether it is yoniso manasikara or ayoniso manasikara. Otherwise objects have no intrinsic wholesomeness or unwholesomeness. Thanks in advance for your feedback. Metta, Phil 39641 From: Date: Fri Dec 10, 2004 5:21am Subject: Re: False Identification of Paramattha Dhammas and Realities (Re: [dsg] Conce... Hi, Sarah - Warning to the casual reader: The following involves a lot of technical analysis and theorizing that may well be disconcerting if not outright upsetting. In a message dated 12/10/04 2:56:58 AM Eastern Standard Time, sarahprocterabbott@y... writes: > Hi Howard, > > --- upasaka@a... wrote: > >Howard: > > Yes, it is. And it is a reality, is it not? But it is not, > >itself, a > >paramattha dhamma, is it? > >------------------------------------- > .... > S: the ti-lakkhana are characteristics of realities or of paramattha > dhammas. They cannot be known apart from those dhammas (realities). > ------------------------------------------ Howard: Mmm. There are lots of things that only occur together but can still be distinguished. It seems to me that if the tilakkhana are neither rupas nor cittas nor cetasikas nor nibbana, then that leaves Abhidhammikas in the position of saying that they are nothing but pa~n~natti, and that they cannot be objects of insight - that satipatthana does not apply to them, and that they are, in fact, nothing at all. It seems to me that either the view on what constitutes "reality" needs to be changed, or an Abhidhammika who takes the "DSG point of view" with regard to concept and reality is forced into an uncomfortable, if not outright upsetting, position. I would love to see a persuasive explanation of why this is not so. (So far, it strikes me as a real problem.) ----------------------------------------------- > .... > > Certainly relations do not hold independently of what are related > >by > >them. The relations are also not identical with what they relate. The > >relations > >are not imagined. They are, thus, "realities". > > But they also are not paramattha dhammas. > .... > S: These are excellent points/questions. Let me give the example I quoted > before again and then add a little more this time: > > Quote from U Narada's introduction to the Patthana translation (PTS): > > "Just as the hotness of chilli is inherent in it and cannot exist apart > from it and as the sweetness of sugar is inherent in it and cannot exist > apart from it, so also, the conditioning forces inherent in the > (conditioning) states cannot exist apart from those states. > ----------------------------------------- Howard: If a conditioning force were a reality, not imagined, then it would be either rupa, citta, cetasika, or nibbana. Also, a "conditioning force", if there were such a beast, would not itself be a relation, but a cause for a relation. In any case, notions of "conditioning forces" at the level of reality must be very suspect. The Buddha replaced the old, substantialist ideas of hidden forces of causality by conditionality, which simply comes down to "When this is, that is, and when this arises, that arises". This is part of what distinguished the Buddha's notion of idappaccayata from the substantialist causality theories of his predecessors. --------------------------------------------- > > For example, in root condition, the force of greed, which is one of the > six roots, cannot exist apart from that state. > ---------------------------------------------- Howard: The force of greed cannot exist apart from *what* state? Greed cannot exist apart from greed? I don't get what is being said here. If by "state" is meant the citta as mindstate, as opposed to citta as the operation of awareness (vi~n~nana), then what exactly is a mindstate? It seems to be a collection consisting of co-occurring awareness (citta in the 1st sense - vi~n~nana), cetasikas, and arammana. But any collection is pa~n~natti. Is then the root condition of greed, as a relation, a relation between a nama dhamma (greed) and a pa~n~natti (the mindstate)? In any case, the *force* of greed, whatever sort of thing that is supposed to be, is not itself a relation. It seems to me that no matter how any of this matter is turned, it doesn't bear scrutiny very well. ------------------------------------------- > > Here the root conditioning state is greed and the conditioning force of > greed is also greed. Therefore, the force and the state which possesses > that force cannot be considered apart from each other." > ------------------------------------------ Howard: Okay, so the "force" terminology is superfluous. We are talking about greed. What is the greed related to by the greed-root-relation, and in exactly what way? That is - what exactly is the relation being talked about, and is that relation merely concept or is it reality? If it is reality, it must fall into one of the categories of rupa, citta, cetasika, and nibbana. ----------------------------------------- > **** > S: Greed leads to more greed. We all know that. It accumulates by natural > decisive support and other supporting conditions. We refer to these > conditions using various concepts to explain how and why greed leads to > more greed and to show that this is the nature of such dhammas. > > In truth, however, there is nothing apart from the conditioning states > (here the presently arising greed) and the conditioned ones (here the > greed that follows as a consequence). --------------------------------------- Howard: Ahh, okay. Here we are starting to zero-in on matters. There is nothing more than the conditioning and conditioned states. That means that *there are no relations*. There are relations only in a manner of speaking. Relations are (well grounded) concepts, and nothing more. Okay. That may well be so! Relations may well be not events of the type I hypothesized, multi-phenomenal and often trans-temporal events. But, then, they are actually nothing at all. We can make true statements of syntactically relational form about dhammas, but we may not countenance such "things" as actual relations. I will definitely buy that! But what does that tell us about concepts? It says to me that at least until we are arahants, there is no proper grasping of reality that does not indispensably depend on concepts. ------------------------------------------------ > > To give another example. We know that cittas (moments of consciousness) > follow each other in succession and as we read in the texts, this is by > anantara paccaya(proximity condition). > > Here anatara paccaya is a concept which refers to the nature or > characteristics of cittas to succeed each other. In other words, looking > at the list of concepts in Vism or CMA, it is a concept of the existent > based on the existent. It is a concept about the characteristics of these > particular paramattha dhammas (realities) to be conditioned, function and > manifest in this way. There is nothing existing or real apart from the > conditioning and conditioned states. > ---------------------------------- Howard: Okay. But look at what would be not known without the concepts that take us beyond these dhammas to their characteristics and the relations among them. The so called characteristics "to be conditioned, function and manifest" in certain ways (of the dhamma, greed, for example) are not the dhamma itself. These are to be known by inference by us. Moreover, these characteristics are actually nothing at all - as you say. They are concept only. All there actually are are the dhammas (e.g., greed). ------------------------------- > > Even when we come to arammana paccaya which we know includes concepts, we > are still talking about the nature of paramattha dhammas. Cittas in the > mind door process either experience realities or conceptualise about > imaginary objects. The imaginary objects, as you know, are never > experienced as realities. The relation merely explains the manner in which > the cittas and cetasikas at such a time are conditioned to experience > objects, i.e no thinking without an object. > .... > >There is no khandha > >that the > >relation of contiguity, for example, belongs to. That relation is > >neither > >rupa nor vedana nor sankhara nor sa~n~na nor vi~n~nana. .. > .... > S: Contiguity condition/relation(samanantara paccaya) is identical with > anantara paccaya above. Htoo has written about the niyamas or fixed > law/natural order of all dhammas. One of these is citta niyama which > concerns the sequence of cittas (consciousness) which cannot be altered. ------------------------------------- Howard: Okay. So you agree that contiguity relation is pa~n~natti. That looks to me like pa~n~natti are essential aspects of "reality", no? If we throw out pa~n~natti as mere illusion, then we throw out the tilakkhana and all properties and relations. Doesn't it start to seem to you, Sarah, that all this analysis is an empty house of cards, and that no matter how we try to describe reality, the description falls apart? It does to me. All that I am starting to see left is that this is a world of empty appearance, with nothing to hold onto, nothing independent, nothing substantial or self-existent, and all worthy only of relinquishment. (Nagarjuna is looking more and more attractive to me at this moment.) --------------------------------------- > > The relation or niyama is merely a way of describing the cittas and > cetasikas (4 or the 5 khandhas), to explain one of the ways in which they > are conditioned to arise. The conditioned nature is an integral aspect of > all dhammas (apart from nibbana) and is clearly comprehended directly (not > by thinking or calculating) at the second stage of insight. > > To stress, there is no relation apart from the relating and related > realities (paramattha dhammas) here. > -------------------------------------- Howard: Okay. I buy that! :-) -------------------------------------- > ... > >--------------------------------- > >Howard: > > The issue is relations, not the related dhammas.... > ... > S: There is no relation apart from the relating and related dhammas. See > above. > ... > > More problematical is the status of something like > >anatta/impersonality. It is either reality or concept, correct? > ... > S: Or an aspect of reality, like the keyboard I'm using is an aspect or > characteristic of the computer. > ------------------------------------ Howard: No not an aspect of reality. It is either pa~n~natti (and hence nothing at all, as that is understood on DSG) or it is paramattha dhamma. ------------------------------------ There are also other 'parts' which are> > integral to its composition. We can't say the keyboard is the computer > just as we can't say anatta is a reality or paramattha dhamma on its own. > (Nina said she had more from the Vism/Tika to add on this area). > ... > >If > >concept, then, as some here > >view concept, it is nothing at all. > ... > S: Not a concept. > --------------------------------------- Howard: If anatta is not pa~n~natti, then it must be either rupa, citta, cetasika, or nibbana. ---------------------------------------- > ... > >If reality, then where does it fit > >in? It > >does not occur on any list of cetasikas, it is not a rupa, it is not a > >citta, > >and it is not nibbana. That exhausts the Abhidhammic categories, does it > >not? > > Something's wrong here! ;-)) > ... > S: Nothing's wrong, fear not;-)) It fits in to each of those cetasikas, > rupas, cittas and nibbana. It is an aspect of all of them, just like > dukkha and anicca (apart from nibbana) and just as nama is an aspect of > some and rupa an aspect of others. ----------------------------------------- Howard: Using the word 'aspect' doesn't shed any light. What particular cetasika is anatta? (It isn't rupa, citta, or nibbana.) In fact, anatta must, just like relations (as you ahve so clearly pointed out), be concept. ---------------------------------------- > .... > >Howard: > > You wish to exclude the conventional dhammas, which, by the way, > >the > >Buddha in the suttas, often included when using the term 'dhamma', > ... > S: When dhamma includes concepts or conventional dhammas it is never in > the context of dhammas to be penetrated or directly known. This is why > it's important to read suttas such as the Sabba Sutta carefully and to > understand the way conventional terms are used in the Mulapariyaya and > other suttas as some of us have been saying. > > [And......for those bold enough to question the homepage description, this > is why we have 'realities' rather than just 'dhammas' there. > > I think dhammas (realities) would be best and I may be suggesting it at > the next Board Meeting, on the beach I hope - looking sunny for Sunday > here, if a bit chilly for the waves;-).] > > Howard, I think all your comments on this whole thread are very useful. > I'm glad to consider this area more. I'm snipping now as I have a lot of > posts I'm behind on and I've probably written too much already. please > repost any of your other concerns/comments in reply if they haven't been > addressed. > ------------------------------------- Howard: In a way, I feel obliged to apologize for pushing with regard to these matters. I'm afraid it may be upsetting to some. But I feel that it is important to scrutinize carefully, and to seriously question in this area. I see some real problems here, and not the least of them being the inherent inadequacy in all analytical, conceptual, inferential schemes, including Abhidhamma. ------------------------------------- > > 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) 39642 From: Date: Fri Dec 10, 2004 5:27am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: kusala and akusala. Hi, James (and Nina) - In a message dated 12/10/04 3:35:40 AM Eastern Standard Time, buddhatrue@y... writes: > > Friend Howard (and Nina), > > Howard: 1) While I don't think that cetana can outright direct or > command content of consciousness, it can frequently and powerfully > influence what arises. So, I agree with you on this. > > James: I think that we agree also; really, I am having trouble > finding the right words to express what I mean. I seem to take the > meaning of words from the context in which they are used, but others > seem to think that words have an intrinsic meaning. For example, I > can use the word `control' and mean a type of control in a > conventional sense that is not absolute, while others see the > word `control' and immediately start thinking, "ATTA BELIEF! ATTA > BELIEF! RED ALERT! RED ALERT!" ;-)) The words have become like > hidden landmines and I can barely find a safe word to express my > thoughts. ----------------------------------- Howard: ;-)) ----------------------------------- > > Howard: But you should re-read Nina's sentence. She wasn't talking > of self being involved, but of the *idea* of self being involved. > Her point, whether one agrees with it or not, was that the belief > that one can direct cittas involves the *idea* of self. > > James: I was aware of the content of Nina's sentence. With Nina, in > this thread, I am using the Socratic Method, the method of asking > questions until the basis for one's thoughts is revealed. I am not > trying to debate or to be a `smart ass', I genuinely want to know > why she believes this. However, I think I am getting on her nerves > with this method of inquiry so it may end soon! ;-)) ------------------------------------- Howard: I didn't think for a second that you were trying to be a "smart ass". I really thought you had misread her sentence. -------------------------------------- > > > I really want to know why Nina believes that the directing of cittas > translates into a belief in self. The Buddha said that we can > determine that the five khandas are not `self' because we cannot > say, "Let them be thus'. So, to my way of thinking, a belief in > self means that one believes they have absolute control over the > five khandas. I don't believe that, and yet I still believe in the > value of guarding the senses and directing the senses. For example, > I know that I cannot say, "Let my body be like Arnold > Schwarzenegger's" and then it will instantly be. But I know that I > can change my diet, live at the gym, take steroids (bad idea!) and > then my body could become, possibly, like Arnold Schwarzenegger's. > Conversely, I cannot say, "Let my mind be free of its defilements. > Let me know nibbana!" and then it will instantly be. But I know > that if I follow the Eightfold Path, which includes Sila, Samadhi, > and Panna, I could possibly know nibbana. I know this because the > Buddha said it is possible and I have faith in his teaching. > ----------------------------------- Howard: We have no differences on this matter. :-) ------------------------------------ > > Metta, James > > ====================== With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 39643 From: Date: Fri Dec 10, 2004 5:50am Subject: Re: [dsg] Concept and Reality in Primary Texts Hi, Joop - In a message dated 12/10/04 4:53:48 AM Eastern Standard Time, jwromeijn@y... writes: > Dear Howard (and all) > > Howard: I am a rather radical phenomenalist, myself, taking the > perspective that only "the experienced" or at least "conditionally > able to be experienced" is of any pragmatic concern. > > Joop: Well, I'm not, or not exactly. I am a "non-ontologist": we > don't know how the world is in a objective sense, we only have > theories about the world. And from time to time (I hope) we check > that theories to control or they still are correct; or better; if > they still are usefull. > > We to be honest, that was not what Nyanaponika was talking about. He > stated that we should understand the Teachtings of the Buddha (and > the Abhidhamma) on a phenomenological way, that we should not think > that the Buddha was making ontological statements. -------------------------------------- Howard: Yes, I agree. My position is an "extreme" phenomenalist position, putting me near to the vijnanavada camp of Vasubandhu (in Mahayana ... shhh! nobody tell! ;-) ------------------------------------ > But in a way we agree again: "hardness" (as one of the four great so- > called elements) is not a "element" in the sense of "building block" > but an aspect of experiencing things made of material. > ------------------------------------- Howard: Yes, hardness is an aspect of direct experience. However, the notion of "material" and "things made of material" is conceptual projection, as I see it. These are not directly knowable, but only hypothesized. ------------------------------------- > > I don't know if I understand the rest of your message, because your > conclusion "So, for me, ontology is based in phenomenology" surprised > me. My private definition of "ontology" is: the world exists and is > describable in a objective way, even if I don't exist. > ------------------------------------- Howard: We differ there. Such a "world", if existent, is in principle unknowable. Perforce, only experience is experienced. For me, only the content of experience is known to "exist", and that is the extent of ontology that I commit to. As I said, my position is extreme. -------------------------------------- About such an > > ontology I had to be agnostic, is that your conclusion too? --------------------------------------- Howard: If I had reason to believe that an "external world" different from and underlying experiential content could be known, then my position would be fully agnostic. In a sense, it is agnostic anyway, for there is no way the existence of such an "external world" could be disproved. But when the existence of an alleged "thing" can, in principle, neither be proved nor disproved, I choose, pragmatically, to wield Occam's razor, and presume the simpler view of non-existence. --------------------------------------- > > Another question: what is the conseuence of this for our buddhistic > path ? > I don't know; on this moment I think: I'm really not a orthodox > Theravadin, I'm going to study Mahayana. > ------------------------------------------ Howard: I do not think my position is at all required. For me, it helps me understand the Dhamma. For others, Abhidhamma does that. ----------------------------------------- > > > Metta > > Joop ======================= 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) 39644 From: naresh gurwani Date: Fri Dec 10, 2004 9:35am Subject: Re: [dsg] Greetings, new member here. Hi Sarah Yes iam from South America, Curacao, just finding a way to my life , where in US are you from Naresh --- sarah abbott wrote: > > Hi Guy (& RobM & Naresh), > > You joined us at a very busy time on the list and I > really appreciated > both your introduction and also RobM's kind welcome. 39645 From: Date: Fri Dec 10, 2004 5:52am Subject: Re: [dsg] Prolific Posters Hi, Christine - In a message dated 12/10/04 6:48:49 AM Eastern Standard Time, cforsyth1@b... writes: > Hello all, > > For interests sake, I thought I'd see just who our most prolific > members are. There are approximately 31 members who have sent in > posts to the List from the 1st December, up to this moment, and my > estimate (allowing for different time zones and any miscounting) is: > Upasaka Howard 83 Nina 55 KenO 52 Hugo 39 Phil 37 RobM 36 > Htoo 35 Sarah 33 Larry 31 Mike 29 James 24 Andrew 22 Bhante > Vimalaramsi 18 > > Obviously at only 7, I'm letting the side down quite badly. :-) > > metta and peace, > Christine > ======================= Argh!!! ;-)) With prolific 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) 39646 From: nina Date: Fri Dec 10, 2004 11:47am Subject: Vis. XIV, 122 and Tiika Vis. XIV, 122 and Tiika Vis. XIV, 122. At the end of the impulsions, if the object is a very vivid one [52] in the five doors, or is clear in the mind door, then in sense-sphere beings at the end of sense-sphere impulsions resultant consciousness occurs Note 52(taken from the Tiika). ' "A very vivid one" , a very great object, atimahanta, is one with a life of sixteen consciousness moments. For registration consciousness arises with respect to that, not with respect to any other. N: In this case the process of cittas that experience the ruupa runs its full course. As we have seen when the object is great, the object cannot last longer than the javana-cittas. Text Note 52: "Clear" means very evident, and that is only in the sense sphere; for registration (retention) arises with respect to that' (Pm. 479). N: Clear, vibhuuti, refers to an object experienced by cittas in the subsequent mind-door process where also retention consciousness arises. The tadaaramma.na-cittas are kaamaavacara cittas, cittas of the sense-sphere and they arise only in the sensuous planes of existence. They are generated by kamma that is bound up with craving for sense desires. The Tiika explains that the object experienced by the cittas in that process may be very desirable, moderately desirable or undesirable. The javana-cittas which experience an object may be accompanied by happy feeling, unhappy feeling or indifferent feeling. When the javana-cittas are accompanied by unhappy feeling, the tadaaramma.na-cittas that succeed these cannot be accompanied by unhappy feeling since they are vipaakacittas. They cannot, in this case, be accompanied by happy feeling since happy feeling cannot immediately follow upon unhappy feeling. They are accompanied by indifferent feeling. (See Co to the Abhidhammattha Sangaha, T.A. p. 142). Text Vis: through any condition it may have obtained such as previous kamma, impulsion consciousness, etc., with desirable, etc., object [53]. Note 53, taken from the Tiika: ' "Previous kamma": this is said in order to show the differences in kinds of registration; for kamma that generates rebirth-linking is not the only kind to generate registration; other kinds of kamma do so too. But the latter generates registration unlike that generatable by the kamma that generates rebirth-liking. N: Kamma other than the kamma which produces rebirth may produce the vipaakacitta that is retention. Note 53: "Impulsion consciousness": this is said in order to show what defines the registration; for it is said, "Registration is definable by impulsion" N: Also the javana-cittas (impulsion) are a condition for the succeeding retention. Note 53: The word "etc." includes rebirth-linking, however; for that is not a condition for registration that is more outstanding than itself. N: The word "etc.", aadi, refers to the Vis. text: It is said that kamma does not produce retention that is more outstanding (more superior, ukka.t.thara) than itself. Mahaa-kusala citta with two roots, for example, does not produce retention with three roots. (See Expositor, p. 356, which gives opinions of different teachers.) This passage shows that there are several intricate conditions for retention. The object experienced by the javana-cittas which may be very desirable, moderately desirable or undesirable and also the feeling accompanying the javana-cittas are factors which combine and are conditions for the type of retention that arises within the process of cittas. Note 53: "Any condition": any condition from among the desirable objects, etc., that has combined (samaveta) to produce the arising of registration' (Pm. 479). Text Vis: [It occurs thus] as one among the eight sense-sphere resultant kinds with root cause (42)-(49) or the three resultant mind-consciousness elements without root-cause (40), (41), (56), and it [does so] twice or once, following after the impulsions that have impelled, and with respect to an object other than the life-continuum's object, like some of the water that follows a little after a boat going upstream. Though ready to occur with the life-continuum's object after the impulsions have ended, it nevertheless occurs making the impulsions' object its object. Because of that it is called 'registration' (tadaaramma.na--lit. 'having-that-as-its-object'). This is how the occurrence of eleven kinds of resultant consciousness should be understood as registration. N: Retention seizes the object of the javana-cittas. Therefore it is called: having that object, tadaaramma.na ( is that, is object). These eleven kinds of vipaakacittas which are retention are: eight mahaa-vipaakacittas (with sobhana hetus, beautiful roots); three ahetuka vipaakacittas which are three resultant mind-consciousness elements without root-cause. These are the same types as the three santiira.nacittas (investigating consciousness ) which, in this case, perform the function of retention. One is kusala vipaakacitta accompanied by pleasant feeling (if the object is very desirable), one is kusala vipaakacitta accompanied by indifferent feeling and one is akusala vipaakacitta (if the object is undesirable) accompanied by indifferent feeling. The many intricate conditions for retention that arises in between the javana-cittas and the bhavanga-citta remind us that cittas operate each because of their own conditions, nobody can direct them to be in this or that way. As we read in the Co. to the Abhidhammattha Sangaha (T.A., p. 129): <...thus one should understand that when consciousness is operating, it operates by virtue of the fixed order of consciousness (citta niyama), like the fixed order of the seasons and seeds, without there being anyone issuing orders saying,¹You are adverting and come immediately after existence-continuum (bhavanga-citta); you are, say, seeing, or whatever, and come immediately after adverting.¹> ***** Nina. 39647 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Dec 10, 2004 11:47am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: kusala and akusala. Dear friend James, op 10-12-2004 09:35 schreef buddhatrue op buddhatrue@y...: For example, I > can use the word `control' and mean a type of control in a > conventional sense that is not absolute, while others see the > word `control' and immediately start thinking, "ATTA BELIEF! N: No. No. Also Howard explained how he uses the word control (many, many times!!), and I am not afraid of the word control. Meanwhile, I saw your other letter, this overlaps now. Howard explained what I mean when speaking of self etc. (He rescued me before in a similar case with someone else ;-)) ) > James: I was aware of the content of Nina's sentence. I genuinely want to know > why she believes this. However, I think I am getting on her nerves > with this method of inquiry so it may end soon! ;-)) N: to be straightforward, I think the following: we may understand correctly in theory that there can be control and no self doing it, but, inspite of this, the latent tendency conditions time and again wrong view, a dhamma that is wrong belief in self doing this or that. That is why I am grateful that Kh. Sujin says: *the self* is coming in again. But, we may not like to admit this. It can be very, very subtle, hardly noticeable. Before we know we are deluded. James, you are a very understanding person and you do not get on my nerves. I do not mind explaining something again and again, because I know that these are very subtle points and hard to get. But like Howard, I get sometimes weary of too many debates about the same matters. I am not alluding to you now, I mean in general. You have a keen mind and get things quickly. Lodewijk said: these are intelligent questions. When you read Kh. Sujin's sayings, often repeated here, it gives me pleasure to explain more. I do not have the feeling that I should defend anything, I find it a good check for myself whether I have really understood what I repeat. Thus, no need to go around it like Socrates, you can ask straight without much ado. Unlike you I think seeing is an important subject. When we understand what it is it helps to understand other dhammas and how they function. The suttas are full of it. J: The Buddha said that we can > determine that the five khandas are not `self' because we cannot > say, "Let them be thus'. So, to my way of thinking, a belief in > self means that one believes they have absolute control over the > five khandas. I don't believe that, and yet I still believe in the > value of guarding the senses and directing the senses. N: We agree here completely :-) I am glad you have confidence in his teaching. I am also impressed by the sutta text that the Buddha said, it can be done. I begin my India talk like this and Lodewijk added some words: ³Abandon evil, O monks! One can abandon evil, O monks!If it were impossible to abandon evil, I would not ask you to do so. But as it can be done, therefore I say ŒAbandon evil!¹ If this abandoning of evil would bring harm and suffering, I would not ask you to abandon it. But as the abandoning of evil brings weal and happiness, therefore I say, Œabandon evil!¹ Cultivate the good, O monks! One can cultivate what is good, O monks. If it were impossible to cultivate the good, I would not ask you to do so. But as it can be done, therefore I say, ŒCultivate the good!¹ If this cultivation of the good would bring harm and suffering, I would not ask you to cultivate it. But as the cultivation of the good brings weal and happiness, therefore I say, ŒCultivate the good!¹ ² (Gradual Sayings Book of the twos, II, 9, translated by Ven. Nyanaponika, Wheel 155-158.) Lodewijk: These compassionate words of the Buddha show that also in his lifetime people must have struggled with the depth and complexity of his teachings and had to be encouraged on the right path. How much more so in our days! During one of our long and strenuous bus rides through India Lodewijk recited this sutta to our friends. Nina. P.S. I like to correspond with you, but I may not always answer immediately because of lack of time. I read your apologies, but really no need for that. Again, you are not burdening me. 39648 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Dec 10, 2004 11:47am Subject: Re: A Drop More Re: [dsg] The Problem of Relations Hi Howard, op 10-12-2004 05:52 schreef upasaka@a... op upasaka@a...: > Just another thought or two about anatta, anicca, and about relations. > As I think about these a bit more, I do think it may not be wrong to > think of them as realities. N: I promised a text: Vis. XXI, note 4 (p. 747, the whole page is good): When we read such a text we should not understand it in a theoretical or abstract way. As you also indicated, we should not see them as anatta in general, etc., thus, in an abstract way. They are bound up and inherent in all conditioned dhammas. Take seeing now, it has the true nature of impermanence. It falls away, no matter someone realizes this or not. It is an element, beyond control, non-self, no matter one realizes this or not. When insight is developed it can be known without words, insight knows directly without thinking that seeing is non-self, that it is seeing that sees, not a person. As Larry said, insight knows, sati does its task (or something like that). We can talk about dhammas as elements, and that means already: devoid of self. I think there is no need to ask ourselves: is this concept or reality? Then there is doubt, not understanding. H: I think that they are mind-door realities. N: Also in a sense-door process the kusala cittas can be accompanied by pañña. The processes follow upon each other very fast. When pañña realizes seeing as anatta, nobody can stop the occurring of a following eye-door process process with kusala cittas accompanied by pañña. Nina. 39649 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Dec 10, 2004 11:48am Subject: Re: [dsg] Dhamma Thread ( 133 ), lokuttara citta and dukkha. Dear Sarah and Htoo, recently Ken O explained it very clearly. We have to know whether the context is: dukkha as one of the noble Truths or dukkha lakkha.na. All cittas are impermanent and thus dukkha. But the noble truth of dukkha does not apply to lokuttara citta, it does not have as origin the second noble truth: clinging. op 10-12-2004 10:11 schreef sarah abbott op sarahprocterabbott@y...: > You said, I believe, that the lokuttara cittas are not included in dukkha > in the 4 Noble Truths. I heard K.Sujin explain the same, saying this was > because these cittas couldn't be known prior to being experienced or sth > along those lines. 39650 From: Date: Fri Dec 10, 2004 7:22am Subject: Re: [dsg] The Problem of Relations In a message dated 12/10/2004 5:06:56 AM Pacific Standard Time, jwromeijn@y... writes: One concrete question: Can one just say 'concept' as abstraction; or had one always to say the 'concept of person x' ? Does a concept exist outside the mind of a person, as such ? I think the answer is no; I think a concept nearly the same as a theory. Metta Joop Hi Joop Based on the above analysis, consciousness would also be an abstraction or theory because it does not exist outside the mind. TG 39651 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Dec 10, 2004 0:32pm Subject: Re: [dsg] 'Cetasikas' study corner 69- Perception/Sa~n~naa (p) Hello Phil, In different contexts saññaa can have different meanings. Take: the idea of impermanence, here saññaa is the equivalent of insight, insight into impermanence. I learnt this from the Co to the Mahaaraahulovaadasutta. And recently: it can stand even for citta: the beings of the fourth arupa brahma world are: neva-saññi-naasaññino: having neither consciousness nor non-consciousness. Idea is not a fortunate translation of sañña. You have to remember again and again with kusala citta and paññaa that condiitoned realities are impermanent. I have to look at the Co for details. Nina. op 10-12-2004 13:03 schreef plnao op plnao@j...:> >> We read in the Gradual Sayings (Book of the >> Tens, Chapter VI, §6, Ideas) about ten kinds of saññå ... >> -The idea of the foul, of death, ... 39652 From: christine_forsyth Date: Fri Dec 10, 2004 1:52pm Subject: Hinayana and Theravada Hello all, On multi-tradition lists, one constantly comes across the label 'hinayana' applied to Theravada. It is a repetitive topic, the term is often used in a perjorative way, and often generates a good deal of heat. Just in case any new members have come across this term and find it confusing, these articles may be of assistance. The Myth of Hinayana, Article: Theravada is NOT Hinayana http://www.lienet.no/hinayan1.htm The Bodhisattva Ideal in Theravada http://www.buddhistinformation.com/bodhisattva_ideal_in_theravada.htm Hinayana - The "N-word" of Buddhism http://ozarkzen.org/mahathera.html metta and peace, Christine ---The trouble is that you think you have time--- 39653 From: Date: Fri Dec 10, 2004 5:19pm Subject: Re: [dsg] The Problem of Relations Joop: "One concrete question: Can one just say 'concept' as abstraction; or had one always to say the 'concept of person x' ? Does a concept exist outside the mind of a person, as such ? I think the answer is no; I think a concept nearly the same as a theory." Hi Joop, A concept manifests only as an object of consciousness and its cetasikas. A formation, on the other hand, can arise outside of consciousness, e.g. rupa always manifests as a compound of the primary elements and arises outside of consciousness, thence contact. A relation could be either concept or formation. Cetasikas that arise with consciousness do not necessarily become objects of consciousness. Consciousness can have only one object. So cetasikas, rupas, and formations can arise outside of consciousness, that is, not its object. Concept can only "be" object of consciousness. One can, and often does, speak almost completely abstractly without reference to specific experience. Like this email (oops, an experience). Concept is name and/or meaning. There are nameless (wordless) concepts but I don't think there are names (words) without meaning. "Meaning" has a very rich and varied meaning. A theory could easily be view (ditthi). I understand view to be a concept one clings to. In this area it is often difficult to distinguish concept from reality, but the clinging is pretty obvious, though sometimes not so obvious. I really believe I am real. Don't you? Larry 39654 From: Date: Fri Dec 10, 2004 5:39pm Subject: Re: A Drop More Re: [dsg] The Problem of Relations Hi Nina, This is not to say that concepts cannot be (mis)apprehended as impermanent. Nations, chariots, and persons are often so (mis)apprehended. Larry 39655 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Fri Dec 10, 2004 7:49 pm Subject: Re: Vis. XIV, 122 and Tiika Friend Nina, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, nina wrote: > Vis. XIV, 122 and Tiika > It is said that kamma does not produce retention that is more outstanding > (more superior, ukka.t.thara) than itself. Mahaa-kusala citta with two > roots, for example, does not produce retention with three roots. (See > Expositor, p. 356, which gives opinions of different teachers.) Could you explain more what this means? What are the root causes and how are they influenced by kamma? Metta, James 39656 From: buddhatrue Date: Fri Dec 10, 2004 8:37pm Subject: Re: kusala and akusala. Friend Nina, Thank you for your kind response and patience with my questions. I apologize for the Socratic Method I was using but I have tried to be straightforward with you in the past and I didn't understand the answers you gave me. I didn't understand the reason behind the answer, but I think I understand a lot more now. I want to respond to just one point you make, which I believe is very important: Nina: to be straightforward, I think the following: we may understand correctly in theory that there can be control and no self doing it, but, inspite of this, the latent tendency conditions time and again wrong view, a dhamma that is wrong belief in self doing this or that. That is why I am grateful that Kh. Sujin says: *the self* is coming in again. But, we may not like to admit this. It can be very, very subtle, hardly noticeable. Before we know we are deluded. James: I can understand why Kh. Sujin believes that this approach is necessary because there are many people who are highly deluded. Since I helped with meditation retreats, I met many people like this. One example that stands out in my mind was a man who wanted to meditate practically all the time. He once had to wait at an office building for something and decided to do walking meditation in the parking lot while he was waiting. After a while, a small crowd formed and the building security was called to go out and confront him. He was scaring a lot of people! LOL! That type of behavior is just crazy in my opinion and does, at a subtle level, reveal a person who believes in a "self" who is able to control things. The sad part is that he didn't see anything wrong with his behavior; he thought that the building security was at fault. He thought that if the building security and the onlookers were as `wise as him', they would appreciate what he was doing and not bother him. Crazy, crazy! However, and I mean this kindly, Kh. Sujin may be committing what is called `wrong dhamma' and a `danger to the dhamma'. To quote Ledi Sayadaw in "Bodhipakkhiya Dipani": "This is so because these are times when miccha-dhamma (wrong Dhamma) that are likely to cause dhammantaraya (danger to the Dhamma) are rife. By miccha-dhamma that are likely to cause dhammantaraya is meant such views, practices and limitations as the inability to see the dangers of samsára, the belief that these are times when the Paths and the Fruits can no longer be attained, the tendency to defer effort until the parami ripen, the belief that persons of the present day are dvi-hetuka,[38] the belief that the great teachers of the past were nonexistent, etc. 38. Dvi-hetuka-patisandhi--Being reborn with only two root- conditions: alobha (detachment) and adosa (amity). Dvi-hetuka-patisandhi individuals cannot attain the Paths and the Fruits in the present life. 39. Ti-hetuka-patisandhi--Being reborn with all the three root- conditions, namely, alobha, adosa and amoha (wisdom)." It seems that Kh. Sujin is operating under a slight variation of the belief that people of the present day are dvi-hetuka: that the people of today don't have enough inherent wisdom to attain the paths and the fruits of practice. Therefore, it seems that she stresses that people should only study the Abhidhamma so that they may have this wisdom in future lives. This is probably another reason why she stresses the idea that one cannot obtain enlightenment in this lifetime; that enlightenment will take several lives. Personally, I find this a dangerous thing to be teaching. I know that Kh. Sujin may have the best intentions but the negative karma for teaching something contrary to the dhamma is very great. Like those who split the sangha, it could result in an immediate rebirth in hell. Metta, James 39657 From: Ken O Date: Fri Dec 10, 2004 11:09pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: kusala and akusala. Hi Friend James 39. Ti-hetuka-patisandhi--Being reborn with all the three root- conditions, namely, alobha, adosa and amoha (wisdom)." k: Personally when one have faith in the Dhamma is with a conviction, this conviction cannot arise without panna. When one believe in the insight vehicle, the way of development cannot happen without panna, hence the practise of the insight vehicle is with the initial basis that arise with tri-hetuka-patisandhi or not one will not have conviction with the dhamma. The faith on the insight path is difficult to believe especially when the only way out is wise attention takes a lot of faith and conviction especially in times of this century where concentration is emphasis as the vehicle to practise by many comtemporary dhamma practitioners. This do not mean they do not have tri-hetuka patisandhi because if they dont have such, they would not have believe in Buddhism in the first place. Tri-hetuka patisandhi does not implied during a Buddha sasana, it can also happen to people who practise it even when Buddha dhamma is no longer around. Many examples were seen during Buddha Bodhisattva times. Ken O 39658 From: htootintnaing Date: Sat Dec 11, 2004 2:40am Subject: The Buddha In His First Week Dear Dhamma Friends, As soon as asavakkhaya nana arose, all other Buddhaly nanas also arose in Him and He stayed in the greatest bliss. The Buddha sat at the foot of the Bo tree for the whole week. This is the first week. It is called 'pathama sattaaha' or the first week. The Buddha stayed there near the Bo tree for 49 successive days and all these 49 days are known as 'satta-sattaaha' or '7 of 7-days- staying. In the first week The Buddha reviewed on what He discovered. When He first obtained the divinely nana called 'pubbenivasa nana' or 'recollection of all past lives limitlessly', He did contemplated on Dhamma. But in His first week of Buddhahood, this contemplation is much much more effective and He saw everything very very clearly and unobstructively because now He was totally free of any defilements in any form including anusaya forms or subtle forms. The Buddha had been sitting at the foot of the Bo tree on the grass- seat called 'Bodhi-Pallinka'. He was sitting contemplating on Dhamma. He was reviewing self-less nature of Dhamma through paticca-samuppada. He contemplated in foreward order and then backward order and again He contemplated on Dhamma through paticca-samuppada in both foreward and backward order. Before His Buddhahood, dhammas happened in such a foreward order. Avijja or ignorance leads to sankhara or formation or fabrication. Sankhara leads to vinnana or consciousness. Vinnana leads to nama- rupa or mind-material. Nama-rupa leads to salayatana or 6-sense-base. Salayatana leads to phassa or contact. Phassa leads to vedana or feeling. Vedana leads to tanha or craving. Tanha leads to upadana or clinging. Upadana leads to bhavo or becoming. Bhava leads to jati or rebirth. Jati leads to jara/marana and all other stressful conditions and sufferings of living. There is no self at all. May you be free from suffering. With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing 39659 From: htootintnaing Date: Sat Dec 11, 2004 2:56am Subject: Dhamma Thread ( 168 ) Dear Dhamma Friends, We have discussed dhammas down to atomic level and molecular level. All 89 cittas or all 121 cittas have been well explained. Now we are reproaching again the different classifications of citta. Cittas with different vedana or feeling have been discussed. Another classification is cittas with different hetu or root conditions. We have talked on 18 ahetuka cittas. There are 71 sahetuka cittas or 71 cittas with root dhammas. (18 + 71 = 89 cittas). Among 71 sahetuka cittas or consciousness with root, 2 cittas have only one root. That root is moha hetu. These 2 cittas are moha mula cittas or moha-rooted consciousness. They are 'upekkha saha gatam vicikiccha sampayutta citta' and 'upekkha saha gatam uddhacca sampayutta citta'. Molecular level of these 2 cittas have been discussed. Akusala dhammas never arise with kusala dhammas. This is the rule of citta niyama. Akusala hetus or roots never arise with kusala hetus or roots. So in 2 moha cittas, alobha, adosa, and amoha do not arise. In these 2 moha mula cittas, there is no lobha and no dosa. So there is only one and a single hetu which is moha cetasika. So these 2 cittas are called ekahetuka cittas or single-rooted consciousness. May you all be free from suffering. With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing PS: Any comments are welcome and any queries are welcome and they will be valuable. If there is unclarity of any meaning, please just give a reply to any of these posts. 