51400 From: "robmoult" Date: Wed Oct 12, 2005 5:57am Subject: Fear of Losing Partner (Re: Rob M’s Problem Reply Part I) robmoult Hi James, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "buddhatrue" wrote: > But, I have something to mention. Something rather personal, but I > guess not too much so. Remember when you were talking about the > fear you experienced when you had momentarily lost yourself? And > how we can all experience that fear? I have that also- but I also > have another issue: I am sometimes afraid of disappointing and > losing my partner. You see, I realize that the more insight I > achieve the less and less I will be interested in sex and romantic > relationships. I have experienced this many times in the past > during meditation and it always made me pull back a bit (due to my > relationship at the time). Actually, this is such a concern of mine > that I had a small talk with my partner about it yesterday. I told > him that if I got back to meditating seriously, which he encourages > me to do, I might get to the point when I no longer want to have sex > or be romantic with him. In other words, our relationship would be > over. He didn't like the sound of that but he didn't have much to > say in response. After all, it isn't guaranteed that that would > happen. > > Howard, I know that you are married so I wonder if this situation > has presented itself with you and your wife. I also wonder about > Jon and Sarah and other married or committed couples in this group. > Are they sometimes afraid to practice for fear of losing the > relationship and/or disappointing their partner? You don't have to > answer if you don't feel comfortable; I know that this is a rather > personal issue. But it is something I face so I thought I would > bring it up. ===== I was recently asked to made a toast at a wedding of a friend. I said, "May you spend the rest of your years, not looking at each other in blind love, not looking away from each other with your own interests, but together looking in the same direction, following the same path." Over the past decade and particularly in the past five years or so, both my wife and I have become more and more involved with Buddhism. We go to Dhamma talks and meditation classes together. We plan our time to support each other's retreat schedule; for example, when I am not traveling, I take care of the kids and she can go on a retreat. Our communication is closer as we use a common vocabulary. We are closer to each other. It is wonderful for our relationship. James, I know that your situation is quite different. But perhaps you can adapt some of the principles to your situation. Metta, Rob M :-) 51401 From: "jonoabb" Date: Wed Oct 12, 2005 5:34am Subject: Re: Mahaanidana sutta, theory/practice jonoabb Hi Mateesha Hope you don't mind me butting in here with some brief comments ;-)) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "matheesha" wrote: ... > M: I think we need to get experiential here. Why do you assume that > panna doesnt fade, like memory? It is not permanent. Not only does > all phenomena arise and pass away it also changes. > > Panna is not something that can be crystalised into its own object, > say for example like a Sound. It is ultimately a thought, arising at > the mind door. The content of the thought is Understanding of the > dhammas, which we call panna. I would say that the panna of the teachings is ultimately a mental factor (cetasika), like other qualities good and bad, and that these mental factors are accumulated that is to say passed from one moment of consciusness to the next. This is how qualties good and bad come to be developed. If understanding is to be used to > generate more understanding later, it needs to be retained in > memory. Memory is impermanent with time and especially liftimes. if > an old person learns the dhamma but keeps forgetting it, how can he > build up on it? > > There has to be another mechanism outside simple memory but that > seems to be weak and near subconsious perhaps better suited for > bodhisattvas to work with. Memory is known to be notoriously > unreliable from psychology experiments. Only continuous brushing > up/building up can give rise to something even greater. To my (theoretical) understanding, 'memory' as used in the teachings is another mental factor that performs a particular function. It is not the equivalent of conventional memory (nor is it the repository of panna or of other qualities good or bad). > M: From the Mahasatipattana sutta: "And how does a monk remain > focused on the body in & of itself? > > [1] "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. > > I'm sorry, but this is in the sutta in plain English ..sorry Pali! > If this isnt formal meditation.... The question posed at the beginning of the passage quoted above from the Satipatthana Sutta has a rather long answer in the sutta. The part about anapanasati is just the first of about 13 parts to the answer, and so should not be taken in isolation. As to whether it can be called 'formal meditation' or not, I'm not sure that is a fruitful line of discussion. Certainly the Buddha never called it that, nor did any of the ancient commentaries (so why do we seek to characterise it like this?). But in any event, if you want to call it that, then it means that the rest of the part on mindfulness of the body, and the whole of the parts on mindfulness of feelings, consciousness and dhammas, is about something *other than* 'formal meditation'. So we would need to consider the sutta as a whole. Jon 51402 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Wed Oct 12, 2005 6:16am Subject: Behaviors of One Who is Unfit to Talk With buddhistmedi... Dear SD Friends - As a dhamma discusser who has been trying to be a person fit to talk with, I appreciate AN III.67: Kathavatthu Sutta, (Topics for Discussion). I. What is the pupose of a dhamma discussion? -- Clearly knowing one quality(dhamma), comprehending one quality, abandoning one quality, and realizing one quality, one touches right release : the liberation of the mind through no clinging. II. When someone asks a question during a dhamma discussion, how should it be answered? -- When the question deserves a categorial answer, then give it. -- When the question deserves an analytical answer, then give it. -- Give a counter-question to the question that deserves a counter- question. -- Put aside the question that deserves to be put aside. ** Follow the above advice, then you'll be a "person fit to talk with" ! III. What are the behaviors of a dhamma discusser who is unfit to talk with? -- wandering from one thing to another, does not directly answer a question. -- changes the topic ! -- shows anger, aversion, and become silent or withdrawn with resentment. -- when asked a question, doesn't stand by what is possible and impossible, doesn't stand by agreed-upon assumptions, doesn't stand by teachings known to be true, and doesn't stand by standard procedure. -- when asked a question, puts down the questioner, crushes him, ridicules him, grasps at his little mistakes. Avoiding all the above behaviors, then you'll be a very good dhamma discusser. Best wishes, Tep ======= 51403 From: "robmoult" Date: Wed Oct 12, 2005 6:34am Subject: Re: Rob M’s Problem Reply Part I robmoult Hi Ken H, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "kenhowardau" wrote: > Actually, I thought it was you who were having second thoughts. Joop > quoted you as saying: > > "I am of the opinion that attaining jhanas is not required to gain > enlightenment. I belive that Bhikkhu Bodhi gave a detailed analysis > of this issue and came to the same conclusion." > > Are you now saying that Right Concentration of the NEP is the > jhanas, but attaining them is not required for enlightenment? > ====== My statement was over-simplified. What I should have said was, "I am of the opinion that attaining jhanas is not required to gain the first stage of enlightenment (sotapanna). I belive that Bhikkhu Bodhi gave a detailed analysis of this issue and came to the same conclusion." I have just posted the complete Bhikkhu Bodhi essay in one message. Here is conlcusion #2 from BB's essay: "All noble disciples acquire the right concentration of the Noble Eightfold Path, which is defined as the four jhaanas. This need not be understood to mean that stream-enterers and once-returners already possess jhaana before they reach stream-entry. The formula for right concentration may imply only that they must eventually attain the jhaanas in the course of developing the path to its culmination in arahantship. If we go along with the Commentaries in recognizing the Abhidhammic distinction between the preparatory path and the supramundane path, then we can maintain that the jhaanas included in right concentration as a path factor pertain to the supramundane path and are thus of supramundane stature. This still leaves open the question whether aspirants for stream-entry must develop the mundane jhaanas in the preliminary phase of their practice." Ken, my position is, "I agree with Bhikkhu Bodhi" :-) ===== > -------------------- > > I have read your reply but I am still not clear. I want to make > sure > > that I understand your position on this before proceeding. Please > > clarify: > > > > Do you now accept that "Right Concentration" in the Noble Eightfold > > Path is the same as the jhanas and now you want to clarify some > > points (cetasikas, etc.) to square this with your broader > > understanding of the Dhamma? > ------------------- > > My point was that Right Understanding *is* a cetasika. And yet, the > sutta describes a monk experiencing a series of jhana cittas, and > then says, "This, monks, is called right concentration." > > Surely, you will agree that further explanation is required. (?) ===== I assume that you mean "Right Concentration". Why do you think that Right Concentration is a cetasika? I don't think that it is defined that way in the texts. Metta, Rob M :-) 51404 From: "robmoult" Date: Wed Oct 12, 2005 6:36am Subject: Re: Rob M’s Problem Reply Part I robmoult Hi Swee Boon, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "nidive" wrote: > > Hi Rob M, > > > > I also suspect you reject any standard view that liberation can > > > be attained by dry insight, because no sutta reference can be > > > found to support it. > > > > I have no reason to reject dry insight (arahants without jhanas) - I > > think that Bhikkhu Bodhi did find Sutta references to support this. > > I believe that Bhikkhu Bodhi said that jhana is required for the path > of non-return. > > He made this point in a thesis that was posted by Sarah "not too long > ago" in DSG (Mon Jun 14, 2004 2:00 pm) :-). > > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/33870 > > The Jhaanas and the Lay Disciple > According to the Paali Suttas > > Ven. Bhikkhu Bodhi > > I myself believe there is strong evidence in the Nikaayas that the > jhaanas become an essential factor for those intent on advancing from > the stage of once-returning to that of non-returner. > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > > I believe you have read this post before. ===== You are right. Thanks for the correction! Metta, Rob M :-) 51405 From: "robmoult" Date: Wed Oct 12, 2005 6:46am Subject: Re: Jhana and Samadhi robmoult Hi Hal, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Hal" wrote: > > Dear Phil, Rob M & All, > > The following was extracted from the BPS edition _The Jhanas in > Theravada Buddhist Meditation_ by Mahathera Henepola Gunaratana, > Wheel 351/353, pp. 6-8. (Please excuse my poor typing skills! Hal) ===== Thanks for typing out this very interesting quotation. I will be seeing Ven. Gunaratana when he visits Malaysia at the end of November. I plan to ask him his opinion on the issues raised by Bhikkhu Bodhi's essay . Metta, Rob M :-) 51406 From: "matheesha" Date: Wed Oct 12, 2005 6:54am Subject: Re: Mahaanidana sutta, theory/practice matheesha333 Hi Jon, J:> I would say that the panna of the teachings is ultimately a mental > factor (cetasika), like other qualities good and bad, M: Agreed! and that these > mental factors are accumulated that is to say passed from one moment > of consciusness to the next. M: Disagree! Then we would have to be conscious of our panna every thought moment. Yet we are not. I understand that the commentaries might say that. But it is simply not possible when you think about it. After all we must give priority as Truth to what actually happens out there, rather than what the texts say should happen, even though it might go against the grain. I might add that such a passing on of information is not mentioned in the suttas. I am reminded of a sutta where the buddha says he is NOT all seeing all the time, but rather can see anything he wishes to. Nigantanathaputta claimed to be all seeing all the time -the buddha said that if this were the case while walking around he would fall over cows, and into pits etc! J:> The question posed at the beginning of the passage quoted above from > the Satipatthana Sutta has a rather long answer in the sutta. The > part about anapanasati is just the first of about 13 parts to the > answer, and so should not be taken in isolation. M: I did not take it in isolation. The buddha simply starts off using the 'going to an empty house, deserted field etc' right at the start the sutta and is valid as far as i can see for the rest of the sutta. What I meant was that Intentional practice is rcommended in the sutta. This is what i meant by 'formal practice' as opposed to 'accidental' noting of dhammas. Thank you for the comments, you might not agree with me, but we dont have to! metta Matheesha 51407 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Wed Oct 12, 2005 6:57am Subject: Fear of Losing Partner (Re: Rob M’s Problem Reply Part I) buddhatrue Hi Rob M., --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "robmoult" wrote: > > I was recently asked to made a toast at a wedding of a friend. I > said, "May you spend the rest of your years, not looking at each > other in blind love, not looking away from each other with your own > interests, but together looking in the same direction, following the > same path." James: That is such a beautiful toast!! I hope that the whole congregation, including the bride and groom, understood the significance of your meaning. Those events can be so plastic and forced- it was very nice and brave of you to offer a breath of fresh air to the festivities. > > Over the past decade and particularly in the past five years or so, > both my wife and I have become more and more involved with Buddhism. > We go to Dhamma talks and meditation classes together. We plan our > time to support each other's retreat schedule; for example, when I am > not traveling, I take care of the kids and she can go on a retreat. > Our communication is closer as we use a common vocabulary. We are > closer to each other. It is wonderful for our relationship. James: This is also so wonderful!! Rob, you have such good kamma to run into such a person- I hope you appreciate that. Not everyone is so fortunate. I have been struggling with selfish partner after selfish partner- probably because I am (or was) so selfish myself. I hope to make a change and that is why I wanted to bring this subject up. Thank you for offering a description of the ideal situation I want and need. At least I know, now, that my goal is not impossible. > > James, I know that your situation is quite different. But perhaps you > can adapt some of the principles to your situation. James: Yeah, we should just forget about the gender differences. They are so superficial. Those people who are stuck at that level are so low in knowledge. And I will try to adapt some of your principles to my situation. The first step is to have open communication with my partner- as I have tried to do (though it is scarry because I don't want to disappoint or upset anyone). Then, let the person know what is going on with you and what you see might happen in the future. Yeah, this is all good advice. Thank you for caring enough to write to me and sharing your situation/story. That means a lot to me. > > Metta, > Rob M :-) Metta, James 51408 From: "robmoult" Date: Wed Oct 12, 2005 7:02am Subject: Re: Rob M’s Problem Reply Part I robmoult Hi Joop, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Joop" wrote: > > Dear Ken, Rob, Swee Boon (and all), > > Rob. First the simple model: one can be concentrated a little, then > more and then very much. Somewhere on that scale 'being in jhana' is > situated, but the whole range is 'right concentration': 'right' is > not the intensity but the intention of the concentration. > ===== As pointed out in Ven Gunaratana's text typed out by Hal, concentration is ethically variable; it arises in both wholesome and wholesome mental states. However, just because concentration arises in a wholesome mental state does not qualify it as "Right Concentration" as a path factor. To qualify as a path factor, the concentration must be associated with a jhana state. ===== > Second, you state to Ken: "Ken, you differentiate between jhana and > satipatthana according to > type of object taken (concepts vs. conditioned dhammas). This is not > my understanding. Jhana can definitely take conditioned dhammas as > objects (earth kasina, fire kasina, etc.). Satipatthana can also take > concepts as object (sitting, Four Noble Truths, etc.)." I think > somewhere we (Ken, you and me) are talking about different things: > IN INSIGHT-MEDITATION (aka vipassana-meditation Mahasi style) OBJECT > ARE NOT TAKEN; THEY ARISE (and fall), "all" the meditator had to do > is noting this. Perhaps you like the ebook of Ven. Sujiva of Buddhist > Wisdom Centre, Mallaysia: "Essentials of Insight Meditation Practice" > (http://www.buddhanet.net/pdf_file/essentials.pdf) See quotes below > In this book he in fact explains the same as Ken does (Ken: a > propagandist of insight meditation, you could not have dreamt of that) ===== Sorry for my sloppy English; Satipatthana (described in the Sutta) can take concepts as an object. Insight takes whatever arises as its object and penetrates the three characterisitcs. ===== > > And Ken, two other remarks to you: > Ken: "Jhana cannot know Nibbana, so there can be no enlightenment in > the same moment as there is jhana. Unless, of course, there is such a > thing as supramundane jhana." > Joop: perhaps my knowledge is not enough but I ask: so what. Is one a > arahant (because enlightened) after having been in supramundane jhana > for some time (Seconds? Minutes? Hours? Days?) ===== Actually, the achievement of a stage of sainthood (sotapanna, sakadagami, anagami, arahant) arises during a single citta called a "path" citta. This path citta always takes Nibbana as its object. One cannot attain even the first stage of sainthood if one only practices jhanas. ===== > > My last and most serious question to you, (and Rob and others) is > that's difficult to combine what I know about the mindfulnes- > concentration discussion and the MahaSaccaka Sutta (Majjhima Nikaya > 36) in which the Buddha explains the first jhana is enough to get > awakened: > "I thought: `I recall once, when my father the Sakyan was working, > and I was sitting in the cool shade of a rose-apple tree, then— quite > withdrawn from sensuality, withdrawn from unskillful mental qualities— > I entered & remained in the first jhana: rapture & pleasure born from > withdrawal, accompanied by directed thought & evaluation. Could that > be the path to Awakening?' Then, following on that memory, came the > realization: `That is the path to Awakening." ===== I interpret this Sutta as saying that when the Buddha sat under the Bodhi tree, he reflected on his experience with jhana as a child and realized that attaining jhanas would be a good platform from which to pursue insight meditation. Bhikku Bodhi makes the point in his long essay that I recently posted that jhana may not be required to attain the first three stages of sainthood, but it is required to attain Arahantship (and of course Buddhahood). Metta, Rob M :-) 51409 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Wed Oct 12, 2005 7:06am Subject: Re: Behaviors of One Who is Unfit to Talk With buddhatrue Hi Tep, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Tep Sastri" wrote: > > > Dear SD Friends - > > As a dhamma discusser who has been trying to be a person fit to talk > with, I appreciate AN III.67: Kathavatthu Sutta, (Topics for Discussion). > > I. What is the pupose of a dhamma discussion? > > -- Clearly knowing one quality(dhamma), comprehending one quality, > abandoning one quality, and realizing one quality, one touches right > release : the liberation of the mind through no clinging. > > > II. When someone asks a question during a dhamma discussion, how > should it be answered? > > -- When the question deserves a categorial answer, then give it. > -- When the question deserves an analytical answer, then give it. > -- Give a counter-question to the question that deserves a counter- > question. > -- Put aside the question that deserves to be put aside. > > ** Follow the above advice, then you'll be a "person fit to talk with" ! > > III. What are the behaviors of a dhamma discusser who is unfit to talk > with? > > -- wandering from one thing to another, does not directly answer a > question. > -- changes the topic ! > -- shows anger, aversion, and become silent or withdrawn with > resentment. > -- when asked a question, doesn't stand by what is possible and > impossible, doesn't stand by agreed-upon assumptions, doesn't > stand by teachings known to be true, and doesn't stand by standard > procedure. > -- when asked a question, puts down the questioner, crushes him, > ridicules him, grasps at his little mistakes. > > Avoiding all the above behaviors, then you'll be a very good dhamma > discusser. > > > Best wishes, > > > Tep Very good advice! Though it would leave most of us unfit to talk with. Including myself. (hehehehe...but nothing wrong with presenting the standards that we should all reach for, though we may stumble and fall on occassion.) Metta, James 51410 From: "Phil" Date: Wed Oct 12, 2005 7:25am Subject: The value of studying conditions ( was Re: rough index to UPs on paccayas) philofillet Hi Leo > I am not a robot without mind and uncapable of making my analysis. > Since I am capable of making analysis, I will look for "what's in it > for me?" I am not saying you should follow my way. > I guess I am a different kind.... > > Leo Not so different. To tell the truth, I am thinking about what I get out of Dhamma all the time. "By protecting oneself, one protects others" is a sutta line I like. (Of course the same sutta says "by protecting others, one protects oneself.) We're all motivated by self-interest, the desire for enlightenment. You are honest about it and that's great! I think my point was more along the line of having excessive interest in how we are feeling, what we are doing, how we are seen, is a sign, perhaps, of not grasping the fundamental truth of the Buddha's teaching - we are ultimately nothing but conditioned mental and physical factors, rising and falling away. What is so interesting about bare seeing, hearing, touching, void of the mental proliferation that follows later? What is there to get worked up about, what is there to have interest in about ourselves? When you get right down to it, we are just bare elements - seeing, eye, visible form/hearing, ear base, sound/ and so on for the other 4 sense doors. Or the five khandas of form, consciousness, mental factors, feeling and perception. Not a very appealing notion in our modern world which places such value on being interesting, unique, talented people. And this is the sort of thing that almost caused the Buddha to refrain from going out into the world to teach, because he knew his teaching would go against the way of the world. How many of us *truly* want to be extinguished, to disappear as people and be reduced to bare elements penetrated by pure wisdom, devoid of the wanting, liking, hating, loving and so on that is generated because of ignorance. How many of us truly want to get out of samsara, to not be reborn? I must admit I haven't had that sense of urgency about that yet. Sorry Leo, that was a bit of a weird ramble there. I like to think out loud. Phil p.s No need to get back to me on this, unless you really want to. 51411 From: "robmoult" Date: Wed Oct 12, 2005 7:30am Subject: Re: Rob M’s Problem Reply Part I robmoult Hi Andrew, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Andrew" wrote: > > Hi Rob M > > Thanks for your reply. You've asked a few more questions, so I'll > snip to them and see what happens. Please understand that, at this > point in time, I am raising issues of methodology and not substance > (for which, as I said before, I have no answers). I do think it is > critical to adopt an appropriate framework for contemplation because > a faulty one will lead nowhere. > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "robmoult" > wrote: > AT: Don't get me wrong. I know you will reply with a string of other > > > reasons why you take Jhana to be a core teaching. > > > > ===== > > > RM: Just one point... because they are part of the Noble Eightfold > Path, > > they are a key teaching. > > AT: I'll jump in here, Rob. You said before that Jhana is defined as > Right Concentration of the Noble Eightfold Path. But is it? Could > your methodology here be too rigid? I acknowledge your sutta > references but question whether the suttas were ever meant to be > interpreted like statutes where definitions can be looked up. ===== I would say that for really core concepts such as path factors, the Buddha explicitly defined them in Suttas. Because they are the core of the teaching, I believe that the Buddha made the effort to define the path factors like statutes. You can find similar definitions in Suttas for the other Path factors on Access to Insight. ===== > Isn't > it at least possible that the suttas were recited shorthand for easy > memorisation and in the knowledge that (hopefully) there would always > be bhikkhus around to hand down the original details, fill in gaps, > and necessary background? (Perhaps like the details discussed in the > jhana/samadhi article kindly posted by Hal). You point out the > historian's perspective that, in all the schools, the suttas came > down to us very alike, whereas the Abhidhamma and commentaries > didn't. But it doesn't follow that they *all* got it wrong and that > they *all* made these things up brand-new hundreds of years after the > Buddha. > Furthermore (as you hinted at in a previous post), if one is > to follow the historian's perspective in discounting Abhidhammas and > commentaries, one must logically do the same for the suttas - divide > them up between "early" and "later" and "added to" or whatever - > based on linguistic analysis (a field of study far from being free of > controversy, I might add). > To stop rambling here, I'll sum up by saying that what seems > perfectly clear to you (Jhana = RC of NEP) isn't so clearcut to me. > And the difference is in our methodologies, I think. ===== I take the "historian" perspective not to discount any part of the Tipitaka but to try and determine what is the true core of the teaching; the overriding basic principles. I believe that the following must be included as core (an incomplete list): - Noble Eightfold Path - Four Noble Truths - Dependent Origination - Greed / Hatred / Delusion are unwholesome, opposites are wholesome I believe that the Noble Eightfold Path is a core teaching of the Buddha and that the Buddha did make the effort to define each of the path factors. I also believe that "Right Concentration" is the four jhanas (based on multiple Suttas). Andrew, do you believe that "Right Concentration" is not the same as the four jhanas? How would you define "Right Concentration" and based on what text? How then do we interpret the Suttas SN XLV.8, AN IX.36 and AN IV.41? ===== > > AT: I also suspect you > > > reject any standard view that liberation can be attained by dry > > > insight, because no sutta reference can be found to support it. > > > > ===== > RM: I have no reason to reject dry insight (arahants without jhanas) - > I > > think that Bhikkhu Bodhi did find Sutta references to support this. > > AT: Could you please remind me again - if Jhanas are Right > Concentration in the NEP, how can there be arahants without jhanas? ===== I made a mistake here. According to Bhikkhu Bodhi's article, jhanas are not required for the first three stages of sainthood (sotapanna, sakadagami, anagami) but jhanas are required for Arahanthood. ===== > > >AT: That's > > > another area where I have serious reservations about your basic > > > premises - treating the suttas like strict Christians treat the > > Bible > > > makes me nervous. Maybe - just maybe - some of the commentaries > > that > > > have come down to us were sincere and good attempts at preserving > > the > > > true Dhamma by filling in gaps in the suttas or ironing out > > possible > > > misconceptions. In which case, Rob, your methodology (as > studious > > as > > > it appears to us academic westerners) shuts you out of the real > > game. > > > > ===== > > > RM: Please elaborate... I want to understand better. > > AT: I hope my comments above elaborate enough. The suttas are not > the sacrosanct word of some god or God. They are an attempt by some > ariyans and a lot of worldlings to preserve the teachings of Buddha > Gotama for as long as possible before inevitable decay. They are > subject to the limitations of oral transmission, of written language > and of translation between languages. We can't talk Dhamma like a > strict Christian might - by reading out a passage from the Bible and > expecting immediate obedience lest an accusation of heresy be made. > Very few people on Dhamma discussion lists do that, I know, and least > of all you, Rob. But I think we all have to bear in mind that we are > in a pickle - born so distant from the age of Buddha Gotama after > multiple splits in the Sangha. To get to the heart of the Dhamma > now, we're going to need to be intellectually flexible and not stray > too far from the central tenets - especially those that explain the > reality hidden from us by our ignorance. I don't think we can > achieve this by sticking to one basket and relying on our own > knowledge to interpret it correctly. ===== It is for this very reason that I try to determine what are the core teachings of the Buddha versus those added on later. Any way that I look at it, Noble Eightfold Path is core and the assignment of "Right Concentration" as the four jhanas makes sense to me... Metta, Rob M :-) 51412 From: upasaka@... Date: Wed Oct 12, 2005 3:31am Subject: Re: [dsg] Fear of Losing Partner (Re: Ro b M’s Problem Reply Par t I) upasaka_howard Hi, James - In a message dated 10/12/05 8:15:55 AM Eastern Daylight Time, buddhatrue@... writes: > > Hi Howard (and Ken H. and all), > > Howard, I found your responses to Ken H. very skillful. Your > meditation must be reaping great benefit as I can see (sense?) > increased equanimity. > -------------------------------------- Howard: Your sensing/evaluating is on-target here. -------------------------------------- You inspire me to practice more, which I > > haven't been doing as much as I should. Maybe if I did practice > more my posts would be more skillful. > > But, I have something to mention. Something rather personal, but I > guess not too much so. Remember when you were talking about the > fear you experienced when you had momentarily lost yourself? And > how we can all experience that fear? I have that also- but I also > have another issue: I am sometimes afraid of disappointing and > losing my partner. You see, I realize that the more insight I > achieve the less and less I will be interested in sex and romantic > relationships. I have experienced this many times in the past > during meditation and it always made me pull back a bit (due to my > relationship at the time). Actually, this is such a concern of mine > that I had a small talk with my partner about it yesterday. I told > him that if I got back to meditating seriously, which he encourages > me to do, I might get to the point when I no longer want to have sex > or be romantic with him. In other words, our relationship would be > over. He didn't like the sound of that but he didn't have much to > say in response. After all, it isn't guaranteed that that would > happen. > > Howard, I know that you are married so I wonder if this situation > has presented itself with you and your wife. > ------------------------------------------- Howard: In my case I find a reduction in compulsive desire beth case, but no reduction in enjoyment, in fact quite the opposite. Being equanimous (or at least more so) is only to the good. Also, I don't think that one has much to worry about as regards loss of sexual inclination as a worldling or even as a lesser ariyan. ------------------------------------------ I also wonder about > > Jon and Sarah and other married or committed couples in this group. > Are they sometimes afraid to practice for fear of losing the > relationship and/or disappointing their partner? You don't have to > answer if you don't feel comfortable; I know that this is a rather > personal issue. But it is something I face so I thought I would > bring it up. > > Metta, > James > ==================== With metta, Howard 51413 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Wed Oct 12, 2005 7:29am Subject: Re: Rob M’s Problem Reply Part I buddhatrue Hi Rob M. and Joop, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "robmoult" wrote: Bhikku Bodhi makes the point in his long > essay that I recently posted that jhana may not be required to attain > the first three stages of sainthood, but it is required to attain > Arahantship (and of course Buddhahood). > > Metta, > Rob M :-) I am so glad that you made this point. Honestly, I had been reading your dialogue with Ken H. where you kept saying that B. Bodhi didn't say that jhana was required for the path-knowledge of arahant and I thought that you were incorrect. But, I lost all of my bookmarks this summer so I wasn't able to say anything- because I didn't have the article to refer to. Not only that, I respect you and your opinion so much that I second-guessed myself and thought I must be wrong after all. Thank you so much for reversing yourself in the face of the facts and fo doing so gracefully. B. Bodhi is very knowledgeable about the suttas but his personal writings can be very erudite (if anyone has to look that word up, you will know exactly what I mean! ;-). It is no wonder that practically all of us were confused about the main meaning just a few months after it was posted. Metta, James 51414 From: "Phil" Date: Wed Oct 12, 2005 7:38am Subject: Question for A. Sujin ( was Re: A feverish e-card from Varanasi) philofillet Hi Sarah and India gang. I was sorry to hear about your fever, especially after I joked about malaria. I'm sure there is already a long list of discussion topics, but I heard something today that I would like to ask about, if the opportunity arises. I heard A. Sujin say "if there is metta or karuna or upekkha, but not as the development of more kusala, then it is without panna. Becuase it is by one's accumulations." Doesn't kusala that arises due to accumulations lead to "development of more kusala" through further accumulation? What is the difference between development (bhavana?) and the accumulation of kusala? Thanks, Sarah, if there is an opportunity... Phil --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > > Hi All, > > A touch of fever, so this may be another of those nonsense malaria- induced > KISS posts Phil referred to.... > > A morning discussion here in Varanasi/Benares covering topics from 'what > exactly is sati', thr' the complexities of paticca samuppada and other > details (jhana and all too:)) and ending with the relating of the details > of cittas with life outside, the beggars and being in India... > > Oh the bliss of a keyboard here with only a few layers of relatively clean > grime....the one in Bodh Gaya (several mins before each click and a virus > on the downloaded floppy to boot)was an engineeering masterpiece...I was > so fascinated at how anything could work at all in the little grimy hut > that it was hard to follow the messages when the click got through.... > > Now slowly getting up-to-date....sharing with Nina en route....very happy > to hear you're all going strong on conditions and Larry is recommending > downloading and memorising her book in advance:-))lol (and thx so much, > Larry for your nice welcome to Leo and help - Leo, glad to see you on > board). > > Highlights to date - the beautiful climb to Vulture's Peak, the Buddha's > kuti at the top, the descent in a thunder storm (no one equipped), a > lovely little discussion sitting on the grass in the grounds at > Nalanda...always back to NOW..... > > I felt I was being tossed around by the worldly conditions - gain and loss > and so on...lots of tribulations on a trip like this, but nearly all in > the mind....moments of good and bad vipaka are just such brief moments of > seeing, hearing and so on....And then, a little sanity as I sat with Jon > at the foot of the Bo tree....reflecting on how insignificant and > unimportnat these worldly conditions are....and for the first time, a > little understanding of what it means to really offer forgiveness to the > Triple Gem....a kind of respect....when we're so foolishly wrapped up in > our kilesa, our thoughts about ME from morning to nite, there's no respect > at all. How different the much rarer times of consideration for others, > the metta and compassion are...and calm with such kusala moments. > > Azita read a nice sutta from AN this morning and asked a question about > the reference to attachment to restlessness mentioned in it. Surely > there's no attachment to restlessness? But whenever there's lobha, dosa or > moha, there's restlessness and we are addicted to it....however much we > talk about calm. > > Tomorrow will be a very special day in Sarnath....goosebumps at the > anticipation (mostly lobha and maybe a little kusala chanda (interest). > Besides paying respects and later the evening 'wientien'(circling around > with candles)which we do at all the holy places, we'll also be offering > dana again to 120 monks from different traditions, Lodewijk will give a > speech and in the afternoon there will be a special ceremony with the > relics which are opened out of the vault specially and placed on each of > our heads. Also, the chanting of the Dhammacakkapavattana sutta in Pali, > the wheel of truth set rolling in this special place.... > > That's the story- anything can happen and as Azita wrote, still just > visible object and other paramattha dhammas whether here or in the surf. > And yes, KenH and Htoo, sitting here in this hot, dusty spot, I'm having a > little fantasy about the waves across the road from KenH's house.....all > these dreams and stories because of sanna marking and remembering at each > moment, each experience. > > Tep and all - K.Sujin plans another such trip in two years time...Nina and > Lodewijk keep saying this will be their last (conditions so difficult), > but I'm sure they'll be signing up again....if anyone has any interest, > let me or someone know and get your name on the list quickly...they fill > up very early. They are tough and expensive, but such an opportunity.. > > Tomorrow is a long day (an early trip to the Ganges too for some) and it > will be followed by several long bus trip days, remoter holy places with > probably no internet. So thanks to all for running the list so beautifully > in our absence and especially for all the courtesy and respect for each > other.....a real treat to look in when we can. > > Apologies for any delirium.... I need to get back to some hot liquids, so > no time to check. > > Metta, > > Sarah > p.s Phil, I was working on the bus yesterday at some editing of a > recording from Bkk between the bumps and assure you bickering happens > everywhere, even at the Foundation:)) Btw, Betty kindly raised yr qus and > has promised to report back. > 51415 From: "robmoult" Date: Wed Oct 12, 2005 7:41am Subject: Re: Coma - fruit of kamma? robmoult Hi Cheah, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "khcheah33" wrote: > My apologies to every dsg friends for being unable to write in so > often, as I figure I may have personal time-control problem. :-) :-) > Will try to follow closely most of the posts though. > ===== One of the wonderful things about DSG is that everbody is so understanding when a member disappears for a while (as I have done). Whenever I return, I always feel welcome. Do not let concern over what people might say because you have been away stop you from posting whenever you can. I look forward to questions from your study group!!! Metta, Rob M :-) 51416 From: "robmoult" Date: Wed Oct 12, 2005 7:37am Subject: Re: Rob M’s Problem Reply Part I robmoult Hi Steve, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "bodhi2500" wrote: > > Hi Rob M, All > > Below is the sutta you were looking for. > ===== Thank you thank you thank you.. Metta, Rob M :-) 51417 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Wed Oct 12, 2005 7:50am Subject: [dsg] Fear of Losing Partner (Re: Ro b M’s Problem Reply Par t I) buddhatrue Hi Howard, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@a... wrote: > > Hi, James - > -------------------------------------- > Howard: > Your sensing/evaluating is on-target here. > -------------------------------------- James: I thought so. ;-)) So glad to see your practice of benefit. Just watch out for the hindrances which are bound to bear their ugly heads in due course ;-). Sorry, to you and all, for being such a cheerleader about your increased practice. That really isn't beneficial. But I guess I am like the sports fanatic who goes to all the games or watches them on TV, wishing he could be a part of the game. Howard, I identify with your efforts and so I probably praise them more than I should or more than is helpful. Please, everyone ignore me and go back to your daily business.... ;-)) > ------------------------------------------- > Howard: > In my case I find a reduction in compulsive desire beth case, but no > reduction in enjoyment, in fact quite the opposite. James: I have no idea what you are saying here. There seems to be a typo of some sort. Being equanimous (or at > least more so) is only to the good. Also, I don't think that one has much to > worry about as regards loss of sexual inclination as a worldling or even as a > lesser ariyan. James: Yes, as I had said, it may be possible that I have nothing to be worried about- if I sell myself short that is. But, Howard, I NEVER sell myself short! I know that I can accomplish anything I set my mind to, as can anyone! If I want to accomplish enlightenment, all I have to do is set my mind to it and to be fully aware of the consequences- which are the sacrifices. That is the difficult part- and which why I wrote to you. > ------------------------------------------ > I also wonder about > > > > Jon and Sarah and other married or committed couples in this group. > > Are they sometimes afraid to practice for fear of losing the > > relationship and/or disappointing their partner? You don't have to > > answer if you don't feel comfortable; I know that this is a rather > > personal issue. But it is something I face so I thought I would > > bring it up. > > > > Metta, > > James > > > ==================== > With metta, > Howard Thanks so much for sharing with me, Howard. I am so rooting for you and your practice you don't even know! ;-)) Metta, James 51418 From: upasaka@... Date: Wed Oct 12, 2005 3:50am Subject: Re: [dsg] Fear of Losing Partner (Re: Ro b Mâ€â„ ¢s Problem Reply Par t I) upasaka_howard Hi again, James - In a message dated 10/12/05 10:32:20 AM Eastern Daylight Time, upasaka@... writes: > In my case I find a reduction in compulsive desire beth case, but no > reduction in enjoyment, in fact quite the opposite. ======================= Sorry - I haven't a clue what I was trying to write when I wrote "beth case"! ;-) With metta, Howard 51419 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Wed Oct 12, 2005 8:05am Subject: [dsg] Fear of Losing Partner (Re: Ro b Mâ€â„ ¢s Problem Reply Par t I) buddhatrue Hi Again Howard, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@a... wrote: > > Hi again, James - > > In a message dated 10/12/05 10:32:20 AM Eastern Daylight Time, > upasaka@a... writes: > > > In my case I find a reduction in compulsive desire beth case, but no > > reduction in enjoyment, in fact quite the opposite. > > ======================= > Sorry - I haven't a clue what I was trying to write when I wrote "beth > case"! ;-) LOL! No problem. Just forget it and keep moving on. Kamma didn't want you to explain fully- this is my problem that I have to solve by myself. It's so nice to know that I have your support though. You are really awesome! Metta, James 51420 From: "robmoult" Date: Wed Oct 12, 2005 8:06am Subject: Conditions Part 15 - Nutriment Condition (ahara-paccaya) robmoult Hi All, Parents produce children, support them and look after them so that they will grow up happily. A pole supporting a leaning old house, makes the house stable and durable. In the same way, nutriments aid their resultants to arise and keep on supporting them so that they are stable and durable. There are four types: - Food / oja: Physical nutriment that conditions the rupas of the body. - Contact / phassa: Without contact, citta and cetasikas could not experience any object, thus, contact supports citta and cetasikas. Contact also conditions rupa produced by citta. - Volition / cetana: Supports cittas and cetasikas by coordinating their tasks. Volition also conditions rupa produced by citta. - Consciousness / citta: Citta is the chief in cognizing an object, it is the leader. Without citta, the cetasikas could not arise and experience an object. Citta also conditions rèpa. In the case of mental nutriment (phassa, cetana and citta), the conditioning dhamma is co-nascent with the conditioned dhammas. At the moment of rebirth the mental nutriments condition the associated dhammas and the rupa produced by kamma. Metta, Rob M :-) 51421 From: upasaka@... Date: Wed Oct 12, 2005 4:08am Subject: Re: [dsg] Fear of Losing Partner ( Re: Ro b M’s Problem Rep... upasaka_howard Hi, James - In a message dated 10/12/05 10:51:14 AM Eastern Daylight Time, buddhatrue@... writes: > > Hi Howard, > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@a... wrote: > > > >Hi, James - > >-------------------------------------- > >Howard: > > Your sensing/evaluating is on-target here. > >-------------------------------------- > > James: I thought so. ;-)) So glad to see your practice of benefit. > Just watch out for the hindrances which are bound to bear their ugly > heads in due course ;-). Sorry, to you and all, for being such a > cheerleader about your increased practice. That really isn't > beneficial. But I guess I am like the sports fanatic who goes to > all the games or watches them on TV, wishing he could be a part of > the game. Howard, I identify with your efforts and so I probably > praise them more than I should or more than is helpful. Please, > everyone ignore me and go back to your daily business.... ;-)) > > > >------------------------------------------- > >Howard: > > In my case I find a reduction in compulsive desire beth > case, but no > >reduction in enjoyment, in fact quite the opposite. > > James: I have no idea what you are saying here. There seems to be a > typo of some sort. ----------------------------------------- Howard: I have no idea either! ;-)) Please just strike the gibberish "beth case", and it will make adequate sense. ---------------------------------------- > > Being equanimous (or at > >least more so) is only to the good. Also, I don't think that one > has much to > >worry about as regards loss of sexual inclination as a worldling > or even as a > >lesser ariyan. > > James: Yes, as I had said, it may be possible that I have nothing to > be worried about- if I sell myself short that is. But, Howard, I > NEVER sell myself short! I know that I can accomplish anything I > set my mind to, as can anyone! If I want to accomplish > enlightenment, all I have to do is set my mind to it and to be fully > aware of the consequences- which are the sacrifices. That is the > difficult part- and which why I wrote to you. > > > >------------------------------------------ > > I also wonder about > >> > >>Jon and Sarah and other married or committed couples in this > group. > >>Are they sometimes afraid to practice for fear of losing the > >>relationship and/or disappointing their partner? You don't have > to > >>answer if you don't feel comfortable; I know that this is a > rather > >>personal issue. But it is something I face so I thought I would > >>bring it up. > >> > >>Metta, > >>James > >> > >==================== > >With metta, > >Howard > > Thanks so much for sharing with me, Howard. I am so rooting for you > and your practice you don't even know! ;-)) ------------------------------------------- Howard: I really appreciate your sympathetic joy, James. You're a good friend! I wish you all the best with both your practice and your relationship. There is no reason, as I see it, why you cannot have both! ----------------------------------------- > > Metta, > James > ===================== With metta, Howard 51422 From: "robmoult" Date: Wed Oct 12, 2005 8:09am Subject: Conditions Part 16 - Faculty Condition (indriya-paccaya) robmoult Hi All, Indriyas, like ministers, have control over their respective departments or faculties, and by this virtue they contribute to the progress and prosperity of the whole system. Their contribution is said to take place by means of faculty condition. Twenty of the twenty-two faculties (masculine faculty and feminine faculty not included) are faculty condition: - The five senses: control the function of the sense function (seeing, hearing, etc.) and are base pre-nascent - Citta: leader in cognizing an object, co-nascent conditioning of both cetasikas and rupas produced - Life (nama): cetasika that controls and maintains life of associated citta, other cetasikas and rupas produced - Life (rupa): maintains life of kamma-produced rupas - Feelings (pleasure / pain / pleasant / unpleasant / equanimity): co- nascent conditioning of cittas, cetasikas and rupas produced - Faith / Energy / Mindfulness / Concentration / Understanding: spiritual faculties : condition maha-kusala, maha-vipaka and maha- kiriya cittas and rupas produced - "I-shall-come-to-know-the-unknown": accompanies the lokuttara magga citta - Higher knowledge faculty: accompanies the lokuttara phala citta of Sotapanna, Sakadagami and Anagami - Faculty of him who knows: accompanies the lokuttara phala citta of Arahant Metta, Rob M :-) 51423 From: "robmoult" Date: Wed Oct 12, 2005 8:14am Subject: Conditions Part 17 - Jhana Condition (jhana-paccaya) robmoult Hi All, Jhana-condition is a name for the seven jhana-factors, forming a condition to the co-nascent nama and rupa. The jhana condition causes the citta and accompanying cetasikas (the conditioned factors) to fix themselves firmly on the object that is experienced. This condition does not only apply to jhana alone, but also to the general intensifying ('absorbing') impact of these 7 factors: - Thought-conception (vitakka): in all cittas - Discursive thinking (vicara): in all cittas - Interest (piti): in lobha-mula cittas, - Joy (sukha): in lobha-mula cittas - Concentration / one-pointedness (samadhi / ekaggata): in all cittas - Sadness (domanassa): in dosa-mula cittas - Indifference (upekkhŒ): in moha-mula cittas The first five are the "jhana factors" leading to absorption. However, jhana condition arises with both kusala and akusala; they represent the "focus" on doing good or bad. The jhana factors condition the citta, cetasikas and rupas produced. Metta, Rob M :-) 51424 From: "robmoult" Date: Wed Oct 12, 2005 8:18am Subject: Conditions Part 18 - Path Condition (magga-paccaya) robmoult Hi All, Path-condition refers to the 12 path-factors: - knowledge (panna = samma-ditthi, right understanding) - (right or wrong) thought-conception (vitakka) - right speech (samma-vaca) - right bodily action (samma-kammanta) - right livelihood (samma-ajiva) - (right or wrong) energy (viriya) - (right or wrong) mindfulness (sati) - (right or wrong) concentration (samadhi) - wrong views (miccha-ditthi) - wrong speech (miccha-vaca) - wrong bodily action (miccha-kammanta) - wrong livelihood (miccha-ajiva) These factors contain the eightfold noble path (wholesome) and their opposites (unwholesome). The wholesome path constituents form a path conditioning their co-nascent citta, cetasikas and produced rupas to bear results in a blissful state whereas the unwholesome path constituents condition results in a woeful state. Metta, Rob M :-) 51425 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Wed Oct 12, 2005 8:19am Subject: [dsg] Fear of Losing Partner ( Re: Ro b M’s Problem Rep... buddhatrue Hi Again Howard, (ps. So sorry to all for jamming the airwaves with our personal back- and-forth)... --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@a... wrote: > ------------------------------------------- > Howard: > I really appreciate your sympathetic joy, James. You're a good friend! James: No, you are the better friend. You have stuck by me through thick and thin. I have not always been so generous. > I wish you all the best with both your practice and your relationship. James: Thank you. There > is no reason, as I see it, why you cannot have both! James: I'm sorry, but here is where I disagree with you. I do not see a way in which I could have both. I must choose one over the other if I am to go the full distance. And with me, the full distance is the only choice. > ----------------------------------------- > > > > > Metta, > > James > > > ===================== > With metta, > Howard Triple and quadruple Metta, James 51426 From: "robmoult" Date: Wed Oct 12, 2005 8:21am Subject: Conditions Part 19 - Association Condition (sampayutta-paccaya) robmoult Hi All, Tea-essence, milk, sugar and water are so thoroughly mixed in a cup of tea that they cannot be differentiated and they give a combined pleasant taste. Similarly, citta and its cetasikas are so thoroughly mixed that they cannot be differentiated. They arise together, dissolve together, share a common physical base and a common object; they mutually aid one another by being associated together. They aid one another by way of association condition. Association-condition refers to the co-nascent and mutually conditioned four mental groups (khandhas; vinnana, vedana, sanna, sankhara), as they aid each other by their being associated, by having a common physical base, a common object, and by their arising and disappearing simultaneously. Metta, Rob M :-) 51427 From: "robmoult" Date: Wed Oct 12, 2005 8:25am Subject: Conditions Part 20 - Dissociation Condition (vippayutta-paccaya) robmoult Hi All, The six tastes (tart, bitter, sweet, sour, salty and acrid) do not mix together, yet they support one another to give an agreeable taste to a curry. In a crown or necklace, the gold and the jewels do not mix up; they can be differentiated easily by sight. Yet the gold makes the jewels more beautiful and the jewels make the gold more attractive. This is like mixing oil and water; they remain separate. Similarly, nama and rupa do not mix. They do not arise together nor do they dissolve together. Nama and rupa aid each other by way of disassociation condition. Metta, Rob M :-) 51428 From: "robmoult" Date: Wed Oct 12, 2005 8:30am Subject: Conditions Part 21 - Presence Condition / Non-disappearance Condition robmoult Hi All, Atthi-paccaya and avigata-paccaya The earth can support plant to grow on it because it is present. Parents can support and look after their children while they are present or living. A phenomenon which through its presence is a condition for other phenomena to arise is presence-condition. This applies to the following conditions: co-nascence, mutuality, support, pre-nascence, and post-nascence. Examples of dhammas that are related to each other through presence condition are: - The four mental groups (vinnana, vedana, sanna, Sankhara) - The four great essentials (rupas) - At the moment of conception, patisandhi citta and kamma-produced rupa - Citta / cetasikas and produced rupa - The four great essentials and derived matter - Sense-base and sense-consciousness with its cetasikas - Visible object / sound / etc. and sense-consciousness - Visible object / sound / etc. and mind-elements (five door adverting, receiving, etc.) A great ocean, by its non-disappearance, contributes to the happiness of the fish and the sea-turtles which live in it. Such a condition, either pre-nascent or co-nascent, which through its non-disappearance is a condition for another phenomena to arise is called "non- disappearance condition". Metta, Rob M :-) 51429 From: "robmoult" Date: Wed Oct 12, 2005 8:32am Subject: Conditions Part 22 - Absence Condition / Disappearance Condition robmoult Hi All (final installment), Natthi-paccaya and vigata-paccaya The absence of the sun contributes to the appearing of the moon; the absence of light contributes to the appearing of darkness; the death of a king contributes to the enthronement of his eldest son; so one can contribute to something by being absent. When a citta and its cetasikas pass away, they create a condition for the immediately following citta and its cetasikas to arise. Metta, Rob M :-) 51430 From: TGrand458@... Date: Wed Oct 12, 2005 4:56am Subject: Re: [dsg] Conditions Part 20 - Dissociation Condition (vippayutta-paccaya) TGrand458@... Hi Rob M, All Saying these things do mix or don't mix is merely in the eye of the beholder. A jewel vs gold is merely a conventional distinction. In one sense they are completely mixed. In another sense they can be considered separate. The point of the Buddha's teaching IMO is not to reify or obsess about these issues; but rather to get beyond this type of argument ASAP. (Although, the idea of "disassociation condition" is quite the non sequitur IMO.) TG In a message dated 10/12/2005 9:39:51 A.M. Mountain Daylight Time, rob.moult@... writes: Hi All, The six tastes (tart, bitter, sweet, sour, salty and acrid) do not mix together, yet they support one another to give an agreeable taste to a curry. In a crown or necklace, the gold and the jewels do not mix up; they can be differentiated easily by sight. Yet the gold makes the jewels more beautiful and the jewels make the gold more attractive. This is like mixing oil and water; they remain separate. Similarly, nama and rupa do not mix. They do not arise together nor do they dissolve together. Nama and rupa aid each other by way of disassociation condition. Metta, Rob M :-) 51431 From: upasaka@... Date: Wed Oct 12, 2005 5:01am Subject: Re: [dsg] Conditions Part 20 - Dissociation Condition (vippayutta-paccaya) upasaka_howard Hi, Rob - In a message dated 10/12/05 11:39:45 AM Eastern Daylight Time, rob.moult@... writes: > Similarly, > nama and rupa do not mix. They do not arise together nor do they > dissolve together. > ====================== They do not arise together as experiential content (arammana), but they *do* arise together complementary aspects of experience, do they not? Do not citta & rupa (as object), and cetasika & rupa (as object) arise together? With metta, Howard 51432 From: TGrand458@... Date: Wed Oct 12, 2005 6:25am Subject: Re: [dsg] Conditions Part 20 - Dissociation Condition (vippayutta-paccaya) TGrand458@... In a message dated 10/12/2005 10:07:15 A.M. Mountain Daylight Time, upasaka@... writes: Hi, Rob - In a message dated 10/12/05 11:39:45 AM Eastern Daylight Time, rob.moult@... writes: > Similarly, > nama and rupa do not mix. They do not arise together nor do they > dissolve together. > ====================== They do not arise together as experiential content (arammana), but they *do* arise together complementary aspects of experience, do they not? Do not citta & rupa (as object), and cetasika & rupa (as object) arise together? With metta, Howard Hi Howard, Rob M, All Howard, I agree with your point that they do arise together. In looking at the quote you cited above by Rob M, it is the antithesis of the Buddha's teaching of DO IMO. The quote below (and many more) show a complete correlation between nama and rupa... “Monks, consciousness comes to be in dependence on a dyad. And how, monks, does consciousness come to be in dependence on a dyad? In dependence on eye and forms there arises eye-consciousness. The eye is impermanent, changing, becoming otherwise; forms are impermanent, changing, becoming otherwise. Thus this dyad is moving and tottering, impermanent, changing, becoming otherwise. “Eye-consciousness is impermanent, changing, becoming otherwise. The cause and condition for the arising of eye-consciousness is also impermanent, changing, becoming otherwise. When, monks, eye-consciousness has arisen in dependence on a condition that is impermanent, how could it be permanent? “The meeting, the encounter, the occurrence of these three things is called eye-contact. Eye-contact too is impermanent, changing, becoming otherwise. The cause and condition for the arising of eye-contact is also impermanent, changing, becoming otherwise. When, monks, eye-contact has arisen in dependence on a condition that is impermanent, how could it be permanent? “Contacted, monks, one feels, contacted one intends, contacted one perceives. Thus these things too are moving and tottering, impermanent, changing, becoming otherwise. [The Buddha proceeds to analyze the ear-consciousness, nose-consciousness, tongue-consciousness, body-consciousness, and mind-consciousness in the same manner and finishes with...] “It is in such a way, monks, that consciousness comes to be in dependence on a dyad.â€? (The Buddha . . . Connected Discourses of the Buddha, vol. 2, pg. 1172) The "contact" that generates feeling is not limited to nama. That contact is nama and rupa mixing together as it were. If they really didn't associate as "disassociation condition" implies, consciousness would be impossible. TG 51433 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Wed Oct 12, 2005 11:12am Subject: Re: Conditions Part 1 buddhistmedi... Dear Htoo ( Attn. Swee, RobM) - I read your message (#51352) three times, but only by the third time that I could focus attention to reply to it. Your view reflects the Burmese background that influences your Abhidhamma perspective quite differently than mine. You wrote : Htoo: There are many things that cannot be understood without the help of abhidhamma knowledge. Tep : Can you be kind enough to give me a list of such things? -- a few of them will be just fine. And can you specifically say in what way the Abhidhamma can help, while the suttas cannot? To be able to answer this question you have to know both sides very well. .......................................... Htoo: To know all possible diseases and their treatments is to know almost everything about diseases and various modes of treatments. Without the basic knowledge of such depth, one will never know any new disease and any new treatment. Tep: Is the current state of medical science good enough that the doctors "know almost everything about diseases and various modes of treatments" ? I don't think so. Yet, several diseases have been successfully cured. If doctors had waited until they have the perfect, or near-perfect knowledge to cure the diseases, there would have been no human left on earth. This same logic applies to dhamma treatments of the defilements(kilesas). There were enlightened monks during the Buddha's time, who did not know the Abhidhamma. Warm regards, Tep ========== --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "htootintnaing" wrote: > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Tep Sastri" > wrote: > > > > > > Hi, Rob M (Phil and other Abhidhammikas) - > > > > Please let me apologize for my seemingly negative tone in the > > statement I made in the last post ! > > > > > > > > Tep: So it seems reasonable to argue that those conditions beyond > > > the 'dependent origination' and some subsets of the Abhidhamma > > > material not expounded by the Buddha, were not considered by our > > > Greatest Sage, the Buddha, as necessary for Enlightenment. What is > > > your thought on this? > > > > > > > Tep : I did not foresee the tone that sounded negative to you, > until after > > reading your answer. > > > > Rob M : Tep, I am not sure that I answered your question. Certainly > > there were those who gained enlightenment without any study of > > Abhidhamma. However, that does not mean that studying the > > Abhidhamma cannot be of great value for those suitably disposed. > > > > Tep: Ah, I did not question the worth of the whole Abhidhamma -- I > only > > question the part of the Abhidhamma that was added later after the > > Buddha's parinibbana. Questioning its usefulness does not mean > > rejecting it as 100% useless ! Again, like I told Phil earlier, > the dhamma > > is not to be claimed : 'this dhamma is mine, I am identified with > it, it is > > my self'. > > > > "In fact, the real meaning of the most important Buddhist > terminologies > > such as Dhamma, Kamma, Samsara, Sankhara, Paticcasamuppada > > and Nibbana cannot be understood without a knowledge of > > Abhidhamma." [Dr. K. Sri Dhammananda ] > > > > Tep: Thank you for the above passage. I agree somewhat with it. > > > > > > Respectfully, > > > > > > Tep > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > Dear Tep, > > Somewhat is more than nothing. When abhidhamma is totally discarded > then teaching to people who have not learnt anything related to > Dhamma is almost impossible. There are many things that cannot be > understood without the help of abhidhamma knowledge. > > When someone has contracted a disease and if he knows the remedies > even though he is not a medical expert he may be able to treat the > disease. But he will not be able to treat other diseases. > > To know all possible diseases and their treatments is to know almost > everything about diseases and various modes of treatments. Without > the basic knowledge of such depth, one will never know any new > disease and any new treatment. > > With Metta, > > Htoo Naing > 51434 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Wed Oct 12, 2005 0:38pm Subject: Re: Conditions Part 17 - Jhana Condition (jhana-paccaya) buddhistmedi... Hi RobM (Attn. Swee, James, Howard)- The "7 jhana-factors" states in your post are as follows: > - Thought-conception (vitakka): in all cittas > - Discursive thinking (vicara): in all cittas > - Interest (piti): in lobha-mula cittas, > - Joy (sukha): in lobha-mula cittas > - Concentration / one-pointedness (samadhi / ekaggata): in all cittas > - Sadness (domanassa): in dosa-mula cittas > - Indifference (upekkhŒ): in moha-mula cittas > The first five are the "jhana factors" leading to absorption. > However, jhana condition arises with both kusala and akusala; they > represent the "focus" on doing good or bad. The jhana factors > condition the citta, cetasikas and rupas produced. > The description of piti and sukha as associated with lobha-mulla cittas is too restricted. Let me explain. The Buddha's first jhana is one of the four jhanas that define samma- samadhi. For instance, in AN IX.36, Jhana Sutta : 'I tell you, the ending of the mental fermentations depends on the first jhana.' "Thus it has been said. In reference to what was it said? There is the case where a monk, withdrawn from sensuality, withdrawn from unskillful qualities, enters & remains in the first jhana: rapture & pleasure born from withdrawal, accompanied by directed thought & evaluation. ... .... " Or in AN IV.41, Samadhi sutta : " "And what is the development of concentration that, when developed & pursued, leads to a pleasant abiding in the here & now? There is the case where a monk -- quite withdrawn from sensuality, withdrawn from unskillful qualities -- enters & remains in the first jhana: rapture & pleasure born from withdrawal, accompanied by directed thought & evaluation. ... ... " The "setting" of the first jhana that was taught by the Buddha is "quite withdrawn from sensuality, withdrawn from unskillful qualities". Hence it is obvious that there is no lobha, dosa or moha involved in that moment. And the monk then experiences rapture(piti), pleasure (sukha), vitakka and vicara, ... .... It is obvious that the factors 'piti' and 'sukha' here are NOT in lobha- mula cittas as described in your note above. There is no domanassa in the monk either, yet he attained the first (kusala) jhana. Question: Is it possible that the "jhana factors" as described in your post were defined for the "old jhana system" by people who did not know samma-samadhi, the 8th path factor? Respectfully, Tep ======= --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "robmoult" wrote: > > Hi All, > > Jhana-condition is a name for the seven jhana-factors, forming a > condition to the co-nascent nama and rupa. The jhana condition causes > the citta and accompanying cetasikas (the conditioned factors) to fix > themselves firmly on the object that is experienced. This condition > does not only apply to jhana alone, but also to the general > intensifying ('absorbing') impact of these 7 factors: (snipped) 51435 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Wed Oct 12, 2005 1:36pm Subject: Re: Behaviors of One Who is Unfit to Talk With / Who are the exception? buddhistmedi... Hi, James - Thank you for the comment : >James: >Very good advice! Though it would leave most of us unfit to talk >with. Including myself. (hehehehe...but nothing wrong with >presenting the standards that we should all reach for, though we may >stumble and fall on occassion.) Tep: You're exactly right - most of us (but who are the exception- Phil and KenH?). But the minimum requirements are that we must avoid showing anger or crushing/ridculing/ finding fault with the questioner. The next level is to be objective in answering a question. I have a long to way to go in order to meet these rules too! Warm regards, Tep ======== --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "buddhatrue" wrote: > > Hi Tep, > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Tep Sastri" > wrote: > > > > > > Dear SD Friends - > > > > As a dhamma discusser who has been trying to be a person fit to > talk > > with, I appreciate AN III.67: Kathavatthu Sutta, (Topics for > Discussion). > > > > I. What is the pupose of a dhamma discussion? > > > > -- Clearly knowing one quality(dhamma), comprehending one quality, abandoning one quality, and realizing one quality, one touches right release : the liberation of the mind through no clinging. > > > > (snipped) > 51436 From: "Phil" Date: Wed Oct 12, 2005 3:57pm Subject: Re: Behaviors of One Who is Unfit to Talk With / Who are the exception? philofillet Hi Tep > Tep: You're exactly right - most of us (but who are the exception- Phil > and KenH?). Yes, that's right Tep. We are the exceptions. Thanks for demonstrating the need to categorize people. Phil 51437 From: LBIDD@... Date: Wed Oct 12, 2005 5:31pm Subject: Re: [dsg] conditional lbidd2 Leo: "It is too confusing, short and unclear. Can you give me some other references." Hi Leo, There are many books and articles here: http://www.zolag.co.uk/ and this is the booklet I was quoting: http://www.pariyatti.com/book.cgi?prod_id=404506 Larry 51438 From: LBIDD@... Date: Wed Oct 12, 2005 5:40pm Subject: Re: [dsg] conditional lbidd2 Hi again Leo, Re. other source material: One other thought. You probably won't find much meditation advice at Zolag but I think Matara Sri ~Nanarama was using the meditation instructions of Mahasi Sayadaw. You should be able to google something on him. Larry 51439 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Wed Oct 12, 2005 6:40pm Subject: Re: Mahaanidana sutta, theory/practice kenhowardau Hi Matheesha, You wrote: -------- > I think we need to get experiential here. Why do you assume that panna doesnt fade, like memory? It is not permanent. Not only does all phenomena arise and pass away it also changes. --------------- I agree that all conditioned dhammas fade away as soon as they arise. But they condition succeeding dhammas. In some ways, it is like kamma. The mental factor known as kamma (cetana) fades away as soon as it has arisen, but it effects the succeeding dhammas and its potential lies dormant in them. Kammas from long, long ago are just as potent as recent kammas. On one of the occasions when the Buddha experienced physical pain he explained it was the result of an akusala kamma he had committed approximately 28 zillion lifetimes previously. ------------------------ M: > Panna is not something that can be crystalised into its own object, say for example like a Sound. It is ultimately a thought, arising at the mind door. ------------------------ I think you are confusing panna - a conditioned dhamma - with thoughts and ideas, which are just pannatti (concepts) and not dhammas at all. Jon wrote: ------------- > these > mental factors are accumulated that is to say passed from one moment > of consciousness to the next. -------------- To which you replied: --------------------- > Disagree! Then we would have to be conscious of our panna every thought moment. Yet we are not. I understand that the commentaries might say that. But it is simply not possible when you think about it. After all we must give priority as Truth to what actually happens out there, rather than what the texts say should happen, even though it might go against the grain. --------------------------------------- None of us wants to accept beliefs that go against the grain. As I understand the Commentaries, they do not go against the grain (and Jon's opinion does not go against the grain.) I think the problem is that you have misunderstood what the Commentaries and Jon are saying. From the way you understand what they are saying, it would follow that we had to be 'conscious of our panna every thought moment.' But we don't, of course, and that is not what they are saying - nor is it what the Abhidhamma is saying. I am a beginner at this, but I might as well explain the way I see it: The present citta and cetasikas may be kusala, in which case all the mental factors are kusala (there are no akusala dhammas present whatsoever). And yet, soon after, the citta and cetasikas may be akusala, and there will be no kusala dhammas whatsoever. As I was saying before, it is like kamma and vipaka. The present moment might be a very pleasant sense door moment - the fruit of kusala kamma - and there is nothing else at this moment (no unpleasant feelings, for example). But later, there will be unpleasant vipaka citta (the result of akusala kamma) and nothing pleasant will found. So, in summary, volitional reactions arise due to accumulations in much the same way as sense experiences arise due to kamma. I will leave it there for now, remembering what you said about telescoping. :-) Looking forward to your next instalment. Ken H 51440 From: "Phil" Date: Wed Oct 12, 2005 7:19pm Subject: Milk and water vs. the dog and his leash philofillet Hi all Rob M and Tep have spoken out on the harmony issue, so I think I will have a go as well. I suspect my conclusion is that harmony is not the way of the world, so hoping for it is just more clinging and it is therefore best to learn what we can from the reality of disharmony and discord. We'll see where I go with this. (BTW, Tep, while this post was prompted by my previous post about the way you and we all categorize people, I wasn't irritated by your post. I sincerely thanked you for helping me to understand our tendencies better.) I think the sutta in which the Buddha most beautifully speaks on harmony is SN 36:19, in which the Buddha teaches feelings as two kind of feelings, three kinds of feelins, five kinds of feelings , six kinds of feelings, 36 kinds of feelings and 108 kinds of feelings. He taught the Dhamma in different ways at different times to different people but this should not be a source of discord: "When the Dhamma has been tuaght by me in such a way through different methods of expositions, it may be expected of those who will not concede, allow and approve of what is well stated and wells poken by others that they will become contentious and quarrelsome and engage3 in disputes, and that they will dwell stabbing ech other ith verbal daggers. But when the Dhamma has been taught by me in such a way through different methods of exposition, it may be expected of those who will concede, allow and approve of what is well stated and well spoken by others that they will live in concord, with mutual appreciation, without disputing, blinding like milk and water, view each other with kindly eyes." Now, it's important to note that the teaching here is on feeling. Even at DSG there haven't been many contentious debates on that topic, for we all know how subtle and multifarious (is that a word?) feelings are. I don't think even the Buddha would speak of milk and water when the issue at hand is wrong view. Nevertheless, a beautiful ideal that I used to reflect on every morning, but now rarely do because I know it is just an ideal and doesn't reflect the reality that is spoken of by the Buddha in so many other suttas. For example - just one of many, many examples of suttas that show the way we really are due to the second noble truth - I think of SN:100. "Suppose , bhikkhus, a dog tied up on a leash was bound to a strong post or pillar. If it walks, it walks close to that post or pillar. If it stands, it stands close to that post or pillar. If it sits down, it sits down close to that post or pillar. If it lies down, it les down close to that post or pillar." "So too, bhikkhus, the unistructed worlding regards form thus: 'This is mine, this I am, this is my self.' (and same for the other khandas.) If he walks, he walks close to those five aggregates subject to clinging. If he stands, he stands close to those five aggregates subject to clinging." etc Now, as I've said before, in my opinion we have very shallow understanding of suttas, so quoting them doesn't even begin to prove anything, but they do give us fodder for crude reflection. So I will engage in crude reflection on this sutta. Until we are sotapanna we will continue to cling to our self- identity, to the need to categorize people, say "this person thinks this, that person thinks that" in order to keep things nice and tidy the way we like it. That categorizing of people will be just one small example of the way we sit down by the post that we are leashed to. The ideal of the milk and water sutta is beautiful, and it is good to read suttas that point to realizations of insight (such as the satipatthana sutta) but we should bear in mind that it is *not* our understanding that is laid out in such suttas - not yet. As an exercise in Pali, could someone revise the "etam mama, eso 'ham asmi and eso me atta" of the three gatas to mean "this is his, he is this, this is his self" because that certainly goes on a lot for us, all of us, for we are not free from clinging to identity view and being obsessed by people rather than understanding paramattha dhammas. Actually, I'm serious, if there is anyone out there who would like a simple Pali exercise. In conclusion, I'd say we shouldn't expect harmony or cling to it because it is not the way of the world. Better to learn from the reality of discord than to hope for harmony, I think. It is only by understanding defilements that we can begin to eradicate them, so opportunities to better understand defilements should be welcomed, I think. Within reason, of course. I'm not advocating telling people to piss off or anything like that! But I think we can have more harmony in the long run by accepting the disharmony as a reflection of the conditioned nature of nama, as a confirmation of the Buddha's teaching of impermanence and anatta. And seeing the Buddha's teaching confirmed in daily life is such a very good thing. Phil p.s for me, this is a one-off post rather than a thread. If anyone wants to discuss it, "dozo" as we say in Japanese - as you like. Thanks in advance if anyone provides that Pali. 51441 From: "Hal" Date: Wed Oct 12, 2005 7:40pm Subject: Re: BB's "The Jhaanas and the Lay Disciple According to the Paali Suttas" bardosein Hi Rob M, Thanks for posting this. Do you know the source-citation? Hal 51442 From: "Phil" Date: Wed Oct 12, 2005 8:51pm Subject: Re: Milk and water vs. the dog and his leash philofillet Hi again > p.s for me, this is a one-off post rather than a thread. If anyone > wants to discuss it, "dozo" as we say in Japanese - as you like. Of course this was a silly and arrogant thing to write. It is bad manners to post something and say you don't want to discuss it. If anyone wants to discuss it (probably not enough of interest in it to discuss) I would be happy to. Also, I'm aware that my general theme these days is "Friends, you are ignorant and greedy! Join the club!" - Assuming too much, as Tep says. But you know, I think we really do have to understand how little we know and how little we have developed before we can begin to know and develop so I assume that we are all motivated by moha, dosa and lobha most of the time. This is the conclusion I draw from some of the Buddha's discourses, such as "burning", and the one I referred to the other day, about being Mara's prisoners until we have abandoned lobha, dosa and moha (ie we are all Mara's prisoners.) To paraphrase Howard's "start where you are, not where you want to be" I might say "know where you are and *then* start where you are not where you want to be" maybe, or something like that. But of course knowing where we are means we have already started where we are so Howard's formula is right. Phil 51443 From: TGrand458@... Date: Wed Oct 12, 2005 5:28pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Conditions Part 20 - Dissociation Condition (vippayutta-paccaya) TGrand458@... In a message dated 10/12/2005 9:39:51 A.M. Mountain Daylight Time, rob.moult@... writes: Hi All, The six tastes (tart, bitter, sweet, sour, salty and acrid) do not mix together, yet they support one another to give an agreeable taste to a curry. In a crown or necklace, the gold and the jewels do not mix up; they can be differentiated easily by sight. Yet the gold makes the jewels more beautiful and the jewels make the gold more attractive. This is like mixing oil and water; they remain separate. Similarly, nama and rupa do not mix. They do not arise together nor do they dissolve together. Nama and rupa aid each other by way of disassociation condition. Metta, Rob M :-) Hi Rob M This post is a repeat of yours so I am guessing you abide by it most rigorously. I think you see it as convincing evidence. But I don't except any statement from the above paragraph as necessarily accurate, true, or meaningful. I think disassociation condition and absence condition are two of the more questionable of the 24. They're both contradictions of terms IMO. TG 51444 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Wed Oct 12, 2005 11:53pm Subject: Re: Rob M’s Problem Reply Part I kenhowardau Hi Rob M -------- KH: > > Are you now saying that Right Concentration of the NEP is the > jhanas, but attaining them is not required for enlightenment? > >====== RM: > My statement was over-simplified. What I should have said was, "I am of the opinion that attaining jhanas is not required to gain the first stage of enlightenment (sotapanna). I belive that Bhikkhu Bodhi gave a detailed analysis of this issue and came to the same conclusion." I have just posted the complete Bhikkhu Bodhi essay in one message. Here is conlcusion #2 from BB's essay: -------- Thanks. If I remember correctly, the essay was originally posted as part of a conversation between BB and Sarah. I have been looking for that conversation in UP's without success. Do you know where I can find it? ---------------------------- KH: > > My point was that Right Understanding *is* a cetasika. And yet, the > sutta describes a monk experiencing a series of jhana cittas, and > then says, "This, monks, is called right concentration." > > Surely, you will agree that further explanation is required. (?) >===== RM: > I assume that you mean "Right Concentration". ----------------------------------------------------- Oh yes, thanks for that correction. Another typo of mine was to say that I thought 'panna with a dhamma as object' could sometimes be classified as pativedha. It can, of course, especially when that dhamma is Nibbana. What I meant to say was, I think panna with a *conditioned* dhamma as object can sometimes be classified as pativedha. (As in the final stages of mundane insight.) ----------------------------------------- RM: > Why do you think that Right Concentration is a cetasika? I don't think that it is defined that way in can the texts. ------------------------ I am speechless! If course it is! How else could it be defined? Citta? Rupa? Please don't tell me it is pannatti! :-) Ken H 51445 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Wed Oct 12, 2005 11:51pm Subject: Re: Rob M’s Problem Reply Part I kenhowardau Hi Steve, ---------------------- KH: > > PS: About "supramundane jhana:" can that be a term for Magga- citta? ....... S: > Yes. > Here is one example from the Vibhanga, Analysis of the Path factors, Analysis According to Abhidhamma(p310): -------------- Thanks Steve. I seem to remember DSG has discussed this in detail; I really need to spend more time in the UP's file. B Bodhi uses 'supramundane jhana' as a synonym for Magga-citta and still maintains that Right Concentration is the jhanas. So it seems this point will not settle the issue either way. Ken H 51446 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Thu Oct 13, 2005 0:47am Subject: Re: Milk and water vs. the dog and his leash buddhistmedi... Dear Phil ( and all ) - Finally, you hit the jack-pot and I must congratulate you for the following : > Phil: But you know, I think we really do have to understand how little we know and how little we have developed before we can begin to know and develop so I assume that we are all motivated by moha, dosa and lobha most of the time. Tep: Aha! The key word is "to develop" -- without developing, there is no useful outcome (whether it is panna or samadhi, or both). Developing what? Developing the five powers (balas), of course! Just read the following material written by one of the most respected monks of our time. "In the Buddha Saasanaa, these five balas are needed for the work of samatha, vipassanaa, and the attainment of the holy Paths and Fruits and Nibbana. It is only when these balas are first accumulated that the great works mentioned can be undertaken. Those persons who do not possess even one of the five balas cannot evoke a desire to undertake these great tasks. It does not occur to them that those great tasks can be accomplished in this life. They live forgetfully and without determination. If it is pointed out to them that the tasks can be accomplished, they do not wish to hear it. They do not know that such untoward thoughts occur to them because they are utterly impoverished in the balas. They lay the blame at the door of paaramii, or dvi-hetuka, or at the "times". (Some believe that these are the times when the holy Paths and the Fruits thereof can no longer be attained, and tend to defer effort till the paaramii ripens. Some believe that persons of the present day are dvi- hetuka, i.e. beings reborn with only two root-conditions, and as such they cannot attain the holy Paths and the Fruits thereof in the present life.) [Endquote] From Bodhipakkhiya-Dipani, The Manual of The Factors Leading to Enlightenment, by Mahathera Ledi Sayadaw http://www.ubakhin.com/ledi/manual6f.htm Best wishes, Tep ========= --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Phil" wrote: > > > Hi again > > > p.s for me, this is a one-off post rather than a thread. If anyone > > wants to discuss it, "dozo" as we say in Japanese - as you like. > > > Of course this was a silly and arrogant thing to write. It is bad > manners to post something and say you don't want to discuss it. If > anyone wants to discuss it (probably not enough of interest in it to > discuss) I would be happy to. > > Also, I'm aware that my general theme these days is "Friends, you are > ignorant and greedy! Join the club!" - Assuming too much, as Tep says. 51447 From: "Phil" Date: Thu Oct 13, 2005 1:06am Subject: Re: Conditions Part 4 - Predominance Condition (adhipati-paccaya) philofillet Hi all > There are two types of predominance condition: > - Co-nascent predominance (conditioning factor arises together with > conditioned factors) > - Object predominance (occurs when object is very highly regarded by > cittas and accompanying cetasikas) There is a passage in the Perfections that Lodewijk reads, on the perfection of panna, in which the Buddha to be sees drops of dew on a branch, and has insight into impermanence. Then the commentary has "it arose once, and he made it a condition to arise again." It made me wonder which condition it would be when we have a moment of understanding - even a very shallow one compared to the one described above - that sticks with us and conditions more understanding. Once a moment of understandings has fallen away it becomes a concept, an object of thinking now and then. Would it be the object predominance described above? Or would it be natural decisive support condition? I'm sure we all have had these moments of understanding that stick with us and have conditioning power for more of the same kind of understanding. Phil p.s of course one could ask why it is important to determine which condition it is.... 51448 From: "Phil" Date: Thu Oct 13, 2005 1:11am Subject: Indriyas and balas (was Re: Milk and water vs. the dog and his leash) philofillet Hi Tep Thanks for the below. My understanding had been that the indriyas (faculties) are developed first, and become unshakeable, and only then they become balas. Is that your understanding as well? (Not being contentious - just asking. Thanks in advance. Phil > Tep: Aha! The key word is "to develop" -- without developing, there is > no useful outcome (whether it is panna or samadhi, or both). > > Developing what? Developing the five powers (balas), of course! > > Just read the following material written by one of the most respected > monks of our time. > > "In the Buddha Saasanaa, these five balas are needed for the work of > samatha, vipassanaa, and the attainment of the holy Paths and Fruits > and Nibbana. It is only when these balas are first accumulated that the > great works mentioned can be undertaken. 