43400 From: Date: Sat Mar 19, 2005 2:34am Subject: Re: [dsg] Another Alternative for a Buddhist Theory of Memory Hi, Jon - In a message dated 3/19/05 9:08:47 AM Eastern Standard Time, jsabbott@n... writes: > Hi, Howard > > upasaka@a... wrote: > > >Hi, TG - > >... > >Buddhist conditionality is > >summarized by the following formulas: “When this is present, that comes to > >be; from the arising of this, that arises. When this is absent, that does > not > > >come to be; on the cessation of this, that ceases.â€?15 Moving from facts to > >values, the principle of conditionality is summarized as a twelve-fold > chain > >starting with ignorance, then unmindful action, a resultant distorted > >consciousness, and then nine other conditions that lead to rebirth. If > anyone of these conditions is not present, then rebirth in a next life will not > happen. > > > ---------------------------------- Howard: Well this material is quoted by me, but I am not in total agreement with it. ---------------------------------- > > I just question this last statement about the effect of > paticca-samuppada. If I'm not mistaken, it reflects the view that the > links of PS can be 'broken' at any point, thereby leading to release > from samsara. > > To my reading of PS, continued existence in samsara is all attributable > to, and flows from, ignorance and that alone, and the only way out given > is the development of panna, which 'reverses' the sequence of > conditioned events. I do not recall reading anything in the suttas that > supports the view stated just above. > > This is important because there are certain 'practices' that are based > on the idea of cutting off the chain at one of the links. People are > always having ideas about short-cuts that the Buddha himself seems to > have overlooked ;-)) > > Jon > ======================= I agree completely with you on this, Jon. Some folks take the position that "the chain is to be cut" at one link or other, usually the vedana --> tanha link, and I've often expressed disagreement with this position. As I see it, liberating wisdom must arise. That results in uprooting the deep-seated defilements, and unraveling phase of D.O. occurs (cessation of avijja leading to cessation of sankhara, etc), and liberation resulting. Without uprooting the defilements, of which avijja is leader, there is no 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) 43401 From: Matthew Miller Date: Sat Mar 19, 2005 9:06am Subject: Rupa Madness: Seeing with the Tongue There's a new technology that allows blind people to "see" with different parts of the body. For example, a blind subject can "see" by having a camera mounted on his or her forehead that feeds a signal into an electronic device that turns the pattern of light and dark into electrical impulses. The pulses stimulate an array of 144 electrodes on a grid about the size of a postage stamp which zap the coded image into -- the blind person's tongue! At first, the blind subjects describe the sensation as being like candy pop rocks exploding, but later they experience something more "out there" in the world -- a sense of space, depth and shape. Using this device, knowns as a BrainPort, one blind woman who was previously unable to stand upright without holding onto something and concentrating, was able to dance. An earlier version of this device involved a larger array of electrodes taped onto the skin of the back. One interesting finding in these experiments is that there was no experience of a "world" if the camera was mounted on a tripod. Just a tingling sensation. But if the subjects can actively manipulate the camera (mount it on their moving heads, or control the zoom) then a world "emerged" out the mass of tingling. Interaction was the key -- so perception is not the passive process that most people used to assume. It involves active scanning, seeking, interacting. (this surely has implications for our understanding of what's going on during jhana) I don't see how the abhidhamma, with its rigid categories of rupas, vatthus, dvaras and so on, could possibly account for phenomena like this. We need the careful, patient observation and experiment of neuroscience to begin to understand the structure of consciousness. Otherwise we're whistling in the dark and spinning fantasies. Matthew 43402 From: frank Date: Sat Mar 19, 2005 9:47am Subject: cocktail conditionality RE: [dsg] Question on Vedana and Sa~n~na Hi Howard and TG, In [M109]: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/majjhima/mn109.html (not the exact sutta I was thinking about originally, but it says the same thing) Saying, "Very good, lord," the monk... asked him a further question: "Lord, what is the cause, what the condition, for the delineation[2] of the aggregate of form? What is the cause, what the condition, for the delineation of the aggregate of feeling... perception... fabrications... consciousness?" "Monk, the four great existents (earth, water, fire, & wind) are the cause, the four great existents the condition, for the delineation of the aggregate of form. Contact is the cause, contact the condition, for the delineation of the aggregate of feeling. Contact is the cause, contact the condition, for the delineation of the aggregate of perception. Contact is the cause, contact the condition, for the delineation of the aggregate of fabrications. Name-&-form is the cause, name-&-form the condition, for the delineation of the aggregate of consciousness." ============================================================= I'm glad TG appreciated the intended humor of my reference to the cocktail of aggregates (perception+volition+feeling) that arise as a result of contact/phassa. A cocktail is exactly what it is for the unenlightened. We take the raw sensory input (vinnana/consciousness + contact), and form a perception/sanna by relating these raw sensory input to our memory which is stored as a deluded narrative with solid views of self, world, etc. We then have the proliferation of deluded perceptions and deluded volitions/sankhara based on wrong view and wrong perceptions. Isn't this exactly like a fool drunk on cocktails? According to Buddhist scholars, the 12 links of dependent origination was an awkward attempt by well meaning Buddhists to integrate several distinct teachings on conditionality into one magic formula. I find that theory makes much sense, after reading the pali suttas many times. There is a distinct portion on moment to moment experience (6 sets of 6), there is the conundrum of consciousness/nama rupa chicken and egg relationship, there is the long term view of rebirth, and there is the primordial ignorance that underlies all of the worldling's experience. I think it would have been much better off to leave the conditionality relationships in its distinct parts. 1 integrated formula just leads to mass confusion. Just as physicists today want to find a grand unifying theory to consolidate wave and particle properties of light, Buddhist scholars had an anal-retentive impulse to find one clean magic formula on conditionality to settle the matter once and for all. But if you look at the pali suttas as a body of work, the Buddha didn't seem concerned about having perfectly clean formulas. For example, in some places he says there are 3 types of feeling, other places he talks about 5 types of feeling, 6 types of feeling, 18 types of feeling. 3 kinds of people in the world,5 types of people in the world, etc. There's even blatant redundance, recursive relationships, and confusion if we try to really examine the 37 factors of awakening and analyze where each factor belongs. He uses 5 aggregates to characterize the world/self sometimes, other times he prefers using the 6 sense bases. Howard, I think it's beyond the intention of the Buddha's teaching to try to establish a more detailed causal/temporal relationship of the aggregates of feeling+perception+volition than what the Buddha cited above. If there were a more detailed unambiguous causal chain, I'm sure those same people responsible for making 12 links would have made 15 or 16 links and show the proper position of perception in that chain, and maybe have volition listed twice, consciousness listed twice or thrice. Volition/sankhara immediately following ignorance in the formula, should also be right after contact, based on the sutta citation above. You can go mad if you try to find more precise micro-relationships than what's actually needed to see the relationship of dukkha and the letting go of craving/dukkha in our moment to moment experience. If I were to revise the dependent origination formula, I would break it back up into the distinct teachings and concentrate mostly on the moment to moment structure of our experience, namely: Formula for the unawakened: 1) raw sensory input 2) contact 3) a deadly cocktail of feeling + distorted perception + misguided volitions 4) all kinds of exquisite suffering follow Formula restated in more traditional phrasing: 1) there are 6 internal sense media 2) there are 6 external sense media 3) dependent on internal sense media and external media, 6 types of sense consciousness arise 4) the meeting of the first 3 links is sensory impingement/contact/phassa 5) with contact as requisite condition + wrong view, there is a cocktail of feeling + perception + volition 6) with the cocktail as requisite condition, there is craving, aversion, confusion 7) mental proliferation, thicket of views, clinging, solidification of self-identity, the whole mass of dukkha. Formula for the awakened/enlightened: 1-4) same 5) contact is combined with right view + perception + feeling + volition. 6) equanimity caused by right view is established right at that moment 7) the cessation of dukkha experienced in the moment -fk -----Original Message----- From: upasaka@a... [mailto:upasaka@a...] Sent: Friday, March 18, 2005 11:56 AM To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [dsg] Question on Vedana and Sa~n~na Hi, Frank - In a message dated 3/18/05 3:56:25 PM Eastern Standard Time, frank@4... writes: > > I don't know what the abidhamma says, but in either M or S nikaya, > the Buddha says something to the effect of: > > 1) with contact (phassa) as a requisite condition, there is feeling. > 2) with contact as a requisite condition, there is perception (sanna) > 3) with contact as a requisite condition, there is volition (sankhara) > ------------------------------------ Howard: (1) Occurs in the Honeyball Sutta, and (2) is transitively implied in that same sutta. As to (3), I'm not so sure. Certainly in dependent origination, the reverse dependency holds. Of course, treating the scheme as a wheel every link depends on every other, but the primary dependency seems to be sankhara --> phassa. Can you possibly find the sutta source for (3)? ------------------------------------- > > To me, this implies that once there is contact/phassa/sensory impingement, > feeling+perception+volition occur simultaneously. > ------------------------------------ Howard: It makes it possible that they occur simultaneously, but not necessary. This isn't a logical implication. That condition A is needed for conditions B, C, and D doen't imply that B, C, and D be simultaneous. ------------------------------------ > > The critical part of the dependent origination formula referenced so > frequently (with feeling as requisite condition, there is craving), > > So my take on this is that when phassa/contact occurs, you get a cocktail of > the 3 aggregates feeling+volition+perception that arise as a result. If one > has deluded perception+volition, then the result would be craving or its > siamese twin aversion. If one has correct perception + correct volition in that > instant, then the dukkha chain breaks down. Feeling aggregate in an arahant > and a worldling in that instant is no different according to my understanding. > > > ====================== With metta, Howard 43403 From: Tep Sastri Date: Sat Mar 19, 2005 10:33am Subject: Re: Tep /Buddha Nature Dear LK - It was nice of you to give me a thoughtful and proper perspective on this issue of Buddha Nature. To my surprise, after more study, Buddha Nature is more closely related to the "Acariya Mun's school" than I would have thought of a few years ago. Tep: > Is the 'primal mind' according to Acariya Mun same as > "this mind" or is it the same as "that mind" (as described in > Connie's first message on "Buddha Nature")? LK: I am not sure of his terminology . However, I guess Acariya Mun refers to Bhavanga citta as Primal mind . Tep : Well, LK, the following quote is a description of the primal mind. By the way, the author was also in the "Acariya Mun's school". "The ultimate truth within us does not disappear even when we are in darkness and ignorance nor does it return when we reach enlightenment. It is of the nature of 'knowing' (Bhutathata, Literally 'Thusness' or 'Suchness'.). In this there is no ignorance, no right view, just emptiness that is the true essence of the single citta". LK: But I do not think he goes too far as a theravada monk by cleary saying "The true citta is Atta. The true citta is Nibbana". Nibbana is Anatta and Object of Lokuttaracittas in mainstream theravada as far as I know. Tep: O.K., O.K. Now let me give you what I think is the closest response (from the same author) to the above remarks of yours. "When the citta and 'the one who knows' are one in emptiness, then there is nothing to give or knowledge to impart. There is no 'thing' to know the state of anything; there is no state to know a 'thing'. When one knows the original state of the citta then 'citta clearly sees citta'. The citta will then be above all states of conventional labeling, beyond all having and being, beyond all words and past talking about. It is 'Pure Nature' and light coalesced in emptiness, unadulterated and the brightness of the original universe, it is called 'Nibbana' ". From "THE HEART IS KNOWING" : Translated from the original Thai book "Atulo" by Bhikkhu Khemasanto (Ven. Douglas Johnson), Thailand, 1998. http://www.dhammasala.org/content/view/67/115/ Warm regards, Tep ========= --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "lokuttaracitta" wrote: > > > Dear Tep > > Let me start by wishing this comment never serve SGI's purposes. They > are widely considered in Mahayana buddhist world to abuse Lotus > Sutra and other Buddhist teachings just for their own selfish > interest. > > Please remember I am not a students of "Acariya Mun's school" which > seems to me much bolder in discribing his meditaional experiences > than other conservative mainstream in Theravada . > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Tep Sastri" > wrote: > > > > > > Hi LokuttaraCitta (and Connie) - > > > > Is the 'primal mind' according to Acariya Mun same as "this mind" > or is > > it the same as "that mind" (as described in Connie's first message > > on "Buddha Nature")? > > > I am not sure of his terminology . > > However, I guess Acariya Mun refers to Bhavanga citta as Primal > mind . > > > > Is this permanent, never changing, mind of the Arahant same > as "that > > mind" in Connie's message? > > I think so. > > >Further, is it an Atta? Is it Nibbana? > > Please reread Acariya Mun's articule quoted in my post before > > There he dare use a bit provocative terms like the true > citta ,genuine citta and so on. He even says ,"Our real problem, our > one fundamental problem - which is also the citta's fundamental > problem – is that we lack the power needed to be our own TRUE > SELF" Wow !! > > But I do not think he goes too far as a theravada monk by cleary > saying "The true citta is Atta. The true citta is Nibbana". > > Nibbana is Anatta and Object of Lokuttaracittas in mainstream > theravada as far as I know. > > This is very very delicate area which should be treat with utmost > care.Otherwise ,I do believe, it comes only to fuel our Ego and Ego- > clinging and bring Buddhist meditators to stop at one of mundane > Jhanas. As you may know, Jhanic experiences are so blissful and > wonderful that people without right understandings tend to regard > them as Nibbana with pride and sometimes begin to damage other people > by wrong Buddhist teachings. I believe that is one of the reasons why > Mainstream Theravada is discreet in word about this area. > > from LK 43404 From: Date: Sat Mar 19, 2005 6:15am Subject: Re: cocktail conditionality RE: [dsg] Question on Vedana and Sa~n~na Hi, Frank - In a message dated 3/19/05 12:48:30 PM Eastern Standard Time, frank@4... writes: > Hi Howard and TG, > > In [M109]: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/majjhima/mn109.html > (not the exact sutta I was thinking about originally, but it says the same > thing) > Saying, "Very good, lord," the monk... asked him a further question: "Lord, > what is the cause, what the condition, for the delineation[2] of the > aggregate of form? What is the cause, what the condition, for the > delineation of the aggregate of feeling... perception... fabrications... > consciousness?" > > "Monk, the four great existents (earth, water, fire, &wind) are the cause, > the four great existents the condition, for the delineation of the aggregate > of form. Contact is the cause, contact the condition, for the delineation of > the aggregate of feeling. Contact is the cause, contact the condition, for > the delineation of the aggregate of perception. Contact is the cause, > contact the condition, for the delineation of the aggregate of fabrications. > Name-&-form is the cause, name-&-form the condition, for the delineation of > the aggregate of consciousness." > ===================== I'm not clear on what 'delineation' means, but I suppose it means becoming aware of as a phenomenon. If that is so, why would any of this be surprising? I'm not clear on what the point is, Frank. 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) 43405 From: Date: Sat Mar 19, 2005 6:26am Subject: Re: cocktail conditionality RE: [dsg] Question on Vedana and Sa~n~na Hi again, Frank - In a message dated 3/19/05 12:48:30 PM Eastern Standard Time, frank@4... writes: > Howard, I think it's beyond the intention of the Buddha's teaching to try > to > establish a more detailed causal/temporal relationship of the aggregates of > feeling+perception+volition than what the Buddha cited above. > -------------------------------------- Howard: I'm not sure that establishing such a causal/temporal relationship is what the Buddha was intending. For the most part he seems to have been pointing to contact as the condition for delineating three sorts of phenomena. In that regard, he said "Contact is the cause, contact the condition, for the delineation of the aggregate of feeling. Contact is the cause, contact the condition, for the delineation of the aggregate of perception. Contact is the cause, contact the condition, for the delineation of the aggregate of fabrications." ======================= With metta, Howard If there were > > a more detailed unambiguous causal chain, I'm sure those same people > responsible for making 12 links would have made 15 or 16 links and show the > proper position of perception in that chain, and maybe have volition listed > twice, consciousness listed twice or thrice. Volition/sankhara immediately > following ignorance in the formula, should also be right after contact, > based on the sutta citation above. You can go mad if you try to find more > precise micro-relationships than what's actually needed to see the > relationship of dukkha and the letting go of craving/dukkha in our moment to > moment experience. /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) 43406 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Mar 19, 2005 11:49am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Q. Visuddhimagga XIV, 142 - Nina Dear Azita, op 19-03-2005 00:09 schreef gazita2002 op gazita2002@y...: > Azita: I feel like I make no progress :-( even going backwards. > For example, I'm reading dhamma books, listening to tapes and > finding it all very interesting and understandable. Sometimes after > reading/listening there arises a depressed feeling, a flat feeling, a > frustration that I can't take that understanding with me into doing > the everyday things. N: Whatever arises is conditioned, and as James said, it is craving that conditions such feeling, and also, as he said, this is very natural. There is no should not or should. It is difficult for all of us to apply what we learnt to daily life. We need lots of reminders. Our dinner reading is now Vipassana Letters, and I thought of you when reading to Lodewijk that Kh Sujin said: Begin again, be aware again. I hear her calling out this. Just as if nothing unpleasant had happened, just begin again. Also, we can remember: do not yearn after the past nor for what has not come yet. As Ken H stresses again and again: there is only the present moment. I understood you did not go to the Coran meeting? Khun Sujin would also say: it is only a kind of nama that thinks. It is thinking of what is not real, a concept. My situation that is such and such, and we worldlings are inclined to do so all the time. That is why I said to Lodewijk re thinking of concepts and Howard's posts about it: it is high time to develop more understanding of realities. A: I find trying to communicate via internet so frustrating, I actually feel physically ill if I spend much time sitting here in front of the computor. N: Let it rest for a while, it does not matter. A: I can call you my friends but I don't even know what half of > you look like. N: Interesting point. What is the meaning of friend? Friendship is with the citta if we are precise. The real friendship without selfishness, that is mettacitta. You do not have to think of a person or his/her looks. When there is mettacitta with you we call it friendship. This helps when you feel lonely. We cannot always apply this, but we can learn, we have to learn so many things, but that is not discouraging. A: Maybe this is what is meant by conditions, for > example, so much good dhamma discussion on this forum but i'm > unable/unwilling to access it due to my past kamma. N: As James said, this is not right. You do not know your past kamma anyway. It is just temporary, a combination of conditions. Also physical tiredness. A: There doesn't feel like much kusala in my life, those moments > are very short-lived, if they arise at all. N: Of course, they are momentary. Jon reminded us some time ago: many more akusala cittas than kusala cittas. This is just a fact. A: Patience [I have none], courage [what's that?], good cheer > [never heard of it] N: Patience will come with practice, courage: it depends on the citta at that moment, it cannot arise at will, good cheer: well this can easily be with lobha and then it is no good. Nina. 43407 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Mar 19, 2005 11:49am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re:Q. Dhamma in the restaurant Hi Larry, op 19-03-2005 03:05 schreef LBIDD@w... op LBIDD@w...: > Nina: "Investigation of thinking of concepts and how the citta operates > in doing that does not lead to the goal." L: I think it is important to recognize concepts. So much of my life is > involved with trying to grasp concept as though it were a solid reality > that it is always a surprise to notice this, that concept is concept. N: Well said. It is important to know the difference between concept and ultimate reality, this is necessary for the development of insight. It will only become clear, when we begin to learn what realities are. If we begin to be aware of dhammas, even if it is a coarse awareness, not precise yet. Nina. 43408 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Mar 19, 2005 11:49am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Abhidhamma challenge Hi Mateesha, op 18-03-2005 22:34 schreef matheesha op dhammachat@h...:> > N:>Saññaa that accompanies each citta remembers. > > M: Yes, memory is a phenomena which the suttas dont seem to elaborate > on. I would like to think that the dhamma is ultimately experiential. > If the sanna of every pancaskanda which arises contains past memories > (have I understood it wrongly?) then one must be give rise to all > memories each time sanna comes into being (maybe not?). N: Saññaa arises and falls away with each citta, and thus events can be remembered. Also now: a sound is remembered, and words are formed, and so the meaning of a word is understood, and a whole sentence, and many phrases, so that we follow a reasoning and can draw conclusions. Without saññaa all this would not be possible. Not all experiences of this life are remembered at each moment of citta and the accompanying saññaa. Saññaa arising now marks the object now, only one object. M: Nevertheless > it is good to have an abhidhammic explanation for it. I also wondered > about how memories form. Does it have an element of attachment > (upadana) do you think? (ie - is it an act of attachment?). N: It is not necessarily attachment that conditions the forming of memories, although many times there arises attachment on account of what we remember. Also wrong view: we remember self, a person: attasaññaa. But remembrance of the Dhamma can condiiton awareness and understanding so that there will be anattaa saññaa. We cannot find out exactly how memories form. We only know that all experiences are accumulated in each citta and that because of natural strong dependence condition a past experience, a defilement or past kusala can condition now akusala or kusala. It is helpful to remember this (kusala saññaa!), because understanding conditions will lead to less clinging to my kusala, my akusala. I leave the rest of your post until later, Nina. 43409 From: Date: Sat Mar 19, 2005 7:16am Subject: Re: cocktail conditionality RE: [dsg] Question on Vedana and Sa~n~na Hi Frank and Howard In a message dated 3/19/2005 11:16:59 AM Pacific Standard Time, upasaka@a... writes: Hi, Frank - In a message dated 3/19/05 12:48:30 PM Eastern Standard Time, frank@4... writes: > Hi Howard and TG, > > In [M109]: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/majjhima/mn109.html > (not the exact sutta I was thinking about originally, but it says the same > thing) > Saying, "Very good, lord," the monk... asked him a further question: "Lord, > what is the cause, what the condition, for the delineation[2] of the > aggregate of form? What is the cause, what the condition, for the > delineation of the aggregate of feeling... perception... fabrications... > consciousness?" > > "Monk, the four great existents (earth, water, fire, &wind) are the cause, > the four great existents the condition, for the delineation of the aggregate > of form. Contact is the cause, contact the condition, for the delineation of > the aggregate of feeling. Contact is the cause, contact the condition, for > the delineation of the aggregate of perception. Contact is the cause, > contact the condition, for the delineation of the aggregate of fabrications. > Name-&-form is the cause, name-&-form the condition, for the delineation of > the aggregate of consciousness." > ===================== I'm not clear on what 'delineation' means, but I suppose it means becoming aware of as a phenomenon. If that is so, why would any of this be surprising? I'm not clear on what the point is, Frank. With metta, Howard TG Deliniation is a poor was of saying "manifestation" or simpler yet ... arising. B. Bodhi/Nanamoli has manifestation in MLDB. Causes for particular conditions are being laid down much like a scientist would do so. My view is that the arising of these mental states is the immediate result of contact. This perspective: of immediate 'contact--result,' allows conditional alterations to be directly known as they are felt. I think this sutta as well as hundreds of others indicate that a merely phenomenological viewpoint is not sufficient to grasp the totality of the Buddha's teachings... as much of what the Buddha discusses are "separate" physical realities. TG 43410 From: Date: Sat Mar 19, 2005 9:43am Subject: Re: cocktail conditionality RE: [dsg] Question on Vedana and Sa~n~na Hi, TG (and Frank) - In a message dated 3/19/05 3:17:08 PM Eastern Standard Time, TGrand458@a... writes: > My view is that the arising of these mental states is the immediate result > of > contact. This perspective: of immediate 'contact--result,' allows > conditional alterations to be directly known as they are felt. > =================== I don't see immediacy as implied. There are frequent places where the Buddha has said that A is requisite for B when A does not immediately precede B. Birth and death are an example. Also, kamma is condition for kamma vipaka, but rarely with immediate precedence. 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) 43411 From: frank Date: Sat Mar 19, 2005 5:54pm Subject: RE: cocktail conditionality RE: [dsg] Question on Vedana and Sa~n~na Hi Howard, What is it exactly you were asking regarding the honeyball sutta? My impression was you were trying to determine if there was a precise causal relationship (for example in the same way that feeling is the proximate requisite cause for craving) between the aggregate of perception and the aggregate of feeling (what one feels, one perceives). Based on my interpretation of the suttas, there isn't. My impression was you were trying to discern whether there is an atomic precise causal relationship between feeling and perception, and I don't think there is one. In the Buddhist dictionary entry for sankhara nyanatiloka provides some interesting info. The sankhara that is the 2nd link in dependent origination following ignorance is perhaps not exactly the sankhara as one of the 5 aggregates, although there seems like much overlap. You then asked me for a sutta reference to back up the claim that contact is the proximate immediate cause for sankhara (mental formations aggregate), and I provided one which seems to support it, but you seem to have other ideas about what it says. Based on your responses, it sounds like you're discussing some abidhammic subtlety that I have no idea about, so I'll drop out of the thread. It was a mistake to de-lurk :-) From your statement below, it feels like either we're talking about completely different things, or you're trying to address something that I have no clue about. In a way, all communication with humans seems this way. Even though we speak a common language with common understanding of each individual word, perception of the overall body of words arises such that we're effectively in our own worlds and we have no idea what each other is really trying to say. No wonder most relationships end in divorce, and so much discord and animosity between different countries, communities, etc. Even friendly Buddhists can feel like we're talking about completely different things and not understanding what the other friend is driving at. Confused and re-lurking :-) -fk -----Original Message----- From: upasaka@a... [mailto:upasaka@a...] Hi, TG (and Frank) - In a message dated 3/19/05 3:17:08 PM Eastern Standard Time, TGrand458@a... writes: > My view is that the arising of these mental states is the immediate result > of > contact. This perspective: of immediate 'contact--result,' allows > conditional alterations to be directly known as they are felt. > =================== I don't see immediacy as implied. There are frequent places where the Buddha has said that A is requisite for B when A does not immediately precede B. Birth and death are an example. Also, kamma is condition for kamma vipaka, but rarely with immediate precedence. With metta, Howard 43412 From: Date: Sat Mar 19, 2005 5:55pm Subject: Re: cocktail conditionality RE: [dsg] Question on Vedana and Sa~n~na TG: "I think this sutta as well as hundreds of others indicate that a merely phenomenological viewpoint is not sufficient to grasp the totality of the Buddha's teachings... as much of what the Buddha discusses are "separate" physical realities." Hi TG, M brains are so mushy these days I don't have any idea on what a "merely phenomenological viewpoint" might be but I have a thought on separate physical realities. I've been trying to understand Nagarjuna via Tsongkhapa & Co. via Hopkins and it seems to me they are saying there is no independent arising in dependent arising, therefore there is no separate, independent conditioning factor in dependent arising. Essentially there is no independent other, no object independent of sense-base or consciousness in dependent arising. A somewhat outdated translation of paticcasamuppada is "dependent co-arising". That's the way I'm understanding it at the moment. Do you have a different view? Frankly, it's a little difficult to see this dependence in my relations with the world. Larry 43413 From: gazita2002 Date: Sat Mar 19, 2005 6:06pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Q. Visuddhimagga - Nina / James Hello Nina and James, Thank you both for your comments. There are points that I want to answer more directly but have no time at the moment as I must go to work. Just 'voicing' my dis-ease at the time has made me feel better. I agree with James, it is based on craving - wanting results NOW. I remember K.Sujin saying 'begin again', Nina, and it reminds me of the times we used to meet once a week at Mom Dusadee's house somewhere in Bkk. There is craving for the past and wanting something good for the future, but how futile is that!!!!! Patience [there is a bit], courage [a little] and good cheer - I'm smiling, which probably means lobha :-) Azita 43414 From: Date: Sat Mar 19, 2005 1:09pm Subject: Re: cocktail conditionality RE: [dsg] Question on Vedana and Sa~n~na Hi, Frank - In a message dated 3/19/05 8:55:46 PM Eastern Standard Time, frank@4... writes: > > Hi Howard, > What is it exactly you were asking regarding the honeyball sutta? My > impression was you were trying to determine if there was a precise causal > relationship (for example in the same way that feeling is the proximate > requisite cause for craving) between the aggregate of perception and the > aggregate of feeling (what one feels, one perceives). Based on my > interpretation of the suttas, there isn't. My impression was you were trying > to discern whether there is an atomic precise causal relationship between > feeling and perception, and I don't think there is one. ----------------------------------------------- Howard: What I wanted to know was whether the conditionality between vedana and sa~n~na is symmetrical or asymmetrical. Specifically I wrote the following: "In the Honeyball Sutta the Buddha says that what one feels one perceives (or recognizes); that is, sa~n~na depends on vedana. Nowhere, I believe, is it said that vedana depends on sa~n~na. Now according to Abhidhamma, vedana and sa~n~na are universals that *co-occur* in every mindstate. Given that this is so, I wonder in what what sense there holds the asymmetrical dependence of sa~n~na on vedana. In what sense is vedana requisite for sa~n~na but not vice-versa? " The point is that Abhidhamma's claim of both occurring in every mindstate seems to confuse the issue, and I was simply wondering what it means for vedana to condition sa~n~na any more than vice-versa. That's all. ---------------------------------------------- > In the Buddhist dictionary entry for sankhara nyanatiloka provides some > interesting info. The sankhara that is the 2nd link in dependent origination > following ignorance is perhaps not exactly the sankhara as one of the 5 > aggregates, although there seems like much overlap. > You then asked me for a sutta reference to back up the claim that contact > is the proximate immediate cause for sankhara (mental formations aggregate), > and I provided one which seems to support it, but you seem to have other > ideas about what it says. > Based on your responses, it sounds like you're discussing some abidhammic > subtlety that I have no idea about, so I'll drop out of the thread. It was a > mistake to de-lurk :-) > -------------------------------------- Howard: Wow, I didn't know that I could do so much fdamage so quickly! ;-) --------------------------------------- From your statement below, it feels like either we're> > talking about completely different things, or you're trying to address > something that I have no clue about. In a way, all communication with humans > seems this way. Even though we speak a common language with common > understanding of each individual word, perception of the overall body of > words arises such that we're effectively in our own worlds and we have no > idea what each other is really trying to say. No wonder most relationships > end in divorce, and so much discord and animosity between different > countries, communities, etc. Even friendly Buddhists can feel like we're > talking about completely different things and not understanding what the > other friend is driving at. > > Confused and re-lurking :-) > > -fk > ====================== Don't just lurk, Frank. This was a relatively unimportant matter that I raised and that I am quite ready to drop. Stick around. No doubt there'll soon be some actually *important* things to talk about!! 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) 43415 From: kelvin_lwin Date: Sat Mar 19, 2005 6:35pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Another Alternative for a Buddhist Theory of Memory Hi Jon & Howard, > > J: This is important because there are certain 'practices' that are based > > on the idea of cutting off the chain at one of the links. People are > > always having ideas about short-cuts that the Buddha himself seems to > > have overlooked ;-)) > H: I agree completely with you on this, Jon. Some folks take the position > that "the chain is to be cut" at one link or other, usually the vedana --> > tanha link, and I've often expressed disagreement with this position. Kel: Does wrong 'practice' include Mogok sayadaw's teachings? Is his circle of D.O wrong with arrows at vedana-tanha link? http://www.triplegem.plus.com/tdaing1.htm - kel 43416 From: Date: Sat Mar 19, 2005 2:40pm Subject: Re: cocktail conditionality RE: [dsg] Question on Vedana and Sa~n~na Hi Howard and Frank In a message dated 3/19/2005 2:44:40 PM Pacific Standard Time, upasaka@a... writes: I don't see immediacy as implied. There are frequent places where the Buddha has said that A is requisite for B when A does not immediately precede B. Birth and death are an example. Also, kamma is condition for kamma vipaka, but rarely with immediate precedence. With metta, Howard Birth and Death are not immediate if they are thinking of just the "birth event." I think of them as describing the birth of a life and the death of a life. In such a case, I would consider them immediate cause and effect ... as the birth of a life ends in death. When the Buddha speaks of Birth in the 12 Fold Chain, I think he is speaking of the birth of the whole life, not solely the "birth event." This is evidenced by the Buddha explaining the various sufferings that occur during the course of a life. Regarding asynchronous kamma...I think its just an expression. I think of it like two batteries. If one is charged and immediately used...the cause and effect relationship is clear enough. But if the other one is charged but not used for 5 years, it may seem the cause and effect is asynchronous...but its not really. It just wasn't clearly apparent as to how the "charges" were stored and moved along. In each case there was continuous cause and effect all along the line. TG 43417 From: Date: Sat Mar 19, 2005 3:00pm Subject: Re: cocktail conditionality RE: [dsg] Question on Vedana and Sa~n~na Hi Larry In a message dated 3/19/2005 5:55:58 PM Pacific Standard Time, LBIDD@w... writes: TG: "I think this sutta as well as hundreds of others indicate that a merely phenomenological viewpoint is not sufficient to grasp the totality of the Buddha's teachings... as much of what the Buddha discusses are "separate" physical realities." Hi TG, M brains are so mushy these days I don't have any idea on what a "merely phenomenological viewpoint" might be but I have a thought on separate physical realities. TG I'm just going to answer the Honeyball question now as the others require me to think too much. The Buddha speaks about Rods and Weapons in the Honeyball. Nothing is ultimately a "separate physical state" cause they are all related. But Rods and Weapons are spoken about in the Honeyball without a demand placed on the student/reader as seeing them only as viable in connection with consciousness/mentality. I've been trying to understand Nagarjuna via Tsongkhapa & Co. via Hopkins and it seems to me they are saying there is no independent arising in dependent arising, therefore there is no separate, independent conditioning factor in dependent arising. Essentially there is no independent other, no object independent of sense-base or consciousness in dependent arising. A somewhat outdated translation of paticcasamuppada is "dependent co-arising". That's the way I'm understanding it at the moment. Do you have a different view? Frankly, it's a little difficult to see this dependence in my relations with the world. Larry TG I may view it only slightly and subtly differently; and too complicated to get into the difference right now. Its basically the way I see it though. TG 43418 From: rjkjp1 Date: Sat Mar 19, 2005 11:14pm Subject: Re: Rupa Madness: Seeing with the Tongue Dear matthew, Not sure what you are describing is seeing, could you explain why it is? ""Using this device, knowns as a BrainPort, one blind woman who was > previously unable to stand upright without holding onto something and > concentrating, was able to dance."" =========== What about the many blind people who are well capable of standing, and moving (even dancing) without this device? ============= I don't see how the abhidhamma, with its rigid categories of rupas, > vatthus, dvaras and so on, could possibly account for phenomena like > this. We need the careful, patient observation and experiment of > neuroscience to begin to understand the structure of consciousness. > Otherwise we're whistling in the dark and spinning fantasies. >================== I looked into neuroscience, have to say it looked more like witchcraft than anything to help us understand. Just my opinion. Robertk --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Matthew Miller" wrote: > > There's a new technology that allows blind people to "see" with > different parts of the body. > > For example, a blind subject can "see" by having a camera mounted on > his or her forehead that feeds a signal into an electronic device that > turns the pattern of light and dark into electrical impulses. The > pulses stimulate an array of 144 electrodes on a grid about the size > of a postage stamp which zap the coded image into -- the blind > person's tongue! At first, the blind subjects describe the sensation > as being like candy pop rocks exploding, but later they experience > 43419 From: sarah abbott Date: Sat Mar 19, 2005 11:33pm Subject: ‘Cetasikas' study corner 150 - Applied thinking/Vitakka, Sustained thinking/Vicaara(t) 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.8 Applied thinking(Vitakka),Sustained thinking(Vicaara)contd] Questions i Through how many doors can vitakka and vicåra experience an object? ii Can vitakka and vicåra think of paramattha dhammas? iii What is the difference between vitakka and vicåra? iv Do vitakka and vicåra always arise together? v Can vitakka and vicåra arise in a sense-door process? vi Which types of kåmåvacara cittas (cittas of the sensesphere) are not accompanied by vitakka and vicåra? vii In which stages of jhåna does vitakka arise? viii Why is vitakka abandoned in the higher stages of jhåna? ix In which stages of jhåna does vicåra arise? x Both vitakka and vicåra accompany the citta which is mindful of nåma and rúpa. Are both vitakka and vicåra factors of the eightfold Path? ***** [Ch.8 Applied thinking(Vitakka),Sustained thinking(Vicaara)finished!] Metta, Sarah ====== 43420 From: matheesha Date: Sun Mar 20, 2005 1:16am Subject: [dsg] Re: Abhidhamma challenge Hi Nina, >N:Also now: a sound is remembered, and words are formed, and so > the meaning of a word is understood, and a whole sentence, and many phrases, > so that we follow a reasoning and can draw conclusions. Without saññaa all > this would not be possible. M: Yes, that does seem to show the flow of information and also it's processing. Storage would be the next step. In a way since there is no doubt that it occures its not essential to find out the exact nuts and bolts of how it happens. I suppose understanding that the three characterisitcs are applicable in every instance for seen and unseen mechanisms are enough. >N:because understanding conditions will lead to less clinging to my > kusala, my akusala. M: This is a movement towards Right View. Do you think purely learning and applying this way to day to day life (without formal sathipattana meditation) is a path to nibbana? I suspect for some it might be and possible there is 'proof' in the suttas for this. >N: I leave the rest of your post until later, M: thats fine, no hurry! metta matheesha --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > Hi Mateesha, > > op 18-03-2005 22:34 schreef matheesha op dhammachat@h...:> > > N:>Saññaa that accompanies each citta remembers. > > > > M: Yes, memory is a phenomena which the suttas dont seem to elaborate > > on. I would like to think that the dhamma is ultimately experiential. > > If the sanna of every pancaskanda which arises contains past memories > > (have I understood it wrongly?) then one must be give rise to all > > memories each time sanna comes into being (maybe not?). > N: Saññaa arises and falls away with each citta, and thus events can be > remembered. Also now: a sound is remembered, and words are formed, and so > the meaning of a word is understood, and a whole sentence, and many phrases, > so that we follow a reasoning and can draw conclusions. Without saññaa all > this would not be possible. > Not all experiences of this life are remembered at each moment of citta and > the accompanying saññaa. Saññaa arising now marks the object now, only one > object. > > M: Nevertheless > > it is good to have an abhidhammic explanation for it. I also wondered > > about how memories form. Does it have an element of attachment > > (upadana) do you think? (ie - is it an act of attachment?). > N: It is not necessarily attachment that conditions the forming of memories, > although many times there arises attachment on account of what we remember. > Also wrong view: we remember self, a person: attasaññaa. But remembrance of > the Dhamma can condiiton awareness and understanding so that there will be > anattaa saññaa. > We cannot find out exactly how memories form. We only know that all > experiences are accumulated in each citta and that because of natural strong > dependence condition a past experience, a defilement or past kusala can > condition now akusala or kusala. It is helpful to remember this (kusala > saññaa!), because understanding conditions will lead to less clinging to my > kusala, my akusala. > I leave the rest of your post until later, > Nina. 43421 From: Christine Forsyth Date: Sun Mar 20, 2005 1:52am Subject: Re: Q. Visuddhimagga XIV, 142 - Nina Hello Azita, and all, Just came home from the Cooran weekend ... you were missed, everyone sends hugs - a shame you were a thousand kilometres north this time. Just think, if you had come, you could have been put on the right track about Right View by KenH - like the rest of us. :-) Things could be worse, girl. Andrew can tell you about the crash of a branch falling, and how, when an investigation was made, there was a large python compressing a ringtail possum in order to make it fit into is dislocated jaws. To save or not to save? Not. Pythons have to eat ... but what's a little domanassa compared to that? I can relate to your 'down' feelings - I'd love to have a happy- chappy response ... but all I can advise is 'endure' - fortunately there is anicca. This too shall pass. :-) Looking forward to seeing you in a week in Bangkok, on the evening of Monday 28th. Nothing like being with admirable friends to refresh and revitalise the spiritual life. :-) metta, Chris 43422 From: nina Date: Sun Mar 20, 2005 3:09am Subject: Visuddhimagga XIV, 145, 146, and Tiika. Visuddhimagga XIV, 145, 146, and Tiika. Text Vis.:145. (xviii)-(xix) The light (quick) state of the [mental] body is 'lightness of the body'. The light (quick) state of consciousness is 'lightness of consciousness'. They have the characteristic of quieting heaviness in the [mental] body and in consciousness. Their function is to crush heaviness in the [mental] body and in consciousness. The Tiika explains heaviness as slowness or sluggishness. It states that this designates sloth and torpor or the four naamakkhandhas that occur in that way. Text Vis.: They are manifested as nonsluggishness of the [mental] body and of consciousness. Tiika: They are opposed to sluggishness, they are not merely absence of sluggishness. Text Vis.: Their proximate cause is the [mental] body and consciousness. They should be regarded as opposed to the defilements of stiffness and torpor, which cause heaviness in the [mental] body and in consciousness. **** N: When there are sloth and torpor one has no energy for kusala. Lightness (lahutaa) of cetasikas and of citta are opposed to the mental heaviness of sloth and torpor and the other defilements. One may feel too tired to perform any kind of kusala. Lightness of cetasikas and citta support the kusala citta so that it is gentle and light, and at such a moment all sluggishness, mental heaviness and tiredness are gone. When someone needs help one is able to react quickly, and have alertness to doing what is beneficial. One does not waste an opportunity for dana, sila or bhaavanaa. Mental lightness supports the kusala citta in the development of insight. It supports citta to be alert and non-forgetful of naama and ruupa that appear. **** Text Vis.146: (xx)-(xxi) The malleable state of the [mental] body is 'malleability of the body'. The malleable state of consciousness is 'malleability of consciousness'. They have the characteristic of quieting rigidity in the [mental] body and in consciousness. N: The Tiika states that hardness, thaddha, or rigidity, thambho, are terms for wrong view and conceit etc., or for the four naamakhandhas that exert themselves in that way. Text Vis.: Their function is to crush stiffening in the [mental] body and in consciousness. They are manifested as nonresistance. N: The Tiika explains that by crushing stiffness they manifest themselves by being free of obstruction with regard to whatever object, or that they cause the accompanying dhammas to be non-resistant (appa.tighaata) in that way. Text Vis.: Their proximate cause is the [mental] body and consciousness. They should be regarded as opposed to the defilements of views, conceit (pride), etc., which cause stiffening of the [mental] body and of consciousness. **** N: Pliancy (muduta) of citta and cetasikas perform their function in assisting kusala citta. They suppress mental rigidity. When someone is stubborn in clinging to wrong view there is mental rigidity, one is not openminded to the Dhamma. Because of conceit he may not want to listen to true Dhamma and thinks that his opinion is the best. Malleability or pliancy suppresses such mental rigidity and causes the citta to be non-resistant, openminded to the Truth of Dhamma. ***** Nina. 43423 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Mar 20, 2005 3:09am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Q. Visuddhimagga - Nina / James Dear Azita, thanks for your mail. Wonderful. Yes, sweet memories about Mom Dusadee's house. Do you remember the discussions there? I hear the late Phra Dhhammadhari say to me about unpleasant feeling: 'I know how unpleasant it feels'. Anyway, it is only feeling. Nina. op 20-03-2005 03:06 schreef gazita2002 op gazita2002@y...: > Just 'voicing' my dis-ease at the time has made me feel better. 