39660 From: htootintnaing Date: Sat Dec 11, 2004 3:20am Subject: Dhamma Thread ( 169 ) Dear Dhamma Friends, We have discussed dhammas down to atomic level and molecular level. All 89 cittas or all 121 cittas have been well explained. Now we are reproaching again the different classifications of citta. Cittas with different vedana or feeling have been discussed. In another classification of citta, we are discussing on cittas with different root dhammas. 18 ahetuka cittas and 2 ekahetuka cittas have been discussed. There are 22 dvihetuka cittas or 22 double-rooted consciousness. They are 3 sets of dhamma namely lobha cittas, dosa cittas and kusala cittas. 1. 8 Llobha mula cittas 2. 2 dosa mula cittas 3.12 nana vipayutta mahakusala cittas ---------- 22 dvihetuka cittas or 22 double-rooted consciousness There are 8 lobha mula cittas. To list again, they are 1.somanassa saha gatam ditthi gata sampayuttam asankharika citta 2.somanassa saha gatam ditthi gata sampayuttam sasankharika citta 3.somanassa saha gatam ditthi gata vippayuttam asankharika citta 4.somanassa saha gatam ditthi gata vippayuttam sasankharika citta 5. upekkha saha gatam ditthi gata sampayuttam asankharika citta 6. upekkha saha gatam ditthi gata sampayuttam sasankharika citta 7. upekkha saha gatam ditthi gata vippayuttam asankharika citta 8. upekkha saha gatam ditthi gata vippayuttam sasankharika citta Somanassa is piti and it is mental joy. So 4 cittas are with piti and so they are with somanassa vedana or mental pleasure. And later 4 cittas are upekkha cittas and they do not have piti and their vedana is indifferent feeling. Lobha citta is just one but as vedana differs there are 2 cittas; somanassa or upekkha. Ditthi is a cetasika and it is wrong view. There are 4 cittas with ditthi and they are labelled as 'ditthi gata sampayutta'. Gata means 'to go' and sampayutta means 'mixed inseparably'. As 4 cittas are with ditthi, other 4 cittas are without ditthi or wrong view. First lobha citta is one but because of vedana there are 2. These 2 cittas have different status when they are accompanied by ditthi or not. So 2 and 2 makes 4 cittas. Again asankharika means 'unpromptedness' and sasankharika means 'with prompt'. Already existed 4 different cittas are multiplied with 2 and so there are 8 total lobha mula cittas. 4 cittas are somanassa and 4 cittas are upekkha. 4 cittas are ditthi cittas and 4 cittas are without ditthi. 4 cittas are asankharika cittas and 4 cittas are sasankharika cittas. All these 8 lobha mula cittas have been discussed at molecular level. As they are lobha mula cittas, there always arise lobha cetasika and this cetasika serves as lobha root or lobha hetu. As these 8 cittas are akusala cittas, they are always led by moha cetasika. Moha also serves as a root and it is moha hetu or moha root. So in all these 8 lobha mula cittas, root dhammas are moha and lobha. Dosa never arise together with lobha in the same moment and in the same citta. As these 8 cittas are akusala cittas, there is no hetu of kusala origin. So there are only 2 roots in these 8 lobha mula cittas and they are moha nad lobha. So 8 lobha mula cittas are dvihetuka cittas or double-rooted consciousness. May you all be free from suffering. With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing PS: Any comments are welcome and any queries are welcome and they will be valuable. If there is unclarity of any meaning, please just give a reply to any of these posts. 39661 From: htootintnaing Date: Sat Dec 11, 2004 3:31am Subject: Dhamma Thread ( 170 ) Dear Dhamma Friends, The first classification of citta we have discussed is vedana classification. They are 62 somanassa cittas, 1 sukha citta, 1 dukkha citta, 2 domanassa cittas and 55 upekkha cittas. The second classification of citta we are discussing is hetu classification. There are 18 ahetuka cittas, 2 ekahetuka citta, 22 dvihetuka cittas and 47 tihetuka cittas. We have discussed on 18 ahetuka cittas and 2 ekahetuka cittas. There are 22 dvihetuka cittas or 22 double-rooted consciousness. They are 8 lobha mula cittas, 2 dosa mula cittas and 12 nana vipppayutta cittas. Lobha cittas have been explained in the previous post. There are 2 dosa mula cittas. 1. domanassa saha gatam patigha sampayuttam asankharika citta 2. domanassa saha gatam patigha sampayuttam sasankharika citta Dosa citta or hating mind always hurts. So both of these 2 dosa mula cittas are associated with hurting or patigha. Domanassa is mental displeasure. There is no joy at all when dosa citta arises. Vedana is domanassa vedana. And patigha always happens. One citta does not need promptedness and the other needs it. In these 2 dosa mula cittas, there are moha and dosa as root dhamma. So they are also dvihetuka cittas or double-rooted consciousness. May you all be free from suffering. With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing PS: Any comments are welcome and any queries are welcome and they will be valuable. If there is unclarity of any meaning, please just give a reply to any of these posts. 39662 From: plnao Date: Sat Dec 11, 2004 3:38am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: AN III - 100 mental misconduct vs. thoughts of ill-will Hi Jon, and all A long ramble follows. Please read at your leisure, if you care to. I've let this one sit for awhile, Jon. I like your pace of exchanging messages. Nice and easy - no need to rush. My views on the topics to follow are still so formative that ....well, it helps to write them out now and then even though they are formative. > Phil : Needless to say, like all beginners, I see the exhortative, prescriptive > sounding language used in the suttas (in translation, at the very least, > and presumedly in the original as well) and take it as written. You're > right though, it is so much better to see them as descriptive. So, when we > read, for example, that one removes an unwholesome thought and replaces it > with a wholesome one the way a carpenter replaces a rotten peg with a > solid one, it is a description of what happens when panna rules rather > than a prescription of what someone should do. > > Jon: > A topic well worth discussing, but I find it helps to have the particular > wording to hand. Since I couldn't readily find the peg passage you refer > to, I have given below the statement of the 4 padhanas from Nyanatiloka's > 'Buddhist Dictionary' under the entry 'padhana', a passage that comes up > frequently in this context. You know, at my level of insight, it's really only rote learning to say "panna" controls the citta, but even at the level of rote learning (or "parroting" as people insist on saying - I think this term is disrespectful to Dhamma, because rote is part and parcel of bhavana in Asia, at least) it is helpful. Slowly, the message sinks in, the truth sinks in. Spend some time in the khandas vagga of SN, soak in it, reflect on it, and the belief that there is a self that can control the development of kusala wears away. Yes, I have experienced the benefits of direct action against certain defilements, but even a person of my basic insight can see that it is foolish to think that I am doing anything. It shows ignorance of conditions. So I say "panna" is directing the citta, for want of a better way to get at the way conditions pley out. > As we know, the Buddha's whole teaching can be characterised by the > general pattern 'when this occurs, that comes to be; when this is absent, > that does not come to be', and I think these passages can be seen in the > same (i.e., non-prescriptive) vein. I have come to agree. The right effort language gave me pause, with its exertion and striving and what not. But there is not reason that we cannot be compelled to act in a seemingly intentional way by conditions. Take natural decisive support condition. If I bear down intentionally on a troublesome fabrication, it is because there is a condition for it. It could be as simple as having success with a similar effort the previous day - or previous moment. But it is still a condition. We are not doing it. That seems pretty clear to me, and I have only begun to understand conditions.. Still, knowing this doesn't prevent me from *not* being content with rare moments of mindfulness. The other day Rob K was wondering why people can't be content with this. I think it's fear. Last night in bed, when I was having trouble sleeping, I read some of the talk with Bhikkhu Dhammadharo, who might have the strictest insistence of the rarity of sati, of the rarity of kusala, of the need for great patience of anyone I've come across, including K Sujin, or Nina, or Rob K, or you, or others. He, of course, famously said "one moment of sati in one lifetime? Wealthy man!" or words to that effect. In the middle of the night, when one can't sleep, and reads his talk, there is resistance, there is fear. We want more reassurance, but we don't find it there. Bhante V talked of pessimism - I don't think it is pessimism, it is the perfection of truth, of facing the power of conditions, of kamma. There can be optimism, because we can have our vision cleared and see into the moment. But instead we have fear and rush out for disguised forms of salvation bordering on eternalism. The insistence in the West on nibbana in this lifetime. "It happens in suttas" people say, and it does, but as far as I know it doesn't happen very often to monks who ask for it, who demand it. They are caught by surprise. Surprised by nibanna, to paraphrase CS Lewis. ("Surprised by Joy" was the tititle of his auto-biogrpahy of conversion.) Is that as prevalent in Asian Theravada? Somehow, I doubt it. There is more appreciation of the value of patience in Asia. I think it is a fear of death, a fear of extinction that lies behind some (not everyone's) determined pursuit of nibbana in this lifetime. Why is it not a great enough goal to eliminate wrong view of self, to aspire to sotapanna? When the next lifetime's rebirth has in all likelihood already been determined by kamma, why this determination to have nibbana in this lifetime? I think it is fear of letting go of control, fear of death. I always am so inspired when Nina is so constant, so undoubting about the importance of present realities. When I am her age, will I be so courageous, or will I waver and hedge my bets and grasp at comforting views that conceal a subtle clinging to eternalsm? (I know, 75 is not so old...) This is one of my rambles, obviously. > It is also worth noting (since we share a background in ESL ;-)), that > this and most of the other references one seems to come across are in the > third person ('a monk does this and that'), rather than in second person > which we would more normally associate with prescriptive language. Very good point. I'd never thought of that. The 3rd person is much more descriptive. I would have to check this, but I think even when the Buddha is talking to a monk, he uses the 3rd person to describe what is entailed. I think that is a very important point. > > Did the Buddha tell people to have more kusala, or did he rather help them > to see the value of having more kusala, and point out the different kinds > of kusala to be developed and their relative merits? To me, the former > would suggest that kusala could be made to arise by following a certain > set of procedures with the right kind of intention, which is definitely > not the flavour of the dhamma overall, as I see it. Well, he certainly did give some very harsh warnings about the danger of akusala, of the "If I were to die tonight" variety that warn of unfavourable rebirth. And he did use language that he surely knew would be interpreted as being prescriptive. And he is compared to a doctor at times, a doctor prescribing medicine. So the prescriptive aspect is there, defintely. And again, I think it is very helfpul for people who are at a more basic stage of insight. I am sure I will continue to benefit from seeing a precriptive aspect to the Buddha's teaching as I continue to work on some very blatant, very defineable defilements. Someone, I forget who, said that he (I assume) said that he thought K Sujin's teaching was suitable only for people who have already become enlightened. I can see why he thought so - it is a very pure, very deep, very true Dhamma that cannot be fully appreciated by beginners, especially in the West, where results are wanted fast. I have been wondering aloud here about the possible conflict between emotional well-being in this lifetime and the development of insight. If people need an emotional fix, they will not find it in Abhidhamma, not usually. (I did, for some reason.) People want to control things - subtly and not so subtly, they insist on it. They do not like to be under the control of conditions. But surely this is the case - even when I decide to stop watching TV news and forcefully do so. That resolution was anatta, a conditioned nama. > Phil: > For example, we talk of guarding sense doors, and it's easy to think of > this as a prescribed practice, but whenever there is kusala citta, the > sense doors *are* guarded, because there can only be congnition through > one sense door at a time. > > Jon: > Absolutely so. See the reference to guarded sense doors in the first of > the 4 right efforts: > (1) "What now, o monks, is the effort to avoid? Perceiving a form, or a > sound, or an odour, or a taste, or a bodily or mental impression, the monk > neither adheres to the whole nor to its parts. And he strives to ward off > that through which evil and unwholesome things might arise, such as greed > and sorrow, if he remained with unguarded senses; and he watches over his > senses, restrains his senses. This is called the effort to avoid. > > It's interesting to note that the primary meaning of the effort to avoid > (i.e., the first of the 2 parts to it) is given in these terms: > "Perceiving a form, or a sound, or an odour, or a taste, or a bodily or > mental impression, the monk neither adheres to the whole nor to its > parts." > > There is nothing prescriptive about this, surely. Of course, if we read > it as referring to something to be done (in the sense of a technique or > practice of some kind), then we might assume that we are being told/urged > to do it. But I think the stage of 'not adhering to the whole nor [the] > parts' of arising sense door objects refers to the presence of a > relatively high level of awareness and understanding and is not something > that can somehow be 'practised'. Phil: Yes, but when we get to the second right effort, the language sounds much more forceful - "destroys them, dispels them" etc. And it can be done in a forceful way - we see that in the sutta about removing distracting thoughts. And it's easy to see why people fall into the error of thinking it is something that can be done intentionally. It will not happen until wisdom arises and directs it, it will not happen unless there are conditions that give rise to it. No need for pessimism there, because this wisdom cannot be developed even in this lifetime. It only took me 44 years to figure out how harmful the TV news is for me! Wisdom would have been appreciated a little sooner, but there is no controlling wisdom. > So this level of sati and panna would I believe be what is meant by > remaining with unguarded senses in the second part of the definition. > > Phil, much more that could be discussed in your post, particularly the > 'active' language issue (which I see as being different to the > 'prescriptive' language issue), but this is already long enough. Hoping > that this helps you feel more comfortable with a non-prescriptive > interpretation of this particular passage. Thanks Jon. As you can see, I am more comfortable with a non-prescriptive interpretation of this. I think that wee-hours session with Bhikkhu Dhammadharo was very good for me. I felt fear, the unwillingness to let go of control. But that seemed to be a condition for being able to let go a bit more. A gradual process. Metta, Phil > > Jon > > From Nyanatiloka's 'Buddhist Dictionary', 'padhaana': > > "The monk rouses his will to avoid the arising of evil, unwholesome things > not yet arisen ... to overcome them ... to develop wholesome things not > yet arisen ... to maintain them, and not to let them disappear, but to > bring them to growth, to maturity and to the full perfection of > development. And he makes effort, stirs up his energy, exerts his mind and > strives" (A. IV, 13). > > (1) "What now, o monks, is the effort to avoid? Perceiving a form, or a > sound, or an odour, or a taste, or a bodily or mental impression, the monk > neither adheres to the whole nor to its parts. And he strives to ward off > that through which evil and unwholesome things might arise, such as greed > and sorrow, if he remained with unguarded senses; and he watches over his > senses, restrains his senses. This is called the effort to avoid. > > (2) "What now is the effort to overcome? The monk does not retain any > thought of sensual lust, or any other evil, unwholesome states that may > have arisen; he abandons them, dispels them, destroys them, causes them to > disappear. This is called the effort to overcome. > > (3) "What now is the effort to develop? The monk develops the factors of > enlightenment, bent on solitude, on detachment, on extinction, and ending > in deliverance, namely: mindfulness (sati), investigation of the law > (dhamma-vicaya), energy (viriya), rapture (píti), tranquillity > (passaddhi), concentraton (samádhi), equanimity (upekkhá). This is called > the effort to develop. > > (4) "What now is the effort to maintain? The monk keeps firmly in his mind > a favourable object of concentration, such as the mental image of a > skeleton, a corpse infested by worms, a corpse blueblack in colour, a > festering corpse, a corpse riddled with holes, a corpse swollen up. This > is called the effort to maintain" (A. IV, 14). > 39663 From: htootintnaing Date: Sat Dec 11, 2004 3:43am Subject: Re: [dsg] Dhamma Thread ( 166 ) Dear Phil, Somanassa or somanassa vedana arises with piti cetasika. Somanassa santirana does have piti and somanassa. It has to arise because of conditions. No dhamma arises without cause and condition. This citta 'somanassa santirana citta' cannot perform patisandhi function or linking function. Nor do bhavanga function and cuti function. It just does 2 functions. One function is santirana or investigating function. Another function is tadarammana function or retention function. When javana cittas are all somanassa, then tadarammana cittas have to be somanassa. If santirana cittas have to arise as tadarammana cittas, then they will be somanassa santirana in this case. With Metta, Htoo Naing --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "plnao" wrote: > Hello Htoo > > > And there is an extra santirana citta. It is somanassa santirana > > citta. > (snip) > > joyous-investigating-consciousness and indifferent-investigating- > > consciousness all of which are the result of past good kamma or > > wholesome actions in the past. > > I forget why there is the extra joyous-investigating-consciousness. > I could go and check ADL but I will ask you if you don't mind. > > From the name, I would guess that the object causes joy - so maybe it > is some very special object. Now I remember something about > Buddha statues, for example. > > But I have also read somewhere that there is nothing intrinsic in > objects that make them wholesome or unwholesome - it all depends on our > attention, > whether it is yoniso manasikara or ayoniso manasikara. Otherwise > objects have no intrinsic wholesomeness or unwholesomeness. > > Thanks in advance for your feedback. > > Metta, > Phil 39664 From: sarah abbott Date: Sat Dec 11, 2004 4:11am Subject: ‘Cetasikas' study corner 70- Perception/Sa~n~naa (q) Dear Friends, 'Cetasikas' by Nina van Gorkom http://www.vipassana.info/cetasikas.html http://www.zolag.co.uk/ Questions, comments and different views welcome;-) ========================================== [Ch.3 Perception(sa~n~naa)contd] ***** Questions i Saññå accompanies each citta, but it falls away completely with the citta. How can we still remember things which happened in the past? ii When we see a house, through which doorway does saññå perform its function? iii When we mistake something for something else, how can there still be saññå at such a moment? iv When we recognize a house, can there be perversion of saññå? v Can the sotåpanna think of concepts and recognize people and things? vi Give examples of akusala saññå. vii How can one develop ‘perception of impermanence’ (anicca saññå)? ***** [Ch.3 Perception(sa~n~naa)finished!] Metta, Sarah ====== 39665 From: Egbert Date: Sat Dec 11, 2004 4:16am Subject: Re: Prolific Posters Hi Christine and everyone, I was just contemplating the same subject. Of course, and not intended as a correction of your post, there is the number 0, which is quite a Buddhist number. As a representation of the unrepresentable, it is perhaps the "original sin". And now I've gone and blotted my copybook :-) Have enjoyed lurking, though Herman --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "christine_forsyth" wrote: > > Hello all, > > For interests sake, I thought I'd see just who our most prolific > members are. There are approximately 31 members who have sent in > posts to the List from the 1st December, up to this moment, and my > estimate (allowing for different time zones and any miscounting) is: > Upasaka Howard 83 Nina 55 KenO 52 Hugo 39 Phil 37 RobM 36 > Htoo 35 Sarah 33 Larry 31 Mike 29 James 24 Andrew 22 Bhante > Vimalaramsi 18 > > Obviously at only 7, I'm letting the side down quite badly. :-) > > metta and peace, > Christine > ---The trouble is that you think you have time--- 39666 From: plnao Date: Sat Dec 11, 2004 5:26am Subject: quiz answers- Phil (was Re: [dsg] 'Cetasikas' study corner 70- Perception/Sa~n~naa (q)) Hello all > i Saññå accompanies each citta, but it falls away completely > with the citta. How can we still remember things which > happened in the past? Sanna accompanies every citta, and marks it, so that is how we can recognize it or remember it. Sanna marks an object so that it can be recognized again. I think this is the correct answer, but I don't really get it, yet, to tell the truth. What does it mean to say that sanna "marks" an object? I know the metaphor of the carpenter marking the wood. That I can understand. But how sanna marks an object. Not yet. No hurry though. I'm sure I am still thinking in conventional terms, of a memory needing to be stored. I don't think the neurology of memories and Abhidhamma's interpretation of remembering need to fit perfectly. The purpose of Abhidhamma is to help us toward detachment, not to describe the working of the brain. That's for science. Science and Dhamma can part ways. Should part ways. That's my opinion. Detachment is not a science. > ii When we see a house, through which doorway does saññå > perform its function? When we see a "house", rather than a visible object, there is a concept, not a reality. So I guess the mind door? Quote: "When we understand the meaning of what has been said there are cittas which experience concepts and the sanna which accompanies those cittas remembers and "marks" a concept. So I guess the same applies for "when we understand the meaning of what hsa been seen." > iii When we mistake something for something else, how can > there still be saññå at such a moment? I look out the window and see a huge full moon in the sky. There is a concept. Sanna marks it. Then I realize it is a lightbulb hanging from the balcony roof. Sanna marks it. When we are mistaking something for something, we are dealing with two concepts, aren't we? So in a sense, neither are the realities of visible object, colour etc. Sanna marks both the concepts. It doesn't matter which one is really the moon, and which is the lightbulb. They're both concepts. Just taking a wild shot here. > > iv When we recognize a house, can there be perversion of > saññå? If we think it is something that will last, is permanent, there is a perversion of perception. Just as if we see something foul (human body) and believe it to be fair. That sounds a bit harsh, but it is the Buddha's teaching that the body is foul. Hard to get over, that. Today I was teaching a student who was wearing a red, low cut sweater. Her skin was so smooth, so glowing. A pendant hung enticingly at the top of her cleavage. The pendant said "come, reflect on my beauty, and that of those that lie just below." I reflected instead on the foulness of the body to keep my mind from "going there" any further. It was quite effective. It helped me to connect with her in a more wholesome way, a more helpful way for both of us. > v Can the sotåpanna think of concepts and recognize people > and things? Sure. He or she still has lobha, a lot of lobha, so can mistake that which is foul for that which is fair. The sotapanna is rid of doubt, and self-view, and he can no longer have lobha or dosa of a strength that could cause a transgression, but there is still clinging. > > vi Give examples of akusala saññå. "To hold that in dukka there is non-dukkha" Let's say I go to a baseball game and drink lots of beer. Sanna does not mark the beer correctly, so there is not the correct perception of dukkha. > vii How can one develop 'perception of impermanence' (anicca > saññå)? Patience. Cultivating panna. Knowing realities as they appear through the six doors. Metta, Phil p.s Nina, I know you're busy. Please don't feel the need to answer here, unless you'd like to. There's no hurry. 39667 From: plnao Date: Sat Dec 11, 2004 5:56am Subject: typo Re: [dsg] Re: AN III - 100 mental misconduct vs. thoughts of ill-will . > It will not happen until wisdom arises and directs it, it > will not > happen unless there are conditions that give rise to it. No need for > pessimism > there, because this wisdom cannot be developed even in this lifetime. It *can* be developed in this lifetime, of course. The Buddha said so. "If it wasn't possible, I wouldn't tell you to do it" or words to that effect. That was a typo. Metta, Phil 39668 From: agriosinski Date: Sat Dec 11, 2004 7:12am Subject: Re: The Buddha In His First Week > Avijja or ignorance leads to sankhara or formation or fabrication. > Sankhara leads to vinnana or consciousness. Vinnana leads to nama- > rupa or mind-material. Nama-rupa leads to salayatana or 6-sense-base. > Salayatana leads to phassa or contact. > > Phassa leads to vedana or feeling. Vedana leads to tanha or craving. > Tanha leads to upadana or clinging. Upadana leads to bhavo or > becoming. Bhava leads to jati or rebirth. Jati leads to jara/marana > and all other stressful conditions and sufferings of living. There is > no self at all. Dear Htoo, Could I have your detailed explanation, in depth picture of what avija comes to be and how it leads, what exactly happens that sankharas arise. And then what sankhara is and how it leads to vinnana etc. etc. Or if you don't feel like writing about it, could you point me to the other source? respectfully, Agrios. 39669 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sat Dec 11, 2004 7:22am Subject: Re: False Identification of Paramattha Dhammas and Realities (Re: [dsg] Conce... Hi Howard (and Sarah) Butting in if I may. This is not so much a response to your points directly, Howard, as putting up some other ideas up for consideration or comment, based on my reading of the texts. As a beginner I always like to go back to basics ;-)), so I'll start with a definition of 'dhamma'. 1. 'Dhammas' as 'realities' The term 'dhammas' has many meanings, but in this context (i.e., as the object of insight development) it means things that 'bear their own characteristic'. Visible object and sound, when experienced, have the same characteristic/s for all beings at all times, and in this sense they are 'absolute'. 2. Characteristics -- shared and unique The characteristics (Pali: lakkhana) of a dhamma are attributes that pertain to that dhamma. Some characteristics are common to all dhammas or to the dhammas of a particular class (e.g., the characteristic of being a nama, of being consciousness, of being a rupa, the characteristics of anicca/dukkha/anatta). Each dhamma also has its own unique characteristic (for example, in the case of seeing, that it experiences visible object). 3. Characteristics can be directly known only by insight into dhammas The characteristic of a dhamma can be directly known only by developed insight, that is to say, insight into that particular (kind of) dhamma. Otherwise, characteristics remain the object of conceptual thinking. 4. Classifications of dhammas Dhammas are classified in the teachings in many different ways. The classifications themselves are not dhammas. In some instances individual categories within a classification comprise a single dhamma (for example the 2 khandhas of sanna and vedana, all the dhatus, most of the ayatanas). In other instances a category within a classification embraces more than a single dhamma (for example, sankhara khandha encompasses 50 cetasikas). So when it is said that the khandhas/ayatanas/dhatus are dhammas, it should be understood in this sense. 5. Conditions as relations between dhammas Dhammas are related to each other in multiple ways. These relations are termed 'conditions' (Pali: paccaya). As with characteristics, these relations can only be directly known by developed insight, that is to say, insight into individual (kinds of) dhammas. For example, it is with the development of insight into visible object and seeing consciousness that it becomes directly known that the former is the object of the latter (an instance of arammana paccaya becoming known). In the example of lobha as hetu paccaya, lobha would be hetu paccaya for the co arising citta. 6. Characteristics and conditions -- dhammas or concepts? Characteristics and conditions are not dhammas, since they do not bear their own characteristics, but neither are they concepts. This is explained in the Visuddhi-Magga passage quoted in Nina's post. There is no rule of abhidhamma that says that 'If it's not a dhamma it must be a concept' or vice versa. What the A-S says is that 'ultimate' dhammas are four-fold, and that concepts are 2-fold (as name and as meaning). The importance of the distinction between dhammas as having own nature and concepts as (mere) name or meaning seems to lie in the fact that there is a strong, deeply ingrained tendency to take concepts for dhammas and accordingly as the potential object of insight development. I do not see the distinction as suggesting that concepts should be ignored or downplayed or whatever. Concepts are necessary for all, including the arahant, but it happens that we are extremely forgetful (lacking in mindfulness) when it comes to perceiving what are dhammas and what are not. Frequent reminders are helpful. The aim is not to have less concepts – the aim is for there to be less ignorance and wrong view about dhammas. Well, those are my comments. BTW, it would not surprise me if there are some differences between what I say here and what others of the (supposed) DSG camp say. There is of course no such thing as the "DSG point of view" ;-)) Jon --- upasaka@a... wrote: ... > Howard: > Mmm. There are lots of things that only occur together but can > still > be distinguished. It seems to me that if the tilakkhana are neither > rupas nor > cittas nor cetasikas nor nibbana, then that leaves Abhidhammikas in the > position of saying that they are nothing but pa~n~natti, and that they > cannot be > objects of insight - that satipatthana does not apply to them, and that > they are, > in fact, nothing at all. > It seems to me that either the view on what constitutes "reality" > needs to be changed, or an Abhidhammika who takes the "DSG point of > view" with > regard to concept and reality is forced into an uncomfortable, if not > outright > upsetting, position. I would love to see a persuasive explanation of why > this is > not so. (So far, it strikes me as a real problem.) > ----------------------------------------------- ... > If a conditioning force were a reality, not imagined, then it > would be > either rupa, citta, cetasika, or nibbana. Also, a "conditioning force", > if > there were such a beast, would not itself be a relation, but a cause for > a > relation. > In any case, notions of "conditioning forces" at the level of > reality > must be very suspect. The Buddha replaced the old, substantialist ideas > of > hidden forces of causality by conditionality, which simply comes down to > "When > this is, that is, and when this arises, that arises". This is part of > what > distinguished the Buddha's notion of idappaccayata from the > substantialist > causality theories of his predecessors. > --------------------------------------------- ... > The force of greed cannot exist apart from *what* state? Greed > cannot > exist apart from greed? I don't get what is being said here. If by > "state" is > meant the citta as mindstate, as opposed to citta as the operation of > awareness (vi~n~nana), then what exactly is a mindstate? It seems to be > a collection > consisting of co-occurring awareness (citta in the 1st sense - > vi~n~nana), > cetasikas, and arammana. But any collection is pa~n~natti. Is then the > root > condition of greed, as a relation, a relation between a nama dhamma > (greed) and a > pa~n~natti (the mindstate)? In any case, the *force* of greed, whatever > sort of > thing that is supposed to be, is not itself a relation. It seems to me > that no > matter how any of this matter is turned, it doesn't bear scrutiny very > well. > ------------------------------------------- ... > Okay, so the "force" terminology is superfluous. We are talking > about > greed. What is the greed related to by the greed-root-relation, and in > exactly > what way? That is - what exactly is the relation being talked about, and > is > that relation merely concept or is it reality? If it is reality, it must > fall > into one of the categories of rupa, citta, cetasika, and nibbana. > ----------------------------------------- ... > Ahh, okay. Here we are starting to zero-in on matters. There is > nothing more than the conditioning and conditioned states. That means > that *there > are no relations*. There are relations only in a manner of speaking. > Relations > are (well grounded) concepts, and nothing more. Okay. That may well be > so! > Relations may well be not events of the type I hypothesized, > multi-phenomenal and > often trans-temporal events. But, then, they are actually nothing at > all. We > can make true statements of syntactically relational form about dhammas, > but we > may not countenance such "things" as actual relations. I will definitely > buy > that! But what does that tell us about concepts? It says to me that at > least > until we are arahants, there is no proper grasping of reality that does > not > indispensably depend on concepts. > ------------------------------------------------ ... > Okay. But look at what would be not known without the concepts > that > take us beyond these dhammas to their characteristics and the relations > among > them. The so called characteristics "to be conditioned, function and > manifest" > in certain ways (of the dhamma, greed, for example) are not the dhamma > itself. > These are to be known by inference by us. Moreover, these > characteristics are > actually nothing at all - as you say. They are concept only. All there > actually are are the dhammas (e.g., greed). > ------------------------------- ... > Okay. So you agree that contiguity relation is pa~n~natti. That > looks > to me like pa~n~natti are essential aspects of "reality", no? If we > throw out > pa~n~natti as mere illusion, then we throw out the tilakkhana and all > properties and relations. Doesn't it start to seem to you, Sarah, that > all this > analysis is an empty house of cards, and that no matter how we try to > describe > reality, the description falls apart? It does to me. All that I am > starting to see > left is that this is a world of empty appearance, with nothing to hold > onto, > nothing independent, nothing substantial or self-existent, and all > worthy only > of relinquishment. (Nagarjuna is looking more and more attractive to me > at > this moment.) > --------------------------------------- ... > No not an aspect of reality. It is either pa~n~natti (and hence > nothing at all, as that is understood on DSG) or it is paramattha > dhamma. > ------------------------------------ ... > If anatta is not pa~n~natti, then it must be either rupa, citta, > cetasika, or nibbana. > ---------------------------------------- ... > Using the word 'aspect' doesn't shed any light. What particular > cetasika is anatta? (It isn't rupa, citta, or nibbana.) In fact, anatta > must, just > like relations (as you ahve so clearly pointed out), be concept. > ---------------------------------------- 39670 From: Date: Sat Dec 11, 2004 2:51am Subject: Freedom: a Concept! (Re: A Drop More Re: [dsg] The Problem of Relations) Hi, Larry (and Nina) - In a message dated 12/10/04 8:42:04 PM Eastern Standard Time, LBIDD@w... writes: > Hi Nina, > > This is not to say that concepts cannot be (mis)apprehended as > impermanent. Nations, chariots, and persons are often so > (mis)apprehended. > > ======================= HOWEVER ... if one tells people that because nations, chariots, and persons are pa~n~natti, they are nothing at all and/or they are permanent, we are far more greatly misleading those people. Each of those amorphous, ungraspable, non-entities still *does* have a mode of existence, and that existence is temporary, not permanent! Nations, chariots, and persons, *particular* ones - and note that it makes perfectly good sense to speak of particular ones, and it would not if there weren't such things at all] - arise, change, and cease as aspects of our sankharically constructed experience, based upon and carved out from the ever-changing, multi-sensory flow of experience that underlies them and all aspects of "our world". It is all a magic show, and that is true at every level of experience, the ultimate as well as the conventional. It is most important, I believe, for us to grasp that *all* experience is conditioned, impermanent, insubstantial, impersonal, and without self-existent reality. We need to come to see this directly, and not just as theory. The reason we need to see this is not a matter of idle curiosity or abstract philosophical and intellectual inquiry, but so that disenchantment grows, and craving and grasping are uprooted, and by means of radical relinquishment, suffering can be ended once and for all. We should never lose sight of what the Dhamma is about. It is about freedom. 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) 39671 From: Date: Sat Dec 11, 2004 3:01am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Prolific Posters Hey, Herman!! Nice to see your voice!! ;-)) With metta, Howard P.S. Christine, is this post short enough not to bump my tally? ;-) In a message dated 12/11/04 7:17:02 AM Eastern Standard Time, hhofman@t... writes: > Hi Christine and everyone, > > I was just contemplating the same subject. > > Of course, and not intended as a correction of your post, there is > the number 0, which is quite a Buddhist number. As a representation > of the unrepresentable, it is perhaps the "original sin". > > And now I've gone and blotted my copybook :-) > > Have enjoyed lurking, though > > Herman > > /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) 39672 From: htootintnaing Date: Sat Dec 11, 2004 8:32am Subject: Re: The Buddha In His First Week Dear Agrios, Thanks for your reply. This topic 'The Buddha In His First Week' is originally 'The Buddha'. This topic again is continuation of 'Beginner Course' at JourneyToNibbana Yahoo Group. Your request is good for learners. This is a touch job. It will be expounding of paticcasamuppada dhamma or Dependent Co-arising or Dependent Origination and it is written in short as D.O. My current topic is not to go into paticcasamuppada dhamma. The posts are for general background of Buddhism. In Beginner Course posts, I started with simple words and explanation on them. Then I moved to how Bodhisatta of The Buddha Gotama had a wish in becoming a Sammasambuddha. And then moved to events at the palace where Bodhisatta was born. Currently, the topic is in the first week of The Buddha arising. Regarding D.O, there are many experts here in DSG. They will give you valuable guidance. There are many suttas that expound D.O apparently or indirectly. I may also start another thread on D.O. But currently, I am still busy. May you be free from suffering. With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing ---------------------------------------------------------------------- --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "agriosinski" wrote: > > > Avijja or ignorance leads to sankhara or formation or fabrication. > > Sankhara leads to vinnana or consciousness. Vinnana leads to nama- > > rupa or mind-material. Nama-rupa leads to salayatana or 6-sense- base. > > Salayatana leads to phassa or contact. > > > > Phassa leads to vedana or feeling. Vedana leads to tanha or craving. > > Tanha leads to upadana or clinging. Upadana leads to bhavo or > > becoming. Bhava leads to jati or rebirth. Jati leads to jara/marana > > and all other stressful conditions and sufferings of living. There is > > no self at all. > > Dear Htoo, > > Could I have your detailed explanation, in depth picture of what > avija comes to be and how it leads, what exactly happens that sankharas arise. > And then what sankhara is and how it leads to vinnana etc. etc. > Or if you don't feel like writing about it, could you point me to > the other source? > > respectfully, > > Agrios. 39673 From: Date: Sat Dec 11, 2004 3:41am Subject: Re: False Identification of Paramattha Dhammas and Realities (Re: [dsg] Conce... Hi, Jon - In a message dated 12/11/04 10:22:58 AM Eastern Standard Time, jonoabb@y... writes: > > Hi Howard (and Sarah) > > Butting in if I may. > > This is not so much a response to your points directly, Howard, as putting > up some other ideas up for consideration or comment, based on my reading > of the texts. > > As a beginner I always like to go back to basics ;-)), so I'll start with > a definition of 'dhamma'. > > 1. 