51449 From: "Phil" Date: Thu Oct 13, 2005 4:23am Subject: Fear of Losing Partner ( Re: Ro b M’s Problem Rep... philofillet Hi James > (ps. So sorry to all for jamming the airwaves with our personal back- > and-forth)... I'm sorry I haven't been adding any feedback, James. As you know, I'm usually all over this topic. Something is making me refrain this time. I'll just say that I have faced some similar issues with Naomi, so am wishing you and Amr well. Well, I would anyways. Maybe I will get back to you off-list with something a little bit more personal.... Phil p.s I enjoy the way you and Howard encourage each other. Though I am not a meditator, I feel mudita for you guys. 51450 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Thu Oct 13, 2005 5:33am Subject: Indriyas and balas (was Re: Milk and water vs. the dog and his leash) buddhistmedi... Hi Phil (and all) - Thank you for asking -- it shows that you have paid attention. > Phil: > Thanks for the below. My understanding had been that the indriyas > (faculties) are developed first, and become unshakeable, and only > then they become balas. Is that your understanding as well? (Not > being contentious - just asking. > Tep: Let me try to answer you based on the Ven Ledi Sayadaw's article. He called balas the tools "needed for the work of samatha, vipassanaa, and the attainment of the holy Paths and Fruits and Nibbana". The sentence that prompted your question is probably the following : "It is only when these balas are first accumulated that the great works mentioned can be undertaken." I believe he means that the five Balas have to be developed, first of all, in order to perform "the great works". Developed from Indriyas, I suppose. So, my answer to your question is "Yes". The Venerable also stated in the conclusion of his article: "In this world, the strength of builders lie in good tools, such as awls, chisels, axes, knives, saws, etc. Only when he equips himself with such strength can he undertake to build monasteries, houses, etc. In the work of carpenters, blacksmiths, goldsmiths, artists, wood-carvers, etc., also, they have each their respective strength. Their strength consists of good tools and implements. Only with such can they accomplish their work. "Similarly, in the Sasana, the tools of samatha and vipassana for the purpose of achieving magga-nana and phala-nana consists of bhavana-saddha, bhavana-viriya, bhavana-sati, bhavana-samadhi, and bhavana-panna, developed through one of the satipatthana, such as anapana-sati. These five bala are the strength of yogavacara. Hence, these five bala must be developed in order to undertake successfully the work or samatha and vipassana within the Buddha Sasana. This is the meaning of 'bhaveti' in the stanza quoted above." [Endquote] Regards, Tep =========== --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Phil" wrote: > > > Hi Tep > (snipped) > > > Tep: Aha! The key word is "to develop" -- without developing, > there is no useful outcome (whether it is panna or samadhi, or both). > > > > Developing what? Developing the five powers (balas), of course! > > Just read the following material written by one of the most > respected monks of our time. > > > > "In the Buddha Saasanaa, these five balas are needed for the work > of samatha, vipassanaa, and the attainment of the holy Paths and > Fruits and Nibbana. It is only when these balas are first accumulated > that the great works mentioned can be undertaken. > 51451 From: "Leo (All Intelligent Views Exchange)" Date: Wed Oct 12, 2005 0:18pm Subject: The value of studying conditions ( was Re: rough index to UPs on paccayas) leoaive Hi Phil I guess you have your opinion, but I have mine and I will stay with mine. I think I have seen in Dhamma that some people come to teaching because of different reasons. My reasons are: I see precepts and I see what kind of fruit comes out of this. So when I apply "what's in it for me, than i see that it will be good for me if I follow that" When I apply it for meditation, I understand: if I will meditate, it is good for me. My way is working for me. If I do not make analysis of "what's in it for me", then I will not affraid of going to hell, and I would not really want to be there. For me everything there is, even if you brake it up to elements. To talk about scandha in my mind is for future applying in meditation to get the fruit. I see everything if it good for me or not. I am practical, that is it. Your way look different, but it is good you are trying to gain something out of it, or you have tendency to make your knowledge better, then you realise something. I guess you are taking it in your way. With metta Leo 51452 From: "colette" Date: Wed Oct 12, 2005 2:06pm Subject: Every body realy is a winner, so place your bets. ksheri3 --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Tep Sastri" wrote: > > > Hi, Colette (and Ven. Samahita) - > > > Samahita Bhikkhu: > > > C: Induce direct knowledge of the ego & ownerlessness of all. > > > > colette: IMPOSSIBLE, although I reserve the right to be wrong. There > > is no "beaten path" given in the above definition, a step by step > > direction: see your standard "Popular Mechanics" and to fulfill the > > definition of "Man" one must religiously read and accept as gospel, > > the procedure of the Popular Mechanic. > > I am really impressed by this post of yours; it is a masterpiece. Several > issues that have been in the center of DSG discussions are neatly > gathered in your post. I think Sarah, Phil and KenH (among other Paramattha dhamma specialists) colette: Now you've gone and placed a huge bolder in the road since we have to discover what the actual definition of Paramattha dhamma is. Does it really mean the "ultimate truth" or could it mean a more conventional truth such as vyavahara? "[Vss. 12-13] It is impossible to mount the pinnacle of the palace of truth without the ladder of conventional truth. For this reason, the mind, isolated in conventional truth, should become clear about the particular and general characteristics of things." =---------------------------------- > > I eagerly look forward to hearing Bhkkhu Samahita's reply. colette: watch out tep, the good Bhikkhu and I spinning a lot of yarns here and I would love to know of all the others that are eavesdropping to our parley. However, that does not mean that it would be safe, in any way, to take your eyes off of the spinning table as the tables spin round & round, since ya never know what might come off the table as it spins. You understand convention here don't you, you must place your cards on the table in the land of mild & honey, or you've gotta put your ideas on the table to be kicked around, or.... Lets be careful what we wish for, samadhi, mindfulness huh? toodles, colette 51453 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Wed Oct 12, 2005 9:53pm Subject: Kamma Leading to Low or High Birth ?!? bhikkhu_ekamuni Friends: Which Intentional Actions (Kamma) influence Family Status? A student once asked the Buddha: Master Gotama, what is the cause and condition why some human beings are high-born, while others are low-born ?? The Blessed Buddha then explained: Here, friend, some man or woman is obstinate and arrogant; such one does neither pay respect to one who should receive respect, nor do such one rise up for one in whose presence one should rise up, nor do such one offer a seat to one who indeed deserves a seat, nor do such one make way for one for whom one ought to make way, nor do such one honour, esteem, revere, & venerate one who should be honoured, esteemed, revered, and venerated. Because of intending and performing such action, at the breakup of the body, right after death, such one is reborn in a bad state of deprivation, in a miserable destination, in the painful purgatory, or even in the hells... But if such one at the breakup of the body, right after death, is not reborn in an state of deprivation, a painful destination, the purgatory, or in the hells, but instead comes back to the human state, then wherever such one is reborn, such one is low-born, of low rank, in a low social status family #! This is the way, friend, that leads to low birth, namely, one is obstinate and arrogant and one does not pay respect to one who should receive respect, does not rise up for one in whose presence such one must rise up, does not offer a seat to one who deserves a seat, does not make way for one for whom, one ought to make way, & does not honour, esteem, revere, & venerate, one who deserves to be honoured, esteemed, revered, and venerated..!! However, friend, here some man or woman is neither obstinate nor arrogant. They do indeed pay respect to one who should receive respect, rise up for one in whose presence one should rise up, offer a seat to one who deserves a seat, make way for one for whom, one should make way for, & honour, respect, revere, & venerate one who ought to be honoured, respected, revered, & venerated! Because of intending & performing such advantageous action, at breakup of the body, after death, such one reappears in a pleasurable and happy destination, even in the divine dimensions! But if at the breakup of the body, after death, such one is not reborn in a happy destination, in the heavenly worlds, but instead comes back here to the human state, then wherever such one reappears, such one is high born, into a prominent family %! This is the way, student, that leads being high born, namely, one is neither obstinate nor arrogant; and one do indeed pay respect to one who deserves to receive respect, one do indeed rise up for one in whose presence one should rise up, one do offer a seat to one who deserves a seat, one do make way for one for whom such one should make way for, and one do indeed honour, respect, revere, & venerate one who ought to be honoured, respected, revered, and naturally venerated...!!! #: Such one escapes hell, because the evil kamma is modified by past good! %: Such one miss heaven, because the good kamma is modified by past evil! Source: The Moderate speeches of the Buddha: The short speech on Action. MN 135 http://www.pariyatti.com/book.cgi?prod_id=25072X Full Text: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/majjhima/mn135a.html -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- PS: Please include the word Samahita in any comment, since then will my automatic mail filters pick it up and I will see it & respond!! Bhikkhu Samahita, Sri Lanka. Friendship is the Greatest ... Let there be Calm & Free Bliss !!! 51454 From: "jonoabb" Date: Thu Oct 13, 2005 6:21am Subject: Re: Mahaanidana sutta, theory/practice jonoabb Hi Mateesha Thanks for the reply. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "matheesha" wrote: > > Hi Jon, > > J:> I would say that the panna of the teachings is ultimately a > mental > > factor (cetasika), like other qualities good and bad, > > M: Agreed! > > and that these > > mental factors are accumulated that is to say passed from one > moment > > of consciusness to the next. > > M: Disagree! Then we would have to be conscious of our panna every > thought moment. Yet we are not. As I see it, the fact of being passed from one moment of consciousness to the next need not entail our being conscious of that happening. The effect of kamma performed in the past is carried on unbeknown to us. > I understand that the commentaries might say that. But it is simply > not possible when you think about it. Would be interested to know what you have in mind here when you say 'simply not possible'. After all we must give > priority as Truth to what actually happens out there, rather than > what the texts say should happen, even though it might go against > the grain. Are you saying we should give priority to Truth as we perceive it be? ;-)) Surely, "what actually happens" is what the teachings are all about (and what we are ignorant of). I might add that such a passing on of information is not > mentioned in the suttas. I am reminded of a sutta where the buddha > says he is NOT all seeing all the time, but rather can see anything > he wishes to. Nigantanathaputta claimed to be all seeing all the > time -the buddha said that if this were the case while walking > around he would fall over cows, and into pits etc! > > > J:> The question posed at the beginning of the passage quoted above > from > > the Satipatthana Sutta has a rather long answer in the sutta. The > > part about anapanasati is just the first of about 13 parts to the > > answer, and so should not be taken in isolation. > > M: I did not take it in isolation. The buddha simply starts off > using the 'going to an empty house, deserted field etc' right at the > start the sutta and is valid as far as i can see for the rest of the > sutta. Well I have not seen that reading expressed elsewhere. I'd be interested to know what textual support you find in the sutta. What I meant was that Intentional practice is rcommended in > the sutta. This is what i meant by 'formal practice' as opposed > to 'accidental' noting of dhammas. It is a passage that talks about a particular 'case where'. > Thank you for the comments, you might not agree with me, but we dont > have to! Agreed! Jon 51455 From: "jonoabb" Date: Thu Oct 13, 2005 6:29am Subject: e-Card from Benares (was, Question for A. Sujin ( was Re: A feverish ...)) jonoabb Hi Phil and All Jon here, coming in for Sarah who is having a rest day due to a fever thing that seems to be going around in the group. This afternoon we had to make a hasty return to the hotel from Sarnath when things took a turn for the worse, but it doesn't seem too severe and I'm hoping she'll be better in the morning. Phil, I'll bring up your question in the discussion as soon as an opportunity arises. Thanks for bringing it up. All, Nina and Lodewijk send their best to everyone (as does Sarah), and Lodewijk sends a special hello to James. Jon --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Phil" wrote: > > > Hi Sarah and India gang. > > I was sorry to hear about your fever, especially after I joked > about malaria. > > I'm sure there is already a long list of discussion topics, but I > heard something today that I would like to ask about, if the > opportunity arises. > > I heard A. Sujin say "if there is metta or karuna or upekkha, but > not as the development of more kusala, then it is without panna. > Becuase it is by one's accumulations." > > Doesn't kusala that arises due to accumulations lead > to "development of more kusala" through further accumulation? What > is the difference between development (bhavana?) and the > accumulation of kusala? > > Thanks, Sarah, if there is an opportunity... > > Phil 51456 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Thu Oct 13, 2005 9:46am Subject: Fear of Losing Partner ( Re: Ro b M’s Problem Rep... buddhatrue Hi Phil, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Phil" wrote: > p.s I enjoy the way you and Howard encourage each other. Though I am > not a meditator, I feel mudita for you guys. I'm glad. Howard has inspired me and reminded me of what is important. I am going to get back to practicing meditation (samadhi) more and posting less. There is no reason to waste this opportunity of a human birth. I don't want to have too many regrets when I lay dying. Metta, James 51457 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Thu Oct 13, 2005 9:54am Subject: e-Card from Benares (was, Question for A. Sujin ( was Re: A feverish ...)) buddhatrue Hi Jon, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: Lodewijk sends a special hello to James. > > Jon > Oh my, how nice! Send a special hello back to Lodewijk for me. Hope that he and Nina are keeping well and that you all are trying to keep well. So sorry to hear about Sarah's sickness! Hope she will start feeling better real soon. I've never had a good feeling about you guys going to India. :-( It is a very unhealthy place! Please take all the health precautions: keep your hands clean, don't drink the water, and don't eat in unknown locations. Good luck and come back safe! Metta, James 51458 From: "matheesha" Date: Thu Oct 13, 2005 0:21pm Subject: Re: Mahaanidana sutta, theory/practice matheesha333 Hi KenH, KH> I agree that all conditioned dhammas fade away as soon as they arise. > But they condition succeeding dhammas. > > In some ways, it is like kamma. M: The buddha never mentioned even once in the suttas of the importance of such a mechanism. He did mention more than hundred if not thoudsands of times the importance of satipatthana in attaining nibbana in this lifetime. Its absence tells me that it is quite insignificant in light of other far significant factors in the development of panna, which we can develop in this lifetime. If this whole idea of panna being transfered from one moment to the next were possible there would be another mountain of avijja being transfered as well. That makes it somewhat improbable (to say the least) that occasional noting of phenomena would countract that. The only way forward would seem that accumilations from a previous life are insignificant when compared to satipatthana in this lifetime, and then, prologned continuous satipatthana at that, to counteract avijja that we already have. ------------------------ > M: > Panna is not something that can be crystalised into its own > object, say for example like a Sound. It is ultimately a thought, > arising at the mind door. > ------------------------ > >KH: I think you are confusing panna - a conditioned dhamma - with > thoughts and ideas, which are just pannatti (concepts) and not > dhammas at all. > M: Lets take the world: Sights, sounds, sensations, smells and thought. Now can you tell me in which of these forms will you experience panna? >KH: From the way you understand what they are saying, it would follow > that we had to be 'conscious of our panna every thought moment.' But > we don't, of course, and that is not what they are saying - nor is it > what the Abhidhamma is saying. M: Let me clarify: Can sanna be experienced or not? >KH: So, in summary, volitional reactions arise due to accumulations in > much the same way as sense experiences arise due to kamma. M: Sense experience arise due to kamma? Kamma paccaya phasso? I would say volitional activity arise due to learning/memory, so I might agree with 'accumilations' but 99.98% from those in this lifetime. We might have to revist this. ----------- >KH: I will leave it there for now, remembering what you said about > telescoping. :-) Looking forward to your next instalment. > M: Thank you for being mindful. I hope this is not upsetting in anyway. I dont intend it to be that way. If it gets into an argument it is only going to give rise to a lot of defilements, which is not worthwhile, is it? So lets keep it light! take care Matheesha 51459 From: "Andrew" Date: Thu Oct 13, 2005 5:10pm Subject: Re: Rob M’s Problem Reply Part I corvus121 Hi again RobM A few more comments below (excuse the snipping). --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "robmoult" wrote: Because they are the core > of the teaching, I believe that the Buddha made the effort to define > the path factors like statutes. AT: When I read this statement, I was aghast. A complete overreaction, I know, due no doubt to our different ideas about the writing and reading of statutes. I should have picked some other simile. Saying that suttas must be read like statutes is, to me, a complete rejection of the notion that the Buddha tailored his language and teaching to the capacity of his audience. Just as Shaw used to say that he couldn't afford middle class morality, I think that in our ignorant condition, we don't have the luxury of 'black and white' statutory definitions. There's no wisdom in thinking we do. > I take the "historian" perspective not to discount any part of the > Tipitaka but to try and determine what is the true core of the > teaching; the overriding basic principles. AT: But that is clearly the outcome, no? The ranking and discounting of parts of the Tipitika? And when you study enough linguistic analysis of the Suttanta, you will rank and discount parts of it, too? Forgive me for being frank here, Rob. I'm focussing on the methodology and where it's going to lead and I have in mind Bhikkhu Dhammapala's statement that searches for truth are just extensions of a self-deluded mind. BB has said much the same thing too (in his Intro to the Brahmajala Sutta) - we just keep looking through rose- coloured glasses and enjoying the tint, forgetting it's even a factor. I believe that the > following must be included as core (an incomplete list): > - Noble Eightfold Path > - Four Noble Truths > - Dependent Origination > - Greed / Hatred / Delusion are unwholesome, opposites are wholesome AT: We still haven't solved our problem, have we? How to interpret what has come down to us about these topics without losing faith and falling into wrong views. > Andrew, do you believe that "Right Concentration" is not the same as > the four jhanas? How would you define "Right Concentration" and based > on what text? How then do we interpret the Suttas SN XLV.8, AN IX.36 > and AN IV.41? AT: The last thing I want to do is disparage your energetic efforts at Dhamma study, Rob. But at the same time, I'm not going to be cowed by the results. That's why I've said twice so far in this thread that I see no benefit in formulating 'my answers' to these questions. I am an uninstructed worldling and not a teacher of gods and men. I don't have definitive answers. What the Dickens do I know about RC of the NEP? Am I being a dog in the manger? Perhaps. I come back to another statement of Dhammapala: "the Path is foremost one of understanding, not an intellectual grasp, not a logical conclusion, not an emotional conviction, but a direct and comprehensive understanding through complete seeing of a thing as it is (yatha-buta-nana-dassana), the right as right, the false as false. This understanding which is a perfect understanding is the key to awakening ... Without this, all virtue is but puritanism, all concentration is but self-hypnosis, all inspiration is but imagination." I'm suggesting, Rob, that your methodology produces logical conclusions for a worldling intellect (that's fine) but I'm worrying that you aren't seeing or admitting their limitations and that you may be throwing the baby out with the bathwater when you go looking for the true core of Dhamma. I don't *know* that, of course. It's just a friendly reminder. It may be completely unnecessary. > It is for this very reason that I try to determine what are the core > teachings of the Buddha versus those added on later. Any way that I > look at it, Noble Eightfold Path is core and the assignment of "Right > Concentration" as the four jhanas makes sense to me... AT: And of course, this is where we come to the crunch. OK, you've studied and come to logical conclusions. So what? Where do you go from here? Best wishes Andrew T 51460 From: "matheesha" Date: Thu Oct 13, 2005 5:43pm Subject: Re: Mahaanidana sutta, theory/practice matheesha333 Hi Jon, >J: As I see it, the fact of being passed from one moment of > consciousness to the next need not entail our being conscious of that > happening. The effect of kamma performed in the past is carried on > unbeknown to us. M: I'm trying to keep these replies from getting out of hand! Please follow this in my reply to KenH. > >M: I understand that the commentaries might say that. But it is simply > > not possible when you think about it. > > Would be interested to know what you have in mind here when you > say 'simply not possible'. M: Again, as above... >M: After all we must give > > priority as Truth to what actually happens out there, rather than > > what the texts say should happen, even though it might go against > > the grain. > Are you saying we should give priority to Truth as we perceive it > be? ;-)) Surely, "what actually happens" is what the teachings are > all about (and what we are ignorant of). M: Aha! But, how is it then that the antidote to our ignorance comes from our own sati/awareness, starting off as it is with a mass of ignorance?? > > M: I did not take it in isolation. The buddha simply starts off > > using the 'going to an empty house, deserted field etc' right at > the > > start the sutta and is valid as far as i can see for the rest of > the > > sutta. > > Well I have not seen that reading expressed elsewhere. I'd be > interested to know what textual support you find in the sutta. M: I think I have to agree with you that if one reads the sutta in isolation it looks like that going to a deserted field etc looks like it belongs only to anapanasathi. But when considering that monks at the time used to live in forests coming out into villages only to go on pindapatha we would be hasty in thinking that they were only doing anapanasathi in the jungle and doing the rest of their practice on pindapatha rounds, as absurd as that sounds. Even if it were the case, I think it is telling that he did recommed going somewhere intentionally/formally to do even the anapanasathi practice. Actually the whole point of going forth into monkhood fomrally is to do something intentionally for the purpose of attaining nibbana. Otherwise why would such an institution even exist? metta Matheesha 51461 From: "Phil" Date: Thu Oct 13, 2005 6:13pm Subject: Not wanting out of samsara philofillet Hi all A basic question that I guess can't be answered so easily, but do you all feel that you want out of samsara, the cycle of death and rebirth. Life is quite sweet, and I see the things that irritate me or scare me as passing mental phenomenon so don't get bugged by them. So why would I want out? I know in theory that this human life is precious and I will probably be reborn in lower realms - How did you come to know this in a deep enough way, deeper than theory, in a way that motivated you to practice with a sense of urgency? How do we know that our sense of urgency is not in fact a hidden craving for existence, for a favourable rebirth, or a craving for the rest of this lifetime to be more peaceful, more calm, more loving-kindly? My communication with modern Buddhists at other general groups (not DSG) left me with the impression that most modern Buddhists practice for the latter reason, to be more peaceful and loving people, which is not the point of the Buddha's teaching. If our motivation is a favourable rebirth, is that not craving for existence, which the Buddha said is one of the factors of the Second Noble Truth, the origin of suffering. Seems paradoxical. How do we come to want out of samsara? Is is a matter of understanding the First Noble Truth as deeply as possible? Have I been sheltered from suffering, the way the young Buddha was by his father? I've never had a loved on die on me, although I am already in my 40s. Is my relaxed attitude to samsara due to having been sheltered from suffering by fortuitous circumstances that will not continue? I have never suffered from an agonizing disease, my rupa has not rebelled on me yet in a devastating way. I know The First Noble Truth is far subtler than losing loved ones or suffering from disease, but that is the example that leaps to mind. Was there a moment in which you had an understanding which continues to condition samvega (sense of urgency?) Did it occur conditioned by your own suffering or from insight into suffering in general? Lots of questions there. If anyone wants to pick up one or another, thanks in advance for your feedback. Phil 51462 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Thu Oct 13, 2005 8:19pm Subject: Re: Not wanting out of samsara buddhatrue Hi Phil, I like these questions because they are very genuine. I am going to give you my input but I don't wish to be involved in a long discussion (`telescoping' as Matheesha so aptly puts it). I will answer points of clarification but will not respond to debate (like Howard, I am increasing my practice). Phil: A basic question that I guess can't be answered so easily, but do you all feel that you want out of samsara, the cycle of death and rebirth. Life is quite sweet, and I see the things that irritate me or scare me as passing mental phenomenon so don't get bugged by them. So why would I want out? James: `Why would I want out' is not the proper way to look at it. Ultimately, there is no `you' to `get out' of anywhere. Samsara simply means delusion. Your mind is deluded- in a sleep- unaware of reality. Realizing nibbana doesn't mean you `disappear', because the `you' you think you have is also a delusion. The goal of Buddhism is to realize the truth, the goal isn't to disappear. (The goal of extinction is Nihilism which the Buddha taught against.) Phil: I know in theory that this human life is precious and I will probably be reborn in lower realms - How did you come to know this in a deep enough way, deeper than theory, in a way that motivated you to practice with a sense of urgency? James: Personally, I came to know this with my intuitive mind (note: not, I believe, `accumulated wisdom'). Phil: How do we know that our sense of urgency is not in fact a hidden craving for existence, for a favourable rebirth, or a craving for the rest of this lifetime to be more peaceful, more calm, more loving-kindly? James: It could be. Everyone has different motivations for practice. The Buddha taught to the householder to be more peaceful, calmer, and move loving-kindly. The Buddha did teach those things to householders. Phil: My communication with modern Buddhists at other general groups (not DSG) left me with the impression that most modern Buddhists practice for the latter reason, to be more peaceful and loving people, which is not the point of the Buddha's teaching. James: That IS one level of the Buddha's teaching- aimed at householders. Remember Phil, most of the people on the Internet are householders. The Buddha didn't teach nibbana to everyone, only to those who were ready for renunciation. The Buddha predominately taught stream-entry to householders: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/anguttara/an05-179.html http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/anguttara/an10-092.html Phil: How do we come to want out of samsara? James: Again, there is no `coming out of samsara'. It is more like waking from a dream- a dream with good and bad qualities but still intrinsically dukkha (unsatisfactory) because it is a dream. Phil: Is is a matter of understanding the First Noble Truth as deeply as possible? James: That would be a good start, in my opinion. Phil: Was there a moment in which you had an understanding which continues to condition samvega (sense of urgency?) Did it occur conditioned by your own suffering or from insight into suffering in general? James: Personally, I was born with the sense of urgency to discover the truth about life. I knew, intuitively, from a small child that life was not what it seemed. As a child, I went on my own (as my parents have no religion) to a Christian Sunday School class a few times but stopped after I got into arguments with the Sunday School teacher about Jesus and God and how none of it made sense (yes, I was arguing religion even as a child- and haven't stopped since ;- )). I researched different religions, on my own, through my sense of urgency, and became a Buddhist/Taoist at age 15. I have been a Buddhist (Taoist/Zen influence) ever since then. But every one is different. Some people are born into Buddhism and some people come to Buddhism through a traumatic event or great suffering. But you shouldn't force yourself and believe you need to have a `sense of urgency' when you really don't right now. Conditions may develop later to cause you have that sense of urgency. The important thing is to strive for stream-entry in this lifetime so that you can eventually wake up from the dream ;-)). Loving-kindness, James 51463 From: "Phil" Date: Thu Oct 13, 2005 9:40pm Subject: Re: Not wanting out of samsara philofillet --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "buddhatrue" wrote: > > Hi Phil, > > I like these questions because they are very genuine. I am going to > give you my input but I don't wish to be involved in a long > discussion (`telescoping' as Matheesha so aptly puts it). I will > answer points of clarification but will not respond to debate (like > Howard, I am increasing my practice). Thanks James - haven't read it yet, but would just like to say to everyone that I am just asking for some fodder for reflection and I promise not to say anything critical or judgemental in return. In fact, I won't respond except to say thanks! Promise. Phil 51464 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Fri Oct 14, 2005 4:02am Subject: [dsg] Re: Rob M’s Problem Reply Part I kenhowardau Hi Howard, -------------------- <. . .> H: >I disagree. In any case, the point that I have been making is not so much that dosa can play a role in uprooting dosa in oneself. What I have been emphasizing is craving. We start with a defiled mind, ---------------------- I understand 'defiled mind' to mean 'akusala mind.' In the ultimate sense, akusala mind leads to more akusala mind. It is only by understanding akusala mind (and other mind) when it appears that we make a start on the Middle Way. ------------------------------------------- <. . .> H: > and our desire for liberation is no exception - it is polluted by sense of self. That is the fact of the matter. But without desire for liberation, we'd be sunk. Actually, though, for that matter, even aversion - aversion to suffering, to grasping, to perpetual cognitive and emotional proliferation, aversion that leads to a craving to escape from the round of woe, constitutes a productive force. We start where we are, Ken, and not where we'd hope to be. ---------------------------------------------- You are exasperated by the way I discuss this topic, Howard, and not without reason. I must remind you of the Irishman who was asked for directions to Dublin, and answered, "If I wanted to go to Dublin, I wouldn't start from here." :-) However, I think my line of reasoning is consistent with the Abhidhamma. There is no sentient being that has both good and evil motives: there is only citta. Citta can be good or evil, but it can't be both. ---------------------- > H: >Do you never take any purposeful actions > to alter the course of events, > ------------- KH: > > Conditioned volitional activity (kamma) is not always motivated by ignorance (much less so by ignorance with wrong view). >---------------- H: >You ignored my question. ----------------------- But, you see, I don't think I did ignore your question. I answered it according to my understanding of the Dhamma. That is the only way I can make any real sense of life's meaningful questions. If you insist on talking about how I, as a person or entity, go about my daily life, you will only get answers reminiscent of the Supreme Net of Views: "I do take purposeful actions" "I don't take purposeful actions" "I both do and don't take purposeful actions" or "I neither do nor don't take purposeful actions." According to the Dhamma, they are all, ultimately, wrong. ---------------------------------------- <. . .> H: > Ken, instead of replying to what I asked, you trotted out dogma, a tired old horse. ------------------------------------------ I genuinely don't see it that way. Whenever I can apply Abhidhamma to the present moment (no matter how basic that application might be) it seems to me like anything but a tired old horse. -------------------- H: > This is like reading a textbook, Ken. But it doesn't constitute conversation. --------------------- I will take note of that. Perhaps if I can leave out some of the competitive, point scoring, tendencies (that Tep has been talking about) my tone might be a little more conversational. :-) Ken H 51465 From: "Joop" Date: Fri Oct 14, 2005 4:05am Subject: Re: Not wanting out of samsara jwromeijn Stream entry is good enough for me Dear Phil, James, Hal, and all Two messages are bringing me to the topic (partly a statement, partly a question): Stream-entry is good enough for me (?) One message is the Bhikkhu Bodhi essay Rob quoted: 'The jhanas and the lay disciple according to the Pali Suttas'. BTW, Hal: You can find it at http://www.saigon.com/~anson/ebud/ebidx.htm, I think BB made this essay for the Dhamma Study Group! The shortest conclusion of it: when you want to get a arahant, you should have been in the four jhanas, and that's only possible for a monk. The second that of James: "most of the people on the Internet are householders. The Buddha didn't teach nibbana to everyone, only to those who were ready for renunciation. The Buddha predominately taught stream-entry to householders: AN05-179 and AN10-092. Both messages based on the Suttas, so it's no point of agree or disagree to me. But because the future of Theravada is an important topic to me, I think we had to modernize the aspects of it that were only Indian culture, or more general: the situation of 2500 years ago. And keep the essence. I think the essence is renunciation, and not the oldfashioned concept 'householder', even not the differentiation monk versus layperson. In the globalised future of our planet there will be Theravada without monasteries. But not without renunciation, the core topic. - To me not only and even not in the first place in the meaning of 'without sexual activities' (I agree, as somebody of 66 years, that's not so difficult). - Renunciate of my house as a kind of safe haven and renunciate of the social security system of my country is much more difficult. - Renunciate of my family? I can say: I'm working on that; step by step I'm preparing for the moment I die (tomorrow or in ten years or whatever) so I try to decrease my attachments to the members of my family. Another remark about 'getting stream enterer is enough result for me': I understood that a stream-enterer has seven rebirths or less till arahantship, so that will happen automatically, so that's another reason not to worry about it. That's at the same moment a kind of reaction to Phil's point of worry about the kind of rebirths. I will say: I try not to worry about my future in every way: not my future in this life and not in possible next lives. Metta Joop 51466 From: "matheesha" Date: Fri Oct 14, 2005 5:19am Subject: Re: Not wanting out of samsara matheesha333 Hi Phil, Very important questions which goes to the core of the dhamma. I just wanted to mention a few things: Suffering in this lifetime is caused by defilements Rebirth is also caused by defilements No more suffering in this lifetime means the rebirth aspect is also taken care of. The buddha said the 5 aggregates are dukkha. This means every single moment of existence. The only way to understand this is to see arising and passing away moment to moment, in a continuous and prolonged manner. This leads to th understanding that every moment is impermanent, and that there is nothing outside this understanding whatsoever. This insight leads to building up on further insight based on that: That if there is only impermanance in every moment, then every moment is unsatisfactory/dukkha and there is nothing which can be grasped on to. This was a sad and fearful moment for me since i was still clinging on to samsara. This is what made me understand that I want to have nothing to do with samsara, because it is only an illusion of contiunuity, pleasantness and self. metta Matheesha 51467 From: upasaka@... Date: Fri Oct 14, 2005 2:25am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Rob M’s Probl em Reply Part I upasaka_howard Hi, Ken - In a message dated 10/14/05 7:04:11 AM Eastern Daylight Time, kenhowa@... writes: > However, I think my line of reasoning is consistent with the > Abhidhamma. -------------------------------------- Howard: I hope not - for the sake of the Abhidhamma, and more so, for those who are devoted to it above all. ------------------------------------ There is no sentient being that has both good and evil > > motives: there is only citta. Citta can be good or evil, but it can't > be both. > ----------------------------------- Howard: If one doesn't recognize that there are varying degrees of characteristics of phenomena, but takes a "black & white" view, then this, as I see it, is the mark of fundamentalist extremism, a harmful *non-realism*. ====================== 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) 51468 From: "nidive" Date: Fri Oct 14, 2005 8:29am Subject: Re: Not wanting out of samsara nidive Hi Phil, > A basic question that I guess can't be answered so easily, but do > you all feel that you want out of samsara, the cycle of death and > rebirth. Life is quite sweet, and I see the things that irritate me > or scare me as passing mental phenomenon so don't get bugged by > them. So why would I want out? In my opinion, the Buddha actually taught two sorts of Dhamma, one for those who are satisfied with samsara, and one for those who are dissatisfied with samsara. In MN 117, he taught that there are two sorts of Right View, two sorts of Right Resolve, two sorts of Right Speech, two sorts of Right Action and two sorts of Right Livelihood. The first sort of those five factors "has fermentations, sides with merit, & results in acquisitions". The second sort of those five factors "is without fermentations, transcendent, a factor of the path". So, even if you have no aspiration to get out of samsara, you can still practice Right View, Right Resolve, Right Speech, Right Action and Right Livelihood of the first sort. In fact, it is quite advantageous because you are accumulating meritorious kamma for yourself. For those of us who have made the aspiration to get out of samsara, the aim of the practice is to abandon both meritorious and demeritorious kamma. > I know in theory that this human life is precious and I will > probably be reborn in lower realms - How did you come to know this > in a deep enough way, deeper than theory, in a way that motivated > you to practice with a sense of urgency? Personally, I find watching Animal Planet to be very useful. Those gory and gruesome scenes of killing and devouring are very motivating. It also made me realize that there are far more beings that are reborn as