43424 From: Matthew Miller Date: Sun Mar 20, 2005 5:27am Subject: re: Seeing with the Tongue RobK wrote: > Dear matthew, Not sure what you are describing is seeing, could you > explain why it is? Well, if we define "seeing" as sensitivity to light signals, then this is seeing. Ultimately, all of the input from the sense organs are converted into nerve impulses with which the brain assembles a "world." I have a lot of difficulty with the abhidhamms's segregation of the senses into rigid, unchanging categories. Our sense organs evolved. We primates are very visual creatures, but most of our ancestors and relatives are not. The vast majority of creatures on earth do not have light-sensitive organs. Many have such alien sensory systems that we can only imagine what it must be like to experience the world as they do -- such as the echolocation of bats. One of my principal objections to the abhidhamma is that it describes human consciousness in fixed, eternal categories carved in stone. The modern faculties of homo sapiens, the way we take in signals and process them, have evolved over millions of years. But they are not absolute and unchanging. Take vision for example. The earliest form of vision, amongst our invertebrate ancestors, was just a blurry sensitivity to changes in lightness and darkness. But this was sufficient for detecting, say, the shadow of a predator passing overhead, and so those organisms with the capability to see light survived and reproduced. Obviously, later developments that allowed for more refined perception of form, movement, color, etc survived and were passed on as well. The whole purpose of having sense "doors" is to be able to perceive the world -- to better avoid predators, forage for food, rear our young. We can only really understand the senses in this context. Amongst forest animals, for example, scent is a very important directional sense for perceiving things (prey or a mate) over great distances. This is because sound is quickly muffled by surrounding foliage, which also blocks vision. The same goes for "atta." We primates are very communal creatures. Forming cooperative social orders helped make up for the fact that we hairless apes are rather weak and scrawny. Having a social brain, we also developed a sense of "self." N.B. Doesn't anyone find it curious that nowhere in Buddhism is the question asked -- "Why do we have a sense of 'self' (illusory or not) in the first place?" What purpose does it serve? The sense of self, like the human brain, the human eye or the human foot, is an adaptation to help the organism survive and to reproduce. But the human brain became so large that it became possible for it to take things into its own hands. It could do things that might not actually benefit survival and reproduction. An obvious example is contraception. The Buddha arrived at a late stage in human biological and cultural evolution and pointed out that many of our behaviors have exceeded their usefulness. Their value for survival and reproduction has expired and they are causing unnecessary suffering. (though of course he did not use those terms) At the beginning of the 21st century, it is intellectually irresponsible to try to construct a model of human consciousness that does not take into account evolution. That would be like trying to construct a model of how the planets orbit the sun without taking into account the force of gravity. > I looked into neuroscience, have to say it looked more like > witchcraft than anything to help us understand. Just my opinion. That strikes me as a curious thing to say. Could you elaborate? Since I work in the medical field, every day I see ways in which neuroscience has helped us to understand the biology underlying the human mind and, more importantly, treat diseases of that biology. It is very hard for someone to practice vipassana or jhana if, say, imbalances of neurotransmitters are causing them to hallucinate or be frozen with anxiety. Although neuroscience is the youngest branch of medicine, it is undergoing a big bang of growth right now. Matthew 43425 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sun Mar 20, 2005 5:25am Subject: Re: [dsg] Having no opinions Hi, Charles Charles DaCosta wrote: >Jon, > >All you have to do is die. > > I'm afraid I don't quite see the connection. Anyway, why should this time be any different from all the previous times? ;-)) Jon > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Jonothan Abbott > Sent: Thursday, 10 March, 2005 14:05 > Subject: Re: [dsg] Having no opinions > Jon Wrote: > While I agree generally with James' reply about the important difference > between holding opinions about things and the knowledge that comes from > direct experience, I'm not so sure that the sutta you quote really says > what you say it does ('no opinions'). I think it's more about the danger > of clinging to opinions or ideas, having preconceived notions, etc. For > example, it talks about <>, < dependence on which you regard another as inferior>>, wrong view about > becoming or not, etc. I have my doubts as to whether the ideal of having > no opinions is really attainable. > > 43426 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sun Mar 20, 2005 5:53am Subject: Re: [dsg] Rupa Madness: Seeing with the Tongue Hi, Matthew What is described here seems to be the use of the various senses other than the eye-sense to get an experience of space and depth of the world "out there", or a sense of balance. (If I read the report correctly, it is the body sense located in the tongue that is put to use here -- i.e., it is not the taste sense that is used.) There is nothing particularly remarkable about that. Yes, the added input from the camera is interesting, but there are known parallels for other sense-doors (for example, using experiences through body sense to "improve hearing"). The abhidhamma says that there are only 5 sense-doors, and that the object experienced through each cannot be experienced through any other sense-door. Is there anything here that you see as calling that into question? It would be useful if you could be a bit more specific as regards the comments in your last paragraph. Jon Matthew Miller wrote: >There's a new technology that allows blind people to "see" with >different parts of the body. > >For example, a blind subject can "see" by having a camera mounted on >his or her forehead that feeds a signal into an electronic device that >turns the pattern of light and dark into electrical impulses. The >pulses stimulate an array of 144 electrodes on a grid about the size >of a postage stamp which zap the coded image into -- the blind >person's tongue! At first, the blind subjects describe the sensation >as being like candy pop rocks exploding, but later they experience >something more "out there" in the world -- a sense of space, depth and >shape. > >Using this device, knowns as a BrainPort, one blind woman who was >previously unable to stand upright without holding onto something and >concentrating, was able to dance. > >... > >I don't see how the abhidhamma, with its rigid categories of rupas, >vatthus, dvaras and so on, could possibly account for phenomena like >this. We need the careful, patient observation and experiment of >neuroscience to begin to understand the structure of consciousness. >Otherwise we're whistling in the dark and spinning fantasies. > > 43427 From: Date: Sun Mar 20, 2005 1:00am Subject: Re: [dsg] Another Alternative for a Buddhist Theory of Memory Hi, Kel - In a message dated 3/19/05 9:35:48 PM Eastern Standard Time, kelvin_lwin@y... writes: > Kel: Does wrong 'practice' include Mogok sayadaw's teachings? Is > his circle of D.O wrong with arrows at vedana-tanha link? > ===================== I'm going on what I've read in the suttas and what makes sense to me, and they seem to go together. I haven't read this particular Sayadaw's writings yet. Perhaps he's right, perhaps I'm wrong. It is what it is, and I have no axe to grind in this matter. BTW, the *practice* of being clearly and precisely attentive to the mind, and particularly to be mindful of our mental reacting to vedana, is, IMO, an important, even essential, practice in any case. I believe that such practice cultivates important insight that can contribute to diminishing and even uprooting aspects of ignorance. Ultimately, however, it is the uprooting of ignorance with the sword of wisdom that I consider to be critical, and not some "link-cutting operation". Most essentially, we are enslaved by avijja and freed by vijja. Much cultivation of a variety of sorts, including cultivation of calm, is needed to produce, support, and enable the liberating vijja. 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) 43428 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Mar 20, 2005 6:25am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Abhidhamma challenge Hi Matheesha, op 20-03-2005 10:16 schreef matheesha op dhammachat@h...:> >> N:Also now: a sound is remembered, and words are formed, and so >> the meaning of a word is understood.... > M: Yes, that does seem to show the flow of information and also it's > processing. Storage would be the next step. N: Yes, but I avoid storage, because that suggests lastingness. Also what is accumulated changes, new experiences are also accumulated and added, but even the word added is not good. There isn't anything that stays the same. M: In a way since there is > no doubt that it occures its not essential to find out the exact > nuts and bolts of how it happens. N: I quite agree, that is not the purpose of the teachings. The Dhamma does not teach neurology, it teaches liberation. M:> N:because understanding conditions will lead to less clinging to my >> kusala, my akusala. > M: This is a movement towards Right View. Do you think purely > learning and applying this way to day to day life (without formal > sathipattana meditation) is a path to nibbana? N: Understanding is first intellectual, and it will grow through satipatthana. By satipatthana I do not mean anything formal, it all has to do with daily life. The satipatthanasutta points to the development of understanding in daily life, no matter which of the four sections we take. This is the sure way to enlightenment. But we have to beware of clinging! M: I suspect for some it > might be and possible there is 'proof' in the suttas for this. N: I think for all, and sutta and commentaries explain this. The monk's life is different from the lay life, but also the monk has to be aware while washing his robes, going pindapatha, etc. The Vinaya is closely connected with satipatthana. **** Part 2: N:The maggacitta eradicates defilements and experiences the unconditioned element, nibbaana. .. M: How can an unconditioned element be experienced? Shouldnt there be no experience of it? (ie- identified by not having felt anything ..sort of like sleep?) N: It can be experienced by paññaa which has been developed to that stage. Not like sleep at all. The greatest alertness Lokuttara pannñaa is supported by many sobhana cittas which are also lokuttara. Does the lokuttara vipaka citta mean that phala is arising as an Effect of experience while on the path. Thank you, Metta matheesha --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > Hi Matheesha, > op 17-03-2005 08:33 schreef matheesha op dhammachat@h...: > >> N: We have accumulated so much attachment and ignorance. > > > > M:This idea of accumilation is interesting. Does the word skandas > > refer to the fact that certain things can accumilate? If they do they > > must be the same as thinking habits/memory is it not? > N: Each citta (viññaa.nakkhandha) falls away but since it is immediately > succeeded by the next one there are conditions for accumulating good and bad > inclinations (the formations khandha), all experiences, all we learnt, from > moment to moment, from life to life. > When we think of life as an uninterrupted series of cittas, the fact of > accumulation becomes more understandable. > Indeed, you can notice that habits are formed, what you experienced is > remembered. Saññaa that accompanies each citta remembers. We can remember > things that happened long ago. What has been accumulated is a condition for > the arising again of akusala citta and cetasikas, and of kusala citta and > sobhana cetasikas. Paññaa, a sobhana cetasika, is also accumulated and can > develop from life to life. > Kamma, good and evil deeds, are accumulated and can produce result, even in > future lives. > M: What does abhidhamma state about magga and phala citta. This is > > another area i would like to explore. > N: When paññaa has been developed in stages of insight it can become > accomplished to the degree that enlightenment can be attained. The > maggacitta eradicates defilements and experiences the unconditioned element, > nibbaana. The phala citta is the lokuttara vipaakacitta that succeeds the > maggacitta immediately in the same process, and this also experiences > nibbaana. > Since defilements are deeply rooted, they are eradicated in the subsequent > stages of enlightenment, until they are all eradicated at the fourth stage, > the stage of the arahat. > However, for us now it is more important to understand the right Path > leading to enlightenment. > Nina. 43429 From: Date: Sun Mar 20, 2005 1:28am Subject: Re: [dsg] Another Alternative for a Buddhist Theory of Memory Hi again, Kel - In a message dated 3/20/05 9:00:25 AM Eastern Standard Time, Upasaka writes: > ... the *practice* of being clearly and precisely attentive to the mind, > and particularly to be mindful of our mental reacting to vedana, is, IMO, an > important, even essential, practice in any case. I believe that such practice > cultivates important insight that can contribute to diminishing and even > uprooting aspects of ignorance. Ultimately, however, it is the uprooting of > ignorance with the sword of wisdom that I consider to be critical, and not some > "link-cutting operation". ====================== One more point Kel, which I think may serve to clarify. There is no question that in the unraveling reading of D.O., with the cessation of vedana there is the cessation of tanha. Some folks think this then means that "all we have to do" is pay careful, concentrated attention to the arising of vedana, with the mind in a calm state, so as not to react with craving/aversion. I think this is a fallacious piece of reasoning. First of all, even if there are multiple times that one feels but, due to clear mindfulness and calm, does not react in that instance with tanha, that will only serve to usefully cultivate the mind, but not directly liberate the mind. The actual dispositional link from vedana to tanha, is only uprooted when the core basis for that link is removed, and that core basis is avijja. When ignorance has ceased, vedana is no longer infected with that virus, and it will no longer lead to craving, clinging, becoming, and suffering. Also, "not reacting" is not something one can just "decide" to do. When the deep-seated, ignorance-based disposition to react with craving is still in place, our occasions of non-reaction are few and far between, and generally weak, incomplete, and inadequate. So long as avijja is operative, the forward cycle of D.O. will be repeatedly operative. By practice of the Dhamma, which includes careful attention to all aspects of the 12-link chain as they arise, the mind is cultivated, and useful conditions produced, culminating in the destruction of ignorance, at which time the entire 12-link chain will almost instantaneously fold up like line of dominoes or a house of cards. The entire practice of the Dhamma is based on all sorts of skillful means conditioning the obliteration of ignorance. 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) 43430 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sun Mar 20, 2005 6:21am Subject: Re: [dsg] Another Alternative for a Buddhist Theory of Memory Hi, Kel kelvin_lwin wrote: >Hi Jon & Howard, > > > > Kel: Does wrong 'practice' include Mogok sayadaw's teachings? Is >his circle of D.O wrong with arrows at vedana-tanha link? > >http://www.triplegem.plus.com/tdaing1.htm > > I have looked at the link; it is a very long article ;-)) Perhaps a better approach would be to discuss anything from the article that represents your own view on the subject (trying to discuss the views of (absent) third parties is usually not so fruitful, due to the difficulty of agreeing on what the person means to say anyway). Do you have a view on 'breaking the chain' at the vedana link in particular? Please bring up for discussion, especially any sutta references on the point. Jon 43431 From: rjkjp1 Date: Sun Mar 20, 2005 6:51am Subject: Re: Seeing with the Tongue --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Matthew Miller" wrote: > > ROBK> > I looked into neuroscience, have to say it looked more like > > witchcraft than anything to help us understand. Just my opinion. > ==================== > That strikes me as a curious thing to say. Could you elaborate? > > ========- Dear matthew, Perhaps like apes playing with computers is a better description of what I meant. Say some aliens came to earth and saw the internet working on a computer. They take the computer back to mars , absolutely sure that the internet is in the computer. So they do tests, find hotspots etc. Maybe they zero in on the battery pack and find that if they prod it or cool it or something funny things happen. So they think the battery is key. They spend vast resorces and make a pefect battery, the monitor becomes brighter.. Progress!... Or they pull out a wire and the monitor looks funny. AH! that must be it.... The Abhidhamma is different it points to actual realities, namas and rupas, that are arising now, it is the only way (I believe) that anyone can ever come to understand what mind and matter are. Robertk 43432 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Mar 20, 2005 6:53am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Abhidhamma challenge 2 Dear Matheesha, something happened to my post to you. I shall finish part 2. It was broken off. op 18-03-2005 22:34 schreef matheesha op dhammachat@h...: Part 2: N:The maggacitta eradicates defilements and experiences the unconditioned element, nibbaana. .. M: How can an unconditioned element be experienced? Shouldnt there be no experience of it? (ie- identified by not having felt anything ..sort of like sleep?) N: It can be experienced by paññaa which has been developed to that stage. Not like sleep at all. Lokuttara pannñaa is supported by many sobhana cittas which are also lokuttara. There is a high degree of direct understanding and mindfulness and great alertness. M: Does the lokuttara vipaka citta mean that phala is arising as an > Effect of the magga citta, (which is the Cause)? N: Yes, it is the result. M: Does abhidhamma explain why defilements are eradicated with magga > citta? N: It explains that the latent tendencies are eradicated stage by stage, so that these cannot condition the arising of akusala cittas. M: Is it possible for say ..a sothapanna to experience phala citta again > on a later date at will? I have heard this mentioned in some schools > of theravada meditation. N: Only those who are proficient in jhana. They can have phalacitta experiencing nibbana again. > M: Interestingly i wonder if it is possible for there to be more than > just the 4 x 2 magga-phala citta depending on the maturity of the > mental faculties of the practitioner. But I would suspect that the > answer is no :) N: Those who are proficient in jhana and have reached the different stages can have forty (if we count jhanas as fivefold) lokuttara cittas instead of eight. M: The suttas seem to suggest that there maybe other ways of getting rid > of defilements as well. Would the abhidhamma support this? N: Which sutta? By samatha defilements can be temporarily subdued. Only by the development of the eightfold Path/satipatthana, defilements are completely eradicated. M: The suttas also seem to suggest that nibbana is possible by just > using void/emptiness/letting go as an object of meditation. N: Do you have a sutta at hand? Emptiness is emptiness of the self. We take seeing for self now. How to let go? By understanding it precisely as an element that experiences visible object. There is no other way leading to detachment. M: Would > abhidhamma insist on udaya-vya nana/insight knowledge of impermenence > to give rise to magga-phala citta? N: The three characteristics of dhammas, including impermanence have to be clearly realized by paññaa before enlightenment can be attained. > N:> However, for us now it is more important to understand the right > Path >> leading to enlightenment. > > M: Yes, but I feel my needs are met in that department :) I'm trying > to find out what abidhamma provides as explanation for things we > experience while on the path. N: We experience many defilements while on the Path. If we do not know exactly when we are clinging to result it is very dangerous. We are bound to mislead ourselves, taking for the Path what is not the Path. The Abhidhamma is a great help for understanding defilements in more detail. Nina. 43433 From: Matthew Miller Date: Sun Mar 20, 2005 7:27am Subject: Re: Seeing with the Tongue Robertk wrote: > Perhaps like apes playing with computers is a better description of > what I meant... they pull out a wire and the monitor looks funny. AH! > that must be it.... > I agree. Apes playing with computers is a delightful analogy for science. We did not evolve to do science. We evolved to rear our young, forage for food, and so on. Our ability to see patterns and understand the world arose for practical purposes, activities of daily living. In general, our capacity to understand reality only applies to things at a limited human scale. Just as our eyes and upright posture are best suited for hunting on the African savannah, and not in the jungles of our gorilla brethren, so too our brain gave us survival and reproductive advantages in a specific environment. But the brain is poorly suited to really understanding the ultimate nature of reality. That takes (to borrow a Buddhist phrase) "going against the stream." > The Abhidhamma is different it points to actual realities, namas and > rupas, that are arising now, it is the only way (I believe) that > anyone can ever come to understand what mind and matter are. How so? Through introspection? Matthew 43434 From: Date: Sun Mar 20, 2005 2:59am Subject: Existential Angst, Anicca, and Samatha Hi, all - This is a different sort of post for DSG, I think. ;-) Yesterday we rented a DVD of a film entitled The Forgotten. We haven't viewed it yet, but I did read the plot description. It is about a woman for whom more and more aspects of her life, starting with her son, seem to be missing. She remembers things which others tell her never were! More and more of her apparent life appears to have been complete illusion. In the middle of the night last night, I began to think about this film and its theme. It occurred to me that it describes exactly what my life, and everyone's life, actually is. I realized, not as just a matter of theory, but deeply and emotionally, that the entire past is gone. There is no mother of mine [Was there ever?], there is no father and no grandparents. Aunts & uncles are "missing", a friend of mine, dear as the dearest brother, is nowhere to be seen. And more than this - gone are my young sons, though older ones now seem to exist. Where are those young sons of mine? Where are the teachers and friends of my so-called childhood? Where is anything, even what seemed to be but moments ago? Then I *saw* that there is nothing at all that remains even for a moment, and I saw that nothing *truly* exists at any time. Everything flies away so radically that I had to ask if anything is ever "here" at all! And then a tremendous terror arose in me and renewed itself constantly, and there was an unbearable suffering that nothing could seem to allay. Only by finally turning my mind to the thought that there is a haven of safety at the base of all this was I able to induce sufficient calm to fall back asleep. Now it is the morning, and everything seems "normal". What that means is that I am back to my standard out-of-touch-with-reality mode, my ignorance-is-bliss mode. And my choice appears to be between an in-touch terror, and an out-of-touch calm, a no-win choice, a choice suited for fools. Part of what I conclude from all this is that without cultivating a solid, dependable base of calm and equanimity, I will run from the terror of seeing the radical impermanence and unreality of all dhammas, and so long as I cannot stand and face the facts, genuine liberation and peace can never be attained. And thus, as I see it, samatha bhavana is a critically important part of Dhamma practice, a part that I must work on at all costs. 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) 43435 From: htootintnaing Date: Sun Mar 20, 2005 8:19am Subject: Dhamma Thread (283) Dear Dhamma Friends, The first citta to arise in so called fine-material-being is called patisandhi citta or rebirth-consciousness or linking consciousness. This consciousness is one of 5 rupavipaka citta or 5 fine-material- resultant-consciousness. These 5 rupavipaka cittas are the resultant consciousness of 5 rupakusala cittas or simply 5 rupa jhaanas. These 5 rupa jhaanas are simply 1st jhana, 2nd jhana, 3rd jhana, 4th jhana and 5th jhana. These jhanas are jhana cittas in their immediate past life. Because of the power of jhana, when they are dying rupa-brahmas-to-be escaped from their bodily pain by staying in rupa jhana. In these jhanas especially in the early jhanas that is the first three rupa jhanas there is no pain at all because of sukha which is a constituent of the first three rupa jhanas. When they are dying these jhanas arise because of their tendency which was raised by their frequent practice in their immediate past life. But if they did not do jhana near dying there will not be any jhana at all when they were dying. When jhanas arose near dying, they served as marana-aasanna-javana- cittas or dying-frequenting-mental-impulsive-consciousness and because of the power of these jhanas they are reborn in corresponding rupa bhumis or 'fine-material-realms. May you all be free from suffering. With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing PS: Any comments are welcome and any queries are welcome. If there is unclarity of any meaning, please just give a reply to any of these posts on Dhamma Thread. 43436 From: htootintnaing Date: Sun Mar 20, 2005 8:55am Subject: Dhamma Thread (284) Dear Dhamma Friends, The first citta in rupa brahma or fine material being is one one 5 rupavipaka cittas or 5 'fine-material-resultant-consciousness' depending on what was their marana-asanna-javana in their immediate past life. This earliest citta is called patisandhi citta and this citta is followed by the first bhavanga citta which is characteristically almost the same with patisandhi citta. This citta is then followed by indefinite numbers of bhavanga cittas. When there arises vithi cittas, bhavanga cittas have to stop to arise and the first vithi citta that arise in rupa brahma is mano- dvaravajjana-citta or mind-door-adverting-consciousness. This citta is followed by jhana vithi vara. In a given brahma there will be only a single paytisandhi citta and this is followed by the same citta serving as bhavanga cittas and it is this citta that will end up as cuti citta when this brahma leaves his world of brahma. In between are vithi cittas. Again these vithi cittas are mostly jhana vithi varas. But they may well be kamavacara cittas. In rupa brahmas there are possibilities that cakkhuvinnana cittas, sotavinnana cittas and their related cittas to arise. May you all be free from suffering. With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing PS: Any comments are welcome and any queries are welcome. If there is unclarity of any meaning, please just give a reply to any of these posts on Dhamma Thread. 43437 From: kelvin_lwin Date: Sun Mar 20, 2005 9:04am Subject: Re: Existential Angst, Anicca, and Samatha Hi Howard, I heard a similar story once by another Yogi during interview time. He was diligently practicing at home and unending anicca nature of things kinda hit him squarely in the face. I guess he was scared and dejected at the fruitility of everything. So he felt the need to come to the center and deal with it there. The presiding sayadaw said "oh, you barely missed panna". Don't let kilesa turn the path from panna to akusala. I think it relates to posts about samvega and using the opportunity. Sometime the mind gets overwhelmed and I believe that's why sayadaws give an anchor of some kind. Ultimately though the anchor doesn't increase panna and merely prevent one from getting swept away. I wonder what if you saw the experience not as terror but as precursor to baya-nana. - Kel 43438 From: kelvin_lwin Date: Sun Mar 20, 2005 9:17am Subject: Re: [dsg] Another Alternative for a Buddhist Theory of Memory Hi Howard, I believe Mogok sayadaw's teaching is summarized in the diagram of chapter 2. Avijja is smack in the middle with tanha so he would agree with panna being the key. I mostly asked out of curiosity if you're familar with his teachings and what position you were trying to refute. > H: Some folks think this then means that "all we > have to do" is pay careful, concentrated attention to the arising of vedana, > with the mind in a calm state, so as not to react with craving/aversion. I think > this is a fallacious piece of reasoning. Kel: Can't panna also arise by doing this? I guess I don't see what's so bad about the position since it's mostly all we can do. Of course it would depend on the level of concentrated attention. - kel 43439 From: htootintnaing Date: Sun Mar 20, 2005 9:23am Subject: Dhamma Thread (285) Dear Dhamma Friends, For those who are new to Dhamma Threads, I would like to summarise what have been written under the heading of Dhamma Threads. Dhamma Thread posts are primarily written directly at DSG site. And then each post is forwarded to JourneyToNibbana, where I am available most of the time. Dhamma Thread posts are also forwarded to triplegem Yahoo Group and dhamma-list Yahoo Group. The site dhamma-list does not receive early posts under the heading of Dhamma Threads. Dhamma Thread is strated with simple words and explore the real world. In the first few posts ultimate realities are explained in simple words. After a few posts, Dhamma Thread is moved to discussion on different classifications on consciousness or cittas. After many posts on classifications of citta, Dhamma Thread is navigated to be under discussions on cetasika dhammas. Different types of cetasikas are compiled into a few groups. Regarding 19 universal beautiful cetasika 19 cetasikas are grouped into 2 by repeating 'saddha' cetasika or 'confidence' or 'faith' or 'belief'. After completion of discussions on cetasikas, citta and cetasikas are discussed in different ways. After that different rupas are discussed. Nibbana is also discussed in a post as summary. After that Dhamma Thread is moved to procession of consciousness or vithi cittas and vithi varas. There are pancadvara kama javana vithi vara or '5-sense-door sensuous mental impulsive procession of consciousness' and mind-door procession or manodvara vithi vara. In manodvara vithi vara there are kama javana and appana javana. In appana javana there are jhana vithi vara, magga vithi vara, and abhinna vithi vara. When there is a continuous flow of cittas which are the same or when there is a continuous state like cessation, such states are called samapatti or attainment. There are 3 kinds of attainment. They are jhana-attainment or jhana-samapatti, fruition-attainment of phala- samapatti, and cessation-attainment or nirodha-samapatti. These are happenings when vithi cittas are working. When cittas arenot vithi cittas then they have to be bhavanga cittas or patisandhi citta if it is the very first citta in a life or it is cuti citta if it is the very last citta in a life. These cittas have to depend on rupas and there always is interactions between rupa and nama, which includes cittas and cetasikas. These are explained as beings and beings are living in their places called bhumis or realms. Currently Dhamma Thread posts are on bhumis or realms or planes of existence. First manussa bhumi or human realm and the cittas that can arise in human beings have been explained. This is followed by beings in 4 planes of woeful existence or 4 apaya bhumis. After a few posts, they are followed by explanation on deva realms and their possible cittas. Currently Dhamma Thread is running on rupa brahma bhumis and the possible cittas that arise in rupa brahma bhumis. Dhamma Thread posts can easily be navigated at JourneyToNibbana Yahoo Group, which is a Buddhism Discussion Group. Anyone who is interested in Dhamma are welcome to any of JTN, DSG, dhamma-list, and triplegem Yahoo Group. As long as I am available I will be happy to answer any queries that arise related to Dhamma Thread posts and any other Buddhism related things particularly practical approach to liberation. May you all be free from suffering. With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing PS: Any comments are welcome and any queries are welcome. If there is unclarity of any meaning, please just give a reply to any of these posts on Dhamma Thread. 43440 From: Date: Sun Mar 20, 2005 4:26am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Existential Angst, Anicca, and Samatha Hi, Kel - In a message dated 3/20/05 12:06:29 PM Eastern Standard Time, kelvin_lwin@y... writes: > I wonder what if you > saw the experience not as terror but as precursor to baya-nana. =================== That would have been useful. But how one "sees" an experience cannot be faked or imposed in the moment. Kel, something similar to this happened to me once at a Goenka retreat. I was close, I believe, to a "breakthrough", but terror prevented it. This is why I see an ongoing practice of samatha bhavana, cultivating a layer of calm, as so important. 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) 43441 From: kelvin_lwin Date: Sun Mar 20, 2005 9:28am Subject: Re: [dsg] Another Alternative for a Buddhist Theory of Memory Hi Jon, I just asked since you seem to have knowledge of some 'techniques' that are wrong. To orient myself I gave you the link to Mogok sayadaw who is known for emphasis on use of paticcassamupadda as depicted in chapter 2 diagram. His position is pretty well stated in the link I thought and gave sutta references. I'm not looking for a discussion, just wanted to know if you include his teachings under your original statement or not. If you're not already familar with it then I guess the answer is no. - kel 43442 From: shakti Date: Sun Mar 20, 2005 9:44am Subject: to Christine and Azita Hi Ladies, I sent another email a week or so ago and wondered if you got it, as I am having problems with my computer. Please contact me off line, as I am coming to Australia soon and would love to see you both, if our schedules work. With metta, Shakti Christine Forsyth wrote: Hello Azita, and all, Just came home from the Cooran weekend ... you were missed, everyone sends hugs - a shame you were a thousand kilometres north this time. Just think, if you had come, you could have been put on the right track about Right View by KenH - like the rest of us. :-) Things could be worse, girl. Andrew can tell you about the crash of a branch falling, and how, when an investigation was made, there was a large python compressing a ringtail possum in order to make it fit into is dislocated jaws. To save or not to save? Not. Pythons have to eat ... but what's a little domanassa compared to that? I can relate to your 'down' feelings - I'd love to have a happy- chappy response ... but all I can advise is 'endure' - fortunately there is anicca. This too shall pass. :-) Looking forward to seeing you in a week in Bangkok, on the evening of Monday 28th. Nothing like being with admirable friends to refresh and revitalise the spiritual life. :-) metta, Chris 43443 From: htootintnaing Date: Sun Mar 20, 2005 10:05am Subject: Re: Dhamma Thread (285) RENUNCIATION Tiresome are they, mind comes to still Trying done are days, shrine comes to will. Dirtsome are frail, mind comes to still Trying done are days, applying comes to will. HTOO NAING PS: I will be on top of a mountain for 9 days. One day for preparation and one day for leaving take 2 extra days beyond a week. I will be sinking in for the whole week. Htoo 43444 From: buddhatrue Date: Sun Mar 20, 2005 10:27am Subject: Re: Existential Angst, Anicca, and Samatha Hi Howard, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, Kel - > > In a message dated 3/20/05 12:06:29 PM Eastern Standard Time, > kelvin_lwin@y... writes: > > > I wonder what if you > > saw the experience not as terror but as precursor to baya-nana. > =================== > That would have been useful. But how one "sees" an experience cannot > be faked or imposed in the moment. Kel, something similar to this happened to > me once at a Goenka retreat. I was close, I believe, to a "breakthrough", but > terror prevented it. This is why I see an ongoing practice of samatha bhavana, > cultivating a layer of calm, as so important. > > With metta, > Howard Interesting experience. I have also had similar experiences of terror during meditation and therefore decided to begin cultivating jhana and the brahmaviharas (I believe mentioned this before in DSG?). I don't know if this is an unfair characterization, but in my case I blame the teaching technique of S.N. Goenka (funny you mention one of his retreats). Following his technique, I jumped right into the practice of vipassana without a firm establishment of calm beforehand. Reading the Buddha's discourses, I now see that this was a grave error. Insight, at the beginning stages, is naturally unsettling and disturbing- and downright terrifying. I don't think the Buddha ever spoke about this because it was a non- issue for his monks since they were taught the proper way of practice (But, of course, if it isn't in the texts, some in this group aren't going to believe it. Very unfortunate.) Metta, James 43445 From: Date: Sun Mar 20, 2005 5:52am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Existential Angst, Anicca, and Samatha Hi, James - In a message dated 3/20/05 1:28:22 PM Eastern Standard Time, buddhatrue@y... writes: > Interesting experience. I have also had similar experiences of > terror during meditation and therefore decided to begin cultivating > jhana and the brahmaviharas (I believe mentioned this before in > DSG?). I don't know if this is an unfair characterization, but in > my case I blame the teaching technique of S.N. Goenka (funny you > mention one of his retreats). Following his technique, I jumped > right into the practice of vipassana without a firm establishment of > calm beforehand. Reading the Buddha's discourses, I now see that > this was a grave error. > ------------------------------------ Howard: Perhaps not for everyone. For the most part it was an error for me. However, even though the ultimate fruit of my Goenka practice was subverted by lacking an adequate layer of calm and equanimity, I still did benfit enormously. --------------------------------------- Insight, at the beginning stages, is > > naturally unsettling and disturbing- and downright terrifying. I > don't think the Buddha ever spoke about this because it was a non- > issue for his monks since they were taught the proper way of > practice (But, of course, if it isn't in the texts, some in this > group aren't going to believe it. Very unfortunate.) > > Metta, > James > ========================== I am 99.4% (an exact figure! ;-) in agreement with you on this, James, and I thank you for writing. 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) 43446 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Mar 20, 2005 10:56am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Existential Angst, Anicca, and Samatha Hi Kel, very good what the Sayadaw said. But perhaps people did not get it. When a person is scared he should not miss the opportunity but develop understanding of such akusala citta. Also that is conditioned, not self. If someone would develop samatha alone, he merely suppresses defilements and he would not get to know them as only conditioned dhammas. Whereas, if he begins to see also his defilements as conditioned realities there is at that moment kusala citta with understanding. Some people may have misunderstandings about the stage of insight that sees fear, bhaya ñaa.na. The meaning is: seeing the danger and disadvantages of conditioned realities. It is not the fear going together with aversion, dosa. Understanding is kusala and thus there cannot be unwholesome fear at that moment. Nina. op 20-03-2005 18:04 schreef kelvin_lwin op kelvin_lwin@y...: > He was diligently practicing at home and unending anicca > nature of things kinda hit him squarely in the face. I guess he was > scared and dejected at the fruitility of everything. So he felt the > need to come to the center and deal with it there. The presiding > sayadaw said "oh, you barely missed panna". Don't let kilesa turn > the path from panna to akusala. I think it relates to posts about > samvega and using the opportunity. 43447 From: matheesha Date: Sun Mar 20, 2005 11:50am Subject: [dsg] Re: Existential Angst, Anicca, and Samatha Hi Howard, I had a similar experience with vipassana, but that was on a foundation of jhana practice. I doubt if it made it any less frightening, because at that moment there is fear and havging samadhi isnt necessarily going to take it away. But I suppose it might make it smoother. I also think different personalities react to it differently. Those who are prone to depression might have it really bad. It is a hard truth to face, but that seems to be something we need to process if we are to permanently give up this desire for existence. metta matheesha --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, James - > > In a message dated 3/20/05 1:28:22 PM Eastern Standard Time, > buddhatrue@y... writes: > > > Interesting experience. I have also had similar experiences of > > terror during meditation and therefore decided to begin cultivating > > jhana and the brahmaviharas (I believe mentioned this before in > > DSG?). I don't know if this is an unfair characterization, but in > > my case I blame the teaching technique of S.N. Goenka (funny you > > mention one of his retreats). Following his technique, I jumped > > right into the practice of vipassana without a firm establishment of > > calm beforehand. Reading the Buddha's discourses, I now see that > > this was a grave error. > > > ------------------------------------ > Howard: > Perhaps not for everyone. For the most part it was an error for me. > However, even though the ultimate fruit of my Goenka practice was subverted by > lacking an adequate layer of calm and equanimity, I still did benfit > enormously. > --------------------------------------- > Insight, at the beginning stages, is > > > naturally unsettling and disturbing- and downright terrifying. I > > don't think the Buddha ever spoke about this because it was a non- > > issue for his monks since they were taught the proper way of > > practice (But, of course, if it isn't in the texts, some in this > > group aren't going to believe it. Very unfortunate.) > > > > Metta, > > James > > > ========================== > I am 99.4% (an exact figure! ;-) in agreement with you on this, James, > and I thank you for writing. > > With metta, > Howard > 43448 From: Christine Forsyth Date: Sun Mar 20, 2005 0:01pm Subject: Re: to Christine and Azita Hi Shakti (and Azita), Much excitement this end. :-) Have been talking to Azita per phone. Am replying privately with A Plan. If you don't receive it, let me know on dsg - otherwise we can continue off-list. Best to you and Tom,:-) metta, Chris --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, shakti wrote: > Hi Ladies, > > I sent another email a week or so ago and wondered if you got it, as I am having problems with my computer. Please contact me off line, as I am coming to Australia soon and would love to see you both, if our schedules work. With metta, Shakti > 43449 From: Date: Sun Mar 20, 2005 7:12am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Existential Angst, Anicca, and Samatha Hi, Matheesha - In a message dated 3/20/05 2:51:10 PM Eastern Standard Time, dhammachat@h... writes: > Hi Howard, > > I had a similar experience with vipassana, but that was on a > foundation of jhana practice. I doubt if it made it any less > frightening, because at that moment there is fear and havging > samadhi isnt necessarily going to take it away. But I suppose it > might make it smoother. > ------------------------------------- Howard: All that it needs to do, as I see it, is to make it possible for one not to run away. Fear beyond a certain threshhold, with the threshhold varying from person to person, will lead to a speedy and urgent withdrawal unless there is a countervailing condition to prevent that. A layer of equanimity provides such a condition. This is why, IMO, the Buddha put so much emphasis on the 4th jhana as a base for investigation of dhammas and why that jhana served as the Buddha's own base from which full awakening occurred. -------------------------------------------- I also think different personalities react > > to it differently. Those who are prone to depression might have it > really bad. > ------------------------------------------ Howard: More likely those prone to anxiety. I am not at all a "depressed type", but I am somewhat prone to anxiety. ----------------------------------------- > > It is a hard truth to face, but that seems to be something we need > to process if we are to permanently give up this desire for > existence. > > metta > > matheesha > ======================= 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) 43450 From: mnease Date: Sun Mar 20, 2005 0:56pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Rupa Madness: Seeing with the Tongue Hi Matthew, I've just jumped into this thread so apologies if my comments are redundant: ----- Original Message ----- From: "Matthew Miller" To: Sent: Saturday, March 19, 2005 9:06 AM Subject: [dsg] Rupa Madness: Seeing with the Tongue > I don't see how the abhidhamma, with its rigid categories of rupas, > vatthus, dvaras and so on, could possibly account for phenomena like > this. As I see it, the Dhamma (including abhidhamma) is not meant to account for phenomena in the sense that science etc. is. It is relevant only to suffering and the way out of suffering. Where it fails to overlap science etc., the science--no matter how true it may be--is irrelevant to the Dhamma and the Dhamma irrelevant to science. Science couldn't and shouldn't be expected to lead to the destruction of the fetters and the Dhamma can't and shouldn't be expected to explain natural phenomena except as they pertain to suffering and the end of suffering. > We need the careful, patient observation and experiment of > neuroscience to begin to understand the structure of consciousness. A scientific understanding of neuroscience (or linguistics e.g. or any other science) is completely irrelevant to the Four Noble Truths, I think. > Otherwise we're whistling in the dark and spinning fantasies. Whether we're theorizing and conceptualizing about science or Dhamma, we're always 'darting among unrealities'. A theoretical understanding of Dhamma (pariyatti) can point in the right direction though--to the direct understanding of the experience of present realities, the insight that leads to the arising of the Path. Just my opinion! mike 43451 From: Charles DaCosta Date: Sun Mar 20, 2005 6:04am Subject: Re: [dsg] Abhidhamma challenge Some times, I think we all need to be reminded that when talking about ancient religious/physiosophical text (abhidhamma included), it is a mistake/waste to get caught up in whether the text is authentic or not, unless you are a historian. I find it better to explore whether the text is useful or not. This is an individual thing, and even some-timey. CharlesD ----- Original Message ----- From: Nina van Gorkom Sent: Thursday, 10 March, 2005 09:50 Subject: Re: [dsg] Abhidhamma challenge Hi Joe, op 10-03-2005 06:19 schreef Joe Cummings op joe@j...: > On another Buddhism-related online forum I post to on occasion, a > member has challenged the authenticity of the Abhidhamma Pitaka. > Here's the link in case anyone here would like to respond (I hope > someone will!) N: There have been many posts on the authenticity of the Abhidhamma Pitaka, especially from Sarah, see U.P. under Abhidhamma. No need to repeat those posts. I would like another approach. The fact that you or someone else asks this question must have a cause. Some people do not quite understand what the Abhidhamma is, they merely think of texts. Do you have a topic of Abhdidhamma that interests you? It would be nice if you could give some input on this. It is more important to know what interests you. ... Nina. 43452 From: Charles DaCosta Date: Sun Mar 20, 2005 6:16am Subject: Re: [dsg] Having no opinions It was late and I was falling a sleep when I replied to this. However, the point I was trying to make was about the idea of "having no-opinions." To never have an opinion sounds very unrealistic, I would think you would have to be dead. CharlesD ----- Original Message ----- From: Jonothan Abbott To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sunday, 20 March, 2005 14:25 Subject: Re: [dsg] Having no opinions Charles DaCosta wrote: >All you have to do is die. > I'm afraid I don't quite see the connection. Anyway, why should this time be any different from all the previous times? ;-)) Jon <....> 43453 From: Charles DaCosta Date: Sun Mar 20, 2005 6:32am Subject: Re: [dsg] Having no opinions Hi Joop, You asked the follow (aswell as made the following points): 1. What exactly is "things (ideas) change as you progress..."? I hope this example helps: emptiness -- When I began studying Buddhism it meant the same as "clear your mind" - it was a practice; and now it means a characteristic of exist - a view/thought/feeling. 2. Where do they change? see question 3 3. In my [our] brains or somewhere outside the brains of sentient beings? BOTH it also changes in books, on TV, in other documents, on the internet, etc... 4. In the last case I don't agree: ideas exist only in my (or somebody else) mind; things are only perceived in my mind. Whether we perceive it or not, it can still exists. Example: Deep in the forest a tree falls but there was no-one around that was close enough to hear, see, etc... it fall. Does that mean it really didn't fall? CharlesD ----- Original Message ----- From: Joop <....> Hallo Charles, I think I agree with you. But what exactly is "things (ideas) change as you progress..." Where do they change? In my brains or somewhere outsinde the brains of sentient beings? In the last case I don't agree: ideas exist only in my (or somebody else) mind; things are only perceived in my mind Joop 43454 From: Charles DaCosta Date: Sun Mar 20, 2005 8:04am Subject: Re: [dsg] Dependent origination in daily life (Was Re: To Connie: BB's Article Dear Joop, You asked and stated the following: {Who of them is right? Because BB states DO is about three lifetimes and Nanavira states that's about nothing else than one lifetime. So it's not possible both are right. But how to prove ? Analysis of the Sutta-texts, as both gentlemen do, is one possibility. I prefer another possibility: compare it with our daily reality as an empirical test.} DO has been a confusing issue for many, and many centuries. This is because all of the teaching on the Wheel of life are designed to be taught to people at many levels. So YES they are both right but under different circumstances (people at different levels); oh ya there is also the two life time model (the current and the next) and the radiant wheel model (the process beginning from Wisdom leading to no-suffering) also. AND YES again, you should compare it with your daily life (try to see it working in your life, and how it may be really working in your life). "BUT HOW TO PROVE?" To do this you would have to study the history of Indian Beliefs around the time of the Buddha and how they evolved (in there lies your answer). PS: I use to tell people that it is one of the teachings where Sutra and abidharma meet (one of my favorite subjects). ----- Original Message ----- From: Joop To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sunday, 13 March, 2005 15:08 Subject: [dsg] Dependent origination in daily life (Was Re: To Connie: BB's Article Connie wrote: > Nanavira's and BBodhi's articles will be at > http://www.intergate.com/~dhammapatha for awhile in case anyone's Dear Connie, James, RobM and all I have read the articles of Bhikkhu Bodhi and Ven. Nanavira. Or tried to do; because, to be honest, neither of them mirror my sense of spirituality. Who of them is right? Because BB states DO is about three lifetimes and Nanavira states that's about nothing else than one lifetime. So it's not possible both are right. But how to prove ? Analysis of the Sutta-texts, as both gentlemen do, is one possiblility. I prefer another possiblility: compare it with our daily reality as an empirical test. "DEPENDENT ORIGINATION IN DAILY LIFE" is then the theme. <....