'Dhammas' as 'realities' > The term 'dhammas' has many meanings, but in this context (i.e., as the > object of insight development) it means things that 'bear their own > characteristic'. Visible object and sound, when experienced, have the > same characteristic/s for all beings at all times, and in this sense they > are 'absolute'. ------------------------------------------- Howard: The expression 'bear their own characteristic' isn't clear. Is the dhamma one thing and the characteristic another? At the level of paramathha dhamma, I do not think so. A hardness doesn't "bear" the characteristic of hardness. Hardness *is* hardness, and there is nothing more to say. ------------------------------------------ > > 2. Characteristics -- shared and unique > The characteristics (Pali: lakkhana) of a dhamma are attributes that > pertain to that dhamma. Some characteristics are common to all dhammas or > to the dhammas of a particular class (e.g., the characteristic of being a > nama, of being consciousness, of being a rupa, the characteristics of > anicca/dukkha/anatta). Each dhamma also has its own unique characteristic > (for example, in the case of seeing, that it experiences visible object). ----------------------------------- Howard: Seeing doesn't have the *characteristic* of experiencing visible object. Seeing *is* the experiencing of visible object. ------------------------------------ > > 3. Characteristics can be directly known only by insight into dhammas > The characteristic of a dhamma can be directly known only by developed > insight, that is to say, insight into that particular (kind of) dhamma. > Otherwise, characteristics remain the object of conceptual thinking. > -------------------------------------- Howard: At the level of paramattha dhammas, there are just the dhammas, not characteristics of them. If there is a dhamma and also a characteristic of the dhamma that is not the dhamma itself, and if the characteristic is not imagined - if it is a reality, then that characteristic must be either a rupa, a citta, a cetasika, or nibbana according to Abhidhamma.This kind of close "quantum reality" analysis, Jon, just falls apart the deeper we get into it. We are talking in all this great detail about something we have no direct experience with whatsoever as though we *know* what we are talking about. But when it all starts to dissolve as the analysis gets too fine, we ought to take that as a warning, I think, and back off a bit. -------------------------------------------- > > 4. Classifications of dhammas > Dhammas are classified in the teachings in many different ways. The > classifications themselves are not dhammas. In some instances individual > categories within a classification comprise a single dhamma (for example > the 2 khandhas of sanna and vedana, all the dhatus, most of the ayatanas). > In other instances a category within a classification embraces more than > a single dhamma (for example, sankhara khandha encompasses 50 cetasikas). > So when it is said that the khandhas/ayatanas/dhatus are dhammas, it > should be understood in this sense. > > 5. Conditions as relations between dhammas > Dhammas are related to each other in multiple ways. These relations are > termed 'conditions' (Pali: paccaya). > ------------------------------------- Howard: That is an odd use of language, though, Jon, although I agree that the Patthana uses it. The dhammas are the actual conditions. I don't have a clue what the relations among them are. When there is a relation of determination between dhammas A, B, C, D and dhamma E, the dhammas A,B, C, D are called the conditions and dhamma E is called the conditioned element. A, B, C, and D are conditions for E. What the *relation* is, I don't know. I think that, as Sarah impled, there are just the conditions. And YET, relations among dhammas do hold. A paradox, no? -------------------------------------- As with characteristics, these> > relations can only be directly known by developed insight, that is to say, > insight into individual (kinds of) dhammas. For example, it is with the > development of insight into visible object and seeing consciousness that > it becomes directly known that the former is the object of the latter (an > instance of arammana paccaya becoming known). > > In the example of lobha as hetu paccaya, lobha would be hetu paccaya for > the co arising citta. > > 6. Characteristics and conditions -- dhammas or concepts? > Characteristics and conditions are not dhammas, since they do not bear > their own characteristics, but neither are they concepts. > --------------------------------------- Howard: Wow, the ontology is certainly proliferating! (And whatever happened to "the all"?) ---------------------------------------- This is > explained in the Visuddhi-Magga passage quoted in Nina's post. > There is > no rule of abhidhamma that says that 'If it's not a dhamma it must be a > concept' or vice versa. > ---------------------------------------- Howard: Well, Jon, at this point it seems to me that you are opening the door to the possibility that I put forward of mind-door objects including items that do not appear in any of the khandhas, and of the ayatana breakdown going further than the khandha breakdown. ---------------------------------------- What the A-S says is that 'ultimate' dhammas are> > four-fold, and that concepts are 2-fold (as name and as meaning). > > The importance of the distinction between dhammas as having own nature and > concepts as (mere) name or meaning seems to lie in the fact that there is > a strong, deeply ingrained tendency to take concepts for dhammas and > accordingly as the potential object of insight development. I do not see > the distinction as suggesting that concepts should be ignored or > downplayed or whatever. Concepts are necessary for all, including the > arahant, but it happens that we are extremely forgetful (lacking in > mindfulness) when it comes to perceiving what are dhammas and what are > not. Frequent reminders are helpful. The aim is not to have less > concepts – the aim is for there to be less ignorance and wrong view about > dhammas. > > Well, those are my comments. BTW, it would not surprise me if there are > some differences between what I say here and what others of the (supposed) > DSG camp say. There is of course no such thing as the "DSG point of view" > ;-)) > -------------------------------------------- Howard: I *do* see here some differences in your perspective, greater flexibility especially, from that of some other Abhidhammikas here. I find that heartening, and I find most heartening your final sentence above! ;-) -------------------------------------------- > > Jon > ======================= With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 39674 From: htootintnaing Date: Sat Dec 11, 2004 8:43am Subject: Patthana Dhamma Dear Dhamma Friends, There are 24 conditions that relate different dhammas. These can be studied in patthana dhamma. For understanding of patthana dhamma, ultimate realities have to be understood. I have tried to touch these complicated matter. So far there have been 62 pages. If you type this address 'www.geocities.com/htootintnaing/patthana1.html' into the address box and enter, you will be brought to 'Patthana Dhamma' pages. Specific pages can be reached by typing patthana22.html or patthana50.html or so on. So far 'hetu paccayo' 'arammana paccayo' 'adhipati paccayo' and 'anantara paccayo' have been discussed. Even though patthana dhamma seems to be far reaching dhamma or difficult dhamma, actually this dhamma should be learnt in our daily life. Patthana dhamma is behaving in our daily life and we will see them if we are mindful and have some knowledge of patthana dhamma. It is conditional relationship. With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing 39675 From: christine_forsyth Date: Sat Dec 11, 2004 10:31am Subject: [dsg] Re: Prolific Posters Who cares Howard? :-) Just keep posting - everyone is enjoying reading them. It's a pleasure to be on a list with so many who know the Dhamma and are willing and able to discuss and share. metta and peace, Christine ---The trouble is that you think you have time--- --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@a... wrote: > Hey, Herman!! > > Nice to see your voice!! ;-)) > > With metta, > Howard > > P.S. Christine, is this post short enough not to bump my tally? ;-) 39676 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Dec 11, 2004 11:15am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: kusala and akusala. Dear friend James, It is good you remark this impression you have of Kh Sujin. Lodewijk said, quite understandable that you have it. I try my best to answer this. Just tell me if something is lacking. But I have to take my time. op 11-12-2004 05:37 schreef buddhatrue op buddhatrue@y...: > Nina: ... Before we know we are > deluded. > > James: I can understand why Kh. Sujin believes that this approach is > necessary because there are many people who are highly deluded. ... > However, and I mean this kindly, Kh. Sujin may be committing what is > called `wrong dhamma' and a `danger to the dhamma'. To quote Ledi > Sayadaw in "Bodhipakkhiya Dipani": > > "This is so because these are times when miccha-dhamma (wrong > Dhamma) that are likely to cause dhammantaraya (danger to the > Dhamma) are rife. ... the belief that these are > times when the Paths and the Fruits can no longer be attained, the > tendency to defer effort until the parami ripen, the belief that > persons of the present day are dvi-hetuka,[38] the belief that the > great teachers of the past were nonexistent, etc. > > 38. Dvi-hetuka-patisandhi--Being reborn with only two root- > conditions: > alobha (detachment) and adosa (amity). Dvi-hetuka-patisandhi > individuals cannot attain the Paths and the Fruits in the present > life. > 39. Ti-hetuka-patisandhi--Being reborn with all the three root- > conditions, namely, alobha, adosa and amoha (wisdom)." N: What a coincidence, just talked about this to you, see Vis. post. > J: It seems that Kh. Sujin is operating under a slight variation of the > belief that people of the present day are dvi-hetuka: that the > people of today don't have enough inherent wisdom to attain the > paths and the fruits of practice. N: Never heard her say this. We cannot tell who is born with two or three hetus. She said that understanding can be developed, and also when born with three hetus understanding should be developed. However, we should not underestimate the extent of ignorance accumulated in countless lives. It is not difficult to know this. Ignorance arises with each akusala citta, and we know that there are countless of them in a day. Thus, how can we expect wisdom to develop rapidly? We should be realistic. The most ancient commentators also spoke of a long time practice: cira kala bhavana. They were wise people. I heard her say in India: courage, patience and good cheer. Thus, no downheartedness. Courage, patience so that we persevere in the development of understanding and of all kinds of kusala. I have Ledi Sayadaw's book, it is very good. Do you have the whole book? You quoted that he said: tendency to defer effort until the parami ripen>. This is strange, because viriya, right effort, is one of paramis, but it should go together with pañña. I recently referred to this. All the paramis: keeps us really busy, I would say!!! J: Therefore, it seems that she > stresses that people should only study the Abhidhamma so that they > may have this wisdom in future lives. N: She never said this, but she stresses all the time that book study does not mean so much. We have to understand seeing at this moment. Not the theory but practice. But correct understanding of some basic principles of the Abhidhamma is a good foundation. I am inspired after India with my Visuddhimagga studies to really consider at each para: what can I learn from this for daily life, for my life now? J: This is probably another > reason why she stresses the idea that one cannot obtain > enlightenment in this lifetime; that enlightenment will take several > lives. N: She did not say that it cannot, but understanding develops gradually, the right conditions have to be fulfilled. It is especially expectations with clinging to a quick result she explains as counteractive. You see, we may hope for enlightenment soon, and exactly that is a danger. We may hope for enlightenment: here is the idea of self not yet eradicated. We must know when this idea comes up. This is the real danger, we *have* to know this. She stressed: one has to develop one's own understanding. It would be easy if someone else would say: do this and this and you will attain. It does not work that way and gives rise to false hopes. You have to be your own refuge, nobody can develop understanding for you. She also reminded us of the Buddha's daily routine: every day he told the bhikkhus: do not be neglectful. J: Personally, I find this a dangerous thing to be teaching. I know > that Kh. Sujin may have the best intentions but the negative karma > for teaching something contrary to the dhamma is very great. Like > those who split the sangha, it could result in an immediate rebirth > in hell. N: I can see from your remark that there are serious misunderstandings about the way Kh. Sujin teaches. Something should be done to straighten this out. Khun Sujin does not teach a Dhamma of despair and indolence. She also refers to the sutta, here often quoted: do not long for the past, that has gone, the future has not come yet, but be aware of this or that dhamma at the present. I do not know my past, I do not know the future. There is this very moment and I should not be lazy but have energy to develop understanding of all that appears one at a time through the six doors. Of what use is it to think of: can I or can I not attain in this life? It will not help me, it is only, only thinking. It is great that she reminds us that worry is *only thinking*, a conditioned mental element. That is all. If I would not know this I would attach great importance to my worry and my thinking. Even though I do not see a spectacular progress (and that would be an idea of my progress!!) I still have confidence in the Way and I am happy and grateful that I have the chance of hearing the Dhamma, even after many centuries after the Buddha's parinibbana. Nina. 39677 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Dec 11, 2004 11:15am Subject: Re: A Drop More Re: [dsg] The Problem of Relations Hi Larry, You mean misapprehended as permanent. Yes, right. We do all the time. Nina op 11-12-2004 02:39 schreef LBIDD@w... op LBIDD@w...: > This is not to say that concepts cannot be (mis)apprehended as > impermanent. Nations, chariots, and persons are often so > (mis)apprehended. 39678 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Dec 11, 2004 11:15am Subject: Re: [dsg] 'Cetasikas' study corner 69- Perception/Sa~n~naa (p) Hello Phil, The Co had no comment to this sutta, but I looked at DIII, 243, The Recital, the Fives, which is similar, but here saññaa is translated as notion. The Co to this: Saññaa of impermanence is saññaa arisen with insight that realizes impermanence. Pali: aniccaanupassanaa ñaa.ne uppanna-saññaa. The same is said of dukkha, etc. Anupassanaa: passanaa is seeing, understanding. Anu: this has the meaning of following closely (the characteristic) or: again and again. Here we see that saññaa is manifold, its quality depends on the citta it arises with. It is good you asked! By the way, it is very nice if you would share what you read in the Roots of Good and Evil with your comments. It has many inspiring suttas, and Naresh would like that. For us all a good reminder. Nina. op 10-12-2004 13:03 schreef plnao op plnao@j...:> >> We read in the Gradual Sayings (Book of the >> Tens, Chapter VI, §6, Ideas) about ten kinds of saññå ... >> -The idea of the foul, of death, ... 39679 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Dec 11, 2004 11:15am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Vis. XIV, 122 and Tiika, roots. Dear Friend James, op 11-12-2004 04:49 schreef buddhatrue op buddhatrue@y...: >> Vis. XIV, 122 and Tiika >> It is said that kamma does not produce retention that is more > outstanding >> (more superior, ukka.t.thara) than itself. Mahaa-kusala citta with > two >> roots, for example, does not produce retention with three roots. > (See >> Expositor, p. 356, which gives opinions of different teachers.) > > Could you explain more what this means? What are the root causes > and how are they influenced by kamma? N: Roots, hetus. I quote from Ven. Nyanaponika, the Roots of good and evil http://www.geocities.com/ekchew.geo/rootsofgoodandevilC.html: end quote. Kusala kamma has different degrees. It is always accompanied by non-greed (alobha) and non-hatred (adosa), and it may or may not be accompanied by wisdom. When you give something you may do so with the understanding that giving is wholesome and that kusala brings its corresponding result. Or someone who has never heard the Buddha's teaching gives, but without this understanding. You may chant Pali in the Temple without understanding the meaning, or you may have learnt what it means and chant with understanding of the texts. There are many other factors that make kusala kamma strong or less strong. You may have hesitation in giving and then prompt yourself to give, or someone else may urge you. Then kamma is called prompted. It is stronger when you spontaneously give with your whole heart. Then there are still other factors. When you perform a deed there are many cittas involved before and after it. When you do a good deed, helping someone, there may be unwholesome thoughts afterwards: look how good I am, or, I hope others like me, etc. This will influence the result of the good deed, it conditions it to be less superior. You like to give but you are impatient preparing the materials, wrapping up the gifts without care, or you afterwards have thoughts of stinginess: it is more expensive than I thought. Results of kamma: When you are born, the first citta, rebirth-consciousness is citta that is result of kamma. We are born as a human, and in this case rebirth-consciousness is a wholesome result. One may be reborn with roots, namely with two roots: non-greed and non-hate, or with three roots, then there is wisdom as well. This influences your whole life, you have more possibilities to develop wisdom. The roots with cittas that are result are not active, one can see them as passive, as reflection in a mirror. Vis. text: Associated dhammas: this includes the roots accompanying the citta. Thus, kamma with three roots that is superior can produce result with three roots. Then there is no difference in the associated dhammas, but, they are passive. Degrees of kamma: ============== I quote from my former Vis. studies some passages: Kusala kamma that is unprompted, not induced, is stronger than kusala kamma that is induced, performed by a citta that has some hesitation. As we have seen in the section on kusala citta: But it is not so that unprompted kusala kamma must necessarily produce sahetuka vipaakacitta (resultant citta with roots) that is unprompted. We read in the Commentary to the Abhidhammattha Sangaha (Topics of Abhidhamma, p. 193, 194) that excellent kusala kamma with three roots produces rebirth with three roots and that inferior kusala kamma with three roots and excellent kusala kamma with two roots produces rebirth with two roots. Kusala kamma performed by kusala citta that is with wisdom, accompanied by pleasant feeling and unprompted does not necessarily produce rebirth-consciousness that is vipaakacitta with wisdom, accompanied by pleasant feeling and unprompted. The reason is that kusala kamma is of different degrees and they all produce their results accordingly. There is excellent kusala kamma and inferior kusala kamma. When kusala citta with wisdom performs kusala kamma, the wisdom or understanding can be of different degrees. There may be understanding that kusala brings its result accordingly, or understanding of the degree of insight that realizes kusala as non-self. Or kusala kamma may be performed without understanding, depending on conditions. It depends on many conditions what type of kusala citta arises at a particular moment. Different opinions of teachers are quoted by Buddhaghosa (Expositor (II, p. 358 and following). When there are other opinions he mentions them. He is matter of fact in his conclusion: He quotes also from three Elders: He then goes on analysing the different opinions very carefully. Nina. 39680 From: m. nease Date: Sat Dec 11, 2004 11:57am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Sarah: "One path" [Sukin]n Hi Howard, ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Thursday, December 09, 2004 4:15 PM Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Sarah: "One path" [Sukin]n >> I've given this some thought and this is how it seems to me: Cetasikas >> such >> as phassa and vedanaa don't infect and are not infected. Because they're >> universal they can arise with cittas that are defiled by akusala >> cetasikas >> such as moha and lobha etc. So as I see it it is the citta that is >> defiled, >> not the cetasikas (though the defilements are cetasikas). >> > ------------------------------------------- > Howard: > Your thoughts on this are interesting, Mike, but I'm not certain I > agree. You are saying that it is the citta that is defiled due to certain > cetasikas being defiled, but not the phassa or vedana. Not quite--some cetasikas are defilements (as opposed to defiled), but not phassa or vedanaa. > Now, there are two senses to > 'citta'. Yes--and a lot more, also-- > One of these senses is vi~n~nana, the "awareness operation". Now, > vi~n~nana I *do* see as infected in the non-arahant, because, for such a > "being" > it is a knowing that is infected by the sense of subjectivity (or knowing > subject/agent). This sounds right, As I see it, any vi~n~naa.na would be necessarily defiled by at least latent kilesa(s) (all of which are cetasikas of course)--the 'sense of subjectivity (or knowing subject/agent)' doesn't enter into it at all, as I see it. Of course I could well be wrong--I'd be interested in any support for this from the Paali texts. > But vi~n~nana is but one link of D.O., and as far as "infection" is > concerned, it, like all the other links, performs a store-and-forward (or > transmission) function - it is a carrier. If you mean that phassa and vedanaa occuring in pa.ticcasamuppaada must arise with at least latent defilements, I agree (because pa.ticcasamuppaada doesn't occur for an arahant). > Because of the atta-infection > tranmitted from avijja through sankhara into vi~n~nana, it cascades from > there through > all the subsequent links of D.O. chain. If by 'atta-infection' you mean 'self view' (attadi.t.thi) I don't think it's necessarily present in each link. I've always felt that 'self' comes in at links nine and ten-- 9. Upadana paccaya bhavo: through Clinging is conditioned the process of kamma-formations and becoming (kammabhava and Upapattibhava). 10. Bhava paccaya jati: through the process of kamma formation (kammabhava) is conditioned Rebirth. Not sure though-- > The other sense is of "mindstate". But a mindstate is not a > paramattha > dhamma. It is a collection of co-occuring phenomena - citta, cetasikas, > and > maybe a rupa as arammana, which means that a citta is not a direct element > of > experience. To say that it is infected is just a manner of speaking, where > it > is actually the dhammas that underlie it which are infected. I like the way you've put this and think I agree, now that I see (I think) what you mean. By my reading of the texts 'citta' sometimes refers to 'mind' (or your 'mindstate') in the conventional sense. In this sense, saying that it's 'infected' is a reasonable expression, I think, though I guess I prefer 'defiled' just from habit. Thanks again for the interesting discussion. mike 39681 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Dec 11, 2004 0:21pm Subject: Re: quiz answers- Phil (was Re: [dsg] 'Cetasikas' study corner 70- Perception/Sa~n~naa (q)) Hello Phil: I am glad you try to answer. I have to check myself as to the answers. op 11-12-2004 14:26 schreef plnao op plnao@j...: . What does it > mean to say that sanna "marks" an object? I know the metaphor of > the carpenter marking the wood. That I can understand. But how > sanna marks an object. N: We can say, it is figurative,: memorize. Like Pali words we try to memorize, so that we remember later on. But we can also say: mark or remember, using the two expressions. Ph: ii When we see a house, through which doorway does saññå >> perform its function? > > When we see a "house", rather than a visible object, there is a > concept, not a reality. So I guess the mind door? N: Right. Cittas which think of concepts arise in a mind-door process. Ph: iii When we mistake something for something else, how can >> there still be saññå at such a moment? > > I look out the window and see a huge full moon in the sky. There > is a concept. Sanna marks it. Then I realize it is a lightbulb hanging from > the balcony roof. Sanna marks it. It doesn't matter which one is > really the moon, and which is the lightbulb. They're both concepts. > Just taking a wild shot here. N: Excellent. In hotels A. Sujin used to ask us: is it a fake plant or a real plant. We may take it for real. But in both cases there is likely to be perversity of sañña. Ph: iv When we recognize a house, can there be perversion of >> saññå? > If we think it is something that will last, is permanent, there > is a perversion of perception. N: Excellent. But there is perversity of sañña with each akusala citta. Ph: Just as if we see something > foul (human body) and believe it to be fair. ... A pendant hung enticingly > at the top of her cleavage. The pendant said > "come, reflect on my beauty, and that > of those that lie just below." > I reflected instead on the foulness of the > body to keep my mind from "going there" any further. It > was quite effective. It helped me to connect with her in > a more wholesome way, a more helpful way for both of us. N: You made me laugh, you really have a great sense of humor. Ph: Can the sotåpanna think of concepts and recognize people >> and things? > > Sure. He or she still has lobha, a lot of lobha, so can mistake > that which is foul for that which is fair. The sotapanna is rid > of doubt, and self-view, and he can no longer have lobha or > dosa of a strength that could cause a transgression, but > there is still clinging. N: Also the Buddha recognized Ananda and Sariputta. >> vi Give examples of akusala saññå. > Ph: "To hold that in dukka there is non-dukkha" Let's say I go > to a baseball game and drink lots of beer. Sanna does not > mark the beer correctly, so there is not the correct > perception of dukkha. N: When we speak of dukkha, I think of the truth of dukkha: impermanent, not worth clinging to. I do not take dukkha in a conventional way, as a situation with beer drinking. Akusala sañña: with each akusala citta, with akusala kamma through body, speech and mind. The akusala citta experiences an object and sañña marks or recognizes it at that moment. Ph:>> vii How can one develop 'perception of impermanence' (anicca >> saññå)? > Patience. Cultivating panna. Knowing realities as they > appear through the six doors. N: Yes, see my other post to you. Patience is wholesome energy. I appreciate your answers, Phil. Nina. 39682 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Dec 11, 2004 0:21pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Phra Dhammadharo Hello Phil, You are too kind. Besides, I am older now: 76 :-)) I am not so constant at present realities as you think. I have to learn. But I do not doubt about the right way to take. Now about the late Phra Dhammadharo: sati once in a life time. I knew him and he had such a strong way of expressing himself, in order to push people a bit ahead, like a shock therapy. We should see this in the context of his speech, but you can't now, he passed away. He became a layman, and then he did not use such forceful expressions. We cannot count sati, we cannot say it has to be such or such, or only once. But he wanted to show that sati is valuable, but don't cling. It can be accumulated. We should not be impatient and wish for it, with an idea of self. He wanted to convey this message. I like your dialogue with Jon. Nina. op 11-12-2004 12:38 schreef plnao op plnao@j...: > I always am so inspired when Nina is so constant, so undoubting about the > importance > of present realities. When I am her age, will I be so courageous, or will I > waver and > hedge my bets and grasp at comforting views that conceal a subtle clinging > to eternalsm? > (I know, 75 is not so old...) 39683 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Dec 11, 2004 0:21pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Dhamma Thread ( 166 ) Dear Htoo and Phil, also maha-vipaka citta with pleasant feeling can perform the function of retention. I find all the details about feeling arising with retention very complicated. I have been struggling with it. So many intricate conditions are operating. Nina. op 11-12-2004 12:43 schreef htootintnaing op htootintnaing@y...: > Another function is tadarammana function or retention function. When > javana cittas are all somanassa, then tadarammana cittas have to be > somanassa. If santirana cittas have to arise as tadarammana cittas, > then they will be somanassa santirana in this case. 39684 From: m. nease Date: Sat Dec 11, 2004 0:39pm Subject: Re: Di.t.thijukamma, was Re: [dsg] Sanna/Ken O Hi Nina and Sarah, ----- Original Message ----- > --- "m. nease" wrote: >> > Nibbaana arises for only one moment, I think (when 'it' would >> naturally be >> > 'marked' by sa~n~naa as that is one of sa~n~naa's functions)--I don't >> see >> > why the reviewing after nibbaana might not take a concept (the memory >> of >> > nibbaana?) as an object--but I really don't know. >> N: I think this is what Sarah and I discussed: not so classifiable >> object: >> navattabbamaarama.na. >> Thus, we cannot say it is a concept, it is reality, but reviewed >> afterwards >> by kaamaavacara citta with pañña, not directly experienced by lokuttara >> citta. I should verify this with Sarah. > ... > S: Yes. A reality. The same characteristic experienced by these > kaamaavacara cittas with panna. Also the defilements eradicated etc. It's > not thinking. K.Sujin says (and I'm pretty sure I've read it in Dispeller > too) that when navattabbamaarama.na is understood with this first example, > the other examples can be understood, such as how panna undestands sense > objects or namas just fallen away etc etc. Mike, see > 'navattabbamaarama.na' in UP. It can refer to realities by way of > navattabbaraarama.na, as in these examples, or to concepts as in nimitta > experienced by jhanas etc. Right Sarah, thanks for this, at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/32619. Very interesting and useful I think--clears up a lot of minute but important questions. > p.s Mike, have you heard anything of particular interest on the India > recordings? Nothing to single out as yet-- > Can you listen to these Buddhists while you do your Nudist work;-) No trouble at all--though I do find that reflecting on Dhamma tends to diminish my interest in the subject matter--temporarily, of course...! mike 39685 From: plnao Date: Sat Dec 11, 2004 1:47pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Phra Dhammadharo Hello Nina, and all > Now about the late Phra Dhammadharo: sati once in a life time. I knew him > and he had such a strong way of expressing himself, in order to push people > a bit ahead, like a shock therapy. Yes, there is always some resistance when I read that interview/talk ("Be Here Now"- available at abhidhamma.org) But as I said, it's always good for me to read it, because he does make a very compelling case and what he says is difficult to disregard. He must have been a very stimulating person to talk to. >We should see this in the context of his > speech, but you can't now, he passed away. He became a layman, and then he > did not use such forceful expressions. We cannot count sati, we cannot say > it has to be such or such, or only once. But he wanted to show that sati is > valuable, but don't cling. It can be accumulated. We should not be impatient > and wish for it, with an idea of self. He wanted to convey this message. You know, I think this is a very important point. When I first came across your books, and the above-mentionned Bhante, and K Sujin, I struggled with this notion of the rarity of sati. You remember I asked about it quite often, comparing the idea of such rarity with other teachers such as Ajahn Chah, who say sati should be maintained as constantly as possible. Gradually, those questions have died down. I see that the point is patience. It's very helpful. I'm afraid many people don't get that, and see pessimism. But if the message were rephrased in a more comforting way, it's helpful power would be lost. I feel grateful that I "got" it. Sati can be accumulated. It is accumulated. That is enough to be encouraged by. > I like your dialogue with Jon. Thanks Nina. And good luck for your father's birthday concert preparations. 104! Metta, Phil 39686 From: Date: Sat Dec 11, 2004 4:54pm Subject: Re: Freedom: a Concept! (Re: A Drop More Re: [dsg] The Problem of Relations) Howard: "HOWEVER ... if one tells people that because nations, chariots, and persons are pa~n~natti, they are nothing at all and/or they are permanent, we are far more greatly misleading those people." Hi Howard and Nina, I agree. I think it is probably good to recognize the impermanence of conventional realities. The only draw back is that nations, chariots, and persons etc. can't be experienced directly so in that case the tilakkhana doesn't lead to path consciousness. I was only making the rather nit-picky point that impermanence etc. can be apprehended as a characteristic of concepts. Larry 39687 From: m. nease Date: Sat Dec 11, 2004 5:55pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: kusala and akusala. Hi Nina, ----- Original Message ----- From: "Nina van Gorkom" To: Sent: Saturday, December 11, 2004 11:15 AM Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: kusala and akusala. Khun Sujin does not teach a Dhamma of despair and indolence. She also refers to the sutta, here often quoted: do not long for the past, that has gone, the future has not come yet, but be aware of this or that dhamma at the present. I do not know my past, I do not know the future. There is this very moment and I should not be lazy but have energy to develop understanding of all that appears one at a time through the six doors. Of what use is it to think of: can I or can I not attain in this life? It will not help me, it is only, only thinking. It is great that she reminds us that worry is *only thinking*, a conditioned mental element. That is all. If I would not know this I would attach great importance to my worry and my thinking. Even though I do not see a spectacular progress (and that would be an idea of my progress!!) I still have confidence in the Way and I am happy and grateful that I have the chance of hearing the Dhamma, even after many centuries after the Buddha's parinibbana. Nina. Heartfelt thanks for these thoughtful corrections of misinterpretations of Khun Sujin's efforts. It would be unfortunate if anyone were mislead by misconceptions and/or misrepresentations of her words. mike 39688 From: kenhowardau Date: Sat Dec 11, 2004 7:00pm Subject: Freedom: a Concept! (Re: A Drop More Re: [dsg] The Problem of Relations) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, LBIDD@w... wrote: > Howard: "HOWEVER ... if one tells people that because nations, chariots, > and persons are pa~n~natti, they are nothing at all and/or they are > permanent, we are far more greatly misleading those people." > > Hi Howard and Nina, > > I agree. I think it is probably good to recognize the impermanence of > conventional realities. Hi Howard and Larry, You could be right, but I don't see why. For example, scientists say you and I are made of stardust. That is, the elements that compose our bodies have been in existence since they were created in a star's nuclear reactor ten or more billion years ago. Is stardust impermanent? I suppose it will eventually decay, but so what? The realisation of that sort impermanence is hardly life changing. ------------------------------------ L: > The only draw back is that nations, chariots, > and persons etc. can't be experienced directly so in that case the > tilakkhana doesn't lead to path consciousness. > ------------------------------------- The tilakkhana of what? Of nations, chariots and persons? According to whose Dhamma, do concepts have tilakkhana? ------------------------- L: > I was only making the rather nit-picky point that impermanence etc. can > be apprehended as a characteristic of concepts. > ------------------------- Oh, I see. "Impermanence" can be deduced by seeing that the concepts of today aren't exactly the concepts of yesterday (discounting stardust and the like). But that impermanence is not anicca, is it? We might *call* it a characteristic, but it isn't anything real: it is just a logical conclusion. The characteristics (anicca, dukkha and anatta) that the Buddha taught are real - their existence owes nothing to logical conclusions. Ken H 39689 From: Date: Sat Dec 11, 2004 8:45pm Subject: Re: Freedom: a Concept! (Re: A Drop More Re: [dsg] The Problem of Relations) Hi Ken H, Re: L: "I agree. I think it is probably good to recognize the impermanence of conventional realities." K: "You could be right, but I don't see why." L: Your family is impermanent, your friends are impermanent, your mentors are impermanent, your health is impermanent, your wealth is impermanent, your job is impermanent, your possessions are impermanent, your entertainment is impermanent, anything you enjoy is impermanent. These are all conventional realities. Don't you think it would be a good idea to recognize that they are impermanent? Larry 39690 From: Date: Sat Dec 11, 2004 4:54pm Subject: Re: Freedom: a Concept! (Re: A Drop More Re: [dsg] The Problem of Relations) In a message dated 12/11/2004 8:49:46 PM Pacific Standard Time, LBIDD@w... writes: L: Your family is impermanent, your friends are impermanent, your mentors are impermanent, your health is impermanent, your wealth is impermanent, your job is impermanent, your possessions are impermanent, your entertainment is impermanent, anything you enjoy is impermanent. These are all conventional realities. Don't you think it would be a good idea to recognize that they are impermanent? Larry Hi Larry That's exactly right and not only that...the way you state it above is very often the way the Buddha taught it. TG 39691 From: Egbert Date: Sat Dec 11, 2004 10:36pm Subject: False Identification of Paramattha Dhammas and Realities (Re: [dsg] Conce... I find this a very interesting discussion, Jon, Howard and everyone, The things you have written for further consideration, Jon, have started to bear their fruit, and I have a number of questions. But I'll ask just the one for the moment, time being a limiting factor. > > 1. 'Dhammas' as 'realities' > The term 'dhammas' has many meanings, but in this context (i.e., as the object of insight development) it means things that 'bear their own characteristic'. Visible object and sound, when experienced, have the same characteristic/s for all beings at all times, and in this sense they are 'absolute'. I am wondering about your usage of the terms "absolute" and "same". In the way I would use the terms, no thing can be the same as an absolute, and if it were, it would render the absolute relative. Am I misreading your usage? And what is to be said about the visual experiences of a colour- blind being and a not colour blind being sitting in a room with every surface painted red? I can see that whatever is experienced individually is absolutely experienced, but in which way are their experiences the same? Kind Regards Herman 39692 From: Bhikkhu Samahita Date: Sat Dec 11, 2004 9:35pm Subject: Ultimate Facts ... !!! Friends: Ultimately Advantageous Truths: Seeing that All States is Changing & immediately Passing and therefore ultimately a surely Disappointing & Frustrating Loss & consequently furthermore neither-me-nor-mine-nor-any-self is the most intelligent & advantageous form of Ultra-Realism, since it releases all Craving & relinquishes all even subtle Glinging... This same craving & clinging is the very core cause of all Misery! Knowing & being assured of that Nothing really is Worth Clinging to stirs & inspires to train thoroughly, since all will eventually vanish! Whatever do Develop, will also Decay... Whatever do Arise, will also Cease... Whatever do Begin, will also End... Whoever is born, will also Die... The Buddha, Dhamma & Sangha is thus the only real Refuge...!!! The Noble 8-fold Way is thus the only real Escape...!!! Nibbana is thus the only real Safety...!!! Friendship is the Greatest ! Bhikkhu Samahita, Sri Lanka. 