52000 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Sun Oct 30, 2005 8:54pm Subject: No Nostalgia ... !!! bhikkhu_ekamuni Friends: Focus on the Present... The Past is Not Real! The forest monks do not lament over the past, they neither yearn for what has yet to come, they just maintain themselves here in the present, therefore is their appearance so calm & serene! Samyutta Nikaya I, 5 Let go of the past, relinquish of the future, stay in the present, and cross over to the further shore of all becoming & existence! With mind wholly liberated & released, you shall never return to birth & death! Dhammapada 348 The past should neither be longed for nor dwelled in and the future neither desired, searched nor urged; what is past, not real anymore, is dead & gone, and the future, not real now, have yet to come! Majjhima Nikaya III, 131 Whatever happened in the past is quite irrelevant now! The melancholic longing for a Past, that never can nor will return, is therefore just futile masochism! Let the past be past, let it go, relinquish it fully... Let the future come as it may come! Don't push it! Remain mentally right here in the present: Aware! -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 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 !!! <...> 52001 From: Bhikkhu samahita Date: Sun Oct 30, 2005 9:59pm Subject: Yes and No ... bhikkhu_ekamuni Friend D. wrote: >incorrect judgment which cause ignorance, is the primordial cause of suffering. Indeed. Ignorance is the deepest root of suffering. >We can conclude, that the 12 sources NOT are the cause of suffering, That is too fast a conclusion since, as you maybe well know: Ignorance => mental construction => consciousness => name-&-form => THE 6 SENSES !!! => CONTACT (with 6 Objects) => feeling => craving => clinging => becoming => birth => ageing, decay & death => SUFFERING!!! Ignorance is the root cause of Suffering... The 12 sense sources are remote causes of Suffering! The intermediate media, through which ignorance acts, in the causal chain of dependent origination of Pain! PS: In this Dhamma the Buddha is the ultimate authority & reference... Vasubandhu, Nagarjuna, Buddhaghosa etc. are just "commentators" !!! May all beings be calmed and relinquish their views Friendship is the Greatest ... Bhikkhu Samahita, Sri Lanka. <...> 52002 From: Bhikkhu samahita Date: Sun Oct 30, 2005 10:07pm Subject: Old & New Kamma ... bhikkhu_ekamuni Friend Swee Boon (nidive) quite wisely wrote: >The eye by itself is "passive" dukkha. >Forms by itself is "passive" dukkha. The eye & the forms are Old Kamma ... !!! (namely prior cravings for eye & forms) manifesting their results (vipaka) now. >Delight for the eye is "active" dukkha. >Delight for forms is "active" dukkha. Indeed thereby creating new craving & kamma resulting in future becoming with manifestation of new eyes & new forms & new cravings, & dissolutions, & death again! Friendship is the Greatest ... Bhikkhu Samahita, Sri Lanka. <...> 52003 From: "Leo" Date: Sun Oct 30, 2005 11:51pm Subject: Meditations and your room leoaive Hi Some time ago I was asking: what can I do with my room for more meditative condition. I was told that it should be empty and clean. Later, it was a talk on earplugs. I was reading and doing my research and I found it is very good idea to soundproof your room. There are many companies making soundproof boards and materials for schools, churches, businesses and so on. I found also some articles: how to soundproof your apartment. So I beleive it is very helpfull for meditation, where it can be together with some buddhist paintings and casinas. With metta Leo 52004 From: "Jean" Date: Mon Oct 31, 2005 0:59am Subject: [dsg] Re: What's the meaning of Maha-Paccariya? jean_5004 Dear Sarah, I'm from Taiwan/native speaker of Chinese. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > > Dear Jean, > > I wouldn't have known you were not a native speaker of English. Where are > you from? > > --- Jean wrote: > > I appreciate your kindness and sweet information/summary so much. I > > have found out the book--'The Pali Literature of Ceylon' today at > > the library of my institute (Chung-Hwa Institute of Buddhist > > Studies, Taiwan). And I am trying to read the details. > ... > S: They must have a good library. In my version, it's on p93, the chapter > on 'Buddhaghosa'. I gave Nina a copy of this in India too and knew it > contained the details, but couldn't check easily until return. > > Someone was posting here before from the institute in Taiwan that > publishes free Dhamma books....I forget if it's connected. > .... > > Until now, because of my poor English, there is one sentence I > > donnot really understand--"Mahaa-paccarii means 'Great Raft' and was > > so called 'because it was composed on a raft somewhere in Ceylon'." > > Could you explain "because it was COMPOSED ON a RAFT " more? > > Is "raft" something like boat? Why/How the "Mahaa-paccarii" composed > > on a raft? Thank you very much! > .... > S: Composed on a raft means that it was written/compiled by the author > whilst sitting on a raft. Yes, a raft is like a boat - probably logs of > wood tied together like a simple fishing boat. Anything I say is > speculation too. Remember some of the Tsunami survivors who made very > simple rafts out of logs and survived for days? > .... J:It sounds very interesting! I couldn't image that an Atthakathaa, a great work, was written/compiled by the author whilst sitting on a raft! I always think it must be compiled by some persons & costed a long period...By the way, I checked the book ""ì•û?Š"`•§"T‚ÌŒ¤ ‹† "(The research of the Texts of the South traditional Buddhism.?¨ It's my translation.)by Makoto Nagai in Japanes(1936), it gave the same explaination as you mentioned above. > > > > I am writing my thesis of master's degree. It is about the money > > rules of Bhikkhu. I tried to read/translate(into Chinese) some parts > > of Samantapaasaadikaa, that's why I met "mahaapaccarii". I am > > interested in Vinaya, because it is the base of practicing dhamma. > > And I think the more we understand Vinaya,the better we can be a > > upaasaka/upaasikaa and kappiya kaaraka, even one day to be a > > monk/nun of character. > ... > S: You must be able to read Pali and Chinese then? Very impressive. I'd > like to see the Samantapaasaadikaa translated into English. When I > mentioned this once to B.Bodhi, he was very surprised that anyone was so > interested. I wrote a series of messages based on the Baahiranidaana, > which is transl into English, concerning the origins of the Abhidhamma and > commentaries. (See 'Useful Posts' under Vinaya Commentary if you're > interested). J:It is a great "FILE"! Thank you for telling me this. > James and others here are also interested in the Vinaya, so please share > any or your research interest and elaborate on your comments above if you > feel inclined to do so. I'd also be interested to read any interesting > bits from the Samantapaasaadikaa that you come across and which we may not > be familiar with. > .... J:In fact,the paragraphs I transl. has transl.into English already by Dhamminda Bhikkhu in his"A Life Free of Money". They contained 10 types and 2 classes of kappiya-kaarakas, the example for explaining the Rupiya samvohara sikkhapada called'the four unallowable bowls' etc.. Reading these, we can know more details on practising the money rules, i.e. nissaggiya paacittiya 18,19,20 & 10 of auxiliary, and prpractise them easier on this modern days both to Bhikkhus and kappiya-kaarakas. Some people maybe think some Bhikkhu Rules has outmoded, because they cause some inconveniences on daily life now. The question here is: Is 'making conveniences for monks/nuns' the purpose of that the Buddha made Rules for Bhikkhus? These are my superficial view until now. And I'm afraid of that I cannot temporarily check the massage frequently. Because I have to spend most of the time to flesh my thesis out and finish it in time as soon as I can from now on. Thank you again for your help. I'll be back soon! metta Jean > > > > Oh!If there is any unpolite expression, please forgive me (and teach > > me the polite one, if you want). Because my English is really > > poor...I belive that you are already conscious of that. Thank you > > again for your help! > ... > S: Quite the contrary.....your messages are most polite:). > > I look forward to hearing more from you. > > Metta, > > Sarah > ======== > 52005 From: "Joop" Date: Mon Oct 31, 2005 1:45am Subject: Re: What has changed in 2500 years? (Was: Did Buddhaghosa formal meditate? jwromeijn Hallo Ken, Phil, all Ken: "The answer has always seemed obvious to me: The people who, in the Buddha's day, were ready for enlightenment (who had little dust in their eyes) have become enlightened and are gone from the world. The only people left today, are those who had quite a lot of dust in their eyes. I have suggested this answer before on DSG without getting much response - for or against - so maybe I am missing something. Maybe the discussion is at a deeper level than I am aware of." Joop: This sounds like a good theorie: connect the spiritual and the scientific way of thinking in a correct way. If it's true, is more difficult to say. Part of the reason of this doubt is that I'm more optimistic about the future of Theravada. That's an indirect reaction to Phil too. Perhaps it's because in my country buddhism is increasing (OK from a half procent to one procent, that's not much) But more important is the consequence of yout idea Ken: it's a pitty - for us - that all those people in fhe Buddha's day got enlightened. There is a kind of spiritual logic for the Bodhisattva Vow of Mahayana: to postpone getting enlightened (not being reborn) till all sentient beings got awakened. Metta Joop PS The next week I live without computer, so I will not read or post So Sarah has more time for a answer on my Nyanaponika question 52006 From: "D." Date: Mon Oct 31, 2005 1:58am Subject: Re: Yes and No ... djimpa2002 --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Bhikkhu samahita wrote: > > Friend D. wrote: > > >incorrect judgment which cause ignorance, is the primordial cause of > suffering. > Indeed. Ignorance is the deepest root of suffering. > > >We can conclude, that the 12 sources NOT are the cause of suffering, > That is too fast a conclusion since, as you maybe well know: > > Ignorance => mental construction => consciousness => name-&-form => > THE 6 SENSES !!! => CONTACT (with 6 Objects) => feeling => craving > => clinging => becoming => birth => ageing, decay & death => SUFFERING!!! > > Ignorance is the root cause of Suffering... > The 12 sense sources are remote causes of Suffering! > The intermediate media, through which ignorance acts, > in the causal chain of dependent origination of Pain! Dear Bikkhu Samahita Indeed, i agree with this kind of presentation. Best wishes Djimpa 52007 From: Bhikkhu samahita Date: Mon Oct 31, 2005 0:55am Subject: Sadhu! bhikkhu_ekamuni Friend sarah abbott wisely wrote: >I think that the more concerned we are with the understanding of the >5 khandhas, the less concerned we are with other idle speculations >about the past and future as well as those (wrongly) based on an idea >of self. Well spoken IMHO : - ] since: What is the core of Suffering ? In short the five Clusters of Clinging ! Friendship is the Greatest ... Bhikkhu Samahita, Sri Lanka. <...> 52008 From: "seisen_au" Date: Mon Oct 31, 2005 3:29am Subject: [dsg] Re: Jhana as a prerequisite for enlightenment seisen_au Hi Sarah (and Htoo) Thanks for the reply, certainly helped clarify the situation for me. > In the PTS translation, the relevant passage of the text of the A-S > itself reads: "(41) By taking each in five ways by division according to > association with jhaana-factors, the unsurpassed consciousness is said to > be fortyfold." Hmm, so by my reckoning, that would mean 30 out of the 40 possible magga and phala cittas are without Sammasankappa (Right Thought / Vitaka)? Any ref. to a 7 Fold Path? Htoo, I'm not sure you accepted the idea of magga citta without Sammasamkappa? If not, could you help me understand why you don't believe this is possible? To my reading the texts seem pretty clear on this point. Thanks Steve 52009 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Mon Oct 31, 2005 4:43am Subject: Re: India Photos buddhatrue Hi Sarah, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > > Btw, James, you'll find Ken H in the group pics there. James: Oh thanks, I hadn't looked carefully at those pictures before. Hope you can help > round up a few other regulars too...more prods perhaps? James: I can try, but there is a lot of resistance. Fellow Members: It's important to remember that the photos aren't a beauty contest or anything, they are just a way to make this impersional Internet a little more personal. (Of course, my photos were done by Glamour Shots! ;-)) just kidding). > > Metta, > > Sarah Metta, James 52010 From: upasaka@... Date: Sun Oct 30, 2005 11:58pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Conditions Part 20 - Dissociation Condition (vippayutta-paccaya) upasaka_howard Hi, Sarah (and Swee Boon) - In a message dated 10/31/05 2:43:42 AM Eastern Standard Time, sarahprocterabbott@... writes: > > Hi Swee Boon &Howard, > > Ignore this if anyone else already replied with the same:) > ... > H:> >"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? > > > SB:> 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. > .... > Sarah: In the context of Paticca Samuppada as in this sutta (SN12:2), nama > refers to the vipaka cetasikas only and in particular, to the vipaka > cetasikas accompanying rebirth consciousness. Hence we read here: "With > the arising of consciousness there is the arising of mentality-materiality > (nama-rupa)......" > > So we always have to look at the context, I think. > ... > SB:> -------------------------------------------------------------------- > >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? > .... > S: This is the same. In the context of D.O. some of the terms used have > particular meanings. For example, vi~n~naa.na (consciousness) here doesn't > refer to all cittas as elsewhere, but to rebirth consciousness and other > vipaka cittas. Rupa refers to material phenomena produced by kamma in this > context. > .... > >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. > ... > S: Even in the suttas, the various terms have to be understood in context. > For example 'bhava' in D.O. has a very specific meaning referring to > present kammic formations and 'sankhara' in D.O. refers to past kammic > formations. In other contexts, their meanings are quite different. It > doesn't mean the Buddha, Sariputta or anyone else 'got it wrong':). > > I hope this helps a little. I think it's an example of just how difficult > the suttas can be to really understand for us. > > Metta, > > Sarah > p.s Swee Boon, I liked the way you quoted the sutta from SN with the > verses between Kamada and the Buddha in response to Antony's doubts. > > Also with yr qu (#50435) regarding which condition 'says that Right View > conditions the other 7 path factors to arise auto-magically', I'd suggest: > > 1. sahajata (conascence condition) by the mental aggregates condition each > other, so here they'd all condition each other > > and in particular: > > 2. sahajata adhipati (conascence predominance condition) which falls under > adhipati condition by which the conditioning state (here right view) > causes and predominates over associated states. > > The analogy is given of the universal monarch who reigns with absolute > sovereignty. There are four predominant dhammas: a) prdominant desire > (chanda), predominant investigating-wisdom (panna), predominant effort > (viriya) and predominant consciousness (citta). Other states don't have > the 'required potency and basic features for carrying out the function of > predominance' (U Narada 'Conditional Relations'). In the growth of > satipatthana, panna 'predominates' or develops more and more as the > 'forerunner'. > > Thx for helping me to reflect further and for your other posts. comments > welcome. > > Metta, > > Sarah ========================== I didn't see this issue as particularly an Abhidhamma vs Sutta distinction, but simply as something that was "interesting". The idea of someone "getting it wrong" was not part of my thinking in this matter. What occurred to me was that this business was related to the content of the Sheaves of Reeds Sutta, with *vi~n~nana as subject and namarupa as object, and I was considering the possibility that there might well be the implication that among namic phenomena, only concomitants to vi~n~nana, and not vi~n~nana itself, might serve as object of vi~n~nana. The section in the Satipatthana Sutta on the "consciousness" foundation, for example, actually doesn't discuss awareness of consciousness per se but of various concomitants to and characteristics of states of consciousness. With metta, Howard * As you know, my perspective is that with regard to dependent origination I view the vi~n~nana/namarupa juncture as the dualizing, subject-object vortex point at which avijja, via sankhara, first expresses itself cognitively. /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) 52011 From: "nidive" Date: Mon Oct 31, 2005 5:39am Subject: Re: Old & New Kamma ... nidive Hi Bhikkhu Samahita, > Friend Swee Boon (nidive) quite wisely wrote: > > >The eye by itself is "passive" dukkha. > >Forms by itself is "passive" dukkha. > The eye & the forms are Old Kamma ... !!! > (namely prior cravings for eye & forms) > manifesting their results (vipaka) now. > > >Delight for the eye is "active" dukkha. > >Delight for forms is "active" dukkha. > Indeed thereby creating new craving & > kamma resulting in future becoming with > manifestation of new eyes & new forms & > new cravings, & dissolutions, & death again! Sharp! Sharp indeed! Discussing the Dhamma with you is such a joy! Regards, Swee Boon 52012 From: "nidive" Date: Mon Oct 31, 2005 8:25am Subject: Re: [dsg] Conditions Part 20 - Dissociation Condition (vippayutta-paccaya) nidive Hi Sarah, > Sarah: In the context of Paticca Samuppada as in this sutta > (SN12:2), nama refers to the vipaka cetasikas only and in > particular, to the vipaka cetasikas accompanying rebirth > consciousness. Hence we read here: "With the arising of > consciousness there is the arising of mentality-materiality > (nama-rupa)......" > So we always have to look at the context, I think. Nothing to fret about, Sarah. We all know that consciousness is really nama. I know the Abhidhamma is very important to you, especially conditions. :-) > p.s Swee Boon, I liked the way you quoted the sutta from SN with the > verses between Kamada and the Buddha in response to Antony's doubts. Thank you. > Also with yr qu (#50435) regarding which condition 'says that Right > View conditions the other 7 path factors to arise auto-magically', > I'd suggest: > > 1. sahajata (conascence condition) by the mental aggregates > condition each other, so here they'd all condition each other > > and in particular: > > 2. sahajata adhipati (conascence predominance condition) which > falls under adhipati condition by which the conditioning state > (here right view) causes and predominates over associated states. > > The analogy is given of the universal monarch who reigns with > absolute sovereignty. There are four predominant dhammas: a) > prdominant desire (chanda), predominant investigating-wisdom > (panna), predominant effort (viriya) and predominant consciousness > (citta). Other states don't have the 'required potency and basic > features for carrying out the function of predominance' (U Narada > 'Conditional Relations'). In the growth of satipatthana, panna > 'predominates' or develops more and more as the 'forerunner'. I thought my question was too challenging that Ken H never replied! I guess I am wrong. :-( And I guess the Buddha was wrong as well. Regards, Swee Boon 52013 From: "matheesha" Date: Mon Oct 31, 2005 8:27am Subject: Re: kamma and its cessation matheesha333 Hi everyone, I found an article by Bikkhu Bodhi detailing the connection between kamma and sankhara so i think that question is more or less resolved to some degree. It said that sankhara in the PS is understood differently from the sankhara in the five aggregates ...or something close to that. I need to get my teeth into it a bit more. Any takers for the other question? Promise I wont bite, scratch or argue. :) metta Matheesha --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "matheesha" wrote: > > Hi everyone, > > "And what are the roots of unskillful things? Greed... aversion... > delusion... These are termed the roots of unskillful things. > > "And what are the roots of skillful things? Lack of greed... lack of > aversion... lack of delusion... These are termed the roots of > skillful things." > > — MN 9 > > The end result of the noble eightfold path is alobha, adosa and > amoha ie the roots of skilful kamma. But yet an arahath does not > produce kamma, even skilful ones, as far as i understand. > > How can we reconcile these two? Any input is appreciated. > > metta > > Matheesha > 52015 From: "htootintnaing" Date: Mon Oct 31, 2005 0:25pm Subject: Re: Jhana as a prerequisite for enlightenment htootintnaing --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Joop" wrote: > > Hallo Htoo Naing > > Thanks for your answers. Most of it is clear and helpful, and no > reason for further discussion. > > But your comment on my sutta-quotes was to diffucult to me, possibly > because of the way of linking between the discursive langguage of the > sutta and the abhidhammic (nearly mathematical) language in your > comment, rich of pali-words. > For example: the Buddha did not make the differentiation rupa-jhana > and arupa-jhana in this stutta-quote. > I just read first jhana --> path to awakening. Can you explain a bit > more easy? > > Metta > > Joop ---------------------------------------------------------------- Dear Joop, Mahaasatipatthaana Sutta say '4 jhaanas are sammaa-samaadhi'. My explanations are that all 4 aruupa jhaanas are also included in that counting. As you said there is language difference (between Sutta and Abhidhamma). I think (this is my opinion) having jhaana is more favourable. It makes 'seeing things as they really are' more clearly. In line with Abhidhamma language 'the exact point of jhaana' is not magga. So that is why I wrote to you a bit different way. With Metta, Htoo Naing 52016 From: "htootintnaing" Date: Mon Oct 31, 2005 0:33pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Jhana as a prerequisite for enlightenment htootintnaing --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "seisen_au" wrote: > > Hi Sarah (and Htoo) > > Thanks for the reply, certainly helped clarify the situation for > me. > > > In the PTS translation, the relevant passage of the text of the A- S > > itself reads: "(41) By taking each in five ways by division > according to > > association with jhaana-factors, the unsurpassed consciousness is > said to > > be fortyfold." > > Hmm, so by my reckoning, that would mean 30 out of the 40 possible > magga and phala cittas are without Sammasankappa (Right Thought / > Vitaka)? Any ref. to a 7 Fold Path? > > Htoo, I'm not sure you accepted the idea of magga citta without > Sammasamkappa? If not, could you help me understand why you don't > believe this is possible? To my reading the texts seem pretty clear > on this point. > > Thanks > Steve ----------------- Dear Steve, I have talked with Nina about this. But Nina held reference while I still argued that there has to be samma-sankappa in all lokuttaraa cittas. I will mention again my opinion here. All lokuttaraa cittas must have sammaa-sankappa. There are 89 cittas. In this classification there is no problem. There are 121 cittas. In this classification there is a problem. There are 40 lokuttaraa cittas. That is 8 lokuttaraa cittas are multiplied by 5 steps of jhaana and all aruupa jhaana are inclusive in 5th ruupa jhaana lokuttaraa cittas. My belief is that when lokuttaraa citta is just going to arise the base (cittas before lokuttaraa cittas) are jhaana. So they are called lokuttaraa jhaana cittas. But they are NOT JHAANA CITTAS. THEY ARE LOKUTTARAA CITTAS. So they all have to have sammaa-sankappa. When it is said that 'vitakka' is not a component of 2nd jhaana and above it is true but for lokuttaraa cittas it is not. With Metta, Htoo Naing 52017 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Mon Oct 31, 2005 1:40pm Subject: Re: Reasons for staying on DSG! (was:Reasons for leaving DSG) buddhatrue Hi Andrew, Andrew: "a bit longer" sounds ominous. (-: James: ;-)) Well, I know that the peace isn't going to last forever; nothing is permanent after all. But, a bit longer peace would be nice. ;-) Andrew: Really, I wasn't trying to spark a storm. James: I'm sure you weren't- I was worried about myself. ;-)) I seem to be the flash point for such "storms" and I don't intend it to happen that way. However, I haven't been shy of controversy before so why start now? Maybe a storm won't brew after all. Andrew: James, the tone of the above is a bit evangelical, don't you think? I know some DSG members have made jokes in the past about "converting" other members, James: No. I sincerely believe that you have the wrong view, but I know that I am not going to be able to change it or straighten it out (Since you also believe I have the wrong view). So, why talk at all? Are we trying to get some kind of exercise by butting our heads together? ;-)) However, when I write to you I know that I am addressing not just you but a larger audience. What I write to you may not benefit you but it may benefit that larger, silent audience. You see, I get e-mails off-list, from lurkers (members who never post), thanking me for my posts and for having the courage to consistently confront KS's philosophy. One of these lurkers even met KS, spent an afternoon with her and her "followers", and agrees with everything I have to say about her- and he asked me to not stop posting. So, am I trying to `convert' people? No. But I am trying to give a voice to the opposition- trying to present an alternative viewpoint. Andrew: but I thought one of the useful things to come out of Phil's recent 'dust up' was how unhelpful and negative it is to put pressure on other members to identify with a 'camp' or 'move' from one 'camp' to another. James: Well, I hate to burst your bubble but there are divided camps in this group. That's just the way it is. There are those who agree with the philosophy of KS and those who don't; and the deciding issue is formal meditation practice. Now, Phil may not like that and complain that he doesn't feel comfortable about questioning any of the points of KS (since he has self-identified as being in that group), but that's just too bad. Those are the dynamics of the group and it would be silly to deny it. Andrew: Perhaps it's better to restrict ourselves to sharing and exploring views with some detachment. James: Do you mean not care? Sorry, I can't do that. I care very much about the dhamma. You can call that attachment or whatever but I do. It is still my raft and I'm not ready to let it go yet- or else I will drown. ;-)) Not only that, I feel a sense of responsibility in regards to the dhamma, to care and to share it with those who are open. As the Buddha said, "Of two people who practice the Dhamma in line with the Dhamma, having a sense of Dhamma, having a sense of meaning — one who practices for both his own benefit and that of others, and one who practices for his own benefit but not that of others — the one who practices for his own benefit but not that of others is to be criticized for that reason, the one who practices for both his own benefit and that of others is, for that reason, to be praised." http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/anguttara/an07- 064.html#both Andrew: Although I'm not a formal meditator, I have advised newbies to the list to try formal meditation out for themselves. I don't see 'my views' as permanent at all. James: So, from the above description by the Buddha, which are you? Are you one who practices for his own benefit and not for others, or do you practice for your own benefit and for others? To not practice meditation, and yet suggest for others to try meditation, seems hypocritical. I guess I am unclear about your value system or what it is you are trying to teach me- since you are, in essence, suggesting that I do what you do or have the same approach that you have. Metta, James 52018 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Mon Oct 31, 2005 2:28pm Subject: Re: Reasons for staying on DSG! (was:Reasons for leaving DSG) buddhatrue Hi Andrew (and Phil), --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "buddhatrue" wrote: > > Andrew: but I thought one of the useful things to come out of > Phil's recent 'dust up' was how unhelpful and negative it is to put > pressure on other members to identify with a 'camp' or 'move' from > one 'camp' to another. > > James: Well, I hate to burst your bubble but there are divided camps > in this group. That's just the way it is. There are those who > agree with the philosophy of KS and those who don't; and the > deciding issue is formal meditation practice. Now, Phil may not > like that and complain that he doesn't feel comfortable about > questioning any of the points of KS (since he has self-identified as > being in that group), but that's just too bad. Those are the > dynamics of the group and it would be silly to deny it. Oh, I forgot to mention: Even though there are two camps in this group, they are not as adversarial as Phil imagines- or I wouldn't remain in this group. Metta, James 52019 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Mon Oct 31, 2005 3:48pm Subject: Re: India Photos buddhistmedi... Hi, Sukin - Thank you again for pointing me to the second photo album. > > Tep, you will see that there is one very nice picture of our moderators > Jon and Sarah, together. ;-) > Yes, Sukin, I saw that "very nice picture" of the kind and peaceful- looking couple. { :>)) Sincerely, Tep ========== 52020 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Mon Oct 31, 2005 3:51pm Subject: Practice/Ken (Was Re: [dsg] Re: incredible indiaMhaanidana) kenhowardau Hi James, KH: > In the world that is > known to ordinary folk - uninstructed in the Dhamma - a coping > mechanism is essential. How else can we justify living in luxury > while others starve? How can we enjoy life's pleasures knowing there > are traumatised children all around us? We can't! Not unless we > pretend the suffering isn't happening or we rationalise it or we find > some other dishonest coping mechanism to shut out the 'awful truth.' James: Some people do that; some people are just selfish; other people are ignorant. ---------------- Yes, but ignorant of what? What kind of non-ignorance would, in your opinion, make it possible for a person to get on with his or her own life while knowing that millions of abused children were living in misery? I think this is an important question. I have my own answers but, without a firm grasp of them, I find this topic difficult to discuss. --------------- KH: > > A noble learner gets on with his life knowing full well that people > are suffering. So, by all conventional wisdom, he must have a coping > mechanism. James: Okay, now you lost me. I thought you just said that the dhamma isn't a coping mechanism (which I agree with), but now you are saying that a 'noble learner', which I assume means a dhamma learner, needs a coping mechanism. You lost me. -------------------- I suspect you wrote that before reading the paragraph that followed. My point was, 'By all CONVENTIONAL wisdom an ariyan must have coping mechanism.' I went on to say " However, the Dhamma is not conventional wisdom." (And therefore there must be some kusala, ultimate reality that performs the equivalent task of a conventional coping mechanism.) ---------------------------------- <. . .