> 43455 From: mnease Date: Sun Mar 20, 2005 3:11pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Test Your Knowledge .../ Hi Again Azita, ----- Original Message ----- From: "azita gill" To: "mnease" Sent: Sunday, February 20, 2005 5:20 PM Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Test Your Knowledge .../ > > You know, the Buddha once stated that the higher > > jhaanas were so mysterious > > that you couldn't imagine them (more or less--Yena > > yena his maññanti tato > > tam hoti aññathaa. See, e.g., Majjhima Nikaaya No. > > 113 (III 42 foll.) > > A: I know next to nothing about jhaana states, only > what I read. Yes, I've heard Nibbaana is the cessation > of everything, including the jhaanic states. Did I already reply to this? I thought it worth mentioning that the Buddha spent a lot of time in the higher jhaanas, often for relief of pain from the back injury due to Devadatta's Buddhicide attempt. So I think the jhaanacittas of a Buddha or an arahant must either be kiriya or vipakka (obviously no more mahakusala). There's a reference in the Dispeller to the Dhammasanga.ni, "...Therefore the meaning of all jhaanas, described there as profitable, resultant and functional...". I hope Nina can tell us if I've understood this correctly, as I really don't understand jhaanacittas either. mike 43456 From: Matthew Miller Date: Sun Mar 20, 2005 3:53pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Rupa Madness: Seeing with the Tongue Mike wrote: > As I see it, the Dhamma (including abhidhamma) is not meant to > account for phenomena in the sense that science etc. is. > It is relevant only to suffering and the way out of suffering. > Where it fails to overlap science > etc., the science--no matter how true it may be--is irrelevant to > the Dhamma and the Dhamma irrelevant to science. Some abhidhammikas claim that the abhidhamma and science are totally separate activities -- the abhidhamma deals with "liberation from suffering" and not the description of reality found in science. On the other hand, they claim that science is "irrelevant" to the liberation from suffering. Forgive me, but this is rubbish. First of all, the Abhidhamma (and many of the posts on this list) are filled with bold assertions about reality (the nature of memory, consciousness, physical reality, causality, etc, etc) which are the realm of science. For the most part, these assertions are simply based on 1) the authority of scripture, and/or 2) personal introspective observation. While not useless, these are probably the two least reliable forms of evidence. > the Dhamma is irrelevant to science... Science couldn't and > shouldn't be expected to lead to the destruction of the fetters Why not? Isn't medicine the application of science for the elimination of suffering? And I'm not just talking about drugs and surgery. Take, for example, modern cognitive therapy. Jeffrey M. Schwartz MD, a psychiatrist at UCLA SChool of Medicine, he has developed a four-step method for overcoming Obsessive Compulsive Disorder based on his study (and personal practice) of vipassana meditation. This method involves training the patients in mindfulness techniques specifically designed to "un-lock" the compulsive patterns in the brain. What's most remarkable about Dr. Schwartz's work is that, through brain imaging, he has proven that these techniques can alter the subject's brain chemistry without relying on psychopharmaceuticals. He has written a book called "Brain Lock" which is a popular account of these studies. It can be found here: http://tinyurl.com/5b5c6 If we apply science to the liberation from suffering, then we can potentially get ourselves on much more solid ground as to what is and is not "good dhamma" (and discover how this may vary from individual to individual). For example, we may be able to avoid the endless and irresolvable philosophical squabbles over arcane scriptural dogma, the arguments over the relative value of sitting meditations, and so forth that we find on this list. If we begin to quantitatively measure the effects of different dhamma practices on the behavior and brain chemistry of real people, we may find our way out of this thicket of opinions. Matthew 43457 From: lokuttaracitta Date: Sun Mar 20, 2005 4:03pm Subject: Re: Tep /Buddha Nature Dear Tep >To my surprise, after more study, Buddha > Nature is more closely related to the "Acariya Mun's school" than I > would have thought of a few years ago. I just read the "THE HEART IS KNOWING" at http://www.dhammasala.org/content/view/67/115/ *excerpt* "When practicing the Six perfections (Paramita) or any of the many similar customs or in accumulating as much limitless merit as there are sands in the Ganges River "When words are no more, the citta will appear, completely pure. "In practicing the six perfections (Generosity, Virtue, Patience, Effort, Mindfulness, Wisdom) and in the many and various similar methods with the intention of becoming one of the Buddhas," *end* The words and phrases above also shows the author was familiar with Maha-yaha, especially with Zen to some extent. I remember Ajaan Chan took up a Scripture written by ancient chinese Zen master like "Sutta" in one of his dhamma talks. Kindest regards from LK 43458 From: Andrew Date: Sun Mar 20, 2005 4:07pm Subject: Re: Seeing with the Tongue Hi Matthew I have just checked in on this thread and seen that you have taken over my position as "resident evolutionist" on DSG! (-: I lost that mantle when I became a bit like Mike N and decided that it wasn't useful to mix science and Dhamma (although there are many esteemed Dhamma teachers who do this on a regular basis). Have you formed a view on this threshhold question yet? Ven Dhammananda says that science "cannot offer moral control and guidance". That's also what Stephen Jay Gould used to say, isn't it (i.e. that it is a mistake to look for moral lessons in nature)? The Buddha said that saddha (faith/confidence) was a "treasure": doesn't that suggest to you that he was not involved in a purely scientific endeavour? Re the rigidity of Abhidhamma classifications, it seems to me that the incredible speed of mind-moments permits of a huge degree of flexibility. Would you mind expanding a bit on the place of Dhamma in your life, especially regarding your work? Best wishes Andrew T 43459 From: Date: Sun Mar 20, 2005 4:20pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Visuddhimagga XIV, 145, 146, and Tiika. Hi Nina, Do each of the 'mental body' cetasikas (tranquility, lightness, malleability, wieldiness, proficiency, and rectitude) affect the physical body in a corresponding way like tranquility of mental body does? It probably wasn't intended so but all these subtle details certainly bring a very interesting richness to experience. Larry 43460 From: robmoult Date: Sun Mar 20, 2005 6:32pm Subject: Re: Rupa Madness: Seeing with the Tongue Hi Matthew, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Matthew Miller" wrote: > > Mike wrote: > > As I see it, the Dhamma (including abhidhamma) is not meant to > > account for phenomena in the sense that science etc. is. > > It is relevant only to suffering and the way out of suffering. > > Where it fails to overlap science > > etc., the science--no matter how true it may be--is irrelevant to > > the Dhamma and the Dhamma irrelevant to science. > > Some abhidhammikas claim that the abhidhamma and science are totally > separate activities -- the abhidhamma deals with "liberation from > suffering" and not the description of reality found in science. On the > other hand, they claim that science is "irrelevant" to the liberation from > suffering. > > Forgive me, but this is rubbish. > > First of all, the Abhidhamma (and many of the posts on this list) are > filled with bold assertions about reality (the nature of memory, > consciousness, physical reality, causality, etc, etc) which are the realm > of science. For the most part, these assertions are simply based on 1) > the authority of scripture, and/or 2) personal introspective observation. > While not useless, these are probably the two least reliable forms of > evidence. ===== I am one of those Abhidhammikas who see Dhamma/Abhidhamma and science as separate. I am sincerely interested in understanding your perspective as it differs from mine. I have never learned anything from anybody who agreed with me :-) I could quote Suttas, Culamalunkya Sutta (Mn 63) and Simsapa Sutta (SN LVI.31), as a basis for discussion. However, from your comments above, I am not clear that you would accept this. If we cannot use scriptures nor personal experience to discuss the Buddha's teachings, where are we to turn? We could look at experiments on the impact of meditation on brain functions such as those by: - Schwartz (quoted by you) - Newberg / D'Aquili (Why God Won't Go Away) - Alterations in Brain and Immune Function Produced by Mindfulness Meditation (Article in Psychosomatic Medicine, August 2003) - Long-term meditators self-induce high-amplitude gamma synchrony during mental practice (Article in Proceedings of the National Academy of Science, November 2004) From reading these articles, I conclude that: - Meditation has a measurable impact on the brain and body - Science is at the stage of identifying / measuring the impact; there is no attempt being made for a unified theory of how / why this impact exists How do you suggest that we go from here? Metta, Rob M :-) 43461 From: mnease Date: Sun Mar 20, 2005 6:58pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Rupa Madness: Seeing with the Tongue Hi Matthew, ----- Original Message ----- From: "Matthew Miller" To: Sent: Sunday, March 20, 2005 3:53 PM Subject: Re: [dsg] Rupa Madness: Seeing with the Tongue > Mike wrote: > > As I see it, the Dhamma (including abhidhamma) is not meant to > > account for phenomena in the sense that science etc. is. > > It is relevant only to suffering and the way out of suffering. > > Where it fails to overlap science > > etc., the science--no matter how true it may be--is irrelevant to > > the Dhamma and the Dhamma irrelevant to science. > > Some abhidhammikas claim that the abhidhamma and science are totally > separate activities -- the abhidhamma deals with "liberation from > suffering" and not the description of reality found in science. On the > other hand, they claim that science is "irrelevant" to the liberation from > suffering. > > Forgive me, but this is rubbish. OK Matthew, thanks and adios. mike 43462 From: Matthew Miller Date: Sun Mar 20, 2005 7:26pm Subject: Re: Rupa Madness: Seeing with the Tongue Rob wrote: > I am one of those Abhidhammikas who see Dhamma/Abhidhamma and > science as separate. > > We could look at experiments on the impact of meditation on brain > functions such as those by: > - Schwartz (quoted by you) > - Newberg / D'Aquili (Why God Won't Go Away) > - Alterations in Brain and Immune Function Produced by Mindfulness > Meditation (Article in Psychosomatic Medicine, August 2003) > - Long-term meditators self-induce high-amplitude gamma synchrony > during mental practice (Article in Proceedings of the National > Academy of Science, November 2004) > > How do you suggest that we go from here? > > Rob I did not mean to imply that we should not use scripture and personal observation. I think we should use everything at our disposal! From your references, I see that you are familiar with some of the ways in which science and dhamma are coming together. But doesn't that undermine your claim that dhamma and science are separate? Matthew P.S. Mike, I'm sorry if my language ("rubbish") was offensive. But I really don't see how science has "nothing to do" with the liberation from suffering (what is medicine? psychiatry?) or how abhidhamma has nothing to do with making assertions about scientific reality (what are all these theories of perception, memory, conciousness, karma, rebirth)? 43463 From: Evan Stamatopoulos Date: Sun Mar 20, 2005 7:37pm Subject: RE: [dsg] Rupa Madness: Seeing with the Tongue Mat, I would have to agree with you to a point. As I see it, the goal of science is to quantitatively describe the nature of all phenomena from observation with or without the aid of instrumentation. The goal of Buddhism is to realise the nature of phenomena through observation with the final goal of liberation. And this is where there is a difference. Science does what it does because phenomena exist (i.e. why climb the mountain? - because it's there). Buddhism does what it does because there is a higher goal to be achieved - that of liberation. Buddhism has identified that there is a problem to be solved and a goal to be achieved and therefore there is a reason for its enquiry into the true nature of all things. Science flounders trying to solve one problem after another depending on where the money is coming from without real direction. There is another critical difference. The true nature of all phenomena in Buddhism is to be personally experienced and because of this personal experience, this leads to wisdom and wisdom leads to liberation. Science examines phenomena "objectively" therefore is collects knowledge. This does not lead to wisdom therefore it cannot lead to liberation. Hope this helps. Kind Regards, Evan Stamatopoulos -----Original Message----- From: Matthew Miller [mailto:bupleurum@y...] <...> Some abhidhammikas claim that the abhidhamma and science are totally separate activities -- the abhidhamma deals with "liberation from suffering" and not the description of reality found in science. On the other hand, they claim that science is "irrelevant" to the liberation from suffering. Forgive me, but this is rubbish. First of all, the Abhidhamma (and many of the posts on this list) are filled with bold assertions about reality (the nature of memory, consciousness, physical reality, causality, etc, etc) which are the realm of science. For the most part, these assertions are simply based on 1) the authority of scripture, and/or 2) personal introspective observation. While not useless, these are probably the two least reliable forms of evidence. <...> 43464 From: sarah abbott Date: Sun Mar 20, 2005 11:25pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: New view on satipatthana 2 Hi Andrew L, wrote: > OK so then let me ask: What is sati? And are you saying reflecting on > a particular nama or rupa can condition sati for that bit? That holds > pretty good implications for the course of practise. ... S: As you know, sati arises with all wholesome kinds of consciousness. It is the ‘door-keeper’ which guards the senses and does not ‘allow the floating away of moral states’ (Atthasalini). When there is wise reflection, sati must be there at those moments, conditioning more wise reflection in future and also satipatthana, if it is right reflection on presently arising dhammas. This is how pariyatti can condition patipatti and eventually pativedha. .... <...> > Sarah I can't agree with you that wrong view based on self can be > unwholesome kamma-patha. ... S: firstly, we read how all wrong views arise dependent on self view. When self view is eradicated (at the stage of sotapatti magga), so are all wrong views. “Now, householder, as to those divers views set forth in the Brahmajaala, it is owing to the personality view that they arise, and if the personality view exists not, they do not exist” (S IV.7.3 Bodh). As for the danger of wrong views, let me repeat a couple of quotes from suttas that Nyantiloka gives: http://www.palikanon.com/english/wtb/b_f/ditthi.htm >Wrong or evil views (ditthi or micchá-ditthi) are declared as utterly rejectable for being a source of wrong and evil aspirations and conduct, and liable at times to lead man to the deepest abysses of depravity, as it is said in A. I, 22: "No other thing than evil views do I know, o monks, whereby to such an extent the unwholesome things not yet arisen arise, and the unwholesome things already arisen are brought to growth and fullness. No other thing than evil views do I know, whereby to such an extent the wholesome things not yet arisen are hindered in their arising, and the wholesome things already arisen disappear. No other thing than evil views do I know, whereby to such an extent human beings at the dissolution of the body, at death, are passing to a way of suffering, into a world of woe, into hell." Further in A. I, 23: "Whatever a man filled with evil views performs or undertakes, or whatever he possesses of will, aspiration, longing and tendencies, all these things lead him to an undesirable, unpleasant and disagreeable state, to woe and suffering."< ***** >The Buddha really described wrong view as > more of a general view of things, even conventionally using the term > 'beings' numerous times in it. .... S: Let’s be clear that when the Buddha referred to wrong views, he wasn’t talking about wrong views about the weather, about scientific theories, about numbers of Abhidhamma classifications, about the details of brahma realms, but about wrong views concerning the 6 worlds presently arising and appearing, i.e about the khandhas or namas and rupas as being conditioning, impermanent, unsatisfactory and void of any self. ***** “The Perfect One is free from any theory (ditthigata), for the Perfect One has seen what corporeality is, and how it arises and passes away. He has seen what feeling ... perception ... mental formations ... consciousness are, and how they arise and pass away. Therefore I say that the Perfect One has won complete deliverance through the extinction, fading away, disappearance, rejection and casting out of all imaginings and conjectures, of all inclination to the 'vain-glory of 'I' and 'mine." (M. 72). ***** > That the type of wrong view you describe is a hindrance to practise at > all times, I am not decided on yet. ... S: Wrong view is always a hindrance to practice when it arises. At such moments of wrong view, the practice has to be wrong, i.e silabbata-paramasa (attachment to rites and rituals). Of course this can arise at any time, even whilst reflecting on ‘a particular nama or rupa’. For example, one might have the idea at such a time that focusing on visible object is the way to develop awareness of visible object. It can be very subtle. ... >.I have seen a lot leading one to > use the terms 'you' and 'being' suggesting a view of self to do some > rudimentary practise tasks, and I really think the Buddha taught that > there are some things we can consciously decide to do. ... S: The Buddha taught about all dhammas (realities) as being anatta. Whatever language he used according to what was appropriate, there is never any self that can practice or decide to do anything. Metta, Sarah ========= 43465 From: sarah abbott Date: Sun Mar 20, 2005 11:32pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: New view on satipatthana 2 Hi Andrew L, --- Andrew Levin wrote: > > Aren't there greater forces at work than just kamma? I mean was it > the kamma of 6 million Jews and 2 million others to be incinerated or > have other methods of torture or persecutions put on them so much? ... S: There are always many different conditions at work. Without kamma condition, however, the other conditions cannot bring about the present results through eyes, ears, nose, tongue and body-sense. Did you see my post to Howard and others recently (Mar 17th)? I wrote: “We think we or our governments can play a major role in the results that others will experience, but this is because we have so little real appreciation of kamma and its results and of other complex conditions. As we know, not even a Buddha could prevent kamma from bringing its results when it was the right time, even for arahants such as MahaMoggallana. Of course, this doesn’t mean we don’t do our best to help others in whatever ways we can, but we know that we have very limited abilities to really affect outcomes and the greatest help we can offer when we have a chance is by understanding and sharing the Dhamma with anyone who might benefit.” .... > Explain to me how karma can work if I, say, got an organization > together to decrease penalties for marijuana laws and was later > ticketed for using. Had I not done that, I might have been arrested > and subjected to criminal charges. .... S: We never know. We think, ‘if we go to Thailand, we’ll have a wonderful holiday’ or ‘if I didn’t work for such and such a cause, then XYZ’ will happen. But we don’t know. These are conventional situations we talk about, whereas the result of kamma is just a moment of seeing or hearing or momentary birth or death affected by many complex conditions. ... >Was my activism good karma ... S: Depends on the cittas at the time .... >or > destructive karma that ruined the kamma of being put in jail or did it > merely put off when that karma will be experienced? .... S: When we talk about supportive or destructive kamma etc, it is referring to momentary cittas which affect the arising of other momentary vipaka cittas. ‘Being put in jail’ is a long story involving many different cittas. ... >There are so many > things that could demonstrate this. I could do either idle chatter > here hours on end day after day week after week and go outside and > take a walk down the same stretch of road between 6 and 7 pm, or > instead discuss dharma and do programming work. Assuming this karma > can generate vipaka in this life, how can what I hear, see and feel in > terms of pleasant or painful or neither-pleasant-nor-painful during > that daily walk possibly be related to or a consequence of, what I did > online at my computer hours earlier? .... S: Good and difficult questions. While we think of kamma in terms of situations such as ‘what I did online at my computer hours’, I think it’s impossible to understand, even intellectually, about kamma and its results. However, I think it’s a little easier to understand that at moments of right understanding or kindness or calm that the results are different from moments of gossip or wrong view or anger. For example, When someone’s angry, the rupas in the body are immediately affected and so are experiences through the senses, though it's very easy to confuse the perception, unpleasant mental feeling and aversion towards these for the actual vipaka cittas such as bodily experiences. As for the experiences through the senses when you take a walk, we can never pin-point what the causes of the pleasant and unpleasant bodily feelings were, but we can know that they are conditioned in many ways and quite beyond control. Who can see pleasant visible objects or hear pleasant sounds at will? .... <...> > How can we expect to non-deliberately know paramattha dhammas? ... S: This is the function of panna or right understanding. ... >We can > see them when they are arising and passing away for what they are, > maybe not in total clarity, registering every moment, but we can get a > general picture. Why not? ... S: this is thinking, as I understand you. ... > We take videos of actions happening in > sequence, and we are able to extract enough information to make > connections in our mind based on that, why not the same with the six > senses? ... S: First, there has to be very clear direct understanding of many, many namas and rupas over and over again before the arising and passing away of those namas and rupas can be known when they appear. I look forward to more discussion. I'll be responding to your posts in order, but please keep your comments and queries up meanwhile. They are all good and useful topics. Metta, Sarah ========= 43466 From: sarah abbott Date: Sun Mar 20, 2005 11:42pm Subject: ‘Cetasikas' study corner 151 - Determination/adhimokkha & Energy/viriya (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.9 Determination (adhimokkha) & Energy (viriya)] Adhimokkha, determination or resolution, is another cetasika among the six “particulars” which arises with cittas of the four jåtis but not with every citta. The Visuddhimagga ( XIV, 151) gives the following definition of adhimokkha: * "The act of resolving is resolution. It has the characteristic of conviction. Its function is not to grope. It is manifested as decisiveness. Its proximate cause is a thing to be convinced about. It should be regarded as like a boundary-post owing to its immovableness with regard to the object." * The “Paramattha Mañjúså” (489), the commentary to the Visuddhimagga, states that: * “ the act of resolving should be understood as the act of being convinced about an object”. * The Atthasåliní (I, Part IV, Chapter I, 133) gives a definition similar to the one of the Visuddhimagga (1). *** 1) The Dhammasangaùi does not mention adhimokkha in its list of dhammas, but it adds: “or whatever other factors there are” (§1). The Atthasåliní and the Visuddhimagga classify adhimokkha among the nine “whatsoevers” (ye vå panaka). Manasikåra is also classified among the “whatsoevers”. Manasikåra and adhimokkha are mentioned in the “Discourse on the Uninterrupted” (Middle Length Sayings III, no. 111). See Abhidhamma Studies by Ven. Nyanaponika, in Chapter 4, p. 49, and in his Appendix. B.P.S. Kandy, 1976. ***** [Ch.9 Determination (adhimokkha) & Energy (viriya)to be contd] Metta, Sarah ====== 43467 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon Mar 21, 2005 0:10am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Dialogue with Htoo 2 Dear Htoo, I don’t know if you’ll see this before you head to the summit of the mountain, but in any case, I hope you have a good trip. Please tell us a little more about which mountains you’re heading for and whether this is for trekking or some other purpose. I want to tell you (and others) that we just received a package from Myanmar which took months to arrive. Very exciting – it contains a translation of the Dhammasangani by U KKyaw Khine and of the Dhp verses and stories by Daw Mya Tin. I believe they’re new copies, but one would not know it as they started falling apart as soon as I opened the package and look like they’re hundreds of years old already and I need to open the windows:-). Still, they are great treasures. .... --- htootintnaing wrote: Htoo: > > If not uddhacca-citta and if not vicikiccha-citta, a citta is not > moha-citta. I am talking on moha-citta and not on moha cetasika. > These 2 new sentences open a new front. But I am trying to relate > this to the above topic. > > So when a child is learning there are many cittas. That is a mixture > of vithi cittas and bhavanga cittas. > > Among vithi cittas the most prominent cittas are javana cittas. The > largest number of vithi cittas can be found in 'ati-mahantarammana'. > There are 14 vithi cittas. Half of these vithi cittas are javana > cittas. That is why I told javana cittas are the most prominent. > > When a child is learning there is a mixture of vithi cittas and > bhavanga cittas. Among vithi cittas, the most abundant cittas are > javana cittas. > > His learning is not daana, siila, bhavanaa. ... S: all agreed so far ... > No one will say 'that child is doing daana or siila or bhavanaa when > he is reading or learning'. ... S: probably not, but maybe. He may be studying to make his mother or teacher happy. He may be refraining from bad deeds or speech. He may be helping his friend. ... > But there are javana cittas. These cittas are not kiriya cittas. So > they have to be akusala cittas or kusala cittas. ... S: yes. .... > He is not doing daana, siila, bhavana. So what will you say? > Again he is not killing, stealing, sexing, lying, intoxicating. > Does he do any akusala? What will you say? ... S: Akusala doesn’t have to be concerned with one of the above. .... > He is clearly learning. He is following the meaning of things what he > has been studying. Apparaently he is not in vicikicchaa, which is > moha-cittas. I mean his javana cittas when learning are not > vicikicchaa cittas. > > Uddhacca cittas may happen. But not all the time. So mostly he is not > in moha-javana. ... S: I think the subtle kinds of moha are nearly always quite unknown to us. Uddhacca (restlessness) can be very, very subtle, for example. .... > As he is learning, there is no dosa except the time when he is angry > with his power of understandability. ... S: Again, I disagree. Dosa can also be very, very subtle. Just when there is the slightest hint of uneasiness about the colour of the book or a word, for example. What we think of as anger is a very gross kind of dosa. .... > So apparent there are 2 alternatives. > > 1. mahakusala cittas as javana cittas > 2. lobha muula akusala cittas as javana cittas ... S: Well, I think your logic is rather simplified so far, but yes, if there is no dosa or moha, these are the only remaining options. ... > Mahakusala cittas are 8 and 4 cittas are not accompanied by > pannindriya cetasikas. Then 4 cittas left and they are called > dvihetuka cittas. That is they have alobha and adosa as 2 root > cetasikas. > > Lobha muula akusala cittas are also dvihetuka cittas. Their roots are > lobha and moha cetasika. > > So the child is learning. There are javana cittas. These javana have > 2 roots whatever they are kusala or akusala if there is no panna in > hamakusala cittas. > > 2 alternatives are now > > 1. lobha and moha > 2. alobha and adosa ... S: Yes, IF there is no dosa, no moha javana and no panna of course. .... > > If there is NO ADOSA all javana cittas are not akusala citta. ... S: ‘are akusala citta’, I think you mean. ... >Because > ADOSA cetasika always accompanies all kusala cittas. > Sometimes, lobha is so subtle to be detected. > The differentiating point here is adosa cetasika. ... S: Why not alobha too and of course, other accompanying mental factors? ... I like the assumption that 'purely learning mind' is not akusala .... S: :-) Oh we all like this assumption, but it’s a fantasy, I believe. I’ll look forward to more of your posts on your return. We’ll also be going on a trip next week. Metta, Sarah ======= 43468 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon Mar 21, 2005 0:24am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Sila Visuddhi (purity of sila) Hi Ken H, --- kenhowardau wrote: > Hi Sarah, > > Thanks for this information on sila visuddhi. At the risk of > sounding obstinate, I still don't see the dangers > of "personlessness" that Suan warned against. I think if someone > seems to be taking anatta too far he is actually not taking it far > enough. ... S: I agree with your last sentence - I don't think we can take it far enough:-) I'm not sure if you were agreeing or disagreeing with anything I said or what Suan was waring against, if you wish to elaborate on any of it. ... > We have another weekend of Dhamma discussion at Cooran starting > tomorrow (or tonight for some people). The topic is "Right > Understanding," and I'm just on my way to the Useful Posts file to > plagiarise a contribution. :-) ... S: Why not share a little more - what you used, discussed and concluded:-). Any dissension in the ranks or did they all tow 'your' party line this time??? Btw, loved your momentary post to Charles which ended with the following: "Even the Eight-fold Path is just a fleeting moment in which the five khandhas exist in their supramundane form". Also, another recent sign-off you gave: "Conditioned existence is basically the same in all realms: there is a moment of birth and a moment of death and many moments in between. Gods have more moments in between than we do." You could compile a book of signature lines for people to select from:-) Metta, Sarah p.s In Andrew's last 'New Satipatthana 2' (34244), he picked up on a couple of your quotes I had used....if you'd like to follow-up too, I'm sure he'd be glad. ====== 43469 From: robmoult Date: Mon Mar 21, 2005 0:50am Subject: Re: Rupa Madness: Seeing with the Tongue Hi Matthew, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Matthew Miller" wrote: > > Rob wrote: > > I am one of those Abhidhammikas who see Dhamma/Abhidhamma and > > science as separate. > > > > We could look at experiments on the impact of meditation on brain > > functions such as those by: > > - Schwartz (quoted by you) > > - Newberg / D'Aquili (Why God Won't Go Away) > > - Alterations in Brain and Immune Function Produced by Mindfulness > > Meditation (Article in Psychosomatic Medicine, August 2003) > > - Long-term meditators self-induce high-amplitude gamma synchrony > > during mental practice (Article in Proceedings of the National > > Academy of Science, November 2004) > > > > How do you suggest that we go from here? > > > > Rob > > I did not mean to imply that we should not use scripture and personal > observation. I think we should use everything at our disposal! From > your references, I see that you are familiar with some of the ways in > which science and dhamma are coming together. But doesn't that > undermine your claim that dhamma and science are separate? ===== To use an analogy, on my desk calendar, there is a beautiful photograph of a flower. A book on botany will allow me categorize this flower according to genus, etc. Photography and botany can take the same subject yet be separate becuase they have a different scope. Similarly, Dhamma and science can take the same subject (the way the mind works) yet be quite separate because they have different scope. In the two Suttas mentioned above, the Buddha clearly defined the scope of the Dhamma and clearly identified what was not within the scope of the Dhamma: "Why have I left [answers to speculative questions] undeclared? Because it is unbeneficial, it does not belong to the fundamentals of the holy life, it does not lead to disenchantment, to dispassion, to cessation, to peace, to direct knowledge, to enlightenment, to Nibbana. That is why I have left it undeclared. And what have I declared? 'This is suffering' - I have declared. 'This is the origin of suffering' - I have declared. 'This is the cessation of suffering' - I have declared. 'This is the way to the cessation of suffering' - I have declared. Why have I declared that? Because it is beneficial, it belongs to the fundamentals of the holy life, it leads to disenchantment, to dispassion, to cessation, to peace, to direct knowledge, to enlightenment, to Nibbana. That is why I have declared it." According to my on-line dictionary, science seeks to understand how nature behaves by observing and correlating available factual information. In summary: - Science seeks to understand how nature behaves - Dhamma focuses on the fundamentals of the holy life and how to get to Nibbbana Do you agree with my definitions and do you see these two as overlaping in scope? Metta, Rob M :-) 43470 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon Mar 21, 2005 1:02am Subject: Re: [dsg] ‘Cetasikas' study corner 151 - Determination/adhimokkha & Energy/viriya (a) Dear Nina and Rob M & All, I just quoted from a footnote in Nina’s ‘Cetasikas: ..... > 1) “The Dhammasangaùi does not mention adhimokkha in its list of dhammas, > but it adds: “or whatever other factors there are” (§1). The Atthasåliní > and the Visuddhimagga classify adhimokkha among the nine “whatsoevers” > (yevå panaka). Manasikåra is also classified among the “whatsoevers”. > Manasikåra and adhimokkha are mentioned in the “Discourse on the > Uninterrupted” (Middle Length Sayings III, no. 111). See Abhidhamma > Studies by Ven. Nyanaponika, in Chapter 4, p. 49, and in his Appendix. > B.P.S. Kandy, 1976.” ... S: As the subject of the classification of cetasikas in the Dhammasangani vs the classification in the Abhidammattha Sangaha comes up so often, I’d like to quote from the introduction to U Kyaw Khine’s translation of the Dhsg as we’ve just received it and it may be helpful to go through the perceived discrepancy again. The introduction is by U Ko Lay. ***** “The dhamma factors which constitute the first meritorious thought, numbering fifty-six, are first listed and then defined in the section on the definition of dhamma factors. Of these, 18 dhamma factors occu once in the list; 7 dhamma factors occur twice; 1 dhamma factor occurs 3 times; 2 dhamma factors occur 4 times; 1 dhamma factor occurs 6 times; 1 dhamma factor occurs 7 times. Thus the list in this section in reality consists of only 30 dhamma factors.” * S: It then goes through it detail to show which dhamma factors occur once, twice and so on. The dhamma factor which appears 6 times is “samaadhi (concentration), as samatha (calm or tranquility of mind), as cittassekaggata (one-pointedness of mind), as samaadindriya (faculty of concentration), as samaadhibala (power of concentration), as sammaa samaadhi (Right concentration) and as avikkhepa (non-distraction). The dhamma factor which occurs 7 times is “Pa~n~naa (wisdom), as pa~n~nindriya (faculty of wisdom), as sammaadi.t.thi (Right View) as a constituent of the Ariya Path), as pa~n~naabala (power of wisdom), as amoha (non-bewilderment), as sammaadi.t.thi (Right View as a mental factor for good action), as sampaja~n~na (clear comprehension) and as vipassanaaa (insight).” Later it summarises and says that though we talk about, for example, contact (phassa) and other mental factors as being the proximate cause for wholesome cittas to arise, “this is only an analytical view. The actual fact is that there are thirty dhamma factors occurring as fifty-six items in the complete list and these arise simultaneously.” It goes on to stress that besides these 56 dhamma factors, there are also 9 more which may occur, "wherever appropriate, on the occasion of the arising of those fifty-six dhamma factors", making a total of 65. These 9 are the ‘yevaapana...dhammaa’, i.e chanda, adhimokkha, manasikaara, tatramajjhattataa, karu.naa, muditaa, sammaavacaa, sammaakammanta and sammaa-aajiva. Down to the maths: a)30 dhamma factors. Exclude mind (citta) = 29 cetasikas. b) 29 cetasikas + 9 yevaapanakas = 38 sobhana cetasikas arising in the sensuous sphere. c) Also 14 akusala cetasikas. 38 sobhana + 28 akusala = 52 cetasikas as given in the Abhidammattha Sangaha. .... I know I'm just repeating what has already been clarified, but I've found it helpful to read through in detail. Metta, Sarah ======= 43471 From: Charles DaCosta Date: Sun Mar 20, 2005 9:43pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Rupa Madness: Seeing with the Tongue Good Post, I would have to agree. ----- Original Message ----- From: Matthew Miller <...> Some abhidhammikas claim that the abhidhamma and science are totally separate activities -- the abhidhamma deals with "liberation from suffering" and not the description of reality found in science. On the other hand, they claim that science is "irrelevant" to the liberation from suffering. Forgive me, but this is rubbish. First of all, the Abhidhamma (and many of the posts on this list) are filled with bold assertions about reality (the nature of memory, consciousness, physical reality, causality, etc, etc) which are the realm of science. For the most part, these assertions are simply based on 1) the authority of scripture, and/or 2) personal introspective observation. While not useless, these are probably the two least reliable forms of evidence. <....> 43472 From: Charles DaCosta Date: Sun Mar 20, 2005 9:57pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Rupa Madness: Seeing with the Tongue The goal of Science is to understand the reality around you, both relative and absolute. This way the quality of life can be improved. The Abidharma attempts to do the same. The only real difference is that most look at the Abidharma as a closed book, and science as an open book. However, keep in mind that the Abidharma was written about 2 millenniums ago and science at that time was very much in the dark. Today science offers much more details on the nature of existence/reality from both the relative and the absolute, and like most bodies of knowledge, not all of it can be used to ease ones sufferings, this includes the abidharma. One of my Buddhist teachers called the abidharma as a boring read. However, he felt the same way about science. CharlesD ----- Original Message ----- From: Evan Stamatopoulos To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, 21 March, 2005 04:37 Subject: RE: [dsg] Rupa Madness: Seeing with the Tongue Mat, I would have to agree with you to a point. As I see it, the goal of science is to quantitatively describe the nature of all phenomena from observation with or without the aid of instrumentation. The goal of Buddhism is to realise the nature of phenomena through observation with the final goal of liberation. And this is where there is a difference. <...> 43473 From: Date: Sun Mar 20, 2005 8:24pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Rupa Madness: Seeing with the Tongue In a message dated 3/21/2005 12:52:36 AM Pacific Standard Time, rob.moult@j... writes: According to my on-line dictionary, science seeks to understand how nature behaves by observing and correlating available factual information. In summary: - Science seeks to understand how nature behaves - Dhamma focuses on the fundamentals of the holy life and how to get to Nibbbana Do you agree with my definitions and do you see these two as overlaping in scope? Metta, Rob M :-) Hi Rob M. Just jumping in. Investigation of states and how and why they behave as they do is a major thrust in Buddhism. Investigation is one of the Seven Enlightenment Factors. All of that sounds scientific to me. Buddhism's science is with a definite purpose of overcoming suffering, while modern science seems in general to be more of an 'investgation at random' -- which may not be totally fair to science. >- Science seeks to understand how nature behave< I understand Dhamma to mean above all else... "The nature of things." If we are studying Dhamma, we are studying the nature of things. Sounds like your definition of science to me. >- Dhamma focuses on the fundamentals of the holy life and how to get to Nibbbana< This is pretty vague in every regard. Pretty hard to even find Buddhists who can agree as to what Nibbana is. "The fundamentals of the holy life" might be summed up in one way as the 37 requisites of enlightenment. Investigation, insight, and mindfulness -- as to conditional actualities -- to me is the heart of that development. Once again I feel that's a scientific oriented component of the Buddha's teachings. TG 43474 From: Joop Date: Mon Mar 21, 2005 2:02am Subject: Re: Tep /Buddha Nature --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "lokuttaracitta" wrote: > > Dear Tep > > >To my surprise, after more study, Buddha > > Nature is more closely related to the "Acariya Mun's school" than I > > would have thought of a few years ago. > > I just read the "THE HEART IS KNOWING" at > http://www.dhammasala.org/content/view/67/115/ > The words and phrases above also shows the author was familiar with > Maha-yaha, especially with Zen to some extent. > > I remember Ajaan Chan took up a Scripture written by ancient chinese > Zen master like "Sutta" in one of his dhamma talks. Dear Lokuttaracitta, Tep, all Joop: I'm glad to hear because till now I got the impression that (all) Theravadins are orthodox and not interested in any Mahayana- texts simply because Mahayana is wrong. I know it's subjective but I like some (Mahayana) sutras and still want to be a (liberal) Theravadin. Another topic of course is: are the author of 'The heart is knowing', and his teachers right ? The essay starts with: "All Buddhas and all beings in the world are nothing but the single citta. Outside this single citta nothing at all exists. The single citta, free from the conventional self, is something that was not made and is something, which cannot be destroyed. It is not a thing with color, such as green or yellow and has neither form nor appearance. It is not included in existing things or non-existing things. One cannot have the view that it is something new or old, longer short, large or small because it is beyond all limitations, beyond all measuring, beyond labels, beyond leaving a trace and beyond all comparisons. " (end quote) My first theravadin-abhidhammical answer when reading this, is: No, this is atta-belief. My second and subjective answer is: No, I don't belief that such a citta does exist. My third answer is: I still like this text, and it's a possibility for fruitful (worldwide) discussion between Mahayanists and Theravadins, somethingthing Connie in her initial message and I hope to promote. So I should like to read a reaction from a (buddhological) expert to it. (BTW It's a funny Zen-like joke to talk about a master with the name 'Sutta') Metta Joop 43475 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Mar 21, 2005 2:58am Subject: Re: [dsg ]Q. Visuddhimagga XIV, 145, 146, and Tiika. Hi Larry, op 21-03-2005 01:20 schreef LBIDD@w... op LBIDD@w...: > Do each of the 'mental body' cetasikas (tranquility, lightness, > malleability, wieldiness, proficiency, and rectitude) affect the > physical body in a corresponding way like tranquility of mental body > does? N: I quote again:The Commentary to the ŒAbhidhammattha Sangaha¹ (T.A. p 64) mentions that calm of cetasikas also conditions bodily phenomena: It states: tranquillity etc. and that means that this is said for the other five as well. Then, in the Tiika, under Vis. XIV, 149, they are all summarized again and then almost the same is said as the T.A. with regard to ruupas of the body. It clarifies that naama conditions ruupas of the body. At first one may feel tired, but when kusala citta arises the tiredness is gone. Nina. 43476 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Mar 21, 2005 2:58am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: jhanas, to Mike. Hi Mike, op 21-03-2005 00:11 schreef mnease op mlnease@z...: I thought it worth mentioning that the Buddha > spent a lot of time in the higher jhaanas, often for relief of pain from the > back injury due to Devadatta's Buddhicide attempt. So I think the > jhaanacittas of a Buddha or an arahant must either be kiriya or vipakka > (obviously no more mahakusala). N: They would be kiriyacittas. When someone attains jhana, it cannot produce vipaka in the same life, only in a next life as rebirth-consciousness and bhavangacitta. for the arahat there is no more rebirth. M: There's a reference in the Dispeller to the > Dhammasanga.ni, "...Therefore the meaning of all jhaanas, described there as > profitable, resultant and functional...". N: In Ch 16? I did not see the text. M: I hope Nina can tell us if I've understood this correctly, as I really don't understand jhaanacittas either. N: I don't either and I tell you why. I enjoy the good things of life: music, paintings, a nice house, good food, good company, etc. But, but: we have to rmember that the aim of the jhanas is being removed from the sense objects and the enjoyment bound up with them. If we do not have this as our goal, I do not think jhana can be developed. We have to be very sincere and truthful with regard to our intentions, otherwise we delude ourselves all the time. If a person dedicates himself to samatha only for a limited time jhana cannot be attained. He has to drastically change his lifestyle, he should not enjoying sense objects anymore. Moreover, great pañña and also mindfulness are necessary to know when there is calm and when there is clinging to the result of the development of samatha. One has to be mindful of and directly understand the cetasikas which are the jhanafactors such as applied thinking and sustained thinking. One has to know when rapture, piiti, is kusala and when it accompanies attachment. If paññaa is not keen one may take for jhana what is only a kind of trance that has nothing to do with the purity of kusala jhanacitta. In order to abandon some jhanafactors in order to attain higher jhanas, paññaa has to investigate the jhanafactors and know them very precisely. This has to be investigated at each stage of jhana, not merely at the fourth stage. He has to have the masteries, vasiis: entering jhana whenever he wants, emerging from it whenever he wants, etc. When someone truly has accumulations for jhana, he can use jhana as a base of insight. But one should not underestimate the development of samatha to the degree of jhana. Nina. 43477 From: Matthew Miller Date: Mon Mar 21, 2005 4:30am Subject: Re: [dsg] Rupa Madness: Seeing with the Tongue Rob: > - Science seeks to understand how nature behaves > - Dhamma focuses on the fundamentals of the holy life and how to get > to Nibbbana Evan: > As I see it, the goal of > science is to quantitatively describe the nature of all phenomena > from observation with or without the aid of instrumentation. > The goal of Buddhism is to realise the nature of phenomena > through observation with the final goal of liberation. > And this is where there is a difference. Science does what > it does because phenomena exist > (i.e. why climb the mountain? - because it's there). Buddhism does > what it does because there is a higher goal to be achieved - that > of liberation. Buddhism has identified that there is a problem to > be solved and a goal to be achieved and therefore there is a > reason for its enquiry into the true > nature of all things. Science flounders trying to solve one > problem after another depending on where the money is coming > from without real > direction. > This distinction only works if you have in mind a pure, unapplied branch of science like astrophysics or geology. But could you say that medical science does not have "a higher goal to be achieved"? Could you say that psychiatry or cardiology or oncology is "without real direction"? > There is another critical difference. The true nature of all > phenomena in Buddhism is to be personally experienced and > because of this personal experience, this leads to wisdom > and wisdom leads to liberation. Science examines phenomena > "objectively" therefore is collects knowledge. This > does not lead to wisdom therefore it cannot lead to liberation. > Again, is not the goal of medical science the "personally experienced" liberation from suffering and disease? Hasn't the Buddha often been described as the "master physician"? There are even branches of medicine (e.g. cognitive therapy, psychotherapy) which involve introspection on the part of the patient himself or herself as part of the liberation from suffering. Let me take this out of the realm of abstract definitions into the concrete. All the evidence we have suggests that people who meditate have figured out a way to directly alter their own brain chemistry. Through practice, they have learned to switch on or off the release of different neurotransmitters in the brain. For example, you can trigger an out-of-body experience by stimulating an area of the right parietal cortex. Electrical activity in the temporal lobe (Temporal Lobe Epilepsy) has been associated with various religious experiences. As for Buddhist practice specifically, I don't find anything there that is not a potential area for scientific understanding (and perhaps improvement). Take the experience of "atta," of having a self -- this can be identified with the activities of certain centers in the brain. We know this because we've studied people with damage to these areas and they lose one of the various attributes of "self" -- embodiment, agency, unity or continuity. Someone who reaches a state of "anatta" has figured out a way, through a kind of vipassanic biofeedback, to deactivate these centers. Jhana is a bit easier. These practitioners have activated the "calm" pathways in the brain, many of which have already been identified. The obvious next step, from a medical point of view, is to figure out ways to facilitate and optimize this process, either chemically, electrically or via cognitive therapy or some form of biofeedback. In the beginning, we will have to continue our study of the "master meditators" of the various contemplative religious traditions. But given the extraordinary amount of time and energy required by these traditions to achieve "wisdom" (think of the whole lifetimes spent in monasteries!) I can't help but think that we can learn to do it much more efficiently. :-) Matthew P.S. Rob, I enjoy your use of summary points. Very useful for those of us who tend to ramble in our posts :-) Here are my points: - Science (most notably medicine) *is* involved in liberation from suffering - Dhamma (most notably abhidhamma) *is* involved in making scientific assertions - We are brains - dhamma practice occurs in the brain and can be understood (and potentially improved) by science 43478 From: htootintnaing Date: Mon Mar 21, 2005 4:44am Subject: [dsg] Re: Dialogue with Htoo 2 Sarah wrote: Dear Htoo, I don't know if you'll see this before you head to the summit of the mountain, but in any case, I hope you have a good trip. Please tell us a little more about which mountains you're heading for and whether this is for trekking or some other purpose. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: Regarding 'mountain' I wrote as P.S at the foot of the poem. I am not going pleasure journey but renunciation. That is why I wrote the heading as 'Renunciation'. People have tendencies. Because there are many many conforming factors. Difference in society, belief, culture, environment, education, experience, knowledge etc all contribute the tendencies. Bhikkhu Samahita goes for meditation on a mountain for a month. His Buddhism discussion group site has a picture seemingly on a mountain and secluding sensual pleasure. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Sarah: I want to tell you (and others) that we just received a package from Myanmar which took months to arrive. Very exciting – it contains a translation of the Dhammasangani by U KKyaw Khine and of the Dhp verses and stories by Daw Mya Tin. I believe they're new copies, but one would not know it as they started falling apart as soon as I opened the package and look like they're hundreds of years old already and I need to open the windows:-). Still, they are great treasures. .... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: Sayamagyi (great teacher) Daw Mya Tin (MA) wrote many books. Purefaith of 'TeachingsOfBuddha' Yahoo Group regularly posts Sayamagyi's translations at his site of TOB. Yes. These are treasures. Please just open the window gently. Otherwise you know. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > --- htootintnaing wrote: Htoo: > If not uddhacca-citta and if not vicikiccha-citta, a citta is not > moha-citta. I am talking on moha-citta and not on moha cetasika...snip..snip.. > His learning is not daana, siila, bhavanaa. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- ... S: all agreed so far ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: I snipped away some parts as you agreed. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo's old post:> No one will say 'that child is doing daana or siila or bhavanaa when he is reading or learning'. ... S: probably not, but maybe. He may be studying to make his mother or teacher happy. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: No. Pleasing behaviour to his teacher or his mother is initial javana cittas just before he is sinking in reading. It will be akusala if it is lobha loaded or dosa loaded. What I used as simile was that he is 'purely reading or learning'. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Sarah: He may be refraining from bad deeds or speech. He may be helping his friend. ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: No. This example shifts to others. Reading is not related with refraining from bad deeds or speech. If you do not agree then please consult '3 virati cetasikas' again. They are 'aniyata yogi cetasikas'. Yoga in Pali means 'co-existing' 'co-arising' 'in parallel'. Yogi means 'someone who is in parallel or is co-existing'. Yoga the word is different one. Do not confue with that Yoga. I am talking a Pali word 'yoga' and 'yogi'. Example is there are 7 cetasikas in cakkhuvinnana citta. They are yogi cetasikas of cakkhuvinnana citta. Because they co-arise (yoga) with cakkhuvinnana citta. 3 virati cetasikas are 'aniyata yogi cetasikas'. They do not co-arise unless co-arising citta is lokuttara citta. So the boy will not have any of virati when he is reading or learning. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > But there are javana cittas. These cittas are not kiriya cittas. So > > they have to be akusala cittas or kusala cittas. ... S: yes. .... > > He is not doing daana, siila, bhavana. So what will you say? > > Again he is not killing, stealing, sexing, lying, intoxicating. > > Does he do any akusala? What will you say? ... S: Akusala doesn't have to be concerned with one of the above. .... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: I know. But for simplicity I wrote those things because they are kamma patha. :-) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > He is clearly learning. He is following the meaning of things what he > > has been studying. Apparaently he is not in vicikicchaa, which is > > moha-cittas. I mean his javana cittas when learning are not > > vicikicchaa cittas. > > > > Uddhacca cittas may happen. But not all the time. So mostly he is not > > in moha-javana. ... S: I think the subtle kinds of moha are nearly always quite unknown to us. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: True. When you can detect moha, it has been far away. I mean moha arises and falls away. You will not know its arising. It is so subtle that even anagams will have some difficulties to detect it. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > Uddhacca (restlessness) can be very, very subtle, for example. > .... > > As he is learning, there is no dosa except the time when he is angry > > with his power of understandability. ... S: Again, I disagree. Dosa can also be very, very subtle. Just when there is the slightest hint of uneasiness about the colour of the book or a word, for example. What we think of as anger is a very gross kind of dosa. .... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: I know. There are 9 causes of dosa. But even in the absence of cause dosa can arise. Actually I was talking on 'the boy's reading or learning'. His reading is not dosa. And not lobha if it is a simple wish to learn. When there is no lobha, no dosa and there is no vicikiccha then the only akusala citta will be uddhacca. When he is concentrating on reading or learning there is no uddhacca. All these are my logical thinking. But the initial idea that I wrote was from the book by Dr Mehn Tin Mon. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > So apparent there are 2 alternatives. > > > > 1. mahakusala cittas as javana cittas > > 2. lobha muula akusala cittas as javana cittas ... S: Well, I think your logic is rather simplified so far, but yes, if there is no dosa or moha, these are the only remaining options. ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: :-) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Mahakusala cittas are 8 and 4 cittas are not accompanied by > > pannindriya cetasikas. Then 4 cittas left and they are called > > dvihetuka cittas. That is they have alobha and adosa as 2 root > > cetasikas. > > > > Lobha muula akusala cittas are also dvihetuka cittas. Their roots are > > lobha and moha cetasika. > > > > So the child is learning. There are javana cittas. These javana have > > 2 roots whatever they are kusala or akusala if there is no panna in > > hamakusala cittas. > > > > 2 alternatives are now > > > > 1. lobha and moha > > 2. alobha and adosa ... S: Yes, IF there is no dosa, no moha javana and no panna of course. .... > If there is NO ADOSA all javana cittas are not akusala citta. ... S: `are akusala citta', I think you mean. ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: Thank you. Yes. 'are akusala citta'. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > >Because > > ADOSA cetasika always accompanies all kusala cittas. > > Sometimes, lobha is so subtle to be detected. > > The differentiating point here is adosa cetasika. ... S: Why not alobha too and of course, other accompanying mental factors? ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: Please see the example again. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > I like the assumption that 'purely learning mind' is not akusala .... S: :-) Oh we all like this assumption, but it's a fantasy, I believe. I'll look forward to more of your posts on your return. We'll also be going on a trip next week. Metta, Sarah ======= ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: To clarify again, I am not going for a pleasure trip but for meditation. When I am back we will continue the discussions. With regards, Htoo Naing 43479 From: rjkjp1 Date: Mon Mar 21, 2005 4:46am Subject: Re: Seeing with the Tongue --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Matthew Miller" <> I agree. Apes playing with computers is a delightful analogy for science. > We did not evolve to do science. We evolved to rear our young, forage > for food, and so on. Our ability to see patterns and understand the world > arose for practical purposes, activities of daily living. In general, our > capacity to understand reality only applies to things at a limited human > scale. Just as our eyes and upright posture are best suited for hunting > on the African savannah, and not in the jungles of our gorilla brethren, > so too our brain gave us survival and reproductive advantages in a > specific environment. But the brain is poorly suited to really > understanding the ultimate nature of reality. That takes (to borrow a > Buddhist phrase) "going against the stream." ======== Dear Matthew, I see a few of your posts where you mention evolution; also you say "We are brains - dhamma practice occurs in the brain and can be understood (and potentially improved) by science" I include some things I said from an old post: I am not especially impressed by science. It is surely the outstanding cutural achievement of the west - but when I compare it with the Dhamma of the Buddha it seems more like stamp collecting than an investigation into what is real and crucial. Scientists, despite their metaphysically neutral pose, operate with certain assumptions about life: i.e. they have views. And the dominant view in science at this time is that the universe and life was a chance occurence. The big bang occured (no one knows why or what were the conditions ) and then a billion or so years later it happened that this matter came together to form stars and planets. On one planet, earth, it happened, purely by chance, that there were the right elements and conditions to form amino acids. These then formed complex proteins, which later formed bacteria. Life all arose out of matter. The fact that even a tiny cell is an incredibly complex organism (indeed so complex that scientists cannot make even one, despite all their technology) is not a hindrance to this view. Why? Well, as biologist Richard Lewontin explains: "We have a prior commitment, a commitment to materialism..... we are forced by our a priori adherence to material causes to create an apparatus of investigation and a set of concepts that produce material explanations, no matter how counter-intuitive, no matter how mystifying to the uninitiated. Moreover, that materialism is absolute, for we cannot allow a Divine Foot in the door." (from Lewontin's review of The Demon-Haunted World: Science as a Candle in the Dark, Carl Sagan, in the New York Review of Books, January 9, 1997). Richard Dawkins writes that in a universe governed by materialistic evolution (as he claims our universe to be) "some people are going to get hurt, other people are going to get lucky, and you won't find any rhyme or reason in it, nor any justice." (1995, pp.132-133). And "the universe we observe has precisely the properties we should expect if there is at bottom no design, no purpose, no evil and no good, nothing but pointless indifference." (quoted in Easterbrook, 1997, p.892). In case anyone thinks Dawkins ideas are idiosyncratic I quote some more leading Biologists/scientists: George Gaylord Simpson: "Man is the result of a purposeless and natural process that did not have him in mind." (1967, pp.344-345). Jacques Monod: "Pure chance, absolutely free but blind, lies at the very root of the stupendous edifice of evolution...." (Monod, 1972, p.110); and "Man at last knows that he is alone in the unfeeling immensity of the universe, out of which he emerged by chance." (p.167) As Futuyma explains: "By coupling undirected, purposeless variation to the blind, uncaring process of natural selection, Darwin made theological or spiritual explanations of the life processes superfluous. Darwin's theory of evolution was a crucial plank in the platform of mechanism and materialism, of much of science, in short that has since been the stage of most Western thought." (Futuyma, 1986, p.2). So this is where we (the 'west') have arrived at in our thinking. It is not a pretty place in my opinion. In fact I predict that the current scientific picture of the world is completely skewed and will be viewed in the near futures with derision: Darwin's theories will be remembered more for their amusement value than becuase they point to any deep truths about life and the universe. BTW I do not believe that dhamma practice occurs in the brain. Robertk 43480 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Mon Mar 21, 2005 4:41am Subject: Re: [dsg] Having no opinions Hi, Charles Charles DaCosta wrote: >However, the point I was trying to make was about the idea of "having no-opinions." To never have an opinion sounds very unrealistic, ... > Then we agree here. >... I would think you would have to be dead. > > And also here (taking your meaning as being that a corpse has no opinions ;-)) Jon 43481 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Mon Mar 21, 2005 4:49am Subject: Re: [dsg] Another Alternative for a Buddhist Theory of Memory Hi, Kel kelvin_lwin wrote: >I'm not looking >for a discussion, just wanted to know if you include his teachings >under your original statement or not. If you're not already familar >with it then I guess the answer is no. > > No, I'm not familiar with Mogok Sayadaw's teachings, and I did not in fact have any particular individual in mind when I made the remark. I do not know of any sutta support for the idea that the PS chain can be broken at one of its links, or at the 'vedana' link in particular. (On a quick glance at the article you gave us, there is no sutta reference cited there on the point either.) Jon 43482 From: Joop Date: Mon Mar 21, 2005 6:25am Subject: Re: [dsg] Having no opinions --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Charles DaCosta" wrote: > > Hi Joop, > You asked the follow (aswell as made the following points): Hallo Charles Quote: "2. Where do they change? see question 3 3. In my [our] brains or somewhere outside the brains of sentient beings? BOTH it also changes in books, on TV, in other documents, on the internet, etc... 4. In the last case I don't agree: ideas exist only in my (or somebody else) mind; things are only perceived in my mind. Whether we perceive it or not, it can still exists. Example: Deep in the forest a tree falls but there was no-one around that was close enough to hear, see, etc... it fall. Does that mean it really didn't fall?" Joop: Yes, it still can exist, but we are never sure. 'Deep in the forest' doesn't exist in my small and crwowded country, so take another example: 'In the centre of our Galaxy there is an massive black hole'. This is a theory, a perception of the reality Conclusion: one can only talk on a phenomenological way about dhammas. Metta Joop 43483 From: Joop Date: Mon Mar 21, 2005 6:29am Subject: Re: [dsg] Having no opinions Hallo Jon, Charles --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Jonothan Abbott wrote: > Hi, Charles > > Charles DaCosta wrote: > > >However, the point I was trying to make was about the idea of "having no-opinions." To never have an opinion sounds very unrealistic, ... > > > > Then we agree here. > > >... I would think you would have to be dead. > > > > > > And also here (taking your meaning as being that a corpse has no > opinions ;-)) > > Jon I think that's too easy said, Jon When an opinion is not 'kept' by rupa; is it then kept by nama? I don't think so. An opinion is a concept, kept in somebody's brains. That in rupa, in livinf rupa, feed by oxygen in the blood, but still rupa. Metta Joop 43484 From: mnease Date: Mon Mar 21, 2005 6:50am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: jhanas, to Mike. Hi Nina, ----- Original Message ----- From: "Nina van Gorkom" To: Sent: Monday, March 21, 2005 2:58 AM Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: jhanas, to Mike. M: There's a reference in the Dispeller to the > Dhammasanga.ni, "...Therefore the meaning of all jhaanas, described there as > profitable, resultant and functional...". N: In Ch 16? I did not see the text. M: Sorry Nina, Chapter 12, paragraph 1838--I'll respond more soon. mike 43485 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Mar 21, 2005 7:48am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Dhammasangani translation. Dear Sarah, That is very interesting. Good to compare with the existing PTS translation of the Dhammasangani that could be improved on. Could you perhaps quote one or two lines from it? Howard will also be interested as he was waiting for another English translation. I just saw your quote, thank you. Nina. op 21-03-2005 09:10 schreef sarah abbott op sarahprocterabbott@y...: > I want to tell you (and others) that we just received a package from > Myanmar which took months to arrive. Very exciting – it contains a > translation of the Dhammasangani by U KKyaw Khine and of the Dhp verses > and stories by Daw Mya Tin. 43486 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Mar 21, 2005 7:48am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Rupa Madness: Seeing with the Tongue Dear Rob M, You explained this very clearly and I find the sutta quote most appropriate, Nina. op 21-03-2005 09:50 schreef robmoult op rob.moult@j...: > "Why have I left [answers to speculative questions] undeclared? > Because it is unbeneficial, it does not belong to the fundamentals of > the holy life, it does not lead to disenchantment, to dispassion, to > cessation, to peace, to direct knowledge, to enlightenment, to > Nibbana. That is why I have left it undeclared. And what have I > declared? 'This is suffering' - I have declared. 43487 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Mar 21, 2005 7:48am Subject: Re: [dsg] Answers to Q. Cetasikas Applied thinking Sustained thinking Dear friends, Phil being absent, helas, I answer the Questions. op 20-03-2005 08:33 schreef sarah abbott op sarahprocterabbott@y...:> > [Ch.8 Applied thinking(Vitakka),Sustained thinking(Vicaara)contd] > > Questions > > i Through how many doors can vitakka and vicåra experience > an object? N: through six doors. > ii Can vitakka and vicåra think of paramattha dhammas? N: yes. They share any kind of object with the citta they accompany, be it a paramattha dhamma or a concept. > iii What is the difference between vitakka and vicåra? N: Vitakka directs the citta to the object and vicaara keeps the citta occupied with the object. Vitakka is gross and vicaara is more subtle. But they perform their function only for the duration of one citta. They both arise together with the citta. > iv Do vitakka and vicåra always arise together? N: In the case of cittas of the sensesphere they always arise together. > v Can vitakka and vicåra arise in a sense-door process? N:Yes, they perform their functions also in a sense-door process. Vitakka directs the citta to the rupa which is the object and vicaara keeps the citta occupied with it. > vi Which types of kåmåvacara cittas (cittas of the sensesphere) > are not accompanied by vitakka and vicåra? N: The six pairs of sense-cognitions (seeing etc.) are not accompanied by vitakka and vicåra. Seeing, for example, sees visible object and it does not need vitakka and vicåra in order to experience visible object. The other cittas of that process need vitakka and vicåra in order to experience visible object. > vii In which stages of jhåna does vitakka arise? N: Vitakka is among the jhaanafactors and it is still needed in the first stage of jhana. It is abandoned in the second stage of jhaana. > viii Why is vitakka abandoned in the higher stages of jhåna? N: In the higher stages one has acquired more skill in jhaana and calm has grown. Therefore, vitakka is then no longer needed in order to experience the meditation subject with absorption. > ix In which stages of jhåna does vicåra arise? N: In the first stage of jhaana. Some people have abandoned both vitakka and vicaara at the second stage of jhaana, and for them ruupa-jhaanas are counted as fourfold. Some people still need vicaara at the second stage and they have abandoned it at the third stage. For them ruupa-jhaanas are counted as fivefold. > x Both vitakka and vicåra accompany the citta which is mindful of nåma and rúpa. Are both vitakka and vicåra factors of the eightfold Path? N: Only vitakka is a factor of the eightfold Path, it is called right thinking, sammaa-sa.nkappa. Right thinking touches or hits the nama or rupa which appears, so that sammaa-di.t.thi can investigate its characteristic. Right understanding and right thinking are together the wisdom of the eightfold Path. The other factors are classified as the siila of the eightfold Path and the concentration of the eightfold Path. **** Nina 43488 From: Matthew Miller Date: Mon Mar 21, 2005 8:33am Subject: Re: Seeing with the Tongue Thanks for your reply, Robert. You raised many big issues and I disagree with you on almost all of them :) I will try to address a couple of your points. Of course, most of this is fairly off-topic, but interesting nevertheless. RobertK: > I am not especially impressed by science... when I compare it > with the Dhamma of the Buddha it seems > more like stamp collecting than an investigation into what is real > and crucial. Stamp collecting? Hmm. Again, I think that your low assessment of science comes from thinking of it only in terms of pure, unapplied sciences such as taxonomy and particle physics. What about medical science? The next time you have an infection or (God forbid) a tumor, I wonder if you'll look at the scientific achievements of antibiotics and radiation therapy as "stamp collecting." More people's suffering has been relieved by modern medical science than all of the Buddhist lineages on earth combined. Is this not "real and crucial"? > > In fact I predict that the current scientific picture of the world > is completely skewed and will be viewed in the near futures with > derision: Darwin's theories will be remembered more for their > amusement value than becuase they point to any deep truths about > life and the universe. > Well, all I can say is -- don't hold your breath! The evidence for evolution is overwhelming. As a theory, it is about as shaky as the theory of gravity or the theory that the earth is round. I have occasionally come across Christian creationists who hold similarly dim views of evolution. The problem is, they are never able to offer any alternate theory for the evidence. They never seem to have anything beyond intuitive aversion to the idea of evolution and faith in some scriptural authority. In science, the word "theory" has a special meaning that is different from its ordinary usage. A theory is not just an "idea" or a "hypothesis" or a "philosophy." It is a comprehensive explanation which attempts to account for ALL of the available evidence. The "theory" of evolution, like the "theory" of the atom or the "theory" of the cell, has been repeatedly and rigorously tested against the evidence and has prevailed. Take a stroll through the library of any major university and you will find thousands of journals filled with 100,000's of articles all giving evidence of evolution's validity. Everything that we've learned from molecular biology, genetics, radiocarbon dating, biogeography, the fossil record, comparative anatomy and comparative embryology points toward the fact that complex forms of life evolved from simpler ones. You could easily undermine the theory of evolution. All you would need to do is, say, find a hominid fossil at the level of the pleistocene. That would do it. But again, I wouldn't hold my breath. As we sit here, thousands of new fossils are being unearthed all over the planet. So far every single one of them has been exactly where evolution predicted it would be. This is quite remarkable if you think about it. But evolution is even more special. It is a core theory, the overarching theme of ALL biological science. Nothing that we know in biology makes sense outside of evolutionary theory. It is the unifying thread that ties together all of our biological knowledge. Matthew 43489 From: Date: Mon Mar 21, 2005 4:24am Subject: Re: [dsg] Rupa Madness: Seeing with the Tongue Hi Matthew, All In a message dated 3/21/2005 4:32:07 AM Pacific Standard Time, bupleurum@y... writes: Rob: > - Science seeks to understand how nature behaves > - Dhamma focuses on the fundamentals of the holy life and how to get > to Nibbbana Evan: > As I see it, the goal of > science is to quantitatively describe the nature of all phenomena > from observation with or without the aid of instrumentation. > The goal of Buddhism is to realise the nature of phenomena > through observation with the final goal of liberation. > And this is where there is a difference. Science does what > it does because phenomena exist > (i.e. why climb the mountain? - because it's there). Buddhism does > what it does because there is a higher goal to be achieved - that > of liberation. Buddhism has identified that there is a problem to > be solved and a goal to be achieved and therefore there is a > reason for its enquiry into the true > nature of all things. Science flounders trying to solve one > problem after another depending on where the money is coming > from without real > direction. > This distinction only works if you have in mind a pure, unapplied branch of science like astrophysics or geology. But could you say that medical science does not have "a higher goal to be achieved"? Could you say that psychiatry or cardiology or oncology is "without real direction"? > There is another critical difference. The true nature of all > phenomena in Buddhism is to be personally experienced and > because of this personal experience, this leads to wisdom > and wisdom leads to liberation. Science examines phenomena > "objectively" therefore is collects knowledge. This > does not lead to wisdom therefore it cannot lead to liberation. > Again, is not the goal of medical science the "personally experienced" liberation from suffering and disease? Hasn't the Buddha often been described as the "master physician"? There are even branches of medicine (e.g. cognitive therapy, psychotherapy) which involve introspection on the part of the patient himself or herself as part of the liberation from suffering. Let me take this out of the realm of abstract definitions into the concrete. All the evidence we have suggests that people who meditate have figured out a way to directly alter their own brain chemistry. Through practice, they have learned to switch on or off the release of different neurotransmitters in the brain. For example, you can trigger an out-of-body experience by stimulating an area of the right parietal cortex. Electrical activity in the temporal lobe (Temporal Lobe Epilepsy) has been associated with various religious experiences. As for Buddhist practice specifically, I don't find anything there that is not a potential area for scientific understanding (and perhaps improvement). Take the experience of "atta," of having a self -- this can be identified with the activities of certain centers in the brain. We know this because we've studied people with damage to these areas and they lose one of the various attributes of "self" -- embodiment, agency, unity or continuity. Someone who reaches a state of "anatta" has figured out a way, through a kind of vipassanic biofeedback, to deactivate these centers. Jhana is a bit easier. These practitioners have activated the "calm" pathways in the brain, many of which have already been identified. The obvious next step, from a medical point of view, is to figure out ways to facilitate and optimize this process, either chemically, electrically or via cognitive therapy or some form of biofeedback. In the beginning, we will have to continue our study of the "master meditators" of the various contemplative religious traditions. But given the extraordinary amount of time and energy required by these traditions to achieve "wisdom" (think of the whole lifetimes spent in monasteries!) I can't help but think that we can learn to do it much more efficiently. :-) Matthew This is incredibly well put. I hope you are (or will) write a book on the subject. Buddhists have a propensity to look down on science. I think because science is so highly regarded in society, and Buddhists legitimately believe they have found something overall superior, science is almost seem as a rival. The interesting thing is, most Eastern Buddhists I know enjoy the idea of connectivity between science and Buddhism. Ven. Dr. K Sri Dhammananda has said, for example that -- "the more science learns, the closer it gets to Buddhism." A sentiment I agree with. The educated Sri Lankan Monks I've known have no problem with a certain level or correlation between science and Buddhism. But God help science when it comes to Western Buddhists. ;-) It usually is in for a trashing. Yes, even many 'Abhidhammists,' who follow a doctrine that "scientized" the Dhamma even further, don't have good things to say about science. Again, I suspect it is born out of an elitist point of view. Whatever helps in understanding conditional principles is beneficial. The Buddha said to consider such teachings his own as well. TG 43490 From: nina Date: Mon Mar 21, 2005 11:17am Subject: quote Phra Dhammadharo, to Azita Dear Azita, When reading Vipassana Letters to Lodewijk at dinner, I came across a quote from the late Phra Dhammadharo and I thought of you. It is a good encouragement. I read first: Now the quote: (taken from "Be here now", Adelaide): end quote. More patience, courage and good cheer, Nina. 43491 From: Date: Mon Mar 21, 2005 6:26am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Dhammasangani translation. Hi, Nina (and Sarah) - In a message dated 3/21/05 10:56:51 AM Eastern Standard Time, vangorko@x... writes: > Dear Sarah, > That is very interesting. Good to compare with the existing PTS translation > of the Dhammasangani that could be improved on. Could you perhaps quote one > or two lines from it? Howard will also be interested as he was waiting for > another English translation. --------------------------------- Howard: Yes, I would very much like to see some of it. The current PTS translation I sure do hope ;-) is a very poor one! --------------------------------- > I just saw your quote, thank you. > Nina. > =================== 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) 43492 From: Matthew Miller Date: Mon Mar 21, 2005 0:55pm Subject: Re: Rupa Madness: Seeing with the Tongue Rob writes: > To use an analogy, on my desk calendar, there is a > beautiful photograph of a flower. A book on botany will > allow me categorize this flower according to genus, etc. > Photography and botany can take the > same subject yet be separate becuase they have a different scope. > You seem to be suggesting that the photograph of the flower deals with its aesthetic beauty whereas the botany merely analyzes and categorizes it. This reminds me of a wonderful passage from the opening of the book "The Pleasure of Finding Things Out" by Richard Feynman, the Nobel-prize winning physicist. Here Feynman very eloquently refutes this false distinction between "aesthetic" and "scientific" experience: "I have a friend who's an artist and he's sometimes taken a view which I don't agree very well. He'll hold up a flower and say, "Look how beautiful it is," and I'll agree, I think. And he says - "you see, I as an artist can see how beautiful this is, but you as a scientist, oh, take this all apart and it becomes a dull thing." And I think that he's kind of funny. First of all, the beauty that he sees is available to other people and to me, too, I believe, although I might not be quite as refined aesthetically as he is. But I can appreciate the beauty of a flower. At the same time, I see much more about the flower than he sees. I can imagine the cells in there, the complicated actions inside which also have a beauty. I mean it's not just the beauty at this dimension of one centimeter, there is also a beauty at a smaller dimension, the inner structure. Also the processes, the fact that the colors in the flower evolved in the order to attract insects to pollinate it is interesting - it means that insects can see the color. It adds a question: Does this aesthetic sense also exist in the lower forms? Why is it aesthetic? All kinds of interesting questions which shows that a science knowledge only adds to the excitement and mystery and the awe of a flower. It only adds; I don't understand how it subtracts." -- Richard Feynman, "The Pleasure of Finding Things Out" p.2 43493 From: Charles DaCosta Date: Mon Mar 21, 2005 11:42am Subject: Re: [dsg] Having no opinions YES YES ----- Original Message ----- From: Jonothan Abbott To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, 21 March, 2005 13:41 Subject: Re: [dsg] Having no opinions Hi, Charles Charles DaCosta wrote: >However, the point I was trying to make was about the idea of "having no-opinions." To never have an opinion sounds very unrealistic, ... > Then we agree here. >... I would think you would have to be dead. > > And also here (taking your meaning as being that a corpse has no opinions ;-)) Jon 43494 From: Charles DaCosta Date: Mon Mar 21, 2005 11:59am Subject: Re: [dsg] Having no opinions Joop, You don't believe ideas can exist on paper? or in the spoken word? If not, then what do you call the content of most of our posts? or should I ask, what do you mean by "one can only talk on a phenomenological way about dhammas"? Just curious. CharlesD ----- Original Message ----- From: Joop To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, 21 March, 2005 15:25 Subject: Re: [dsg] Having no opinions Hallo Charles Quote: "2. Where do they change? see question 3 3. In my [our] brains or somewhere outside the brains of sentient beings? BOTH it also changes in books, on TV, in other documents, on the internet, etc... 4. In the last case I don't agree: ideas exist only in my (or somebody else) mind; things are only perceived in my mind. Whether we perceive it or not, it can still exists. Example: Deep in the forest a tree falls but there was no-one around that was close enough to hear, see, etc... it fall. Does that mean it really didn't fall?" Joop: Yes, it still can exist, but we are never sure. 'Deep in the forest' doesn't exist in my small and crwowded country, so take another example: 'In the centre of our Galaxy there is an massive black hole'. This is a theory, a perception of the reality Conclusion: one can only talk on a phenomenological way about dhammas. Joop 43495 From: Charles DaCosta Date: Mon Mar 21, 2005 0:06pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Having no opinions Joop, I have no clue as to what you mean by: "I think that's too easy said, Jon When an opinion is not 'kept' by rupa; is it then kept by nama? I don't think so. An opinion is a concept, kept in somebody's brains. That in rupa, in living rupa, feed by oxygen in the blood, but still rupa. " Can you start out by explaining what you mean by rupa and nama? Because it sounds like you are agreeing, but the statement "I think that's too easy said" make me think you want to disagree; so... CharlesD ----- Original Message ----- From: Joop To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, 21 March, 2005 15:29 Subject: Re: [dsg] Having no opinions Hallo Jon, Charles Jonothan Abbott wrote: > Hi, Charles > > Charles DaCosta wrote: > >However, the point I was trying to make was about the idea of "having no-opinions." To never have an opinion sounds very unrealistic, ... > > > > Then we agree here. > > >... I would think you would have to be dead. > > And also here (taking your meaning as being that a corpse has no > opinions ;-)) > Jon I think that's too easy said, Jon When an opinion is not 'kept' by rupa; is it then kept by nama? I don't think so. An opinion is a concept, kept in somebody's brains. That in rupa, in livinf rupa, feed by oxygen in the blood, but still rupa. Joop 43496 From: Charles DaCosta Date: Mon Mar 21, 2005 0:39pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Seeing with the Tongue Matthew, you have me shaking in my boots:) good points, but I have to add a correction: Today all science is applied in one form or another (e.g., particle physics is giving us faster and faster computers). And, even the Abidharma provides a taxonomy. For my first degree, my thesis was on the evolution of matter and the Bible, and I only found two points of disagreement (i.e., which came first man or woman, and which came first the sun or the earth). CharlesD ----- Original Message ----- From: Matthew Miller To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, 21 March, 2005 17:33 Subject: [dsg] Re: Seeing with the Tongue Thanks for your reply, Robert. You raised many big issues and I disagree with you on almost all of them :) I will try to address a couple of your points. Of course, most of this is fairly off-topic, but interesting nevertheless. ... In science, the word "theory" has a special meaning that is different from its ordinary usage. A theory is not just an "idea" or a "hypothesis" or a "philosophy." It is a comprehensive explanation which attempts to account for ALL of the available evidence. The "theory" of evolution, like the "theory" of the atom or the "theory" of the cell, has been repeatedly and rigorously tested against the evidence and has prevailed. Take a stroll through the library of any major university and you will find thousands of journals filled with 100,000's of articles all giving evidence of evolution's validity. Everything that we've learned from molecular biology, genetics, radiocarbon dating, biogeography, the fossil record, comparative anatomy and comparative embryology points toward the fact that complex forms of life evolved from simpler ones. 43497 From: Matthew Miller Date: Mon Mar 21, 2005 2:44pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Seeing with the Tongue > For my first degree, my thesis was on the evolution of > matter and the Bible, and I only found two points of > disagreement (i.e., which came first man or woman, and > which came first the sun or the earth). > The Bible. What a trip. God creates plants on the third day before he creates the sun on the fourth. Have you seen this site? It's a fun resource: http://www.skepticsannotatedbible.com/ Matthew 43498 From: Andrew Date: Mon Mar 21, 2005 3:00pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Rupa Madness: Seeing with the Tongue --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Matthew Miller" wrote: Here are my points: > > - Science (most notably medicine) *is* involved in liberation from > suffering > - Dhamma (most notably abhidhamma) *is* involved in making scientific > assertions > - We are brains > - dhamma practice occurs in the brain and can be understood (and > potentially improved) by science Hello Matthew and others interested in this thread. Re Matthew's first point above, can somebody tell me whether or not the Nazi medical experiments on Jewish concentration camp interns were science and, if so, how they were "involved in liberation from suffering"? Andrew T 43499 From: Date: Mon Mar 21, 2005 4:10pm Subject: Vism.XIV,147 "The Path of Purification" (Visuddhimagga) Ch. XIV 147. (xxii)-(xxiii) The wieldy state of the [mental] body is 'wieldiness of body'. The wieldy state of consciousness is 'wieldiness of consciousness'. They have the characteristic of quieting unwieldiness in the [mental] body and in consciousness. Their function is to crush unwieldiness in the [mental] body and in consciousness. They are manifested as success in making (something) an object of the [mental] body and consciousness. As bringing trust in things that should be trusted in and as bringing susceptibility of application to beneficial acts, like the refining of gold, they should be regarded as opposed to the remaining hindrances, etc., that cause unwieldiness in the [mental] body and in consciousness. 43500 From: kenhowardau Date: Mon Mar 21, 2005 4:56pm Subject: To James: Re: To Connie: BB's Article 2 Hi James, ------------- J: > I am reminded of the time before the Buddha was enlightened, when he was Gotama, and he became very upset when he encountered three different types of people: old, sick, and dead. And he thought to himself `Since I am also subject to old age, sickness, and death it would not be fitting, it would not be proper, for me to pursue things which are also subject to old age, sickness, and death. That would be an ignoble quest. Therefore, since I am subject to old age, sickness, and death, I should pursue that which is not subject to those things. That would be a noble quest.' ------------------------- I haven't read the story lately, but I wonder if you are correct when you say Gotama became "very upset." As you have already pointed out, the Buddha never became upset, so I would think the Bodhisatta, too, was an extremely even-tempered person - at least by worldling standards. The quote you have given would seem to describe calm wise-consideration (kusala) more than anxiety-ridden unwise- consideration (akusala). -------------------------- C: > Compare this to what BB writes, "And, as I will show presently, these terms are intended quite literally as signifying biological birth, aging, and death, not our anxiety over being born, growing old, and dying." But what about the dukkha that made Gotama seek the truth? It seems to me that Gotama had a lot of anxiety over sickness, aging, and death and he hadn't experienced them directly (at least not aging and death- and he didn't recall his past lives). This is not a cut-and-dry issue; there seems to be some gray area. And, again, we have to get back to how this all relates to DO. Anyone have an Advil? ;-)) ------------------------------------- Good luck with your research, and sorry for missing your "Advil" joke - it's not in my dictionary. :-) Ken H PS: just Googled Advil - a headache tablet. Now I get it! :-) 43501 From: connie Date: Mon Mar 21, 2005 5:04pm Subject: Re: the alley-walk Hi, Walkers, Just a bit of graffito & graffiti in passing: Sam.ii, 105: Even so have I, monks, seen an ancient way, an ancient road followed by the wholly Awakened Ones of olden times. ... Along that have I gone, and the matters that I have come to know fully as I was going along it I have told to the monks, nuns, men and women layfollowers... Nina: Until we are sotapanna, a person who walks straight, we are going to have misunderstandings about sati, very normal. Nyanaponika Thera: ... mindfulness means just "to watch one's steps" so that one may not stumble or miss a chance in the pursuit of one's aims. ... Mindfulness walks slowly and deliberately, and its daily task is of a rather humdrum nature. Yet where it places its feet it cannot easily be dislodged, and it acquires and bestows true mastery of the ground it covers. Ven. Mahasi Sayadaw: ...wandering thoughts are called "hindering thoughts". Soma Thera: ...walking fast is comparable to the bhikkhu's entry into the state of unskillful thinking; the walking slowly, to the cutting off of unskillful thought-conduct SN XXXV.95: Malukyaputta! When you have nothing to do with the sense-objects that you perceive, you will get no foothold on them. Malukyaputta! When you lose your foothold on the objects of sense, your namarupa (aggregates of mind and matter) will neither be here in this world, nor there in the other world. And this being not anywhere in both worlds means the end of suffering. Dan: When a mind that is harboring dosa or lobha or moha is said to be "following the path", that path cannot be the Buddha's. peace, connie 43502 From: kenhowardau Date: Mon Mar 21, 2005 5:14pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Ken--ultimate (Abhidhamma) view part 2 Hi Charles, ------------------ KH:> > There is only the present moment." ------------------ C: > So beings can't have existed in the past? --------------------------------- When you consider a 'being' as the momentarily existing five khandhas, then beings have certainly existed in the past. But those beings no longer exist. There are only the present five khandhas. --------------------------------------------- C: > And, the future doesn't exit? ---------------------------------------------- No. Nor has it ever. ---------------------------------- C: > Have you experience this, or do you not experience? When you look in the mirror in the morning, do your image disappear after a billionth of a second, or a moment? ---------------------------------- An image in the mirror is a concept and, as such, it has no actual existence at all. The only ultimately real thing that meets the eye is visible object, and it lasts for one moment of rupa. Seeing consciousness, which experiences visible object, lasts for one moment of nama. ---------------- C: > In ultimate reality there is space, emptiness, but you may not find it, unless you search for the essence. ---------------------------- You and I are approaching the Dhamma from different perspectives and so I don't see the meaning you obviously see in the above. According to the Theravada teaching, a dhamma is empty of self but it is not nothingness. -------------------------------- KH: > > and moments of thought creation (conceptualizing). In many of those moments, the mental factor known as lobar has arisen, performed its function (of attachment to its object) and fallen away. > > ---------------------------------- I have noticed lately that your spell-checker changes my spellings - and not always for the better. :-) ----------------- KH: > > Conditioned reality is the five khandhas as they arise in this present, fleeting moment. They can arise in one of six ways, or, as the Buddha said, "as one of the six worlds." There is one world for each of the six kinds of consciousness - seeing, hearing, smelling, tasting, touching and mentally cognising. In a moment of seeing (the eye world) the ........................ C: > Have you experienced this, and how would you describe that experience? ------------------ According to the Buddha, this is all I ever really experience. The best way of describing it would be to cut and paste from the Theravada texts. Or, I could just continue with what I have been doing - putting my understanding of those texts into my own words. --------------------- KH: > > they exist for only the briefest possible moment. Even the Eight-fold Path is just a fleeting moment in which the five khandhas exist in their supramundane form. ...................... C: > how have you experienced these briefest possible moments? ------------- As I have explained, I experience them all the time - as moments of seeing or hearing etc. But I think you must be asking which parts (if any) of the teaching have I personally verified. Is that of any relevance? Where did the Buddha say we should divide the Dhamma into two sections - the parts we have personally verified and the parts we have not? If anything, the opposite is true: concepts of self should be excluded from our understanding. ---------------- C: > How have you experience the ending of your existence? ---------------- According to the Abhidhamma, the falling away of a conditioned nama or rupa can be directly known, but only by well-developed panna. So too can its arising and persistence. Ken H 43503 From: Matthew Miller Date: Mon Mar 21, 2005 5:28pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Rupa Madness: Seeing with the Tongue Andrew: > can somebody tell me whether or not the Nazi > medical experiments on Jewish concentration camp interns were > science and, if so, how they were "involved in liberation > from suffering"? Matthew: Well, no, they weren't. But what is your point? Throughout history, one can find extreme examples of the perversion of anything. Here's an example of how Buddhism was perverted by the Nazi's allies, the Japanese: *** "Before the foe my heart / Is calmed, composure-blessed / While belching cannons sing / A lullaby of rest." The poetic words of a Zen Buddhist chaplain to the Japanese armed forces in the Russo-Japanese war of 1904-05 offer the equivalent to any tank-blessing sermon by a British bishop in the first world war. And in that Japanese victory - a crucial one since it is the first modern war in which a western power was defeated - Buddhism played a crucial role. The religion had long since been state-sponsored in Japan - part of how it defined itself against the west and asserted its modern military identity. By the 19th century there were almost half a million Buddhist temples in Japan and every household was obliged to affiliate itself to one. And when Japan defeated China in 1894-95, it was proof for the Japanese that their kind of Buddhism worked because it was less pessimistic than any other variety. Buddhism now justified war in the name of a higher "civilising" purpose - just as Christianity and Islam had done. As Shaku Soen, the poetic chaplain, wrote: "Many material human bodies may be destroyed - but from a broader point of view these sacrifices are so many phoenixes consumed in the sacred fire of spirituality." Generals noted approvingly how their Buddhist soldiers were simply the best. In the 1904-05 war, General Hayashi Senjuro lost 4000 of his 5000 men. But even as they died, he noted approvingly, they recited the name of the Buddha. And Sawaki Kodo, who survived that war to become one of the great 20th century Zen masters, described how he and his colleagues "gorged ourselves in killing people ... Just what you'd expect from a Zen priest. A man with guts." People who are ill at ease in their own skin will be attracted by the Buddhist recommendation to sacrifice all that egoism. But the same message can also be used to justify militarism and power lust. General Nogi, the Zen-trained hero of the 1904-05 war, committed ritualistic suicide with his wife on the death of the Emperor Meiji in 1912. For by then Buddhism was part of the cult of emperor worship - what was technically classified as "imperial-way Buddhism". The emperor ("Golden wheel turning Sacred King") could use force and go to war. Like a parent, said the Buddhist state-theologians, the emperor was at his most compassionate when he was being most coercive. -- Hywel Williams, The Guardian, Monday April 21, 2003 (http://www.guardian.co.uk/religion/Story/0,2763,940513,00.html) 43504 From: Evan Stamatopoulos Date: Mon Mar 21, 2005 2:47pm Subject: RE: [dsg] Rupa Madness: Seeing with the Tongue With all due respect, TG, I am not giving science a trashing. I am merely putting it in perspective. I am an Electronics Engineer so I would be trashing something I make a living from. One does not pursue a branch of Engineering if one does not have a high regard for science to begin with. Science and Buddhism have areas of overlap and this is where the confusion occurs. Overlap does not mean equal. Kind Regards, Evan -----Original Message----- From: TGrand458@a... [mailto:TGrand458@a...] Sent: Tuesday, 22 March 2005 4:25 AM To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [dsg] Rupa Madness: Seeing with the Tongue Hi Matthew, All ... Buddhists have a propensity to look down on science. I think because science is so highly regarded in society, and Buddhists legitimately believe they have found something overall superior, science is almost seem as a rival. The interesting thing is, most Eastern Buddhists I know enjoy the idea of connectivity between science and Buddhism. Ven. Dr. K Sri Dhammananda has said, for example that -- "the more science learns, the closer it gets to Buddhism." A sentiment I agree with. The educated Sri Lankan Monks I've known have no problem with a certain level or correlation between science and Buddhism. But God help science when it comes to Western Buddhists. ;-) It usually is in for a trashing. Yes, even many 'Abhidhammists,' who follow a doctrine that "scientized" the Dhamma even further, don't have good things to say about science. Again, I suspect it is born out of an elitist point of view. Whatever helps in understanding conditional principles is beneficial. The Buddha said to consider such teachings his own as well. TG 43505 From: Evan Stamatopoulos Date: Mon Mar 21, 2005 3:30pm Subject: RE: [dsg] Rupa Madness: Seeing with the Tongue Matthew, It is interesting to note that these days science is being "personalised". The whole idea of removing bias in science is to "de-personalise" it otherwise the results can be "adjusted" to reflect the views of the experimenter either deliberately or accidentally. Let's make no bones about this and let's not allow personal bias into this. What is the point of performing double-blind experiments if science is supposed to be personal? Science is objective. It always has been and by nature it always must be. So no, I do not go along with your assertion that science is personal. What it must be is: objective, observable and repeatable. Why is this so? Because its purpose is to collect data and classify. Knowledge is the objective of science. And knowledge in as many areas as possible without discrimination. Now, you bring up the area of medical science as an example of "a higher goal". They liberate us from suffering. That could be extracted to many other branches of science. Technology is supposed to make our lives easier, less stressful, liberate us from menial tasks. Agricultural science has meant that most of us in the western world don't have to grow our own food so we are liberated from frustrations of failed crops and the possible hunger that can result from that. Last week I was sick. I couldn't work for 3 days. I was in a great deal of pain. New diseases appear throughout the world from time to time and we are even unwittingly breeding new "super bugs" by overuse of our medical solutions like anti-biotics. Guess what, this sounds very much like samsara - a mass of suffering to me. Now, I must address the issue of "atta" that you raise. Particularly your summary statement "we are brains". So, when death occurs and the body lies still, are you still brains? When the maggots and micro-organisms have caused the body to bloat and stench, are you still brains? When the micro-organisms and maggots have had their fill and left leaving nothing behind, are you still brains? It would in fact be quite difficult to identify where these brains of yours are at any one time. When science figures out a way to sit and pass an exam on my behalf, then it may figure out how to achieve "wisdom" for me. Kind Regards, Evan PS I also like the idea of a summary. 1. All conditioned things are impermanent. 2. Atta is a permanent self or soul. 3. The brain is impermanent. 4. The brain is therefore Anatta. 5. The purpose of science is to accumulate knowledge of the universe. 6. The purpose of Buddhism is liberation which is achieved through wisdom whose by-product is knowledge. -----Original Message----- From: Matthew Miller [mailto:bupleurum@y...] Sent: Monday, 21 March 2005 11:30 PM To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [dsg] Rupa Madness: Seeing with the Tongue ... - Science (most notably medicine) *is* involved in liberation from suffering - Dhamma (most notably abhidhamma) *is* involved in making scientific assertions - We are brains - dhamma practice occurs in the brain and can be understood (and potentially improved) by science 43506 From: Date: Mon Mar 21, 2005 0:41pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Rupa Madness: Seeing with the Tongue Hi Evan No disrespect intended for anyone and my comments were not directed toward you...in fact I don't think I read a post by you on this subject. But I have seen a lot of anti-science sentiment in Buddhist chat rooms and the like. I know several highly educated Sri Lankan Theravdin monks who consider Buddhism to be a science. TG In a message dated 3/21/2005 5:33:59 PM Pacific Standard Time, evan.stamatopoulos@p... writes: With all due respect, TG, I am not giving science a trashing. I am merely putting it in perspective. I am an Electronics Engineer so I would be trashing something I make a living from. One does not pursue a branch of Engineering if one does not have a high regard for science to begin with. Science and Buddhism have areas of overlap and this is where the confusion occurs. Overlap does not mean equal. Kind Regards, Evan 43507 From: Matthew Miller Date: Mon Mar 21, 2005 6:24pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Rupa Madness: Seeing with the Tongue Evam wrote: > I do not go along with your assertion > that science is personal. Forgive me, my friend, but I don't recall asserting that science is "personal." However, as someone once said, "misunderstanding is one of the great engines of progress." So, since you brought it up, it occurs to me that one might argue that science is a human activity, carried out by people, so it will always be "personal." Even as it strives to be "objective," the initial motivation is always some personal goal. For example, while AIDS research is (in as sense) objective and impersonal, we wouldn't devote so much time to it if it didn't promise to relieve a great deal of suffering. Of course, there are sordid examples of science (the Nazis, Hiroshima) just as there are sordid examples of Buddhism, Christianity and anything else. We are, after all, only human. > Now, I must address the issue of "atta" that you raise. Particularly > your summary statement "we are brains". So, when death occurs and > the body lies still, are you still brains? When the maggots and > micro-organisms have caused the body to bloat and stench, are you > still brains? I would say no. When the brain dies, "you" no longer exist. Sorry, no karma or rebirth here. But that's the subject of another post! Matthew 43508 From: lokuttaracitta Date: Mon Mar 21, 2005 6:25pm Subject: Re:Buddha Nature Dear Joop: >I'm glad to hear because till now I got the impression that > (all) Theravadins are orthodox and not interested in any Mahayana- > texts simply because Mahayana is wrong. Theravadins in Myanmar seem very orthodox. while those in Thai are not and some of them seem to break bounds like "Dammakaya Foundation ". > I know it's subjective but I like some (Mahayana) sutras and still > want to be a (liberal) Theravadin. Let me make you much more glad by the followings. ------------------------------------------------. Seven Stages of Purification & Insight Knowledges — Ven. Matara Sri Nanarama. http://www.buddhanet.net/pdf_file/bm7insight.pdf Some meditators are unable to go beyond the knowledge of equanimity about formations(sankhar'upekkha-ñana) due to some powerful aspirations they have made in the past,such as for buddhahood,or pacekabuddhahood,chief discipleship,etc.In fact, it is at this stage that one can ascertain whether one has made any such aspiration in the past.Sometimes when he has reached his stage the meditatior comes to feel that he is cherishing a powerful aspiration. ------------------------------------------------ Bodhisattva Ideal in Buddhism by Ven. Dr. W. Rahula (From: "Gems of Buddhist Wisdom", Buddhist Missionary Society, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, 1996) http://www.saigon.com/~anson/ebud/ebdha126.htm Although the Theravada holds that anybody can be a Bodhisattva, it does not stipulate or insist that all must be Bodhisattva which is considered not practical. The decision is left to the individual whether to take the Path of the Sravaka or of the Pratyekabuddha or of the Samyaksambuddha. But it is always clearly explained that the state of a Samyaksambuddha is superior and that the other two are inferior. Yet they are not disregarded. *snip* A Thera named Maha-Tipitaka Culabhaya who wrote the Milinda-Tika (about the 12th Century AD.) in the Theravada tradition of the Mahavihara at Anuradhapura, says at the end of the book in the colophon that he aspires to become a Buddha: Buddho Bhaveyyam "May I become a Buddha," which means that this author is a Bodhisattva. We come across at the end of some palm leaf manuscripts of Buddhist texts in Sri Lanka the names of even a few copyists who have recorded their wish to become Buddhas, and they too are to be considered as Bodhisattvas. *snip* There are many Buddhists, both bhikkhus and laymen, in Sri Lanka, Myanmar, Thailand and Cambodia which are regarded as Theravada countries, who take the vow or resolution to become Buddhas to save others. They are indeed Bodhisattvas at different levels of development. Thus one may see that in Theravada countries all are not Sravakas. There are Bodhisattvas as well. ------------------------------------------------ > > Another topic of course is: are the author of 'The heart is knowing', > and his teachers right ? His expressions must be against Pali tipitaka, but I can not say his teachings never lead to Nibbana. > The essay starts with: "All Buddhas and all beings in the world are > nothing but the single citta. Outside this single citta nothing at > all exists. The single citta, free from the conventional self, is > something that was not made and is something, which cannot be > destroyed. It is not a thing with color, such as green or yellow and > has neither form nor appearance. It is not included in existing > things or non-existing things. One cannot have the view that it is > something new or old, longer short, large or small because it is > beyond all limitations, beyond all measuring, beyond labels, beyond > leaving a trace and beyond all comparisons. " (end quote) > > My first theravadin-abhidhammical answer when reading this, is: No, > this is atta-belief. > > My second and subjective answer is: No, I don't belief that such a > citta does exist. > > My third answer is: I still like this text, and it's a possibility > for fruitful (worldwide) discussion between Mahayanists and > Theravadins, somethingthing Connie in her initial message and I hope > to promote. So I should like to read a reaction from a > (buddhological) expert to it. I am not interested in dry buddhological views, but why dont we start with "Lokuttaracitta" ? Abhiddhama says there are 33 to 36 cetasikas in each of lokuttaracittas. The object of lokuttarcittas is Nibbana. How can the 36 to 38 cetasikas in each of lokuttaracittas be known as such ? (I gave this question to Sarah, but I have not receive her answer yet. ) From LK 43509 From: Evan Stamatopoulos Date: Mon Mar 21, 2005 6:29pm Subject: RE: [dsg] Rupa Madness: Seeing with the Tongue That's OK. I was just trying to set the story straight. And while I would agree with a Theravadin Buddhist monk that Buddhism is a science, I would not agree that western science and Buddhism are the same thing. The confusion occurs because their common ground seems large. I would most certainly not speculate whether science and Buddhism will one day "meet". Kind Regards, Evan -----Original Message----- From: TGrand458@a... [mailto:TGrand458@a...] <...