mosquitoes, ants, spiders, fishes, cattles, etc. > How do we know that our sense of urgency is not in fact a hidden > craving for existence, for a favourable rebirth, or a craving for > the rest of this lifetime to be more peaceful, more calm, more > loving-kindly? My communication with modern Buddhists at other > general groups (not DSG) left me with the impression that most > modern Buddhists practice for the latter reason, to be more peaceful > and loving people, which is not the point of the Buddha's teaching. In my opinion, it is a part of the Buddha's teaching, though not the whole part. > If our motivation is a favourable rebirth, is that not craving for > existence, which the Buddha said is one of the factors of the Second > Noble Truth, the origin of suffering. Seems paradoxical. Nothing paradoxical in my opinion, because the Buddha actually taught two sorts of Dhamma as I said above. If you crave for existence in a future favourable rebirth, then you practice the Dhamma that "has fermentations, sides with merit, & results in acquisitions". If you sincerely want to get out of samsara, then you practice the Dhamma that "is without fermentations, transcendent, a factor of the path". > How do we come to want out of samsara? Is is a matter of > understanding the First Noble Truth as deeply as possible? Have I > been sheltered from suffering, the way the young Buddha was by his > father? I've never had a loved on die on me, although I am already > in my 40s. Is my relaxed attitude to samsara due to having been > sheltered from suffering by fortuitous circumstances that will not > continue? I have never suffered from an agonizing disease, my rupa > has not rebelled on me yet in a devastating way. I know The First > Noble Truth is far subtler than losing loved ones or suffering from > disease, but that is the example that leaps to mind. Personally, I find contemplation on my own death very useful. This fear of being reborn in the animal realm is very real to me. > Was there a moment in which you had an understanding which > continues to condition samvega (sense of urgency?) Did it occur > conditioned by your own suffering or from insight into suffering in > general? Both I think, but my own suffering seems to play the leading role. For me, contemplating on suffering leads to the knowledge that there is actually no meaning to life. Regards, Swee Boon To the extent that one finds a meaning to life, to that extent one finds an identity. To the extent that one finds an identity, to that extent one stands attached to life. Standing attached to life, sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress, and despair come into play. Life springs out of Ignorance and Craving. When one sees that life springs out of Ignorance and Craving, would the meaning of life be discernible? I say the meaning of life is not discernible. I say there is no meaning to life. 51469 From: "Andrew" Date: Fri Oct 14, 2005 3:59pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Rob M’s Probl em Reply Part I corvus121 Hi Howard I think Ken H is out of town for a while, so don't expect to hear back from him too soon. For my own benefit, though, regarding the bit below: --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@a... wrote: > Howard: > If one doesn't recognize that there are varying degrees of > characteristics of phenomena, but takes a "black & white" view, then this, as I see it, > is the mark of fundamentalist extremism, a harmful *non-realism*. AT: I'm trying to find the Dhamma in amongst this. Can you help? Are you saying that the implications from the doctrine of anatta are not to be followed too far, lest ... what? Are ariyans fundamentalists and extremists because they see things more 'black and white' than worldlings? As you can see, you've lost me, Howard. (-: Best wishes Andrew T 51470 From: "Phil" Date: Fri Oct 14, 2005 4:57pm Subject: SN 36:7 Painful or pleasant feeling >> reflection on impermanence philofillet Hi all This morning I came across note I had made on SN 36:7 in one of my notebooks, a sutta in which the bhikkhu experiences pleasant or painful feeling, but is able to reflect that it is dependent on this body, and is therefore "impermanent, conditioned, dependently- arisen" and this can lead, eventually, to reflection on cessation etc. I wondered why it is that I have read this sutta so often (well, a few dozen times) but rarely if ever pause to reflect on it in daily life, when painful or pleasant feeling arise. It could be because I consume too many suttas, and fail to reflect on one, just one, long enough. Overconsuming suttas because they are so tasty and attractive. But now I find that I was led to the computer to write this down, perhaps a condition for reflecting on this very helpful sutta more often today. I also found that I put the notebook down, and concentrated on the meaning of the sutta, reflected, meditated. I was sitting on a tatami floor with my legs crossed, so this could be an example of how meditation can arise in a natural way, conditioned by the Buddha's teaching and what we are already doing as a natural part of our daily life. (I read suttas every morning, sitting on the floor with my legs crossed, Japanese style.) Phil 51471 From: upasaka@... Date: Fri Oct 14, 2005 1:17pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Rob Mâ€â†žÂ¢s Probl em Reply Part I upasaka_howard Hi, Andrew - In a message dated 10/14/05 7:00:21 PM Eastern Daylight Time, athel60@... writes: > > > Hi Howard > > I think Ken H is out of town for a while, so don't expect to hear > back from him too soon. ----------------------------------- Howard: Thanks for mentioning that. ---------------------------------- > > For my own benefit, though, regarding the bit below: > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@a... wrote: > >Howard: > > If one doesn't recognize that there are varying degrees of > >characteristics of phenomena, but takes a "black &white" view, > then this, as I see it, > >is the mark of fundamentalist extremism, a harmful *non-realism*. > > AT: I'm trying to find the Dhamma in amongst this. Can you help? > Are you saying that the implications from the doctrine of anatta are > not to be followed too far, lest ... what? > ---------------------------------------- Howard: I wasn't discussing anatta. I wasn't discussing the impersonality and insubstantiality of phenomena. I was discussing the matter of kusala and akusala. And my point was that there are *degrees* of each of these. Some phenomena may be mildly one or the other or very strongly so. The desire to murder is horrendously akusala (unwholesome). The desire to scratch an itch is rather less so! The desire to save a loved one from harm may well be due in part, or even entirely, to selfish need of that person. The result of acting in furtherance of that flawed, "akusala" desire, however, is frequently to the good! Moreover, it seems to me that in the suttas, the Buddha used those terms 'kusala' and 'akusala' in a conventional manner, and that a phenomenon may be kusala (in the sense of "useful") in some respects and akusala in others as regards consequence. I was born with an inclination to "the mystical". Before I came to Buddhism, I came to Advaita Vedanta. Now, that is a very different species of philosophy/practice from the Dhamma, though they fall into the same genus. Advaita Vedanta is an atta view, which makes it a wrong view (as I see it, and according to the Dhamma). However, it has many virtues. It happens that my tentative acceptance of Advaita Vedanta led me to much contemplation, and from Advaita Vedanta I was led to somewhat similar aspects of Mahayana Buddhism, and then to the purer aspects of Mahayana and to Theravada. I am grateful for the initial wrong view, because it brought me to the Dhamma. So there, you see, is an example of an atta view which had the usefulness to lead me to the anatta view of the Buddha's. The desire to attain awakening is a self-oriented desire, and that makes it akusala. But it will frequently have wonderful wholesome consequences. And that was my main point. --------------------------------------------------- Are ariyans > > fundamentalists and extremists because they see things more 'black > and white' than worldlings? > --------------------------------------------------- Howard: Do they? They see things more *clearly*. Arahants see them *as they are*. I don't think that the nature of things is black & white. To see things as they are is to see all the nuances. I don't think things are simple. It was Ananda, I think, or maybe another follower of the Buddha, who said he thought dependent origination was quite simple. The Buddha set him straight on that. --------------------------------------------------- > As you can see, you've lost me, Howard. (-: --------------------------------------------------- Howard: Now I hope I've found you! ;-)) I hope that my saying that there are degrees to things and that is simplistic and misleading to simply just say akusala (black) and kusala (white) is an explanation that has clarified things for you. Since 99% of our states are defiled, we are sunk in akusala, and if all instances of "akusala" are equally lacking in auspicious consequences, then we are pretty much "out of luck"! Fortunately, I believe, that is not so. ------------------------------------------------ > > Best wishes > Andrew T > > ======================= 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) 51472 From: "Andrew" Date: Fri Oct 14, 2005 6:26pm Subject: Re: Rob Mâ€â†žÂ¢s Probl em Reply Part I corvus121 Hi Howard Thanks for the elaboration. I was lost but now I am found. (-: Interesting, isn't it. Everyone here agrees that there *is* a way leading to cessation, but we can't agree on what it is or we emphasise different aspects. Still, if we all agreed, that wouldn't say much for the Buddhadhamma being "difficult, hard to see" etc, would it! Just on this bit: --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@a... wrote: > Since 99% of our states are defiled, we are sunk in akusala, and if > all instances of "akusala" are equally lacking in auspicious consequences, then > we are pretty much "out of luck"! Fortunately, I believe, that is not so. AT: Speaking conventionally, being in a mostly akusala world as we are provides a wonderful opportunity for wisdom, doesn't it. Contrast the gods in their mostly kusala worlds where there is no rupa or just no motivation for seeing the worth in cessation. So for us, being in a mire of (conventional) akusala, when understood correctly, is a big part of the solution. That's *my* preferred emphasis coming to the surface - that the Dhamma is primarily an understanding based teaching focussed on now. I'll stop rambling. Thanks again Howard. Best wishes Andrew T 51473 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Sat Oct 15, 2005 0:27am Subject: Re: Mahaanidana sutta, theory/practice kenhowardau Hi Matheesha, Dhamma discussions are never easy, and ours is no exception. I think neither of us really understands the other's perspective and, therefore, some seemingly minor points are forming major barriers to communication. You have an objection to the notion of accumulated tendencies. I don't know why. To my mind, it is a natural component of the overall explanation. Does the cause of your objection relate back to the sutta we were talking about earlier - the one that says anyone who practises satipatthana will become sotapanna in seven years or less? Clearly, some people in the Buddha's day attained very quickly (e.g., Kondana during the first Ddscourse), while other loyal followers did not attain at all. Obviously this 7-year practice that is referred to is something very difficult to do. -------------------------------------------- M: The buddha never mentioned even once in the suttas of the importance of such a mechanism. --------------------------------------------- That might depend on how we understand the mechanism, and how we understand the suttas. Certainly, the bodhisatta had to accumulate all wholesome qualities to their highest degree and that took countless millions of lifetimes. Other arahants needed to do far less, but their wisdom nevertheless took a long, long time to develop, -------------------------- M: > He did mention more than hundred if not thousands of times the importance of satipatthana in attaining nibbana in this lifetime. -------------------------- Matheesha, I think it all comes down to different understandings of satipatthana. One understanding is that satipatthana is a simple, commonplace activity that can be summed up in the words, "When a person is walking, he knows he is walking." Another understanding is that satipatthana is the most difficult and the least commonplace of all attainments. It is described as, "When the required conditions are in place, sati and panna arise to know a paramattha dhamma as anicca, dukkha and anatta." ------------------------------------ M: > Its absence tells me that it is quite insignificant in light of other far significant factors in the development of panna, which we can develop in this lifetime. ------------------------------------ I would put it slightly differently: I would say the past is no longer important, and it does not matter if Nibbana is close or far away. What does matter is that we understand the reality of the present moment. ------------------- M: > If this whole idea of panna being transfered from one moment to the next were possible there would be another mountain of avijja being transfered as well. That makes it somewhat improbable (to say the least) that occasional noting of phenomena would countract that. ------------------- Again, I don't understand your opposition to the idea of panna as a conditioned dhamma. Nor do I understand how panna can be developed if it is not accumulated in every moment and passed on to the next. Otherwise, all our good works would be lost as soon as an evil or unskilful moment occurred. --------------------- <. . .> >KH: I think you are confusing panna - a conditioned dhamma - with > thoughts and ideas, which are just pannatti (concepts) and not > dhammas at all. > .......... M: > Lets take the world: Sights, sounds, sensations, smells and thought. Now can you tell me in which of these forms will you experience panna? ---------------------- I am not trying to avoid that question, but I think it needs to be worded differently. Firstly, "the world" as described in the suttas (e.g., in the Sabba Sutta) is more than the external objects. It includes consciousness (in any of its six forms), and the various mental factors that can accompany consciousness (volition, panna, contact, perception, feeling, etc.). Secondly, when the suttas are correctly translated, "thoughts" are not included in their descriptions of "the world". A common mistake is to translate the word "dhammayatana" (mind objects) as if it were the same as "dhammarammana" (objects of consciousness). Ven. Thanissaro (e.g.) makes this mistake; as does Nyanatiloka's Buddhist Dictionary). Thoughts are illusory, and the Buddha did not believe in an illusory world. Getting back to your question; panna can experience any of the objects that ultimately constitute "the world." When it does, there is mundane insight (satipatthana, patipatti). Panna can also experience thoughts. When it does, there is correct intellectual understanding (pariyatti). ------------------------------------- >KH: > From the way you understand what they are saying, it would follow that we had to be 'conscious of our panna every thought moment.' But we don't, of course, and that is not what they are saying - nor is it what the Abhidhamma is saying. >............. M: > Let me clarify: Can sanna be experienced or not? -------------------------------------- I am sorry, but that doesn't clarify anything for me. We don't understand each other's overall perspective, and that is making communication difficult. ----------- >KH: > So, in summary, volitional reactions arise due to accumulations in > much the same way as sense experiences arise due to kamma. >......... M: > Sense experience arise due to kamma? -------------------------- Yes. -------------------------------------- M: > Kamma paccaya phasso? I would say volitional activity arise due to learning/memory, so I might agree with 'accumilations' but 99.98% from those in this lifetime. We might have to revist this. --------------------------- That will be good, any time you feel like it. Ken H 51474 From: "robmoult" Date: Sat Oct 15, 2005 0:54am Subject: Re: [dsg] Conditions Part 20 - Dissociation Condition (vippayutta-paccaya) robmoult Hi Howard, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@a... wrote: > > Hi, Rob - > > In a message dated 10/12/05 11:39:45 AM Eastern Daylight Time, > rob.moult@j... writes: > > > Similarly, > > nama and rupa do not mix. They do not arise together nor do they > > dissolve together. > > > ====================== > They do not arise together as experiential content (arammana), but > they *do* arise together complementary aspects of experience, do they not? Do not > citta & rupa (as object), and cetasika & rupa (as object) arise together? > > With metta, > Howard ===== The text explains that nama and rupa are related through disassociation condition. This is really a tautology since nama is defined as mental phenomena and rupa is defined as non-mental phenomena. It is true that nama takes rupa as object (they are also related through many other conditions), but this does not mean that they "mix". Citta and cetasika "mix", the four great primaries (earth, fire, water and air) also "mix". However, nama and rupa always remain at arms-length to each other. When two things "mix", they arise at the same time and they fall away at the same time. Metta, Rob M :-) 51475 From: "robmoult" Date: Sat Oct 15, 2005 0:53am Subject: Re: [dsg] Conditions Part 20 - Dissociation Condition (vippayutta-paccaya) robmoult Hi TG, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, TGrand458@a... wrote: > > Hi Rob M, All > > Saying these things do mix or don't mix is merely in the eye of the > beholder. A jewel vs gold is merely a conventional distinction. In one sense they > are completely mixed. In another sense they can be considered separate. The > point of the Buddha's teaching IMO is not to reify or obsess about these > issues; but rather to get beyond this type of argument ASAP. (Although, the idea > of "disassociation condition" is quite the non sequitur IMO.) > > TG > > > In a message dated 10/12/2005 9:39:51 A.M. Mountain Daylight Time, > rob.moult@j... writes: > > Hi All, > > The six tastes (tart, bitter, sweet, sour, salty and acrid) do not mix > together, yet they support one another to give an agreeable taste to a > curry. In a crown or necklace, the gold and the jewels do not mix up; > they can be differentiated easily by sight. Yet the gold makes the > jewels more beautiful and the jewels make the gold more attractive. > This is like mixing oil and water; they remain separate. Similarly, > nama and rupa do not mix. They do not arise together nor do they > dissolve together. Nama and rupa aid each other by way of > disassociation condition. > > Metta, > Rob M :-) ===== Please help me to understand what you mean by "get beyond this type of argument ASAP". I see Buddhism as offering a variety of teachings because we each have different accumulations. Some people progress along a faith-based path, some are meditators, some find the "scientific" approach of the Abhidhamma suits them best. Though the definition of the various conditions is not taken from the Suttas, the Buddha did at times make an effort to create lists, classification and groups for people who have "scientific" accumulations. DN 33 is an example. Metta, Rob M :-) 51476 From: "robmoult" Date: Sat Oct 15, 2005 0:55am Subject: Re: [dsg] Conditions Part 20 - Dissociation Condition (vippayutta-paccaya) robmoult Hi TG and Howard, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, TGrand458@a... wrote: > > > In a message dated 10/12/2005 10:07:15 A.M. Mountain Daylight Time, > upasaka@a... writes: > > Hi, Rob - > > In a message dated 10/12/05 11:39:45 AM Eastern Daylight Time, > rob.moult@j... writes: > > > Similarly, > > nama and rupa do not mix. They do not arise together nor do they > > dissolve together. > > > ====================== > They do not arise together as experiential content (arammana), but > they *do* arise together complementary aspects of experience, do they not? > Do not > citta & rupa (as object), and cetasika & rupa (as object) arise together? > > With metta, > Howard > > > > Hi Howard, Rob M, All > > Howard, I agree with your point that they do arise together. In looking at > the quote you cited above by Rob M, it is the antithesis of the Buddha's > teaching of DO IMO. The quote below (and many more) show a complete correlation > between nama and rupa... > > > “Monks, consciousness comes to be in dependence on a dyad. And how, monks, > does consciousness come to be in dependence on a dyad? In dependence on eye > and forms there arises eye-consciousness. The eye is impermanent, changing, > becoming otherwise; forms are impermanent, changing, becoming otherwise. > Thus this dyad is moving and tottering, impermanent, changing, becoming > otherwise. > “Eye-consciousness is impermanent, changing, becoming otherwise. The cause > and condition for the arising of eye-consciousness is also impermanent, > changing, becoming otherwise. When, monks, eye-consciousness has arisen in > dependence on a condition that is impermanent, how could it be permanent? > “The meeting, the encounter, the occurrence of these three things is called > eye-contact. Eye-contact too is impermanent, changing, becoming otherwise. > The cause and condition for the arising of eye-contact is also impermanent, > changing, becoming otherwise. When, monks, eye-contact has arisen in > dependence on a condition that is impermanent, how could it be permanent? > “Contacted, monks, one feels, contacted one intends, contacted one > perceives. Thus these things too are moving and tottering, impermanent, changing, > becoming otherwise. > [The Buddha proceeds to analyze the ear-consciousness, nose- consciousness, > tongue-consciousness, body-consciousness, and mind-consciousness in the same > manner and finishes with...] > “It is in such a way, monks, that consciousness comes to be in dependence on > a dyad.â€? > (The Buddha . . . Connected Discourses of the Buddha, vol. 2, pg. 1172) > The "contact" that generates feeling is not limited to nama. That contact > is nama and rupa mixing together as it were. If they really didn't associate > as "disassociation condition" implies, consciousness would be impossible. > TG ===== According to the Abhidhamma, the lifespan of rupa is seventeen times longer than the lifespan of nama. How then can nama and rupa arise together and dissolve together? Citta and its associated cetasikas do arise together and they do dissolve together, therefore they do not qualify for disassociation condition. The four great primaries (earth, fire, water and air) arise together and dissolve together, therefore they qualify for disassociation condition. When the Buddha said that "consciousness comes to be in dependence on a dyad" the Buddha is clarifying details of the Honeyball Sutta MN18 "Dependent on eye & forms, eye-consciousness arises". This does not mean that consciousness arises and dissolves at the same time as eye-sensitivity nor does it mean that consciousness arises and dissolves at the same time as visible object. TG, I disagree with your statement, "The `contact' that generates feeling is not limited to nama." Contact (phassa) is a cetasika and is limited to nama (it is a type of nama). Rupa does not have any cetasikas. You continue, "That contact is nama and rupa mixing together as it were. If they really didn't associate as "disassociation condition" implies, consciousness would be impossible." While I agree with you that there are many relationships between nama and rupa, please keep in mind that the definition of disassociation condition relates to arising together and dissolving together. Metta, Rob M :-) 51477 From: "robmoult" Date: Sat Oct 15, 2005 0:57am Subject: Re: Conditions Part 17 - Jhana Condition (jhana-paccaya) robmoult Hi Tep, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Tep Sastri" wrote: > > > Hi RobM (Attn. Swee, James, Howard)- > > The "7 jhana-factors" states in your post are as follows: > > > - Thought-conception (vitakka): in all cittas > > - Discursive thinking (vicara): in all cittas > > - Interest (piti): in lobha-mula cittas, > > - Joy (sukha): in lobha-mula cittas > > - Concentration / one-pointedness (samadhi / ekaggata): in all cittas > > - Sadness (domanassa): in dosa-mula cittas > > - Indifference (upekkhŒ): in moha-mula cittas > > > The first five are the "jhana factors" leading to absorption. > > However, jhana condition arises with both kusala and akusala; they > > represent the "focus" on doing good or bad. The jhana factors > > condition the citta, cetasikas and rupas produced. > > > > The description of piti and sukha as associated with lobha-mulla cittas > is too restricted. Let me explain. > > The Buddha's first jhana is one of the four jhanas that define samma- > samadhi. For instance, in AN IX.36, Jhana Sutta : > > 'I tell you, the ending of the mental fermentations depends on the first > jhana.' "Thus it has been said. In reference to what was it said? There > is the case where a monk, withdrawn from sensuality, withdrawn from > unskillful qualities, enters & remains in the first jhana: rapture & > pleasure born from withdrawal, accompanied by directed thought & > evaluation. ... .... " > > Or in AN IV.41, Samadhi sutta : > > " "And what is the development of concentration that, when developed > & pursued, leads to a pleasant abiding in the here & now? There is the > case where a monk -- quite withdrawn from sensuality, withdrawn from > unskillful qualities -- enters & remains in the first jhana: rapture & > pleasure born from withdrawal, accompanied by directed thought & > evaluation. ... ... " > > The "setting" of the first jhana that was taught by the Buddha is "quite > withdrawn from sensuality, withdrawn from unskillful qualities". Hence it > is obvious that there is no lobha, dosa or moha involved in that > moment. And the monk then experiences rapture(piti), pleasure > (sukha), vitakka and vicara, ... .... > > It is obvious that the factors 'piti' and 'sukha' here are NOT in lobha- > mula cittas as described in your note above. There is no domanassa > in the monk either, yet he attained the first (kusala) jhana. > > Question: Is it possible that the "jhana factors" as described in your > post were defined for the "old jhana system" by people who did not > know samma-samadhi, the 8th path factor? > > > Respectfully, > > > Tep > > ======= > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "robmoult" > wrote: > > > > Hi All, > > > > Jhana-condition is a name for the seven jhana-factors, forming a > > condition to the co-nascent nama and rupa. The jhana condition > causes > > the citta and accompanying cetasikas (the conditioned factors) to fix > > themselves firmly on the object that is experienced. This condition > > does not only apply to jhana alone, but also to the general > > intensifying ('absorbing') impact of these 7 factors: > (snipped) > ===== Thanks for catching this mistake. Suka and piti can arise in both lobha-mula mental states and also in kusala mental states. Instead of "in lobha-mula cittas", I should have written, "In some lobha-mula cittas and in some kusala cittas". Here is an interesting quote from Nina's book, "24 Conditions" (available as a .PDF for free download). The jhana-factors which are developed in samatha are sobhana cetasikas, they have to be developed together with pañña which knows the way to develop calm, so that absorption can be attained. However, jhana-factors can also be taken in a wider sense, they can even be akusala. That is why the "Dhammasangani" mentions in the "Summary" jhana-factors arising not only with the maha-kusala cittas which are accompanied by pañña, but also with those which are unaccompanied by pañña, ñana-vippayutta, as well as with each of the akusala cittas. Not only kusala citta but also akusala citta needs jhana-factors which assist the citta to be firmly fixed on an object. Even when someone performs evil deeds he needs jhana-factors which accompany the akusala citta, so that he is concentrated on the object of aksusala; these jhana-factors condition the akusala citta by way of jhana-condition. We read in the "Patthana" (Faultless Triplet, VII, Investigation Chapter, §431) that akusala jhana-factors are related to their associated aggregates ( the other nama-kkhandhas) by jhana- condition. Without the assistance of the jhana-factors good or evil deeds cannot be performed. Metta, Rob M :-) 51478 From: "robmoult" Date: Sat Oct 15, 2005 0:59am Subject: Re: BB's "The Jhaanas and the Lay Disciple According to the Paali Suttas" robmoult Hi Hal, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Hal" wrote: > > Hi Rob M, > > Thanks for posting this. Do you know the source-citation? > > Hal > ===== Bhikkhu Bodhi wrote this article just over a year ago. I am not sure in what form he intended to publish it (you might want to ask Sarah when she returns, she might know). Because Bhikkhu Bodhi knew that this subject was of interest to many on DSG, he send an electronic copy of the article to Sarah. Sarah posted it in 20 installments on DSG in June 2004. I consolidated Sarah's posts into one long post. Metta, Rob M :-) 51479 From: "robmoult" Date: Sat Oct 15, 2005 1:03am Subject: Re: Rob M’s Problem Reply Part I robmoult Hi Ken H, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "kenhowardau" wrote: > > Hi Rob M > > -------- > KH: > > Are you now saying that Right Concentration of the NEP is the > > jhanas, but attaining them is not required for enlightenment? > > > >====== > > RM: > My statement was over-simplified. What I should have said > was, "I am of the opinion that attaining jhanas is not required to > gain the first stage of enlightenment (sotapanna). I belive that > Bhikkhu Bodhi gave a detailed analysis of this issue and came to the > same conclusion." > > I have just posted the complete Bhikkhu Bodhi essay in one message. > Here is conlcusion #2 from BB's essay: > -------- > > Thanks. If I remember correctly, the essay was originally posted as > part of a conversation between BB and Sarah. I have been looking for > that conversation in UP's without success. Do you know where I can > find it? ===== Yes, this is a consolidation from a series of 20 posts made by Sarah in June 2004. The first post can be found as message # 33870 ===== > > ---------------------------- > KH: > > My point was that Right Understanding *is* a cetasika. And > yet, the > > sutta describes a monk experiencing a series of jhana cittas, and > > then says, "This, monks, is called right concentration." > > > > Surely, you will agree that further explanation is required. (?) > > >===== > > RM: > I assume that you mean "Right Concentration". > ----------------------------------------------------- > > Oh yes, thanks for that correction. Another typo of mine was to say > that I thought 'panna with a dhamma as object' could sometimes be > classified as pativedha. It can, of course, especially when that > dhamma is Nibbana. What I meant to say was, I think panna with a > *conditioned* dhamma as object can sometimes be classified as > pativedha. (As in the final stages of mundane insight.) > > ----------------------------------------- > RM: > Why do you think that Right Concentration is a cetasika? I > don't think that it is defined that way in can the texts. > ------------------------ > > I am speechless! If course it is! How else could it be defined? > Citta? Rupa? Please don't tell me it is pannatti! :-) ===== Fasten your seatbelt, Ken H, I will be replying to this in a new message titled, "Ultimate Realities in the Suttas". Coming soon :-) Metta, Rob M :-) 51480 From: "robmoult" Date: Sat Oct 15, 2005 1:04am Subject: Re: Conditions Part 4 - Predominance Condition (adhipati-paccaya) robmoult Hi Phil, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Phil" wrote: > > > > Hi all > > > > > > There are two types of predominance condition: > > - Co-nascent predominance (conditioning factor arises together with > > conditioned factors) > > - Object predominance (occurs when object is very highly regarded by > > cittas and accompanying cetasikas) > > > There is a passage in the Perfections that Lodewijk reads, on the > perfection of panna, in which the Buddha to be sees drops of dew on a > branch, and has insight into impermanence. Then the commentary has "it > arose once, and he made it a condition to arise again." > > It made me wonder which condition it would be when we have a moment > of understanding - even a very shallow one compared to the one > described above - that sticks with us and conditions more understanding. > > Once a moment of understandings has fallen away it becomes a concept, > an object of thinking now and then. Would it be the object predominance > described above? Or would it be natural decisive support condition? > > I'm sure we all have had these moments of understanding that stick > with us and have conditioning power for more of the same kind of > understanding. > > Phil > > p.s of course one could ask why it is important to determine which > condition it is.... > ===== You are correct. It is Natural Decisive Support Condition. Metta, Rob M :-) 51481 From: "robmoult" Date: Sat Oct 15, 2005 1:01am Subject: Re: [dsg] Conditions Part 20 - Dissociation Condition (vippayutta-paccaya) robmoult Hi TG, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, TGrand458@a... wrote: > > > In a message dated 10/12/2005 9:39:51 A.M. Mountain Daylight Time, > rob.moult@j... writes: > > Hi All, > > The six tastes (tart, bitter, sweet, sour, salty and acrid) do not mix > together, yet they support one another to give an agreeable taste to a > curry. In a crown or necklace, the gold and the jewels do not mix up; > they can be differentiated easily by sight. Yet the gold makes the > jewels more beautiful and the jewels make the gold more attractive. > This is like mixing oil and water; they remain separate. Similarly, > nama and rupa do not mix. They do not arise together nor do they > dissolve together. Nama and rupa aid each other by way of > disassociation condition. > > Metta, > Rob M :-) > > > > Hi Rob M > > This post is a repeat of yours so I am guessing you abide by it most > rigorously. I think you see it as convincing evidence. But I don't except any > statement from the above paragraph as necessarily accurate, true, or meaningful. > I think disassociation condition and absence condition are two of the more > questionable of the 24. They're both contradictions of terms IMO. ===== I posted the set of conditions as a series and I wanted them to appear as a sequence in proper order. Unfortunately, Yahoo was misbehaving and sometimes reordered the messages. I found myself deleting messages and then reposting them so that they would appear in the correct sequence. This is how the second posting of the same message arose. Frankly, I find disassociation condition to be of very little interest but I wanted to publish the complete set for my friends on DSG. Metta, Rob M :-) 51482 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Sat Oct 15, 2005 1:42am Subject: Re: SN 36:7 Painful or pleasant feeling >> reflection on impermanence buddhatrue Hi Phil (and all), You often write very interesting posts which inspire me to respond. I am going to respond to this post as well and just let it be (BTW, thanks for not telescoping my last post). Phil: It could be because I consume too many suttas, and fail to reflect on one, just one, long enough. Overconsuming suttas because they are so tasty and attractive. James: You have a very good point here I wish to elaborate on. I was also, and still am to some extent, like the way you describe above. Reading suttas, or books on Buddhism, ostensibly for the knowledge or information they could give me, but in reality reading them mainly for the `good feelings' they would give me. Reading such things puts your mind, temporarily, in the place of the writer and you can feel that such wisdom and tranquility they describe is yours. Of course, this is just a temporary feeling and it goes away soon after the book or sutta is put down. So, you may find yourself reading and reading hundreds of books and hundred of suttas just to keep those good feelings going, to keep daily stress at bay- it can become very much like a drug. Posting to DSG can also become very much the same thing, a substitute for real practice, a drug to make one feel good temporarily. The real practice is daily mindfulness and Samadhi- but these are not usually very exciting. Actually, they can be downright boring and difficult. It takes a lot of dedication and effort to properly practice the Buddha's path and it is hard to do so without encouragement and guidance. I think that what you have stumbled upon, described below, is a good way to go. Phil: I also found that I put the notebook down, and concentrated on the meaning of the sutta, reflected, meditated. I was sitting on a tatami floor with my legs crossed, so this could be an example of how meditation can arise in a natural way, conditioned by the Buddha's teaching and what we are already doing as a natural part of our daily life. (I read suttas every morning, sitting on the floor with my legs crossed, Japanese style.) James: Reading a sutta, just one sutta, and then meditating on the meaning is a good beginning meditation practice. Then, during that reflection, when there is a feeling of calm, perhaps focusing on the breath entering and exiting the nostrils. Not allowing the thoughts to stray here and there, creating akusala, but keeping the mind on the breath. Then, continuing that practice by throughout the day keeping the mind on the breath during daily activities, whenever attention is free, instead of letting the mind wander into fantasies and scheming plans as it usually does. Then, eventually, being mindful of the mind and body in all is dispositions throughout the day. This is a much better way to have calm and insight than consuming suttas like candy! ;-)) Metta, James Ps. As for myself, (since, Phil, you have asked me to reveal myself more often in my posts) I start my practice with walking meditation for 15 minutes and then sitting meditation for 15 minutes. Then I lay down to rest for a few minutes because I am out of shape and practice ;-)). If I have more time I will read some suttas, do walking meditation and then sitting meditation again in the same cycle, and then lay down to rest again. I hope to eventually increase my time doing walking and sitting meditation but I just don't have the energy now- or the concentration ability. I have started to do Chi Kung to increase my energy and vitality for longer, more intensive meditation, but it will probably take a few weeks. You can read about this practice at this site, if you are interested: http://www.shaolin-wahnam.org/chikung.html Phil, I am not saying that this should be your practice or that you should model anything after my practice. I am just telling you, and others, since you are usually curious to know. 51483 From: "Phil" Date: Sat Oct 15, 2005 5:30am Subject: Re: SN 36:7 Painful or pleasant feeling >> reflection on impermanence philofillet Hi James Thanks for the encouragement. > James: You have a very good point here I wish to elaborate on. I > was also, and still am to some extent, like the way you describe > above. Reading suttas, or books on Buddhism, ostensibly for the > knowledge or information they could give me, but in reality reading > them mainly for the `good feelings' they would give me. Reading > such things puts your mind, temporarily, in the place of the writer > and you can feel that such wisdom and tranquility they describe is > yours. Yes, well said. More dangerously, perhaps, rather than thinking that we have gained access to the wisdom and tranquility of a writer, is when we read a sutta and feel that we have downloaded the wisdom of the Buddha, mistaken the pleasant feelings of living in a refined and peaceful way for something deeper. But I am aware of that danger. Of course, this is just a temporary feeling and it goes away > soon after the book or sutta is put down. So, you may find yourself > reading and reading hundreds of books and hundred of suttas just to > keep those good feelings going, to keep daily stress at bay- it can > become very much like a drug. Posting to DSG can also become very > much the same thing, a substitute for real practice, a drug to make > one feel good temporarily. Yes, and it does work. I wonder if other people out there have experienced this. After posting something conciliatory and mellow at DSG, something about your appreciation of the Buddha's teaching, you can go out into the world feeling much better than you do if you have posted something intolerant or grouchy. Well, nothing surprising there. Wrong speech bites us on the ass as soon as we start to walk away from it. > > The real practice is daily mindfulness and Samadhi- but these are > not usually very exciting. Actually, they can be downright boring > and difficult. It takes a lot of dedication and effort to properly > practice the Buddha's path and it is hard to do so without > encouragement and guidance. I think that what you have stumbled > upon, described below, is a good way to go. I think so too. I find the paramis is also helpful. (Basically, it's about developing kusala, which is good for me since there is so much awareness of kusala. Balance.) BTW, I reflected on that sutta again and again through my very, very busy Saturday (most chaotic day of the week.) It kept coming up. So I suspect I will be reflecting in this way on another sutta tomorrow - putting down the book, closing my eyes, letting the meaning of the sutta, the conceptual understanding, float around and see if understanding alights on it. Only for the purpose of a more rooted conceptual understanding - not with the expectation of sati. ?