> KH: > While a conventional path starts in an > unsatisfactory moment, progresses through various intermediate > moments and ends in a satisfactory moment, the Buddha's path takes > place in a single moment. James: This I don't agree with. The Buddha described his path as "Lovely in the beginning, lovely in the middle, and lovely in the end". Obviously, to me, that demonstrates that the Buddha's path is supposed to progress through stages, not only happen all at once in single mind moments. ----------------------------------- Whether you agree with it or not, I can assure you it is the Dhamma. I am not sure what, exactly, is meant by, "Lovely in the beginning, lovely in the middle, and lovely in the end," but there is no doubt the Buddha taught that every absolute reality exists in the present moment. So, one interpretation might be that the beginning, middle and end of the present moment are lovely if that moment happens to be a Path moment. Another interpretation might be that the Path is composed exclusively of kusala (lovely) moments. This is something I know you agree with, while some other DSG members say that some certain (akusala) moments containing lobha (akusala desire) can form part of the path. But let's not get into that again. :-) ------------------ KH: > > Similarly, if we want to liken the bhikkhu's way to a coping > mechanism, we need a totally new way of understanding that. There is > only the present moment - any coping that is going to be done will > need to be done in the present moment. James: Hmmm...weird idea: single moment coping. :-) ----------------- Yes, but I was trying to make a subtle point, remember? Conventional things such as paths and practices take on weird new meanings when we learn that they they have counterparts in absolute reality - and those counterparts take place in a single moment. So too, the idea of coping [with the knowledge of other people's suffering] must take on a weird new meaning if it, too, it is to be understood as happening in a single moment. Perhaps I confused the issue by bringing in the idea of a paramattha coping mechanism. If you are happy to forget I ever mentioned it, so am I. :-) ----------------------- KH: > > Well, yes, but the word transcendence can have a conventional > meaning (as in 'transcendental meditation' for example). James: That isn't at all what I meant. I meant as a means of gnosis. ----------------------- Yes, but transcendence, or gnosis, as taught by the Buddha is absolutely real - it exists in a single moment. The idea that there is a reality outside the present moment (the loka) contradicts the Dhamma. By saying that gnosis, for example, persists from the past, through the present, to the future is tantamount to saying there is a self. ---------------- <. . .> James: Again, I don't agree. The dhamma does occur in stages according to the Buddha. --------------- Yes it does, but there is only the present moment. If we are familiar with the Buddha's description of the world, we may be able to identify the present moment as, for example, seeing, thinking, or insight. Such moments may be identified even more precisely as, for example, seeing a desirable object, thinking in a wholesome way, or insight at the stage of Stream-entry. ---------------- KH: > > The idea of being good so that we can benefit from our goodness in a future life is dangerous territory. It flirts with the idea of an > abiding self. James: Well, the Buddha taught this very thing in several suttas. He often taught how good behavior will result in a favorable rebirth. I couldn't even give you the suttas because there are hundreds! ---------------- Just to humour me, would you please try to imagine the Dhamma as being descriptive rather than prescriptive? If the Buddha had "described" good behaviour as resulting in favourable rebirth, that would help us to understand the way we exist now - in the human realm. If the Buddha "prescribed" good behaviour as a means of obtaining a favourable rebirth, wouldn't he be teaching something other than 'understanding the present moment?' Ken H 52021 From: "Andrew" Date: Mon Oct 31, 2005 4:00pm Subject: Re: Reasons for staying on DSG! (was:Reasons for leaving DSG) corvus121 Hi James Well, so much for just walking on. (-: Not sure that I should reply, but here goes:- --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "buddhatrue" wrote: > Andrew: James, the tone of the above is a bit evangelical, don't you > think? I know some DSG members have made jokes in the past > about "converting" other members, > > James: No. I sincerely believe that you have the wrong view, but I > know that I am not going to be able to change it or straighten it > out (Since you also believe I have the wrong view). A: Only sometimes. James: So, why talk at > all? Are we trying to get some kind of exercise by butting our > heads together? ;-)) However, when I write to you I know that I am > addressing not just you but a larger audience. What I write to you > may not benefit you but it may benefit that larger, silent > audience. You see, I get e-mails off-list, from lurkers (members > who never post), thanking me for my posts and for having the courage > to consistently confront KS's philosophy. One of these lurkers even > met KS, spent an afternoon with her and her "followers", and agrees > with everything I have to say about her- and he asked me to not stop > posting. So, am I trying to `convert' people? No. But I am trying > to give a voice to the opposition- trying to present an alternative > viewpoint. A: I've read some of your summaries of "KS's philosophy" in the past and not recognised them as things I've ever heard her say (I've listened to some tapes). Which makes me wonder whether you are just boxing at shadows. > Andrew: but I thought one of the useful things to come out of > Phil's recent 'dust up' was how unhelpful and negative it is to put > pressure on other members to identify with a 'camp' or 'move' from > one 'camp' to another. > > James: Well, I hate to burst your bubble but there are divided camps > in this group. That's just the way it is. There are those who > agree with the philosophy of KS and those who don't; and the > deciding issue is formal meditation practice. Now, Phil may not > like that and complain that he doesn't feel comfortable about > questioning any of the points of KS (since he has self-identified as > being in that group), but that's just too bad. Those are the > dynamics of the group and it would be silly to deny it. A: You sound like that American president who said to the world "you're either with us or against us". (-: > Andrew: Perhaps it's better to restrict ourselves to sharing and > exploring views with some detachment. > > James: Do you mean not care? Sorry, I can't do that. I care very > much about the dhamma. You can call that attachment or whatever but > I do. It is still my raft and I'm not ready to let it go yet- or > else I will drown. ;-)) Not only that, I feel a sense of > responsibility in regards to the dhamma, to care and to share it > with those who are open. As the Buddha said, > > "Of two people who practice the Dhamma in line with the Dhamma, > having a sense of Dhamma, having a sense of meaning — one who > practices for both his own benefit and that of others, and one who > practices for his own benefit but not that of others — the one who > practices for his own benefit but not that of others is to be > criticized for that reason, the one who practices for both his own > benefit and that of others is, for that reason, to be praised." > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/anguttara/an07- > 064.html#both A: Can we add the Sallekha Sutta to the list, please: "that one who himself is sinking in the mud should pull out another who is sinking in the mud is impossible ..." James, I'm impressed but skeptical that you are aware of your own mindstates sufficiently to be able to suggest you practice for your own benefit and that of others. Do you make that claim? What was the situation when you called people "dogs" the other week? Were you practising then? "Tough love" I think you called it. Did you mean "practising for the benefit of others"? > Andrew: Although I'm not a formal meditator, I have advised newbies > to the list to try formal meditation out for themselves. I don't > see 'my views' as permanent at all. > > James: So, from the above description by the Buddha, which are you? > Are you one who practices for his own benefit and not for others, or > do you practice for your own benefit and for others? To not > practice meditation, and yet suggest for others to try meditation, > seems hypocritical. I guess I am unclear about your value system or > what it is you are trying to teach me- since you are, in essence, > suggesting that I do what you do or have the same approach that you > have. A: What am I? I am an uninstructed worldling. What's the value of my opinion about whether I practice for myself alone or for others also? You seem to have greater respect for my opinions than I do.(-: I don't want to foist my opinions onto you. I want to express them and get feedback. The feedback I want is about the opinions themselves - not the holder or where the holder stands in relation to other holders. Sorry, but I'm just not going to play the game of us versus them. BTW I *was* into meditation in the past. And who knows about the future? Best wishes Andrew T 52022 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Mon Oct 31, 2005 4:01pm Subject: [dsg] Re: India Photos buddhistmedi... Hi, Sarah - It is very kind of you to write to me. > S: > And Tep, Foo is also American Thai living in Texas and she promises to join us on DSG when she's settled back. Tep: I saw her in the pictures, and I thought she looked like a friend of mine long time ago. I am not sure, but Thailand is a small country. >> Sukin: > > Tep, you will see that there is one very nice picture of our > > moderators Jon and Sarah, together. ;-) > ... Tep: Sukin was right. I was glad to see that picture of you and Jon. I could feel the radiant metta (almost like a radiant energy) from your and Jon's eyes. Warm regards, Tep ====== 52023 From: "Andrew" Date: Mon Oct 31, 2005 4:05pm Subject: Re: Satipatthana - a new book about corvus121 --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Hal" wrote: > > Hi Joop, > > Yes, that's a terrific book. I look forward to hearing more of your > comments about it. It's packed full of references, and as you say, it's > very relevant to the recent discussion here at the forum. Hi Joop and Hal I have a copy of the book too (2004 reprint, softcover). I'm about 75% through it at the moment. It's an impressive scholarly work. Will say more after I've finished and digested it. Best wishes Andrew T 52024 From: "Phil" Date: Mon Oct 31, 2005 4:34pm Subject: Re: What has changed in 2500 years? (Was: Did Buddhaghosa formal meditate? philofillet Hi Joop > Part of the reason of this > doubt is that I'm more optimistic about the future of Theravada. > That's an indirect reaction to Phil too. Perhaps it's because in my > country buddhism is increasing (OK from a half procent to one > procent, that's not much) I can relate to you, Joop, for your sincere hopes for the future of Buddhism. I often wished that I could somehow contribute, somehow, to the Theravadin Dhamma becoming better known in Japan. (Rob K is doing so with a group of his students who are translating one of Nina's books.) But I don't think modernizing Theravada to make it more accessible to people is the way to go. (I think that is what you have proposed or discussed in the past, forgive me if I'm wrong.) We shouldn't change the Buddha's teaching to make it more palatable, I think. For example, if you were to discuss Dhamma with one of the 1% Buddhists you mention above, and if the topic of why bad things happen to good people (for example, children being abused by their parents) came up and you were to tell them that the Buddha taught that this is due to kamma, how do you think it would go down? It would be rejected, I think. But it is the Buddha's teaching. IMO, it is good enough that many people who first come across the Buddha's teaching in more user-friendly terms will gradually come to the true Dhamma. That was the case with me - I started with a bilingual collection of Mahayana sutta excerpts that is left in hotel rooms, and from there to the Zen of Thich Nhat Hahn, and finally to Theravada. So getting closer and closer to the true source as I progressed. It just happened because there were accumulations for it, or perhaps fewer conditioned obstacles to it, or something. I think of a river that flows inland from the sea. If in this simile we take fresh water from upriver as the pure Dhamma and the muddy, salty estuary water as Dhamma mixed with lots of wrong view and well-intentionned misunderstanding and misapplication (for example, as all beginners do, meditating by just sitting and watching the breath, and taking the calm that results as satipatthana or something else profound, such as wisdom), this backward flowing river gradually pulls, gently pulls people toward the true source of Dhamma, but on the way there are so many hindrances and conditioned obstacles to understanding that catch people, that people latch on to out of akusala motivations for Dhamma study such as fear, desire for comfort, desire to be seen as a wise person, etc. Few will have the accumulations in this lifetime, enough detachment, to be drawn by conditions to the heartland of the river, the source of the river. (Maybe this is like the sutta in which a man goes looking for the wood at the heart of the tree, but goes away content with branches, bark, pulp etc or something like that.) The good news, I think, that no matter where people are caught along the way, as long as they have come across Dhamma, they will benefit. That's the beautiful thing. So instead of hoping to move the pure source of Dhamma closer to the mouth of the river where the new Buddhists come in, why not just accept that everyone will respond to a different degree of Dhamma according to their conditions, and leave it at that? Just some thoughts. I do relate to what you're saying, because I've often thought that I wished more people in Japan could benefit from Dhamma. But if I were to (or do someday) try to get it across to them, unlike Rob K I would (will) offer tham a watered-down version, something about using the Brahma-Viharas in a very intentional way, to bring emotional well-being and cultivate more kindness towards strangers (lacking here.) And then, if there were conditions for it, the gentle pull of the true Dhamma would catch them and they would be drawn upriver, if you will. If they aren't drawn upriver, it wasn't meant to be in this lifetime for them. Something like that. Phil 52025 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Mon Oct 31, 2005 4:50pm Subject: Re: kamma and its cessation .. Sankhara buddhistmedi... Hi, Math (and all) - Thank you for your post # 52013. The quest to find clear understandings of "kamma and sankhara" has been mine for a long, long time. So I am glad to participate in a discussion with you -- not as one who knows, but rather as one who wants to know. {:->) Matheesha: It said that sankhara in the PS is understood differently from the sankhara in the five aggregates ...or something close to that. I need to get my teeth into it a bit more. Any takers for the other question? Tep: I know that your first question was : > Math: > The end result of the noble eightfold path is alobha, adosa and > amoha ie the roots of skilful kamma. But yet an arahath does not > produce kamma, even skilful ones, as far as i understand. > How can we reconcile these two? Tep: Unfortunately, the first question is not clear to me (and I will appreciate your help in clarifying it), so I will try to reply to your second question first. The Acariya Buddhaghosa gave an answer to your (first) question, if my understanding is right. Below is what I wrote, using the Visuddhimagga as guidance. Please let me know if you find it confusing or erroneous. On Sankhara ------------------- Sankhara-khandha is the aggregate of 50 cetasika (mental factors or mental concomitants) that condition the citta (mind, consciousnes) into the various states, wholesome and unwholesome. Therefore, it is of utmost importance that we develop true understanding of these mental concomitants by means of careful study and contemplation (anupassana) for eventual abandoning of greed(lobha), aversion (dosa), and delusion(moha). The goal is towards alobha, adosa, and amoha: i.e. achieving greedlessness (alobha) or unselfishness and liberality, hatelessness (adosa) for kindness or goodwill (metta), and undeludedness (amoha) or wisdom (pañña). What is the formation aggregate? " They form the formed(conditioned dhamma), thus they are formations." [Vism XVII, 44] A conditioned dhamma (sankhata) arises when there are supporting factors, or conditions(paccaya). Thus the conditions that come together to form a sankhata dhamma are sankhara khandha, and this includes all karma- formations plus other formations. To `form' here means to bring together supporting factors to perform a function. For example, visual impression (cakkhu-samphassa) arises because of the coming together of three conditions(paccaya): cakkhu, rupa, chakkhu- viññána to make a visual contact. Therefore, cakkhu-samphassa is a sankhara. Chakkhu-vedana is a sankhata since it arises from cakkhu- samphassa as its condition. Often, the term sankhara denotes anything formed and conditioned, and it includes all things whatsoever in the world, i.e. all phenomena of existence. Sometimes it also means 'volitional effort' [see sankhára , Nyanatiloka Buddhist Dictionary]. The mental concomitants vedana and saññá are called citta-sankhara (mental formations) since when they cease the mind is completely tranquilized. Breath is a bodily formation(kaya-sankhara) because breath is a paccaya for the continuity of the body (which is a conditioned dhamma). All cetasika dhamma are sankhara since they form kusala-, akusala- and avyákata (indeterminate) cittas. According to the paticcasamuppada (the Dependent Origination doctrine), there are two kinds of sankhara : (a) formations as ignorance as condition (avijja-paccaya sankhara), and (b) formations given in the text with the word sankhara. For the (a) category there are (i) formations of merit(punna), (ii) of demerit(apunna), (iii) of the imperturbable (anenja), (iv) the bodily formations (kaya-s.), (v) the verbal formations (vaci-s.), and (vi) the mental formations(citta-s.). For the (b) category there are sankhata-sankhara (formations of the conditioned dhamma), abhisankhata-sankhara (kamma-conditioned), abhisankharana- sankhara (forming by kamma), and payoga-abhisankhara (forming by continuing exertion or momentum). Another group of formations that may be thought of as sankhata- sankhara consists of kaya-sankhara = breath, vaci-sankhara = vitakka and vicara, and citta-sankhara = sanna and viññana. All formations have the characteristic of forming. Their function is to accumulate for the purpose of rebirth. To accumulate is to "heap up". They are manifested as volition, and their proximate cause is ignorance(avijja). Avijja-pacaya-sankhara is known as "Cetana 29". Here puññabhisankhara ( 'meritorious karma-formations') consists of 13 kusala cetana (8 kamavacara-kusala-cetana + 5 rupavacara- kusala cetana); apuññabhisankhara (`demeritorious karma- formations') consists of 12 akusala-cetana; aneñjabhisankhara (`imperturbable karma-formations') consists of 5 arupavacara-kusala cetana that arise by means of development (bhavana). So these 3 abhisankhara together make Cetana 29 (i.e. 13 + 12 + 4 = 29). All the 29 volitions are the mental formations(citta-sankhara) when they arise in the mind-door (mano-dvara) without originating either bodily intimation or verbal intimation. {end of Tep's essay} Respectfully, Tep ===== --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "matheesha" wrote: > > Hi everyone, > > I found an article by Bikkhu Bodhi detailing the connection between > kamma and sankhara so i think that question is more or less resolved > to some degree. It said that sankhara in the PS is understood > differently from the sankhara in the five aggregates ...or something > close to that. I need to get my teeth into it a bit more. > > Any takers for the other question? Promise I wont bite, scratch or > argue. :) > > metta > > Matheesha 52026 From: LBIDD@... Date: Mon Oct 31, 2005 4:53pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: kamma and its cessation lbidd2 Matheesha: "Hi everyone, "And what are the roots of unskillful things? Greed... aversion... delusion... These are termed the roots of unskillful things. "And what are the roots of skillful things? Lack of greed... lack of aversion... lack of delusion... These are termed the roots of skillful things." — MN 9 The end result of the noble eightfold path is alobha, adosa and amoha ie the roots of skilful kamma. But yet an arahath does not produce kamma, even skilful ones, as far as i understand. How can we reconcile these two?" Hi Matheesha, The end result of the noble eightfold path is nibbana. The wholesome root consciousnesses _are_ the noble eighfold path. So the end result of the wholesome root consciousnesses is nibbana, aka arahantship. Larry 52027 From: "Phil" Date: Mon Oct 31, 2005 5:19pm Subject: Vipaka paradox philofillet Hi all This is something that comes to mind occasionally for me and strikes me as kind of paradoxical - so there must be a misunderstanding. We know that pleasant sense experiences are the result (vipaka) of kusala (wholesome) kamma, and unpleasant ones the result of akusala (unwholesome.) Yet it seems to me that it is the unpleasant experiences that wake me up more to the Noble Truths, while all the pleasant experiences just drug me and drag me deeper into the binds of samsara. We know the suttas in which Mara entices and hooks us through sense objects and how "he who delights in the khandas delights in suffering" etc, but the objects that are pleasant and therefore likely to be delightful and therefore dangerous arise as the result of wholesome kamma, if I undestand correctly... So it seems at first glance that wholesome kamma ends up trapping us rather than helping us towards liberating us, while unwholesome kamma creates unpleasant vipaka that helps us to wake up. I guess I am oversimplifying the idea of "pleasant" and "unpleasant" vipaka. Any thoughts on that? Thanks in advance. Phil 52028 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Mon Oct 31, 2005 5:28pm Subject: Re: kamma and its cessation .. Sankhara / a typo buddhistmedi... Hi, all - There was an error in my earlier message : > The Acariya Buddhaghosa gave an answer to your (first) question, if > my understanding is right. Please change "first" to "second". Thanks. Sincerely, Tep ======== --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Tep Sastri" wrote: > > > Hi, Math (and all) - > (snipped) > > How can we reconcile these two? > > Tep: Unfortunately, the first question is not clear to me (and I will > appreciate your help in clarifying it), so I will try to reply to your second question first. > > The Acariya Buddhaghosa gave an answer to your (first) question, if > my understanding is right. Below is what I wrote, using the > Visuddhimagga as guidance. Please let me know if you find it > confusing or erroneous. > > On Sankhara > ------------------- (snipped) 52029 From: LBIDD@... Date: Mon Oct 31, 2005 9:25pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Vipaka paradox lbidd2 Phil: "Yet it seems to me that it is the unpleasant experiences that wake me up more to the Noble Truths, while all the pleasant experiences just drug me and drag me deeper into the binds of samsara." Hi Phil, For me, the only glimpses of insight I have had were into the impermanence and emptiness of pleasant sense experiences. But this says nothing about kamma itself, craving and clinging, where self-view lies. Logic dictates that insight into the impermanence and emptiness of pleasant sense experiences will eventually work its way back to eradicate craving and clinging, but so far it hasn't. I think because there have been only glimpses here and there. Larry 52030 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Mon Oct 31, 2005 10:03pm Subject: Re: What has changed in 2500 years? (Was: Did Buddhaghosa formal meditate? kenhowardau Hi Phil, ---------- > Ken wrote : > I suspect the Buddhist community in Buddhaghosa's day > (and before) > > had a different preconception of the Dhamma. Today, if you told a > > Buddhist, "In truth and reality, there are no beings here, there > are > > only conditioned dhammas," he would not know what you were talking > > about. I think, in earlier times he would have known exactly what > you > > were talking about. > > > I think all Buddhists today understand this at least in theory, > don't they? I mean it's Dhamma 101. ----------- Well thank you very much, Phil, that has done a lot for my self- esteem: I obviously failed and repeated Dhamma 101 26 times! :-) Quite seriously, I don't remember having any understanding of conditioned dhammas until I joined DSG. I thought mindfulness of the body meant mindfulness of the conventional body, and I did not know the difference between concepts and realities. I shouldn't assume everyone else was an equally poor Dhamma student: I know a lot of Buddhists are ignorant of conditioned dhammas (as distinct from conventional realities), but in many cases that is because they have chosen to reject the very notion of them. Ken H 52031 From: "seisen_au" Date: Mon Oct 31, 2005 10:41pm Subject: Re: Jhana as a prerequisite for enlightenment seisen_au Hi Htoo, All, Thanks for your reply. Below are some quotes and comments. > Dear Steve, > My belief is that when lokuttaraa citta is just going to arise the > base (cittas before lokuttaraa cittas) are jhaana. So they are called > lokuttaraa jhaana cittas. But they are NOT JHAANA CITTAS. THEY ARE > LOKUTTARAA CITTAS. > > So they all have to have sammaa-sankappa. > > When it is said that 'vitakka' is not a component of 2nd jhaana and > above it is true but for lokuttaraa cittas it is not. > > With Metta, > > Htoo Naing I found a section in the PTS translation of the Atthasalini which seems to address these points. "Here is the discourse in regular succession: *The Path arisen* in one of dry insight by the fixing of insight, and the Path arisen without making a base of the jhana of one who has acquired the attainment, and the Path produced by making a base of the first jhana and contemplating particular conditioned dhammas (other than the basic jhana) *are of the first jhana*. In all of them there are seven Wisdom-factors, eight Path-factors, five Jhana-factors." (Atthasaalini, Magga Citta, p.307) I believe this passage shows that the `The Path arisen' is 'of the First Jhana' for the 3 types mentioned. "In the five-fold method, in the Paths produced by making a base of the Second, Third, Forth Jhanas, the Jhana in due course has four, three, two factors. But in all the Paths there are seven Path- factors, in the Forth Jhana six Wisdom-factors." (Atthasaalini, Magga Citta, p.307). This passage seems to confirm the possibility of a Seven-Fold Path. My understanding is that by making(lokiya)jhana a base for Magga citta, the Magga citta that arises is a lokuttarajjhana citta corresponding to the jhana used as the base. Corrections welcome Steve 52032 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Mon Oct 31, 2005 10:01pm Subject: Mistaken Refence ... !!! bhikkhu_ekamuni Friends: The Sense Sources are a 'Representation...' & not a 'Reality...'