45200 From: "nichiconn" Date: Fri May 6, 2005 8:47pm Subject: thank you / dsg nichiconn i think thanks for the thoughts of well-being and still can't help wishing things a bit perversely: May every day be a good day to die. halleluya. ;) Every breath the last. Steam on the mirror, or glass on the screen door here today. Inhale as it fades/shrinks. Does dying happy count? who cares? It's done and gone on. What's that word? tathA agata ?? 4 things are always gone to some description/mark of : manifestation (manifest destiny!) tilakkhana, goes w/out saying. uniqueness? relentlessness? Lisa is my mother's name. rambling, c. 45201 From: upasaka@... Date: Fri May 6, 2005 6:49pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Concepts vs. Real Objects [was Re:1. characteristic> 2. function> 3... upasaka_howard Hi, Tep - In a message dated 5/6/05 11:42:42 PM Eastern Daylight Time, tepsastri@... writes: Hi, Howard (Htoo and anyone -- please butt in) - Thank you very much for taking time to write me about the "concepts" and "realities". Let me list some highlights of your explanation: -- "when the mind is engaged in thinking, .. it does so largely in terms of conventional ideas that are not actually occurring things at all". The concepts are "merely mentally projected, mentally superimposed on those phenomena that actually do occur". -- Realities are "directly arising" actual "objects of onsciousness". "So, for example, there are hardness sensations, odors, and sights etc." -- "Perceptions (or, perhaps better, recognitions) are mental operations that actually occur". They are "among the khandhic elements that the Buddha teaches us it is possible to be aware of and to note their impermanence, inadequacy, and emptiness of self. In the sense that they actually occur", they are "real". T: I really like your way with words, Howard! Now, just for the sake of expanding my understanding further, let me refer to Acharn Sujin's definitions of Pannatti and Paramattha in her e-book "Summary of Paramatthadhamma", 2000, in the following 2 paragraphs: "The paramattha-dhamma are realities that truly exist but not entities, persons or the self. The paramattha-dhamma are only citta, cetasika and rupa of distinct characteristics and signs that arise because of causes and conditions and fall rapidly away. Whenever one does not know the characteristics of citta, cetasika and rupa as paramattha- dhamma that arise and fall away in very rapid sequence, then there is knowledge of pannatti (concept/signification/name) or taking signs of rupa and nama, which arise and fall away in very rapid continuation as something. Therefore those who do not know the characteristics of paramattha-dhamma are in the world of sammati-sacca (conventional truth) because they take realities that appear by their signs and forms as something real. "Each day pannatti hides the characteristics of paramattha-dhamma through eyes, ears, nose, tongue, bodysense and mind so that one does not know realities as they truly are: that the reality appearing through the eyes, is not an entity, a person or the self, but only colors and features that appear when in contact with the cakkhuppasada [eye-sense]. Only when panna has developed until it knows the truth when seeing could it attenuates attachment to the reality as a self, an entity or a person, and know the differences between paramattha- arammana and pannatti-arammana. The same applies to the ears, nose, tongue, bodysense and mind. [endquote] May I ask you and all other DSG members a question? According to the above definition, the paramattha-dhamma "arise because of causes and conditions and fall rapidly away", then is it correct to say that you and I (assuming that we don't have yathabhuta- nana-dassana) only know and see pannatti (or concepts) in every moment, because the true realities are too fast for us to catch them the moment they arise or fall away? ------------------------------------------------ Howard: I don't think so. I have not been persuaded by the speed argument. After all, what is observed is observed in the very mindstates that are "so quickly moving". It is not as if there is a "watcher" standing back and observing a rapid stream of mindstates; the mindstates themselves are the observational states! I believe we are taken in by the magician-mind's creation of a world of concept due to fundamental avijja. ------------------------------------------------ My doubt is supported by A. Sujin's own words : "Therefore those who do not know the characteristics of paramattha-dhamma are in the world of sammati-sacca (conventional truth) because they take realities that appear by their signs and forms as something real". Since everything appears as a "concept" to us (the worldlings), then why do some worldling DSG members try so hard to make me feel that it is wrong to take "concepts" as the objects of my meditation, eventhough they themselves don't know or see the realities? ---------------------------------------------- Howard: We don't experience only conceptually. When we experience hardness or warmth or a sight, we do so directly at first and the conceptualizing follows upon that. A feature of "mindfulness meditation" according to Nyanaponika Thera is to prolong the direct observational phase of observing. Whether that is so or not, cerrtainly Buddhist practice enables one to begin to see through concepts to the actual phenomena on which they are superimposed. In any case, I do not think it is wrong to take pa~n~natti as objects of meditation. THAT IS WHERE THE DHAMMAS ARE! When the Buddha taught the Anapanasati Sutta, he directed us to put our attention on the breath, not on the experiential realities of touch sensation, warmth, coolness, moisture, etc that we actually experience when "attending to the breath". Attending to the breath puts our attention where the action is. As we do so, eventually "breath" disappears, and what remains are dhammas.The seeing through the breath to the dhammas is a form of insight. And then we see that these dhammas themselves are *radically* impermanent, without substance, and without own-being: dependent, inseparable, momentary waves in an experiential stream that makes the wildest sci-fi scenarios seem ordinary by comparison. ---------------------------------------------------- Tep: Is it fair to say that we don't have any choice except using concepts as the objects of our Satipatthana, or Anapanasat meditation, for now, until one day when yathabhuta-nana arises? After that moment, of course, all realities will be seen as realities, and no more concepts would apprear anymore. --------------------------------------------------- Howard: I would say that is correct. We begin where we are, not where we would hope to be. BTW, I have long thought that the 4th foundation of mindfulness, dhammanupassana, is the stage of real mindfulness meditation and represents the advanced point at which concepts have been seen through and we are looking directly at realities, "face to face, and not as through a glass darkly". ---------------------------------------------------- Respectfully, Tep =========================== 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) 45202 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri May 6, 2005 11:17pm Subject: ‘Cetasikas' study corner 186 - Enthusiasm/piiti (d) sarahprocter... 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.11 Enthusiasm (piiti) contd] As we have seen, in the case of the kåmåvacara cittas, píti arises with the cittas which are accompanied by pleasant feeling. Whenever there is interest in the object and delight with it there is also pleasant feeling; in such cases there cannot be indifferent feeling or unpleasant feeling. In the case of akusala cittas, píti arises with the types of lobha múla-cittas which are accompanied by pleasant feeling1. When the lobha-múla-citta is accompanied by pleasant feeling, the lobha is more intense than when it is accompanied by indifferent feeling. Píti which arises together with lobha-múla-citta accompanied by pleasant feeling takes an interest in the desirable object, it is delighted, thrilled with it. For example, when we have thoroughly enjoyed listening to beautiful music we may applaud with great enthusiasm. When we admire a musician, a painter or a famous sportsman, there may be many moments of lobha-múla-citta with píti. Whenever we are attached to an object with pleasant feeling, there is also píti. The object may be a pleasant sight, a beautiful sound, a fragrant odour, a delicious flavour, a pleasant tangible object or an agreeable object experienced through the mind-door. There are many moments of akusala píti we are not aware of. *** 1) See Abhidhamma in Daily Life, Chapter 4. ***** [Ch.11 Enthusiasm (piiti) to be contd] Metta, Sarah ====== 45203 From: "Lisa" Date: Sat May 7, 2005 0:20am Subject: Re: thank you / dsg foamflowers Dear Connie, In many mahayana teachings to remember that we all have at one time or another been each others mother is a way of unbinding from clinging to self, fear, hatred and loathing of other. I found a word you used, 'tilakkhana' and I remembered something. This article is very much like what I was taught in vipassana meditation. Part of a larger article I read a while back because I happen to like the word 'Naana' http://www.palikanon.com/english/practice_insight/direction.htm From the 4th ñána onwards one enters the stages of vipassaná-ñána and meditates in order to gain a clear comprehension of the three characteristics anicca, dukkha, anattá. One cannot go searching for the tilakkhana; but if one notes the presently existing rúpa-náma perceiving the arising and vanishing, then the tilakkhana, which are the uggaha-nimitta (acquired sign) of vipassaná, will become more evident. It is the function of anuloma to concentrate on this uggaha-nimitta which is the nature of the 5 rúpa-náma-kkhandha. In every consciousness-process, that is in every act of noticing, there arises then: parikamma-upacára-anuloma-patiloma (preparation, access, thrusting forward, receding again), because the strength of anuloma is not sufficient to yield or turn into absorption. In the development of patipadá-ñána-dassana or vipassaná-ñána, understanding and perception of the three characteristics gain power and thus anuloma becomes stronger. It is said, when the meditator has reached sankhárupekkhá-ñána and makes an effort to contemplate persistently so as to increase and make much of sankhárupekkhá, then saddhá (confidence and faith) of the meditator will become intrepid, his energy will be supported well, sati becomes firmly established, the mind is very concentrated, and sankhárupekkhá becomes unshakable. Then sankhárupekkhá-ñána of that meditator will become aware that the maggañána is about to arise now. Therefore it considers all sankhára as either anicca or dukkha or anattá --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "nichiconn" wrote: > i think thanks for the thoughts of well-being and still can't help > wishing things a bit perversely: May every day be a good day to die. > halleluya. ;) > Every breath the last. Steam on the mirror, or glass on the screen > door here today. Inhale as it fades/shrinks. Does dying happy > count? who cares? It's done and gone on. What's that word? tathA > agata ?? > > 4 things are always gone to some description/mark of : > manifestation (manifest destiny!) > tilakkhana, goes w/out saying. > uniqueness? relentlessness? > > Lisa is my mother's name. > rambling, > c. 45204 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Sat May 7, 2005 0:25am Subject: Concepts vs. Real Objects [was Re:1. characteristic> 2. function> 3. ...] buddhatrue --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Tep Sastri" wrote: > > Hi, Howard (Htoo and anyone -- please butt in) - Hi Tep, You offered for anyone to butt in so I am going to take you up on your offer. Really, I have debated these items many times in this group but now I feel energetic and well-rested (having gotten my needed medication for my sleeping disorder- and am back to meditating), and I feel that maybe these issues are important to discuss again and again: Tep: Since everything appears as a "concept" to us (the worldlings), then why do some worldling DSG members try so hard to make me feel that it is wrong to take "concepts" as the objects of my meditation, James: You are quite correct in your assertion that they try to make you *feel* as if you are doing something wrong. This approach of theirs has, in the past, been the condition for me to write some very scathing and hot retorts. I really don't like it when someone tries to make me feel like I am doing something wrong when I know that I am not. However, it is important to keep your dignity and your wits about you and to remember that they are the ones with the problem. If they didn't feel some deep insecurity about their own Buddhist practice or wisdom, they wouldn't try so hard to make others feel bad or wrong. Tep: even though they themselves don't know or see the realities? James: Yes, it is hypocritical. They preach something that they are not able to do (perhaps therein lies the insecurity I mention above). Also, I don't like the term `realities', it is very misleading. It is better to use the terminology the Abhidhamma uses, "dhammas". The human mind defines reality, either correctly or incorrectly, and dhammas are those constituents which lie outside of this definition of `reality'. Actually, true `realities' are concepts. Tep: Is it fair to say that we don't have any choice except using concepts as the objects of our Satipatthana, or Anapanasat meditation, for now, until one day when yathabhuta-nana arises? James: Of course we have no choice but to use `concepts' as the objects of Satipatthana- BECAUSE THAT IS WHAT THE BUDDHA TAUGHT! The Buddha taught in the Satipatthana Sutta that we should use the breath and the 32 parts of the body as objects of contemplation. These things are not `dhammas', but so what? Now, the other camp (K. Sujinians, for want of a better term) are starting to come up with a new argument: Suttas don't really mean what they say if the whole Tipitaka is taken into account (the Suttas, Abhidhamma, and Commentaries- they always conveniently leave out the Vinaya since the Vinaya blows their theory out of the water immediately ;). First of all, those who make this argument don't know the `Whole Tipitaka' to make such a ludicrous assertion. Bhikkhu Bodhi, who would probably be the only one posting to this group who is qualified as knowing the `Whole Tipitaka', doesn't agree with their half-baked theories (that should tell you and them something!). Additionally, it should be remembered that the audience during the Buddha's time didn't know the `Whole Tipitaka' because it wasn't even completely formed yet or they had heard but only parts! The K. Sujinians seem to think that the sons of the Buddha had a large stack of books in front of each of them so that they could check and cross-reference everything the Buddha spoke. Obviously, that wasn't the case. Tep: After that moment, of course, all realities will be seen as realities, and no more concepts would apprear anymore. James: Here I don't agree with you. It seems to me that you are trying to reach a `compromise' with the K. Sujinians, and that isn't necessary. Arahants and the Buddha still saw `reality' in terms of concepts, or they wouldn't have been able to function in the world. Of course, they were able to see past the surface appearance of concepts because they were no longer attached to them. Metta, James 45205 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Sat May 7, 2005 0:29am Subject: James' Contribution [was Re: Breathing. - Htoo/Sukinder's Panna...] buddhatrue Hi Tep, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Tep Sastri" wrote: > > Hi James and Kel - > > In message # 45166, James wrote : Very nice summary, Tep. > -- 'When the wisdom has affected that which it has to do, then the > wisdom ceases to go on. But that which has been acquired by means > of it remains--the knowledge of the impermanence of every being, of > the suffering inherent in individuality, and of the absence of any soul.' > > The last item is most interesting. Maybe it has something to do with > accumulations. I'm not sure what it has to do with, but I think it is important to remember. 'Wisdom' rises for a purpose and then it goes away. It would be wrong to call the Buddha or Arahnts 'wise' because they have gone past wisdom. > > > Respectfully yours, > > > Tep > Metta, James 45206 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sat May 7, 2005 0:54am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Breathing. jonoabb Hi Nina (and Tep), and All To my great relief, my internet connection problems seem to be resolved (fingers crossed). Nina, hope this reaches you before you go away for the week. Nina van Gorkom wrote: >Hi Jon and Tep, >I looked again at the text. Kh Sujin was explaining how Mindfulness of >in-&-out breathing, when developed & pursued, is of great fruit, of great >benefit. >Her answer was: through satipatthana, by using it as an object of insight. >Nina. > > Thanks for these remarks. Yes, I need to correct what I said in my earlier post, when I suggested that the first tetrad of the Anapanasati Sutta was to be distinguished from the remaining 3 by being limited to samatha. As you point out, all 4 tetrads relate to satipatthana. Jon PS Nina and Lodewijk, hope you enjoy your trip. 45207 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sat May 7, 2005 1:22am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: sati and no sati, Intellectual Understanding, no 2 jonoabb Hi Tep I hope you don't mind me butting in here ;-)) You have quoted a number of suttas that refer to concentration and/or jhana. I'd like to make some general comments about concentration. Where a sutta refers to 'concentration' in the context of the development of the path, it is of course only kusala concentration that is meant. While this may seem obvious, it is important to note, because concentration can be kusala or akusala, depending on the citta it accompanies. When is concentration kusala? Concentration is kusala if (and only if) it accompanies kusala consciousness. That is to say, there can only be kusala concentration if there is kusala of one kind or another arising. As you know, there are different kinds of kusala, and one way of classifying kusala is as dana, sila and bhavana. Bhavana encompasses both samatha ('tranquillity) and vipassana ('insight'). So when we read in a sutta reference to concentration, we need to ask ourselves whether the reference is to the concentration that accompanies samatha bhavana or the concentration that accompanies vipassana bhavana. If it is samatha bhavana that is referred to, we need to further ask whether this is mentioned for the reason that, for example, the listeners are monks who are already skilled in samatha, and thus have the potential for attaining enlightenment with jhana as basis. A classic example of the latter (i.e., a reference to samatha in a teaching given to monks who are already skilled in samatha) would be the Anapanasati Sutta, which you are considering in another thread. It is clear from the introductory part of that sutta that the monks are already developing anapanasati. In such cases, we should be careful about taking the sutta to mean that anyone who wishes to develop insight (from the beginning), should start with the development of anapanasati. In summary, 'samadhi' sometimes refers to the concentration that accompanies samatha, and sometimes to the concentration that accompanies insight. We need to find out from the context or from the commentaries which of these is intended in the particular case. A similar thing applies as regards references to jhana. Sometimes it refers to the jhana that is the outcome of the development of samatha, and sometimes to the momentary concentration that accompanies a moment of path consciousness. The concentration that accompanies a moment of path consciousness is said to be of the intensity of jhana. I hope you find this useful. I'll try to make some comments on your specific sutta quotes (trimmed for the purpose of this reply) in a separate post. Jon Tep Sastri wrote: >Dear Nina and Sukinder - > >Intellectual understanding is necessary at the beginning when we >study the Dhamma (pariyatti). However, it is a mistake to believe that >intellectual understanding alone is strong enough as the supporting >condition for knowledge and vision of realities: it is concentration >(samadhi) that is the supporting condition for knowledge and vision of >realities. I have at least three evidences from the suttas plus some >advice from Bhikkhu Bodhi's book to prove my point. Please read the >following excerpts with an open mind. > >(I) Concentration supports discernment (panna). > "Develop concentration, monks. A concentrated monk discerns things >as they actually are present." SN XXXV.99, Samadhi Sutta. ... > > 45208 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sat May 7, 2005 1:32am Subject: Re: [dsg] Self & No Self jonoabb Hi, Naresh Just a short comment to supplement Nina's response. naresh gurwani wrote: >Another query why is it so difficult to accept tht >there is no self, iam trying to understand , but it is >quite difficult to accept the fact of No -self > >but on the other hand iam very much keen on knowing >only Truth, >So self & no self is a big battle field inside me this >2 clashes & make my living worse. > > The teaching on 'no-self' is the deepest, most difficult part of the entire teachings to properly grasp. It is something that can only be appreciated step by step, as the understanding of dhammas is gradually developed. We should not worry too much about not seeing this in the beginning. As you have commented, this only makes things more difficult, not less difficult. Jon 45209 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sat May 7, 2005 1:38am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: 44's up jonoabb Hi Connie I enjoyed your original post, especially the great verses from Dispeller about ageing as suffering. Some of the descriptions there were me to a tee! Thanks for the thoughts. Hope you're feeling better by now. Jon connie wrote: > dear Sarah, Jon, All, >there was nothing cryptic intended... just that the archives are updated >& birthday greetings. I remembered saying I'd take my nose out of the >book long enough to write when a keyboard washed up on my desert island as >I was dropping a wet rag onto the burning one & that struck me as being >rather funny at the time. So did my friend's screaming and running out of >the house, but considering she wouldn't even be buying this one if her old >one hadn't burnt to the ground, perhaps all those people who've suggested >that my sense of humour isn't quite what it should be have a point. >Anyway, seems whatever I'd been trying to fight off the few days before >that took advantage of the situation and I've been sicker than a dog >since, so fever is my excuse for any more than usual lack of sense. >peace, >connie on the way back to bed > > 45210 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sat May 7, 2005 1:39am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: ‘Cetasikas' study corner 181- Right Effort of the eightfold Path (l) jonoabb Hi Azita gazita2002 wrote: > Hello Sarah and other friends, > I understand birthday greetings are in order - but I'm unsure >whether its you or Jon - anyway, I'll send wishes to both of you and >then that covers it for this year :-) > > Yep, it is (or was) both of us. Thanks a lot! Jon 45211 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sat May 7, 2005 1:50am Subject: Re: [dsg] Instructions ..by the buddha? jonoabb Hi Mateesha I would certainly agree that there are suttas in which the Buddha encouraged the development of samatha (and I think no-one on this list has ever suggested otherwise). And similarly he taught the development of insight with jhana consciousness as basis. The more important (and, apparently, controversial) question is whether he always taught samatha when teaching insight. Do you have any thoughts to share on this? Jon matheesha wrote: >Samatha and vipassana has been likened to two wheels on the chariot >of the dhamma. The buddha said that he would teach samatha to those >who knew vipassana and vice versa. > >The current theravada world seems to be in the grip of sathipatthana >and seems to have forgotten that it is not that simple. To reject >everything else is simply to blinkered and sometimes just be trying >to run on one wheel. > >If a teacher was teaching his students to meditate on golden lotuses >would you say this is sathipattana? > >If a teacher was teaching his students to meditate by rubbing on a >white cloth, is this sathipattana? > >Yet both these methods are instructions by the buddha. > >Is there only so much you can know by a 'one size fits all' attitude >towards the dhamma? When carefully built up castles of concepts >start crumbling what is left? What is left to investigate in ones >own mind? > >metta > >Matheesha > > 45212 From: "htootintnaing" Date: Sat May 7, 2005 1:54am Subject: [dsg] Re:1. characteristic> 2. function> 3. manifestation> 4.proximate cause htootintnaing Tep wrote: Dear Htoo: I asked you whether the body (32 parts + breaths) was real, and your answer was as follows: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: Dear Tep. I think there seems to remain unsettled question. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > Htoo: > > When you look for hair, teeth, you will not finally discover anything > > that is hair. What you find as hair, teeth are in your mind. They are > > not first-hand object. And never can they be. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Tep: Are rupa, citta, cetasikas and nibbana not found in your mind? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: Paramattha dhamma can come to you in both ways. One way is in the form of paramattha dhamma. Another way is in the form of pannatti. When they come to you in the form of pannatti, they are not of your first-hand object. If still not clear further explanations are ready for you and anyone else. So rupa, citta, cetasikas and nibbana are found in my mind. They may be first-hand object or they may be later object. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Tep: Are any of then "first-hand" object? Why? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: There are 7 ruupa that are 1st hand object. 1. sight 2. sound 3. smell 4. taste 5. hardness 6. temperature 7. pressure Citta can also be 1st hand object only after thorough and repeated learning. So do cetasikas. Nibbana is only first hand object only when lokuttara cittas arise. All pannatti are constructions. Why? because 7 ruupas do serving as objects. As they are objects and ruupa they are 1st hand object. Citta can also be 1st hand through manodvarika cittas. Why because, it can serve as dhamma-arammana. So do cetasikas and nibbana. Pannatti is not first-hand object. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Tep: Specifically, what about perception? Is perception real? Do you discover perception as perception? How? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: Perception (Sanna) is cetasika. If you are talking about 'perception' that appears in conventional books, it may have different meanings. But sanna is real. So if you referred to sanna as perception, it is real. You asked 'Do you discover perception as perception?' This is I think asking personal opinion. I do not need to answer this question. But to generalize, anyone can discover perception (sanna) as perception (sanna). ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Respectfully and with kind regards, Tep Your Dhamma friend ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Friends Always, Htoo Naing 45213 From: "htootintnaing" Date: Sat May 7, 2005 1:56am Subject: [dsg] Re:1. characteristic> 2. function> 3. manifestation> 4.proximate cause htootintnaing --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, LBIDD@w... wrote: > Hi Htoo, > > Does abhidhamma have anything to say about groups such as rupa kalapas > or the mental body with respect to these four features? Are groups of > realities (khandhas) considered to be real? > > Larry -------------------------------------------------- ---------------------- Dear Larry, Kalapas are working units. So they are real and can be experienced. With Metta, Htoo Naing 45214 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sat May 7, 2005 1:56am Subject: Re: [dsg] Breathing & Path of Discrimination/ Introduction jonoabb Hi Tep Tep Sastri wrote: >Great suggestion, Jon! I do have the Thai version and it will not be any >trouble for me to incorporate nice things from it into the presentation. >But the Pali supplement is beyond my reach (like trying to pick a fruit >from a tall tree?)-- maybe I can make an attempt at it, but I do need help >to correct inevitable errors! > > I'm afraid I would be no help in correcting errors in Pali translation, due to my own lamentable lack of Pali skills. ;-)) Looking forward to your extracts from the Thai. Jon 45215 From: "rjkjp1" Date: Sat May 7, 2005 2:19am Subject: Re: Breathing Meditation Rob K part 1. rjkjp1 --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "htootintnaing" wrote: > Rob K wrote: > > Dear Htoo, > > I don't know that phrase, what is the pali? Why do you ask? > Robertk > -------------------------------------------------- > Htoo: > > Dear Rob K, > > I do have a very special reason for asking this question. > > The Buddha just said 'when bhikkhu breathes in long, he knows he > breathes in long'. > > May I ask another time? > > Did The Buddha say 'note incoming air and outgoing air' 'note nose, > mouth, lip' etc in mahaasatipatthaana sutta? > > ======== Dear Htoo, I don't remember that section of the satipatthana sutta, I don't think he did. Robertk 45216 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Sat May 7, 2005 3:13am Subject: Re: Breathing. - Sukinder's Pudding - Hasituppada kenhowardau Hi Tep, --------------------------------------- T: > In this message you mentioned "insight into conditioned dhammas" and said it was the "momentary arising of panna to take another conditioned nama or rupa as its object". Honestly speaking, have you ever had such experience ----------------------------------------- Do I want to have such experience? When panna takes a paramattha dhamma as its object there are only dhammas. Am I ready to know there is no Ken H? I don't know. But I think, when I am ready, I will know. :-) ------------------------------------------------------------ T: > without using a samatha meditation as described in the Kayagatasati Sutta? ------------------------------------------------------------- Please refer to previous DSG threads on the nature of samatha meditation. Please refer also to the many suttas that describe vipassana being developed at any time and in any situation. ----------------------------------- H: > I have often had such "awareness of rupa and nama" while I do walking meditation slowly or breathing meditation. ---------------------------------- No matter how slowly you walk or breathe, you cannot directly know nama and rupa. Only panna and sati can do that. Panna and sati are paramattha dhammas, not self. ------------------------------- KenH : > > Again, I shouldn't sidetrack our conversation, but have you noticed the wording, "There is the case where a monk remains focussed"? It is not, "Perform the following exercises in order to create right mindfulness": it is simply a description of a case where monk is already practising right mindfulness. ........... T: > This issue is not a sidetrack one for me. So please allow me to say a few words here. Whether that is "a description of a case where monk is already practising right mindfulness" or "perform the following exercises in order to create right mindfulness", the effect on me is the same. To me the sutta elaborates on the detailed activity of a prototype meditator (call him a "monk" or a "bhikkhu") that I can use as my model. -------------------------------- Well, I would urge you to reconsider. By all means understand, to the best of your ability, what the bhikkhus in that sutta are doing, but do not imitate them. ------------------------------------------ T: > I don't waste time worrying too much about the wordings and their interpretation the way you do, because that does not benefit me as a meditator. I am not a language expert. I am not a philosopher. It is not my concern whether this or that object of meditation is a concept (pannatti) or a reality (paramattha) as long as the Buddha recommended it; it must work for me too. I am not a debater either. ------------------------------------------ You can practise the Buddha's teaching only to the extent that you have heard and understood it. If there is ignorance, then know there is ignorance because the only way to have respect for the Buddha is to understand the present reality, whatever it is. Ken H 45217 From: "hasituppada" Date: Sat May 7, 2005 3:40am Subject: Re: Breathing. - Sukinder's Pudding - Hasituppada hasituppada DearKenH, You say in a reply to Tep, ".......then know thereis ignorance because the only way to have respect for the Buddha isto understand the present reality, whatever it is." I have neither the lower panna nor the higher panna. Could you please, explain to me what is "the PRESENT REALITY" ? with metta, Hasituppada 45218 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Sat May 7, 2005 0:28am Subject: Nibbana - right here & now - in this very life or Non-return ... !!! bhikkhu_ekamuni Friends: How to Cut the Five Minor Mental Chains : Friends, how do one cut the 5 minor mental chains of: a.. Identity and personality belief. b.. Sceptical doubt in the Buddha. c.. Superstitious clinging to rule & ritual. d.. Greed, desire, lust and attraction. e.. Hate, anger, irritation, & aversion. In whatever situation or mental state one enters, whether high or low, whether fine or foul, whether subtle or gross, whether far or near, one knows, notes, reflects and remembers the facts exactly like this: 'Whatsoever herein is form, feeling, experience, mental construction, & bare consciousness, all this is impermanent, transient, passing, unstable, decaying, and vanishing; all this is miserable, painful, ill, a thorn, a tumour, a disaster, a torture, and a burning pit; all this is remote, alien, impersonal, ownerless, void of stable substance & keepable entity, completely empty of any self-ego-me-I-mine-identity-or-personality...' One thereby directs mind away from those unsafe phenomena and turns it towards the freedom of the Deathless Dimension: Nibbâna like this: 'But this is peace, the supreme stilling of all construction, the relinquishing of all acquisition, the sublime release of all clinging, the calming of all craving, disgust, disillusion, ceasing of all noise, perception & sensation, Nibbâna...' Firmly established in this safe mode of reflection, one either eliminates the mental fermentations completely and thus attains Nibbâna - here and now - in this very life, or if not that, then one is reborn spontaneously in the pure abodes, the pure lands, the pure realms, the pure spheres, of light matter, where one clears the 5 lower fetters - the 5 minor mental chains - & attains Nibbâna from there, without ever returning to this world from that level... The Moderated Speeches by the Buddha. Majjhima Nikaya 64 [I 435-7] http://www.pariyatti.com/book.cgi?prod_id=25072X http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/majjhima/index.html PS: The 'Pure Land' (SukhaVati) Buddhism of today may thus have begun from what the Buddha early & originally called 'The Pure Abodes' (SuddhaVasa): http://www.accesstoinsight.org/ptf/loka.html#rupa Friendship is the Greatest ! and the entire Noble Life... Bhikkhu Samahita, Sri Lanka. <...> 45219 From: "Sukinder" Date: Sat May 7, 2005 4:32am Subject: Re: Gacchanto vaa gacchaamii'ti pajaanaati. sukinderpal Dear Htoo, I just read this and wanted to respond immediately. ---------------------------------- You said: The Buddha said to his disciples bhikkhus at kammaasadhamma village in kuru country, which is close to Deli in India that '...gacchanto vaa gacchaamii'ti pajaanaati.' This means that 'when going, bhikkhu knows as going 'in detail'. Sukinder: Well, what *really* are the details Htoo? There is vinnana, sankhara, vedana, sanna, earth, fire, wind elements and there is kayavinnatti. Do you think the Buddha would ask us, or rather the disciples who were his audience, to observe non-existent body, left/right feet, bending, and so on belonging to non-existent selves? Does not this amount to `misleading'? When there is all the time Paramattha Dhammas, why would the Buddha ask us to observe concepts, especially the particular audience of the Satipatthana Sutta? Before hearing the Teachings and long after that, this body, this hand, feet, head, face, etc. and other bodies, faces etc. have been misperceived and misconceived. When the Sutta refer to the different postures and the parts of the body, the objective is to draw the attention to what *really* are the elements of experience. All that were wrongly conceived, we now have the chance to correct. Thanks to the Buddha! This is the objective of the Sutta. But instead you and most of the Buddhist world encourage the same kind of misperception in the name of `patipatti'. You see the efficacy in it where there is none, obviously fed by the illusion of result, some of which have lead so far as to thinking that nama-rupa parichedannana or even the tilakkhana have being experienced. ------------------------------------------ Htoo: Here 'in detail' is very very important and crucial. Without inclusion of this, there always arise confusion. Sukinder: Yes, if there is correct understanding and the level of accumulated panna corresponds, no, if there is not ;-). The latter is part of that which drives certain worldlings to arouse "wrong effort". ------------------------------------------ Htoo: The confusion is that those people who are good at abhidhamma argue that 'to know going as going' is not satipatthana and so on. Sukinder: Are you saying that there are other ways to patipatti than first acquiring pariyatti? What is the paccaya leading to satipatthana from knowing bodily postures, such as sitting, standing, walking and lying down, the way you and most `meditators' seek to know it? ----------------------------------------------------- Htoo: But the word used in that Buddha words is 'pajaanaati'. Jaananti means 'to know'. Pajaananti means 'to know in detail'. Sukinder: Again, detail of what? Realities, or unrealities? ---------------------------------------------------- Metta, Sukinder 45220 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Sat May 7, 2005 6:02am Subject: [dsg] Concepts vs. Real Objects [was Re:1. characteristic> 2. function> 3... buddhistmedi... Hi, Friend Howard (Htoo and anyone -- please butt in) - I am happy to respond to your message. We are, in general, in agreement with respect to the main issue. T: ... is it correct to say that you and I (assuming that we don't have >yathabhuta-nana-dassana) only know and see pannatti (or concepts) >in every moment, because the true realities are too fast for us to catch >them the moment they arise or fall away? ------------------------------------------------ Howard: I don't think so. I have not been persuaded by the speed argument. After all, what is observed is observed in the very mindstates that are "so quickly moving". It is not as if there is a "watcher" standing back and observing a rapid stream of mindstates; the mindstates themselves are the observational states! I believe we are taken in by the magician-mind's creation of a world of concept due to fundamental avijja. ------------------------------------------------ Howard: In any case, I do not think it is wrong to take pa~n~natti as objects of meditation. THAT IS WHERE THE DHAMMAS ARE! When the Buddha taught the Anapanasati Sutta, he directed us to put our attention on the breath, not on the experiential realities of touch sensation, warmth, coolness, moisture, etc that we actually experience when "attending to the breath". Attending to the breath puts our attention where the action is. As we do so, eventually "breath" disappears, and what remains are dhammas.The seeing through the breath to the dhammas is a form of insight. And then we see that these dhammas themselves are *radically* impermanent, without substance, and without own-being: dependent, inseparable, momentary waves in an experiential stream that makes the wildest sci-fi scenarios seem ordinary by comparison. ---------------------------------------------------- Tep: Is it fair to say that we don't have any choice except using >concepts as the objects of our Satipatthana, or Anapanasat >meditation, for now, until one day when yathabhuta-nana arises? After >that moment, of course, all realities will be seen as realities, and no >more concepts would apprear anymore. --------------------------------------------------- Howard: I would say that is correct. We begin where we are, not where we would hope to be. BTW, I have long thought that the 4th foundation of mindfulness, dhammanupassana, is the stage of real mindfulness meditation and represents the advanced point at which concepts have been seen through and we are looking directly at realities, "face to face, and not as through a glass darkly". ---------------------------------------------------- Tep: I think you're right - this dhammanupassana stage of anapanasati is based on the four anupassanas: aniccanupassana, viraganupassana, nirodhanupassana, and patinissagganupassana. The power of the anupassana of this stage is supported by the strength of concentration that has been achieved throught the third stage (cittanupassana), when the yogi's mind is associated with "purity of equanimity & mindfulness, neither pleasure nor pain". And such mind state supports arising of the lokuttara panna that can look at the realities "face to face, and not as through a glass darkly" -- as you put it. Thank you very much, Howard. Sincerely, Tep ========= --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, Tep - > > In a message dated 5/6/05 11:42:42 PM Eastern Daylight Time, > tepsastri@y... writes: > Hi, Howard (Htoo and anyone -- please butt in) - > > Thank you very much for taking time to write me about the "concepts" > and "realities". > > Let me list some highlights of your explanation: > > -- "when the mind is engaged in thinking, .. it does so largely in terms of > conventional ideas that are not actually occurring things at all". The > concepts are "merely mentally projected, mentally superimposed on > those phenomena that actually do occur". > > -- Realities are "directly arising" actual "objects of onsciousness". "So, > for example, there are hardness sensations, odors, and sights > etc." > > -- "Perceptions (or, perhaps better, recognitions) are mental > operations that actually occur". They are "among the khandhic > elements that the Buddha teaches us it is possible to be aware of and > to note their impermanence, inadequacy, and emptiness of self. In the > sense that they actually occur", they are "real". > > T: I really like your way with words, Howard! Now, just for the sake of > expanding my understanding further, let me refer to Acharn Sujin's > definitions of Pannatti and Paramattha in her e-book "Summary of > Paramatthadhamma", 2000, in the following 2 paragraphs: > > "The paramattha-dhamma are realities that truly exist but not entities, > persons or the self. The paramattha-dhamma are only citta, cetasika > and rupa of distinct characteristics and signs that arise because of > causes and conditions and fall rapidly away. Whenever one does not > know the characteristics of citta, cetasika and rupa as paramattha- > dhamma that arise and fall away in very rapid sequence, then there is > knowledge of pannatti (concept/signification/name) or taking signs of > rupa and nama, which arise and fall away in very rapid continuation as > something. Therefore those who do not know the characteristics of > paramattha-dhamma are in the world of sammati-sacca (conventional > truth) because they take realities that appear by their signs and forms > as something real. > > "Each day pannatti hides the characteristics of paramattha-dhamma > through eyes, ears, nose, tongue, bodysense and mind so that one > does not know realities as they truly are: that the reality appearing > through the eyes, is not an entity, a person or the self, but only colors > and features that appear when in contact with the cakkhuppasada > [eye-sense]. Only when panna has developed until it knows the truth > when seeing could it attenuates attachment to the reality as a self, an > entity or a person, and know the differences between paramattha- > arammana and pannatti-arammana. The same applies to the ears, > nose, tongue, bodysense and mind. [endquote] > > May I ask you and all other DSG members a question? > > According to the above definition, the paramattha-dhamma "arise > because of causes and conditions and fall rapidly away", then is it > correct to say that you and I (assuming that we don't have yathabhuta- > nana-dassana) only know and see pannatti (or concepts) in every > moment, because the true realities are too fast for us to catch them the > moment they arise or fall away? > ------------------------------------------------ > Howard: > I don't think so. I have not been persuaded by the speed argument. After > all, what is observed is observed in the very mindstates that are "so quickly > moving". It is not as if there is a "watcher" standing back and observing a > rapid stream of mindstates; the mindstates themselves are the observational > states! > I believe we are taken in by the magician-mind's creation of a world of > concept due to fundamental avijja. > ------------------------------------------------ > > > My doubt is supported by A. Sujin's own words : "Therefore those who > do not know the characteristics of paramattha-dhamma are in the world > of sammati-sacca (conventional truth) because they take realities that > appear by their signs and forms as something real". > > Since everything appears as a "concept" to us (the worldlings), then > why do some worldling DSG members try so hard to make me feel that > it is wrong to take "concepts" as the objects of my meditation, > eventhough they themselves don't know or see the realities? > ---------------------------------------------- > Howard: > We don't experience only conceptually. When we experience hardness or > warmth or a sight, we do so directly at first and the conceptualizing follows > upon that. A feature of "mindfulness meditation" according to Nyanaponika Thera > is to prolong the direct observational phase of observing. Whether that is so > or not, cerrtainly Buddhist practice enables one to begin to see through > concepts to the actual phenomena on which they are superimposed. In any case, I do > not think it is wrong to take pa~n~natti as objects of meditation. THAT IS > WHERE THE DHAMMAS ARE! When the Buddha taught the Anapanasati Sutta, he directed > us to put our attention on the breath, not on the experiential realities of > touch sensation, warmth, coolness, moisture, etc that we actually experience when > "attending to the breath". Attending to the breath puts our attention where > the action is. As we do so, eventually "breath" disappears, and what remains > are dhammas.The seeing through the breath to the dhammas is a form of insight. > And then we see that these dhammas themselves are *radically* impermanent, > without substance, and without own-being: dependent, inseparable, momentary waves > in an experiential stream that makes the wildest sci-fi scenarios seem > ordinary by comparison. > ---------------------------------------------------- > Tep: > Is it fair to say that we don't have any choice except using concepts as > the > objects of our Satipatthana, or Anapanasat meditation, for now, until > one day when yathabhuta-nana arises? After that moment, of course, > all realities will be seen as realities, and no more concepts would > apprear anymore. > --------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > I would say that is correct. We begin where we are, not where we would > hope to be. BTW, I have long thought that the 4th foundation of mindfulness, > dhammanupassana, is the stage of real mindfulness meditation and represents the > advanced point at which concepts have been seen through and we are looking > directly at realities, "face to face, and not as through a glass darkly". > ---------------------------------------------------- > > Respectfully, > > > > Tep > =========================== > With metta, > Howard > 45222 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Sat May 7, 2005 6:41am Subject: Concepts vs. Real Objects [was Re:1. characteristic> 2. function> 3. ...] buddhistmedi... Hi James - It is nice to know that your health is improving. James: You are quite correct in your assertion that they try to make you *feel* as if you are doing something wrong. This approach of theirs has, in the past, been the condition for me to write some very scathing and hot retorts. I really don't like it when someone tries to make me feel like I am doing something wrong when I know that I am not. Tep: I understand how you feel, James. But "hot retorts" are not effective for two-way communication. James: Of course we have no choice but to use `concepts' as the objects of Satipatthana- BECAUSE THAT IS WHAT THE BUDDHA TAUGHT! The Buddha taught in the Satipatthana Sutta that we should use the breath and the 32 parts of the body as objects of contemplation. These things are not `dhammas', but so what? Now, the other camp (K. Sujinians, for want of a better term) are starting to come up with a new argument: Suttas don't really mean what they say if the whole Tipitaka is taken into account (the Suttas, Abhidhamma, and Commentaries- they always conveniently leave out the Vinaya since the Vinaya blows their theory out of the water immediately ;). Tep : Yes, James, you're right that our Great Buddha used concepts all the time, but the 4 "realities" (rupa, citta, cetasikas, Nibbana) are also found everywhere in the suttas. Of course, when someone can't deny the Teachings they have to come up with another way to interpret the Buddha's words: "Oh, I don't think that was what He meant....You have to read His Teachings more carefully ... Yeah, I know it was confusing, but ..." . James: ...Additionally, it should be remembered that the audience during the Buddha's time didn't know the `Whole Tipitaka' because it wasn't even completely formed yet or they had heard but only parts! Tep : I believe we can get to know everything about the key Dhammas the Buddha taught (the Bodhipakkhiya) by using a subset of less than 10 suttas. >Tep: After that moment, of course, all realities will be seen as >realities, and no more concepts would apprear anymore. James: Here I don't agree with you. It seems to me that you are trying to reach a `compromise' with the K. Sujinians, and that isn't necessary. Arahants and the Buddha still saw `reality' in terms of concepts, or they wouldn't have been able to function in the world. Of course, they were able to see past the surface appearance of concepts because they were no longer attached to them. Tep: Shame on me, James! I have been called "diplomatic" often and I do understand why. Of course, no diplomats can succeed without compromising. It is also very useful in any negotiation too! BUT, I did not try to reach a compromise here, James. When the Buddha said "seeing and knowing" the way the pancakkhandha or salayatana "really are", he meant truly seeing the realities through the 'Dhamma eye'. And such is the ability "to see past the surface appearance of concepts" as you put it, which was also what I meant above. [Again, it may sound like I am trying to reach a compromise with you here.] Thank you very much, James, for the discussion. I am satisfied that we are mostly in agreement. Respectfully and with warm regards, Tep ===== --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "buddhatrue" wrote: > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Tep Sastri" > wrote: > > > > Hi, Howard (Htoo and anyone -- please butt in) - > > Hi Tep, > > You offered for anyone to butt in so I am going to take you up on your > offer. Really, I have debated these items many times in this group > but now I feel energetic and well-rested (having gotten my needed > medication for my sleeping disorder- and am back to meditating), and I > feel that maybe these issues are important to discuss again and again: > 45223 From: "Philip" Date: Sat May 7, 2005 6:55am Subject: Letter to James 1 ( Against K. Sujin (Re: khanti and "setting up mindfulness) philofillet Hi James Hope you had a good spring break, and that your ailments have eased. >> James: I often wonder what this "cloud of concepts" or "black curtain > of concepts" really means when people use it. I am guessing that this > is a term that K. Sujin originated since I heard her use it on one of > the tapes, and I have never come across it before in Buddhist > literature. What I wonder is does it relate to the tendency to mental > proliferation as taught by the Buddha, or does it relate to something > else? Ph: Actually, I think that was a mixed metaphor on my part. I've heard "ocean of concepts" and "black curtain of ignorance." Yes, I would say proliferation, at least for the first one. (It seems that ignorance is a paramattha dhamma, with its own characteristics, rather than just being the absence of understanding that I would have thought it to be.) Proliferation, this sea of concepts. Let me give you an example. The other day I walked in a park on a lovely spring day. I found myself looking at some brightly-coloured rubber balls being sold at a kiosk in the park. So I had already seen them, and liked them, before I became aware of looking at them. Fair enough. And then came the proliferation. I thought with happiness about kids' enjoying them - and then I deeply remembered how much I had loved balls like that, and that made me sad - I was getting old, etc. This brought to mind the sutta "one excellent night" (in Majhimma) in which the Buddha described the monk who gets lost in formations such as "I had form like that" or "I will have form like that" (and with the other khandas.) So just from having seen the balls, my mind was churning up pseudo-mudita, churning up sadness, churning up thinking about suttas, and maybe conditioning a little understanding as well. And that goes on all day, every minute that we're awake. So I guess we could think of this mental proliferation emerging like a cloud from our steaming noggins, forming this cloud of concepts that gets between us and realities. I think we can see soomething like that in the honeyball sutta, and in many other suttas. . >Does it mean that all concepts are bad or that just the > proliferation of concepts is bad? After all, even the Buddha used and > recognized concepts. Maybe if you explain what you mean by this > phrase and thinking I could more adequately respond? No, of course concepts are not bad. We will always live though concepts. But there is a sense of liberation when concepts are dropped. The stories are let go. Tonight I was walking home with Naomi, and we were both exhausted after long days at work. The Buddha's teaching came to mind, and in a flash I was able to intellectually understand the fatigue as nama and rupa. I let go of the story of tired Phil, and there was just nama and rupa. It was very liberating. Of course this was still thinking, still intellectual...but man, I love letting go of stories! WHen I think how I used to go through days stewing about what someone had said or done to hurt my feelings. So easy to drop now, thanks to Abhidhamma and suttas and reflection on them in daily life. > Phil: (Or, if you don't believe Abhidhamma is the Buddha's word, why > would it come to have been included in the Triple Basket? Our of the > intellectual greed of the Sangha? That sounds like a naughty view.) > > James: ;-)) Well, naughty or not, that is my view. I don't believe > the Buddha taught the Abhidhamma, to Sariputta or to the Devas of > Tusita Heaven or to anyone. All major evidence points to the > Abhidhamma being a much later development. I don't accuse the Sangha > of a conspiracy and cover-up, it think is more a matter of over- active > mental proliferations. Ph: Yes, like I said last time, I can see that there is a possibility of getting into Abhidhamma enough to increase the thinking without gaining penetrative/eradicating benefits. There is the danger. But there is danger in sitting down to meditate and not realizing it's all about lobha, comfort, self-pleasure as well. (Not that it is for you - but it was for me.) > James: I don't think that the Abhidhamma automatically leads to an > understanding of anatta. From my understanding, anatta is deeper than > just the interplay of dhammas. Understanding the Abhidhamma can lead > to a good understanding of annica (impermanence), but not necessarily > anatta. Ph: Well, again, to each his own. For me, the suttas lay out dukkha and annica quite clearly, but not anatta. I think of the common progression in SN of "Is what is impermanent suffering?" Yes my Lord" "And is it fitting to take what is impermanent and suffering as "This is mine, this I am, this is my self" "Not fitting my Lord." I never could get that last link. Nver convincing for me. To each his own. We all have different accumulated tendencies and ways of understanding. > Anatta can only be comprehended when the mind no longer > identifies anything as being "mine" or "his" or "hers" or "theirs", > etc. Phil, if you can honestly say that you no longer think in terms > of "mine", "his", "hers", "theirs", or even that you think less in > those terms, then you have a better understanding of anatta. But if > you still think in those terms, to the same extent as you thought > previously, then your understanding of anatta hasn't increased. Ph: Only sotappanas don't think in those terms, of course. But there are moments in which I see through, get a glimpse of the way things work. A quick glimpse to a shallow degree, but still enough to give me confidence. As I wrote above, I have found it so much easier to elt go of anger because I have come to sense that people are not to blame for what they do, that they are at the beck and call of conditions. > > Phil: Thanks for the warning, though. I know it comes from your > kindness. I will keep it in mind, no doubt, the way I do with many > things you say in your inimitable way! > > James: Just something to think about. I care for you and don't want > to see you suffer needlessly. Ph: James, I have some good news to report, and you to thank for it. I've started to write again, started connecting to my creative writing again. Obviously your post on that topic conditioned something to get me going. These days when I get up and have my first coffee, instead of reading suttas, I read some of my stories, some favourite stories, and this conditions some good writing for me. There is plenty of time for Dhamma study, Dhamma reflection during the day - everything is Dhamma, of course. But the stories will help people in a different way. So thanks. You're a good friend. > Phil: Well, I *was* impressed. It sounds like you have a sound > approach to Dhamma in daily life. > > James: Well, don't be too impressed. My dhamma practice isn't what it > should be lately; I don't meditate at all nowadays. I am having > medical problems which interfere with my practice: hypoglycemia and a > rare neurological disorder which disturbs my sleep (PLMD). I hope to > be getting my needed medication soon and so I will get back on track. > (How's that for personal information? ;-)) Ph: Sorry to hear that - I hope you're back on track soon. I've kept this short. I'm sleepy. And to be honest I'm loing interest in trying to convince you or anyone else about the benefits of Abhidhamma. To each his own, according to conditions. Metta, Phil p.s I was thinking it would be nice if you could visit us in Japan on some holiday. I told Naomi about the way you scolded me for being spaced ou and alienated from her, and she agreed! You will like her. 45224 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Sat May 7, 2005 7:29am Subject: Re: sati and no sati, Intellectual Understanding, no 2 buddhistmedi... Dear Jon and all other DSG friends - Jon: > I hope you don't mind me butting in here ;-)) Tep: Thank you for taking time off your busy schedule to give valuable comments to my posts. You know, I have adopted the permanent "Please butt-in " policy. :-> :-> Jon: A classic example of the latter (i.e., a reference to samatha in a teaching given to monks who are already skilled in samatha) would be the Anapanasati Sutta, which you are considering in another thread. It is clear from the introductory part of that sutta that the monks are already developing anapanasati. In such cases, we should be careful about taking the sutta to mean that anyone who wishes to develop insight (from the beginning), should start with the development of anapanasati. Tep: That is an excellent point, Jon. I have an idea to propose to you: the 4-tetrad Anapanasati can bring the full benefits to those who already have the right view (samma-ditthi). I have no doubt (although I have no proof) that the monks who listened to the Anapanasati Discourse that day all had the right view. If you have time please visit the link below to find out why I think so. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/SariputtaDhamma/message/784 Jon: Where a sutta refers to 'concentration' in the context of the development of the path, it is of course only kusala concentration that is meant. While this may seem obvious, it is important to note, because concentration can be kusala or akusala, depending on the citta it accompanies. Tep: In DN 22 it states that in order to enter the first jhana the meditator must be "withdrawn from sensuality, withdrawn from unskillful (mental) qualities". All other suttas with emphasis on concentration also say the same about the 1st jhana. It follows that all the jhana states after that also must be supported by kusala too. Don't you think so? Jon: In summary, 'samadhi' sometimes refers to the concentration that accompanies samatha, and sometimes to the concentration that accompanies insight. We need to find out from the context or from the commentaries which of these is intended in the particular case. A similar thing applies as regards references to jhana. Sometimes it refers to the jhana that is the outcome of the development of samatha, and sometimes to the momentary concentration that accompanies a moment of path consciousness. The concentration that accompanies a moment of path consciousness is said to be of the intensity of jhana. Tep: That observation is very good --'samadhi' sometimes refers to the concentration that accompanies samatha, and sometimes to the concentration that accompanies insight. My opinion on the 4th jhana is that it was defined in 99% of the suttas with samma-ditthi and the other Path factors in mind. In MN 117 the term "noble right concentration" was used to mean exactly that <"Of those, right view is the forerunner. And how is right view the forerunner? In one of right view, right resolve comes into being. In one of right resolve, right speech comes into being. In one of right speech, right action... In one of right action, right livelihood... In one of right livelihood, right effort... In one of right effort, right mindfulness... In one of right mindfulness, right concentration... In one of right concentration, right knowledge... In one of right knowledge, right release comes into being. Thus the learner is endowed with eight factors, and the arahant with ten".> It is always nice talking with you, Jon. Respectfully, Tep ======= --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Jonothan Abbott wrote: > Hi Tep > > I hope you don't mind me butting in here ;-)) > > You have quoted a number of suttas that refer to concentration and/or > jhana. I'd like to make some general comments about concentration. > (snipped) > > I hope you find this useful. I'll try to make some comments on your > specific sutta quotes (trimmed for the purpose of this reply) in a > separate post. > > Jon > > Tep Sastri wrote: > > >Dear Nina and Sukinder - > > > >Intellectual understanding is necessary at the beginning when we > >study the Dhamma (pariyatti). However, it is a mistake to believe that 45225 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Sat May 7, 2005 7:43am Subject: Re:1. characteristic> 2. function> 3. manifestation> 4.proximate cause buddhistmedi... Dear Friend Htoo ( Butting in is welcome!) I just asked the several questions in order to know how you precisely define concepts, real objects, etc. Thank you for answering me in full and unemotionally. I apologize for bugging you with these boring questions that have been asked over and over again. The answers you gave will go into my notebook. Respectfully yours, Tep ====== --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "htootintnaing" wrote: > Tep wrote: > > Dear Htoo: > > I asked you whether the body (32 parts + breaths) was real, and your > answer was as follows: > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > Htoo: > > Dear Tep. I think there seems to remain unsettled question. > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Htoo: > > > When you look for hair, teeth, you will not finally discover > anything that is hair. What you find as hair, teeth are in your mind. They are not first-hand object. And never can they be. > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > Tep: > > Are rupa, citta, cetasikas and nibbana not found in your mind? > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > Htoo: > > Paramattha dhamma can come to you in both ways. One way is in the form of paramattha dhamma. Another way is in the form of pannatti. > When they come to you in the form of pannatti, they are not of your > first-hand object. > > If still not clear further explanations are ready for you and anyone > else. > > So rupa, citta, cetasikas and nibbana are found in my mind. They may be first-hand object or they may be later object. > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > Tep: > > Are any of then "first-hand" object? Why? > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > Htoo: > > There are 7 ruupa that are 1st hand object. > > 1. sight > 2. sound > 3. smell > 4. taste > 5. hardness > 6. temperature > 7. pressure > > Citta can also be 1st hand object only after thorough and repeated > learning. So do cetasikas. > > Nibbana is only first hand object only when lokuttara cittas arise. > > All pannatti are constructions. > > Why? because 7 ruupas do serving as objects. As they are objects and ruupa they are 1st hand object. > > Citta can also be 1st hand through manodvarika cittas. Why because, it can serve as dhamma-arammana. So do cetasikas and nibbana. > > Pannatti is not first-hand object. > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > Tep: > > Specifically, what about perception? Is perception real? Do you > discover perception as perception? How? > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > Htoo: > > Perception (Sanna) is cetasika. If you are talking about 'perception' > that appears in conventional books, it may have different meanings. > > But sanna is real. So if you referred to sanna as perception, it is > real. > > You asked 'Do you discover perception as perception?' > > This is I think asking personal opinion. I do not need to answer this > question. > > But to generalize, anyone can discover perception (sanna) as > perception (sanna). > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Respectfully and with kind regards, > > Tep > > Your Dhamma friend > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > Friends Always, > > Htoo Naing 45226 From: "htootintnaing" Date: Sat May 7, 2005 8:18am Subject: [dsg] Concepts vs. Real Objects [was Re:1. characteristic> 2. function> 3... htootintnaing Tep wrote: Hi, Friend Howard (Htoo and anyone -- please butt in) - ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: It's a pleasure to discuss dhamma-things. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Tep: I am happy to respond to your message. We are, in general, in agreement with respect to the main issue. >T: ... is it correct to say that you and I (assuming that we don't have yathabhuta-nana-dassana) only know and see pannatti (or concepts) in every moment, because the true realities are too fast for us to catch them the moment they arise or fall away? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: Actually we see realities. I agree with Howard. I will give comment after Howard's message. Everything is too fast to recognise. We do see realities. But we just accept concepts and the results of re- constructions or conceptualizations. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > Howard: I don't think so. I have not been persuaded by the speed argument. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: I have agreed this above. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > Howard's: After all, what is observed is observed in the very mindstates that are "so quickly moving". It is not as if there is a "watcher" standing back and observing a rapid stream of mindstates; ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: If one thinks in 'that way' that someone is watching with bare attention then it is wrong idea. There is no one watching. The arisen cittas just knew what they have to know. So called 'we' do see realities. But 'we' do not recognise all realities in their virginities but what we accept are concepts and re-constructions of those data of realities. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > Howard's: the mindstates themselves are the observational states! ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: How true!! ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >Howard: I believe we are taken in by the magician-mind's creation of a world of concept due to fundamental avijja. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: Right. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > Howard: In any case, I do not think it is wrong to take pa~n~natti as objects of meditation. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: If vipassana, it is wrong. Because pannatti does not have any character and so there is no anicca, dukkha, anatta, asubha marks on pannatti, which otherwise will help in development of vipassana panna. But if meditation is just samatha meditation, then it may well work for the meditator. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >Howard: THAT IS WHERE THE DHAMMAS ARE! When the Buddha taught the Anapanasati Sutta, he directed us to put our attention on the breath, not on the experiential realities of touch sensation, warmth, coolness, moisture, etc that we actually experience when "attending to the breath". ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: True. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >Howard: Attending to the breath puts our attention where the action is. As we do so, eventually "breath" disappears, and what remains are dhammas.The seeing through the breath to the dhammas is a form of insight. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: Good ideation. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >Howard: And then we see that these dhammas themselves are *radically* impermanent, without substance, and without own-being: dependent, inseparable, momentary waves in an experiential stream that makes the wildest sci-fi scenarios seem ordinary by comparison. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: How true!! ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Tep: Is it fair to say that we don't have any choice except using concepts as the objects of our Satipatthana, or Anapanasat meditation, for now, until one day when yathabhuta-nana arises? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: Before answering fair or not, first we need to talk that satipatthaana do not take concept. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Tep continued: After that moment, of course, all realities will be seen as realities, and no more concepts would apprear anymore. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: Concepts are essential. Even The Buddha had been using concepts. He used concepts when He preached Dhamma. He taught Dhamma through concepts. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > Howard: I would say that is correct. We begin where we are, not where we would hope to be. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: Agree. We have to begin where we are. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > Howard: BTW, I have long thought that the 4th foundation of mindfulness, dhammanupassana, is the stage of real mindfulness meditation and represents the advanced point at which concepts have been seen through and we are looking directly at realities, "face to face, and not as through a glass darkly". ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: All pabbas or all portions or all sessions (21 sessions) deal with real mindfulness. So kaayanupassanaa, cittaanupassanaa, vedanaanupassanaa, and dhammaanupassanaa all help seeing of realities. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Tep: I think you're right - this dhammanupassana stage of anapanasati is based on the four anupassanas: aniccanupassana, viraganupassana, nirodhanupassana, and patinissagganupassana. The power of the anupassana of this stage is supported by the strength of concentration that has been achieved throught the third stage (cittanupassana), when the yogi's mind is associated with "purity of equanimity & mindfulness, neither pleasure nor pain". And such mind state supports arising of the lokuttara panna that can look at the realities "face to face, and not as through a glass darkly" -- as you put it. Thank you very much, Howard. Sincerely, Tep ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: On the contrary, concentration has to invlove in all stages. With Metta, Htoo Naing PS: This is a reply post to Tep, who wrote the message. So 'Howard' is marked with '> Howard' to reveal that he is 3rd person while Tep and 'I' are discussing. 45227 From: "htootintnaing" Date: Sat May 7, 2005 8:28am Subject: Re: Ritual, Abhidhamma and Buddhism htootintnaing Lisa wrote: Ritual the tension between desire and transcendence. The Buddha criticized ceremony for pomp and circumstance and blind faith, especially ritual bathing and mortification ceremonies and ritual sacrifices of animals. He did, integrate some rituals of his own into his teachings. The Buddha set up rituals that could act as aids or vehicles in the inner journey towards the discovery of one's own true nature, a raft to carry us to the other shore so to speak. I really do think that meditation, the study of sutra and learning the Abhidhamma are aids to help me break free of suffering but I don't want to go blindly into the study of Abhidhamma. Taking refuge in the Buddha, the Dhamma and the Sangha, a transformation, a initiation, taking and following the precepts and recitation of precepts, formative and transformative. Initiation and ritual an aid in letting go of old hurtful habits and conditioning and a tool to aid memory in establishing more healthful habit patterns for building a stable foundation to make that leap into the unknown? With Metta, Lisa ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: Dear Lisa, Thanks you very much for posting this message of 'Ritual, Abhidhamma and Buddhism'. I will reply piece by piece. With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing 45228 From: upasaka@... Date: Sat May 7, 2005 4:33am Subject: Re: [dsg] Concepts vs. Real Objects [was Re:1. characteristic> 2. function> 3... upasaka_howard Hi, Htoo - In a message dated 5/7/05 11:19:51 AM Eastern Daylight Time, htootintnaing@... writes: > Howard: In any case, I do not think it is wrong to take pa~n~natti as objects of meditation. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: If vipassana, it is wrong. Because pannatti does not have any character and so there is no anicca, dukkha, anatta, asubha marks on pannatti, which otherwise will help in development of vipassana panna. But if meditation is just samatha meditation, then it may well work for the meditator. ======================== I'm afraid I didn't make myself clear. Looking at pa~n~natti is for the purpose of looking at the right place and then seeing through concept to actualities. When we wish to observes bodily sensations, we turn attention to the body, and the body is concept-only. To examine the axle and wheels of a chariot, we attend to the chariot. 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) 45229 From: "htootintnaing" Date: Sat May 7, 2005 8:44am Subject: Re: Ritual, Abhidhamma and Buddhism htootintnaing Lisa wrote: Ritual the tension between desire and transcendence. The Buddha criticized ceremony for pomp and circumstance and blind faith, especially ritual bathing and mortification ceremonies and ritual sacrifices of animals. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: Because they should have been criticized. For example, if there was a ritual that 'when a husband died, the wife had to jump into fire and die' is that ritual fair for that woman? The Buddha had great compassion. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Lisa: He did, integrate some rituals of his own into his teachings. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: Beautiful rituals ; beneficial rituals; profitable rituals should be integrated. But you have to define 'rituals' to clearly speak. Rituals of homage etc are in a way good thing. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Lisa: The Buddha set up rituals that could act as aids or vehicles in the inner journey towards the discovery of one's own true nature, a raft to carry us to the other shore so to speak. ---------- Htoo: Good writing. ---------------------------- Lisa: I really do think that meditation, the study of sutra and learning the Abhidhamma are aids to help me break free of suffering but I don't want to go blindly into the study of Abhidhamma. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: Sutra is not Pali word. Sutta is a Pali word. Blindness is never good. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Lisa: Plus categorical denial of ritual in Buddhism got me thinking; what is all that chanting, meditation, instruction, and study all about if not part of a system of teachings to unbind us from suffering? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: These will depend on the way you understand them. Chanting? You have to define it. Citation is traditional bearing of teachings forwarded on next and next generations. Meditation? If right, it is a good thing. If instructed in wrong ways, it will not be much fruitful. Instruction? This will depend how deeply the instructors understand and realize and how the followers understand the instructions. Studying? This is requirement and it is essential. There is not a time that one should not study. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- To be continued: Htoo-: 45230 From: "htootintnaing" Date: Sat May 7, 2005 9:00am Subject: Re: Ritual, Abhidhamma and Buddhism 2 htootintnaing Part 2-: Lisa wrote: How does ritual play a part in understanding and transcendence? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: This will depend on your definition of ritual. If teaching and learning are included, it plays a crucial part. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Lisa: Here are some of my questions about religion and religious study that I've asked myself over the years and still question all the time. And now I question why I want to study the Abhidhamma. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: Should question. It helps. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Lisa: Why do I want to learn Abhidhamma and what is my motivation and why am I asking about ritual right now as I get into the study of Abhidhamma? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: To understand what are right and what are wrong. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Lisa: Rituals and Religious Activities are they aids to breaking the fetters that bind us to suffering? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: If there are conditions, there will be break through even though one is following rituals. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Lisa: What is ritual? What does it look like in a Buddhist context? Relic worships, chanting, reading of doctrine and sutra, meditation; what are the main components of ritual in general and in context to Dhamma and Buddhism? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: Please you define 'rituals'. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Lisa: Entering the Temple Shrine room, the ritualized leaving daily life in reverence of the sacredness of ritual space, triple prostration of honor before the Buddha image. Kneeling with palms pressed together before the heart and head, bowing full body to the floor head on the ground. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: There are conditions that help wholesome actions to arise. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Lisa: Monks and lay folk both do this depending on traditions. Lay folk also give reverence to monks and nuns in this manor. Chanting in Pali an ancient religious language of Gotama Buddha by both lay people and monks, blessings are given, discourses of the Buddha are listened too as the lay people sit lower than the Monks, usually on the floor with feet turned away from the Teacher Monk. Special housing, clothing, social rights to distance religious body from lay community…ritual plays a part in establishing authority? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: They have their own rights. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Lisa: Merit for both oneself and others through ritual acts and daily giving for a better life in the next rebirth are a large part of daily life for most native Buddhist. Theravada monks study and chant the Buddhist scriptures and perform ritual ceremonies for the lay public. The monks go on daily rounds of silent begging for alms, and the householders practice generosity by offering them food. Practice: Meditation, visualization, liturgy (collection of formulas and other texts), mantra and text recitation, image veneration, and initiation. Structure, elements and methods of the Abhidhamma, investigation into why it was established as important part of Buddhist doctrine. Theravada monks study and chant the Buddhist scriptures and perform ritual ceremonies for the lay public. The monks go on daily rounds of silent begging for alms, and the householders practice generosity by offering them food. Theravada ritual begins with three particular Pali chants. Buddha vandana, or Homage to the Buddha, is known also by its first two Pali words: Namo tassa. Ritual is work? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: All these that you have described will depend on how you define 'rituals'. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Lisa: Can we look without bias at tradition and ritual outside of our own culture? When establishing a new religion in our life how does bias affect our understanding of doctrine, practice and rituals? Aversion to creator gods, thoughtless ritual and ceremony, blind faith; does that color the way we see our new adopted religion or philosophy? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: I do not know 'learning new philosophy and religion'. But what you and others called Buddhism is not like a religion but it is solutions- providing-behaviour. Instead of searching God or other, try to search for oneself or yourself. Depending on your prefection of wisdom and other necessary elements for realization of suffering, the cause of suffering, cessation of suffrering, the way of wiping out of suffering you may see 'THE UNIVERSAL SOLUTION'. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- To be continued: Htoo Naing-: 45231 From: "htootintnaing" Date: Sat May 7, 2005 9:22am Subject: Re: Ritual, Abhidhamma and Buddhism 3 htootintnaing Lisa wrote: I'm I wearing rose-colored glasses? What is the origin of our/my belief on ritual? Has the meaning of ritual changed over time? How do people who come to Buddhism and Abhidhamma let go of their old belief system of ritual so it will not color the long established ritual of the religious study of the Abhidhamma text and Buddhism? Can we really look at another religion outside of our own belief system without bias and use it for a tool to unbind from suffering? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: Again, you need to define 'rituals'. As I said in the previous 2 posts, Buddhism is not like other religion, it is solutions-providing- behaviour. So it can be learned by anyone, any religion and any background. Even among Buddhists, there are a few true Buddhists. Those Buddhists who are still not true Buddhists also should learn to become true Buddhists. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Lisa: Rituals and privileged status, scholars and practitioners, how does intellectual powers give status to the study of Abhidhamma and Buddhism in general? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: In general, the more intellectual, the more effectively people can study on Buddhism. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Lisa: How does tradition of those who are part of Buddhism and study Abhidhamma play a part in their actions and performance? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: Once Abhidhamma is fully studied, one has deeper level of admiration on The Buddha, The Dhamma and The Sangha. And their actions and performances will be finer than before they study Abhidhamma. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Lisa: Where is wisdom located? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo; Wisdom or panna is nama dhamma. It is not a physical matter. So it cannot be found anywhere physically. But as it is a nama dhamma, it is associated with citta or consciousness. Cittas have to depend on matters in 2 ways. One way is as their base or ground. Another way is not inevitable. Another way is by using matters as their objects. But when ruupa dhammas are not object, ruupa dhammas only involve as base or ground. So panna or wisdom is located at cittas. To be exact, panna or wisdom is located at 47 tihetuka cittas or triple-rooted consciousness. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Lisa: Can the body know? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: Never. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Lisa: Is ritual empirically based? Does the body have to be involved for immediate,non-conceptual wisdom? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: Define ritual. Meditation can be done naturally. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Lisa: Does my use and understanding of the Pali language help or hinder letting go of conceptual grasping and ignorance of self? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: At least you will definitely need a language as medium. If you master that language and if insturctions, teachings etc are available in that language you do not need any Pali. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Lisa: Is there self-aggrandizing power in knowing what few know? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: Pardon? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Lisa: What are the goals of understanding Nama and Rupa? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: If you understand them, you will be able to trace their causes, their characteristics, manifestations, and then you will definitely lose illusion of 'identity' and this will lead to higher and higher understanding and finally till totally liberated from binding of craving and avijja. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Lisa: What theoretical strategies, conceptual tools and analytical categories are used in the Abhidhamma and is this study ritualized reading? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: Don't think so. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Lisa: What is the internal logic, teaching aid to be taken seriously or lightly? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: The Buddha never said unbeneficial words. So all The Buddha words have to be taken seriously and never lightly. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Lisa: How is Abhidhamma structured, what are it's basic components; metaphysical,phenomenal, political, psychological, status quo, what else? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: I do not know what you want. But abhidhamma is higher dhamma and not a simple one. But very useful one. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- To be continued: Htoo :- 45232 From: "htootintnaing" Date: Sat May 7, 2005 9:29am Subject: Re: Ritual, Abhidhamma and Buddhism 4 htootintnaing Lisa wrote: What is the difference between reading religious text and reading daily text? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: What is daily text? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Lisa: Is reading doctrine like the sutra and Abhidhamma a way to transform or reveal, uncover what is sacred, a ritual act of transformation through understanding? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: Your question is badly prepared. It is not a ritual act to read doctrine. Is it a way? It helps but not the direct way. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Lisa: Can reading not be reading and text not be text? What is the difference between ritualized reading and casual reading? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: Define ritual reading. I never heard before. Define casual reading. I never heard before. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Lisa: The Five Precepts and taking refuge in the Buddha, Dhamma and Sangha is this an initiation ritual? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: Do you believe these are rituals? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Lisa: Taking refuge in the Buddha, the Dhamma and the Sangha, a transformation, a initiation, taking and following the precepts and recitation of precepts, formative and transformative. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: Unclear. I think you are asking. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Lisa: Initiation and ritual an aid in letting go of old hurtful habits and conditioning and a tool to aid memory in establishing more healthful habit patterns for building a stable foundation to make that leap into the unknown? With Metta, Lisa ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: I think so. With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing 45233 From: "htootintnaing" Date: Sat May 7, 2005 9:40am Subject: Re: Breathing Meditation Rob K part 1. htootintnaing --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "rjkjp1" wrote: ======== Dear Htoo, I don't remember that section of the satipatthana sutta, I don't think he did. Robertk -------------------------------------------------- ---------------------- Dear Robert K, I also do not think that The Buddha said in a specific way when he instructed in mahasatipatthaana. The Buddha did not say 'to focus on nose, mouth, lip, incoming air, outgoing air' etc etc. Equally The Buddha did not say 'to focus on rising and falling of abdomen'. What The Buddha said in aanaapaana pabba is 'Diigham vaa assasanto, diigham assassaamii'ti pajaanaami'. Idha bhikkhu_ the practitioner in The Buddha Sasana knows when he breathes in long as 'long' in detail. This is just a description. The typical bhikkhu does know that. Because he has well been instructed. If you follow the instruction, you will also know if you have practised enough. With Metta, Htoo Naing 45234 From: "htootintnaing" Date: Sat May 7, 2005 9:46am Subject: Re: Gacchanto vaa gacchaamii'ti pajaanaati. htootintnaing Htoo: But the word used in that Buddha words is 'pajaanaati'. Jaananti means 'to know'. Pajaananti means 'to know in detail'. Sukinder: Again, detail of what? Realities, or unrealities? ---------------------------------------------------- Metta, Sukinder -------------------------------------------------- ---------------------- Htoo: Details of everything related to things that are in question. With Metta, Htoo Naing 45235 From: "htootintnaing" Date: Sat May 7, 2005 9:48am Subject: [dsg] Concepts vs. Real Objects [was Re:1. characteristic> 2. function> 3... htootintnaing --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, Htoo - > > In a message dated 5/7/05 11:19:51 AM Eastern Daylight Time, > htootintnaing@y... writes: > > Howard: In any case, I do not think it is wrong to take pa~n~natti > as objects of meditation. > -------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > Htoo: > > If vipassana, it is wrong. Because pannatti does not have any > character and so there is no anicca, dukkha, anatta, asubha marks on > pannatti, which otherwise will help in development of vipassana panna. > > But if meditation is just samatha meditation, then it may well work > for the meditator. > ======================== > I'm afraid I didn't make myself clear. Looking at pa~n~natti is for the > purpose of looking at the right place and then seeing through concept to > actualities. When we wish to observes bodily sensations, we turn attention to the > body, and the body is concept-only. To examine the axle and wheels of a chariot, > we attend to the chariot. > > With metta, > Howard ---------------------------------------------------------------------- :-)) :-)) :-)) That is fine, Howard. Htoo Naing 45236 From: "htootintnaing" Date: Sat May 7, 2005 9:51am Subject: Dhamma Thread (347) htootintnaing Dear Dhamma Friends, There are 4 sets of 4-kamma or catu-catukka kamma. Depending on (a) their causative power or regenerative power or productive power There are 4 kamma. 1. janaka kamma or regenerative kamma 2. upatthambhaka kamma or supportive kamma 3. upapiilaka kamma or reductive kamma 4. upaghataka kamma or destructive or abloishing kamma (b) their seniority of result-giving There are another set of 4 kamma 1. garuka kamma or heavy kamma 2. asanna kamma or frequenting kamma 3. acinna kamma or practised kamma or learned kamma 4. katattaa kamma or olden kamma (c) their timing of result-giving There are another set of 4 kamma 1. dittha-dhamma-vedaniiya kamma or visible-current-life-feeling kamma 2. upapajja-vedaniiya kamma or next-life-result-giving kamma 3. aparaapariya-vedaniiya kamma or 2nd-next-life-till-end-of-samsara k 4. ahosi kamma or fruitless kamma (d) their placing of kamma-doers or depending on bhuumi or place for beings who did kamma There are another set of 4 kamma. They are 1. akusala kamma or unwholesome kamma 2. kaamaavacara kusala kamma or 'sensuous plane wholesome kamma' 3. rupaavacara kusala kamma or 'fine material plane wholesome kamma' 4. arupaavacara kusala kamma or 'non-material plane wholesome kamma'. 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. 45237 From: "htootintnaing" Date: Sat May 7, 2005 10:02am Subject: Gacchanto vaa gachaamiiti pajaanaati 2 htootintnaing Dear Dhamma Friends, Mahasatipatthaana sutta deals with 4 frames of reference or 4 foundations of mindfulness. 1. mindfulness on the body 2. mindfulness on feeling 3. mindfulness on consciousness 4. mindfulness on dhamma There are a total of 21 sessions. 14 sessions in kaayaanupassanaa or mindfulness on the body, 1 session in vedanaanupassanaa or mindfulness on feeling, 1 session in cittaanupassanaa or mindfulness on consciousness, 5 sessions in dhammaanupassanaa or mindfulness on dhamma. ----- 21 sessions The Buddha said, 'Idha bhikkhave bhikkhu gacchanto vaa gacchaamii'ti pajaanaati' in the 2nd part of kaayaanupassana or mindfulness on the body. 'Bhikkhave! O Monks!' 'Idha bhikkhu / In this sasana or teaching of mine, there is a bhikkhu or one who follows all my instructions' 'Gacchanto vaa / when he goes..' 'gacchaami iti / as going' 'pajaanaati / knows'. In this sasana there is a bhikkhu. When he goes he knows as he goes. With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing 45238 From: "htootintnaing" Date: Sat May 7, 2005 10:04am Subject: Dhamma Thread (348) htootintnaing Dear Dhamma Friends, There are 4 sets of 4 kamma or 'kamma catu-catukka'. Still there are other kamma. Depending on 'where kamma are done' or depending on 'door of kamma' or 'kamma-dvara' there are 3 kamma. They are 1. kaaya kamma or 'bodily actions or bodily kamma' 2. vacii kamma or 'verbal actions or verbal kamma' 3. mano kamma or 'mental actions or mental kamma' As these kamma are classified according to kamma-dvara, there is no mentioning on good or bad. If they have to be included, there will be 6 kamma. They are 1. akusala kaaya kamma 2. akusala vacii kamma 3. akusala mano kamma & 4. kusala kaaya kamma 5. kusala vacii kamma 6. kusala mano kamma 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. 45239 From: "Lisa" Date: Sat May 7, 2005 10:12am Subject: Re: Ritual, Abhidhamma and Buddhism foamflowers > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > Htoo: > > Sutra is not Pali word. Sutta is a Pali word. Blindness is never good. > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Dear Htoo, Thank you for dialoging with me, your questions remind me of Socrates and his dialoge with the wayward young men of Athens. Sometimes I feel like a very difficult wayward child and you are very patient and kind to me, thank you. First exploring the word Sutta and then on to ritual...Patience is needed right now, because I don't really understand ritual, that is why I wrote the paper. I would like to look at sutra or sutta first, Sanskrit and Pali; I like Pali better than Sanskrit because it's easier for me to remember the words for some reason. I do get them mixed up sometimes like Dharma and Dhamma. Sutta (Pali) Sutra (Sanskrit) Thank you for correcting me. I'm sitting at my kitchen table right now stringing beads made from Carnelian stone, lovely variegated swirls of orange colours and cool to the touch. They remind me of Monk's robes and their cool well disciplined minds, smooth to the touch. Sutta can mean string, and I use this string to bead a lovely design to wear around my neck or to give as a gift. Lovely beads of Dhamma strung on a strong red silk thread called sutta. Sutta: --pabuddha--awakened from sleep" referring to the awakening (entrance) in the deva—world.// That does sound like Jhana, entering into the deva world—nimitta's that come out to play and take me away from the sensual world of should of and should not and pretenses (this of course is pure speculation, I haven't touched Jhana in my research yet when it comes to the Abhidhamma doctrine) Sutta: a thread, string, for tanha, kala° a carpenter's measuring line, digha° with long thread.// The lovely necklace of red silk string, strung with carnelian stone flowers, a gift to the Buddha. Dana to give without conditions, just a string and some lovely beads, when I give this to you, the thread strung with beads; this thread, beads and giving are let go of and what you do with it is up to you. Sutta: the (discursive, narrational) part of the Buddhist Scriptures containing the suttas or dialogues, later called Sutta--pitaka (cp. Suttanta), an ancient verse, and quotations.// Words strung on a string of Dhamma... Sutta: A spiders thread, a woman spinner, jala a web of thread, a spider's web, bhikkha begging for thread, maya made of threads. // During a retreat I had a vision of one thread woven together over a fast expanse of dark empty space and golden beads strung out along the thread vibrating, a high pitched humming sound that never left even after the vision faded. Vibhanga classification of rules and that leads me to the word "ritual" and what I think is ritual, what I don't understand, and what I do understand when it comes to correct or right view and understanding of ritual. To be continued, I need to finish my necklace of carnelian beads and take a long walk with my boyfriend. It's a lovely spring day here in the state of Chicago, USA. With unconditioned kindness (metta), Lisa 45240 From: "Larry" Date: Sat May 7, 2005 10:46am Subject: [dsg] Re:1. characteristic> 2. function> 3. manifestation> 4.proximate cause lbidd2 --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "htootintnaing" wrote: > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, LBIDD@w... wrote: > > Hi Htoo, > > > > Does abhidhamma have anything to say about groups such as rupa > kalapas > > or the mental body with respect to these four features? Are groups > of > > realities (khandhas) considered to be real? > > > > Larry > -------------------------------------------------- > ---------------------- > Dear Larry, > > Kalapas are working units. So they are real and can be experienced. > > With Metta, > > Htoo Naing Hi Htoo, Is a kalapa an object of consciousness? Does it have characteristic, function manifestation and proximate cause? Larry 45241 From: "htootintnaing" Date: Sat May 7, 2005 11:00am Subject: Dhamma Thread (349) htootintnaing Dear Dhamma Friends, There are 4 sets of 4 kamma or 'catu-catukka kamma'. 1. janaka kamma or regenerative kamma 2. upatthambhaka kamma or supportive kamma 3. upapiilaka kamma or reductive kamma 4. upaghataka kamma or destructive kamma are classification based on 'the power of kamma that have regenerative potentials'. 1. garuka kamma or heavy kamma 2. asanna kamma or frequenting kamma 3. acinna kamma or practised kamma or learned kamma 4. katattaa kamma or olden kamma are 2nd classification based on the seniority of kamma in terms of their weightage. 1. ditthia-dhamma-vedaniiya kamma or visible kamma 2. upapajja-vedaniiya kamma or kamma fruits in the next life 3. aparaapariya-vedaniiya kamma or kamma fruits through out samsara starts from 2nd next life or 3rd life from the current one. 4. ahosi kamma or fruitless kamma are 3rd classification based on the timing of fruition of kamma. 1. akusala kamma or unwholesome kamma 2. kamavacara kusala kamma or sensuous-sphere wholesome kamma 3. rupavacara kusala kamma or fine material-sphere wholesome kamma 4. arupavacara kusala kamma or non-material-sphere wholesome kamma are 4th classification based on 'the place where kamma give as their effects. Again there are 3 kamma depending on the door where kamma are done. These 3 kamma are 1. kaaya kamma or bodily action 2. vacii kamma or verbal action 3. mano kamma or mental action But these 3 do not specify anything but just reveals where kamma are done as kamma-dvara or kamma-door. They may be akusala or kusala. So there are 3 akusala kamma. 1. akusala kaaya kamma 2. akusala vacii kamma 3. akusala mano kamma And there are 3 kusala kamma at the same kamma-dvara. They are 1. kusala kaaya kamma 2. kusala vacii kamma 3. kusala mano kamma Depending on the course of action or kamma-patha there are 10 akusala kamma and 10 kusala kamma. So there are 20 kamma. There are 3 akusala kaaya kamma & 3 kusala kaaya kamma, 4 akusala vacii kamma & 4 kusala vacii kamma and 3 akusala mano kamma & 3 kusala mano kamma. 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. 45242 From: "htootintnaing" Date: Sat May 7, 2005 11:12am Subject: Re: Ritual, Abhidhamma and Buddhism htootintnaing --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Lisa" wrote: Dear Htoo, Thank you for dialoging with me, your questions remind me of Socrates Vibhanga classification of rules and that leads me to the word "ritual" and what I think is ritual, what I don't understand, and what I do understand when it comes to correct or right view and understanding of ritual. To be continued, I need to finish my necklace of carnelian beads and take a long walk with my boyfriend. It's a lovely spring day here in the state of Chicago, USA. With unconditioned kindness (metta), Lisa ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Dear Lisa, You are a nice baby, my Mom. You have well researched for even a single Pali word. I am also not still good at Pali. I am not trying to be god at it. I just go for some basic and essential Pali words. There are about 100 words that frequently occur and if they are mastered, I think we can explore what The Buddha taught with more understanding. 500 words make more confidence. But we do not need as many as 80,000 Pali words. With Metta, Htoo Naing 45243 From: "htootintnaing" Date: Sat May 7, 2005 11:15am Subject: [dsg] Re:1. characteristic> 2. function> 3. manifestation> 4.proximate cause htootintnaing --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Larry" wrote: Hi Htoo, Is a kalapa an object of consciousness? Does it have characteristic, function manifestation and proximate cause? Larry -------------------------------------------------- ---------------------- Htoo: Dear Larry, I think, I have said that Nina, Rob M etc are good at these 4 features of realities. They may answer your questions. What I think is that kalapa or aggregate itself has already been pannatti even though I have said it is basic working unit. With Metta, Htoo Naing 45244 From: "Larry" Date: Sat May 7, 2005 11:36am Subject: Concepts vs. Real Objects [was Re:1. characteristic> 2. function> 3. ...] lbidd2 Hi Tep, I would like to make a comment on concept and reality. K. Sujin writes, "Whenever one does not know the characteristics of citta, cetasika and rupa as paramattha-dhamma that arise and fall away in very rapid sequence, then there is knowledge of pannatti (concept/signification/name) or taking signs of rupa and nama, which arise and fall away in very rapid continuation as something." It seems to me that sanna simplifies experience into an abstract symbol (sign) in order to facilitate identification. In the case of visual perception the sign is most often a shape. However, whatever is signified also has a shape. The sign is a simplified shape, without much detail. The Buddha often uses the example of a cow that a man cuts into pieces as an example of satipatthana. What is happening though, is that the shape of the cow is being radically altered. A cow cannot be found among the pieces because the cow shape is gone. If there were a simple drawing with the cows parts outlined, the cow would still be there. Whether a cow is living or dead, simply a drawing, any colour or size, it is recognizable as a cow. But if someone erases the head and legs of the drawing, the cow is no more because the shape has been radically altered. So, shape is a quality of both the living cow and the sign of cow. But shape is not a reality. Why? Is the living cow not a reality because it has a shape? Larry 45245 From: "Larry" Date: Sat May 7, 2005 11:40am Subject: Re: [dsg]Abhidhamma. lbidd2 Hi Hasitupadda, I hope your tooth ache is better. I have never been able to distinguish between nama and rupa with respect to physical pain. Could you elaborate on your analysis of your experience a little more. Larry 45246 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Sat May 7, 2005 11:45am Subject: Concepts vs. Real Objects [was Re:1. characteristic> 2. function> 3. ...] buddhatrue Hi Tep, Tep: It is nice to know that your health is improving. James: Thanks; I am happy about that also. But, surprisingly, I don't begrudge sickness either. The Buddha taught that we should always be mindful of how fragile the body is. Sickness is a good reminder of the fragile body. Tep: I understand how you feel, James. But "hot retorts" are not effective for two-way communication. James: LOL! Oh, Tep, how little you know about me. I am not always interested in `two-way communication'; it depends on who I am communicating with. Sometimes I know that the person I am communicating with has nothing or little to offer me. At that time, a 'hot retort' is the only way to knock some sense into their dull heads! ;-) Of course, I sense that this is antithetical to your 'diplomatic' approach. So be it. Tep: Yes, James, you're right that our Great Buddha used concepts all the time, but the 4 "realities" (rupa, citta, cetasikas, Nibbana) are also found everywhere in the suttas. James: This is a stretch. Tell me some suttas where the terms: rupa, citta, or cetasika are used and I will buy into this `compromise' position. Tep: I believe we can get to know everything about the key Dhammas the Buddha taught (the Bodhipakkhiya) by using a subset of less than 10 suttas. James: The Bodhipakkhiya has little to do with `dhammas'. You would need to explain what you mean here. From my research, there is a specific meaning to Bodhipakkhiya (see below*) which is unrelated to Abhidhamma dhammas. Tep: Shame on me, James! I have been called "diplomatic" often and I do understand why. James: LOL! What a diplomatic response!! ;-)) Tep: Of course, no diplomats can succeed without compromising. It is also very useful in any negotiation too! James: I don't wish to compromise or negotiate the dhamma. That is just the way I am. No compromise here! ;-)) Tep: BUT, I did not try to reach a compromise here, James. When the Buddha said "seeing and knowing" the way the pancakkhandha or salayatana "really are", he meant truly seeing the realities through the 'Dhamma eye'. And such is the ability "to see past the surface appearance of concepts" as you put it, which was also what I meant above. [Again, it may sound like I am trying to reach a compromise with you here.] James: Yes, you are trying to reach such a compromise that I can't even follow what you are trying to say anymore. What does Tep believe; regardless of anyone else?? Answer me that and we can have a straightforward conversation. Metta, James *bodhipakkhiya-dhammá The 37 'things pertaining to enlightenment', or 'requisites of enlightenment' comprise the entire doctrines of the Buddha. They are: • the 4 foundations of mindfulness (satipatthána, q.v.), • the 4 right efforts (s. padhána), • the 4 roads to power (iddhi-páda, q.v.), • the 5 spiritual faculties (indriya; s. bala), • the 5 spiritual powers (bala, q.v.), • the 7 factors of enlightenment (bojjhanga), • the Noble 8-fold Path (s. magga). In M.77 all the 37 bodhipakkhiya-dhammá are enumerated and explained though not called by that name. A detailed explanation of them is given in Vis.M. XXII. In S.XLVII, 51, 67, only the five spiritual faculties (indriya) are called bodhipakkhiya-dhammá; and in the Jhána-Vibhanga, only the 7 factors of enlightenment (bojjhanga). See The Requisites of Enlightenment, by Ledi Sayadaw (WHEEL 169/172). 45247 From: "htootintnaing" Date: Sat May 7, 2005 11:47am Subject: Dhamma Thread (350) htootintnaing Dear Dhamma Friends, There are 4 sets of 4 kamma or 'catu-catukka kamma'. 1. janaka kamma or regenerative kamma 2. upatthambhaka kamma or supportive kamma 3. upapiilaka kamma or reductive kamma 4. upaghataka kamma or destructive kamma are classification based on 'the functions of kamma that have regenerative potentials'. 1. garuka kamma or heavy kamma 2. asanna kamma or frequenting kamma 3. acinna kamma or practised kamma or learned kamma 4. katattaa kamma or olden kamma are 2nd classification based on the seniority of kamma in terms of their weightage. 1. ditthia-dhamma-vedaniiya kamma or visible kamma 2. upapajja-vedaniiya kamma or kamma fruits in the next life 3. aparaapariya-vedaniiya kamma or kamma fruits through out samsara starts from 2nd next life or 3rd life from the current one. 4. ahosi kamma or fruitless kamma are 3rd classification based on the timing of fruition of kamma. 1. akusala kamma or unwholesome kamma 2. kamavacara kusala kamma or sensuous-sphere wholesome kamma 3. rupavacara kusala kamma or fine material-sphere wholesome kamma 4. arupavacara kusala kamma or non-material-sphere wholesome kamma are 4th classification based on 'the place where kamma give as their effects. Again there are 3 kamma depending on the door where kamma are done. These 3 kamma are 1. kaaya kamma or bodily action 2. vacii kamma or verbal action 3. mano kamma or mental action Kaaya kamma are actions done at kaaya-dvara or acts through body. This is reflected as 'kaaya vinatti rupa'. Kaaya vinatti rupas are gesture. They are like 'behavioural actions revealing different body positions of bending or stretching arms, legs etc with weapons or poison or the offerable or robe or food etc etc. That is why kaaya kamma manifests as kaaya vinatti rupas. These vinatti rupas are cittaja rupas or 'mind-generated rupas'. These mind are 'akusala cittas accompanied by dosa cetasikas in case of killing' or 'mahakusala cittas accompanied by saddha in case of offerings etc. 3 akusala kaaya kamma are 1. killing 2. stealing 3. wrong-practising of sex 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. 45248 From: "Larry" Date: Sat May 7, 2005 11:59am Subject: [dsg] Re:1. characteristic> 2. function> 3. manifestation> 4.proximate cause lbidd2 --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "htootintnaing" wrote: > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Larry" wrote: > > Hi Htoo, > > Is a kalapa an object of consciousness? Does it have characteristic, > function manifestation and proximate cause? > > Larry > -------------------------------------------------- > ---------------------- > Htoo: > > Dear Larry, > > I think, I have said that Nina, Rob M etc are good at these 4 > features > of realities. They may answer your questions. > > What I think is that kalapa or aggregate itself has already been > pannatti even though I have said it is basic working unit. > > With Metta, > > Htoo Naing Hi Htoo, Okay, if kalapa is a concept is contact a concept? I am talking here not of the contact cetasika but of the coming together of three realities, sense object, sense door, and sense consciousness. Is consciousness cognizing an object a concept? In all of these cases we have two or more realities together. The Buddha talks about khandha a lot. "Khandha" means group. "Sankhara" can mean to form into a group. What is going on here? One dhamma is real; two dhammas is concept???? Larry 45249 From: "htootintnaing" Date: Sat May 7, 2005 0:12pm Subject: [dsg] Re:1. characteristic> 2. function> 3. manifestation> 4.proximate cause htootintnaing --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Larry" wrote: Hi Htoo, Okay, if kalapa is a concept is contact a concept? -------------------------------------------------- ---------------------- Htoo: Both. Pannatti and paramattha dhamma. If you think of word it is pannatti. If you think of characteristic it is paramattha dhamma. Contact is phassa. :-)) beforehand. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Larry: I am talking here not of the contact cetasika but of the coming together of three realities, sense object, sense door, and sense consciousness. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: That coming together of three is phassa or contact and it is a cetasika even though you are denying you are not saying cetasika contact. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Larry: Is consciousness cognizing an object a concept? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: I am not clear about your question. Are you asking 'Can consciousness cognize an object which is a concept? If the question is confirmed, it can. If not confirmed what is your question? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Larry: In all of these cases we have two or more realities together. The Buddha talks about khandha a lot. "Khandha" means group. "Sankhara" can mean to form into a group. What is going on here? One dhamma is real; two dhammas is concept???? Larry ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: 1. visual object ruupa 2. sense-door ruupa eye 3. eye-consciousness 4. contact These arise together. All are not concept. With Metta, Htoo Naing 45250 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Sat May 7, 2005 0:25pm Subject: Concepts vs. Real Objects [was Re:1. characteristic> 2. function> 3. ...] buddhistmedi... Hi Larry - Thank you for the initiative to open a dialogue on concepts and reality. L: So, shape is a quality of both the living cow and the sign of cow. But shape is not a reality. Why? Is the living cow not a reality because it has a shape? T: No. Both dead cow and living cow are concepts not because of their shape, but because the mind depends on sanna to "facilitates description and identification". Not just shape but also color are the characteristics for recognizing a cow - a dead cow, a living one, a picture of it, or even a drawing of it. We know from reading Acharn Sujin's e-book that a concept does not exhibit the characteristics of rapid arising and disappearing, but an ultimate reality like sanna does. How do you see a reality as a reality, not seeing and knowing concepts? Say, right now in this very moment, a cow is walking along... How are you supposed to see a rupa in the cow? If you sense a sanna of a past cow arising that moment, is that realizing the sanna "the correct way" according to Abhidhamma? Or, would you contemplate the 4 mahabhuta-dhatu making up the cow as being impermanent and anatta ? Respectfully, Tep ======== --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Larry" wrote: > Hi Tep, > > I would like to make a comment on concept and reality. K. Sujin > writes, "Whenever one does not know the characteristics of citta, > cetasika and rupa as paramattha-dhamma that arise and fall away in > very rapid sequence, then there is knowledge of pannatti > (concept/signification/name) or taking signs of rupa and nama, which > arise and fall away in very rapid continuation as something." > > It seems to me that sanna simplifies experience into an abstract > symbol (sign) in order to facilitate identification. In the case of > visual perception the sign is most often a shape. However, whatever > is signified also has a shape. The sign is a simplified shape, > without much detail. > > The Buddha often uses the example of a cow that a man cuts into > pieces as an example of satipatthana. What is happening though, is > that the shape of the cow is being radically altered. A cow cannot be > found among the pieces because the cow shape is gone. If there were a > simple drawing with the cows parts outlined, the cow would still be > there. Whether a cow is living or dead, simply a drawing, any colour > or size, it is recognizable as a cow. But if someone erases the head > and legs of the drawing, the cow is no more because the shape has > been radically altered. > (snipped) > Larry 45251 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Sat May 7, 2005 0:33pm Subject: Letter to James 1 ( Against K. Sujin (Re: khanti and "setting up mindfulness) buddhatrue Hi Phil: Phil: Hope you had a good spring break, and that your ailments have eased. James: Yes and yes. Thanks for asking. Phil: (It seems that ignorance is a paramattha dhamma, with its own characteristics, rather than just being the absence of understanding that I would have thought it to be.) James: You would have to explain more what you mean here. Ignorance takes many forms and I don't understand how it could be seen as a paramattha dhamma. The Buddha taught that the mind is luminous and it is the defilements which block the luminosity of the mind. Phil: Proliferation, this sea of concepts. James: So, if by `sea of concepts' K. Sujin means mental proliferation, I have no disagreement with her. However, it is a rather unfortunate metaphor because it implies that the concepts somehow arise 'outside of oneself', while in actuality the proliferation of concepts is and feeds the false sense of `self'. Phil: Let me give you an example. The other day I walked in a park on a lovely spring day. I found myself looking at some brightly-coloured rubber balls being sold at a kiosk in the park. So I had already seen them, and liked them, before I became aware of looking at them. Fair enough. And then came the proliferation. I thought with happiness about kids' enjoying them - and then I deeply remembered how much I had loved balls like that, and that made me sad - I was getting old, etc. This brought to mind the sutta "one excellent night" (in Majhimma) in which the Buddha described the monk who gets lost in formations such as "I had form like that" or "I will have form like that" (and with the other khandas.) So just from having seen the balls, my mind was churning up pseudo-mudita, churning up sadness, churning up thinking about suttas, and maybe conditioning a little understanding as well. And that goes on all day, every minute that we're awake. James: Thanks for this wonderful illustration. Wow, you do get carried away with thoughts! However, the good thing is that you are able to trace the thoughts and follow them (the sign of a creative writer), which will hopefully lessen the proliferation in the future. Meditation could help in this regard. Phil: But there is danger in sitting down to meditate and not realizing it's all about lobha, comfort, self-pleasure as well. (Not that it is for you - but it was for me.) James: Then you need to examine what your motivations were at the time and readjust your practice. Meditation isn't harmful just because you approached it in a harmful way. There is no reason to throw out the baby with the bathwater. (And no, my meditation isn't about lobha, comfort, and self-pleasure! You make it sound like watching a porno movie! LOL! ;-)) Phil: Well, again, to each his own. For me, the suttas lay out dukkha and annica quite clearly, but not anatta. I think of the common progression in SN of "Is what is impermanent suffering?" Yes my Lord" "And is it fitting to take what is impermanent and suffering as "This is mine, this I am, this is my self" "Not fitting my Lord." I never could get that last link. Nver convincing for me. James: That is what I am telling you! You must meditate to get that last link! Phil: James, I have some good news to report, and you to thank for it. I've started to write again, started connecting to my creative writing again. Obviously your post on that topic conditioned something to get me going. These days when I get up and have my first coffee, instead of reading suttas, I read some of my stories, some favourite stories, and this conditions some good writing for me. James: Good. I would just suggest you combine the dhamma with your writing ability- in that way you will reach more people. And the dhamma isn't all about rainbows and sunshine, it is also about confronting conflicts/problems and overcoming them with wisdom. That can make some good stories! ;-) Phil: And to be honest I'm loing interest in trying to convince you or anyone else about the benefits of Abhidhamma. To each his own, according to conditions. James: That's fine. We can end this discussion if you would like. It has already somewhat reached its logical conclusion. Phil: I was thinking it would be nice if you could visit us in Japan on some holiday. I told Naomi about the way you scolded me for being spaced ou and alienated from her, and she agreed! You will like her. James: I'm sure I would like her. I can see that she has a lot of compassion and understanding. You are quite lucky. Maybe I will come to visit you both someday. I would like to see Japan. Metta, James 45252 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Sat May 7, 2005 0:50pm Subject: Concepts vs. Real Objects [was Re:1. characteristic> 2. function> 3. ...] buddhistmedi... Hi, James - Boy, how rapidly we got into a hand-to-hand combat! James: Sometimes I know that the person I am communicating with has nothing or little to offer me. At that time, a 'hot retort' is the only way to knock some sense into their dull heads! ;-) James: Yes, you are trying to reach such a compromise that I can't even follow what you are trying to say anymore. What does Tep believe; regardless of anyone else?? Answer me that and we can have a straightforward conversation. Tep: Maybe it is not worth it to continue our dialogue, James. I am very afraid that my "dull head" would get knocked off! Sincerely, Tep ========= --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "buddhatrue" wrote: > Hi Tep, > 45253 From: "hasituppada" Date: Sat May 7, 2005 1:19pm Subject: Re: [dsg]Abhidhamma. hasituppada Thank you Larry? The pain is not gone. I will write when I am better. Pain is the rupa and knowing it or being aware of it the nama. That is in short. with metta, Hasituppada __________________________________________________________ --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Larry" wrote: > Hi Hasitupadda, > > I hope your tooth ache is better. I have never been able to distinguish > between nama and rupa with respect to physical pain. Could you > elaborate on your analysis of your experience a little more. > > Larry 45254 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Sat May 7, 2005 2:49pm Subject: Re: Breathing. - Sukinder's Pudding - Hasituppada kenhowardau Hi Hasituppada, ------------------------------- H: > You say in a reply to Tep, ".......then know thereis ignorance because the only way to have respect for the Buddha isto understand the present reality, whatever it is." I have neither the lower panna nor the higher panna. Could you please, explain to me what is "the PRESENT REALITY" ? ------------------- Thanks for the question. I will do my best, but it is a big assignment: as I understand it, the whole purpose of the Dhamma was to explain the present reality, and the Buddha spent the last forty- five years of his life doing just that. Without the Dhamma, all views of ultimate reality would be wrong views, classifiable into two kinds. Firstly, there is the eternalist view, which says the doer of the deeds and the experiencer of the results of the deeds are one and the same. Secondly, there is the annihilationist view, which says death will prevent the doer from experiencing the results of his deeds. Under the influence of the first view, beings strive for release from suffering, while, under the influence of the second view, beings do nothing; believing release will come to them regardless. As we now know, the truth lies in neither of the extremes and release comes, "not from striving, and not from standing still." (Samyutta Nikaya I.1) It comes purely from understanding the present reality. There can be no other way: the past no longer exists, and the future had never existed: there is only the present moment. As I was saying, all of the Buddha's discourses were aimed at describing the realities of the present moment so that we could know them for ourselves. I think the Abhidhamma is essential knowledge right from the start. It explains how the present moment can be known. Otherwise, there would be a contradiction in terms: if the reality is that we don't know, how could we know that we don't know? Ken H 45255 From: "Charles DaCosta" Date: Sat May 7, 2005 8:09am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Ken--ultimate (Abhidhamma) view part 2 dacostacharles Hi Ken, ***************** C: > In the first paragraph, what do you mean by "the physical bases of contact"? do you mean the sense organs? ----------------------- K: > Sense organs (eyes, ears, tongues, etc.) are not paramattha dhammas: they are concepts. Concepts are creations of the thinking mind. Sense bases are paramattha dhammas that perform the functions we conventionally attribute to sense organs. They arise and fall away in just one moment of consciousness (less than a billionth of a second). .......................................... What do you mean by "... paramattha dhammas that perform the functions we conventionally attribute to sense organs."? 1. paramattha dhammas 2. the functions we conventionally attribute to sense organs 3. and what are you saying about the sense organs (they are not real)? ***************************************** C: > So, what are non absolute realties, and what is not real? -------------------------------------------- K: > Anything that is not a paramattha dhamma is not real - it is just a concept. You can have a concept of something that is real (e.g., the actual words "paramattha-dhamma" "nama" "rupa" "citta" are concepts) or you can have a concept of something that is not absolutely real (e.g., man, woman, tree, table, flying purple elephant). ................................................. Maybe you should define or explain what is a paramattha dhamma. *********************************************** KH: > > At any one moment in time there is one citta and a small number of cetasikas plus one or more rupas, and that is our entire world. The Buddhist practice is to directly know one of those namas or rupas, as it exists in the present moment. When we do that, we know the world as it truly is and we lose our attachment and infatuation for it. ------------------------------------------------------ C: > How is knowing one of the namas or rupas, as it exists in the present moment, a way to lose attachment and infatuation for it? ---------------------------------------------------- K: > Because you see that it is just a mental or physical phenomenon that is dependent on conditions, that is extremely short lived and that is devoid of any self or entity. In that way, you know from your own direct experience that attachment to such an unsatisfactory thing would be pointless and could only lead to suffering. ..................................................... Ok. I usually try to see everything as having a nature that is complex, impermanent, and uncontrollable; and because of that, everything is a source of suffering when we crave the nature to be otherwise. It does not matter to e whether it is a nama or rupa. I know that all the objects of my desire have that nature. When desire arises and turns into clinging, and clinging to suffering, I understand the nature of my of my suffering. ***************************************** C: > I can see that I am getting old, it is too easy for me to get lost in trying to remember all the definitions so that I could understand what is being said. ----------------------------------- K:> I am a good deal older than you, and I can tell you that it is not age that makes it hard to remember Abhidhamma terminology: it is simply that we don't appreciate the difference between concepts and realities. When we really appreciate that there are only dhammas we become genuinely interested in them, and remembering their names and definitions becomes second nature. .......................................................................... May be you are right. People here tell me that I can't speak Danish because I am lazy or don't really care. I do wish there was a pill I could take because I have been trying to learn this language and culture since 1994 (over 10 years). How old are you ? ************************************ KH: > An ordinary person who is untrained in the Dhamma can know about faith, doubt, harmlessness, hatred and other aspects of everyday life, but he does not know them as they truly are. In the absolute reality taught by the Buddha, there are phenomena with the same general description as certain every-day concepts, but which have their own absolute existence - independent of any person who might think about them. ........................................... I can't seem to see the helpfulness in knowing these concepts as they truly are. ******************************************************** C: > It is interesting, after reading this post I am starting to realize that the Abidharma focuses on trying to the reader a view (i.e., wisdom) of the world, and from this view, the rest should fall into place. --------------------------------------------------------- K: > Yes, indeed. The world is just the small number of namas and rupas that have arisen in the present moment. Anything else is concept. Concepts can seem to be very, very real, but they are just illusions created by realities. -------------------------- C: > For this view to work, morality and concentration would have to be inherent to the wisdom, or they would have to be preconditions/prerequisites. ------------------------- K: > Exactly! The paramattha dhamma known as wisdom has the inherent quality of being morally wholesome (kusala). It relies on (and arises with) the right kind of concentration, and the right kind of concentration relies on it. But, of the two, wisdom (right understanding) is the forerunner. ........................................................................ My problem with this idea is that I don't think the Buddha thought that way. If he did, the 8 fold path would have just one fold -- wisdom, he would have stated wisdom alone is the way. ************************************** KH: > > As conditioned realities (conditioned paramattha dhammas), they arise, perform their functions and desist in the shortest possible period of time. And so they cannot possibly be directly known to anyone who is not extremely well trained in the Dhamma. That is why the way to enlightenment is in learning about paramattha dhammas and understanding how they exist here and now. ....................... C: > I hope you realize that this is just one of the paths to enlightenment? ------------------------------------------- K: > There we disagree. I am sure that satipatthana - right understanding of conditioned dhammas - is the only way taught by the Buddha. .................................................................. Do you believe that before the Buddha became enlightened, he knew the paramattha dhammas and understood how they exist? If so, why wasn't this the lesson of the first sermon? ----- Original Message ----- From: kenhowardau To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, 04 May, 2005 13:23 Subject: [dsg] Re: Ken--ultimate (Abhidhamma) view part 2 45256 From: "Charles DaCosta" Date: Sat May 7, 2005 8:16am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Musings8 - Clinging to Self, Clinging to Results dacostacharles Hi Mike, and thanks, That is why I keep practicing even though I am not a monk and have no desire to be. However, I do live in samsara and consider it part of the scheme to bring about enlightenment -- definitely not a monks path. CharlesD PS: for me, the key is insight into Desire, not so much the things or dharmas ----- Original Message ----- From: mnease To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, 02 May, 2005 05:51 Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Musings8 - Clinging to Self, Clinging to Results Hi Charles, Nice to hear from you-- ----- Original Message ----- From: "Charles DaCosta" To: Sent: Sunday, May 01, 2005 8:12 AM Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Musings8 - Clinging to Self, Clinging to Results > Hi mike, very good questions; however some Buddhist believe you have to be a bhikkhus cultivating > absorption as a basis for insight to reach enlightenment. Agreed on both counts, Charles--and when the conditions are (or were) present I think this is (or was) the ideal situation. A cursory search of 'pabbajjaa' will bear this out, I think. > And by the way, I should emphases that not > every Buddhist believes this. No indeed, the suttas tell of many laypeople attaining the various paths and some Buddhists acknowledge this. Whether either or both of these ways are available today is a matter of opinion to be sure. What is clear from all the texts, I think, is that with or without jhaana or ordination, insight into present dhammas is the key. mike 45257 From: "Charles DaCosta" Date: Sat May 7, 2005 8:24am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Musings8 - Clinging to Self, Clinging to Results dacostacharles Hi, This sounds like a good practice to me: "...Whenever ... a noble disciple enters and dwells in the rapture of seclusion, on that occasion these five things come to him: (1) Whatever pain and grief there is connected with sensual desire does not exist on that occasion; (2) whatever pleasure and joy there is connected with sensual desire does not exist on that occasion; (3) whatever pain and grief there is connected with the unwholesome does not exist on that occasion: (4) whatever pleasure and joy there is connected with the unwholesome does not exist on that occasion; (5) whatever pain and grief there is connected with the wholesome does not exist on that occasion. Whenever a noble disciple enters and dwells in the rapture of seclusion, on that occasion these five things come to him." I am sorry DSG backupers, it was worth repeating. CharlesD ----- Original Message ----- From: buddhatrue To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, 02 May, 2005 01:23 Subject: [dsg] Re: Musings8 - Clinging to Self, Clinging to Results Charles DaCosta: > very good questions; however some Buddhist believe you have to be a bhikkhus cultivating absorption as a basis for insight to reach enlightenment. And by the way, I should emphases that not every Buddhist believes this. mike:> Can you cite from the discourses examples of the Buddha instructing laypeople in the same way that he instructed bhikkhus cultivating absorption as a basis for insight? If so, I think this would be very helpful to our discussion. ........................................................................................................ ... the Buddha did teach laypeople to practice the jhanas: AN 109 "The Rapture of Seclusion": Then the householder Anathapindika, accompanied by five hundred lay followers, approached the Blessed One.The Blessed One then said to them: "Householders, you attend upon the Sangha of monks with robes, almsfood, lodgings and medicinal requisites for use in time of sickness. But you should not remain satisfied merely with this. Rather, householders, you should train yourselves thus: "How can we enter and dwell from time to time in the rapture of seclusion?" (33) Thus should you train yourselves." When he heard this, the Venerable Sariputta said to the Blessed One: "It is wonderful, Lord! It is marvelous, Lord! How well spoken was that statement of the Blessed One. Whenever, Lord, a noble disciple enters and dwells in the rapture of seclusion, on that occasion these five things come to him: (1) Whatever pain and grief there is connected with sensual desire does not exist on that occasion; (2) whatever pleasure and joy there is connected with sensual desire does not exist on that occasion; (3) whatever pain and grief there is connected with the unwholesome does not exist on that occasion: (4) whatever pleasure and joy there is connected with the unwholesome does not exist on that occasion; (5) whatever pain and grief there is connected with the wholesome does not exist on that occasion. Whenever a noble disciple enters and dwells in the rapture of seclusion, on that occasion these five things come to him." "Good, good, Sariputta!" (The Buddha then repeats the Venerable Sariputta's words in full.) Note 33: Pavivekam pitim. AA: The rapture arising in dependence on the first and second jhanas. James: I don't wish to get into an extended debate on this matter, but I thought I would offer the sutta quotation since it was requested. Metta, James 45258 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sat May 7, 2005 3:56pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re:1. characteristic> 2. function> 3. manifestation> 4.proximate cause jonoabb Hi Htoo Hope you don't mind me butting in here. htootintnaing wrote: >Thanks. Now I am clear. Pannatti is not real. So it does not have any >of 4 features, I think. Nibbana is a special case. > >But I would like to ask you. > >Does pannatti not have a function? > > Just a suggestion, but rather than saying, 'Pannatti is not real', you might find it more helpful to think in terms of, 'Whatever is not real (dhamma) can be called pannatti (a concept)'. It's not a question of 'There are dhammas and then there are pannatti', since that is to attribute a degree of reality to 'the pannatti'. (It could be for this reason that we do not find mention of 'pannatti' in the suttas. Even the 'Whatever ...' formulation could be construed as imputing a degree of reality to pannatti, if one wanted to argue that.) Jon 45259 From: LBIDD@... Date: Sat May 7, 2005 4:28pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re:1. characteristic> 2. function> 3. manifestation> 4.proximate cause lbidd2 Htoo: 1. visual object ruupa 2. sense-door ruupa eye 3. eye-consciousness 4. contact These arise together. All are not concept. Hi Htoo, If all 4 _together_ are realities then you have 4 realities that are the object of one consciousness. Same as kalapa. How can that be? Larry 45260 From: LBIDD@... Date: Sat May 7, 2005 4:39pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Shape of a cow/Tep lbidd2 Hi Tep, Let's look at it like this. Is the shape of the sign of a cow the object of a single consciousness? If, looking at your own experience of the sign of a cow, it takes more than one consciousness to cognize the shape, then shape is not a concept, because concept is an object of consciousness. Additionally, this sign is not a concept for the same reason. On the other hand, the shape of a living cow obviously requires many consciousnesses to cognize it. Therefore this shape is definitely neither concept nor reality. What is it? Larry 45261 From: "Philip" Date: Sat May 7, 2005 5:20pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Musings8 - Clinging to Self, Clinging to Results philofillet Hi Charles and all > This sounds like a good practice to me: > > "...Whenever ... a noble disciple enters and dwells in the rapture of seclusion, If I'm not mistaken, being a "noble disciple" refers to more than being devoted to Dhamma. It refers to a certain degree of enlightenment.In Bhikkhu Bodhi's commentarial notes to Samyutta Nikaya, I'm quite sure he said as much. Somebody please correct me if I'm wrong. > "Householders, you attend upon the Sangha of monks with robes, > almsfood, lodgings and medicinal requisites for use in time of > sickness. But you should not remain satisfied merely with this. > Rather, householders, you should train yourselves thus: "How can we > enter and dwell from time to time in the rapture of seclusion?" (33) > Thus should you train yourselves." If I'm not wrong about the above, this means that people should train themselves by becoming noble disciples. Not as easy as one might assume! I have a feeling this is where we run into trouble when we are attracted to practices taught in suttas. For example, in Satippathana sutta the opening condition "having put away covetousness and grief for the world" that must be achieved, as BB puts it, "for the practice to succeed" - how can we who live in the modern world claim so easily to have "put away covetnousness and grief for the world" when we sit down and plunge into our meditation? I remember reading one of the famous introduction guides to meditation - "Mindfulness in Plain English" I think, in which it was taught that a kind of warm-up exercise should be done to deal with hindrances *before* meditating, in order to satisfy the "put away grief and covetousness" above. As though thinking about metta for 5 minutes could do that! That goes against the anatta sutta, thinking that there is a self that can choose to have the khandas in this way or that. I suspect that for laypeople who have busy lives in the sensation drenched modern world, attempting to cut that off and behave like monks is just an exercise in self-enjoyment disguised as liberation - so subtly disguised that they themselves often don't know that it's going on. Stress on I "suspect" - I have no way of knowing what is really going on in people's minds. (There may be sour grapes at work here because my living circumstances do not allow for formal meditation?) If I am wrong about "noble disciple" being more than just someone who is devoted to the Buddha's teaching, please correct me. Metta, Phil 45262 From: LBIDD@... Date: Sat May 7, 2005 5:53pm Subject: Re: [dsg]Abhidhamma. lbidd2 Hasituppada: "The pain is not gone. I will write when I am better. Pain is the rupa and knowing it or being aware of it the nama. That is in short." Hi Hasituppada, I'm sure you know there are medications for tooth ache that you can get at a pharmacy without a doctor. That aside, pain isn't rupa. Pain is feeling. In this case I think the rupa would be hardness or tension but it is very difficult to distinguish that from pain. Awareness is probably attention cetasika. Just a guess. Larry 45263 From: LBIDD@... Date: Sat May 7, 2005 6:50pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Concepts vs. Real Objects [was Re:1. characteristic> 2. function> 3... lbidd2 Howard: "I have not been persuaded by the speed argument. After all, what is observed is observed in the very mindstates that are "so quickly moving". It is not as if there is a "watcher" standing back and observing a rapid stream of mindstates; the mindstates themselves are the observational states!" Hi Howard, This raises an interesting question: what is happening when something is moving too fast to see it? Why don't we see it, or why do we see a distortion of it, like the spokes of a moving wheel? Consciousness cognizes the most minute conscious moment but "I" only see the big picture. Larry 45264 From: upasaka@... Date: Sat May 7, 2005 5:19pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Concepts vs. Real Objects [was Re:1. characteristic> 2. function> 3... upasaka_howard Hi, Larry - In a message dated 5/7/05 9:50:25 PM Eastern Daylight Time, LBIDD@... writes: Hi Howard, This raises an interesting question: what is happening when something is moving too fast to see it? Why don't we see it, or why do we see a distortion of it, like the spokes of a moving wheel? Consciousness cognizes the most minute conscious moment but "I" only see the big picture. Larry ========================= What sort of "something is moving too fast to see"? You are presuming some conventional object "out there" in "the external world". That is - you are talking concept, not reality. 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) 45265 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Sat May 7, 2005 9:21pm Subject: Concepts vs. Real Objects [was Re:1. characteristic> 2. function> 3. ...] buddhatrue Hi Tep, Tep: Boy, how rapidly we got into a hand-to-hand combat! James: Huh? Just because I question a few of your points it's now `hand-to-hand' combat?? Don't you think you are exaggerating a bit? Especially since this is the Internet and I haven't laid one hand on you (and never would). As a Buddhist, I don't believe in violence. Tep: Maybe it is not worth it to continue our dialogue, James. I am very afraid that my "dull head" would get knocked off! James: Oh brother! Okay, whatever, suit yourself. Metta, James 45266 From: sarah abbott Date: Sun May 8, 2005 0:51am Subject: ‘Cetasikas' study corner 187 - Enthusiasm/piiti (e) sarahprocter... 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.11 Enthusiasm (piiti) contd] Píti does not arise with dosa-múla-citta. When dosa-múla-citta arises, the citta dislikes the object and then there cannot be at the same time a pleasurable interest. Píti does not arise either with moha-múla-citta; at the moment of moha-múla-citta there is no enthusiasm. As regards ahetuka cittas(2), only the two types which are accompanied by pleasant feeling arise with píti: one type of santíraùa-citta which is kusala vipåka and investigates an extraordinarily pleasant object(3) and the hasituppåda-citta, the smile-producing consciousness of the arahat(4). When there is seeing, which is one of the dvi-pañcaviññåùas (sense-cognitions), there is no delight or enthusiasm about visible object, seeing merely sees it. If visible object is an extraordinarily pleasant object, the santíraùa-citta in that process which investigates visible object is accompanied by pleasant feeling and píti. The javana-cittas of that process may or may not be accompanied by píti. If they are accompanied by pleasant feeling they are also accompanied by píti. *** 2) See Abhidhamma in Daily Life, Chapter 8 and 9. There are eighteen types of ahetuka cittas, cittas without akusala hetus or sobhana hetus, “roots”. They are the sense-door-adverting-consciousness, the “five pairs” of sense-cognitions (seeing, hearing, etc.), two types of receiving-consciousness, three types of investigating-consciousness, the mind-door-adverting-consciousness and the smile-producing consciousness of the arahat. 3) Abhidhamma in Daily Life, Chapter 13. 4) Abhidhamma in Daily Life, Chapter 9. ***** [Ch.11 Enthusiasm (piiti) to be contd] Metta, Sarah ====== 45267 From: "hasituppada" Date: Sun May 8, 2005 1:03am Subject: Re: [dsg]Abhidhamma. hasituppada Larry, Thank you it is very kind of you to inquire. I am taking some sort of pain killer the effect of which lasts only about four hours ! Any way it is part of sansaric suffering....... I am not conversant with Abhidhamma terminology. From what I have learnt Rupa are not necessarily hard things: all forms, feelings like, softness, hardness pain, hot and cold, wind on your body, a sound, a smell, a taste, a thought that arises in the mind are all rupas which could be an object of meditation. Htoo may perhaps give appropriate elaboration. with metta, Hasituppada 45268 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sun May 8, 2005 1:16am Subject: Re: [dsg]Abhidhamma. jonoabb Hi Hasituppada I join Larry in wishing you relief from the pain hasituppada wrote: >Thank you Larry? > >The pain is not gone. I will write when I am better. Pain is the >rupa and knowing it or being aware of it the nama. That is in short. > >with metta, >Hasituppada > > To supplement Larry's reply a little, a study of the Abhidhamma helps us to understand (at an intellectual level) that what we know conventionally as tooth-ache is likely to be, in terms of dhammas: (a) the experience through the body-door of certain unpleasant instances of hardness, heat and pressure, accompanied by painful (bodily) feeling, and (b) subsequent (akusala) mind-door moments of dosa-rooted consciousness accompanied by unpleasant feeling. We probably confuse these 2 different sets of dhammas. Are we able to distinguish the painful bodily feeling from the aversion and its accompanying unpleasant feeling? And in between the moments of 'tooth-ache', there are also other dhammas arising as usual, including the experiences through the other sense-doors and the thinking that follows that experiencing. So there is never *only toothache*, even though it may seem like that at times! Hope you're feeling better. Jon 45269 From: "htootintnaing" Date: Sun May 8, 2005 1:59am Subject: Asubha kammatthaana htootintnaing Dear Dhamma Friends, What the asubha kammatthaana practitioner first sees as the object of asubha kammatthaana is visual object in front of his or her eyes. But what he or she is developing is just name or pannatti. This initial object is 'dead body of so and so form'. This is initiation of asubha kammatthaana and this object is called parikamma nimitta as it is a preparatory sign of asubha kammatthaana. When the practitioner becomes able to recognise the whole picture in his or her mind and it appears exactly as if it is seen by the eyes, that new object in the mind is called uggaha nimitta or mental image. At a time, when mature, there arise another image and it is called counter image or patibhaaga nimitta. This sign is also a form that is similar to initial object and mental object that it is something like a form of a person. But that appears in the mind as patibhaaga nimitta is free of staining, tethering, bleeding, disintegration etc. When this appears, it is said that the practitioner is said to have the stage of upacaara samadhi or proximate concentration. As this new object, patibhaaga nimitta is free of ugly markers, it is strongly advisable that the practitioners do not have to practise on the dead body of opposite sex. Otherwise, at this stage of patibhaaga nimitta, the attraction may arise and then jhaana will be destroyed. When this new sign arises and there are 5 jhana factors of vitakka, vicara, piti, sukha and ekaggata there is no trace of hindrances of sensuous thinking, aversive thinking, sloth-torpored thinking, spreading-worrying thinking and suspicious thinking. This stage is upacaara samaadhi. When the mind suddenly absorbed into that object and there is complete stillness, then that stage is said to be appanaa samaadhi or appanaa jhaana or 1st ruupa jhaana. As the kammatthaana is asubha, this jhaana is said to be 1st jhaana arises from asubha kammatthaana. 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. 45270 From: "hasituppada" Date: Sun May 8, 2005 2:15am Subject: Re: Breathing. - Sukinder's Pudding - Hasituppada hasituppada Dear KenH, Thank you very much for your taking time to explain. We know that there is not the past nor the future but only the present moment. But from what I understand from the teachings in the Sutta is, that there is more to it than knowing the present reality to escape from the suffering in samsra. It is the mind that is causing all our problems, because : Mind precedes all mental states. Mind is their chief; they are all mind-wrought. If with an impure mind one speaks or acts, suffering follows one like the wheel that follows the foot of the ox. (Dhammapada) The mind is going a long journey, in that journey it has collected so much of habits, which are good , which are bad and which are neutral. So it is the mind that we will have to get hold of to cultivate and save it from bad habits and put it on the correct path to reach the goal of Nibbana. What is the present reality ? To me the "present reality ", is what I am doing now. When I write I write, when I see, I see. When I eat, I eat etc. We the yogis call that, bare attention. Bare attention, by itself, is not enough to purify the mind of its accumulation of bad habits, let alone unwholesome kamma. Therefore some thing more effective to get hold of the mind and see it as it is, is essential. It is not the present reality that could do that purification of the mind to reach the set target. Specially, for us human beings with multifarious activities, it is certainly an enormous assignment. Therefore, Buddha took as his disciples those who had given up their household life to follow his teachings. The Maha Satipattana Sutta consists of the instructions to his Bikkhus to do Bhavana. Bhavana is defined as mental cultivation and called in English Meditation. During the time of the Buddha, instructions were not given to lay people to Meditate. They were told of the merit of Dana Sila and Bhavana which would have been enough for a diligent human earthling to attain at least Sotapatti. Now we have the time and the means, which were not available those days, to take off to meditate. We have no other alternative but to follow those same instructions the Buddha gave to his disciples, to enter the Stream. Then we will have to follow the Sutta Pitaka. As the instructions for the Bikkhus are in them. Abhidhamma is a sacred book, but there are no instructions in it for us or his disciples to follow to purify the mind of its impurities and prepare it to the journey towards Nibbana. It is after all the mind, that reaches Nibbana, not you, me, ken or Larry. Abhidhamma explains the mechanism of the mind. How the mind works. But it does not say, HOW TO GET THE MIND TO WORK. Therefore, we will have to use the appropriate material to set about the cleaning of the mind. The appropriate material is found in the Sutta and not in the Abhidhamma. Your method of " present reality " is mere scratching the surface. That would not do Dear Ken. Set aside the scriptures and meditate, go for a retreat in a good Buddhist Meditation Centre. There are many in America now. Not necessary to go far. Then you will get an idea as to what the mind is without these " present realities". May you be happy, Ken, With metta, Hasituppada. 45271 From: "htootintnaing" Date: Sun May 8, 2005 2:24am Subject: Gacchanto vaa gacchaamii'ti pajaanaati. htootintnaing Dear Dhamma Friends, Jananti and pajanati are different word. The Buddha said in mahasatipatthana as 'gacchanto vaa gacchaamii'ti pajanati'. Jananti and pajanati are explained below. Jananti means 'know' and pa+janati means 'know in details' or 'know well'. PTS-: Pa° (p. 378) (indecl.) [Ved. pra, Idg. *pro, cp. Gr. pro/, Lat. pro, Goth. fra, Lith. pra, pro, Oir. ro--] directional prefix of forward motion, in applied sense often emphasising the action as carried on in a marked degree or even beyond its mark (cp. Ger. ver-- in its function of Goth. fra & Ger. vor). Thus the sphere of pa-- may be characterised in foll. applications: 1. forth, forward, out: papatati fall forward, i. e. down; °neti bring forth (to); °ganhati hold out; °tharati spread forth; °dhavati run out; °bajati go forth; °sareti stretch out; etc. -- 2. (intensive) in a marked degree, more than ordinarily (cp. E. up in cut up, heap up, fill up; thus often to be trsld by "up," or "out," or "about"): pakopeti up-- set; °chindati cut up; °bhanjati break up; °cinati heap up; °kinnaka scattered about; °nada shouting out; °bhati shine forth; °bhavati grow up, prevail; °duseti spoil entirely; °jahati give up entirely; ° tapeti make shine exceedingly (C. ativiya dipeti); °jalati blaze up; °janati know well. -- ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Htoo: Pa-janati = to know well I interpreted this as 'to know detail'. Examples-: a)I saw him running in the street. b)I saw him run in the street. a) just saw that the man was running and I know he ran. b) I know all the details. I saw that he put in his shoes, stood up, learned forward and when there was a signal to run, he started to run and he ran and when he reached the destination he stopped. I saw the whole action all in details. Like this ; Bhikkhi who has been well trained by The Buddha knows when he goes as he goes. This knowing is 'pajanati' and it is not just 'jananti'. Pajanati means 'to know well' or 'to know in detail' while jananti means 'just know'. When uninstructed person goes he may or may not know that he goes. Because he is thinking other things like 'where to go, what to do next, what to do with so and so thing and so on' while he is going. Even when he knows that he goes, his knowing is not free of self- identity. So this is explained in commentary or atthakatha that such knowing is like 'knowing of dogs, foxes etc'. They may know when they go as they go. But well instructed bhikkhu knows that 'my heel starts to be lighter' 'my heel more lighter' 'my heel rises' 'my heel clears the ground' 'my knee bends' 'my thigh swings forward' 'my thigh becomes heavy' 'my leg mecomes more heavier' 'my heel drops' 'my heel touches the ground' 'my heel rests on the ground' 'my body rests on my heel' 'I stand on my heel' 'my another heel become lighter' '..and the cycle continues. He the bhikkhu does not need to cite or say these. But he knows all the detail as 'they are ruupa' and they each disappear at each stages and he sees them (ruupa) as impermanence. His knowing on these ruupa also vanishes and he also sees them (naama) as impermanence. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- PTS-: continues In this meaning often with adjectives like patanu very thin; °thaddha quite stiff; °dakkhina right in pre--eminence; °bala very strong. -- 3. "onward": patthaya from . . . onward; pavattati move on; fig. "further, later": paputta a later (secondary) son, i. e. grandson. -- 4. "in front of," "before": padvara, before the door. -- 5. Sometimes in trs. (reflexive) use, like pakujin singing out to (each other, cp Ger. besingen, an--rufen).--The most frequent combination with other (modifying) prefixes is sam--ppa; its closest relatives (in meaning 2 especially) are a and pari. The double (assimilation) p is restored after short vowels, like appadhansiya (a+pa°). ---------------------------------------------------------------------- ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ htootintnaing wrote: Dear All, The Buddha said to his disciples bhikkhus at kammaasadhamma village in kuru country, which is close to Deli in India that '...gacchanto vaa gacchaamii'ti pajaanaati.' This means that 'when going, bhikkhu knows as going 'in detail'. Here 'in detail' is very very important and crucial. Without inclusion of this, there always arise confusion. that 'to know going as going' is not satipatthana and so on. But the word used in that Buddha words is 'pajaanaati'. Jaananti means 'to know'. Pajaananti means 'to know in detail'. With Metta, Htoo Naing 45272 From: "htootintnaing" Date: Sun May 8, 2005 2:37am Subject: [dsg] Re:1. characteristic> 2. function> 3. manifestation> 4.proximate cause htootintnaing --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Jonothan Abbott wrote: > Hi Htoo > > Hope you don't mind me butting in here. > Jon -------------------------------------------------- ---------------------- Dear Jon, Thank you very much for your kind suggestions and saying. As I love definitions, I would define dhamma in this way. There are dhammas and they are dhammas. They are citta, cetasikas, ruupa and nibbana. If something is not from any of these mentioned things, that something is not in the castegory of dhamma. So as you said 'what is not real are all pannatti'. Thanks, Htoo Naing 45273 From: "htootintnaing" Date: Sun May 8, 2005 2:43am Subject: [dsg] Re:1. characteristic> 2. function> 3. manifestation> 4.proximate cause htootintnaing --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, LBIDD@w... wrote: > Htoo: > 1. visual object ruupa > 2. sense-door ruupa eye > 3. eye-consciousness > 4. contact > These arise together. All are not concept. > > Hi Htoo, > > If all 4 _together_ are realities then you have 4 realities that are the > object of one consciousness. Same as kalapa. How can that be? > > Larry -------------------------------------------------- ---------------------- Dear Larry, We are not in any of 4 while we are speaking on these matters. Visual objecrt ruupa is not yours, not mine but we talked about a single moment of a typical citta of cakkhu-vinnana citta'. OK. Sense-door ruupa eye is not your, not mine and only ruupa at that moment. Eye-consciousness did not arise in you, in me but at that ruupa that we talked on as a single citta. Contact is not yours, not mine, but arose at that time when a single citta arose. What that 'cakkhu-vinnana citta' took was 'visual object ruupa'. That citta did not take eye or cakkhu pasada, contact or phassa. I think you confused on 4 requisites for consciousness. With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing 45274 From: "htootintnaing" Date: Sun May 8, 2005 2:48am Subject: Re: [dsg]Abhidhamma. htootintnaing --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "hasituppada" wrote: Larry, Thank you it is very kind of you to inquire. I am taking some sort of pain killer the effect of which lasts only about four hours ! Any way it is part of sansaric suffering....... I am not conversant with Abhidhamma terminology. From what I have learnt Rupa are not necessarily hard things: all forms, feelings like, softness, hardness pain, hot and cold, wind on your body, a sound, a smell, a taste, a thought that arises in the mind are all rupas which could be an object of meditation. Htoo may perhaps give appropriate elaboration. with metta, Hasituppada ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Dear Larry, Hasituppada and all, Leaving nibbana, all other dhammas that exist are naama and ruupa only. There is no other things that exist as existences. Among them only naama have the faculty of knowing. Ruupa never know thenmselves, their surroundings, naama and anything at all. The computer is seen. But the computer cannot see. Sounds can be heard but they cannot hear. With Metta, Htoo Naing 45275 From: "htootintnaing" Date: Sun May 8, 2005 2:51am Subject: Dhamma Thread (351) htootintnaing Dear Dhamma Friends, There are 4 sets of 4 kamma or 'catu-catukka kamma'. 1. janaka kamma or regenerative kamma 2. upatthambhaka kamma or supportive kamma 3. upapiilaka kamma or reductive kamma 4. upaghataka kamma or destructive kamma are classification based on 'the functions of kamma that have regenerative potentials'. 1. garuka kamma or heavy kamma 2. asanna kamma or frequenting kamma 3. acinna kamma or practised kamma or learned kamma 4. katattaa kamma or olden kamma are 2nd classification based on the seniority of kamma in terms of their weightage. 1. ditthia-dhamma-vedaniiya kamma or visible kamma 2. upapajja-vedaniiya kamma or kamma fruits in the next life 3. aparaapariya-vedaniiya kamma or kamma fruits through out samsara starts from 2nd next life or 3rd life from the current one. 4. ahosi kamma or fruitless kamma are 3rd classification based on the timing of fruition of kamma. 1. akusala kamma or unwholesome kamma 2. kamavacara kusala kamma or sensuous-sphere wholesome kamma 3. rupavacara kusala kamma or fine material-sphere wholesome kamma 4. arupavacara kusala kamma or non-material-sphere wholesome kamma are 4th classification based on 'the place where kamma give as their effects. Again there are 3 kamma depending on the door where kamma are done. These 3 kamma are 1. kaaya kamma or bodily action 2. vacii kamma or verbal action 3. mano kamma or mental action Among 3 kama-dvara, there are 3 akusala kamma that are frequentlky committed at kaaya dvara or body door. These 3 akusala kaaya kamma are 1. killing 2. stealing 3. wrong-practising of sex Killing is mostly committed through kaaya dvara or through body. But there are some occasions that killing is committed through vaci-dvara or verbal-kamma-door. Examples are 'ordering of killing'. But killing is not done through mind-door alone even though mano- dvara or mind-kamma-door always invlove in any of akusala or kusala actions. By the same token, stealing is mostly done through body-kamma-door or kaaya-dvara. Again, this can also be committed through verbal action by giving orders or any other means of communication while delegating others to perform the action. Wrong-practising of sex is also committed through body-kamma-door or kaaya-dvara. Again there are many implication related to this bad kamma. Once committed, there are many potentials that these kamma are brought along through out the samsara as long as they do not receive their debt. Wrong practising of sex are having sex with married people. This invloves both parties and both male male and female beings committed the same kamma. This happens not only in human beings but in other realms like deva, peta, asura, animals etc as long as beings are in sensuous sphere. When both parties are not married ones, still there this kamma of kaamesu-micchaacara can be committed with unmarried ones. There are 8 kinds of virgins or 8 kinds of woman who are not married but they are guarded by simple owners (not sex owners but just guardians). When unmarried men have sex with any of these 8 woman, they do commit kaamesu-micchaacara akusala kaaya kamma. But these 8 women who have sex with unmarried men are not committing kaamesumicchaacara akusala kamma. Because they own their sex and they just have sex with unmarried one who do not have sex-owners. However, all male partners who have sex with these 8 women without consent of their guardians and without consent of these 8 women are said to commit kaamesumicchaacara akusala kaaya kamma. 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. 45276 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Sun May 8, 2005 4:48am Subject: Fatal "I"-dentification ... !!! bhikkhu_ekamuni Friends: Overblown Narcissism versus the Bliss of Impersonality: The subconscious notion of 'I Am' is a false assumption based on a longstanding Conceit.! The subconscious notion of 'Mine' is a false assumption based on a deep, deep Craving.! The subconscious notion of 'This is My Self' is a false assumption based on a wrong view.! The mentally constructed idea of an internally existing, invisible yet unchanging and independent entity of identity, being in full control and mastering the individual, is rooted in an inflated sense of self-importance! This fabricated 'Ego' assuming an imaginary 'Self' rapidly becomes deeply and tragically in love with itself... This 'auto romance', even though merely an hypothetical ideation, nevertheless demands to be gratified, praised and respected without end, and therefore reacts violently towards any external or internal threats against it's postulated unique magnificence... The root of all EGOISM therefore starts right where & when this conceptual notion of 'I-Me-Mine-Myself-My-Identity-My-Personality' is born...!!! The effects are well known as being catastrophic both individually & socially, locally and globally, here & now, later and much later... They assumed existence of an Ego is therefore the biggest invisible obstruction and the worst immaterial calamity for any being in any world, whether divine or human, whether high or low, whether past, present or future... Basically is 'Self'-belief based on an assumption that either is body, feelings, perceptions, mental constructions, or consciousness itself an 'embodiment' of an otherwise invisible and unobservable 'Self'. This 'representational' ego is then exalted to be the center of the universe... However, this self 'imaging' is merely a manifestation of simple identification with and clinging to internal form, social position, professional occupation, & socalled personal possessions... Such is a highly treacherous, dangerous, and tragic mental projection... The primary self-deception is "I Am...." Then comes the fermentation "I Am this & or that..." Finally is added "I Am better or worse than... & equal to..." The Buddha said: From everywhere, above as below, set free & all released, beyond the concept of 'I am this or that', one has crossed a river never crossed before... Thus freed, do one not renew any being. Udana - Inspiration: VII - 1 Blissful is solitude for one who is content, learned & who see the True Dhamma. Blissful is harmlessness towards all beings without exception. Blissful is freedom from any sensual urge whatsoever. Yet, the supreme bliss, is the elimination of the abysmal conceit "I am"!' Udana - Inspiration: II - 1 Friendship is the Greatest ! and the entire Noble Life... Bhikkhu Samahita, Sri Lanka. 45277 From: connie Date: Sun May 8, 2005 7:38am Subject: eka.m puggala.m piya.m manaapa.m - Tiktak* nichiconn to all the dear mothers, then, Lisa ! May we all live vyaapaadapadosa.m pahaaya - having abandoned ill will and hatred. Mettaasahagatena - accompanied by amity. Thanks, Htoo. You know, I have trouble understanding everyone - how we all talk together and misunderstanding comes up quicker than it goes away, even when we think we agree. 'Pa.n.natti has no character' - beautiful. But I think the well instructed monk knows there is no my surviving foot in all this coming and going, just things "come about merely by means of the diffusion of the air element through the action of consciousness" and such. No summer meditation group. Pali-Girl says I am to give her lessons on citta meanwhile anyway. Maybe Mary? Uhhh, can I practice clear comprehension in talking? I hardly remember anything I said a few weeks ago at the comparative religions class. Not sure what the guy meant asking whether a buddhist could be "normal", but I took it to mean "layman". Is spaced out when you realize you've walked home and the car is still downtown? HAHAHA... when we were leaving, I asked JozaiDog didn't he want to go and he just looked back at Dinah sitting in the car, shook his head no at me & kept heading back to the house. He wasn't too crazy about sticking around her place after the big KAboom and all the other day. peace, connie *Significant photo 45278 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Sun May 8, 2005 8:29am Subject: Waliking Meditation [Re: Gacchanto vaa gacchaamii'ti pajaanaati.] buddhistmedi... Dear Htoo, Ken H, Sukinder, Nina + all interested DSG members - Thank you for bouncing back again and again to explain, simplify further, to provide more necessary details, and to even go back to the very beginning, despite being rejected now and then. Htoo, you've more patience that Tep does. I will take you as another good example to follow. Your exaplanation on walking meditation, using DN 22 (or MN 10) as support, is now complete. I have its summary below: Hatoo: >Pa-janati = to know well; I interpreted this as 'to know detail'. >Bhikkhu who has been well trained by The Buddha knows when > he goes as he goes. ...Even when he knows that he goes, >his knowing is not free of self-identity. [Htoo then described > walking meditation, during which the yogi has clear comprehension > of the detailed leg movements and the accompaniying >arising/passing away sensations] ...he knows all the detail > as 'they are ruupa' and > they each disappear at each stages and he sees them (ruupa) > as impermanence. His knowing on these ruupa also vanishes > and he also sees them (naama) as impermanence. That is indeed my practice too. Respectfully with warm regards, Tep ===== --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "htootintnaing" wrote: > Dear Dhamma Friends, > > Jananti and pajanati are different word. The Buddha said in > mahasatipatthana as 'gacchanto vaa gacchaamii'ti pajanati'. > > Jananti and pajanati are explained below. > > Jananti means 'know' and pa+janati means 'know in details' or 'know > well'. > > >(snipped) > But well instructed bhikkhu knows that > > 'my heel starts to be lighter' 'my heel more lighter' 'my heel > rises' 'my heel clears the ground' 'my knee bends' 'my thigh swings > forward' 'my thigh becomes heavy' 'my leg mecomes more heavier' 'my > heel drops' 'my heel touches the ground' 'my heel rests on the > ground' 'my body rests on my heel' 'I stand on my heel' 'my another > heel become lighter' '..and the cycle continues. > > He the bhikkhu does not need to cite or say these. But he knows all > the detail as 'they are ruupa' and they each disappear at each stages > and he sees them (ruupa) as impermanence. His knowing on these ruupa > also vanishes and he also sees them (naama) as impermanence. > With Metta, (snipped) > > Htoo Naing 45279 From: "hasituppada" Date: Sun May 8, 2005 8:40am Subject: Re: [dsg]Abhidhamma. hasituppada Dear Jon It is very kind of you to good thoughts for me. Thank you Jon, Please see my post (45270) to KenH, on present reality. Your point of view is welcome. It is very enriching the thoughts that arise contemplating on the " present reality of pain". There is the pain, with its surrounding "land situation", the heat,hardness, pressure, body feelings. Then the mental situation, caused by anger, impatience, and also the akusala kamma rooted in dosa. In the meantime there is a whole lot of other dhamma arising such as irritating sounds, ear ache, headaches and again akusala kamma rooted in aversion. Those are lot of things to take in Jon for "the present reality". They are relevant in the study of Abhidhamma. But how can we manage all that material in a moment of a "present reality". The question that bothers me is, why did the Buddha teach for 45 years and made well over 10,000 discourses, found in the Tipitaka, when he could have explained the Abhidhamma, and taught us about the present reality ? The Sutta Pitaka ( Discourses) divided into five groups ( Nikaya) contains: 1. Digha Nikaya ( long discourses) contains 34 sutta 2. Majjima Nikaya ( middle length discourses) contains 152 sutta 3. Samyutta Nikaya ( 36 grouped discourses) contains 2889 sutta 4. Anguttara Nikaya ( numbered Discourses) contains 8777 suttas 5. Khuddaka Nikaya ( miscellaneous, called books) 15 books Why did he take all that time making discourses ? Was it just to mislead us the human beings? He could have easily asked us to follow the Abhidhamma . If it was to mislead us and take us away from Abhidhamma, it is the biggest hoax played on us. In that case, it is well and good we have found some one who saw through it and started teaching us the importance of the reality of the instance, referring to the Suttas as mere scripts rejected by an editor, as not good except to support the Abhidhamma. I have great confidence in my Lord the Buddha, and my confidence and saddha is too great to make any such accusation. His teachings are in the Sutta. The discourses in the Sutta Pitaka are meant for his human followers. His mission was to show the human beings suffering in the Samsara, the way to freedom. The corner stone of his teaching is suffering. Therefore our emancipation is through understanding the four noble truths and following the Noble eight fold path. Which teaches us that the final leap into freedom lies in the panna developed through Sila and Samadhi. The reality of the instance is the sati or being mindful as a training to meditation. Meditation is done seated, taking an object of medittion such as Anapana Sati, for Samatha and thereafter directing the mind for insight into anicca dukkha anatma. A meditation session is sacred, one prepares for it, through keeping precepts and paying respect to Buddha Dhamma and Sangha. I express these feelings in the cordial atmosphere of Dhamma discussion. With my respects to all in this forum. May you be happy, Jon, With metta Hasituppada 45280 From: "Larry" Date: Sun May 8, 2005 8:59am Subject: [dsg] Concepts vs. Real Objects [was Re:1. characteristic> 2. function> 3... lbidd2 --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, Larry - > > In a message dated 5/7/05 9:50:25 PM Eastern Daylight Time, LBIDD@w... > writes: > Hi Howard, > > This raises an interesting question: what is happening when something is > moving too fast to see it? Why don't we see it, or why do we see a > distortion of it, like the spokes of a moving wheel? Consciousness > cognizes the most minute conscious moment but "I" only see the big > picture. > > Larry > ========================= > What sort of "something is moving too fast to see"? You are presuming > some conventional object "out there" in "the external world". That is - you are > talking concept, not reality. > > With metta, > Howard > Hi Howard, How can a concept move? Larry 45281 From: "Larry" Date: Sun May 8, 2005 9:11am Subject: [dsg] Re:1. characteristic> 2. function> 3. manifestation> 4.proximate cause lbidd2 --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "htootintnaing" wrote: > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, LBIDD@w... wrote: > > Htoo: > > 1. visual object ruupa > > 2. sense-door ruupa eye > > 3. eye-consciousness > > 4. contact > > These arise together. All are not concept. > > > > Hi Htoo, > > > > If all 4 _together_ are realities then you have 4 realities that > are > the > > object of one consciousness. Same as kalapa. How can that be? > > > > Larry > -------------------------------------------------- > ---------------------- > Dear Larry, > > We are not in any of 4 while we are speaking on these matters. > > Visual objecrt ruupa is not yours, not mine but we talked about a > single moment of a typical citta of cakkhu-vinnana citta'. OK. > > Sense-door ruupa eye is not your, not mine and only ruupa at that > moment. > > Eye-consciousness did not arise in you, in me but at that ruupa that > we > talked on as a single citta. > > Contact is not yours, not mine, but arose at that time when a single > citta arose. > > What that 'cakkhu-vinnana citta' took was 'visual object ruupa'. > > That citta did not take eye or cakkhu pasada, contact or phassa. > > I think you confused on 4 requisites for consciousness. > > With Unlimited Metta, > > Htoo Naing Hi Htoo, I don't understand your argument. If something is real it must be capable of being an object of consciousness. If "with" is real then consciousness must potentially have two objects. If the 4 _together_ are real then some consciousness must be able to perceive them together. Larry 45282 From: upasaka@... Date: Sun May 8, 2005 5:31am Subject: Re: [dsg] Concepts vs. Real Objects [was Re:1. characteristic> 2. function> 3... upasaka_howard Hi, Larry - In a message dated 5/8/05 11:59:48 AM Eastern Daylight Time, LBIDD@... writes: > What sort of "something is moving too fast to see"? You are presuming > some conventional object "out there" in "the external world". That is - you are > talking concept, not reality. > > With metta, > Howard > Hi Howard, How can a concept move? Larry =========================== Whatever is correctly referred to as pa~n~natti is actually nothing at all. There are no such things, and to "talk of them" is just to speak in a certain way. When we speak for example, of a firebrand being moved in a circle, there really is no firebrand at all, no circle, and no moving. What there is is a stream of experience decomposable into (actually) inseparable phenomena called "paramattha dhammas". 