39693 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Dec 12, 2004 2:05am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Phra Dhammadharo, Phil, Herman. Hello Phil (and Herman at the end), op 11-12-2004 22:47 schreef plnao op plnao@j...:> what he says is difficult to disregard. He must have been a very > stimulating person to talk to. N: He explained Dhamma very clearly and lively, you do not forget it what he said, Azita will agree. He was very kind and generous, and this appeared more when he had become a layman. Of course there has to be a certain distance between bhikkhu and laypeople. Ph: I see > that the > point is patience. It's very helpful. I'm afraid many people don't get that, > and see pessimism. But if the message were rephrased in a more comforting way, it's > helpful power would be lost. I feel grateful that I "got" it. > Sati can be accumulated. It is accumulated. That is enough to be encouraged > by. N: In India we talked about imitation patience and false patience. Kh. Sujin remarked that patience is viriya, energy. Patience, khanti, is not a separate cetasika, but it describes a wholesome quality. It is certainly not a passive, indolent waiting for sati or an imitation patience. How difficult to rightly understand what Kh Sujin and also Phra Dhammadharo said. I am glad you got it. We first dislike it, we are not ready for it yet, but after considering more we see the value. I spoke to Kh. Sujin about my worry concerning Lodewijk's health I had during this year. She said: it is only a nama, a kind of thinking. I disliked this and mentioned later on that it felt like a cold shower. You have to swallow and speak about something you take to heart and then you have to hear this. But after considering I found it most helpful. We find our problems so important and get drowned in the ocean of concepts. But there is the island of Dhamma. Worry is just a kind of thinking, and it can be realized as such. You have problems and everybody has. If you would tell Kh Sujin she would answer the same: just a kind of thinking, it is conditioned and already past. Is it not true that we make it very big and important? What she says is deep, it is wise, it is most effective. The same when Lodewijk cannot accept: there is no Nina. He finds it clearer now but he says that some explanations are necessary. Kh Sujin said: Is seeing Nina, is hearing Nina? To which dhamma does one cling? One only clings to the name. Bitter medicine! As to sickness, Lodewijk just read the Sutta about Nakulapitar (S.N. III): how is the body sick but the mind is not sick. B.T.W. India was very good for his health, he started eating more. As I said, we shall go again to India, inspite of the bodily disconfort. Ph: Thanks Nina. And good luck for your father's birthday concert preparations. > 104! N: Thank you for your thoughtfulness. The dog likes the music so much, and then he starts to go near me and pushes my music stand, so that the book falls down. (Hey Herman: Music. I thought of you, and see, there you are. Nice to see you) Rehearsing today with my nephews. Nina. 39694 From: sarah abbott Date: Sun Dec 12, 2004 2:38am Subject: ‘Cetasikas' study corner 71- Volition/cetanaa (a) Dear Friends, 'Cetasikas' by Nina van Gorkom http://www.vipassana.info/cetasikas.html http://www.zolag.co.uk/ Questions, comments and different views welcome;-) ========================================== [Ch.4 Volition(cetanaa]] ***** Cetanå, volition, is another cetasika among the ‘universals’, the seven cetasikas which accompany every citta. Cetanå is often translated as ‘volition’, but we should not be misled by the conventional term which designates the reality of cetanå. Cetanå accompanies, together with phassa (contact), vedanå (feeling), saññå (remembrance) and the other ‘universals’, all cittas of the four jåtis. Thus, cetanå accompanies kusala citta, akusala citta, vipåkacitta and kiriyacitta. When we intend to steal or when we make the resolution not to kill, it is evident that there is cetanå. However, also when we are seeing or hearing, and even when we are asleep, there is cetanå since it accompanies every citta. There is no citta without cetanå. ***** [Ch.4 Volition(cetanaa) to be contd] Metta, Sarah ====== 39695 From: sarah abbott Date: Sun Dec 12, 2004 2:58am Subject: Re: [dsg] Letter to B.Bodhi-'The Jhânas and the Lay Disciple ..' Dear Friends, Yesterday I received a reply from B.Bodhi to the letter I copied to the list recently: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/39500 Comments are most welcome as usual. [His postscript is not relevant to this discussion, but after some dithering, I’m keeping it in the message here as 'pabhassaram cittam' (luminous mind) has also been a very popular topic here and I’ll repost a link to his earlier letter when I find it to send back to him. (Meanwhile, newcomers to DSG may like to look under ‘luminous’ in UP).] ***** From B.Bodhi: ….. >Dear Sarah, Thank you for taking the time and trouble to summarize the main points of the discussion. The point format makes it easy to follow. Your comments represent a "synthetic view," that is, an interpretation that synthesizes sutta, Abhidhamma, and commentaries, along with the mode of interpreting these developed by K. Sujin. In my paper, I wanted to confine myself to the strict standpoint of the Nikayas. To do so is not to devalue the contributions the other sources make to our understanding, but to limit one's sources to those that can reasonably be assigned to the earliest period of Buddhist textual composition. On that basis I do not see any text that explicitly admits the possibility of attaining the last two stages of realization, non-return and arahantship, without the first jhana as a minimum. One can find ways to affirm such attainments as rational possibilities, as you have done, but to do so one has to apply to the texts certain presuppositions and modes of interpretation that cannot be derived from the suttas themselves. I wouldn't reject them, and in fact I respect the commentarial recognition of a dry-visioned arahant. This type of arahant is also admitted in the North Indian Abhidharma system, under the name "dry-wisdom arhat"; apparently, since they both use the word 'dry', they likely derive from a common source and thus perhaps go back to a period before the two systems became divided. But the fact remains that such a type does not explicitly appear either under that name or under some synonymous term or description in the Pali Nikayas. There are also no texts that say that the sotapannas and sakadagamis don't have any jhana. This, again, is a conclusion that has to be derived by reasoning from the texts. But the fact that the suttas do not routinely ascribe jhanas to them gives strong support to this conclusion, as do certain other considerations militate (particularly, the fact that they take rebirth in the human and deva worlds, which seems unlikely for one who has mastered the jhanas). Thanks for the invitation to provide support if I return to Hong Kong. I wasn't contemplating another Far Eastern journey in the near future, but I'll let you know if by chance I come that way. With metta, BB. P.S. I had meant to ask you: A couple of years ago, I think it was in the course of the last trip -- of late 2002 -- I made to the Far East, I had sent you a letter commenting on the 'pabhassaram cittam' (luminous mind) idea. I seem to have accidentally deleted that file from my hard drive, probably thinking it was just a routine letter with nothing of continuing relevance. Sometimes I get inquiries about my understanding of this phrase, and it would be useful if I could have that letter on hand so I don't have to repeat myself. Nowadays, to save time, I just state my view in a single sentence, but if I had the file I could give a fuller account. Would you happen to have that letter, and if so, could you send it back to me? >Thanks. [end B.Bodhi's letter] ***** --- sarah abbott wrote: > As most people will recall, some time ago I posted an article by Bhikkhu > Bodhi: > “The Jhânas and the Lay Disciple According to the Pâli Suttas” > I’m not aware that it has been published and may still be a draft, but > it > can be seen here: > http://www.saigon.com/~anson/ebud/ebdha267.htm 39696 From: connieparker Date: Sun Dec 12, 2004 7:01am Subject: Re: [dsg] Letter to B.Bodhi-'The Jhânas and the Lay Disciple ..' Hi, Friends, B Bodhi: There are also no texts that say that the sotapannas and sakadagamis don't have any jhana. This, again, is a conclusion that has to be derived by reasoning from the texts. But the fact that the suttas do not routinely ascribe jhanas to them gives strong support to this conclusion, as do certain other considerations militate (particularly, the fact that they take rebirth in the human and deva worlds, which seems unlikely for one who has mastered the jhanas). Connie: I know the dictionary says they take human rebirth, but can anyone name one who was? Aside from the momentary life goes on before cuti rebirth, I mean. I guess the right kinds of jhana / factors just develop faster / naturally at a certain level of understanding. thank you. 39697 From: rjkjp1 Date: Sun Dec 12, 2004 7:01am Subject: Re: [dsg] Letter to B.Bodhi-'The Jhânas and the Lay Disciple ..' --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, connieparker wrote: > > > Connie: I know the dictionary says they take human rebirth, but can > anyone name one who was? Aside from the momentary life goes on before > cuti rebirth, I mean. > ======== Dear Connie, From memory all the sotapannas and sakadagamis in the tipitaka go to the deva world only. Howver it is said that Sakka will one day be born as a human. Robertk 39698 From: htootintnaing Date: Sun Dec 12, 2004 10:56am Subject: Dhamma Thread (171) Dear Dhamma Friends, There are 89 cittas or 89 mental states or 89 states of consciousness. Among them 18 cittas are ahetuka cittas or rootless consciousness. 71 cittas are sahetuka cittas or they arise with root dhamma such as lobha, dosa, moha, alobha, adosa, and amoha. 2 cittas are ekahetuka cittas, 22 cittas are dvihetuka cittas, 47 cittas are tihetuka cittas. Eka means 'one'. Ekahetuka cittas have only one root and it is moha root. It is ignorance. Tihetuka cittas have three roots. They are alobha, adosa, and amoha. These 3 roots can arise together. But there are 22 dvihetuka cittas. They have 2 roots. These 2 roots have exact combination. 1. lobha + moha 2. dosa + moha 3. alobha + adosa Lobha and dosa never arise together. Kusala and akusala never arise together. So far we have discussed on 18 ahetuka cittas or rootless consciousness, 2 ekahetuka cittas or 2 single-rooted consciousness, 8 dvihetuka cittas or lobha cittas, 2 dvihetuka cittas of dosa cittas. There still left 12 dvihetuka cittas. These 12 dvihetuka cittas are kama sobhana cittas and they are nana vippayutta cittas. Nana is pannidriya cetasika and it is also amoha root. As there is no panna, then there will be only 2 roots in these beautiful consciousness. They are alobha and adosa roots. They are 4 mahakusala cittas, 4 mahavipaka cittas, and 4 mahakiriya cittas. 1. somanassa saha gatam nana vippayuttam asankharika mahakusala citta 2. somanassa saha gatam nana vippayuttam sasankharika mahakusala citta 3. upekkha saha gatam nana vippayuttam asankharika mahakusala citta 4. upekkha saha gatam nana vippayuttam sasankharika mahakusala citta 5.somanassa saha gatam nana vipayuttam asankharika mahavipaka citta 6.somanassa saha gatam nana vippayuttam sasankharika mahavipaka citta 7. upekkha saha gatam nana vippayuttam asankharika mahavipaka citta 8. upekkha saha gatam nana vipaayuttam sasankharika mahavipaka citta 9. somanassa saha gatam nana vippayuttam asankharika mahakiriya citta 10.somanassa saha gatam nana vippayuttam sasankharika mahakiriya citta 11. upekkha saha gatam nana vippayuttam asankharika mahakiriya citta 12. upekkha saha gatam nana vippayuttam sasankharika mahakiriya citta As all these 12 cittas do not have panna cetasika, and they just have alobha and adosa hetus, they are called dvihetuka cittas. May you all be free from suffering. With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing PS: Any comments are welcome and any queries are welcome and they will be valuable. If there is unclarity of any meaning, please just give a reply to any of these posts. 39699 From: htootintnaing Date: Sun Dec 12, 2004 11:06am Subject: Dhamma Thread (172) Dear Dhamma Friends, 18 cittas are ahetuka cittas, 2 cittas are ekahetuka cittas, 22 cittas are dvihetuka cittas and 47 cittas are tihetuka cittas. Altogether there are 89 cittas. 18 cittas do not have any root from 6 roots. 6 roots are lobha, dosa, moha, alobha, adosa, and amoha. 2 cittas just have one root. It is moha root. And they are called ekahetuka cittas or single-rooted consciousness. 22 cittas have two roots. There are 3 different combination of roots for double-rooted cittas. a) 8 lobha mula cittas ( lobha + moha ) b) 2 dosa mula cittas ( dosa + moha ) c)12 nana vippayutta cittas ( alobha + adosa ) ---------- 22 dvihetuka cittas. 47 cittas have 3 roots. These 3 roots are alobha, adosa and amoha or panna. They are a) 12 kamavacara nana sampayutta cittas b) 15 rupavacara cittas c) 12 arupavacara cittas d) 8 lokuttara cittas ------- 47 tihetuka cittas All these 47 cittas have three roots. These 3 roots are alobha, adosa and amoha or panna. In summary, there are 18 ahetuka cittas, 2 ekahetuka cittas, 22 dvihetuka cittas and 47 tihetuka cittas. So far we have discussed on vedana classification and hetu classification on cittas. May you all be free from suffering. With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing PS: Any comments are welcome and any queries are welcome and they will be valuable. If there is unclarity of any meaning, please just give a reply to any of these posts. 39700 From: htootintnaing Date: Sun Dec 12, 2004 11:16am Subject: Re: ‘Cetasikas' study corner 71- Volition/cetanaa (a) Dear Sarah and Nina, Not different view. But I would like to mention one thing here. That cetana is serving as 'sahajata-kamma paccaya'. All cittas have cetana. Each has cetana and this cetana serves as 'sahajata-kamma paccaya'. Once I discussed with Nina regarding cetana. There are 4 kinds of ahara. They are 1.kabballikaara ahara ( some spell 'kabballinkara' ) 2.phassa ahara 3.manosancetana ahara 4.vinnaana ahara In nama-ahara cetana cetasika is included. But I believe this cetana is not all cetana. I mean this cetana which is ahara is not cetana that accompanies any kind of citta. This cetana is confined to only 29 cittas. They are 12 akusala cittas, 8 mahakusala cittas, 5 rupakusala cittas, and 4 arupakusala cittas ( 12 + 8 + 5 + 4 = 29 cittas ). Any thought? With Metta, Htoo Naing ---------------------------------------------------------------------- --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > Dear Friends, > > 'Cetasikas' by Nina van Gorkom > > http://www.vipassana.info/cetasikas.html > http://www.zolag.co.uk/ > > Questions, comments and different views welcome;-) > ========================================== > [Ch.4 Volition(cetanaa]] > ***** > Cetanå, volition, is another cetasika among the `universals', the > seven cetasikas which accompany every citta. Cetanå is often > translated as `volition', but we should not be misled by the > conventional term which designates the reality of cetanå. > > Cetanå accompanies, together with phassa (contact), vedanå (feeling), > saññå (remembrance) and the other `universals', all cittas of the > four jåtis. Thus, cetanå accompanies kusala citta, akusala citta, > vipåkacitta and kiriyacitta. > > When we intend to steal or when we make the resolution not to kill, it is > evident that there is cetanå. However, also when we are seeing or hearing, > and even when we are asleep, there is cetanå since it accompanies every > citta. There is no citta without cetanå. > ***** > [Ch.4 Volition(cetanaa) to be contd] > > Metta, > > Sarah > ====== 39701 From: htootintnaing Date: Sun Dec 12, 2004 11:36am Subject: Dhamma Thread (173) Dear Dhamma Friends, There are 89 cittas. They can be classified into according to their origin or jati or the kind of dhamma. There are akusala dhamma, kusala dhamma and abyakata dhamma. Akusala dhamma give rise to akusala vipaka or 'bad results' and kusala dhamma give rise to kusala vipaka or 'good results'. But abyakata dhamma are dhamma that do not give rise to further effects. These abykata dhamma among cittas are vipaka dhamma and kiriya dhamma. Vipaka are resultant and so there is no further effect arises because of arising of these vipaka dhamma. As it is already cooked, there is nothing to do with further effect. Kiriya dhamma are also abyakata dhamma. Kiriya cittas are cittas of arahats and they are totally free of defilements. Because of this power, there is no further effect because of arising of these kiriya cittas. So 89 cittas can be classified into a) 12 akusala cittas b) 21 kusala cittas c) 36 vipaka cittas d) 20 kiriya cittas --------------------- 89 cittas 12 akusala cittas are 8 lobha cittas, 2 dosa cittas, and 2 moha cittas. 21 kusala cittas are 8 mahakusala cittas, 5 rupakusala cittas, and 4 arupakusala cittas ( 8+5+4= 17 loki kusala cittas ), and 4 lokuttara kusala cittas which are magga cittas. So there are 17 loki kusala and 4 lokuttara kusala cittas altogether 21 kusala cittas. 36 vipaka cittas are 1. 7 ahetuka akusala vipaka cittas 2. 8 ahetuka kusala vipaka cittas 3. 8 sahetuka kusala vipaka cittas ( 8 mahavipaka cittas ) 4. 5 rupavipaka cittas 5. 4 arupavipaka cittas( 7+8+8+5+4= 32 loki vipaka cittas ) 6. 4 lokuttara vipaka cittas ( 4 phala cittas ) ------------- 36 vipaka cittas ( 32 + 4 = 36 cittas ) 20 kiriya cittas are 1. 3 kama ahetuka kiriya cittas 2. 8 kama sahetuka kiriya cittas 3. 5 rupakiriya cittas 4. 4 arupakiriya cittas ------- 20 kiriya cittas If cittas are counted as 121 total cittas, then they can be reclassified as a) 12 akusala cittas b) 37 kusala cittas ( 17 loki kusala + 20 lokuttara kusala cittas ) c) 52 vipaka cittas ( 32 loki vipaka + 20 lokuttara vipaka cittas ) d) 20 kiriya cittas ------------------- 121 cittas 20 lokuttara kusala cittas are 20 magga cittas and 20 lokuttara vipaka cittas are 20 phala cittas. There are 5 jhanas and when 4 magga cittas arise in the power of 5 jhanas, there have to be 4 >< 5 = 20 magga cittas. By the same token, 4 phala cittas when arise as the result of 4 magga cittas in the vacinity of 5 jhanas will be 20 phala cittas. May you all be free from suffering. With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing PS: Any comments are welcome and any queries are welcome and they will be valuable. If there is unclarity of any meaning, please just give a reply to any of these posts. 39702 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Sun Dec 12, 2004 11:40am Subject: Re: foundation web links Hi Nina, The active ones are currently: DhammaHome.com - www.dhammahome.com - has just been transitioned to a new server. Presumably the main website maintained in association with the foundation. You will find some materials here. I hope that the materials associated with the foundation from www.buddhadhamma.org will eventually get here. Buddha Dhamma Org - www.buddhadhamma.org -This website is currently not promoted as being associated with the foundation because there is no manpower to maintain it. There are still more English Books on this site that dhammahome, but hopefully, this will change in the future. www.dhammastudyandsupport.com - defunct - just a redirect to dhammahome.com. kom ps: I am not currently receiving email from the group. If you have more questions, please email me directly! 39703 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Dec 12, 2004 0:07pm Subject: Re: Freedom: a Concept! (Re: A Drop More Re: [dsg] The Problem of Relations) Hi Larry, That is an important point. That is why we have to learn first more about the nama elements and rupa elements. Otherwise we are nowhere! A whole of a person does not arise and fall away. Nina. op 12-12-2004 01:54 schreef LBIDD@w... op LBIDD@w...: > The only draw back is that nations, chariots, > and persons etc. can't be experienced directly so in that case the > tilakkhana doesn't lead to path consciousness. 39704 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Dec 12, 2004 0:07pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: latent tendencies. Hi Mike, I like your post but I have just one remark. Latent tendencies do not arise, but perhaps you mean something else here in this context. They condition the arising of akusala cittas. Nina. op 11-12-2004 20:57 schreef m. nease op mlnease@z...: > If you mean that phassa and vedanaa occuring in pa.ticcasamuppaada must > arise with at least latent defilements 39705 From: Date: Sun Dec 12, 2004 7:22am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: latent tendencies. Hi, Nina (and Mike) - In a message dated 12/12/04 3:09:38 PM Eastern Standard Time, vangorko@x... writes: > Hi Mike, > I like your post but I have just one remark. Latent tendencies do not arise, > but perhaps you mean something else here in this context. They condition the > arising of akusala cittas. > Nina. > ============================ Nina, I believe I understand what you mean. On another list I'm engaged in an ongoing discussion of mana as the underlying tendency to sense-of-self. The understanding there is that sense-of-self arises at various points, always conditioned by mana, the core aspect of avijja. Because of that discussion, I'm particularly interested in the matter of underlying tendencies (anusaya). In any case, when you say that underlying tendencies do not arise, I do believe I understand what you mean, but the formulation troubles me a bit. The idea of anything other than nibbana existing but never having arisen troubles me. Might an alternative formulation be that underlying tendencies have no very first arising, but are continually self-replicating (or repeating) until finally uprooted upon arahanthood? 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) 39706 From: Date: Sun Dec 12, 2004 7:55am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: latent tendencies. In a message dated 12/12/2004 12:24:52 PM Pacific Standard Time, upasaka@a... writes: Nina, I believe I understand what you mean. On another list I'm engaged in an ongoing discussion of mana as the underlying tendency to sense-of-self. The understanding there is that sense-of-self arises at various points, always conditioned by mana, the core aspect of avijja. Because of that discussion, I'm particularly interested in the matter of underlying tendencies (anusaya). In any case, when you say that underlying tendencies do not arise, I do believe I understand what you mean, but the formulation troubles me a bit. The idea of anything other than nibbana existing but never having arisen troubles me. Might an alternative formulation be that underlying tendencies have no very first arising, but are continually self-replicating (or repeating) until finally uprooted upon arahanthood? With metta, Howard Hi Howard, Nina, and Mike I'm assuming (a dangerous endeavor) that Nina means that latent tendencies don't arise "in that instance" because they have already arisen, they are already present, due to previous conditions. I hope Nina didn't mean that they didn't arise at some point. All conditioned things of course are subject to arising and dissolution and are constantly in the process of transforming (albeit sometimes very slowly from our perspective.) TG 39707 From: Egbert Date: Sun Dec 12, 2004 1:20pm Subject: To all of Nina Hi Nina, Thank you for your kind words. It is nice to be writing again with you and the group. Only yesterday my first boss rang me (I did an apprenticeship in pipe-organ building with him). We have kept in touch over the years, and he played the organ at both my weddings. He is a very competent musician, he played the closing fugue from Klavieruebung III at my last (and final :-)) wedding. To cut a long story short, he asked if I would be willing to regularly tune the reeds of the organ in the local Anglican cathedral, and I said Yes, Yes, Yes!!!! (can you tell I'm excited :-)(I haven't tuned anything for 15 years, but I don't think the ears forget) Now with regards to Nina and Lodewijk, I'm with Lodewijk, and I will not have you negating Nina away :-) In the dhamma, does not experience arise from the coming together of rupa, nama and sense-base? Perhaps it is too scientific, but sense base does not arise in a vacuum, it also requires many other conditions for its arising. Seeing, hearing, touching, tasting, smelling do not occur without the entire complexity of the nervous system, and the nervous system does not function without other support systems. For me sense-base is only shorthand for the entire body, and the body known as Nina is real enough. I agree with you if you mean that the ego Nina is not a substantial entity. For me, the ego is simply the awareness of conflict, a resultant from the conflicting inputs of a body in a world that both supports and undermines that body. So the body in a conflicting world thinks the story of Nina the actor that negotiates through the conflicts. These thoughts are real, but they have no foundation. Nina, the thought, does not, and cannot, do anything. Sorry for preaching :-) Kind Regards Herman > I spoke to Kh. Sujin about my worry concerning Lodewijk's health I had > during this year. She said: it is only a nama, a kind of thinking. I > disliked this and mentioned later on that it felt like a cold shower. You > have to swallow and speak about something you take to heart and then you > have to hear this. But after considering I found it most helpful. We find > our problems so important and get drowned in the ocean of concepts. > But there is the island of Dhamma. Worry is just a kind of thinking, and it > can be realized as such. > You have problems and everybody has. If you would tell Kh Sujin she would > answer the same: just a kind of thinking, it is conditioned and already > past. Is it not true that we make it very big and important? What she says > is deep, it is wise, it is most effective. > The same when Lodewijk cannot accept: there is no Nina. He finds it clearer > now but he says that some explanations are necessary. Kh Sujin said: Is > seeing Nina, is hearing Nina? To which dhamma does one cling? One only > clings to the name. Bitter medicine! > As to sickness, Lodewijk just read the Sutta about Nakulapitar (S.N. III): > how is the body sick but the mind is not sick. B.T.W. India was very good > for his health, he started eating more. As I said, we shall go again to > India, inspite of the bodily disconfort. > Ph: Thanks Nina. And good luck for your father's birthday concert > preparations. > > 104! > N: Thank you for your thoughtfulness. The dog likes the music so much, and > then he starts to go near me and pushes my music stand, so that the book > falls down. (Hey Herman: Music. I thought of you, and see, there you are. > Nice to see you) > Rehearsing today with my nephews. > Nina. 39708 From: m. nease Date: Sun Dec 12, 2004 2:21pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: latent tendencies. Hi Nina, ----- Original Message ----- > op 11-12-2004 20:57 schreef m. nease op mlnease@z...: > >> If you mean that phassa and vedanaa occuring in pa.ticcasamuppaada must >> arise with at least latent defilements From: "Nina van Gorkom" To: Sent: Sunday, December 12, 2004 12:07 PM Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: latent tendencies. > Hi Mike, > I like your post but I have just one remark. Latent tendencies do not > arise, > but perhaps you mean something else here in this context. > They condition the > arising of akusala cittas. Yes, bad wording--let me refer back to the STA Ch. 5, the Process Free briefly: "(91) To one whose death is near, either at the end of the process consciousnesses or at the ceasing of the existence-continuum, the decease consciousness, constituting the conclusion of the present existence, arises and ceases by way of decease. When that has ceased, immediately after it, taking as its object what has been apprehended in the above manner, a mind understood as 'relinking' by virute of its linking different existences, simply arises and proceeds in the new existence. This mind...is generated by a volitional formation appropriately wrapped in the latent defilement of ignorance and rooted in the latent defilement of craving; it is enfolded in its associated dhammas; and as basis, it is the forerunner of conascent [dhammas]." Commentary "Surely it is said that [the volitional formation] is wrapped in the latent defilement of ignorance, and so on, so how can [ignorance and craving] that are conascent with impulsion {javana} have the nature of latent defilements? This is not a problem. Since they too are designated 'latent defilements' because of being like latent defilements, otherwise neither [ignorance and craving] conascent with the unwholesome kamma nor that conascent with craving for existence could be included with [ignorance and craving] conascent with impulsions close to death. "Ignorance occurring as latent in so far as it has not been abandoned is a latent defilement; by a volitional formation wrapped in--enclosed in--that. "That which has the latent defilement of craving as its root, its basis, causing them to act together is rooted in the latent defilement of craving. "By a volitional formation: by a wholesome or unwholesome kamma--the collection of dhammas, beginning with contact, that are conascent with the kamma, or [the volitional formation] conascent with the impulsions close to death; being generated by that. For craving inclines towards an object whose dangers are concealed by ignorance. The afore mentiond formations, which are considered to be 'projecting formations', project; hence it is said: For those going down [into the realms of misfortune], the [volitions] that are born with the formations of ignorance and craving conceal the dangers of objects, inclining and also projecting [those beings towards them]. For others, the unabandoned [formations of ignorance and craving] create concealment and also the inclination, but the projecting formations here are only wholesome..." So would it be more correct to say that, though latent defilements don't arise with phassa and vedanaa, still phassa and vedanaa don't arise without them? mike 39709 From: kenhowardau Date: Sun Dec 12, 2004 3:21pm Subject: Freedom: a Concept! (Re: A Drop More Re: [dsg] The Problem of Relations) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, TGrand458@a... wrote: > In a message dated 12/11/2004 8:49:46 PM Pacific Standard Time, > LBIDD@w... writes: > L: Your family is impermanent, your friends are impermanent, your > mentors are impermanent, your health is impermanent, your wealth is > impermanent, your job is impermanent, your possessions are impermanent, > your entertainment is impermanent, anything you enjoy is impermanent. > These are all conventional realities. Don't you think it would be a good > idea to recognize that they are impermanent? > > Larry > > Hi Larry > > That's exactly right and not only that...the way you state it above is very > often the way the Buddha taught it. Hi Larry and TG, If you explained the question carefully to a six-year-old, he would tell you those things are impermanent. I have never heard anyone claim otherwise. May I ask your views on the profundity of the Buddha's teaching? What is it telling us that we don't already know? Ken H 39710 From: plnao Date: Sun Dec 12, 2004 3:55pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Phra Dhammadharo, Phil, Herman. Hi Nina, and all > N: In India we talked about imitation patience and false patience. Kh. Sujin > remarked that patience is viriya, energy. Patience, khanti, is not a > separate cetasika, but it describes a wholesome quality. It is certainly not > a passive, indolent waiting for sati or an imitation patience. Phil: This is something that Jon mentionned some weeks ago. Patience as energy. It's a helpful way to see it. In any case, there must be heedfulness (appamada) that quality that the Buddha said in at least one sutta is chief to the faculties. There is nothing indolent about being heedful. I guess that "imitation patience" is just sloth and indolence. The energetic patience is related to the results. I think my assertion that many people (and probably most newcomers) to Dhamma are thrown off course by being to attached to results is most definitely true. On the other hand, results with respect to eradicating the kind of gross defilements that lead to transgressions is encouraging, and I think it can be taught in a somehwat prescriptive way to beginners. But the problem is that once progress has been made in one area, there will be conditions for being attached to progress in subtler areas. And that progress is likely to come in the space of lifetimes rather than years. Stress on the more likely. > How difficult to rightly understand what Kh Sujin and also Phra Dhammadharo > said. I am glad you got it. Phil: Sometimes I get it, sometimes there is resistance. It will take time. Reading Samyutta Nikaya on khandas is also always very helpful. It's hard for a thoughtful person to read and reflect in there and not come away with his or her self-view loosened a little. And meditating as well. I am back on the cushion. Spending quality time with my defilements, as I put it. I see how they rise beyond my control. Of course, I can and do see that in daily life as well. Daily life will continue to be where the real action is, so to speak. But vipassana meditation is helpful as a kind of exercise, at the very least. No danger that I will allow harmful expectations to arise related to it. At least I think not. > We first dislike it, we are not ready for it yet, but after considering more > we see the value. Phil: We do, or we don't. I think Abhidhamma and K Sujin are not for everyone. We shouldn't expect them to be for everyone. The Buddha was such a brilliant teacher. He taught according to people's accumulations, as we never tire of repeating. I think I have acumulations for patience. At some point in my mid-20s (20 years ago) I chose a phrase from Matthew as a motto, and it has never left me: "In patience, shall ye possess your soul." Maybe now I would say "In patience, shall you eradicate false notions of your soul" haha In any case, patience is a virtue, as long as it it not used to conceal sloth. > I spoke to Kh. Sujin about my worry concerning Lodewijk's health I had > during this year. She said: it is only a nama, a kind of thinking. I > disliked this and mentioned later on that it felt like a cold shower. Cold showers are unpleasant at the time but leave us refreshed and are known to be good for the health, aren't they? >You > have to swallow and speak about something you take to heart and then you > have to hear this. But after considering I found it most helpful. We find > our problems so important and get drowned in the ocean of concepts. > But there is the island of Dhamma. Worry is just a kind of thinking, and it > can be realized as such. All the stories we create and get caught up in. Yesterday on the subway in Tokyo I saw an advertisement for an energy drink featuring on of my baseball heroes, Ichiro Suzuki! It said "I don't boast about my fatigue" The Japanese for boast is "jiman." "Ji" is self "man" is satisfaction, fullnesss. At work, there are so many students who talk of being tired, or use it as an excuse for not being able to do their homework, etc. As you know, I do it too. I am tired a lot of the time. But everytime I talk about it, I just make it worse. I make a story out of it. I'm not sure if tiredness is a rupa or a nama - Htoo gave me some interesting comments but I'm afraid I can't remember them- but in any case my thinking about it is nama. The worry about a loved one's health is another level of worry, of course. > You have problems and everybody has. If you would tell Kh Sujin she would > answer the same: just a kind of thinking, it is conditioned and already > past. Is it not true that we make it very big and important? What she says > is deep, it is wise, it is most effective. I appreciate hearing it again and again and again and again and again and..... > The same when Lodewijk cannot accept: there is no Nina. He finds it clearer > now but he says that some explanations are necessary. Kh Sujin said: Is > seeing Nina, is hearing Nina? To which dhamma does one cling? One only > clings to the name. Bitter medicine! I remember we talked about this before, after I had that breakthrough insight in which I saw Naomi as dhammas. To be honest, I don't understand why people don't see this more easily. As I said above, if we spend time reflecting on the Buddha's teaching of the khandas, starting with "is form constant or inconstant" and going through feelings, perception, fabrications and consciousness with dukkha and anatta as well, if we just soak in that teaching, how do we come away believing that people are not concepts fabricated by the mind? I still don't understand the controversy, whether we say pannati or not. (It's harder for me to understand that physical objects such as trees are concepts, but that will take more time.) Does that mean that we don't love, treasure, respect people? Of course not! Why should it? It just liberates us from false hopes, false expectations, impossible demands. It frees us to appreciate them more purely in the moment, both are loved ones and acquaintances and strangers. Honestly, I don't understand why that is a problem. But of course if you say to someone who hasn't come into contact with Dhamma that people are just concepts, they will think you are nuts. So be it. As I said above, Abhidhamma is not for everyone, and I'm afraid that applies to Dhamma as a whole. It's healing power is so evident to people that "get it" that we wonder why it hasn't prevailed in the world. It's because of accumulations, or something. I don't know. > As to sickness, Lodewijk just read the Sutta about Nakulapitar (S.N. III): > how is the body sick but the mind is not sick. B.T.W. India was very good > for his health, he started eating more. As I said, we shall go again to > India, inspite of the bodily disconfort. Yes, I like that sutta a lot. It is one of those SN suttas that I was referring to above. "Discern" appears again and again and again in SN. When we discern the true characteristics of the khandas, we are liberated from fear and anxiety. Even at a basic intellectual level, in my opinion. In my case, should I say. Of course the fear and anxiety return again and again. And will. But there are moments of liberation that condition the arising of more to come. That is enough to be very encouraged about, very grateful about. > Ph: Thanks Nina. And good luck for your father's birthday concert > preparations. > > 104! > N: Thank you for your thoughtfulness. The dog likes the music so much, and > then he starts to go near me and pushes my music stand, so that the book > falls down. He must have done something very naughty in a past life! Perhaps he was Mozart. Metta, Phil 39711 From: m. nease Date: Sun Dec 12, 2004 4:00pm Subject: Re: Freedom: a Concept! (Re: A Drop More Re: [dsg] The Problem ofRelations) Hi Ken and Larry, ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Saturday, December 11, 2004 8:45 PM Subject: Re: Freedom: a Concept! (Re: A Drop More Re: [dsg] The Problem ofRelations) > L: "I agree. I think it is probably good to recognize the impermanence > of conventional realities." > > K: "You could be right, but I don't see why." > > L: Your family is impermanent, your friends are impermanent, your > mentors are impermanent, your health is impermanent, your wealth is > impermanent, your job is impermanent, your possessions are impermanent, > your entertainment is impermanent, anything you enjoy is impermanent. > These are all conventional realities. Don't you think it would be a good > idea to recognize that they are impermanent? I think you're both right in my usual way--that is, vohaara- vs. paramattha-sacca subsume this discrepancy to my mind. In the Lokavipatti Sutta e.g.: Gain/loss, status/disgrace, censure/praise, pleasure/pain: these conditions among human beings are inconstant, impermanent, subject to change. Knowing this, the wise person, mindful, ponders these changing conditions. (TB's translation from http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/anguttara/an08-006.html) Most of the items (dhammas?) here are clearly conceptual, I think, and there are many other examples from the suttas of the conceptual consideration of conceptual objects (various beings and so on) with, I think, the aim of a kind of conceptual insight. The great danger, I think, is in mistaking these conceptual considerations and insights for consideration of and insights into paramattha dhammas--the latter being transformative and the former not. Sorry if I have but one string to my bow lately--I just don't feel that the conventional needs to be the enemy of the 'real' or the best the enemy of the good. mike 39712 From: Date: Sun Dec 12, 2004 4:50pm Subject: Re: Freedom: a Concept! (Re: A Drop More Re: [dsg] The Problem of Relations) Ken H: "May I ask your views on the profundity of the Buddha's teaching? What is it telling us that we don't already know?" Hi Ken, Regarding impermanence, he says desiring or even valuing anything that is impermanent leads to dukkha, in one way or another, always. I don't think we really know that and probably are a little afraid to know it. It seems almost inhuman. Plus the tactic of rejecting all pleasure usually hides a gigantic desire for release. In this case the desire is for a concept that will never arise [this may not be in the suttas]. In any case, even though impermanence may be obvious, he repeated that message over and over. Whatever is impermanent is dukkha. Whatever is impermanent and dukkha is not self. Larry 39713 From: Date: Sun Dec 12, 2004 5:02pm Subject: Re: Freedom: a Concept! (Re: A Drop More Re: [dsg] The Problem ofRelations) Mike: "Most of the items (dhammas?) here are clearly conceptual, I think, and there are many other examples from the suttas of the conceptual consideration of conceptual objects (various beings and so on) with, I think, the aim of a kind of conceptual insight. The great danger, I think, is in mistaking these conceptual considerations and insights for consideration of and insights into paramattha dhammas--the latter being transformative and the former not." Hi Mike, Transformation is relative. Noticing the impermanence of a touch sensation probably isn't going to transform anyone's values, but if a loved one dies that impermanence makes a big difference. I think the place to look for potential transformation is where we are clinging the most, or the most habitually, whether the object is concept or reality. A good reality to investigate is clinging itself. Larry 39714 From: Date: Sun Dec 12, 2004 5:09pm Subject: Vism.XIV,123 "The Path of Purification" (Visuddhimagga) Ch. XIV 123. (n) At the end of registration the life-continuum resumes its occurrence. When the [resumed occurrence of the] life-continuum is again interrupted, adverting, etc., occur again, and when the conditions obtain, the consciousness continuity repeats its occurrence as adverting, and next to adverting seeing, etc., according to the law of consciousness, again and again, until the life-continuum of one becoming is exhausted. For the last life-continuum consciousness of all in one becoming is called death (cuti) because of falling (cavanatta) from that [becoming]. So that is of nineteen kinds too [like rebirth-linking and life-continuum]. This is how the occurrence of nineteen kinds of resultant consciousness should be understood as death. 39715 From: Date: Sun Dec 12, 2004 0:32pm Subject: Re: Freedom: a Concept! (Re: A Drop More Re: [dsg] The Problem of Relations) In a message dated 12/12/2004 3:22:09 PM Pacific Standard Time, kenhowardau@y... writes: L: Your family is impermanent, your friends are impermanent, your > mentors are impermanent, your health is impermanent, your wealth is > impermanent, your job is impermanent, your possessions are impermanent, > your entertainment is impermanent, anything you enjoy is impermanent. > These are all conventional realities. Don't you think it would be a good > idea to recognize that they are impermanent? > > Larry > > Hi Larry > > That's exactly right and not only that...the way you state it above is very > often the way the Buddha taught it. Hi Larry and TG, If you explained the question carefully to a six-year-old, he would tell you those things are impermanent. I have never heard anyone claim otherwise. May I ask your views on the profundity of the Buddha's teaching? What is it telling us that we don't already know? Ken H We may think we understand impermanence, even in a common sense manner, but we don't really. If we really understood it we would be arahats. The reason we don't understand impermanence is because we have a tendency to see things as permanent and bound with essence and substantiality. Although a mind might think it understands that all things are impermanent, the likelihood is that it still is plagued by permanence-view and self-view. Understanding impermanence is not the surface belief that things are impermanent. It is deep awareness of impermanence and of the sorrowful consequences of that condition. Repeatedly and consistently cultivating awareness of the impermanence of states can gradually breakdown misperceptions of permanence-view and self-view. This awareness is needed to detach the mind from clinging and grasping. If a mind understands the significance of impermanence, it won't crave and affliction will not result. The more impermanence is taught regarding whatever object is being considered, the more the mind inclines toward impermanence-view. The "profundity" is not in determining what elements exist or don't exist. The profundity resides in breaking permanence-view, pleasurable-view, and self-view, and overcoming attachment. There are all sorts of methods taught by the Buddha to achieve that...as different methods appeal to different minds inclinations. The statement and question above are what might be expected from a non-Buddhists trying to grapple with their first experiences of the Buddha's teaching. Nothing provided in an e-mail is liable to drive forward the insight needed to resolve the issue in the mind of the questioner. A deep and consistent study of the Sutta Pitaka are needed to provide the potential needed to resolve the issues address above. Otherwise, they may never be understood. Since the Buddha did indeed spend a lot of time teaching the impermanence of what some describe as "conventional realities," I guess one needs to ask -- whether the Buddha was teaching six-year-olds, or whether there is something more to it! TG 39716 From: rjkjp1 Date: Sun Dec 12, 2004 6:08pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Phra Dhammadharo, Phil, Herman. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "plnao" wrote: > I am back on the cushion. Spending quality time with > my defilements, as I put it. > I see how they rise beyond my control. Of course, I can and do see that in > daily life as well. Daily life > will continue to be where the real action is, so to speak. But vipassana > meditation is helpful as a kind > of exercise, at the very least. ======== Dear Phil, Easy isn't it, just sit on the pillow and have vipassana. Or is it really vipassana? RobertK 39717 From: plnao Date: Sun Dec 12, 2004 6:38pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Phra Dhammadharo, Phil, Herman. Hi Rob > Dear Phil, > Easy isn't it, just sit on the pillow and have vipassana. Or is it > really vipassana? > RobertK Yes, very easy! I had it 11 times this morning and 17 times yesterday! I hear you Rob. I always appreciate your reminders. I hope you saw the mention I made the other day of your wondering why people can't be satisfied with moments of mindfulness. That made a big impression on me. But I am curious to know more about vip meditation. The last time I tried I was so focussed on results that it was a farce. Now I am relaxed and will just see what is up. I've always said that even while I have suspicions that jhanas are not as easy to attain as people say, there is no reason that formal meditation in itself need be seen as a self-driven activity, any more than studying suttas is. I would not return to metta meditation at this time. That still feels unnecessary to me. And I won't be seeking jhanas in this lifetime, unless something very unexpected happens about my lifestyle! Also, now that I have just received my copy of MN and have ordered the SN as well I am in danger of being swamped by reading, reading, reading. Of course reminders from K Sujin and all about realities in the moment help me most of all, but putting down my treasured book and just sitting is good for calming my agitated mind, at the very least. I know the agitation is a reality that I can learn from, but... Panna will let me know if there is any valuable insight arising from the exercise. But I won't press for insight any more than I do in daily life. Anyways, please do keep sending reminders my way. Thanks! Metta, Phil 39718 From: christine_forsyth Date: Sun Dec 12, 2004 6:47pm Subject: 'Samsara and Nibbana are the same' Dear Group, I have been reflecting on the saying that 'Samsara and Nibbana are the same' and whether 'Nibbana is Conscious/ness'. I'd be interested to hear what anyone's thoughts are on this subject. The following contains excerpts from "Dimensions of Buddhist Thought" by Francis Story (BPS 1985). We briefly touched on it during the last dhamma discussion weekend at Cooran - but this idea is endemic to many discussion groups. It seems often to be tied to the idea that Nibbana is pure conscious/ness. "To get this statement [Samsara is the same as Nibbana] into perspective, it is necessary to distinguish between the experience of Nibbaana known to the Arahant while he is still living, and the Nibbaana after death. The first is called in Pali, Sa-upaadisesa- nibbaana : Nirvaana with all the components of individualised personality still present. The second is called Anu-paradises- nibbaana. It is Nirvaana without any substratum of personality in the present, and without the possibility of its arising in the future. This is the Nibbaana in which present and future do not exist, since it is free from all conditionality. It is clear, from the descriptions given of the lives of disciples subsequent to their attainment of Arahantship, that although they could induce the Nirvaanic consciousness when ever they wished, they were not, in their ordinary state, exempt from the pains of the flesh. Only their minds remained unaffected. Physically, they suffered from sickness and injury, as all mortals must do. Even the Buddha himself endured much in this way, towards the end of his life. He told Aananda that it was only when he withdrew his consciousness from the physical plane that he could obtain bodily ease. **(Mahaa Parinibbaana Sutta, `Last Days of the Buddha'. The Wheel No. 67/69) Sa-upaadisesa-nibbaana, therefore, is only intermittent release from suffering; as a continual state of consciousness for a living being it would be incompatible with the maintenance of life. Remaining in it constantly, the physical organism would perish. Far from being `one with Sa.msaara', it is the state in which all sa.msaaric experience is suspended, so long as the Arahant remains in it. If he intends to live out his course, he has to emerge from the contemplation of Nirvaana so that he can again function within the modes, and according to the laws, of conditionality. The Nibbaana after death is the same as that which the Arahant is capable of experiencing in life, but it is the absolute and final withdrawal from sa.msaaric conditions. It is in this sense that it becomes `permanent'. As the Buddha taught it, Nibbaana is desirable because it is cessation of births and deaths, and all the suffering they entail. One may live with the intellectual understanding that all existence is anicca, dukkha and anattaa, and one may reach the full interior experience of it while still living; but neither of these is equivalent to that Nibbaana which is the total release from conditioned existence and its necessary suffering. A Bodhisatta is able to continue the round of rebirths while he qualifies himself to become a Supreme Buddha, but only by stopping short of the attainment of Arahantship. He does not experience Nibbaana and Sa.msaara as identical. To him, Nibbaana is certainty because he has confidence; but it is a certainty belonging to the future, not to his present condition and daily activities. It may indeed be said that Sa.msaara contains the potentiality of Nibbaana; but potential states and actual ones should not be confused. Nibbaana in its fullest sense means the complete extinction of Craving, not in one form only, but in all its manifold guises; and where Craving is extinguished, there can be no re-arising of sa.msaaric existence. This is the whole point and essence of the Buddha's doctrine."' Metta and peace, Christine ---The trouble is that you think you have time--- 39719 From: Date: Sun Dec 12, 2004 3:45pm Subject: Re: [dsg] 'Samsara and Nibbana are the same' Hi Christine Here are some quotes from the Suttas on the subject of whether Nibbana entails some sort of conscious/ness. My conclusion, from the Suttas, is that Nibbana is the abscence of consciousness. Those with self-view will do anything possible to avoid that conclusion. ;-) As far samsara and nibbana being the same thing? Well, there might be a way in which a 'fine meal' or 'human excrement' might be considered the same thing...but I'd make the effort to dine on the 'fine meal.' ;-) again The Buddha describes the “death resultâ€? of an enlightened (arahat) monk, Ven.Dabba Mallaputta… The body disintegrated, perception ceased, All feelings became cool, Mental activities were calmed, And consciousness came to an end. (The Buddha . . . The Udana & The Itivuttaka, pg. 116, 8.9) “Where consciousness becomes established and comes to growth … I say that is accompanied by sorrow, anguish, and despair.â€? … “Where consciousness does not become established and come to growth…I say that is without sorrow, anguish, and despair.â€? (The Buddha . . . CDB, vol. 1, pg. 600 - 601) “By the utter destruction of delight in existence, By the extinction of perception and consciousness, By the cessation and appeasement of feelings, It is thus, friend, that I know for beings – Emancipation, release, seclusion.â€? (The Buddha . . . CDB, vol. 1, pg. 90) “…the arising, continuation, production, and manifestation of feeling born of eye-contact is the arising of suffering, the continuation of disease, the manifestation of aging and death. The arising, continuation, production, and manifestation of feeling born of ear-contact … of feeling born of nose-contact … of feeling born of tongue-contact … of feeling born of body-contact … of feeling born of mind-contact is the arising of suffering, the continuation of disease, the manifestation of aging and death. The cessation, subsiding, and passing away of feeling born of eye-contact … feeling born of mind-contact is the cessation of suffering, the subsiding of disease, the passing away of aging and death.â€? (The Buddha . . . CDB, vol. 1, pg. 1009) “The topmost achievement is the release-without-grasping, by seeing as it really is the arising and the ceasing, the attraction, the danger, and the escape from the six spheres of contact.â€? [Visual, audible, olfactory, gustatory, tactile, and mental] (The Buddha . . . GS vol. 5, pg. 45) “…cognizance enters into cessation which is the Nibbana principle…â€? (PD, pg. 228 - 229, Treatise on Faculties) “…there is an escape from this whole field of perception.â€? (The Buddha . . . MLDB, pg. 120, The Simile of the Cloth, Vatthupama Sutta, #7) 39720 From: buddhatrue Date: Sun Dec 12, 2004 9:01pm Subject: Re: kusala and akusala. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > Dear friend James, > It is good you remark this impression you have of Kh Sujin. Lodewijk said, > quite understandable that you have it. I try my best to answer this. Friend Nina, Thank you for the explanation of the outlook of Kh. Sujin. It seems that I was mistaken in the ideas I had about what she teaches. I was just thinking out loud really and hadn't come to any firm conclusions. I don't know why, I can't quite put my finger on it, but I am still not very impressed by her teaching. Whenever you quote something that she said, or how she responded to a direct question (like her famous, "What do you see now?") I just think to myself, "Oh please, go sell that mojo somewhere else!" ;-)) Anyway, I have gone on too much about her in the past and now, it is time for me to stop. Here is my last word to you on this subject: I don't think you should be so afraid of "atta belief" entering your practice. Doing that is like being afraid of your own shadow! As you move closer to the light (nibbana), and the light is directly overhead, the shadow will be gone. Until then, make peace with it. Metta, James ps. I think you should listen more to Lodewijk than Kh. Sujin. 39721 From: Date: Sun Dec 12, 2004 9:54pm Subject: Re: [dsg] 'Samsara and Nibbana are the same' Christine: "I have been reflecting on the saying that 'Samsara and Nibbana are the same' and whether 'Nibbana is Conscious/ness'. I'd be interested to hear what anyone's thoughts are on this subject." Hi Christine, The idea that nibbana and samsara are the same comes from Nagarjuna's "Fundamental Wisdom of the Middle Way" (Mulamadhyamakakarika). That is sort of the conclusion of his argument. For Nagarjuna all understanding of any experience is conceptual. Whatever is known is concept, empty of self-nature (sabhava), non-arising. Samsara is known; nibbana is known. Samsara is concept, nibbana is concept. Nibbana and samsara are the same. This is my interpretation. He didn't use these words or reasons, but he did come to this conclusion. The idea that nibbana is pure consciousness can be found in the Cittamatra (mind-only) school (also called Yogacara). However I don't know of anyone who actually said this. Here the idea is that all there is is consciousness. Consciousness "stuff" is the complete emptiness that is subjectivity, the indescribable, limitless point of your point of view, where you are coming from. All objects are nothing more than a colorful manifestation of this stuff, consciousness. Again, my interpretation. Imo, abhidhamma is not incompatible with either view and there are some who synthesize the two. I think the Buddha was a realist interested in experience. The only way to know what nibbana was for him is to follow the path as he described it. Larry 39722 From: rjkjp1 Date: Sun Dec 12, 2004 10:05pm Subject: Re: Phra Dhammadharo, Phil, Herman. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "plnao" wrote: > Hi Rob > > > Yes, very easy! I had it 11 times this morning and 17 times yesterday! > > > I hear you Rob. I always appreciate your reminders. I hope > you saw the mention I made the other day of your wondering why people > can't be satisfied with moments of mindfulness. That made a big impression > on me. > > But I am curious to know more about vip meditation. The last time I tried > I was so focussed on results that it was a farce. Now I am relaxed and will > just see what is up. I've always said that even while I have suspicions > that jhanas > are not as easy to attain as people say, there is no reason that formal > meditation > in itself need be seen as a self-driven activity, any more than studying > suttas is. >==================- Dear Phil, I have had these conversations many times over the last 15 years or so. In India with my guide, he went to the Ganges river every morning to do his ritual washing. I asked him about it and he said it is so that he is reminded to be good etc. ect.- "oh yes it doesn't matter I can be reminded anytime, I don't have to do it" but still he seemed attached to me. Or a muslim friend who says bowing to mecca five times a day reminds him of his duties and purifies his mind. And they will all say that they don't have to do such rituals but then ... The most striking was speaking to a Sth American woman at Bodh Gaya who seemed thrilled to hear about the six doors but then apologised because she had to cut our conversation short to do her few thousand prostrations for the day. Here is a quote from a popular book by Venerable Gunaratana. Mindfulness in Plain English. ""One of the most difficult things to learn is that mindfulness is not dependent on any emotional or mental state. .......You don't need to move at a snail's pace to be mindful. You don't even need to be calm. You can be mindful while solving problems in intensive calculus. You can be mindful in the middle of a football scrimmage. You can even be mindful in the midst of a raging fury. Mental and physical activities are no bar to mindfulness. If you find your mind extremely active, then simply observe the nature and degree of that activity. It is just a part of the passing show within.."endquote I find so few people can see this. Anger is just as good an object as pleasant feeling, and yet so many seem to think that vipassana is about sitting quietly trying to be calm. Funnily enough they might also feel relaxed sitting in a hot bath or going for a jog but they wouldn't equate that with vipassana. RobertK 39723 From: kenhowardau Date: Sun Dec 12, 2004 11:01pm Subject: Freedom: a Concept! (Re: A Drop More Re: [dsg] The Problem ofRelations) Mike, I was arguing with Larry over the value of seeing concepts as impermanent. You wrote: --------------- > I think you're both right in my usual way--that is, vohaara- vs. paramattha-sacca subsume this discrepancy to my mind. In the Lokavipatti Sutta e.g.: Gain/loss, status/disgrace, censure/praise, pleasure/pain: these conditions among human beings are inconstant, impermanent, subject to change. Knowing this, the wise person, mindful, ponders these changing conditions. > ---------------- That sounds pretty convincing, but I will continue to argue, if you don't mind. I agree that absolute truth does not contradict conventional truth. For example, knowledge of anicca does not lead people to doubt they will eventually die. But absolute truth goes beyond conventional truth, and it renders it obsolete. For example, with knowledge of anatta we see that death is just one more citta in an endless stream of cittas. With that knowledge, there is no need to think in terms of people dying. ---------------- <. . .> M: > there are many other examples from the suttas of the conceptual consideration of conceptual objects (various beings and so on) with, I think, the aim of a kind of conceptual insight. The great danger, I think, is in mistaking these conceptual considerations and insights for consideration of and insights into paramattha dhammas-- the latter being transformative and the former not. > ----------- Again, is hard to argue with that, so I will resort to nit-picking: Even without ever hearing the Dhamma, a wise man can enjoy the calm, kusala consciousness that sees his own mortality. However, this will never get him out of samsara - the Middle Way is not this kind of kusala. The Buddha described all kinds of kusala and akusala, but he taught *only* the Middle Way. -------------- M: > Sorry if I have but one string to my bow lately--I just don't feel that the conventional needs to be the enemy of the 'real' or the best the enemy of the good. > ---------------- In your case, it isn't. You distinguish between conventional truth and ultimate truth. However, some dsg members are saying that the Buddha described concepts (people, chariots, nations, and so on) as anicca, dukkha and anatta. They are missing the distinction. According to them, the Middle Way is just conventional truth that has become concentrated in some [mystical] way. Thanks for butting in - I hope I haven't cured you of it. :-) Ken H 39724 From: sarah abbott Date: Sun Dec 12, 2004 11:11pm Subject: ‘Cetasikas' study corner 72- Volition/cetanaa (b) Dear Friends, 'Cetasikas' by Nina van Gorkom http://www.vipassana.info/cetasikas.html http://www.zolag.co.uk/ Questions, comments and different views welcome;-) ========================================== [Ch.4 Volition(cetanaa] contd] ***** The Atthasåliní (I, Part IV, Chapter I, 111) states about cetanå that its characteristic is coordinating the associated dhammas (citta and the other cetasikas) on the object and that its function is ‘willing’. We read: -…There is no such thing as volition in the four planes of existence -without the characteristic of coordinating; all volition has it. But the -function of ‘willing’ is only in moral (kusala) and immoral (akusala) -states… It has directing as manifestation. It arises directing -associated states, like the chief disciple, the chief carpenter, etc. who -fulfil their own and others’ duties. The Visuddhimagga (XIV, 135) gives a similar definition (1). The characteristic of cetanå is coordinating. It coordinates the citta and the other cetasikas it accompanies on the object. Citta cognizes the object, it is the leader in knowing the object. *** 1) See also the Dhammasangaùi §5 ***** [Ch.4 Volition(cetanaa) to be contd] Metta, Sarah ====== 39725 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon Dec 13, 2004 0:46am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: AN III - 100 mental misconduct vs. thoughts of ill-will Friend James, I had planned to continue our ‘long time no chat’ discussion last week….anyway here goes.. --- buddhatrue wrote: > Hi there!! Gosh, long time no chat. Well, lucky for me I took the > day off from work. I really like your post because it is very > direct: … Thanks, James. Let me try to keep this one direct too. …. > James: To be aware of one's attachment with detachment? That would > be quite a trick! ;-)) …. S: Well, being aware with attachment would certainly not lead to any guarding of the sense doors would it? Surely, it’s only by knowing and being aware of realities for what they are and developing detachment,that there will be less interest in the ideas about what is seen, heard and so on ? …. >Seriously, I know what you are getting at but > it seems that you are forgetting the defilement of delusion. We are > all suffering from delusion so it isn't always possible to be really > aware of one's defilements. ….. S: Good points. I agree that delusion is there most of the day – whenever there isn’t dana, sila or bhavana, there’s bound to be delusion. However, surely it is the development of awareness of attachment and any other realities with detachment that slowly leads to the ‘piercing’ of delusion. Panna or samma ditthi dispels the darkness of avijja when it arises and it does lead to more panna, wouldn’t you agree? ….. >We take the beautiful for ugly, the > ugly for beautiful, the impermanent for permanent,…etc. Not only > that, in a worldling the defilement of attachment is arising almost > constantly! When is there ever really a moment without attachment? …. S: Quite right. This is why attachment is said to be the ‘teacher and the student’ or the ‘leader and the follower’. We follow it all the time and it follows us all the time. We’re always concerned about the aversion, but forget about all the attachment arising throughout the day and don’t see the danger in it accumulating all the time. …. > As far as what the Buddha taught, he taught that one should purify > the mind by following the Noble Eightfold Path; this would include > cultivating sila, samadhi, and panna. …. S: Agreed. One of the points I was discussing with B.Bodhi was about how at moments of satipatthana, there is higher sila, higher samadhi and higher panna arising together naturally. This is the fivefold path which leads to the eightfold path at moments of enlightenment. The higher sila (adhisiila-sikkhaa) is the guarding of the sense doors. So at moments of satipatthana, there is already such guarding. The same applies to higher samadhi (adhicitta-sikkhaa) which develops along with satipatthana. So when we read in the suttas about how ‘whenever the monk perceives a form with the eye……..etc, he neither adheres to the appearance as a whole, nor to its parts………..restrains his senses’ (as in M 38), it is referring to the development of satipatthana, the development of higher sila, samadhi and panna developing together with detachment, the function of panna, as leader. Let me know if this makes any sense or your understand differently here, James. … > James: Again, I don't think it is possible to know the truth of > one's accumulations. We are all suffering from delusion (ignorance). …. S: Yes, I agree with you. We can just know the truth of our accumulations momentarily – at a moment of understanding which knows attachment or anger arising, for example, we can see the accumulation then and there. We have no idea what accumulations will appear next…..:-/ …. > James: If we knew what `it' (defilements) is really, then we > wouldn't have attachment, aversion, or ignorance. See what I am > getting at? … S: Yes and well said. Somewhere the Buddha says something about if we really saw the danger in the smallest traces of the defilements, we wouldn’t go on accumulating them. ‘If they knew what I know…’ or something along those lines. If we really understood the 4 Noble Truths…. …. > James: This is like saying, "What would be really helpful for the > blind is if they would just see." …. S: Sounds pretty obvious doesn’t it;-) We are the blind, but there is the opportunity to learn to see if there’s not too much dust in our eyes….. …. > James: No, it leads to a greater purification of the mind. Don't do > evil, do only good, and purify the mynd, this is the teaching of all > Buddhas. And what is this "more attachment to the self" mean > really? I asked Nina this also, what is this `self' that you are > saying we are attached to? I don't know any `self'. I can be > attached to food, money, sex, etc., these things exist, but what is > this `self' you keep speaking of? Do you mean the craving for being? …. S: Like now. Do we want to be wiser, smarter, less foolish, less attached? I can’t speak for you, but I know that for myself and others I talk to, that clinging to ‘me' is lurking behind all these wishes, finding oneself important, being concerned for one’s spiritual and material welfare. It doesn’t mean there’s always a wrong idea of self arising, but the attachment or clinging to oneself is far, far more prevalent than we like to admit, I think. Exactly like you said before about attachment and delusion…. And then, behind so many of our spiritual endeavours, there is a wrong idea of self sneaking in so very easily too. Surely, it's better to recognise it when it arises? Without good reminders from friends, our lobha and wrong views can easily take us seriously off-track, I think. …. > Sarah: Did you listen to any of the audio discussion from India?. > > James: No, I have a slow connection so I didn't attempt to download > them. But I think it is a good idea that you have them available! …. S: Thanks for the encouragement. ALL – for anyone like James with a slow connection, we are very happy to send out India MP3s by mail – it’s as simple as ending out Xmas cards (and a lot more useful in our view). Just send me off-list your full name and address for a cut and paste job if you’d still like one. …. > James: Thanks. Glad to know you're keeping an eye on me. Somebody > has to! ;-)) … S: You said it!! ;-)) Btw, I think you were doing a good job in questioning KenO on generosity and the Noble Eightfold Path, (though I understood your point, Ken O. In Cetasikas, we’re now looking at cetana (intention). It arises with all cittas, including all wholesome ones, but that doesn’t make it an Eightfold Path factor, Ken;-). [An interesting point came up about the Paramis in India. K.Sujin was saying there are not only the Bodhisatta paramis, but also pacceka paramis and savaka (follower) paramis too. Still, again, these develop naturally with the development of satipatthana.. No need to say or think “I am developing the paramis’] Thanks for stressing about how it would be a‘cold day in hell’ before I’d urge anyone to do this or that in order to develop wisdom;-). It would be a freezing one before I’d suggest anyone could ‘think’ themselves to enlightenment either. The middle way, as I see it, is in seeing all realities (dhammas) for what they are without any self in the picture at all. Developing panna in order to really be alone without family or friends or companions or a self – seeing elements (dhatus) for what they are, such as seeing, visible object, hearing and sound. That’s why courage is stressed! As Phil said, cold showers are said to be good for the health;-). Actually, I’ve always found suttas like the Migajala Sutta very comforting – I love to read and be reminded about how very alone we are with just the seeing or the hearing or the thinking at this moment. We can follow the truth (sacca) and really understand these conditioned dhammas for what they are instead of looking for any way to find nibbana with an idea of a self. Oops ATTA-alert again - time to finish! I liked your sutta quote from M144: “There is wavering in one who is dependent, there is no wavering in one who is independent; when there is no wavering, there is tranquility; when there is tranquility, there is no bias…’ etc. With the development of vipassana, there is higher tranquility. It is perfected in the anagami who has no more attachment to sensuous objects at all. Eradicated for good. I’ll look forward to your further comments, James. Good to see you around again;-). Metta, Sarah ========= 39726 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon Dec 13, 2004 1:10am Subject: Re: [dsg] Greetings, new member here. Hi Naresh, --- naresh gurwani wrote: > Yes iam from South America, Curacao, just finding a > way to my life , where in US are you from ... I just checked Curacao out on google - in the Caribbean, looks pretty cool. Do you speak Dutch too? I'm not from the US. Originally I'm from England, but have lived in Hong Kong for the past 20 years and before that in Australia for 3 yrs. From Christine's top 13 for the busiest ever week or so on DSG which you happened to join, let me add for you what I can remember about the others as newcomers do sometimes ask me: Howard: Long Island, New York Nina: The Hague, Netherlands KenO: Singapore, s'times Brunei Hugo: ?, US Phil: Tokyo, Japan. Originally from Canada RobM: Kuala Lumpur. Originally from Canada (Is it those Canadian winters...??) Htoo: ?. Originally from Burma Sarah: see above Larry: ?Boulder, Colorado, US Mike: Seattle, US James: Cairo, Egypt. Originally from Arizona, US Andrew: Outback Queensland, Australia Bhante V: Missouri, US ***** Anyway, different stories, same 6 doorways, same lobha, dosa, moha, same Truths to be known. Metta, Sarah ======== 39727 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon Dec 13, 2004 1:46am Subject: Re: [dsg] Concept and Reality in Primary Texts Hi Larry & All, --- LBIDD@w... wrote: > I thought the explanation of pannatti in Abhidhammattasangaha came from > another book in ab. pitaka about different types of people. Sorry, I > don't remember the name. .... I think that all the detail about the different kinds of pannatti is given in the commentary to the Puggalapannatti. The Puggalapannatti (PTS: Designation of Human Types) is one of the texts of the Abhidhamma Pitaka. All the detail given in the Vism note is from this source apparently, clarifying further the content of the Abhidhamma text. The comy is not translated into English, but even the Abhidhamma Pitaka text itself begins with limited classifications of pannatti concerned with the real and unreal and then continues to elaborate on pannatti concerned with people (puggala), following the AN groupings. Hence the tile 'Puggala pannatti'. So when we read in the various texts, such as AN or here about people and things, worldly gains and losses etc, we have to understand that these are mere conceptual terms used as a kind of 'short-hand' to point to a number of different namas and rupas. We're subject to the worldly conditions because we don't clearly understand the 6 worlds for what they are. We are susceptible to praise and blame, gain and loss and so on, because we don't appreciate what kamma and vipaka really are and we follow and are obsessed by our stories and ideas on account of what is seen, heard and so on. Also more detail given in the commentary to Abhidhammatthasangaha which some of us quote from here. ... >In Vism. there is a lot of discrimination of > dhammas with and without sabhava (particular characteristic) and there > are a few instances of the use of "paramattha" mostly from the Mahatika > which is dated no later than 7th cent. .... S: Good points. All the Pitakas are about (paramattha) dhammas. Our lives, everything we find important are in truth, merely these paramattha dhammas or khandhas. Metta, Sarah ====== 39728 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Dec 13, 2004 1:51am Subject: Re: Freedom: a Concept! (Re: A Drop More Re: [dsg] The Problem of Relations) Hi T G and Larry, I appreciate these reminders. We are reminded of the Truth all the time in daily life, if we would only pay attention, wise attention. Nina. op 12-12-2004 06:54 schreef TGrand458@a... op TGrand458@a...: > In a message dated 12/11/2004 8:49:46 PM Pacific Standard Time, > LBIDD@w... writes: > L: Your family is impermanent, your friends are impermanent, your > mentors are impermanent, your health is impermanent, your wealth is > impermanent, your job is impermanent, your possessions are impermanent, > your entertainment is impermanent, anything you enjoy is impermanent. > These are all conventional realities. Don't you think it would be a good > idea to recognize that they are impermanent? > Hi Larry > > That's exactly right and not only that...the way you state it above is very often the way the Buddha taught it. 39729 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Dec 13, 2004 1:51am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: latent tendencies. Hi Howard, op 12-12-2004 21:22 schreef upasaka@a... op upasaka@a...: > In any case, when you say that underlying tendencies do not arise, I > do believe I understand what you mean, but the formulation troubles me a bit. > The idea of anything other than nibbana existing but never having arisen > troubles me. Might an alternative formulation be that underlying tendencies > have no > very first arising, but are continually self-replicating (or repeating) until > finally uprooted upon arahanthood? N: I give some quotes: In the ³Pañcappakaranatthakathå², in the Commentary to the ³Yamaka², the Sixth Book of the Abhidhamma, we read in the section on the latent tendencies (anusaya-våra) and the section on ³possessed of latent tendencies² (sånusaya-våra): "In the section on Œbeing possessed of latent tendencies¹ the Buddha said : ¹Who is with the latent tendency of sense desire, he is possessed of it' . It is just like someone who suffers extremely from the sickness of old age, and so on, and, so long as he is not cured from this sickness, is called a sick person even when illness does not arise. It is the same in the case of someone with defilements who is traversing the round of rebirths whose latent tendencies have not been eradicated by the noble eightfold Path. Even though the latent tendencies do not arise he is called a person who is possessed of the latent tendencies. Thus, concerning such latent tendencies he is possessed with, he finds them quite acceptable. The other words in this section are the same as those in the section on latent tendencies.² Thus we see that there are latent tendencies in each of the cittas that are arising and falling away in succession so long as they have not been eradicated by the noble eightfold Path. 2. The latent tendencies have ³arisen² in the sense of ³having obtained a soil² (bhumiladdhuppanna). This refers to the defilements that cannot yet be eradicated and are present in their own soil. N: The word arisen is also used, but in the meaning as quoted above. See also Nyanponika, Abh Studies, p. 121, 122. Actually, also kamma committed is accumulated from citta to citta and it can produce result when there are conditions. In a similar way, all latent tendencies are like microbes in each citta, even in kusala citta, and accumulated from citta to citta. Nina. 39730 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Dec 13, 2004 1:51am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: ‘Cetasikas' - Volition/cetanaa , Htoo. Dear Htoo, Thank you for bringing up this point. op 12-12-2004 20:16 schreef htootintnaing op htootintnaing@y...: > There are 4 kinds of ahara. They are > > 1.kabballikaara ahara ( some spell 'kabballinkara' ) > 2.phassa ahara > 3.manosancetana ahara > 4.vinnaana ahara > > In nama-ahara cetana cetasika is included. But I believe this cetana > is not all cetana. I mean this cetana which is ahara is not cetana > that accompanies any kind of citta. > > This cetana is confined to only 29 cittas. They are 12 akusala > cittas, 8 mahakusala cittas, 5 rupakusala cittas, and 4 arupakusala > cittas ( 12 + 8 + 5 + 4 = 29 cittas ). N: There are different methods of teaching (naya). Ahara: it can be taught according to the method of D.O. or according to the method of Patthana. There is no contradiction, as I said before. Different aspects are highlighted. The Sammaditthi sutta Co, under ahara, teaches ahara according to the method of D.O. and then cetana in 29 cittas are manosancetana ahara, as you said above. In the Patthana, cetana arising with each citta is ahara, conascent nutriment condition, it supports the conascent dhammas. It coordinates their tasks. See Guide to Conditional Relations by Ven. U Narada, p. 57, and p. 113, where this is explained: volition associated with 89 cittas, kusala, akusala and indeterminate, as well as the associated cetasikas and rupa produced by citta and kamma produced rupa at rebirth. Nina. 39731 From: Egbert Date: Mon Dec 13, 2004 2:36am Subject: Re: kusala and akusala.Herman butting in Hi James, It's good to be reading your posts. On reading this current one, the following came to mind. I don't know why, I can't quite put my finger on it, > but I am still not very impressed by her teaching. Whenever you > quote something that she said, or how she responded to a direct > question (like her famous, "What do you see now?") I just think to > myself, "Oh please, go sell that mojo somewhere else!" ;-)) Anyway, > I have gone on too much about her in the past and now, it is time > for me to stop. I see "What do you see now?" as a very nice little koan. All answers to the question "What do you see now?" are a contradiction, a nonsense. Because they are all always in terms of the past. In terms of itself only, the present moment is .............. Kind Regards Herman 39732 From: htootintnaing Date: Mon Dec 13, 2004 2:37am Subject: [dsg] Re: ‘Cetasikas' - Volition/cetanaa , Htoo. Dear Nina, Thank you very much for your kind explanation that the matter is of different teaching method. I now understand and accept as you said. With Metta, Htoo Naing ---------------------------------------------------------------------- --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > Dear Htoo, > Thank you for bringing up this point. > op 12-12-2004 20:16 schreef htootintnaing op htootintnaing@y...: > > There are 4 kinds of ahara. They are > > > > 1.kabballikaara ahara ( some spell 'kabballinkara' ) > > 2.phassa ahara > > 3.manosancetana ahara > > 4.vinnaana ahara > > > > In nama-ahara cetana cetasika is included. But I believe this cetana > > is not all cetana. I mean this cetana which is ahara is not cetana > > that accompanies any kind of citta. > > > > This cetana is confined to only 29 cittas. They are 12 akusala > > cittas, 8 mahakusala cittas, 5 rupakusala cittas, and 4 arupakusala > > cittas ( 12 + 8 + 5 + 4 = 29 cittas ). > N: There are different methods of teaching (naya). Ahara: it can be taught > according to the method of D.O. or according to the method of Patthana. > There is no contradiction, as I said before. Different aspects are > highlighted. > The Sammaditthi sutta Co, under ahara, teaches ahara according to the method > of D.O. and then cetana in 29 cittas are manosancetana ahara, as you said > above. > In the Patthana, cetana arising with each citta is ahara, conascent > nutriment condition, it supports the conascent dhammas. It coordinates their > tasks. See Guide to Conditional Relations by Ven. U Narada, p. 57, and p. > 113, where this is explained: volition associated with 89 cittas, kusala, > akusala and indeterminate, as well as the associated cetasikas and rupa > produced by citta and kamma produced rupa at rebirth. > Nina. 39733 From: htootintnaing Date: Mon Dec 13, 2004 3:28am Subject: Dhamma Thread (174) Dear Dhamma Friends, There are 89 cittas or 89 states of mind, or 89 mental states or 89 consciousness. Or there are 121 cittas or 121 consciousness in total. There are many classifications on these cittas. First we discussed on cittas with different vedana or feeling. That is classification of cittas depending on vedana or feeling. After that we moved to classification citta depending on hetu or root. The third classification of cittas that we discussed is classification of citta depending on jati or origin or kind of citta or kind of dhamma. Now we are discussing another classification of citta. This 4th classification depends on realm of consciousness or depends on bhumi of cittas or consciousness. There are 4 realms of consciousness. They are 1. 54 kamavacara cittas 2. 15 rupavacara cittas 3. 12 arupavacara cittas 4. 8 lokuttara cittas ----------------- 89 total cittas When magga cittas arise in the vicinity of 5 jhanas, then there will be 40 lokuttara cittas and total cittas will be 121 cittas. They are 1. 54 kamavacara cittas 2. 15 rupavacara cittas 3. 12 arupavacara cittas 4. 40 lokkuttara cittas. a) Kamavacara cittas Kama are dhammas related to 5 senses of seeing, hearing, smelling, tasting, touching and their implications. Avacara means 'frequently arising. Kama in kamavacara means 'kama bhumi' and so kamavacara cittas are cittas that frequently arise in kama bhumi. But they can still arise in rupa brahma bhumi and arupa brahma bhumi even though not all 54 cittas are possible to arise. Kamavacara cittas are 1. 12 akusala cittas ( 8 lobha citta, 2 dosa citas, 2 moha cittas ) somanassa/upekkha 2>< with ditthi/without>< asankhara/sasankhara 2>< 2>< 2 = 8 lobha cittas. 2 dosa cittas are asankharika and sasankharika. 2 moha cittas are 1.vicikiccha or doubt/suspicision, 2.uddhacca 8 + 2 + 2 = 12 akusala cittas 2. 15 ahetuka vipaka cittas ( 7 akusala vipaka and 8 kusala vipaka ) 5 sense-consciousness of akusala vipaka ( 5 pancavinana ) 1 receiving-consciousness of akusala vipaka ( 1 sampaticchana citta ) 1 investigating-consciousness of akusala vipaka( 1 santirana citta ) --- 7 cittas and the same name with kusala vipaka cittas so there are 7 ahetuka kusala vipaka citta and there is an extra citta called somanassa santirana citta. So there are 8 ahetuka kusala vipaka cittas. 7 + 8 = 15 ahetuka vipaka cittas 3. 3 ahetuka kiriya cittas 1. 1 pancadvaravajjana citta 2. 1 manodvaravajjana citta 3. 1 hasituppada citta ------ 3 ahetuka kiriya cittas 4. 24 kama sobhana cittas These are beautiful consciousness because there are beautiful roots like alobha, adosa and amoha in these 24 cittas. 1. 8 mahakusala cittas 2. 8 mahavipaka cittas 3. 8 mahakiriya cittas ---------------- 24 kama sobhana cittas They each have 8 cittas because there are 3 alternatives that is somanassa or upekkha 2>< nana sampayutta or vippayutta2>< asankarika or sasankharika 2. So 2>< 2>< 2= 8 cittas. So kamavacara cittas are 12 akusala, 15 ahetuka vipaka, 3 ahetuka kiriya, 24 kama sobhana and altogether 12 + 15 + 3 + 24 = 54 kamavacara cittas. b) 15 rupavacara cittas 1. 5 rupakusala cittas ( when in rupa jhana javana of any being ) 2. 5 rupavipaka cittas ( when in bhavanga cittas of rupa brahmas ) 3. 5 rupakiriya cittas ( when in rupa jhana javana of arahats ) ----------- 15 rupavacara cittas [ 5 are 5 jhanas ] Rupavipaka cittas may also be patisandhi citta or cuti citta in rupa brahmas. Rupakiriya cittas may be in any arahats. This means arahats may be ( mostly ) human beings , arahata devas, arahatta rupa brahmas and arahatta arupa brahmas. c) 12 arupavacara cittas 1. 4 arupakusala cittas (when in arupa jhana javana of any being) 2. 4 arupavipaka cittas (when in bhavanga of arupa brahmas ) 3. 4 arupakiriya cittas ( when in arupa jhana javana of arahats ) ------------------ 12 arupavacara cittas [ 4 are 4 arupa jhanas ] Arupavipaka cittas may also be patisandhi or cuti cittas of arupa brahmas. Arupakiriya cittas are may arise in any arahats while in arupa jhana javana. ANy arahat means 1. human arahat, 2. deva arahat, 3. rupa brahma arahat, and 4.arupabrahma arahat. d) 8 lokuttara cittas 1. 4 lokuttara kusala cittas ( 4 magga cittas ) 2. 4 lokuttara phala cittas ( 4 phala cittas ) ---------------------- 8 lokuttara cittas Lokuttara cittas are supramundane consciousness. They are nothing to do with mundane things. Their object is nibbana and they are the highest and pure cittas ever exist. Magga cittas each arise ONLY ONCE in the whole samsara and that particular magga citta is immediately followed by respective phala citta which is lokuttara vipaka cittas. This is known as 'Akaliko'. This is one of attributes of The Dhamma. The result comes at once and there is no delay. So depending on realms of citta there are a) 54 kamavacara cittas b) 15 rupavacara cittas c) 12 arupavacara cittas d) 8 lokuttara cittas ------- 89 total cittas These are realms of citta. These are not realms of beings. So kamavacara cittas may still arise in other bhumi of beings apart from kama bhumi. Rupavacara cittas can also arise in manussa bhumi or human realm and deva realms. Arupavacara cittas can also arise in manussa bhumi or human realm, deva realms and rupa brahma realms apart from arupa brahma bhumi. If magga cittas arise in the vicinity of 5 jhanas with the power of those jhana then 8 lokuttara cittas may be counted as ( 8 >< 5 jhana ) 40 lokuttara cittas. So there will be 121 total cittas and they are 1. 54 kamavacara cittas 2. 15 rupavacara cittas 3. 12 arupavacara cittas 4. 40 lokuttara cittas ------------ 121 total cittas Here PLEASE BE CAREFUL. 40 lokuttara cittas are all lokuttara cittas. They are not mundane consciousness or they are not loki cittas. 15 rupavacara cittas and 12 arupavacara cittas are majjhima cittas or middle consciousness because they are in the middle of kamavacara cittas and lokuttara cittas. These cittas in total 27 ( 15 + 12 ) are called mahaggata cittas. They are not kamavacara cittas. They are not lokuttara cittas. So they are not part of Noble Eightfold Path. By the same token 54 kamavacara cittas are not part of Noble Eightfold Path. They are kama cittas. Noble Eightfold Path is there in 8 lokuttara cittas or there in 40 lokuttara cittas and no other cittas have Noble Eightfold Path. But there may be pre-Path way like kamavacara mahakusala cittas. 27 mahaggata cittas do have their own object and they will never take nibbana as their object. Nibbana is the ONLY OBJECT of 8 lokuttara cittas or 40 lokuttara cittas. Nibbana is the ONLY OBJECT of them. Because these lokuttara cittas can never take other objects as their object. Kama dhammas like seeing, hearing, smelling, tasting, touching and thinking on these cannot be the object of lokuttara cittas. The object of mahaggata cittas cannot be the object of lokuttara cittas. So 27 jhana cittas are not lokuttata cittas and they can never take nibbana as their object. When realms of citta or consciousness are not well understood, people always argue on Dhamma. They may have a good source, a good evidence, a good support for their materials. But finally they fail to realize The Dhamma because of misunderstanding on these realms of cittas. May you all be free from suffering. With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing PS: Any comments are welcome and any queries are welcome and they will be valuable. If there is unclarity of any meaning, please just give a reply to any of these posts. 39734 From: jwromeijn Date: Mon Dec 13, 2004 3:36am Subject: Re: 'Samsara and Nibbana are the same' --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "christine_forsyth" wrote: > > Dear Group, > > I have been reflecting on the saying that 'Samsara and Nibbana are > the same' and whether 'Nibbana is Conscious/ness'. I'd be interested > to hear what anyone's thoughts are on this subject. ..... Dear Christine A good theme. To me the first question is: "is the statement Nibanna = Samsara correct in the context of Theravada, of the Pali Canon ?" I can not proof it with quotes from the Canon, but I think the answer must be: NO It is a typical Mahayana-statement. I like the "Fundamental Wisdom of the Middle Way" of Nagarjuna but his statement Nirvana = Samsara gives me the most difficulties; primary to understand what is meant, to imagine something with it; but till now it are only words to me, a kind of Mahayana-mantra. Or even it's a way of mocking the socalled Hinayana obsession to become a arahat as quick as possible and out of the cyclus of samsara. Still the second question is: is this statement true, even if it is not Theravada, because that is a possibility to me. To put it more subjective: is this statement usefull to me in the stage of this moment of my buddhistic path ? Maybe that this is real your question. Of course you can only answer that yourself, but I can say some about it. So in that case the statement must have a soteriological effect, perhaps in the way Larry describes. To me it has no effect on this moment. Other (Mahayana) statements like the Heart Sutra do me more. I think TG is right in saying that Nibanna is not consciousness: Nibanna can (for us, not-arahats) only been explained in negative statements: not this, not that etc. And samasara is not negatable (if this is a correct engish word). The (Yogacara) opinion, Larry mentions it, that all there is is consciousness: I don't agree with it. a It's not the same as nibanna = samasara b It's not Tharavada: rupa is not consciousness Conclusion: I'm interested in the results of your contemplating this statement. Metta Joop 39735 From: htootintnaing Date: Mon Dec 13, 2004 4:13am Subject: Dhamma Thread (175) Dear Dhamma Friends, We have discussed on different classifications of citta. We have talked on vedana classification or 'citta with different feelings'. We have discussed on hetu classification or 'citta without root and cittas with different combinations of root. Then we went over discussion of classification of citta depending on kinds of Dhamma or jati. After that we talked on classification of citta depending on realms of citta and some details have been discussed. Now before we move to another classification, let us have a talk on functions of citta. Sabbe dhamma anatta. There is no self. This may be known by just theoretical learning if not still realized. Sabbe sankhara anicca. There is no permanent sankhara dhammas. There are citta, cetasika and rupa as sankhara dhamma. In a life as we know, there are many cittas happen and many rupa arise and fall away in connection with these cittas. Actually there is no life at all. But conventioanlly everyone knows what a life is. Patisandhi citta determines what a being is. Actually there is no being at all. So in a life as we know, the starting point is patisandhi citta. The end of this whole life is cuti citta. In between are cittas of different kinds. Now we are going to count each function of citta starting from patisandhi citta to finishing with cuti citta. We will leave cittas with similar function. There are 14 kinds of function of citta. 