> Hi Evan No disrespect intended for anyone and my comments were not directed toward you...in fact I don't think I read a post by you on this subject. But I have seen a lot of anti-science sentiment in Buddhist chat rooms and the like. I know several highly educated Sri Lankan Theravdin monks who consider Buddhism to be a science. <...> 43510 From: Evan Stamatopoulos Date: Mon Mar 21, 2005 7:15pm Subject: RE: [dsg] Rupa Madness: Seeing with the Tongue Matthew, Well, then, let's use a little year 12 calculus to prove that you do not exist even now. You said: "When the brain dies, "you" no longer exist". So you are only here in existence for this one lifetime. Let's say you fluke it in this lifetime and you live to be 100 years old (consider yourself lucky my friend). Now, let's pick a reasonable figure for the age of the universe of 10 billion years. That means you have lived 10^-8th of the age of the universe (this is hard to do in text only so bear with me). Now as the universe continues to age, of course "your" little portion of that will reduce. So we can conclude as the age of the universe tends to infinity, your life's portion of it tends to zero. i.e.: As ua -> oo, ma -> 0 Where: ua = age of the universe ma = age of Matthew oo = infinity So if we assume the age of the universe will tend to infinity, why not cut out all that waiting and say that you have already tended to zero. Ipso facto, you do not exist today. Well, quite aside from this light-hearted analysis, what is the purpose of existence if it is finite? What is the difference to anything if all ceases at the point of death? I am interested in your understanding of what existence is and what purpose it serves if any. Kind Regards, Evan -----Original Message----- From: Matthew Miller [mailto:bupleurum@y...] <...> Forgive me, my friend, but I don't recall asserting that science is "personal." However, as someone once said, "misunderstanding is one of the great engines of progress." So, since you brought it up, it occurs to me that one might argue that science is a human activity, carried out by people, so it will always be "personal." Even as it strives to be "objective," the initial motivation is always some personal goal. For example, while AIDS research is (in as sense) objective and impersonal, we wouldn't devote so much time to it if it didn't promise to relieve a great deal of suffering. Of course, there are sordid examples of science (the Nazis, Hiroshima) just as there are sordid examples of Buddhism, Christianity and anything else. We are, after all, only human. <....> 43511 From: Andrew Date: Mon Mar 21, 2005 8:40pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Rupa Madness: Seeing with the Tongue --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Matthew Miller" wrote: > > Andrew: > > can somebody tell me whether or not the Nazi > > medical experiments on Jewish concentration camp interns were > > science and, if so, how they were "involved in liberation > > from suffering"? > > Matthew: > Well, no, they weren't. But what is your point? Throughout history, > one can find extreme examples of the perversion of anything. Here's > an example of how Buddhism was perverted by the Nazi's allies, the > Japanese: Hi Matthew Yes, I have read about the persecution of Christians by Japanese Buddhists during nationalistic periods of their history. If pushed, I could write an essay analysing such "Buddhist" actions in Dhamma terms and concluding that those actions were not the Buddha's Middle Way. But you could write that essay too, so let's not waste time. However, if science is "learning or study concerned with demonstrable truths or observable phenomena, and characterised by the systematic application of scientific method" [dictionary], then I still need you to state why you contend that the Nazi scientists were not engaged in science. What part of science had they perverted, in your opinion? This seems to me to be the crux of the matter. You are suggesting that Dhamma is pseudo-science but also that science has some *inherent* ethical direction-finder (whether it is objective or subjective, I'm not yet clear). But I'd really like to hear more. Or have I misread you? Best wishes Andrew T 43512 From: Matthew Miller Date: Mon Mar 21, 2005 9:43pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Rupa Madness: Seeing with the Tongue Andrew: > > I need you to state why you contend that the Nazi scientists were > not engaged in science. What part of science had they perverted, > in your opinion? > This seems to me to be the crux of the matter. You are suggesting > that Dhamma is pseudo-science but also that science has some > *inherent* ethical direction-finder (whether it is objective or > subjective, I'm not yet clear). But I'd really like to hear more. > Or have I misread you? > Yes, I think you have misread me, but I probably wasn't very clear. Again, misunderstanding is par for the course on the internet. Let me summarize my position: -- Science is a human activity, like religion, and has been used for both good and ill. -- The Nazis used it for ill. -- The Nazis were not engaged in "liberation from suffering." -- I never said that *all* science is engaged in the liberation of suffering. In response to listers who described all scientific activity as "random" and "without direction" I pointed toward whole branches of science whose (human-given) purpose is the liberation of suffering (e.g. medicine). -- "Science" does not have an inherent ethical direction-finder. -- social primates (including humans) do (though they don't always follow it) Matthew 43513 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon Mar 21, 2005 11:01pm Subject: ‘Cetasikas' study corner 152 - Determination /adhimokkha & Energy/viriya (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.9 Determination(adhimokkha) & Energy(viriya) contd] Adhimokkha is not the same as what we usually mean by the words “determination” and “decision” in conventional language. In order to understand the characteristic of adhimokkha we should know which types of citta it accompanies. Since adhimokkha is one of the “particulars” it accompanies cittas of the four jåtis and thus it can be kusala, akusala, vipåka or kiriya. As we have seen, the “particulars” do not arise with every citta. Adhimokkha does not accompany the dvi-pañcaviññåùas (sense-cognitions) which are accompanied only by the “universals”, not by other types of cetasikas. Seeing-consciousness, for example, arises at the eye-base and sees visible object. It does not need, apart from the seven “universals”, adhimokkha or any other cetasika in order to see visible object. Adhimokkha does not arise either with the type of moha-múlacitta (citta rooted in ignorance) which is accompanied by doubt (vicikicchå). When there is doubt there cannot be at the same time the cetasika adhimokkha which “does not grope” and is “convinced” about the object. Adhimokkha accompanies all cittas other than the aforementioned cittas. It arises in the sense-door process as well as in the mind-door process. ***** [Ch.8 Determination(adhimokkha) & Energy(viriya))to be contd] Metta, Sarah ====== 43514 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon Mar 21, 2005 11:14pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Rupa Madness: Seeing with the Tongue Hi Matthew & All, Just joining in the fun a little. I appreciate your spirited defence of science vs abhidhamma. I wrote this post a couple of days ago (before reading most the discussions), but was interrupted and then forgot to send it. So it's probably redundant at this stage, having read some of the other excellent comments on the thread....:-) ***** I googled ’seeing, tongue, science’ and read two articles: 1) from Science News on-line ‘the seeing tongue’ 2) from BBC on-line ‘see with sound’. --- Matthew Miller wrote: > > I don't see how the abhidhamma, with its rigid categories of rupas, > vatthus, dvaras and so on, could possibly account for phenomena like > this. We need the careful, patient observation and experiment of > neuroscience to begin to understand the structure of consciousness. > Otherwise we're whistling in the dark and spinning fantasies. ... S: I think that either way we’re ‘whistling in the dark and spinning fantasies’. However, based on those ‘rigid categories’ of the abhidhamma, we have a chance of beginning to understand ‘the structure of consciousness’ and to see the spinning of fantasies for what it is....::-) Brief comments on the articles in no special order: a) It’s well-known that particular areas of the body such as the tongue are extremely sensitive to touch- many sensations (or rupas) are experienced through the body-sense here. This has been well-known in Chinese medicine for thousands of years. b) It’s also well-known that many healing techniques occur by stimulating the experience of sensations in quite a different part of the body, such as the foot or tongue as in acupressure points. c) It’s clear that touch receptors are being triggered and the stimulation is then perceived and interpreted.. As the second article makes clear, the ‘visual content of the live camera....is carried by the soundscapes, so that they experience something akin to meaningful vision’. It is not vision, it is an interpretation of the sounds in this case. For example, ‘brighter areas sound louder, height is indicated by pitch’ etc. A blind person learns to become even more sensitive to physical sensations and sounds (all rupas) than blind people usually do. d) How scientific is science? In the first study above, there were a total of 6 sighted but blindfolded subjects and 6 congenitally blind subjects only! What is congenitally blind? I’ve taught students who are supposedly congenitally blind or deaf, but this seldom means zero sounds or visible objects are experienced. From an abhidhamma point of view, blind from birth means something quite different and is far more precise. e) From the second article, “There’s plenty of evidence...that even those brain regions devoted almost exclusively to a certain sense actually receive a variety of sensory signals. ‘We showed many years ago that even in the specialized eye region, auditory and tactile signals also arrive’...” Again, modern science is just learning what has been obvious to Chinese medicine and was clearly understood by the Buddha. There’s no reason, therefore, why stimulation of the tongue might not assist eye-sight if it’s done with skill. f) Loss of balance- it’s common after injuries, such as a twisted ankle, to be given specific exercises such as standing on one leg with eyes closed to re-train parts of the body and so on. It doesn’t mean one is literally learning to see in different ways. Conclusion: 1. Just as we read in the Abhidhamma, seeing consciousness only occurs as a result of visible objects (rupas) impacting on the eye-sense. 2. Those with poor vision learn to use other sense door experiences to ‘compensate’, such as the hearing of sounds and experience of rupas through the body-sense. 3. What we call images, shapes, forms and so on are really the mind-door interpretations of these rupas, depending on perceptions (sanna) and other mental factors which follow very rapidly. 4.From your article:“When it comes to seeing via the sense of touch, reorganization may involve switching portions of the visual cortex to the processing of touch sensations” The Abhidhamma would say, rupas experienced through the body-sense are marked and interpreted according to previous experiences and these interpretations determine how we perceive/see the world. **** Matthew, my background is in psychology and until recently I kept up my memberships and publications of various psychology societies, so I still have a professional interest, but honestly, as soon as I came across the Abhidhamma, it answered all the questions that science never gave me. I think we also have to question the entire premises of scientific experimentation, such as in the field of memory acquisition which Howard recently referred to and which is based on acquisition in this life only and the very limited hypotheses such as acquisition occurring as a result of genetic or ‘environmental factors’. None of this means that these studies and the kind of scientific research you're referring to isn't of immense value. The second article above in particular points to great practical benefits from scientific advances. Look forward to more:-) Metta, Sarah p.s Also, pls look at some posts under ‘Science’ in Useful Posts and add any comments if inclined. Have you read DN26 -comments? =========== 43515 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Mar 22, 2005 0:21am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: New view on satipatthana 3 & a q Hi Andrew L, [on mindfulness, right view, doubts, practice.....) --- Andrew Levin wrote: > <...> >So this gets me thinking, > maybe wrong view of self is indeed a significant matter when it comes > to wrong view, moreso than I thought. This makes me think right view > is something more significant than I had thought. As I have told you > in the last post, I am reading Bhikkhu Bodhi's "The Noble Eightfold > Path <...> > Bhikku Bodhi suggests that through reflection and recognition of > certain principles such as that of a moral law of cause and effect, we > can come to possess right view. This sort of gets me because, while > it does seem that there is a 'view' to be had, it does say recognition > of the principal of karma can constitute part of right view. .... S: This reflection is only conceptual right view and this is why there are bound to be doubts and questions as you rightly point out. There can only be direct understanding of kamma when there is direct understanding of the conditioned nature of dhammas. This understanding can only arise and develop when we first directly understanding namas and rupas appearing now. It’s like the comments about knowing the impermanence of dhammas. It’s bound to be theoretical right understanding at best unless there is a clear understanding of namas and rupas appearing, one at a time and not mixed with an idea of self. .... >I have > to say I don't know how this can be the case because for all I know I > have accepted the theory of karma for long, if nothing else but on > faith, but I can't say it feels like it fits into what would comprise > Right View ... S: I think this is right – first we consider and reflect ‘on faith’ and then gradually as there’s more understanding of dhammas, the higher insights may develop. Knowing what is directly known and what is just ‘on faith’ as you do here is very important. Otherwise we over-estimate our knowledge. .... >(having known wrong view in my mind on one occasion and > possibly seeing a projection of it unto reality), ... S: I think that right understanding can begin to see more and more wrong view when it develops. It’s common and even the subtlest kinds have to be known. ... <...> Good points of yours snipped for now because I agreed with them. .... > So I guess I mean to ask, how can we work with right view, to create > it? Is there a specific model right view must follow, and if so, how > can we bring it to its perfection? Or is having our views > 'straightened out' to be generally in line with the dhamma good > enough, all considered? How do we know, if reflecting on, and/or > accepting certain ideas, if we have this 'unshakeable' right view? > Your thoughts? .... S: As you said, we can reflect on what is right, but when wisdom or right view is so weak and infrequent, we can engage in any unwholesome actions out of habit, peer pressure, circumstance and so on. Having our views ‘straightened out’, as we’re trying to help each other with here, is very important. Not over-estimating the development of satipatthana but beginning to see how very, very common ignorance and attachment are is important too. I can only say that I think the more understanding there is, even at a beginner level, of basic dhammas appearing now, such as seeing and visible object etc, the more confidence there is in the teachings about life existing in the present moment. Even if we're feeling agitated, depressed, run-down or sick, there may then be lots of ignorance but not so much doubt about the present dhammas appearing. So I think that wisely reflecting, hearing/reading about namas and rupas, seeing wrong views for what they are and questioning a lot as you’re doing, are conditions for ‘unshakeable right view’ to develop. Of course, it has a long way to go for us all before it’s really unshakeable. There may not be much doubt now, but we have no idea about the future or next life. .... <...> > Hmm.. guarding the sense doors as a cause of morality? I hadn't > thought of that, but now I guess I can try it out. In the past, I > have behaved with morality after reading how it is practised by those > gone forth, emulating the behavior described, with regard to speech, > keeping the precepts, and so forth (practising compassion for beings > is another feat in and of itself but I got most of it). ... S: (See ‘Guarding..’ in U.P. too) As soon as you say ‘I can try it out’, it again sounds like self rather than understanding. I believe that guarding of the sense doors is a function of the development of awareness and wisdom. If there is awareness of visible object or sound now as rupas experienced through the senses, the sense doors are guarded already. It’s true that we can ‘behave with morality’ by emulating good behaviour and this is good. However, again such behaviour will only become ‘unshakeable’ by the development of the understanding of the mental states involved. .... <...> big snip ... >Another example of this would be where the author states if > you're crossing a street, or for example answering a phone, you dont > keep your mindfulness or attention on the body, but focus on what are > you going to say, and the interaction. ... S: This is a common idea about mindfulness, but it’s not the same as the development of satipatthana as I understand it. Whatever your attention or focus is on, whether you’re concentrating on the interaction or multi-tasking (as I tend to do when I’m on the phone:-)), there are conditioned dhammas arising and passing away without any rule at all about which one will be the object of the javana cittas next and therefore which one may be the object of mindfulness. When we set rules, it’s self again. ... >At one point I have shifted > awareness to answering a phone call and there was a deep knowing of my > faculties at that point, what I was doing, and expecting to say or > hear. This is the type of mindfulness I have experienced. ... S: I understand what you’re saying , but again we need to differentiate between this conventional mindfulness and awareness of namas and rupas at any given moment. .... > I ask how mindfulness as you know it is 'mindful of' certain > realities, not just ones you study, but ones that appear prominent at > any given time. I can say that this is a type of mindfulness, too, > having seen realities come to the fore or become very apparent in and > of themselves on occasion. ... S: What ‘realities come to the fore or become very apparent’? We need to be very specific, I think. For example, when we talk about awareness of ‘what I was doing’, what appears at that moment? Is there an idea of what should appear or is there detachment from any reality appearing, whether it’s hardness, restlessness, irritation or any other dhamma? To be honest, I don’t see a need to do anything special at all in order for awareness to develop. We read and consider the truths and if it arises, it arises. If it doesn’t, it doesn’t. The only big obstacle is wrong view and trying to make mindfulness arise in any way is a result of wrong view as I see it. .... > And I don't know how to reconcile the two with each other or the term > sati. ... S: The only way is by ‘testing out’ and being aware of the present dhamma. For example, at the moment of wondering the above, there’s thinking and doubt. These can be known instantly. .... <...> > Sarah, these are nearly interchangeable. I have read Bhikkhu Bodhi > assert that mindfulness of posture illuminates the selfless nature of > the body as it is in different positions- so whether or not this is > the case, I could just as well be doing mindfulness of the four > elements in my practise. In fact, sooner or later, I will be. ... S: What is posture, body, positions in reality? How are they experienced? Through the eyes, ears, nose, tongue, body-sense or mind? What does it mean to ‘be doing mindfulness of the four elements’? .... > I have read a little from the U.P. Satipatthana section, but I still > think that the four foundations are to be practised sequentially, for > long periods of time. ... S: This is because of an idea of self that can control objects to arise or appear in order. ... >Sati conditions more sati, but can't sati be > cultivated? We can cultivate faith, to be honest I don't know if the > mindfulness I describe using is sati or whether it is something > different but mindfulness has the four foundations of mindfulness as > its proximate cause, right? ... S: 'Yes' to the two questions. What does it mean to have the ‘four foundations....as proximate cause’? As I understand, it means that any of the namas or rupas as contained in the four foundations is the proximate cause for satipatthana. Without a nama or rupa appearing, there could be no sati. .... <....> >And back to the gradual training, how is most of it done but > by 'doing' it? E.g. Contentment. One has to foster a sense of > contentment at the instructor's words. Even in some of the UP > Satipatthana 4 posts there is support for my notion of practise, as > the Buddha describes how mindfulness of breathing is of great fruit > when developed, and then goes on to give instructions for it. .... S: But it’s not self that follows a gradual training, develops contentment or satipatthana. ... > Heck, what about the Noble Eightfold Path? There's even a path factor > called Right Intention. It would be hard to truthfully dispute that > intentions need to be made on the path and practise has to be done. .... S: Samma-sankappa is not Right Intention. It is right vitakka (thinking/touching the object). Cetana (intention) is not a path factor. [See Thinking-right in U.P.]. Cetana (intention) arises with every citta. When the citta is kusala, so is cetana. ..... <...> > I don't think I've taken it to be 'my' metta. It is just > loving-kindness that can be given or applied to anyone. Metta and > compassion are a hard task. Here's hoping that they can be > successfully developed by us all. ... S: Nice:-) .... Andrew, I’ve snipped many of your comments. I read them all with great interest and appreciation and I look forward to more. I’ll be going away in a few days, so I’ll try to respond to your latest one I have, but may have to leave any further ones til my return. (The same applies to any posts from others that come in addressed to me from now on). Metta, Sarah ======= 43516 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Mar 22, 2005 1:08am Subject: Re: [dsg] Sarah2Re: Buddha Nature Hi LK, (Tep, Connie) Thanks for your efforts to clarify the ‘thitibhutam’. The article by A.Chah helped and made more sense, I think. (btw, Connie – for the record, in case you move on whilst we’re away, I remember A.Chah well for his good humour, very kind smiles and .....lots of laughter when we met:-)). .... --- lokuttaracitta wrote: > > S: I'm not familiar with this `thitibhutam?E Can anyone help me > with the > > Pali <...> > > S: Can you give me a sutta reference which uses this phrase or > helps me > > understand what he and you are talking about? ... <...> > "Clarity of insight by Ajahn Chah" > > http://www.abhayagiri.org/dhamma/clarity.pdf > > That means you must become your own witness, able to confirm the > results from within your own mind. <...> >Venerable Ajahn Mun referred this internal witness that exists > within the mind as thitibhutam. The authenticity of any knowledge > acquired simply from other people remains unsubstantiated, it is only > a truth proven to someone else .<...> .... S: I’m wondering if it is based on the Pali ‘Yathaa bhuuta’ (seeing things as they are)? Tep also referred to ‘bhutathata’ or’ the nature of ‘knowing’, literally ‘thusness’ or ‘suchness’ quoting BK. [More on yathaa bhuuta in U.P. under the pali if you’re interested]. ..... > >S: When no conditions arise at all?Emakes little sense to me. Even > lokuttara cittas > > are conditioned. > > But I do not think that "Object" of Lokuttaracittas is conditioned. .... S: No, I didn’t suggest this. However, unless there is a conditioned citta to experience nibbana, it’s not experienced. .... > By the way, could you please explain me how can 33 to 36 cetasikas in > lokuttaracittas be discerned ? .... S: By a Buddha’s wisdom:-). I believe the subsequent reviewing cittas ‘review’ the path, i.e the lokuttara cittas, but I imagine it will depend on accumulations as to exactly what appears, like with the reviewing of the defilements eradicated.. It may seem like it’s only thinking, but it’s not, it’s direct knowledge or insight into these characteristics. Do you have any further suggestions? Metta, Sarah p.s still hoping to get back on your luminous quote ====== 43517 From: lokuttaracitta Date: Tue Mar 22, 2005 2:30am Subject: [dsg] Sarah2Re: Buddha Nature Dear Sarah Thank you very much for your reply. I feel very lucky to get Abhiddhama lessons from experts like you !?I > > >S: When no conditions arise at allEmakes little sense to me. Even > > lokuttara cittas > > > are conditioned. > > > > But I do not think that "Object" of Lokuttaracittas is conditioned. > .... > S: No, I didn?ft suggest this. However, unless there is a conditioned citta > to experience nibbana, it?fs not experienced. > .... > > By the way, could you please explain me how can 33 to 36 cetasikas in > > lokuttaracittas be discerned ? > .... > S: By a Buddha?fs wisdom:-). I believe the subsequent reviewing cittas > ?ereview?f the path, i.e the lokuttara cittas, but I imagine it will depend > on accumulations as to exactly what appears, like with the reviewing of > the defilements eradicated.. It may seem like it?fs only thinking, but > it?fs not, it?fs direct knowledge or insight into these characteristics. Do > you have any further suggestions? According to Abhiddamma of Theravada, Lokuttaracittas can not directly know themselves as they really are because their object is "unconditioned nama" and Lokuttaracittas are conditioned nama. Lokuttacittas are known as such only by the "Subsequent" reviewing cittas which are conditioned. There can not be direct knowledge of lokuttaracittas. How can Theravadin exclude the possiblity that lokuttaracittas are unconditioned nama? Metta from LK 43518 From: Joop Date: Tue Mar 22, 2005 3:09am Subject: Re:Buddha Nature --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "lokuttaracitta" wrote: > > Dear Joop: > > >I'm glad to hear because till now I got the impression that > > (all) Theravadins are orthodox and not interested in any Mahayana- > > texts simply because Mahayana is wrong. > > Theravadins in Myanmar seem very orthodox. while those in Thai are > not and some of them seem to break bounds like "Dammakaya > Foundation ". Dear Lokuttaracitta Thanks for your answers and information. I have again stuff to study for some weeks. Still already some remarks. > > a possibility for fruitful > > (worldwide) discussion between Mahayanists and > > Theravadins, somethingthing Connie in her initial message and I > > hope to promote. So I should like to read a reaction from a > > (buddhological) expert to it. > I am not interested in dry buddhological views, Joop: That's a pity, because I am: the dryer, the more reliable. In the second place the reason I mentioned it here was to put the question: how can we have a language (a joint frame of reference) in which Mahayanists and Theravadins can discuss with each other ? > but why dont we start with "Lokuttaracitta" ? Joop: I doubt if this level is wise for me to start with, that is: to continue my path on this moment. Two questions: - Are the lokuttara cittas more than the 'lower' ones, special connected with Mahayana-thinking ? - Is lokuttaracitta special connected with what interests me most in Mahayana: emptiness ? > Abhiddhama says there are 33 to 36 cetasikas in each of lokuttaracittas. > The object of lokuttarcittas is Nibbana. > How can the 36 to 38 cetasikas in each of lokuttaracittas be known as such ? Joop: I real don't know Metta Joop 43519 From: kenhowardau Date: Tue Mar 22, 2005 4:21am Subject: [dsg] Re: Sila Visuddhi (purity of sila) Hi Sarah, -------------------------- S: > I'm not sure if you were agreeing or disagreeing with anything I said or what Suan was warning against, if you wish to elaborate on any of it --------------------------- I was agreeing with everything you said, although I had hoped the material you referred me to might explain how 'acceptance of training rules' can be described in paramattha terms. But it's not important. ------------------------------------------------------ KH: > > We have another weekend of Dhamma discussion at Cooran starting > tomorrow ... S: > Why not share a little more - what you used, discussed and concluded:-). Any dissension in the ranks or did they all tow 'your' party line this time??? ------------------------------------------------------- What we used: I used one of your posts on right understanding (41137). It was well received but I can't remember anything special from the discussion, so it might not have been the showstopper I hoped it would be. If it wasn't, it was because the delivery was lacking. Christine read out the Anatta-sutta (is that its correct name?). Steve said I shouldn't use it [any more than any other sutta] to validate the "no control" slogan. He pointed out that the lack of control described in that sutta was the inability to make the impermanent permanent, the painful pleasant and the non-self, self. We agreed, however, that the doctrine of anatta made "no control" a perfectly accurate thing to say in all other Dhamma contexts as well. Reg brought along a newspaper article by a Brisbane Buddhist. It was about . . . um, . . something to do with the Middle Way. I can't remember Andrew's contribution at all, but that doesn't mean there wasn't one. Steve brought a large bottle of orange juice for us to have with lunch. I'll bet you wish you had been there! :-) But, really, the weekend was much more deep and meaningful than it sounds. Oh yes, another thing we discussed was a discussion topic for our next meeting! It will be on Vesak Day and we think we should keep the eight precepts. We appointed Steve to collate material especially applicable to Vesak, which we will study in advance. Dissention: As usual, I was the most argumentative person there. Rightly or wrongly, I argued that the lack of personal verification - of rebirth or anything else - did not make any part of the Dhamma less valid than others (as I was saying to Charles today). There were no more toes on the line than usual. ---------------- S: > You could compile a book of signature lines for people to select from:-) ---------------- I'm glad you think some of my remarks come out well, but if I had to intentionally think of something pithy - like I'm trying to do now, for example - I couldn't. :-) Ken H 43520 From: Matthew Miller Date: Tue Mar 22, 2005 4:48am Subject: Re: [dsg] Rupa Madness: Seeing with the Tongue Hello Sarah & All, Sarah, welcome to the party and thank you for your thoughtful reply. > S: I think that either way we're `whistling in the dark and spinning > fantasies'. However, based on those `rigid categories' of the > abhidhamma, we have a chance of beginning to understand `the > structure of consciousness' and to see the spinning of fantasies > for what it is. From a scientific point of view, abhidhamma is based on 1) scriptural authority, and/or 2) personal observation of one's own consciousness (introspection). While useful, these are actually the two poorest forms of evidence. The difficulties with scriptural authority should be obvious, so I'll focus on introspection. At best, introspection is one tool among many for learning about the mind. But it is not without its flaws. Some have held that introspective access to one's mental states cannot be erroneous or, at least, that it overrides all other evidence. Descartes is famous for this. The Abhidhamma seems to fall in this camp as well, with its insistence that nama/rupa arising in consciousness are "ultimate realities." But introspection can be very erroneous. Psychological research has found that, in introspection, we often misrepresent our own mental states. Many introspective judgments result from confabulation. People literally invent mental states to explain their own behavior in ways that are expected or acceptable. Daniel Dennett and others have argued that all introspective reports can be treated as reports of useful fictions. Introspection not only misrepresents our mental states, but also fails to reveal many concurrent states, both in ordinary and exotic situations (an illuminating example is "blindsight" which I will describe below). And it is likely that introspection seldom if ever reveals all the mental properties of target states. Many, moreover, would endorse Ashley's (1958) dictum that introspection never makes mental processes accessible, only their results. Blindsight is a well-documented phenomenon in which a blind person can accurately point to an object. In the time of the Buddha, this would certainly have been taken as a example of ESP or mystical power. Here is how neuroscience has been able to explain this... *** "The message from the eyeball on the retina goes though the optic nerve and goes to two major visual centers in the brain. One of these I'll call it the old system, the old visual centre, it's the evolutionary ancient centre, the old pathway that's in the brain stem and it's called the superior colliculus. The second pathway goes to the cortex, the visual cortex in the back of the brain and it's called the new pathway. The new pathway in the cortex is doing most of what we usually think of as vision, like recognizing objects, consciously. The old pathway, on the other hand, is involved in locating objects in the visual field, so that you can orient to it, swivel your eyeballs towards it, rotate your head towards it. Thereby directing your high acuity central foveal region of the retina towards the object so then you an deploy the new visual pathway and then proceed to identify what the object is and then generate the appropriate behaviour for that object. Let me now tell you now about an extraordinary neurological syndrome called Blindsight discovered by Larry Weiscrantz and Alan Cowey at Oxford. It's been known for more than a century that if the visual cortex which is part of the new visual pathway, if that's damaged you become blind. For example if the right visual cortex is damaged you're completely blind on the left side if you look straight everything to the left side of your nose, you're completely blind to. When examining a patient named GY who had this type of visual deficit, one half of the visual field completely missing, where he was blind, Weizcrantz noticed something really strange. He showed the patient a little spot of light in the Blind region. Weiscrantz asked him "what do you see"? The patient said "nothing" and that's what you would expect given that he was blind but now he told the patient "I know you can't see it but please reach out and touch it" The patient said well that's very strange - he must have thought this is a very eccentric request. I mean, point to this thing which he can't see. So the patient said, you know I can't, I can't see it how can I point to it? Weiscrantz said well just try anyway, take a guess. The patient then reaches out to touch the object and imagine the researcher's surprise when the patient reaches out and points to it accurately, points to the dot that he cannot consciously perceive. After hundreds of trials it became obvious that he could point accurately on 99% of trials even though he claimed on each trial that he was just guessing. He said he didn't know if he was getting it right or not. From his point of view it might as well have been an experiment on ESP. The staggering implication of this is that the patient was accurately able to point to an object that he denied being able to see. How is this possible? How do you explain his ability to infer the location of an invisible object and point to it accurately? The answer is obvious. As I said GY has damage to his visual cortex - the new pathway - which is why he is blind. But remember he still has the other old pathway, the other pathway going through his brain stem and superior colliculus as a back-up. So even though the message from the eyes and optic nerves doesn't reach the visual cortex, given that the visual cortex is damaged, they take the parallel route to the superior colliculus which allows him to locate the object in space and the message then gets relayed to higher brain centres in the parietal lobes that guide the hand movement accurately to point to the invisible object! It's as if even though GY the person, the human being is oblivious to what's going on, there's another unconscious zombie trapped in him who can guide the hand movement with uncanny accuracy." -- V.S. Ramachandran, "Synapses and the Self" Matthew 43521 From: rjkjp1 Date: Tue Mar 22, 2005 4:54am Subject: [dsg] Sarah2Re: Buddha Nature --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "lokuttaracitta" wrote: > > > > Lokuttacittas are known as such only by the "Subsequent" reviewing > cittas which are conditioned. > There can not be direct knowledge of lokuttaracittas. > > How can Theravadin exclude the possiblity that lokuttaracittas are > unconditioned nama? > >========== Dear LK, On the point about direct experience. It has subtle meanings. For example the Paramatthamanjusa (see note 7 VII Visuddhimagga) talks about the Buddhas knowledge of past and future "and the Buddha's knowledge that has past and future as its objective field is entirely actual experience since it is devoid of assumption based on inference, tradition or conjecture" Robertk 43522 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Mar 22, 2005 6:58am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Dhammasangani translation, Howard. Hi Howard, op 21-03-2005 20:26 schreef upasaka@a... op upasaka@a...: > Howard: > Yes, I would very much like to see some of it. The current PTS > translation I sure do hope ;-) is a very poor one! N: I find, for example, the way the word 'representative' is used not clear. A new translation may not completely help you, that is why you say that you hope... We also need the commentary, the Expositor. I have the Pali text and that helps. If you have certain phrases you want clarified you are always welcome. Nina. 43523 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Mar 22, 2005 7:07am Subject: Re: [dsg] Dhamma weekend Cooran Hi Ken H, Andrew T, Christine, How was your Cooran weekend? Looking forward to hearing about it, Nina. 43524 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Mar 22, 2005 7:16am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Cooran. Hi Ken H, Thank you, I just got your post. What a good idea to read a sutta and then discuss it. I like no control for anatta, but no control can also be misunderstood. People may think that no kusala can be developed. But recently Sarah wrote a post I read to Lodewijk in the restaurant, where she explained very clearly about the Middle Way. Nina. op 22-03-2005 13:21 schreef kenhowardau op kenhowardau@y... > > Christine read out the Anatta-sutta ... 43525 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Mar 22, 2005 7:32am Subject: Re: [dsg]Lokuttara cittas Dear LK, op 22-03-2005 11:30 schreef lokuttaracitta op lokuttaracitta@y...: > According to Abhiddamma of Theravada, > > Lokuttaracittas can not directly know themselves as they really are > because their object is "unconditioned nama" and Lokuttaracittas are > conditioned nama. > > Lokuttacittas are known as such only by the "Subsequent" reviewing > cittas which are conditioned. > There can not be direct knowledge of lokuttaracittas. > > How can Theravadin exclude the possiblity that lokuttaracittas are > unconditioned nama? N: You just said rightly: Lokuttaracittas are conditioned nama. This is correct, all cittas arise because of conditions. Only nibbaana is unconditioned, it does not arise and fall away. Lokuttara cittas arise because there are the appropriate conditions for their arising, because paññaa has been developed to that degree, and then they fall away immediately. They arise and fall away and are thus conditioned dhammas, like all other cittas. You write: There can not be direct knowledge of lokuttaracittas. No citta can know itself, but shortly after it has fallen away paññaa can have direct understanding of its characteristic. There can be direct understanding of a dhamma even though it has just fallen away. Processes occur extremely fast one after the other. Nina. > 43526 From: Date: Tue Mar 22, 2005 2:41am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Dhammasangani translation, Howard. Hi, Nina - In a message dated 3/22/05 10:06:00 AM Eastern Standard Time, vangorko@x... writes: > N: I find, for example, the way the word 'representative' is used not > clear. > A new translation may not completely help you, that is why you say that you > hope... We also need the commentary, the Expositor. > I have the Pali text and that helps. If you have certain phrases you want > clarified you are always welcome. > ==================== Thanks. :-) Someday I'll get hold of a good translation plus the commentary. That is what I think I need. 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) 43527 From: Matthew Miller Date: Tue Mar 22, 2005 7:55am Subject: Re: Rupa Madness: Seeing with the Tongue Evan wrote: > what is the > purpose of existence if it is finite? Why would something have to be infinite to serve a purpose? For example, everywhere in nature we see that finite individuals pass their genes onto their offspring, raise them to adulthood, then die to make room for the next generation. All life on earth exhibits this purpose: the continuity of life. Matthew 43528 From: Date: Tue Mar 22, 2005 6:12am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Rupa Madness: Seeing with the Tongue Hi, Matthew (and Evan) - In a message dated 3/22/05 11:04:22 AM Eastern Standard Time, bupleurum@y... writes: > Evan wrote: > >what is the > >purpose of existence if it is finite? > > Why would something have to be infinite to serve a purpose? > > For example, everywhere in nature we see that finite individuals pass > their genes onto their offspring, raise them to adulthood, then die to > make room for the next generation. All life on earth exhibits this > purpose: the continuity of life. > > Matthew > ==================== Just out of curiosity, Matthew, why do you refer to passing on genes to offspring, raising the offspring to adulthood, and then dying to make room for the next generation i.e., "the continuity of life," as "purpose" in some cosmic sense? Also, why is such a circumstance as genes and their passing on any more *significant* than any other random alternative circumstance such as there being no such thing as genes at all, or, for that matter, there being no world at all in any sense? Finiteness and infinity aside, the bottom line in my mind is that the whole business of "purpose" presupposes sentience and intention, and if sentience and intention are not fundamental to "the world" in some manner, whether in terms of primacy of consciousness and kamma - the Buddhist "take", or in theistic terms, then purpose in the grand sense goes right out the window and becomes merely empty terminology. 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) 43529 From: Joop Date: Tue Mar 22, 2005 11:45am Subject: Re: [dsg] Having no opinions --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Charles DaCosta" wrote: > > Joop, > > I have no clue as to what you mean by: "I think that's too easy said, Jon When an opinion is not 'kept' by rupa; is it then kept by nama? I don't think so. An opinion is a concept, kept in somebody's brains. That in rupa, in > living rupa, feed by oxygen in the blood, but still rupa. " > > Can you start out by explaining what you mean by rupa and nama? Hi Charles No. Because my remark was a mixture of joke and seriousness And because it deviates us more from the topic of the thread: having no opinions Joop 43530 From: Matthew Miller Date: Tue Mar 22, 2005 0:07pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Rupa Madness: Seeing with the Tongue Howard: > Just out of curiosity, Matthew, why do you refer to passing on genes > to offspring, raising the offspring to adulthood, and then dying to > make room for the next generation i.e., "the continuity of life," > as "purpose" in some cosmic sense? I didn't intend to refer to the rearing of young as a purpose in some "cosmic sense." My intention was only to give an example, in response to Evan's post, of a finite individual serving a purpose. Perhaps I should have used "function" or some other word that does not imply a "cosmic sense." We see the convergence of form and function everywhere in biology, including our own bodies and brains. But I don't think that implies that there is some Grand Providential Design to the universe. See Richard Dawkins's book "The Blind Watchmaker: Why the Evidence of Evolution Reveals a Universe Without Design": http://tinyurl.com/55c2f Personally, I do not see any Cosmic Purpose to existence. God is an improbable proposition. I certainly find no evidence that human intelligence has any kind of privileged position in the cosmos. Nor do I see karma as anything more than a post hoc explanation of events which has no supporting evidence and is plagued by serious philosophical and practical problems. > then purpose in the grand sense goes right out the window and > becomes merely empty terminology. Yes, it does. Matthew 43531 From: Date: Tue Mar 22, 2005 8:07am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Rupa Madness: Seeing with the Tongue Hi, Matthew - In a message dated 3/22/05 3:20:49 PM Eastern Standard Time, bupleurum@y... writes: > > Howard: > >Just out of curiosity, Matthew, why do you refer to passing on genes > >to offspring, raising the offspring to adulthood, and then dying to > >make room for the next generation i.e., "the continuity of life," > >as "purpose" in some cosmic sense? > > I didn't intend to refer to the rearing of young as a purpose in some > "cosmic sense." My intention was only to give an example, in response > to Evan's post, of a finite individual serving a purpose. Perhaps I > should have used "function" or some other word that does not imply a > "cosmic sense." > > We see the convergence of form and function everywhere in biology, > including our own bodies and brains. But I don't think that implies > that there is some Grand Providential Design to the universe. See > Richard Dawkins's book "The Blind Watchmaker: Why the Evidence of > Evolution Reveals a Universe Without Design": > > http://tinyurl.com/55c2f > > Personally, I do not see any Cosmic Purpose to existence. God is an > improbable proposition. I certainly find no evidence that human > intelligence has any kind of privileged position in the cosmos. Nor > do I see karma as anything more than a post hoc explanation of events > which has no supporting evidence and is plagued by serious > philosophical and practical problems. > > >then purpose in the grand sense goes right out the window and > >becomes merely empty terminology. > > Yes, it does. > > Matthew > ======================== Thank you very much for your reply, Matthew. So, if I may ask, how do you see yourself? As a scientologist (lower-case 's') and also as a Buddhist? And from your materialist-scientist perspective (please correct me if I am mischaracterizing), what do you see as of value in the Dhamma, and why? I know a good number of materialist Buddhists [If some people consider themselves such, I accept that], but I've never had a clear picture of how fundamentally their Buddhism differs from the Dhamma as taught by the Buddha, though I have no question that it must differ significantly. At times, when in a persnickety mood, I wonder (usually not out loud) whether their Buddhism comes down to a "deep sounding" alternative to such self-help practices as chi gung, Rolfing, and regular running, but then I chasten myself and cut out such nasty thinking! ;-)) 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) 43532 From: sunnaloka Date: Tue Mar 22, 2005 1:08pm Subject: Re: jhana & Abhidhamma Pitaka Hi all, Is there any specific mention of the learning sign and counterpart sign in the seven books of the Abhidhamma Pitaka? (I don't have access to these texts.) Any help with this matter will be greatly appreciated. Geoff 43533 From: lokuttaracitta Date: Tue Mar 22, 2005 6:44pm Subject: [dsg] Sarah2Re: Buddha Nature --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "rjkjp1" wrote: > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "lokuttaracitta" > wrote: > > > > > > > Lokuttacittas are known as such only by the "Subsequent" > reviewing > > cittas which are conditioned. > > There can not be direct knowledge of lokuttaracittas. > > > > How can Theravadin exclude the possiblity that lokuttaracittas are > > unconditioned nama? > > > >========== > Dear LK, > On the point about direct experience. It has subtle meanings. > For example the Paramatthamanjusa (see note 7 VII Visuddhimagga) > talks about the Buddhas knowledge of past and future > "and the Buddha's knowledge that has past and future as its > objective field is entirely actual experience since it is devoid of > assumption based on inference, tradition or conjecture" > Robertk Dear RK Thank you for your instruction. I found a famous passage in the note . "The objective field of Enlightened Ones is unthinkable, it cannot be thought out; anyone who tried to think it out would reap madness and frustration"(A.ii,80) I do not like to reap them, but let me try ! Question ; As an orthodox theravadin, 1)Is it appropriate to say,"For the Buddhas, every nama and rupa and pannatti(concepts)of every sacred one and worldly being in the past and the present and the future can exist timelessly." 