@I did use the breath, just as a way of calming down to allow the meaning of the sutta a less agitated medium in which to be reflected on. But I know this is not using the breath in the much more refined way the Buddha taught. Well, I don't *know* that. I have learned that this is the case, but the topic doesn't grab me. The way you describe using it during daily life certainly makes sense, but could be a bit of an emotional crutch, I think, the way metta can be, or was for me. I remember Lisa, and the way she described using the breath in daily life, being sensitive to tension and using the breath for ease - I think that's what she said. And that is how Bhikkhu V who visited us last winter described his meditation, as though it were a technique for avoiding stress and discomfort. A bit dangerous, I think. How can we learn from dosa if we become conditioned to move away from it automatically? But I agree that if there are really sleazy or nasty fantasies or other intense akusala forces at work, why not breathe them away, sure. As long as we know that they are just being supressed and will reappear with even greater force, perhaps, when the conditions are right. Perhaps it is by not dodging them that we gain more insight into them and weaken them more. Nice to ramble with you without having anything to disagree upon, James. No need to respond to this unless there is something you'd like to add. Phil p.s thanks for sharing your way of practice. I am rooting for you. 51484 From: "jean_5004" Date: Thu Oct 13, 2005 8:51pm Subject: What's the meaning of Maha-Paccariya? jean_5004 Hi~ My name is Jean.I am a graduate student in Buddhism and also a new member of this group.Is there anybody can explain the meaning of "Maha-Paccariya" to English for me? Is the word"pa" from "pati"? Thank you! Jean 51485 From: "Leo (All Intelligent Views Exchange)" Date: Fri Oct 14, 2005 0:29am Subject: Re: Not wanting out of samsara leoaive Hi Maybe Buddha did not tell to housholders directly, but he said that to prince and kings. I beleive Lotus Sutra is representation of bhikkhu life and path to householder/bramin/prince/king. Talking about samsara and wish to get out. It depends on how you take life, i guess. Some people drive back and forth for all kinds of things and feel happy with life like that. Some do not like to have that life and all that weight of house life and world of rupa. It depends on what you have in focus. Buddha tired of being a prince and understand that all is impermanent, some not. That is a point of start I guess. With metta Leo --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "buddhatrue" wrote: > > Hi Phil, ... > Phil: How do we know that our sense of urgency is not in fact a > hidden craving for existence, for a favourable rebirth, or a craving > for the rest of this lifetime to be more peaceful, more calm, more > loving-kindly? > > James: It could be. Everyone has different motivations for > practice. The Buddha taught to the householder to be more peaceful, > calmer, and move loving-kindly. The Buddha did teach those things > to householders. > > Phil: My communication with modern Buddhists at other > general groups (not DSG) left me with the impression that most > modern Buddhists practice for the latter reason, to be more peaceful > and loving people, which is not the point of the Buddha's teaching. > > James: That IS one level of the Buddha's teaching- aimed at > householders. Remember Phil, most of the people on the Internet are > householders. The Buddha didn't teach nibbana to everyone, only to > those who were ready for renunciation. The Buddha predominately > taught stream-entry to householders: > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/anguttara/an05-179.html > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/anguttara/an10-092.html > 51486 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Fri Oct 14, 2005 2:07am Subject: Kamma leading to Stupidity or Intelligence !?! bhikkhu_ekamuni Friends: Which Intentional Actions (Kamma) influence Family Status? A student once asked the Buddha: Master Gotama, what is the cause and condition why some human beings are stupid, while others are intelligent ?? The Blessed Buddha then explained: Here, friend, some man or woman when visiting recluse or priest, does never ask: Venerable Sir, what is advantageous? What is disadvantageous? What is blamable? What is blameless? What should be cultivated? What should not be cultivated? What kind of behaviour will lead to my harm and suffering for a long time? What kind of behaviour will lead to my welfare and happiness for a long time? Because of intending and performing such action, at the breakup of the body, right after death, such one is reborn in a bad state of deprivation, a dreadful destination, in the painful purgatory, or even in the hells... But if such one at the breakup of the body, right after death, is not reborn in a state of deprivation, a painful destination, the purgatory, or in one of the many hells, but instead comes back to this human state, then wherever such unlucky one is reborn, such one is born stupid, foolish, dimwitted, slow to learn, and unintelligent #! This is the way, friend, that leads to stupidity, namely never asking neither recluse nor priest: Venerable Sir, what is advantageous? What is disadvantageous? What is blamable? What is blameless? What should be cultivated? What should not be cultivated? What behaviour will lead to my harm and suffering for a long time? What kind of behaviour will lead to my welfare and happiness for a long time?..!! However, friend, here some man or woman do indeed ask both recluses or priests: Venerable Sir, what is advantageous? What is disadvantageous? What is blamable? What is blameless? What should be cultivated? What should not be cultivated? What kind of behaviour will lead to my harm and suffering for a long time? What kind of behaviour will lead to my welfare and happiness for a long time? Because of intending & performing such advantageous action, at breakup of the body, after death, such one reappears in a pleasurable and happy destination, even in the divine dimensions! But if at the breakup of the body, after death, such one is not reborn in a happy destination, in the heavenly worlds, but instead comes back here to a human state, then wherever such one reappears, such one is born clever, wise, quick to learn, and intelligent %! This is the way, friend, that leads to intelligence, namely, indeed asking & questioning recluses or priests: Venerable Sir, what is advantageous? What is disadvantageous? What is blamable? What is blameless? What should be thus be cultivated? What should not be cultivated? What kind of behaviour will lead to my harm and suffering for a long time? What kind of behaviour will lead to my welfare and happiness for a long time? #: Such one escapes hell, because the evil kamma is modified by past good! %: Such one miss heaven, because the good kamma is modified by past evil! Source: The Moderate speeches of the Buddha: The short speech on Action. MN 135 http://www.pariyatti.com/book.cgi?prod_id=25072X Full Text: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/majjhima/mn135a.html -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- PS: Please include the word Samahita in any comment, since then will my automatic mail filters pick it up and I will see it & respond!! Bhikkhu Samahita, Sri Lanka. Friendship is the Greatest ... Let there be Calm & Free Bliss !!! 51487 From: "Charles DaCosta" Date: Fri Oct 14, 2005 8:38am Subject: RE: [dsg] Re: Different Approaches to Anatta? --Charles D.'s Q&A dacostacharles Hi Tep, You ask, "But, Charles, why is there the motivation to be different from another?" That is an interesting question. Evolutionary psycho-Biologist would argue mating and being different helps to insure the survivability of the species. The idea of animals being "motivated to be different" is what is tricky because there is such as well as the opposite (ref: culture), but you also have to keep in mind that nature does not seem to create 100% duplicates (e.g., even identical twins have differences). So when I was talking about labels (e.g., "I") helping to differentiate one being from another, I was not talking about motivated differences, I was talking about a method of identifying which being; e.g., this post is addressed to Tep and I signed it Charles A. DaCosta; This tells who this post is intended for and who it is from. In this case, we are not motivated to be different; we are different because of nature. Now if you are asking a general question, different also points to "special or unique." This is a two edge sword, which can give rise to many different emotions (feelings combined with intellect). And then there are the Evolutionary psycho-Biologists. Best Regards, Charles A. DaCosta -----Original Message----- From: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com [mailto:dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Tep Sastri Sent: Sunday, 09 October, 2005 22:25 To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com Subject: [dsg] Re: Different Approaches to Anatta? --Charles D.'s Q&A Dear Charles D. (and all) - [Charles DaCosta] Your answer to the question, "Does 'I' exist because of holding a belief in 'self'?", is a little complicated for me. You wrote, " 'I' is a label, conventional or otherwise, to point the senses to a being. It, 'I', helps to differentiate one being from another." But, Charles, why is there the motivation to be different from another? Tep ======= --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Charles DaCosta" wrote: > > Hi Tep, > > You ask, "Does "I" exist because of holding a belief in 'self'?" > > This is a good/interesting question. From my stand point, "I" is a label, conventional or otherwise, to point the senses to a being. It, "I", helps to differentiate one being from another. So no, "I" does not exist because of holding a belief in 'self'. Self too is a label that points the senses to a being. > > Can the "I" suffer? No, not the label, but the being can. Therefore, it can be said that the "I" exist because of holding a belief in beings. And since "beings" appear to the senses, they exist whether you believe in them or not. > > Now if by self you mean essence or eternal soul, well that is a different story. The existence of these things can not be verified. > (snipped) 51488 From: "Leo (All Intelligent Views Exchange)" Date: Sat Oct 15, 2005 0:33am Subject: conditional and non-attachment leoaive Hi There are many conditional things that lead to other conditional things that again lead to other conditional things and only sometime later to unconditional things. That is my understanding of Abhidhamma. Now, making maditations for your progress, what would be a right way to go in meditiations from Abhidhamma standpoint? It looks to me Abhiddhama way is different. With metta Leo 51489 From: "jonoabb" Date: Sat Oct 15, 2005 6:03am Subject: e-Card from Lumbini (was, Re: Mahaanidana sutta, theory/practice) jonoabb Hi Mateesha and All We have just arrived in the Lumbini area of Nepal, after a several- hour journey from Kushinara (place of the Buddha's parinibbana and cremation). It is 6:00 pm and I have come across the road to an internet cafe before checking into my room. I will download the latest batch of posts to a floppy disk so that Sarah and I can read them on my laptop in the hotel (no luck with connecting directly to the internet in hotle rooms so far). This stage of the pilgrimage involves a number of one-night stays with longish bus-rides each day. Fortunately today's journey was a pleasant one, with quite lovely scenery (but no view of the Himalayas, due to increased air pollution). Mateesha, many thanks for the reply, which I will read properly (along with your reply to Ken H's message) in due course. I may not have time to continue our discussion at this stage, so that should effectively prevent things from getting out of hand! However, I may get back to you later ... ;-)) Sarah is still recovering from her flu bug but is feeling much better. Best wishes to all. Jon --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "matheesha" wrote: > > Hi Jon, > > >J: As I see it, the fact of being passed from one moment of > > consciousness to the next need not entail our being conscious of > that > > happening. The effect of kamma performed in the past is carried > on > > unbeknown to us. > > M: I'm trying to keep these replies from getting out of hand! Please > follow this in my reply to KenH. 51490 From: upasaka@... Date: Sat Oct 15, 2005 2:28am Subject: Re: [dsg] Conditions Part 20 - Dissociation Condition (vippayutta-paccaya) upasaka_howard Hi Rob (and TG) - In a message dated 10/15/05 3:56:31 AM Eastern Daylight Time, rob.moult@... writes: > > According to the Abhidhamma, the lifespan of rupa is seventeen times > longer than the lifespan of nama. How then can nama and rupa arise > together and dissolve together? > ====================== Assuming the Abhidhamma description as fact: When rupa first arises as object, the citta apprehending it also arises. As that rupa persists through 16 additional mind-moments, consciousness is always there to apprehend it without gap. What distinguishes one of those "mind moments" from another during the course of the single rupic object is not the object nor the apprehending awareness, but the changing cetasikas. Any time there is a change in cetasika or arammana, the mind-state is considered new. But the function of knowing of content is just that. When I speak of rupa, I am speaking of rupa-as-arammana; I am speaking of a physical, phenomenological, experiential event-thing. There is no arammana without vi~n~nana, and no vi~n~nana without arammana. When rupa-as-content arises, so does the experience of it, and when rupa-as-content ceases, so does the experience of it. With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 51491 From: upasaka@... Date: Sat Oct 15, 2005 2:34am Subject: Re: [dsg] Conditions Part 20 - Dissociation Condition (vippayutta-paccaya) upasaka_howard Hi again, Rob - In a message dated 10/15/05 3:57:24 AM Eastern Daylight Time, rob.moult@... writes: > It is true that nama takes rupa as object (they are also related > through many other conditions), but this does not mean that > they "mix". Citta and cetasika "mix", the four great primaries > (earth, fire, water and air) also "mix". However, nama and rupa > always remain at arms-length to each other. When two things "mix", > they arise at the same time and they fall away at the same time. > ====================== As to co-arising and co-cessation, please see my previous post. As to "mixing", I'm not clear as to what that is supposed to mean. Nama and rupa are different, and there are no hybrids of these. For that matter, mental functions and characteristics co-occur and relate interdependently in many ways, but they don't "mix" in the sense of amalgamating into something new. 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) 51492 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Sat Oct 15, 2005 6:45am Subject: [dsg] Re: Different Approaches to Anatta? --Charles D.'s Q&A buddhistmedi... Hi, Charles D. - Your reply was a 90-degree trun from the subject of atta-ditthi or self views. Charles D. : > You ask, "But, Charles, why is there the motivation to be different from > another?" > > That is an interesting question. Evolutionary psycho-Biologist would argue mating and being different helps to insure the survivability of the species. > > The idea of animals being "motivated to be different" is what is tricky > because there is such as well as the opposite (ref: culture), >but you also have to keep in mind that nature does not seem >to create 100% duplicates (e.g., even identical twins have >differences). So when I was talking about labels (e.g., "I") >helping to differentiate one being from another, I was not talking >about motivated differences, I was talking about a method of >identifying which being; e.g., this post is addressed to Tep and I >signed it Charles A. DaCosta; This tells who this post is intended > for and who it is from. In this case, we are not motivated to be >different; we are different because of nature. > > Tep: Can the right answer to the question (Why is there the motivation to be different from another?) be simply : because there is a self view in the mind of every person ? Warm regards, Tep =============== --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Charles DaCosta" wrote: > > Hi Tep, > (snipped) > > Now if you are asking a general question, different also points to "special > or unique." This is a two edge sword, which can give rise to many different > emotions (feelings combined with intellect). And then there are the > Evolutionary psycho-Biologists. > 51493 From: "matheesha" Date: Sat Oct 15, 2005 8:03am Subject: e-Card from Lumbini (was, Re: Mahaanidana sutta, theory/practice) matheesha333 Hi Jon, No rush! Enjoy you journey. You might as well forget the internet for a while and enjoy what you set out to do! I'm stuck in a room studying for exams! Hope Sarah recovers completely soon and gets back safely. Glad to hear she feeling better. Much mudita, Matheesha 51494 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Sat Oct 15, 2005 9:30am Subject: Re: Conditions Part 17 - Jhana Condition (jhana-paccaya) buddhistmedi... --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "robmoult" wrote: > > Hi Tep, > (snipped) > > Thanks for catching this mistake. Suka and piti can arise in both > lobha-mula mental states and also in kusala mental states. Instead > of "in lobha-mula cittas", I should have written, "In some lobha-mula > cittas and in some kusala cittas". > > Here is an interesting quote from Nina's book, "24 Conditions" > (available as a .PDF for free download). (snipped) >We read in the "Patthana" (Faultless Triplet, VII, Investigation Chapter, > 431) that akusala jhana-factors are related > to their associated aggregates ( the other nama-kkhandhas) by >jhana- condition. Without the assistance of the jhana-factors >good or evil deeds cannot be performed. > Tep: Because "good or evil deeds" can be performed with "the assistance of the jhana-factors", does it follow that meditators have to have the "right control" over the jhana factors -- i.e. be selective ? Regards, Tep ========= 51495 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Sat Oct 15, 2005 9:55am Subject: Re: SN 36:7 Painful or pleasant feeling >> reflection on impermanence buddhatrue Hi Phil, Just to add one clarification: --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Phil" wrote: The way you > describe using it during daily life certainly makes sense, but could > be a bit of an emotional crutch, I think, the way metta can be, or > was for me. I remember Lisa, and the way she described using the > breath in daily life, being sensitive to tension and using the > breath for ease - I think that's what she said. And that is how > Bhikkhu V who visited us last winter described his meditation, as > though it were a technique for avoiding stress and discomfort. A bit > dangerous, I think. How can we learn from dosa if we become > conditioned to move away from it automatically? I suggested focusing on the breath during everyday moments when the mind is free to keep the mind focused on the present moment, not as a relaxation technique. Relaxation may happen, but that isn't the point. Actually, sometimes you focus on the breath when it is fast and shallow because of tension, and just acknowledge that there is tension- not try to make it go away. K. Sujin and Nina are always talking about being aware of the present moment- well, the breath is definitely in the present moment! Phil, you can try it yourself and see if you use it to relax or if you use it to be more aware of the present moment. I think that if you know the goal and purpose, you can use it to be more aware of the present moment. Thanks for your well-wishes. Loving-kindness, James 51496 From: "Larry" Date: Sat Oct 15, 2005 10:46am Subject: Re: SN 36:7 Painful or pleasant feeling >> reflection on impermanence lbidd2 --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Phil" wrote: > > > Hi all > > This morning I came across note I had made on SN 36:7 in one of my > notebooks, a sutta in which the bhikkhu experiences pleasant or > painful feeling, but is able to reflect that it is dependent on this > body, and is therefore "impermanent, conditioned, dependently- > arisen" and this can lead, eventually, to reflection on cessation > etc. > > I wondered why it is that I have read this sutta so often (well, a > few dozen times) but rarely if ever pause to reflect on it in daily > life, when painful or pleasant feeling arise. > > It could be because I consume too many suttas, and fail to reflect > on one, just one, long enough. Over consuming suttas because they are > so tasty and attractive. > > But now I find that I was led to the computer to write this down, > perhaps a condition for reflecting on this very helpful sutta more > often today. > > I also found that I put the notebook down, and concentrated on the > meaning of the sutta, reflected, meditated. I was sitting on a > tatami floor with my legs crossed, so this could be an example of > how meditation can arise in a natural way, conditioned by the > Buddha's teaching and what we are already doing as a natural part of > our daily life. (I read suttas every morning, sitting on the floor > with my legs crossed, Japanese style.) > > Phil > Hi Phil, The reason for noting, for questioning, for discussing, and for contemplating is the same in all cases: because of the body. Without the body none of these activities would arise. Aside from the tilakkhana, it is interesting to note that the foundation and basis of all concern is, in fact, no concern at all. In other words, rupa. There is no intrinsic value in rupa whatsoever. "Because of the body" is the answer to all questions and the purification of doubt. Larry 51497 From: "Larry" Date: Sat Oct 15, 2005 11:04am Subject: Re: What's the meaning of Maha-Paccariya? lbidd2 --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jean_5004" wrote: > > Hi~ My name is Jean.I am a graduate student in Buddhism and also a new > member of this group.Is there anybody can explain the meaning of > "Maha-Paccariya" to English for me? Is the word"pa" from "pati"? Thank > you! > > Jean > Hi Jean, Welcome to the group. Are you sure you have it spelled correctly? I couldn't find it in the Pali-English Dictionary: http://dsal.uchicago.edu/dictionaries/pali/ Where did you find this word? Larry 51498 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Sat Oct 15, 2005 11:25am Subject: Re: SN 36:7 Painful or pleasant feeling >> reflection on impermanence buddhistmedi... Hi, James and Phil - Interesting discussion ! >James: > > K. Sujin and Nina are always talking about being aware of the present > moment- well, the breath is definitely in the present moment! Phil, > you can try it yourself and see if you use it to relax or if you use > it to be more aware of the present moment. I think that if you know > the goal and purpose, you can use it to be more aware of the present > moment. > Tep: James, you were right. Also, try 'sankhara aniccanupassana'. "This was said by the Blessed One, said by the Arahant, so I have heard: "Remain focused, monks, on the foulness of the body. Have mindfulness of in-&-out breathing well established to the fore within you. Remain focused on the inconstancy of all fabrications. For one who remains focused on the foulness of the body, the obsession with passion for the property of beauty is abandoned. For one who has mindfulness of in-&-out breathing well established to the fore within oneself, annoying external thoughts & inclinations don't exist. For one who remains focused on the inconstancy of all fabrications, ignorance is abandoned, clear knowing arises." {Iti III.36} Yours truly, Tep ========= --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "buddhatrue" wrote: > > Hi Phil, > (snipped) > > I suggested focusing on the breath during everyday moments when the mind is free to keep the mind focused on the present moment, not as a relaxation technique. Relaxation may happen, but that isn't the > point. Actually, sometimes you focus on the breath when it is fast > and shallow because of tension, and just acknowledge that there is > tension- not try to make it go away. Thanks for your well-wishes. > > Loving-kindness, > James > 51499 From: "robmoult" Date: Sat Oct 15, 2005 1:56pm Subject: Re: What's the meaning of Maha-Paccariya? robmoult Hi Jean, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Larry" wrote: > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jean_5004" > wrote: > > > > Hi~ My name is Jean.I am a graduate student in Buddhism and also a new > > member of this group.Is there anybody can explain the meaning of > > "Maha-Paccariya" to English for me? Is the word"pa" from "pati"? Thank > > you! > > > > Jean > > > > Hi Jean, > > Welcome to the group. Are you sure you have it spelled correctly? I > couldn't find it in the Pali-English Dictionary: > http://dsal.uchicago.edu/dictionaries/pali/ Where did you find this > word? > > Larry > ===== Welcome to the group from me as well! You might want to post your question on the Pali discussion group: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Pali/ The PTS dictionary above (p 450) lists paacariya (i.e. accent on the first a) as part of a compound, aacariya-paacariya meaning teacher upon teacher or teacher of teachers. Given the maha prefix I suggest the second definition might be more fitting. So my guess is "great teacher of teachers". But frankly, any one of the members of the Pali discussion group above have forgotten more Pali than I have learned :-) Look forward to more questions from you! Metta, Rob M :-) 51500 From: "matheesha" Date: Sat Oct 15, 2005 3:19pm Subject: Re: SN 36:7 Painful or pleasant feeling >> reflection on impermanence matheesha333 Hi James, Phil, Tep, Being lightly focused on sounds, sensations, smells, tastes arising.. watch the mind grasp at them one after the next letting go of one grabbing hold of one like a newborn enthralled with its enviornment watch with mindfulness and clear comprehension not getting involved with the details watching with clear understanding that when a sound arises, it is impermanent when a sensation arises, it is impermanent when a thought arises, it is impermanent etc, etc watching with panna seeing what you learnt proven before your very eyes understanding with direct experience 5 minutes, 10 minutes 20 minutes, 1 hour 2 hours, 5 hours.. still impermanent.. what do you think will happen?! will the child be still enthralled!? 51501 From: "Phil" Date: Sat Oct 15, 2005 4:21pm Subject: Re: SN 36:7 Painful or pleasant feeling >> reflection on impermanence philofillet Hi James > I suggested focusing on the breath during everyday moments when the > mind is free to keep the mind focused on the present moment, not as a > relaxation technique. Relaxation may happen, but that isn't the > point. Actually, sometimes you focus on the breath when it is fast > and shallow because of tension, and just acknowledge that there is > tension- not try to make it go away. OK, sorry about that. Now I see what you mean. There is the tendency to use the breath to relax, of course. And it is effective as we know - take ten deep breaths works. But it is superficial. Not what you are talking about. > > K. Sujin and Nina are always talking about being aware of the present > moment- well, the breath is definitely in the present moment! Phil, > you can try it yourself and see if you use it to relax or if you use > it to be more aware of the present moment. I think that if you know > the goal and purpose, you can use it to be more aware of the present > moment. Yes, that's what it is all about. Today I had a nice meditation/reflection/focussed thinking on this favourite passage: "Let not a person revive the past ("I have had such a material form etc in the past") nor in the future build his hopes ("may I have such form in the future")(snip) Instead , with insight, let him see each presently arisen state...let him know that, and be sure of it, invinceibly, unshakably." I think it is from the MN sutta entitled "A Single Excellent Night" but I'm not sure. I like this passage because it is something we can all agree on, whether we find the key to understanding presently arisen states in Abhidhamma (I do) or in practices laid out in suttas. We all want to get at presently arising states, free from the suffering always implicit in thoughts about the past and future. Of course, the thinking about the past and the future is also a presently arisen state. As for "unshakably, invincibly" the only thing that is unshakable and invincible for me related to Dhamma these days is that understanding the present moment is all that matters. And I think we can all agree on that, which is nice. So when A. Sujin says "is there seeing now?" this is the point. I often think of the point you made - if Kh. Sujin wants to help people, she should make them self-reliant without needing constant reminders. Well, I think we are so consumed by unwholesome cittas (especially moha and lobha) that we need lots and lots and lots of reminders whether it is through a sutta or words from a teacher. The more the better. Gradually, these reminders will condition more self- reliance. (i.e sati and panna will be cultivated.) But it takes time. I wonder if as much reflection will arise today on this passage as it did on that other sutta yesterday? No intention for that to happen - well there is clinging to it of course or I wouldn't be writing this. We'll see how powerful this morning's reflection was as a condition for more reflection to arise in a helpful way during my busy day. It is out of my hands. Phil 51502 From: "Phil" Date: Sat Oct 15, 2005 5:20pm Subject: Re: SN 36:7 Painful or pleasant feeling >> reflection on impermanence philofillet Hi Larry > The reason for noting, for questioning, for discussing, and for > contemplating is the same in all cases: because of the body. Without > the body none of these activities would arise. Aside from the > tilakkhana, it is interesting to note that the foundation and basis > of all concern is, in fact, no concern at all. In other words, rupa. > There is no intrinsic value in rupa whatsoever. "Because of the body" > is the answer to all questions and the purification of doubt. Interesting. I was reading about the khandas yesterday and thought that when you get down to it is is really rupa (form) that is the "murderous servant" described in that simile. I think we can gain a certain detachment from mental states but not so easy to have detachment when rupa rebels. Certainly beyond me. In the talk on the perfection of panna, either A. Sujin or a commentary she is quoting from gets at this. It is rupa that is the source of all our troubles, all our greed. But the greed is a mental state, I think. But then think that the greed wouldn't have an object, if we get right down to it, if it weren't for rupa. And yet, as you say, no instrinsic value in it whatesover. We are so misled by lobha and moha, hungering (whether in an obvious way or not) after things that have no instrinsic value. Phil 51503 From: "Phil" Date: Sat Oct 15, 2005 5:34pm Subject: Re: SN 36:7 Painful or pleasant feeling >> reflection on impermanence philofillet Hi Matheesha Thanks for this. Nicely laid out. It makes very good sense and I think it will be very helpful if I reflect on it. In fact, I think I will write it down in my notebook right now so that I am more likely to reflect on it again. Perhaps a danger is believing too readily that what is going on here is satipatthana. I'm sure it can be satipatthana if it arises due to conditions rather than being intentionally done. Perhaps reflecting on it in an intentional way will condition satipatthana. That could be. But in my case at least it would just be thinking - a very kind of refined and helpful thinking. But still thinking. I would also say that "mindfulness and clear comprehension" are attainments that are not had so easily. Especially "clear comprehension." I forget the Pali, but isn't it a fairly deep attainment of some kind rather than something that can arise so easily in response to a teacher or friend's guidance? Phil p.s I am going to write it down right now. Thanks again. > Being lightly focused on sounds, sensations, smells, tastes arising.. > watch the mind grasp at them > one after the next > letting go of one > grabbing hold of one > like a newborn enthralled with its enviornment > > watch with mindfulness > and clear comprehension > not getting involved with the details > watching with clear understanding > that when a sound arises, it is impermanent > when a sensation arises, it is impermanent > when a thought arises, it is impermanent > etc, etc > watching with panna > > seeing what you learnt proven before your very eyes > understanding with direct experience > > 5 minutes, 10 minutes > 20 minutes, 1 hour > 2 hours, 5 hours.. > still impermanent.. > > > what do you think will happen?! > > will the child be still enthralled!? > 51504 From: TGrand458@... Date: Sat Oct 15, 2005 2:16pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Conditions Part 20 - Dissociation Condition (vippayutta-paccaya) TGrand458@... In a message dated 10/15/2005 1:55:11 A.M. Mountain Daylight Time, rob.moult@... writes: Hi TG, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, TGrand458@a... wrote: > > Hi Rob M, All > > Saying these things do mix or don't mix is merely in the eye of the > beholder. A jewel vs gold is merely a conventional distinction. In one sense they > are completely mixed. In another sense they can be considered separate. The > point of the Buddha's teaching IMO is not to reify or obsess about these > issues; but rather to get beyond this type of argument ASAP. (Although, the idea > of "disassociation condition" is quite the non sequitur IMO.) > > TG > > > In a message dated 10/12/2005 9:39:51 A.M. Mountain Daylight Time, > rob.moult@j... writes: > > Hi All, > > The six tastes (tart, bitter, sweet, sour, salty and acrid) do not mix > together, yet they support one another to give an agreeable taste to a > curry. In a crown or necklace, the gold and the jewels do not mix up; > they can be differentiated easily by sight. Yet the gold makes the > jewels more beautiful and the jewels make the gold more attractive. > This is like mixing oil and water; they remain separate. Similarly, > nama and rupa do not mix. They do not arise together nor do they > dissolve together. Nama and rupa aid each other by way of > disassociation condition. > > Metta, > Rob M :-) ===== Please help me to understand what you mean by "get beyond this type of argument ASAP". I see Buddhism as offering a variety of teachings because we each have different accumulations. Some people progress along a faith-based path, some are meditators, some find the "scientific" approach of the Abhidhamma suits them best. Though the definition of the various conditions is not taken from the Suttas, the Buddha did at times make an effort to create lists, classification and groups for people who have "scientific" accumulations. DN 33 is an example. Metta, Rob M :-) Hi Rob M DN 33 is taught by Sariputta (not Buddha) and is one of the reasons Sariputta is often considered the "Father" of Abhidhamma style Buddhism. Although I am confident, in my mind, that there is nothing in DN 33 the Buddha would have objected to. Yet even with the cataloging style found in DN 33, I don't think Sariputta is introducing new teachings or forms of analysis in DN 33 that weren't already found in other Sutta/Buddha sources. I agree with what you have said in the second paragraph above completely. The question that might come into consideration is "how far do we go" in analyzing states before we lose sight that -- the analysis is merely for the purpose of "turning away" from states and getting beyond the need for analysis. The analysis "itself" does not arrive at the truth. It is merely a "framework" to reflect off of in order to get the mind from Samsara to Nibbana. In the Suttas, the analysis used usually makes that point understood within the Sutta. From my knowledge of the original Abhidhamma texts, most of what they contain is found in the Suttas. Of the 24 conditional relations, I would not have a problem with most of them although I start feeling a sense of over-analysis. And the Abhidhamma texts do not contain the "lesson" (moral of the story ... if you will) for what is being taught so it tends to lead the mind onto "dry" analysis. It is my sense that the Buddha wanted to teach dhamma in such a way that analysis was left at a bare minimum. I think he broke things down as simply as possible for what was needed to achieve the purpose of overcoming suffering. The problem I usually end up with Abhidhamma is from the folks who zealously believe its the actual teaching of the historical Buddha. (I use the word zealous because I feel a detached historical analysis would indicate otherwise.) What happens then is since these folks believe its the teaching from the historical Buddha, and since they usually see it as the "higher teaching," they are content to use it as the foundation for what the Buddha wanted to communicate; and use the Suttas as a "backdrop" or "flavoring" as something to be applied tp Abhidhamma. I feel this is a misdirected approach and the opposite of the way it should be done ... but that's just my view of course. Of course different minds have different inclinations and different approaches work better or worse for different people. Its also possible that some approaches can lead a mind into a state that does not arrive closer to the goal or perhaps maintains a state that is closer to the goal but then stagnates. But all of this comes back to my problem with "disassociation condition." When a so called scientific approach gets so engaged with "itself" that a tern like "disassociation condition" results, that's when red flags start flying in my head. Then very meaning of the term "condition" is that there is an association! To add the term disassociation to it as if there was such a thing, starts to pollute the foundation of the Buddha's teaching. The formula of DO ... "This being, that is" etc. and the knowledge of no-self, impermanence, and suffering are all inextricably tied to a correct understanding of cause and effect. Re: disassociation condition, this is where I have to say that Abhidhamma analysis starts doing more harm then good. I believe this type of analysis, and spending time to try to resolve it, is actually taking the mind further away from the dhamma, not aiding it at all. I then see Abhidhamma as joining the types of thinking that have resulted in sects like Nichiren that end up either having to do nothing with Buddhism, or even worse, being the opposite of Buddhism. In my views, there aren't really "different conditions." There are just different ways to regard the way things are altering. If folks understand that its just mental gymnastics to break things down into 24 conditions, that's fine. But if they think there are actually different "conditional realities" that have "their own characteristics," then I feel their view is being corrupted and they are headed in a direction away from dhamma. TG 51505 From: TGrand458@... Date: Sat Oct 15, 2005 2:59pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Conditions Part 20 - Dissociation Condition (vippayutta-paccaya) TGrand458@... Hi Rob M Some comments after your paragraphs and some more below your post too... In a message dated 10/15/2005 1:56:32 A.M. Mountain Daylight Time, rob.moult@... writes: According to the Abhidhamma, the lifespan of rupa is seventeen times longer than the lifespan of nama. How then can nama and rupa arise together and dissolve together? TG: Since I don't use the Abhidhamma as an authority, I don't need to make their cases which I often disagree with...at least in terms of their necessity. Before Einstein, people might not have believed that matter and light could be inter-changeable or "mixable." All conditions influence other conditions in my view. Its as "simple" as the Buddha's formula of DO -- This being, that is...etc. Citta and its associated cetasikas do arise together and they do dissolve together, therefore they do not qualify for disassociation condition. The four great primaries (earth, fire, water and air) arise together and dissolve together, therefore they qualify for disassociation condition. TG: Is there a Sutta source that can back this up. Do the Suttas address this concern? Better yet, does this concern address the Suttas? The source I've already provided doesn't seemed concerned with this "minutia." When the Buddha said that "consciousness comes to be in dependence on a dyad" the Buddha is clarifying details of the Honeyball Sutta MN18 "Dependent on eye & forms, eye-consciousness arises". This does not mean that consciousness arises and dissolves at the same time as eye-sensitivity nor does it mean that consciousness arises and dissolves at the same time as visible object. TG, I disagree with your statement, "The `contact' that generates feeling is not limited to nama." Contact (phassa) is a cetasika and is limited to nama (it is a type of nama). Rupa does not have any cetasikas. TG: The Buddha defines contact (phassa) as -- "the meeting, the encounter, the occurrence" of three things ... eye, forms, eye consciousness (for example). Apparently the Buddha thinks they are occurring in unison. Doesn't sound "dissassociating" to me. Is there anywhere in the Suttas the Buddha defines "contact" as a cetasika? I don't think so. You continue, "That contact is nama and rupa mixing together as it were. If they really didn't associate as "disassociation condition" implies, consciousness would be impossible." While I agree with you that there are many relationships between nama and rupa, please keep in mind that the definition of disassociation condition relates to arising together and dissolving together. Metta, Rob M :-) Hi Rob M (again) The whole 17 times of consciousness vs one rupa, cetasika vs form arguments just are not an issue in the Suttas. They aren't there. If you can find one please show me. The point you are arguing against is not "my point." It's from the Suttas. Contact is -- the meeting, the encounter, the occurrence -- of eye, form, and consciousness. Where does the Buddha say that contact is a cetasika??? Please please show me. I really want to see it if it exists. Where does the Buddha argue the issue of how fast consciousness arises or dissolves in relation to form? Is it anything that matters in any meaningful way? Does it advance insight? Does it help "see" impermanence? Maybe but I'm not sure how. “Monks, consciousness comes to be in dependence on a dyad. And how, monks, does consciousness come to be in dependence on a dyad? In dependence on eye and forms there arises eye-consciousness. The eye is impermanent, changing, becoming otherwise; forms are impermanent, changing, becoming otherwise. Thus this dyad is moving and tottering, impermanent, changing, becoming otherwise. “Eye-consciousness is impermanent, changing, becoming otherwise. The cause and condition for the arising of eye-consciousness is also impermanent, changing, becoming otherwise. When, monks, eye-consciousness has arisen in dependence on a condition that is impermanent, how could it be permanent? “The meeting, the encounter, the occurrence of these three things is called eye-contact. Eye-contact too is impermanent, changing, becoming otherwise. The cause and condition for the arising of eye-contact is also impermanent, changing, becoming otherwise. When, monks, eye-contact has arisen in dependence on a condition that is impermanent, how could it be permanent? “Contacted, monks, one feels, contacted one intends, contacted one perceives. Thus these things too are moving and tottering, impermanent, changing, becoming otherwise. [The Buddha proceeds to analyze the ear-consciousness, nose-consciousness, tongue-consciousness, body-consciousness, and mind-consciousness in the same manner and finishes with...] “It is in such a way, monks, that consciousness comes to be in dependence on a dyad.