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) 45283 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Sun May 8, 2005 10:29am Subject: Re: [dsg]Abhidhamma./ Ruupas and Objects of Meditation buddhistmedi... Hi Htoo, Hasituppada, Larry, Howar, KenH, KenO ..etc. - Although I have not read several posted messages here (who can anyway?), I still can recall a good number of them that focus on ruupa, and Htoo and Nina and Sarah etc. have discussed this topic over and over. However, when talking about ruupa as an object of meditation, most theoretical discussers have not done a complete job. Hasituppada have a broad classification for ruupa. His concern, as well as mine, is on ruupa as an object of meditation. Hasituppada: >All forms, feelings like, softness, hardness pain, hot and cold, > wind on your body, a sound, a smell, a taste, a thought that arises > in the mind are all rupas which could be an object of meditation. Htoo responded, " Ruupa never know themselves, their surroundings, naama and anything at all". Tep: Htoo's answer above cannot scratch the spot where it is itching! Hasituppada and Tep want to know why it is wrong to say that all rupas (those given above) may be used as an object of meditation? I believe that, by "meditation", Hasituppada means samatha-vipassana bhavana. Htoo in the message # 44977 stated firmly that there were 7 types of "first-hand object", namely : 1. sight, 2. sound, 3. smell, 4. taste, 5. hardness, 6. temperature, and 7. pressure. Other rupas outside this group are non-first-hand objects, and they are pannatti. If I am not mistaken, we (Hasituppada and Tep) have been told that any pannatti objects (concepts) cannot be the object of Satipatthana. Of course, we have been told that any meditation not using an ultimate reality as an object of Satipatthana is worthless. Is my understanding above right or wrong? Anyone who cares to answer, please do. Respectfully, Tep =========== --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "htootintnaing" wrote: > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "hasituppada" > wrote: > > Larry, > > Thank you it is very kind of you to inquire. I am taking some sort > of pain killer the effect of which lasts only about four hours ! Any > way it is part of sansaric suffering....... > > I am not conversant with Abhidhamma terminology. From what I have > learnt Rupa are not necessarily hard things: > > all forms, feelings like, softness, hardness pain, hot and cold, > wind on your body, a sound, a smell, a taste, a thought that arises > in the mind are all rupas which could be an object of meditation. > > Htoo may perhaps give appropriate elaboration. > > with metta, > Hasituppada > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > Dear Larry, Hasituppada and all, > > Leaving nibbana, all other dhammas that exist are naama and ruupa > only. There is no other things that exist as existences. > > Among them only naama have the faculty of knowing. Ruupa never know > thenmselves, their surroundings, naama and anything at all. > > The computer is seen. But the computer cannot see. Sounds can be > heard but they cannot hear. > > With Metta, > > Htoo Naing 45284 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Sun May 8, 2005 10:38am Subject: [dsg] Concepts vs. Real Objects [was Re:1. characteristic> 2. function> 3... buddhistmedi... Hi Larry - Good question! I'd like to know the answer too. Thank you for asking the question. Sincerely, Tep ======= --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Larry" wrote: > > > Hi Howard, > > How can a concept move? > > Larry 45285 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Sun May 8, 2005 11:04am Subject: Concepts vs. Real Objects -- It Is No Abhidhamma. buddhistmedi... Hi Howard and Larry - Okay, Howard. You say that there is no firebrand, no circle of fire, no movement -- only a stream (flow) of experience. What you said is at the micro-level of description; it is a perception straight from a learned theory; it is your own mental fabraication of concepts. The same as when you say our bodies are 99% emptiness -- there are only molecules: there is no being, no Howard; there is only a space of nothing except for electrons and sub-particles floating far apart. At that micro-level everything breaks down into almost nothingness - who can call the totality of electrons, sub-particles and emptiness a being? There is no self either. But this is not Paramattha dhamma -- it is Physics. How does that kind of thinking conditions samma-ditthi? Respectfully, Tep ===== --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, Larry - (snipped) > > > Hi Howard, > > How can a concept move? > > Larry > =========================== > Whatever is correctly referred to as pa~n~natti is actually nothing at all. There are no such things, and to "talk of them" is just to speak in a certain way. When we speak for example, of a firebrand being moved in a circle, there really is no firebrand at all, no circle, and no moving. What there is is a stream of experience decomposable into (actually) inseparable phenomena called "paramattha dhammas". > > With metta, > Howard > 45286 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Sun May 8, 2005 11:51am Subject: Re: Shape of a cow/Tep buddhistmedi... Hi Larry - You might have assumed that Tep knows the Abhidhamma/Paramattha principles as taught by Acharn Sujin very well. It is not so, Larry. Larry (message #45260): Let's look at it like this. Is the shape of the sign of a cow the object of a single consciousness? If, looking at your own experience of the sign of a cow, it takes more than one consciousness to cognize the shape, then shape is not a concept, because concept is an object of consciousness. Additionally, this sign is not a concept for the same reason. T: We might have a terminology problem here, Larry. I am only at 1 - 2 inches from the ground zero, i.e. I think I only vaguely know a few Paramattha dhamma concepts (i.e. pannatti, ultimate reality, Nibbana, and a few cetasikas like vedana, sanna and vinnana). So I am not sure how to determine if and when an object may take one consciousness or more. I am not sure if a "sign" is the same as a nimitta (mental image), a perception(related to labels and memory), or a mental fabrication (thoughts). Is consciousness same as citta? How do you count consciousness, Larry? If you don't know when it arises and when it passes away, how can you count it? L: On the other hand, the shape of a living cow obviously requires many consciousnesses to cognize it. Therefore this shape is definitely neither concept nor reality. What is it? T: I am not sure how long it takes for the mind to recognize a shape. I don't have a clue about the difference between a "single consciousness" (a single citta) and "many consciousnesses" (stream of cittas?). I guess there are only two choices, something that exists in the universe can be either a concept or a reality. If the shape you were talking about is neither one of the two, then I have no clue. Respectfully, Tep === --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, LBIDD@w... wrote: > Hi Tep, > > Let's look at it like this. Is the shape of the sign of a cow the object > of a single consciousness? If, looking at your own experience of the > sign of a cow, it takes more than one consciousness to cognize the > shape, then shape is not a concept, because concept is an object of > consciousness. Additionally, this sign is not a concept for the same > reason. > > On the other hand, the shape of a living cow obviously requires many > consciousnesses to cognize it. Therefore this shape is definitely > neither concept nor reality. What is it? > > Larry 45287 From: "Christine Forsyth" Date: Sun May 8, 2005 2:47pm Subject: Re: [dsg]Abhidhamma. christine_fo... Hello Hasituppada, all, Thank you for your posts to dsg. They are appreciated as the stimulus for relection. May I ask if you would explain, through your understanding of what the Blessed One taught, what Anatta is? metta and peace, Christine ---The trouble is that you think you have time--- --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "hasituppada" wrote: > Dear Jon > > It is very kind of you to good thoughts for me. Thank you Jon, > > Please see my post (45270) to KenH, on present reality. > > Your point of view is welcome. It is very enriching the thoughts > that arise contemplating on the " present reality of pain". There > is the pain, with its surrounding "land situation", the > heat,hardness, pressure, body feelings. Then the mental situation, > caused by anger, impatience, and also the akusala kamma rooted in > dosa. In the meantime there is a whole lot of other dhamma arising > such as irritating sounds, ear ache, headaches and again akusala > kamma rooted in aversion. > > Those are lot of things to take in Jon for "the present reality". > They are relevant in the study of Abhidhamma. But how can we manage > all that material in a moment of a "present reality". > > The question that bothers me is, why did the Buddha teach for 45 > years and made well over 10,000 discourses, found in the Tipitaka, > when he could have explained the Abhidhamma, and taught us about the > present reality ? > > The Sutta Pitaka ( Discourses) divided into five groups ( Nikaya) > contains: > 1. Digha Nikaya ( long discourses) contains 34 sutta > 2. Majjima Nikaya ( middle length discourses) contains 152 sutta > 3. Samyutta Nikaya ( 36 grouped discourses) contains 2889 sutta > 4. Anguttara Nikaya ( numbered Discourses) contains 8777 suttas > 5. Khuddaka Nikaya ( miscellaneous, called books) 15 books > > Why did he take all that time making discourses ? Was it just to > mislead us the human beings? He could have easily asked us to follow > the Abhidhamma . If it was to mislead us and take us away from > Abhidhamma, it is the biggest hoax played on us. > > In that case, it is well and good we have found some one who saw > through it and started teaching us the importance of the reality > of the instance, referring to the Suttas as mere scripts rejected > by an editor, as not good except to support the Abhidhamma. > > I have great confidence in my Lord the Buddha, and my confidence and > saddha is too great to make any such accusation. His teachings are > in the Sutta. The discourses in the Sutta Pitaka are meant for his > human followers. His mission was to show the human beings suffering > in the Samsara, the way to freedom. > > The corner stone of his teaching is suffering. Therefore our > emancipation is through understanding the four noble truths and > following the Noble eight fold path. Which teaches us that the > final leap into freedom lies in the panna developed through Sila > and Samadhi. > > The reality of the instance is the sati or being mindful as a > training to meditation. Meditation is done seated, taking an object > of medittion such as Anapana Sati, for Samatha and thereafter > directing the mind for insight into anicca dukkha anatma. A > meditation session is sacred, one prepares for it, through keeping > precepts and paying respect to Buddha Dhamma and Sangha. > > I express these feelings in the cordial atmosphere of Dhamma > discussion. With my respects to all in this forum. > > May you be happy, Jon, > > With metta > Hasituppada 45288 From: upasaka@... Date: Sun May 8, 2005 10:49am Subject: Re: [dsg] Concepts vs. Real Objects -- It Is No Abhidhamma. upasaka_howard Hi, Tep (and Larry) - In a message dated 5/8/05 2:05:19 PM Eastern Daylight Time, tepsastri@... writes: Hi Howard and Larry - Okay, Howard. You say that there is no firebrand, no circle of fire, no movement -- only a stream (flow) of experience. What you said is at the micro-level of description; it is a perception straight from a learned theory; it is your own mental fabraication of concepts. --------------------------------------- Howard: I am 100% persuaded of the ultimate unreality of conventional objects as fact. The concept/reality dichotomy has become increasingly clear to me. --------------------------------------- The same as when you say our bodies are 99% emptiness -- there are only molecules: there is no being, no Howard; there is only a space of nothing except for electrons and sub-particles floating far apart. At that micro-level everything breaks down into almost nothingness - who can call the totality of electrons, sub-particles and emptiness a being? ------------------------------------ Howard: I consider all that Physics to be just some more conceptualizing, and not ultimate reality. This is not to say that I think that conceptualizing is useless. It is anything but useless, for it is our basic means at this point of grasping the relational structure of reality, but it is not the reality itself - it is a useful superimposition. ---------------------------------- There is no self either. But this is not Paramattha dhamma -- it is Physics. How does that kind of thinking conditions samma-ditthi? --------------------------------- Howard: I think that understanding the concept/reality dichotomy on an intellectuall level is of very little import. Understanding it directly by seeing through concepts, however, is an important step, and it comes about by the practices laid out by the Buddha, and not just intellectual theorizing. And even that direct seeing through of concepts is just one step, IMO. Right view goes well beyond merely distinguishing conventional from ultimate, and it produces a disenchantment and an understanding that fully uproots all defilements leaving a reality that goes beyond all concepts, including the dream of separate, self-existent paramattha dhammas. --------------------------------------- Respectfully, Tep ==================== 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) 45289 From: "Charles DaCosta" Date: Sun May 8, 2005 1:43pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Musings8 - Clinging to Self, Clinging to Results dacostacharles Hi Phil, I can understand your concerns; however, I remember Noble referring to some one that is moral and ethical. A person was considered Noble because he/she was good natured, liked, and respected for it. So yes, a Noble person had a certain degree of enlightenment, morality, one of the three pillars of the eight-fold-path (the other two being wisdom and concentration). However, I think the point of this sutra is to "enter and dwell from time to time in the rapture of seclusion." I would even go so far to say that if you do this, it will increase your chances of becoming a Noble disciple (what ever it is) if you are not already. Even if you don't have wisdom or selfless morality (i.e., your morality is driven by the Fear of Blame or the Shame of bad karma). Another point: I was taught to look at each sutra individually. Each sutra was written for a certain group of people under a certain situation. So yes, sutras can contradict each other. After all what is good for one may not be good for another. This is also why there are legends of people reading or hearing one sutra then becoming enlightened by it. Phil, you stated, "laypeople who have busy lives in the sensation drenched modern world, attempting to cut that off and behave like monks is just an exercise in self-enjoyment disguised as liberation - so subtly disguised that they themselves often don't know that it's going on." Is that self-enjoyment disguised as liberation causing suffering, or is it suffering in its-self. I say neither, unless it causes the layperson to neglect his/her duty. In this sensation drenched modern world, wouldn't an exercise in self-enjoyment disguised as liberation mean there are periods of no-suffering? and perhaps periods where the three (i.e., morality, wisdom, and concentration) could be developed? and maybe even enlightenment cultivated. Could you imagine not having those periods? Sour grapes are often used to make vinegar or even some wines, so try not to throw away a useful resource. CharlesD ----- Original Message ----- From: Philip To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sunday, 08 May, 2005 02:20 Subject: [dsg] Re: Musings8 - Clinging to Self, Clinging to Results > This sounds like a good practice to me: > "...Whenever ... a noble disciple enters and dwells in the rapture of seclusion, ..................................... If I'm not mistaken, being a "noble disciple" refers to more than being devoted to Dhamma. It refers to a certain degree of enlightenment.In Bhikkhu Bodhi's commentarial notes to Samyutta Nikaya, I'm quite sure he said as much. Somebody please correct me if I'm wrong. ....................................... > "Householders, you attend upon the Sangha of monks with robes, > almsfood, lodgings and medicinal requisites for use in time of > sickness. But you should not remain satisfied merely with this. > Rather, householders, you should train yourselves thus: "How can we > enter and dwell from time to time in the rapture of seclusion?" (33) > Thus should you train yourselves." ....................................................................................... If I'm not wrong about the above, this means that people should train themselves by becoming noble disciples. Not as easy as one might assume! I have a feeling this is where we run into trouble when we are attracted to practices taught in suttas. For example, in Satippathana sutta the opening condition "having put away covetousness and grief for the world" that must be achieved, as BB puts it, "for the practice to succeed" - how can we who live in the modern world claim so easily to have "put away covetnousness and grief for the world" when we sit down and plunge into our meditation? I remember reading one of the famous introduction guides to meditation - "Mindfulness in Plain English" I think, in which it was taught that a kind of warm-up exercise should be done to deal with hindrances *before* meditating, in order to satisfy the "put away grief and covetousness" above. As though thinking about metta for 5 minutes could do that! That goes against the anatta sutta, thinking that there is a self that can choose to have the khandas in this way or that. I suspect that for laypeople who have busy lives in the sensation drenched modern world, attempting to cut that off and behave like monks is just an exercise in self-enjoyment disguised as liberation - so subtly disguised that they themselves often don't know that it's going on. Stress on I "suspect" - I have no way of knowing what is really going on in people's minds. (There may be sour grapes at work here because my living circumstances do not allow for formal meditation?) If I am wrong about "noble disciple" being more than just someone who is devoted to the Buddha's teaching, please correct me. Phil 45290 From: "Charles DaCosta" Date: Sun May 8, 2005 1:52pm Subject: Re: [dsg]Abhidhamma. dacostacharles It would be better to say the Abhidhamma is full of suttas teachings. ----- Original Message ----- From: Nina van Gorkom <...> Dear Hasituppada, Rob K and Sarah have written many thorough posts on the historical side of the Abhidhamma, as belonging to the oldest tradition. It is in U.P. under Abhidhamma. As far as I understood, the Abhidhamma and the Commentaries were recited from the first Council on. I do not think it to be a later tradition, but most important to me: how does it relate to our life? And, the suttas are full of Abhidhamma. In the U.P. of our list also sutta texts are mentioned that refer to Abhidhamma, especially where the suttas are explained under the aspect of angas. I am preparing to go out of town the whole day tomorrow, so I cannot go deeper into this now. <....> 45291 From: "hasituppada" Date: Sun May 8, 2005 3:14pm Subject: Re: [dsg]Abhidhamma. hasituppada Dear Christine, We were discussing Abhidhamma. Why Anatta ? If you are starting a new post, on Anatta I will then be pleased to write. Otherwise to write on Anatta is a big task. Anattavada is another name for the Buddha's teaching. It is the whole of Buddhism infact. That is what differentiates Buddhism from other religions. with metta, Hasituppada __________________________________________________________ > Hello Hasituppada, all, > > Thank you for your posts to dsg. They are appreciated as the > stimulus for relection. May I ask if you would explain, through > your understanding of what the Blessed One taught, what Anatta is? > > metta and peace, > Christine > ---The trouble is that you think you have time--- > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "hasituppada" > wrote: > > Dear Jon > > > > It is very kind of you to good thoughts for me. Thank you Jon, > > > > Please see my post (45270) to KenH, on present reality. > > > > Your point of view is welcome. It is very enriching the thoughts > > that arise contemplating on the " present reality of pain". > There > > is the pain, with its surrounding "land situation", the > > heat,hardness, pressure, body feelings. Then the mental > situation, > > caused by anger, impatience, and also the akusala kamma rooted in > > dosa. In the meantime there is a whole lot of other dhamma arising > > such as irritating sounds, ear ache, headaches and again akusala > > kamma rooted in aversion. > > > > Those are lot of things to take in Jon for "the present reality". > > They are relevant in the study of Abhidhamma. But how can we > manage > > all that material in a moment of a "present reality". > > > > The question that bothers me is, why did the Buddha teach for 45 > > years and made well over 10,000 discourses, found in the Tipitaka, > > when he could have explained the Abhidhamma, and taught us about > the > > present reality ? > > > > The Sutta Pitaka ( Discourses) divided into five groups ( Nikaya) > > contains: > > 1. Digha Nikaya ( long discourses) contains 34 sutta > > 2. Majjima Nikaya ( middle length discourses) contains 152 sutta > > 3. Samyutta Nikaya ( 36 grouped discourses) contains 2889 sutta > > 4. Anguttara Nikaya ( numbered Discourses) contains 8777 suttas > > 5. Khuddaka Nikaya ( miscellaneous, called books) 15 books > > > > Why did he take all that time making discourses ? Was it just to > > mislead us the human beings? He could have easily asked us to > follow > > the Abhidhamma . If it was to mislead us and take us away from > > Abhidhamma, it is the biggest hoax played on us. > > > > In that case, it is well and good we have found some one who saw > > through it and started teaching us the importance of the reality > > of the instance, referring to the Suttas as mere scripts > rejected > > by an editor, as not good except to support the Abhidhamma. > > > > I have great confidence in my Lord the Buddha, and my confidence > and > > saddha is too great to make any such accusation. His teachings > are > > in the Sutta. The discourses in the Sutta Pitaka are meant for his > > human followers. His mission was to show the human beings > suffering > > in the Samsara, the way to freedom. > > > > The corner stone of his teaching is suffering. Therefore our > > emancipation is through understanding the four noble truths and > > following the Noble eight fold path. Which teaches us that the > > final leap into freedom lies in the panna developed through Sila > > and Samadhi. > > > > The reality of the instance is the sati or being mindful as a > > training to meditation. Meditation is done seated, taking an > object > > of medittion such as Anapana Sati, for Samatha and thereafter > > directing the mind for insight into anicca dukkha anatma. A > > meditation session is sacred, one prepares for it, through keeping > > precepts and paying respect to Buddha Dhamma and Sangha. > > > > I express these feelings in the cordial atmosphere of Dhamma > > discussion. With my respects to all in this forum. > > > > May you be happy, Jon, > > > > With metta > > Hasituppada From: "hasituppada" Date: Sun May 8, 2005 3:38pm Subject: Re: [dsg]Abhidhamma./ Ruupas and Objects of Meditation hasituppada Dear Tep, At the beginning stages of Samatha Bhavana, all objects coming in contact with the sense faculties are taken as objects of meditation. When seated with eyes closed there are no visual objects. The primary object of meditation is the breath. Then other objects like sound, feelings, or thoughts etc. are felt, heard or noted. The meditator takes the sound as an object, and being aware of that object, it passes away and then he comes back to the breath. This enables him to train himself in one pointed concentration. There is no process of thinking and separating concepts and non concepts. It is merely being aware of each object with metta, Hasituppada ___________________________________________________________ Hi Htoo, Hasituppada, Larry, Howar, KenH, KenO ..etc. - > > Although I have not read several posted messages here (who can > anyway?), I still can recall a good number of them that focus on ruupa, > and Htoo and Nina and Sarah etc. have discussed this topic over and > over. However, when talking about ruupa as an object of meditation, > most theoretical discussers have not done a complete job. > > Hasituppada have a broad classification for ruupa. His concern, as > well as mine, is on ruupa as an object of meditation. > > Hasituppada: > >All forms, feelings like, softness, hardness pain, hot and cold, > > wind on your body, a sound, a smell, a taste, a thought that arises > > in the mind are all rupas which could be an object of meditation. > > Htoo responded, " Ruupa never know themselves, their surroundings, > naama and anything at all". > > Tep: Htoo's answer above cannot scratch the spot where it is itching! > Hasituppada and Tep want to know why it is wrong to say that all rupas > (those given above) may be used as an object of meditation? I > believe that, by "meditation", Hasituppada means samatha-vipassana > bhavana. > > Htoo in the message # 44977 stated firmly that there were 7 types > of "first-hand object", namely : 1. sight, 2. sound, 3. smell, 4. taste, 5. > hardness, 6. temperature, and 7. pressure. Other rupas outside this > group are non-first-hand objects, and they are pannatti. > > If I am not mistaken, we (Hasituppada and Tep) have been told that > any pannatti objects (concepts) cannot be the object of Satipatthana. > Of course, we have been told that any meditation not using an ultimate > reality as an object of Satipatthana is worthless. > > Is my understanding above right or wrong? Anyone who cares to > answer, please do. > > > Respectfully, > > > Tep > > =========== > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "htootintnaing" > wrote: > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "hasituppada" > > wrote: > > > > Larry, > > > > Thank you it is very kind of you to inquire. I am taking some sort > > of pain killer the effect of which lasts only about four hours ! Any > > way it is part of sansaric suffering....... > > > > I am not conversant with Abhidhamma terminology. From what I have > > learnt Rupa are not necessarily hard things: > > > > all forms, feelings like, softness, hardness pain, hot and cold, > > wind on your body, a sound, a smell, a taste, a thought that arises > > in the mind are all rupas which could be an object of meditation. > > > > Htoo may perhaps give appropriate elaboration. > > > > with metta, > > Hasituppada > > ----------------------------------------------------------------- ----- > > Dear Larry, Hasituppada and all, > > > > Leaving nibbana, all other dhammas that exist are naama and ruupa > > only. There is no other things that exist as existences. > > > > Among them only naama have the faculty of knowing. Ruupa never > know > > thenmselves, their surroundings, naama and anything at all. > > > > The computer is seen. But the computer cannot see. Sounds can be > > heard but they cannot hear. > > > > With Metta, > > > > Htoo Naing 45293 From: LBIDD@... Date: Sun May 8, 2005 4:23pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Concepts vs. Real Objects [was Re:1. characteristic> 2. function> 3... lbidd2 Howard: "Whatever is correctly referred to as pa~n~natti is actually nothing at all. There are no such things, and to "talk of them" is just to speak in a certain way. When we speak for example, of a firebrand being moved in a circle, there really is no firebrand at all, no circle, and no moving. What there is is a stream of experience decomposable into (actually) inseparable phenomena called "paramattha dhammas"." Hi Howard, It seems to me you are forsaking your phenomenalist/experiential roots in favor of a concept of ultimate reality. Movement is as plain as the colour red. We don't just agree to accept a particular phenomenon as "movement". It is unavoidable and not a convention. Be that as it may, I would still like to know how the "conventional" appearance of movement comes about. I agree the notion of a watcher is tied up with this, but I don't see the details of the 'how'. Any ideas? Larry 45294 From: LBIDD@... Date: Sun May 8, 2005 4:30pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Shape of a cow/Tep lbidd2 Tep: "If the shape you were talking about is neither one of the two, then I have no clue." Hi Tep, I don't know either, but I am relying on you to come up with an answer. Please strive harder! Larry 45295 From: "Christine Forsyth" Date: Sun May 8, 2005 4:33pm Subject: Re: Abhidhamma/Anatta christine_fo... Hello Hasituppada, all, It is my understanding that Anatta is what the Abhidhamma is about. "It is on this very doctrine of Non-self (anatta) that all Abhidhamma thought converges and this is where it culminates. The elaborate and thorough treatment of Anatta is also the most important practical contribution of the Abhidhamma to the progress of the Buddha's disciple towards liberation." - quoted from "The Abhidhamma Philosophy - Its Estimation in the Past and its value for the Present" by Nyanaponika Thera (Buddhist Publication Society, Kandy, Sri Lanka). metta and peace, Christine ---The trouble is that you think you have time--- --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "hasituppada" wrote: > Dear Christine, > > We were discussing Abhidhamma. Why Anatta ? If you are starting a > new post, on Anatta I will then be pleased to write. > Otherwise to write on Anatta is a big task. Anattavada is another > name for the Buddha's teaching. It is the whole of Buddhism infact. > That is what differentiates Buddhism from other religions. > > with metta, > Hasituppada > __________________________________________________________ > > > Hello Hasituppada, all, > > > > Thank you for your posts to dsg. They are appreciated as the > > stimulus for relection. May I ask if you would explain, through > > your understanding of what the Blessed One taught, what Anatta is? > > > > metta and peace, > > Christine > > ---The trouble is that you think you have time--- > > > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "hasituppada" > > wrote: > > > Dear Jon > > > > > > It is very kind of you to good thoughts for me. Thank you Jon, > > > > > > Please see my post (45270) to KenH, on present reality. > > > > > > Your point of view is welcome. It is very enriching the > thoughts > > > that arise contemplating on the " present reality of pain". > > There > > > is the pain, with its surrounding "land situation", the > > > heat,hardness, pressure, body feelings. Then the mental > > situation, > > > caused by anger, impatience, and also the akusala kamma rooted > in > > > dosa. In the meantime there is a whole lot of other dhamma > arising > > > such as irritating sounds, ear ache, headaches and again > akusala > > > kamma rooted in aversion. > > > > > > Those are lot of things to take in Jon for "the present > reality". > > > They are relevant in the study of Abhidhamma. But how can we > > manage > > > all that material in a moment of a "present reality". > > > > > > The question that bothers me is, why did the Buddha teach for 45 > > > years and made well over 10,000 discourses, found in the > Tipitaka, > > > when he could have explained the Abhidhamma, and taught us about > > the > > > present reality ? > > > > > > The Sutta Pitaka ( Discourses) divided into five groups ( > Nikaya) > > > contains: > > > 1. Digha Nikaya ( long discourses) contains 34 sutta > > > 2. Majjima Nikaya ( middle length discourses) contains 152 sutta > > > 3. Samyutta Nikaya ( 36 grouped discourses) contains 2889 sutta > > > 4. Anguttara Nikaya ( numbered Discourses) contains 8777 suttas > > > 5. Khuddaka Nikaya ( miscellaneous, called books) 15 books > > > > > > Why did he take all that time making discourses ? Was it just > to > > > mislead us the human beings? He could have easily asked us to > > follow > > > the Abhidhamma . If it was to mislead us and take us away from > > > Abhidhamma, it is the biggest hoax played on us. > > > > > > In that case, it is well and good we have found some one who > saw > > > through it and started teaching us the importance of the > reality > > > of the instance, referring to the Suttas as mere scripts > > rejected > > > by an editor, as not good except to support the Abhidhamma. > > > > > > I have great confidence in my Lord the Buddha, and my confidence > > and > > > saddha is too great to make any such accusation. His teachings > > are > > > in the Sutta. The discourses in the Sutta Pitaka are meant for > his > > > human followers. His mission was to show the human beings > > suffering > > > in the Samsara, the way to freedom. > > > > > > The corner stone of his teaching is suffering. Therefore our > > > emancipation is through understanding the four noble truths and > > > following the Noble eight fold path. Which teaches us that the > > > final leap into freedom lies in the panna developed through > Sila > > > and Samadhi. > > > > > > The reality of the instance is the sati or being mindful as a > > > training to meditation. Meditation is done seated, taking an > > object > > > of medittion such as Anapana Sati, for Samatha and thereafter > > > directing the mind for insight into anicca dukkha anatma. A > > > meditation session is sacred, one prepares for it, through > keeping > > > precepts and paying respect to Buddha Dhamma and Sangha. > > > > > > I express these feelings in the cordial atmosphere of Dhamma > > > discussion. With my respects to all in this forum. > > > > > > May you be happy, Jon, > > > > > > With metta > > > Hasituppada 45296 From: LBIDD@... Date: Sun May 8, 2005 4:56pm Subject: Re: [dsg]Abhidhamma. lbidd2 Hi Hasituppada, I would just like to add that I thought your original insight is a good one. There is no feeling characteristic in awareness. Feeling is the only dhamma that feels (pleasant, unpleasant, or neutral). All other dhammas, materiality, perception, mental formations, and consciousness (plus nibbana and concepts) are completely void of the characteristic of feeling. As long as you have this more or less steady stream of pain you might try to notice the beginning, middle, and end of a moment of painful feeling. I have never been able to do this myself, but I imagine it is very subtle. Larry 45297 From: "Charles DaCosta" Date: Sun May 8, 2005 3:19pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Self & No Self dacostacharles Hi Naresh, I apologies for this unsolicited response, my own desires got the best of me so "I" had to reply: You asked what is the difference between a Monk & layperson. In simple terms, the difference is in the number of vows. Monks take on lots of vows and laypeople take on 5 to 8 vows at most. This gives monks a higher status in Buddhism. Also more, in-terms of morality and concentration, is expected of monks. You also ask about the doctrines of self and no-self. You stated the two ideas clashes (a big battle field) inside & the battle, I assume, makes your living worse. The doctrine is hard for most to accept because they do not have the right definition, or they have a solid belief system, already in place, that contradicts the definition they have been given. What I like to get people to understand is that both ideas are true in Buddhism. So, yes at times you have a self, and at times you don't. This is because it is just an idea or concept, a way of representing any combination of the 5 aggregates seen as you. You can say this self is like a candle flame, changing every instant, having a limited life span, having no essence, and somewhat uncontrollable. I like to tell people that are new to Buddhism, it is better to view the doctrine as relating to self-centered thinking, and do not get caught up in weather or not we really exist. And, after you understand more of the teachings, progress to seeing the doctrine relating to -- not having an eternal, unchanging, essence. At this point you may still have a soul; however it is changing, not your essence, nor will it exist for ever. And as you progress more in the teaching, you begin to understand that the self is born ever time you think "I", "me", or "mine"; and it dies away when you stop. At this point you realize that the term is just another useful concept to describe all the processes that makes up you. So, at this point you can look in a mirror and know that is you and you are real. The doctrine of non-self is a doctrine that spans a graded path. A very, very, small number of people will gain instant enlightenment upon hearing it, and most will never fully grasp it, but some will understand how and when to apply it. CharlesD PS: Take what is useful and store the rest. ----- Original Message ----- From: naresh gurwani To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, 03 May, 2005 02:27 Subject: [dsg] Self & No Self Hi Nina Since long time iam not in to this discussion board, i have a question what is the difference between a Monk & layperson, is it that Monk is one who stays in seclusion and practices & learns And Layperson is one who follows dhamma but is also a householder ? Another query why is it so difficult to accept tht there is no self, iam trying to understand , but it is quite difficult to accept the fact of No -self but on the other hand iam very much keen on knowing only Truth, So self & no self is a big battle field inside me this 2 clashes & make my living worse. Naresh 45298 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Sun May 8, 2005 6:58pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Shape of a cow/Tep buddhistmedi... Hi, Larry - I have found it strange that the Abhidhammika had to seek an answer from the rookie. If you were not kidding me, let's work out an answer together. But in order to prove that you did not play a trick on me, can you tell me why you asked that question in the first place? Sincerely, Tep ====== --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, LBIDD@w... wrote: > Tep: "If the shape you were talking about is neither one of the two, > then I have no clue." > > Hi Tep, > > I don't know either, but I am relying on you to come up with an answer. > Please strive harder! > > Larry 45299 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Sun May 8, 2005 7:47pm Subject: Re: Concepts vs. Real Objects -- It Is No Abhidhamma. buddhistmedi... Dear Howard - Like I said before - you had a way with words. I like your invention, "ultimate unreality". Thank you for skillfully explaining the importance of "conventional objects" and the utility of conceptualizing. Howard: > It is anything but useless, for it is our basic means at this point of > grasping the relational structure of reality, but it is not the reality > itself - it is a useful superimposition. > ---------------------------------- > I think that understanding the concept/reality dichotomy on an > intellectuall level is of very little import. Understanding it directly > by seeing through concepts, however, is an important step, >and it comes about by the practices laid out by the Buddha, > and not just intellectual theorizing. And even that > direct seeing through of concepts is just one step, IMO. > Right view goes well beyond merely distinguishing conventional > from ultimate, and it produces a disenchantment and an > understanding that fully uproots all defilements leaving a > reality that goes beyond all concepts, including the dream of > separate, self-existent paramattha dhammas. ------------------------------------------------------ T: You have said it all. I think you have the right defense against the charges made by the Abhidhammikas on concepts and conceptualization. Respectfully, Tep ====== --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, Tep (and Larry) - > > In a message dated 5/8/05 2:05:19 PM Eastern Daylight Time, > tepsastri@y... writes: > Hi Howard and Larry - > > Okay, Howard. You say that there is no firebrand, no circle of fire, no > movement -- only a stream (flow) of experience. What you said is at the > micro-level of description; it is a perception straight from a learned > theory; it is your own mental fabraication of concepts. > --------------------------------------- 45300 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Sun May 8, 2005 8:06pm Subject: Re: Breathing. - Sukinder's Pudding - Hasituppada kenhowardau Dear Hasituppada, You wrote: ----------------------------- > Thank you very much for your taking time to explain. We know that there is not the past nor the future but only the present moment. But from what I understand from the teachings in the Sutta is, that there is more to it than knowing the present reality to escape from the suffering in samsara. ----------------------------- It is a pity that we disagree, but at least we know where we disagree. I say there is nothing more to the Dhamma than knowing the present reality: you say there *is* something more. I think this is also where 99% of modern-day Buddhists disagree with the ancient Theravadin texts. I am grateful that you, and others like you, have joined DSG to discuss our dinosaur version of the Dhamma. ------------------------------------- H: > It is the mind that is causing all our problems, because : Mind precedes all mental states. Mind is their chief; they are all mind-wrought. If with an impure mind one speaks or acts, suffering follows one like the wheel that follows the foot of the ox. (Dhammapada) --------------------------------------- Agreed. We non-arahants have impure minds. Even in rare moments of kusala kamma there are latent tendencies for akusala, and so the wheel of suffering is kept turning. However, this is nothing to get upset about because there is only the present moment. Outside of the present five khandhas, there is nothing than can have any effect on us. And there is no "us" - anywhere - for it to have any effect on. ---------------- H: > The mind is going a long journey, in that journey it has collected so much of habits, which are good, which are bad and which are neutral. --------------- Sorry to be picky, but only arahants have neutral kamma, and so I doubt we can have neutral habits. ------------------------------------------------- H: > So it is the mind that we will have to get hold of to cultivate and save it from bad habits and put it on the correct path to reach the goal of Nibbana. ------------------------------------------------ That sounds like an onerous duty. It reminds me of Shakespeare's Hamlet: "Oh cursed spite, That ever I was born to set it right." Fear not, H, there are only dhammas here. They are fleeting, conditioned, impersonal phenomena, and not worth obsessing over. ------------------------------------------ H: > What is the present reality ? To me the "present reality ", is what I am doing now. When I write I write, ------------------------------------------- I don't want to convert you: I just want you to know that there is another side to the story. When you are writing, there is no writer and there is no writing: there are only dhammas. Some dhammas perform the function of thinking, and they create the illusion of "writer" and "writing." -------------------------------- H: > when I see, I see. -------------------------------- Here, the ultimate story is slightly different. To paraphrase the Abhidhamma; 'Mere seeing exists but no seer is found.' Seeing is eye-consciousness, which is a paramattha dhamma. While you have been reading this message, countless eye-consciousnesses have arisen, performed their functions, and fallen away. ------------------------------------------------- H: > When I eat, I eat etc. We the yogis call that, bare attention. ------------------------------------------------- Yogi or not, you cannot practise the Dhamma when you believe eating is a reality. ------------------------ H: > Bare attention, by itself, is not enough to purify the mind of its accumulation of bad habits, let alone unwholesome kamma. Therefore some thing more effective to get hold of the mind and see it as it is, is essential. It is not the present reality that could do that purification of the mind to reach the set target. ------------------------- I agree, and I should clarify one extremely important point: It is not the present reality that purifies the mind. The thing that purifies the mind is *knowing the present reality.* The present moment might be very impure - it might include dosa, for example, or moha, or even micha-ditthi - but the immediately following moments of consciousness can take any present (now, fallen away) reality as their object. It resonates in a way that it can be experienced even though it has just fallen away. ----------------------------- H: > Specially, for us human beings with multifarious activities, it is certainly an enormous assignment. ------------------------------ There, the Theravadin understanding has the advantage. Since there is only the present moment, there are no human beings and no multifarious activities: there are only dhammas. Therefore, the only obstacle that could stand in the way of vipassana development is moha (ignorance of the Dhamma). ------------------------------------------------- H: > Therefore, Buddha took as his disciples those who had given up their household life to follow his teachings. ------------------------------------------------- I don't know which meaning you are applying to the word "disciples" in this instance - do you mean chief disciples? There were, and possibly still are, lay followers who were ariyans. Lay followers and bhikkhus are equally capable when it comes to understanding and practising Dhamma. However, some people have accumulated the necessary tendencies for living the homeless life, preserving the arahant lifestyle and, in some cases, developing jhana. --------------------------------- H: > The Maha Satipattana Sutta consists of the instructions to his Bikkhus to do Bhavana. Bhavana is defined as mental cultivation and called in English Meditation. ------------------------------- Ultimately, a bhikkhu is anyone who follows the Buddha's teaching. Or, more correctly, it is the five khandhas when they the sankhara-khandha includes right understanding and right mindfulness (and so on). When we know ultimate reality as being the present five khandhas (in whatever form they might arise), the term "instruction to do bhavana" takes on a whole new meaning. "Understand the five khandhas" is one new meaning that springs to mind; can you think of any others? -------------------------------------------------- H: > During the time of the Buddha, instructions were not given to lay people to Meditate. They were told of the merit of Dana Sila and Bhavana which would have been enough for a diligent human earthling to attain at least Sotapatti. --------------------------------------------------- I'll have to skip over that because I don't understand what you are saying. Unless, that is, you are agreeing that right understanding is enough for the attainment of enlightenment. (?) ------------------------------------------------- H: > Now we have the time and the means, which were not available those days, to take off to meditate. We have no other alternative but to follow those same instructions the Buddha gave to his disciples, to enter the Stream. Then we will have to follow the Sutta Pitaka. As the instructions for the Bikkhus are in them. -------------------------------------------------- Do you mean the Dhamma has changed since the Buddha taught it? That is the sort of thinking that can arise only from a non-present- moment-centred interpretation. The namas and rupas that are arising now have exactly the same characteristics that they had in the Buddha's day. --------------------------- H: > Abhidhamma is a sacred book, but there are no instructions in it for us or his disciples to follow to purify the mind of its impurities and prepare it to the journey towards Nibbana. ---------------------------- Apart from the dhammas described in the Abhidhamma, there is nothing but illusion. In the ulltimate sense, there are no books, no instructions, no disciples and no journeys. You must realise that. Otherwise, you will always be practising a conventional technique of a kind that can be taught by any moderately intelligent person. The Dhamma is unique. It can be taught only by a Buddha, and it can be practised only by the wise. Even if there is no wisdom now, lots of other dhammas are arising, ready to be understood. Ken H 45301 From: upasaka@... Date: Sun May 8, 2005 4:13pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Concepts vs. Real Objects [was Re:1. characteristic> 2. function> 3... upasaka_howard Hi, Larry - In a message dated 5/8/05 7:24:12 PM Eastern Daylight Time, LBIDD@... writes: Hi Howard, It seems to me you are forsaking your phenomenalist/experiential roots in favor of a concept of ultimate reality. Movement is as plain as the colour red. ------------------------------------------- Howard: Not to me. I experience one thing, then another, then another - and I *concoct* motion. This is becoming increasingly clear to me. ------------------------------------------ We don't just agree to accept a particular phenomenon as "movement". It is unavoidable and not a convention. Be that as it may, I would still like to know how the "conventional" appearance of movement comes about. I agree the notion of a watcher is tied up with this, but I don't see the details of the 'how'. Any ideas? ------------------------------------------- Howard: The best I can say is what I said above about experiencing differing things and then mentally relating them and constrcting a percept of motion. -------------------------------- Larry =================== With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 45302 From: upasaka@... Date: Sun May 8, 2005 4:16pm Subject: Lost Message upasaka_howard Hi, all - Just a little while ago I was replying to a post by someone [not sure whether from Tep or Larry or ???] and I lost my connecton as well as the post. If someone sent me a post that I haven't eplied to, coud you pease re-send it directly to me? 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) 45303 From: LBIDD@... Date: Sun May 8, 2005 8:20pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Shape of a cow/Tep lbidd2 Tep: "can you tell me why you asked that question in the first place?" Hi Tep, The questions just popped into my head, no control. But once they arose, we have to find an answer. Don't you think so? First, what is a sign? A sign is a symbol, an abstraction, something that stands for something else, a greater reality. A word is a sign but for visual perception a sign is most often a shape. A smiley face is a sign :-) In the past we have often talked about the 'alleged' existence of a tree in Howard's yard. Whenever we talk about Howard's tree I imagine a simple generic tree shape. It's vague, with little detail and undoubtedly nothing like the actual tree. So here comes the first question. The tree sign is an abstraction of the living tree shape. We identify the tree because it conforms to the basic tree shape sign, but the actual tree shape is infinitely more detailed than the tree sign. Just because the actual tree shape conforms to the tree sign doesn't mean that the actual tree shape is only the simple, abstract tree sign. If the actual tree shape isn't the tree sign, what is it? What is any shape? How do we know a shape? Every visual object and every tactile object has a shape. Do we know the shape all at once or piece by piece? If we know anything piece by piece, how do we put it together? Consciousness can only know one thing at a time. The actual tree shape is very complex so we must 'take it in' piece by piece. Even a simple tree sign has a number of features. Consciousness can not only know only one reality at a time, it can also only know one concept at a time. We obviously know shapes and many other complex phenomena, both conceptual and real. How? If shape is somehow real, what about the Buddha's cow and what about Vajira's chariot? The cow and chariot cannot be found by dividing them into parts, the basic satipatthana (and abhidhamma) procedure. Dividing the cow and chariot into parts destroys their shape. Whatever is destroyed must have existed in some way. Hence, cow and chariot are impermanent. Therefore 'person' and 'self' are impermanent. Utoh... KenO isn't going to like this. That's the general idea. What do we do with it? We have to understand better what we know and how we know it. Everyone is working with the same reality, so how do you see it? Larry 45304 From: "mnease" Date: Sun May 8, 2005 8:47pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re:1. characteristic> 2. function> 3. manifestation>4.proximate cause mlnease Hi Nina and Htoo, ----- Original Message ----- From: "Nina van Gorkom" To: Sent: Wednesday, May 04, 2005 11:42 AM Subject: Re: [dsg] Re:1. characteristic> 2. function> 3. manifestation>4.proximate cause Dear Htoo, See my book Cetasikas, and also on line: rupas. As for cittas, I did in my Abhidhamma book, but not for all. The four things cannot be applied to nibbaana, this is a special case. Paññatti do not have these four. Nina. op 04-05-2005 19:35 schreef htootintnaing op htootintnaing@...: > Once I have asked someone to teach me through someone like Nina about > > 1. characterstic > 2. function > 3. manifestation > 4. approximate cause > > of citta, 52 cetasikas, 28 rupas, nibbana, and pannatti. But I was > thrashed that I was lazy and Nina will not do such job, said that > person. The best source for these, I think, is the Atthasaalinii. I'm working on a series of 'flash cards' including just these data but must wait till I get a copy of the Ats. to finish. I'll keep dsg posted for anyone interested in these. mike 45305 From: Sarah and Jonothan Abbott Date: Sun May 8, 2005 8:54pm Subject: trim and salutation reminders dsgmods Hi All, Just a couple of reminders. Trimming When replying to another post, please remember to trim any part of the other post that is not necessary for your reply. If the post you are replying to is a recent one, you may assume that other members will have seen it. Salutation etc To avoid confusion, please use a salutation at the beginning of each post, and sign off at the end. We appreciate your co-operation. Jon and Sarah PS The full guidelines can be found in the files section. Comments or questions off-list only. Thanks 45306 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Sun May 8, 2005 8:36pm Subject: Final Freedom ... !!! bhikkhu_ekamuni Friends: The Supreme Goal Ahead: Buddha once said: The purpose of morality is self-control. The purpose of self-control is absence of regrets. The purpose of absence of regrets is joy. The purpose of joy is satisfaction. The purpose of satisfaction is calm. The purpose of calm is happiness. The purpose of happiness is concentration. The purpose of concentration is understanding. The purpose of understanding is turning away. The purpose of turning away is disillusion. The purpose of disillusion is mental release. The purpose of mental release is Nibbâna, Final Freedom without remnants of clinging... Friendship is the Greatest ! and the entire Noble Life... Bhikkhu Samahita, Sri Lanka. <.....