! The need to control & master the senses is obvious, since it is the very ability to sense that enables both all the pleasant & painful experiences of this world. However, paradoxically, it is exactly this spontaneous and quite impulsive rush after the immediate, but only short-lived satisfaction of pleasant sense reaction, that is both the seed & root of much suffering, created by delayed side-effects. Thus do the urge after momentary pleasant feeling, create only lust and greed. Thus do the urge away from brief painful feeling, create only hate and aversion. Thus do the urge after absence of neutral feeling, create neglect and ignorance. These three roots of Suffering & Evil, are always lying hidden and latent within the untrained mind: Ignorance is obscuring the true nature of things making them only appear as lasting, agreeable and ownable. Hate induces bad aversion towards very advantageous phenomena such as learning, morality, meditation, & friendship just because these may once have been associated with a brief unlikable feeling! These instantaneous reactions overwhelm the untrained mind & make it act contrary to it's own & other's interest: It rush ahead in the hunt for immediate gratification, oblivious to the fact, that the paradoxical fruit of sense delight is much delayed, yet inevitable misery, namely, infinitely repeated rebirth, ageing, sickness & death! On a much deeper & more subtle level do the sense sources create a misapprehended pointing, by mistaking a mere sensation for a true reference to a world really existing "out there": 'I see the world therefore do it exist!', which is as absurd as postulating: 'I saw the phenomena on a film therefore is this phenomena real' insofar as all & any sensation only is a 'inner' mentally created 'film' or 'representation' of some form of contact between a 'sensor' and it's sensitivity for a given object as e.g. an 'idea'... In much the same way do the 5 clusters of clinging induce a misapprehended pointing, by mistaken reference to an assumed & constructed entity 'Ego', 'I' or 'me' "In here", while all there really is, is a five-fold flux of changing qualities, relentlessly arising & ceasing right there, where they momentarily arised! Right there do the untrained mind also create & reinforce the basic root of this abysmal conceit: "I Am" or "I exists" !!! Only the Buddha's explain: Sabbe Sankhara Anicca! All constructions vanish! Sabbe Sankhara Dukkha! All construction is miserable! Sabbe Dhamma Anatta! All states are self-less! -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 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 !!! <...> 52033 From: "Hal" Date: Tue Nov 1, 2005 1:27am Subject: Re: Mistaken Refence ... !!! bardosein Ven. Samahita, Thank you for this very helpful contribution, that clearly illustrates how both greed and delusion give rise to wrong view and conceit while mutually reinforcing each other. I particularly liked how you delt with the "mistaken reference" at the more subtle level of perception itself; namely, the mistaken notion of some detached witness/observer spanning the perception of ever changing events. What must be seen and known directly, not merely acknowledged, is the radical discontinuity of consciousness itself. Through the mental training prescribed by the Buddha, this reality can be known, cutting the root of all "mistaken references," and the ever increasing spiral of delusion, greed and wrong view. Hal 52034 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Nov 1, 2005 2:03am Subject: ‘Cetasikas' study corner 297 Aversion-dosa (f) sarahprocter... Dear Friends, 'Cetasikas' by Nina van Gorkom http://www.vipassana.info/cetasikas.html http://www.zolag.co.uk/ Questions, comments and different views welcome;-) ========================================== [Ch18 - Aversion (dosa)] We may not have dosa of the intensity to motivate the committing of akusala kamma patha, but even dosa which is of a lesser degree can condition unpleasant behaviour and speech. We can easily, before we realize it, utter harsh speech to someone else. When there is dosa, even if it is a slight annoyance, there is no loving kindness, no consideration for other people’s feelings. When, for example, unexpected visitors arrive at a time we do not want to be disturbed, we may be annoyed. At such a moment there is mental rigidity, we are unable to adapt ourselves to a new situation with kindness and hospitality. The Book of Analysis (Chapter 17,§833) gives us a short but very effective reminder in a section in which pairs of realities are summed up (Twofold Summary): * "…Absence of softness and inhospitably." * This statement is meant as a reminder to be aware of realities of daily life. How true it is that inhospitably goes together with absence of softness, with mental rigidity. However, although there may be aversion at first when we are, for example, disturbed by unexpected visitors, right understanding can change our attitude. We may see the disadvantage of being inconsiderate to others and of absence of softness, of gentleness. Then we can receive our guests with kindness and we can see for ourselves that there is no longer mental rigidity and harshness, but pliancy of mind. ***** [Aversion (dosa) to be contd] Metta, Sarah ====== 52035 From: Bhikkhu samahita Date: Tue Nov 1, 2005 2:20am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Mistaken Refence ... !!! bhikkhu_ekamuni Friend Hal wisely wrote: >What must be seen and known directly, is the >radical discontinuity of consciousness itself. Well spoken. Sadhu! It arises & ceases right there ... Just a flicker in a mirror ... Never to return ... Not mine ... Pain ... : - ] Friendship is the Greatest ... Bhikkhu Samahita, Sri Lanka. 52036 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Tue Nov 1, 2005 3:24am Subject: Practice/Ken (Was Re: [dsg] Re: incredible indiaMhaanidana) buddhatrue Hi Ken H., Ken H: Whether you agree with it or not, I can assure you it is the Dhamma. I am not sure what, exactly, is meant by, "Lovely in the beginning, lovely in the middle, and lovely in the end," but there is no doubt the Buddha taught that every absolute reality exists in the present moment. James: There is no need to tell me "The Buddha taught this and the Buddha taught that" – SHOW ME! Show me exactly where he taught what you are describing. I have read the Buddha teaching the Noble Eightfold Path as mundane and supermundane, but I haven't read him teaching the Eightfold Path as a single moment. How could anyone cultivate a single moment???? You write some other interesting things in this post but I can't respond unless we can overcome this hurdle. Metta, James 52037 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Tue Nov 1, 2005 3:44am Subject: Re: Reasons for staying on DSG! (was:Reasons for leaving DSG) buddhatrue Hi Andrew, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Andrew" wrote: > > Hi James > > Well, so much for just walking on. (-: Not sure that I should reply, > but here goes:- Okay. Whatever. I am too tired to continue this dialogue with you. It is just getting too personal and pointless. With tired metta, James 52038 From: shiang Wang Date: Tue Nov 1, 2005 4:21am Subject: RE; a short Hello! dnirodha Dear DSG Dhamma Friends: I am glad to learned this group from my dhammamittas who.joined the group recently. This will be a great source for getting help and consulting in pali and Buddha's teaching in Theravada tradition. I am a studend of CHIBS, Taiwan too. My thesis is to find out if the 4 appaman cetovimutti (also called brahmavihara) lead to nibbana in the teaching of Early Buddhism, how and why. The text will be Pali Nikayas and Chinese Agamas. Since I am just starting to proceed my thesis, you are welcome to share with me If you have any comments or material about this topic. I am glad to join this group, and nice to meet all of you. with metta Wendy Wang 52039 From: upasaka@... Date: Mon Oct 31, 2005 11:54pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Vipaka paradox upasaka_howard Hi Larry & Phil - In a message dated 11/1/05 12:25:46 AM Eastern Standard Time, LBIDD@... writes: > Hi Phil, > > For me, the only glimpses of insight I have had were into the > impermanence and emptiness of pleasant sense experiences. But this says > nothing about kamma itself, craving and clinging, where self-view lies. > Logic dictates that insight into the impermanence and emptiness of > pleasant sense experiences will eventually work its way back to > eradicate craving and clinging, but so far it hasn't. I think because > there have been only glimpses here and there. > > Larry > ======================== As to your point, Phil, about the apparent paradox of wholesome action leading to pleasant experience, but unpleasant experience leading to results that are ultimately more useful, I have the following comments: 1) Pleasant experience can be craved or not, and unpleasant experience can be reacted to aversively or not, depending on one's particular inclinations. So which is ultimately more useful or harmful depends on one's specific makeup. 'Pleasant' means merely "pleasant," not "good," and 'unpleasant' means merely "unpleasant," and not "bad." 2) Ones own kamma is not the sole determiner of the sort of experience that comes to one. 3) This matter is likely more one of irony and misattribution than of paradox. 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) 52040 From: "Hal" Date: Tue Nov 1, 2005 5:42am Subject: Re: Satipatthana - a new book about bardosein Hi Andrew, Good to hear you're also enjoying Ven. Analayo's commentary! Yes please, do post more on this later. Regards, Hal 52041 From: "nidive" Date: Tue Nov 1, 2005 8:11am Subject: Re: Vipaka paradox nidive Hi Phil, > So it seems at first glance that wholesome kamma ends up trapping > us rather than helping us towards liberating us, while unwholesome > kamma creates unpleasant vipaka that helps us to wake up. This is the way it is for one who discerns rightly! This is the First Noble Truth of Dukkha ... Since there is no such thing as the First Noble Truth of Sukha. Regards, Swee Boon 52042 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Tue Nov 1, 2005 8:51am Subject: Re: Vipaka paradox buddhatrue Hi Phil and Howard, Phil: We know that pleasant sense experiences are the result (vipaka) of kusala (wholesome) kamma, and unpleasant ones the result of akusala (unwholesome.) James: I think I recall a conversation with you once where you said something along these lines. You wrote that everything we experience is the result of good or bad kamma (vipaka). I disagreed with you then and you replied that I didn't know "basic Buddhism". ;-)) I let the issue drop because kamma is too complicated to get into and we were discussing a great many items. However, Howard's reply to you is spot on! I would also recommend the article "The Theory of Karma" from which this relevant passage it taken: "Refuting the erroneous view that "whatsoever fortune or misfortune experienced is all due to some previous action", the Buddha said: "So, then, according to this view, owing to previous action men will become murderers, thieves, unchaste, liars, slanderers, covetous, malicious and perverts. Thus, for those who fall back on the former deeds as the essential reason, there is neither the desire to do, nor effort to do, nor necessity to do this deed, or abstain from this deed." It was this important text, which states the belief that all physical circumstances and mental attitudes spring solely from past Karma that Buddha contradicted. If the present life is totally conditioned or wholly controlled by our past actions, then certainly Karma is tantamount to fatalism or determinism or predestination. If this were true, free will would be an absurdity. Life would be purely mechanistic, not much different from a machine…" http://www.buddhanet.net/e-learning/karma.htm James: BTW, where did you get the erroneous view that everything we experience is vipaka? (KS?) I'm just curious. Metta, James 52043 From: "matheesha" Date: Tue Nov 1, 2005 9:32am Subject: [dsg] Re: kamma and its cessation matheesha333 Hi Larry, > The end result of the noble eightfold path is nibbana. The wholesome > root consciousnesses _are_ the noble eighfold path. So the end result of > the wholesome root consciousnesses is nibbana, aka arahantship. > M: Yes, agreed. I think I need to clarify my question. If arahaths have nothing but wholesome roots, why dont they create kusala kamma? (The noble eightfold path has been called the path to the cessation of kamma.) metta Matheesha --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, LBIDD@w... wrote: > > Matheesha: "Hi everyone, > "And what are the roots of unskillful things? Greed... aversion... > delusion... These are termed the roots of unskillful things. > "And what are the roots of skillful things? Lack of greed... lack of > aversion... lack of delusion... These are termed the roots of skillful > things." > — MN 9 > The end result of the noble eightfold path is alobha, adosa and amoha ie > the roots of skilful kamma. But yet an arahath does not produce kamma, > even skilful ones, as far as i understand. > How can we reconcile these two?" > > Hi Matheesha, > > The end result of the noble eightfold path is nibbana. The wholesome > root consciousnesses _are_ the noble eighfold path. So the end result of > the wholesome root consciousnesses is nibbana, aka arahantship. > > Larry > 52044 From: "matheesha" Date: Tue Nov 1, 2005 10:03am Subject: Re: kamma and its cessation .. Sankhara / a typo matheesha333 Hello Tep, Thank you Tep. That was nice to read and quite impressive. I wonder if you have seen this essay by Bhikku Bodhi called 'Anicca vata sankhara'. It paints an incredible picture of the whole of the buddhist insight in a nutshell, including the relationship between kamma and sankhara. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/bodhi/bps-essay_43.html I wonder if it is possible at all to see the action of kamma on perpetuating the mind stream. That would be a very very interesting thing to be able to experience if possible at all (as ludicrous as it sounds!). Of course since it would be some kind of energy it wouldnt be possible to see it directly but, if it were possible to see its actions/urging in some way... im just rambling but its very interesting! Is it th 'energy' which cause things to Arise? metta Matheesha 52045 From: "htootintnaing" Date: Tue Nov 1, 2005 11:56am Subject: Re: Jhana as a prerequisite for enlightenment htootintnaing --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "seisen_au" wrote: Hi Htoo, All, This passage seems to confirm the possibility of a Seven-Fold Path. My understanding is that by making(lokiya)jhana a base for Magga citta, the Magga citta that arises is a lokuttarajjhana citta corresponding to the jhana used as the base. Corrections welcome Steve ------------- Dear Steve, I agree. It can be called a lokuttaraajhaana citta but not a ruupaavacara rupa jhaana citta. That is why I almost always argue on this point. When lokuttaraa cittas arise the object is no more jhaana object. With Metta, Htoo Naing 52046 From: "matheesha" Date: Tue Nov 1, 2005 0:52pm Subject: Re: Meditations and your room matheesha333 Hi Leo, My opinion is that it is good enough to have a quiet room. The objective is to soundproof your mind, through developing calm! When you do this little sounds will not distract you and your mind will remain one-pointed. The idea that we can alter the external envioronment entirely to suit our practice is not a practical one. Even if you soundproofed your room, what about all the aches and pains in your body? How will you not be distracted by them? The best you can do practically I think is to make sure your room is fairly quiet, at the right temperature, not phones, no pets, no friends/family, comfortable seating posture. You can use images of the buddha, incense etc if it helps you to quieten your mind. metta Matheesha 52047 From: "matheesha" Date: Tue Nov 1, 2005 1:49pm Subject: Re: SN 35:234 - Ananda explains that seeing (etc) is not self matheesha333 Hi Phil,Tep,James ..er everyone, The Four noble truths in the 4 satipattana seems quite interesting. There is a sense of gradation even in the satipatthana. It seems that the Buddha started with the grossest object that could be felt, because that was the easiest for the beginner to feel ie - the body. Then less gross - feelings, more subtle - mind. Finally things like 4 noble truths and 7 factors of enlightenment. There is this idea that these were things to be experienced in their entirety as one progressed in one's practice. Interestingly the chinese agamas (ie the chinese thripitaka, with its satipattana sutta) dont start with mindfulness of breath, but the postures which are obviously more gross than breath. I picked this up from Analayo's excellent book, which was recently presented on this egroup. I have seen the four noble truths cross referenced with parts of the paticcasamuppada or the five aggragates. It seems as if the buddha is telling us to see all dhammas in terms of existence (stress being a feature), the cause, the cessation and the path to the cessation. [5] "Furthermore, the monk remains focused on mental qualities in & of themselves with reference to the four noble truths. And how does he remain focused on mental qualities in & of themselves with reference to the four noble truths? There is the case where he discerns, as it is actually present, that 'This is stress...This is the origination of stress...This is the cessation of stress...This is the way leading to the cessation of stress.' [1] To understand cessation one needs to have experienced a magga/phala citta, ofcourse. This is why this is obviously advanced practice and really practice of someone in arahantha training because this speaks of the 7 factors of enlightenment as well. Not forgetting that the fetter of avijja is broken at that level and the definition of avijja is ...... :) I'm not sure why it is important to see the dhammas in the structure of the four noble truths though. Maybe it is the final finishing flourish where all of the dhamma is brought into perspective - the 'completion of the circle'. metta Matheesha 52048 From: "matheesha" Date: Tue Nov 1, 2005 1:59pm Subject: Re: Vipaka paradox matheesha333 Hi Phil, Kusala kamma brings us deeper into samsara? Kusala kamma leads us into the dhamma (as well). Akusala kamma leads us into hell worlds where the nibbana is as far away as in the sensual deva worlds (as well). kusala -pleasant vipaka akusala-unpleasant vipaka ...as immediate result. anything further down the line of causation is affected by many many causes so cannot be predicted, any more than we can predict a moment of panna will affect us in a future life IMO. its a leaf in a storm. metta Matheesha 52049 From: "matheesha" Date: Tue Nov 1, 2005 2:09pm Subject: Re: RE; a short Hello! matheesha333 Hi wendy wang, My thesis is to find out > if the 4 appaman cetovimutti (also called > brahmavihara) lead to nibbana in the teaching of Early > Buddhism, how and why. Very interesting. I seem to recall the Buddha mentioning in the udanas that he developed such a mind in a previous life as a bodhisattva and as a result was born as the maha brahma, sakka etc. But I believe it did not lead him to enlightenment simply because it seems to be (not 100% sure about this) a jhana state based on metta as the object of meditation but of expanded focus like in a arupa jhana object (space, consciousness etc). Very strong kusala kamma. Also the mettanisansa sutta (the effect of metta - not being harmed etc) seems to be relavent with such a mind. Cetovimutti alone doesnt seem to be able to take us to nibbana. It seems to need to be linked to panna vimutti as well. Good luck on your thesis! Post it to this group once you finish it if you can. :) metta Matheesha 52050 From: "matheesha" Date: Tue Nov 1, 2005 2:17pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Conditions Part 20 - Dissociation Condition (vippayutta-paccaya) matheesha333 Hi Howard, The section in the Satipatthana Sutta on the > "consciousness" foundation, for example, actually doesn't discuss awareness of > consciousness per se but of various concomitants to and characteristics of states of > consciousness. [2] "Furthermore, the monk remains focused on mental qualities in & of themselves with reference to the five aggregates for clinging/sustenance. And how does he remain focused on mental qualities in & of themselves with reference to the five aggregates for clinging/sustenance? There is the case where a monk [discerns]: 'Such is form, such its origination, such its disappearance. Such is feeling... Such is perception...Such are fabrications...Such is consciousness, such its origination, such its disappearance.' I think it is in the dhammanupassana section, unless i have understood the sutta incorrectly. cheers Matheesha 52051 From: "Andrew" Date: Tue Nov 1, 2005 2:52pm Subject: Re: Reasons for staying on DSG! (was:Reasons for leaving DSG) corvus121 --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "buddhatrue" wrote: > > Hi Andrew, > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Andrew" wrote: > > > > Hi James > > > > Well, so much for just walking on. (-: Not sure that I should > reply, > > but here goes:- > > Okay. Whatever. I am too tired to continue this dialogue with you. > It is just getting too personal and pointless. > > With tired metta, > James Hi James I agree. Best wishes Andrew T > 52052 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Tue Nov 1, 2005 2:52pm Subject: Practice/Ken (Was Re: [dsg] Re: incredible indiaMhaanidana) kenhowardau Hi James, ------------------- KH: > > there is no doubt the Buddha taught that every absolute reality exists in the present moment. .... James: > There is no need to tell me "The Buddha taught this and the Buddha taught that" – SHOW ME! Show me exactly where he taught what you are describing. ---------------------- No point has been explained more often and more comprehensively on DSG than this one. I can't help believing you know that, and you just want to make me look foolish - by making me jump through hoops. Is that how you please your anti-DSG friends? :-) I am not going over all the usual sutta references (the Buddha explaining he used conventional language without being caught out by it: there being only the five khandhas: at any one time the five khandhas are only a moment of seeing, hearing, . . . or thinking: consciousness changes so fast from one kind to another that no adequate simile can be given: a monk does not concern himself with the past or future but only with the presently arisen state). I am not going to do that. :-) But why don't you put up your alternative model? In message 52042 you seem ("seem") to be telling Phil that there has to be more to the world than conditioned dhammas. If that is what you are saying, what is that "something more?" --------------------------------------- J: > I have read the Buddha teaching the Noble Eightfold Path as mundane and supermundane, but I haven't read him teaching the Eightfold Path as a single moment. How could anyone cultivate a single moment???? ---------------------------------------- The answer, of course, is there is no one that cultivates the Path - there are only dhammas. But wrong view will never accept that. Wrong view will stop at nothing to prove the existence of self. It will even hijack the Buddha's no-self Dhamma; misquoting and rewriting it until it appears to be "just another religion." It is not our job to stop that. The decline of the Buddha's sasana is just another reality to be understood. --------------------------------------------------- J: > You write some other interesting things in this post but I can't respond unless we can overcome this hurdle. ---------------------------------------------------- Maybe this hurdle can't be overcome so easily. In the meantime, why don't we simply study the ancient Theravada texts - regardless of whether we believe them or not? Ken H 52053 From: "matheesha" Date: Tue Nov 1, 2005 3:37pm Subject: Practice/Ken (Was Re: [dsg] Re: incredible indiaMhaanidana) matheesha333 Hi KenH, Just to humour me, would you please try to imagine the Dhamma as > being descriptive rather than prescriptive? M: ok, lets give that a try :) If the Buddha > had "described" good behaviour as resulting in favourable rebirth, > that would help us to understand the way we exist now - in the human > realm. M: thats right M: He said that he taught only two things. Suffering and the cessation of suffering. That is, there must be cessation of suffering as a function of enlightenment. According to the KS model, you would attain magga-phala, thereby ridding the mind of defilements and all would be well. Have I understood this correctly? But you engage in discussing the dhamma etc to bring this about. I would suggest that you are doing this purposefully to fulfil the aim of attaining insight, whether you would like to admit this is the case or not. I would say if you were to completely abandon yourself to the present moment and causation there wouldnt even be that practice. How is discussing the dhamma or listening to the dhamma (all purposeful activity) any different from meditating? All are sources of insight. All are done purposefully with a goal in mind -a beggar on the street might be completely goal- les, but not someone who posts to an egroup every single day, on the same subject). A meditator doesnt think 'may my insight arise now' any more than someone following the Ks medthod. He's just being aware of the present moment. Insight strikes when it strikes depending on causes including study and discussion. He has only made the conditions more favourable for doing so, much like the objective of the KS model. K:If the Buddha "prescribed" good behaviour as a means of obtaining a > favourable rebirth, wouldn't he be teaching something other > than 'understanding the present moment?' M: Well I dont believe the Buddha was stuck only able to describe the present moment. Anger, to take an example, is spread out over many thought moments, all arising and passing away. To say that anger lasts only one moment ignoring all the other moments of anger which come after it almost invariably, is to be a bit too selective dont you think. The Paticca samuppada is spread over lifetimes. With the cessation of avijja he described how rebirth comes to an end in it, in the future. The buddha was a master able to understand the present moment and to influence causes so as to bring the mind to a cessation of suffering in the future. You dont need a self to do this. metta Matheesha 52054 From: LBIDD@... Date: Tue Nov 1, 2005 4:02pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: kamma and its cessation lbidd2 Matheesha: "I think I need to clarify my question. If arahaths have nothing but wholesome roots, why dont they create kusala kamma?" Hi Matheesha, That's just the way it is ;-) I think consciousnesses rooted in alobha, adosa, and amoha are classified as "functional" rather than "kusala" in the case of arahants. Larry 52055 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Tue Nov 1, 2005 4:24pm Subject: Re: kamma and its cessation .. Sankhara / a typo buddhistmedi... Hi, Math - I am relieved that you have not yet found errors in my essay on formations. 