â€? (The Buddha . . . Connected Discourses of the Buddha, vol. 2, pg. 1172) TG 51506 From: TGrand458@... Date: Sat Oct 15, 2005 3:01pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Conditions Part 20 - Dissociation Condition (vippayutta-paccaya) TGrand458@... In a message dated 10/15/2005 2:20:41 A.M. Mountain Daylight Time, rob.moult@... writes: Frankly, I find disassociation condition to be of very little interest but I wanted to publish the complete set for my friends on DSG. Metta, Rob M :-) But its fun that you've been trying to make the case. ;-) TG 51507 From: TGrand458@... Date: Sat Oct 15, 2005 3:18pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Conditions Part 20 - Dissociation Condition (vippayutta-paccaya) TGrand458@... In a message dated 10/15/2005 7:40:01 A.M. Mountain Daylight Time, upasaka@... writes: Nama and rupa are different, and there are no hybrids of these. For that matter, mental functions and characteristics co-occur and relate interdependently in many ways, but they don't "mix" in the sense of amalgamating into something new. With metta, Howard Hi All Does the mind work independently of matter? Maybe for deva. But even in that case the mentality was presumable generated from association with matter at an earlier time. I would suggest the mentality is every bit as much related to the matter of the brain/body as light is related to the matter of a light bulb, (or hydrogen in the case of nuclear fusion.) They're temporarily different forms due to the prevailing conditions. How easy it would have been to say, 200 years ago, that light and matter were different things and they do not mix. Now we know that's not true. Personally I think mind and matter are "mixing" a lot more than they're given credit for. TG 51508 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Sat Oct 15, 2005 7:21pm Subject: Re: SN 36:7 Painful or pleasant feeling >> reflection on impermanence buddhistmedi... Hi, Math (and James and Phil) - You asked an easy question : > what do you think will happen?! > > will the child be still enthralled!? > No, no more enthrallment when the "environment" is being watched with mindfulness, clear comprehension, and letting go (not getting involved with the details). Kind regards, Tep ======== --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "matheesha" wrote: > > Hi James, Phil, Tep, > > Being lightly focused on sounds, sensations, smells, tastes arising.. > watch the mind grasp at them > one after the next > letting go of one > grabbing hold of one > like a newborn enthralled with its enviornment > > watch with mindfulness > and clear comprehension > not getting involved with the details > watching with clear understanding > that when a sound arises, it is impermanent > when a sensation arises, it is impermanent > when a thought arises, it is impermanent > etc, etc > watching with panna > > seeing what you learnt proven before your very eyes > understanding with direct experience > > 5 minutes, 10 minutes > 20 minutes, 1 hour > 2 hours, 5 hours.. > still impermanent.. > > 51509 From: "nidive" Date: Sat Oct 15, 2005 7:47pm Subject: Re: Conditions Part 20 - Dissociation Condition (vippayutta-paccaya) nidive Hi TG, Below are some of the points which I share the same thoughts about and I thought it worth repeating. > Of the 24 conditional relations, I would not have a problem with > most of them although I start feeling a sense of over-analysis. > It is my sense that the Buddha wanted to teach dhamma in such a > way that analysis was left at a bare minimum. I think he broke > things down as simply as possible for what was needed to achieve > the purpose of overcoming suffering. I think the Buddha would have also used the KISS principle too. It makes sense when teachings are orally conveyed. > The problem I usually end up with Abhidhamma is from the folks who > zealously believe its the actual teaching of the historical Buddha. > What happens then is since these folks believe its the teaching > from the historical Buddha, and since they usually see it as the > "higher teaching," they are content to use it as the foundation for > what the Buddha wanted to communicate; and use the Suttas as a > "backdrop" or "flavoring" as something to be applied to Abhidhamma. > I feel this is a misdirected approach and the opposite of the way > it should be done ... but that's just my view of course. Opposite indeed! > Re: disassociation condition, this is where I have to say that > Abhidhamma analysis starts doing more harm then good. I believe > this type of analysis, and spending time to try to resolve it, is > actually taking the mind further away from the dhamma, not aiding > it at all. > I then see Abhidhamma as joining the types of thinking that have > resulted in sects like Nichiren that end up either having to do > nothing with Buddhism, or even worse, being the opposite of > Buddhism. Although I don't see Abhidhamma in the same light, I definitely see Khun Sujin's application of the Abhidhamma as a new sect of Buddhism. I call it Conditional Buddhism. It looks nice on the outside, but is missing the essence in the core. Regards, Swee Boon 51510 From: "nidive" Date: Sat Oct 15, 2005 7:57pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Conditions Part 20 - Dissociation Condition (vippayutta-paccaya) nidive Hi TG, > The point you are arguing against is not "my point." It's from > the Suttas. Contact is -- the meeting, the encounter, the > occurrence -- of eye, form, and consciousness. Where does the > Buddha say that contact is a cetasika??? > Please please show me. I really want to see it if it exists. I think the Buddha did say that contact is nama. --------------------------------------------------------------------- http://accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/samyutta/sn-12-002-tb0.html "And what is name-&-form? Feeling, perception, intention, CONTACT, & attention: This is called name. The four great elements, and the form dependent on the four great elements: This is called form. This name & this form are called name-&-form. --------------------------------------------------------------------- Regards, Swee Boon 51511 From: upasaka@... Date: Sat Oct 15, 2005 5:14pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Conditions Part 20 - Dissociation Condition (vippayutta-paccaya) upasaka_howard Hi, See Boon (and TG) - In a message dated 10/15/05 10:58:30 PM Eastern Daylight Time, nidive@... writes: > Hi TG, > > >The point you are arguing against is not "my point." It's from > >the Suttas. Contact is -- the meeting, the encounter, the > >occurrence -- of eye, form, and consciousness. Where does the > >Buddha say that contact is a cetasika??? > >Please please show me. I really want to see it if it exists. > > I think the Buddha did say that contact is nama. > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > http://accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/samyutta/sn-12-002-tb0.html > > "And what is name-&-form? Feeling, perception, intention, CONTACT, & > attention: This is called name. The four great elements, and the form > dependent on the four great elements: This is called form. This name & > this form are called name-&-form. > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Regards, > Swee Boon > > ============================= "Feeling, perception, intention, contact, & attention: This is called name." Isn't it interesting that consciousness is missing from the list? It would be interesting even if it were there but not 1st on the list. But it's not there at all!! What should be made of that? Anyone? 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) 51512 From: upasaka@... Date: Sat Oct 15, 2005 5:16pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Conditions Part 20 - Dissociation Condition (vippayutta-paccaya) upasaka_howard Hi again - In a message dated 10/16/05 12:14:58 AM Eastern Daylight Time, upasaka@... writes: > Hi, See Boon (and TG) - > ================= I really DO know your name, Swee Boon! ;-)) 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) 51513 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Sat Oct 15, 2005 0:52am Subject: Evil action enhances other Evil Kamma...!!! bhikkhu_ekamuni Friends: Prior or later evil action makes present evil action (Kamma) worse! The Blessed Buddha once explained: Regarding the effects of actions, Ananda, as to the person here who kills living beings, who takes what is not given, who misconducts himself in sensual pleasures, who speaks false, who speaks divisively, who speaks aggressively, who speaks idle & empty gossip, who is envious & jealous, who is of ill will, and who holds wrong views and who at the breakup of the body, right after death, is reborn in a state of deprivation, a dreadful destination, in the painful purgatory, or even in the hells: Either earlier - prior to this - such one also did evil actions to be felt as painful, or later - after this - such one also did evil actions to be felt as pain, or at the death-moment such one entered & maintained wrong views! Because of one or more of these, right after death, such one is reborn in a bad state of deprivation, a dreadful destination, in the painful purgatory, or even in the hells. And since such one furthermore has here also now in the present killed living beings, taken what is not given, misconducted himself in sensual pleasures, spoken false, spoken divisively, spoken aggressively, and spoken empty & idle gossip, and since such one is envious & jealous, and since such one is of ill will, since such one and holds wrong views, such one will experience the result of that either here and now, or too in such one's next rebirth, or too in some subsequent later existence... Source: The Moderate speeches of the Buddha: The great speech on Action. MN 136 http://www.pariyatti.com/book.cgi?prod_id=25072X Full Text http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/majjhima/mn136.html -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- PS: Please include the word Samahita in any comment, since then will my automatic mail filters pick it up and I will see it & respond!! Bhikkhu Samahita, Sri Lanka. Friendship is the Greatest ... Let there be Calm & Free Bliss !!! 51514 From: "Phil" Date: Sun Oct 16, 2005 2:56am Subject: Please teach me about any difference in A. Sujin's approach to Abhidhamma philofillet Hi Swee Boon and all > Although I don't see Abhidhamma in the same light, I definitely see > Khun Sujin's application of the Abhidhamma as a new sect of Buddhism. > > I call it Conditional Buddhism. It looks nice on the outside, but is > missing the essence in the core. Don't mean this in an adversial way, but if you or anyone else can point out any difference in the way A. Sujin explains the paccayas (conditional relations) (as seen in Nina's book) from the way they are taught in the Abhidhamma (as in Bhikkhu Bodhi's way of explaining them in Comprehensive Manual of Abhidhamma) please don't hesitate to lay them out. I am a beginner so would benefit from hearing details (rather than vague statements) about any difference in A. Sujin's approach to Abhidhamma. I know Rob M's explanation of natural decisive support condition seems a bit different from A. Sujin's - but other than that I haven't come across any difference. Do keep us posted, Swee Boon or anyone. Whether related to paccayas, or anything else in Abdhidamma. Thanks in advance. I truly want to know. Phil 51515 From: "Hal" Date: Sun Oct 16, 2005 4:18am Subject: Re: Please teach me about any difference in A. Sujin's approach to Abhidhamma bardosein Hi Phil, The audio quality isn't that great, but you might find the Burmese monk, Dr. Ashin Dhammapiya's dhamma talks helpful, particularly the one entitled _Practical Abhidhamma for Vipassana Meditation_. Here's the link: http://tinyurl.com/9579w Hal 51516 From: "Phil" Date: Sun Oct 16, 2005 4:51am Subject: Re: Please teach me about any difference in A. Sujin's approach to Abhidhamma philofillet Thanks Hal I'm recording it for my ipod right now. I see there's also a talk entitled "concept and reality." I'll listen to that too. Very important topic. Phil >_Practical Abhidhamma for Vipassana Meditation_. Here's the > link: 51517 From: "Phil" Date: Sun Oct 16, 2005 4:58am Subject: Re: Please teach me about any difference in A. Sujin's approach to Abhidhamma philofillet Hi again (esp Rob M) > Phil: I know Rob M's explanation of natural decisive support condition > seems a bit different from A. Sujin's - but other than that I > haven't > come across any difference. There also seems to be a difference about kamma and vipaka - do all akusala kamma cittas condition vipaka, or only akusala kamma patha, deeds that are of the degree of transgression? Rob M, or anyone in the India gang, am I right in thinking that there is some difference related to something to do with that? Phil 51518 From: "robmoult" Date: Sun Oct 16, 2005 5:31am Subject: Re: Please teach me about any difference in A. Sujin's approach to Abhidhamma robmoult Hi Phil, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Phil" wrote: > > > Hi again (esp Rob M) > > > Phil: I know Rob M's explanation of natural decisive support > condition > > seems a bit different from A. Sujin's - but other than that I > > haven't > > come across any difference. > > There also seems to be a difference about kamma and vipaka - do all > akusala kamma cittas condition vipaka, or only akusala kamma patha, > deeds that are of the degree of transgression? > > Rob M, or anyone in the India gang, am I right in thinking that there > is some difference related to something to do with that? ===== So far, the only area that I am aware of in which my opinion differs from Khun Sujin is that I have been taught that activities that are not akusala kamma patha can create kamma (but not strong enough to act as rebirth linking kamma) while Khun Sujin teaches that only akusala kamma patha activities will create kamma. This is an extremely minor point and the texts (at least the ones that I have seen) do not say one way or the other. As for Natural Decisive Support, I have discussed this with Khun Sujin when we met and we both agree that it is an extremely important condition. Metta, Rob M :-) 51519 From: "Phil" Date: Sun Oct 16, 2005 5:58am Subject: Re: Please teach me about any difference in A. Sujin's approach to Abhidhamma philofillet Hi Rob Thanks for the feedback. > So far, the only area that I am aware of in which my opinion differs > from Khun Sujin is that I have been taught that activities that are > not akusala kamma patha can create kamma (but not strong enough to > act as rebirth linking kamma) while Khun Sujin teaches that only > akusala kamma patha activities will create kamma. > > This is an extremely minor point and the texts (at least the ones > that I have seen) do not say one way or the other. OK. I will be learning more about this, I think, because Sarah was kind enough to offer to bring up my question about it during the talk. > > As for Natural Decisive Support, I have discussed this with Khun > Sujin when we met and we both agree that it is an extremely important > condition. From what I understand, A. Sujin talks about all past experience, all accumulations forming natural decisive support condition and doesn't make the distinction about things that are recent, repeated etc that you do in your book, if I'm not mistaken. So when reading your book I was left with the impression that things we do often or have done recently might be considered as having more conditioning power in the light of n.d.s.c. while when I listen to A. Sujin there is no such pinpointing with respect to refrequency, intensity, how recent etc. It makes sense to me that kusala or akusala that has arisen recently or often or with intensity would have more conditioning power than kusala or akusala that happened once, weakly, a long time ago. (I don't know if we can say "intense" with respect to kusala or akusala - maybe that is prompted vs. unprompted? I think you're off on your business trip in the morning, so please don't worry if there's no time for you to get back on this. Phil 51520 From: "nidive" Date: Sun Oct 16, 2005 7:45am Subject: Re: [dsg] Conditions Part 20 - Dissociation Condition (vippayutta-paccaya) nidive Hi Howard, > "Feeling, perception, intention, contact, & attention: This is > called name." Isn't it interesting that consciousness is missing > from the list? It would be interesting even if it were there but > not 1st on the list. But it's not there at all!! What should be > made of that? Anyone? Oh no, the Abhidhamma got it all wrong! :-) I really don't know what to make of it anyway. This definition of nama is taught by the Buddha, and it is repeated by Sariputta as well. -------------------------------------------------------------------- http://accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/majjhima/mn-009-nb0.html 54. "And what is mentality-materiality, what is the origin of mentality-materiality, what is the cessation of mentality-materiality, what is the way leading to the cessation of mentality-materiality? Feeling, perception, volition, contact and attention — these are called mentality. The four great elements and the material form derived from the four great elements — these are called materiality. So this mentality and this materiality are what is called mentality- materiality. With the arising of consciousness there is the arising of mentality-materiality. With the cessation of consciousness there is the cessation of mentality-materiality. The way leading to the cessation of mentality-materiality is just this Noble Eightfold Path; that is, right view... right concentration. -------------------------------------------------------------------- How could Sariputta then twist the Blessed One's words and come up with a different definition of nama in the Abhidhamma? Perhaps this is the piece of crucial evidence that suggests the Buddha did not teach the Abhidhamma, neither to the devas nor to Sariputta. I don't know, it doesn't make a difference to me anyway. My emphasis is on the Buddha's teachings direct from the suttas and not the Abhidhamma. Regards, Swee Boon 51521 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Sun Oct 16, 2005 8:53am Subject: Re: Conditions Part 20 - Dissociation Condition (vippayutta-paccaya) buddhistmedi... Hi Howard and Swee - You are having an interesting discussion ! > > Howard: > > > "Feeling, perception, intention, contact, & attention: This is > > called name." Isn't it interesting that consciousness is missing > > from the list? It would be interesting even if it were there but > > not 1st on the list. But it's not there at all!! What should be > > made of that? Anyone? > > Swee: Oh no, the Abhidhamma got it all wrong! :-) > > I really don't know what to make of it anyway. > > This definition of nama is taught by the Buddha, and it is repeated by > Sariputta as well. > Tep: Name and form are conditioned by consciousness and vice versa. " ...from name & form as a requisite condition come the six sense media. ... from consciousness as a requisite condition comes name-&- form." Samyutta Nikaya XII.67 :Nalakalapiyo Sutta http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/samyutta/sn12-067.html Respectfully, Tep ========= 51522 From: "nidive" Date: Sun Oct 16, 2005 8:57am Subject: Re: Please teach me about any difference in A. Sujin's approach to Abhidhamma nidive Hi Phil, > I am a beginner so would benefit from hearing details (rather than > vague statements) about any difference in A. Sujin's approach to > Abhidhamma. > Do keep us posted, Swee Boon or anyone. Whether related to > paccayas, or anything else in Abdhidamma. Thanks in advance. > I truly want to know. I suggest you read up the old posts in DSG. I don't think my statements are vague. But frankly speaking, I don't really think you really want to know. As I see it, you are already indoctrinated in Conditional Buddhism. And I don't think I am capable of waking you up from the matrix. Regards, Swee Boon 51523 From: upasaka@... Date: Sun Oct 16, 2005 5:08am Subject: Re: [dsg] Conditions Part 20 - Dissociation Condition (vippayutta-paccaya) upasaka_howard Hi, Swee Boon - In a message dated 10/16/05 10:48:01 AM Eastern Daylight Time, nidive@... writes: > > Hi Howard, > > >"Feeling, perception, intention, contact, &attention: This is > >called name." Isn't it interesting that consciousness is missing > >from the list? It would be interesting even if it were there but > >not 1st on the list. But it's not there at all!! What should be > >made of that? Anyone? > > Oh no, the Abhidhamma got it all wrong! :-) > > I really don't know what to make of it anyway. > > This definition of nama is taught by the Buddha, and it is repeated by > Sariputta as well. > > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > http://accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/majjhima/mn-009-nb0.html > > 54. "And what is mentality-materiality, what is the origin of > mentality-materiality, what is the cessation of mentality-materiality, > what is the way leading to the cessation of mentality-materiality? > Feeling, perception, volition, contact and attention — these are > called mentality. The four great elements and the material form > derived from the four great elements — these are called materiality. > So this mentality and this materiality are what is called mentality- > materiality. With the arising of consciousness there is the arising of > mentality-materiality. With the cessation of consciousness there is > the cessation of mentality-materiality. The way leading to the > cessation of mentality-materiality is just this Noble Eightfold Path; > that is, right view... right concentration. > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > > How could Sariputta then twist the Blessed One's words and come up > with a different definition of nama in the Abhidhamma? > > Perhaps this is the piece of crucial evidence that suggests the Buddha > did not teach the Abhidhamma, neither to the devas nor to Sariputta. --------------------------------------- Howard: Perhaps. I do think it is evidence, though how crucial I'm not sure. -------------------------------------- > > I don't know, it doesn't make a difference to me anyway. My emphasis > is on the Buddha's teachings direct from the suttas and not the > Abhidhamma. --------------------------------------- Howard: That's my emphasis as well. But the business of including phassa but not vi~n~nana under nama is interesting to me. I can't believe that it is without some significance. One thought of mine is that maybe vi~n~nana really doesn't take vi~n~nana as object, but it *can* note the event of contact. Perhaps the Sheaves of Reeds interdependency between vi~n~nana and namarupa is involved in the excluding of vi~n~nana from nama. Or it could be something else entirely. But I don't think it is just a random variation. The Buddha was very careful in his formulations. ---------------------------------------- > > Regards, > Swee Boon > =================== 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) 51524 From: "robmoult" Date: Sun Oct 16, 2005 9:19am Subject: Re: Conditions Part 20 - Dissociation Condition (vippayutta-paccaya) robmoult Hi Howard & Swee Boon, Just have time for a quick comment. In this Sutta, the Buddha is describing nama as an element in dependent origination, not nama in general. Nama as it is part of dependent origination is a subset of nama in general. If you are interested, I could give you the specific Abhidhamma definitions for each of the elements of dependent origination and the conditions which link them (I have posted this a couple of times on DSG). Metta, Rob M :-) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@a... wrote: > > Hi, Swee Boon - > > In a message dated 10/16/05 10:48:01 AM Eastern Daylight Time, > nidive@y... writes: > > > > > Hi Howard, > > > > >"Feeling, perception, intention, contact, &attention: This is > > >called name." Isn't it interesting that consciousness is missing > > >from the list? It would be interesting even if it were there but > > >not 1st on the list. But it's not there at all!! What should be > > >made of that? Anyone? > > > > Oh no, the Abhidhamma got it all wrong! :-) > > > > I really don't know what to make of it anyway. > > > > This definition of nama is taught by the Buddha, and it is repeated by > > Sariputta as well. > > > > ----------------------------------------------------------------- --- > > http://accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/majjhima/mn-009-nb0.html > > > > 54. "And what is mentality-materiality, what is the origin of > > mentality-materiality, what is the cessation of mentality- materiality, > > what is the way leading to the cessation of mentality- materiality? > > Feeling, perception, volition, contact and attention â€" these are > > called mentality. The four great elements and the material form > > derived from the four great elements â€" these are called materiality. > > So this mentality and this materiality are what is called mentality- > > materiality. With the arising of consciousness there is the arising of > > mentality-materiality. With the cessation of consciousness there is > > the cessation of mentality-materiality. The way leading to the > > cessation of mentality-materiality is just this Noble Eightfold Path; > > that is, right view... right concentration. > > ----------------------------------------------------------------- --- > > > > How could Sariputta then twist the Blessed One's words and come up > > with a different definition of nama in the Abhidhamma? > > > > Perhaps this is the piece of crucial evidence that suggests the Buddha > > did not teach the Abhidhamma, neither to the devas nor to Sariputta. > > --------------------------------------- > Howard: > Perhaps. I do think it is evidence, though how crucial I'm not sure. > -------------------------------------- > > > > > I don't know, it doesn't make a difference to me anyway. My emphasis > > is on the Buddha's teachings direct from the suttas and not the > > Abhidhamma. > > --------------------------------------- > Howard: > That's my emphasis as well. But the business of including phassa but > not vi~n~nana under nama is interesting to me. I can't believe that it is > without some significance. One thought of mine is that maybe vi~n~nana really > doesn't take vi~n~nana as object, but it *can* note the event of contact. Perhaps > the Sheaves of Reeds interdependency between vi~n~nana and namarupa is involved > in the excluding of vi~n~nana from nama. Or it could be something else > entirely. But I don't think it is just a random variation. The Buddha was very > careful in his formulations. > ---------------------------------------- > > > > > Regards, > > Swee Boon > > > =================== > 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) > > > > 51525 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Sun Oct 16, 2005 9:24am Subject: Re: SN 36:7 Painful or pleasant feeling >> reflection on impermanence buddhatrue Hi Tep, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Tep Sastri" wrote: > > > Hi, James and Phil - > > Interesting discussion ! > > >James: > > > > K. Sujin and Nina are always talking about being aware of the present > > moment- well, the breath is definitely in the present moment! Phil, > > you can try it yourself and see if you use it to relax or if you use > > it to be more aware of the present moment. I think that if you know > > the goal and purpose, you can use it to be more aware of the present > > moment. > > > > Tep: James, you were right. Also, try 'sankhara aniccanupassana'. > > "This was said by the Blessed One, said by the Arahant, so I have > heard: "Remain focused, monks, on the foulness of the body. Have > mindfulness of in-&-out breathing well established to the fore within you. > Remain focused on the inconstancy of all fabrications. For one who > remains focused on the foulness of the body, the obsession with > passion for the property of beauty is abandoned. For one who has > mindfulness of in-&-out breathing well established to the fore within > oneself, annoying external thoughts & inclinations don't exist. For one > who remains focused on the inconstancy of all fabrications, ignorance > is abandoned, clear knowing arises." {Iti III.36} Thank you for the sutta quote in support of what I had to say to Phil. I also like this quote: ""Mindfulness of in-&-out breathing, when developed & pursued, is of great fruit, of great benefit. Mindfulness of in-&-out breathing, when developed & pursued, brings the four frames of reference to their culmination. The four frames of reference, when developed & pursued, bring the seven factors for Awakening to their culmination. The seven factors for Awakening, when developed & pursued, bring clear knowing & release to their culmination." I like mindfulness of in-&-out breathing because it can be used as the key. (It also follows nicely with you KISS philosophy ;-)). Metta, James 51526 From: "nidive" Date: Sun Oct 16, 2005 9:28am Subject: Re: [dsg] Conditions Part 20 - Dissociation Condition (vippayutta-paccaya) nidive Hi Howard (& Tep), > Perhaps the Sheaves of Reeds interdependency between vi~n~nana and > namarupa is involved in the excluding of vi~n~nana from nama. Or it > could be something else entirely. But I don't think it is just a > random variation. The Buddha was very careful in his formulations. You are right that the Buddha was very careful in his formulations. There can't be random variations in something as important as Dependent Co-arising! He could have formulated it as cetasika-rupa and not nama-rupa, but he didn't! Cetasika-rupa would have been the exact term in Abhidhamma parlance. How could he not have been exact in the all important Dependent Co- arising? Regards, Swee Boon 51527 From: "nidive" Date: Sun Oct 16, 2005 9:43am Subject: Re: Conditions Part 20 - Dissociation Condition (vippayutta-paccaya) nidive Hi Rob M, > In this Sutta, the Buddha is describing nama as an element in > dependent origination, not nama in general. Nama as it is part of > dependent origination is a subset of nama in general. > > If you are interested, I could give you the specific Abhidhamma > definitions for each of the elements of dependent origination and > the conditions which link them (I have posted this a couple of times > on DSG). A better way would be to quote a sutta in which the Buddha defined nama as including consciousness. That would really back up the above claim, doesn't it? Regards, Swee Boon 51528 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Sun Oct 16, 2005 9:54am Subject: Re: Please teach me about any difference in A. Sujin's approach to Abhidhamma buddhatrue Hi Phil, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Phil" wrote: > > Hi Swee Boon and all > > > Although I don't see Abhidhamma in the same light, I definitely > see > > Khun Sujin's application of the Abhidhamma as a new sect of > Buddhism. > > > > I call it Conditional Buddhism. It looks nice on the outside, but > is > > missing the essence in the core. > > Don't mean this in an adversial way, but if you or anyone else can > point out any difference in the way A. Sujin explains the paccayas > (conditional relations) > (as seen in Nina's book) from the way they are taught in the > Abhidhamma > (as in Bhikkhu Bodhi's way of explaining them in Comprehensive > Manual > of Abhidhamma) please don't hesitate to lay them out. I am a > beginner > so would benefit from hearing details (rather than vague statements) > about any difference in A. Sujin's approach to Abhidhamma. > > I know Rob M's explanation of natural decisive support condition > seems a bit different from A. Sujin's - but other than that I > haven't > come across any difference. > > Do keep us posted, Swee Boon or anyone. Whether related to > paccayas, > or anything else in Abdhidamma. Thanks in advance. I truly want to > know. > > Phil I was very surprised to read this post because you are not such a `beginner' that you don't know the arguments against K. Sujin's approach. Personally, I have sent you links to other writers on the Abhidhamma and have explained, in great detail in many posts, about how K. Sujin's passive approach of `let conditions rule' is contrary to the Buddha's teaching- as well as being foreign to how others teach the Abhidhamma. Remember me??? ;-)) I'm the one who referred to KS and her crew as a cult. ;-) Ring a bell?? Or have you been so brainwashed that you forgot it all?? (hehehe…just kidding). Anyway, you may think that Swee Boon took at cheap shot at KS, but I don't see it that way. I see someone who, out of compassion for others and respect for the Buddhadhamma, told it like it is. Now, you may not agree, for whatever reasons, but the ideological differences to KS's position have been well-established. Perhaps it is your turn to explain how KS doesn't contradict the Buddhadhamma or Abhidhamma? Metta, James 51529 From: upasaka@... Date: Sun Oct 16, 2005 5:58am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Conditions Part 20 - Dissociation Condition (vippayutta-paccaya) upasaka_howard Hi, Rob (and Swee Boon) - In a message dated 10/16/05 12:20:33 PM Eastern Daylight Time, rob.moult@... writes: > Hi Howard &Swee Boon, > > Just have time for a quick comment. > > In this Sutta, the Buddha is describing nama as an element in > dependent origination, not nama in general. Nama as it is part of > dependent origination is a subset of nama in general. --------------------------------------- Howard: Yes, that's why I thought of the Sheaves of Reeds sutta. ---------------------------------------- > > If you are interested, I could give you the specific Abhidhamma > definitions for each of the elements of dependent origination and > the conditions which link them (I have posted this a couple of times > on DSG). ------------------------------------- Howard: Thanks. I'd be interested. ------------------------------------- > > Metta, > Rob M :-) > ===================== 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) 51530 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Sun Oct 16, 2005 11:40am Subject: The Crying Baby Strategy [was: Please teach me ....in A. Sujin's ] buddhistmedi... Hi, Phil, James, and Swee - I agree with you, James, that it is now Phil's turn. Phil, you should stop crying for "more milk" because you are no longer a baby. Regards, Tep ====== > > > Phil: > > Don't mean this in an adversial way, but if you or anyone else > > can point out any difference in the way A. Sujin explains the > >paccayas (conditional relations) (as seen in Nina's book) > >from the way they are taught in the Abhidhamma > > (as in Bhikkhu Bodhi's way of explaining them in Comprehensive > > Manual of Abhidhamma) please don't hesitate to lay them out. > > I am a beginner so would benefit from hearing details > > (rather than vague statements) about any difference in > > A. Sujin's approach to Abhidhamma. > > (snipped) > > Do keep us posted, Swee Boon or anyone. Whether related to > > paccayas, > > or anything else in Abdhidamma. Thanks in advance. I truly want to > > know. > > > James: > I was very surprised to read this post because you are not such > a `beginner' that you don't know the arguments against K. Sujin's > approach. Personally, I have sent you links to other writers on the > Abhidhamma and have explained, in great detail in many posts, about how K. Sujin's passive approach of `let conditions rule' is contrary to the Buddha's teaching- as well as being foreign to how others teach the Abhidhamma. Remember me??? ;-)) I'm the one who referred to KS and her crew as a cult. ;-) Ring a bell?? Or have you been so brainwashed that you forgot it all?? (hehehe…just kidding). > > Anyway, you may think that Swee Boon took at cheap shot at KS, but I > don't see it that way. I see someone who, out of compassion for > others and respect for the Buddhadhamma, told it like it is. Now, > you may not agree, for whatever reasons, but the ideological > differences to KS's position have been well-established. Perhaps it > is your turn to explain how KS doesn't contradict the Buddhadhamma > or Abhidhamma? > 51531 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Sun Oct 16, 2005 0:21pm Subject: Re: SN 36:7 Painful or pleasant feeling >> reflection on impermanence buddhistmedi... Hi, James - Thank you for the lively reply. >James: > Thank you for the sutta quote in support of what I had to say to > Phil. I also like this quote: > > ""Mindfulness of in-&-out breathing, when developed & pursued, is of > great fruit, of great benefit. Mindfulness of in-&-out breathing, > when developed & pursued, brings the four frames of reference to > their culmination. The four frames of reference, when developed & > pursued, bring the seven factors for Awakening to their culmination. > The seven factors for Awakening, when developed & pursued, bring > clear knowing & release to their culmination." > > I like mindfulness of in-&-out breathing because it can be used as > the key. (It also follows nicely with you KISS philosophy ;-)). > Tep: Not many persons I know say that anapanasati is simple. So I know that you probably have practiced breathing meditation for several years. Some people who complain, blame it on Acariya Budhaghosa's complicated guideline on anapanasati, especially about the nimittas and jhanas associated with the meditation. The following excerpt from Bhikkhu Bodhi's book shows that breathing meditation can be simple ! "The meditation requires no special intellectual sophistication, only awareness of the breath. One merely breathes naturally through the nostrils keeping the breath in mind at the contact point around the nostrils or upper lip, where the sensation of breath can be felt as the air moves in and out. There should be no attempt to control the breath or to force it into predetermined rhythms, only a mindful contemplation of the natural process of breathing in and out.The awareness of breath cuts through the complexities of discursive thinking, rescues us from pointless wandering in the labyrinth of vain imaginings, and grounds us solidly in the present. For whenever we become aware of breathing, really aware of it, we can be aware of it only in the present, never in the past or the future." The Noble Eightfold Path by Bhikkhu Bodhi; Chapter VI RIGHT MINDFULNESS (Samma Sati) Best wishes, Tep ========= 51532 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Sun Oct 16, 2005 2:59pm Subject: Re: The Crying Baby Strategy [was: Please teach me ....in A. Sujin's ] kenhowardau Hi Tep, Phil, James and Swee Boon, Tep wrote: ----------------------------- > I agree with you, James, that it is now Phil's turn. Phil, you should stop > crying for "more milk" because you are no longer a baby. > > Regards, > > > Tep > > ====== > > > > > > Phil: > > > Don't mean this in an adversial way, but if you or anyone else > > > can point out any difference in the way A. Sujin explains the > > >paccayas (conditional relations) (as seen in Nina's book) > > >from the way they are taught in the Abhidhamma > > > (as in Bhikkhu Bodhi's way of explaining them in Comprehensive > > > Manual of Abhidhamma) please don't hesitate to lay them out. > > > I am a beginner so would benefit from hearing details > > > (rather than vague statements) about any difference in > > > A. Sujin's approach to Abhidhamma. > > > > (snipped) > > > > Do keep us posted, Swee Boon or anyone. Whether related to > > > paccayas, > > > or anything else in Abdhidamma. Thanks in advance. I truly want to > > > know. > > > > > James: > > I was very surprised to read this post because you are not such > > a `beginner' that you don't know the arguments against K. Sujin's > > approach. --------------------------------------------- Phil did not say that he was unaware of arguments against K Sujin's approach in general. He was unaware (as I was too) that some of the 24 paccaya were given differing explanations, and so he asked specifically about those differences. Arguments against K Sujin's general approach are constantly appearing in DSG, and they are very well known. But, even if Phil had been asking about them, he would have been entitled to do so in a friendly manner. James, for example, asked me, in a friendly manner; " I'm confused by your arguments and I really want to understand. Could you explain why meditation is wrong, in a straightforward manner?" I did not respond by accusing him of crying like a baby. I suggested he would never "catch on" to how our approaches differed while he remained "ideologically opposed." -------------------------- J: > Personally, I have sent you links to other writers on the > > Abhidhamma and have explained, in great detail in many posts, > about how K. Sujin's passive approach of `let conditions rule' is > contrary to the Buddha's teaching- as well as being foreign to how > others teach the Abhidhamma. ------------------------- This ideological opposition can lead people to misrepresent KS's approach. As has been repeatedly explained, her approach is not one of "let conditions rule." The Buddha said the flood was crossed "not by striving, and not by standing still." In other words, it was crossed 'not by trying to control conditions and not by letting conditions rule.' Each of those extremes depends on the idea of a self that has a say in the matter. The middle way is hard to see, and that is why Dhamma discussions are so important. --------------------------------------- J: > Remember me??? ;-)) I'm the one who > referred to KS and her crew as a cult. ;-) Ring a bell?? Or have you > been so brainwashed that you forgot it all?? (hehehe…just kidding). > > > > Anyway, you may think that Swee Boon took at cheap shot at KS, but I > > don't see it that way. I see someone who, out of compassion for > > others and respect for the Buddhadhamma, told it like it is. ------------------------------------------ If KS represents a 'crew' or a 'cult' or (as Swee Boon has said) a 'sect,' I think the only name that could be given to it would be "Theravada." She merely points to the ancient Theravada commentaries, most of which have been completely overlooked in recent times. Buddhaghosa (and, I believe, the Theras before him) understood the Dhamma in a way that did not entail the formal meditation practices that are so popular today. This enrages some so-called meditation masters (and some would-be meditation masters). But that is not K Sujin's fault, and she did not set out to enrage anybody. ----------------------------------------- J: > > Now, > > you may not agree, for whatever reasons, but the ideological > > differences to KS's position have been well-established. Perhaps it > > is your turn to explain how KS doesn't contradict the Buddhadhamma > > or Abhidhamma? ------------------------------------------- Good, let's get back to Dhamma discussion. :-) Ken H 51533 From: upasaka@... Date: Sun Oct 16, 2005 11:21am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: The Crying Baby Strategy [was: Please teach me ....in A. Sujin'... upasaka_howard Hi, Ken - In a message dated 10/16/05 6:00:20 PM Eastern Daylight Time, kenhowa@... writes: > The Buddha said the flood was crossed "not > by striving, and not by standing still." In other words, it was > crossed 'not by trying to control conditions and not by letting > conditions rule.' Each of those extremes depends on the idea of a > self that has a say in the matter. The middle way is hard to see, > and that is why Dhamma discussions are so important. > ====================== I write to you with negative criticism of positions of yours quite frequently enough! I'm happy to take this opportunity to write approvingly to you!! The middle way of effort/practice is, indeed, hard to see. I think that the Taoist/Ch'an phrase of "non-doing doing" (wu wei) isn't bad for naming it, or perhaps "effortless effort". And what it is is more easily experienced than described, but if I had to describe it, I'd say it is a doing with minimal sense-of-self imposed, with minimal sense of a controller, doer, or actor. There is an old, oft repeated story of a millipede who used to do an absolutely beautiful dance ... until the time he was told he should always lift his 3rd leg at the same time he lifted his 78th leg. From that point on he could never dance again. (That is the point that "self" got in the way. :-) 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) 51534 From: "Phil" Date: Sun Oct 16, 2005 5:26pm Subject: Re: Please teach me about any difference in A. Sujin's approach to Abhidhamma philofillet Hi James, Swee Boon (Hal at end) and all > Personally, I have sent you links to other writers on the > Abhidhamma and have explained, in great detail in many posts, about > how K. Sujin's passive approach of `let conditions rule' is contrary > to the Buddha's teaching- as well as being foreign to how others > teach the Abhidhamma. What I'm keen on is to hear specific examples of how A. Sujin's teaching of conditional relations is different from other Abhidhamma teachers. Rob M, very knowledgeable on Abhidhamma, has indicated that there are only minor differences as far as he sees. (Correct me if I'm wrong, Rob.) As for whether Abhidhamma is Buddhadhamma or not, that's an entirely different kettle of fish that I'm not asking about. I assume that Abhidhamma is helpful Dhamma - those who think otherwise, that's fine. But what I am interested in in this thread is Abhidhamma, because Swee's statement that A. Sujin has a unique way of teaching Abhidhamma is an important one and if it is true, I want to know about it. Sincerely, I do. There is a tendency to assume at DSG that we are always being adversarial, but that is not the case here. Unfortunately, I don't have time to read through all the posts at DSG - if someone has the knowledge and can share it, it would be appreciated. If it means repeating something you have shared before, I apologize, but you know, repeating it will confirm your understanding, so it is good. I'm asking for knowledge, not opinions, if possible. And not about meditation techniques, which as far as I know are not taught in Abhidhamma - I want to know more about the teaching of paramattha dhammas, conditional relations and whatever else is found in Abhidhamma. As for "let conditions rule" - and this is just my opinion/shallow understanding - that is the nature of conditions, isn't it? There is no self that can rule whether we think there is or not, so what can rule other than conditions? Even if we sit down and say "I am going to meditate and develop satipatthana right now" there is no self doing it - there are only conditions. Perhaps chanda and right understanding, perhaps lobha and delusion, or a mix of both, or something else, who knows, but only cittas and cetasiksa acting as conditions. Maybe this is a point where my understanding is starting to differ from some of my friends who listen to A. Sujin. I always hear "self creeps in" and whatnot, but there is no self, so how can self creep in? It seems to me that it is lobha and moha that creep in. But I guess wrong view is a cetasika that creeps in and that is what they mean by "self creeps in", I don't know. Back to the point - If anyone knows of an Abhidhamma teacher that says cittas and cetasikas are not conditioned and do not act as conditions, or who says that there is some other controlling factor other than conditional relations, or who says that there are not concepts (pannati) and realities (paramattha dhammas), please let me know! > James : Perhaps it > is your turn to explain how KS doesn't contradict the Buddhadhamma > or Abhidhamma? I couldn't possibly do this, James. You say I'm not a beginner, but I've been studying Abhidhamma for less than two years. I think that is a beginner. Not to worry about it, James or Swee or anyone else, if you're not interested or don't have time or whatever. Just let it drop. Don't want to start a debate - I am just hoping to expand my knowledge of Abhidhamma so that I don't get locked into a wrong teaching of it. If A. Sujin is wrong about Abhidhamma, I want to know. Honestly, I do. Phil p.s Hal, unfortunately that talk didn't download properly on to my i pod. I listened to some parts on the computer. He certainly affirms the importance of Abhidhamma, and says something that I have thought before - if we read suttas and read about the khandas, can we understand them without Abhidhamma? How can we understand what "mental factors" means without learning about cetasikas? He says we can't. I have heard that it is is in Myanmar that people are the most ardent on Abhidhamma, and he is a good example, obviously. I will listen next to hear what he says about applying Abdhidhamma in vipassana meditation. > 51535 From: "Phil" Date: Sun Oct 16, 2005 5:28pm Subject: Re: The Crying Baby Strategy [was: Please teach me ....in A. Sujin's ] philofillet Hi Tep > I agree with you, James, that it is now Phil's turn. Phil, you should stop > crying for "more milk" because you are no longer a baby. Oh dear! I thought it was chanda!!! :( Phil 51536 From: "Phil" Date: Sun Oct 16, 2005 5:55pm Subject: Re: Please teach me about any difference in A. Sujin's approach to Abhidhamma philofillet Hi again, all > What I'm keen on is to hear specific examples of how A. Sujin's > teaching of conditional relations is different from other Abhidhamma > teachers. Just to repeat, please don't take my question the wrong way, all. I really didn't mean it in an adversarial way, so please please please feel free to let it drop if differences in details of the way different teachers teach Abhidhamma don't interest you. I didn't mean to get in to the "meditate or not" issue - which is obviously an issue that has come up many times and will come up many times again but was not my meaning here. Just want to ask about paramattha dhammas, paccayas etc and the way they are taught by different Abhihdhamma teachers. Perhaps it would have been wiser to ask people who are interested in Abhidhamma directly, off-list. So please let it drop if you are not an Abhidhamma keener. Thanks. Phil 51537 From: LBIDD@... Date: Sun Oct 16, 2005 6:22pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: The Crying Baby Strategy [was: Please teach me ....in A. Sujin's ] lbidd2 Ken: "Buddhaghosa (and, I believe, the Theras before him) understood the Dhamma in a way that did not entail the formal meditation practices that are so popular today." Hi Ken, I agree there is nothing in Buddhaghosa or the suttas that conforms to most modern meditation practices, these being a kind of practical, "skillful means" approach to meditation deemed appropriate to modern circumstances. But I have to point out that a third of the "Path of Purification" is devoted to the details of jhana practice. If anything is formal, that is. I agree Acharn Sujin's and Acharn Nina's abhidhamma is the same as everyone else's. Their unique feature is their approach to bhavana. I don't feel qualified to elaborate on this approach, but it certainly seems very helpful to people who have no interest in meditation. Where the friction comes in is with people who are very attached to meditation or are overwhelmed by all the detail of abhidhamma. I think if these people could step back and take a look at what is here, they might be able to learn something as well. Abhidhamma is for everyone. Larry 51538 From: "rjkjp1" Date: Sun Oct 16, 2005 7:24pm Subject: Re: The Crying Baby Strategy [was: Please teach me ....in A. Sujin's ] rjkjp1 --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Tep Sastri" wrote: > > > Hi, Phil, James, and Swee - > > I agree with you, James, that it is now Phil's turn. Phil, you should stop > crying for "more milk" because you are no longer a baby. > > Regards, > > > Tep > +++++++++++ Dear Tep, Earlier this week you posted this advice to us all http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/51402 "III. What are the behaviors of a dhamma discusser who is unfit to talk with? -- ..