> 45307 From: LBIDD@... Date: Sun May 8, 2005 8:59pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Concepts vs. Real Objects [was Re:1. characteristic> 2. function> 3... lbidd2 Howard: "I experience one thing, then another, then another - and I *concoct* motion." Hi Howard, I very much agree we experience one thing at a time, but this goes in a very plodding, jerky pace. Motion is smooth and uninterrupted within the crude fits and starts of attention. It is very hard to believe you experience motion in frames, but even if you do I would be inclined to attribute that to a peculiar visual skill in being able to spot details in the movement of an object. I think this says more about the versatility of consciousness than the nature of motion. It is actually stopping motion rather than concocting it. Larry 45308 From: "Lisa" Date: Sun May 8, 2005 9:19pm Subject: [dsg] Re:1. characteristic> 2. function> 3. manifestation>4.proximate cause foamflowers I want to wade into this too--Hi everyone! Htoo, I'm still working on what ritual means to me...I will post this coming week. Thanks again for wading through my questions and pointing out the strong and weak spots. Some of my notes I've been taking on this subject, please be free with your corrections! Two levels of reality paramattha and pannatti. Paramattha, that which is independent of cognition, that which cannot be seen by the eye or be felt but that which can be understood by consciousness like sensation, cool, hard, soft, pushing, tight, stiff, movement, pain, numb and so on (sensations?). Pannatti, cannot exist without the cognative functions that which is seen by the eye, felt, tasted, touched and so on. (1) nama-pannatti=names+words+signs+symbols=designated things, which can be real or unreal (sannakaramatta)=mode of recognizing, worldly convention. loka-sanketa-nimmita+lokavoharena siddha (2)attha-pannatti=ideas, notions, concepts corresponding to names, words, signs, or symbols, that is the mind which functions as the interpreter (kappana) and appearances or forms which arise from the (dhammas) elements depending on situations or positions (avattha-visesa). Nama Pannatti and attha-pannatti are psychological in their nature reality and are not part of that which does not depend on our existence and the way of performing observations. Pannatti= don't spend to much time with pannatti (personal opinion) just know it for what it is and move on. This understanding helps condition the next movement to the next level paramattha I think there is a danger of getting lost in the details of Pannatti, once understood I should look for what is not conditioned which is pure sensation or feeling? So motion would be the pure sensation of walking, that light and heavy feeling going through the body in an split second as one moves legs up and down, kind of like the feeling when one rides in an elevator except it happens in a nano second (the nama and rupa meet and flash..bling-bling) A cow the reality of a cow would be the pure sensation of a cow when we look at it or smell it or taste it, touch it and so on (hahaha), then the name or symbol we give that sensation and then all the other stuff that follows a name which could be memories, worries, anger, happiness, indifference and so on. With Metta, Lisa 45309 From: "Lisa" Date: Sun May 8, 2005 9:32pm Subject: [dsg] Re:1. characteristic> 2. function> 3. manifestation>4.proximate cause foamflowers I forgot to add the last part of my little note... > Pannatti= don't spend to much time with pannatti (personal opinion) > just know it for what it is and move on. This understanding helps > condition the next movement to the next level paramattha > > I think there is a danger of getting lost in the details of >Pannatti, once understood I should look for what is not conditioned >which is pure sensation or feeling? > So motion would be the pure sensation of walking, that light and >heavy feeling going through the body in an split second as one moves >legs up and down, kind of like the feeling when one rides in an >elevator except it happens in a nano second (the nama and rupa meet >and flash..bling-bling) > > A cow the reality of a cow would be the pure sensation of a cow when > we look at it or smell it or taste it, touch it and so on (hahaha), > then the name or symbol we give that sensation and then all the >other stuff that follows a name which could be memories, worries, >anger,happiness, indifference and so on. Add on to this part.....I therefore understand why I lift my leg and set it down and also understand the cause of this lifting of the leg. and setting it down. I know when I stand and the cause of why I stand, I know why I walk and the cause of why I walk...it is the nama and the rupa coming together--bling-bling ( all the jewerly and flashy, fancy stuff money can buy--bling-bling) and I know why I walk and why I stand, plus I get a kick out of being able to watch sensation without hooking all that other stuff onto it. Walking becomes very light and fun to just watch! Nana go lightly...lol With metta, Lisa 45310 From: sarah abbott Date: Sun May 8, 2005 10:38pm Subject: ‘Cetasikas' study corner 188 - Enthusiasm/piiti (f) sarahprocter... 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.11 Enthusiasm (piiti) contd] As regards the kåmåvacara sobhana cittas (beautiful cittas of the sense-sphere), only the types of citta which are accompanied by pleasant feeling arise with píti. When we, with generosity and full of joy, help someone else, the kusala citta is accompanied by pleasant feeling and also by píti which invigorates body and mind. Even if there was tiredness before, it is gone; one is refreshed. The same may happen when one reads a sutta with kusala citta accompanied by joy and enthusiasm. At such a moment one is not bored or tired, there is píti which takes a pleasurable interest in the object. ***** [Ch.11 Enthusiasm (piiti) to be contd] Metta, Sarah ====== 45311 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon May 9, 2005 0:06am Subject: Re: [dsg] Musings12 - More on Prescribing and Strategi es sarahprocter... Hi Howard, --- upasaka@... wrote: <....> >S: We discussed how when there isn’t any development of satipatthana now, > we > keep thinking about what actions to take, how to cope or what to do in > various situations. However, the thinking is always about the future or > past. At the same time, the development of understanding is being > postponed by thinking and yet more thinking at these times. > -------------------------------- > Howard: > I don't get what you are pointing out here. > -------------------------------- S: I was trying to say that whilst we keep thinking about what we should do, how we should behave (or should have behaved) and when we should develop bhavana (meditation), we are lost in stories about future or past concepts rather than actually being aware of what is real right now. Really, I’d like to quote back some of your own excellent comments (to Tep): You wrote: “My understanding is that when the mind is engaged in thinking, which is something that goes on “all” the time(!), it does so largely in terms of conventional ideas.........but those “things” are not actually occurring things at all any more than a unicorn is, but are merely mentally projected, mentally superimposed.......etc” And then “So, for example, there are hardness sensations, odors, and sights etc that are not, themselves, thought process-produced but which serve as the basis for our perceiving of a “gingkok tree”......” In just the same way, the thoughts about how to behave or what actions to take in future (or those taken in the pas)t are ‘not actually occurring things at all’. There can be awareness now of the ‘hardness sensations, odors, and sights’ or the thinking if they appear, one at a time, but not of the various concepts. When satipatthana begins to develop, there is less inclination to think about future and past bhavana. I hope this makes sense. ..... >S: A friend also raised other examples of suttas which seem to be > suggesting > strategies to follow at times of strong akusala (unwholesome states), <...> > Howard: > What is your point here, Sarah? > ----------------------------------- S: (btw, I included your name because I remembered you had discussed this sutta before). I think my point follows below: <...> >S: Indeed the Buddha is always stressing panna whilst describing and giving > examples such as these. However,the panna knows that in fact, ‘we’ > do > whatever conditions dictate. Whatever happens, whatever action is taken, > is completely conditioned. So panna has to understand whatever the > dhamma > (reality) is at any given time so that insight can develop. This is > ‘bhaavanaa mayaa pa~n~naa’ – the real development of satipatthana. .... S: We all have our own ways of behaving or tendencies/strategies for coping. These are conditioned in complex ways, but the purpose is to understand, to develop detachment, towards dhammas arising and appearing now. Whilst we continue to believe that ‘we’ can make them be a certain way or that intentions can somehow be controlled, satipatthana won’t be developing. Let me stress that this doesn’t mean that certain ways of behaviour aren’t good and others not good. On the contrary, good is seen as good and bad is seen as bad, more and more precisely, I believe. .... > Howard: > The Buddha repeatedly gave instructions for practice, and he urged > their > carrying out. Thius is so eminently clear that it boggles my mind how > some > folks strain to see the matter otherwise. > ---------------------------------- S: Yes, he gave instructions. He left the Dhamma and his instruction was to take refuge in it, to develop satipatthana by following the eightfold Path. However, it is right understanding and the other path factors which do the developing when there has been sufficient wise reflection about present namas and rupas to be known. .... > S: Panna has to develop with detachment, not with an idea of self that is > following strategies or trying hard to be aware and control actions. It > has to also develop with patience to know what isn’t known, not with > attachment to having awareness arise often. > --------------------------------- > Howard: > All development has to start from where we are, and not from where > we > hope to be. One who is without idea of self has already made > considerable > progress. ... S: One who is without any idea of self is a sotapanna already. To reach this stage, the understanding has to develop step by step. ... >The process doesn't begin at that stage, for that stage has to > first be > attained. We start, in fact, in the midst of ignorance, and we must > engage in the > practice taught by the Buddha to get oneself off ground zero. ... S: I agree about the midst of ignorance (or the mist of ignorance for that matter). Again, it is the development of awareness which begins by being aware of dhammas so that panna can know there’s no self to get ‘off ground zero’ at all. .... >S: The most important thing is that it should be the right > path at this moment. > -------------------------------------- > Howard: > To be the *right* path, it must be *some* path. With no path, one > just > does what feels good and remains enmeshed in craving and ignorance > forever. > -------------------------------------- S: Even no path is better than wrong path:-). Even whilst ‘enmeshed in craving and ignorance’ like for much of the day, awareness can and does begin to develop. If we hadn’t heard about these qualities or heard that they are dhammas, not self, it would be impossible for awareness to develop. But, we’ve heard a lot about them, we’ve heard a lot about seeing consciousness and visible object and other sense objects, so that awareness can slowly perform its function. It can be aware of seeing now if conditions allow, but it can never make seeing arise or more awareness for that matter. As soon as there is any craving or wish to have more or quicker awareness, or attempts to make it arise, there’s likely to silabbataparamasa again, I think. Howard, I know you will again disagree with many of these comments and I respect that you just point out differences as you see them. I don’t mind at all and am just glad to see you contributing to these threads again. As I said, I particularly liked your comments on concepts and realities. I look forward to more. Metta, Sarah ========== 45312 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon May 9, 2005 0:47am Subject: Re: [dsg] Musings12 More on Prescribing and Strategies sarahprocter... Hi Tep, I just lost a longer reply to you on this topic, so this one will be briefer. --- Tep Sastri wrote: > T: Sarah, I agree with every nice thing you have mentioned concerning > Satipatthana and understanding with sampajanna. The Satipatthana > Sutta is a major discourse, it was not meant to be for beginners to > follow and ignore everything else of the Teachings. It is not the only > discourse the Buddha taught. So your "points" are only a part of what > the Buddha taught. > > Maybe they are too advanced. Frankly, how often can you be "aware > of the present nama or rupa appearing" in the present moment? ... S: No need to think of ‘how often’. If awareness arises, it arises, if it doesn’t it doesn’t. It’s just an element, not self. I really don’t count and am confident that it’s useless to be concerned about it. ... >How > well does your Satipatthana scheme work when the mind is attacked > by hindrances? ... S: Again, I see the hindrances as elements which can just as easily be objects of awareness as any other dhamma appearing. Like just now when I lost my post to you, there was some brief irritation, but I don’t see the irritation or any other dhamma as being a real hindrance to satipatthana, because they have to be known for what they are too. The one real hindrance is wrong view and particularly the idea of self that experiences these various states or which can control the various elements. .... >What do you do in order to clear your mind from > hindrances? ... S: Conventionally speaking, I may go for a swim or walk or write a post again like now:-). It may seem that ‘I’ have found a way to clear ‘my’ mind of hindrances, but this is just wrong thinking. Simply put, if there are conditions for attachment or aversion to arise, they will arise. If I go swimming or write a post, it may be that there no longer is irritation arising, but that’s really because of a complex set of condtions, particularly natural decisive support condition. ... >Does the Satipatthana in the present moment work when > you have wandering mind, that is not steadied internally and quieted? ... S: All these questions indicate the attachment we have to having certain dhammas arising rather than others. Again, it has to be the path of detachment towards whatever is appearing, rather than trying to have a quiet mind and so on. If there’s a ‘wandering mind’, it’s just a momentary element too. Not self. I really have confidence, Tep, that the way all defilements will eventually be eradicated is through the development of understanding, acceptance and detachment, rather than wishing for particular states. .... > <...? > Is it possible that these "points" you have made are ideal, suitable for > advanced practitioners only? ... S: I really think it has to be the right path from the beginning. More and more of our subtle and not so subtle wrong practices, such as trying to have satipatthana arise, have to be seen for what they are. ... >And, is it possible that there are other > practical aspects of the Teachings that have been overlooked,... .... S: More and more I see that if there is understanding of satipatthana and the dhammas to be known directly at this moment, all the practical aspects of the Teachings become apparent. I believe it’s our lack of confidence which leads us to think there must be something else overlooked. Even the value of dana and sila is understood so much more clearly with just a little glimpse of satipatthana. .... <...> > Apparently, Sarah is having trouble believing the major suttas that > give "instructions" to the monks for the practice that leads to > abandonment (pahana) of mental defilements, e.g. MN 20 > (Vitakkasa.n.thaana Sutta) <"When he examines the danger in those > thoughts [i.e. `evil unwholesome thoughts connected with desire, with > hate, and with delusion]..when he tries to forget those thoughts and > does not give attention to them..... <...> S: I believe the Buddha pointed out everything. I may well say to you , like when I started this post, if I feel irritated or something, I just try to forget it, not give attention to those thoughts and carry on. We can say this or read the Buddha’s words, with or without any idea of self. .... > > Indeed there are several other suttas that give instructions for dealing > with kilesas, to abandon them, and to practice such that the mind > is "steadied internally, quieted, brought to singleness, and > concentrated". How can panna work effectively otherwise? ... S: By *understanding* what is good, what is bad, what is the present dhamma appearing. It does its work naturally, not with any self-interference. ... > > Of course, once the mind is calm because of viveka (free from > sensuous things, akusala vitakka, and karmically unwholesome > things) then the Stipatthana in the present moment will have the strong > support needed for it to work well. ... S: I’d put it the other way round. When satipatthana develops, there is viveka, there is calm and so one. This will be the support for the growth of all kinds of kusala and the eventual eradication of akusala, without any idea of self. Metta, Sarah ======== 45313 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Mon May 9, 2005 0:54am Subject: Re: [dsg]Abhidhamma./ Ruupas and Objects of Meditation kenhowardau Hi Tep, You wrote: -------------------------------- > Although I have not read several posted messages here (who can anyway?), I still can recall a good number of them that focus on ruupa, and Htoo and Nina and Sarah etc. have discussed this topic over and over. However, when talking about ruupa as an object of meditation, most theoretical discussers have not done a complete job. ----------------------------------- For various reasons, I would like to suggest that you read all DSG posts, even if that means scanning quickly through some that don't interest you very much. Secondly, I think rupa has been explained quite thoroughly, but you and I, as comparative newcomers to the Abhidhamma, do not absorb all we read. Whenever I gain some new understanding of the Dhamma, I usually realise that I have seen it explained here many times before but without appreciating its meaning. ----------------------------------------------------------- T: > Hasituppada have a broad classification for ruupa. His concern, as well as mine, is on ruupa as an object of meditation. Hasituppada: >All forms, feelings like, softness, hardness pain, hot and cold, > wind on your body, a sound, a smell, a taste, a thought that arises > in the mind are all rupas which could be an object of meditation. ---------------------------------- We clearly have a conflict of definitions here. As Htoo explained, rupas are physical phenomena. Hasituppada, however, is using "rupa" to refer to a category that includes physical phenomena (hardness, heat, sound, the wind element, smell, taste), a mental phenomenon (pain) and concepts (thoughts). ---------------------------------- T: > Htoo responded, "Ruupa never know themselves, their surroundings, naama and anything at all". Tep: Htoo's answer above cannot scratch the spot where it is itching! ------------------------------------------------------------- No, but he was answering the question, "Are those things rupas." Rupas, unlike namas, never experience anything. ------------------------------------------------------------- T: > Hasituppada and Tep want to know why it is wrong to say that all rupas (those given above) may be used as an object of meditation? I believe that, by "meditation", Hasituppada means samatha-vipassana bhavana. ---------------------------------- The rupas that are sense objects can be objects of vipassana bhavana. You have quoted where Htoo listed them as "1. sight, 2. sound, 3. smell, 4. taste, 5. hardness, 6. temperature, and 7. pressure." They are the rupas that appear at the sense doors (and sometimes at the mind-door when they have just fallen away). I *think* I have been told that other rupas can also be known at the mind door, but only by the most advanced practitioners. (As I was saying, most things don't sink in the first one hundred times I hear them.) ----------------------------------- T: > If I am not mistaken, we (Hasituppada and Tep) have been told that any pannatti objects (concepts) cannot be the object of Satipatthana. ------------------------------------ That's right. The Buddha's teaching (satipatthana) is to know the characteristics of conditioned namas and rupas. --------------- T: > Of course, we have been told that any meditation not using an ultimate reality as an object of Satipatthana is worthless. --------------- No, I don't think you have been told that. Wise consideration of anything (concept or reality) is kusala and is therefore accompanied by mental calm. I believe the Buddha recommended four specific objects of samatha meditation - the Buddha, metta, death and foulness. But then again, I haven't been told about them the necessary 100 times, yet. :-) Ken H 45314 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon May 9, 2005 1:21am Subject: Re: [dsg] Ritual, Abhidhamma and Buddhism sarahprocter... Hi Lisa (Htoo, Connie & camera-shy meditators), Delighted to read your various reflections, pali wanderings, colourful threads and all. --- Lisa wrote: > Ritual the tension between desire and transcendence. > > The Buddha criticized ceremony for pomp and circumstance and blind > faith, especially ritual bathing and mortification ceremonies and > ritual sacrifices of animals. He did, integrate some rituals of his > own into his teachings. The Buddha set up rituals that could act as > aids or vehicles in the inner journey towards the discovery of one's > own true nature, a raft to carry us to the other shore so to speak. ... S: If we remember that the only dhammas are cittas, cetasikas and rupas, I think it becomes clearer that wrong practice and rituals (silabbataparamasa) refers to cittas and cetasikas whilst following mental or bodily actions. For example, we may go to the temple and pay our respects with wholesome or unwholesome states of mind. The same actions can be performed with mental states which are reflecting or the Buddha’s virtues, ideas about these actions being the way to have a happier rebirth, or one may just be following one’s friends or family. So rituals cannot simply be judged by the outer appearance. The same with the keys in the bowl. There isn’t any idea that this is the way to have a happy rebirth or develop satipatthana, so it’s not silabbataparamasa. However, if we follow particular actions or mentally attend or focus on certain objects such as our moving feet, thinking this is the way to develop understanding, then silabbataparamasa comes in. It can be very subtle (far more subtle than we realize now, I think). For example, if there is a little awareness and we try to repeat the experience, it’s silabbataparamasa. I know Phil was joking when he said he half-wished his oven door would smash like Nina’s so as to follow the same experiences. That would be a very good example:-). As soon as there is any selection of objects for awareness as opposed to ordinary daily functioning, silabbataparamasa creeps in. For example, in yoga which you and I both do, there can be focusing on the movements with or without any idea of it having anything to do with the Path. The same applies to breathing. One can focus on one’s breath for many reasons, such as for one’s health. When one thinks that focusing on the breath is the way to develop satipatthana, I’d suggest it’s wrong. I agree with all your comments about ‘no control’ and headaches and frustration if one tries:-). Thanks for the reminders to put the keys in the bowl – I really need a lot of key reminders. However, when we read about the function of sati being not to forget, it’s referring to dhammas (realities). Even whilst forgetting the keys, there can be sati which remembers to be aware of seeing, visible object, even forgetfulness at such a time. So it may be frustrating on a conventional level to lose one’s keys, but I don’t see it as any hindrance to the development of sati. I was going to bring in the stringing of the threads of pearls, but they’re not in the bowl either right now – Connie may have seen them;-). I did find the new pic in the members’ album – Connie referred to a ‘significant pic’, but it doesn’t look like her. Is it a ‘taken by surprise’ Lisa I wonder? Very charming, whoever...pls someome solve the mystery. While I’m at it – how come all the meditators are so camera-shy....? Htoo (I know I’ll have to wait for your half-promised visit and then, ‘click, click’:-)), Tep, Hasituppada, Mateesha, Charles D, Alan L.....I forget who else....Any are welcome. Metta, Sarah ========= 45315 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon May 9, 2005 2:07am Subject: Re: [dsg]Abhidhamma. sarahprocter... Dear Hasituppada (Charles P), --- hasituppada wrote: > Hasituppada says: > > I thought Kuddhakanikaya was a later addition to Tipitaka. I have > read in many place and even in the Internet that only the > Suttapitaka and the Vinayapitaka were recited at the Council by the > Venerbla Ananda and Venerable Upali. Who read the Abhidhamma Pitaka > at the first Council ? > However, I do not wish to have polmics with you on this question. > If you say so I will accept it on the face value. .... S: I’m not a historian at all, but I do have a lot of confidence in what I read in the ancient commentaries. Back to the commentary to the Vinaya (repeated in others), it states that the Pitakas should be known ‘in their divers aspects: and in accordance with them the word of the Buddha should be understood as being threefold.’ When it comes to the division into Nikayas, there is the fivefold division – DN, MN, SN, AN and Khuddakanikaya. It describes all these in detail, starting with DN. Coming to the last: “What is the Khuddakanikaaya? The rest of the word of the Buddha including the entire Vinaya Pitaka, the Abhidhamma Pitaka, and the fifteen divisions commencing with the Khuddakapaa.tha enumerated earlier, leaving aside the four Nikaayas. The rest of the word of the Buddha, excluding these four nikaayas such as the Diigha, is considered the Khuddakanikaaya. Thus it is fivefold according to (the division into ) Nikaayas.” Then there follows a long description and breakdown into the A”ngas, which I’ve already referred to. According to the commentary, with regard to the Khuddakanikaaya, “the venerable Elder Upaali explained the Vinaya therein and the Elder Aananda the remaining sections of the Khuddakanikaaya and the four Nikaayas.” We then read: “All this forms the word of the Buddha which should be known as uniform in sentiment, twofold as the Dhamma and the Vinaya, threefold according to the first, intermediate, and last words, and similarly as Pi.takas, fivefold according to the Nikaayas, ninefold according to the A”ngas, and forming 84,000 divisions according to the Units of the Dhamma.” Honestly speaking, Hasituppada, when I see modern articles suggesting that the Abhidhamma isn’t the ‘word of the Buddha’ etc, I find they are based on other articles, but I think very few people actually read these ancient commentaries. .... > Hasituppada says: > > Meditation is I think the English translation of the word > Bhavana. "Bhavana" is defined as the cultivation of the mind > (mental cultivation, if you like). ... S: So far so good. ... >Abhidhamma is concerned with the > Paramatta Dhamma, explaining the beings( satta) as a conditioned > reality, a pancakkhandha. In reality there is no identifiable being. .... S: Don’t the suttas teach the same? For example, what does the Khandhasamyutta teach? .... > > Bhavana, is what the Buddha taught, and instructed through the > Mahasatipattana Sutta for the human beings to practice to allow the > purification of mind to attain Nibbana. It could be done now as it > was done before, and could be done in the future. ... S: Yes, not just in the Mahasatipatthana Sutta but throughout the Tipitaka, I’d suggest. Can there be any satipatthana development if there is no understanding of pancakkhandha and no identifiable beings etc? .... > Hasituppada says: > > An advice given to a meditator or if you like a Yogi, at the outset > is to stop reading during or in between meditation sessions. This > is to avoid confusion and mental disturbance. There are periods set > aside for reading or discussion of Dhamma. ... S: I’m familiar with this regimen, but did the Buddha ever say that listening (no reading then:-)) or discussion should be put aside at the outset of bhavana? What about all those who became enlightened whilst listening? In fact aren’t suta maya panna (listening) and cinta maya panna (careful reflecting) the very conditions for bhavana maya panna? .... > Hasituppada says: > > There is no where in the Sutta where the Buddha spoke about a dry > Vipassana. .... S: Did the Buddha ever speak about the 4 or 5 jhanas (or one or two) being essential requisites for all in order to develop vipassana? For example, Visakkha became a sotapanna at the age of 7 and continued to lead a very worldly kind of life. Is there any suggestion that she had attained any jhanas before becoming enlightened? .... >The word "Bhavana" is an all inclusive term that takes > in both Samatha and Vipassana. I think that mind without Samatha is > not purified enough to have insight or penetrate into the anicca > dukkha anatma and open it self to panna. ... S: Let’s just be clear for a moment that there is samatha (tranquility or calm) at each moment of kusala. So at moments of vipassana, there must be samatha. What you are saying is that samatha bhavana must be developed to the degree of jhana first. I think the texts make it clear that when the lokuttara cittas arise, the concentration and accompanying factors such as samma-sankappa are of the degree of jhana by nature of the object (nibbana) automatically. Even if highly developed samatha bhavana were essential first, it can still only be developed with understanding and not by will or concentration. I know there are some differences here and as I said to Howard, I’m glad you’re sharing your opinions and well-considered reflections too. (If you have time, please look at posts under 'Susima Sutta' in U.P) Metta, Sarah > Hasituppada Says: > > What is in a name after all, but this is a moment of Lobha, I love > to be called Hasituppada, what more could you wish to be, more than > a smile of an Arahat !!! .... S: Hmmm – we try to encourage everyone to use real names here, but don't insist as someone may have a very good reason for not doing so..... Like the others, I really hope your tooth-ache has subsided by now and you're able to get attention for it. My sympathies. =========== 45316 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon May 9, 2005 2:23am Subject: Re: [dsg] Sarah's Elaboration on Anatta [was Re: ‘Cetasikas' study corner 177 ] sarahprocter... Hi Tep, --- Tep Sastri wrote: <...> > I selected b) Self needs to make the choice until it is eradicated, and > you asked : <...> > > e) other – please specifiy <...> > According to the Anattalakkhana sutta, the Buddha said, for example, > about the consciousness aggregate : "...If consciousness were the > self, this consciousness would not lend itself to dis-ease. It would be > possible [to say] with regard to consciousness, 'Let my consciousness > be thus. Let my consciousness not be thus.' " > [Same for the other four aggregates..] > > T: Clearly, the Buddha only gave a logical deduction on the self view > of the pancakkhandha that says such a view is wrong and why. ... S: In doing so, he was pointing out the truth about the khandhas which can be directly understood. .. >The > self view, 'This is mine, this is I, this is my self', is a consequence > of the > existence of pancakkhandha in the present moment. ... S: Specifically, a result of ignorance... .... >Such a self view > reflects a wrong attitude - a miccha ditthi, because 'self ' is real > only to > people who have upadana on the aggregates. .... S: I assume you mean the wrong view of self is real. Of course, upadana or craving can be with or without wrong view. A sotapanna has craving, but no wrong view. .... >Because of the anicca > and dukkha characteristics, it does not make sense for anyone to take > the pancakkhandha as me, mine or my self -- therefore, there is nothing > to be taken as self, and self is thus an illusion. ... S: Right we agree. The khandhas are mere elements (dhatus) which are not in anyone’s conrol or command as the sutta extract shows. They are anatta, however much illusion there is to the contrary. .... > With or without the wrong attitude about self or the miccha ditthi self > view, the pancakkhandha exists (they are not illusion at all, despite > the > Truth that they are impermanent and so on) and decisions are being > made all the time (the decisions are not illusion either. .... S: Agreed. And can we also agree that any decisions are mere momentary cittas and cetasikas, i.e consisting of the 4 mental khandhas– conditioned dhammas. .... >For example, > President Bush was elected and his decision to invade Iraq was real.) ... S: What are the khandhas or dhammas in your example, would you say? Are President Bush and Iraq realities? What is the decision? What are the condtions for decisions? Following on from this, what makes the choice? Can we agree that thinking is not self, intention is not self, wrong view is not self, effort is not self? Thanks for being such a good sport with the counter-quizes and for all your diplomatic responses:-). I thought your detailed qus to Nina were very good and all your other Abhidhamma enquiries. Metta, Sarah ====== 45317 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon May 9, 2005 2:44am Subject: Re: [dsg] Breathing & Path of Discrimination/ Summary Note sarahprocter... Hi Tep (& James) --- Tep Sastri wrote: > > Hi, all interested DSG members - > > The Introduction post lists 10 (I - X) knowledge groups like the "eight > kinds of knowledge of obstacles" and the "seventy-two kinds of > knowledge through insight", for example. The book provides the Pali > of some terms in the INDEX, from which I have extracted to present > below. Forgive me for not having the appropriate Pali fonts. > > knowledge = naana; obstacle = paripantha; imperfection = > uppakkilesa; cleansing = vodaana; mindfulness = sati. > concentration = samaadhi; insight = vipassanaa; dispassion = > nibbidaa; conformity = anuloma; tranquillizing = patipassadhi. > pleasure = sukha; deliverance = vimutti. The Thai version says that the > Pali for aids is uppakara. .... S: All these notes you gave (and those snipped) are very helpful. Maybe you can just paste them with each extract if applicable so we don't need to hunt around each time:-). I was looking for 'Grounds' as in 16 grounds...do you have any idea? Is it vatthu - bases or sth? (can't see it in the English text). Btw, James, really liked the extract from Qus of K.Milinda on panna (wisdom). Very relevant and as usual, Tep, you gave a good summary. James, I think all the bodhpakkhiya dhammas you quoted refer to dhammas or Dhammas -- whether in Suttanta or Abhidhamma. Maybe we use dhammas in a different way and I know you don't wish to discuss these topics with me. I hope one day you'll be able to continue your discussion together:-). Metta, Sarah ====== 45318 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon May 9, 2005 2:59am Subject: Re: [dsg] Concepts vs. Real Objects [was Re:1. characteristic> 2. function> 3. ...] sarahprocter... Hi Tep (& Larry), Butting in....such a good thread. --- Tep Sastri wrote: > How do you see a reality as a reality, not seeing and knowing > concepts? Say, right now in this very moment, a cow is walking along... ... S: And what is seen? Only visible object. Either there is or isn't awareness of the visible object. Then attending to the signs and details (nimitta, anupyanjanna), the idea of a cow walking along and so on..other dhammas, more visible objects, sounds and so on, further concepts... ... > > How are you supposed to see a rupa in the cow? ... S: What's seen is merely visible object. If you touch the cow, merely tactile object such as hardness, heat and so on. it's seen as it's always been seen, no differently. Usually there's no awareness though and we really think we see a cow! .... >If you sense a > sanna of a past cow arising that moment, is that realizing the > sanna "the correct way" according to Abhidhamma? ... S: Sounds like thinking. ... >Or, would you > contemplate the 4 mahabhuta-dhatu making up the cow as being > impermanent and anatta ? ... S: More thinking - rightly or wrongly depending.... Metta, Sarah p.s Htoo and Tep, Gacchanto etc, Satipatthana tiika: "Going. The term is applicable both to the awareness of the fact of moving on and to the knowledge of the (true) characteristic qualities of moving on. The terms sitting, standing and lying down , too, are applicable in the general sense of awareness and in the particular sense of *knowledge of the (true) characteristic qualities. Here (in this discourse) the particular and not the general sense of awareness is to be taken." ... S: characteristics (lakkhana) of namas and rupas to be known, not awareness of ideas about walking and so on. ========= 45319 From: "htootintnaing" Date: Mon May 9, 2005 4:11am Subject: [dsg] Re:1. characteristic> 2. function> 3. manifestation> 4.proximate cause htootintnaing --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Larry" wrote: Hi Htoo, I don't understand your argument. If something is real it must be capable of being an object of consciousness. If "with" is real then consciousness must potentially have two objects. If the 4 _together_ are real then some consciousness must be able to perceive them together. Larry -------------------------------------------------- ---------------------- Dear Larry and any members who are interested, You made the discussion more difficult. OK. Now when you read this message of my reply just take 'the following example' for current discussion. 'Now I see computer screen'.' Example is 'cakkhuvinnana citta'. Leave all other cittas. That citta just know 'light' and nothing more than that. So its object is 'light'. When that citta arises, there are 2 rupas. One is 'light' which is serving as 'visual object' or rupa-arammana. Another rupa is cakkhu-pasada rupa. Cakkhuvinnana citta does not know cakkhu-pasada rupa but it knows 'rupa- arammana', here 'light'. There arise contact. That contact or phassa is co-incidence and cakkhuvinna citta does not see 'that contact' or 'that phassa'. But cakkhuvinnana sees 'rupa-arammana' only. I do not know why you made this complicated. With Metta, Htoo Naing 45320 From: "htootintnaing" Date: Mon May 9, 2005 4:32am Subject: Re: [dsg]Abhidhamma./ Ruupas and Objects of Meditation htootintnaing --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Tep Sastri" wrote: Hi Htoo, Hasituppada, Larry, Howar, KenH, KenO ..etc. - Hasituppada: >All forms, feelings like, softness, hardness pain, hot and cold, wind on your body, a sound, a smell, a taste, a thought that arises in the mind are all rupas which could be an object of meditation. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Dear Tep and Hasituppada, This is 2nd time that I heard 'thoughts are ruupa' said by Hasituppada. I think this stems from language matter. I think, Hasituppada has been thinking that 'anything that can be known by mind are ruupa'. Isn't that true, Hasituppada? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Tep wrote: Htoo responded, " Ruupa never know themselves, their surroundings, naama and anything at all". ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: This is quite clear. 1. Ruupa do not know ruupa. 2. Ruupa do not know their surroundings, livings or non-livings. 3. Ruupa do not know naama dhamma. 4. Ruupa do not know anything at all Because ruupa do not have the faculties to know. The faculty to know is not characteristic of ruupa. It is characterstic of citta. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Tep: Htoo's answer above cannot scratch the spot where it is itching! Hasituppada and Tep want to know why it is wrong to say that all rupas (those given above) may be used as an object of meditation? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: Sorry, I have snipped away some parts. Regarding object of meditation, this will depend on what type of meditation it is. If satipatthaana, or vipassanaa then all the object have to be naama or ruupa. This is right. Because naama do not last long. Ruupa do not last long. They both pass away. This is a character of both naama and ruupa. Without this character, no one will develop higher wisdom for release or liberation. Pannatti is not ruupa. So pannatti is not the object of satipatthaana or vipassana meditation. Object-wise pannatti can serve as the object of meditation but not vipassana. When vipassana has to be involved, pannatti is no more the object and naama or ruupa become the object of meditation. Even in mahaasatipatthaana sutta there are many pannatti but essence is to direct at naama or ruupa. This can be seen in the sutta (DN 22) if each and every Pali word in that sutta is thoroughly understood. Otherwise there will be endless argumentations. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Tep: I believe that, by "meditation", Hasituppada means samatha-vipassana bhavana. Htoo in the message # 44977 stated firmly that there were 7 types of "first-hand object", namely : 1. sight, 2. sound, 3. smell, 4. taste, 5. hardness, 6. temperature, and 7. pressure. Other rupas outside this group are non-first-hand objects, and they are pannatti. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: Correction here. 7 ruupas are always first hand object. But what I said above 'they are pannatti' is secondment of those 1st hand object. To completely apperceive as 'computer', which is right now in front of so called 'me' , there have to be many many many cittas. As computer is the final one, it is never 1st hand object. :-)) I do not know who is itchy. ;-) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Tep: If I am not mistaken, we (Hasituppada and Tep) have been told that any pannatti objects (concepts) cannot be the object of Satipatthana. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: No. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Tep: Of course, we have been told that any meditation not using an ultimate reality as an object of Satipatthana is worthless. Is my understanding above right or wrong? Anyone who cares to answer, please do. Respectfully, Tep ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: I always care. Worthless here needs to be stick to development of vipassana naana. Pannatti is not for vipassana naana. With Metta, Htoo Naing 45321 From: upasaka@... Date: Mon May 9, 2005 0:44am Subject: Re: [dsg] Concepts vs. Real Objects [was Re:1. characteristic> 2. function> 3... upasaka_howard Hi, Larry - In a message dated 5/9/05 12:03:47 AM Eastern Daylight Time, LBIDD@... writes: Howard: "I experience one thing, then another, then another - and I *concoct* motion." Hi Howard, I very much agree we experience one thing at a time, but this goes in a very plodding, jerky pace. Motion is smooth and uninterrupted within the crude fits and starts of attention. It is very hard to believe you experience motion in frames, but even if you do I would be inclined to attribute that to a peculiar visual skill in being able to spot details in the movement of an object. I think this says more about the versatility of consciousness than the nature of motion. It is actually stopping motion rather than concocting it. Larry ===================== Well, I make no presumptions about the nature (or even the existence) of an external world, but speak only experientially. Now, a very gradually changing stream of experiences with each "frame" gaplessly following the preceding will not seem chopped up except to a meditatively extremely well trained mind. Our ordinary minds construct (I believe) experiential continuity from actual experiential contiguity. If I'm not mistaken, modern experimental psychology, for whatever this is worth, confirms this. 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) 45322 From: upasaka@... Date: Mon May 9, 2005 1:02am Subject: Re: [dsg] Musings12 - More on Prescribing and Strategi es upasaka_howard Hi, Sarah - In a message dated 5/9/05 3:09:57 AM Eastern Daylight Time, sarahprocterabbott@... writes: Hi Howard, --- upasaka@... wrote: <....> >S: We discussed how when there isn’t any development of satipatthana now, > we > keep thinking about what actions to take, how to cope or what to do in > various situations. However, the thinking is always about the future or > past. At the same time, the development of understanding is being > postponed by thinking and yet more thinking at these times. > -------------------------------- > Howard: > I don't get what you are pointing out here. > -------------------------------- S: I was trying to say that whilst we keep thinking about what we should do, how we should behave (or should have behaved) and when we should develop bhavana (meditation), we are lost in stories about future or past concepts rather than actually being aware of what is real right now. ------------------------------- Howard: I get your point, Sarah. But sometimes thinking and planning is necessary. We are not at the stage of wisdom being so well developed that we can afford to skip plodding thinking and planning activities. ------------------------------- Really, I’d like to quote back some of your own excellent comments (to Tep): You wrote: “My understanding is that when the mind is engaged in thinking, which is something that goes on “allâ€? the time(!), it does so largely in terms of conventional ideas.........but those “thingsâ€? are not actually occurring things at all any more than a unicorn is, but are merely mentally projected, mentally superimposed.......etcâ€? And then “So, for example, there are hardness sensations, odors, and sights etc that are not, themselves, thought process-produced but which serve as the basis for our perceiving of a “gingko treeâ€?......â€? In just the same way, the thoughts about how to behave or what actions to take in future (or those taken in the pas)t are ‘not actually occurring things at all’. There can be awareness now of the ‘hardness sensations, odors, and sights’ or the thinking if they appear, one at a time, but not of the various concepts. When satipatthana begins to develop, there is less inclination to think about future and past bhavana. I hope this makes sense. -------------------------------- Howard: It does, but so does the point about the need for us to stop, think, consider, and plan. At our stage, not doing so frequently leaves us vulnerable to our own defilements. -------------------------------- ..... >S: A friend also raised other examples of suttas which seem to be > suggesting > strategies to follow at times of strong akusala (unwholesome states), <...> > Howard: > What is your point here, Sarah? > ----------------------------------- S: (btw, I included your name because I remembered you had discussed this sutta before). I think my point follows below: <...> >S: Indeed the Buddha is always stressing panna whilst describing and giving > examples such as these. However,the panna knows that in fact, ‘we’ > do > whatever conditions dictate. Whatever happens, whatever action is taken, > is completely conditioned. So panna has to understand whatever the > dhamma > (reality) is at any given time so that insight can develop. This is > ‘bhaavanaa mayaa pa~n~naa’ – the real development of satipatthana. .... S: We all have our own ways of behaving or tendencies/strategies for coping. These are conditioned in complex ways, but the purpose is to understand, to develop detachment, towards dhammas arising and appearing now. Whilst we continue to believe that ‘we’ can make them be a certain way or that intentions can somehow be controlled, satipatthana won’t be developing. Let me stress that this doesn’t mean that certain ways of behaviour aren’t good and others not good. On the contrary, good is seen as good and bad is seen as bad, more and more precisely, I believe. .... > Howard: > The Buddha repeatedly gave instructions for practice, and he urged > their > carrying out. Thius is so eminently clear that it boggles my mind how > some > folks strain to see the matter otherwise. > ---------------------------------- S: Yes, he gave instructions. He left the Dhamma and his instruction was to take refuge in it, to develop satipatthana by following the eightfold Path. However, it is right understanding and the other path factors which do the developing when there has been sufficient wise reflection about present namas and rupas to be known. .... > S: Panna has to develop with detachment, not with an idea of self that is > following strategies or trying hard to be aware and control actions. It > has to also develop with patience to know what isn’t known, not with > attachment to having awareness arise often. > --------------------------------- > Howard: > All development has to start from where we are, and not from where > we > hope to be. One who is without idea of self has already made > considerable > progress. ... S: One who is without any idea of self is a sotapanna already. To reach this stage, the understanding has to develop step by step. ... >The process doesn't begin at that stage, for that stage has to > first be > attained. We start, in fact, in the midst of ignorance, and we must > engage in the > practice taught by the Buddha to get oneself off ground zero. ... S: I agree about the midst of ignorance (or the mist of ignorance for that matter). Again, it is the development of awareness which begins by being aware of dhammas so that panna can know there’s no self to get ‘off ground zero’ at all. .... >S: The most important thing is that it should be the right > path at this moment. > -------------------------------------- > Howard: > To be the *right* path, it must be *some* path. With no path, one > just > does what feels good and remains enmeshed in craving and ignorance > forever. > -------------------------------------- S: Even no path is better than wrong path:-). Even whilst ‘enmeshed in craving and ignorance’ like for much of the day, awareness can and does begin to develop. If we hadn’t heard about these qualities or heard that they are dhammas, not self, it would be impossible for awareness to develop. But, we’ve heard a lot about them, we’ve heard a lot about seeing consciousness and visible object and other sense objects, so that awareness can slowly perform its function. It can be aware of seeing now if conditions allow, but it can never make seeing arise or more awareness for that matter. As soon as there is any craving or wish to have more or quicker awareness, or attempts to make it arise, there’s likely to silabbataparamasa again, I think. Howard, I know you will again disagree with many of these comments and I respect that you just point out differences as you see them. I don’t mind at all and am just glad to see you contributing to these threads again. As I said, I particularly liked your comments on concepts and realities. I look forward to more. 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) 45323 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Mon May 9, 2005 5:32am Subject: Walking Meditation [Re: Gacchanto vaa gacchaamii'ti pajaanaati.] buddhistmedi... Dear Htoo, Howard, Hasituppada, KenH, Sukiner, Nina and others - I'd like to tell you a story that may explain why walking meditation can be both samatha (tranquillity) and vipassana(insight), based on my own experience. The best time for my meditation is early in the morning. Before starting the walking I stand very still for a few minutes, gathering all attention and mindfulness to the front and letting go of all thoughts, then I start the walking meditation along a path back and forth. Sometimes, I can walk with mindfulness and clear comprehension, with the mind staying within the body, then there is no wandering thought about the past or the future; there is no concern about time or about anything -- the whole attention and awareness is completely within the body. I am fully aware that now I am walking forward, now I stop and turn around, now I am standing, and now I am walking back. The beginning and the ending of the walking and the standing are known with full awareness. When I am fully aware of each movement of the body (walking, stopping, standing, turning back) and when I know its begining and its ending, that is knowing ruupa. Then there are gladness and calm (these are nama) arising, and I am fully aware of them when they arise and when they persist. That is knowing nama. Because the mind is concentrated and calm now; that is samatha. Sometimes, there is a clear knowing that this is an aggregate of ruupa and that knowing is supported by clear comprehension and mindfulness, There is also a knowing that the ruupa and nama are separate -- the nama knows, the ruupa is known, and they are not the same; that is vipassana. Question: What do you think of the above experience of mine, and have you got similar one to share with us? Thanks. Respectfully yours, Tep ======== --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Tep Sastri" wrote: > > Dear Htoo, Ken H, Sukinder, Nina + all interested DSG members - > > Thank you for bouncing back again and again to explain, simplify > further, to provide more necessary details, and to even go back to the > very beginning, despite being rejected now and then. Htoo, you've > more patience that Tep does. I will take you as another good example > to follow. > > Your exaplanation on walking meditation, using DN 22 (or MN 10) as > support, is now complete. I have its summary below: > > Hatoo: > > >Pa-janati = to know well; I interpreted this as 'to know detail'. > >Bhikkhu who has been well trained by The Buddha knows when > > he goes as he goes. ...Even when he knows that he goes, > >his knowing is not free of self-identity. [Htoo then described > > walking meditation, during which the yogi has clear comprehension > > of the detailed leg movements and the accompaniying > >arising/passing away sensations] ...he knows all the detail > > as 'they are ruupa' and > > they each disappear at each stages and he sees them (ruupa) > > as impermanence. His knowing on these ruupa also vanishes > > and he also sees them (naama) as impermanence. > > That is indeed my practice too. > > Respectfully with warm regards, > > > Tep > > ===== > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "htootintnaing" > wrote: > > Dear Dhamma Friends, > > > > Jananti and pajanati are different word. The Buddha said in > > mahasatipatthana as 'gacchanto vaa gacchaamii'ti pajanati'. > > > > Jananti and pajanati are explained below. > > > > Jananti means 'know' and pa+janati means 'know in details' or 'know > > well'. > > > > > > >(snipped) > > > But well instructed bhikkhu knows that > > > > 'my heel starts to be lighter' 'my heel more lighter' 'my heel > > rises' 'my heel clears the ground' 'my knee bends' 'my thigh swings > > forward' 'my thigh becomes heavy' 'my leg mecomes more > heavier' 'my > > heel drops' 'my heel touches the ground' 'my heel rests on the > > ground' 'my body rests on my heel' 'I stand on my heel' 'my another > > heel become lighter' '..and the cycle continues. > > > > He the bhikkhu does not need to cite or say these. But he knows all > > the detail as 'they are ruupa' and they each disappear at each > stages > > and he sees them (ruupa) as impermanence. His knowing on these > ruupa > > also vanishes and he also sees them (naama) as impermanence. > > With Metta, > > (snipped) > > > > Htoo Naing 45324 From: "Lisa" Date: Mon May 9, 2005 5:32am Subject: Re: Breathing. - Sukinder's Pudding - Hasituppada foamflowers Dear KenH, I found it curious that self keeps coming up over and over again and it is the two I found it curious that self keeps coming up over and over again and it is the two extremes, self and no-self. I was taught anatta means not self. An article from Access To Insight, No-self or Not-self? by Thanissaro Bhikkhu http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/thanissaro/notself2.html He seems it up very nicely here at the end of this very short article: In this sense, the anatta teaching is not a doctrine of no-self, but a not-self strategy for shedding suffering by letting go of its cause, leading to the highest, undying happiness. At that point, questions of self, no-self, and not-self fall aside. Once there's the experience of such total freedom, where would there be any concern about what's experiencing it, or whether or not it's a self? ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > [kenh] It is a pity that we disagree, but at least we know where we > disagree. I say there is nothing more to the Dhamma than knowing the > present reality: you say there *is* something more. The present Moment or Absolute is beyond concepts and I find the word moment limiting, it actually means a unit of time. But I do understand what you mean, Moment with a large 'M' >[kenh] I think this is also where 99% of modern-day Buddhists > disagree with the ancient Theravadin texts. I am grateful that > you, and others like you, have joined DSG to discuss our dinosaur > version of the Dhamma. [lisah]That is a fallacy, where is the data you qoute from? Generalizations are dangerous in my limited opinioon. > > >[kenh]Agreed. We non-arahants have impure minds. Even in rare moments of > kusala kamma there are latent tendencies for akusala, and so the > wheel of suffering is kept turning. [lisah] you make it seem impossible to walk away from the cycle of suffering, it is possible to achieve the end of suffering in this very life time. I know this from experience although I am a common every day person my suffering is not so heavy and it is much easier to move. Your message seems very disheartening. I used to suffer from panic attacks, anxiety, and night terrors. Now I move through the day with much more ease and no more night terrors, panic attacks or generalized anxiety. All done without taking a pill, I just sat and watched everything come and go with a focused mind and didn't react. Oh and I faced my fears in meditation and in daily life, which has become my meditation too. >[kenh] However, this is nothing to get upset about because there is >only > the present moment. Outside of the present five khandhas, there is > nothing than can have any effect on us. And there is no "us" - > anywhere - for it to have any effect on. [lisah] no-self that is saying there is no being there at all is an extreme view and I can't find the quote right now but it is even said in the Pali Canon, it's just the other side of saying there is a self. > > Sorry to be picky, but only arahants have neutral kamma, and so I > doubt we can have neutral habits. > > > That sounds like an onerous duty. It reminds me of Shakespeare's > Hamlet: "Oh cursed spite, That ever I was born to set it right." > > Fear not, H, there are only dhammas here. They are fleeting, > conditioned, impersonal phenomena, and not worth obsessing over. > > > I don't want to convert you: I just want you to know that there is > another side to the story. When you are writing, there is no writer > and there is no writing: there are only dhammas. Some dhammas > perform the function of thinking, and they create the illusion > of "writer" and "writing." > > > Here, the ultimate story is slightly different. To paraphrase the > Abhidhamma; 'Mere seeing exists but no seer is found.' Seeing is > eye-consciousness, which is a paramattha dhamma. While you have been > reading this message, countless eye-consciousnesses have arisen, > performed their functions, and fallen away. > > [lisah]one time the Buddha was asked point-blank if there is a self, he refused to answer, on the grounds that either a Yes or a No to the question would lead to extreme forms of wrong view that block the path to awakening. A Yes or a qualified No would lead to attachment: you'd keep clinging to a sense of self however you defined it. An unqualified No would lead to bewilderment and alienation, for you'd feel that your innermost sense of intrinsic worth had been denied. [lisah]In meditation 'I have not found a 'self' and 'I have not found no-self.' Both are conceptual constructs and therefore empty of what is in and of itself. "Who am I?" the Buddha included it in a list of dead-end questions that lead to "a thicket of views, a wilderness of views, a contortion, a writhing, a fetter of views. Bound by a fetter of views, [you] don't gain freedom from birth, aging, and death, from sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress, or despair." In other words, any attempt to answer either of these questions is unskillful karma, blocking the path to true freedom. [lisah]The point of Gotama's teacings is to unbind us from wrong views, that is anything that is pannatti? The Abhidhamma distinguishes two kinds of pannatti. One is called nama-pannatti. It refers to names, words, signs, or symbols through which things, real or unreal, are designated: "It is the mere mode of recognizing (sannakaramatta) by way of this or that word whose significance is determined by worldly convention". It is created by worldly consent (loka-sanketa-nimmita) and established by worldly usage (lokavoharena siddha). The other, called attha-pannatti, refers to ideas, notions or concepts corresponding to the names, words, signs, or symbols. interpretative function of the mind (kappana) and is based on the various forms or appearances presented by the real elements (dhammas) when they are in particular situations or positions (avattha-visesa). Both nama-pannatti and attha-pannatti thus have a psychological origin and as such both are devoid of objective reality. Nama-pannatti is often defined as that which makes known (pannapanato pannatti) and attha-pannatti as that which is made known (pannapiyata pannatti). The former is an instance of agency-definition (kattu-sadhana) and the latter of object-definition (kammasadhana). What both attempt to show is that nama-pannatti which makes attha-pannatti known, and attha-pannatti which is made known by nama-pannatti, are mutually inter-dependent and therefore logically inseparable. [lisah] this is a thicket of views, don't stay long or you may get lost! With Metta, Lisa 45325 From: "htootintnaing" Date: Mon May 9, 2005 7:22am Subject: Walking Meditation [Re: Gacchanto vaa gacchaamii'ti pajaanaati.] htootintnaing --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Tep Sastri" wrote: Dear Htoo, Howard, Hasituppada, KenH, Sukiner, Nina and others - I'd like to tell you a story that may explain why walking meditation can be both samatha (tranquillity) and vipassana(insight), based on my own experience. Sometimes, there is a clear knowing that this is an aggregate of ruupa and that knowing is supported by clear comprehension and mindfulness, There is also a knowing that the ruupa and nama are separate -- the nama knows, the ruupa is known, and they are not the same; that is vipassana. Question: What do you think of the above experience of mine, and have you got similar one to share with us? Thanks. Respectfully yours, Tep ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Dear Tep and all, As I am on the same activities I do know what you are describing. What is important is that there is no discontinuity in naana or wisdom. If you really reached higher stages, you will have been printed with a seal called sotapatti magga or above. Otherwise there always is discontinuity. There is no particular time that naama and ruupa are clearly distinguished. So it starts with the first consciousness till the last consciousness in a day just before slipping into deep sleep. DSG will say that 'understanding' is important and will deny special activities. With Metta, Htoo Naing 45326 From: "htootintnaing" Date: Mon May 9, 2005 7:47am Subject: Re: [dsg]Abhidhamma./ Ruupas and Objects of Meditation htootintnaing --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "kenhowardau" wrote: > Hi Tep, No, I don't think you have been told that. Wise consideration of anything (concept or reality) is kusala and is therefore accompanied by mental calm. I believe the Buddha recommended four specific objects of samatha meditation - the Buddha, metta, death and foulness. But then again, I haven't been told about them the necessary 100 times, yet. :-) Ken H -------------------------------------------------- ---------------------- Dear Ken H, Tep, Hasituppada and all, I think DSG is a site for Dhamma studying. So it is named as dhamma- study-group. I myself have been taught many times. Hasituppada, I would suggest to read 'rupa' at useful posts under files section. There are 28 paramattha rupas. 16 are subtle rupas and can only appear at manodvara or mind-door through thinking. 5 pasada rupas or 5 sense- sentivities called cakkhu/eye, sota/ear, ghana/nose, jivha/tongue, kaya/body also appear at mind door only. The physical eyes that we have is not cakkha-pasada even those they serve as the ground for cakkhu pasada rupa and so do other 4 pasada rupas. 28 - (16+5) = 7 rupas Only these 7 rupas work as grossly physical and easy to recognise through 5 sense doors. What are these 7 rupas. They are 1. sight (rupa-rupa) 2. sound (sadda-rupa) 3. smell (ghanda-upa) 4. taste (rasa-rupa) 5. photthabba (photthabba-rupa) 5. hardness (pathavi) 6. temperature (tejo) 7. pressure (vayo) Only these 7 rupas work as 1st hand object. All other objects are secondary. We only know them because of The Buddha's teachings. Otherwise we will never know them as they are. With Metta, Htoo Naing 45327 From: "htootintnaing" Date: Mon May 9, 2005 7:57am Subject: Re: eka.m puggala.m piya.m manaapa.m - Tiktak* htootintnaing --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, connie wrote: to all the dear mothers, then, Lisa ! May we all live vyaapaadapadosa.m pahaaya - having abandoned ill will and hatred. Mettaasahagatena - accompanied by amity. Thanks, Htoo. You know, I have trouble understanding everyone - how we all talk together and misunderstanding comes up quicker than it goes away, even when we think we agree. 'Pa.n.natti has no character' - beautiful. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: Dear Connie, yes pannatti does not have any character and so also are right for function, manifestations and causes. So there is no beautiful pannatti. Example; she is beautiful. As there is no 'she', there is no beautiful thing. I am thinking why you wrote this post. As usual your posts are like poematic. But I think I picked up the right piece of message from your poematic thread-ball. With Metta, Htoo Naing But I think the well instructed monk knows there is no my surviving foot > in all this coming and going, just things "come about merely by means of > the diffusion of the air element through the action of consciousness" and > such. > > No summer meditation group. Pali-Girl says I am to give her lessons on > citta meanwhile anyway. Maybe Mary? Uhhh, can I practice clear > comprehension in talking? > > Herein, when there is no occurrence of the derived materiality of the > sound base, there is no talking; when it occurs there is, and the bhikkhu > who lays hold in this way is one who practises clear comprehension in > talking. And teaching the dhamma keeping the sphere of deliverance > uppermost in mind, one who abandons the 32 kinds of low (lit. "animal") > talk and speaks what is based on the ten bases for discourse (see M iii > 113; A iv 352, 357; v 67, 128-30; Ndi 220-1, 472) is one who practises > clear comprehenion in talking.> > > I hardly remember anything I said a few weeks ago at the comparative > religions class. Not sure what the guy meant asking whether a buddhist > could be "normal", but I took it to mean "layman". > > Is spaced out when you realize you've walked home and the car is still > downtown? HAHAHA... when we were leaving, I asked JozaiDog didn't he want > to go and he just looked back at Dinah sitting in the car, shook his head > no at me & kept heading back to the house. He wasn't too crazy about > sticking around her place after the big KAboom and all the other day. > > peace, > connie > > *Significant photo 45328 From: "htootintnaing" Date: Mon May 9, 2005 8:02am Subject: [dsg] Re:1. characteristic> 2. function> 3. manifestation>4.proximate cause htootintnaing --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "mnease" wrote: > Hi Nina and Htoo, > The best source for these, I think, is the Atthasaalinii. I'm working on a > series of 'flash cards' including just these data but must wait till I get a > copy of the Ats. to finish. I'll keep dsg posted for anyone interested in > these. > > mike -------------------------------------------------- ---------------------- Dear Mike, Thanks and i appreciate your effort. When you finish flash cards could you please post it to DSG. With regards, Htoo Naing 45329 From: "htootintnaing" Date: Mon May 9, 2005 8:29am Subject: [dsg] Re:1. characteristic> 2. function> 3. manifestation>4.proximate cause htootintnaing Dear Lisa, You wrote: I want to wade into this too--Hi everyone! Htoo, I'm still working on what ritual means to me...I will post this coming week. Thanks again for wading through my questions and pointing out the strong and weak spots. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: I am just on communication mode. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Lisa: Some of my notes I've been taking on this subject, please be free with your corrections! ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: As I usually said, I will not be correcting but I will be discussing. Thanks for freeing on discussions without limitations. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Lisa: Two levels of reality paramattha and pannatti. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: No. Panatti is not reality. So it does not include in the level as you said. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Lisa: Paramattha, that which is independent of cognition, that which cannot be seen by the eye or be felt but that which can be understood by consciousness like sensation, cool, hard, soft, pushing, tight, stiff, movement, pain, numb and so on (sensations?). ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: Paramattha is the sense that is directly sensed. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Lisa: Pannatti, cannot exist without the cognative functions that which is seen by the eye, felt, tasted, touched and so on.[+ hear, smell :Htoo] (1) nama-pannatti=names+words+signs+symbols=designated things, which can be real or unreal (sannakaramatta)=mode of recognizing, worldly convention. loka-sanketa-nimmita+lokavoharena siddha ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: It is sadda-pannatta rather than nama-pannatta. Example; 'One' which is designated as the first number in a series of 1 to 9 is said with different 'voice' by different languages. But the pannatta is the same. Examples are One, Uno, Ichi, Yee, Eka etc. These are diufferent sadda- pannatta or different sounding-names but all represent only a single thing, which is '1'. So they all are nama-pannatta as you said or sadda-pannatta. But 'One' as a number as understood by all nations is a single pannatta and it is called 'attha-pannatta'. When we check with primary sense organ, there is nothing which is 'One' at all. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Lisa: (2)attha-pannatti=ideas, notions, concepts corresponding to names, words, signs, or symbols, that is the mind which functions as the interpreter (kappana) and appearances or forms which arise from the (dhammas) elements depending on situations or positions (avattha-visesa). Nama Pannatti and attha-pannatti are psychological in their nature reality and are not part of that which does not depend on our existence and the way of performing observations. Pannatti= don't spend to much time with pannatti (personal opinion) just know it for what it is and move on. This understanding helps condition the next movement to the next level paramattha ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: Pannatti is just a vehicle to transport paramattha dhamma. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Lisa: I think there is a danger of getting lost in the details of Pannatti, once understood I should look for what is not conditioned which is pure sensation or feeling? So motion would be the pure sensation of walking, that light and heavy feeling going through the body in an split second as one moves legs up and down, kind of like the feeling when one rides in an elevator except it happens in a nano second (the nama and rupa meet and flash..bling-bling) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: There are 4 rupa dhaatus and 3 of them can directly be sensed by the body. When you walk what you know at your body are these dhaatus but you cannot sense apo or water element directly. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Lisa: A cow the reality of a cow would be the pure sensation of a cow when we look at it or smell it or taste it, touch it and so on (hahaha), ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: Right. You can mock and you can be amused at any stage of your development. But there always are kamma along with each and every action. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Lisa: then the name or symbol we give that sensation and then all the other stuff that follows a name which could be memories, worries, anger, happiness, indifference and so on. With Metta, Lisa ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: There are different series of procession-cittas and they run in a matter of split second. With Metta, Htoo Naing 45330 From: "htootintnaing" Date: Mon May 9, 2005 8:33am Subject: [dsg] Re:1. characteristic> 2. function> 3. manifestation>4.proximate cause htootintnaing --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Lisa" wrote: I forgot to add the last part of my little note... > > Pannatti= don't spend to much time Add on to this part.....I therefore understand why I lift my leg and set it down and also understand the cause of this lifting of the leg. and setting it down. I know when I stand and the cause of why I stand, I know why I walk and the cause of why I walk...it is the nama and the rupa coming together--bling-bling ( all the jewerly and flashy, fancy stuff money can buy--bling-bling) and I know why I walk and why I stand, plus I get a kick out of being able to watch sensation without hooking all that other stuff onto it. Walking becomes very light and fun to just watch! Nana go lightly...lol With metta, Lisa ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: Dear Lisa, As I said in the previous post, there always are kamma as soon as actions are taken. The Buddha's Dhamma is not to be mocked. But you have your own right. As that is true, it is also true that kamma have their own right. With Metta, Htoo Naing 45331 From: "htootintnaing" Date: Mon May 9, 2005 8:46am Subject: Dhamma Thread (352) htootintnaing Dear Dhamma Friends, Tare 3 kamma depending on the door where kamma are done. These 3 kamma are 1. kaaya kamma or bodily action 2. vacii kamma or verbal action 3. mano kamma or mental action Among 3 kama-dvara, there are 3 akusala kamma that are frequentlky committed at kaaya dvara or body door. These 3 akusala kaaya kamma are 1. killing 2. stealing 3. wrong-practising of sex Among these 3 akusala kaaya kamma, killing is committed by dosa muula cittas in most occasions. But in some occasions, killing may be committed by lobha muula cittas. Example lobha cittas that arise while killing are cittas in killing while hunting. Examples birds may be very very happy when they kill worms. Because they are having food for their survival and the killing satietiate their wishes to feed their body. Stealing is mostly committed by lobha muula cittas. Because stealing itself is related with greediness. But there are occasions that stealing is committed by dosa muula cittas. Examples are that someone steals so that he may see the distress of the owner. Here the action is stealing. But the intention is different from his wanting on the properties. It is directed to dosa or aversion which wants the enemies to be in despair because of stealing. Again wrongful sex are mostly committed by lobha muula cittas. But in some occasions these akusala kamma are committed by dosa mula cittas or aversive mind. 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. 45332 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Mon May 9, 2005 9:37am Subject: Re: Breathing & Path of Discrimination/ Summary Note buddhatrue Hi Sarah (and Tep), Sarah: James, I think all the bodhpakkhiya dhammas you quoted refer to dhammas or Dhammas -- whether in Suttanta or Abhidhamma. James: The Bodhpakkhiya Dhammas are listed in the Abhidhamma? I wouldn't think so since they deal with conventional items and not *ultimate reality*, but you would be the expert in that regard. If you say they are in the Abhidhamma then I stand corrected. Sarah: Maybe we use dhammas in a different way and I know you don't wish to discuss these topics with me. James: Who is *we* that use dhammas in a different way? What do you mean you know I don't want to discuss dhammas with you? I never said that did I? I stopped one thread with you about wrong views because it was going round and round and getting nowhere, but that doesn't mean I never want to discuss anything with you (now, I did say that about Jon because Jon gives me the creeps somehow and I lose my equanimity with him; but maybe that is just because he and I have had conflicts in a previous lifetime? I don't think he likes me very much either. But he is very nice to everyone else and he knows the dhamma quite well.). Anyway, I wouldn't want to argue endlessly about any subject, but you can tell me about any references you have in regards to dhammas. I like to learn new things about the dhamma. Sarah: I hope one day you'll be able to continue your discussion together:-). James: I wouldn't mind discussing with Tep again; but he seems afraid of me- which I find rather strange because I was agreeing with him for the most part! Anyway, maybe one day we can discuss again. Metta, James 45333 From: "Lisa" Date: Mon May 9, 2005 10:17am Subject: [dsg] Re:1. characteristic> 2. function> 3. manifestation>4.proximate cause foamflowers Define Mock: treat with contempt; "The new constitution mocks all democratic principles" the act of mocking or ridiculing; "they made a mock of him" imitate with mockery and derision; "The children mocked their handicapped classmate" constituting a copy or imitation of something; "boys in mock battle" www.cogsci.princeton.edu/cgi-bin/webwn --------------------------------------------------------------- You cannot see my face, my laughter is in delight of understanding this difficult subject and the words I use are not of your culture (bling-bling). I will try and keep my words limited to Abhidhamma and pali. To taste a cow...I should give you a visual, tongue on the hide of a cow (hahahaha)...you can't read my mind so again I will contain my humor. Plus my nick name has been Nana for a very long time, the name of my business in which I sell my art is "Nana Go Lightly" I had no idea what nana meant in a Buddhist context until just recently. Also my investigation and questioning can be uncomfortable and seem flippant. Sorry if I give the impression that I do not care but I cannot control how you see or react, but I can be more careful how I throw my words around. I know you are not discomforted because I sense your equanimity is strong and that you truly do care about me and everyone else who studies Dhamma. With Metta, Lisa > I forgot to add the last part of my little note... > > > > Pannatti= don't spend to much time > > > > Add on to this part.....I therefore understand why I lift my leg and > set it down and also understand the cause of this lifting of the leg. > and setting it down. I know when I stand and the cause of why I stand, > I know why I walk and the cause of why I walk...it is the nama and the > rupa coming together--bling-bling ( all the jewerly and flashy, fancy > stuff money can buy--bling-bling) and I know why I walk and why I > stand, plus I get a kick out of being able to watch sensation without > hooking all that other stuff onto it. Walking becomes very light and > fun to just watch! Nana go lightly...lol > > With metta, > Lisa > ------------------------------------------------------------------- --- > Htoo: > > Dear Lisa, > > As I said in the previous post, there always are kamma as soon as > actions are taken. The Buddha's Dhamma is not to be mocked. But you > have your own right. As that is true, it is also true that kamma have > their own right. > > With Metta, > > Htoo Naing 45334 From: "Lisa" Date: Mon May 9, 2005 11:05am Subject: Re: [dsg] Ritual, Abhidhamma and Buddhism foamflowers --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > Hi Lisa (Htoo, Connie & camera-shy meditators), > > Delighted to read your various reflections, pali wanderings, colourful >> > While I'm at it – how come all the meditators are so camera- shy....? > Htoo (I know I'll have to wait for your half-promised visit and then, > `click, click':-)), > Tep, Hasituppada, Mateesha, Charles D, Alan L.....I forget who else....Any > are welcome. > > Metta, > > Sarah > ========= Dear Sarah, Yes that is me, caught by surprise last summmer! I love that picture because I usually avoid the camera and I think I found a picture that expresses all that nama and rupa coming together. I would also like to see some more pics of others too. S: If we remember that the only dhammas are cittas, cetasikas and rupas, I think it becomes clearer that wrong practice and rituals (silabbataparamasa) refers to cittas and cetasikas whilst following mental or bodily actions. L: I'm starting to understand this formula and I can follow you on this to a limited point but until I can put it in my own words with ease I know I don't truly understand it on a intellectual level. S: Thanks for the reminders to put the keys in the bowl – I really need a lot of key reminders. However, when we read about the function of sati being not to forget, it's referring to dhammas (realities). Even whilst forgetting the keys, there can be sati which remembers to be aware of seeing, visible object, even forgetfulness at such a time. So it may be frustrating on a conventional level to lose one's keys, but I don't see it as any hindrance to the development of sati. L: The remembering that is Sati is also tied to visual perception? And is it also that, which knows what is sensation or feeling before labels, names, and other fabrications are set into action? I will get into my books tonight and figure this out. I know there is a bunch of information on this site and also in my own reference books, no need to answer back if time is limited Sarah. Sati is not the name of the keys or bowl or the idea or thoughts that this is the way I will not lose my keys if they are in the bowl by the door, that is very empty I have found that kind of mindfulness worth while help get to work on time because I know where my keys are lol. S: So rituals cannot simply be judged by the outer appearance. The same with the keys in the bowl. There isn't any idea that this is the way to have a happy rebirth or develop satipatthana, so it's not silabbataparamasa. L: I will go more into ritual as I explore what it means to me as I walk through this bewildering area of sense data in Buddhism. I must look up the word silabbataparamasa, I know what sila means in addition I must look the word up so I can understand your message more deeply. S: I was going to bring in the stringing of the threads of pearls, but they're not in the bowl either right now – Connie may have seen them;-). L: I will try and be patient...lol looks for Connie. Lunch break is over back to work...I have to go over to Court today and untangle some issues for my Boss. Thank you every so much for you patience and kindness Sarah and also Htoo and Tep. With Metta, Lisa 45335 From: "htootintnaing" Date: Mon May 9, 2005 11:09am Subject: [dsg] Re:1. characteristic> 2. function> 3. manifestation>4.proximate cause htootintnaing Dear Lisa, Thanks for your reply and education on 'mock'. Maybe that words that appear on the net are interpreted in many different ways. I just replied in a way that a test has already been with it. I did that because I want to know more how people use words in different ways. I am still learning. Especially languages. Senses (not abhidhamma senses) are understood differently in different societies. Especially laughter matters are difficult ones. Let me give you an example. Once there was a group of people who speak a specific language. Some of them have learnt another language and they can well understand. One day a man from that another society who speaks different language come to that group of people. They arrange for a talk. There is a man in that group of people. He is much much more proficient than those who leanrt other language. In that ceremony of talk he acts as a translator. The man from other society gives a talk and in that talk there is a piece of luahgter. No one understand 'the laughter' even though some, who learnt the language know what the meanings are. Even the translator does not laugh. But as soon as he has finished his translation all the audience laugh. The speaker asked the translator why people did not laugh earlier. The man said, 'I do not know'. Then 'what did you say finally?' asked the speaker. I just told them you speak 'a laughter'. Actually I just saw your expression in words. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Lisa" wrote: Define Mock: treat with contempt; "The new constitution mocks all democratic principles" the act of mocking or ridiculing; "they made a mock of him" imitate with mockery and derision; "The children mocked their handicapped classmate" constituting a copy or imitation of something; "boys in mock battle" www.cogsci.princeton.edu/cgi-bin/webwn ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Lisa: You cannot see my face, my laughter is in delight of understanding this difficult subject and the words I use are not of your culture (bling-bling). I will try and keep my words limited to Abhidhamma and pali. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: Of course not. It is up to you. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Lisa: To taste a cow...I should give you a visual, tongue on the hide of a cow (hahahaha)...you can't read my mind so again I will contain my humor. Plus my nick name has been Nana for a very long time, the name of my business in which I sell my art is "Nana Go Lightly" I had no idea what nana meant in a Buddhist context until just recently. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: Golightly is a surname or family name or last name. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Lisa: Also my investigation and questioning can be uncomfortable and seem flippant. Sorry if I give the impression that I do not care but I cannot control how you see or react, but I can be more careful how I throw my words around. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: Actually I just saw that laughter-indicating words. I did not read deeply on Go Lightly or anything. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Lisa: I know you are not discomforted because I sense your equanimity is strong and that you truly do care about me and everyone else who studies Dhamma. With Metta, Lisa ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: I am still practising to be equanimous. With Metta, Htoo Naing 45336 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Mon May 9, 2005 3:15pm Subject: Breathing Treatise / Section i buddhistmedi... Hi, all interested members - The translation is terse. Without the Pali inserted behind each important translated word, it would be more difficult to follow the text. Personally, I have found that it is not impossible to understand it when I read slowly, pausing and pondering along the way! [Section i] 2. What are the eight kinds of knowledge of obstacles and eight kinds of knowledge of aids? 3. Zeal(chanda) for sensual-desires(kaama) is an obstacle to concentration, renunciation(nekkhamma) is an aid for concentration. Ill-will is an obstacle to concentration, non-ill-will is an aid for concentration. Stiffness-and-torpor(tina-middha) is an obstacle to concentration, perception of light(aaloka sannaa) is an aid for concentration. Agitation(uddhacca) is an obstacle to concentration, non-distraction (avikkhepa) is an aid for concentration. Uncertainty(vicikicchaa) is an obstacle to concentration, definition-of- ideas(dhammavavatthaana) is an aid for concentration. Ignorance(avijja) is an obstacle to concentration, knowledge is an aid for concentration. Boredom(arati) is an obstacle to concentration, gladness(paamojja) is an aid for concentration. Also all unprofitable ideas(akusala dhamma) are an obstacle to concentration, and all profitable ideas(kusala dhamma) are an aid to concentration. These are the eight kinds of knowledge of obstacles and eight kinds of knowledge of aids. 4. When cognizance(citta) is oriented, well oriented, in these sixteen aspects, it establishes the unities(ekatta) and is purified from hindrances. [Tep's note: purification = visuddhi; purification of cognizance = citta-visuddhi] What are these unities? Renunciation is unity, non-ill-will is unity, perception of light is unity, non- distraction is unity, definition-of-ideas is unity, knowledge is unity, gladness is unity, also all profitable ideas are unity. 5. What are these hindrances? Zeal for sensual-desires is a hindrance, ill-will is a hindrance,stiffness- and-torpor is a hindrance, agitation is a hindrance, uncertainty is a hindrance, ignorance is a hindrance, boredom is a hindrance, also all unprofitable ideas are a hindrance. Hindrances: in what sense hindrance? They are hindrances in the sense of blocking the outlets(niyyaana). What are the outlets? Renunciation is an outlet for noble ones, and noble ones are let out by renunciation: zeal for sensual-desires blocks that outlet, and because one is hindered by zeal for sensual-desires one does not understand the noble ones' outlet consisting in renunciation. Non-ill-will ... ill-will ... Perception-of-light ... stiffness-and-torpor ... Nin-distraction ... agitation ... Definition-of-ideas ... uncertainty ... Knowledge ... ignorance ... Gladness ... boredom ... Also all profitable ideas are an outlet for noble ones, and noble ones are let out by all profitable ideas: all unprofitable ideas block that outlet, and because one is hindered by all unprofitable ideas one does not understandthe noble ones' outlet consisting in all profitable ideas. Tep's Note: This is the end of Section i. I will post Section ii by Friday, 5/13/05. But in case there is an on-going discussion that may take longer than a week, then the next section posting will be delayed. Thank you for your attention. Respectfully yours, Tep ========== 45337 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Mon May 9, 2005 4:06pm Subject: Re: Breathing & Path of Discrimination/ Summary Note buddhistmedi... Hi James (and Sarah) - I just want to jump in (a little stronger than 'butt in', I guess) to chat with James a little bit. James, you're right about the observation that we have several points uniquely in agreement. But I also have a few other points in good agreement with Sarah and dear Nina, for example. A bad consequence of being agreeable with several people is that some pessimists may think of Tep as having no spine. However, when you come to think about it, being flexible, or "diplomatic", is different from being spineless and it also has a few advantages. You make no enemy; you learn a lot more because you listen more and the other side also listens to you more,you may even discover that you were wrong, sometimes, etc., etc. On the other hand, having a "spine" is like having a "self", and having a "self" is unacceptable, according to Sarah. I am not afraid of you, James. I know you don't bite, do you? In my last message I was just kidding a little bit. But I promise you, James, that from now I'll not kid around (like Htoo did, sometimes) anymore. Yes, we'll continue our dialogue soon. Thanks. Respectfully, Tep ===== --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "buddhatrue" wrote: > Hi Sarah (and Tep), > > Sarah: James, I think all the bodhpakkhiya dhammas you quoted refer to > dhammas or Dhammas -- whether in Suttanta or Abhidhamma. > > James: The Bodhpakkhiya Dhammas are listed in the Abhidhamma? I > wouldn't think so since they deal with conventional items and not > *ultimate reality*, but you would be the expert in that regard. If > you say they are in the Abhidhamma then I stand corrected. > > Sarah: Maybe we use dhammas in a different way and I know you don't > wish to discuss these topics with me. > > James: Who is *we* that use dhammas in a different way? What do you > mean you know I don't want to discuss dhammas with you? I never said > that did I? I stopped one thread with you about wrong views because > it was going round and round and getting nowhere, but that doesn't > mean I never want to discuss anything with you (now, I did say that > about Jon because Jon gives me the creeps somehow and I lose my > equanimity with him; but maybe that is just because he and I have had > conflicts in a previous lifetime? I don't think he likes me very much > either. But he is very nice to everyone else and he knows the dhamma > quite well.). Anyway, I wouldn't want to argue endlessly about any > subject, but you can tell me about any references you have in regards > to dhammas. I like to learn new things about the dhamma. > > Sarah: I hope one day you'll be able to continue your discussion > together:-). > > James: I wouldn't mind discussing with Tep again; but he seems afraid > of me- which I find rather strange because I was agreeing with him for > the most part! Anyway, maybe one day we can discuss again. > > Metta, > James 45338 From: "Philip" Date: Mon May 9, 2005 5:07pm Subject: Anatta as strategy? (was Re: Breathing. - Sukinder's Pudding - Hasituppada philofillet Hi Lisa, Charles (*) and all >> Thanissaro Bhikkhu: In this sense, the anatta teaching is not a doctrine of no-self, but a not-self strategy for shedding suffering by letting go of its cause,leading to the highest, undying happiness. At that point, questions ofself, no-self, and not-self fall aside. Once there's the experience ofsuch total freedom, where would there be any concern about what'sexperiencing it, or whether or not it's a self? A strategy? This kind of wording is typical of western Buddhists in my apprarently not-so-humble opininion. (How dare a beginnner question a venerable?) There is an emphasis in the west on strategies and techniques, thus the desire to try out practices described in suttas lickety-split and get results this year, this month - maybe in time for the new fiscal year! (I think this tendency is most pronounced in North America, and I include myself as a Canadian.) "Once there's the experience of such total freedom, where would there be any concern about what's experiencing it, or whether or not it's a self?" I suspect there are many Buddhists in the west who believe they have expereinced such total freedom, and perhaps that they can experience such total freedom just about any ol' time they want through practices described in suttas, which are in fact usually describing the practices of "instructed noble disciples" (ie ariyans - (*) Charles, I will get back to you later on this, but it does seem from what I've been reading that "noble" refers to something more than the conventional meaning.) What good does the venerable do by talking so lightly of experiencing such total freedom? He just plants seeds of false expectations. For worldlings, we need to be humble and patient in our expectations. No talk of strategies for getting beyond the need to reflect on anatta. Of course we need to reflect on anatta, in theory and with ever-so-gradually-deepening understanding. It is through understanding of the realities of each moment that arises, ever so patiently, without clinging to results, that anatta will eventually be revealed. It is not to be treated as a strategy. As for not-self vs. no-self, there's an interesting discussion in one of the recorded talks in which Jon and others say there is a difference between them, and Sarah and others think there isn't.(I find it very groovy to hear a married couple discussing and gently disagreeing about Dhamma topics!) I think there *is* a difference that is worthwhile to reflect on. I think it can be found in the "three grips" (gathas) "not self" is a characteristsic of dhammas and can be found in "this I am" (eso 'ham asmi). So we can say, for example, "seeing is not self" .On the other hand, no self suggests "There is no self" and can be found in the grip of "this is my self" (eso me atta) There is no atta, no soul, like is found in other religions. It is this very deep and multi-facteted teaching of anatta that makes the Buddha's teaching unique, and for Thanissaro Bhikkhu to reduce it to a strategy suggests that even famous venerables can have foggy days. (I must say I didn't read the whole article - that one paragraph was enough!) Metta, Phil 45339 From: "gazita2002" Date: Mon May 9, 2005 5:21pm Subject: Re: Conventional world vs world of ultimate realities-Phil gazita2002 Hello Phil, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Philip" wrote: > Hi Azita > I also liked when you - I think it was you - asked Kh Sujin *why* > annica is dukkha. I had been thinking the same thing, as it happens. > And then Kh Sujin asked "what is the greatest dukkha?" and there was > discussion about that. I am really enjoying listening to the talks. > Azita: ... and the greatest dukkha is annica. When we begin to understand more of how we cling to soooo much and that everything we cling to has gone already - experienced for a short moment and then gone. Seems ludicrous to cling, doesn't it? I understand why Kh.Sujin keeps reminding us that the aim is detachment, all the way, but we shouldn't delude ourselves that this is easy. We can't make ourselves be detached, no more than we can make ourselves be attached to something we don't like. You mentioned patience, Phil. I think it takes so much patience and most of the time we are impatient, wanting results, and that's a hindrance. > As for your voice being "sheepish" that wasn't quite the right > word. I didn't mean it in a negative way. Azita: i didn't take it in a negative way. I was enjoying the banter. so my comments about my shearing family was true and I was having some fun with it:-) On the list, I might look at someone's choice of words, and > judge them, and when listening, judge their voice. Absolutely > meaningless, in ultimate terms, but we spend so much time thinking > about ultimately meaningless things, stories etc. At least I know > I'm doing it. > > There is so much mana, all the time. Mana is a good example of a > word that is better left in Pali (there aren't that many of them, in > my opinion) because it is much wider and deeper in meaning than what > we think of by "conceit" Azita: for me, there are quite a few Pali words that are better left untranslated, citta for example. Any english t'lation just doesn't have the same meaning. > > Thanks, we had a nice time during our little "Golden Week" (as > they call it here in Japan) early summer vacation. > > Metta, > Phil Azita: 'Golden Week' - I was thinking that in Australia we have no nicely named events and then realised that's probably some degree of mana....... Patience, courage and good cheer, Azita. 45340 From: LBIDD@... Date: Mon May 9, 2005 5:29pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Concepts vs. Real Objects [was Re:1. characteristic> 2. function> 3... lbidd2 Hi Howard, There are several abhidhamma arguments that support your position: 1. what moves must be the same thing throughout the movement, which is not the case. 2. movement isn't an object of one consciousness, so it is like shape; in other words it must be a synthesis. 3. there could not be movement in the mind base where the 'appearance' of movement arises. So on and so forth. But I still don't see how the appearance of movement is constructed. In order to make a bunch of still images appear to move, you have to move them. Plus the appearance of movement prevents us from seeing clearly what is moving. Are you saying we always see clearly what is only apparently moving? Larry 45341 From: upasaka@... Date: Mon May 9, 2005 2:20pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Concepts vs. Real Objects [was Re:1. characteristic> 2. function> 3... upasaka_howard Hi, Larry - In a message dated 5/9/05 8:34:19 PM Eastern Daylight Time, LBIDD@... writes: Hi Howard, There are several abhidhamma arguments that support your position: 1. what moves must be the same thing throughout the movement, which is not the case. 2. movement isn't an object of one consciousness, so it is like shape; in other words it must be a synthesis. 3. there could not be movement in the mind base where the 'appearance' of movement arises. So on and so forth. But I still don't see how the appearance of movement is constructed. --------------------------------------------- Howard: Well, Larry, I don't know how it is done either. I don't know whether Abhidhamma gives the details, and I'm sure it isn't given in the suttas. Modern psychology probably has lots to say about this, but I'm ignorant of that. Most importantly, I don't know (yet) by direct seeing what the mechanisms are. I am, however, quite certain, that experience of motion is a mental construct. As to "motion itself," I've never encountered such a thing, because all that I ever encounter is experience. ----------------------------------------- In order to make a bunch of still images appear to move, you have to move them. ---------------------------------------- Howard I don't think so Larry. What is moved in a dream, Larry? There we construct entire worlds, none of which are real, and with nothing actually moving, though the seeming of motion is a regular phenomenon. And what of waking "reality"? As we ordinarily see it, it is a construct! And the ultimate constructor is avijja. ------------------------------------------ Plus the appearance of movement prevents us from seeing clearly what is moving. Are you saying we always see clearly what is only apparently moving? ----------------------------------------- Howard: I'm not really making a positive assertion at all - just the negative one that for the most part things are not at all what they seem to be. To see what they really are, we need to walk the walk, i.e., we need to practice what the Buddha taught us to practice, and then, someday ... . ----------------------------------------- Larry ========================= With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 45342 From: LBIDD@... Date: Mon May 9, 2005 6:27pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re:1. characteristic> 2. function> 3. manifestation> 4.proximate cause lbidd2 Htoo: "I do not know why you made this complicated." Hi Htoo, You get all the crazy questions when Nina is away. Where this line of inquiry led me is to the empty nature of the appearance of relationship. Any kind of appearance of relationship is empty of sabhava (intrinsic nature). Even if what you are considering is paramattha dhammas the appearance of togetherness of two is an illusory appearance. We can say consciousness and object of consciousness are truly together but if they appear to be together that appearance is a synthesis, not really an object of consciousness, and is asabhava. If I drink some tea there is soft, hot, taste, and aroma. We could say that tea is that kalapa but there is no discernible unity there. If there is the sense that these sensations are one, that sense is a fabrication, a formation, illusion. Forgetting about impermanence, if I say Larry is the appearance of Larry, where is the essence of that appearance? If I say Larry is the total of all the changing appearances of Larry throughout time, where is the essence of all those appearances? Appearance is a mental fabrication and all mental fabrications are empty of intrinsic nature (sabhava). Asabhava is a finer distinction than anatta in that paramattha dhammas have intrinsic nature but are not self. "Anatta" is more general, but asabhava might be easier to see. It's all about relationship. Larry 45343 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Mon May 9, 2005 6:48pm Subject: Re: Breathing. - Sukinder's Pudding - Hasituppada kenhowardau Hi Lisa, ------------------- L: > I found it curious that self keeps coming up over and over again and it is the two extremes, self and no-self. I was taught anatta means not self. An article from Access To Insight, No-self or Not-self? ------------------------------------ I am glad you mentioned this. Some time ago, I was very anxious to make known certain facts about Access To Insight and the teachings of Thanissaro Bhikkhu. My anxiety was allayed when I learned that TB was already well recognised amongst Buddhist academics as a source of heterodox views. Anyway, I started a thread on the subject, and was very pleased to see some of it saved in the Useful Posts file (under 'Anatta - ATI'). If you have time, please read 34543 where I raise the issue; 34774, where Andrew T adds some pithy observations; 34782, where I analyse some of TB's writings; and (if still you have the stamina) 37725, where some additional comments are made. -------------------- L: > The present Moment or Absolute is beyond concepts and I find the word moment limiting, it actually means a unit of time. But I do understand what you mean, Moment with a large 'M' --------------------- Yes, it is the Moment in which a single citta arises, performs its functions and falls away. But I don't think too much damage is done by also thinking of it as a [very, very brief] period of time. ----------------------------- KH: > > I think this is also where 99% of modern-day Buddhists > disagree with the ancient Theravadin texts. I am grateful that > you, and others like you, have joined DSG to discuss our dinosaur > version of the Dhamma. > I think this is also where 99% of modern-day Buddhists > disagree with the ancient Theravadin texts. I am grateful that > you, and others like you, have joined DSG to discuss our dinosaur > version of the Dhamma [lisah]That is a fallacy, where is the data you quote from? Generalizations are dangerous in my limited opinion ---------------------- At the time of writing, I tried to avoid the idea of "them and us." But isn't it true that almost every Buddhist you meet is following a teaching other than the one found in the original Theravada texts? Most obviously, there are the Mahayanaists. Then there are people who wish to find their own path - borrowing from any source they find helpful. And then there are people who call themselves Theravadin Buddhists, but who reject parts of the Theravadin texts and who add in teachings that aren't there. What proportion does that leave? I think 1% may have been excessive. But I wasn't meaning to be judgemental: people might be quite right in choosing another version of the teachings. I was just taking a "Let's put our cards on the table" approach. --------------------- KH: > > Agreed. We non-arahants have impure minds. Even in rare moments of > kusala kamma there are latent tendencies for akusala, and so the > wheel of suffering is kept turning. [lisah] you make it seem impossible to walk away from the cycle of suffering, it is possible to achieve the end of suffering in this very life time. --------------------- I simply meant to refer to Dependent Origination, which explains that both akusala AND kusala kamma keep the wheel of samsara turning. It is only at arahantship that there is any 'getting off the cycle.' ------------------------ L: > I know this from experience although I am a common every day person my suffering is not so heavy and it is much easier to move. Your message seems very disheartening. ------------------------ Sorry about that. Like a lot of other shy people, I sometimes adopt the persona of 'grumpy old man.' The downside of that ploy is that some people think I am a grumpy old man. :-) But what is your experience of getting off the cycle? Clearly, we are talking about different things. ------------------------------------------ L: >I used to suffer from panic attacks, anxiety, and night terrors. Now I move through the day with much more ease and no more night terrors, panic attacks or generalized anxiety. All done without taking a pill, I just sat and watched everything come and go with a focused mind and didn't react. Oh and I faced my fears in meditation and in daily life, which has become my meditation too. ------------------------------ I see. So that answers my question. I don't deny the value of therapy, and I have had similar experiences - with and without a pill. It irks me, however, when some therapists talk-up the potency of their therapy by adding the words, "This is what the Buddha taught." ---------------- L: > one time the Buddha was asked point-blank if there is a self, he refused to answer, on the grounds that either a Yes or a No to the question would lead to extreme forms of wrong view that block the path to awakening. A Yes or a qualified No would lead to attachment: you'd keep clinging to a sense of self however you defined it. An unqualified No would lead to bewilderment and alienation, for you'd feel that your innermost sense of intrinsic worth had been denied ---------------- Ven. Thanisarro was remiss in the way he explained that sutta. He omitted to say that Ananda queried the Buddha about his refusal to give a yes or no answer. The Buddha then explained that the original questioner was so blinded by wrong view that he would have taken a 'no' answer to mean something it did not mean. That is, he would have thought that he previously did have a soul and that the Buddha had taken it away from him. I will snip the rest of your comments for now because I don't know to what extent they are influenced by Ven Thanissaro's extreme views. I'd be very glad in the meantime if you would read some of the posts I have mentioned above and give me your thoughts on them. Ken H 45344 From: TGrand458@... Date: Mon May 9, 2005 5:11pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Concepts vs. Real Objects [was Re:1. characteristic> 2. function> 3... TGrand458@... Hi Larry and Howard Everything is moving. Nothing is experienced other than movement. Anything that doesn't move, cannot be experienced. TG 45345 From: "Evan Stamatopoulos" Date: Mon May 9, 2005 9:22pm Subject: RE: [dsg] Concepts vs. Real Objects [was Re:1. characteristic> 2. function> 3... Evan_Stamato... Everything is moving. Nothing is experienced other than movement. Anything that doesn't move, cannot be experienced. TG Nibbana doesn't move. It can be experienced by the wise. ES 45346 From: TGrand458@... Date: Mon May 9, 2005 5:29pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Concepts vs. Real Objects [was Re:1. characteristic> 2. function> 3... TGrand458@... Hi ES If you read the suttas, you will read in many places the Buddha saying that Nibbana is the END of experience. TG In a message dated 5/9/2005 9:23:23 PM Pacific Standard Time, evan.stamatopoulos@... writes: Everything is moving. Nothing is experienced other than movement. Anything that doesn't move, cannot be experienced. TG Nibbana doesn't move. It can be experienced by the wise. ES 45347 From: "Evan Stamatopoulos" Date: Mon May 9, 2005 9:41pm Subject: RE: [dsg] Concepts vs. Real Objects [was Re:1. characteristic> 2. function> 3... Evan_Stamato... Hi TG It has been described as the unconditioned state, the deathless state, the extinguished, the cooled, the unravelling, and others but I don't remember it being described as the END of experience although, if pressed, I probably wouldn't disagree with that description. Could you please quote some references (I have the Wisdom Publications translations of the Digha, Majjhima and Samyutta Nikayas so you can reference from there if you like). With Metta, ES Hi ES If you read the suttas, you will read in many places the Buddha saying that Nibbana is the END of experience. TG 45348 From: LBIDD@... Date: Mon May 9, 2005 9:41pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Concepts vs. Real Objects [was Re:1. characteristic> 2. function> 3... lbidd2 TG: "Everything is moving. Nothing is experienced other than movement. Anything that doesn't move, cannot be experienced." Hi TG, Does consciousness move, feeling, perception, mental formations? Is red a thing that moves? How does movement work? Larry 45349 From: "Evan Stamatopoulos" Date: Mon May 9, 2005 9:55pm Subject: RE: [dsg] Concepts vs. Real Objects [was Re:1. characteristic> 2.function> 3... Evan_Stamato... Larry, Is consciousness conditioned? Is feeling conditioned? Is perception conditioned? Are mental formations conditioned? If the answer to these questions is "yes" (and it is) then it moves. Don't know about red but I would say the same thing if red is indeed a thing. With Metta, Evan Hi TG, Does consciousness move, feeling, perception, mental formations? Is red a thing that moves? How does movement work? Larry 45350 From: TGrand458@... Date: Mon May 9, 2005 7:00pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Concepts vs. Real Objects [was Re:1. characteristic> 2. function> 3... TGrand458@... In a message dated 5/9/2005 9:42:47 PM Pacific Standard Time, LBIDD@... writes: Hi TG, Does consciousness move, feeling, perception, mental formations? Is red a thing that moves? How does movement work? Larry Hi Larry Yes, yes, yes, yes. Yes. The last question I don't understand. Are you asking "What is movement?" TG 45351 From: TGrand458@... Date: Mon May 9, 2005 6:58pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Concepts vs. Real Objects [was Re:1. characteristic> 2. function> 3... TGrand458@... In a message dated 5/9/2005 9:42:33 PM Pacific Standard Time, evan.stamatopoulos@... writes: Hi TG It has been described as the unconditioned state, the deathless state, the extinguished, the cooled, the unravelling, and others but I don't remember it being described as the END of experience although, if pressed, I probably wouldn't disagree with that description. Could you please quote some references (I have the Wisdom Publications translations of the Digha, Majjhima and Samyutta Nikayas so you can reference from there if you like). With Metta, ES Hi ES These are some samples. They may or may not satisfy you in regard to "ending" although I'm unclear how extinguished does not qualify. There are other quotes even more to the point but I don't have them on hand. "...a Bhikkhu who is beyond training understands the six faculties -- the eye faculty, the ear faculty, the nose faculty, the tongue faculty, the body faculty, the mind faculty. He understands: 'These six faculties will cease completely and totally without remainder, and no other six faculties will arise anywhere in anyway.' " (The Buddha . . . Connected Discourses of the Buddha, vol 2, pg. 1697) “By the utter destruction of delight in existence, By the extinction of perception and consciousness, By the cessation and appeasement of feelings, It is thus, friend, that I know for beings – Emancipation, release, seclusion.â€? (The Buddha . . . CDB, vol. 1, pg. 90) “Where consciousness becomes established and comes to growth … I say that is accompanied by sorrow, anguish, and despair.â€? … “Where consciousness does not become established and come to growth…I say that is without sorrow, anguish, and despair.â€? (The Buddha . . . CDB, vol. 1, pg. 600 - 601) “Escape of cognizance as a meaning is to be directly known.â€? (PD, pg. 20, Treatise on Knowledge) The body disintegrated, perception ceased, All feelings became cool, Mental activities were calmed, And consciousness came to an end. (The Buddha . . . The Udana & The Itivuttaka, pg. 116, 8.9) 1) Non-arising is nibbana 2) Non-occurrence is nibbana 3) Non-sign is nibbana 4) Non-accumulation is nibbana 5) Non-rebirth-linking is nibbana 6) Non-destination is nibbana 7) Non-generation is nibbana 8) Non-rearising is nibbana 9) Non-birth is nibbana 10) Non-aging is nibbana 11) Non-sickness is nibbana 12) Non-death is nibbana 13) Non-sorrow is nibbana 14) Non-lamentation is nibbana 15) Non-despair is nibbana (PD, pg. 17, Treatise on Knowledge) “…cognizance enters into cessation which is the Nibbana principle…â€? (PD, pg. 228 - 229, Treatise on Faculties) “…there is an escape from this whole field of perception.â€? (The Buddha . . . MLDB, pg. 120, The Simile of the Cloth, Vatthupama Sutta, #7) TG 45352 From: TGrand458@... Date: Mon May 9, 2005 7:01pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Concepts vs. Real Objects [was Re:1. characteristic> 2.function> 3... TGrand458@... Hi Evan Red moves... at the speed of light. ;-) TG In a message dated 5/9/2005 9:56:03 PM Pacific Standard Time, evan.stamatopoulos@... writes: Larry, Is consciousness conditioned? Is feeling conditioned? Is perception conditioned? Are mental formations conditioned? If the answer to these questions is "yes" (and it is) then it moves. Don't know about red but I would say the same thing if red is indeed a thing. With Metta, Evan 45353 From: "Evan Stamatopoulos" Date: Mon May 9, 2005 11:10pm Subject: RE: [dsg] Concepts vs. Real Objects [was Re:1. characteristic> 2. function> 3... Evan_Stamato... TG, You're right. I'm not going to be pedantic about semantics. Ending, extinguishing, cessation these are all the same. It's just that I hadn't seen it be described as the end of existence. It just seemed to be too close to anihilism. But I get your point now. With Metta, Evan 45354 From: "Sukinder" Date: Tue May 10, 2005 0:27am Subject: Re: Gacchanto vaa gacchaamii'ti pajaanaati. sukinderpal Dear Htoo and all, (Howard*) I'll respond to this first and if I have time, I will then respond to one of the older ones. (I was hoping Robert would continue the topic of anapanasati with you ;-)). -------------------------------------- > Htoo: > But the word used in that Buddha words is 'pajaanaati'. > > Jaananti means 'to know'. > Pajaananti means 'to know in detail'. > > Sukinder: > Again, detail of what? Realities, or unrealities? > ---------------------- > Htoo: > > Details of everything related to things that are in question. Date: Tue May 10, 2005 0:41am Subject: ‘Cetasikas' study corner 189 - Enthusiasm/piiti (g) sarahprocter... 