2)Can you say " Wisdom in lokuttaracittas of Sotapana or Sakadagami without any abhinna have entirely actual experience that has past and future as its objective field since it is devoid of assumption based on inference, tradition or conjecture" Metta from LK 43534 From: Evan Stamatopoulos Date: Tue Mar 22, 2005 2:32pm Subject: RE: [dsg] Re: Rupa Madness: Seeing with the Tongue Matthew: What is the point of passing genes onto offspring, raising them to adulthood and dying. Not to mention all the in between stuff like: getting sick, getting old, working, getting married, having children, paying off a mortgage, etc. Surely death negates all of this? Evan Matthew wrote: Why would something have to be infinite to serve a purpose? For example, everywhere in nature we see that finite individuals pass their genes onto their offspring, raise them to adulthood, then die to make room for the next generation. All life on earth exhibits this purpose: the continuity of life. Matthew 43535 From: lokuttaracitta Date: Tue Mar 22, 2005 7:27pm Subject: Re: [dsg]Lokuttara cittas Dear Nina Thank you for your clarification. I just like to know what is the truth in Theravadin. > > According to Abhiddamma of Theravada, > > > > Lokuttaracittas can not directly know themselves as they really are > > because their object is "unconditioned nama" and Lokuttaracittas are > > conditioned nama. > > > > Lokuttacittas are known as such only by the "Subsequent" reviewing > > cittas which are conditioned. > > There can not be direct knowledge of lokuttaracittas. > > > > How can Theravadin exclude the possiblity that lokuttaracittas are > > unconditioned nama? > N: You just said rightly: Lokuttaracittas are conditioned nama. This is > correct, all cittas arise because of conditions. Only nibbaana is > unconditioned, it does not arise and fall away. > Lokuttara cittas arise because there are the appropriate conditions for > their arising, because paññaa has been developed to that degree, and then > they fall away immediately.They arise and fall away and are thus > conditioned dhammas, like all other cittas. Can you say, " Nibbana arises in us because of conditions such as the arising of the change-of-lineage or vodana(cleansing) citta " Or "Nibbana arises in us because there are the appropriate conditions for its arising, because paññaa has been developed to the degrees of the change-of-lineage or vodana citta or lokuttaracittas , and then it falls away immediately " And "It(Nibbana) arises and falls away in us, but is Unconditioned Dhamma.In likewise ,Lokuttaracittas are unconditioned " > You write: There can not be direct knowledge of lokuttaracittas. No citta > can know itself, but shortly after it has fallen away paññaa can have direct > understanding of its characteristic. There can be direct understanding of a > dhamma even though it has just fallen away. Processes occur extremely fast > one after the other. Are you saying that paññaa in a certain citta can never know the other cetasikas in the same citta ? metta from LK 43536 From: Matthew Miller Date: Tue Mar 22, 2005 7:40pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Rupa Madness: Seeing with the Tongue > What is the point of passing genes onto offspring, raising them to > adulthood and dying. Not to mention all the in between stuff like: > getting sick, getting old, working, getting married, > having children, paying off a mortgage, etc. > Surely death negates all of this? > > Evan > Please read my previous post in this thread, in response to Howard asking basically the same question. Matthew 43537 From: Evan Stamatopoulos Date: Tue Mar 22, 2005 8:10pm Subject: RE: [dsg] Re: Rupa Madness: Seeing with the Tongue Matthew, OK, so why do you bother living or doing anything at all? If there is no purpose to anything then stop. Regards, Evan Matthew wrote: Personally, I do not see any Cosmic Purpose to existence. God is an improbable proposition. I certainly find no evidence that human intelligence has any kind of privileged position in the cosmos. Nor do I see karma as anything more than a post hoc explanation of events which has no supporting evidence and is plagued by serious philosophical and practical problems. > then purpose in the grand sense goes right out the window and > becomes merely empty terminology. Yes, it does. Matthew 43538 From: rjkjp1 Date: Tue Mar 22, 2005 8:14pm Subject: [dsg] Sarah2Re: Buddha Nature --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "lokuttaracitta" wrote: > > > As an orthodox theravadin, > > 1)Is it appropriate to say,"For the Buddhas, every nama and rupa and > pannatti(concepts)of every sacred one and worldly being in the past > and the present and the future can exist timelessly." ===========] Dear LC, No that would be incorrect. All namas and rupas are incredibly temporary, they barely last at all. ============== > > > 2)Can you say " Wisdom in lokuttaracittas of Sotapana or Sakadagami > without any abhinna have entirely actual experience that has past and > future as its objective field since it is devoid of assumption based > on inference, tradition or conjecture" ===========-- Sotapanna and sakadagami without abhinna do not directly know the future. But they do know directly the immediately past cittas when reviewing knowledge of change of lineage occurs: as Nina said 'No citta can know itself, but shortly after it has fallen away paññaa can have direct understanding of its characteristic. There can be direct understanding of a dhamma even though it has just fallen away' RobertK > > > Metta > > from LK 43539 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Mar 22, 2005 9:59pm Subject: ‘Cetasikas' study corner 153 - Determination /adhimokkha & Energy/viriya (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.9 Determination(adhimokkha) & Energy(viriya) contd] Adhimokkha is one among the cetasikas which assist citta in cognizing its object. Adhimokkha also accompanies the cittas which do not arise in a process: the paìisandhi-citta, the bhavanga-citta and the cuti-citta. It is “convinced” about the object these cittas experience. When we hear the word “decision” or “determination”, we usually associate this word with a decision we have to consider carefully. We may not have expected adhimokkha to arise in a sense-door process, but, as we have seen, it arises in sense-door processes as well as in mind-door processes and it assists the citta in cognizing the object. ***** [Ch.8 Determination(adhimokkha) & Energy(viriya))to be contd] Metta, Sarah ====== 43540 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Mar 23, 2005 2:11am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: jhana & Abhidhamma Pitaka Hi Geoff, op 22-03-2005 22:08 schreef sunnaloka op sunnaloka@y...: > Is there any specific mention of the learning sign and counterpart > sign in the seven books of the Abhidhamma Pitaka? (I don't have > access to these texts.) Any help with this matter will be greatly > appreciated. N: The Visuddhimagga Ch IV, 24 etc. gives all the details. These are not given in the Book of Analysis, although this Book of the Abh. Ch 12 gives many details about the different stages of jhana. My eye just fell on an interesting passage: Interrogation, The Triplets: Also jhaanas can be objects of attachment. Are you in particular interested at the learning sign and counterpart sign? Nina. 43541 From: sarah abbott Date: Wed Mar 23, 2005 3:22am Subject: Re: [dsg] Sarah2Re: Buddha Nature Warning: long, technical and full of Pali, Abhidhamma and commentary detail:-/ Dear LK, (Nina, Suan, Connie and all ‘luminous’ followers still reading), We were discussing the meaning of 'luminous mind' or luminous cittas and you gave me an extract from Pa auk Sayadaw's explanations (below) whch I find very interesting and helpful. I'm most grateful - I believe that its pointing to the rupas conditioned by cittas accompanied by panna (wisdom) is significant and now I'm reading the AN verses on ‘luminous’ with this in mind. It also stresses, I believe, why akusala cittas which (like all cittas) are pandara (clear), but can never be pabhassaram (luminous) if the latter term is really referring to the rupas conditioned by ‘pure’ cittas. To re-cap a little:from the sutta, AN 1, 51-52, Nina’s translation of the to the suttas can be found here in full: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/10268 The first one starts: >49. navame pabhassaranti pa.n.dara.m parisuddha.m. cittanti bhava"ngacitta.m. ki.m pana cittassa va.n.no naama atthiiti? natthi. >N: As to the ninth,² luminous². Luminous is clear, pure. citta is the life-continuum. But how does there exist indeed a colour of citta? No, it does not. >niilaadiina~nhi a~n~natarava.n.na.m vaa hotu ava.n.na.m vaa ya.mki~nci parisuddhataaya ``pabhassara''nti vuccati. >N: For anything which may be a certain colour, beginning with blue, or without colour, is called luminous because of its purity.< ***** S: Suan added his extremely helpful translation of the sub-commentary passages to both: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/10785: Here is the Pali and translation of the first part where in fact it’s made clear that the radiance or luminosity refers to the colour (vanna)only, as I understand. ***** >49. Navame pabhassaranti pariyodaatam sabhaavaparisuddhatthena. Tenaaha– "pandaram parisuddhan"ti. Pabhassarataadayo naama vannadhaatuyam labbhanakavisesaati aaha– "kim pana cittassa vanno naama atthii"ti? Itaro aruupataaya "natthii"ti patikkhipitvaa pariyaayakathaa ayam taadisassa cittassa parisuddhabhaavanaadiipanaayaati dassento "niilaadiinan"ti-aadimaaha. SUBCOMMENTARY TRANSLATION >Suan: "49. In the ninth statement, the expression `radiant' means complete purity due to natural complete cleanness. That is why the commentator said "pure, completely clean." Because the qualities like radiance are attributes available in the color element, the commentator posed the question "How could there be such a thing as the color of the mind?" Having negated that question as "No" due to the mind's immateriality, and showing the other argument for explaining complete cleansing of such a mind, the commentator made the statement beginning with "any color such as brown"....."< ***** S: I could easily add more and start discussing the thorny points about the bhavanga cittas, but I want to get to LK’s post which just concerns the reference of luminosity to the rupas conditioned by the cittas:-) .... LK:> You might get some sense from Pa auk sadadaw's explainations on what the light of wisdom is. > >http://www.btinternet.com/~maunglwin/nibbanacom/l_of_w01.htm#lightofwisdom > > *excerpt* > > ******************* > "But as to "light of wisdom", the questions arise: "Is there light in wisdom?", "Is there light in mental factors (Nama dhamma)?" This is explained in the subcommentary to Visuddhimagga, page 428, paragraph 733: Vipassanobhaso ti vipassana citta samuithitam, sasantatipatitam utu samutthananca bhasuram Rupam - What is the light of Vipassana insight? Two types of causes are mentioned. This bright light is caused by Vipassana Citta (mind) and also by the Tejo dhatu >called utu which occur in one's own continuity process of Rupa. ...." ..... S: I checked the reference which can be found in the Vism, XX, 107 (Nanamoli transl), under 'The Ten Imperfections of Insight' (Vipassanupakkilesaa). It starts off: "Herein, illumination is illumination due to insight(Tattha obhaasoti vipassanobhaaso)". And just as Pa auk Sayadaw clearly explains in the excellent note LK gave(and which continues below), the sub-commentary adds the following detail: >' "Illumination due to insight" is the luminous materiality originated by insight consciousness, and that originated by temperature belonging to his own continuity. Of these, that originated by insight consciousness is bright and is found only in the meditator's body. The other kind is independent of his body and spreads all round over what is capable of being experienced by knowledge. It becomes manifest to him too, and he sees anything material in the place touched by it' (Pm 816)'.< **** S: The reason the main text is under the Imperfections of Insight is because at this stage it is easy it seems to imagine that nibbana has been realized, insight is interrupted as 'the meditator' enjoys the 'illumination'. We read that the 'illumination arises in one bhikkhu illuinating only as much as the seat he is sitting on...........But in the Blessed One it arose illuminating the ten-thousandfold world-element". The imperfections (upakilesa) are particularly likely to arise in one who 'has acquired serenity and insight. Because the defilements suppressed by the attainments do not manifest themselves.' Examples are given. .... S:I think the following explanations the Sayadaw gave are particularly interesting and seem logical to me (as far as I follow), so I'll repeat them after signing off. Of course, many questions are left unanswered here concerning a)the AN suttas with the references in the commentaries to the bhavanga cittas and b)the connection between the passage in the Vism and the AN suttas, but I'm sure we'll continue to return to them:-). LK, I haven't checked the link you gave yet, as you already gave me a lot to work on, but pls share any further short extracts, though I won't be able to follow up for a while. Comments most welcome from anyone meantime. Metta, Sarah ======= Pa auk sadadaw’s further comments as quoted by LK: >”This explanation can be easily understood by the meditator who is meditating at the Rupa kammatthana stage: 1) For any person, any living beings who are composed of Nama and Rupa, every mind that arises dependent on hadaya vatthu (heart base) has the ability to produce Cittaja Rupa (matter cause by mind). These Cittaja Rupa arise as Cittaja Kalapa in the whole life. If one of these Kalapa is analysed, there are 8 kinds of Rupa factors: Pathavi, Apo, Tejo, Vayo, Vanna, Gandha, Rasa and Oja (Earth, water, fire, wind, colour, smell, taste and nutritive essence). The colour of it is called Vanna dhatu. Every Samatha Bhavana Citta (mind) and Vipassana Bhavana Citta (mind) can produce Cittaja Rupa. So, in this case the Vipassana Bhavana Citta can produce Cittaja Rupa. Every Kalapa of Cittaja Rupa has the Ruparammana called Vanna dhatu. This Ruparammana is 'Bhasuram Rupam', a brilliantly bright Rupa. 2) Also if discerned further, every Cittaja Kalapa has the 4 element: Pathavi, Apo, Tejo, Vayo. In these 4 elements, the Tejo dhatu is called utu. This Tejo dhatu called utu can produce new generations of Kalapa. Depending on how powerful the Samatha Bhavana Citta and Vipassana Bhavana Citta are, this production of new generations of Kalapa by Tejo datu has the ability to spread out, externally (bahiddha) from internal (ajjhata). If analysed, every Kalapa produced by Tejo dhatu has 8 kinds of Rupa factors: Pathavi, Apo, Tejo, Vayo, Vanna, Gandha, Rasa and Oja. Every Utuja Rupa Kalapa has the Ruparammana called Vanna dhatu. This Ruparammana is 'Bhasuram Rupam', a brilliantly bright Rupa. This explanation shows that both - 1) the brightness of the Vanna dhatu of every Cittaja Rupa Kalapa caused by the Vipassana Citta and 2) the brightness of the Vanna dhatu of every Kalapa caused by the Tejo dhatu called utu which is present in the Cittaja Rupa Kalapa - are called Vipassanobhasa, the light of Vipassana nana. The explanation above is similar for the light that appears in Samatha Bhavana Citta. So, is this really the light of Vipassana nana? No, it is not. It is used in the Text as a metaphor only. Instead of saying that the effect (Rupa) has light which is caused by nana (insight), it is said that the cause in itself has light as a metaphor. It is actually the name of the Vanna dhatu, Ruparammana present in Cittaja Rupa and Utuja Rupa”<. ======================================================= 43542 From: sarah abbott Date: Wed Mar 23, 2005 3:40am Subject: Re: [dsg] Sarah2Re: Buddha Nature Hi LK, I'm glad to see Nina and Rob K are discussing your qus here and I'll look forward to reading your further discussions with them. let me just stress (and show I can be brief:-): --- lokuttaracitta wrote: > > According to Abhiddamma of Theravada, > > Lokuttaracittas can not directly know themselves as they really are > because their object is "unconditioned nama" and Lokuttaracittas are > conditioned nama. ... S: No cittas can know themselves, regardless of the object. .... > Lokuttacittas are known as such only by the "Subsequent" reviewing > cittas which are conditioned. ... S: Any cittas or cetasikas can only be known by subsequent or immediately following cittas which are conditioned. It's like a photocopy or replica of the characteristic which is directly known. Of course, in the case of the reviewing cittas, we're talking about a high level of wisdom following the lokuttara cittas, but the principle is the same. ... > There can not be direct knowledge of lokuttaracittas. ... S: I believe there can. (see 'navattabbarammana' in U.P. perhaps, also 'reviewing') ... > How can Theravadin exclude the possiblity that lokuttaracittas are > unconditioned nama? .. S: Because nibbana is the only dhamma (reality) given as being unconditioned (asankhata), not subject to rise and fall. LK, look forward to chatting more after our trip probably. Thanks again for your contributions. Metta, Sarah ======== 43543 From: Matthew Miller Date: Wed Mar 23, 2005 3:45am Subject: [dsg] Re: Rupa Madness: Seeing with the Tongue Evan: > > OK, so why do you bother living or doing anything at all? > If there is no purpose to anything then stop. > Umm... why does something have to have a purpose to be valuable? Can't it just be valuable in itself? Evan, since you enjoy math, you can see that this would lead to an infinite regress. If the purpose of X is Y... then what is the purpose of Y? Z? And the purpose of Z? And so on... Let X=X. Matthew 43544 From: connie Date: Wed Mar 23, 2005 5:48am Subject: Re: Rupa Madness: Seeing with the Tongue Hi, Evan, Matthew, > If there is no purpose to anything then stop. Exactly so. "The stopping of grasping is from the stopping of craving; the stopping of becoming is from the stopping of grasping; the stopping of birth is from the stopping of becoming; With the stopping of birth then grief, suffering, sorrow, despair and lamentation are stopped. Thus comes to be the stopping of this entire mass of ill." (M.i,337;S.ii,1-3) peace, connie 43545 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Mar 23, 2005 7:55am Subject: Re: [dsg]Lokuttara cittas Dear LK, op 23-03-2005 04:27 schreef lokuttaracitta op lokuttaracitta@y... > Can you say, > > " Nibbana arises in us because of conditions such as the arising of > the change-of-lineage or vodana(cleansing) citta " N: Nibbana does not arise, it is unconditioned. It does not arise and fall away, it could never arise in us. > LK: "Nibbana arises in us because there are the appropriate conditions > for its arising, because paññaa has been developed to the degrees of > the change-of-lineage or vodana citta or lokuttaracittas , and then > it falls away immediately " N: No, for the same reason. > LK: "It(Nibbana) arises and falls away in us, but is Unconditioned > Dhamma.In likewise ,Lokuttaracittas are unconditioned " N: Again, a contradiction, see above. Lokuttara cittas are conditioned, see my previous post. I can see that you have some difficulties with this topic. Of course nibbaana far away so long paññaa has not been developed to that stage. At this moment the objects are very ordinary, like visible object, sound, hardness, etc. They are all conditioned dhammas, they arise and fall away. So long as there is not precise understanding of conditioned dhammas, we cannot imagine what it means that lokuttara citta arises and experiences the unconditioned dhamma. Is there a special reason that you ask about this subject? LK: You write: There can not be direct knowledge of lokuttaracittas. > No citta >> can know itself, but shortly after it has fallen away paññaa can > have direct >> understanding of its characteristic. .... > Are you saying that paññaa in a certain citta can never know the > other cetasikas in the same citta ? N: No it cannot. Paññaa, and all other accompanying cetasikas share the same object with the citta, only that one object. For example citta with paññaa understands the characteristic of visible object, and that is the object at that moment. Citta and cetasikas arise and fall away very fast while they all experience that object. Nina. 43546 From: Matthew Miller Date: Wed Mar 23, 2005 9:23am Subject: The Brain on Dhamma RobertK wrote: > I predict that the current scientific picture of the > world is completely skewed and will be viewed in the > near futures with derision... > > I do not believe that dhamma practice occurs in the brain. Then where does it occur? Some people seem to think that saying "We are the brain" somehow reduces the richness of human experience to a lump of clay. The fact is, the human brain is the most complex object in the known universe. Carl Sagan pointed out: The human brain is made up of one hundred billion nerve cells (neurons). Each neuron makes a thousand to ten thousand contacts with other neurons and these points of contact, called synapses, are where exchange of information occurs. Based on this data, we can calculate that the number of possible permutations and combinations of brain activity, in other words the numbers of brain states, exceeds the total number of elementary particles in the entire known universe. This almost inconceivable level of complexity is made even more complicated by the effects of hormones on the sensitivity of neurons to signals from other neurons, as well as other biochemical regulatory factors. In nature, form follows function. The kind of astronomical formal complexity we see in the brain begs a functional explanation. As it turns out, that complex form does have a function -- us! The brain can write sonnets, it can compose the Brandenburg Concertos, it can practice dhamma. The awesome complexity of the brain can easily account for the full richness of our minds. (Mind you, I'm not talking about Cosmic Purpose or Divine Plan, just biological form and function). There is a huge and ever-increasing amount of knowledge about the brain and its workings, all of which appears to point conclusively to the view that the mind simply cannot exist apart from the brain. The dependence of the mind on brain is easily demonstrated; it does not require detailed knowledge of modern neuroscience. Drinking a bottle of whisky should give a good demonstration of this. Without oxygen or under the influence of anestehtics or soporific drugs, we rapidly lose consciousness. Moreover, the quality of our consicousness can be influenced in spectacular ways by appropriate drugs or by mechanical stimulation of the brain. But if we do look at the evidence of neuroscience, the case becomes even more convincing and a much more detailed picture emerges. As Colin McGinn writes: What we call the mind is in fact made up of a great number of subcapacities, and each depends upon the functioning of the brain V.S. Ramachandran: When you look at these people who have had a small lesion in a specific part of the brain, what you see is not an across-the-board reduction in all their cognitive capacities, not a blunting of their mind. What you see is a highly selective loss of one specific function with other functions being preserved intact. As recent as 10 years ago, brain imaging studies were still pretty crude. But the technology has improved rapidly and the images are adding up, like bits in a jigsaw puzzle, to reveal something quite startling: a complete picture of the human mind at work. Rita Carter: Today's brain scans reveals our thoughts, moods, and memories as clearly as an X-ray reveals our bones. We can actually observe a person's brain registering a joke or experiencing a painful memory. This knowledge is only gradually seeping into the field of psychology, where we still find a lot of dense, jargon-laden psychobabbble (not unlike the abhidhamma ;-) An excellent overview of recent brain research can be found in Rita Carter's "Mapping the Mind": http://tinyurl.com/5tk4d Robert, if you'd care to offer some specific views contrary to what I've described (preferably with references to evidence) I'd be eager to hear them. Matthew 43547 From: matheesha Date: Wed Mar 23, 2005 10:49am Subject: [dsg] Re: Abhidhamma challenge 2 Hi Nina, Have been busy for the last few days. This egroup is like a river - if you dont keep up your posts will get swept away! > M: How can an unconditioned element be experienced? Shouldnt there be no > experience of it? (ie- identified by not having felt anything ..sort of like > sleep?) > N: It can be experienced by paññaa which has been developed to that stage. > Not like sleep at all. Lokuttara pannñaa is supported by many sobhana cittas > which are also lokuttara. There is a high degree of direct understanding and > mindfulness and great alertness. M: If magg-phala citta experiences nibbana, should it not experience what has been used to describe nibbana (if only in the negative)? One will have panna about it as well. > M: Is it possible for say ..a sothapanna to experience phala citta again > > on a later date at will? I have heard this mentioned in some schools > > of theravada meditation. > N: Only those who are proficient in jhana. They can have phalacitta > experiencing nibbana again. M: It is interesting to hear you say this. You are only the second person who has told me this. The first person being meditation guru Ven Amathagavesi who is a bit of a practical abhidhamma enthusiast. He developed a system of meditation incorporating jhana, and this was one of the reasons he used jhana extensively. > M: The suttas seem to suggest that there maybe other ways of getting rid > > of defilements as well. Would the abhidhamma support this? > N: Which sutta? By samatha defilements can be temporarily subdued. Only by > the development of the eightfold Path/satipatthana, defilements are > completely eradicated. M: Well, ones like the vitakkasanthana sutta/MN for example which seem to be using simple ways of changing the way one thinks. > M: The suttas also seem to suggest that nibbana is possible by just > > using void/emptiness/letting go as an object of meditation. > N: Do you have a sutta at hand? Emptiness is emptiness of the self. We take > seeing for self now. How to let go? By understanding it precisely as an > element that experiences visible object. There is no other way leading to > detachment. M: I'm sorry I dont. In this sutta a monk approaches the buddha and tell him that he is incapable of doing either samatha or vipassana. Then the buddha suggests that he try void as his object of meditation. I suspect it might be either from sutta nipata or the samyutta nikaya. I saw it as random post in another forum. Then there are the 10 recollections (dasa anussathi) which also seems to prescribe just conteplation of impermanence etc rather than actual direct observation. It makes me wonder whether panna from direct observation is essential or whether other types of panna (sutamaya, cintamaya) are equally valid in giving rise to enlightenment. N:The Abhidhamma > is a great help for understanding defilements in more detail. M: Yes, I suspect it must be. False enlightenment is a major pitfal on the path. metta matheesha --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > Dear Matheesha, > something happened to my post to you. I shall finish part 2. It was broken > off. > op 18-03-2005 22:34 schreef matheesha op dhammachat@h...: > > Part 2: > N:The maggacitta eradicates defilements and experiences the > unconditioned element, nibbaana. .. > > M: How can an unconditioned element be experienced? Shouldnt there be no > experience of it? (ie- identified by not having felt anything ..sort of like > sleep?) > N: It can be experienced by paññaa which has been developed to that stage. > Not like sleep at all. Lokuttara pannñaa is supported by many sobhana cittas > which are also lokuttara. There is a high degree of direct understanding and > mindfulness and great alertness. > > M: Does the lokuttara vipaka citta mean that phala is arising as an > > Effect of the magga citta, (which is the Cause)? > N: Yes, it is the result. > M: Does abhidhamma explain why defilements are eradicated with magga > > citta? > N: It explains that the latent tendencies are eradicated stage by stage, so > that these cannot condition the arising of akusala cittas. > M: Is it possible for say ..a sothapanna to experience phala citta again > > on a later date at will? I have heard this mentioned in some schools > > of theravada meditation. > N: Only those who are proficient in jhana. They can have phalacitta > experiencing nibbana again. > > M: Interestingly i wonder if it is possible for there to be more than > > just the 4 x 2 magga-phala citta depending on the maturity of the > > mental faculties of the practitioner. But I would suspect that the > > answer is no :) > N: Those who are proficient in jhana and have reached the different stages > can have forty (if we count jhanas as fivefold) lokuttara cittas instead of > eight. > M: The suttas seem to suggest that there maybe other ways of getting rid > > of defilements as well. Would the abhidhamma support this? > N: Which sutta? By samatha defilements can be temporarily subdued. Only by > the development of the eightfold Path/satipatthana, defilements are > completely eradicated. > M: The suttas also seem to suggest that nibbana is possible by just > > using void/emptiness/letting go as an object of meditation. > N: Do you have a sutta at hand? Emptiness is emptiness of the self. We take > seeing for self now. How to let go? By understanding it precisely as an > element that experiences visible object. There is no other way leading to > detachment. > M: Would > > abhidhamma insist on udaya-vya nana/insight knowledge of impermenence > > to give rise to magga-phala citta? > N: The three characteristics of dhammas, including impermanence have to be > clearly realized by paññaa before enlightenment can be attained. > > N:> However, for us now it is more important to understand the right > > Path > >> leading to enlightenment. > > > > M: Yes, but I feel my needs are met in that department :) I'm trying > > to find out what abidhamma provides as explanation for things we > > experience while on the path. > N: We experience many defilements while on the Path. If we do not know > exactly when we are clinging to result it is very dangerous. We are bound to > mislead ourselves, taking for the Path what is not the Path. The Abhidhamma > is a great help for understanding defilements in more detail. > Nina. 43548 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Mar 23, 2005 11:31am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Abhidhamma challenge 2 Hi Matheesha, op 23-03-2005 19:49 schreef matheesha op dhammachat@h...> > M: If magg-phala citta experiences nibbana, should it not experience > what has been used to describe nibbana (if only in the negative)? > One will have panna about it as well. N: I do not understand your Q. True, nibbaana is described as the end of dukkha, the end of defilements. It is the effect of the lokuttara cittas experiencing nibbaana. There are many descriptions, but one only knows what the unconditioned element is in experiencing it. Now we only speculate about it. >> M: The suttas seem to suggest that there maybe other ways of > getting rid >>> of defilements as well. .. > > M: Well, ones like the vitakkasanthana sutta/MN for example which > seem to be using simple ways of changing the way one thinks. N: See the posts in U.P. I translated the Co from Thai. Satipatthaana is implied in the whole sutta, no matter he changes his thoughts. I just quote one part: Without understanding of the Abhidhamma we may misunderstand the Sutta and the Commentary. One may believe that the bhikkhu merely has to think of the contents of his bag in order to avoid unwholesome thoughts. However, we should remember that when the citta is not engaged with daana, siila or bhaavanaa, all thinking is done with akusala citta. When the bhikkhu¹s objective is siila he thinks with kusala citta. But when he merely thinks, this is a match, this is a needle, and defines different objects without mindfulness of naama and ruupa his thoughts are akusala, he is merely replacing unwholesome thoughts by other unwholesome thoughts. This can remind us that whenever we define what we see or hear there are mostly akusala cittas arising in mind-door processes. These cittas are often accompanied by indifferent feeling, and therefore we may believe that they are not akusala cittas. While we define different things after seeing or hearing we do not harm others, but we forget that thinking is either kusala or akusala, and that it is mostly akusala. This can remind us of the urgency to be aware of visible object, of seeing, and also of thinking.> >> M: The suttas also seem to suggest that nibbana is possible by > just >>> using void/emptiness/letting go as an object of meditation. .... In this sutta a monk approaches the buddha and > tell him that he is incapable of doing either samatha or vipassana. > Then the buddha suggests that he try void as his object of > meditation. ... Then there are the 10 recollections (dasa anussathi) which also seems to > prescribe just conteplation of impermanence etc rather than actual > direct observation. It makes me wonder whether panna from direct > observation is essential or whether other types of panna (sutamaya, > cintamaya) are equally valid in giving rise to enlightenment. N: Hearing and considering are very essential. Paññaa can develop, stage by stage until enlightenment is attained. Not without mindfulness of nama and rupa. When you read about contemplating impermanence etc., this is not merely thinking about it. Anybody could just think, but this is not enough. Defilements are deeply rooted. They cannot be eradicated by thinking. Nina. 43549 From: kenhowardau Date: Wed Mar 23, 2005 3:41pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Cooran. Hi Nina ------------------------ N: > Thank you, I just got your post. What a good idea to read a sutta and then discuss it. I like no control for anatta, but no control can also be misunderstood.People may think that no kusala can be developed. But recently Sarah wrote a post I read to Lodewijk in the restaurant, where she explained very clearly about the Middle Way. ------------------------- It is good of you to be concerned for people who have that particular wrong understanding (that anatta means no kusala can be developed). Do they honestly think that? Or is their attachment so great that they are simply not interested in kusala without self? This reminds me of a topic that came up repeatedly at the Cooran meeting. We were facing the fact that enlightenment has consequences that we, as unenlightened folk, find disagreeable: namely, it proclaims that final extinction of consciousness is nigh. A Sotapanna has, at most, seven more lives. To us unenlightened folk, it is as if he has jumped out of an aeroplane with no parachute - there is no turning back! We might pretend to want enlightenment and final extinction of the khandhas, but that is just bluff. Fortunately for us, the laws of nature save us from ourselves by not calling our bluff. :-) All this seems obvious to me now, but only after having met you and other DSG people. The Dhamma does not teach us to want to be other than we are. It teaches us to know the present five khandhas. Ken H 43550 From: sunnaloka Date: Wed Mar 23, 2005 2:00pm Subject: [dsg] Re: jhana & Abhidhamma Pitaka Hi Nina, Good to talk to you again (we conversed in Pali group when I inquired about Sunnata Katha quotation, I've since ordered the Patisam. text). Anyway, my interest right now is in tracing the source of certain terms and ideas that arise in the commentarial literature but may not be specifically stated in the Tipitaka. Of course, not having access to the complete Tipitaka makes this endeavor somewhat difficult. Concerning jhana, I'd also like to find out if it specifically states in the Abhidhamma Pitaka that jhanacittas cannot have sensory objects (i.e. does jhana necessarily mean the cessation of visual, auditory, tactile awareness). I understand that the commentarial position is that this is indeed the case, but is there any specific canonical precedent for this position? I do have access to the V.M. as well as the material you've published online, and so am aware of the countersign, etc., commentarial methodology. I'm very curious though, why none (or very little) of this seems to be explicitly stated in the Sutta Pitaka, and I'm therefore wondering how much of this methodology is explicit in the Abhidhamma Pitaka. (I'm not taking any position as to right/wrong etc., just interested in the canonical precedence of commentarial assertions.) As always, any light you can shed on this matter would be greatly appreciated. Geoff 43551 From: sunnaloka Date: Wed Mar 23, 2005 3:53pm Subject: Re: The Brain on Dhamma Hi Mathew, I'm new to this conversation and so am ignorant of the context of what you are trying to assert here: > There is a huge and ever-increasing amount of knowledge about the > brain and its workings, all of which appears to point conclusively to > the view that the mind simply cannot exist apart from the brain. Are you trying to state that consciousness can be reduced to material (i.e. neural, electric, etc.) activities and processes in the brain? If so, can you support this with any definative scientific discovery? More to the point, exactly what is consciousness made of? > Today's brain scans reveals our thoughts, moods, and > memories as clearly as an X-ray reveals our bones. > We can actually observe a person's brain registering > a joke or experiencing a painful memory. To be sure, thoughts, moods, and memories have material correlations in the brain which they are dependent upon for their arising, but is the neuroscientist, when looking at a brain scan, observing a thought, mood, memory, etc., or is s/he merely observing a visual reproduction of the material correlation of said thought/mood/memory? If the neuroscientist is actually observing a thought why is s/he not aware of the content of this thought? If s/he is observing a joke why doesn't s/he laugh? What I'm getting at, is that from a phenomenological perspective, the subjective experience of a thought is a distinctly different phenomena than the objective experience of a neuroscientist observing the material changes of this thought. And for this very reason it is a cognitive error to reduce the subjective experience to the objective one. They are related, but they are not the same. This phenomenological method (i.e. abhidhamma method) exposes the error of the materialist position that all mental phenomena can be reduced to mere material phenomena. A subjective experience of laughing is simply not the same phenomena as the material neurological activities occurring in the brain, and these material activities are not the same phenomena as the visual reproduction of said material neurological activities observed by the neuroscientist. They are related and interdependent, but they are not identical. One cannot be reduced to the other. Furthermore, because there is no irrefutable evidence that consciousness is a material substance, there is no valid reason to conclude that consciousness can't exist apart from the brain. True, visual consciousness is dependent upon the material visual sensory organ (eye, nerves, brain, etc.), as are all six sensory consciousnesses, but consciousness as such, the pure subjectivity that you are, hasn't been scientifically proven to be dependent upon the brain (the effects of alchohol on the average mind is no proof). And until such a time that pure subjective consciousness can be scientifically proven to be dependent on the brain, the materialist theory is only a mere theory, and as such is just another mental phenomenon that one could observe, if one so wishes, with clear seeing (vipassana) and thereby discern (panna) that it is not-self nor does it pertain to a self. In this way one could, if one so wishes, free oneself form the tangle of all limited views, positions, and opinions. The Buddha stated that such freedom is radically Deathless. Geoff 43552 From: Andrew Date: Wed Mar 23, 2005 4:49pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Dhamma weekend Cooran --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > Hi Ken H, Andrew T, Christine, > How was your Cooran weekend? > Looking forward to hearing about it, > Nina. Dear Nina It is very kind of you to enquire about our humble discussion weekend and I'm glad to see Ken H has provided a response. The article which Reg brought along was "Why is Buddhism called the 'Middle Way'?" by Dr Peter Nelson: quite a strange article to find in a suburban Brisbane newspaper (The Westender). Reg considered it was relevant to the topic of Right View because the author points out that in the Discourse to Kaccayana (SN 2:17) the Buddha equated the 'middle way' with 'right view'. During the weekend, we also read the Mahacattarisaka Sutta and found parts of it very difficult to interpret without the assistance of notes and commentaries: so much for *just* reading the suttas! Then Ken H started testing our knowledge using the questions in ADL. It's always humbling to realise how little one really knows! But some of us did very well [names suppressed]. I hope you and Lodewijk are both well. Best wishes Andrew T 43553 From: matheesha Date: Wed Mar 23, 2005 4:55pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Abhidhamma challenge 2 Hi Nina, > > M: If magg-phala citta experiences nibbana, should it not experience > > what has been used to describe nibbana (if only in the negative)? > > One will have panna about it as well. > N: I do not understand your Q. True, nibbaana is described as the end of > dukkha, the end of defilements. M: Sorry about that. I'm reffering to the statements about nibbana saying it is devoid of this or that (sun moon etc!)-ie- it is stated in the negative in some places. Perhaps another point is that the buddha sought a state beyond the eigth jhana, which is nirodha. Is this not an 'experience' (or more acurately non experience) of nibbana? Or are these two seperate in some way? Ven Sariputta says nirodha is like sleep in some respects; this is why i mentioned sleep in an earlier post. A sothapanna also experiences nibbana for a moment through the lokuttara citta, even though there isnt a full eradication of defilements. So nibbana can be experienced before this final act. >N:While we define different things after seeing or > hearing we do not harm others, but we forget that thinking is either kusala > or akusala, and that it is mostly akusala. M: Yes, that is useful to remember. While there is a definite element of mindfulness involved in carrying out the vitakkasanthana sutta instructions, there seems to be an active element of changing akusala thoughts as well through contemplation etc which is not visible in the sathpattana (even though it happens via a different mechanism there). In the gradual teaching there are techniques given for getting rid of hinderances which seem to have little do with sathipatthana if i remember correctly. Rather they seem to be done in anticipation of sathipattana practice. But final removal of defilements does seem to require insight. I have my doubts whether simple prolonged contemplation of impermanence etc cannot achieve the same effect of removing defilements. This seems to be in effect the 'Dukka magga' which Ven moggalana tread. The Buddha himself mentions the dvedhavitakka type of practice, the 'three similies which have never been thought of before', and a intentional directing the mind towards nibbana in his training as a bodhisattva. The only sathipattana type practice he seems to mention is the cemetary (bhayaberava) meditation as I recall. I suspect that any practices which aim at ridding the mind of lobha,dosa and moha are effective in the path (on a background of jhana which make the mind 'maleable'). Would that be 'abhihammacially' correct? A word on the self view. It is lost at the sothapanna stage. This is ridding of sakkayaditti. This can happen through vipassana practice - seeing nama-rupa/hethu-phala etc. However its complete eradication occurs when one becomes an arahath according to the suttas. This i believe involves removing entirely from thoughts any 'feeling' of self .. to the point where ripping out ones eyes and throwing them away is possible! This has been temporarily felt by some people who had a very strong insight into no-self. A comlpete emptiness. The 'feeling' of self later returned, however the insight knowledge remained (along with insght into the other two charachteristics). metta matheesha --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > Hi Matheesha, > op 23-03-2005 19:49 schreef matheesha op dhammachat@h...> > > M: If magg-phala citta experiences nibbana, should it not experience > > what has been used to describe nibbana (if only in the negative)? > > One will have panna about it as well. > N: I do not understand your Q. True, nibbaana is described as the end of > dukkha, the end of defilements. It is the effect of the lokuttara cittas > experiencing nibbaana. There are many descriptions, but one only knows what > the unconditioned element is in experiencing it. Now we only speculate about > it. > > >> M: The suttas seem to suggest that there maybe other ways of > > getting rid > >>> of defilements as well. .. > > > > M: Well, ones like the vitakkasanthana sutta/MN for example which > > seem to be using simple ways of changing the way one thinks. > N: See the posts in U.P. I translated the Co from Thai. Satipatthaana is > implied in the whole sutta, no matter he changes his thoughts. I just quote > one part: > keen-eyed man shutting his eyes and looking away from some direction in > order to avoid seeing visible objects come within sight, should the bhikkhu > in whom evil, unskillful thoughts continue to arise in spite of his > pondering on their disadvantageousness, endeavor to be without attention and > reflection as regards them.> > Without understanding of the Abhidhamma we may misunderstand the Sutta and > the Commentary. One may believe that the bhikkhu merely has to think of the > contents of his bag in order to avoid unwholesome thoughts. However, we > should remember that when the citta is not engaged with daana, siila or > bhaavanaa, all thinking is done with akusala citta. When the bhikkhu¹s > objective is siila he thinks with kusala citta. But when he merely thinks, > this is a match, this is a needle, and defines different objects without > mindfulness of naama and ruupa his thoughts are akusala, he is merely > replacing unwholesome thoughts by other unwholesome thoughts. This can > remind us that whenever we define what we see or hear there are mostly > akusala cittas arising in mind-door processes. These cittas are often > accompanied by indifferent feeling, and therefore we may believe that they > are not akusala cittas. While we define different things after seeing or > hearing we do not harm others, but we forget that thinking is either kusala > or akusala, and that it is mostly akusala. This can remind us of the urgency > to be aware of visible object, of seeing, and also of thinking.> > >> M: The suttas also seem to suggest that nibbana is possible by > > just > >>> using void/emptiness/letting go as an object of meditation. > .... In this sutta a monk approaches the buddha and > > tell him that he is incapable of doing either samatha or vipassana. > > Then the buddha suggests that he try void as his object of > > meditation. ... Then there are the 10 recollections (dasa anussathi) which > also seems to > > prescribe just conteplation of impermanence etc rather than actual > > direct observation. It makes me wonder whether panna from direct > > observation is essential or whether other types of panna (sutamaya, > > cintamaya) are equally valid in giving rise to enlightenment. > N: Hearing and considering are very essential. Paññaa can develop, stage by > stage until enlightenment is attained. Not without mindfulness of nama and > rupa. When you read about contemplating impermanence etc., this is not > merely thinking about it. Anybody could just think, but this is not enough. > Defilements are deeply rooted. They cannot be eradicated by thinking. > Nina. 43554 From: Andrew Date: Wed Mar 23, 2005 5:38pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Rupa Madness: Seeing with the Tongue --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Matthew Miller" wrote: Let > me summarize my position: > > -- Science is a human activity, like religion, and has been used for > both good and ill. > -- The Nazis used it for ill. > -- The Nazis were not engaged in "liberation from suffering." > -- I never said that *all* science is engaged in the liberation of > suffering. In response to listers who described all scientific > activity as "random" and "without direction" I pointed toward whole > branches of science whose (human-given) purpose is the liberation of > suffering (e.g. medicine). > -- "Science" does not have an inherent ethical direction-finder. > -- social primates (including humans) do (though they don't always > follow it) Hi Matthew Sorry I haven't been able to keep up with my posting. Thank you for your patient reply. Dot points are THE way to get through to me. This thread seems to be entering a thicket of factual knowledge that is not helpful in sorting out the bigger picture. I think that science is very valuable and Dhamma is a treasure. I don't see any problem with being a scientist and also a student of Dhamma when one is honest and sticks to the facts. In science, one adheres strictly to scientific methodology and ascertains scientific facts (which cannot be equated with absolutisms). In Dhamma, one is studying the teachings of a being who claimed to be able to see things as they really are and who taught to the capability of his audience. One can "test" those teachings personally to a certain extent but, to overcome the brakes of skepticism, one must take a great deal on faith. Where's the problem with that if one acknowledges it? Did not the Buddha tell us to be clear in our language about this, about what we "know" and what we understand to be the teachings on any given topic? You might respond with a flurry of quotations from Dhamma teachers who speak as if they are dealing in absolutisms, but IMHO the issue is only one of semantics. Science and the Dhamma are separate pursuits and the way to see their separateness is through fastidious honesty. I hope you don't mind me saying, but I have a feeling that there is something religious about your position, something that doesn't fit neatly within the scientific method. Might be something to do with the inherent ethical direction-finder you perceive in social primates. Would you care to elaborate on that aspect? Is it just plain self-interest? Best wishes Andrew T 43555 From: Evan Stamatopoulos Date: Wed Mar 23, 2005 6:31pm Subject: RE: [dsg] Re: Rupa Madness: Seeing with the Tongue Thank you connie. Some people do get my cryptic meanings. You are quite correct. That is exactly what I was referring to. Hi, Evan, Matthew, > If there is no purpose to anything then stop. Exactly so. "The stopping of grasping is from the stopping of craving; the stopping of becoming is from the stopping of grasping; the stopping of birth is from the stopping of becoming; With the stopping of birth then grief, suffering, sorrow, despair and lamentation are stopped. Thus comes to be the stopping of this entire mass of ill." (M.i,337;S.ii,1-3) peace, connie 43556 From: rjkjp1 Date: Wed Mar 23, 2005 6:40pm Subject: Re: The Brain on Dhamma In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Matthew Miller" wrote: > > RobertK wrote: > > I predict that the current scientific picture of the > > world is completely skewed and will be viewed in the > > near futures with derision... > > > > I do not believe that dhamma practice occurs in the brain. > > Then where does it occur? ========= Dear Matthew, Geoff has given an elegant reply that I can't really improve on. I just add some extra. > > There is a huge and ever-increasing amount of knowledge about the > brain and its workings, all of which appears to point conclusively to > the view that the mind simply cannot exist apart from the brain. ========== I gave this hypothetical case: Say some aliens came to earth and saw the internet working on a computer. They take the computer back to Mars , absolutely sure that the internet is in the computer. So they do tests, find hotspots etc. Maybe they zero in on the battery pack and find that if they prod it or cool it or something funny things happen. So they think the battery is key. They spend vast resorces and make a pefect battery, the monitor becomes brighter.. Progress!... Or they pull out a wire and the monitor looks funny. AH! that must be it.... They think they are really getting to the heart of the internet and will soon plumb its depths. So they carry on - for decades. Every year there is a facinating new discovery. Prodding a point there gives this result,?