'Anicca vata sankhara' is another excellent article by the venerable Bhikkhu Bodhi. Thank you several times for this dhamma dana. The following passage from the Bhikkhu Bodhi's article is what I like the most -- it explains the meaning of anatta, the five aggregates as sankhara, and why it is a wrong view to think that they are controllable according to what we wish. He dramatized it like a poet. "As long as we continue to identify with the five aggregates (the work of ignorance) and to seek enjoyment in them (the work of craving), we go on spewing out the volitional formations that build up future combinations of aggregates. Just that is the nature of samsara: an unbroken procession of empty but efficient sankharas producing still other sankharas, riding up in fresh waves with each new birth, swelling to a crest, and then crashing down into old age, illness, and death. Yet on it goes, shrouded in the delusion that we're really in control, sustained by an ever-tantalizing, ever receding hope of final satisfaction." Matheesha : I wonder if it is possible at all to see the action of kamma on perpetuating the mind stream. That would be a very very interesting thing to be able to experience if possible at all (as ludicrous as it sounds!). Of course since it would be some kind of energy it wouldnt be possible to see it directly but, if it were possible to see its actions/urging in some way... im just rambling but its very interesting! Is it th 'energy' which cause things to Arise? Tep: I think the "mind stream" arises because of volitional formations that perpetuate through time by ignorance and craving. The "action of kamma" forms the mindstream. My model of the mindstream is that it is made of waves of signal that are also a form of energy. It may be seen (like a video clip?), I guess, by abhinna ("direct knowledge"). But that is just a thought (a sankhara). Warm regards, Tep ========= --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "matheesha" wrote: > > Hello Tep, > > Thank you Tep. That was nice to read and quite impressive. > > I wonder if you have seen this essay by Bhikku Bodhi called 'Anicca > vata sankhara'. It paints an incredible picture of the whole of the > buddhist insight in a nutshell, including the relationship between > kamma and sankhara. > > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/bodhi/bps-essay_43.html > (snipped) 52056 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Tue Nov 1, 2005 4:38pm Subject: [dsg] Re: kamma and its cessation buddhistmedi... Hi, Larry (and Matheesha)- Interesting dialogue ! > > Matheesha: "I think I need to clarify my question. If arahaths have > nothing but wholesome roots, why dont they create kusala kamma?" > > Hi Matheesha, > > That's just the way it is ;-) I think consciousnesses rooted in alobha, > adosa, and amoha are classified as "functional" rather than "kusala" in > the case of arahants. > > Larry > Tep: Are functional consciousnesses not producing action (kamma) ? Regards, Tep ========= 52057 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Tue Nov 1, 2005 4:51pm Subject: Re: SN 35:234 - Ananda explains that seeing (etc) is not self buddhistmedi... Hi Math (and all) - Matheesha: > > I'm not sure why it is important to see the dhammas in the structure > of the four noble truths though. Maybe it is the final finishing > flourish where all of the dhamma is brought into perspective - > the 'completion of the circle'. Tep: The Four Noble Truths are summarized by LuangPu Dun as follows: "The heart (citta) which is sent outside is Samudaya. The results of sending the heart out is Dukkha The heart seeing the heart is Magga The results of the heart seeing the heart is Nirodha." Luang Pu's Legacy http://www.dhammasala.org/content/view/85/115/ Tep: At the moment the Four Noble Truths are penetrated all the bodhipakkhiya dhammas arise and become matured -- that's the final finishing to me. Regards, Tep ========= --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "matheesha" wrote: > > Hi Phil,Tep,James ..er everyone, > > The Four noble truths in the 4 satipattana seems quite interesting. > There is a sense of gradation even in the satipatthana. It seems > that the Buddha started with the grossest object that could be felt, > because that was the easiest for the beginner to feel ie - the body. > Then less gross - feelings, more subtle - mind. Finally things like > 4 noble truths and 7 factors of enlightenment. There is this idea > that these were things to be experienced in their entirety as one > progressed in one's practice. > (snipped) > > I have seen the four noble truths cross referenced with parts of the > paticcasamuppada or the five aggragates. It seems as if the buddha > is telling us to see all dhammas in terms of existence (stress being > a feature), the cause, the cessation and the path to the cessation. > (snipped) 52058 From: upasaka@... Date: Tue Nov 1, 2005 11:58am Subject: Re: [dsg] Conditions Part 20 - Dissociation Condition (vippayutta-paccaya) upasaka_howard Hi, Matheesha - In a message dated 11/1/05 5:19:26 PM Eastern Standard Time, dhammachat@... writes: > Hi Howard, > > The section in the Satipatthana Sutta on the > >"consciousness" foundation, for example, actually doesn't discuss > awareness of > >consciousness per se but of various concomitants to and > characteristics of states of > >consciousness. > > [2] "Furthermore, the monk remains focused on mental qualities in & > of themselves with reference to the five aggregates for > clinging/sustenance. And how does he remain focused on mental > qualities in &of themselves with reference to the five aggregates > for clinging/sustenance? There is the case where a monk > [discerns]: 'Such is form, such its origination, such its > disappearance. Such is feeling... Such is perception...Such are > fabrications...Such is consciousness, such its origination, such its > disappearance.' > > I think it is in the dhammanupassana section, unless i have > understood the sutta incorrectly. > > cheers > > Matheesha ========================= I'm not following you, I'm afraid. What you quoted seems to support what I said. I don't believe that anywhere in the Satipatthana Sutta there is explicit mention of mindfulness of awareness, per se. 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) 52059 From: LBIDD@... Date: Tue Nov 1, 2005 5:31pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: kamma and its cessation lbidd2 Tep: "Are functional consciousnesses not producing action (kamma) ?" Hi Tep, Kusala and akusala consciousnesses are kamma and produce kamma result in a later life. Functional consciousnesses don't. But either could motivate an action, as I understand it. Maybe Htoo or Sarah could explain this better. I'm not sure of the mechanics of action. Larry 52060 From: LBIDD@... Date: Tue Nov 1, 2005 5:57pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Mistaken Refence ... !!! lbidd2 Bhikkhu Samahita: "The Sense Sources are a 'Representation...' & not a 'Reality...'!" Hi Bhikkhu Samahita, May I ask where this idea came from? I know of one place in the Visuddhimagga that says the consciousness element is like a mirror image, but no one here seems to be much interested in that view. Maybe because it takes a definite step in the direction of "Consciousness Only" of the Mahayana. Also, "not a reality" would seem to me to be technically incorrect from an abhidhamma perspective, but I get your meaning. Larry 52061 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Tue Nov 1, 2005 7:14pm Subject: Practice/Ken (Was Re: [dsg] Re: incredible indiaMhaanidana) buddhatrue Dear Ken H., Dear Dhamma Brother- I assure you that I am not trying to embarrass you or put you on the spot with my questions. Really, I feel a special affinity for you- that is why I wanted so much to see your picture (and, so sorry to say, you look like a `meditator' to me ;- )). Ken H: No point has been explained more often and more comprehensively on DSG than this one. I can't help believing you know that, and you just want to make me look foolish - by making me jump through hoops. Is that how you please your anti-DSG friends? :-) James: Look- I am getting really sick and tired of these personal oriented comments, from you and others! Every time I share some personal information about myself (like my off-list e-mails that I shared with Andrew) I get attacked for it! Ken, this had better be this last time you mention this kind of crap to me! I am not "anti- DSG" and I really resent the slanderous reference!!! Okay…deep breath……now that I got that off my chest ;-)), I will respond to your actual message: The only other time I discussed this in-depth with a fellow member was with Sarah. Well, I'm sorry to say this, but Sarah bamboozled and overwhelmed me with her thousand word essays to my questions to such an extent that I finally gave up! ;-) (But, I think Sarah is such a sweetheart.) Ken, you seem like a no-nonsense type of guy, and straight to the point, so I thought I would ask you to explain this philosophy: The Eightfold Path in a single moment. Of course I have heard of it before in this group! (I wasn't trying to be clever or coy- maybe I should have explained all of my thoughts when I posted? Whewww…this group is getting tiring! ;-). Ken H: I am not going over all the usual sutta references (the Buddha explaining he used conventional language without being caught out by it: there being only the five khandhas: at any one time the five khandhas are only a moment of seeing, hearing, . . . or thinking: consciousness changes so fast from one kind to another that no adequate simile can be given: a monk does not concern himself with the past or future but only with the presently arisen state). James: Okay, I am familiar with all these references that you refer to- but what about when the Buddha explained the Noble Eightfold Path? Ken, he explained it outright, in full sight, in black and white (okay, now I am rhyming ;-). There are no secrets to his teaching. I know that that is hard to accept. It was even hard to accept in the Buddha's time- so he explained that he wasn't a "closed fist" teacher. We are all so fascinated with "The Da Vinci Code" and "Angels and Demons" types of mysteries, but the Buddha offered no such mysteries! Ken, if you can't explain this to me outright then you are chasing after phantoms. Ken H: But why don't you put up your alternative model? In message 52042 you seem ("seem") to be telling Phil that there has to be more to the world than conditioned dhammas. If that is what you are saying, what is that "something more?" James: What are you talking about? I went back to message #52042 (talk about the "Da Vinci Code" ;-)) and it is about kamma. I have never really said that there is more to the world than conditioned dhammas. Ken, you still don't understand my position in regards to the "dhammas" issue: I recognize "dhammas", as taught in the Abhidhamma, as a convenient means to explain meditative experience. However, I also see "dhammas" as empty of essence (non-self). Therefore, I see ultimate reality as "emptiness". (Yes, I am a Mahayana in Theravada's clothing!- get over it! ;-)) Ken H: The answer, of course, is there is no one that cultivates the Path - there are only dhammas. James: Then who is this joker I am addressing: Dhamma 1 or Dhamma 2?? ;-)) (Reference: "Cat in the Hat"). Again, I know what you are saying- but you are mixing ultimate reality with conventional reality and it makes absolutely no sense, to me. Ken H: In the meantime, why don't we simply study the ancient Theravada texts - regardless of whether we believe them or not? James: Okay, let's do that. I am going to have to take an extended break anyway. Metta, James 52062 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Tue Nov 1, 2005 7:54pm Subject: Re: Reasons for staying on DSG! (was:Reasons for leaving DSG) buddhatrue Hi Andrew, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Andrew" wrote: > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "buddhatrue" > wrote: > > > > Hi Andrew, > > > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Andrew" > wrote: > > > > > > Hi James > > > > > > Well, so much for just walking on. (-: Not sure that I should > > reply, > > > but here goes:- > > > > Okay. Whatever. I am too tired to continue this dialogue with > you. > > It is just getting too personal and pointless. > > > > With tired metta, > > James > > Hi James > > I agree. > > Best wishes > Andrew T > > > Thank you. Metta, James 52063 From: "Andrew" Date: Tue Nov 1, 2005 8:16pm Subject: Practice/Ken (Was Re: [dsg] Re: incredible indiaMhaanidana) corvus121 Hi Ken H and James I often have things explained to me and they just don't register until somebody tries a new angle. Of course, the Buddha spent many years explaining essentially the same things in different ways to help people of different dispositions and inclinations and accumulations awaken. So we shouldn't be too hard on ourselves. James wrote: what about when the Buddha explained the Noble Eightfold > Path? Ken, he explained it outright, in full sight, in black and > white (okay, now I am rhyming ;-). There are no secrets to his > teaching. I know that that is hard to accept. It was even hard to > accept in the Buddha's time- so he explained that he wasn't > a "closed fist" teacher. A gentle reminder. Let's see exactly what the Buddha said about his Dhamma immediately after his Enlightenment: "This Dhamma that I have attained is profound, hard to see and hard to understand, peaceful and sublime, unattainable by mere reasoning, subtle, to be experienced by the wise. But this generation delights in worldliness, takes delight in worldliness, rejoices in worldliness. It is hard for such a generation to see such a truth, namely, specific conditionality, dependant origination. And it is hard to see this truth, namely, the stilling of all formations, the reliquishing of all acquisitions, the destruction of craving, dispassion, cessation, Nibbana. If I were to teach the Dhamma, others would not understand me, and that would be wearying and troublesome for me." [Ariyapariyesana Sutta, transl BB & B Nanamoli] My comment: it was hard then, it's hard now. If only someone could spell it out for us in black and white terms that would penetrate our understanding. But understanding can't be forced. It arises only when the conditions are right. Enjoy your extended break James. Best wishes Andrew T 52064 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Tue Nov 1, 2005 8:20pm Subject: One Month Absence buddhatrue Hi all, I lost a bet/agreement with my bf so I now have to stay off the Internet for one month. I don't make arrangements with money; I make such agreements with something more important to me- the Internet!! ;- )) Anyway, a deal is a deal so I won't be on the Internet at all for one month. If you must reach me, a "Dhamma Emergency" of some sort ;- )), you can write to my bf at: memoelgamed@... and he can pass on the message. Metta, James 52065 From: "Phil" Date: Tue Nov 1, 2005 8:47pm Subject: Re: One Month Absence philofillet Hi James (and in passing others who responded re "vipaka paradox" > > I lost a bet/agreement with my bf so I now have to stay off the > Internet for one month. Out of respect for amr, you keep to that promise and don't come back for a month, ok? I've made similar promises to Naomi and always back out A month will fly by and you'll have more time for meditating for awhile. I was going to get back to you tonight about your question in the vipaka pardox thread. No, it is not KS who says seeng consciousness etc is vipaka, result of kamma. I think she differs from other Abhidhamma teachers by saying that it is only kamma patha, deeds of the level of transgression, that condition vipaka, whereas others say it is kusala or akusal citta of all levels, ie any javana citta. Rob M posted about that some weeks ago when I waws asking "Please teach me etc...>>>crying baby strategy. I think every experience we have through the sense doors is a resultant of kamma, sure, of course. I don't know how clearly that comes through in the suttas. Will be finding out more about that. Take care James. The month will fly by. Thanks Howard Larry Matheesha and Swee Boon for your helpful responses re vipaka. Will be getting back on it. I am reading and reflecting on a lot of suttas in the SN 35 vagga (?) on the ayatanas (sense bases) A lot in there about how it is in our response to the lovely and unlovely forms, sounds mind objects etc that we decline or do not decline from wholesomeness. So yes, there is the deeply accumulated tendency to proliferate in an unwholesome way on pleasant objects that arise (wholesome vipaka) but it is there that we can make progress by responding in a more mindful way. I am still confuse about yoniso manasikara (sp?) because in Abhidhamma it is one of the universal cetasikas that we would presumedly not have much direct influence over, but in the suttas it reads as a point at which great progress can be made. (Buddha said something like "I know of no other thing by which wholseome state arise and unwholesome states do not arise" about yoniso m, or words to that effect.) Phil p.s sorry for typos. Just want to grab James before he disappears. 52066 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Nov 1, 2005 9:39pm Subject: ‘Cetasikas' study corner 298 Aversion-dosa (g) sarahprocter... Dear Friends, 'Cetasikas' by Nina van Gorkom http://www.vipassana.info/cetasikas.html http://www.zolag.co.uk/ Questions, comments and different views welcome;-) ========================================== [Ch18 - Aversion (dosa)] Dosa can also appear as fear. When there is fear one dislikes the object which is experienced. Fear is harmful for mind and body. One may have fear of people, of situations, of sickness, old age and death. So long as dosa has not been eradicated it will always find an object. People have different accumulations: some people may have aversion at certain occasions while others do not. Dosa does not only arise because of what other people do or don’t do, it can arise on account of any object experienced through one of the six doors. One may even be cross with the rain, the sun or the wind. We read in the Atthasåliní (II, Book II, Part II, Summary, Chapter II, 367): * "…“Or when vexation (springs up) groundlessly” means anger without reason; for example, someone gets angry saying “it rains too much”, “it does not rain”, “the sun shines too much”, “it does not shine”; gets angry when the wind blows, when it does not blow, gets angry at being unable to sweep away the Bodhi leaves, at being unable to put on his robe; he gets angry with the wind, in slipping he gets angry with a tree-stump…" * ***** [Aversion (dosa) to be contd] Metta, Sarah ====== 52067 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Nov 1, 2005 11:09pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Reasons for staying on DSG! (was:Reasons for leaving DSG) sarahprocter... Hi James, I hope this reaches you before you take your leave of absence. Thx for letting us know. --- buddhatrue wrote: > 1. Simply put, there is concentration at every moment > 2. For the concentration to be `right', the consciousness must be > wholesome. > 3. Now when it comes to `Right Concentration' of the eightfold path, > not only does the consciousness have to be wholesome, there also has > to be Right Understanding of a nama or rupa at that moment and other > path factors arising. > 4. Even when we refer to the development of Right Concentration in > the > development of calm or samatha which may eventually lead to > attainment of the jhanas, it has to be accompanied by Right > Understanding of that kind or level too. > 5. So, like anything connected with the Buddha's teachings, it's > subtle and not easy to understand moments of right and wrong > concentration as I see it. ... S: Thnakyou - well summarised (or point formed) .... > > James: Okay, no arguments with me. I agree, basically, with > everything you say here. But you still didn't really answer my > original question: How is this supposed to happen without formal > meditation practice? ... S: I was heartened to see you agreement. I hadn't seen this question before. Short answer: By developing Right Understanding of the present dhammas, initially by careful reading, considering, listening, reflecting and questioning as we're doing here, i.e pariyatti (right theoretical understanding), the basis for patipatti (direct understanding) of these dhammas. I know you'll be reflecting further on dhammas, i.e namas and rupas, in your absence from the internet too. Are you allowed to listen to recordings? If so, why not download some of the discussions from dhammastudygroup.org. ... > Sarah: I think that when I began to appreciate that my meditation > practice was based on an idea of getting results with attachment and > furthemore on a deep-rooted idea of self that could somehow focus > and bring about such results, it became clear to me that it was not > the path taught by the Buddha. For others like yourself, it may be > quite different. > > James: Reasonable answer and I agree. It is not the fault of the > practice but the unrealistic expectations of the practitioner. ... S: Yes, meditation or bhavana always comes back to the present mind-states of the 'practitioner'. If there is attachment or expectations, there's no bhavana anytime. And as you know, there's no practioner, just those ever-changing mind-states and other namas and rupas whether we call it meditation or not. Metta, Sarah ====== 52068 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Nov 1, 2005 11:31pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Reasons for staying on DSG! (was:Reasons for leaving DSG) sarahprocter... Hi James (& Andrew), --- buddhatrue wrote: > Should any bhikkhu, malicious, angered, displeased, charge a > (fellow) bhikkhu with an unfounded case involving defeat, > (thinking), "Surely with this I may bring about his fall from the > celibate life," then regardless of whether or not he is cross- > examined on a later occasion, if the issue is unfounded and the > bhikkhu confesses his anger, it entails initial and subsequent > meetings of the Community. .... S: Should = IF. If X happens, then Y will be the result ..... > > Should any bhikkhu, malicious, angered, displeased, using as a mere > ploy an aspect of an issue that pertains otherwise, charge a bhikkhu > with a case involving defeat, (thinking), "Surely with this I may > bring about his fall from the celibate life," then regardless of > whether or not he is cross-examined on a later occasion, if the > issue pertains otherwise, an aspect used as a mere ploy, and the > bhikkhu confesses his anger, it entails initial and subsequent > meetings of the Community. .... S: IF X happens... .... > Should any bhikkhu agitate for a schism in a Community in concord, > or should he persist in taking up an issue conducive to schism, the > bhikkhus should admonish him thus: "Do not, Ven. sir, agitate for a > schism in a Community in concord or persist in taking up an issue > conducive to schism. Let the venerable one be reconciled with the > Community, for a Community in concord, on complimentary terms, free > from dispute, having a common recitation, dwells in peace." > > And should those bhikkhus, thus admonished, persist as before, the > bhikkhus are to rebuke them up to three times so as to desist. If > while being rebuked up to three times by the bhikkhus they desist, > that is good. If they do not desist, it entails initial and > subsequent meetings of the Community. > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/vinaya/bhikkhu-pati.html#1 ... S: Again, if X occurs. No one would suggest that the bhikkhu should, i.e ought to pursue such unwholesome deeds. A simple statement of conditions. ... > James: I have just selected a few translations from the Vinaya > Pitaka (spoken by the Lord Buddha) and so far I have counted > six `should's. That sounds like the Buddha taught controllable > actions to me. ;-)) ... S: The Buddha is indicating what is unacceptable and what the results of such actions will be, like a parent would a child. In truth, whether or not the parent, child or bhikkhu understands it or not, there is no person, no being, no control over any dhammas in an ultimate sense. Merely conditioned and fleeting namas and rupas. More to reflect on during the coming month:). Yes, let's consider all three baskets of the Tipitaka 'to really understand the Buddha's message' as you suggest. They all have to be in conformity with each other. Metta, Sarah ======= 52069 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Nov 1, 2005 11:45pm Subject: Re: [dsg] One Month Absence sarahprocter... Hi James, One more brief one - --- buddhatrue wrote: > Hi all, > > I lost a bet/agreement with my bf so I now have to stay off the > Internet for one month. <..