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.11 Enthusiasm (piiti) contd] Sometimes we are full of joy and enthusiasm while we help others, while we give something away or while we are performing other ways of kusala, but it is not always possible to have joy and enthusiasm at such moments. There are also moments of kusala citta accompanied by indifferent feeling, upekkhå, and then there is no píti. It depends on conditions whether píti arises or not. When one has great confidence in kusala and sees the benefit of it there are conditions for the arising of joy and enthusiasm while applying oneself to it. When kusala citta with pleasant feeling arises the accompanying píti invigorates the citta and the other cetasikas. Viriya, for example, is intensified by píti. We may be able to notice that, when there is joy and enthusiasm for kusala, we also have more energy to perform it. ***** [Ch.11 Enthusiasm (piiti) to be contd] Metta, Sarah ====== 45356 From: "htootintnaing" Date: Tue May 10, 2005 3:39am Subject: Metta and the world htootintnaing Dear Dhamma Friends, There are many different ways of cultivating metta or loving- kindness. Metta sutta says all the details of effects of metta, how to develop metta, how to stay with metta and how to cover the whole world with metta. Metta brahmavihara or 'loving-kindness pure-living' is a kind of mental exertion. It is a mental work. It takes the object beings. As beings are all panatti the object of metta brahmavihara is also pannatti. The typical cittas of 1st jhana derived from metta brahmavihara are just cittas. They all have to ground on hadaya vatthu or heart-base material. They all take the object beings as their object and it is pannatti. As metta is pure thing there have not be any impure things like lobha or attachment, dosa or aversion, moha or ignorance, ditthi or wrong- view, maana or conceit, issaa or jealousy, macchariya or stinginess, kukkucca or worry, ahirika or shamelessness, anottappa or fearlessness and uddhacca or upset. As metta is pure and it is a good mental exertion, it has not to be with sloth and torpor. And metta has to be free from any form of suspicion or doubt. Metta is so pure that as soon as impurity comes metta instantaneously disappears. May you all be free from suffering. With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing 45357 From: "htootintnaing" Date: Tue May 10, 2005 3:41am Subject: Metta and the world 2. htootintnaing Dear Dhamma Friends, 'Metta brahmavihaara' or 'loving-kindness pure-living' is a method of meditation and it can give rise to 1st rupa jhana or 1st material absorption. The typical 1st jhana cittas derived from metta brahmavihara take the object of pannatti. That pannatti is satta-pannatti or idea-of-being. Unlike other meditations that can give rise to 1st jhana, metta brahmavihara and other 2 that is karuna and mudita cannot give rise to patibhaaga nimitta or counter sign as there is no mental image that will change into counter image. But the object of all brahmaviharas is just pannatti like all other meditations that can give rise to 1st jhana. Metta is non-attachment. Metta is loving-kindness. Metta is universal friendliness. Metta is universal and it can act on anyone if there are conditions. Metta should not be equated with 'love'. To avoid this metta is talked as 'loving-kindness'. If metta is equated with 'love', then those who do not have enough understanding on metta may believe that 'love' between husband and wife is metta. This is not fully the case. Hasband and wife may develop metta to each other. But this pure metta may change into another 'love', which is lobha and strong attachment. And lobha or greediness is akusala or unwholesome thing. Metta is compared with 'the love of mother to her child'. This is especially true between newborn baby and its mother. From mother side there is no expectation from her baby when she treats anything to her baby. She will clean her baby's filth and any messy things that arisen from it. Still the mother is willing to do all things related to her baby. The baby may urinate directly to her face. Still the mother will smile and treat her baby as her most precious jewel. The baby kicks on her face. The mother smiles. The baby hit on her face. The mother smile. The mother will be very protective to her baby at all cost. Metta is really cool and it is more than that. May you all be free from suffering. With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing 45358 From: upasaka@... Date: Tue May 10, 2005 0:29am Subject: Re: [dsg] Concepts vs. Real Objects [was Re:1. characteristic> 2. function> 3... upasaka_howard Hi, TG (and Larry) - In a message dated 5/10/05 12:12:53 AM Eastern Daylight Time, TGrand458@... writes: Hi Larry and Howard Everything is moving. Nothing is experienced other than movement. Anything that doesn't move, cannot be experienced. TG ====================== With respect to the realm of "the conditioned" I would sooner say that nothing remains rather than everything moves. (But I think I get your point, that apparently unchanging sensory experience quickly becomes no experience.) 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) 45359 From: "htootintnaing" Date: Tue May 10, 2005 4:33am Subject: Re: Gacchanto vaa gacchaamii'ti pajaanaati. htootintnaing --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Sukinder" wrote: Dear Htoo and all, (Howard*) *So I believe unlike Howard, our `being where we are', is about this moment of having either a right or wrong pariyatti. This is where we start from, and it's not about our being generally full of akusala and having the anusaya of `self view'. Right now, there can be right or wrong pariyatti leading to right or wrong patipatti. This direct relationship between pariyatti and patipatti is without doubt most important. We have to determine if our personal ideas about what needs to be done do indeed constitute right pariyatti. If these ideas are inconsistent with the principle of anatta and conditionality, then we can be sure that it is wrong pariyatti and that this will condition wrong patipatti. I had other things in mind, but now I forgot. :-/ Anyway, I'll look forward to your response and see what comes up. Metta, Sukinder ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: Dear Sukin, Thank you very much for your reply and explanations. I snipped nearly all as I agree with you. I will be looking forward to hearing 'what you forgot' will come up. But I am still thinking that you (Sukin), Sarah, Robert K, and other DSGs hold the candle light lighted and seach for things as they are. What I posted was from 'genuine sutta'. Even these 'words' are attacked. I think this is because of 'already holding light'. What I have been doing is searching for things as they are while the light arises from the searcher own eyes. Would you say 'The Buddha is wrong to preach to his disciples as - gacchanto vaa gacchaamii'ti pajaanaati'? I will be looking forward to hearing from you and others who are interested especially Sarah, Robert K etc. With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing 45360 From: "htootintnaing" Date: Tue May 10, 2005 4:38am Subject: Dhamma Thread (353) htootintnaing Dear Dhamma Friends, Depending on bhumi or realm, where kamma can give rise to their results, kamma are classified into 1. akusala kamma 2. kaama kusala kamma 3. ruupa kusala kamma 4. aruupa kusala kamma There are 3 akusala kamma based on kamma-dvara or where kamma are committed. They are akusala kaaya kamma, akusala vaci kamma, and akusala mano kamma. Akusala kaaya kamma have been discussed in the previous post. There are 4 akusala vaci kamma. They are 1. musaavaada or 'telling lies' 2. pisuna vaacaa or 'telling divisive speech' 3. pharusa vaacaa or 'telling harsh speech' 4. samphappalaapa or 'telling unfruitful speech' Musaavaada akusala kamma is committed by both 'lobha' and 'dosa'. In both cases 'moha' is already included. People tell lies so as to gain something they want through lobha. When this happens, there always is moha. On some occasions, people tell lie so that others meet difficulties or suffering. In this example, the chief dhamma is dosa and dosa commit musaavaada with the intention of destruction of others' properties, reputation, fame etc. In both cases, moha is included. Actually moha is the leader in both cases of musaavaada. But as asaadharana method, moha is not counted here. That is musaavaada is committed by lobha or dosa as main source of dhamma. As moha always includes in any akusala dhamma, it is here not high-lighted. 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. 45361 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Tue May 10, 2005 6:15am Subject: Obsessed Viewpoint on Self buddhistmedi... Hi, all - The omnipresent "self" theme has been repeated in almost every dialogue I have encountered at DSG, for example: Sarah (#44453 ): The `I' thinks it seems right when we set aside particular times or activities, but really we're enslaved to lobha (attachment) which wishes for particular results. ... It is this same attachment to self and results which may lead to `feeling low' or `alone' or discouraged. At such times we don't wish to see the problem as being a `clinging to self' and even less to see the `silabbataparamasa' (adherence to rites and rituals) when there is lobha trying to do something different. T: Because of having obsessed 'self viewpoint', then even the Buddha's Teachings on developing sila & samadhi and eradicating akusala vitakka, are confused because of the fear that the " self demon" may be directing the activities. A danger of this obsession is that it may lead to "a thicket of views, a wilderness of views, a contortion, a writhing, a fetter of views" that block the Path. T: When a self viewpoint becomes an obsession, one is too scared to practice the Dhamma (e.g. according to MN 20), and may take ' no self' as a protection from the fear of self. As example of the ' no self viewpoint 'is given by Kel in message #41384. The idea that "there is no I involve" is not wrong, only the obsession of the idea is. Kel (#41384): We have to be clear that panna is the forerunner. So a right effort can only be right if there is panna as its percusor. Some Brahims at that time already are skilled practioners of sila and samadhi and even more advance than Buddha before he is enlighted. Deliberate actions (see below answer on more on cetana) are actions based on the concept of I, when there is volition based on the concept of I, there is taint of ignorance, it will only lead to rounds of suffering. Remember when this arise, that arise, shows there is no I involve in this process. Since the process is as such, there is no way one can understand the process when one still stick to an I concept. [endquote] T: An obsession with the 'no-self viewpoint' is also seen in KenH's message (#45300) to Hasituppada : KenH: Apart from the dhammas described in the Abhidhamma, there is nothing but illusion. In the ulltimate sense, there are no books, no instructions, no disciples and no journeys. You must realise that. .... Outside of the present five khandhas, there is nothing than can have any effect on us. And there is no "us" - anywhere - for it to have any effect on. T: It is one small thing when anyone talks intellectually about a dhamma principle from a book, about a theory or a concept, just to feel good about it. But it is quite a different thing when that person preaches the Dhamma principles as if she/he already is the master, saying it authoritatively: 'Only this is true; anything otherwise is worthless'. Such a proclamation is a viewpoint (ditthi) , according to AN X.96, Kokanuda Sutta. So it seems to me that having a 'viewpoint' reflects a lack of the samma-ditthi, which is the state of mind that is free from ditthis. One kind of ditthi is the 'viewpoint of no self'. Lisa in her message # 45324 explains why it is wrong to dwell on the viewpoints of self or no self. Those viewpoints can block your path, she says. [lisah]one time the Buddha was asked point-blank if there is a self, he refused to answer, on the grounds that either a Yes or a No to the question would lead to extreme forms of wrong view that block the path to awakening. A Yes or a qualified No would lead to attachment: you'd keep clinging to a sense of self however you defined it. An unqualified No would lead to bewilderment and alienation, for you'd feel that your innermost sense of intrinsic worth had been denied. [lisah]In meditation 'I have not found a 'self' and 'I have not found no-self.' Both are conceptual constructs and therefore empty of what is in and of itself. T: Lisa has said it very well. Take the "breath" as an example -- meditators don't care whether it is or it is not a concept, they leave this "viewpoint" to the Abhidhamma intellectuals. Respectfully, Tep ======== 45362 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Tue May 10, 2005 6:25am Subject: Re: Breathing & Path of Discrimination/ Summary Note buddhatrue --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Tep Sastri" wrote: > > Hi James (and Sarah) - > > I just want to jump in (a little stronger than 'butt in', I guess) to chat with > James a little bit. > > James, you're right about the observation that we have several points > uniquely in agreement. But I also have a few other points in good > agreement with Sarah and dear Nina, for example. A bad > consequence of being agreeable with several people is that some > pessimists may think of Tep as having no spine. However, when you > come to think about it, being flexible, or "diplomatic", is different from > being spineless and it also has a few advantages. Hi Tep, Of course there is nothing wrong with being diplomatic or compromising. You can be whatever type of person you want to be. I don't think of you as spineless or anything like that. However, I think you are going to find that your `compromising efforts' are in vain. The main issue with the K. Sujianians, as we were discussing, is that they don't believe in the practice of meditation. In short, they believe that the people of this era don't have the proper accumulations to practice the jhanas and/or vipassana- and that such practice could only be motivated by a belief in "self" since the proper accumulations are absent. Consequently, they believe that the people of today only have the accumulations to practice satipatthana, as in daily mindfulness. This belief is based on a hodge podge of different sources, but it predominately goes back to the writings of Buddhaghosa. You will find that they will not compromise this belief one iota. You can try to compromise all you want, but they won't budge. I know because I have actively debated them regarding this issue for over a year. Compromise and diplomacy has to be a two-way street or it is pointless. Now, it IS somewhat spineless to compromise with someone or groups who won't also allow concessions- don't you think? Then it is all one-sided. Personally, I won't compromise on this issue. I believe that the people of this era have the proper accumulations to practice meditation and that the Buddha didn't teach otherwise. Proper meditation needs the proper instruction from a qualified teacher, but it isn't impossible for the people of today. Really, I don't see this as an issue where there can be compromise. If you can think of some possible compromise about this issue then please share it with the group- you could save a lot of useless wrangling over this issue. Metta, James 45363 From: "hasituppada" Date: Tue May 10, 2005 6:43am Subject: Re: Abhidhamma/Anatta hasituppada Dear Christine, You say: It is my understanding that Anatta is what the Abhidhamma is about. My Reply to Christine: Abhidhamma is the higher dhamma, above the convensional teachings found in the Sutta. The Buddha's teaching is simple. He made it easily accessible to ordinary people. He even used the maghadi (Pali) the common language of the people to make his vohara desana- the conventional discourses. He of course made no distinction between the Kings and citizens, Queens and courtesans, Masters and slaves, educated and uneducated, Brahmana and the untouchable. The suttas he made were for every one. Abhidhamma on the other hand was not meant for the ordinary people. That was because it confuses understanding, because we the ordinary people (prutajjhans) have our minds clouded with ignorance. Until ignorance is eliminated through gradual development through Sila Samadhi Panna, we will not be able to grasp the real meaning of paramatta sacca- the reality beyond conventional terms. "Real meaning" is the meaning gleaned through "experience"-meditative experience. Lord Buddha explained Anatta very cleary in his Suttas. The very relevant ones are the Anatta Lakkhana Sutta, Alagadduppama Sutta, his discourse to Vaccagotta etc. Anatma is a very difficult subject to understand, specially to the Westerners coming from a Christian Culture. It is not necessary to go to Abhidhamma to understand Anatta. The Buddha's teaching of conditionality- paticcasamuppada, clears all doubt about the existence of a self. And again the sutta explanation of the panchaskhandha-the five aggregates, and the Panch Upadanaskhandha- the five aggregates of clinging, explains where the nucleus of the idea of a self begins. And then you quote Venerable Nyanaponika Thera. He and his teacher the Venerable Nanatiloka were the Western monks that made Abhidhamma a work of research for intellectually bent persons. Abhidhamma was not taught or no dicourses based on the Abhidahmma were made to the Buddhist lay followers in the Buddhist Country I come from. Burma was in a way a more advanced country in Theravada. There the lay people had to go through a period of training as a Bikkhu. The layfollowers studied Abhidhamma, and there great confidence in Buddha Dhamma and Sangha made them understand the value of both Abhidhamma and Sutta without mixing up priorities. They therefore understood the importance of the Suttas for a real follower of Buddha. Venerable Nyanaponika, however stressed that you should follow a middle path between Abhidhamma and Suttas. Venerable Nyanaponika who I had the good fortune to meet was a Meditating monk. He had set hours for meditation and who ever were present when the time came he retreated to his place of meditation. In a conversation with a Great Sinhala monk,Venerable Pelane Vajiranana Maha Thero, who understood the enthusiasm of the Western monks for intellectual inspiration drawn from Abhidhamma, had told Venerable Nyanaponika, some thing very significant: "As to the relation of the teachings of the Abhidhamma to those of the Sutta Pitaka, two very apt comparisons given in a conversation by the late Venerable Pelene VajirananaMaha Nayake Thera of Vajirarama, Colombo may be added in conclusion: The Abhidhamma is like a powerful magnifying-glass, but the understanding gained from the Sutta is the eye itself, which performs the act of seeing. Again, the Abhidhamma is like a medicine container with a label giving an exact analysis of the medicine; but the knowledge gained from the Sutta is the medicine itself which alone is able to cure the illness and its symptoms, namely craving rooted in ignorance and the suffering caused by it." ( Abhidhamma Studies( Research in Buddhist Psychology) by Nyanaponika Thera-Buddhist Publication Society Kandy.) With metta, Hasituppada. _________________________________________________________________ "It is on this very doctrine of Non-self (anatta) that all Abhidhamma thought converges and this is where it culminates. The elaborate and thorough treatment of Anatta is also the most important practical contribution of the Abhidhamma to the progress of the Buddha's disciple towards liberation." - quoted from "The Abhidhamma Philosophy - Its Estimation in the Past and its value for the Present" by Nyanaponika Thera (Buddhist Publication Society, Kandy, Sri Lanka). metta and peace, Christine 45364 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Tue May 10, 2005 7:05am Subject: Re: Breathing & Path of Discrimination/ Summary Note buddhistmedi... Hi James and others - Thank you for talking firstly about our attitude on exchanging ideas at DSG when there are opposing beliefs. Let me respond to you point by point. James: >However, I think you are going to find that your `compromising efforts' >are in vain. In short, > they believe that the people of this era don't have the proper > accumulations to practice the jhanas and/or vipassana- and that such > practice could only be motivated by a belief in "self" since the > proper accumulations are absent. T: I agree. No compromise is possible in this case. James: >Consequently, they believe that the people of today only have the >accumulations to practice satipatthana, as in daily mindfulness. I also practice Satipatthana according to MN 10/DN22 but with the perspective of the person standing at the foot of a very tall mountain, finding ways to get to the top. James: > I know because I have actively debated them regarding this >issue for over a year. Compromise and diplomacy has to be >a two-way street or it is pointless. Now, it IS somewhat spineless >to compromise with someone or groups who won't also allow >concessions- don't you think? Then it is all one-sided. T: It is absolutely spineless and despicable to compromise with someone/group that allows no concessions. When I compromise in a business negotiation there must be a give and a take. But when I discuss the Dhamma with someone/group, I don't expect a compromise that leads to a loss of my integrity or denying what I know is right according to the Buddha. James: >If you can think of some possible compromise about this issue then >please share it with the group- you could save a lot of useless >wrangling over this issue. > T: Only when they finally realize that they were not correct, most people (except for the very stubborn ones) will be willing to change a little. So if you are really confident that you have the right answer, then you will go on discussing and exchanging ideas with them. Otherwise, you quit being member of DSG. There are two choices only: stay and do your best, or get the hell out of here. Respectfully, Tep ===== --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "buddhatrue" wrote: > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Tep Sastri" > wrote: > > > > Hi James (and Sarah) - > > > > I just want to jump in (a little stronger than 'butt in', I guess) > to chat with > > James a little bit. > > > > James, you're right about the observation that we have several points > > uniquely in agreement. But I also have a few other points in good > > agreement with Sarah and dear Nina, for example. A bad > > consequence of being agreeable with several people is that some > > pessimists may think of Tep as having no spine. However, when you > > come to think about it, being flexible, or "diplomatic", is > different from > > being spineless and it also has a few advantages. > > Hi Tep, > > Of course there is nothing wrong with being diplomatic or > compromising. You can be whatever type of person you want to be. I > don't think of you as spineless or anything like that. However, I > think you are going to find that your `compromising efforts' are in > vain. The main issue with the K. Sujianians, as we were discussing, > is that they don't believe in the practice of meditation. In short, > they believe that the people of this era don't have the proper > accumulations to practice the jhanas and/or vipassana- and that such > practice could only be motivated by a belief in "self" since the > proper accumulations are absent. Consequently, they believe that the > people of today only have the accumulations to practice satipatthana, > as in daily mindfulness. This belief is based on a hodge podge of > different sources, but it predominately goes back to the writings of > Buddhaghosa. > > You will find that they will not compromise this belief one iota. You > can try to compromise all you want, but they won't budge. I know > because I have actively debated them regarding this issue for over a > year. Compromise and diplomacy has to be a two-way street or it is > pointless. Now, it IS somewhat spineless to compromise with someone > or groups who won't also allow concessions- don't you think? Then it > is all one-sided. > > Personally, I won't compromise on this issue. I believe that the > people of this era have the proper accumulations to practice > meditation and that the Buddha didn't teach otherwise. Proper > meditation needs the proper instruction from a qualified teacher, but > it isn't impossible for the people of today. Really, I don't see this > as an issue where there can be compromise. If you can think of some > possible compromise about this issue then please share it with the > group- you could save a lot of useless wrangling over this issue. > > Metta, > James 45365 From: "Philip" Date: Tue May 10, 2005 8:02am Subject: Re: Obsessed Viewpoint on Self philofillet HI Tep, and all T: Because of having obsessed 'self viewpoint', then even the Buddha's Teachings on developing sila & samadhi and eradicating akusala vitakka, are confused because of the fear that the " self demon" may be directing the activities. Ph: I think this could bug beginners like myself - and it did - but I was helped when I learned that we cannot develop panna if we don't appreciate sila and dana. On the other hand, when activities that are purported to develop sati or panna are subtly directed by idea of self, there is no benefit for the person doing them, or anyone else. Well, there may be therapeautic benefits, a sense of emotional well-being and stabilty, but that is not satipatthana. Metta, Phil 45366 From: "htootintnaing" Date: Tue May 10, 2005 8:35am Subject: Dhamma Thread (354) htootintnaing Dear Dhamma Friends, Depending on bhumi or realm, where kamma can give rise to their results, kamma are classified into 1. akusala kamma 2. kaama kusala kamma 3. ruupa kusala kamma 4. aruupa kusala kamma There are 3 akusala kamma based on kamma-dvara or where kamma are committed. They are akusala kaaya kamma, akusala vaci kamma, and akusala mano kamma. Akusala kaaya kamma have been discussed in the previous post. There are 4 akusala vaci kamma. They are 1. musaavaada or 'telling lies' 2. pisuna vaacaa or 'telling divisive speech' 3. pharusa vaacaa or 'telling harsh speech' 4. samphappalaapa or 'telling unfruitful speech' Musaavaada or lying has been discussed in the previous post. Pisuna vaacaa or telling harsh speech is also akusala kamma or vaci origin. That is this kamma is committed at the kamma-door of mouth or verbal-door. The words inside may or may not be true. When the words are not true, that kamma is both musaavaada and pisuna vaacaa. But this akusala kamma can be committed even with true speech. Even when the speech spoken is true and not musaavaada, they may still be pisuna vaacaa or akusala kamma of 'telling divisive speech'. This kamma is akusala because the main dhamma that underlie is dosa citta and it is manifested through vaci-vinatti rupa, which is a cittaja rupa arisen from akusala cittas. When a word causes 2 beloved people to be separated, that word should not be told however the words are right. When this is not considered and there is an intention of separation of 2 people with telling these words, pisuna vaacaa is said to be committed. In this akusala vaci kamma, the main dhamma that underlie is dosa. But the leader is always moha. As moha always includes in any of akusala citta, moha is not high-lighted here and pisuna vaacaa is said to be commited by dosa or aversion. 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. 45367 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Tue May 10, 2005 9:23am Subject: Re: Obsessed Viewpoint on Self buddhistmedi... Hi Phil - I was talking about one extreme viewpoint and a consequence of it. The other extreme is that of 'no self'. You were talking about neither. Below the Sotapanna level there still is an "idea of self" that should be eliminated by abandoning the first 3 fetters. Respectfully, Tep ======== --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Philip" wrote: > > HI Tep, and all > > T: Because of having obsessed 'self viewpoint', then even the > Buddha's Teachings on developing sila & samadhi and eradicating > akusala vitakka, are confused because of the fear that the " self > demon" may be directing the activities. > > Ph: I think this could bug beginners like myself - and it did - > but I was helped when I learned that we cannot develop panna if we > don't appreciate sila and dana. On the other hand, when activities > that are purported to develop sati or panna are subtly directed by > idea of self, there is no benefit for the person doing them, or > anyone else. Well, there may be therapeautic benefits, a sense of > emotional well-being and stabilty, but that is not satipatthana. > > Metta, > Phil 45368 From: "hasituppada" Date: Tue May 10, 2005 9:33am Subject: Re: [dsg]Abhidhamma. hasituppada Dear Sarah, Sarah says: I'm not a historian at all, but I do have a lot of confidence in what I read in the ancient commentaries. _______________________________________________________________ Charles Perera says: If you are not a historian, but one who has confidence in what you read, I think it is best I leave you to your theories about the history of Abidhamma, and get onto the next point you have raised. ______________________________________________________________ Sarah writes: Honestly speaking, Hasituppada, when I see modern articles suggesting that the Abhidhamma isn't the `word of the Buddha' etc, I find they are based on other articles, but I think very few people actually read these ancient commentaries. Charles Perera says: Different people have different points of views, it had been so since the beginning of time. World is such and we have to put up with that sort of annoyance. _____________________________________________________________________ __ Hasituppada had said: Bhavana, is what the Buddha taught, and instructed through the Mahasatipattana Sutta for the human beings to practice to allow the purification of mind to attain Nibbana. It could be done now as it was done before, and could be done in the future. ... _________________________________________________________________ Sarah says: Yes, not just in the Mahasatipatthana Sutta but throughout the Tipitaka, I'd suggest. Can there be any satipatthana development if there is no understanding of pancakkhandha and no identifiable beings etc? _____________________________________________________________________ __ Charles Perera Says: For the purpose of Bhavana the whole of Tipitaka is not necessary. Maha Satipatthana Sutta gives all the necessary instructions. If Bhavana is done under the guidance of a good teacher he will guide you along. Eventually you will understand the Panchakkhandha. It is a path traced by the Buddha to start from what you know now, to discover what is not yet known. ____________________________________________________________________ Sarah says: I'm familiar with this regimen, but did the Buddha ever say that listening (no reading then:-)) or discussion should be put aside at the outset of bhavana? What about all those who became enlightened whilst listening? In fact aren't suta maya panna (listening) and cinta maya panna(careful reflecting) the very conditions for bhavana maya panna? .... __________________________________________________________________ Charles Perera says: Buddha said ""This is the direct path for the purification of beings, for the overcoming of sorrow & lamentation, for the disappearance of pain & distress, for the attainment of the right method, & for the realization of Unbinding -- in other words, the four frames of reference. Which four? "There is the case where a monk remains focused on the body in & of itself -- ardent, alert, & mindful -- putting aside greed & distress with reference to the world. He remains focused on feelings... mind... mental qualities in & of themselves -- ardent, alert, & mindful -- putting aside greed & distress with reference to the world. "There is the case where a monk -- having gone to the wilderness, to the shade of a tree, or to an empty building -- sits down folding his legs crosswise, holding his body erect and setting mindfulness to the fore [lit: the front of the chest]. Always mindful, he breathes in; mindful he breathes out." (Maha Satipatthana Sutta) Second part of the question, may be the extreme saddha and a moment of deep concentration equal to an jhana absorption that broke loose the identity of self. I do not think one can attain bhavanamaya panna so easily. A sotapanna has still not attained panna…. ___________________________________________________________________ Sarah says: (a)Did the Buddha ever speak about the 4 or 5 jhanas (or one or two) being essential requisites for all in order to develop vipassana? (b)For example, Visakkha became a sotapanna at the age of 7 and continued to lead a very worldly kind of life. Is there any suggestion that she had attained any jhanas before becoming enlightened? ____________________________________________________________________ Charles Perera says: (a) Yes, in several Suttas. A very instructive Sutta is Samannaphala Sutta. And then the Maha Satipattahna Sutta: "…………………And what is right concentration? There is the case where a monk -- quite withdrawn from sensuality, withdrawn from unskillful (mental) qualities -- enters & remains in the first jhana: rapture & pleasure born from withdrawal, accompanied by directed thought & evaluation. With the stilling of directed thought & evaluation, he enters & remains in the second jhana: rapture & pleasure born of composure, unification of awareness free from directed thought & evaluation -- internal assurance. With the fading of rapture he remains in equanimity, mindful & alert, physically sensitive of pleasure. He enters & remains in the third jhana, of which the Noble Ones declare, 'Equanimous & mindful, he has a pleasurable abiding.' With the abandoning of pleasure & pain -- as with the earlier disappearance of elation & distress -- he enters & remains in the fourth jhana: purity of equanimity & mindfulness, neither pleasure nor pain. This is called right concentration. "This is called the noble truth of the path of practice leading to the cessation of stress. " (extracted from Maha Satipatthana Sutta) (b)After becoming a Sotapanna one can continue to sit Samatha again and again and have jhana absorptions. _____________________________________________________________________ _ Sarah says: Let's just be clear for a moment that there is samatha (tranquility or calm) at each moment of kusala. So at moments of vipassana, there must be samatha. What you are saying is that samatha bhavana must be developed to the degree of jhana first. ____________________________________________________________________ Charles Perera says: I cannot understand the question as it is put. (what I cannot under stand is why: at each moment of Kusala. So at moments of Vipassana) There isn't just a moment…. Samatha is developed taking a parikamma nimitta. That is any "object" the breath or a kasina ( do not worry about pannatti or no-pannatti) just an object. Then when the mind becomes very calm, alert and silent, you have attained deep Samadhi and will attain the first Jahna. You continue and you will attain the second, third and forth jhana. Then you come out of the Jhana and with a very calm and clear mind start vipassana meditation. In vipassana meditation too you may attain Vipassana Jhana absorptions. Yes, samatha bhavana must be developed to the degree of jhana firstbefore going on to vipassana. _____________________________________________________________________ _ Sarah says: I think the texts make it clear that when the lokuttara cittas arise, the concentration and accompanying factors such as samma- sankappa are of the degree of jhana by nature of the object (nibbana) automatically. _____________________________________________________________________ Charles says: Sorry, I do not understand what you mean. ____________________________________________________________________ Sarah says: Even if highly developed samatha bhavana were essential first, it can still only be developed with understanding and not by will or concentration. I know there are some differences here and as I said to Howard, I'm glad you're sharing your opinions and well-considered reflections too. _____________________________________________________________________ __ Charles Perera says: Yes one has to prepare oneself for Samatha meditation. There has to be effort, Samma Vayama. Understanding (samma sankappa), about the four noble truths, and the noble eight fold path are essential for a Buddhist. That is the first of the eight fold path. _____________________________________________________________________ Sarah says: (If you have time, please look at posts under 'Susima Sutta' in U.P) ____________________________________________________________ Charles Perera says: I will. _________________________________________________________________ Sarah Says: Hmmm – we try to encourage everyone to use real names here, but don't insist as someone may have a very good reason for not doing so..... _____________________________________________________________________ _ Charles Perera says: I will abide if it pleases you. I wasn't really hiding behind a name. It is just taht I liked being addressed Hasituppada. May be a bit of Mana. With metta, Hasituppada (oh Charles Perera) 45369 From: "matheesha" Date: Tue May 10, 2005 11:19am Subject: Re: Metta and the world 2. matheesha333 --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "htootintnaing" Hi Htoo,everyone H:> Metta is compared with 'the love of mother to her [M: only] child'. This is > especially true between newborn baby and its mother. This can be a bit tricky. How do we solve the problem that like it or not, mothers are strongly attached to their babies and it is this attachment which is so blinding? Does the suttas say metta is similar to this, or it is the same? metta Matheesha 45370 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Tue May 10, 2005 2:07pm Subject: Sarah's Elaboration on Anatta [was Re: ‘Cetasikas' study corner 177 ] buddhistmedi... Hi Sarah (Howard, etc.)- [A reply to message #45316] I think the following is what we have agreed (or in near agreement). Tell me if you disagree now. -- The Anattalakkhana Sutta does not directly define self (atta) or not- self (anatta), but rather gives a logical deduction on the self view of the pancakkhandha. It essentially states that the 5 aggregates are anatta because they are subject to disease (aabaadha) and so they cannot be controlled accoding to one's wishes. Therefore, (the logical deduction that follows is that) it would be wrong to have the following viewpoint on each of the five aggregates : 'This is mine, this is I, this is my self'. The reverse of this deduction must be true, i.e. one may think of each of the 5 aggregates as 'This is mine, this is I, this is my self', if and only if it is an atta (self), which is free from disease and can be controlled according to one's wishes. T: >Such a self view reflects a wrong attitude - a miccha ditthi, >because 'self ' is real only to people who have upadana >on the aggregates. .... S: I assume you mean the wrong view of self is real. Of course, upadana or craving can be with or without wrong view. A sotapanna has craving, but no wrong view. T: I don't follow your reasoning. Why do you assume that "the wrong view of self is real"? However, I agree that upadana on any kind of viewpoint can happen. I want to change my previous conclusion : "therefore, there is nothing to be taken as self, and self is thus an illusion". This conclusion of "no self" is an extreme viewpoint and it is wrong. Why? Take a look at Lisa's message # 45324 : [Liisah] one time the Buddha was asked point-blank if there is a self, he refused to answer, on the grounds that either a Yes or a No to the question would lead to extreme forms of wrong view that block the path to awakening. A Yes or a qualified No would lead to attachment: you'd keep clinging to a sense of self however you defined it. An unqualified No would lead to bewilderment and alienation, for you'd feel that your innermost sense of intrinsic worth had been denied. S:(referring to "therefore, there is nothing to be taken as self, and self is thus an illusion".) Right we agree. The khandhas are mere elements (dhatus) which are not in anyone's conrol or command as the sutta extract shows. They are anatta, however much illusion there is to the contrary. T: By agreeing, it means that you also have the same extreme view on self. Do you want to change that wrong view now? The other conclusion I made was right, though : > With or without the wrong attitude about self, or the miccha ditthi >self view, the pancakkhandha exists (they are not illusion at all, >despite the Truth that they are impermanent and so on) and >decisions are being made all the time (the decisions are not >illusion either. For example, President Bush was elected and his >decision to invade Iraq was real. ... S: What are the khandhas or dhammas in your example, would you say? Are President Bush and Iraq realities? What is the decision? What are the condtions for decisions? Following on from this, what makes the choice? Can we agree that thinking is not self, intention is not self, wrong view is not self, effort is not self? T: According to the conventional truth, both Bush and Iraq are real. According to the Anattalakkhana Sutta, President Bush and Iraq and also Bush's decision are Anatta -- i.e. all three should not be taken as self because they are subject to disease and do not obey our wishes that they should be this and that, or they should not be this or that. In other words, we should not have a wrong view that they can be taken for granted. All these logical deductions do not mean that President Bush and Iraq and also Bush's decision were not real -- because they existed in that moment. Bush made that decision and they existed in the past. Of course all dhammas (thinking, decision, intention, pancakkhandha of Bush) then and now are anatta. This is not an extreme viewpoint. I am learning to replace my view on atta and anatta. Certainly, there is more to learn while panna is being developed. Respectfully, Tep ====== --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > Hi Tep, > > --- Tep Sastri wrote: > <...> > > I selected b) Self needs to make the choice until it is eradicated, ====== 45371 From: "hasituppada" Date: Tue May 10, 2005 2:35pm Subject: Re: Breathing. - Sukinder's Pudding - Hasituppada hasituppada Dear KenH KenH says: I think this is also where 99% of modern-day Buddhists disagree with the ancient Theravadin texts. I am grateful that you, and others like you, have joined DSG to discuss our dinosaur version of the Dhamma. _____________________________________________________________ Charles Perera says: I think it is an exaggerated remark, full of conceit-manna. Here you have failed to watch the reality of the present moment !!! _____________________________________________________________ KenH says: However, this is nothing to get upset about because there is only the present moment. Outside of the present five khandhas, there is nothing than can have any effect on us. And there is no "us" - anywhere - for it to have any effect on. __________________________________________________________________ Charles Perera says: "the present moment" exists but one cannot make a whole philosophy out of that. There is of course "you" and "me" "he" "them" and whole of the world. That is not a lie. That is the truth- sammuti sacca or the conventional truth. Well rest of what KenH says is more or less the same thing, ad infinitum. Point is that Ken H thinks he is living in a world of paramattadhamma. When he looks into the mirror, there is no image, because he is empty. When he goes to have his breakfast, there is no kitchen, no table, no chair, no plate, no food and no KenH. This is a dialog without "any body" because according to KenH nothing exists. No "me" No "us" With metta (nevertheless) Hasituppada; __________________________________________________________ > -------------------------------- > H: > when I see, I see. > -------------------------------- > > Here, the ultimate story is slightly different. To paraphrase the > Abhidhamma; 'Mere seeing exists but no seer is found.' Seeing is > eye-consciousness, which is a paramattha dhamma. While you have been > reading this message, countless eye-consciousnesses have arisen, > performed their functions, and fallen away. > > ------------------------------------------------- > H: > When I eat, I eat etc. We the yogis call that, bare attention. > ------------------------------------------------- > > Yogi or not, you cannot practise the Dhamma when you believe eating > is a reality. > > ------------------------ > H: > Bare attention, by itself, is not enough to purify the mind of > its accumulation of bad habits, let alone unwholesome kamma. > Therefore some thing more effective to get hold of the mind and see > it as it is, is essential. It is not the present reality that could > do that purification of the mind to reach the set target. > ------------------------- > > I agree, and I should clarify one extremely important point: It is > not the present reality that purifies the mind. The thing that > purifies the mind is *knowing the present reality.* > > The present moment might be very impure - it might include dosa, for > example, or moha, or even micha-ditthi - but the immediately > following moments of consciousness can take any present > (now, fallen away) reality as their object. It resonates in a way > that it can be experienced even though it has just fallen away. > > ----------------------------- > H: > Specially, for us human beings with multifarious activities, it > is certainly an enormous assignment. > ------------------------------ > > There, the Theravadin understanding has the advantage. Since there > is only the present moment, there are no human beings and no > multifarious activities: there are only dhammas. Therefore, the only > obstacle that could stand in the way of vipassana development is > moha (ignorance of the Dhamma). > > ------------------------------------------------- > H: > Therefore, Buddha took as his disciples those who had given up > their household life to follow his teachings. > ------------------------------------------------- > > I don't know which meaning you are applying to the word "disciples" > in this instance - do you mean chief disciples? There were, and > possibly still are, lay followers who were ariyans. Lay followers > and bhikkhus are equally capable when it comes to understanding and > practising Dhamma. However, some people have accumulated the > necessary tendencies for living the homeless life, preserving the > arahant lifestyle and, in some cases, developing jhana. > > --------------------------------- > H: > The Maha Satipattana Sutta consists of the instructions > to his Bikkhus to do Bhavana. Bhavana is defined as mental > cultivation and called in English Meditation. > ------------------------------- > > Ultimately, a bhikkhu is anyone who follows the Buddha's > teaching. Or, more correctly, it is the five khandhas when they > the sankhara-khandha includes right understanding and right > mindfulness (and so on). > > When we know ultimate reality as being the present five khandhas (in > whatever form they might arise), the term "instruction to do > bhavana" takes on a whole new meaning. "Understand the five > khandhas" is one new meaning that springs to mind; can you think of > any others? > > -------------------------------------------------- > H: > During the time of the Buddha, instructions were not given to > lay people to Meditate. > They were told of the merit of Dana Sila and Bhavana which would > have been enough for a diligent human earthling to attain at least > Sotapatti. > --------------------------------------------------- > > I'll have to skip over that because I don't understand what you are > saying. Unless, that is, you are agreeing that right understanding > is enough for the attainment of enlightenment. (?) > > ------------------------------------------------- > H: > Now we have the time and the means, which were not available > those days, to take off to meditate. We have no other alternative > but to follow those same instructions the Buddha gave to his > disciples, to enter the Stream. Then we will have to follow the > Sutta Pitaka. As the instructions for the Bikkhus are in them. > -------------------------------------------------- > > Do you mean the Dhamma has changed since the Buddha taught it? That > is the sort of thinking that can arise only from a non-present- > moment-centred interpretation. The namas and rupas that are arising > now have exactly the same characteristics that they had in the > Buddha's day. > > --------------------------- > H: > Abhidhamma is a sacred book, but there are no instructions in > it for us or his disciples to follow to purify the mind of its > impurities and prepare it to the journey towards Nibbana. > ---------------------------- > > Apart from the dhammas described in the Abhidhamma, there is > nothing but illusion. In the ulltimate sense, there are no books, no > instructions, no disciples and no journeys. You must realise that. > Otherwise, you will always be practising a conventional technique of > a kind that can be taught by any moderately intelligent person. The > Dhamma is unique. It can be taught only by a Buddha, and it can be > practised only by the wise. > > Even if there is no wisdom now, lots of other dhammas are arising, > ready to be understood. > > Ken H 45372 From: "Philip" Date: Tue May 10, 2005 3:52pm Subject: Re: Obsessed Viewpoint on Self philofillet Hi Tep Tep> I was talking about one extreme viewpoint and a consequence of it. > The other extreme is that of 'no self'. You were talking about neither. You're right. I said this: "when activities > > that are purported to develop sati or panna are subtly directed by > > idea of self, there is no benefit for the person doing them, or > > anyone else. Well, there may be therapeautic benefits, a sense of > > emotional well-being and stabilty, but that is not satipatthana." What I was talking about is not "subtly" directed by self. For example, deciding to sit down and force the arising of metta is not subtle. Deciding to sit down and have sati in contradiction to the conditions at work is not subtle. Being concerned about the implications of this kind of wrong practice is not obsessive. As you say below, the subtle clinging to self is something only sotapannas can eradicate. Being concerned about those subtler levels of self clinging would be obsessive because it is obviously something we worldlings will live with for many, many lifetimes. Thanks for the correction! Tep > Below the Sotapanna level there still is an "idea of self" that should be > eliminated by abandoning the first 3 fetters. Metta, Phil 45373 From: LBIDD@... Date: Tue May 10, 2005 4:17pm Subject: motion lbidd2 Hi TG, Evan, and Howard, TG and Evan, I think you guys are going to have to tell me what you mean by movement. Movement through physical space from one location to another by one entity? If that is close how does consciousness and mental phenomena move? If by movement you mean movement through time, that is just change and I would accept that. Abhidhamma says impermanence is the arising, ageing, and ceasing of the same phenomenon. This only happens in a mind moment (or, presumably, 17 mind moments for rupa). If one thing arises and another ceases, that isn't impermanence. Also red isn't light but light might be red. Light is a group of rupas (kalapa) which may include red. You could say a kalapa moves through space but, technically speaking, a kalapa isn't included in "everything" because it doesn't have an intrinsic nature (sabhava). What is the object of consciousness when you are aware of movement? Howard, I don't think the appearance of movement is due to ignorance but we are most of the time ignorant of the relational nature of the appearance of movement and ignorant of the impermanence of what appears to move. Larry 45374 From: "htootintnaing" Date: Tue May 10, 2005 4:55pm Subject: Re: Metta and the world 2. htootintnaing --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "matheesha" wrote: > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "htootintnaing" > > Hi Htoo,everyone > > H:> Metta is compared with 'the love of mother to her [M: only] > child'. This is > > especially true between newborn baby and its mother. > > This can be a bit tricky. How do we solve the problem that like it or > not, mothers are strongly attached to their babies and it is this > attachment which is so blinding? > > Does the suttas say metta is similar to this, or it is the same? > > metta > > Matheesha ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Dear Matheesha, Metta sutta says 'Mata yatha niyam putta maayusaa, eka putta manurakkhe. Evam pi sabba bhuutesu maanasam bhavaye apparimaanam'. Yatha-like, mata-mother, putta-son, aayusaa-breed/nurture (aayusaa is changed to maayusaa), eka-one, rakkhe-protect. Evam-such, pi-like this, sabba-all, bhuutesu-at apparent being, manasam-mind/consciousness, bhavaye-being cultivated. This is just comparison. I have already explain in the post that metta runs away as soon as attachment arise. With Metta, Htoo Naing 45375 From: "htootintnaing" Date: Tue May 10, 2005 4:58pm Subject: Dhamma Thread (355) htootintnaing Dear Dhamma Friends, Depending on bhumi or realm, where kamma can give rise to their results, kamma are classified into 1. akusala kamma 2. kaama kusala kamma 3. ruupa kusala kamma 4. aruupa kusala kamma There are 3 akusala kamma based on kamma-dvara or where kamma are committed. They are akusala kaaya kamma, akusala vaci kamma, and akusala mano kamma. Akusala kaaya kamma have been discussed in the previous post. There are 4 akusala vaci kamma. They are 1. musaavaada or 'telling lies' 2. pisuna vaacaa or 'telling divisive speech' 3. pharusa vaacaa or 'telling harsh speech' 4. samphappalaapa or 'telling unfruitful speech' Pharusa vaacaa is also akusala vaci kamma. The words in that sort of speech may be true or not true. If not true, then the kamma will be both musaavaada and pharusa vaacaa. But even when words are true, the speech may not be a good one as they carry painful messages or words. Harsh speech may well be untrue and divisive. This this happen, then there will be 3 akusala vaci kamma being committed at the same time. They are musaavaada, pisuna vaacaa and pharusa vaacaa. Pharusa vaacaa are mainly committed by dosa. When there is dosa, there also is moha. But as moha always includes in any of akusala dhamma, moha is not high-lighted as main cause of akusala kamma patha dhamma. 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. 45376 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Tue May 10, 2005 5:14pm Subject: Re: Obsessed Viewpoint on Self buddhistmedi... Hi, Phil - I appreciate your careful study and giving me the feedback. I am glad that we have reached the same conclusion. Respectfully, Tep ============ --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Philip" wrote: > > Hi Tep > > > Tep> I was talking about one extreme viewpoint and a consequence of > it. > > The other extreme is that of 'no self'. You were talking about > neither. > > You're right. I said this: "when activities > > > that are purported to develop sati or panna are subtly directed > by > > > idea of self, there is no benefit for the person doing them, or > > > anyone else. Well, there may be therapeautic benefits, a sense > of > > > emotional well-being and stabilty, but that is not satipatthana." > > What I was talking about is not "subtly" directed by self. For > example, deciding to sit down and force the arising of metta is not > subtle. Deciding to sit down and have sati in contradiction to the > conditions at work is not subtle. Being concerned about the > implications of this kind of wrong practice is not obsessive. As you > say below, the subtle clinging to self is something only sotapannas > can eradicate. Being concerned about those subtler levels of self > clinging would be obsessive because it is obviously something we > worldlings will live with for many, many lifetimes. Thanks for the > correction! > > Tep > Below the Sotapanna level there still is an "idea of self" > that should be > > eliminated by abandoning the first 3 fetters. > > Metta, > Phil 45377 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Tue May 10, 2005 5:59pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Breathing & Path of Discrimination/ Summary Note buddhistmedi... Hi, Sarah - Thank you for the suggestion for improvement of this Series. I agree with it and will paste all the Pali word I can find along with its English translation, starting in Section ii. There are 4 tetrads in the Anapanasati, each tetrad has 4 grounds, and each ground corresponds to each item in the tetrad. The yogi "steps up" from one ground to the next higher ground, step by step. For example, the first two grounds are : (I) The yogi (one devoted to mental training) mindfully exhales an out- breath, and mindfully inhales an in-breath. (II) When a long breath is exhaled, he knows that he exhales a long out- breath. When a long breath is inhaled, he knows that he inhales a long in-breath. When a short breath is exhaled, he knows that he exhales a short out-breath. When a short breath is inhaled, he knows that he inhales a short in-breath. I hope the explanation makes sense. Respectfully, Tep ========== --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > Hi Tep (& James) > .