@‚?rodding here another. They even invent new machines which can map the temperature of the computers components and 'prove' that at certain times and under certain conditions this or that happens. BUt they will never come to understand what the internet really is by any of this. And this is only an analogy - the internet is something that can be understood without the help of a Buddha . Consciousness is much more profound. =============== > > But if we do look at the evidence of neuroscience, the case becomes > even more convincing and a much more detailed picture emerges. As > Colin McGinn writes: > > What we call the mind is in fact made up of a great number > of subcapacities, and each depends upon the functioning of > the brain > > ======= Colin Mcginn is a materialist philosopher (as so many are at this time). But even with his materialist views he admits about the various scientific ideas on consciousness?gThe head spins in theoretical disarray; no explanatory model suggests itself; bizarre ontologies loom. There is a feeling of intense confusion, but no clear idea of where the confusion lies?h(1993) Problems in philosophy: the limits of inquiry. RobertK 43557 From: Matthew Miller Date: Wed Mar 23, 2005 6:58pm Subject: Re: The Brain on Dhamma Greetings Geoff! Thank you for taking the time to reply. You wrote: > > because there is no irrefutable evidence that > consciousness is a material substance, there is no valid reason to > conclude that consciousness can't exist apart from the brain. These are really two different issues. The first is: is the mind the same as the brain? The second is, can the mind exist without the brain? A mind-body dualist may argue that "mind stuff" and "body stuff" are two different things (which I find improbable), but nevertheless the dualist would have to agree that all the evidence we have suggests that the mind cannot exist apart from the brain. >the pure subjectivity that you are, hasn't been scientifically >proven to be dependent upon the brain All the evidence points in that direction. Furthermore, there is *no* evidence whatsoever of a person's mind being able to exist independently from their brain. > They [subjective states and the brain] are related, > but they are not the same. Subjective phenomena and brain states are not merely "related" in some vague, general way. There is a specific, predictable, one-to-one, *causal* relationship between activation or deactivation of areas of the brain and corresponding subjective states. Damage to specific areas of the brain *causes* very specific, proportional and predictable changes in cognitive function. Alzheimer disease is a powerful example. Paul Edwards: "In the early stages of Alzheimer, the person misses appointments, he constantly loses and mislays objects, and he frequently can't recall events in the recent past. As the illness progresses, he can no longer read or write and his speech tends to be incoherent. In nursing homes Alzheimer patients commonly watch television, but there is no evidence that they understand what is happening on the screen. The decline in intellectual function is generally accompanied by severe emotional symptoms, such as extreme irritability and violent reactions to persons in the environment, as well as hallucinations and paranoid fears. In the final stages the patient is totally confused, frequently incontinent, and quite unable to recognize anybody, including the closest relatives and friends. "Although Alzheimer is incurable, a great deal is known about what goes on in the brain of Alzheimer patients. The cerebral cortex and the hippocampus develop twisted tangles and filaments as well as abnormal neurites known as neuritic plaques. It has been determined that the density of these abnormal components is directly proportional to the severity of the disorder." Here's a thought experiment for you: When faced with someone with Alzheimer or some lesser form of senility, it is perfectly natural for us to say in such situations -- and all of us speak like this, even phenomenologists and believers in reincarnation -- that the person's mind has deteriorated with age. Goeff (or anyone else), would you say that the mind has not deteriorated? Do you believe that this person actually has a fully intact mind (just as it would be if the brain had not been damaged)? Matthew 43558 From: Matthew Miller Date: Wed Mar 23, 2005 7:09pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Rupa Madness: Seeing with the Tongue > Might be something to do with > the inherent ethical direction-finder you perceive in social > primates. Would you care to elaborate on that aspect? Is it just > plain self-interest? > Oh, no. Not "plain self interest." Within primate societies, we see the patterns of communal moral behavior taht we do in human societies -- sharing, protection, sympathy,guilt, reciprocity, altruism, obligation, expectations, rules, and community concern. For more info, see the book "Good Natured: The Origins of Right and Wrong in Humans and Other Animals" by primatologist Frans De Waal: http://tinyurl.com/3jktx De Waal's work, as well as that of other primatologists and anthropologists, gives strong evidence against the old canard that humanity needs religion to be good. The foundations of ethical behavior not only predate the world's major religions; they also predate the rise of Homo sapiens. Matthew 43559 From: sarah abbott Date: Wed Mar 23, 2005 7:32pm Subject: ‘Cetasikas' study corner 154- Determination /adhimokkha & Energy/viriya (d) 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.9 Determination(adhimokkha) & Energy(viriya) contd] Adhimokkha which accompanies akusala citta is determination which is akusala. When one, for example, speaks harshly or hits someone else, there is akusala adhimokkha which is convinced about the object of aversion. Adhimokkha which accompanies kusala citta is determination which is kusala. When one, for example, decides with kusala citta to study the Dhamma, kusala adhimokkha accompanies the kusala citta. However, at such a moment there are also many other wholesome cetasikas accompanying the kusala citta and adhimokkha is only one of them. It is difficult to know exactly what adhimokkha is. There is, for example, kusala cetanå which “wills” kusala, there is nonattachment, alobha, and there are many other cetasikas which each have their own task in assisting the citta to perform its function. They all take part in “ deciding” to study the Dhamma. ***** [Ch.8 Determination(adhimokkha) & Energy(viriya))to be contd] Metta, Sarah ====== 43560 From: Date: Wed Mar 23, 2005 2:48pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: The Brain on Dhamma Hi Geoff, Matthew, All In a message dated 3/23/2005 4:53:53 PM Pacific Standard Time, sunnaloka@y... writes: This phenomenological method (i.e. abhidhamma method) exposes the error of the materialist position that all mental phenomena can be reduced to mere material phenomena. A subjective experience of laughing is simply not the same phenomena as the material neurological activities occurring in the brain, and these material activities are not the same phenomena as the visual reproduction of said material neurological activities observed by the neuroscientist. They are related and interdependent, but they are not identical. One cannot be reduced to the other. Furthermore, because there is no irrefutable evidence that consciousness is a material substance, there is no valid reason to conclude that consciousness can't exist apart from the brain. True, visual consciousness is dependent upon the material visual sensory organ (eye, nerves, brain, etc.), as are all six sensory consciousnesses, but consciousness as such, the pure subjectivity that you are, hasn't been scientifically proven to be dependent upon the brain (the effects of alchohol on the average mind is no proof). And until such a time that pure subjective consciousness can be scientifically proven to be dependent on the brain, the materialist theory is only a mere theory, and as such is just another mental phenomenon that one could observe, if one so wishes, with clear seeing (vipassana) and thereby discern (panna) that it is not-self nor does it pertain to a self. In this way one could, if one so wishes, free oneself form the tangle of all limited views, positions, and opinions. The Buddha stated that such freedom is radically Deathless. Geoff To me: 'phenomenological,' 'material' are just abstract distinctions. We have grown up with these distinctions. I don't think there is any difference other than in the manner of catagorizing things. Its all energy. TG 43561 From: sunnaloka Date: Wed Mar 23, 2005 9:20pm Subject: Re: The Brain on Dhamma Hi Matthew, > Goeff (or anyone else), would you say that the mind has not > deteriorated? Do you believe that this person actually has a fully > intact mind (just as it would be if the brain had not been damaged)? Certainly not. But with all due respect I think you're missing my point. All such argumentation as to whether consciousness is or isn't the same as the brain never goes beyond inferential conclusion. Personally I neither support nor oppose the notion that consciousness continues after the death of the brain. From the perspective of skillful discernment it ultimately makes no difference one way or the other. When the Buddha was asked whether he considered the life force (soul, consciousness, whatever you want to call it) to be the same as the body (i.e. brain) or different from the body he maintained noble silence. All such metaphysical assumptions he considered meaningless argumentation (papanca). He considered the fading away and cessation of all such speculative views to be liberating (i.e. Deathless). The ultimate existential question is: how can I make the most of this life? Or stated another way: what actions of body, speech, and mind result in happiness? This is exactly what the Buddha is getting at in the Kalama Sutta (the charter of free inquiry) where he says that if you find that the Dhamma (ethical conduct, meditation, and discernment) he recomends is skillful (kusala) and promotes long term happiness and benefit, then use it. Conversely, if you find that such thoughts and actions based on them are unskillful and lead to regret and suffering, abandon them. So (in my opinion) the path of ethical conduct (sila), meditation (samadhi), and discernment (panna) taught by the Buddha is functional and not fundamentalist. It is based on the skillful employment of thoughts, speech, and actions to produce what the existentialists call 'the optimal mode of being.' This mode of being is unconditionally free from all existential angst because it discerns the emptiness and futility of speculating upon what lies outside our present frame of reference, while at the same time skillfully employing all of our present faculties to their optimal levels of functionality. This results in the greatest and most stable happiness for oneself and also contributes to the greater good of society as a whole. To summarize, this skillful path in no way depends upon belief in the continuity of consciousness after death, and all such speculation is actually the antithesis of the third noble truth: the cessation of suffering (i.e. Deathlessness). May we all realize this profound mode of being a.s.a.p.. Hi TG, >To me: 'phenomenological,' 'material' are just abstract >distinctions. We have grown up with these distinctions. I don't >think there is any difference other than in the manner of >catagorizing things. Its all energy. Well said. I would add that even the mental notion 'energy' is an abstract distinction. In the final analysis all mental labels and conceptual fabrications are empty. Geoff 43562 From: sarah abbott Date: Wed Mar 23, 2005 10:09pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Another Alternative for a Buddhist Theory of Memory Hi Howard, (James in passing at the end) After this afternoon, I’ll likely be signing off for a couple of weeks, so perhaps I shouldn’t be getting into new threads:-) However, I particularly wished to show my appreciation for your comment here in a post to Kel: --- upasaka@a... wrote: >H: “Ultimately, however, it is the uprooting of ignorance with the sword of wisdom that I consider to be critical, and not some "link-cutting operation". Most essentially, we are enslaved by avijja and freed > by vijja”. S: You followed it up with another post (#43429) and I thought it was very well written indeed. For example, you wrote: “There is no question that in the unraveling reading of D.O., with the cessation of vedana there is the cessation of tanha. Some folks think this means that “all we have to do” is pay careful, concentrated attention to the arising of vedana, with the mind in a calm state, so as not to react with craving/aversion. I think this is a fallacious piece of reasoning.” S: You then go on to clearly show why. Well said. Nothing to add to it at all, but possibly to stress that calm arises and develops with insight too. In other words, there cannot be moments of ‘liberating vijja’ or even beginning vijja without calm accompanying the citta. In fact ‘higher calm’ or concentration (adhi citta) can only be developed with satipatthana, not without. While I’m here, you wrote to Frank (#43414) that according to the Abhidhamma ‘vedana and sa~n~na are universals that *co-occur* in every mindstate’. You went on to question why we read about the dependence of sanna on vedana in the texts. Let me add a couple of points which I hope will help this good question: 1. See Guide to Conditional Relations which you have, p24 under sahajata (conascence)paccaya: “Now, if feeling aggregate, one of the four mental aggregates, is taken as the conditioning state, the remaining three aggregates are the conditioned states; if perception aggregate is taken as the conditioning state, the remaining three [mental]aggregates are the conditioned states and so on.”. It goes on to say that if two or three of the [mental] aggregates are taken as the conditioning states, the remaining two or one [mental] aggregate are conditioned at that moment by conascence condition. “The above shows how the four mental aggregates are both conditioning and conditioned states.” 2. I recently quoted an extract from Sammohavinodanii (Dispeller) for Azita which emphasized that the ‘order’ of the khandhas as given was not an ‘order of arising’, “because the aggregates do not arise in the order of their successive determining as in the case of ‘the foetus in the first stage’, etc; nor ‘order of abandoning’.......; nor ‘order of practice’......But ‘order of teaching’ is appropriate.” Having stressed this, the passage went on to say how for ‘easy grasping’ , the Buddha taught “the gross materiality aggregate [first] which is the object of the eye and so on; and after that the feeling which feels the materiality experienced as desirable and undesirable; [then] the perception which grasps the aspects of the object of feeling thus: ‘What he feels, that he perceives’ (M i 293); [then] formations by means of perception; [and lastly] consciousness which is their support and which dominates them.” So to stress, sanna, vedana and the other cetasikas arising are all dependent on each other. ***** Finally, a brief speculation on the sensitive, but important topic you raised about the fear/panic/terror you and others have experienced when seemingly on the brink of some insight. It may also be relevant to ‘burned out’ experiences when reading posts, I don’t know and apologise if this is off-track. Is it possible, do you think, that a) we hear/read/ reflect on something important and potentially likely to shatter some deeply-held beliefs, b)there is enough awareness/understanding to recognize the truth of it, but c) the deeply attachment to our views and ‘safe world’ results in an immediate kind of very strong reaction – whether of terror or some other aspect of aversion (dosa)? There is no terror or fear in any insight or understanding at all, but I think these rapidly following emotional states merely go to point out the anattaness of processes of cittas which are quite beyond anyone’s wish or control. After all, who would ever *choose* to experience such reactions? I think they're very natural and yes, even these states can be known for what they are, merely fleeting conditioned dhammas too. If these comments are off-track, just ignore them. I appreciated your sharing of your experiences (also James's and btw James, I liked your kind post to Azita very much). I’ll greatly look forward to anything you or others add on these or other topics while we’re away, or before we go (not til Monday actually, but I need to give my computer arm a good rest at the weekend and get prepared). Metta, Sarah ====== 43563 From: sarah abbott Date: Wed Mar 23, 2005 10:50pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Phil's letter from Japan Hi Phil, I’m glad you and Naomi have settled well into your new ‘high-class’ neighbourhood and superior apartment. I’m afraid there weren’t any responses to your letter on the list. As usual, it continues busily with some active new members too. I’m sure Nina and others are keenly awaiting your returning from hibernation. The ‘Cetasikas’ are especially waiting for your return:-). Anyway, as I’m about to take a break myself, let me just add a couple of comments on points you raise, so that I can send something back to you. Phil wrote: > One question I’d like to ask. This is Nina, writing to Howard: “It only > makes sense that I need to listen and read dhamma and on and on. With > so > much avijja and craving what would I find when I seek to practice? The > feeling of urgency points to the present moment, and if there is no sati > and panna what can be done? Nothing can accelerate the process of > development except when sati and panna does arise.” > > I think this is very important. When I see how gross my lobha is at > times, > should there not be samvega, should there not be an arousing of a sense > of > urgency? If there is, there is, but even when there is, when there is > so > much ignorance, what will be gained from urgency? .... S: I think it’s important to stress that the sense of urgency has to be with right understanding. For example, I was talking on the phone to a friend whose parents died recently. She appreciates that we should make the most of our lives while we can, but for many people this means we should see the urgency to enjoy our lives. As good students of the Dhamma, we know better, but so easily we may think ‘we’ or ‘self’ should urgently act to get rid of our defilements. I’m not at all sure that this kind of urgent mission by ‘self’ is any better as it’s likely to just lead to more attachment to Self, as I see it. So, understanding is the key again. We read that a sense or urgency is the proximate cause for viriya (energy/effort) to arise, but the words used are “bestirred, he strives wisely”. (We’ll soon be coming to this under viriya cetasika in the ‘Cetasikas’ series in more detail). The ‘wisely’ is very important. As it stresses elsewhere, better not to rouse viriya than to rouse it wrongly. So, I agree with you, that when there is ignorance, any urgency at such moments is quite useless.Now, I'm not sure if that was your question:-/ ... >If the man with his > turban on fire strikes out at the fire, hurries to put it out, the > flames > might just spread deeper, fanned by his flailing! Better to ever so > patiently remove the turban, which has to be unwound, not just torn off, > maybe. Something to think about, but these days I find even samvega can > lead to a further deepening of patience, paradoxically. ... S: I’ll look forward to hearing more when you return. We’ve talked about patience as an aspect of viriya, so I think there is a close connection. Energy, courage, patience, perseverance to follow the right path against the flow. .... > I am now rereading the CMA, but am wondering where pariyatti, patipatti > and pativedha fall in as dhammas? I won’t be able to read the answer for > now, but I hope the question will lead to a little fruitful discussion. > It sounds like a very important point! :-) ... S: Panna (understanding) of different degrees, accompanied by other mental factors of course. Pariyatti is right intellectual understanding with concepts of dhammas as objects. For example, now we are talking about the characteristic of viriya. If there is some right understanding it’s pariyatti, but not patipatti unless the characteristic appears. So patipatti refers to moments of the direct understanding of namas and rupas. Pativedha refers to higher insights into realities. (look up under ‘pariyatti......’ and also ‘samvegga...’ and maybe ‘viriya’ when you return to U.P:-). I’m sorry, this is not much, but I’m a little rushed these days. .... > P.S. many thanks to Ken H for sending me copies of the Burma talks on > tape. Great stuff! .... S: Hope you make notes of any points or comments for further discussion too. Many thanks again for your letter. Best wishes to Naomi Metta, Sarah p.s Jon sends his regards too. He’s flat-out at work and looking forward to his break:-) ====== 43564 From: sarah abbott Date: Thu Mar 24, 2005 0:07am Subject: Dhsg translations on Samvegga Dear Nina & Howard, I remember searching for ages for the Pali Icaro once gave to some phrases at the end of the Dhammasangani in vain before I realized that the PTS translation stops short at around 1400 of the Pali. To my delight, the Burmese translation is complete, up to 1616 and also it follows the Pali numbering so it’s easy to check. Ok, an example from the very end of the PTS translation, p 332 as this is where I’m looking. On Samvegga as it’s relevant: 1376. Sa.mvegoti– jaatibhaya.m jaraabhaya.m byaadhibhaya.m mara.nabhaya.m. Sa.mvejaniya.m [sa.mvejaniiya.m (sii.)] .thaananti– jaati jaraa byaadhi mara.na.m. ***** PTS: iii) The phrase “agitation” implies dread of birth, dread of old age, dread of sickness, dread of death. iv) The phrase “occasion of agitation” means birth, old age, sickness, death. ****** Myanmar: (39) Samvega Duka i) 1376. Emotional religious awakening means feeling of apprehension at seeing the danger of rebirth, the danger of ageing, the danger of illness, the danger of death. The cause of the apprehension are rebirth, ageing, illness and death. ***** S: I’m not keen on either of these translations and haven’t had a chance to look at much of the Myanmar text yet. The great advantage for me is being able to cross-check with the Pali much more easily, the fact that it is complete and has a very good Matika section at the front . Metta, Sarah p.s I know that both of you and others will be glad to hear that we received a nice note from Victor the other day. He doesn’t want to post it on list, but I think I can summarise by saying he greatly appreciates his active time on DSG (even though it was ‘heated’ at times), he’s been living at Metta Forest Monastery (under Ven Thanissararo, I believe) for the last 8 months, I believe as a samanera and expects to be fully ordaining there in July. He has very limited internet access, just once a week at a library when he tries to check in on us. He also gave this link for if anyone has any questions anytime for Ven Thanissaro or “Tan Ajaan Geoff” as he referred to him: http://www.mettaforest.org/VisitInfo.htm 43565 From: Christine Forsyth Date: Thu Mar 24, 2005 0:55am Subject: Victor .... (Re: Dhsg translations on Samvegga) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott > p.s I know that both of you and others will be glad to hear that we > received a nice note from Victor the other day. He doesn't want to >post it on list, but I think I can summarise by saying he greatly >appreciates his active time on DSG (even though it was `heated' >at times), he's been living at Metta Forest Monastery (under Ven >Thanissararo, I believe) for the last 8 months, I believe as a >samanera and expects to be fully ordaining there in July. He has >very limited internet access, just once a > week at a library when he tries to check in on us. He also gave > this link for if anyone has any questions anytime for Ven >Thanissaro or "Tan Ajaan Geoff" as he referred to him: > http://www.mettaforest.org/VisitInfo.htm Hello Victor, Only last weekend at the Cooran gathering, some were asking if anyone had heard from/about you ... so it is lovely to hear the news from Sarah that you are living at Metta Forest Monastery and are soon to be ordained. I always felt that this was a path you would take eventually ... I miss your active presence on dsg - and your (sometimes exasperating :-)) reminders about 'This is not mine, this is not I, this is not myself.' Victor - may you be safe and protected, may you be healthy and strong, may you be happy of heart and mind, and may you live with ease and wellbeing. metta and peace, Christine ---The trouble is that you think you have time--- 43566 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Mar 24, 2005 0:56am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Cooran. Dear Andrew and Ken H, thank you for your reports. op 24-03-2005 00:41 schreef kenhowardau op kenhowardau@y...:> > It is good of you to be concerned for people who have that > particular wrong understanding (that anatta means no kusala can be > developed). Do they honestly think that? Or is their attachment so > great that they are simply not interested in kusala without self? N: I have a feeling that they are afraid of anatta in all its consequences and feel powerless, lost. Also, they think about anatta in a logical way, purely intellectual and then start to draw conclusions. If everything is anatta, how can anyone develop metta, etc. etc. But all these things are real problems for them. K: This reminds me of a topic that came up repeatedly at the Cooran > meeting. We were facing the fact that enlightenment has consequences > that we, as unenlightened folk, find disagreeable: namely, it > proclaims that final extinction of consciousness is nigh. A > Sotapanna has, at most, seven more lives. N: We know it is not near. And when we come to that stage, paññaa is up to that to face it. It is still different form what we think it is at this moment. K: The Dhamma does not teach us to want to be other > than we are. It teaches us to know the present five khandhas. N: That is the solution. We have to be sincere and come to know our true accumulations. This goes also for the problems people have about anatta and dhammas as being beyond control. When we begin to have more understanding of what appears now, there is less opportunity for speculating. What seemed a problem at first just disappears. One begins to turn away from thinking how is this, how is that, because one understands that this is only thinking, a conditioned nama. It may take a while to understand the implications of the word 'only'. Nina. 43567 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Mar 24, 2005 0:56am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: jhana & Abhidhamma Pitaka Hi Geoff, op 23-03-2005 23:00 schreef sunnaloka op sunnaloka@y...: > Concerning jhana, I'd also like to find out if it specifically states > in the Abhidhamma Pitaka that jhanacittas cannot have sensory objects > (i.e. does jhana necessarily mean the cessation of visual, auditory, > tactile awareness). I understand that the commentarial position is > that this is indeed the case, but is there any specific canonical > precedent for this position? N: The suttas repeat all the time: aloof from sense pleasures, or detached from sense objects. See M 119 for example, and Book of Analysis, Ch 12. This is the aim of jhana: detachment from sense objects. The meditation subject of ruupajhaana is still connected with materiality, but it is a concept. When someone begins he looks at the kasina but then he acquires a nimitta of it. The meditation subjects of arupajhaana have nothing to do with materiality. Nina. 43568 From: nina Date: Thu Mar 24, 2005 0:56am Subject: Visuddhimagga Ch XIV, 147 and Tiika. Visuddhimagga Ch XIV, 147 and Tiika. Text Vis.: (xxii)-(xxiii) The wieldy state of the [mental] body is 'wieldiness of body'. The wieldy state of consciousness is 'wieldiness of consciousness'. N: Wieldiness, kammaññataa, is workableness, readiness for wholesome action. Text Vis: They have the characteristic of quieting unwieldiness in the [mental] body and in consciousness. Their function is to crush unwieldiness in the [mental] body and in consciousness. N: The Tiika explains unwieldiness as non-application to daana, siila and other meritorious deeds. It refers to the defilements, beginning with sense desire (kaamacchandaa). Or unwieldiness pertains to the four akusala naamakkhandhas that are striving in that way. When one is overcome by sense desire or aversion, there is mental unwieldiness. Wieldiness is indispensable for any kind of kusala. Text Vis.: They are manifested as success in making (something) an object of the [mental] body and consciousness. N: They assist the citta in experiencing an object with wholesomeness, they cause it to succeed in what is beneficial. Text Vis.: As bringing trust in things that should be trusted in and as bringing susceptibility of application to beneficial acts, like the refining of gold, they should be regarded as opposed to the remaining hindrances, etc., that cause unwieldiness in the [mental] body and in consciousness. N: As to the remaining hindrances, the Tiika refers to sense desire etc., and this implies also the hindrance of ill-will (vyaapaada). The Tiika explains that wieldiness brings confidence in the objects that one should have confidence in since it subdues attachment and since it causes one to proceed with ease. It is opposed in particular to the hindrances of sense desire and aversion. The Tiika elaborates on the simile about the purity of gold. Just as gold that has impurities removed is smooth and can be molded into an ornament, evenso when defilements are removed there can be patient application to beneficial conduct. N: Wieldiness goes together with saddhaa, confidence in the Dhamma, confidence in wholesomeness. Kusala citta is resilient and smooth, also when the circumstances of life are difficult. Kusala citta is wieldy like purified gold and it can be shaped to any kind of kusala for which there is an opportunity. It can apply itself to daana, siila and bhaavanaa. One can have confidence in the benefit of satipa.t.thaana and develop right understanding of any dhamma that appears, even if it is unpleasant or unwholesome. In this way one takes one¹s refuge in the Dhamma with confidence. *** Nina. 43569 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Mar 24, 2005 0:56am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Abhidhamma challenge 2 Hi Matheesha, op 24-03-2005 01:55 schreef matheesha op dhammachat@h...: I'm reffering to the statements about nibbana > saying it is devoid of this or that (sun moon etc!)-ie- it is stated > in the negative in some places. > Perhaps another point is that the buddha sought a state beyond the > eigth jhana, which is nirodha. Is this not an 'experience' (or more > acurately non experience) of nibbana? N: Attainment of Extinction, nirodha samaapatti: suspension of all mental activity. Anagamis and arahats who also have developed jhaana can reach this. They should have masteries of all the stages of jhaana and devlop insight in between the stages of jhaana. This extinction, nirodha, is not the experience of nibbaana. When that person emerges from it he experiences nibbaana with the phalacitta of the anagami or arahat, depending on the stage of enlightenment he has reached. M: A sothapanna also experiences nibbana for a moment through the > lokuttara citta, even though there isnt a full eradication of > defilements. So nibbana can be experienced before this final act. N: There are four stages of enlightenment and at each stage magga-citta and phalacittas arise. > M: While there is a definite element of mindfulness involved in carrying out the vitakkasanthana sutta instructions, there seems to be an active element of changing > akusala thoughts as well through contemplation etc which is not > visible in the sathpattana (even though it happens via a different > mechanism there). N: As to , yes, also that is citta, a conditioned nama, and it should be object of mindfulness, otherwise one takes that changing of thoughts for self. See Application of Mindfulness of citta. Satipatthana is the Buddha's teaching and even when we read about samatha, also satipatthana is implied. The jhanacitta should be object of mindfulness. There isn't anything that cannot be object of mindfulness. When we remember this, we read all texts in a way different from before. I cannot see satipatthana as a mechanism, I am not sure what you mean. It is to be developed. M: In the gradual teaching there are techniques given for getting rid > of hinderances which seem to have little do with sathipatthana if i > remember correctly. Rather they seem to be done in anticipation of > sathipattana practice. N: It is very meaningful that the hindrances are in the application of mindfulness of dhammas. They are conditioned namas. If they are not objects of mindfulness they can never be eradicated. In samatha they are only temporarily subdued. M: ...The Buddha himself mentions the > dvedhavitakka type of practice, the 'three similies which have never > been thought of before', and a intentional directing the mind > towards nibbana in his training as a bodhisattva. The only > sathipattana type practice he seems to mention is the cemetary > (bhayaberava) meditation as I recall. N: In many of his lives he listened to other Buddhas and developed satipatthana, insight, but not to the stage of gotrabhuu, since he intended to accumulate the perfections to the degree of being able to become a sammaasambuddha. He developed the perfections, and that means, excellent qualities together with satipatthana, with the aim to eliminate defilements. M:I suspect that any practices > which aim at ridding the mind of lobha,dosa and moha are effective > in the path (on a background of jhana which make the > mind 'maleable'). Would that be 'abhihammacially' correct? N: Not any practice. Only vipassana. Those who had accumulations developed jhana as well, but they had to be mindful of jhanacitta, otherwise the wrong view of self could not be eradicated. M: A word on the self view. It is lost at the sothapanna stage. This is > ridding of sakkayaditti. This can happen through vipassana practice - > seeing nama-rupa/hethu-phala etc. However its complete eradication > occurs when one becomes an arahath according to the suttas. This i > believe involves removing entirely from thoughts any 'feeling' of > self N: wrong view is eradicated at the sotapanna stage. But after that there is still conceit, thinking 'oneself' important or clinging to 'oneself' without wrong view. The arahat has eradicated conceit. We have to differentiate between wrong view and conceit. Even when one clearly understands that what we take for self are the five khandhas arising and falling away, one may, because of accumulations, still find these khandhas important. Nina. 43570 From: sarah abbott Date: Thu Mar 24, 2005 1:07am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: jhana & Abhidhamma Pitaka Hi Geoff, --- sunnaloka wrote: > > Anyway, my interest right now is in tracing the source of certain > terms and ideas that arise in the commentarial literature but may not > be specifically stated in the Tipitaka. Of course, not having access > to the complete Tipitaka makes this endeavor somewhat difficult. ... S: Just briefly to say I'm delighted to read your posts and areas of interest and I know Nina and others will appreciate the questions you're raising. I'll look forward to more contact later but look f/w to your threads in the meantime. Btw, welcome to DSG! Pls share a little about your background and keen interest in Dhamma (if you wish). Where do you live? Metta, Sarah ====== 43571 From: sarah abbott Date: Thu Mar 24, 2005 1:33am Subject: Re: [dsg] Question on Vedana and Sa~n~na Hi Frank, Like Howard, I'd like to say, pls don't go back to lurkerland:-) I thought you made many good points in your posts on D.O. (and some I might have questioned if I'd had more time:-). --- Frank wrote: > > I don't know what the abidhamma says, but in either M or S nikaya, > the Buddha says something to the effect of: > > 1) with contact (phassa) as a requisite condition, there is feeling. > 2) with contact as a requisite condition, there is perception (sanna) > 3) with contact as a requisite condition, there is volition (sankhara) > > To me, this implies that once there is contact/phassa/sensory > impingement, feeling+perception+volition occur simultaneously. ... S: Yes, well said. Would you agree that 'once there is' means co-arising with the contact? ... > The critical part of the dependent origination formula referenced so > frequently (with feeling as requisite condition, there is craving), > > So my take on this is that when phassa/contact occurs, you get a > cocktail of the 3 aggregates feeling+volition+perception that arise as > a result. If one has deluded perception+volition, then the result would > be craving or its siamese twin aversion. ... S: Well put. .... >If one has correct perception + > correct volition in that instant, then the dukkha chain breaks down. > Feeling aggregate in an arahant and a worldling in that instant is no > different according to my understanding. .... S: I know what you mean. I was also interested in your post 43402. >F: Formula for the unawakened: 1) raw sensory input 2) contact 3) A deadly cocktail..... 4) .....suffering....< S: Why no sense bases (internal sense media)...and vipaka cittas such as seeing, hearing etc as in the 'more traditional phrasing'? Also, cessation of dukkha when there is right view....I'm not sure we can say this. Certainly there is no dukkha dukkha, but the dukkha as in the 4NT refers to all conditioned dhammas, incl. right view, but excluding lokuttara dhammas, as I understand. Sorry, this is rushed and you weren't asking for my views, but I was interested in your comments on D.O. If you pick this up or continue with the discussions, I hope others will join in and respond. Metta, Sarah p.s TG Good quotes in #43331:-) ================================= 43572 From: sarah abbott Date: Thu Mar 24, 2005 1:52am Subject: Re: [dsg] Question on Vedana and Sa~n~na Hi TG, --- TGrand458@a... wrote: > Check out Connected Discourses of the Buddha pages 1531 - 1532. The two > > Suttas on Dwelling. Reading these suttas one has to wonder if > perception is a > "universal." ... S: Only just checked out. SN45:11(1) Dwelling, under Maggasamyutta,2 Dwelling Did you read the comy notes on p1894? Interesting ref. to how this sutta is referred to as 'proof' the Buddha taught the Abhidhamma. But that's another thread:-). Later, the feeling conditioned by perception is referring to 2nd jhana - base of nothingness. Then the feeling when perception has subsided is referring to the base of neither perception-nor-nonperception and I'm getting out of my depth without further checking/considering:-). ... > However, in the same suttas mentioned above, the Buddha does say "there > is > feeling with perception as condition." In my way of thinking about > that...an > initial feeling instigated the perception and the perception, in turn, > is a > condition instigating feelings based on that. ... S: See my earlier post to Howard about how they condition each other. I think this sutta is referring to very specific jhana states, but you'd have to ask Nina or someone for more detail. good suttas to raise. Metta, Sarah ====== 43573 From: Charles Perera Date: Thu Mar 24, 2005 2:04am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: jhana & Abhidhamma Pitaka Nina, I remember a Sutta, but the references elude me. It is about a Brhaman who Visits the Buddha and sees all the Bikkhus in meditation seated erect without moving. He asks the Buddha whether they have all attained "arahathood". Then the Buddha says, there was a time I too believed the same, but these Bikkhus still have vedana(feelings) and sanna(perceptions) in them, it is only when they attain "arahathood" that vedana and percetion will cease. with metta, Charles(Hasituppada) -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Nina van Gorkom wrote: Hi Geoff, op 23-03-2005 23:00 schreef sunnaloka op sunnaloka@y...: > Concerning jhana, I'd also like to find out if it specifically states > in the Abhidhamma Pitaka that jhanacittas cannot have sensory objects > (i.e. does jhana necessarily mean the cessation of visual, auditory, > tactile awareness). I understand that the commentarial position is > that this is indeed the case, but is there any specific canonical > precedent for this position? N: The suttas repeat all the time: aloof from sense pleasures, or detached from sense objects. See M 119 for example, and Book of Analysis, Ch 12. This is the aim of jhana: detachment from sense objects. The meditation subject of ruupajhaana is still connected with materiality, but it is a concept. When someone begins he looks at the kasina but then he acquires a nimitta of it. The meditation subjects of arupajhaana have nothing to do with materiality. Nina. 43574 From: gazita2002 Date: Thu Mar 24, 2005 3:27am Subject: Re: quote Phra Dhammadharo, to Azita Hello Nina, -- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, nina wrote: > Dear Azita, > When reading Vipassana Letters to Lodewijk at dinner, I came across a quote > from the late Phra Dhammadharo and I thought of you. It is a good > encouragement. > I read first: and mindful in order to accumulate a great deal of kusala, "our kusala". > Instead of right understanding of realities which arise because of their own > conditions our goal becomes the accumulation of kusala. Then we are moving > away from our real goal: detachment from the self through right > understanding.> > Now the quote: > (taken from "Be here now", Adelaide): > > now. We want to get rid of distraction, to be calmer, to be steadier, to be > more organized, to be somehow, other than we are. What is that if it is not > attachment? Azita: this is it in a nutshell! this is what I was feeling, get rid of this distraction, don't like these bad feelings, want it to be different - something other than this....... > > Why can't we just be aware of distraction? But, oh no, we don't like > distraction and there we are, thoroughly distracted from awareness, because > of our attachment to a self who does not want to be distracted. In fact, > this is more an attachment to peace than to understanding. Ask yourself, do > you really want to be aware or do you just want calm? Azita: I suddenly thought of Sacca. to be really truthful to ourselves - do I want peace or do I want to understand any reality which appears, pleasant, painful or otherwise. We just go on > perpetuating the illusion of a self who has got a job to do and who wants to > do it and does not like distraction which gets in the way of doing the job. Azita: I relate very strongly to the above :-( > That is not right understanding at all. It is a cause for more frustration > when distraction arises. When there is satipatthana you are not thrown off > balance by distraction. You are just aware and then there can be awareness > of what appears next. There can be awareness and right understanding of what > has already appeared by conditions, which is not self. Only for one moment > though. And then there may be a whole lot of distraction. We can't do > anything about it, it is anatta. If there is awareness at that moment > something has been done already. It is anatta. > > Developing awareness. I don't think it is what we really want to do at all. > We don't have the inclination, deep down we are not really interested very > often. Only at a moment of right understanding is there any interest, right > interest in the object that appears, in order to see it as it really is. azita: I tend to agree here. I kid myself sometimes that I am interested in dhamma study, occasionally there is a battle within me thinking I 'should' do more study etc. its like forcing something that does not come naturally. We > are always looking for some other object, trying to change it or make it > last. That is attachment, not detachment. > > end quote. > More patience, courage and good cheer, > Nina. Thank you for these reminders, Nina. I was listening to a Dhamma tape this morning before I went to work, it was one I've heard lots of times, but realised that no matter how many times I listen there is always something that I learn from. It really does take lots of patience to just accept the present moment, pleasant or painful. with metta Azita 43575 From: Date: Wed Mar 23, 2005 10:56pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Another Alternative for a Buddhist Theory of Memory Hi, Sarah - (Have a pleasant 2-week hiatus, Sarah :-) In a message dated 3/24/05 1:11:06 AM Eastern Standard Time, sarahproctera bbott@y... writes: > While I’m here, you wrote to Frank (#43414) that according to the > Abhidhamma ‘vedana and sa~n~na are universals that *co-occur* in every > mindstate’. You went on to question why we read about the dependence of > sanna on vedana in the texts. Let me add a couple of points which I hope > will help this good question: > > 1. See Guide to Conditional Relations which you have, p24 under sahajata > (conascence)paccaya: > > “Now, if feeling aggregate, one of the four mental aggregates, is taken as > the conditioning state, the remaining three aggregates are the conditioned > states; if perception aggregate is taken as the conditioning state, the > remaining three [mental]aggregates are the conditioned states and so on.â€?. > It goes on to say that if two or three of the [mental] aggregates are > taken as the conditioning states, the remaining two or one [mental] > aggregate are conditioned at that moment by conascence condition. “The > above shows how the four mental aggregates are both conditioning and > conditioned states.â€? > > 2. I recently quoted an extract from Sammohavinodanii (Dispeller) for > Azita which emphasized that the ‘order’ of the khandhas as given was not > an ‘order of arising’, “because the aggregates do not arise in the order > of their successive determining as in the case of ‘the foetus in the first > stage’, etc; nor ‘order of abandoning’.......; nor ‘order of > practice’......But ‘order of teaching’ is appropriate.â€? > > Having stressed this, the passage went on to say how for ‘easy grasping’ , > the Buddha taught “the gross materiality aggregate [first] which is the > object of the eye and so on; and after that the feeling which feels the > materiality experienced as desirable and undesirable; [then] the > perception which grasps the aspects of the object of feeling thus: ‘What > he feels, that he perceives’ (M i 293); [then] formations by means of > perception; [and lastly] consciousness which is their support and which > dominates them.â€? > > So to stress, sanna, vedana and the other cetasikas arising are all > dependent on each other. > ***** > -------------------------------------- Howard: The foregoing doesn't settle the issue for me. The suttic causal asymmetry between vedana and sa~n~na still seems to remain. I find your examples more a matter of Abhidhammic & commentarial *claiming* than explanation, let alone proof. Now it may well be that there really is a symmetry involved, but I don't see that as at all established. -------------------------------------- > Finally, a brief speculation on the sensitive, but important topic you > raised about the fear/panic/terror you and others have experienced when > seemingly on the brink of some insight. It may also be relevant to ‘burned > out’ experiences when reading posts, I don’t know and apologise if this is > off-track. > > Is it possible, do you think, that a) we hear/read/ reflect on something > important and potentially likely to shatter some deeply-held beliefs, > b)there is enough awareness/understanding to recognize the truth of it, > but c) the deeply attachment to our views and ‘safe world’ results in an > immediate kind of very strong reaction – whether of terror or some other > aspect of aversion (dosa)? > ------------------------------------- Howard: Quite possibly it is a matter of threatened beliefs for some folks, but certainly not for all - nor do I think that it being a matter of threatened beliefs is primary. I can tell you that losing any sense of an anchor, is a novel, shocking, and, unless in a state of equanimity, dreadfully terrifying experience. Imagine being hurled into a bottomless abyss with nothing at all to hold onto. (Recall the Buddha's metaphor of being hurled down a turbulent, rushing river, desperately but fruitlessly attempting to grasp the kusa grass growing out from the river banks?) --------------------------------------- > > There is no terror or fear in any insight or understanding at all, but I > think these rapidly following emotional states merely go to point out the > anattaness of processes of cittas which are quite beyond anyone’s wish or > control. After all, who would ever *choose* to experience such reactions? > ---------------------------------------- Howard: Perhaps when the insight is complete, there is "no terror or fear in any insight or understanding at all," but one must be able to *get* to the point of the insight being complete. Possibly multiple experiencing of certain insights will build a familiarity that will enable closer viewing without the blocking terror. ---------------------------------------- > > I think they're very natural and yes, even these states can be known for > what they are, merely fleeting conditioned dhammas too. If these comments > are off-track, just ignore them. I appreciated your sharing of your > experiences (also James's and btw James, I liked your kind post to Azita > very much). > > I’ll greatly look forward to anything you or others add on these or other > topics while we’re away, or before we go (not til Monday actually, but I > need to give my computer arm a good rest at the weekend and get prepared). > > 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) 43576 From: Joop Date: Thu Mar 24, 2005 4:25am Subject: Re:Buddha Nature Dear all Back to the initial question: Is it possible to interprete the (Mahayana-)concept 'Buddha-Nature' in Theravada-language, so that this can be used in a fruitful dicsussion between Mahayanists and Theravadins? (It's a normal human habit that when a discussion takes place on an unknown terrain, to get as quick as possible to the known terrain, for example by taking a detail of the original discussion and redefine it in the frame of reference of the known terrain. In this thread many DSG-participants prefer to discuss about an abhidhammic concept like 'lokuttaracitta', and not about the concept 'Buddha- Nature; I do understand that) Included two quotes about this question Metta Joop In the essay "The self and the person as treated in some Buddhist texts. (part 1)" Mitchiko Ishigami-Iagolnitzer analyses Eraly Buddhist, Theravada and Mahayana- (Zen-) texts. (source: http://ccbs.ntu.edu.tw/FULLTEXT/JR-EPT/mitch.htm) His conclusion: "We have seen how the self and the person have been treated in some Buddhist texts of different periods and how the notions concerning them have evolved. But we notice two constant tendencies: men's attachment to the individual and egotistic self is always discouraged, while their effort to find out their true self (the Buddha Nature) and to realise it (Nirvana) is encouraged, this self being considered, nevertheless, void of substance. This distinction between two selves is merely a skilful way of leading people to Nirvana." DSG is not the only Forum in which this topic is discussed. From E- Sangha I quote some message about it: Adamabsurd: I have been studying the Pali texts and Theravada commentaries for quite some time now, but have yet to come across any mention of Buddha Nature, or anything like Dharma-kaya. It seems these are foreign to Theravada and are not part of Buddha's original teaching. Is this correct, or does Theravada actually teach about Buddha Nature? BodhiTraveler These teachings are compeltely foreign to the theravada tradition. The teachings of Buddha Nature and the Dharmakaya, like most early Mahayana teachings, are actually derived from differing interpretations of some Pali texts. For example, the attitude that it is possible for all beings to achieve nibbana is present in theravada. However, the term 'Buddha Nature' comes loaded with other connotations. From my understanding [and I am not a Mahayana practitioner], Buddha nature is about the potential to become a buddha, and thus to 'merge' with the Dharmakaya. According to Theravada, it's really a question of the proper use of terms. As long as we are having this conversation about Buddhism, no one can be a Buddha, as the main characteristic of a Buddha is that he discovers the dhamma on his own. In addition, the teaching on Dharmakaya is taken from a very specific Pali Sutta. On one occasion, a devout lay follower was dying, and was much too sick to travel to see the Buddha, whom he had never seen and paid his respects to. Eventually, his plight made it's way up to the Buddha himself, and he stated that seeing him personally was not an issue since 'whoever sees the dhamma, sees me'. Now, the traditional interpretation is that the buddha was placing a higher value on following the dhamma than on seeing him personally. This was probably another way to discourage devotionalism to The Buddha's personage. The Mahayanists took this and, in my opinion, took it out of context and very literally, drawing the conclusion that 'Whoever sees the dhamma, sees me' means that the buddha and the dhamma are actually one and the same, that the buddha is some sort of physical manifestation of the dhamma. Adamabsurd Thanks for the confirmation, BodhiTraveler. I hear the term "Buddha Nature", and to be honest, it sounds like a very subtle self-theory, particularly as it uses the term "Nature", and because it is said to be "inherent" in all beings. It would seem more likely that all beings ultimately have "Arahant Potential", while only a few exceptional beings who start their spiritual quest under the right (rare) circumstances (eg start their spiritual journey already having great compassion and generousity etc) actually have "Buddha Potential". That's just my take. Anders Honore Bodhitraveler, that is an almost absurd misrepresentation of not only the methodology of Mahayana but also its understanding of the Dhamma. For starters, Buddhanature, tathagatagarbha in sanskrit (literally 'seed of Tathagata' a somewhat different connotation to 'Buddha-nature' which was a Chinese transliteration), denotes a connotation not explicit in the Pali Canon for sure: Mainly that the Tathagata (ie the fully enlightened being) is something that lies intrinsic in the mind (its fundamental nature, ie it is not something we become, but something we come to realise). The Pali Canon makes clear that the Tathagata is NOT the kandhas (which means that there is way which the tathagatagarbha could be interpreted as any kind of physical manifestation of the Dhamma) and its doctrine is consistent with this as well as the tathagata not being found apart from the kandhas (The Yogacara certainly backs this up). What follows from this is that the Tathagata is the same as the Dharmakaya, or that the Tathagata is in fact the very same as Nibbana. Something which is not at all implausible when looking at the various discussions of the nature of the Tathagata and why common classifications do not apply to it (ie, it is of a transcendent nature much like Nibbana), specifically in relation to the fate of the Tathagata after death. There are other suttas in the Pali Canon which point to the intrinsic purity of the mind (tathagatagarbha), such as the Pabhassara Sutta: "Luminous, monks, is the mind.