> ... S: And with regard to your question (while we were away) on relationships, I can only suggest that everyone appreciates kindness and consideration. Any relationship benefits from such concerns for the others' welfare and any relationship suffers from the far more common concerns for our own welfare and our usual attachments. But we are ordinary worldlings, starting off on the path. Like Howard said, I think, there's no use in emulating the anagamis and arahants who have no sense desires at all. So we can live easily and naturally, developing more understanding and appreciation of how even now as we speak, attachment is conditioned and clings immediately to the sense objects appearing. Best wishes and metta, Sarah ======= 52070 From: sarah abbott Date: Wed Nov 2, 2005 0:10am Subject: Re: [dsg] RE; a short Hello! sarahprocter... Dear Wendy, --- shiang Wang wrote: > Dear DSG Dhamma Friends: > > I am glad to learned this group from my dhammamittas > who.joined the group recently. This will be a great > source for getting help and consulting in pali and > Buddha's teaching in Theravada tradition. I am a > studend of CHIBS, Taiwan too. My thesis is to find out > if the 4 appaman cetovimutti (also called > brahmavihara) lead to nibbana in the teaching of Early > Buddhism, how and why. ... S: Very glad to see you here as well and thank you for introducing yourself. I think Matheesha already made some good comments. Why not share your understanding (or a brief summary) of how you see the brahma viharas and whether they lead to nibbana first? You may also like to look in "Useful Posts' in the files under 'brahma viharas', 'metta', 'karuna' etc for more idea of past discussions. Without a clear understanding of the various dhammas, the khandhas, as anatta, no divine abidings or any other 'pure' states can lead to nibbana as I understand. Metta, Sarah ========== 52071 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Wed Nov 2, 2005 2:47am Subject: Practice/Ken (Was Re: [dsg] Re: incredible indiaMhaanidana) kenhowardau --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "matheesha" wrote: > > Hi KenH, > > > Just to humour me, would you please try to imagine the Dhamma as > > being descriptive rather than prescriptive? > > M: ok, lets give that a try :) > > > If the Buddha > > had "described" good behaviour as resulting in favourable rebirth, > > that would help us to understand the way we exist now - in the > human > > realm. > > M: thats right Hi Matheesha, Thanks for giving it a try. So far, so good. :-) -------------------------- M: He said that he taught only two things. Suffering and the cessation of suffering. That is, there must be cessation of suffering as a function of enlightenment. According to the KS model, you would attain magga-phala, thereby ridding the mind of defilements and all would be well. Have I understood this correctly? ---------------------------- Maybe I haven't understood you correctly. I think we all agree the Eightfold Path destroys defilements, so I don't know why you think this is particularly "the KS model." (But it's not important just now.) ---------------------------------------------------------------- M: > But you engage in discussing the dhamma etc to bring this about. ---------------------------------------------------------------- No one who understood the Dhamma as descriptive-not-prescriptive could engage in any activity with the aim of bringing enlightenment (or any other dhamma) about. ---------------------------------- M: > I would suggest that you are doing this purposefully to fulfil the aim of attaining insight, whether you would like to admit this is the case or not. ----------------------------------- Well, none of us is perfect: we can all lapse into silly, subconscious ideas about a self that exists now and will continue into the future where it can become enlightened. I don't think anyone minds admitting to these lapses, but, in my case, that particular wrong understanding is rarely a motive for taking part in DSG. I participate in much the same way as I participate in various other activities. When I write a message for DSG it is with no more idea of creating conditions for enlightenment than when I play tennis. ------------------------------------------------------ M: > I would say if you were to completely abandon yourself to the present moment and causation there wouldnt even be that practice. ------------------------------------------------------- Abandon what self? I don't try to 'abandon self to the present moment.' I try to understand the Dhamma, and I do that in much the same way as I try to get improve my tennis. If I ever do it with the thought, "This will make me a great sage one day," then I have lost the point. :-) ------------------------------ M: > How is discussing the dhamma or listening to the dhamma (all purposeful activity) any different from meditating? -------------------------------- If either is done with the idea of control over dhammas then it is done with wrong view. -------------------------------------- M: > All are sources of insight. --------------------------------------- Here, you raise another issue. You are assuming that Dhamma study done properly (without desire conceit or wrong view) is the same as formal meditation done properly (without desire conceit or wrong view). But is it? The Buddha said that true Dhamma study was a factor leading to enlightenment. He did not say the same for formal meditation. Therefore, it is hard to imagine how anyone could engage in formal "Buddhist" meditation without having wrong understanding. ---------------------------------------------------- M: > All are done purposefully with a goal in mind -a beggar on the street might be completely goal- les, but not someone who posts to an egroup every single day, on the same subject). ----------------------------------------------------- I hope you will take my word for it: I do not take part in Dhamma discussion with the idea, "This will get me out of samsara." I am quite content to know the present moment as well as I can. There is no point in wanting to know some other moment (a moment of Vipassana, for example). --------------------------------- M: > A meditator doesnt think 'may my insight arise now' any more than someone following the Ks method. He's just being aware of the present moment. --------------------------------- When we say, "the present moment," are we both talking about the same thing? I understand that consciousness (citta) and its object exist for an indescribably brief fraction of a second. So it is not a "moment" in the conventional sense of the word (something we can observe if we are quick enough). I also know the conventional meaning of 'being aware of the present moment.' It is something anyone - even an animal - can do, and it has nothing to do with the Dhamma. ------------------------------ M: > Insight strikes when it strikes depending on causes including study and discussion. He has only made the conditions more favourable for doing so, much like the objective of the KS model. ------------------------------ He has not made the conditions any more or any less favourable. However, he thinks he has, and that is his wrong view. -------------------------------------- KK: > > If the Buddha "prescribed" good behaviour as a means of obtaining a > favourable rebirth, wouldn't he be teaching something other > than 'understanding the present moment?' ... M: > Well I dont believe the Buddha was stuck only able to describe the present moment. Anger, to take an example, is spread out over many thought moments, all arising and passing away. To say that anger lasts only one moment ignoring all the other moments of anger which come after it almost invariably, is to be a bit too selective dont you think. --------------------------------------- No, I don't see it that way at all. But I won't go into it now. -------------- M: > The Paticca samuppada is spread over lifetimes. With the cessation of avijja he described how rebirth comes to an end in it, in the future. The buddha was a master able to understand the present moment and to influence causes so as to bring the mind to a cessation of suffering in the future. You dont need a self to do this. -------------- The Buddha never claimed to have any influence over the laws of cause and effect. To put it simply, the practice of satipatthana is right understanding of a *presently* arisen paramattha dhamma. It happens if, and only if, the conditions for its happening have been put in place. There is no control! It happens or it doesn't happen! Conditions rule! Ken H 52072 From: "dnirodha" Date: Wed Nov 2, 2005 5:43am Subject: Re: RE; a short Hello! dnirodha Dear Matheesha and Sarah: Thank you for your comments. It seems a common understanding in Theravada Buddhism that brahma-viharas (BV) alone won't lead to nibbana. That is my understanding too. But some western scholars and some dhamma friends in Taiwan assert BV directly lead to nibbana. I am just a beginner in this field, and still have lots of things and dhamms to learn. According to my current understanding, when it is said in sutra that someone practices BV and attains nibbana, it usually accompanies with other terms, i.e. bojjhanga. I wish to classify those sutras and find out the explanation. During the proceeding of thesis, maybe I will revise my understanding or reconfirm and enhance it. Thank for your advice. I will check related discussion of past in DSG. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > > Dear Wendy, > > --- shiang Wang wrote: > > > Dear DSG Dhamma Friends: > > > > I am glad to learned this group from my dhammamittas > > who.joined the group recently. This will be a great > > source for getting help and consulting in pali and > > Buddha's teaching in Theravada tradition. I am a > > studend of CHIBS, Taiwan too. My thesis is to find out > > if the 4 appaman cetovimutti (also called > > brahmavihara) lead to nibbana in the teaching of Early > > Buddhism, how and why. > ... > S: Very glad to see you here as well and thank you for introducing > yourself. > > I think Matheesha already made some good comments. Why not share your > understanding (or a brief summary) of how you see the brahma viharas and > whether they lead to nibbana first? > > You may also like to look in "Useful Posts' in the files under 'brahma > viharas', 'metta', 'karuna' etc for more idea of past discussions. > > Without a clear understanding of the various dhammas, the khandhas, as > anatta, no divine abidings or any other 'pure' states can lead to nibbana > as I understand. > > Metta, > > Sarah > ========== > 52073 From: upasaka@... Date: Wed Nov 2, 2005 1:17am Subject: Re: [dsg] Conditions Part 20 - Dissociation Condition (vippayutta-paccaya) upasaka_howard Hi again, Matheesha - In a message dated 11/1/05 7:59:29 PM Eastern Standard Time, upasaka@... writes: > Hi, Matheesha - > > In a message dated 11/1/05 5:19:26 PM Eastern Standard Time, > dhammachat@... writes: > > >Hi Howard, > > > >The section in the Satipatthana Sutta on the > >>"consciousness" foundation, for example, actually doesn't discuss > >awareness of > >>consciousness per se but of various concomitants to and > >characteristics of states of > >>consciousness. > > > >[2] "Furthermore, the monk remains focused on mental qualities in & > >of themselves with reference to the five aggregates for > >clinging/sustenance. And how does he remain focused on mental > >qualities in &of themselves with reference to the five aggregates > >for clinging/sustenance? There is the case where a monk > >[discerns]: 'Such is form, such its origination, such its > >disappearance. Such is feeling... Such is perception...Such are > >fabrications...Such is consciousness, such its origination, such its > >disappearance.' > > > >I think it is in the dhammanupassana section, unless i have > >understood the sutta incorrectly. > > > >cheers > > > >Matheesha > ========================= > I'm not following you, I'm afraid. What you quoted seems to support > what I said. I don't believe that anywhere in the Satipatthana Sutta there > is > explicit mention of mindfulness of awareness, per se. > > With metta, > Howard > > ====================== I have reread what you quoted, and I see that I was wrong. Your main point, I realize, was the line "Such is consciousness, such its origination, such its disappearance." This, of course, is awareness of awareness. I stand corrected. 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) 52074 From: "matheesha" Date: Wed Nov 2, 2005 10:10am Subject: [dsg] Re: kamma and its cessation matheesha333 Hi Larry, Tep, Matheesha: If arahaths have > > nothing but wholesome roots, why dont they create kusala kamma?" Larry: > That's just the way it is ;-) M: oh dear, dogmatic answer of the year! :)) nevermind, :) Ok, lets try another route - what is it in normal people that helps give rise to good kamma (other than alobha, adosa, amoha)? i cant help thinking it has something to do with the idea of self or the desire to be. until we get there.. take care Matheesha 52075 From: "matheesha" Date: Wed Nov 2, 2005 10:33am Subject: Re: kamma and its cessation .. Sankhara / a typo matheesha333 Hi Tep, You say that the 'mind stream' is perpetuated by ignorance and craving. I can understand avijja paccaya sankhara. While i tend to agree with the craving bit, and that has been my experience through meditation as well, it would be wonderful if I could read a sutta on it. Do you know of any? Tep> I am relieved that you have not yet found errors in my essay on > formations. M: Dear Tep. I feel you put yourself down a lot and tend to seek approval from others (I may be wrong). I used to do this a lot, and it caused me a lot of suffering, until i used techniques in the vitakkasantana sutta to get rid of those irrational thoughts, filled with aversion (towards myself) and avijja (especially Self). It reduced my suffering a lot. What does it matter if I found something wrong? So what? You might be embarrassed. So what? You would feel bad if youre embarresed. So what? Well you might feel that way for a few minutes. So what? If you keep asking yourself So what, even the greatest problems in life are put into perspective. Often when we worry about a problem in the present we worry like it will always be there. Like it will affect us forever. This is just the avijja in our minds thinking in terms of permanence. If we can see the impermenence of our problems they dont affect us that much. I'm only typing this to the group because these are common problems and it could be useful to someone. take care Matheesha 52076 From: "matheesha" Date: Wed Nov 2, 2005 10:47am Subject: Re: [dsg] Conditions Part 20 - Dissociation Condition (vippayutta-paccaya) matheesha333 Hi Howard, How to be aware of awareness!? I suppose it is possible to be aware that one is aware of sights, sounds, sensations.. etc. But I dont think that captures the idea of being aware of consciousness itself. I think that is only possible when you see chakku-vinnana etc at work. - the movement of awareness towards a sense door. Difficult but certainly not impossible, if you know exactly when to focus in the process of perception. Well worth the effort because it also shows bits of causation in action. metta Matheesha 52077 From: "matheesha" Date: Wed Nov 2, 2005 0:54pm Subject: Practice/Ken (Was Re: [dsg] Re: incredible indiaMhaanidana) matheesha333 Hi KenH, KH: I think we all agree the > Eightfold Path destroys defilements, M: Indeed. KH: > No one who understood the Dhamma as descriptive-not- prescriptive > could engage in any activity with the aim of bringing enlightenment > (or any other dhamma) about. M: yes, obviously. KH: 'Well, none of us is perfect: we can all lapse into silly, > subconscious ideas about a self that exists now and will continue > into the future where it can become enlightened.' M: If you still do that even at times - and still your self view persists, there is obviously no right view. Right view arises only upon attaining the sotapanna state. I wonder if you agree with me? So without ever having right view, how could you ever have a noble eightfold path according to the KS method (shall we call it that just for the need of a name)? You say you need to have right view to start. Yet your end result is right view as well? --------------------- KH: I > participate in much the same way as I participate in various other > activities. When I write a message for DSG it is with no more idea of > creating conditions for enlightenment than when I play tennis. M: So if you had to stop discussing the dhamma for the rest of your life you would honestly have no problem with that? :) -------------- KH:I don't try to 'abandon self to the present > moment.' I try to understand the Dhamma, and I do that in much the > same way as I try to get improve my tennis. M: Well why do you want to understand the dhamma? I think you would say because it conditions panna? Then the next question is why do you want to condition panna. Your intention is buried under layers of thought but it is still there IMO, else it would be quite meaningless to want to understand the dhamma, except perhaps out of attachment (call it intellectual curiosity) to it. ---------------------- > ------------------------------ > M: > How is discussing the dhamma or listening to the dhamma (all > purposeful activity) any different from meditating? > -------------------------------- > > If either is done with the idea of control over dhammas then it is > done with wrong view. M: Oh good. I'm begining to understand you better now. So you dont do anything intentionally, because that would be futile under the 'Right View is the forerunner' of the mahasaccarika sutta. So what you do do, is to discuss the dhamma etc with no intention of any result in the future. (please bear with me, im repeating it to clarify in my own mind!). That leaves me with the same question. Are you saying that there can be moments of right view even though you are not a sotapanna? KH: The Buddha said that true Dhamma study was a factor > leading to enlightenment. He did not say the same for formal > meditation. Therefore, it is hard to imagine how anyone could engage in > formal "Buddhist" meditation without having wrong understanding. M: Depends on which angle you look at it, doesnt it? A meditator would say that whole of the satipattana including the bit where the buddha advices monks to go to a forest, a field, a quiet house, sit in the lotus posture and bring mindfulness to the fore and be mindful of the in and out breath is actually formal meditation. ------------------------ KH> I hope you will take my word for it: I do not take part in Dhamma > discussion with the idea, "This will get me out of samsara." M: Fair enough, Ken.:) ------------------------------ KH:> I am quite content to know the present moment as well as I can. There > is no point in wanting to know some other moment (a moment of > Vipassana, for example). M: Well, lets read the rest of your answer as well.... > When we say, "the present moment," are we both talking about the same > thing? I understand that consciousness (citta) and its object exist > for an indescribably brief fraction of a second. So it is not > a "moment" in the conventional sense of the word (something we can > observe if we are quick enough). M: Heavens no! It certainly isnt a moment in the conventional sense of the word, as in something we can experience if we are quick enough... I might add ..with an unprepared, undeveloped mind. You are right in that a beginner in vipassana might experience just that. If you could sense (with no thinking, only experiencing) awarness merging with a sense door and that in turn giving rise to the appropriate sight, sound etc and be able to see causation in that link and the impermanance in each of these, and see them arising and passing away, I think you would be on the right path. What do you think? --------------------- Kh:> The Buddha never claimed to have any influence over the laws of cause > and effect. To put it simply, the practice of satipatthana is right > understanding of a *presently* arisen paramattha dhamma. It happens > if, and only if, the conditions for its happening have been put > in place. There is no control! It happens or it doesn't happen! > Conditions rule! M: :), you see my reply (and the image passes away). thoughts form in your mind as an effect of that (and passes away). Intention arises in your mind to type, as an effect of that(and passess away). The action of typing occurs (and passess away). (to put it simply) No need for a self there. But you typed what you wanted to type. On a paramatta level there is no control. On a conventional level there is control (you were able to type what you wanted). I think Sarah would agree with me. On a paramatta level everything happened on causes. On a conventional level 'you' were able to type something to 'me', hence 'change'/'control' what i read in your post. :) so what do you think? metta Matheesha 52078 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Wed Nov 2, 2005 4:14pm Subject: Re: kamma and its cessation .. Sankhara / Mindstream buddhistmedi... Hi, Math - You asked for a sutta reference to support my following statement : "The 'mind stream' is perpetuated by ignorance and craving." . Good question. :-) I think it is fair to define the "mindstream" as the stream of cittas (vinnana) and cetasikas (sankhara + vedana + sanna) . According to SN XXII.79 (as introduced by Bhikkhu Bodhi in the article 'Anicca Vata Sankhara'), the Buddha said : "They construct the conditioned; therefore they are called volitional formations. And what are the conditioned things they construct? They construct the body, feeling, perception, volitional formations, and consciousness; therefore they are called volitional formations". Therefore, the mindstream is volitional formations. And it follows that the mindstream is perpetuated by ignorance and craving, according to the Dependent Origination (avijja pacaya sankhara) and the Second Noble Truth (which states that tanha is the cause, or samudaya, of dukkha and samsara). Also by the Visuddhimagga, XVII, 285 : " The two things, ignorance and craving, should be understood as the root of this Wheel of Becoming. Of the derivation from the past, ignorance is the root and feeling the end. And of the continuation into the future, craving is the root and ageing-and-death the end." .......................................... Math : Dear Tep. I feel you put yourself down a lot and tend to seek approval from others (I may be wrong). I used to do this a lot, and it caused me a lot of suffering, until i used techniques in the vitakkasantana sutta to get rid of those irrational thoughts, filled with aversion (towards myself) and avijja (especially Self). It reduced my suffering a lot. Tep: Humbleness is a good quality. I don't have any problem with suffering when I ask friends for helps -- such as checking for errors in an article. :-) ......................................... Math : What does it matter if I found something wrong? So what? You might be embarrassed. So what? You would feel bad if youre embarresed. So what? Well you might feel that way for a few minutes. So what? If you keep asking yourself So what, even the greatest problems in life are put into perspective. Tep: If you find errors just let me know, I won't be embarassed. Promised! {:->)) Kind regards, Tep ===== --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "matheesha" wrote: > > Hi Tep, > > You say that the 'mind stream' is perpetuated by ignorance and > craving. I can understand avijja paccaya sankhara. While i tend to > agree with the craving bit, and that has been my experience through > meditation as well, it would be wonderful if I could read a sutta on > it. Do you know of any? > (snipped) > > Often when we worry about a problem in the present we worry like it > will always be there. Like it will affect us forever. This is just > the avijja in our minds thinking in terms of permanence. If we can > see the impermenence of our problems they dont affect us that much. > > I'm only typing this to the group because these are common problems > and it could be useful to someone. > 52079 From: upasaka@... Date: Wed Nov 2, 2005 11:29am Subject: Re: [dsg] Conditions Part 20 - Dissociation Condition (vippayutta-paccaya) upasaka_howard Hi, Matheesha - In a message dated 11/2/05 1:49:03 PM Eastern Standard Time, dhammachat@... writes: > Hi Howard, > > How to be aware of awareness!? > > I suppose it is possible to be aware that one is aware of sights, > sounds, sensations.. etc. But I dont think that captures the idea of > being aware of consciousness itself. I think that is only possible > when you see chakku-vinnana etc at work. - the movement of awareness > towards a sense door. Difficult but certainly not impossible, if you > know exactly when to focus in the process of perception. Well worth > the effort because it also shows bits of causation in action. > > metta > > Matheesha > > ========================= I'm not certain about this. The quote that you gave does seem to show the Buddha speaking of being aware of awareness. Now perhaps it is only a being aware *that* one is aware; that is, perhaps there is a degree of indirection involved. When I am seeing, I know that I am seeing, but it's not clear to me exactly what that means. Perhaps there is seeing, and that is immediately followed by the mental realization of the seeing. I just don't know. I do think that such realization is more than merely an *inferring* of seeing, but exactly what it is I cannot say. 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) 52080 From: LBIDD@... Date: Wed Nov 2, 2005 7:20pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: kamma and its cessation lbidd2 Matheesha: "what is it in normal people that helps give rise to good kamma (other than alobha, adosa, amoha)? i cant help thinking it has something to do with the idea of self or the desire to be." Hi Matheesha, Maybe the Brahma Vihara would answer your question, loving kindness (metta), compassion (karuna), gladness for others (mudita), and equanimity (upekkha). Vism.IX,124. Having thus fulfilled the [ten] perfections, these [divine abidings] then perfect all the good states classed as the ten powers, the four kinds of fearlessness, the six kinds of knowledge not shared [by disciples], and the eighteen states of the Enlightened One. This is how they bring to perfection all the good states beginning with giving. L: Loving kindness sees the basic goodness ("beauty") of everyone. That's a good place to start. Larry ps: there is an extensive exposition of the "Divine Abidings" in the Visuddhimagga. 52081 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Wed Nov 2, 2005 8:30pm Subject: The Internal Transience ... !!! bhikkhu_ekamuni Friends: The Internal Sensors are Fragile, Decaying and Vanishing! At Savatthi The Blessed Buddha said this: Bhikkhus, the eye is impermanent! What is impermanent is suffering! What is suffering is no-self! What is no-self should be seen as it really is with correct, true and realistic understanding thus: This is not mine, this I am not, this is not my self... The ear is impermanent.... The nose is impermanent.... The tongue is impermanent.... The body is impermanent.... The mind is impermanent. What is impermanent is really suffering... What is suffering is no-self. What is no-self should be seen as it really is with correct, true and realistic understanding thus: This is neither me nor mine, this I am not, this is not my or any self! Seeing this, bhikkhus, any educated noble disciple is disgusted with the eye, the ear, the nose, the tongue, the body, and with the mind... The experience of this disgust, brings disillusion & disenchantment!!! Through this disillusion, the mind is all released! When it is liberated, then there appears the assurance: 'This mind is freed' & one instantly understands: Rebirth is now ended, this Noble Life is fully concluded, done is what should be done, there is no state beyond this... Source: The Grouped Sayings by the Buddha. Samyutta Nikaya. IV 1-2 The group on the 6 Senses 35:1 The Internal as Impermanent... http://www.pariyatti.com/book.cgi?prod_id=948507 http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/samyutta/index.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 !!! <...> 52082 From: Bhikkhu samahita Date: Wed Nov 2, 2005 8:32pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Mistaken Refence ... !!! bhikkhu_ekamuni friend LBIDD@... wrote: >The Sense Sources are a 'Representation...' & not a 'Reality...'! >May I ask where this idea came from? The Buddha! Friendship is the Greatest ... Bhikkhu Samahita, Sri Lanka. <...