(snipped ) > .... > S: All these notes you gave (and those snipped) are very helpful. Maybe you can just paste them with each extract if applicable so we don't need to hunt around each time:-). > > I was looking for 'Grounds' as in 16 grounds...do you have any idea? Is it vatthu - bases or sth? (can't see it in the English text). > > Metta, > > Sarah > ====== 45378 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Tue May 10, 2005 8:18pm Subject: Re: Breathing. - Sukinder's Pudding - Hasituppada kenhowardau --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "hasituppada" wrote: > > Dear KenH > > KenH says: > > I think this is also where 99% of modern-day Buddhists > disagree with the ancient Theravadin texts. I am grateful that > you, and others like you, have joined DSG to discuss our dinosaur > version of the Dhamma. > _____________________________________________________________ > Charles Perera says: > I think it is an exaggerated remark, full of conceit-manna. Here > you have failed to watch the reality of the present moment !!! > _____________________________________________________________ > Hi Charles, Thank you for at least continuing to speak to me. Did I say something wrong? I thought we had agreed that you and I were studying different texts. I don't think that is an insult to you at all. Many famous, highly respected, Theravada monks are of the same opinion as you. That is, they believe that the Abhidhamma- pitaka and the ancient commentaries are late additions to the Theravada texts. And they believe that those 'late additions' give an interpretation to the Dhamma that was not originally intended. As I said to Lisa yesterday, I am not being judgemental: I am prepared to admit that they (and you) may well be right. Rightly or wrongly, I have chosen to study the traditionally accepted Theravada texts. Because I don't have time, I have chosen not to study any opinions (or teachings) that contradict those texts. That puts me in a tiny minority of modern-day Buddhists. I estimated it at 1%. I don't see what was so wrong in saying that. I also said that I was genuinely glad DSG's membership included people with varying objectives. In face-to-face discussions, I tend the opposite way - I want all members to like-minded. But on the internet, it seems to work better the way it is. As for the rest of your post, all I can say is, "Guilty as charged." :-) Ken H > KenH says: > However, this is nothing to get upset about because there is only > the present moment. Outside of the present five khandhas, there is > nothing than can have any effect on us. And there is no "us" - > anywhere - for it to have any effect on. > __________________________________________________________________ > Charles Perera says: > > "the present moment" exists but one cannot make a whole philosophy > out of that. There is of course "you" and "me" "he" "them" and > whole of the world. That is not a lie. That is the truth- sammuti > sacca or the conventional truth. > > Well rest of what KenH says is more or less the same thing, ad > infinitum. > > Point is that Ken H thinks he is living in a world of > paramattadhamma. When he looks into the mirror, there is no image, > because he is empty. When he goes to have his breakfast, there is no > kitchen, no table, no chair, no plate, no food and no KenH. This is > a dialog without "any body" because according to KenH nothing exists. > No "me" No "us" > > With metta (nevertheless) > > Hasituppada; 45379 From: "Philip" Date: Tue May 10, 2005 9:43pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Musings8 - Clinging to Self, Clinging to Results philofillet Hi Charles and Lisa(*) and all Sorry for taking so long to get back to you, Charles. > I can understand your concerns; however, I remember Noble referring to some one that is moral and ethical. A person was considered Noble because he/she was good natured, liked, and respected for it. So yes, a Noble person had a certain degree of enlightenment, morality, one of the three pillars of the eight-fold- path (the other two being wisdom and concentration). Ph: Well, I'm not sure about this. There are suttas that distinguish between "worldlings" (albeit "uninstructed" ones) and "noble disciples" (albeit "instructed" ones.) I notice that in a sutta translation used by Nina we find "well-taught ariyan disciple" instead of "instructed noble disciple." So I still suspect "noble" might refer to sotapannas etc. But I'm also not sure if this distinction should keep us from emulating the practices of enlightened ones. Again, I suspect we should be wary of emulating them, because without the degree of understanding they have, we will fool ourselves if we think we can gain the results described in suttas. Just my hunch... I think of SN 22.61 (abbreviated version of 35:28, "Burning" i.e the Fire suta.) "Bhikkhus form (etc) is burning. Seeing this, the instructed noble disciple (i.e well-taught ariyan disciple, if we accept that translation used by Nina) experiences revulsion towards form etc. Experience revulsion, he becomes dispassionate" and so on. I know the first few times I read this sutta, I interpreted it to mean that I, an ignorance drenched worldling, could experience this revulsion and detachment. I'm sure I'm not the only foolish (but well-intentioned) person who has interpreted it this way. But I am not a noble disciple, yet, and the "revulsion" refers to seeing things with a degree of insight that goes well beyond intellectual understanding. (According to B Bodhi's commentarial notes) This is just one of countless examples of suttas that can easily be misinterpreted. I just urge caution, that's all. If one person reading this realizes that suttas are not as easy to understand as they might think, I will have helped one person out. And if one person comes to understand that an intellectual understanding of Abhidhamma greatly deepens our intellectual understanding of suttas, I will be even happier! >> Phil, you stated, "laypeople who have busy lives in the sensation drenched modern world, attempting to cut that off and behave like monks is just an exercise in self-enjoyment disguised as liberation - so subtly disguised that they themselves often don't know that it's going on." > > Is that self-enjoyment disguised as liberation causing suffering, or is it suffering in its-self. I say neither, unless it causes the layperson to neglect his/her duty. Ph: "Neglect one's duty" - that's a helpful phrase, thanks. Another one of my hunches tells me that when people place emphasis on developing sati intentionally, by formally meditating, believing that it increases the likelihood of sati increasing, they thereby come to beleive that in daily life there is less likelihood of sati increasing, and could neglect the duty they have to examine all experience and come to understand it. (Conditions permitting.) But I know I tend to be too critical of formal meditation, based on how misguided my attempts at it were. I shouldn't assume people are as ignorant as I am! (But I still tend to do so...sorry all!) > > In this sensation drenched modern world, wouldn't an exercise in self-enjoyment disguised as liberation mean there are periods of no- suffering? and perhaps periods where the three (i.e., morality, wisdom, and concentration) could be developed? and maybe even enlightenment cultivated. > > Could you imagine not having those periods? PH: Charles, I do appreciate that any kind of liberation from Dhamma that we gain is helpful for reducing suffering. I am not a sour person - I'm quite sweet. I write children's stories about healing. I want people to feel better. But when it comes to Dhamma, I still suspect that there are forms of meditation that in the wrong hands lead to people feeling temporary relief from suffering, but lead to deepening their roots in samsara, because there is this belief that kusala cittas can be generated intentionally... > Sour grapes are often used to make vinegar or even some wines, so try not to throw away a useful resource. Ph: Thanks. Yesterday I made a bitter and fairly (but not completely) foolish attack on Thanissaro Bhikkhu (not the last time, I'm sure) and indirectly on Lisa, who quoted him. (*Sorry Lisa - I think I overdid it, but I know you're cool about that sort of thing.) I listen to the DSG Bangkok talks on tape, and there is a certain consistency of view, which helps me to undertand better (be brainwashed better, my friend James would say) but then when I come to the internet there is nothing but disagreement, and I guess I get frustrated. But as Ken said, there can be a different dynamic in the face to face talks and internet. I will look at my sour grapes when they arise (and they will, often) and know them to the degree I am capable of as annica, dukkha and anatta. Metta, Phil 45380 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue May 10, 2005 10:33pm Subject: ‘Cetasikas' study corner 190 - Enthusiasm/piiti (h) sarahprocter... 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.11 Enthusiasm (piiti) contd] There is another aspect of píti: it can become an enlightenment factor . The other enlightenment factors are, as we have seen, mindfulness, investigation of the Dhamma (dhamma vicaya), energy (viriya), calm (passaddhi), concentration (samådhi) and equanimity (upekkhå)(1). When the enlightenment factors have been developed through satipaììhåna, they lead to the realization of the four noble Truths. When we have just started to be mindful of nåma and rúpa, we cannot expect the enlightenment factors to be developed yet. They will develop through satipaììhåna. *** 1) See Chapter 9, Viriya. ***** [Ch.11 Enthusiasm (piiti) to be contd] Metta, Sarah ====== 45381 From: "Philip" Date: Tue May 10, 2005 11:33pm Subject: Re: ‘Cetasikas' study corner 190 - Enthusiasm/piiti (h) philofillet Hi all > When the enlightenment factors have been developed through satipa?E håna, > they lead to the realization of the four noble Truths. When we have just > started to be mindful of nåma and rúpa, we cannot expect the enlightenment > factors to be developed yet. They will develop through satipa?Ehån a. I remember when I first read about the enlightenment factors a couple of years ago - probably in a book by Thich Nhat Hahn - there was a teaching that we should develop the stirring factors when sluggish, and the calming factors when restless or agitated. That seems dubious to me now, though of course if calming factors arise when we are agitated etc, it can be appreciated. We can't intentionally cause the arising of enlightenment factors - that seems pretty clear to me now. Metta, Phil 45382 From: "hasituppada" Date: Tue May 10, 2005 11:52pm Subject: Re: Breathing. - Sukinder's Pudding - Hasituppada hasituppada Dear KenH, No, there had been no insult, we are only emphasising what we say in various ways. But I think you should read Suttas for what they are without using them to explain your own narrow views based on Abhidhamma. That way you will understand what really is Buddhism. Otherwise you will be walking out side the teachings of the Buddha. I am copying an extract made in another post which explains the differenc in Abhidhamma and Buddha's teachings to his followers. "As to the relation of the teachings of the Abhidhamma to those of the Sutta Pitaka, two very apt comparisons given in a conversation by the late Venerable Pelene VajirananaMaha Nayake Thera of Vajirarama, Colombo may be added in conclusion: The Abhidhamma is like a powerful magnifying-glass, but the understanding gained from the Sutta is the eye itself, which performs the act of seeing. Again, the Abhidhamma is like a medicine container with a label giving an exact analysis of the medicine; but the knowledge gained from the Sutta is the medicine itself which alone is able to cure the illness and its symptoms, namely craving rooted in ignorance and the suffering caused by it." ( Abhidhamma Studies( Research in Buddhist Psychology) by Nyanaponika Thera-Buddhist Publication Society Kandy.)" with metta, Hasituppada 45383 From: sarah abbott Date: Wed May 11, 2005 0:26am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re:1. characteristic> 2. function> 3. manifestation> 4.proximate cause sarahprocter... Hi Larry (& Htoo), Just butting in on this important point - I'll try to keep it v.plain. --- Larry wrote: > > > Htoo: > > > 1. visual object ruupa > > > 2. sense-door ruupa eye > > > 3. eye-consciousness > > > 4. contact > > > These arise together. All are not concept. > > > > > > Hi Htoo, > > > > > > If all 4 _together_ are realities then you have 4 realities that > > are > > the > > > object of one consciousness. .... S: No, as Htoo explained, only the visual object rupa here is the object of eye-consciousness. Only one object is ever experienced at a time as you rightly say. However, many different namas and rupas arise and fall away at that and every moment. For example, eye-consciousness is accompanied by 7 cetasikas (including contact) as we know at the moment it experiences that visual object. The visual object does not arise alone, but in a group or kalapa of rupas. It is supported by the primary rupas and other essential 'ingredients', but only visual object is seen. Likewise, there is also the eye-base rupa and its kalapa of rupas arising at that moment in order for the seeing to take place. .... >Same as kalapa. How can that be? ... So any rupa always arises in a kalapa as you point out - it cannot arise alone. However, only one characteristic of a rupa is ever experienced at any moment. For example, when temperature is experienced, hardness supports it and so do the other essential rupas in the kalapa. It depends on conditions what is experienced. <....> > I don't understand your argument. If something is real it must be > capable of being an object of consciousness. ... S: Yes, depending on conditions. ... >If "with" is real then > consciousness must potentially have two objects. If the 4 _together_ > are real then some consciousness must be able to perceive them > together. ... S: No, because in order for that 'real' object to be experienced, many conditions are required. For visual object to be experienced, there must be seeing consciousness as a result of kamma, accompnaying cetasikas inc. phassa, eye-base, the supporting rupas, previous cittas and so on. Please let me know if this is still not clear - I understand the difficulty. Metta, Sarah ======== 45384 From: sarah abbott Date: Wed May 11, 2005 1:50am Subject: Re: [dsg]Abhidhamma. sarahprocter... Dear CharlesP:-), --- hasituppada wrote: > Charles Perera says: > > Different people have different points of views, it had been so > since the beginning of time. World is such and we have to put up > with that sort of annoyance. ... S: I agree with the first sentence. Truly, I don't find it annoying at all when people read different texts/articles or come to different points of view. I also don't find it fearful, threatening or any of the other things suggested by some:-). .... > Charles Perera Says: > > For the purpose of Bhavana the whole of Tipitaka is not necessary. > Maha Satipatthana Sutta gives all the necessary instructions. ... S: IF sufficient wisdom has been developed when we read or hear this sutta, I agree. For most of us, we need to read, question and consider a lot more in order to understand the sutta to be about dhammas to be directly known in daily life at any moment rather than as a set of 'necessary instructions' as I see it. .... >If > Bhavana is done under the guidance of a good teacher he will guide > you along. > Eventually you will understand the Panchakkhandha. It is a path > traced by the Buddha to start from what you know now, to discover > what is not yet known. .... S: This is how I was taught in the beginning, under what you would describe as very good teachers. However, I realised it was all motivated by an idea of self and so much lobha, doing bhavana, following instructions, living unnaturally, concetrating on breath, eyes closed, slow motion walking and so on -- all for the purpose of attaining specific results and attainments. Then it dawned on me that the teaching is about dhammas, about anatta and that these dhammas couldn't be controlled in anyway. Suddenly, I felt free. I didn't need to live in a forest temple in Sri Lanka, meditating all those hours in the day, cutting myself off from the world and so on. I could help my family, get a job, be sociable, read and study and have fun too. I'm just mentioning this because you seem to have the idea that if only some of us would go on a retreat, learn to meditate and so on, we'd come to our senses. In fact many of us (those you are concerned about) have been model meditators:-). .... > Sarah says: > > I'm familiar with this regimen, but did the Buddha ever say that > listening (no reading then:-)) or discussion should be put aside at > the > outset of bhavana? What about all those who became enlightened whilst > listening? In fact aren't suta maya panna (listening) and cinta maya > panna(careful reflecting) the very conditions for bhavana maya panna? > .... > __________________________________________________________________ > > > Charles Perera says: <..> > Second part of the question, may be the extreme saddha and a moment > of deep concentration equal to an jhana absorption that broke loose > the identity of self. I do not think one can attain bhavanamaya > panna so easily. A sotapanna has still not attained panna…. .... S: On the other hand, I'd say that panna had to be developed with the saddha in order for the self-view to be eradicated by the lokuttara cittas. Panna has to begin by knowing the present namas and rupas appearing. ... > ___________________________________________________________________ > Sarah says: <...> > (b)For example, Visakkha became a sotapanna at the age of 7 and > continued to lead a very worldly kind of life. Is there any > suggestion that she had attained any jhanas before becoming > enlightened? > > ____________________________________________________________________ > > Charles Perera says: <...> > (b)After becoming a Sotapanna one can continue to sit Samatha again > and again and have jhana absorptions. ... S: If such samatha has been developed to this degree. Is there any suggestion anywhere in the Tipitaka that Visakkha, for example, ever 'sat Samatha' or attained jhana absorptions? I don't think so. .... > Charles Perera says: > > I cannot understand the question as it is put. (what I cannot under > stand is why: at each moment of Kusala. So at moments of Vipassana) ... S: Samatha (tranquillity or calm) refers to pasaddhi cetasika which accompanies all wholesome cittas. ... > There isn't just a moment…. Samatha is developed taking a parikamma > nimitta. That is any "object" the breath or a kasina ( do not worry > about pannatti or no-pannatti) just an object. ... S: This is the development of samatha, but first there has to be a clear understanding of which moments are kusala and which are akusala, otherwise it cannot develop just by taking such an object. For example, all the students in my yoga class focus very well on their breath. Are they all developing samatha? Does it help them to develop satipatthana? I don't think so. .... > Sarah says: > > I think the texts make it clear that when the lokuttara cittas > arise, the concentration and accompanying factors such as samma- > sankappa are of the degree of jhana by nature of the object > (nibbana) automatically. > _____________________________________________________________________ > Charles says: > Sorry, I do not understand what you mean. > ____________________________________________________________________ S: What I mean is that we have to know when the reference is to jhana, whether it is referring to prior attainement of jhanas or to concentration etc which are of the degree of jhana at this time, even for those with no prior attainment. See U.P. Jhanas - two meanings. .... > > Sarah says: > > Even if highly developed samatha bhavana were essential first, it can > still only be developed with understanding and not by will or > concentration. <...> > Charles Perera says: > Yes one has to prepare oneself for Samatha meditation. There has to > be effort, Samma Vayama. Understanding (samma sankappa), about the > four noble truths, and the noble eight fold path are essential for > a Buddhist. That is the first of the eight fold path. ... S: When you say that 'one has to prepare oneself for Samatha meditation', again it's different from how I understand samatha bhavana (meditation) to develop. In other words, I believe it is the kusala citta (and cetasikas) that are important, rather than the place or way of sitting. ... I appreciate your goodwill and also good humour over your name:-) it's really good to have you around and I mean that most sincerely. Metta, Sarah p.s You mentioned to Chris that 'Abhidhamma was not taught....to the Buddhist lay followers in the Buddhist country (i.e Sri Lanka) I come from.' BB writes in the intro to CMA: "In the Theravada tradition the Abhidhamma Pitaka is held in the highest esteem, revered as the crown jewel of the Buddhist scriptures. As examples of this high regard, in Sri Lanka King Kassapa V (tenth century A.C.) had the whole Abhidhamma Pitaka inscribed on gold plates and the first book set in gems, while another king, Vijayabahu (eleventh century) used to study the Dhammasangani each morning before taking up his royal duties and composed a translation of it into Sinhala." In general, I'm sure your comments are correct about the decline of interest more recently, but I also don't think it's quite true to say that there hasn't been any Abhidhamma study by lay people there in modern times or that it has only been for research. Indeed, while he lived in Thailand, Jon and others distributed copies of Nina's book, ADL in Sri Lanka because of interest and further copies were published at one time. These were mostly to lay folk and not 'intellectually bent persons' in particular. I joined Nina and K.Sujin on a couple of visits in the 70s when quite a large number of lay followers would attend every evening to hear more and I got to know some of them very well who had a keen interest in the Abhidhamma as applied in their ordinary daily lives. (Incidentally, this was when I first met B.Bodhi at one talk held in Kandy, and also Ven Nyanaponika at the Forest Hermitage a couple of times - fortunately not 'retreated':-)). ======== 45385 From: sarah abbott Date: Wed May 11, 2005 2:21am Subject: Re: [dsg] Ritual, Abhidhamma and Buddhism sarahprocter... Hi Lisa (Nana go lightly:-), Thx for labelling the nice pic - --- Lisa wrote: > L: The remembering that is Sati is also tied to visual perception? ... S: sati remembers or is heedful, not forgetful of kusala. In other words, it prevents akusala when it arises. Hence there is sati with all wholesome moments of consciousness. When it comes to sati of satipatthana, it is aware or heedful of the reality being experienced, whether that be visual object or any other dhamma. (Btw, lots in Useful Posts under 'concepts and realities' as in another thread of yours). ... > And is it also that, which knows what is sensation or feeling before > labels, names, and other fabrications are set into action? ... S: Yes, if there is awareness at such a time of either the rupa (such as the tangible object) or the nama (such as feeling) is experienced. Sati is aware, panna knows. ... > Sati is not the name of the keys or bowl or the idea or thoughts > that this is the way I will not lose my keys if they are in the bowl > by the door, that is very empty I have found that kind of > mindfulness worth while help get to work on time because I know > where my keys are lol. ... S: lol too - no need to tone down. If Htoo can follow Connie, he'll soon learn your short-hand:-). Yes, conventional awareness (and making conventional decisions, Howard:-)) is very useful....just not to be confused with the 'real' thing. ... > L: I will go more into ritual as I explore what it means to me as I > walk through this bewildering area of sense data in Buddhism. I must > look up the word silabbataparamasa, I know what sila means in > addition I must look the word up so I can understand your message > more deeply. ... S: I like the way you do your own research and check meanings - keep sharing your findings. Again, try U.P. too, perhaps. ... > > > S: I was going to bring in the stringing of the threads of pearls, > but they're not in the bowl either right now – Connie may have seen > them;-). > > L: I will try and be patient...lol looks for Connie. ... S: Connie may have had another computer burn-out or flood while stringing threads:-/ Here's one I was thinking of which is quoted here in a post of Nina's: ">The Dhammasanga.nii, when dealing with the first type of kusala citta, states: and then it enumerates the many cetasikas that assist the citta. The ³Expositor² (p. 76 etc.) explains numerous meanings of samaya, such as: time or occasion, concurrence of causes, moment. It explains that the should be classed as the one moment in the sense of occasion, they form the occasion for the production of merit. It states: It shows the extreme shortness of the time in the occurrence of kusala citta and it points out . It stresses that advice has been given that we should have strenuousness and earnestness in pa.tivedha, realization of the truth, since this is very difficult: ** Samaya can also mean group, and this shows the simultaneous occurrence of many dhammas. The kusala citta is accompanied by many cetasikas, each performing their own function. By samaya is shown the concurrence of conditions, the mutual contribution towards the production of a common result. The Expositor explains with regard to samaya as condition: " ... S: The many conditions which need to concur for one moment of kusala, for one moment of sati to arise, like the stringing of pearl in the dark by a flash of lightning...and understanding the complexity of conditions even a little by understanding dhammas as anatta, the conceit that we can control them will be 'subdued'..... Really good having you around, Lisa -- a great asset to the list. Metta, Sarah p.s yes, panic attacks and all - we can follow any strategies we find helpful and live happily and easily, but at the same time, understand that our life at these and any moments are mere conditioned dhammas not at the beck and call of anyone's will - no conflict at all:-) ======= 45386 From: "Sukinder" Date: Wed May 11, 2005 3:05am Subject: Re: Gacchanto vaa gacchaamii'ti pajaanaati. sukinderpal Dear Htoo, Htoo: > What I posted was from 'genuine sutta'. Even these 'words' are > attacked. I think this is because of 'already holding light'. > > What I have been doing is searching for things as they are while the > light arises from the searcher own eyes. > > Would you say 'The Buddha is wrong to preach to his disciples as - > gacchanto vaa gacchaamii'ti pajaanaati'? Sukinder: To discuss the meaning of statements given by the Buddha, I need not only to be well read with regard to the Sutta and commentaries, but also have to have some proficiency in pali. In both areas, I am extremely poor. Using only reasoning based on my general understanding isn't good enough. Of course, anything the Buddha stated is in accordance with the Truth and cannot have double meaning. This makes it an even more daunting task requiring great responsibility, and I'm not known to be very discreet. But I will express some general views with the idea that it is the best so far, and that all other interpretations put forward by others are not consistent with what I understand the Teachings to be. The Mahasatipatthana Sutta may be said on one level to be an `instruction' given by the Buddha. However I think this is more in the form of "reminder" than something to "do". After all we are dealing with conditioned cittas and cetasikas and not conventional reality. As you know, sati does not arise just by observing posture and bodily movement. It can be sati and panna or it can be lobha-mula-citta with wrong view which does the observation. Don't you think that it is likely that `ditthi' would arise when we purposefully observe the posture and movement? When on the other, these conventional realities happen to be the object of consciousness without any view that *this is the right practice*, then indeed by upanissaya paccaya they can condition satipatthana. I think being worldlings, when we hear of this instruction of the Buddha, we more likely approach it the wrong way. My understanding is that the Sutta was given to those disciples who already had very developed sati. For them the sati arose so readily that at every bodily activity, satipatthana could alternate with cittas having posture as object. So it is by pakattupanissaya paccaya that the latter would condition the former. The Buddha's instruction worked for them "directly", i.e. it conditioned patipatti and even pativedha. For us, we need to have correct pariyatti, this being the best that will most likely be conditioned to arise by pakattupanissaya paccaya on hearing these same instructions. But because of wrong understanding, instead it ends up conditioning wrong practice for some of us. We think that it is `deliberate looking' which will condition satipatthana, not knowing about the different conditions, particularly pakattupanissaya paccaya. In fact I think, sign of progress along the path is determined by the different states of mind while engaging in varying activities and situations serving as pakattupanissaya paccaya for sati of whatever level to arise. From this point of view too, deliberate practice seem to lead to a different direction that the right one. This is why when I first heard K. Sujin state that the Teachings are to be seen as `descriptive' instead of `prescriptive', it made sense to me. I think this difference in view point is decisive in whether indeed there will be further development of Right View. Metta, Sukinder 45387 From: "htootintnaing" Date: Wed May 11, 2005 3:07am Subject: Dhamma Thread (356) htootintnaing Dear Dhamma Friends, There are 4 akusala vaci kamma. They are 1. telling lies 2. telling divisive speech 3. telling harsh speech 4. telling unfruitful speech or non-sense speech Telling lie or musaavaada is the leader of all these 4 akusala vaci kamma. When these 4 verbal actions are checked, they will be in some way related to musaavaada kamma. The 1st kamma musaavaada is definitely musaavaada or lying. The 2nd akusala vaci kamma called pisuna vaacaa or telling divisive speech may also be musaavaada. The 3rd akusala vaci kamma called pharusa vaacaa or telling hrash speech is usually untrue words. The 4th akusala vaci kamma called samphappalaapa or telling unfruitful speech or telling tales is also related to musaavaada kamma. But there is difference between 'telling real stories as evidence to support proposition which bear fruit is not samphappalaapa. 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. 45388 From: sarah abbott Date: Wed May 11, 2005 3:12am Subject: Re: [dsg] Sarah's Elaboration on Anatta [was Re: ‘Cetasikas' study corner 177 ] sarahprocter... Hi Tep, --- Tep Sastri wrote: > -- The Anattalakkhana Sutta does not directly define self (atta) or not- > self (anatta), but rather gives a logical deduction on the self view of > the > pancakkhandha. It essentially states that the 5 aggregates are anatta > because they are subject to disease (aabaadha) and so they cannot > be controlled accoding to one's wishes. ... S: A little fine-tuning in this post. I think it says that because the 5 aggregates are anatta, therefore they are subject to disease, and as you say, they cannot be controlled according to one’s wishes. [Yasmaa ca kho, bhikkave, ruupa.m (etc) anatta (since rupa is anatta), tasmaa ruupa.m aabaadhaaya sa.mvattati (then rupa is subject to disease), na ca labbhati ruupe: ‘eva.m me ruupa.m hotu, eva.m me ruupa.m maa ahosii’ti (one cannot obtain from rupa, may rupa be thus, may rupa not be thus).] .... >Therefore, (the logical > deduction that follows is that) it would be wrong to have the following > viewpoint on each of the five aggregates : 'This is mine, this is I, > this is > my self'. ... S: Yes ... > The reverse of this deduction must be true, i.e. one may think > > of each of the 5 aggregates as 'This is mine, this is I, this is my > self', if > and only if it is an atta (self), which is free from disease and can be > controlled according to one's wishes. ... S: I would say, if and only if there is the illusion of self, there is the idea of being able to control the khandhas. If there were a self, rupa would not be subject to disease and one would be able to control them according to one’s wishes, but clearly this isn’t so. .... > > T: >Such a self view reflects a wrong attitude - a miccha ditthi, > >because 'self ' is real only to people who have upadana > >on the aggregates. > .... > S: I assume you mean the wrong view of self is real. Of course, > upadana or craving can be with or without wrong view. A sotapanna > has craving, but no wrong view. > > T: I don't follow your reasoning. Why do you assume that "the wrong > view of self is real"? ... S: Miccha-ditthi is real. Wrong view is a cetasika which arises with certain kinds of cittas rooted in lobha. When it arises, there is a distorted idea of realities at that moment. The concepts of self or other ideas are imagined pannatti and not real. The ditthi itself has to be known over and over again when it arises in order for it to be eventually eradicated at the stage of sotapanna. ... >However, I agree that upadana on any kind of > viewpoint can happen. ... S: Yes, there can be clinging to any object (except nibbana and lokuttara cittas I believe). There can certainly be clinging to right view/wisdom or other wholesome states. .... <....> > S:(referring to "therefore, there is nothing to be taken as self, and > self is > thus an illusion".) Right we agree. The khandhas are mere elements > (dhatus) which are not in anyone's conrol or command as the sutta > extract shows. They are anatta, however much illusion there is to the > contrary. > > T: By agreeing, it means that you also have the same extreme view on > self. Do you want to change that wrong view now? ... S: No:-) I stand by this interpretation. See above. Oh well, you were warned:-). ... <...> > T: According to the conventional truth, both Bush and Iraq are real. > According to the Anattalakkhana Sutta, President Bush and Iraq and > also Bush's decision are Anatta -- i.e. all three should not be taken as > > self because they are subject to disease and do not obey our wishes > that they should be this and that, or they should not be this or that. .... S: The sutta said rupa, vedana etc are anatta and therefore subject to disease etc. Are Bush and Iraq rupa, vedana or what khandha? .... > In > other words, we should not have a wrong view that they can be taken > for granted. All these logical deductions do not mean that President > Bush and Iraq and also Bush's decision were not real -- because they > existed in that moment. .... S: Were they seen? Were they heard? Were they felt? How were they experienced? .... >Bush made that decision and they existed in > the past.Of course all dhammas (thinking, decision, intention, > pancakkhandha of Bush) then and now are anatta. This is not an > extreme viewpoint. .... S: So are you saying that there were conditions for those various khandhas to arise, not in the control or command of any self or Bush? If so, no problem. ... > I am learning to replace my view on atta and anatta. Certainly, there is >more to learn while panna is being developed. ... S: Yes, I think there’s always more and more refining of view and development of panna necessary. Very good points and sutta extracts to keep discussing and reflecting on. Metta. Sarah p.s I hoped to add to the walking discussions but out of time – hope others will continue them. ========= 45389 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Tue May 10, 2005 10:33pm Subject: Exalted Tranquillity ... !!! bhikkhu_ekamuni Friends: Gradually Deeper Successive Stillings: In the 1st meditative jhâna absorption, all sense-desire ceases. In the 2nd meditative jhâna absorption, conceptual thinking ceases. In the 3rd meditative jhâna absorption, enraptured joy ceases. In the 4th meditative jhâna absorption, breathing in & out ceases. In the sphere of infinite space, experience of form & sense reaction ceases. In the sphere of infinite consciousness, experience of infinite space ceases. In the sphere of nothingness, experience of infinite consciousness ceases. In the sphere of neither-perception-nor-non-perception, nothingness ceases. When attaining complete mental cessation, all perception and sensation ceases. These 9 sublime states have been perfectly formulated by the blessed Buddha, who knew & saw directly. therefore should we recite them together for the future advantage , welfare and happiness for both the line and human beings... Source: The Exhaustive Speeches by the Buddha. Digha Nikaya 33 http://www.pariyatti.com/book.cgi?prod_id=25103 http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/digha/index.html For the complete details of the entrance to these exalted states see: The Path of Purification: Visuddhimagga. Chapter III-XI: http://www.pariyatti.com/book.cgi?prod_id=771100 Friendship is the Greatest ! and the entire Noble Life... Bhikkhu Samahita, Sri Lanka. <....> 45390 From: "matheesha" Date: Wed May 11, 2005 5:12am Subject: Re: Metta and the world 2. matheesha333 Yes, thanks Htoo, for the light in dark places. metta Matheesha 45391 From: upasaka@... Date: Wed May 11, 2005 2:57am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re:1. characteristic> 2. function> 3. manifestation> 4.proximate ca... upasaka_howard Hi, Sarah (and Larry & Htoo) - In a message dated 5/11/05 3:27:28 AM Eastern Daylight Time, sarahprocterabbott@... writes: Hi Larry (& Htoo), Just butting in on this important point - I'll try to keep it v.plain. --- Larry wrote: > > > Htoo: > > > 1. visual object ruupa > > > 2. sense-door ruupa eye > > > 3. eye-consciousness > > > 4. contact > > > These arise together. All are not concept. > > > > > > Hi Htoo, > > > > > > If all 4 _together_ are realities then you have 4 realities that > > are > > the > > > object of one consciousness. .... S: No, as Htoo explained, only the visual object rupa here is the object of eye-consciousness. Only one object is ever experienced at a time as you rightly say. However, many different namas and rupas arise and fall away at that and every moment. For example, eye-consciousness is accompanied by 7 cetasikas (including contact) as we know at the moment it experiences that visual object. The visual object does not arise alone, but in a group or kalapa of rupas. It is supported by the primary rupas and other essential 'ingredients', but only visual object is seen. Likewise, there is also the eye-base rupa and its kalapa of rupas arising at that moment in order for the seeing to take place. .... >Same as kalapa. How can that be? ... So any rupa always arises in a kalapa as you point out - it cannot arise alone. However, only one characteristic of a rupa is ever experienced at any moment. For example, when temperature is experienced, hardness supports it and so do the other essential rupas in the kalapa. It depends on conditions what is experienced. <....> > I don't understand your argument. If something is real it must be > capable of being an object of consciousness. ... S: Yes, depending on conditions. ... >If "with" is real then > consciousness must potentially have two objects. If the 4 _together_ > are real then some consciousness must be able to perceive them > together. ... S: No, because in order for that 'real' object to be experienced, many conditions are required. For visual object to be experienced, there must be seeing consciousness as a result of kamma, accompnaying cetasikas inc. phassa, eye-base, the supporting rupas, previous cittas and so on. Please let me know if this is still not clear - I understand the difficulty. Metta, Sarah ====================== Here is my personal, non-Abhidhamma hypothesis: Many phenomena "arise in conciousness" at the same time, including various rupas (an entire kalapa thereof) and numerous cetasikas. Quite shortly after experiencing hardness, for example, there is the recalling that other rupas and a variety of cetasikas, including pleasant feeling for example, were present as well. Such veridical recollecting could not take place unless the prior experiences actually occurred. But there are levels of intensity to experiential presence of phenomena, and at any moment all but one phenomenon occur subliminally as regards awareness of them, and only the one that is not subliminal registers at the level of "object". It is like a choir of people on a stage. They are all there, but only one is soloist. Which particular phenomenon occurs strongly enough to register as object is multiply conditioned, largely by kamma, and even with regard to actual objects, not all of them are strong enough to clearly "register". 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) 45392 From: "htootintnaing" Date: Wed May 11, 2005 8:43am Subject: Dhamma Thread (357) htootintnaing Dear Dhamma Friends, There are 3 akusala kamma based on where kamma are committed. That is kamma are classified as 3 based on kamma-dvaara or kamma-door. Kamma are committed at body-door or kaaya-dvara and manifest as ( akusala citta + akusala cittaja rupa kaaya-vinatti rupa ), committed at vaci-dvaara or verbal-door and manifest as ( akusala citta + akusala cittaja rupa vaci-vinatti rupa ), and committed at mano-dvaara or mind- door and manifest as ( akusala citta + akusala cittaja rupa without vinatti ruupa ). So there are 3 akusala kamma and they are kaaya-akusala-kamma, vaci- akusala-kamma, and mano-akusala-kamma. Kaaya-akusala-kamma and vaci-akusala-kamma have been discussed in the previous posts under heading of Dhamma Thread. There are mano-akusala-kamma. They are kamma that are totally confined to mind-door or mano-dvaara and they are not associated with any vinatti ruupas at all. There are 3 akusala mano-kamma. They are 1. abhijjhaa 2. byaapaada 3. micchaa-ditthi Abhijjhaa is a kamma that are mental activities wishing to possess properties or things that are owned by others beings. The base dhamma that underlie this abhijjhaa kamma is lobha cetasika. Byaapaada ( spell as Vyapada in PTS ) is a kamma that are mental activities wishing destruction of others' properties, fames, good reputation etc etc. The base dhamma that underlie this byaapaada kamma is dosa cetasika or aversion. Micchaa-ditthi is a mano-kamma that is they are mental activities that wrongly see things with wrong view. Examples are the beliefs that 'worshipping to trees' 'worshipping to seas' 'worshipping to the earth' 'worshipping to the sky' are the cause of 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. 45393 From: "matheesha" Date: Wed May 11, 2005 9:53am Subject: Re: [dsg]Abhidhamma. matheesha333 Hi Sarah, S:However, I realised it was all motivated > by an idea of self and so much lobha, doing bhavana, following > instructions, living unnaturally, concetrating on breath, eyes closed, > slow motion walking and so on -- all for the purpose of attaining specific > results and attainments. Then it dawned on me that the teaching is about > dhammas, about anatta and that these dhammas couldn't be controlled in > anyway. Suddenly, I felt free. I didn't need to live in a forest temple in > Sri Lanka, meditating all those hours in the day, cutting myself off from > the world and so on. I could help my family, get a job, be sociable, read > and study and have fun too. I must say that I have been helped greatly by 'meditating all those hours in the day and 'living unnaturally' as you put it. :) You might note many suttas where the buddha praises a great disciple in meditation in a jungle without even a single movement of the body. You might note other places where they are practicing walking meditation, enjoying fewness of desires and even fewer meals and hours asleep. :) I think its not just me, but hundreds if not thousands who keep coming back to same meditation centre bear witness to how useful it is. Most of them have removed any concept of self from their minds because they have experienced the five aggreagates at their roots and seeing their impermanence and see with direct vision that the idea of the self is false. This might sound like a mad statement, but i do ask you to consider the possibility of what is outside general experience. Yes of course it is motivated by desire and a sense of self. Once VenAnanda was questioned by an ascetic about the buddhist path and he talks about the 4 bases of power (sathara iddipada) of which the first one is canda, which is a form of desire. The ascetic says that this path is impossible because we are trying to irradicate desire with desire. (regardless of the abhidhammic explanation to this..) ven Ananada explains it thruogh a similie. That is it is like the desire a king has to enter the royal grounds and enjoy there. This desire drives him on his chariot there. However once he enters through the gates the desire disappears. The desire for the dhamma is like this then. To say that this is something wrong is to argue a point with Ven Ananda, the 'storekeeper of the dhamma' IMO! The same will happen to the sense of self too, and i have seen this happen. One just needs to take it all the way and not stop half way. There is a sutta where the buddha admonishes Anathapindika and says that lay people should spend time in seclusion, not just giving dana. I dont see anything wrong in spending a few weeks away on retreat as a necessary boost to develop some of the mental faculties the buddha speaks of. I have benefitted greatly from it and gained much insight which otherwise i would not have. Most sutta would be gibberish and just studying about the 'taste of oranges' if you know what i mean. There's no hindrence to coming back and living your life as it is. I'm sorry that you feel that such experience has not been useful to you. Do you really feel that it is not possible to experience such things as jhana mentioned in the suttas as we presently dont have enough good kamma, as was suggested by someone earlier? I am not questioning what works for you. We all have to tread our different paths. Different things work for different people. Most people who have benefitted from one method will prescribe it to others (and quite rightly so) but also denounce other methods. This is just a beginner's mistake. No one can say that any of the present paths are 'dysfunctional' as the only reason they have lasted for such a long time is that people have benefitted from them. They will merge and evolve and many interesting things will be available in the future. yours in dialogue, Matheesha 45394 From: "Philip" Date: Wed May 11, 2005 4:14pm Subject: Kamma through mind door (Re: Dhamma Thread (357) philofillet Hello Htoo Thanks as always for this series. Your perseverence encourages me to persevere with my Dhamma study. I have a question that I'm sure occurs to many beginners. > Abhijjhaa is a kamma that are mental activities wishing to possess > properties or things that are owned by others beings. The base > dhamma that underlie this abhijjhaa kamma is lobha cetasika. >Byaapaada ( spell as Vyapada in PTS ) is a kamma that are mental >activities wishing destruction of others' properties, fames, good >reputation etc etc. The base dhamma that underlie this byaapaada >kamma >is dosa cetasika or aversion. Phil: Are kamma done through the mental door always less potent or harmful than kamma done through the body door? Is thinking of killing a human, for example, less potent than actually killing an insect? I think Rob M taught me on this point, and said that it is case by case, depending on the intensity of the intention, but I can't recall for sure. Also, is a kamma that is unprompted (ie an unwholesome thought that just arises on its own) more potent and harmful than a prompted thought (for example, we think of killing after watching a violent movie?) And if there is wrong view -"it doesn't matter if I do this - there is no result from kamma - I can get away with it" - does that make the kamma more potent? I guess we don't know, that the Buddha taught that trying to fingure out the precise working of kamma would drive us to distraction. In any case, I appreciate this reminder to be aware of akusala kamma through the mental door. I am slack in that department. Thanks in advance for your feedback. Metta, Phil 45395 From: "Evan Stamatopoulos" Date: Wed May 11, 2005 4:26pm Subject: RE: [dsg] Exalted Tranquillity ... !!! Evan_Stamato... Great reminder! But I think we should do more than just "recite them together for the future advantage". We should practice them. With Metta, Evan Friends: Gradually Deeper Successive Stillings: In the 1st meditative jhâna absorption, all sense-desire ceases. In the 2nd meditative jhâna absorption, conceptual thinking ceases. In the 3rd meditative jhâna absorption, enraptured joy ceases. In the 4th meditative jhâna absorption, breathing in & out ceases. In the sphere of infinite space, experience of form & sense reaction ceases. In the sphere of infinite consciousness, experience of infinite space ceases. In the sphere of nothingness, experience of infinite consciousness ceases. In the sphere of neither-perception-nor-non-perception, nothingness ceases. When attaining complete mental cessation, all perception and sensation ceases. These 9 sublime states have been perfectly formulated by the blessed Buddha, who knew & saw directly. therefore should we recite them together for the future advantage , welfare and happiness for both the line and human beings... 45396 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Wed May 11, 2005 4:46pm Subject: Ariya Savako [Re: Musings8 - Clinging to Self, ..] buddhistmedi... Hi Phil and all others - I'd like to quote from your message #45379 and talk to you a little bit. >Phil: Well, I'm not sure about this. There are suttas that distinguish >between "worldlings" (albeit "uninstructed" ones) and "noble disciples" (albeit "instructed" ones.) I notice that in a sutta translation used by Nina we find "well-taught ariyan disciple" instead of "instructed noble disciple." So I still suspect "noble" might refer to sotapannas etc. >Phil: But I'm also not sure if this distinction should keep us from >emulating the practices of enlightened ones. Again, I suspect we >should be wary of emulating them, because without the degree of >understanding they have, we will fool ourselves if we think we can >gain the results described in suttas. Just my hunch... Phil: This is just one of countless examples of suttas that >can easily be misinterpreted. I just urge caution, that's all. If one >person reading this realizes that suttas are not as easy to >understand as they might think, I will have helped one person out. >And if one person comes to understand that an intellectual >understanding of Abhidhamma greatly deepens our intellectual >understanding of suttas, I will be even happier! Tep: I believe Nina's translation of Ariya savaka as "ariyan disciple" is 100% correct. However, it does not mean that all those suttas are not useful for worldlings. I believe that the term "Ariya savaka" in many suttas I have seen comes near the end of the discourses. For instance, in the SN 35.28 (Adittapapariyaya Sutta) the Buddha addressed the 1000 bhikkhus as "Bhikkhus" at the beginning. Then at the end of the discourse He talked about the Ariya savaka experiencing revulsion and detachment as the end result, the fruit of following the Teaching all the way through. Clearly, the Ariya savaka indicates the end state, not the beginning. "Monks, the All is aflame. What All is aflame? The eye is aflame. Forms are aflame. Consciousness at the eye is aflame. Contact at the eye is aflame. And whatever there is that arises in dependence on contact at the eye -- experienced as pleasure, pain or neither-pleasure-nor-pain -- that too is aflame. Aflame with what? Aflame with the fire of passion, the fire of aversion, the fire of delusion. Aflame, I tell you, with birth, aging & death, with sorrows, lamentations, pains, distresses, & despairs. ... ... ... ... "Seeing thus, the well-instructed disciple of the noble ones grows disenchanted with the eye, disenchanted with forms, disenchanted with consciousness at the eye, ... ... ... [Thanissaro Bhikkhu's translation] Tep: I agree with you, Phil, that "well-instructed disciple of the noble ones" should be replaced by "well-taught ariyan disciple" . Respectfully, Tep ======= --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Philip" wrote: > > Hi Charles and Lisa(*) and all > > Sorry for taking so long to get back to you, Charles. > 45397 From: LBIDD@... Date: Wed May 11, 2005 5:01pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re:1. characteristic> 2. function> 3. manifestation> 4.proximate ca... lbidd2 Hi Sarah and Howard, In subsequent posts to the one you replied to I came to the conclusion that a group or compound, as such, has no intrinsic nature (sabhava), even if it is composed of realities with intrinsic nature. A kalapa or the mental body would be examples of this, but so would shape or motion, imo. These later two are often labelled concepts but I think it would be more accurate to call them formations insofar as they are formations of multiple consciousnesses. The point I am getting at is that ordinary experience isn't exactly conceptual but it is asabhava in the sense of being combinations of realities. I think it is this lack of center that makes ordinary experience fundamentally bewildering or uncognizable because a group both is and isn't an object of consciousness. I know this computer is here but I can't really see it. It is asabhava but also conditioned and impermanent on some level. I think there might be allusions to this phenomenon in the suttas in terms of "illusion" or "formation", but probably nothing definitive. A counter argument is that Vajira in SN says a chariot is just a word. Larry ------------------------ ps: actually Vajira doesn't say a chariot is just a word: p. 230 Wisdom SN. "Just as, with an assemblage of parts, the word 'chariot' is used, so when the aggregates exist, there is the convention 'a being'." 45398 From: "Philip" Date: Wed May 11, 2005 5:34pm Subject: Ariya Savako [Re: Musings8 - Clinging to Self, ..] philofillet Hi Tep, and all Good timing for me, Tep. I was just reading SN 22.99 (THe Leash) and reflecting on this very topic. > > Tep: I believe Nina's translation of Ariya savaka as "ariyan disciple" is > 100% correct. However, it does not mean that all those suttas are not > useful for worldlings. I believe that the term "Ariya savaka" in many > suttas I have seen comes near the end of the discourses. For instance, > in the SN 35.28 (Adittapapariyaya Sutta) the Buddha addressed the > 1000 bhikkhus as "Bhikkhus" at the beginning. Then at the end of the > discourse He talked about the Ariya savaka experiencing revulsion > and detachment as the end result, the fruit of following the Teaching all > the way through. Clearly, the Ariya savaka indicates the end state, not > the beginning. Ph: Yes, this is the usual pattern, isn't it? In the sutta I mentionned above, the Buddha describes very vividly the way worldlings wander around tied to their identity view like a dog leashed to a pole. And then we learn that the instructed noble disciple does not do this, does not regard form as self etc. ?@ ?@?@This is quite sobering, in a way, because it tells us that only the ariyan does not see form as self, etc. It suggests that until then we will remain in ignorance of the true nature of the khandas and will cling to them like dumb dogs (sorry Christine!) no matter how much we reflect on them, no matter how much we meditate on them. I'm glad to know this, because when I first started reading suttas, I thought that I could have moments of not regarding form (etc) as self (etc) quite easily, and of course I can intellectually, and it is helpful, but this is not the way it is seen by the ariyan. It is not the way it is described in the suttas such as the two we have referred to. I wonder if meditation teachers make this clear to their students? Well, I guess what they do is promise that students can become sotapanna within weeks of practice etc. Perhaps they can. I shouldn't assume that they can't - after all, we know about the seven day plan laid out in the satipatthana sutta. But I remain wary of teachers that promise quick results to modern worldlings, whose conditions and accumulations are so radically different from worldings in the Buddha's day. So what do we do? Give up? Remain content with shallow intellectual knowledge? No, there is great value of small moments of mindfulness - the water pot is filled ever so slowly, drop by drop, as the Dhammapada puts it. It is better to be patient than to try to fill the pot in a hurry. That'll just burst the pot! (Our pots are in very bad condition, very corrupt, because of the world we live in, maybe?) Tep, I remember the analogy of the casino you used. It was very vivid and will stick with me. You described this ever-so-patient approach to mindfulness encouraged by Kh Sujin and others as random, like the roulette ball falling into place, I thnk. And of course, gambling and hoping for results at a casino is unwholesome and depressing and pathetic. I know that your chanda to develop mindfulness in a more intentional way is wholesome and you want to share your enthusiasm with others. That's so clear. Continuing to read your posts will help me to keep an open mind toward more intentional ways of developing mindfulness. And I hope that you too will come to see that there is nothing pessimistic or passive about finding value in apparently random (but not so - there are conditions at work) moments of mindfulness in daily life. Metta, Phil 45399 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Wed May 11, 2005 5:35pm Subject: [dsg] Sarah's Elaboration on Anatta [was Re: ‘Cetasikas' study corner 177 ] buddhistmedi... Dear Sarah and others - I believe that this thread is important, although the topic of atta/anatta has been discussed many times already. >T: ....the 5 aggregates are anatta because they are subject to disease (aabaadha) ... S: ... because the 5 aggregates are anatta, therefore they are subject to disease.. T: Isn't it true both ways? ---------------------------- S: Miccha-ditthi is real. Wrong view is a cetasika which arises with certain kinds of cittas rooted in lobha. When it arises, there is a distorted idea of realities at that moment. T: Yes, miccha-ditthi is real just as panca kkhandha is real, in the sense of existence at a given moment. One who has a wrong view, does not see characteristics of dhammas the way they really are. ----------------------------- S: The concepts of self or other ideas are imagined pannatti and not real. T: I think you may be contradicting to what you just said above. If the wrong view of self (miccha-ditthi) is real, how can the concepts of self be unreal? The "concepts of self" are also a viewpoint, a ditthi. The contradiction comes from an attachment to the Paramattha-dhamma definition of pannatti. [:->) ---------------- [ Please read Lisa's message # 45324 on extreme viewpoints.] > T: By agreeing, it means that you also have the same extreme view on self. Do you want to change that wrong view now? ... S: No:-) I stand by this interpretation. See above. Oh well, you were warned:-). T: Please be precise -- write down the "above", because I don't know which part of the above you referred to. Look, you might miss a chance to abandon your extreme view of no self! [ :->) -------------- S: Yes, I think there's always more and more refining of view and development of panna necessary. Very good points and sutta extracts to keep discussing and reflecting on. T: It is so important that we are learning and adjusting/refining views for the better. Otherwise, why are we spending time discussing the Dhamma? Thank you for the appreciation. Your discussion points are very good too, Sarah. Respectfully, Tep ========= --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > Hi Tep, > > > Sarah > p.s I hoped to add to the walking discussions but out of time – hope > others will continue them. > =========