1. patisandhi kicca or 'linking function' 2. bhavanga kicca or 'life-continuum function' 3. avajjana kicca or 'adverting function' 4. dassana kicca or 'seeing function' 5. savana kicca or 'hearing function' 6. ghayana kicca or 'smelling function' 7. sayana kicca or 'tasting function' 8. phusana kicca or 'touching function' 9. sampaticchana kicca or 'receiving function' 10.santirana kicca or 'investigating function' 11.votthapana kicca or 'determining function' 12.javana kicca or 'mental impulsion function' 13.tadarammana kicca or 'retention function' 14.cuti kicca or 'death function' A life starts with patisandhi citta. That citta does the job of linking. That life ends with cuti citta. That cuti citta does the job of dying or death. In between are many many many cittas doing different functions. function 2 to function 13 are different cittas doing different jobs. May you all be free from suffering. With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing PS: Any comments are welcome and any queries are welcome and they will be valuable. If there is unclarity of any meaning, please just give a reply to any of these posts. 39736 From: htootintnaing Date: Mon Dec 13, 2004 4:24am Subject: Dhamma Thread (176) Dear Dhamma Friends, In a life, the earliest event is arising of patisandhi citta and okkantikkama rupas or patisandhi kammaja rupas. Kammaja means 'generated by kamma'. Okkantikkama means 'rebirth'. The earliest event is arising of patisandhi citta and patisandhi rupas. As we are discussing on classification of citta and now currently on functions of citta, we will not discussing on rupa at the moment. This patisandhi citta is immediately followed by bhavanga cittas infinitely. So the first function is patisandhi kicca or linking function. This linking is linkage between the cuti citta of previous life and the first bhavanga citta of this life. The 2nd function is bhavanga kicca or life-continuum. When there is no specific object to attend or not able to attend those objects, then citta has to arise as bhavanga citta. There are still kamma. There is no possibility of vithi citta or conscious mind and then citta has to arise as life-continueing consciousness and this is called bhavanga citta. In between patisandhi citta and cuti citta, if there is no vithi citta arise, then as there are still kamma, citta has to arise as bhavanga citta one after another limitlessly. The third function is avajjana kicca or adverting function. This function will be discussed in the coming posts. May you all be free from suffering. With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing PS: Any comments are welcome and any queries are welcome and they will be valuable. If there is unclarity of any meaning, please just give a reply to any of these posts. 39737 From: m. nease Date: Mon Dec 13, 2004 6:17am Subject: Re: Freedom: a Concept! (Re: A Drop More Re: [dsg] The ProblemofRelations) Hi Larry, ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Sunday, December 12, 2004 5:02 PM Subject: Re: Freedom: a Concept! (Re: A Drop More Re: [dsg] The ProblemofRelations) > Transformation is relative. Noticing the impermanence of a touch > sensation probably isn't going to transform anyone's values, but if a > loved one dies that impermanence makes a big difference. I think the > place to look for potential transformation is where we are clinging the > most, or the most habitually, whether the object is concept or reality. > A good reality to investigate is clinging itself. Agreed--anything that leads to consideration of present attachment can be a good condition. Of course the transformation I meant was that of satipa.t.thaana and magga/phala. Any transformation short of these is illusory I think--though even conceptualization can lead to wise attention, heedfulness and so on. mike 39738 From: plnao Date: Mon Dec 13, 2004 7:07am Subject: Is there seeing now? (Re: [dsg] Re: kusala and akusala. Hi James, and all I was intending to post something about this, so this gives me a good chance. > Whenever you > quote something that she said, or how she responded to a direct > question (like her famous, "What do you see now?") I just think to > myself, "Oh please, go sell that mojo somewhere else!" ;-)) There is a difference between "is there seeing now?" (which is the question K Sujin asks) and "what do you see now?" which I've never come across her asking but is still a good question. This is just my hunch, but I think the reason she asks "is there seeing now?" is because it is the sense we are most likely to take for granted. In fact, according to both Abhidhamma and the Suttanta (think of that monk who "stops at seeing") seeing as pure consciousness is a lot harder to experience than we think. I've had more confirmations of this recently. I mentioned a few days back about the time that I "saw" a woman while I was thinking of something else. And since posting that, I've noticed it several more times. I'll be thinking about something, walking through a train station or something, and will find that my eyes have locked on a woman. Conventionally, at that moment, one would say "I see a woman" and perhaps you would say that. In fact, the seeing has finished. Why do I find that I am looking at a woman? That I "see" a woman, that my eyes have locked on her while I am thinking of something else. Why don't I have this experience with businessmen? Or trash cans? It is because my mind is not interested in them. It is because my mind has already proliferated about the woman, before I "see" her in the conventional sense. The mind is constantly getting visual information, sanna is constantly doing its work, and this is going on all over the place, all the time. But why is it the woman and not the trash can or the businessman that I keep finding that my eyes have locked on? This is due to conditions, accumulations - natural decisive support condition, or something like that. It is due to what is going on through the mind door, not "seeing." The seeing is done. Conventionally, we would say "I see a woman." But surely you can see it's not so simple. I think that's why K Sujin asks "is there seeing now?" The answer is very likely "no", and being able to answer "no" is evidence of deepening insight. I encourage you to keep an open mind and ask yourself that question now and then. It might be the question that leads to your Road to Damascus Moment re Abhidhamma! (I see it coming, James.....) Metta Phil 39739 From: Ken O Date: Mon Dec 13, 2004 8:13am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: latent tendencies. Hi Mike Vedana and phassa also arise during kiriya cittas of Arahants. My opinion and not of the commentary, the effect of latency could be recognise with the arising of the akusala roots and not the other type of cetasikas. Other than it is dormant, even with kamma. It is the two roots that conditioned kamma to conditioned rebirth Ken O 39740 From: Ken O Date: Mon Dec 13, 2004 8:20am Subject: Re: Freedom: a Concept! (Re: A Drop More Re: [dsg] The Problem ofRelations) Hi Larry and Rob M In the Dispeller of Delusion, I recalled it under the aggregates, in my own words the seeing of dhammas in terms of elements will help us to understand "anattaness". I cannot give you the full quotes as now I am in overseas and will not be back after Christmas Ken O 39741 From: Date: Mon Dec 13, 2004 3:50am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: latent tendencies. Hi, Nina - In a message dated 12/13/04 4:55:00 AM Eastern Standard Time, vangorko@x... writes: > > Hi Howard, > > op 12-12-2004 21:22 schreef upasaka@a... op upasaka@a...: > > >In any case, when you say that underlying tendencies do not arise, I > >do believe I understand what you mean, but the formulation troubles me a > bit. > >The idea of anything other than nibbana existing but never having arisen > >troubles me. Might an alternative formulation be that underlying tendencies > >have no > >very first arising, but are continually self-replicating (or repeating) > until > >finally uprooted upon arahanthood? > N: I give some quotes: > In the ³Pañcappakaranatthakathå², in the Commentary to the ³Yamaka², the > Sixth Book of the Abhidhamma, we read in the section on the latent > tendencies (anusaya-vÃ¥ra) and the section on ³possessed of latent > tendencies² (sÃ¥nusaya-vÃ¥ra): > > "In the section on Å’being possessed of latent tendencies¹ the Buddha said : > ¹Who is with the latent tendency of sense desire, he is possessed of it' . > It is just like someone who suffers extremely from the sickness of old age, > and so on, and, so long as he is not cured from this sickness, is called a > sick person even when illness does not arise. > It is the same in the case of someone with defilements who is traversing > the round of rebirths whose latent tendencies have not been eradicated by > the noble eightfold Path. Even though the latent tendencies do not arise he > is called a person who is possessed of the latent tendencies. Thus, > concerning such latent tendencies he is possessed with, he finds them quite > acceptable. > The other words in this section are the same as those in the section on > latent tendencies.² > > Thus we see that there are latent tendencies in each of the cittas that are > arising and falling away in succession so long as they have not been > eradicated by the noble eightfold Path. > > 2. The latent tendencies have ³arisen² in the sense of ³having obtained a > soil² > (bhumiladdhuppanna). This refers to the defilements that cannot yet be > eradicated and are present in their own soil. > N: The word arisen is also used, but in the meaning as quoted above. > See also Nyanponika, Abh Studies, p. 121, 122. > Actually, also kamma committed is accumulated from citta to citta and it can > produce result when there are conditions. In a similar way, all latent > tendencies are like microbes in each citta, even in kusala citta, and > accumulated from citta to citta. > Nina. > ====================== I thank you for the foregoing, but it just doesn't answer my question or solve my problem. From time to time Abhidhammic material and commentarial material is amazingly vague, amazingly fuzzy. And that seems to happen at critical points. ;-) Some things, not so terribly important, such as how many mind-moments can pass during the course of a single rupa - I recall that 17 is the magic number? - are extraordinarily precise, but other very important things such as the precise nature of latent tendencies and the apparent sort of permanence to them, are quite vague. As phenomena that truly exist, and latent tendencies are certainly such, and being other than nibbana, they should be subject to the moment-to-moment arising and ceasing that all other such realities are subject to. Of course, if anusaya are merely pa~n~natti, well, that is a different story. But then, how do they cease? For that matter, they don't ever exist at all according to Abhidhamma. If one were to say that anusaya are deep-seated cetasikas that may be strengthened and weakened, but otherwise tenaciously replicate themselves from moment to moment, and that manifest as outflowings, that would be an explanation that is sufficiently detailed and credible for me to "buy". But apparently this is not the "story", and there doesn't seem to be a story that has much clarity to it. I'm not "blaming" you, Nina. You are incredibly knowledgeable with regard to the tipitaka and commentaries, and you faithfully report what seems to be there. There is no way I could possibly glean this information except from such a wonderful and generous source as you, and I greatly appreciate your assistance. 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) 39742 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Dec 13, 2004 11:10am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: latent tendencies. Hi Mike, At times the T.A. transl is very hard to read. About arising of latent tendencies: this is also misunderstood, seems like nibbana that does not arise. Of course not. Say, lobha-mulacitta arises and then falls away, and then, although the citta is no longer there, the sense desire continues on as a latent tendency, and is accumulated from one citta to the next. See my quotes to Howard. It increases ever more. More lobha arises, and is then accumulated, etc. This accumulated latent tendency of lobha conditions the arising of lobha-mulacitta again. A vicious circle. Nina. op 12-12-2004 23:21 schreef m. nease op mlnease@z...: > So would it be more correct to say that, though latent defilements don't > arise with phassa and vedanaa, still phassa and vedanaa don't arise without > them? 39743 From: Egbert Date: Mon Dec 13, 2004 1:41pm Subject: Re: Phra Dhammadharo, Phil, Herman. Hi RobK, I hope you are well. Seing as my name is in the subject, I thought I'd chip in :-) I found it an interesting quote from Venerable Gunaratana. > Here is a quote from a popular book by Venerable Gunaratana. > Mindfulness in Plain English. > ""One of the most difficult things to learn is that mindfulness > is not dependent on any emotional or mental state. > .......You don't need to move at a snail's pace to be mindful. > You don't even need to be calm. You can be mindful while solving > problems in intensive calculus. You can be mindful in the middle > of a football scrimmage. You can even be mindful in the midst of > a raging fury. Mental and physical activities are no bar to > mindfulness. If you find your mind extremely active, then simply > observe the nature and degree of that activity. It is just a > part of the passing show within.."endquote > My take on this is that at a moment of mindfullness there is no sense of "I am doing this" or "I am doing that" or even "doing this" or "doing that". There is no sense of noting or identifaction or classification. Whatever activity seems to be taking place would only appear so to a third-party observer. Am I correct in this, or am I confusing mindfullness with something else? Thanks and Kind Regards Herman 39744 From: plnao Date: Mon Dec 13, 2004 3:22pm Subject: Re: Is there seeing now? (Re: [dsg] Re: kusala and akusala. Hi all > Phil I think that's why K Sujin asks "is there seeing now?" The answer is very > likely "no", and being able > to answer "no" is evidence of deepening insight. Thinking afterwards, I would add that yes, of course, there is seeing now but we are unaware of it. In almost all cases, what we take to be seeing something is actually *looking at.* (Quite often at work I have opportunities to teach the difference between "see" and "look at" , as well as "hear" and "listen to") I would say that a lot of what we take to be seeing is more like looking at, directed by the mind that has already proliferated in a way in response to the visual information, conditioned by natural decisive support conditioned, or accumulations in the citta, or with the cittas, or whatever. And the value of knowing this is, of course, that it points yet again at the lack of self that can steer citta processess in a desired direction. Yet more evidence of the overwhelming influence of conditions. More reason, therefore, to feel helpless about things.? No - more reason to feel gratitude to the Buddha who laid out the workings of mind, more reason to have faith that by following the Buddha's teaching panna can be cultivated, the pannna that will conceivably in this lifetime but more likely in a lifetime to come give rise to the cessation of proliferation. (ie " the monk stops at seeing.") Metta, Phil 39745 From: plnao Date: Mon Dec 13, 2004 3:52pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Phra Dhammadharo, Phil, Herman. Hi Rob K, and all > Dear Phil, > I have had these conversations many times over the last 15 years or > so. In India with my guide, he went to the Ganges river every > morning to do his ritual washing. I asked him about it and he said > it is so that he is reminded to be good etc. ect.- "oh yes it > doesn't matter I can be reminded anytime, I don't have to do it" but > still he seemed attached to me. > Or a muslim friend who says bowing to mecca five times a day reminds > him of his duties and purifies his mind. > And they will all say that they don't have to do such rituals but > then ... Ah, but we are interested in the workings of the mind, in proliferation, in the way the roots conditions condition our thought processess. No matter what one thinks of vipassana meditation and the risk of becoming attached to it in an unwholesome way, it cannot be denied that it is directly related to seeing into mind. When I meditated in the past, it was all so ritualistic. I had my altar, and my little Buddha (actually a Filipino rice god, but it felt close) and candles and incense. I got into a full lotus and bore down in a such a serious way. Now it is much more relaxed. I'm already sitting on a cushion anyway, because it's a Japanese room, and as you know that's the way we sit whether we're watching TV or whatever. I'm already sitting cross-legged, because that's the way I always sit. I do full lotus if I do yoga, but doing it for vip makes me feel that I am too keen on technique, to keen for results, so I jsut sit with my legs crossed., the way I'm already sitting. I have my coffee, I have my suttas, and at some point, without deciding when, I put down the book and start doing some mindfulness exercises. I don't wait until there's nobody home, the way I used to. This morning Naomi was puttering in the kitchen, making our lunchboxes for the day, and at one point she came in to show me the results. There wasn't a hint of irritation about that. I'm just not that attached to these exercises. We'll see if I get into them in a way that is more likely to lead to attachment. I think it's important that the gap between the way one meditates and one's daily life is not too wide. There's no big gap there for me. It's pretty much the same thing I do on the train. What will make it helpful for me now is to condition awareness of when I am thinking too much. I am so thrilled by the deep Dhamma I continue to find in the Suttanta that I don't stop thinking about it all day long. That has got to stop. And this will help, I suspect. I found a good quote, from Einstein : "The level of thinking that gets one into trouble is insufficient to get one out of it." That certainly applies to the way I'm studying suttas these days. I need guidance from the Buddha to be aware of thinking that threatens to sweep me away into what Nina calls "the ocean of concepts." I've said it before and I'll say it again that I think cultivating panna without resorting to formal meditation is incredibly courageous and indicates a degree of patience that few people are capable of. I think the way of practice taught by K Sujin and advocated by Nina and you and others is the purest way of Dhamma I have ever come across. How easy it is to leap out after comforting ways of practice. But you don't. I really respect that. But I'm aware of some mental imbalances that I want to sort out in a more focused way. I think there is room for that for beginners. The danger is getting attached to these practices and not being able to shed them when they are no longer needed. So the Einstein quote above could apply to meditation as well - "the level of meditation that gets one into trouble is insuffificient to get one out of it." Yes, that could definitely be true. > I find so few people can see this. Anger is just as good an object > as pleasant feeling, and yet so many seem to think that vipassana is > about sitting quietly trying to be calm. As you know if you have been reading my posts, I am well aware of this. All my references to staying with anger instead of lunigng away towards calming methods. But there are benefits to calm as well. I referred in the past to a swimming metaphor. Practicing swimming in a pool, in calm waters, helps us be better swimmers when we swim in open water. We could go out to sea and get battered and tossed around by the waves and eventually fall into a skillful stroke. That is a very courageous way to go about it. Practicing one's strokes first in an indoor pool isn't as courageous but it may lead to a faster arising of skill. > Funnily enough they might also feel relaxed sitting in a hot bath or > going for a jog but they wouldn't equate that with vipassana. I would. Daily life is what it's all about. Metta, Phil 39746 From: Date: Mon Dec 13, 2004 4:04pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Concept and Reality in Primary Texts Hi Sarah, Thanks for the background info in 'concept' in the abhidhamma. I brought it up because I thought Rob M. was going to research it. But, as often happens when someone thinks too much about concept, he went mad and gave up;-) Larry 39747 From: Date: Mon Dec 13, 2004 11:27am Subject: Re: [dsg] 'Samsara and Nibbana are the same' In a message dated 12/12/2004 9:59:40 PM Pacific Standard Time, LBIDD@w... writes: Hi Christine, For Nagarjuna all understanding of any experience is conceptual. Whatever is known is concept, empty of self-nature (sabhava), non-arising. Samsara is known; nibbana is known. Samsara is concept, nibbana is concept. Nibbana and samsara are the same. This is my interpretation. He didn't use these words or reasons, but he did come to this conclusion. Hi Larry and Christine, I'm pretty rusty on my Nagarjuna, but my recollection was that Nagarjuna was a pure "anti-conceptualist." His teaching was to show that concepts are completely false. The idea was, therefore, to surpass conceptual thinking. Nagarjuna's thinking was basically the foundation for much if not all of Mahayana and especially Zen. TG 39748 From: Antony Woods Date: Mon Dec 13, 2004 5:15pm Subject: Re: 'Samsara and Nibbana are the same' Dear Christine, Bhikkhu Bodhi wrote: "The Mahayana schools, despite their great differences, concur in upholding a thesis that, from the Theravada point of view, borders on the outrageous. This is the claim that there is no ultimate difference between samsara and Nirvana, defilement and purity, ignorance and enlightenment. For the Mahayana, the enlightenment which the Buddhist path is designed to awaken consists precisely in the realization of this non-dualistic perspective." and: "Thus the Theravada makes the antithesis of samsara and Nibbana the starting point of the entire quest for deliverance. Even more, it treats this antithesis as determinative of the final goal, which is precisely the transcendence of samsara and the attainment of liberation in Nibbana. Where Theravada differs significantly from the Mahayana schools, which also start with the duality of samsara and Nirvana, is in its refusal to regard this polarity as a mere preparatory lesson tailored for those with blunt faculties, to be eventually superseded by some higher realization of non-duality. From the standpoint of the Pali Suttas, even for the Buddha and the arahants suffering and its cessation, samsara and Nibbana, remain distinct." http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/bps/news/essay27.html Sorry about overquoting sometimes, it's just that I don't have anything to add to Bhikkhu Bodhi's analysis. May you be well and happy, Antony. 39749 From: rjkjp1 Date: Mon Dec 13, 2004 6:32pm Subject: Re: Phra Dhammadharo, Phil, Herman. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Egbert" wrote: > > Hi RobK, > > I hope you are well. > > Seing as my name is in the subject, I thought I'd chip in :-) > > I found it an interesting quote from Venerable Gunaratana. > > > Here is a quote from a popular book by Venerable Gunaratana. > > Mindfulness in Plain English. > > ""One of the most difficult things to learn is that mindfulness > > is not dependent on any emotional or mental state. > > .......You don't need to move at a snail's pace to be mindful. > > You don't even need to be calm. You can be mindful while solving > > problems in intensive calculus. You can be mindful in the middle > > of a football scrimmage. You can even be mindful in the midst of > > a raging fury. Mental and physical activities are no bar to > > mindfulness. If you find your mind extremely active, then simply > > observe the nature and degree of that activity. It is just a > > part of the passing show within.."endquote > > > > My take on this is that at a moment of mindfullness there is no > sense of "I am doing this" or "I am doing that" or even "doing this" > or "doing that". There is no sense of noting or identifaction or > classification. Whatever activity seems to be taking place would > only appear so to a third-party observer. Am I correct in this, or > am I confusing mindfullness with something else? > >================= Dear Herman, In the satipatthana sutta commentary it stresses that the type of mindfulness the Buddha meant was one that is associated with wisdom, sati-sampajanna. And especially the satipatthana sutta is about non- delusion: "Within, it is said, there certainly is no self or soul which looks straight on or looks away from the front. Still, at the arising of the thought "I shall look straight on," and with that thought the process of oscillation (vayo dhatu) originating from mind, [citta samutthana] bringing into being bodily expression [viññatti] arises. Thus owing to the diffusion of the process of oscillation born of mental activity [cittakiriyavayodhatu vipphara], the lower eyelid goes down and the upper eyelid goes up. Surely there is no one who opens with a contrivance. Thereupon, eye-consciousness arises fulfilling the function of sight [tato cakkhu viññanam dassana kiccam sadhentam uppajjati], it is said. Clear comprehension of this kind here is indeed called the clear comprehension of non-delusion [evam sampajananam panettha asammoha sampajaññam nama]. Further, clear comprehension of non- delusion should be also understood, here, through accurate knowledge of the root (mula pariñña), through the casual state (agantuka bhava) and through the temporary state [tavakalika bhava]. First (is the consideration) by way of the accurate knowledge of the root: -- ..Thus here in the first instance, clear comprehension of non- delusion should be understood, by way of the accurate knowledge of the root. " endquote So indeed your comment is correct: "My take on this is that at a moment of mindfullness there is no > sense of "I am doing this" or "I am doing that" or even "doing this" > or "doing that". "" However we have to be careful that we are not taking some type of mild avijja (ignorance) as been sati-sampajjana. There is an object at each moment of consciosness but the object is seen as it is without the usual overlay of me (or I am having sati): "..The passage beginning with the words: Within, it is said, there certainly is no self or soul is stated to explain that looking straight on or looking away from the front is, to be sure, just a variety of occurrence of even bare phenomena and that therefore clear comprehension of non-delusion is the knowing of that fact as it really is [yasma pana alokitadi nama dhamma mattasseva pavatti viseso tasma tassa yathavato jananam asammoha sampajaññanti dassetum abhantareti adi vuttam]. ""endquote Thus whether there is sati-sampajanna or not can only be known each for himself, the teachings help point us in the right direction though. I like what you said about" Whatever activity seems to be taking place would > only appear so to a third-party observer."" At first I was going to say 'but sati is an activity'. But then in another way it is tearing down the wall of I making (the paticcasamuppada). It is about as non-active as it can be from the standpoint of worldly activity. And so even one who is walking and talking; when there are any moments of genuine sati-sampajanna is inactive in this sense. We can also see that it is not easy to have sati because it is going against our usual wordly way of attachment. Sati comes with non- attachment, which is why the effort/energy that comes with sati is so profound. RobertK 39750 From: kenhowardau Date: Mon Dec 13, 2004 7:35pm Subject: Freedom: a Concept! (Re: A Drop More Re: [dsg] The Problem of Relations) Hi Larry, I wrote; ------------ > > "May I ask your views on the profundity of the Buddha's teaching? What is it telling us that we don't already know?" > > ------------ And you replied: --------------- > Regarding impermanence, he says desiring or even valuing anything that is impermanent leads to dukkha, in one way or another, always. I don't think we really know that and probably are a little afraid to know it. It seems almost inhuman. --------------- That's good commonsense, and I think almost everyone teaches it. When the Bible says, 'Put not your treasures where rust and moth doth corrupt,' it is warning us not to have faith in anything impermanent: ----------------------- L: > Plus the tactic of rejecting all pleasure usually hides a gigantic desire for release. In this case the desire is for a concept that will never arise [this may not be in the suttas]. > ----------------------- I'm not sure of your point, there. I did ask for something profound: perhaps you've given me more than I can handle. :-) ----------------------------- L: > In any case, even though impermanence may be obvious, he repeated that message over and over. Whatever is impermanent is dukkha. Whatever is impermanent and dukkha is not self. > ----------------------------- Yes, he said, "In short, the five khandhas are dukkha." (Dhammacakkappavattana) But what are the five khandhas? Are nations, people and chariots the five khandhas? No, they are mere concepts, and this is where the Dhamma becomes truly profound. I think we should be learning all we can about the khandhas. Ken H 39751 From: buddhatrue Date: Mon Dec 13, 2004 8:35pm Subject: Is there seeing now? (Re: [dsg] Re: kusala and akusala. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "plnao" wrote: > > > Hi all > > > Phil I think that's why K Sujin asks "is there seeing now?" The answer > is very > > likely "no", and being able > > to answer "no" is evidence of deepening insight. > > Thinking afterwards, I would add that yes, of course, there is seeing now > but we > are unaware of it. Friend Phil, Sorry to have misquoted but I don't see a big difference between "What are you seeing now?" and "Is there seeing now?" The second is simply crouched in politically correct non-atta terms. But, you have delighted me with your two posts on this question because you have proven my point: The question is silly! ;-) If you think about this question deeply, in every possible aspect, you will soon come to the conclusion that there isn't an answer. As Herman pointed out, it is like a koan, a riddle without a solution. Personally, I don't think this type of question, usually given when asked a direct question, is really supposed to answer anything. It is probably just meant to befuddle the person until they shut up. ;-) Metta, James 39752 From: Date: Mon Dec 13, 2004 8:41pm Subject: Re: Freedom: a Concept! (Re: A Drop More Re: [dsg] The Problem of Relations) Hi Ken H, You wrote, in part: K: "Yes, he said, "In short, the five khandhas are dukkha." (Dhammacakkappavattana) But what are the five khandhas? Are nations, people and chariots the five khandhas? No, they are mere concepts, and this is where the Dhamma becomes truly profound. I think we should be learning all we can about the khandhas." L: I agree, but I think what we have to see directly is that what we desire is ungraspable, either because it is a concept and cannot be truly experienced or because it is immediately impermanent. Concepts are no less unsatisfactory than realities if they are objects of desire. And I think we can see directly the conceptuality of concepts. Take a person you especially like, for example. Can you see directly that you cannot really experience that person? You can't even come close. The more carefully you examine who and what that person is, the less you see a whole person. If you can see directly how impossible it is to experience that person and at the same time see that there is a person there, then that is a direct insight into concept. If understood correctly this insight should dissolve all desire to grasp that person, whether physically or conceptually. Larry 39753 From: Date: Mon Dec 13, 2004 9:23pm Subject: Re: [dsg] 'Samsara and Nibbana are the same' TG: "I'm pretty rusty on my Nagarjuna, but my recollection was that Nagarjuna was a pure "anti-conceptualist." " Hi TG, If anything Nagarjuna could be said to be the ultimate eel-wriggler, neither 'anti' nor 'not-anti', nor both nor neither. (I might have a few too many negatives in there to make sense.) Anyway, the favorite criticism is that he doesn't have a position. His defenders refute that with subtle arguments too subtle for me to understand. It looks to me, from a Theravada abhidhamma point of view, that he is analyzing concepts, not realties, and showing how they are logically ungraspable in a conceptual sense. Aha! there's the anti-conceptualist. But still, I think this is just pointing out no self nature (asabhava), which is standard abhidhamma lingo for concept. This is a valid approach because it is not too difficult to argue that all objects of desire are concepts. But that is my own argument, neither Nargarjuna's nor abhidhamma's. Larry 39754 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon Dec 13, 2004 10:36pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Dhamma Thread (174) Dear Htoo, You're providing more helpful details. This was a long post, but I thought the content was very useful. Here's an extract: --- htootintnaing wrote: > So depending on realms of citta there are > > a) 54 kamavacara cittas > b) 15 rupavacara cittas > c) 12 arupavacara cittas > d) 8 lokuttara cittas > ------- > 89 total cittas > > These are realms of citta. These are not realms of beings. .... S: A good point to stress again and again! .... >So > kamavacara cittas may still arise in other bhumi of beings apart from > kama bhumi. Rupavacara cittas can also arise in manussa bhumi or > human realm and deva realms. Arupavacara cittas can also arise in > manussa bhumi or human realm, deva realms and rupa brahma realms > apart from arupa brahma bhumi. > > If magga cittas arise in the vicinity of 5 jhanas with the power of > those jhana then 8 lokuttara cittas may be counted as ( 8 >< 5 > jhana ) 40 lokuttara cittas. > > So there will be 121 total cittas and they are > > 1. 54 kamavacara cittas > 2. 15 rupavacara cittas > 3. 12 arupavacara cittas > 4. 40 lokuttara cittas > ------------ > 121 total cittas .... No nit-picking for most these posts - very good;-) Thank you for your contributions and comments on the Cetasikas too. Metta, Sarah p.s I also thought your post on smiles was a good one;-);-) ===== 39755 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon Dec 13, 2004 10:44pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Vis. XIV, 122 and Tiika Dear Nina, I like this quote below a lot: --- nina wrote: > As we read in the Co. to the Abhidhammattha Sangaha (T.A., p. > 129): <...thus one should understand that when consciousness is > operating, > it operates by virtue of the fixed order of consciousness (citta > niyama), > like the fixed order of the seasons and seeds, without there being > anyone > issuing orders saying,¹You are adverting and come immediately after > existence-continuum (bhavanga-citta); you are, say, seeing, or whatever, > and > come immediately after adverting.¹> .... S: It was the point I was stressing to Howard on conditions - it is the nature of cittas that they follow according to citta niyama. We can test out how impossible it is to direct cittas at this moment. 'You, lobha, don't return again. Come sati now after seeing...'No;-). Metta, Sarah p.s I think there was a typo earlier in this post. You wrote 'when the object is great, the object cannot last longer than the javana-cittas'.Perhaps you meant 'not great'? ============== 39756 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon Dec 13, 2004 10:54pm Subject: ‘Cetasikas' study corner 73- Volition/cetanaa (c) Dear Friends, 'Cetasikas' by Nina van Gorkom http://www.vipassana.info/cetasikas.html http://www.zolag.co.uk/ Questions, comments and different views welcome;-) ========================================== [Ch.4 Volition(cetanaa]contd] ***** The cetasikas which accompany citta share the same object, but they each have to fulfil their own task. For example, phassa contacts the object, vedanå feels, experiences the “taste” of the object, and saññå “marks” and remembers the object. Cetanå sees to it that the other dhammas it arises together with fulfil their tasks with regard to the object they all share. Every cetanå which arises, no matter whether it accompanies kusala citta, akusasa citta, vipåkacitta or kiriyacitta, has to coordinate the tasks of the other dhammas it accompanies. The cetanå which accompanies kusala citta and akusala citta has, in addition to coordinating, another task to perform: ‘willing’ or ‘activity of kamma’(1). According to the Atthasåliní, as to activity in moral and immoral acts, cetanå is exceedingly energetic whereas the accompanying cetasikas play only a restricted part. Cetanå which accompanies kusala citta and akusala citta coordinates the work of the other cetasikas it arises together with and it ‘wills’ kusala or akusala, thus, it makes a “double effort”. The Atthasåliní compares the double task of cetanå to the task of a landowner who directs the work of his labourers, looks after them and also takes himself an equal share of the work. He doubles his strength and doubles his effort. Even so volition doubles its strength and its effort in moral and immoral acts. *** 1) Åyúhana which means ‘striving’ or pursuing, is translated in the English text of the Atthasåliní as conation, and in the english text of the Visuddhimagga as accumulation. ***** [Ch.4 Volition(cetanaa) to be contd] Metta, Sarah ====== 39757 From: christine_forsyth Date: Mon Dec 13, 2004 11:23pm Subject: Re: [dsg] 'Samsara and Nibbana are the same' Hello Joop, Larry, TG, Antony, and all, Thank you all for your replies - I don't have much to add at this moment - still reflecting and forming questions. As a side note, you may be interested in Prof. Richard P. Hayes's article about "Nagarjuna: Master of Paradox, Mystic or Perpetrator of Fallacies?" http://www.unm.edu/~rhayes/nagarjuna_smith.pdf metta and peace, Christine ---The trouble is that you think you have time--- --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, LBIDD@w... wrote: > TG: "I'm pretty rusty on my Nagarjuna, but my recollection was that > Nagarjuna was a pure "anti-conceptualist." " > > Hi TG, > > If anything Nagarjuna could be said to be the ultimate eel- wriggler, > neither 'anti' nor 'not-anti', nor both nor neither. (I might have a few > too many negatives in there to make sense.) Anyway, the favorite > criticism is that he doesn't have a position. His defenders refute that > with subtle arguments too subtle for me to understand. It looks to me, > from a Theravada abhidhamma point of view, that he is analyzing > concepts, not realties, and showing how they are logically ungraspable > in a conceptual sense. Aha! there's the anti-conceptualist. But still, I > think this is just pointing out no self nature (asabhava), which is > standard abhidhamma lingo for concept. > > This is a valid approach because it is not too difficult to argue that > all objects of desire are concepts. But that is my own argument, neither > Nargarjuna's nor abhidhamma's. > > Larry 39758 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon Dec 13, 2004 11:56pm Subject: pabhassaram cittam (luminous mind) - was Letter to B.Bodhi-'The Jhânas and the Lay Disciple ..' copy of letter just sent to B.Bodhi ====================================== Dear Ven Bodhi, Thank your for your kind and considered comments which I may respond to separately. I need to consider further. As you say, much depends on the weight one gives to the commentaries in these matters. Meanwhile, I didn’t keep a copy of your letter on the ‘pabhassaram cittam’ in my personal mail, but your letter was sent to DSG . I believe this is the one you were referring to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/16751 As I looked for it, I also noted that Nina replied on DSG here: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/16771 In another post I quoted your comments from the back of your anthology from Anguttara Nikaya (p.278, note 13) which I think gives a good summary of the meaning of Luminous (pabhassaram) and pretty much accords with what some of us have been saying and quoting. "Luminous (pabhassaram). AA states that here "the mind" (citta) refers to the bhavanga-citta, the "life-continuum" or underlying stream of consciousness which supervenes whenever active consciousness lapses, most notably in deep sleep. The 'adventitious defilements' are greed, hatred and delusion, which appear at a stage of the cognitive process which, in later Buddhist literature, is called javana, "impulsion". AA says that the defilements do not arise simultaneously with the bhavanga, but they 'arrive' later, at the phase of javana. the fact that this expression "luminous mind" does not signify any "eternal and pure mind-essence" is evident for the preceding text, in which the mind is said to be extremely fleeting and transitory. the "uninstructed worldling" (assutavaa puthujjana) is one who lacks adequate knowledge of the dhamma and training in its practice." ***** In a more recent letter to me (10th October, 2003), you wrote with regard to your earlier comments (in the first link): BB: >Re-reading my note on pabhassara-citta after one year (it was almost Exactly one year ago that we were in Hong Kong), I still agree with it. To me, the idea that 'luminosity' is an intrinsic quality of citta, consisting in its ability to "illuminate" objects, seems more convincing than the idea that pabhassaram cittam refers to the 'bhavanga,' a concept that comes to prominence only in a considerably later strata of Buddhist literature. Still, the fact that the statement is made without elucidation in the Nikaya text may imply that it was intended to be suggestive rather than definitive, and thus should not be pinned down to one exclusive interpretation. I hope this is what you were looking for. Please let me know anytime you wish to retrieve any of your letters. Metta, Sarah ======= BB: > P.S. I had meant to ask you: A couple of years ago, I think it was in > the course of the last trip -- of late 2002 -- I made to the Far East, I > had sent you a letter commenting on the 'pabhassaram cittam' (luminous > mind) idea. I seem to have accidentally deleted that file from my hard > drive, probably thinking it was just a routine letter with nothing of 39759 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Dec 14, 2004 0:22am Subject: Re: [dsg] 'Samsara and Nibbana are the same' Dear Chris & All, --- christine_forsyth wrote: > > > Hello Joop, Larry, TG, Antony, and all, > > Thank you all for your replies - I don't have much to add at this > moment - still reflecting and forming questions. ... S: I also don't have much to add, but would like to say it's a good topic to raise as there tend to be a lot of misunderstandings in this area. I thought TG's post with all the good quotes was excellent. He was ready and armed for this one!! Also Joop gave a good summary, I thought. For more quotes on nibbana, you might like to look one rainy day in U.P. under 'Udana' for a series I wrote from the commentary and also of course under 'Nibbana' for many more quotes. No samsara involved;-). I also agreed with the gist of the Francis Story article, though I always find room for nit-picking in his writings (but that's probably just me - I've been marking student assignments for far too long, I think;-)). I think Larry gave some pertinent comments too on Nagarjuna's work. Possibly see U.P, under 'Nagarjuna'. From what I've gathered from long, long dscussions with members like Anders and Rob Ep before on DSG, there are just two lines in the Tipitaka which particularly have been used (some might say abused!) for much of the Mahayana edifice and these kinds of ideas. One of these is the line about luminous mind (AN1:10)just referred to in my letter to BB (see 'luminous' in UP for more) and the other is the line where vinnana refers to nibbana (and not consciousness) which was discussed in detail before. (I've just forgotten the sutta, MN49, I think). Probably you'll find posts on it under 'nibbana' or by searching for 'Anders'and 'vinnana' or 'nibbana' in dsg.org I'll also be glad to hear further comments. Thx for raising it. Metta, Sarah ========= > As a side note, you may be interested in Prof. Richard P. Hayes's > article about "Nagarjuna: Master of Paradox, Mystic or Perpetrator > of Fallacies?" > http://www.unm.edu/~rhayes/nagarjuna_smith.pdf 39760 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Dec 14, 2004 0:28am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: The Buddha In His First Week Hi Agrios, You asked Htoo some good questions here: --- agriosinski wrote: > > Could I have your detailed explanation, in depth picture of what > avija comes to be and how it leads, what exactly happens that sankharas > arise. > And then what sankhara is and how it leads to vinnana etc. etc. > Or if you don't feel like writing about it, could you point me to > the other source? ... S: You could also look at some of the past posts (saved by the moderators!!) in U.P. under: 'ignorance' and 'dependent origination' http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/files/Useful_Posts You may get sent to the Pali names, I forget how they're classified. Why not take a look and come back with any unanswered questions or comments you read which don't make sense or which you'd like to discuss further. Metta, Sarah ========= 39761 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Dec 14, 2004 1:06am Subject: Re: Is there seeing now? (Re: [dsg] Re: kusala and akusala. Hi Phil (Sarah (!!),James, Nina & All), This is a good topic and I’d like to join in. --- plnao wrote: > > Phil I think that's why K Sujin asks "is there seeing now?" The > answer > is very > > likely "no", and being able > > to answer "no" is evidence of deepening insight. > Phil again:> Thinking afterwards, I would add that yes, of course, there is seeing > now > but we > are unaware of it. In almost all cases, what we take to be seeing > something > is actually *looking at.