> 52083 From: sarah abbott Date: Wed Nov 2, 2005 9:33pm Subject: ‘Cetasikas' study corner 299 Aversion-dosa (h) sarahprocter... Dear Friends, 'Cetasikas' by Nina van Gorkom http://www.vipassana.info/cetasikas.html http://www.zolag.co.uk/ Questions, comments and different views welcome;-) ========================================== [Ch18 - Aversion (dosa)] The Buddha compares someone who gets angry very easily with an open sore. An open sore hurts at the slightest touch, it is foul and unpleasant to look at. We read in the Gradual Sayings (Book of the Threes, Chapter III, §25, The open sore): * "… of what sort, monks, is the one whose mind is like an open sore? Herein a certain person is irritable and turbulent. When anything, no matter how trifling, is said to him, he becomes enraged, he gets angry and quarrelsome: he resents it and displays anger, hatred and sulkiness. Just as, for instance, when a festering sore, if struck by a stick or sherd, discharges matter all the more, even so, monks, a certain person… displays anger, hatred and sulkiness. This one is called “He whose mind is like an open sore”…" * The Buddha then spoke about the “lightning-minded”, the person who has realized the four noble Truths but who is not yet arahat, and about the “diamond-minded”, the arahat. Just as a diamond can cut everything, even a gem or a rock, even so has the arahat cut off, destroyed, the “åsavas”(1). *** 1) “Intoxicants”, a group of defilements. ***** [Aversion (dosa) to be contd] Metta, Sarah ====== 52084 From: sarah abbott Date: Wed Nov 2, 2005 10:04pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Did Buddhaghosa (formal) meditate? (Was: Reasons for staying on DSG sarahprocter... Hi Joop, > No, I don't agree. We are ill-informed about the future at the same > level as we are ill-informed about the past. > Not only 'present dhammas': that on the individual level. But we need > also sociological imagination about the future of Theravada. > If you prefer not to react on my little essay about the furure and my > question on Nyanaponika's statement: so be it. ... S: I was going to say it would seem quiet next week with you and James away, but Nina will be back and who knows what will happen? All we can ever do is spculate and make informed and uninformed guesses about the future in conventional terms. On the other hand, the Buddha's teachings about the khandhas, about the all are just will be just as true tomorrow as they are now as they were in the past, whatever language we dress them up in, whether we understand them rightly or wrongly. Regarding BB's comment on Nyanaponika's statement about the impermanence of concepts, see #50851. Concepts are 'imagined' or thought about. They don't have characteristics (lakkhana) and cannot be said to be anicca and therefore cannot be said to be dukkha either. We read again and again about the impermanence of the khandhas only. What else? On the decline, there may be a perceived little upswing in the appreciation of the teachings now in Holland or elsewhere and this may be correct. But looking at the overall picture, there's a decline as the Buddha predicted. Eventually the teachings will die out completely, starting with the Abhidhamma and then starting with the Patthana. Eventually there will be a day when the outer trimmings may appear to be there, but there's no understanding at all. Eventually all trace of the relics will disappear and only when there is no Dhamma at all available will a new Buddha appear. I don't see how anyone can read suttas, such as DN27, Agga~n~na Sutta with confidence in the Buddha's teachings, doubting about the changes in world systems. Of course, just because we know the teachings are declining and will continue to do so doesn't mean that we don't help share whatever little understanding we have of them to the best of our ability as you do in Holland and as we all try to do here. Sometimes we forget (or wish to disbelieve) about other realms as you mentioned too, in spite of reading so many of the Buddha's teachings concerning them. Many who heard the teachings in the past and developed degrees of wisdom or stages of enlightenment (but not full enlightenment) continue in various deva, rupa and aupa realms for aeons. They didn't all become arahants then. As for any further comments of Nyanponika's concerning the future of Theravada Buddhism, I think it's just a question of whether you take these to refer to the teachings themselves about the Truths or whether you take them as referring to the packing. I think we have to just agree to disagree when it comes to the adding of natural science and theories from other schools in order to make the Theravada teachings more palatable. Anyway, you said you were not suggesting any evolution of 'the core principles, the doctrines' and on this we agree:). As an example of what will be changed for the better, you suggested that the '31 realms of existence will not play a role any more etc'. I'm sure you're right as to what will be accepted as the teachings decline (many 'Buddhists' don't even accept there is rebirth), but I think that any such attempts to 'simplify' the teachings or bring them into conformity with other ideas simply hastens the decline further. I agree with Hal's comments and quotes which indicate that today we all need to hear and consider a lot in order for any wisdom to develop. We are not like some of the disciples in the Buddha's day who were able to grasp the meaning and become enlightened on hearing just a few words. Indeed it was the Buddha himself who taught about the length of the sasana and how the decline would come about. Finally, you asked Azita and others of us whether our trip to India and discussions with others made us 'more or less orthodox Theravadin'? My answer is that when we're interested to learn more about the realities which make up our lives now as we speak, there's no concern or interest in whether we're 'orthodox' anything. And with regard to James' question about selecting objects which I think you referred to, it always comes back to whether we cling to an idea of a self that can select anything at all at this moment. When we appreciate that there are only cittas, cetasikas and rupas - all conditioned dhammas - what's the use of trying to have a particular one arise rather than just understanding what has arisen already? As I said, I liked the extract from Nyanaponika's book which Hal quoted and will end by re-quoting the following: "In a compartative evaluation of the Abhidhamma and the suttas, the fact is often overlooked--which, however, has been repeatedly stressed by the Venerable Nyanatiloka Mahathera--that the Sutta Pitaka too contains a considerable amount of Abhidhamma. This comprises all the numerous texts expounded from the ultimate standpoint (paramattha), which make use of strict philosphical terminology and explain experience in terms of selfless, conditioned processes; for example, those suttas dealing with the five aggregates, the eighteen elements, and the twelve sense bases (khanda, dhatu, ayatana)." James complains when my answers are too long and you do the same when they're too short:-) I hope this answers your questions and you have a good break next week. Metta, Sarah ========= 52085 From: sarah abbott Date: Wed Nov 2, 2005 10:23pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Conditions Part 20 - Dissociation Condition (vippayutta-paccaya) sarahprocter... Hi Swee Boon, --- nidive wrote: > And I guess the Buddha was wrong as well. > ... S: ???? This was with regard to conditions and right understanding. Please clarify! Metta, Sarah ======= 52086 From: sarah abbott Date: Wed Nov 2, 2005 10:58pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Conditions Part 20 - Dissociation Condition (vippayutta-paccaya) sarahprocter... Hi Howard, --- upasaka@... wrote: > I didn't see this issue as particularly an Abhidhamma vs Sutta > distinction, but simply as something that was "interesting". The idea of > someone > "getting it wrong" was not part of my thinking in this matter. ... S: No, the part of my message you're referring to was addressed to Swee Boon. Apologies for any confusion. .... >What > occurred to me > was that this business was related to the content of the Sheaves of > Reeds > Sutta, with *vi~n~nana as subject and namarupa as object, ... S: Just for clarification, let me add an extract from the sutta here (TB transl): Nalakalapiyo Sutta Sheaves of Reeds "Very well then, Kotthita my friend, I will give you an analogy; for there are cases where it is through the use of an analogy that intelligent people can understand the meaning of what is being said. It is as if two sheaves of reeds were to stand leaning against one another. In the same way, from name-&-form as a requisite condition comes consciousness, from consciousness as a requisite condition comes name-&-form. From name & form as a requisite condition come the six sense media. From the six sense media as a requisite condition comes contact. From contact as a requisite condition comes feeling. From feeling as a requisite condition comes craving. From craving as a requisite condition comes clinging/sustenance. From clinging/sustenance as a requisite condition comes becoming. From becoming as a requisite condition comes birth. From birth as a requisite condition, then aging & death, sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress, & despair come into play. Such is the origination of this entire mass of suffering & stress." *** S: We can't refer to consciousness as subject and nama-rupa as object as I see it. Consciousness refers (here) to patisandhi citta (rebirth consciousness) and subsequent vipaka cittas and nama to the cetasikas(mental factors) accompanying the citta in question. Rupas refer to the kamma-produced rupas which at the time of rebirth arise at the same time as the patisandhi citta and accompanying cetasikas. Thus at rebirth, these particular dhammas arise together and support each other. .... >and I was > considering > the possibility that there might well be the implication that among > namic > phenomena, only concomitants to vi~n~nana, and not vi~n~nana itself, > might serve as > object of vi~n~nana. .... S: Just to clarify, in the context of the suttas you and SB gave, the context is D.O. and nama refers to the cetasikas accompanying patisandhi and other vipaka cittas, i.e the universal cetasikas. The object of the vinnana and nama in context is therefore a sense-door object only as I understand. (In the human realm or others born by way of the womb, the only groups of rupa arising with rebirth consciousness are heart-base rupas, sex rupas and body-sense rupas, so only temperature,motion or hardness/softness could be experienced I believe). .... >The section in the Satipatthana Sutta on the > "consciousness" foundation, for example, actually doesn't discuss > awareness of > consciousness per se but of various concomitants to and characteristics > of states of > consciousness. ... S: I know you've had further discussion on this. As I read the sutta, under cittanupassana, the object of awareness is citta, e.g the citta rooted in greed and so on. Any citta, eg seeing consciousness or thinking consciousness can be the object of awareness. This is the meaning of cittanupassana. .... > * As you know, my perspective is that with regard to dependent > origination I > view the vi~n~nana/namarupa juncture as the dualizing, subject-object > vortex > point at which avijja, via sankhara, first expresses itself cognitively. .... S: Can we rather say there is the experiencing (vinnana+nama or cetasikas) and the rupa experienced or else simply refer to the arising of the various namas and rupas at the moment of birth together, distinct from the death consciousness and rupas already conditioned at the end of the previous existence? Of course, the new life of namas and rupas is conditioned by previous avijja and sankhara, i.e kamma. Metta, Sarah p.s I agreed with your comments to Phil on pleasant/unpleasant experiences and craving/aversion. Usually attachment 'attaches' to the pleasant and aversion 'is averse' to the unpleasant, but just occasionally, if there is awareness or wise reflection for example, this may not be so for an instant! ================ 52087 From: sarah abbott Date: Wed Nov 2, 2005 11:10pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: What has changed in 2500 years? (Was: Did Buddhaghosa formal meditate? sarahprocter... Hi Hal, --- Hal wrote: > Hi Joop, > > Thanks for your comments. Perhaps the question is no, and as you say, > it is a historical question not an abhidhamma one. Concerning the four > classes of individuals, Ledi Sayadaw cites the Puggala-Pannatti, 160 > and the Anguttara Nikaya (The Fours, No. 133). ... S: Yes, these have been quoted before. Hmmm, try 'neyya' in U.P. and also, 'Sasana -decline' where I believe the quote from the Netti which RobK gave before is given. ... > > Ledi Sayadaw also says: "the five thousand years of the present Buddha > Sasana constitute, all of them, the Age of the Saints. This age of > Saints will continue to exist so long as the Tipitakas (canonical > scriptures) remain in the world" (p.10). I have no idea what the > scriptural source is for the idea of the Buddha's 5000 year > dispensation and the nature of its demise. From an abhidhamma > perspective, couldn't the notion of "accumulations" explain the loss of > the first two classes of persons in our present age? ... S: Again these sources are given from the Vinaya and elsewhere in messages under 'Sasana -decline' in U.P. The length of the dispensation was said to be halved when women were accepted into the bhikkhuni Sangha. Many conditions lead to the decline, including accumulations. Also, of course, the chance to hear 'true dhamma'. I'm also interested to see the source of the suttas you refer to in your message to Phil (#51986). Pls let us know if you or anyone else finds them. With regard to the second one about the man's potential, perhaps this is the one about the man who took to drink and at each step was able to attain less. Eventually, he was not even able to attain any insight. A friend of ours Phra Dhammadharo/Alan Driver used to refer to it a lot - it was his favourite sutta. I've seen it too but can't put a finger on it for now. I hope someone else will help. Metta, Sarah ======= 52088 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Wed Nov 2, 2005 11:11pm Subject: Practice/Ken (Was Re: [dsg] Re: incredible indiaMhaanidana) kenhowardau Hi Matheesha, KH: > > none of us is perfect: we can all lapse into silly, > subconscious ideas about a self that exists now and will continue > into the future where it can become enlightened. ... M: >If you still do that even at times - and still your self view persists, there is obviously no right view. Right view arises only upon attaining the sotapanna state. I wonder if you agree with me? ---------------------------- I agree that supramundane right view (which first arises at Stream- entry) permanently eradicates wrong view. However, right view can also arise in mundane forms. Mundane right view (at the level of satipatthana) gradually eradicates wrong view, but until Stream-entry is reached there is always the risk that wrong view (even if only at a weak level) will occasionally arise. ----------------------------- M: > So without ever having right view, how could you ever have a noble eightfold path according to the KS method (shall we call it that just for the need of a name)? You say you need to have right view to start. Yet your end result is right view as well? ------------------------------- That's right, the Middle Way is with right view all the way - from pariyatti, to patipatti, to pativedha. It is important to know that right view is a conditioned dhamma (panna cetasika). When panna takes a concept as its object we call it "intellectual right view" (pariyatti), when panna takes a conditioned dhamma as its object we call it "mundane right view," (patipatti), and when panna takes Nibbana as its object we call it "supramundane right view" (pativedha). ------------------------------------------------------- <. . .> KH: > > When I write a message for DSG it is with no more idea of > creating conditions for enlightenment than when I play tennis. ......... M: > So if you had to stop discussing the dhamma for the rest of your life you would honestly have no problem with that? :) --------------------------------------------------------- Well, it is my main interest in life, so you couldn't expect me to be happy about it. :-) ------- <. . .> M: > I'm begining to understand you better now. So you dont do anything intentionally, because that would be futile under the 'Right View is the forerunner' of the mahasaccarika sutta. ------- I would phrase that differently, but I'll leave it for now. ------------------------ M: > So what you do do, is to discuss the dhamma etc with no intention of any result in the future. (please bear with me, im repeating it to clarify in my own mind!). That leaves me with the same question. Are you saying that there can be moments of right view even though you are not a sotapanna? ------------------------ Yes, of course! Stream-entry is not a sudden enlightenment by virtue of which an ignorant worldling, enmeshed in wrong views, suddenly becomes a saint. A sotapanna attains supramundane right view as a natural consequence of his highly developed mundane right view. He gained his mundane right view as a natural consequence of his highly developed intellectual right view. Here at DSG, people must occasionally understand the Dhamma correctly - even if it is only at a very elementary level. -------------------------------------- M: > Depends on which angle you look at it, doesnt it? A meditator would say that whole of the satipattana including the bit where the buddha advices monks to go to a forest, a field, a quiet house, sit in the lotus posture and bring mindfulness to the fore and be mindful of the in and out breath is actually formal meditation. ------------------------------------- A Dhamma student would say that the whole of the Satipatthana Sutta, including the bit about the forest, is actually a description of right understanding arising in the natural course of a monk's daily life. A jhana-meditating monk who sits cross-legged in a forest does so with no more desire to attain satipatthana than a monk who plays tennis with his friends (or whatever the equivalent monk activity might be). ------------------ <. . .> M: > If you could sense (with no thinking, only experiencing) awarness merging with a sense door and that in turn giving rise to the appropriate sight, sound etc and be able to see causation in that link and the impermanance in each of these, and see them arising and passing away, I think you would be on the right path. What do you think? ------------------ I don't know what that would be, but it doesn't sound like satipatthana. I could be wrong, but I have never seen satipatthana described that way in the Tipitaka. ------------------------------------ M: > you see my reply (and the image passes away). thoughts form in your mind as an effect of that (and passes away). Intention arises in your mind to type, as an effect of that (and passess away). The action of typing occurs (and passess away). (to put it simply) No need for a self there. But you typed what you wanted to type. ------------------------------------ Strictly speaking, in the example you have given there is "need for a self." You say that I see your reply, but do I see a "reply?" In absolute reality there is no reply: only visible object is seen. In reality, no action of typing occurs. Typing is not real, but volition (cetana-cetasika) can experience the concept of typing. In effect, you are saying, "The text on the computer screen is real, but there is no self who sees it. The act of typing is real, but there is no self who types." But that is not right. You can't have it both ways: if the text is real then so is the person who reads it: if the act of typing is real then so is the person who types. ------------------ M: > On a paramatta level there is no control. On a conventional level there is control (you were able to type what you wanted). I think Sarah would agree with me. ------------------- Obviously, we don't flop about uselessly on the floor, and so in conventional reality there is control. But that is just illusion (pannatti; the product of thinking). In absolute reality, there is no floor and no person typing or flopping about, there are only conditioned dhammas. When dhammas are conditioned in such a way as to produce the illusion of a person typing then the illusion of a person typing is produced. -------------------------------- M: > On a paramatta level everything happened on causes. On a conventional level 'you' were able to type something to 'me', hence 'change'/'control' what i read in your post. :) so what do you think? -------------------------------- :-) I hope by this time you will know what I think. The conventional level is an illusory level. Satipatthana cannot take place on an illusory level. And the Buddha's teaching is satipatthana all the way. Ken H 52089 From: sarah abbott Date: Thu Nov 3, 2005 0:00am Subject: Phil's abhidhamma Qus (was Re: One Month Absence) sarahprocter... Hi Phil, --- Phil wrote: > I was going to get back to you tonight about your question in the > vipaka pardox thread. No, it is not KS who says seeng consciousness > etc > is vipaka, result of kamma. ... S: Yes, seeing consciousness (vipaka) is the result of kamma. Kamma is cetana cetasika, but only naa.nakkha.nika kamma-paccaya (asynchronous kamma condition) can produce vipaka. This cetana accompanying kusala and akusala cittas is still kamma. ... I think she differs from other > Abhidhamma > teachers by saying that it is only kamma patha, deeds of the level > of > transgression, that condition vipaka, whereas others say it is > kusala > or akusal citta of all levels, ie any javana citta. .... S: See 'U.P.' kamma and scroll down to kamma-patha for more. There have been many discussions and I've written a lot (too much as James would say:)). Why bother to distinguish between pakatupanisaya paccaya and kamma paccaya if all kusala and akusal bring results? Why distinguish between the rounds of kusala/akusala and kamma? Why refer to kamma which acts as support condition only in the texts and so on. We raised your qu in India about all the many moments of seeing now. 'One seed can produce many sprouts or results'. .... > back on it. I am reading and reflecting on a lot of suttas in the SN > 35 vagga (?) on the ayatanas (sense bases) A lot in there about how > it is in our response to the lovely and unlovely forms, sounds mind > objects etc that we decline or do not decline from wholesomeness. So > yes, there is the deeply accumulated tendency to proliferate in an > unwholesome way on pleasant objects that arise (wholesome vipaka) > but it is there that we can make progress by responding in a more > mindful way. ... S: not we of course:). ... > > I am still confuse about yoniso manasikara (sp?) because in > Abhidhamma it is one of the universal cetasikas that we would > presumedly not have much direct influence over, but in the suttas it > reads as a point at which great progress can be made. (Buddha said > something like "I know of no other thing by which wholseome state > arise and unwholesome states do not arise" about yoniso m, or words > to that effect.) ... S: Manasikara is a universal cetasika, not yoniso manasikara. We don't have influence over any states of course! Yoniso manasikara in the suttas refers to the wholesome mind door processes with awareness and understanding. With wise attention, the arising of wholesome states will increase and vice versa. Also see more in U.P. under 'yoniso' perhaps. ..... S: Briefly, as Betty hasn't responded yet, to your qu on KS's quote: "if there is metta or karuna or upekkha, but not as the development of more kusala, then it is without panna. Because it is by one's accumulations." Development means that such wholesome states will grow by being understood, especially as anatta. Otherwise, there may or may not be the accumulations for any wholesome states to arise in future and they will continue to be taken for 'mine'. Better an understanding of whatever is conditioned now as a nama or rupa, not 'me' or 'mine' than a trying to have more kusala in anyway. You'll listen to much more on the tapes yourself in due course. These are just my brief reflections. One of your other conditions regarding understanding in #51447 and its growth. It grows by natural decisive support condition (pakatupanissaya)that it grows, not by thinking of a concept of a fallen away moment of understanding. However, I believe the object of understanding may act as arammanupanissaya paccaya (decisive support of object)conditioning yoniso manasikara at the time of wisdom or wise reflection in the way some nice food may be a condition for attachment! Just my quick thoughts. metta, Sarah ======= 52090 From: sarah abbott Date: Thu Nov 3, 2005 0:20am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Jhana as a prerequisite for enlightenment sarahprocter... Hi Steve (& Htoo), --- seisen_au wrote: > > In the PTS translation, the relevant passage of the text of the A-S > > itself reads: "(41) By taking each in five ways by division > according to > > association with jhaana-factors, the unsurpassed consciousness is > said to > > be fortyfold." > > Hmm, so by my reckoning, that would mean 30 out of the 40 possible > magga and phala cittas are without Sammasankappa (Right Thought / > Vitaka)? ... S: 30 or 32? .... Any ref. to a 7 Fold Path? ... S: I see you gave one in the Atthasalini. Also, pls see these posts I've just taken from U.P. which include many detailed references. I don't think there's any doubt about the matter, but Htoo is holding out still:). Jhana13 – vitakka, ‘sevenfold’ path 45633, 47560, 47610 .... > Htoo, I'm not sure you accepted the idea of magga citta without > Sammasamkappa? If not, could you help me understand why you don't > believe this is possible? To my reading the texts seem pretty clear > on this point. ... S: Yes, very clear. I'm not sure Htoo whether any of the teachers you consult share your understanding or whether it's just your own? So far, no reference to suggest otherwise. On the otherhand, I agree with Htoo on the definition of lokuttaraajhaana citta. It's not a ruupaavacara rupa jhaana citta as he said. "When lokuttaraa cittas arise the object is no more jhaana object." We're completely on side here:). Also, as I understand, lokuttarajhana citta can refer to any lokuttara cittas (all of which are lakkanupanijjhana cittas as opposed to aramannupanijjhanna cittas), not just those succeeding (lokiya)jhana cittas which are a 'base'. Metta, Sarah p.s Htoo, w/regard to your post to Joop, I agree with you that when sammaa-samaadhi is defined as the 4 jhaanas, 'jhaana is more favourable' and the Buddha often/usually refers to the 'best' kind or includes all possible kinds of enlightenment factors. a second p.s - Htoo, I was confused by your DT 572 when you referred to one tanhaa that is not the cause of suffering:-/. ========================================= 52091 From: sarah abbott Date: Thu Nov 3, 2005 0:27am Subject: Re: Practice/Ken (Was Re: [dsg] Re: incredible indiaMhaanidana) sarahprocter... Hi Ken H, Did you take the comment about how you looked like a meditator as a compliment? And I didn't know about tennis....I thought no other sport would drag you away from the surf:/. kenhowardau wrote: > Whether you agree with it or not, I can assure you it is the Dhamma. > I am not sure what, exactly, is meant by, "Lovely in the beginning, > lovely in the middle, and lovely in the end," but there is no doubt > the Buddha taught that every absolute reality exists in the present > moment. > > So, one interpretation might be that the beginning, middle and end of > the present moment are lovely if that moment happens to be a Path > moment. Another interpretation might be that the Path is composed > exclusively of kusala (lovely) moments. ... S: I always understood it to refer to the teachings as being lovely or excellent or wonderful throughout. Of course, we can say they are wonderful or lovely because they help us to understand present realities or dhammas for what they are and to eventually lead to the end of samsara, the end of these rotten present realities:). Any comments from anyone welcome. Metta, Sarah ======== 52092 From: "Phil" Date: Thu Nov 3, 2005 0:41am Subject: Phil's abhidhamma Qus (was Re: One Month Absence) philofillet Hi Sarah Ph to James > > I was going to get back to you tonight about your question in the > > vipaka pardox thread. No, it is not KS who says seeng consciousness > > etc > > is vipaka, result of kamma. > ... > S: Yes, seeing consciousness (vipaka) is the result of kamma. Ph: I was going to post again to clarify my above meaning which wasn't clear because I wrote so quickly. I didn't mean KS doesn't say this, but was answering James' question about whether it was from KS (rather than the Buddha's teaching) that I learned that everything we experience through sense doors is vipaka. So what I meant above is that it isn't from KS that this teaching originates - it is Abhidhamma. > Kamma is > cetana cetasika, but only naa.nakkha.nika kamma-paccaya (asynchronous > kamma condition) can produce vipaka. This cetana accompanying kusala and > akusala cittas is still kamma. Ph: asynchronous means the result comes later, perhaps much later, right? Results that come immediately would be through proximity condition, repetition condition, something like that? The cetana of one javana citta gives immeditate rise to the next javana citta through repetition paccaya rather than kamma paccaya? > ... > > I think she differs from other > > Abhidhamma > > teachers by saying that it is only kamma patha, deeds of the level > > of > > transgression, that condition vipaka, whereas others say it is > > kusala > > or akusal citta of all levels, ie any javana citta. > .... > S: See 'U.P.' kamma and scroll down to kamma-patha for more. OK. I will. > There have been many discussions and I've written a lot (too much as James > would say:)). Why bother to distinguish between pakatupanisaya paccaya and > kamma paccaya if all kusala and akusal bring results? Why distinguish > between the rounds of kusala/akusala and kamma? Why refer to kamma which > acts as support condition only in the texts and so on. Ph: This is difficult for me, can't follow. But that's ok. I just find it hard to understand that only kamma patha give rise to all those countless moments of seeing etc. Doesn't make sense to me numerically because the latter are presumedly much much more numerours than the former, but that's ok, really doesn't matter. > We raised your qu in India about all the many moments of seeing now. 