[1] And it is defiled by incoming defilements." {I,v,9} "Luminous, monks, is the mind. And it is freed from incoming defilements." {I,v,10} "Luminous, monks, is the mind. And it is defiled by incoming defilements. The uninstructed run-of-the-mill person doesn't discern that as it actually is present, which is why I tell you that -- for the uninstructed run-of-the-mill person -- there is no development of the mind." {I,vi,1} "Luminous, monks, is the mind. And it is freed from incoming defilements. The well-instructed disciple of the noble ones discerns that as it actually is present, which is why I tell you that -- for the well-instructed disciple of the noble ones -- there is development of the mind." {I,vi,2} …. boom_cat Any attempt in reconciling the Buddha Nature with the Theravadan standpoint will be very difficult. There are many materials in Mahayana schools that explain the Buddha Nature, the Dharmakaya and Tathagatagarbha, many of which deal with very very fine philosophical issues, thing is, no matter how fine the words are, as soon as one starts to talk about those things with words, it becomes coarse immediately. It is always taken for meaning there is either a self or no self, which, in the view of those who follow the Nikayas, is simply unspeakable--it goes beyond the level of concept and therefore it is not possible to talk about it without getting one-sided (the favour quote tells us that the Buddha did not encourage his disciples to dive into such questions). Anyway, the Buddha Nature is but one way of expressing the unspeakable. Some call it a positive expression of the not-selfness. So we could say that it is just one side of the coin. It is said that the Buddha Nature is the luminosity that is present in everyone at every present moment, and when enlightenment is attained it is this luminosity that completely reveals itself. Looking from this way we can say the Buddha Nature is merely a function which is common to all sentient beings but it only fully reveals itself only when the perfect enlightenment is attained, but it does not imply a self (nor a 'no self'). It is our deluded mind that fabricates a self from which the dualism between 'self' and 'no self' also derives. The later scholars had to come up with answers like this when non- Buddhists started to question Buddhist thoughts. Their questions are not totally absurd, for instance, they asked, if nibbana is not-self, then what's the difference between a person who realises it and a stone? To them, when not-selfness is realised, there has to be some kind of realising, some kind of knowing, otherwise it does not make any sense. The Buddha Nature may sound as if there is an independent entity called the knower, although it is explained very clearly that it is not the case at all, some of us will still be not pleased with the answer. Some will still continue to ask, if the luminosity is not a knower, then who knows all the things including the voidness of the things? Therefore it still does not make us totally happy, although these are perhaps the best conceptual answers we can get. Just need to bear into mind the Buddha taught a lot of things, some of them even sound contradictory. When we know the full picture is beyond the words, we shall know the words are fine as reference points but still not to be taken literally. It would be more interesting to look at the functional implication of the Buddha Nature, such as, how does it relates to one's practice-- and how does this relates to the Theravadan teachings. I am certain this will be much more beneficial than merely focusing on 'is it really a saying can be found from the Pali Canon' or any angle similar to that. Anders Honore : Hello Bodhitraveler, You do have a good point. Most Theravadans do not feel it is reconcilable. The notable exceptions nowadays is the Thai Forest tradition started by Ajahn Mun. His principle heir, Ajahn Boowa for instance talks about the Unborn Citta, a notion many Theravadans would find heretical. I am not familiar with how the scene is in Sri Lanka but I get the impression from Burma that they are primarily abidhammists (as are most not of the forest vtradition in Thailand). Another reformator like Ajahn Buddhadasa also found the Pali Canon and the Mahayana Sutras compatible. Ajahn Buddhadasa I feel is a significant character to bring the debate, as he did something few would dare at the time: Critisise the Abidhamma. Basically, he debunked it almost entirely, which is quite something since it in most Theravada circles consired one of the baskets of the Buddha's teachings. Though there is far from agreement on the issue, at leats he has opened up the discussion to a point where one can begin to talk about Theravada Buddhism without abidhammist theory. Ajahn Mun did not critisise the Abidhamma as such as far as I am aware, but certainly did critisise a lot of the doctrines extrapolated from it as well. Others have also voiced their critique on both the Abidhamma and the Commentaires, both of which are exponents of a Dhamma that is not compatible with the Mahayana. What I find interesting about this is that though the Mahayana and its compatability with the Pali Canon has been entirely irrelevant to the debate, most of those who have argued against it have been primarily meditation monks whose teachings in general are consistent with what is taught in the Mahayana as well. The curious implication of the Mahayana is of course that the Dhamma doesn't change at all. The these teachings are implicit already in the Pali Canon and it is merely its expression that changes. 43577 From: Date: Wed Mar 23, 2005 11:40pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Dhsg translations on Samvegga Hi, Sarah - In a message dated 3/24/05 3:08:55 AM Eastern Standard Time, sarahprocterabbott@y... writes: > p.s I know that both of you and others will be glad to hear that we > received a nice note from Victor the other day. He doesn’t want to post it > on list, but I think I can summarise by saying he greatly appreciates his > active time on DSG (even though it was ‘heated’ at times), he’s been > living at Metta Forest Monastery (under Ven Thanissararo, I believe) for > the last 8 months, I believe as a samanera and expects to be fully > ordaining there in July. He has very limited internet access, just once a > week at a library when he tries to check in on us. He also gave this link > for if anyone has any questions anytime for Ven Thanissaro or “Tan Ajaan > Geoffâ€? as he referred to him: > http://www.mettaforest.org/VisitInfo.htm > ==================== Wow, how wonderful! Should you be in further contact with Victor, please send him my congratulations and very warmest wishes! 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) 43578 From: Charles DaCosta Date: Wed Mar 23, 2005 11:50pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Having no opinions OK ----- Original Message ----- From: Joop To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com > Can you start out by explaining what you mean by rupa and nama? Hi Charles No. Because my remark was a mixture of joke and seriousness And because it deviates us more from the topic of the thread: having no opinions Joop 43579 From: Charles DaCosta Date: Thu Mar 24, 2005 2:02am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Ken--ultimate (Abhidhamma) view part 2 Hi Ken ------------------ KH:> > There is only the present moment." ------------------ C: > So beings can't have existed in the past? --------------------------------- KH: When you consider a 'being' as the momentarily existing five khandhas, then beings have certainly existed in the past. But those beings no longer exist. There are only the present five khandhas. ...................... When you make this claim ("as the momentarily existing five khandhas"), you are say that beings don't change, they just cease to exist. Is this what you mean? ****************************************** C: > And, the future doesn't exit? ---------------------------------------------- k: No. Nor has it ever. ...................................... This is good, but it would have been better to say the future exist only as a concept, an idea. ****************************** k: >> ... after a billionth of a second ... ---------------------------------- C: > Have you experience this, or do you not experience? When you look in the mirror in the morning, do your image disappear after a billionth of a second, or a moment? ---------------------------------- K: An image in the mirror is a concept and, as such, it has no actual existence at all. The only ultimately real thing that meets the eye is visible object, and it lasts for one moment of rupa. Seeing consciousness, which experiences visible object, lasts for one moment of nama. ..................................... I would have to disagree with you, when you say, "An image in the mirror is a concept and, as such, it has no actual existence at all." and I don't understand what you mean by: "The only ultimately real thing that meets the eye is visible object, and it lasts for one moment of rupa. Seeing consciousness, which experiences visible object, lasts for one moment of nama." Do you believe that there are things that you can sense that are not real, even in the mind? and do you believe that thoughts and ideas (things in the mind) are not real? Maybe you should list/define what you think is real. *************************** C: > In ultimate reality there is space, emptiness, but you may not find it, unless you search for the essence. ---------------------------- K: You and I are approaching the Dhamma from different perspectives and so I don't see the meaning you obviously see in the above. According to the Theravada teaching, a dhamma is empty of self but it is not nothingness. ........................................... You don't see the meaning because: We are not sharing the same definition of "emptiness," "essence," and "self." However we both are relying on the Theravada teaching to explain/substantiate our definitions. Your problem is that you don't seem to understand the word "essence" from a Buddhist or Hindu perspective. I think you would define the word as "The Self" (a sutra teaching/summary) where I would define the word as: "The unchanging: attman, soul, the uncompounded part that gives you the whole, etc..." (an abidharmic teaching/more detailed). These things don't exist, so yes they are nothingness or nibbia (I can't spell). In this case, my goal was to try and help expand your definition of "Self," but I realize now that may be you don't need a new definition yet. That would depend on your practice. Do you see the Abidharma as a detailed scholastic endeavor only, a method for removing ... from the mind, or both? *************************** KH: > > and moments of thought creation (conceptualizing). In many of those moments, the mental factor known as lobar has arisen, performed its function (of attachment to its object) and fallen away. > > .................................... Now this is good/I agree with, I think. I am not sure what you mean by " lobar." And instead of "fallen away," I would say, "will, if not has already, change/transformed." §§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§ K: I have noticed lately that your spell-checker changes my spellings - and not always for the better. :-) .................................... Thanks a lot for the warning, please help me to catch the changes. §§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§ KH: > > Conditioned reality is the five khandhas as they arise in this present, fleeting moment. They can arise in one of six ways, or, as the Buddha said, "as one of the six worlds." There is one world for each of the six kinds of consciousness - seeing, hearing, smelling, tasting, touching and mentally cognizing. In a moment of seeing (the eye world) the ----------------------------- C: > Have you experienced this, and how would you describe that experience? --------------------------------- K: According to the Buddha, this is all I ever really experience. The best way of describing it would be to cut and paste from the Theravada texts. Or, I could just continue with what I have been doing - putting my understanding of those texts into my own words. ...................................... This doesn't answer the question, but that is OK, I did not think you could answer it. So you have accept these specific teaching by faith? ******************************** KH: > > they exist for only the briefest possible moment. Even the Eight-fold Path is just a fleeting moment in which the five khandhas exist in their superabundance form. ------------------------------ C: > how have you experienced these briefest possible moments? ------------- k: As I have explained, I experience them all the time - as moments of seeing or hearing etc. But I think you must be asking which parts (if any) of the teaching have I personally verified. Is that of any relevance? Where did the Buddha say we should divide the Dhamma into two sections - the parts we have personally verified and the parts we have not? If anything, the opposite is true: concepts of self should be excluded from our understanding. ...................................... You said: "as moments of seeing or hearing etc." This answers the question, but then, are those moments for a billionth of a second or do they vary (in terms of how long they last); and is that based on experience or teaching? And the relevance will be explained in the next post if you remind me of the question ("Where did the Buddha say we should divide the Dhamma into two sections - the parts we have personally verified and the parts we have not?"). We have a good flow going and I don't want you to get caught by a small off the track detail. ******************************** C: > How have you experience the ending of your existence? ---------------- K: According to the Abhidhamma, the falling away of a conditioned nama or rupa can be directly known, but only by well-developed panna. So too can its arising and persistence. ...................................... This doesn't answer the question, but that is OK, I did not think you could answer it. So you accept these specific teaching by faith? CharlesD ----- Original Message ----- <.....> 43580 From: Charles DaCosta Date: Thu Mar 24, 2005 2:21am Subject: Re: [dsg] Rupa Madness: Seeing with the Tongue Hi Andrew T, They believed (or were deceived into thinking) that by eliminating/... the Jews, it would free the world (their world) from all the suffering that Jews cause {in their world --- the sick-people believe the Jews were the root cause of suffering}. However, this is no different than when Buddhist killers (like in southeast Asia) have, in the past, killed and justified it by the "no-self doctrine -- there is no you no me, there is no killing only death caused by karma." Some, not all, of the medical experiments has worked its way into the medical community (there was a lot of "hoopla" about dismissing all the experiments, but in-reality the data is used (I herd that it has even referenced sometimes) - but to most scientists it is in bad taste to use, especially where the "SICK-people" did not use the scientific method. CharlesD ----- Original Message ----- From: Andrew <.....> Hello Matthew and others interested in this thread. Re Matthew's first point above, can somebody tell me whether or not the Nazi medical experiments on Jewish concentration camp interns were science and, if so, how they were "involved in liberation from suffering"? Andrew T 43581 From: Charles DaCosta Date: Thu Mar 24, 2005 2:25am Subject: Re: [dsg] Rupa Madness: Seeing with the Tongue Me too, It teaches the science of mind, the first form/school of psychology. CharlesD ----- Original Message ----- From: TGrand458@a... <...> Hi Evan No disrespect intended for anyone and my comments were not directed toward you...in fact I don't think I read a post by you on this subject. But I have seen a lot of anti-science sentiment in Buddhist chat rooms and the like. I know several highly educated Sri Lankan Theravdin monks who consider Buddhism to be a science. TG <....> 43582 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Thu Mar 24, 2005 4:57am Subject: Re: [dsg] Having no opinions Hi, Joop Joop wrote: >I think that's too easy said, Jon >When an opinion is not 'kept' by rupa; is it then kept by nama? I >don't think so. >An opinion is a concept, kept in somebody's brains. That in rupa, in >livinf rupa, feed by oxygen in the blood, but still rupa. > > The dhamma explanation, as I understand it, would not see an opinion as being kept in a person's brain. "An opinion" merely refers to a way of thinking about something. The 'reality' of that moment is the consciousness that thinks, but that consciousness is not 'kept' anywhere at other times. Jon 43583 From: Date: Thu Mar 24, 2005 0:43am Subject: Re: [dsg] Having no opinions Hi, Jon (and Joop) - In a message dated 3/24/05 8:08:45 AM Eastern Standard Time, jsabbott@n... writes: > The dhamma explanation, as I understand it, would not see an opinion as > being kept in a person's brain. "An opinion" merely refers to a way of > thinking about something. The 'reality' of that moment is the > consciousness that thinks, but that consciousness is not 'kept' anywhere > at other times. > > Jon > ================== I agree with you Jon. The distinction is one of process/operation versus substance. There occurs "opinion-ing", but nowhere are there to be found "opinions". 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) 43584 From: Matthew Miller Date: Thu Mar 24, 2005 6:19am Subject: Re: Rupa Madness: Seeing with the Tongue TG wrote: > > But God help science when it comes to Western Buddhists. ;-) > It usually is in for a trashing. > One of the things that first attracted me to Buddhism was the Dalai Lama's stated position on science: "If the words of the Buddha and the findings of modern science contradict each other, then the former have to go." That really impressed me. Can you imagine the Pope or some Ayatollah saying the same thing about the Bible or the Koran? Later I discovered that Buddhism, like every religion, has its share of Sutta-thumping Fundamentalists. Matthew 43585 From: Matthew Miller Date: Thu Mar 24, 2005 7:42am Subject: Re: Rupa Madness: Seeing with the Tongue Rob wrote: > the Buddha clearly defined the > scope of the Dhamma and clearly identified what was not within the > scope of the Dhamma: > "Why have I left [answers to speculative questions] undeclared? > Because it is unbeneficial, it does not belong to the fundamentals > of the holy life, it does not lead to disenchantment, to > dispassion, to cessation, to peace, to direct knowledge, to > enlightenment, to Nibbana. Yes, but in practice, it is not always easy to identify at the outset which questions will be "beneficial" and which will not. Here's an analogy: in science, we have both basic science and applied science. Applied science seeks practical knowledge with everyday uses. You might say, it only asks questions that are clearly "beneficial." But there is also what we call "basic science" research. This research furthers our knowledge of how the world works, but does not have any immediately obvious practical application. Nevertheless, most breakthroughs in applied science are built on the foundation of this basic science. So I think that the "scope of dhamma" and what is or is not a beneficial question is not so clearly defined. Matthew 43586 From: Andrew Levin Date: Thu Mar 24, 2005 9:06am Subject: [dsg] Re: New view on satipatthana 2 --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > Hi Andrew L, > > > --- Andrew Levin wrote: > > OK so then let me ask: What is sati? And are you saying reflecting on > > a particular nama or rupa can condition sati for that bit? That holds > > pretty good implications for the course of practise. > ... > S: As you know, sati arises with all wholesome kinds of consciousness. It > is the `door-keeper?which guards the senses and does not `allow the > floating away of moral states?(Atthasalini). When there is wise > reflection, sati must be there at those moments, conditioning more wise > reflection in future and also satipatthana, if it is right reflection on > presently arising dhammas. This is how pariyatti can condition patipatti > and eventually pativedha. I do not know that sati arises with all kinds of wholesome consciousness, at all. I know that it can maintain wholesome states and prevent negative, unwholesome states but it is new to me that it arises with all wholesome states. If this is true. It seems to me that if wise reflection can condition sati, or reflecting on the nature of a nama or rupa after discussion about it or reading the dhamma, it is not such a long jump to say that sati can be conditioned intentionally, through sitting meditation. At the least, wholesome deeds conditioning sati can get a good portion of it going. What other methods are there for the arising of sati, that you acknowledge, and do I get you right, that it is your position that sati can be mindful of nama and rupa by discussing the nature of that particular nama or rupa? This would seem to contradict your position that we have to wait for whichever nama and rupa comes to the fore on any given occasion to be mindful of it. There is some correlation here with your view and mine, for instance, if wrong views arise, or moha or dosa, it is said (in ADL, and by inference I assume that you agree with this stance) that being mindful of it is the way to eradicate these defilements. Please describe further how the sati that you describe can be cultivated and what other function(s) it has. Certainly one moment of sati conditions the next, but there must be an initial cause. I am willing to listen to more views on this because I have had what seems like sati of a diffeferent nature arise at some times but not others (ie, "30 minutes of sati in a day? You're a rich man" as you quoted at one point in time.). > .... > <...> ***** > >The Buddha really described wrong view as > > more of a general view of things, even conventionally using the term > > 'beings' numerous times in it. > .... > S: Let's be clear that when the Buddha referred to wrong views, he wasn't > talking about wrong views about the weather, about scientific theories, > about numbers of Abhidhamma classifications, about the details of brahma > realms, but about wrong views concerning the 6 worlds presently arising > and appearing, i.e about the khandhas or namas and rupas as being > conditioning, impermanent, unsatisfactory and void of any self. > ***** > "The Perfect One is free from any theory (ditthigata), for the Perfect One > has seen what corporeality is, and how it arises and passes away. He has > seen what feeling ... perception ... mental formations ... consciousness > are, and how they arise and pass away. Therefore I say that the Perfect > One has won complete deliverance through the extinction, fading away, > disappearance, rejection and casting out of all imaginings and > conjectures, of all inclination to the 'vain-glory of 'I' and 'mine." (M. > 72). Certainly right view does not encompass complex theories about the detailed workings of worlds, but it has been said that right view should include knowledge that beings are reborn spontaneously, and or in accordance with their deeds (kamma & vipaka) and it should include knowledge of suffering and its origin, cessation, and way to practise for its cessation (ie, reflection on the four noble truths, mundane right view.) I would like to discuss this more with you, as right view is the first path factor that should be cultivated in the Noble Eightfold Path, and in one of the books I am reading to foster right view, ("The Four Noble Truths" by Francis Story) the author talks about the psychological mechanism whereby suffering is suppressed from coming to the fore of our consciousness and we therefore take refuge in pleasure and pleasurable experiences. I have seen suffering of other people and recognized my own, but reflecting on this, and the principles of kamma, to create something that can qualify as right view, is not an easy task. > ***** > > That the type of wrong view you describe is a hindrance to practise at > > all times, I am not decided on yet. > ... > S: Wrong view is always a hindrance to practice when it arises. At such > moments of wrong view, the practice has to be wrong, i.e > silabbata-paramasa (attachment to rites and rituals). Of course this can > arise at any time, even whilst reflecting on `a particular nama or rupa? > For example, one might have the idea at such a time that focusing on > visible object is the way to develop awareness of visible object. It can > be very subtle. > ... I again would disagree that wrong view of self is the cause of all wrong views. I have detailed elsewhere how wrong view of self can be countered through perception of impermanence, but have said I don't see it as necessary to the type of mundane right view that which constitute right view as a path factor. I would think that the understanding that there are fruit and result of good and bad actions, a moral law of causality, is enough to have one perform meritorious deeds and spur the other path factors on. Additionally, while I do see the danger in wrong view of self leading to wrong practise, I think there is a chance that we may not be able to escape wrong view of self leading to attachment to rites and rituals until that fetter, the deeply ingrained view of self, is eradicated by practise still tainted with that view of self. > >.I have seen a lot leading one to > > use the terms 'you' and 'being' suggesting a view of self to do some > > rudimentary practise tasks, and I really think the Buddha taught that > > there are some things we can consciously decide to do. > ... > S: The Buddha taught about all dhammas (realities) as being anatta. > Whatever language he used according to what was appropriate, there is > never any self that can practice or decide to do anything. No, but if you allow for causes and conditions to create right view, that the desire to cultivate sati via sitting meditation, can be a cause for the arising of sati through actual sitting meditation, does not seem unfeasible to me. > > Metta, > > Sarah > ========= Yours in mischief, Andrew Levin 43587 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Mar 24, 2005 10:47am Subject: Re: [dsg] Dhsg translations on Samvegga Dear Sarah, Thank you, I followed the Pali. After this passage it explains about the four right efforts, viriya.m aarabhati... Very good text. Nina. op 24-03-2005 09:07 schreef sarah abbott op sarahprocterabbott@y...:> Ok, an example from the very end of the PTS translation, p 332 as this is > where I’m looking. On Samvegga as it’s relevant: > > 1376. Sa.mvegoti– jaatibhaya.m jaraabhaya.m byaadhibhaya.m mara.nabhaya.m. > Sa.mvejaniya.m [sa.mvejaniiya.m (sii.)] .thaananti– jaati jaraa byaadhi > mara.na.m. 43588 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Mar 24, 2005 11:18am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: jhana & Abhidhamma Pitaka Dear Charles, op 24-03-2005 11:04 schreef Charles Perera op hasituppada@y...: > I remember a Sutta, but the references elude me. It is about a Brhaman who > Visits the Buddha and sees all the Bikkhus in meditation seated erect without > moving. He asks the Buddha whether they have all attained "arahathood". Then > the Buddha says, there was a time I too believed the same, but these Bikkhus > still have vedana(feelings) and sanna(perceptions) in them, it is only when > they attain "arahathood" that vedana and percetion will cease. N: It must be a special case of jhana and nirodha. Anagamis and arahats can attain if they also are proficient in jhana. But I cannot remember I have read the conversation you quote. Nina. 43589 From: Date: Thu Mar 24, 2005 8:42am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Rupa Madness: Seeing with the Tongue Hi Matthew, All In a message dated 3/24/2005 6:29:24 AM Pacific Standard Time, bupleurum@y... writes: TG wrote: > > But God help science when it comes to Western Buddhists. ;-) > It usually is in for a trashing. > One of the things that first attracted me to Buddhism was the Dalai Lama's stated position on science: "If the words of the Buddha and the findings of modern science contradict each other, then the former have to go." That really impressed me. Can you imagine the Pope or some Ayatollah saying the same thing about the Bible or the Koran? Later I discovered that Buddhism, like every religion, has its share of Sutta-thumping Fundamentalists. Matthew TG That is a very impressive statement from the Dalai Lama. This shows his confidence that a correct investigation of actuality by science, or Buddha, or any other discipline, will draw the same conclusions. They have to. Surely scientific knowledge is incomplete and addresses many things Buddhism is not interested in addressing and vice versa. But the things that they commonly address and their expressions of principles of 'actualities of nature' are quite capable of overlapping seamlessly. This is by no means to equate science and Buddhism. Buddhism is infinitely more valuable IMO. But that's not to say science is wrong or garbage. I think science, like the Abhidhamma, can be usefully used (to a certain extent) in deeping the understanding of the Buddha's teachings in the Sutta Pitaka. TG 43590 From: Andrew Date: Thu Mar 24, 2005 3:38pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Rupa Madness: Seeing with the Tongue --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Matthew Miller" wrote: > > > Might be something to do with > > the inherent ethical direction-finder you perceive in social > > primates. Would you care to elaborate on that aspect? Is it just > > plain self-interest? > > > > Oh, no. Not "plain self interest." Within primate societies, we see > the patterns of communal moral behavior taht we do in human societies > -- sharing, protection, sympathy,guilt, reciprocity, altruism, > obligation, expectations, rules, and community concern. > > For more info, see the book "Good Natured: The Origins of Right and > Wrong in Humans and Other Animals" by primatologist Frans De Waal: > > http://tinyurl.com/3jktx > > De Waal's work, as well as that of other primatologists and > anthropologists, gives strong evidence against the old canard that > humanity needs religion to be good. The foundations of ethical > behavior not only predate the world's major religions; they also > predate the rise of Homo sapiens. Hi Matthew Thanks for the link. I will explore it when I get time. I wasn't actually raising that "old canard" as you put it. When I did undergrad anthropology, it was my impression that the de Waal type theories all still rested upon "self view" (mostly in the sense of passing on genes) i.e. that there had to be a pay-off in evolutionary terms for "ethical behaviour". That is why I suspected that your inner ethical direction-finder was essentially a form of self-view and/or a type of clinging in Dhamma terms. Was I right? Hot? Warm? Cold? Best wishes Andrew T 43591 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Thu Mar 24, 2005 3:34pm Subject: Re: A Question Re: [dsg] Re: Ken--ultimate (Abhidhamma) view part 2 Hi, Howard Although we disagree on the issue of being/not being object of consciousness, we do agree on the distinction to be made, as you do here, between (a) moments when there is a dhamma as object of consciousness and (b) moments of thinking, remembering etc. when there is not. Your comments on this aspect are in agreement with my understanding of the teachings, that at a moment of thinking, remembering, etc. only the consciousness itself (and not the 'thoughts' or matters conceived of) may be the object of awareness/insight should it arise. This distinguishes a moment of thinking, remembering, etc. from a moment when there is a dhamma as object of consciousness (which of course include the moments of sense-door consciousness). In the latter case, either the consciousness itself or the object of that consciousness could be the object of arising awareness/insight. upasaka@a... wrote: >Hi, Jon - >... > > > As regards "objects", if one means by "object" either an actual >phenomenon (paramattha dhamma) that is objective content of consciousness OR what >merely *seems* to be such, like a tree or house or memory, but does not >actually exist, then I would agree to saying that there is always an object of >consciousness. As I see it, when we are "remembering something" or "seeing a tree", >there is no actual thing/event remembered or cognized, and my preference in >speaking literally/ultimately would be to say that there really is no object >present, but conventionally there is - that is, it is a covention to say that >there is an object of consciousness present. And, as you know, I have no problem >with figurative speech so long as one is aware that this is what one is using. > > In my view, the question of whether consciousness has an object is a different question from the question you pose here of whether 'there really is an object present'. In the former case we are talking about a relationship, specifically a subject/object relationship, whereas in the latter case we must be talking about an 'actual dhamma' or thing. By 'object of consciousness' I refer simply to what is 'experienced' by consciousness at that moment. In the context of the consciousness that thinks, the 'object of consciousness' is the thought that is conceived of. The thought is 'object of consciousness' but not 'an object present'. Jon 43592 From: Date: Thu Mar 24, 2005 11:02am Subject: Re: A Question Re: [dsg] Re: Ken--ultimate (Abhidhamma) view part 2 Hi, Jon - In a message dated 3/24/05 6:54:05 PM Eastern Standard Time, jsabbott@n... writes: > In my view, the question of whether consciousness has an object is a > different question from the question you pose here of whether 'there > really is an object present'. In the former case we are talking about a > relationship, specifically a subject/object relationship, whereas in the > latter case we must be talking about an 'actual dhamma' or thing. > > By 'object of consciousness' I refer simply to what is 'experienced' by > consciousness at that moment. In the context of the consciousness that > thinks, the 'object of consciousness' is the thought that is conceived > of. The thought is 'object of consciousness' but not 'an object present'. > ===================== I really do understand you. Actually, I think you are being more content with conventional speech in this case than I am! How's that for amusing?!! ;-)) As you say earlier in your post Jon [not quoted here by me] except for "object" terminology, we are very much in agreement on this subject 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) 43593 From: matheesha Date: Thu Mar 24, 2005 4:15pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Abhidhamma challenge 2 Hi Nina, >N: This extinction, nirodha, is not > the experience of nibbaana. M: Any ideas how they differ? Is nirodha lokuttara? >N:When that person emerges from it he experiences > nibbaana with the phalacitta of the anagami or arahat M: This is new to me. Does this mean that if a sakadagami, in training to become an anagami, experiences nirodha for the first time, when coming out of this nirodha will experience phalacitta and become an anagami? > N: As to contemplation...>, yes, also that is citta, a conditioned nama, and it > should be object of mindfulness, otherwise one takes that changing of > thoughts for self. M: Yes, very tricky and applies to all practices really...My teacher uses a series of directed vipassana techniques aimed at identifying 1) nama-rupa, then 2) their causal connection to each other and then 3) the arising and passing away of these cause and effect nama-rupa. The Self view is usually abandoned between 1 and 3 in the trainees. The last technique 4) is anapanasathi -seeing arising and passing away of the breath (similar to the fourth tetrad of the anapanasathi sutta in that impermenence is viewed). I suspect he used the last one because the joining vipassana with samatha at this point has a better chance of giving rise to aanantharika samadhi. Unfortunately he has passed away and why he chose these in this order is not clear. Any ideas are welcome. I suspect that there is a link to the saptha-visuddi/vipassana nana. N:> I cannot see satipatthana as a mechanism, I am not sure what you mean. It is > to be developed. M: Sathi--> develop insight into the thilakkana/udaya-vya nana-- >nibbida (?), letting go based on that insight ie- erradication of craving delusion, craving and aversion (based on maggacitta)-- >vimukthi/release. This is the mechanism behind the sathipattana if Im not mistaken. However vitakkasanthana sutta seems to be talking about a more active/direct method of identifying lobha,dosa,moha and getting rid of them. That also mentions the possibility of becoming an arahath with mastery over thought. I'm wondering if there are other paths to maggacitta rather than through udaya-vya which doesnt seem to be the style of vitakkasanthana practice which seems to use more direct and pointed action as and when required rather than prolonged mindfulness. metta matheesha --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > Hi Matheesha, > op 24-03-2005 01:55 schreef matheesha op dhammachat@h...: > I'm reffering to the statements about nibbana > > saying it is devoid of this or that (sun moon etc!)-ie- it is stated > > in the negative in some places. > > Perhaps another point is that the buddha sought a state beyond the > > eigth jhana, which is nirodha. Is this not an 'experience' (or more > > acurately non experience) of nibbana? > N: Attainment of Extinction, nirodha samaapatti: suspension of all mental > activity. Anagamis and arahats who also have developed jhaana can reach > this. They should have masteries of all the stages of jhaana and devlop > insight in between the stages of jhaana. This extinction, nirodha, is not > the experience of nibbaana. When that person emerges from it he experiences > nibbaana with the phalacitta of the anagami or arahat, depending on the > stage of enlightenment he has reached. > > M: A sothapanna also experiences nibbana for a moment through the > > lokuttara citta, even though there isnt a full eradication of > > defilements. So nibbana can be experienced before this final act. > N: There are four stages of enlightenment and at each stage magga- citta and > phalacittas arise. > > > M: While there is a definite element of mindfulness involved in carrying out > the vitakkasanthana sutta instructions, there seems to be an active element > of changing > > akusala thoughts as well through contemplation etc which is not > > visible in the sathpattana (even though it happens via a different > > mechanism there). > N: As to contemplation...>, yes, also that is citta, a conditioned nama, and it > should be object of mindfulness, otherwise one takes that changing of > thoughts for self. See Application of Mindfulness of citta. > Satipatthana is the Buddha's teaching and even when we read about samatha, > also satipatthana is implied. The jhanacitta should be object of > mindfulness. There isn't anything that cannot be object of mindfulness. When > we remember this, we read all texts in a way different from before. > I cannot see satipatthana as a mechanism, I am not sure what you mean. It is > to be developed. > M: In the gradual teaching there are techniques given for getting rid > > of hinderances which seem to have little do with sathipatthana if i > > remember correctly. Rather they seem to be done in anticipation of > > sathipattana practice. > N: It is very meaningful that the hindrances are in the application of > mindfulness of dhammas. They are conditioned namas. If they are not objects > of mindfulness they can never be eradicated. > In samatha they are only temporarily subdued. > M: ...The Buddha himself mentions the > > dvedhavitakka type of practice, the 'three similies which have never > > been thought of before', and a intentional directing the mind > > towards nibbana in his training as a bodhisattva. The only > > sathipattana type practice he seems to mention is the cemetary > > (bhayaberava) meditation as I recall. > N: In many of his lives he listened to other Buddhas and developed > satipatthana, insight, but not to the stage of gotrabhuu, since he intended > to accumulate the perfections to the degree of being able to become a > sammaasambuddha. > He developed the perfections, and that means, excellent qualities together > with satipatthana, with the aim to eliminate defilements. > > M:I suspect that any practices > > which aim at ridding the mind of lobha,dosa and moha are effective > > in the path (on a background of jhana which make the > > mind 'maleable'). Would that be 'abhihammacially' correct? > N: Not any practice. Only vipassana. Those who had accumulations developed > jhana as well, but they had to be mindful of jhanacitta, otherwise the wrong > view of self could not be eradicated. > M: A word on the self view. It is lost at the sothapanna stage. This is > > ridding of sakkayaditti. This can happen through vipassana practice - > > seeing nama-rupa/hethu-phala etc. However its complete eradication > > occurs when one becomes an arahath according to the suttas. This i > > believe involves removing entirely from thoughts any 'feeling' of > > self > N: wrong view is eradicated at the sotapanna stage. But after that there is > still conceit, thinking 'oneself' important or clinging to 'oneself' without > wrong view. The arahat has eradicated conceit. We have to differentiate > between wrong view and conceit. Even when one clearly understands that what > we take for self are the five khandhas arising and falling away, one may, > because of accumulations, still find these khandhas important. > Nina. 43594 From: Matthew Miller Date: Thu Mar 24, 2005 5:06pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Rupa Madness: Seeing with the Tongue Andrew: > When I did > undergrad anthropology, it was my impression that the de Waal type > theories all still rested upon "self view" (mostly in the sense of > passing on genes) i.e. that there had to be a pay-off in > evolutionary terms for "ethical behaviour". That is why I > suspected that your inner ethical direction-finder was > essentially a form of self-view and/or a type of clinging > in Dhamma terms. > > Was I right? Hot? Warm? Cold? > I'm not talking about my own personal "inner ethical direction-finder. " I'm looking at the evidence from evolutionary biology to see what the roots of moral behavior in homo sapiens might be. As a species, our moral behavior is definitely instinctual. To say that this instinct derives from the "self view" of individuals does not account for all of the evidence, and reflects an earlier more primitive concept of Darwinism. For example, it does not account for phenomena such as kin selection and eusociality, where organisms act against their individual interests (in the sense of health, safety or personal reproduction). Have you read Dawkins's "The Selfish Gene"? Despite the title (which should prick any good Buddhist's ears), it does not actually argue that genes somehow have selfish motives (any more than viruses do), but rather that they act as if they do. A crude analogy would be the old joke "A chicken is just an egg's way of making more eggs." Dawkins describes biological organisms as "vehicles" used by their genes for making more copies of those genes. Actually, this dovetails nicely with the Buddhist notion that the "self" is constructed. Our neurological sensation of "self" is not actually the control center of our being, but just an illusion, an adapative strategy of the genes. Matthew 43595 From: connie Date: Thu Mar 24, 2005 9:23pm Subject: Re: Rupa Madness: Seeing with the Tongue Hi, Guys, Just joining AndrewL in a bit of mischief. Matthew: Later I discovered that Buddhism, like every religion, has its share of Sutta-thumping Fundamentalists. Connie: heavy sigh. co-miserating for fun. "This verse was stated by earlier worthy ones, fully self-awakened: 'Freedom from disease: the foremost good fortune. Unbinding: the foremost ease. The eightfold: the foremost of paths going to the Deathless, Secure.' "But now it has gradually become a verse of run-of-the-mill people." [MN 75: Magandiya S. (TB)] There comes a time when the Summoner lies silently forgotten behind the dark curtain no one knows is there. Groping blindly in the dark, one is led by craving, conceit and a mistaken belief in a self to identify 'This is mine (etam mama), this I am (esoham asmi), and this is myself (eso me atta)' [?], not remarking that "What the world at large considers Truth (idam saccamti upanijjhayitam) has been viewed as falsehood by the Noble (Ariya) through their consummate comprehension, whilst the Noble hail as Truth what the world deems falsehood" [SN.III,12]. Sound the Tipitaka of the Ultimate Science that one might follow the Ancient Way "for the purification of beings, for the overcoming of sorrow and lamentation, for the disappearance of pain and grief, for reaching the Noble Path, for the realization of Nibbana" [DN 22; MN 10] pointed out by "the Arahat in the world, a teacher peerless". "Empty of Ascetics are the other ways of thought. Resound thus, O Bhikkhus, your swelling diapason of just rejoicing." [Cula Sihanada Sutta] Matthew: I'm looking at the evidence from evolutionary biology to see what the roots of moral behavior in homo sapiens might be. As a species, our moral behavior is definitely instinctual. To say that this instinct derives from the "self view" of individuals does not account for all of the evidence, and reflects an earlier more primitive concept of Darwinism. For example, it does not account for phenomena such as kin selection and eusociality, where organisms act against their individual interests (in the sense of health, safety or personal reproduction) Connie: Ethics? Evolution? A fun read in 'primitive thought': www.webcastmy.com.my/bodhivision/aganna/agannaS.PDF Also, Maha-nidana Sutta [http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/digha/dn15.html]: "...Now, craving is dependent on feeling, seeking is dependent on craving, acquisition is dependent on seeking, ascertainment is dependent on acquisition, desire and passion is dependent on ascertainment, attachment is dependent on desire and passion, possessiveness is dependent on attachment, stinginess is dependent on possessiveness, defensiveness is dependent on stinginess, and because of defensiveness, dependent on defensiveness, various evil, unskillful phenomena come into play: the taking up of sticks and knives; conflicts, quarrels, and disputes; accusations, divisive speech, and lies." I think Bhikkhu Dhammadharo's is a nice, scientific statement: "There is no nature which is a whole, which is desirable. Dukkha, unsatisfactory is not sukha, pleasant. Different elements can be known one at a time through the six doorways. This will lead to detachment. Things are not as we would like them to be and they never will. They are as they are. They arise and then fall away again. We should see the truth of disintegration." Just elements... see MN 140 / M iii 238 - Dhatu-vibhanga Sutta - An Analysis of the Properties: "A person has six properties, six media of sensory contact, eighteen considerations, & four determinations. He has been stilled where the currents of construing do not flow. And when the currents of construing do not flow, he is said to be a sage at peace. One should not be negligent of discernment, should guard the truth, be devoted to relinquishment, and train only for calm. This is the summary of the analysis of the six properties." Or if that seems a little dry to drink in, consider the pounding of this "Drum of the Deathless": "the element of happiness, the element of anguish, the element of gladness, the element of sorrowing, the element of equanimity, the element of ignorance." [Discourse on the Manyfold Elements' (Middle Length Sayings III, 115)]. peace, connie 43596 From: connie Date: Thu Mar 24, 2005 9:23pm Subject: Re: New view on satipatthana 2 Hi, Andrew, Andrew: I am willing to listen to more views on this because I have had what seems like sati of a diffeferent nature arise at some times but not others (ie, "30 minutes of sati in a day? You're a rich man" as you quoted at one point in time.). Connie: [link?] BE HERE NOW - Bhikkhu Dhammadharo: peace, connie 43597 From: sarah abbott Date: Thu Mar 24, 2005 10:11pm Subject: ‘Cetasikas' study corner 155- Determination /adhimokkha & Energy/viriya (e) 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.9 Determination(adhimokkha) & Energy(viriya) contd] When one develops calm there is adhimokkha which is determined, sure about the object, which is in this case an object of samatha. When jhåna is attained adhimokkha accompanies the jhåna-citta and it performs its function of being determined as to the object of absorption. When one develops right understanding of nåma and rúpa, there is adhimokkha accompanying the kusala citta. We may believe that we can decide to make sati arise, but there is no self who can decide this. When there are the appropriate conditions for sati and paññå they arise and then there is also adhimokkha which performs its function while it accompanies the kusala citta. When one begins to develop right understanding of nåma and rúpa, there will be doubt as to their different characteristics. When there is doubt adhimokkha does not arise. When there is right mindfulness of the nåma or rúpa which appears, adhimokkha performs its function of being “convinced”, sure about the object. ***** [Ch.8 Determination(adhimokkha) & Energy(viriya))to be contd] Metta, Sarah ====== 43598 From: lokuttaracitta Date: Thu Mar 24, 2005 11:27pm Subject: [dsg] Re Rob K: Buddha Nature --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "lokuttaracitta" wrote: > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "rjkjp1" wrote: > > > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "lokuttaracitta" > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Lokuttacittas are known as such only by the "Subsequent" > > reviewing > > > cittas which are conditioned. > > > There can not be direct knowledge of lokuttaracittas. > > > > > > How can Theravadin exclude the possiblity that lokuttaracittas > are > > > unconditioned nama? > > > > > >========== > > Dear LK, > > On the point about direct experience. It has subtle meanings. > > For example the Paramatthamanjusa (see note 7 VII Visuddhimagga) > > talks about the Buddhas knowledge of past and future > > "and the Buddha's knowledge that has past and future as its > > objective field is entirely actual experience since it is devoid of > > assumption based on inference, tradition or conjecture" > > Robertk > > Dear RK > > As an orthodox theravadin, > > > > 1)Is it appropriate to say,"For the Buddhas, every nama and rupa > and > > pannatti(concepts)of every sacred one and worldly being in the > past > > and the present and the future can exist timelessly." > ===========] > Dear LC, > No that would be incorrect. All namas and rupas are incredibly > temporary, they barely last at all. > ============== Dear RK Thanks a lot for your help! Q-1 The note 7 VII Visuddhimagga says, "it is called omniscient knowledge becaue its objective field consists of formed, unformed,and conventional(sammuti) [i.e.conceptural]dhammas without remainder." Do not the objects of the Buddha's omniscient knowledge include formed ,unformed and conventional dhammas in the past and the future ? > > > > 2)Can you say " Wisdom in lokuttaracittas of Sotapana or > Sakadagami > > without any abhinna have entirely actual experience that has past > and > > future as its objective field since it is devoid of assumption > based > > on inference, tradition or conjecture" > > > ===========-- > Sotapanna and sakadagami without abhinna do not directly know the > future. But they do know directly the immediately past cittas when > reviewing knowledge of change of lineage occurs: > as Nina said 'No citta > can know itself, but shortly after it has fallen away paññaa can > have direct > understanding of its characteristic. There can be direct > understanding of a > dhamma even though it has just fallen away' > > RobertK Q-2 There is Bhavanga citta between falling away of a Sotapanna's Pharacitta and arising of the Subsequent Reviewing knowledge. Can the reviewing knowledge still be called "direct knowledge devoid of assumption based on inference when the Sotapanna has no abbhinna ? Metta from LK 43599 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Thu Mar 24, 2005 11:40pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re:Buddha Nature Hi, Joop Joop wrote: >Dear all > >Back to the initial question: Is it possible to interprete the >(Mahayana-)concept 'Buddha-Nature' in Theravada-language, so that >this can be used in a fruitful dicsussion between Mahayanists and >Theravadins? > > Although I doubt that this will lead to anything, I'm willing to follow along to see ;-)). I would say that if 'Buddha-Nature' is to fit into the Theravada scheme of things, it would have to be one of the following: - a dhamma, apprehendible through one of the doorways (presusmably the mind door) - an attribute of dhammas, or of a particular dhamma - a condition describing the relationship between dhammas - a natural law Otherwise it would be a term that is descriptive of some thing or state, which would make it a concept I suppose. Don't know if this is helpful. Jon