* … Yes! The second answer is more to the point, I think. Why is seeing and visible object stressed? In India (Jetavana on audio), K.Sujin was saying that this is the doorway that most people have most difficulty with and raise most questions about. It is always the first doorway mentioned in the suttas too. Nina has already written about its importance and the misunderstanding that arises on account of the eye door, but I’d like to add a little more. As you have said we have long, long stories about what is seen and we completely forget that it’s only visible object that is seen. By remembering that it is only visible object appearing, slowly there will be less interest in all the ideas about what’s seen and we won’t be quite so lost in the ocean of concepts. Sound or taste may seem more obviously only very briefly experienced, but gradually with the development of understanding, I think visible object can be known to be just as brief and momentary and quite different from all those stories. I’ve heard K.sujin saying that visible object is only one rupa appearing, but because it appears with different colours and detail, it brings more ideas about it, even when it doesn’t appear. We are not as attached on the whole to our memories about sounds or other sense objects and so there is less proliferating about them. She’s said there are conditions for taking note of what appears more often such as the different characteristics, colours and so on. In addition, visible object keeps appearing even though it’s only one rupa. It’s very, very common, more common than sound or taste for example. So it conditions more thinking in our memories. When awareness grows, I think we can also begin to see that visible object appears in between moments of hearing, tasting, smelling etc and certainly while thinking (conventionally speaking here). These experiences through the eye-door therefore also play more of a role in influencing our ideas of people,things and self-views. So back to K.Sujin’s question ‘Is there seeing now?’. It’s intended as a reminder of what is real as opposed to what is being conceptualized right now. As you say,”the value of knowing this is, of course, that it points yet again at the lack of self that can steer citta processes in a desired direction. Yet more evidence of the overwhelming influence of conditions”. Metta, Sarah p.s love your comments about moving or not moving into the Brahma vihara club and the quip on the Marx Brothers line;-) Also your comments to KK on wanting metta. Yes, at these times of metta meditation (or vipassana meditation when there’s any attempt to ‘have vipassana’), K.Sujin would say, ‘it’s not the study of mind, but the study of self’ at such times;-).So go swimming, sit in lotus on your nice Japanese cushions (my choice too!) and avoid the News by all means. Just no need to equate any of these actions with ‘vipassana meditation’;-). ===================================================================== 39762 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Dec 14, 2004 1:27am Subject: Re: [dsg] Dhamma Thread ( 133 ), lokuttara citta and dukkha. Dear Nina (Htoo and Ken O), --- Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Dear Sarah and Htoo, > recently Ken O explained it very clearly. We have to know whether the > context is: dukkha as one of the noble Truths or dukkha lakkha.na. All > cittas are impermanent and thus dukkha. But the noble truth of dukkha > does > not apply to lokuttara citta, it does not have as origin the second > noble > truth: clinging. ... Yes, thank you for reminding me about Ken O's post which I'd put aside too. I may have attributed his comment to Htoo by mistake. As you say, the context is important and the Dispeller comments need to be read carefully I think. ... > sarahprocterabbott@y...: > > > You said, I believe, that the lokuttara cittas are not included in > dukkha > > in the 4 Noble Truths. I heard K.Sujin explain the same, saying this > was > > because these cittas couldn't be known prior to being experienced or > sth > > along those lines. .... Ken O quoted from the Abhidhammattha Sangaha I believe: "The items joined with the path and the fruit are outside the four truths." I came across more detail in STA (the comy) on this, p283: "The items joined with the path are the remaining items, other than the eight factors, beginning with contact that are associated with the path, and the fruit along with its associated items - these are outside, excluded from, the four truths from an absolute standpoint. But from a relative standpoint, since it is stated in the exposition of the faculty of having known that it is a 'path factor and included in the path', it is possible, in the case of the dhammas belonging to the fruit, to include right view, etc, in the truth of the path, and the other dhammas associated with the paths and fruits in the truth of suffering because they share in the suffering constituted by conditioned formations. When this is done the summarising of all also occurs in the teaching of the truths." .... S: 'in the exposition of the faculty of having known that it is a 'path factor and included in the path' I find this interesting in the light of KS's comment above. Metta, Sarah ======= 39763 From: jwromeijn Date: Tue Dec 14, 2004 2:02am Subject: Re: [dsg] 'Samsara and Nibbana are the same' And absabhava = pannatti ? --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, LBIDD@w... wrote: ... Larry states: "no self nature (asabhava), which is standard abhidhamma lingo for concept" Are you really correct? Is in the Abhidhamma asabhava (no self nature) = pannatti (concept) ? I cannot believe it. Perhaps only in the commentaries ? To me sabhava and asabhava are themselves concepts. And, what is worse: they are wrong concepts; nothing has a self nature, it is atta- belief ! I'm not the first who thinks so. In Wheel 412/413 "The Dhamma Theory, Philosophical Cornerstone of the Abhidhamma", Y. Karunadasa explains: " … in the post-canonical exegetical literature of Sri Lanka where, for the first time, the term sabhåva (Skt svabhåva) came to be used as a synonym for dhamma. Hence the recurrent definition: "Dhammas are so called because they bear their own nature" (attano sabhåva◊ dhårent¥ ti dhammå). Now the question that arises here is whether the Theravådins used the term sabhåva in the same sense as the Sarvåstivådins did. Did the Theravådins assume the metaphysical view that the substance of a dhamma persists throughout the three phases of time? In other words, does this amount to the admission that there is a duality between the dhamma and its sabhåva, between the bearer and the borne, a dichotomy which goes against the grain of the Buddhist doctrine of anattå? … (snip) … It is also observed that if the dhammas are said to have own-nature (saka-bhåva = sabhåva), this is only a tentative device to drive home the point that there is no other-nature (para-bhåva) from which they emerge and to which they finally lapse. Now this commentarial definition of dhamma as sabhåva poses an important problem, for it seems to go against an earlier Theravåda tradition recorded in the Pa†isambhidåmagga. This canonical text specifically states that the five aggregates are devoid of own-nature (sabhåvena-suñña◊). Since the dhammas are the elementary constituents of the five aggregates, this should mean that the dhammas, too, are devoid of own-nature. What is more, does not the very use of the term sabhåva, despite all the qualifications under which it is used, give the impression that a given dhamma exists in its own right? And does this not amount to the admission that a dhamma is some kind of substance? The commentators were not unaware of these implications and they therefore took the necessary steps to forestall such a conclusion. This they sought to do by supplementing the former definition with another which actually nullifies the conclusion that the dhammas might be quasi-substances. This additional definition states that a dhamma is not that which bears its own-nature, but that which is borne by its own conditions (paccayehi dhåriyant¥ ti dhammå). Whereas the earlier definition is agent-denotation (kattusådhana) because it attributes an active role to the dhamma, elevating it to the position of an agent, the new definition is object-denotation (kamma-sådhana) because it attributes a passive role to the dhamma and thereby downgrades it to the position of an object. What is radical about this new definition is that it reverses the whole process which otherwise might culminate in the conception of dhammas as substances or bearers of their own-nature. What it seeks to show is that, far from being a bearer, a dhamma is being borne by its own conditions. … (snip) … In the Abhidhammic exegesis this term paramattha is defined to mean that which has reached its highest (uttama), implying thereby that the dhammas are ultimate existents with no possibility of further reduction. Hence own-nature (sabhåva) came to be further defined as ultimate nature (paramattha-sabhåva)." See http://www.saigon.com/~anson/ebud/ebdha227.htm Sofar this quote. By the way, in this Wheel publication Karunadasa is saying important thing about the theme "Pannatti and the Two truth" too. Metta Joop 39764 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Dec 14, 2004 2:37am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: latent tendencies. Hi Howard, op 13-12-2004 17:50 schreef upasaka@a... op upasaka@a...: From time to time Abhidhammic material and commentarial > material is amazingly vague, amazingly fuzzy.... other very important things > such as the precise nature of latent tendencies and the apparent sort of > permanence to them, are quite vague. N: Thanks for your kind words. But more important: do ask again when anything is not clear in the texts, you render me a service. (The same for my Vis. studies.) It is an opportunity for me to look at dhammas from all angles. Let's walk again through the text and I add remarks: >> In the , in the Commentary to the , the >> Sixth Book of the Abhidhamma, we read in the section on the latent >> tendencies (anusaya-våra) and the section on > tendencies> (sånusaya-våra): N: saanusaya: sa+anusaya: with latent tendencies, thus, having latent tendencies. Text: "In the section on being possessed of latent tendencies the Buddha said : >> Who is with the latent tendency of sense desire, he is possessed of it' . >> It is just like someone who suffers extremely from the sickness of old age, >> and so on, and, so long as he is not cured from this sickness, is called a >> sick person even when illness does not arise. N: Even at rebirth or at the moment of kusala citta, we are still sick, even though the akusala cetasika does not arise with the citta. Text: It is the same in the case of someone with defilements who is traversing >> the round of rebirths whose latent tendencies have not been eradicated by >> the noble eightfold Path. Even though the latent tendencies do not arise he >> is called a person who is possessed of the latent tendencies. N: From birth to death our life consists of an uninterrupted stream of cittas, succeeding one another. Even when no objects are experienced through the six doors by cittas arising in processes, there is still citta that keeps the continuity in our life: the bhavanga-citta. And again, again, the stream of cittas goes on in the next life (see my Vis. studies). The latent sickness is not cured, unless enlightenment is attained in different stages, and then, only at arahatship no trace of it is left. Text: Thus, concerning such latent tendencies he is possessed with, he finds them quite >> acceptable. N: The Pali has: aamanta, . One goes along with them, not knowing their danger. >> Thus we see that there are latent tendencies in each of the cittas that are >> arising and falling away in succession so long as they have not been >> eradicated by the noble eightfold Path. >> Text: 2. The latent tendencies have in the sense of > soil> >> (bhumiladdhuppanna). This refers to the defilements that cannot yet be >> eradicated and are present in their own soil. >> N: The word arisen is also used, but in the meaning as quoted above. Arisen, uppanna has different meanings. This may be intricate. When I say, the latent tendencies do not arise, I do not mean they are unconditioned like nibbana. It only means: they are dormant in the citta, do not come out, but can condition the arising of akusala. Then, we have texts where the word arisen is used but in a specific sense. See below. >> See also Nyanponika, Abh Studies, p. 121, 122. Nyanaponika: (bhuumiladdhuppanna), that is, a fertile soil for the actual arising. This applies to potential defilements (kilesa), which are in the sense of possessing a fertile soil from which they may actually sprout when other conditions for their arising are given...These potential defilements may be compared to dangerous microbes infesting the body, which, though in a latent state, may become active at any moment when the condiitons are favorable...> He then refers to the Abhidhamma texts: dhammas favorable to defilements, to cankers, etc. H: As phenomena that truly exist, and latent tendencies are certainly > such, and being other than nibbana, they should be subject to the > moment-to-moment arising and ceasing that all other such realities are subject > to. N: There is no store citta where they would stay. The middle has to be kept between eternalism and annihilation. They are dhammas, not pa~n~natti. They are powerful, they condition the arising of all sorts of akusala. Where are they? Deeply engrained in each citta, even in kusala citta, because cittas succeed one another from moment to moment and thus, all experiences, all tendencies, good or bad, are accumulated from one moment to the next. We can verify this in life: citta falls away, but you can learn from what you experienced before. Good qualities can become good habits, and bad ones bad habits. One may take a sip of a drink, and slowly one likes it more and more, a new habit. One may tell just a little lie, and slowly one gets into the habit of lying. The akusala citta falls away and more of that type is added to the latent tendencies. Thus, these change all the time. H: If one were to say that anusaya are deep-seated cetasikas that may > be strengthened and weakened, but otherwise tenaciously replicate themselves > from moment to moment, and that manifest as outflowings, that would be an > explanation that is sufficiently detailed and credible for me to "buy". N: Is this not more or less what is said above? They do not replicate themselves each moment, because there are also kusala cittas. Because of the defilements that appear we know that there are these underlying microbes that are with each citta arising and falling away in the long, long stream of cittas, in the cycle of birth and death. As I explained to Mike, with the arising of each akusala citta, the underlying sickness gets worse. But on the other hand, by wisdom they can also wear out. I hope you and Mike will also ask again when there is anything not yet cleared up. Nina. P.S. Rupa lasts as long as seventeen moments of citta: we cannot count but it helps us to have more understanding of the process of cittas experiencing a sense object that has not fallen away yet. It reminds us that very soon after seeing defilements can arise on account of the sense object that is still present. That objcet is not a concept. 39765 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Dec 14, 2004 2:37am Subject: Re: Vism.XIV,123, and Tiika Vism.XIV,123, and Tiika (n) At the end of registration the life-continuum resumes its occurrence. When the [resumed occurrence of the] life-continuum is again interrupted, adverting, etc., occur again, and when the conditions obtain, the consciousness continuity repeats its occurrence as adverting, and next to adverting seeing, etc., N: The Tiika states that it is implied that after seeing the receiving-consciousness arises, and so on for the other cittas performing their functions in the process. It also mentions hearing, smelling, tasting, and the experience of tangible object. Again and again (puna, puna). The Vis. text reminds us of the danger of being in the cycle of birth and death which is dukkha. Again and again we have to experience objects, pleasant or unpleasant, and happiness and sorrow arise in life. Again and again defilements are likely to arise on account of what we experience. This is an exhortation to develop right understanding of whatever dhamma appears, so that eventually there will be the end of the cycle. Text Vis: according to the law of consciousness, again and again, until the life-continuum of one becoming is exhausted. N: The law of consciousness, in Pali: citta niyama, which is the fixed order of the occurrence of cittas. Nobody can change this. The bhavanga-citta maintains the continuity in the life of an individual. From birth to death our life consists of an uninterrupted stream of cittas, succeeding one another. Also in between the processes when one does not experience an object impinging on one of the six doors, there has to be citta so that one stays alive. And again, again, the stream of cittas goes on in the next life. The dying-consciousness is the last bhavanga-citta in a life and after that a new life begins. Text Vis. : For the last life-continuum consciousness of all in one becoming is called death (cuti) because of falling (cavanatta) from that [becoming]. So that is of nineteen kinds too [like rebirth-linking and life-continuum]. N: The dying-consciousness is the last bhavangacitta and thus it can be one of the nineteen types, just as in the case of all the other bhavanga-cittas. Vis. Text: This is how the occurrence of nineteen kinds of resultant consciousness should be understood as death. N: Reviewing: these types are: 1 akusala vipaaka santiira.na-citta (ahetuka, result of akusala kamma) 1 kusala vipaaka santiira.na-citta (ahetuka, result of weak kaamaavacara kusala kamma) 8 mahaa-vipaakacittas (sahetuka, results of kaamaavacara kusala kammas) 5 ruupaavacara vipaakacittas (sahetuka, results of ruupa-jhaanacittas) 4 aruupaavacara vipaakacittas (sahetuka, results of aruupa-jhaanacittas) Thus, nineteen types of citta can perform the function of rebirth, bhavanga (life-continuum) and dying. ****** Nina 39766 From: jwromeijn Date: Tue Dec 14, 2004 3:12am Subject: Re: [dsg] The Problem of Relations --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, LBIDD@w... wrote: > A theory could easily be view (ditthi). I understand view to be a > concept one clings to. In this area it is often difficult to distinguish > concept from reality, but the clinging is pretty obvious, though > sometimes not so obvious. I really believe I am real. Don't you? > Dear Larry and all To me, and I realize that's not very orthodox Theravada, a 'concept' is the same as a 'theory' And for Larry who states "A theory could easily be view (ditthi)", some more explanation of what I mean. I use the term 'theory' in the way of philosophy of science. Without looking in any books of it, theory means than something like: a model of, a picture of the reality, only existing in the mind of the human beings, using this model (not existing in itself, as such). That human beings using the theory know very very that's only a model of reality, not the reality itself, because the socalled reality can only be described in models. There are more than one paradigma's in philosophy of science, I prefer Popper who (simplified) says than one can state that a theory is correct (more precise: not incorrect) as long as all empirically based efforts to falsify the theory, failed. Others (Kuhn) say that a theory is not used any more and subsistuted by another theory when most scientists think the new one is more useful, and 'useful' is something else than 'correct' ! To me (maybe a personal opinion) any concept is that kind of theory: only a consumption-thing, only a pragmatic useful image of the indescribable reality. And are the (paramattha) dhammas of the Abhidhamma that reality ? I think that's not the question. That dhammas are the best way to describe the processes in me (in any human being) and I have to be aware if I want to get enlightened. Metta Joop 39767 From: Alan Lam Date: Tue Dec 14, 2004 2:36am Subject: The Jhaanas and the lay disciples. Note: forwarded message attached. ===== With best regards, ........................... Alan Lam 39768 From: Alan Lam Date: Tue Dec 14, 2004 2:24am Subject: Hello. Hi, I am a newbie here. Hope to learn from all of you. Thanks in advance and Metta. Alan ===== With best regards, ........................... Alan Lam 39769 From: sarahprocterabbott Date: Tue Dec 14, 2004 3:31am Subject: Re: Hello. Hi Alan, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Alan Lam wrote: > > Hi, I am a newbie here. Hope to learn from all of you. > Thanks in advance and Metta. Alan > ... I'm glad you've made it here! I know we can all learn a lot from you and your keen interest in the Dhamma too. With regard to your other message, unfortunately the list doesn't accept attachments, so would you mind re-sending it as text in a message? Many thanks in advance. I'd also be especially glad to hear where you live and anything about your background interest in the Teachings. Metta, Sarah p.s look forward to further discussion on the 'Jhana and Lay Disciple' thread.... apologies for any delays in advance. ========================== 39770 From: AlanLam Date: Tue Dec 14, 2004 3:35am Subject: The jhaanas and the Lay Disciples Dear Sarah, A respected member of E-Sangha (www.lioncity.net) has your yahoogroup link there where I came across your knowledgeable comments on "The Jhaanas and the Lay Disciples according to the Paali Suttas". I read with interest and respect your command of the Visudhimagga. I do concur with most of your comments, but I do have 2nd opinion on the following which you have posted reply to Ven. Bhikkhu Bodhi as follows; SN55.40/V398-99 Quote : He is content with his confirmed confidence in the Buddha (etc.). But strives further in seclusion by day and in retreat by night. As he dwells diligently, gladness arises (as above)... for one who is happy the mind becomes concentrated. When the mind is concentrated, phenomena become manifest. It is with manifestation of phenomena to him that he is reckoned as "one who dwells diligently". (31). Unquote. Here please allow me to address the above point by point as follows; "But strives further in seclusion by day" : "strives" could mean he "energetically meditated" in seclusion by day. Buddha always remind his disciples to stay in meditation in seclusions, i.e. in a forest under the tree or in empty building. "in retreat by night". : "retreat" always mean "meditation practise in seclusions" without disturbance. And retreat could also mean "working very ernestly in meditation". It is a full time meditation process during a retreat. Hence, here it should mean that he is "in strict and diligent meditation by day and by night". Working ernestly hard in meditation. "As he dwells diligently, gladness arises" : "dwell" here could mean "engrossed", "fully concentrated" and "energetically meditating", lasting for a period of time. "gladness arises" : Here "gladness" is a distinct mark called "piti" or "raptures". For one who ernestly meditates and achieving a state of continuous samadhi djyana, there will be stages of piti or raptures, i.e. feelings of "extreme joy" or "extreme happiness". This mark of piti/raptures could last for a while to hours or a day long depending on one's length of samadhi djyana immersion then. Here, "gladness" could mean "contentment" or "full of joy" as a mark of piti or raptures because of the continuous immersion in samadhi djyana. "For one who is happy" : Here, "happy" could again mean the only mark of "piti or raptures" of "bliss", "extreme joy" of different stages similar to "gladness", due to the continuous samadhi djyana achived. Yes, surely this is the only "djyana" state of mind. "the mind becomes concentrated" : Only due to the distinct mark piti/raptures that the mind is still in "one-pointedness". This is also the samadhi djyana state of mind. Hence, here he has achived samadhi djyana state and thus NOT, I would like to repeat, NOT "Access Concentration" and or "Entering Concentration" as you have commented. As either of the two (2) (Access or Entering Concentration) does not and will not, come with the mark of piti or raptures. Only prolonged djyana does have this mark of piti/raptures. I would then greatly appreciate if you could again please cross-check and advise if you do agree to the above analysis. Much thanks and regards. Yours in the Dharma, with Metta. Pubbarama 39771 From: Ken O Date: Tue Dec 14, 2004 3:57am Subject: Re: Is there seeing now? (Re: [dsg] Re: kusala and akusala. Hi Sarah There is a passage on Dispeller of Delusion on Elements, as to order why eye is said first, then the rest. I cannot write it now bc I am away. One of the reason that eye is said because of its obviousness as compare to the rest. Could you type it out for the sake of the rest of the readers. Thanks Ken O 39772 From: Ken O Date: Tue Dec 14, 2004 4:01am Subject: Re: [dsg] 'Samsara and Nibbana are the same' And absabhava = pannatti ? Hi Joop We have before discuss something on sabhava, I think it is in the U.P. After reading it if u still have any quesions, I am most happen to reply u. Ken O 39773 From: christine_forsyth Date: Tue Dec 14, 2004 4:14am Subject: Re: [dsg] 'Samsara and Nibbana are the same' And absabhava = pannatti ? Hello Joop, all, Have you read the 20 + posts in the Useful Posts under the subject 'Sabhava (with essence, particular characteristic)': http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/files/ This is a sample (from Sarah) and discusses points by Prof. Karunadasa in The Dhamma Theory. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/29873 metta and peace, Christine ---The trouble is that you think you have time--- --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jwromeijn" wrote: > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, LBIDD@w... wrote: > ... > > Larry states: > "no self nature (asabhava), which is standard abhidhamma lingo for > concept" > > Are you really correct? Is in the Abhidhamma asabhava (no self nature) > = pannatti (concept) ? > I cannot believe it. Perhaps only in the commentaries ? > To me sabhava and asabhava are themselves concepts. And, what is > worse: they are wrong concepts; nothing has a self nature, it is atta- > belief ! > > I'm not the first who thinks so. In Wheel 412/413 "The Dhamma Theory, > Philosophical Cornerstone of the Abhidhamma", Y. Karunadasa explains: > > " … in the post-canonical exegetical literature of Sri Lanka where, > for the first time, the term sabhåva (Skt svabhåva) came to be used > as a synonym for dhamma. Hence the recurrent definition: "Dhammas are > so called because they bear their own nature" (attano sabhåva◊ > dhårent¥ ti dhammå). Now the question that arises here is whether the > Theravådins used the term sabhåva in the same sense as the > Sarvåstivådins did. Did the Theravådins assume the metaphysical view > that the substance of a dhamma persists throughout the three phases > of time? In other words, does this amount to the admission that there > is a duality between the dhamma and its sabhåva, between the bearer > and the borne, a dichotomy which goes against the grain of the > Buddhist doctrine of anattå? > … (snip) … > It is also observed that if the dhammas are said to have own- nature > (saka-bhåva = sabhåva), this is only a tentative device to drive > home the point that there is no other-nature (para-bhåva) from which > they emerge and to which they finally lapse. > Now this commentarial definition of dhamma as sabhåva poses an > important problem, for it seems to go against an earlier Theravåda > tradition recorded in the Pa†isambhidåmagga. This canonical text > specifically states that the five aggregates are devoid of own- nature > (sabhåvena-suñña◊). Since the dhammas are the elementary constituents > of the five aggregates, this should mean that the dhammas, too, are > devoid of own-nature. What is more, does not the very use of the term > sabhåva, despite all the qualifications under which it is used, give > the impression that a given dhamma exists in its own right? And does > this not amount to the admission that a dhamma is some kind of > substance? > The commentators were not unaware of these implications and they > therefore took the necessary steps to forestall such a conclusion. > This they sought to do by supplementing the former definition with > another which actually nullifies the conclusion that the dhammas > might be quasi-substances. This additional definition states that a > dhamma is not that which bears its own-nature, but that which is > borne by its own conditions (paccayehi dhåriyant¥ ti dhammå). Whereas > the earlier definition is agent-denotation (kattusådhana) because it > attributes an active role to the dhamma, elevating it to the position > of an agent, the new definition is object-denotation (kamma- sådhana) > because it attributes a passive role to the dhamma and thereby > downgrades it to the position of an object. What is radical about > this new definition is that it reverses the whole process which > otherwise might culminate in the conception of dhammas as substances > or bearers of their own-nature. What it seeks to show is that, far > from being a bearer, a dhamma is being borne by its own conditions. > … (snip) … > In the Abhidhammic exegesis this term paramattha is defined to mean > that which has reached its highest (uttama), implying thereby that > the dhammas are ultimate existents with no possibility of further > reduction. Hence own-nature (sabhåva) came to be further defined as > ultimate nature (paramattha-sabhåva)." > > See http://www.saigon.com/~anson/ebud/ebdha227.htm > Sofar this quote. By the way, in this Wheel publication Karunadasa is > saying important thing about the theme "Pannatti and the Two truth" > too. > > Metta > > Joop 39774 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Dec 14, 2004 5:32am Subject: Re: Is there seeing now? (Re: [dsg] Re: kusala and akusala. Hi Ken O, Always happy to help out a fellow dinosaur who likes to quote from the same text;-) thanks for the reminder - I had it marked, so easy to find: Dispeller (Transl of Sammohavinodanii, PTS)223: With regard to the 'order of teaching' "For among the internal bases the eye base is taught first, being obvious through having as its object what is visible (sanidassana) and accompanied by impact (sappa.tigha). After that, the ear base, etc which have as their objects what is invisible and accompanied by impact. Or alternatively the eye base and ear base are taught first among the internal bases because of their great helpfulness as causes for the Incomparable of Seeing and for the Incomparable of Hearing [respectively] (cf A iii 325]. After the three beginning with the nose base. And the mind base [is taught] last because of its having the resorts of the [other] five as its object. But because of their being the [respective] resorts of the eye base and so on, the visible-data base and so on, among the external [bases, are taught] each next [to its correspondeing internal base]. ***** S: The internal bases here are the internal ayatana of eye-sense etc as opposed to the external ayatana or bases of visible object etc. There are of course 12 ayatanas or bases in all. Here's another good quote from the same page I've marked which also neatly addresses questions about the meaning of sabhava and anatta and control;-) 227 "..but here all these bases should be regarded as having no provenance and no destination. For they do not come from anywhere previous to their rise, nor do they go anywhere after their fall; but rather before their rise they had not obtained their intrinsic nature (sabhaava) and after their fall their intrinsic nature is completely broken up; in between what is before and after, they occur without power [being exercisable over them] owing to dependence on conditions. Therefore they should be regarded as having no provenance and no destination. "Likewise [they should be regarded] as inactive and unoccupied. For it does not occur to the eye and visible-datum and so on: 'Would the consciousness might arise from our concurrence.' And they are not active nor do they occupy themselves as door, basis and object for the purpose of arousing consciousness; but rather it is the rule (dhammataa) that eye-consciousness and so on come into being with the concurrence of eye-visible-datum and so on. Therefore they should be regarded as inactive and unoccupied." ***** S: Of course, it's not only in Abhidhamma texts that we read about ayatanas. Entire sections (Sa.laayatanavagga) of the Samyutta Nikaya are devoted to them. But the Abhidhamma (and especially commentaries like this one) makes it a lot easier to follow I find. Thanks for the prompt, Ken O Metta, Sarah ====== --- Ken O wrote: > > Hi Sarah > > There is a passage on Dispeller of Delusion on Elements, as to order > why eye is said first, then the rest. I cannot write it now bc I am > away. One of the reason that eye is said because of its obviousness > as compare to the rest. Could you type it out for the sake of the > rest of the readers. Thanks 39775 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Dec 14, 2004 6:57am Subject: Re: [dsg] Vis. XIV, 122 and Tiika Dear Sarah, I also like the reminder about citta niyama. No typo here: when the object is mahanta, great: then the object cannot last longer than the > javana-cittas'. And next para: when the object is very great, atimahanta: the object lasts even two more moments longer, there can be tadaaramma.na cittas. When the object is slight there are not even javana cittas. And sometimes a process will not even begin: mogha vaara. Nina. P.s. Gabi will join the next India trip! op 14-12-2004 07:44 schreef sarah abbott op sarahprocterabbott@y...: > p.s I think there was a typo earlier in this post. You wrote 'when the > object is great, the object cannot last longer than the > javana-cittas'.Perhaps you meant 'not great'? 39776 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Dec 14, 2004 6:57am Subject: Re: [dsg] To all of Nina Hi Herman, op 12-12-2004 22:20 schreef Egbert op hhofman@t...: he asked if > I would be willing to regularly tune the reeds of the organ in the > local Anglican cathedral, and I said Yes, Yes, Yes!!!! (can you tell > I'm excited :-)(I haven't tuned anything for 15 years, but I don't > think the ears forget) N: I am really glad. You do not forget, you have accumulated this skill. From citta to citta. H: Now with regards to Nina and Lodewijk, I'm with Lodewijk, and I will > not have you negating Nina away :-) > > In the dhamma, does not experience arise from the coming together of > rupa, nama and sense-base? Perhaps it is too scientific, but sense > base does not arise in a vacuum, it also requires many other > conditions for its arising. N: Yes. Instead of nervous system I am more inclined to use the word rupas arising because of their appropriate conditions. H: I agree with you if you mean that the ego Nina is not a substantial > entity. ... the story of Nina the actor that negotiates through the > conflicts. These thoughts are real, but they have no foundation. > Nina, the thought, does not, and cannot, do anything. N: Agreed, it is a story we think of, a whole. I would leave out the term conflicts. In reality there are only changing nama elements and rupa elements. But, in practice it is hard to swallow. Bitter medicine! Nina. 39777 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Dec 14, 2004 6:57am Subject: Re: Is there seeing now? (Re: [dsg] Re: kusala and akusala. Hello Phil, James, and Sarah, Phil,yes, that is right. I like your clear formulation. The cushion: I talked to Lodewijk about the tatami floor, it is so confortable. Lodewijk said, he should sit on a cushion in the evening and take some time for reflection. Nothing wrong. You have read a lot and at times you need a quiet time for reflection, why not. Only vipassana is a word used for the development of the stages of insight, not just for reflection or relaxation. Lodewijk thinks that using this word here may create confusion. But otherwise, I very well understand what you mean. James, just as I said to Howard, you render me a service by keeping on asking. You see, I listened to Kh sujin 37 years and then one does not realize that others may not get it. I am grateful if you keep on asking. Is there seeing? It is actually meant as a reminder to understand what seeing is: just a citta that experiences visible object, nothing else. James, you made me laugh:< It is probably just meant to befuddle the person until they shut up. ;-) > We should pay attention to what Sarah says: op 14-12-2004 00:22 schreef plnao op plnao@j...: ... of course, there is seeing now > but we > are unaware of it. In almost all cases, what we take to be seeing something > is actually *looking at.* 39778 From: Date: Tue Dec 14, 2004 3:05am Subject: Re: [dsg] 'Samsara and Nibbana are the same' Hi, Christine - In a message dated 12/14/04 2:25:45 AM Eastern Standard Time, cforsyth1@b... writes: > Hello Joop, Larry, TG, Antony, and all, > > Thank you all for your replies - I don't have much to add at this > moment - still reflecting and forming questions. > > As a side note, you may be interested in Prof. Richard P. Hayes's > article about "Nagarjuna: Master of Paradox, Mystic or Perpetrator > of Fallacies?" > http://www.unm.edu/~rhayes/nagarjuna_smith.pdf > > metta and peace, > Christine > ========================== Just by way of balance, permit me to mention that the good Dr. Hayes, a very brilliant man, is also a fan of Stephen Bachelor's and a disbeliever in literal rebirth. So, you are doing what we *all* do - picking and choosing what appeals to us. (Of course, frequently what appeals to one may be exactly what is correct! ;-) 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) 39779 From: Date: Tue Dec 14, 2004 4:47am Subject: Re: [dsg] The Problem of Relations Hi Joop In a message dated 12/14/2004 3:14:55 AM Pacific Standard Time, jwromeijn@y... writes: Dear Larry and all To me, and I realize that's not very orthodox Theravada, a 'concept' is the same as a 'theory' And for Larry who states "A theory could easily be view (ditthi)", some more explanation of what I mean. I would see a 'theory' as a "string of concepts." I use the term 'theory' in the way of philosophy of science. Without looking in any books of it, theory means than something like: a model of, a picture of the reality, only existing in the mind of the human beings, using this model (not existing in itself, as such). That human beings using the theory know very very that's only a model of reality, not the reality itself, because the socalled reality can only be described in models. There are more than one paradigma's in philosophy of science, I prefer Popper who (simplified) says than one can state that a theory is correct (more precise: not incorrect) as long as all empirically based efforts to falsify the theory, failed. Others (Kuhn) say that a theory is not used any more and subsistuted by another theory when most scientists think the new one is more useful, and 'useful' is something else than 'correct' ! To me (maybe a personal opinion) any concept is that kind of theory: only a consumption-thing, only a pragmatic useful image of the indescribable reality. The difference in the way science uses theories to understand to investgate phenomena vs the way a Buddhist might use insight to investigate concepts are huge. A Buddhist might use insight to investigate concepts so that the mind can penetrate delusion on a personal level and "directly experience actuality" and eliminate roots the lead to suffering. Science uses theories to model physical happenings so that those happenings can be better understood. However, since the scientist is unaware of the delusional base of his or her investigation, whatever conclusions the scientist realizes are always subject to their delusional base. With that said, the similarities are that they both use models and concepts to do what they do. The Tipitika is also a model composed of concepts that is designed to use those concepts to develop intuitive knowledge and overcome suffering. Intuitive knowledge might be seen as a metamorphosis of 'conceptual knowledge and mindfulness' cultivation. And are the (paramattha) dhammas of the Abhidhamma that reality ? I think that's not the question. That dhammas are the best way to describe the processes in me (in any human being) and I have to be aware if I want to get enlightened. I think this is super good Joop! By describing the aggregates and elements as "processes" instead of "realities or ultimate realities" one has less chance of falling into the trap of seeing things as substantial or 'with essence,' i.e., self-view. It also enhances the view of the "conditionally realitive and altering nature of phenomena," i.e., Right View. Metta Joop TG 39780 From: htootintnaing Date: Tue Dec 14, 2004 9:53am Subject: Dhamma Thread (177) Dear Dhamma Friends, We are discussing on different classifications of citta or consciousness. 1. Classification of citta depending on vedana(62, 1, 1, 2, 55 = 121) 2. Classification of citta depending on hetu (18, 2, 22, 47 = 89 ) 3. Classification of citta depending on jati ( 12, 21, 36, 20 = 89 ) or ( 12, 37, 52, 20 = 121 ) 4. Classification of citta depending on bhumi ( 54, 15, 12, 8 = 89 ) 5. Classifications ...coming We are currently talking on functions of citta. In a life, the first citta is patisandhi citta. In other way, citta at that time does the function of patisandhi or linking. Pati means 'again', and sandhi means 'linking' 'sticking' 'stitching''joining'. The last citta is cuti citta. In the other way, citta at that time does the job of 'last existing'. After which there is no more existence in that life. As a citta has 3 submoments of upada, thi, and bhanga, cuti citta cannot be death consciousness. The dead cannot be conscious. So it is better to call it as dying consciousness after cessation of that cuti citta is death. In a life, the 1st citta is patisandhi citta and the last citta is cuti citta. In between is filled with countless cittas as there are still kamma. As these cittas of in-between are continuation of life, these cittas are called life continuum. It is called bhavanga citta. Bhava means 'existence' or 'life'. Anga means 'part' 'limb' 'factor' 'component'. So bhavanga means 'part of life'. All cittas in a life constitute the whole life. Each citta is a 'part of life'. So essentially all cittas are bhavanga cittas( I will explain_this is my words and idea ). Because each acts as a part of life. But as the 1st citta links the past life cuti citta and 1st bhavanga citta of this life, it is called patisandhi citta. This is function. But characterwise, it is all the same with bhavanga citta. By the same token, cuti citta is characterwise all the same with bhavanga citta. But as it is the last existence and does the function of cuti or 'last-existing' it is called cuti citta. So now citta has three main functions. 