'One > seed can produce many sprouts or results'. Ph: Ah, perhaps this is the answer. One kamma-patha can produce many, many moments of seeing. That makes sense. > .... > > back on it. I am reading and reflecting on a lot of suttas in the SN > > 35 vagga (?) on the ayatanas (sense bases) A lot in there about how > > it is in our response to the lovely and unlovely forms, sounds mind > > objects etc that we decline or do not decline from wholesomeness. So > > yes, there is the deeply accumulated tendency to proliferate in an > > unwholesome way on pleasant objects that arise (wholesome vipaka) > > but it is there that we can make progress by responding in a more > > mindful way. > ... > S: not we of course:). Ph: I'm starting to swing back a little to thinking that since we are not sotapanna we can benefit from thinking about progress we make as people, more conventionally. Ironically, it is listening to the Perfections that has influenced me in that direction. Of course energy, patience and so on are momentary cetasikas but in the context of daily life there is inevitably clinging to this Phil who is becoming more patient, more energetic etc. I am aware of it, at least. Listening to the recorded talks, studying Abhidhamma, always keeps me from going too far in this direction, but it is a long, long way until enlightenment and being supported in conventional ways by consideration of progress toward becoming more wholesome people etc doesn't hurt too much, I think. I think my recent realization that if I am honest I don't even want out of samsara has made me more relaxed about all the tons of lobha at the root of Dhamma practice. Thinking about it all the time, but not being too strict about going for a little joy ride with wrong view now and then. A lack of courage, a lack of patience at times, yes. That's ok. As long as I keep studying Abhidhamma and listening to the talks I won't swing too far into interpreting suttas with reckless wrong view rooted in desire to become a better person. > > I am still confuse about yoniso manasikara (sp?) because in > > Abhidhamma it is one of the universal cetasikas that we would > > presumedly not have much direct influence over, but in the suttas it > > reads as a point at which great progress can be made. (Buddha said > > something like "I know of no other thing by which wholseome state > > arise and unwholesome states do not arise" about yoniso m, or words > > to that effect.) > ... > S: Manasikara is a universal cetasika, not yoniso manasikara. We don't > have influence over any states of course! Ph: The little joy ride I took with wrong view this morning told me differently... wink. > Yoniso manasikara in the suttas refers to the wholesome mind door > processes with awareness and understanding. With wise attention, the > arising of wholesome states will increase and vice versa. Also see more in > U.P. under 'yoniso' perhaps. Ph: In A. Sujin's talks I've heard recently, I think it is often said that it is so difficult to know mind door processes. THere is the simile of the sense door process being one piece of ultra thin paper, and the mind door being another. The object goes from the sense door process to the mind door process as quickly as a drop of water from one piece of paper to the next. It is a difficult subject and perhaps I missed the point completely. But it seemed that there cannot be "awareness and understanding" of mind door processes according to that simile? So a more conventional, "slower" if you will, understanding of yoniso manasikara seems very desirable to me. As you say in one talk "we always want more, we always want more..." (After the very funny point where Jon asks just what the adze handle simile refers to, and posits several possibilities at length, then A. Sujin says "it means patience." Very good moment. > ..... > S: Briefly, as Betty hasn't responded yet, to your qu on KS's quote: > "if there is metta or karuna or upekkha, but not as the development of > more kusala, then it is without panna. Because it is by one's > accumulations." > > Development means that such wholesome states will grow by being > understood, especially as anatta. Otherwise, there may or may not be the > accumulations for any wholesome states to arise in future and they will > continue to be taken for 'mine'. Better an understanding of whatever is > conditioned now as a nama or rupa, not 'me' or 'mine' than a trying to > have more kusala in anyway. Ph: So as I suspected I have been using "development" (bhavana) too loosely. Wholesome states must be understand to be accumulated? No, not quite that. I heard yesterday that we accumulate metta in daily life, for example, without understanding it....didn't I? > > You'll listen to much more on the tapes yourself in due course. Ph: Looking forward to it! I hope you are slaving in your Hong Kong Dhamma sweatshop editing out quarrels and churning out CDs at this very moment. Seriously, thanks so much for what you and Jon are doing with these talks. I really feel they are a great source of very good Dhamma that would have been lost far too soon... > One of your other conditions regarding understanding in #51447 and its > growth. It grows by natural decisive support condition > (pakatupanissaya)that it grows, not by thinking of a concept of a fallen > away moment of understanding. However, I believe the object of > understanding may act as > arammanupanissaya paccaya (decisive support of object)conditioning yoniso > manasikara at the time of wisdom or wise reflection in the way some nice > food may be a condition for attachment! Ph: I don't recall what this was, but will look tout de suite. I am curious about how suttas we have read and reflected on in the morning act as conditions for wholesome reflection later in the day. I think one of the aspects that my view might be going a little wrong is placing too much faith in the wholesome conditioning power of reading and reflecting on suttas. But then again, maybe not. Thanks Sarah. Phil 52093 From: "Phil" Date: Thu Nov 3, 2005 1:01am Subject: My story contest entry, summarized philofillet Hi all As a way of conditioning a little more enthusiasm for a story I am entering in a picture book contest here in Japan, I would like to tell you about my story, which I am in the process of getting down on paper. It is in Japanese, but here's a summary. Morning in a garden. The rain stops and the sun comes out. A leaf glittering. A bug named Misuzu (named after my favourite children's poet, Kaneko Misuzu) lands on the leaf. Even though she has been hungering to eat a leaf, she finds she is so grateful to have such a nice leaf to sit on that her desire to eat it goes away. She looks around at everything going on in the garden and wishes that the birds and the cat and the people she sees will be as happy as she is. (note - metta arises in an unexpected way at unexpected times. No need to intend to decide to generate it. But when it does arise, that is the opportunity for it to expand, radiate etc.) A bird sits in the branch above, watching Misuzu the bug. What a delicious looking bug, he thinks, and he hops a little closer. But although he has been hungering to eat a bug, this bug looks so happy that his desire to eat a bug goes away. (note - the metta that Misuzu is radiating protects her, as we know is one of the benefits of metta. Of course I don't talk about that in the story.) The bug notices the bird, and instead of being frightened greets him in a friendly way. They chat about the weather. The bird excuses itself and flies to the next tree, where it sits feeling very happy, perhaps (haven't decided yet) also wishing well to all etc. A cat watches from below, in a bad mood because he is often bullied by a boy these days. He climbs up the tree, ready to pounce on the delicious looking bird. Again, something stops him. The bird notices him, and they chat about the weather. The cat excuses himself, and hops back down to lie in the sun. The mean boy, stone in hand, creeps up on him. But when the cat looks up and sees him, instead of fleeing in terror, he purrs and comes up to him, rubs against his leg in a friendly way. Of course, the boy's mean intentions vanish, and he kneels to pet the cat. The boy's mother (vaguely abusive) who has the same mean features that the boy did, sees the boy neglecting his duties and is just about to scold him fiercely, as always, but the sight of him gently patting the cat stops her. He looks up and sees her and is frightened because he thinks he will be scolded, but she calls him to her, hugs him. The, since it's getting hot and the plants are thirsty, they water the plants together. And at the end, again, a leaf is glistening in the sun, waiting for a bug to land. So small acts rooted in metta, gratitude etc ripple through the world in ways we can't imagine. I hope you enjoyed this summary. I think it's a very nice little story! (No need for comments.) Hopefully I won't be posting here again until I get the thing done. Deadline next Wednesday. Phil 52094 From: "seisen_au" Date: Thu Nov 3, 2005 1:38am Subject: [dsg] Re: Jhana as a prerequisite for enlightenment seisen_au Hi Sarah (& Htoo) > > Hmm, so by my reckoning, that would mean 30 out of the 40 possible > > magga and phala cittas are without Sammasankappa (Right Thought / > > Vitaka)? > ... > S: 30 or 32? > .... Ahh, yes 32. The only magga and phala with Sammasankappa would be Stream-entrant, Once-returner, Non-returner and Arahant Path and Fruition cittas at the level of 1st lokuttarajjhana > Jhana13 – vitakka, `sevenfold' path > 45633, 47560, 47610 Thanks, I'll take a look. > On the otherhand, I agree with Htoo on the definition of >lokuttaraajhaana citta. It's not a ruupaavacara rupa jhaana citta as >he said. No disagreements there, lokuttarajjhana cittas are neither rupa nor arupa jhana cittas. >"When lokuttaraa cittas arise the object is no more jhaana object." >We're completely on side here:). I would say that the object of lokuttarajjhana is Nibbana. >Also, as I understand, lokuttarajhana citta can > refer to any lokuttara cittas (all of which are lakkanupanijjhana >cittas as opposed to aramannupanijjhanna cittas), not just those >succeeding (lokiya)jhana cittas which are a 'base'. Ya, I agree. > a second p.s - Htoo, I was confused by your DT 572 when you >referred to one tanhaa that is not the cause of suffering:-/. > ========================================= Not sure about the context that Htoo was talking about but to me it seems there is a type of tanha that does not condition rebirth. In a sense I think that could be called a tanha that does not produce suffering(five khandhas)? Its from the commentary to : `This body comes into being through craving. And yet it is by relying on craving that craving is to be abandoned.' (Anguttara Nikaya IV.159, Bhikkhuni Sutta) Commentary: Based on the present craving [ta.nhaa] (i. e., desire for becoming an Arahant), he gives up previous craving that was the root-cause of (one's involvement in) the cycle of rebirth. Now (it may be asked) whether such present craving (for Arahantship) is wholesome [kusala] or unwholesome [akusala]? It is unwholesome. Should it be pursued or not? It should be pursued [sevitabbaa]. Does it drag one into rebirth [pa.tisandhi.m aaka.d.dhati] or not? It does not drag one into rebirth. Steve 52095 From: "gazita2002" Date: Thu Nov 3, 2005 2:34am Subject: Phil's abhidhamma Qus (was Re: One Month Absence) gazita2002 --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Phil" wrote: > > > Hi Sarah ....snip.... > > You'll listen to much more on the tapes yourself in due course. > > Ph: Looking forward to it! I hope you are slaving in your Hong Kong > Dhamma sweatshop editing out quarrels and churning out CDs at this > very moment. Seriously, thanks so much for what you and Jon are > doing with these talks. I really feel they are a great source of > very good Dhamma that would have been lost far too soon... hello Phil and Sarah, oh yes, Phil, u should hear what has to be deleted prior to publication :-0 - no, i'm jesting. i wish to second your thanks to S & J for all the work they do with these recordings. I find them so valuable. Anumodana to Sarah and Jon. the more i hear, the more i know i don't know - does that make sense? i remember feeling overwhelmed in india, not unpleasantly so more like in awe of the profoundness of the dhamma. at one point, the realisation of just how profound it is, almost took my breath away. Sounds rather theatrical, I know, but at that moment that is how it affected me. it is rather special being in the Buddha Holy Places, like Bodh Gaya where the Buddha attained enlightenment, and very special was Kushinagar where the Buddha attained parinibbana. There were a great number of Korean nuns there at the same time as we were, and their chanting inside the shrine was like heavenly beings voices [or what i imagine h.v. to sound]. may we have much patience, courage and good cheer azita 52096 From: sarah abbott Date: Thu Nov 3, 2005 5:18am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Jhana as a prerequisite for enlightenment sarahprocter... Hi Steve (& Htoo), --- seisen_au wrote: > Ahh, yes 32. The only magga and phala with Sammasankappa would be > Stream-entrant, Once-returner, Non-returner and Arahant Path and > Fruition cittas at the level of 1st lokuttarajjhana ... S: Yes ... > > a second p.s - Htoo, I was confused by your DT 572 when you > >referred to one tanhaa that is not the cause of suffering:-/. > > ========================================= > > Not sure about the context that Htoo was talking about ... S: I should have given the post # too. It was #51354. Maybe you can see if it makes better sense to you. It was a particular context. .... >but to me it > seems there is a type of tanha that does not condition rebirth. In a > sense I think that could be called a tanha that does not produce > suffering(five khandhas)? Its from the commentary to : > > `This body comes into being through craving. And yet it is by relying > on craving that craving is to be abandoned.' (Anguttara Nikaya > IV.159, Bhikkhuni Sutta) ... S: Yes here, craving is a condition (natural decisive support condition) for insight. (As we know, unwholesome states can condition wholesome ones and vice versa in this way). .... > > Commentary: > > Based on the present craving [ta.nhaa] (i. e., desire for becoming an > Arahant), he gives up previous craving that was the root-cause of > (one's involvement in) the cycle of rebirth. Now (it may be asked) > whether such present craving (for Arahantship) is wholesome [kusala] > or unwholesome [akusala]? It is unwholesome. Should it be pursued > or not? It should be pursued [sevitabbaa]. Does it drag one into > rebirth [pa.tisandhi.m aaka.d.dhati] or not? It does not drag one > into rebirth. ... S: Yes, this is always a difficult passage. I don't think that sevitabba here means that the unwholesome tendency should be pursued or followed, but that the path to arahantship should be followed, 'acting upon' any craving already arisen. If such craving is a condition for insight and enlightenment, it doesn't drag one into rebirth at such a time. More to reflect on. Look f/w to any more of your or Htoo's comments. Metta, Sarah ======== 52097 From: upasaka@... Date: Thu Nov 3, 2005 1:40am Subject: Re: [dsg] Did Buddhaghosa (formal) meditate? (Was: Reasons for staying on DSG upasaka_howard Hi, Sarah (and Joop) - In a message dated 11/3/05 1:04:25 AM Eastern Standard Time, sarahprocterabbott@... writes: > Regarding BB's comment on Nyanaponika's statement about the impermanence > of concepts, see #50851. Concepts are 'imagined' or thought about. They > don't have characteristics (lakkhana) and cannot be said to be anicca and > therefore cannot be said to be dukkha either. We read again and again > about the impermanence of the khandhas only. > ===================== It seems to me that the problem with this topic lies in language use. When we say that we feel warmth, that way of speaking suggests an actually arising element of physical experience called "warmth." Likewise, when we say that concepts are thought about or imagined, that suggests actually existing (mental) things called "concepts". What I think is actually the case is that concept talk is mere manner of speaking. There are, in fact, no things called "concepts". It is not that literally "We imagine concepts," the form of that sentence suggesting a relation of imagining between a thing called "we" and mental things called "concepts," but rather that a process of thinking or imagining projects (or makes-seem-to-appear) things that do not in truth arise at all, and we apply the term 'concept' in this context. What actually occurs in this context, is a thought-process, and nothing more. 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) 52098 From: "nidive" Date: Thu Nov 3, 2005 6:41am Subject: Re: Conditions Part 20 - Dissociation Condition (vippayutta-paccaya) nidive Hi Sarah, > > And I guess the Buddha was wrong as well. > ... > S: ???? This was with regard to conditions and right understanding. > Please clarify! The Buddha was wrong because he taught a Noble Eightfold Path. The ideal case would be a Noble Onefold Path as powerfully illustrated by the panna conascence predominance condition. Therefore, the Buddha never actually attained nibbana because he got it all wrong in the first place. He should have discovered the panna conascence predominance condition first! Isn't the Buddha deluded? Regards, Swee Boon 52099 From: "nidive" Date: Thu Nov 3, 2005 7:11am Subject: Re: [dsg] Did Buddhaghosa (formal) meditate? (Was: Reasons for staying on DSG nidive Hi All, > > Regarding BB's comment on Nyanaponika's statement about the > > impermanence of concepts, see #50851. Concepts are 'imagined' > > or thought about. They don't have characteristics (lakkhana) > > and cannot be said to be anicca and therefore cannot be said > > to be dukkha either. This topic is so silly I decided to declare that: Concepts are anicca, concepts are dukkha and concepts are anatta! How so? "Self" is a concept. There are moments where "Self" arises and there are moments where "Self" does not arise. The very arising of "Self" is dukkha. What is anicca and dukkha is anatta. Even so, "Self" itself is not- self. Regards, Swee Boon 52100 From: upasaka@... Date: Thu Nov 3, 2005 2:36am Subject: Re: [dsg] Did Buddhaghosa (formal) meditate? (Was: Reasons for staying on DSG upasaka_howard Hi, Swee Boon - In a message dated 11/3/05 10:12:57 AM Eastern Standard Time, nidive@... writes: > Hi All, > > >>Regarding BB's comment on Nyanaponika's statement about the > >>impermanence of concepts, see #50851. Concepts are 'imagined' > >>or thought about. They don't have characteristics (lakkhana) > >>and cannot be said to be anicca and therefore cannot be said > >>to be dukkha either. > > This topic is so silly I decided to declare that: > > Concepts are anicca, concepts are dukkha and concepts are anatta! > > How so? > > "Self" is a concept. > > There are moments where "Self" arises and there are moments where > "Self" does not arise. > > The very arising of "Self" is dukkha. > > What is anicca and dukkha is anatta. Even so, "Self" itself is not- > self. > > Regards, > Swee Boon > ========================= Figuratively I agree with you, but literally not. There are certainly times at which a thinking process surmises a self. But I don't think that there is any specific aspect of the namic flow that we can point to and identify as "the concept of self". There are aspects of the namic flow that are pleasant, unpleasant, or neutral feeling, aspects that are emotions of liking or of disliking, aspects that are operations of recognition, and aspects that are moments within a process of thinking. But nowhere to actually be found, I believe, are so called concepts. There are just thinking processes, some fully conscious and some subliminal. 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) 52101 From: "nidive" Date: Thu Nov 3, 2005 7:54am Subject: Re: [dsg] Did Buddhaghosa (formal) meditate? (Was: Reasons for staying on DSG nidive Hi Howard, > But nowhere to actually be found, I believe, are so called concepts. > There are just thinking processes, some fully conscious and some > subliminal. I once suggested to Sarah that so-called "concepts" actually falls under the aggregate of fabrications, but I think she rejected it. What is "Self", other than a fabrication? -------------------------------------------------------------------- http://accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/samyutta/sn22-081.html "Well then -- knowing in what way, seeing in what way, does one without delay put an end to the effluents? There is the case where an uninstructed, run-of-the-mill person -- who has no regard for noble ones, is not well-versed or disciplined in their Dhamma; who has no regard for men of integrity, is not well-versed or disciplined in their Dhamma -- assumes form to be the self. That assumption is a fabrication. Now what is the cause, what is the origination, what is the birth, what is the coming-into-existence of that fabrication? To an uninstructed, run-of-the-mill person, touched by that which is felt born of contact with ignorance, craving arises. That fabrication is born of that. And that fabrication is inconstant, fabricated, dependently co-arisen. That craving... That feeling... That contact... That ignorance is inconstant, fabricated, dependently co-arisen. It is by knowing & seeing in this way that one without delay puts an end to the effluents. -------------------------------------------------------------------- Regards, Swee Boon 52102 From: "icarofranca" Date: Thu Nov 3, 2005 9:35am Subject: Re: [dsg] Did Buddhaghosa (formal) meditate? (Was: Reasons for staying on DSG icarofranca Hi Nidive! This issue about Concepts is a recurrent theme here: once and again we circle around words (Pali and English) and definitions... they are raised out over things known or that make known - forms like lakes, mountains, groups of objects or beings like a squad of chariots or a row of tables, locality, time, images, visualized images and so on, and their respective ideas nurtured out on mind by them: all this is Sammuit-sacca, mere conventional truths. Paramattha_sacca abide on an all-different level of mind - this can include Lokiya (mundane) ones like many emotions connected with Viññana, Cetasika ( there are good Cetasikas and ill-posed cetasikas, Kusala and Akusala) or Rupas and finnaly the supramundane realm, the Nibbbana. There are a lot of work on classificating emotions and sattes of Consciousness on these Categories. > I once suggested to Sarah that so-called "concepts" actually falls > under the aggregate of fabrications, but I think she rejected it. > > What is "Self", other than a fabrication? No. Self and No-self (Dhamma) are devoid of this idea of fabrication, that would implicate on an old Philosophical Question: if the self was fabricated, who fabricated it ? Another self ? The external circunstances ? And how they made it anyway ? All the Dhammas are an union between Mind and Object of Mind ( no idea of "Self" imbricated here)...and even the noblest Dhamma is devoided of permanence. Take your pick! []s Ícaro > > ------------------------------------------------------------------- - > http://accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/samyutta/sn22-081.html > > "Well then -- knowing in what way, seeing in what way, does one > without delay put an end to the effluents? There is the case where an > uninstructed, run-of-the-mill person -- who has no regard for noble > ones, is not well-versed or disciplined in their Dhamma; who has no > regard for men of integrity, is not well-versed or disciplined in > their Dhamma -- assumes form to be the self. That assumption is a > fabrication. Now what is the cause, what is the origination, what is > the birth, what is the coming-into-existence of that fabrication? To > an uninstructed, run-of-the-mill person, touched by that which is felt > born of contact with ignorance, craving arises. That fabrication is > born of that. And that fabrication is inconstant, fabricated, > dependently co-arisen. That craving... That feeling... That contact... > That ignorance is inconstant, fabricated, dependently co-arisen. It is > by knowing & seeing in this way that one without delay puts an end to > the effluents. > ------------------------------------------------------------------- - > > Regards, > Swee Boon > 52103 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Thu Nov 3, 2005 5:08pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Jhana as a prerequisite for enlightenment kenhowardau Hi Sarah and Steve, Steve: > > . . . >but to me it > seems there is a type of tanha that does not condition rebirth. In a > sense I think that could be called a tanha that does not produce > suffering(five khandhas)? Its from the commentary to : > > `This body comes into being through craving. And yet it is by relying > on craving that craving is to be abandoned.' (Anguttara Nikaya > IV.159, Bhikkhuni Sutta) ... Sarah: > Yes here, craving is a condition (natural decisive support condition) for insight. (As we know, unwholesome states can condition wholesome ones and vice versa in this way). .... Steve:> > > Commentary: > > Based on the present craving [ta.nhaa] (i. e., desire for becoming an > Arahant), he gives up previous craving that was the root-cause of > (one's involvement in) the cycle of rebirth. Now (it may be asked) > whether such present craving (for Arahantship) is wholesome [kusala] > or unwholesome [akusala]? It is unwholesome. Should it be pursued > or not? It should be pursued [sevitabbaa]. Does it drag one into > rebirth [pa.tisandhi.m aaka.d.dhati] or not? It does not drag one > into rebirth. ... Sarah: >Yes, this is always a difficult passage. ----------------- It reminds me of another difficult passage that gives the simile of a running man who thinks, "Why don't I slow to a walk", and having slowed to a walk, "Why don't I stand still" . . . "Why don't I sit?" . . ."Why don't I lie down?" I think that simile was given with reference to the way the hindrances to jhana can be overcome. The Bhikkhuni Sutta seems to be referring to a similar process leading to the development of vipassana. -------------------------------------------- Sarah: > I don't think that sevitabba here means that the unwholesome tendency should be pursued or followed, -------------------------------------------- I agree: otherwise the man in the simile would not have said, "Having slowed to a walk, why don't I stand still?" he would have said, "Having slowed to a walk, why don't I continue walking?" ------------------------------------------------------------- Sarah: > but that the path to arahantship should be followed, 'acting upon' any craving already arisen. If such craving is a condition for insight and enlightenment, it doesn't drag one into rebirth at such a time. ------------------------------------------------------------ I like that explanation - although the 'running man' simile has it happening in several stages. Perhaps I am taking it too far, but I wonder if we could say; strong akusala can be a condition for weak akusala - can be a condition for kusala - can be a condition for strong kusala without panna - can be a condition for kusala with panna - can be a condition for strong kusala with panna - can be a condition for supramundane kusala - can be a condition for viriya with panna. Ken H PS: Yes, Sarah, of course I like looking like a meditator! Why else would I have shaved off a full head of thick, wavy hair? :-) 52104 From: "Sukinder" Date: Thu Nov 3, 2005 9:12pm Subject: Re: India Photos sukinderpal Dear Sarah (Christine *), I have only now found time to respond to this. You wrote: > I made a reference to your 'highlight' of the trip regarding > 'thinking about thinking'. Could you elaborate for us? It wasn't a highlight or anything like that, but something I noted as happening to me when it seemed that others were having spontaneous kusala arise on being at the holy places. This may be because I almost never read the suttas, so in my mind there are hardly any stories about Buddha and his life and times. I realize though, that on another level, one might think about the Teachings, feel grateful about them, and also see the significance of these holy places, in that they were "only here" that the events connected to Buddha's life *could* have taken place. That is, He could not have been born any where else, enlightened any where else, taught his first sermon anywhere else nor chosen to pass away anywhere else. But such thoughts almost never arose and if it did, was never associated with any sati and panna. :-/ What happened instead was that I thought them all to be concepts, and there was reflecting about how this was so natural to arise. Different people will have different concepts arising while in those places, all of which is largely influenced by accumulations. Other influences would be the present conditions, including health, weather conditions and any stories about `self' and `other' going through one's mind. Actually, my main interest for going to India was to have the chance to associate for an extended period of time, with wise friends, thinking that we may have lots of discussions (though this did not happen). But of course this is an example of conditioned 'thinking' that I have just been referring to. Believe it or not, I did not even have the idea that we were traveling to "The Four Holy Places" and the significance of this. I realized this only half way through our tour :-p. But this is my accumulations; I don't register with enthusiasm any stories about events in my life. So I guess I am not a person to ask about `highlights' ;-). Wanted to write more on this topic, particularly the relationship between suttamaya panna, cintamaya panna and bhavanamaya panna, but maybe will do so in another post. Metta, Sukin. Ps: Christine, thanks for the photo you sent me off-list. It was too big for my very slow internet connection, but I finally downloaded it. I will create a separate album to place this picture in, but will have to significantly reduce the size. Would you like to upload other photos into the album? If so, here is my log-in name and password: Name: sukinderpal Password: harkaran 52105 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri Nov 4, 2005 0:33am Subject: ‘Cetasikas' study corner 300 Aversion-dosa (i) sarahprocter... Dear Friends, 'Cetasikas' by Nina van Gorkom http://www.vipassana.info/cetasikas.html http://www.zolag.co.uk/ Questions, comments and different views welcome;-) ========================================== [Ch18 - Aversion (dosa)] So long as we cling to the pleasant “worldly conditions” (lokadhammas) of gain, fame, praise and well-being, we are bound to have aversion when they change. They change all the time but we forget that they are impermanent. When we lose possessions, when we do not receive honour, when we are blamed or when we suffer pain, we have aversion and sadness. Right understanding of realities, of kamma and vipåka, can help us to be more evenminded about pleasant and unpleasant things which happen to us. When we experience unpleasant objects through the senses, it is caused by akusala kamma, by unwholesome deeds which have been committed already, and nobody can avoid akusala vipåka when it is the right time for its arising. When we understand that aversion about akusala vipåka is not helpful, there can be “wise attention” instead of “unwise attention” to the objects which are experienced. There may be intellectual understanding of realities but this understanding cannot eradicate dosa and the other defilements. Only right understanding developed in vipassanå can eradicate them. ***** [Aversion (dosa) to be contd] Metta, Sarah ====== 52106 From: upasaka@... Date: Fri Nov 4, 2005 1:01am Subject: Two Items upasaka_howard Hi, all - The first item is a Beliefnet quote, from, I presume, a Japanese Buddhist: _______________________ "If you wish to understand yourself, you must succeed in doing so in the midst of all kinds of confusions and upsets. Don't make the mistake of sitting dead in the cold ashes of a withered tree. -Emyo" I take this to mean that meditation that leads to wisdom is not a mere absorbed quietism, but a clear attention to whatever arises under all conditions. _______________________ The second item is the relating of an event of yesterday's, and a moral I draw from it: My wife and I were walking through a parking lot to get to our car. As we passed behind a large, parked SUV, the driver, not seeing us, started to back out right into us. My wife hadn't noticed this. I, who have cultivated the habit of paying attention to what is happening at the moment, did notice it. I put my hand out and pushed my wife back as I also moved back out of the way. (My wife said "Wow, you actually saved my life!") a) Had I not cultivated the habit of ongoing attention, I might well have not noticed that car. b) Had I not, quite consciously, determinedly, and intentionally moved my wife and myself out of harm's way, but instead "waited for conditions" to somehow arise, I might not be here to write this. [Note to all folks who reply to posts not by addressing the content, but by instead saying "That's all concept": All mention of "I", "my", "wife", "parking lot", "SUV", "hand", etc, etc, etc is figurative language, and I know that!] 