-- when asked a question, puts down the questioner, crushes him, ridicules him, grasps at his little mistakes."" I would think referring to Phil's question as the 'crying baby strategy' is a way of ridicule, or do you see it as differently? Robertk 51539 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Sun Oct 16, 2005 9:53pm Subject: Re: Please teach me about any difference in A. Sujin's approach to Abhidhamma buddhatrue Hi Phil and All, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Phil" wrote: > > > Hi James, Swee Boon (Hal at end) and all > > > Personally, I have sent you links to other writers on the > > Abhidhamma and have explained, in great detail in many posts, > about > > how K. Sujin's passive approach of `let conditions rule' is > contrary > > to the Buddha's teaching- as well as being foreign to how others > > teach the Abhidhamma. > > What I'm keen on is to hear specific examples of how A. Sujin's > teaching of conditional relations is different from other Abhidhamma > teachers. Rob M, very knowledgeable on Abhidhamma, has indicated > that there are only minor differences as far as he sees. (Correct me > if I'm wrong, Rob.) Well, I seem to have inadvertently started a little fire storm. ;- )) It is the morning and I am going to work in a few minutes, but I wanted to post a little bit of an explanation. Phil, I thought your question was naïve because the arguments against KS's position have been well-established. You ask, basically, "But how is what she teaches different from what others teach?" Well, I have been explaining that over and over again: she teaches against the practice of meditation, mental cultivation, and `chosen object' mindfulness. But, as Ken has pointed out, you asked specifically, "How are the 24 Paccaya that KS teaches different from the 24 Paccaya that others teach?" Again, I found this to be a naïve question, which you should know better than to ask. Of course the 24 Paccaya that KS teaches are not different than what others teach. She wouldn't, as far as I know, come up with something which isn't in the Abhidhamma. It is when she EXPLAINS what these conditions mean that there arises the difference. It is the `flavor' and the `explanation', all leaning away from meditation practice and chosen object mindfulness, that differs greatly from how others teach the same material. That is why I found the link to the teacher of meditation who also explains the 24 Paccaya, because I knew his explanation of the conditions would differ from KS's. I will respond to some other posts when I get back from work. I wanted to decrease my participation but that doesn't seem to be working! ;-)). Loving-kindness, James ps. As I have posted before, I like Rob M's presentation of the Abhidhamma because it doesn't have the same 'flavor' as KS's. 51540 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Sun Oct 16, 2005 11:04pm Subject: Hard to see. /was Re: The Crying Baby Strategy.. kenhowardau Hi Howard, ----------- H: > I write to you with negative criticism of positions of yours quite frequently enough! I'm happy to take this opportunity to write approvingly to you!! ----------- Just a moment while I pick myself up off the floor. :-) ------------------ H: > The middle way of effort/practice is, indeed, hard to see. I think that the Taoist/Ch'an phrase of "non-doing doing" (wu wei) isn't bad for naming it, or perhaps "effortless effort". And what it is is more easily experienced than described, but if I had to describe it, I'd say it is a doing with minimal sense-of-self imposed, with minimal sense of a controller, doer, or actor. > ------------------ They are not the choice of words that work best for me, but I must agree, if we can understand them without wrong view, we will be on the right track. Ken H 51541 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Sun Oct 16, 2005 11:09pm Subject: [dsg] Re: The Crying Baby Strategy [was: Please teach me ....in A. Sujin's ] kenhowardau Hi Larry, There is only one thing in your post that I am tempted to take issue with: ----------------- > But I have to point out that a third of the "Path of Purification" is devoted to the details of jhana practice. If anything is formal, that is. > ----------------- I'm not so sure, Larry. Everything - including jhana - is to be understood in terms of conditioned nama and rupa. We can't control the conditions for jhana any more than we can control the conditions for satipatthana. But I won't argue: yours was a lovely conciliatory post, and I wouldn't want to spoil the atmosphere. :-) Ken H 51542 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Mon Oct 17, 2005 5:19am Subject: Re: Please teach me about any difference in A. Sujin's approach to Abhidhamma buddhatrue Hi Phil, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Phil" wrote: > > James : Perhaps it > > is your turn to explain how KS doesn't contradict the Buddhadhamma > > or Abhidhamma? > > I couldn't possibly do this, James. You say I'm not a beginner, > but I've been studying Abhidhamma for less than two years. I think > that is a beginner. James: Ohhhh, I think you could give your best shot at it! It wouldn't have to be perfect. No one in this group is an all-knowing Buddha but that doesn't stop any of us from expressing our opinion. You appear, at least on the surface, to be a true devotee of K. Sujin, so go ahead and explain to me why I am wrong about her. > > Not to worry about it, James or Swee or anyone else, if you're not > interested or don't have time or whatever. Just let it drop. Don't > want to start a debate - I am just hoping to expand my knowledge of > Abhidhamma so that I don't get locked into a wrong teaching of it. > If A. Sujin is wrong about Abhidhamma, I want to know. Honestly, I > do. James: Now I am really confused about your viewpoint, Phil. Before you were saying that those who disagree with K. Sujin should get out of this group, and now you are saying that you aren't sure if her teaching is wrong or not. I hope you aren't just playing the Devil's Advocate?? Loving-kindness, James 51543 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Mon Oct 17, 2005 6:01am Subject: Re: The Crying Baby Strategy [was: Please teach me ....in A. Sujin's ] buddhatrue Hi Ken H., Ken: If KS represents a 'crew' or a 'cult' or (as Swee Boon has said) a 'sect,' I think the only name that could be given to it would be "Theravada." She merely points to the ancient Theravada commentaries, most of which have been completely overlooked in recent times. James: You have something of a point, but not quite. While it is true that this group is very orthodox Theravada- and I feel somewhat out of place because I am not so orthodox Theravada (being strongly influenced by Zen)- KS appears to me to diverge from the Theravada position. KS doesn't always `point to the ancient Theravada commentaries' as you state. As I have pointed out- and I want Nina, Sarah, Jon, Lodewjik, or anyone in India to ask KS about- why it is that she directly contradicts the commentary to the Satipatthana Sutta which recommends that one choose one of the Four Foundations based on one's accumulations? The Vism. also refers to this. And yet, KS directly contradicts this commentary because, I believe, it doesn't agree with her main philosophy of `no control'. This issue must be answered satisfactorily before I will admit that K. Sujin is simply presenting the Theravada perspective. Metta, James 51544 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Mon Oct 17, 2005 6:19am Subject: Re: The Crying Baby Strategy [was: Please teach me ....in A. Sujin's ] buddhistmedi... Hi, RobertK - I was surprised that Robert K. had the time to read emails and interest in finding fault in another member's comments. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "rjkjp1" wrote: > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Tep Sastri" > wrote: > > > > > > Hi, Phil, James, and Swee - > > > > I agree with you, James, that it is now Phil's turn. Phil, you > should stop crying for "more milk" because you are no > > longer a baby. > > > > Regards, > > > > > > Tep > > +++++++++++ > Dear Tep, > Earlier this week you posted this advice to us all > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/51402 > > > "III. What are the behaviors of a dhamma discusser who is unfit to > talk > with? > > -- ..-- when asked a question, puts down the questioner, crushes him, > ridicules him, grasps at his little mistakes."" > > I would think referring to Phil's question as the 'crying baby > strategy' is a way of ridicule, or do you see it as differently? > Robertk > Tep: Of course, I see it differently. I find Phil's strategy (to avoid his turn to address the issue squarely) very funny. Don't you ? Regards, Tep =========== 51545 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Mon Oct 17, 2005 6:19am Subject: Re: Please teach me about any difference in A. Sujin's approach to Abhidhamma kenhowardau Hi James, It seems you will never be happy unless DSG members are fighting amongst themselves, and you will do anything it takes to cause trouble. ----------- J: > Before you were saying that those who disagree with K. Sujin should get out of this group, ----------- Is there no depth to which you will not sink? In case anyone is tempted to believe James's allegation, I should explain that he made a series of unsubstantiated personal attacks, which most of us ignored (that is what James does, and we are used to him). Phil tried to help, pointing out that if DSG had such a bad effect on James, maybe he should consider leaving. Actually, I think he put it even more mildly than that. Words fail me! Ken H 51546 From: "Phil" Date: Sun Oct 16, 2005 7:50pm Subject: Re: Please teach me about any difference in A. Sujin's approach to Abhidhamma philofillet Hi again all Gaargh...trying to work on my story and DSG stuff keeps popping in to my head. Time to try again to take a leave of absence until after my deadline (November 11) Catch you again next month. Phil p.s hi Rob. Hope the lecture in Shizuoka went well. I think Tep meant that I should be more independent in forming and expressing my opinions or something, not that I am infantile. But this is a mistake. Dhamma is built on the tradition of people of limited knowledge and understanding listening to people who have more knowledge and deeper understanding. I will listen for awhile - until I start babbling again! :) 51547 From: "Jean" Date: Sun Oct 16, 2005 0:05am Subject: Re: What's the meaning of Maha-Paccariya? jean_5004 Dear Larry and Rob M, Thank you so much to answer my question!^_^~ In fact, "Maha-Paccariya" is the title of the ancient Commentary of Vinaya mentioned in Samantapaasaadikaa. And just as Larry said, I cannot find the meaning of "Maha-Paccariya" or "paccariya" in the dictionaries. Thank Rob for supplying the information about "paacariya"(pa-aacariya). It is a good clue to try to understand "paccariya"(pa-cariya). Fortunately, today I foud the message dated 6/12/03 1:04:16 PM Eastern Daylight Time Nina(Ms. Nina van gorkom) posted on the Web-- …Buddhaghosa was merely a translator of old sources: the Maha-Atthakata, Maha-paccariya, and the Kurundi he found at the Great Monastery in Sri Lanka…. I think Nina must know well about these Commentaries. Very nice to meet you here,and thank you again~ metta Jean --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "robmoult" wrote: > > Hi Jean, > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Larry" wrote: ... > > Welcome to the group. Are you sure you have it spelled correctly? I > > couldn't find it in the Pali-English Dictionary: > > http://dsal.uchicago.edu/dictionaries/pali/ Where did you find this > > word? > > > > Larry > > > ===== > > Welcome to the group from me as well! <...> > Rob M :-) > 51548 From: "nidive" Date: Mon Oct 17, 2005 7:57am Subject: [dsg] Re: The Crying Baby Strategy [was: Please teach me ....in A. Sujin'... nidive Hi Ken & Howard, > > The Buddha said the flood was crossed "not by striving, and not > > by standing still." In other words, it was crossed 'not by trying > > to control conditions and not by letting conditions rule.' Each > > of those extremes depends on the idea of a self that has a say in > > the matter. The middle way is hard to see, and that is why Dhamma > > discussions are so important. Ken, I think you are referring to the Ogha-tarana Sutta. --------------------------------------------------------------------- http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/samyutta/sn01-001.html ... "I crossed over the flood without pushing forward, without staying in place (or: unestablished)."[1] "But how, dear sir, did you cross over the flood without pushing forward, without staying in place?" "When I pushed forward, I was whirled about. When I stayed in place, I sank. And so I crossed over the flood without pushing forward, without staying in place." ... --------------------------------------------------------------------- This is not the way I interpret this sutta. In fact, it is talking about the "balancing" of the 7 factors of awakening. --------------------------------------------------------------------- http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/modern/thanissaro/wings/2g.html#97 ... In the same way, when the mind is sluggish, that is the wrong time to develop serenity as a factor for Awakening, concentration as a factor for Awakening, equanimity as a factor for Awakening. Why is that? The sluggish mind is hard to raise up by those mental qualities. Now, on occasions when the mind is sluggish, that is the right time to develop analysis of qualities as a factor for Awakening, persistence as a factor for Awakening, rapture as a factor for Awakening. Why is that? The sluggish mind is easy to raise up by those mental qualities. ... In the same way, when the mind is restless, that is the wrong time to develop analysis of qualities as a factor for Awakening, persistence as a factor for Awakening, rapture as a factor for Awakening... Now, on occasions when the mind is restless, that is the right time to develop serenity as a factor for Awakening, concentration as a factor for Awakening, equanimity as a factor for Awakening. Why is that? The restless mind is easy to calm down with those mental qualities. ... As for mindfulness, I tell you, that is beneficial everywhere. SN XLVI.53 --------------------------------------------------------------------- When the mind is sluggish, it sinks, it is not raised up. When the mind is restless, it is whirled about, it is not calmed down. When the mind is sluggish, the mental quality of insight (vipassana) is not developed. When the mind is restless, the mental quality of tranquility (samatha) is not developed. Therefore, the Buddha crossed over the flood without being restless, without being sluggish, bringing the 7 factors of enlightenment to culmination. Regards, Swee Boon 51549 From: "Leo (All Intelligent Views Exchange)" Date: Sun Oct 16, 2005 0:20am Subject: Re: What's the meaning of Maha-Paccariya? leoaive Hi I think that is sanskrit word. I think I have seen it somewhere. Try to search under sanskrit sutras. Maybe you will find something. Leo --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Larry" wrote: > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jean_5004" > wrote: > > > > Hi~ My name is Jean.I am a graduate student in Buddhism and also a new > > member of this group.Is there anybody can explain the meaning of > > "Maha-Paccariya" to English for me? Is the word"pa" from "pati"? <...> 51550 From: "Leo (All Intelligent Views Exchange)" Date: Sun Oct 16, 2005 0:51am Subject: Re: [dsg] Conditions Part 20 - Dissociation Condition (vippayutta-paccaya) leoaive --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, TGrand458@a... wrote: > Hi Rob M (again) > > The whole 17 times of consciousness vs one rupa, cetasika vs form arguments > just are not an issue in the Suttas. They aren't there. If you can find one > please show me. > > The point you are arguing against is not "my point." It's from the Suttas. > Contact is -- the meeting, the encounter, the occurrence -- of eye, form, > and consciousness. Where does the Buddha say that contact is a cetasika??? > Please please show me. I really want to see it if it exists. > > Where does the Buddha argue the issue of how fast consciousness arises or > dissolves in relation to form? Is it anything that matters in any meaningful > way? Does it advance insight? Does it help "see" impermanence? Maybe but > I'm not sure how. > > > “Monks, consciousness comes to be in dependence on a dyad. <....> Hi It looks to me Abhidhamma is a different teaching. Since Buddha was teaching his mother and other people of that category, I would not think they would exept meditating on decomposed body or skeleton without flesh or something of that sort. I am familiar with rich people. They normally have many visitors and all looks very well off. At the same time they are educated. So, their way to exept what is high is coming through high talk. It would be difficult for them to understand teaching for monk, because teaching for monks is more faith based, where dead body talk and instructions on that meditation is good. Abidhamma is more fact based, with all nice things (no dead bodies and so on). Personally I beleive, that Abhidhamma is more sutable for talking on internet if you are layperson. Since the way your society sees you not as a monk, but a person driving car and flying to vacation 2000 miles away. If you say someone that meditation on dead body is good, people could mistake you, or even go to some wrong thinking. It is like hallowin year long. That is my view. With metta Leo 51551 From: Ng Boon Huat Date: Sun Oct 16, 2005 8:10pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Not wanting out of samsara mr39515 Dear Bro and Sis of the Dhamma.... Hi there.... this question seem very fimilar... hmm, come to think about it... I believe I did ask this question to my senior in the our Uni DSG group about 10 years ago.... and I did not get an answer I wanted... hahaha I manage to figure this out myself after years of attending Dhamma class and getting to know more about Buddhism. Just to share my experience, I believe the reason why I ask this (last time) was basically not knowing or what we call today as ignorance. It seem to be one of the wrong view that I thought "life is about this current life itself and it is not that bad... so why should we get out of it...and future lives should still be ok??" It is until I get to know that there is a much bigger picture from my current (most probably an average of 75 human years) life which is part of a small time frame of the billions and billions of cycle of rebirth and death. And basically beings suffer more than being happy thru all those cycle of rebirth and death. If you take chances or probability to count, we should be easily get into a happy realms (27/31 planes of existance) but the fact is that it is much easier to fall into the 4 planes of suffering (hell, asuras, animal, hungry ghost). And worst still, it would be much more difficult to get up to other planes once we fall into those suffering planes. Then asking back the same question, I thoughts why are we just looking at this very very short period of the 75 average human years to make this conclusion (not wanting to get out of samsara) compare with billions of years of suffering....?? I guess the rest you can do the maths.... I did mine... and found the answer to that question.... I guess you have to figure that out yourself... Everything has a beginning has an end.... Metta mr39515 --- Phil wrote: > > Hi all > > A basic question that I guess can't be answered so > easily, but do > you all feel that you want out of samsara, the cycle > of death and > rebirth. Life is quite sweet, and I see the things > that irritate me > or scare me as passing mental phenomenon so don't > get bugged by > them. So why would I want out? > <.....> 51552 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Sun Oct 16, 2005 9:46pm Subject: How to be a True Buddhist on Observance Day ... !!! bhikkhu_ekamuni Friends: How to be a Real True Buddhist through Observance? Any Lay Buddhist simply joins the Three Refuges and undertakes the Five Precepts like this: Newly bathed, shaved, white-clothed, & with clean bare feet, one first bows three times at a shrine with a Buddha-statue, so that feet, hands, elbows, knees & head touch the floor. Then, with joined palms in front of the heart, one kneels and recite these memorized lines in a loud, calm & steady voice: As long as this life lasts: I hereby take refuge in the Buddha. I hereby take refuge in the Dhamma. I hereby take refuge in the Sangha. I hereby seek shelter in the Buddha for the 2nd time. I hereby seek shelter in the Dhamma for the 2nd time. I hereby seek shelter in the Sangha for the 2nd time. I hereby request protection from the Buddha for the 3rd time. I hereby request protection from the Dhamma for the 3rd time. I hereby request protection from the Sangha for the 3rd time. I hereby accept the training rule of avoiding all Killing. I hereby accept the training rule of avoiding all Stealing. I hereby accept the training rule of avoiding all Sexual Abuse. I hereby accept the training rule of avoiding all Dishonesty. I hereby accept the training rule of avoiding all Alcohol & Drugs. As long as this life lasts... Then, one keeps these sacred vows better than one protects one's own eyes & children!, since they protect you & all other beings much better than any army! They are the highest offer one can give in & to this world! This is the very start on the path towards Nibbana -the Deathless Element- This is the Noble Way to Peace, to Freedom, to Bliss, initiated by Morality, developed further by Dhamma-Study & fulfilled by practicing Meditation... Today indeed is Pooya or uposatha or observance day, where any lay Buddhist normally keeps the Eight Precepts from sunrise until the next dawn... If any wish an official recognition by the Bhikkhu-Sangha, they may simply forward the lines starting with "I..." signed with name, date, town & country to me. I have put up a public list of this newly born Saddhamma Sangha here! http://www.What-Buddha-Said.org/sangha/Saddhamma_Sangha.htm May your journey hereby be eased, light, swift and sweet. Never give up !!! Bhikkhu Samahita: what.buddha.said@... For Details on Uposatha Observance Days: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/ptf/uposatha.html ________________________________________________________ PS: Please include the word Samahita in any comment, since then will my automatic mail filters pick it up and I will see it & respond!! Bhikkhu Samahita, Sri Lanka. Friendship is the Greatest ... Let there be Calm Free Bliss !!! <.....> 51553 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Sun Oct 16, 2005 10:07pm Subject: The Free Google Gmail is Great! bhikkhu_ekamuni Friends: Google Gmail is Giantly Great: The free Google Gmail Offers: > 2.6 Gigabyte storage !!! No advertisements... Highly efficient Spam filtering! Free, multiple & filterable Forwarding. Free POP3 and SMTP mail client access. IMHO the very best free email currently! One needs to be invited to it though... If anyone is interested in a free gmail account, then send an email to me: bhikkhu.samahita@... including these words: samahita & gmail, then I will mail you an invitation asap... Have a nice observance day too ;-) -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Bhikkhu Samahita, Sri Lanka. Friendship is the Greatest ... Let there be Calm & Free Bliss !!! <....> 51554 From: "Joop" Date: Mon Oct 17, 2005 8:11am Subject: Re: Please teach me about any difference in A. Sujin's approach to Abhidhamma jwromeijn Dear all When the female DSG-participants (plus adherents) coming back home from India, they will be surprised that the male members have taken te lead in DSG with discussions in which a new middle way between being polite and being straight is taken. There is one thing lacking in the Sujin-discussions (for myself abstracted as: either one completely conditioned or is there a - small - fraction of free will, of intentional behavior to influence one situation, in a better direction) What is neglected is the social dimension that Abhidhamma should have: the interaction between individuals can also be described in ultimate language. And part of the social dimension is that the behavior of a person (for example what she talks) is a condition for namarupa of another person (a bad or a wholesome influence) I think this fact can not been denied, otherwise all dhammatalks (of Sujin and others) are totally useless, without any effect. It's not without reason that I use the term 'free will', an old (western) philosophical term. Because, my dear DSG-friends, we don't think Theravada is the only area in which this kind of discussions take place? Another reason for me to think this discussion has not yet reached it's higest level is that'sd only about one or two aspect of the Noble Eightfold Path. Ans it' sclear and easy: all eight aspects had to be paid attention. With karuna (another of the brahmavihara) Joop 51555 From: upasaka@... Date: Mon Oct 17, 2005 4:52am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: The Crying Baby Strategy [was: Please teach me ....in A. Sujin'... upasaka_howard Hi, Swee Boon - In a message dated 10/17/05 10:58:29 AM Eastern Daylight Time, nidive@... writes: > This is not the way I interpret this sutta. In fact, it is talking > about the "balancing" of the 7 factors of awakening. > ==================== I'm not sure that our positions are in opposition, Swee Boon. At a stage in which the enlightenment factors have developed, "self" is on the back burner and progress proceeds largely "on its own". That, of course, is not the stage at which one begins. Much prior cultivation is required to get to that stage, and during the period of initial cultivation, there is plenty of whirling about and plenty of sinking, and sense of self is almost constantly i nterposed. Where Ken and I differ the most, I think, is that Ken seems to me to think that one must be at a non-doing stage immediately, and, if not, then any steps taken are missteps. 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) 51556 From: upasaka@... Date: Mon Oct 17, 2005 5:01am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Please teach me about any difference in A. Sujin's approach to ... upasaka_howard Hi, Phil - In a message dated 10/17/05 11:26:10 AM Eastern Daylight Time, philco777@... writes: > Hi again all > > Gaargh...trying to work on my story and DSG stuff keeps popping in > to my head. Time to try again to take a leave of absence until after my > deadline (November 11) Catch you again next month. > > Phil > > p.s hi Rob. Hope the lecture in Shizuoka went well. I think Tep > meant that I should be more independent in forming and expressing my > opinions or something, not that I am infantile. But this is a mistake. > Dhamma is built on the tradition of people of limited knowledge and > understanding listening to people who have more knowledge and deeper > understanding. I will listen for awhile - until I start babbling > again! :) > ======================== Something I've been meaning to say. I'll say it now: I commend you on the equanimity you have been displaying. 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) 51557 From: "nidive" Date: Mon Oct 17, 2005 9:09am Subject: [dsg] Re: The Crying Baby Strategy [was: Please teach me ....in A. Sujin'... nidive Hi Howard, > I'm not sure that our positions are in opposition, Swee Boon. At a > stage in which the enlightenment factors have developed, "self" is > on the back burner and progress proceeds largely "on its own". > That, of course, is not the stage at which one begins. Much prior > cultivation is required to get to that stage, and during the period > of initial cultivation, there is plenty of whirling about and plenty > of sinking, and sense of self is almost constantly interposed. I am saying that this sutta is not talking about "extreme" views. It is talking about balancing the mental factors of enlightenment. Restlessness is not an "extreme" view. Neither is sluggishness. Regards, Swee Boon 51558 From: upasaka@... Date: Mon Oct 17, 2005 5:14am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: The Crying Baby Strategy [was: Please teach me ....in A. Sujin'... upasaka_howard Hi, Swee Boon - In a message dated 10/17/05 12:10:58 PM Eastern Daylight Time, nidive@... writes: > > I am saying that this sutta is not talking about "extreme" views. It > is talking about balancing the mental factors of enlightenment. > ==================== Okay. :-) 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) 51559 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Mon Oct 17, 2005 9:54am Subject: Balancing the mental factors of enlightenment [was The Crying Baby Strategy ] buddhistmedi... Hi Swee - It seems that Howard was contented with your assertion (or he might not be interested in pursuing it further). : ->)) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@a... wrote: > > Hi, Swee Boon - > > In a message dated 10/17/05 12:10:58 PM Eastern Daylight Time, > nidive@y... writes: > > > > > I am saying that this sutta is not talking about "extreme" views. It > > is talking about balancing the mental factors of enlightenment. > > > ==================== > Okay. :-) > Swee: When the mind is sluggish, it sinks, it is not raised up. When the mind is restless, it is whirled about, it is not calmed down. When the mind is sluggish, the mental quality of insight (vipassana) is not developed. When the mind is restless, the mental quality of tranquility (samatha) is not developed. Therefore, the Buddha crossed over the flood without being restless, without being sluggish, bringing the 7 factors of enlightenment to culmination. ........................................................ Tep: The sutta did not give a clue about the "balancing the mental factors of enlightenment" as you put it. Can you tell me why you believe that the wordings of the second sutta(SN XLVI.53) are the same as those of the first (SN I.1)? I ask this question out of curiosity only. Thank you in advance. Regards, Tep ======== 51560 From: upasaka@... Date: Mon Oct 17, 2005 6:15am Subject: Re: [dsg] Balancing the mental factors of enlightenment [was The Crying Baby ... upasaka_howard Hi, Tep (and Swee) - In a message dated 10/17/05 12:55:37 PM Eastern Daylight Time, tepsastri@... writes: > It seems that Howard was contented with your assertion (or he might > not be interested in pursuing it further). : ->)) > ==================== It was the latter. ;-)) 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) 51561 From: "matheesha" Date: Mon Oct 17, 2005 11:50am Subject: Re: The Free Google Gmail is Great! matheesha333 Dear Bhanthe, I'm sure it is! But I personally dont need 2.6GB of space. My MSN is also quite good at filtering spam! Please tell me where you get your inspiration write so many dhamma emails and also advertise Gmail! metta Matheesha ps - dont take this seriously :) 51562 From: TGrand458@... Date: Mon Oct 17, 2005 9:25am Subject: Re: [dsg] Conditions Part 20 - Dissociation Condition (vippayutta-paccaya) TGrand458@... In a message dated 10/15/2005 8:58:30 P.M. Mountain Daylight Time, nidive@... writes: think the Buddha did say that contact is nama. --------------------------------------------------------------------- http://accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/samyutta/sn-12-002-tb0.html "And what is name-&-form? Feeling, perception, intention, CONTACT, & attention: This is called name. The four great elements, and the form dependent on the four great elements: This is called form. This name & this form are called name-&-form. --------------------------------------------------------------------- Regards, Swee Boon Hi Swee Boon Excellent. Thank you. Looks like you're right. And yet also contact is the meeting of the 3 ... eye, form, consciousness; for eye contact for example. Let me ask you...if the meeting of these three is name. And two of the three (or at least one of the three) appears to be form, does that indicate that the argument that name and form have to be separate things is wrong? Thanks. TG 51563 From: TGrand458@... Date: Mon Oct 17, 2005 9:31am Subject: Re: [dsg] Conditions Part 20 - Dissociation Condition (vippayutta-paccaya) TGrand458@... In a message dated 10/15/2005 10:14:58 P.M. Mountain Daylight Time, upasaka@... writes: "Feeling, perception, intention, contact, & attention: This is called name." Isn't it interesting that consciousness is missing from the list? It would be interesting even if it were there but not 1st on the list. But it's not there at all!! What should be made of that? Anyone? With metta, Howard Hi Howard Another point ... noting the order of this list, with contact coming after intention, is it possible that contact is a "new" contact generated by intention rather than the "older" contact that generated feeling? I.E., contact generated feeling ... feeling led to intention ... intention generated "new volitional contacts" ... etc. Got any remarks? Thanks. TG 51564 From: upasaka@... Date: Mon Oct 17, 2005 10:04am Subject: Re: [dsg] Conditions Part 20 - Dissociation Condition (vippayutta-paccaya) upasaka_howard Hi, TG - In a message dated 10/17/05 4:32:01 PM Eastern Daylight Time, TGrand458@... writes: > > In a message dated 10/15/2005 10:14:58 P.M. Mountain Daylight Time, > upasaka@... writes: > > "Feeling, perception, intention, contact, &attention: This is called > name." Isn't it interesting that consciousness is missing from the list? It > > would be interesting even if it were there but not 1st on the list. But > it's > not > there at all!! What should be made of that? Anyone? > > With metta, > Howard > > > > Hi Howard > > Another point ... noting the order of this list, with contact coming after > intention, is it possible that contact is a "new" contact generated by > intention rather than the "older" contact that generated feeling? > > I.E., contact generated feeling ... feeling led to intention ... intention > generated "new volitional contacts" ... etc. Got any remarks? Thanks. > > TG > ======================= Well, your hypothesis is interesting, but I'm not sure an order is really intended. In MN 18, there is the following: _____________________ Dependent on eye & forms, eye-consciousness arises. The meeting of the three is contact. With contact as a requisite condition, there is feeling. What one feels, one perceives (labels in the mind). What one perceives, one thinks about. What one thinks about, one complicates. Based on what a person complicates, the perceptions & categories of complication assail him/her with regard to past, present, & future forms cognizable via the eye. _____________________ So here we have the following: eye & forms ==> eye-consciousness --> contact (of eye, form, and consciousness) ==> feeling ==> perception (recognition) ==> papa~nca. In this, the ordering makes clear sense (to me). But not in the nama collection, at least not to me. I'm not at all sure that there is an ordering intended in the nama collection {feeling, perception, intention, contact, and attention}. 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) 51565 From: "Andrew" Date: Mon Oct 17, 2005 5:23pm Subject: Re: Balancing the mental factors of enlightenment [was The Crying Baby Strategy ] corvus121 --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Tep Sastri" wrote: > Swee: > When the mind is sluggish, it sinks, it is not raised up. > When the mind is restless, it is whirled about, it is not calmed down. > When the mind is sluggish, the mental quality of insight (vipassana) > is not developed. > When the mind is restless, the mental quality of tranquility (samatha) > is not developed. > Therefore, the Buddha crossed over the flood without being restless, > without being sluggish, bringing the 7 factors of enlightenment to > culmination. > > ........................................................ > > Tep: > > The sutta did not give a clue about the "balancing the mental factors of > enlightenment" as you put it. Can you tell me why you believe that the > wordings of the second sutta(SN XLVI.53) are the same as those of the > first (SN I.1)? Dear Tep and Swee Boon I think Tep has asked a very pertinent question. This is particularly so given the assertion occasionally made on DSG that the suttas can be read and understood fully by themselves (i.e. without any need for commentaries and Abhidhamma). According to the authorised commentary to the Samyutta Nikaya, the verse being discussed has seven levels of meaning, only one of which refers to slackness and restlessness. (They are enumerated in note 3 to Bhikkhu Bodhi's translation, Wisdom publication - pp342-343). I cannot find any reference to the 7 factors of enlightenment. Swee Boon, are you interpreting the verse simply using the language of the sutta itself, or have you had recourse to supplementary material and if so, would you be kind enough to give us the reference? Best wishes Andrew T 51566 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Mon Oct 17, 2005 5:27pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Please teach me about any difference in A. Sujin's approach to ... buddhistmedi... Hi, Howard and Phil - Phil, you amazed me by displaying your rare "equanimity" -- it was the first time I ever saw it. > > Phil > > > > p.s hi Rob. Hope the lecture in Shizuoka went well. I think Tep > > meant that I should be more independent in forming and > > expressing my opinions or something, not that I am infantile. But > > this is a mistake. > > Dhamma is built on the tradition of people of limited knowledge and > > understanding listening to people who have more knowledge and deeper understanding. I will listen for awhile - until I start babbling > > again! :) > > >Howard: > > Something I've been meaning to say. I'll say it now: > I commend you on the equanimity you have been displaying. > Tep: Howard was right. Thank you, Phil, for understanding that I meant no harm. No, it would not be a mistake to tell James about your thoughts on Khun Sujin's principles. Regards, Tep =========== 51567 From: "nidive" Date: Mon Oct 17, 2005 5:43pm Subject: Re: Balancing the mental factors of enlightenment [was The Crying Baby Strategy ] nidive Hi Andrew T and Tep, > Swee Boon, are you interpreting the verse simply using the language > of the sutta itself, or have you had recourse to supplementary > material and if so, would you be kind enough to give us the > reference? I am interpreting it simply using the language of the sutta itself. It just doesn't make any sense to me to interpret it as talking about "extreme" views. Regards, Swee Boon 51568 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Mon Oct 17, 2005 5:53pm Subject: Re: Balancing the mental factors of enlightenment [was The Crying Baby Strategy ] buddhistmedi... Dear Andrew - I am glad to read your post. This sutta is beyond me, and so a help from "the authorized commentary" will be helpful indeed. > Andrew: >According to the authorised commentary to the Samyutta Nikaya, >the verse being discussed has seven levels of meaning, only >one of which refers to slackness and restlessness. (They are >enumerated in note 3 to Bhikkhu Bodhi's translation, Wisdom >publication - pp342-343). I cannot find any reference to >the 7 factors of enlightenment. > Tep : I do not have an access to that publication. So, if it isn't going to trouble you much, could you please give a clue about the "seven levels of meaning" ? Warm regards, Tep ======= --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Andrew" wrote: > (snipped) > > Swee Boon, are you interpreting the verse simply using the language > of the sutta itself, or have you had recourse to supplementary > material and if so, would you be kind enough to give us the reference? > > Best wishes > Andrew T > 51569 From: "nidive" Date: Mon Oct 17, 2005 6:02pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Conditions Part 20 - Dissociation Condition (vippayutta-paccaya) nidive Hi TG, > Excellent. Thank you. Looks like you're right. And yet also > contact is the meeting of the 3 ... eye, form, consciousness; for > eye contact for example. > Let me ask you...if the meeting of these three is name. And two > of the three (or at least one of the three) appears to be form, > does that indicate that the argument that name and form have to be > separate things is wrong? Thanks. In my understanding, rupa comes into being in dependence on nama and nama comes into being in dependence on rupa. They go hand in hand with each other and can never really be "separate" from each other even though they are not the same things. Regards, Swee Boon 51570 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Mon Oct 17, 2005 6:10pm Subject: Re: The Crying Baby Strategy [was: Please teach me ....in A. Sujin's ] kenhowardau Hi James --------------------- J: > KS doesn't always `point to the ancient Theravada commentaries' as you state. As I have pointed out- and I want Nina, Sarah, Jon, Lodewjik, or anyone in India to ask KS about- why it is that she directly contradicts the commentary to the Satipatthana Sutta which recommends that one choose one of the Four Foundations based on one's accumulations? The Vism. also refers to this. And yet, KS directly contradicts this commentary because, I believe, it doesn't agree with her main philosophy of `no control'. This issue must be answered satisfactorily before I will admit that K. Sujin is simply presenting the Theravada perspective. ----------------------- I hope they do ask your question, but I doubt the answer will change your perspective very much. If the commentary recommends that "one choose," who or what would it mean by "one?" I think it could only mean conditions (in this case, personal accumulations), and I think it would specifically mean the accumulations of a monk who practises satipatthana as described in the sutta. Would it be in any way relevant to the accumulations of an uninstructed worldling who, by definition, barely knows the meaning of satipatthana? I am not referring particularly to myself (let alone to you or anyone else) but I doubt the beginner has any meaningful preferences for one Foundation of Mindfulness over another. I don't know, but I think the answers will be just more Abhidhamma - "dry," impersonal lists and categories of namas, rupas and conditions - all good stuff, but no self and no control. :-) Ken H 51571 From: upasaka@... Date: Mon Oct 17, 2005 2:41pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Balancing the mental factors of enlightenment [was The Crying B... upasaka_howard Hi, Swee Boon (and Andrew and Tep) - In a message dated 10/17/05 8:44:01 PM Eastern Daylight Time, nidive@... writes: > Hi Andrew T and Tep, > > >Swee Boon, are you interpreting the verse simply using the language > >of the sutta itself, or have you had recourse to supplementary > >material and if so, would you be kind enough to give us the > >reference? > > I am interpreting it simply using the language of the sutta itself. > > It just doesn't make any sense to me to interpret it as talking about > "extreme" views. > > Regards, > Swee Boon > ========================== I don't see the Buddha as talking about views or about enlightenment factors in this sutta, least of all the latter. What I see him as talking about is the middle way - the practice which, when it is well developed, proceeds effortlessly, with sense of self not interfering. It pertains to the 8-fold noble path of practice at a very advanced stage. Don't forget, this is the Buddha's answer to how *he* crossed the flood. 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) 51572 From: "rjkjp1" Date: Mon Oct 17, 2005 7:56pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Conditions Part 20 - Dissociation Condition (vippayutta-paccaya) rjkjp1 --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "nidive" wrote: > > > >TG: Excellent. Thank you. Looks like you're right. And yet also > > contact is the meeting of the 3 ... eye, form, consciousness; for > > eye contact for example. > > Let me ask you...if the meeting of these three is name. And two > > of the three (or at least one of the three) appears to be form, > > does that indicate that the argument that name and form have to be > > separate things is wrong? Thanks. > =========================== > In my understanding, rupa comes into being in dependence on nama and > nama comes into being in dependence on rupa. > > They go hand in hand with each other and can never really be > "separate" from each other even though they are not the same things. ============== Dear TG and Swee Boon, I think Arupa Brahma Gods have mentality without any rupa. It is good to learn about the 24 conditions in the Patthana including dissociation condition. Robertk 51573 From: LBIDD@... Date: Mon Oct 17, 2005 8:25pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: What's the meaning of Maha-Paccariya? lbidd2 Hi Jean, Assuming paccariya = pati + ariya, I would put it at something like "The Great Ennobler". Btw, B. ~Na.namoli has it as "Mahaa-Paccarii" (P. of P. xxx). A couple of snippets are googlable. Larry 51574 From: TGrand458@... Date: Mon Oct 17, 2005 4:32pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Conditions Part 20 - Dissociation Condition (vippayutta-paccaya) TGrand458@... In a message dated 10/17/2005 8:59:35 P.M. Mountain Daylight Time, rjkjp1@... writes: Dear TG and Swee Boon, I think Arupa Brahma Gods have mentality without any rupa. It is good to learn about the 24 conditions in the Patthana including dissociation condition. Robertk Hi RobertK But it is my understanding that such gods attained that state from a "rupa foundation" and are subject to returning to a rupa oriented state unless they are non-returners. Their temporary arupa status is still based on rupa in that regard. TG 51575 From: "rjkjp1" Date: Mon Oct 17, 2005 9:01pm Subject: Re: The Crying Baby Strategy [was: Please teach me ....in A. Sujin's ] rjkjp1 --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Tep Sastri" wrote: >> --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "rjkjp1" > wrote: > > > > --- > > > +++++++++++ > > Dear Tep, > > Earlier this week you posted this advice to us all > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/51402 > > > > > > "III. What are the behaviors of a dhamma discusser who is unfit to > > talk > > with? > > > > -- ..-- when asked a question, puts down the questioner, crushes him, > > ridicules him, grasps at his little mistakes."" > > > > I would think referring to Phil's question as the 'crying baby > > strategy' is a way of ridicule, or do you see it as differently? > > Robertk > > > > Tep: > > Of course, I see it differently. I find Phil's strategy (to avoid his turn to > address the issue squarely) very funny. ======= Dear Tep, Sacca parami is basic to developing Dhamma. If you are sure your post was in line with the sutta you recommended then I say no more. Robertk 51576 From: "Andrew" Date: Mon Oct 17, 2005 9:11pm Subject: Re: Balancing the mental factors of enlightenment [was The Crying Baby Strategy ] corvus121 --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Tep Sastri" wrote: > > > Dear Andrew - > > I am glad to read your post. This sutta is beyond me, and so a help > from "the authorized commentary" will be helpful indeed. > > > Andrew: > >According to the authorised commentary to the Samyutta Nikaya, > >the verse being discussed has seven levels of meaning, only > >one of which refers to slackness and restlessness. (They are > >enumerated in note 3 to Bhikkhu Bodhi's translation, Wisdom > >publication - pp342-343). I cannot find any reference to > >the 7 factors of enlightenment. > > > > Tep : I do not have an access to that publication. So, if it isn't going to > trouble you much, could you please give a clue about the "seven > levels of meaning" ? Dear Tep Bhikkhu Bodhi's notes are rather long and I don't have time to type them out in full. However, I am happy to type out the 7 dyads enumerated. BTW the expression "the authorized commentary" is Bhikkhu Bodhi's, not mine (p15), so if you have an issue with that, I'm afraid I can't assist. The 7 dyads are: 1. 'halting' by way of defilements, one sinks; 'straining' by way of volitional formations, one gets swept away. 2. by way of craving and views, one sinks; by way of other defilements, one gets swept away. 3. by way of craving, one sinks; by way of views, one gets swept away. 4. by way of the eternalist view, one sinks; by way of the annihilationist view, one gets swept away. 5. by way of slackness, one sinks; by way of restlessness, one gets swept away. 6. by way of devotion to sensual pleasures, one sinks; by way of devotion to self-mortification, one gets swept away. 7. by way of all unwholesome volitional formations, one sinks; by way of all mundane wholesome volitional formations, one gets swept away. Number 7 looks interesting. Any ideas on exactly what it means? Anyone? Best wishes Andrew T 51577 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Mon Oct 17, 2005 9:37pm Subject: Re: The Crying Baby Strategy [was: Please teach me ....in A. Sujin's ] buddhatrue Hi Ken H., --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "kenhowardau" wrote: > > Hi James > > --------------------- > J: > KS doesn't always `point to the ancient Theravada commentaries' > as you state. As I have pointed out- and I want Nina, Sarah, Jon, > Lodewjik, or anyone in India to ask KS about- why it is that she > directly contradicts the commentary to the Satipatthana Sutta which > recommends that one choose one of the Four Foundations based on > one's accumulations? The Vism. also refers to this. And yet, KS > directly contradicts this commentary because, I believe, it doesn't > agree with her main philosophy of `no control'. > > This issue must be answered satisfactorily before I will admit that > K. Sujin is simply presenting the Theravada perspective. > ----------------------- > > I hope they do ask your question, but I doubt the answer will change > your perspective very much. If the commentary recommends that "one > choose," who or what would it mean by "one?" I think it could only > mean conditions (in this case, personal accumulations), and I think > it would specifically mean the accumulations of a monk who practises > satipatthana as described in the sutta. Would it be in any way > relevant to the accumulations of an uninstructed worldling who, by > definition, barely knows the meaning of satipatthana? > > I am not referring particularly to myself (let alone to you or anyone > else) but I doubt the beginner has any meaningful preferences for one > Foundation of Mindfulness over another. I don't know, but I think the > answers will be just more Abhidhamma - "dry," impersonal lists and > categories of namas, rupas and conditions - all good stuff, but no > self and no control. :-) > > Ken H > Yes, you are correct, if KS gave me this type of answer I would not be satisfied. I don't see what you have written above as a direct answer; I see it as philosophical musings. Excessive thinking gets us further away from the dhamma, not closer. Remember: KISS. :-) Metta, James 51578 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Mon Oct 17, 2005 11:07pm Subject: Re: Balancing the mental factors of enlightenment [was The Crying Baby Strategy ] kenhowardau Hi Andrew, <. . .> > 7. by way of all unwholesome volitional formations, one sinks; by way > of all mundane wholesome volitional formations, one gets swept away. > > Number 7 looks interesting. Any ideas on exactly what it means? > Anyone? > My guess is: By unwholesome volitions, one makes no effort to escape samsara and sinks. By wholesome volitions that are not connected with the Eightfold Path, one makes an effort but to no avail, and gets swept away. Ken H 51579 From: "Antony Woods" Date: Tue Oct 18, 2005 3:56am Subject: The All: //now as we speak?// antony272b2 Dear Howard, Sarah and Group, I have a question related to "The All" in the Sabba Sutta (I did look up the Useful Posts): The Blessed One said, "What is the All? Simply the eye & forms, ear & sounds, nose & aromas, tongue & flavors, body & tactile sensations, intellect & ideas. This, monks, is called the All. Anyone who would say, 'Repudiating this All, I will describe another,' if questioned on what exactly might be the grounds for his statement, would be unable to explain, and furthermore, would be put to grief. Why? Because it lies beyond range." http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/samyutta/sn35-023.html ++++++++ Antony: This All seems quite limited (e.g. the word "range"). Surely reality is bigger than this? It seems logical that things, mostly suffering, are happening in the world //as we speak// even if we are not sensing or thinking about them. Turning the TV news off and on (and off and on) doesn't affect the suffering in Pakistan. Or am I caught up in papanca? When I met Sarah and Jon in Sydney city we heard a siren of an emergency vehicle. I think Sarah said it was just hearing. I thought there was more to it than that. There were various possible explanations for the siren e.g. a false alarm. Or Sarah do you mean that //remembering// the siren //right now// is reality and the beings involved in causing the siren have moved on in the 10 weeks since and I am still carrying the siren! Is writing this post trying to establish a wise self that, being outside of it, can comment on The All? Thanks / Antony. 51581 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Tue Oct 18, 2005 5:08am Subject: Re: Please teach me about any difference in A. Sujin's approach to Abhidhamma buddhatrue Hi Ken H., --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "kenhowardau" wrote: > > Hi James, > > It seems you will never be happy unless DSG members are fighting > amongst themselves, and you will do anything it takes to cause > trouble. > > ----------- > J: > Before you were saying that those who disagree with K. Sujin > should get out of this group, > ----------- > > Is there no depth to which you will not sink? > > In case anyone is tempted to believe James's allegation, I should > explain that he made a series of unsubstantiated personal attacks, > which most of us ignored (that is what James does, and we are used to > him). Phil tried to help, pointing out that if DSG had such a bad > effect on James, maybe he should consider leaving. Actually, I think > he put it even more mildly than that. > > Words fail me! > > Ken H > In case you were wondering, I did read this post but decided not to reply. I wrote some replies and then deleted them all because I thought they would probably just enflame the situation even more. But I just wanted you to know that I'm not ignoring you and I appreciate you telling me how you really feel. Metta, James 51582 From: upasaka@... Date: Tue Oct 18, 2005 1:29am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Balancing the mental factors of enlightenment [was The Crying B... upasaka_howard Hi, Andrew - In a message dated 10/18/05 12:13:22 AM Eastern Daylight Time, athel60@... writes: > 7. by way of all unwholesome volitional formations, one sinks; by way > of all mundane wholesome volitional formations, one gets swept away. > > Number 7 looks interesting. Any ideas on exactly what it means? > Anyone? > ======================== Wholesome and unwholesome cetana are both defiled by atta-sense, by a (false) sense of "self/core residing in the conventional person and elsewhere." The only cetana besides these two is the functional kiriya cetana, which, as I understand it, is the mode of impulsion that is free of sense of self and is the only form of cetana left in arahants but is an only occasional state in worldlings and lesser ariyans. So, perhaps # 7 refers to realization of nibbana requiring the effortless effort put forth by an advanced ariyan practitioner in a state of "no-mind" (as the Zen folks put it) in which action is largely free of interposition of "self". To actually cross the flood and "enter" nibbana, the state of mind must already be one of near-pristine purity. (I find myself thinking of the surgeon who is well scrubbed prior to entering the operating theater, or the ancient Hebrew high priest who has fasted, prayed, and abstained in preparation for entering "the holy of holies".) 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) 51583 From: "nidive" Date: Tue Oct 18, 2005 6:04am Subject: Re: Conditions Part 20 - Dissociation Condition (vippayutta-paccaya) nidive Hi RobertK & TG, > I think Arupa Brahma Gods have mentality without any rupa. It is > good to learn about the 24 conditions in the Patthana including > dissociation condition. > Robertk > But it is my understanding that such gods attained that state from > a "rupa" foundation" and are subject to returning to a rupa oriented > state unless they are non-returners. Their temporary arupa status > is still based on rupa in that regard. > TG I agree with you, TG. It is said that the four arupa jhanas are also modes of the fourth rupa jhana. The arupa jhanas must always take rupa jhanas as their foundation. Regards, Swee Boon 51584 From: "nidive" Date: Tue Oct 18, 2005 6:34am Subject: Re: Balancing the mental factors of enlightenment [was The Crying Baby Strategy ] nidive Hi Andrew T & All, > The 7 dyads are: > 1. 'halting' by way of defilements, one sinks; 'straining' by way of > volitional formations, one gets swept away. > 2. by way of craving and views, one sinks; by way of other > defilements, one gets swept away. > 3. by way of craving, one sinks; by way of views, one gets swept > away. > 4. by way of the eternalist view, one sinks; by way of the > annihilationist view, one gets swept away. > 5. by way of slackness, one sinks; by way of restlessness, one gets > swept away. > 6. by way of devotion to sensual pleasures, one sinks; by way of > devotion to self-mortification, one gets swept away. > 7. by way of all unwholesome volitional formations, one sinks; by > way of all mundane wholesome volitional formations, one gets swept > away. I am wondering whether "swept away" and "whirled about" have the same meaning. I am thinking there is a difference. Or is this a translation issue? Between "sinking" and "being swept away", I don't really see any difference between the two. Sinking: 1. 'halting' by way of defilements, one sinks; 'straining' by way of volitional formations, one also sinks. 2. by way of craving and views, one sinks; by way of other defilements, one also sinks. 3. by way of craving, one sinks; by way of views, one also sinks. 4. by way of the eternalist view, one sinks; by way of the annihilationist view, one also sinks. 5. by way of slackness, one sinks; by way of restlessness, one also sinks. 6. by way of devotion to sensual pleasures, one sinks; by way of devotion to self-mortification, one also sinks. 7. by way of all unwholesome volitional formations, one sinks; by way of all mundane wholesome volitional formations, one also sinks. Being swept away: 1. 'halting' by way of defilements, one gets swept away; 'straining' by way of volitional formations, one also gets swept away. 2. by way of craving and views, one gets swept away; by way of other defilements, one also gets swept away. 3. by way of craving, one gets swept away; by way of views, one also gets swept away. 4. by way of the eternalist view, one gets swept away; by way of the annihilationist view, one also gets swept away. 5. by way of slackness, one gets swept away; by way of restlessness, one also gets swept away. 6. by way of devotion to sensual pleasures, one gets swept away; by way of devotion to self-mortification, one also gets swept away. 7. by way of all unwholesome volitional formations, one gets swept away; by way of all mundane wholesome volitional formations, one also gets swept away. If this is the way we interpret the meaning of "sinking" and "being swept away", then I say this sutta is really superfluous. Redundant in fact. There is really no cause for joy in that deva. Regards, Swee Boon 51585 From: "jonoabb" Date: Tue Oct 18, 2005 6:43am Subject: e-Card from Delhi (was, e-Card from Benares (was, Question for A. Sujin)) jonoabb Hi James and All Thanks for this, James. I've passed on to Lodewijk your hello. All, I'm glad to report that Sarah is fully recovered now and is in good spirits. We've just finished the actual pilgrimage part of the trip, having spent a memorable morning yesterday in the Jetavanna Grove at Savatthi, where the Buddha spent so many years of his life. Very peaceful, very inspiring, and a good venue for discussion. Last night was spent at Lucknow, and this morning we flew to Delhi. After arriving we visited the site marking the place where the Satipatthana Sutta was deliverd (to the people of Kuru). Nina told us about a 'daily life' incident that happened at Lumbini. When the group began the formal walk around the holy site, Nina could not find Loewijk. This was a condition for anxiety and some distress, as they had agreed to stick together at each place, since this could be their last trip together. Nina remarked how, despite knowing that dosa arose, how difficult it is to know that dosa as just a dhamma, not 'my dosa'. (Nina may add more when she comes back on line.) Appreciating the luxury of wireless broadband in our hotel room (especially after the frustration of not getting connected in our room in Lucknow last night), instead of dingy internet cafes. Unfortunately, little time to enjoy the other luxuries of our fine hotel, as we have an early start tomorrow for the flight to Srinagar. Regards to all Jon --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "buddhatrue" wrote: > > Hi Jon, > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" > wrote: > > > Lodewijk sends a special hello to James. > > > > Jon > > > > Oh my, how nice! Send a special hello back to Lodewijk for me. > Hope that he and Nina are keeping well and that you all are trying > to keep well. So sorry to hear about Sarah's sickness! Hope she > will start feeling better real soon. I've never had a good feeling > about you guys going to India. :-( It is a very unhealthy place! > Please take all the health precautions: keep your hands clean, don't > drink the water, and don't eat in unknown locations. Good luck and > come back safe! > > Metta, > James 51586 From: upasaka@... Date: Tue Oct 18, 2005 3:07am Subject: Re: [dsg] The All: //now as we speak?// upasaka_howard Hi, Antony (and Sarah, and all) - In a message dated 10/18/05 6:57:38 AM Eastern Daylight Time, antony272b@... writes: > Dear Howard, Sarah and Group, > > I have a question related to "The All" in the Sabba Sutta (I did look > up the Useful Posts): > The Blessed One said, > "What is the All? > Simply the eye &forms, > ear &sounds, > nose &aromas, > tongue &flavors, > body &tactile sensations, > intellect &ideas. > This, monks, is called the All. Anyone who would say, 'Repudiating > this All, I will describe another,' if questioned on what exactly > might be the grounds for his statement, would be unable to explain, > and furthermore, would be put to grief. Why? Because it lies beyond > range." > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/samyutta/sn35-023.html > ++++++++ > Antony: This All seems quite limited (e.g. the word "range"). Surely > reality is bigger than this? It seems logical that things, mostly > suffering, are happening in the world //as we speak// even if we are > not sensing or thinking about them. Turning the TV news off and on > (and off and on) doesn't affect the suffering in Pakistan. Or am I > caught up in papanca? > > When I met Sarah and Jon in Sydney city we heard a siren of an > emergency vehicle. I think Sarah said it was just hearing. I thought > there was more to it than that. There were various possible > explanations for the siren e.g. a false alarm. Or Sarah do you mean > that //remembering// the siren //right now// is reality and the > beings involved in causing the siren have moved on in the 10 weeks > since and I am still carrying the siren! > > Is writing this post trying to establish a wise self that, being > outside of it, can comment on The All? > > Thanks / Antony. > > ======================== As I understand it, "the all" refers to everything that can fall within actual experience. Whatever does not so fall, if there is anything, by that very fact "lies beyond range." Whatever alleged things are beyond experience are, pragmatically, dismissible. 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) 51587 From: "nidive" Date: Tue Oct 18, 2005 7:43am Subject: [dsg] Re: Balancing the mental factors of enlightenment [was The Crying B... nidive Hi Howard, > I don't see the Buddha as talking about views or about enlightenment > factors in this sutta, least of all the latter. What I see him as > talking about is the middle way - the practice which, when it is > well developed, proceeds effortlessly, with sense of self not > interfering. It pertains to the 8-fold noble path of practice at a > very advanced stage. Don't forget, this is the Buddha's answer to > how *he* crossed the flood. Actually, at the advanced stage, the 7 factors of enlightenment are in fact quite well balanced. Magga nanas are ready to erupt at any moment. Watch out! :-) Regards, Swee Boon 51588 From: upasaka@... Date: Tue Oct 18, 2005 4:09am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Balancing the mental factors of enlightenment [was The Crying B... upasaka_howard Hi, Swee Boon - In a message dated 10/18/05 10:43:54 AM Eastern Daylight Time, nidive@... writes: > > Hi Howard, > > >I don't see the Buddha as talking about views or about enlightenment > >factors in this sutta, least of all the latter. What I see him as > >talking about is the middle way - the practice which, when it is > >well developed, proceeds effortlessly, with sense of self not > >interfering. It pertains to the 8-fold noble path of practice at a > >very advanced stage. Don't forget, this is the Buddha's answer to > >how *he* crossed the flood. > > Actually, at the advanced stage, the 7 factors of enlightenment are in > fact quite well balanced. -------------------------------- Howard: So, I was right. We're not so far apart on this. :-) -------------------------------- > > Magga nanas are ready to erupt at any moment. Watch out! :-) -------------------------------- Howard LOL! ------------------------------ > > Regards, > Swee Boon > > ===================== 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) 51589 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Tue Oct 18, 2005 9:21am Subject: Re: Balancing the mental factors of enlightenment [was The Crying Baby Strategy ] buddhistmedi... Dear Andrew - Thank you for replying to my request ; the list of the seven dyads is exactly what I wanted. Thank you very much. Andrew: Number 7 looks interesting. Any ideas on exactly what it means? Anyone? Tep: The first six dyads tell me that we sink by way of certain defilements or (wrong) views, and get swept way by way of other defilements or (wrong) views. One way or another, we lose. The seventh dyad tells me that volitional formations, which are neither defilement nor wrong views, also are harmful. Even wholesome (kusala) volitional formations can sweep us away (from Nibbana). Only supramundane volitional formations are an exception. I only can give my interpretation without guaranteeing its accuracy. Regards, Tep ====== --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Andrew" wrote: > (snipped) > > The 7 dyads are: > 1. 'halting' by way of defilements, one sinks; 'straining' by way of > volitional formations, one gets swept away. > 2. by way of craving and views, one sinks; by way of other > defilements, one gets swept away. > 3. by way of craving, one sinks; by way of views, one gets swept away. > 4. by way of the eternalist view, one sinks; by way of the > annihilationist view, one gets swept away. > 5. by way of slackness, one sinks; by way of restlessness, one gets > swept away. > 6. by way of devotion to sensual pleasures, one sinks; by way of > devotion to self-mortification, one gets swept away. > 7. by way of all unwholesome volitional formations, one sinks; by way > of all mundane wholesome volitional formations, one gets swept away. 51590 From: "htootintnaing" Date: Tue Oct 18, 2005 11:47am Subject: Re: [dsg] Conditions Part 20 - Dissociation Condition (vippayutta-paccaya) htootintnaing --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "nidive" wrote: > > Hi TG, > > > Excellent. Thank you. Looks like you're right. And yet also > > contact is the meeting of the 3 ... eye, form, consciousness; for > > eye contact for example. > > Let me ask you...if the meeting of these three is name. And two > > of the three (or at least one of the three) appears to be form, > > does that indicate that the argument that name and form have to be > > separate things is wrong? Thanks. > > In my understanding, rupa comes into being in dependence on nama and > nama comes into being in dependence on rupa. > > They go hand in hand with each other and can never really be > "separate" from each other even though they are not the same things. > > Regards, > Swee Boon ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Dear Swee Boon, As soon as reborn in aruupa bhuumi ruupa are left and it sounds like separated. With respect, Htoo Naing 51591 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Tue Oct 18, 2005 3:14pm Subject: Re: The All: //now as we speak?// kenhowardau Hi Anthony, You wrote: ----------------- > I have a question related to "The All" in the Sabba Sutta >It seems logical that things, mostly suffering, are happening in the world //as we speak// even if we are not sensing or thinking about them. > ------------------------------------------------- I suspect you have missed the point of the sutta. It is not saying the things that are happening in the world exist only when we are thinking about them, and when we are not thinking about them they do not exist. It is saying that things that are happening in the world do not exist at any time: in reality, there are only dhammas. The meaning of the sutta is missed when the wrong translation is given for the last couplet, "manayatana and dhammayatana." This should be translated as "mind and mind object." It should not be translated (as ATI does) as, "mind and ideas." If ideas were included in the All, then pannatti (and papanca) would be just as real as anything. Or, to put it another way, dhammas would be just as unreal as pannatti. But ideas are not included in the All. Ultimately, there are only dhammas. ------------------------------------------------------------------ A: > Turning the TV news off and on (and off and on) doesn't affect the suffering in Pakistan. Or am I caught up in papanca? -------------------------------------- To the extent that you believe people and places are ultimately real, yes, you are caught up in papanca. :-) Ken H 51592 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Tue Oct 18, 2005 4:15pm Subject: Re: Please teach me about any difference in A. Sujin's approach to Abhidhamma kenhowardau -- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "buddhatrue" wrote: > ...... > In case you were wondering, I did read this post but decided not to > reply. I wrote some replies and then deleted them all because I > thought they would probably just enflame the situation even more. > > But I just wanted you to know that I'm not ignoring you and I > appreciate you telling me how you really feel. > ------------- Thank you James. My little tantrum was quite a performance, wasn't it? Especially as it followed straight after my lecture (to Howard) on how dosa could never be wholesome. :-) Ken H 51593 From: "Andrew" Date: Tue Oct 18, 2005 4:23pm Subject: Re: Balancing the mental factors of enlightenment [was The Crying Baby Strategy ] corvus121 Dear Swee Boon (and Tep, Howard and Ken H) Thanks for your input. All very plausible to me. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "nidive" wrote: > > Hi Andrew T & All, > I am wondering whether "swept away" and "whirled about" have the same > meaning. > > I am thinking there is a difference. Or is this a translation issue? > > Between "sinking" and "being swept away", I don't really see any > difference between the two. I think it might be a translation issue, Swee Boon. According to Bhikkhu Bodhi's notes, the Buddha's reply to the deva was meant to be paradoxical and to elicit a further question from him. So I think the Pali has layers of connotations that I simply can't pick up on. Best wishes Andrew T 51594 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Mon Oct 17, 2005 10:19pm Subject: Blazing Friendliness ... !!! bhikkhu_ekamuni Friends: Making oneself into a Mighty Friend: Friendliness means Goodwill Friendliness means Kindness Friendliness means Helpfulness Friendliness means Assistance Friendliness means Support Friendliness means Benevolence Friendliness means Concern Friendliness means Care Friendliness means Compassion Friendliness means Cooperation Friendliness means Mutual Aid Friendliness means Mutual Advantage Friendliness means Symbiosis Friendliness means Sympathy Friendliness means Basic Trust --- A friend who always lends a hand, a friend both in sorrow and joy, a friend who offers good counsel, a friend who sympathizes too. These are the four kinds of true friends: one who is wise, having understood, will always cherish and serve such friends just as a mother tends her only child. DN III 188 --- As a mother even with her life protects her only child, so let one cultivate immeasurable loving-kindness towards all living beings. --- Bhikkhus, whatever kinds of worldly merit there are, all are not worth one sixteenth part of the release of mind by universal friendliness; in shining, glowing and beaming radiance the release of mind by infinite & endless friendliness far excels & even surpasses them all. Itivuttaka 27 --- He who does not strike nor makes others strike, who robs not nor makes others rob, sharing love with all that live, finds enmity with none. Itivuttaka 22 --- Thus he who both day and night takes delight in harmlessness sharing love with all that live, finds enmity with none. SN I 208 --- When one with a mind of love feels compassion for the entire world -- above, below and across, unlimited everywhere. Jataka 37 --- am a friend of the footless, I am a friend of the bipeds; I am a friend of those with four feet, I am a friend of the many-footed. May not the footless harm me, may not the bipeds harm me, may not those with four feet harm me, and may not those with many feet harm me. AN II 72 --- Among tigers, lions, leopards & bears I lived on the wood. No one was frightened of me, nor did I fear anyone. Uplifted by such universal friendliness I enjoyed the forest. Finding great solace in silent solitude. Suvanna-sama Jataka 540 --- I am a friend and helper to all, I am sympathetic to all living beings. I develop a mind full of love and takes always delight in harmlessness. I gladden my mind, fill it with joy, and make it immovable and unshakable. I develop the divine states of mind not cultivated by simple men. Theragatha. 648-9 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- PS: Please include the word Samahita in any comment, since then will my automatic mail filters pick it up and I will see it & respond!! Bhikkhu Samahita, Sri Lanka. Friendship is the Greatest ... Let there be Calm & Free Bliss !!! 51595 From: "nidive" Date: Tue Oct 18, 2005 5:37pm Subject: Re: Conditions Part 20 - Dissociation Condition (vippayutta-paccaya) nidive Hi Htoo, > > In my understanding, rupa comes into being in dependence on nama > > and nama comes into being in dependence on rupa. > > They go hand in hand with each other and can never really be > > "separate" from each other even though they are not the same > > things. > > Swee Boon > > As soon as reborn in aruupa bhuumi ruupa are left and it sounds like > separated. > Htoo Naing Sariputta said that name-&-form depends on consciousness and consciousness depends on name-&-form. In the arupa jhana realms, it can always be interpreted as name depends on consciousness and consciousness depends on name, without including form. In the sensuous realms, it is like what Sariputta said above. Does this prove the dissociation condition? I don't know. In fact, I really have a vague idea of what it means by dissociation condition. The Buddha never taught it in the suttas anyway. Regards, Swee Boon 51596 From: LBIDD@... Date: Tue Oct 18, 2005 7:13pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Conditions Part 20 - Dissociation Condition (vippayutta-paccaya) lbidd2 Swee Boon: "Does this prove the dissociation condition? I don't know. In fact, I really have a vague idea of what it means by dissociation condition. The Buddha never taught it in the suttas anyway." Hi Swee Boon, Dissociation condition has to do only with a particular difference. It has nothing to do with independence. "Condition" means "dependence". Vism.XVII,95. Material states that assist immaterial states, and immaterial states that assist material states by not having sameness of physical basis, etc., are 'dissociation condition'. L: Once it is seen that "Swee Boon" is only nama and rupa, or only 5 khandhas, then it can be seen that those 5 khandhas give rise to one another by way of dissociation condition: dependent on the eye and forms, eye consciousness arises by dissociation condition. There is no Swee Boon anywhere. Larry 51597 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Tue Oct 18, 2005 9:23pm Subject: Re: e-Card from Delhi (was, e-Card from Benares (was, Question for A. Sujin)) buddhatrue Hi Jon and India Travelers, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: > > Hi James and All > > Thanks for this, James. I've passed on to Lodewijk your hello. James: Thank you. Now tell him that he better stick close to Nina or he is going to get a spanking! ;-)) > > All, I'm glad to report that Sarah is fully recovered now and is in > good spirits. James: That is very good to hear! Sarah so sick that she can't write posts almost gave me a heart attack! (Of course, just more dosa...moha...blah, blah, blah ;-)) > > We've just finished the actual pilgrimage part of the trip, having > spent a memorable morning yesterday in the Jetavanna Grove at > Savatthi, where the Buddha spent so many years of his life. Very > peaceful, very inspiring, and a good venue for discussion. Last > night was spent at Lucknow, and this morning we flew to Delhi. > After arriving we visited the site marking the place where the > Satipatthana Sutta was deliverd (to the people of Kuru). James: Wow! That sounds awesome! Jon, you could write travel brochures! ;-)) I almost want to sign up...and then I remember that it is India and I have some reservations. > > Nina told us about a 'daily life' incident that happened at > Lumbini. When the group began the formal walk around the holy site, > Nina could not find Loewijk. This was a condition for anxiety and > some distress, as they had agreed to stick together at each place, > since this could be their last trip together. Nina remarked how, > despite knowing that dosa arose, how difficult it is to know that > dosa as just a dhamma, not 'my dosa'. (Nina may add more when she > comes back on line.) James: LOL! How cute! Tell Nina and Loewijk that I once got lost on a guided tour of Italy. We were in a crowded area and the crowd surged around me and I got cut off from the group. It was very scary! So, Loewijk might have been just as frightened as Nina. Anyway, I had to borrow a stranger's cell phone to call my tour director to come and get me. They threatened to put a leash on me after that! LOL! > > Appreciating the luxury of wireless broadband in our hotel room > (especially after the frustration of not getting connected in our > room in Lucknow last night), instead of dingy internet cafes. > Unfortunately, little time to enjoy the other luxuries of our fine > hotel, as we have an early start tomorrow for the flight to Srinagar. James: So glad you got a respite. Sounds like a nice hotel. Hmmmm...maybe India isn't all bad?? ;-)) > > Regards to all > > Jon Metta, James 51598 From: TGrand458@... Date: Tue Oct 18, 2005 6:33pm Subject: Re: [dsg] The All: //now as we speak?// TGrand458@... In a message dated 10/18/2005 8:10:09 A.M. Mountain Daylight Time, upasaka@... writes: Hi, Antony (and Sarah, and all) - In a message dated 10/18/05 6:57:38 AM Eastern Daylight Time, antony272b@... writes: > Dear Howard, Sarah and Group, > > I have a question related to "The All" in the Sabba Sutta (I did look > up the Useful Posts): > The Blessed One said, > "What is the All? > Simply the eye &forms, > ear &sounds, > nose &aromas, > tongue &flavors, > body &tactile sensations, > intellect &ideas. > This, monks, is called the All. Anyone who would say, 'Repudiating > this All, I will describe another,' if questioned on what exactly > might be the grounds for his statement, would be unable to explain, > and furthermore, would be put to grief. Why? Because it lies beyond > range." > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/samyutta/sn35-023.html > ++++++++ > Antony: This All seems quite limited (e.g. the word "range"). Surely > reality is bigger than this? It seems logical that things, mostly > suffering, are happening in the world //as we speak// even if we are > not sensing or thinking about them. Turning the TV news off and on > (and off and on) doesn't affect the suffering in Pakistan. Or am I > caught up in papanca? > > When I met Sarah and Jon in Sydney city we heard a siren of an > emergency vehicle. I think Sarah said it was just hearing. I thought > there was more to it than that. There were various possible > explanations for the siren e.g. a false alarm. Or Sarah do you mean > that //remembering// the siren //right now// is reality and the > beings involved in causing the siren have moved on in the 10 weeks > since and I am still carrying the siren! > > Is writing this post trying to establish a wise self that, being > outside of it, can comment on The All? > > Thanks / Antony. > > ======================== As I understand it, "the all" refers to everything that can fall within actual experience. Whatever does not so fall, if there is anything, by that very fact "lies beyond range." Whatever alleged things are beyond experience are, pragmatically, dismissible. With metta, Howard Hi Anthony Although Howard's direct experiential analysis may be correct, another way to consider "The All" is -- that it indicates all states that are a "potential field for experience." There is no other potentials then those the Buddha listed ... (or if there are, they are beyond our range/scope as the Buddha states.) TG 51599 From: "Antony Woods" Date: Wed Oct 19, 2005 3:42am Subject: Re: The All: //now as we speak?// antony272b2 Dear Howard, Ken, TG and all, Obviously I haven't been mindful when watching the TV or surfing the net. As a result dosa has arisen (Ayya Khema said that "we can only fear what we hate"). Thanks for the reminder to refer everything to direct experience rather than have assumptions (such as materialism) about what does or doesn't lie behind my experience. I'll probably have further questions after practising with this. Thanks again / Antony.