1. patisandhi kicca or 'linking function' 2. bhavanga kicca or 'life-continueing function'/life-continuum 3. cuti kicca or 'last-existing function' or 'dying function' Characterwise, all these 3 cittas are all the same. What characters do they have. 1. Bhumi. They all have the same realm of citta or the same bhumi of citta. 2. Jati. They all have the same origin or the same kind 3. Sankhara. They all have the same volition. 4. Sampayutta dhammas. They all have the same accompanying dhammas 5. Arammana. They all take the same object. The object is not the present object. The object is past object or past life object or the object of immediate past life's marana-asanna- javana cittas. So all these 3 cittas will not know any of present object at all. As we all are in sensuous sphere, functions of citta will be explained with examples of sensuous objects. For example, if there arises a sound which is very clear, there has to arise conscious mind to this sound. This sound which is a rupa called sadda or sound serves as object or arammana. There also arises sotapasada or ear-sense-base at the same time of arising of that sound. There is ear. There is sound. But there is no attention to sound. Why? Because a rupa has a life span of 17 cittakkhana or 51 anukhana or 51 submoments. In its initial arising ( upada ), it is not that clear to be perceived as object. At that time, one bhavanga citta passes away. In a life in pancavokara bhumi or beings with 5 khandhas, all cittas have to depend on hadaya vatthu with the exception of 10 pancavinnana cittas. The first vithi citta or conscious mind also has to depend on hadaya vatthu. As it is about to arise, as there arises strong object the sound, and as there arise sotappasada, and everything is ready to take the present object. But citta still takes the past object. But as there arises signal, this 2nd arising bhavanga citta is called vibrating bhavanga citta or bhavanga calana citta. Bhavanga cittas are flowing in rapid succession like a running man's running. When there arises a signal to stop running immediately, he would not be able to stop straight away. Instead, he will overshoot a few steps. The first is atita bhavanga citta or past bhavanga. The 2nd is bhavanga calana or vibrating bhavanga. And the last bhavanga just before arising of vithi cittas or conscious mind is called bhavanguppaccheda or arresting bhavanga. So far there have been only 3 functions (patisandhi, bhavanga, cuti). Now the first vithi citta arises. After that a series of vithi cittas arise and pass away. Each does different functions with the exceptions of javana cittas who repeat 7 times and tadarammana cittas who repeat twice. At the end or at the disappearance of the last tadarammana citta, there arise bhavanga citta again and if there is no further objects, bhavanga citta will arise endlessly till cuti citta. May you all be free from suffering. With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing PS: Any comments are welcome and any queries are welcome and they will be valuable. If there is unclarity of any meaning, please just give a reply to any of these posts. 39781 From: Date: Tue Dec 14, 2004 5:09am Subject: Re: [dsg] 'Samsara and Nibbana are the same' In a message dated 12/13/2004 9:25:43 PM Pacific Standard Time, LBIDD@w... writes: Hi TG, If anything Nagarjuna could be said to be the ultimate eel-wriggler, neither 'anti' nor 'not-anti', nor both nor neither. (I might have a few too many negatives in there to make sense.) Anyway, the favorite criticism is that he doesn't have a position. His defenders refute that with subtle arguments too subtle for me to understand. It looks to me, from a Theravada abhidhamma point of view, that he is analyzing concepts, not realties, and showing how they are logically ungraspable in a conceptual sense. Aha! there's the anti-conceptualist. But still, I think this is just pointing out no self nature (asabhava), which is standard abhidhamma lingo for concept. This is a valid approach because it is not too difficult to argue that all objects of desire are concepts. But that is my own argument, neither Nargarjuna's nor abhidhamma's. Larry Hi Larry I wouldn't consider Nagarjuna an ell-wriggler because ell-wrigglers won't take any position in the fear that they will be found wrong (or probably more likely they don't know anything to begin with.) Nagarjuna took a definite stance even if it was conceptual destruction. (An ell-wrigglers position would be to say that: "they can't say whether concepts are true or whether they are false.") Nagarjuna was making a case that concepts cannot represent reality because they are conditionally relative and have no self of their own. I discussed this one time with a highly educated Sri Lankan Theravadin monk and his view that Nagarjuna was reacting to Hinayana schools that were developing all sorts of "substantialist" theories. Seeing things as having "substance of their own:" which by-the-way, is a danger some of us see with some types of Abhidhamma thought...which walk a "tight-rope" in that area IMO. Anyway, to me Nagarjuna's teaching are philosophy and the Buddha's teachings are not. Buddha taught "pragmatic actuality" for the purpose of overcoming suffering. Nagarjuna taught a philosophy for the purpose of overcoming concepts. Without suffering being a major motivating factor of insight, I question whether Nagarjuna's method can have the power to uproot the defilements. Maybe it can, maybe it can't, but I'm putting my money on the Tipitika this 'go-round.' ;-) TG 39782 From: Date: Tue Dec 14, 2004 5:26am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: latent tendencies. Hi, Nina - In a message dated 12/14/04 5:41:10 AM Eastern Standard Time, vangorko@x... writes: > When I say, > the latent tendencies do not arise, I do not mean they are unconditioned > like nibbana. It only means: they are dormant in the citta, do not come out, > but can condition the arising of akusala. > ------------------------------------------ Howard: Okay. I think you are saying that though they manifest as outflows, conditioning, as you say, akusala states, they, themselves, remain subliminal to ordinary awareness. That sounds right to me. They are deep seated tendencies. ------------------------------------- > Then, we have texts where the word arisen is used but in a specific sense. > See below. > >>See also Nyanponika, Abh Studies, p. 121, 122. > Nyanaponika: > (bhuumiladdhuppanna), that is, a fertile soil for the actual arising. This > applies to potential defilements (kilesa), which are in the > sense of possessing a fertile soil from which they may actually sprout when > other conditions for their arising are given...These potential defilements > may be compared to dangerous microbes infesting the body, which, though in a > latent state, may become active at any moment when the condiitons are > favorable...> > He then refers to the Abhidhamma texts: dhammas favorable to defilements, to > cankers, etc. > > H: As phenomena that truly exist, and latent tendencies are certainly > >such, and being other than nibbana, they should be subject to the > >moment-to-moment arising and ceasing that all other such realities are > subject > >to. > N: There is no store citta where they would stay. The middle has to be kept > between eternalism and annihilation. They are dhammas, not pa~n~natti. They > are powerful, they condition the arising of all sorts of akusala. > Where are they? Deeply engrained in each citta, even in kusala citta, > because cittas succeed one another from moment to moment and thus, all > experiences, all tendencies, good or bad, are accumulated from one moment to > the next. > ------------------------------------ Howard: Okay. So dependent on grasping or relinquishment, they can strengthen or weaken, from mindstate to mindstate. They are not ongoing "substances", but deep-seated phenomena that arise and fall, with varying strengths, as the stream of conciousness proceeds. ---------------------------------- We can verify this in life: citta falls away, but you can learn> > from what you experienced before. Good qualities can become good habits, and > bad ones bad habits. One may take a sip of a drink, and slowly one likes it > more and more, a new habit. One may tell just a little lie, and slowly one > gets into the habit of lying. The akusala citta falls away and more of that > type is added to the latent tendencies. Thus, these change all the time. > ---------------------------------- Howard: Good. :-) --------------------------------- > H: If one were to say that anusaya are deep-seated cetasikas that may > >be strengthened and weakened, but otherwise tenaciously replicate > themselves > >from moment to moment, and that manifest as outflowings, that would be an > >explanation that is sufficiently detailed and credible for me to "buy". > N: Is this not more or less what is said above? They do not replicate > themselves each moment, because there are also kusala cittas. > Because of the defilements that appear we know that there are these > underlying microbes that are with each citta arising and falling away in the > long, long stream of cittas, in the cycle of birth and death. > ------------------------------------- Howard: But if they are "underlying microbes that are with each citta arising and falling away," then they do replicate themselves each moment, do they not? (I don't mean *exact* replication.) -------------------------------- > As I explained to Mike, with the arising of each akusala citta, the > underlying sickness gets worse. But on the other hand, by wisdom they can > also wear out. > -------------------------------- Howard: Sounds right to me! ------------------------------- > I hope you and Mike will also ask again when there is anything not yet > cleared up. > Nina. > P.S. Rupa lasts as long as seventeen moments of citta: we cannot count but > it helps us to have more understanding of the process of cittas experiencing > a sense object that has not fallen away yet. It reminds us that very soon > after seeing defilements can arise on account of the sense object that is > still present. That objcet is not a concept. > ======================== 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) 39783 From: htootintnaing Date: Tue Dec 14, 2004 10:33am Subject: Dhamma Thread (178) Dear Dhamma Friends, In a life there are many cittas. But when each is thoroughly examined they can be characterized as this citta that citta and so on. Characterwise there are a total of 89 cittas or 121 cittas. These are just maximal typical cittas. All of these do not arise in any being. Even The Buddha in His Buddhahood or in His last life did not have all these cittas. These things in connection with beings will be discussed at some point. Currently we are discussing on functions of citta. In a life, there are many cittas. The first is patisandhi citta and the last is cuti citta. In between are bhavanga cittas as long as there there is no vithi cittas or conscious mind. In the previous post we were taking the example of sound object and ear-sense-base. Now sensuous object of sound arises. So there are going to arise vithi cittas. But 3 moments passed without being able to arise any vithi cittas for a given rupa ( sadda or sound object ) and sota pasada or ear-sense-base. So there left only 14 cittakkhana of rupa's life. All these 14 cittakkhana moments will be taken by each vithi citta one after another. They each perform their action or do their function. Primarily, 1. patisandhi citta doing patisandhi kicca or 'linking' function 2. bhavanga citta doing bhavanga kicca or 'life-continuum' function 3. cuti citta doing cuti kicca or 'last existing' or 'dying'function. Now as sensuous object arise, and vithi cittas have to arise, there are more functions of citta. 1. patisandhi citta/ kicca _linking 2. bhavanga citta/ kicca_life-continuum 3. avajjana citta/ kicca_adverting 4. cakkhuvinnana citta/ dasana kicca_seeing 5. sotavinnana citta/ savana kicca_hearing 6. ghanavinnana citta/ ghayana kicca_smelling 7. jivhavinnana citta/sayana kicca_tasting 8. kayavinnana citta/phusana kicca_touching 9. sampaticchana citta/ kicca_receiving 10.santirana citta/ kicca_investigating 11.votthapana citta/ votthapana kicca_determining 12.javana citta/ javana kicca_impulsion 13.tadarammana citta/ kicca_retention 14.cuti citta/ cuti kicca_dying/last existing function. These 14 functions are functions of citta. A life starts with the first citta and ends with cuti citta. In between are 2nd functioning cittas or bhavanga cittas as long as there is no vithi cittas. If a series of vithi citta arises they arise in the exact order. Unlike genes, physics and other science principles, these citta orders are always right. They never go wrong as in case of genes, going wrong of which causes cancers and many other diseases. Water does not always boils at 100 degree centigrades even though 99.999 % may boil at that temperature. But citta always follow it rules without ever breaking the law. Function 4 to 8 ( 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 ) are 1. dasana kicca or seeing function 2. savana kicca or hearing function 3. ghayana kicca or smelling function 4. sayana kicca or tasting function 5. phusana kicca or touching function and all these 5 functions are related to sensuous plane. May you all be free from suffering. With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing PS: Any comments are welcome and any queries are welcome and they will be valuable. If there is unclarity of any meaning, please just give a reply to any of these posts. 39784 From: htootintnaing Date: Tue Dec 14, 2004 11:09am Subject: Dhamma Thread (179) Dear Dhamma Friends, A life has started. Now bhavanga cittas or life continueing consciousness are arising one after another without any intervening other kind of citta. Once there arise a loud and clear sound arises. This is a rupa. It is sadda or sound. It serves as arammana or object to cittas. Rupa 'sound' is an ultimate reality. Citta is a reality. These 2 realities are related through object condition. This condition is arammana or object condition. Rupa conditions nama which is a citta. This sound just has 17 cittakkhana. As soon as it arises, it cannot still serve as an object because it is still weak. But as it is a loud sound the middle 49 anukhana or 49 submoments become very strong object or very clear object. An example here is 'when a tungsten or wolfram wire' which is a kind of metal in mineralogy of geology is passed by electric current, there arises a bright light.' Just before glowing light there is a weak light in red colour because the light wave of red comes first in our visible eyes ( infra-red is invisible ). This is floowed by very bright white light. White light is a combination of 7 colours of light. At the end of the current, again there will be a weak light. You can test yourselves with weak batteries and light bulbs. When at its weakest stage of time ( out of 51 submoments ), rupa cannot serve as an object. But after one submoment, it appears well 'like above example' and serves as object. In terms of cittakkhana, one cittakkhana passes away. So rupa sound has left 16 cittakkhanas life. As it passes away, a bhavanga citta also passes away. Further 2 bhavanga citta have to pass away without vithi citta arising as explained in the previous post. So out of 17 moments, 3 moments have passed away. 14 moments left. At each of these 14 moments there arise each citta performing each function. As sound arises, sotapasada or ear-sense-base also arises at the same time and it also left 14 cittakkhana or 14 moments. At the end of these 14 moments both rupa sound and sotapasada will pass away. So there will not be possible to arise for vithi cittas. Instead bhavanga cittas have to arise immediately because there are still kamma. Still there are no javana citta at that time. But rupas have arisen. This is purejata paccaya or prenascent conditioning of dhamma. So in vithi vara, as soon as bhavanguppaccheda citta passes away, the first vithi citta arises is 'pancadvaravajjana citta'. This citta is avajjana citta. It does the job of avajjana or adverting. This is 'turning attention to' a particular object. Pancadvaravajjana does his job like shunting, turning to the right place. It contemplates on the object and chooses the right faculty of sense-base and adverts the object to a particular sense-base. As soon as bhavanga disappears, a citta arises. It is pancadvaravajjana. It just knows that there is an object. And then it advert the object to one of 5 sense faculties. This is the 3rd function of citta called avajjana kicca or adverting function. If arammana or object is 5 senses, then pancadvaravajjana citta arises. If arammana is dhammarammana or object of mind, then manodvaravajjana citta arises. They do the function of avajjana or adverting. May you all be free from suffering. With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing PS: Any comments are welcome and any queries are welcome and they will be valuable. If there is unclarity of any meaning, please just give a reply to any of these posts. 39785 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Dec 14, 2004 11:33am Subject: Re: [dsg] 'Samsara and Nibbana are the same' Dear Sarah, I remember. Suan wrote about nibbaana and viññaa.na. Here, viññaa.na means: what can be known. Thus, in this context it is not consciousness. Nibbana can be known by the lokuttara citta which experiences it. Nina. op 14-12-2004 09:22 schreef sarah abbott op sarahprocterabbott@y...: > there are just two lines in the Tipitaka > which particularly have been used (some might say abused!) for much of the > Mahayana edifice and these kinds of ideas. One of these is the line about > luminous mind (AN1:10)just referred to in my letter to BB (see 'luminous' > in UP for more) and the other is the line where vinnana refers to nibbana > (and not consciousness) which was discussed in detail before. (I've just > forgotten the sutta, MN49, I think). Probably you'll find posts on it > under 'nibbana' or by searching for 'Anders'and 'vinnana' or 'nibbana' in > dsg.org 39786 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Dec 14, 2004 11:33am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: D.O. Agrios. Dear Agrios and Sarah, I went through my file and cannot resist requoting a quote by Rob K who wrote a long article on it before. It really refers to basics here in order to have right understanding of D.O. We should not start the wrong way when we begin to study it. > > --- agriosinski wrote: >> >> Could I have your detailed explanation, in depth picture of what >> avija comes to be and how it leads, what exactly happens that sankharas >> arise. >> And then what sankhara is and how it leads to vinnana etc. etc. >> Or if you don't feel like writing about it, could you point me to >> the other source? 39787 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Dec 14, 2004 11:33am Subject: Re: [dsg] Dhamma Thread ( 133 ), lokuttara citta and dukkha. Dear Sarah, Very deep. Some may not know the term: the faculty of having known, aññaataavindriya: the faculty at the attainment of the fruition of the arahat. (I shall come to know what I did not know: at the magga-citta of the sotaapanna, the faculty of knowing: fruition of sotapanna) op 14-12-2004 10:27 schreef sarah abbott op sarahprocterabbott@y...: > But from a relative standpoint, since it is stated in the exposition of > the faculty of having known that it is a 'path factor and included in the > path', it is possible, in the case of the dhammas belonging to the fruit, > to include right view, etc, in the truth of the path, and the other > dhammas associated with the paths and fruits in the truth of suffering > because they share in the suffering constituted by conditioned formations. > When this is done the summarising of all also occurs in the teaching of > the truths." > .... > S: 'in the exposition of the faculty of having known that it is a 'path > factor and included in the path' > > I find this interesting in the light of KS's comment above. > saying this was because these cittas couldn't be known prior to being experienced N: Now only do I begin to understand this remark. This faculty is not experienced before it arises. But it is a difficult text. Nina. 39788 From: jwromeijn Date: Tue Dec 14, 2004 11:52am Subject: Re: [dsg] 'Samsara and Nibbana are the same' And absabhava = pannatti ? --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "christine_forsyth" wrote: > > Hello Joop, all, > > Have you read the 20 + posts in the Useful Posts under the > subject 'Sabhava (with essence, particular characteristic)': > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/files/ Dear Christine and KenO Dear Christine and KenO Thanks for the suggestion I read the most of the posts and I see that I repeated an old dsg- discussion The best answer to me came from Nina in message 27860 of Wed Dec 10, 2003 7:18 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: characteristics Nina (then): "Dear Michael, I am just wondering whether you see too much behind this term sabhava. Can it be a matter of translation? It just means: each dhamma has its own characteristic, and speaking of conditioned dhamma, it falls away immediately. No question of essentialism." Joop: My conclusion is that 'sabhava' should not be translated with 'self nature'. A translation even better than 'characteristics' that Nina uses, is 'properties' (like an electron had properties like electric charge, spin etc) And a unanswered question to me still is: WHY did the commentators introduce the word sabhava ? Metta Joop 39789 From: Date: Tue Dec 14, 2004 6:54am Subject: Re: [dsg] 'Samsara and Nibbana are the same' In a message dated 12/14/2004 11:41:06 AM Pacific Standard Time, vangorko@x... writes: Dear Sarah, I remember. Suan wrote about nibbaana and viññaa.na. Here, viññaa.na means: what can be known. Thus, in this context it is not consciousness. Nibbana can be known by the lokuttara citta which experiences it. Nina. Hi Nina Is there any realitivly "hard evidence" of this in the Suttas? Is this lokuttara citta one that arises upon reflection of Nibbana, or is it supposed to arise at the same time? If its supposed to arise at the same time, then I wonder what the source for this idea is? ... as it would seem to have a lot of conflicts with the Suttas. Also, I thought citta meant consciousness. It seems here that we have a non-consciousness consciousness. (Not a typo.) Thanks and I know the above does not necessarily represent your ideas. It seems to me, that based on overwhelming evidence from the Suttas, that Nibbana is the complete "relief" from experience and not some new type of experience. TG 39790 From: ericlonline Date: Tue Dec 14, 2004 0:55pm Subject: Re: 'Samsara and Nibbana are the same' Dear Group, > Christine> I have been reflecting on the saying that 'Samsara and Nibbana are the same' and whether 'Nibbana is Conscious/ness'. I'd be interested to hear what anyone's thoughts are on this subject. Every dhamma is empty and non-self. Therefore samsara is nibbana. Seen from the desiring mind they are distinct. Seen from the one gone beyond desire they are the same. Do you see why this must be so? To try to describe nibbana in prose would be to say something like...it is pure awareness without a subject or object. No Buddha, No Dhamma, No Sangha, No form, No emptiness, etc. etc Only when all the known, as subject and object with their various names and forms, is negated can the unknown BE. PEACE E 39791 From: Egbert Date: Tue Dec 14, 2004 0:59pm Subject: Is there seeing now? (Re: [dsg] Re: kusala and akusala. Hi Sarah, KenO and all, Just by way of complement/contrast, modern science holds that hearing is the "first" sense, in that it is the first to develop in the womb, and the last to disappear in the final stages of death. (Rites for the dying all around the world acknowledge this fact) It is also considered the most immediate sense, in that there is no escaping sound. The eyes may be closed so that unwanted sights can be excluded, but no matter how one averts the head, sound is there. All the very best to you Herman --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > Hi Ken O, > > Always happy to help out a fellow dinosaur who likes to quote from the > same text;-) thanks for the reminder - I had it marked, so easy to find: > 39792 From: Date: Tue Dec 14, 2004 8:09am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: 'Samsara and Nibbana are the same' Hi, Eric - In a message dated 12/14/04 4:02:05 PM Eastern Standard Time, ericlonline@y... writes: > To try to describe nibbana in prose would be to say something > like...it is pure awareness without a subject or object. > > =================== But why say "awareness"? Awareness of what, if there is no object? I think that with regard to nibbana, to say anything is already to say too much. I sometimes want to say that nibbana is "that", or is "the real". But these don't really say anything, do they? Silence is best, I think. With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 39793 From: Date: Tue Dec 14, 2004 8:15am Subject: Re: Is there seeing now? (Re: [dsg] Re: kusala and akusala. Hi, Herman (and Sarah & Ken) - In a message dated 12/14/04 4:05:26 PM Eastern Standard Time, hhofman@t... writes: > Hi Sarah, KenO and all, > > Just by way of complement/contrast, modern science holds that > hearing is the "first" sense, in that it is the first to develop in > the womb, and the last to disappear in the final stages of death. > (Rites for the dying all around the world acknowledge this fact) > ----------------------------------- Howard: Yep. In that sense it is the alpha and the omega. (This makes me think of "In the beginning was the word." ;-) ----------------------------------- > > It is also considered the most immediate sense, in that there is no > escaping sound. The eyes may be closed so that unwanted sights can > be excluded, but no matter how one averts the head, sound is there. > ----------------------------------- Howard: But even with eyes shut, there is seeing. There are light images, colors etc, and there is darkness, and all that is still visual content. ------------------------------------ > > All the very best to you > > > Herman > ====================== 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) 39794 From: Date: Tue Dec 14, 2004 9:45am Subject: Re: Is there seeing now? (Re: [dsg] Re: kusala and akusala. In a message dated 12/14/2004 1:18:54 PM Pacific Standard Time, upasaka@a... writes: Howard: But even with eyes shut, there is seeing. There are light images, colors etc, and there is darkness, and all that is still visual content. Hi Howard I've heard you say this a lot. I've spent considerable time in photographic "dark rooms," though not recently, my recollection is that they were "pitch black." In other cases, when light is present to some degree, and the eye lids are closed, light still can go through the lids and show up as faint visual impressions. I don't recall those impressions in the "dark room." Darkness to me is not seeing. Darkness is the abscence of seeing. (I'm not sure where you're coming from on this one.) With no light, there is nothing to see as there is no contact with visual object. Any analysis or interpretation that might arise due to darkness is a mind-object. That's the way I see it. TG 39795 From: Date: Tue Dec 14, 2004 10:51am Subject: Re: Is there seeing now? (Re: [dsg] Re: kusala and akusala. Hi, TG - In a message dated 12/14/04 5:50:16 PM Eastern Standard Time, TGrand458@a... writes: > Hi Howard > > I've heard you say this a lot. I've spent considerable time in photographic > > "dark rooms," though not recently, my recollection is that they were "pitch > black." > > In other cases, when light is present to some degree, and the eye lids are > closed, light still can go through the lids and show up as faint visual > impressions. I don't recall those impressions in the "dark room." > > Darkness to me is not seeing. Darkness is the abscence of seeing. (I'm not > > sure where you're coming from on this one.) With no light, there is nothing > > to see as there is no contact with visual object. Any analysis or > interpretation that might arise due to darkness is a mind-object. That's > the way I see it. > > TG > ======================== When I am not unconscious in a pitch black room, without an iota of light, and if it is a moment that I am neither hearing, tasting, touching, or experiencing mind-object, then I AM seeing - and the content is blackness. Only at a moment at which another sense door is active or there is a state of unconsciousness is there no seeing. If you go into a pitch black room and turn your attention to sight, you will be seeing blackness. If, instead, you turn your attention to temperature, you will momentarily be conscious via body-sense and will not be seeing, not blacknes nor any visual object. Also, whenever there is rapid change in conditions, consciousness may flit from one sense-door to another. For example, at a moment of intent listening to sound, though the lights be on, you will not be seeing, but should the room be suddenly plunged into pitch-black darkness, immediately you will no longer be hearing, but will be seeing, due to the mind adverting to the eye-door. Absence of seeing is not darkness. At an instant of hearing there is neither experience of darkness nor of light - there is no visual experience at all. This topic is an interesting one. Somehow I always feel obliged to "jump in"! ;-) However, I think it has little or no bearing on the matter of liberation. 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) 39796 From: Date: Tue Dec 14, 2004 3:53pm Subject: Re: [dsg] 'Samsara and Nibbana are the same' And absabhava = pannatti ? Joop: "And a unanswered question to me still is: WHY did the commentators introduce the word sabhava ? " Hi Joop, One possible answer is that a concept/reality distinction was necessary in order to eradicate attachment to concepts. We can directly see that a reality is not graspable by witnessing its impermanence first hand. For example, happiness is a reality; it is a pleasant mental feeling. We can see this is ungraspable and therefore not truly desirable by seeing how quickly it arises and ceases. We can't say the same thing about a concept, such as a person, for example. Conventionally speaking, we say a person is born, lives for maybe 80 years and dies. This kind of impermanence is not going to discourage grasping. We have to see that a person is ultimately a relational being composed of many properties with countless relationships with the rest of the 'world' (also a concept). Because all a person is is this interrelatedness there isn't really anything there that could be experienced as a person in the same way as happiness can be experienced as happiness. This lack of an experiencable being is asabhava, no self-nature. It doesn't particularly have anything to do with impermanence. Sabhava (self-nature) is what is impermanent (nibbana is an exception). Larry 39797 From: kenhowardau Date: Tue Dec 14, 2004 4:09pm Subject: Freedom: a Concept! (Re: A Drop More Re: [dsg] The Problem of Relations) Hi TG< I wrote: > Hi Larry and TG, > > If you explained the question carefully to a six-year-old, he would > tell you those things are impermanent. I have never heard anyone > claim otherwise. > > May I ask your views on the profundity of the Buddha's teaching? > What is it telling us that we don't already know? wrote, in part: You replied: ------------ > We may think we understand impermanence, even in a common sense manner, but we don't really. If we really understood it we would be arahats. > ------------------------ I think you will agree that we can endlessly develop our commonsense understanding of the world without ever becoming arahants (or sotapanna). ------------------------ TG: > The reason we don't understand impermanence is because we have a tendency to see things as permanent and bound with essence and substantiality. > ------------------------ To continue with my six-year-old's questioning: is a coffee cup permanent or impermanent? Assuming the answer is 'impermanent,' in what way is it impermanent? How long will it take to disappear? Can I see this impermanence directly, or can it only be deduced from various observations over time? --------------------------------- TG: > Although a mind might think it understands that all things are impermanent, the likelihood is that it still is plagued by permanence-view and self-view. Understanding impermanence is not the surface belief that things are impermanent. It is deep awareness of impermanence and of the sorrowful consequences of that condition. > ----------------------------------- Only at the most advanced stages of satipatthana is anicca directly understood. Until then, an intellectual understanding is the best we can hope for. To begin that intellectual understanding, we must learn the difference between concepts (which are merely ideas) and conditioned dhammas (which are realities with inherent characteristics (sabhava) including anicca). ----------------------------------- TG: > Repeatedly and consistently cultivating awareness of the impermanence of states can gradually breakdown misperceptions of permanence-view and self-view. This awareness is needed to detach the mind from clinging and grasping. > ----------------------------------- I think you are advising me to be aware of the same, banal impermanence that non-Dhamma students are aware of, but to do it more often. ---------------------------- TG: > If a mind understands the significance of impermanence, it won't crave and affliction will not result. The more impermanence is taught regarding whatever object is being considered, the more the mind inclines toward impermanence-view. --------------------------- Is that necessarily so? There is a popular saying to the effect you can't teach a man to stand on his own two feet by taking away the crutch he is leaning on. He will simply find another crutch. In other words, if you tell a man his world is impermanent and unsatisfactory, he will imagine another world - at the right hand of God - where everything lasts forever. The lesson, here, is that only right understanding (of conditioned dhammas) can turn mindfulness of impermanence into something profoundly beneficial. -------------------------------------------------- TG: > The "profundity" is not in determining what elements exist or don't exist. The profundity resides in breaking permanence-view, pleasurable-view, and self-view, and overcoming attachment. > ------------------------------------------------- What if we could directly see one of the dhammas (as distinct from a concept) that have arisen in the present moment? It wouldn't have to be a supramundane Path dhamma - any dhamma would do. It could be visible-object or audible-object: it could even be ignorance or aversion - who cares? Any dhamma is more than welcome as an object of right understanding! It is profoundly welcome! :-) -------------------- TG: > There are all sorts of methods taught by the Buddha to achieve that...as different methods appeal to different minds inclinations. > -------------------- Mmmm! Just about everyone thinks he has a technique for creating supramundane experiences. We are always assured that the techniques are found in the Tipitaka - somewhere - but they aren't! For anyone and everyone, right understanding is the only way. If the Buddha asked anything of us, it was simply that we listen, consider, and understand. --------------- TG: > The statement and question above are what might be expected from a non-Buddhists trying to grapple with their first experiences of the Buddha's teaching. Nothing provided in an e-mail is liable to drive forward the insight needed to resolve the issue in the mind of the questioner. A deep and consistent study of the Sutta Pitaka are needed to provide the potential needed to resolve the issues address above. Otherwise, they may never be understood. Since the Buddha did indeed spend a lot of time teaching the impermanence of what some describe as "conventional realities," I guess one needs to ask -- whether the Buddha was teaching six-year- olds, or whether there is something more to it! > ----------------- Very good - except you make no mention of the Abhidhamma and commentaries. That is a worry. When we go our own way - interpreting suttas according to our own experiences - we simply reinforce worldling preconceptions. Ken H 39798 From: plnao Date: Tue Dec 14, 2004 4:09pm Subject: Re: Is there seeing now? (Re: [dsg] Re: kusala and akusala. Hi James, and all > Sorry to have misquoted but I don't see a big difference > between "What are you seeing now?" and "Is there seeing now?" The > second is simply crouched in politically correct non-atta terms. I think there is a big difference. And if you think about it you will too. Obviously, "what are you seeing now?" is the the thing seen, and "is there seeing now?" is the seeing-consciouness. (or "eye-consciousness" as translator below puts it) You said a while back that you think knowing the difference between nama and rupa is a very basic thing but unless you wrote the above without thinking carefully, you had better go back to square one on rupa and nama! I'm sure you've read the Fire Sutta: "The eye is burning, forms are burning, eye-consciousness is burning, eye-contact is burning" Phil : Which of the above are nama and which are rupa? Do you see the difference between those two questions now? "also whatever is felt as pleasant or painful or neither-painful-nor-pleasant that arises with eye-contact for its indispensable condition, that too is burning. Burning with what? Burning with the fire of lust, with the fire of hate, with the fire of delusion. I say it is burning with birth, aging and death, with sorrows, with lamentations, with pains, with griefs, with despairs." Phil: People here have said that "the flavour of Abhidhamma is anatta." To me these days, it seems the flavour of Dhamma in general is burning! Proliferation. Effluents. All this lunging and leaping and slithering of the mind in pursuit of objects and thoughts that please, all this mental movement that represents the strengthening of the roots of lust, hate and delusion. K Sujin is just one of many Dhamma teachers who help us in one of many different ways to see into this process. Her question is very helpful for this reason, though since as you say it is a bit like a koan it can be helpful to different people in different ways. For me, it helps in understanding proliferation. For others it will help in different ways. On with the sutta: "Bhikkhus, when a noble follower who has heard (the truth) sees thus, he finds estrangement in the eye, finds estrangement in forms, finds estrangement in eye-consciousness, finds estrangement in eye-contact, and whatever is felt as pleasant or painful or neither-painful- nor-pleasant that arises with eye-contact for its indispensable condition, in that too he finds estrangement. Estrangement in the eye. Cooling. Cessation. The fire begins to die down. It won't go out for many lifetimes, in all probability, but it is already dying down, moment by moment, thanks to thoughtful and patient consideration of Dhamma. > But, you have delighted me with your two posts on this question > because you have proven my point: The question is silly! ;-) I wonder if you still think so? >If you think about this question deeply, in every possible aspect, you will > soon come to the conclusion that there isn't an answer. And I say to you that if you think about it, you'll see that there is. Reflect on the Fire Sutta. Reflect on the Honeyball Sutta. Reflect on any number of suttas that deal with the sense doors. Most importantly, reflect on your own experience. Perhaps you will come to take note, as I did, of the way you find that your eye has locked on certain objects, and that it does so consistently, and not on others. In my case, it is women, and for me it is irrefutable evidence of proliferation that has already ocurred when the conventionally-insighted person would say "I see a woman." The difference between finding that one is looking at something and has seen something. "See" is never used in the progressive continuous tense. We never say "I am seeing." - but perhaps we should, because it better gets at how quickly seeing is rising and falling away, beyond our control. K Sujin's question helps us understand this. Well, it helped me! Metta, Phil 39799 From: Date: Tue Dec 14, 2004 0:01pm Subject: Re: Freedom: a Concept! (Re: A Drop More Re: [dsg] The Problem of Relations) In a message dated 12/14/2004 4:14:17 PM Pacific Standard Time, kenhowardau@y... writes: To continue with my six-year-old's questioning: is a coffee cup permanent or impermanent? Assuming the answer is 'impermanent,' in what way is it impermanent? How long will it take to disappear? Can I see this impermanence directly, or can it only be deduced from various observations over time? TG These are good topics to resolve. Only at the most advanced stages of satipatthana is anicca directly understood. Until then, an intellectual understanding is the best we can hope for. To begin that intellectual understanding, we must learn the difference between concepts (which are merely ideas) and conditioned dhammas (which are realities with inherent characteristics (sabhava) including anicca). TG If this were the crucial case you think it is, i.e., distinguishing between concepts and conditional states, it would be a mystery to me why in over 10,000 pages of Sutta material, no one recorded the Buddha saying such. It would be one of the easiest things to remember. ----------------------------------- TG: > Repeatedly and consistently cultivating awareness of the impermanence of states can gradually breakdown misperceptions of permanence-view and self-view. This awareness is needed to detach the mind from clinging and grasping. > ----------------------------------- I think you are advising me to be aware of the same, banal impermanence that non-Dhamma students are aware of, but to do it more often. TG Many such 'banal' examples permeate the Suttas. (Must have been those six-year-olds the Buddha was teaching.) ---------------------------- TG: > If a mind understands the significance of impermanence, it won't crave and affliction will not result. The more impermanence is taught regarding whatever object is being considered, the more the mind inclines toward impermanence-view. --------------------------- Is that necessarily so? There is a popular saying to the effect you can't teach a man to stand on his own two feet by taking away the crutch he is leaning on. He will simply find another crutch. In other words, if you tell a man his world is impermanent and unsatisfactory, he will imagine another world - at the right hand of God - where everything lasts forever. TG Yes, it is necessarily so. :-) -------------------------------------------------- TG: > The "profundity" is not in determining what elements exist or don't exist. The profundity resides in breaking permanence-view, pleasurable-view, and self-view, and overcoming attachment. > ------------------------------------------------- What if we could directly see one of the dhammas (as distinct from a concept) that have arisen in the present moment? It wouldn't have to be a supramundane Path dhamma - any dhamma would do. It could be visible-object or audible-object: it could even be ignorance or aversion - who cares? Any dhamma is more than welcome as an object of right understanding! It is profoundly welcome! :-) TG I agree with that basically, except for the concept comment. I don't see concepts the way you apparently do. I see them as mind-objects. Since the Buddha did indeed spend a lot of time teaching the impermanence of what some describe as "conventional realities," I guess one needs to ask -- whether the Buddha was teaching six-year- olds, or whether there is something more to it! > ----------------- Very good - except you make no mention of the Abhidhamma and commentaries. That is a worry. When we go our own way - interpreting suttas according to our own experiences - we simply reinforce worldling preconceptions. TG I've spent years studying the Abhidhamma and contrary to what some people might think, I consider it beneficial. I've even read the Visuddhimagga cover to cover about 10 times...that's not too shabby. And it even has a couple of pages that instruct on how to practice as I recall. ;-) (Of course that doesn't mean I understood a lick of it.) I primarily use Suttas as examples because I consider them the "prime authority." Ken H TG