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) 52107 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Fri Nov 4, 2005 6:11am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Kusala and akusala development (was, incredible india) jonoabb Hi Swee Boon nidive wrote: >Hi Jon, > >I don't think our discussion is going to be fruitful. But just want to >note this point. > > >>It is my understanding that Right Livelihood for a monk is to do >>with the observance of the vinaya and the performance of his daily >>alms round. >> > >The observance of the Vinaya is to support the "formal practice" as >laid out in the whole of DN 22. It can be said that everything in the >Vinaya revolves around DN 22. > >True bhikkhus do not eat alms food for nothing. They eat alms food to >maintain their bodies so that they have the energy to undertake the >"formal practice" as laid out in the whole of DN 22. > Yes, the goal and purpose of the living of the monk's life is the development of the path as laid out in the teachings and in the Satipatthana Sutta in particular. I agree with you that mere observance of the monks' rules without this would not constitute the monk's life properly lived. However, I think we should be careful about equating the development of the path with 'formal practice'. After all, the section on mindfulness of breathing is only a small part of the Satipatthana Sutta, and there are many instances in the texts of persons attaining enlightenment without any apparent 'formal practice'. Jon 52108 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Fri Nov 4, 2005 6:16am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: SN 35:234 - Ananda explains that seeing (etc) is not self jonoabb Hi Tep Thanks for including me in your post. You would like to encourage Phil to give up on the reading of suttas and the thinking that is conditined by that, which is getting him nowhere, and take up meditation, which will bring pretty well immediate results. Let's not forget, however, that meditation can never constitute more than a minor part of one's day (whether monk or layperson). So what about the rest of the day? Surely the development of satipatthana is something that may potentially occur at any time of the day or night, regardless of the present activity or mental state (see the Satipatthana Sutta). Jon Tep Sastri wrote: >Hi, Phil (Attn. Matheesha, James, Jon)- >... >Tep: Don't you think that the udayabbhaya-nnana will never arise if you >keep on thinking and being attached to the definition of the Principal >Insights? Just leave the concepts alone, put the books back on the >book shelf and start to do some "formal meditation" -- e.g. breathing >meditation as described in DN 22 or in the Breathing Treatise. There is >no thinking when you are mindfully aware of the in-breaths and out- >breaths. ... > > 52109 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Fri Nov 4, 2005 6:21am Subject: Re: [dsg] Conditions Part 20 - Dissociation Condition (vippayutta-paccaya) jonoabb Hi Howard and Mateesha I am not going to join in this discussion, but am wondering if there may not be some confusion regarding terminology here. upasaka@... wrote: >Hi again, Matheesha - > >>>[2] "Furthermore, the monk remains focused on mental qualities in & >>>of themselves with reference to the five aggregates for >>>clinging/sustenance. And how does he remain focused on mental >>>qualities in &of themselves with reference to the five aggregates >>>for clinging/sustenance? There is the case where a monk >>>[discerns]: 'Such is form, such its origination, such its >>>disappearance. Such is feeling... Such is perception...Such are >>>fabrications...Such is consciousness, such its origination, such its >>>disappearance.' >>> >>>I think it is in the dhammanupassana section, unless i have >>>understood the sutta incorrectly. >>> >>>cheers >>> >>>Matheesha >>> >>> >>========================= >> I'm not following you, I'm afraid. What you quoted seems to support >>what I said. I don't believe that anywhere in the Satipatthana Sutta there >>is >>explicit mention of mindfulness of awareness, per se. >> >>With metta, >>Howard >> >> >====================== > I have reread what you quoted, and I see that I was wrong. Your main >point, I realize, was the line "Such is consciousness, such its origination, >such its >disappearance." This, of course, is awareness of awareness. I stand >corrected. > >With metta, >Howard > > Howard, when you say 'awareness of awareness', do you by any chance mean awareness of consciousness (using the terminology of the passage quoted by Mateesha)? Jon 52110 From: "nidive" Date: Fri Nov 4, 2005 6:22am Subject: Re: [dsg] Did Buddhaghosa (formal) meditate? (Was: Reasons for staying on DSG nidive Hi Ícaro, > if the self was fabricated, who fabricated it ? Another self ? The > external circunstances ? And how they made it anyway ? Fabrications fabricate themselves! And because fabrications fabricate themselves seemingly without an end in sight, the escape from samsara is not discerned. But in one who sees rightly that very remainderless cessation of fabrications, the escape from samsara is made known. Regards, Swee Boon 52111 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Fri Nov 4, 2005 6:33am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: kamma and its cessation jonoabb Hi Mateesha matheesha wrote: >Hi Larry, Tep, > > Matheesha: If arahaths have > > >>>nothing but wholesome roots, why dont they create kusala kamma?" >>> >>> >Larry: > That's just the way it is ;-) > >M: oh dear, dogmatic answer of the year! :)) > >nevermind, :) > >Ok, lets try another route - what is it in normal people that helps >give rise to good kamma (other than alobha, adosa, amoha)? i cant >help thinking it has something to do with the idea of self or the >desire to be. > > The types of consciousness comprising the mind-stream of worldlings and the 'lesser' ariyans include kusala, akusala, vipaka and kiriya. The types of consciousness comprising the mind-stream of the arahant include only vipaka and kiriya. This is as a result of the final eradication of all vestiges of aksuala at the moment of path consciousness. So I think the answer to the question you pose above must be: the presence of cittas of the kusala and akusala jatis. I hope this helps resolve your query. (I think Larry's answer was also one way of putting it ;-)) Jon 52112 From: upasaka@... Date: Fri Nov 4, 2005 1:39am Subject: Re: [dsg] Conditions Part 20 - Dissociation Condition (vippayutta-paccaya) upasaka_howard Hi, Jon - In a message dated 11/4/05 9:24:50 AM Eastern Standard Time, jonabbott@... writes: > Howard, when you say 'awareness of awareness', do you by any chance mean > awareness of consciousness (using the terminology of the passage quoted > by Mateesha)? > ====================== Yes, of course. I'm using 'consciousness' and 'awareness' as synonyms. Also, I am not assuming that an act of consciousness takes *itself* as object any more than I think that a mirror can directly reflect itself. (When I sometimes speak of nondual awareness, I am speaking of experience freed of the subject-object split, with there being *neither* subject nor object. I do not assume a mindstate with itself as object.) 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) 52113 From: "Joop" Date: Fri Nov 4, 2005 0:17pm Subject: [dsg] Re: What has changed in 2500 years? (Was: Did Buddhaghosa formal meditate? jwromeijn Dear Hal, Phil, Sarah A message is never to long for me. I try to combine some reactons. 1. Phil, thanks for your reaction and description about the situation in Japan and your own conversion to Theravada. You said: "But I don't think modernizing Theravada to make it more accessible to people is the way to go. (I think that is what you have proposed or discussed in the past, forgive me if I'm wrong.) We shouldn't change the Buddha's teaching to make it more palatable, I think." This is what I proposed in message #51891 "The future of (Theravada-) Buddhism": A. Theravada without monks B. Taking parts of the Pali-canon not literal but metaphorical C. Theravada with less ritual activities, less dhamma-study and more meditation Now I think one should better say: 'an other kind of dhamma-study' in stead of 'less dhamma-study' But that was not in the first place a neutral proposal, but also a wish of me (I take parts of the Pali-canon not literal; to me there is not a fundamental difference laypersons-monks) and a prognose about the way Theravada evolve! Your reaction, Phil, not to change the teachings of the Buddha is the same as Sarahs: "… but I think that any such attempts to 'simplify' the teachings or bring them into conformity with other ideas simply hastens the decline further." Joop: Well, I'm more optimistic. I have studied the last month about the introduction of Buddhism in China (O.K. it was Mahayana, so not the pure thing). It's fascinating how it was combined with for example Daoism. And I think in the way Theravada will evolve in Western countries, the so important doctrines anatta, anicca and dukkha will clearly exist in the future. 2. An other way? Phil: " The good news, I think, that no matter where people are caught along the way, as long as they have come across Dhamma, they will benefit. That's the beautiful thing. So instead of hoping to move the pure source of Dhamma closer to the mouth of the river where the new Buddhists come in, why not just accept that everyone will respond to a different degree of Dhamma according to their conditions, and leave it at that?" Joop: That's a good formulae; I'm not sure you mean it as an alternative for my 'proposal' or an addition? 3. The selection of messages in U.P. under the heading 'Sasana - decline' is very past-oriented, none of them is future-oriented, and that's the way of thinking I prefer. 4. The five thousand years existing Buddha Sasana (after which it will decline) is mentioned in the Vinya. But there it was after five hundred years! Some commentary made five thousand of it, in my opinion with an opportunistic reason. The five hundred years are already gone, so we had to say: the Buddha was to modest about the impact of his Teachings (we remember that after his awakening he first would not teach at all because people should not get it). 5. Sarah: "Many conditions lead to the decline, including accumulations. Also, of course, the chance to hear 'true dhamma'." Joop: but also many conditions can lead to the rise of Buddha Sasana, for example the fact that more and more persons see (the proofs) that the Buddha was right. That for example neuroscientific research shows that the idea of arising and falling away of phenomena is correct. 6. Sarah: But looking at the overall picture, there's a decline as the Buddha predicted. Eventually the teachings will die out completely, starting with the Abhidhamma and then starting with the Patthana. Eventually there will be a day when the outer trimmings may appear to be there, but there's no understanding at all. Eventually all trace of the relics will disappear and only when there is no Dhamma at all available will a new Buddha appear. I don't see how anyone can read suttas, such as DN27, Agga~n~na Sutta with confidence in the Buddha's teachings, doubting about the changes in world systems. Joop: That relics will disappear don't interest me at all. And I did reread the Agganna Sutta you mentioned (DN27): a great myth but no proof for your (and many Theravadins) pessimism. 7. Theravada will disappear when Theravadins only want to protect it in a conservative (meant literal) way. I think the core of it has more possibilities in the way of the program (because that's what it is) of Nyanaponika that I quote one time more. Metta Joop In the preface to his Abhidhamma Studies, Nyanaponika states: "There is no reason why the Abhidhamma philosophy of the Southern or Theravada tradition should stagnate today or why its further development should not be resumed. In fact, through many centuries there has been a living growth of Abhidhamma thought ... There are are a vast number of subjects in the canonical and commentarial Abhidhamma literature that deserve and require closer investigation and new presentation in the language of our time. There are many lines of thought, only briefly sketched in Abhidhamma tradition, that merit detailed treatment in connection with parallel tendencies in modern thought. … Abhidhamma is meant for enquiring spirits who are not satisfied by monotonously and uncritically repeating ready-made terms, even if these are Abhidhamma terms. Abhidhamma is for imaginative minds who are able to fill in, as it were, the columns of the tabulations, for which the canonical Abhidhamma books have furnished the concise headings. The Abhidhamma is not for those timid souls who are not content that a philosophical thought should not actually contradict Buddhist tradition, but demand that it must be expressly, even literally, supported by canonical or commentarial authority. Such an attitude is contrary to the letter and the spirit of the Buddha- Dhamma. It would mean that the Abhidhamma philosophy must remain within the limits of whatever has been preserved of the traditional exegetical literature and hence will cease to be a living and growing organism … We are convinced that the Abhidhamma, if suitably presented, could also enrich modern non-Buddhist thought, … It is … important that the Buddhist way of presenting and solving the respective problems should show modern independent thinkers new vistas and open new avenues of thought, which in turn might revive Buddhist philosophy in the East. (page XXVII-XXVIII) 52114 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Fri Nov 4, 2005 6:18pm Subject: [dsg] Re: SN 35:234 - Ananda explains / One More Loose End ! buddhistmedi... Hi, Jon - > Jon : >Thanks for including me in your post. Tep: I just thought that this time we might be able to tie a few loose ends that we had in the past. My previous dialogue with Phil (# 51955) was : > >Phil : Again, if it were me, this would just be thinking. As far as I know, this sutta shows us the case of a monk who has reached at least the level of insight known as udayabbhaya-nnana, "knowledge of the arising and falling away of nama and rupa", one of the Maha- viapassana-nnana. That ain't me. > Tep: Don't you think that the udayabbhaya-nnana will never arise if you keep on thinking and being attached to the definition of the Principal Insights? Just leave the concepts alone, put the books back on the book shelf and start to do some "formal meditation" -- e.g. breathing meditation as described in DN 22 or in the Breathing Treatise. There is no thinking when you are mindfully aware of the in- breaths and out-breaths. That's when you know what it means by "unification and non-distraction" of the cognizance. ..................................... Tep: And my reply to James, Howard, and Phil in # 51969 (that they did not respond) was : Hi, James (Howard and Phil) - It is true that there are varieties of "meditation" in DN 22 but all of them are inward, not outward ( toward ideas learned from books, reflecting a dhamma while driving your car to work, or thinking about anything). I mentioned the breathing meditation to Phil because it is just the most important one( at least for me) in the first foundation group (kaaye kaayaanupassi viharati). It is clearly a formal meditation, while thinking and reflecting with book knowledge is not. >James : I believe that Phil, during his morning sutta reflection, is practicing formal meditation as taught by the Buddha. In the Satipatthana Sutta, the Longer Discourse, in the section on the contemplation of mental objects, the Buddha recommends the contemplation of the Four Noble Truths. ...So, when Phil contemplates a sutta in the morning and throughout the day- if he keeps in mind how the sutta applies to the Four Noble Truths- he is indeed practicing satipatthana as taught by the Buddha. Tep: Why? Could you please explain to me what it means to you by "contemplation of the Four Noble Truths (FNT)", according to the Buddha? In particular, please explain what you mean by keeping "in mind how the sutta applies to the Four Noble Truths" and why is 'dhammanupassana' of the FNT the same as that? It is great that you initiated a discussion on the DN 22, which is the basic sutta all members of DSG say they know very well. But I do not recall we have ever had a detailed examination of this important sutta (since I joined the group in Nov 2004). Perhaps, we'll find out if our claim that we 'know the sutta very well' is just another version of "the ten blind men and the elephant". I look forward to learning a lot from you and Howard. [end of message # 51969] ........................ > Jon: > You would like to encourage Phil to give up on the reading of suttas and the thinking that is conditined by that, which is getting him nowhere, and take up meditation, which will bring pretty well immediate results. > Tep: Nope, I did not encourage hime to stop reading/studying the suttas. My purpose was given above in the message # 51969. Respectfully, Tep ======= --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Jonothan Abbott wrote: > > Hi Tep > (snipped) > Let's not forget, however, that meditation can never constitute more > than a minor part of one's day (whether monk or layperson). So what > about the rest of the day? Surely the development of satipatthana is > something that may potentially occur at any time of the day or night, > regardless of the present activity or mental state (see the Satipatthana > Sutta). > > Jon > 52115 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Fri Nov 4, 2005 6:55pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Conditions Part 20 - Dissociation Condition (vippayutta-paccaya) jonoabb Hi Howard --- upasaka@... wrote: > Hi, Jon - > > In a message dated 11/4/05 9:24:50 AM Eastern Standard Time, > jonabbott@... writes: > > > Howard, when you say 'awareness of awareness', do you by any chance > mean > > awareness of consciousness (using the terminology of the passage > quoted > > by Mateesha)? > > > ====================== > Yes, of course. I'm using 'consciousness' and 'awareness' as > synonyms. Thanks for clarifying this. I thought that might be the case, but I sensed that Mateesha was not aware of your particular usage in this regard ;-)) As a matter of interest, do you find 'awareness' a better term for the Pali 'vinnana' (as in the 5 khandhas) than 'consciousness'? What is your preferred English term for the Pali 'sati' as in 'satipatthana' (normally translated as 'awareness' or 'mindfulness')? > Also, I am not assuming that an act of consciousness takes > *itself* as > object any more than I think that a mirror can directly reflect itself. Right. As far as I know, there is no suggestion from any quarter that a moment of consciousness can take itself as object. My reading of the passage from the Satipatthana Sutta quoted by Mateesha is that consciousness accompanied by sati/panna of satipatthana may take an immediately past moment of consciousness as object. > (When > I sometimes speak of nondual awareness, I am speaking of experience > freed of > the subject-object split, with there being *neither* subject nor object. > I do > not assume a mindstate with itself as object.) In the texts consciousness is classified or described in various ways, including: - kusala or akusala - in the case of consciousness that is akusala, with or without wrong view of self - in the case of consciousness that is kusala, with or without sati/panna of the level of satipatthana There is no classification into dual/non-dual consciousness, I believe. As I see it, the existence or otherwise of a subject-object relationship between, say, consciousness and its object is something that is independent of our perception of the matter. Jon 52116 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Fri Nov 4, 2005 9:09pm Subject: The External Transience ... !!! bhikkhu_ekamuni Friends: The External Objects are Fading Away & Vanishing Right There! At Savatthi The Blessed Buddha said this: Bhikkhus, all forms are impermanent! What is impermanent is suffering! What is suffering is no-self! What is no-self should be seen as it really is with correct, true and realistic understanding thus: This is not mine, this I am not, this is not my self ... All sounds are impermanent ... All smells are impermanent ... All flavour is impermanent ... All touches are impermanent ... All Mental states are impermanent. What is impermanent is suffering... What is suffering is no-self. What is no-self should be seen as it really is with correct, true and realistic understanding thus: This is neither me nor mine, this I am not, this is not my or any self! Seeing this, bhikkhus, any educated noble disciple is disgusted with all forms, sounds, smells, flavour, touches, and with any mental state ... The experience of this disgust, brings disillusion & disenchantment !!! Through this disillusion, the mind is all released! When it is liberated, then there appears the assurance: 'This mind is freed' & one instantly understands: Rebirth is now ended, this Noble Life is fully concluded, done is what should be done, there is no state beyond this... Source: The Grouped Sayings by the Buddha. Samyutta Nikaya. IV 3-4 The group on the 6 Senses 35:4 The External as Impermanent... http://www.pariyatti.com/book.cgi?prod_id=948507 http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/samyutta/index.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 !!! <...> 52117 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri Nov 4, 2005 10:52pm Subject: ‘Cetasikas' study corner 301 Aversion-dosa (j) sarahprocter... Dear Friends, 'Cetasikas' by Nina van Gorkom http://www.vipassana.info/cetasikas.html http://www.zolag.co.uk/ Questions, comments and different views welcome;-) ========================================== [Ch18 - Aversion (dosa)] Dosa can be temporarily eliminated by the development of calm. When one sees the disadvantages of clinging to sensuous objects and one has accumulations for the development of calm to the degree of jhåna, one can be temporarily remote from sense impressions. Rúpåvacara kusala cittas (of “fine material jhåna”) can produce result in the form of rebirth in rúpa-brahma planes and arúpåvacara kusala cittas (of immaterial jhåna) can produce results in the form of rebirth in arúpa-brahma planes. Although lobha and moha can arise in these planes(1), there are no conditions for dosa. However, dosa arises again when there is rebirth in one of the sensuous planes. As we have seen, clinging to sense objects conditions dosa. Only when the stage of the anågåmí has been attained dosa has been eradicated. The anågåmí does not cling to sense objects and thus he has no conditions for dosa. *** 1) Except in the rúpa- brahma plane which is the asañña-satta plane, the plane of “unconscious beings”, where there is only rúpa. ***** [Aversion (dosa) to be contd] Metta, Sarah ====== 52118 From: "matheesha" Date: Fri Nov 4, 2005 11:59pm Subject: Re: Conditions Part 20 - Dissociation Condition (vippayutta-paccaya) matheesha333 Hi Jon, >J: Right. As far as I know, there is no suggestion from any quarter that a > moment of consciousness can take itself as object. My reading of the > passage from the Satipatthana Sutta quoted by Mateesha is that > consciousness accompanied by sati/panna of satipatthana may take an > immediately past moment of consciousness as object. I'm including below a fuller version of the same passage. The one i quoted previously certainly looks like it could be read the way you mentioned. But if you see the passage below, you will see the Buddha mentions remembering the immediate past moment of consciousness quite seperately from mindfulness of dhammas arising now. "In this way he remains focused internally on mental qualities in & of themselves, or externally on mental qualities in & of themselves, or both internally & externally on mental qualities in & of themselves. Or he remains focused on the phenomenon of origination with regard to mental qualities, on the phenomenon of passing away with regard to mental qualities, or on the phenomenon of origination & passing away with regard to mental qualities. Or his mindfulness that 'There are mental qualities' is maintained to the extent of knowledge & remembrance. And he remains independent, unsustained by (not clinging to) anything in the world. This is how a monk remains focused on mental qualities in & of themselves with reference to the five hindrances. Also it would not make much sense, and indeed makes much more sense, that the first bit of this passage is about using prolonged sati/mindfulness/awareness ('remains focused') to focus on the dhammas arising and passing away. Focused on the origination, focused on the passing away, focused on both speaks of the order in which mindfulness grows in sensitivity to experience these events. metta Matheesha ps- :), did you think that i wouldnt understand that awareness is vinnaana!? give me some credit here..:) I would use the two words seperately sati/awareness to denote focusing, vinnaana/consciousness to denote being simply conscious as we are in day to day life. 52119 From: sarah abbott Date: Sat Nov 5, 2005 1:12am Subject: Re: [dsg] Did Buddhaghosa (formal) meditate? (Was: Reasons for staying on DSG sarahprocter... Hi Swee Boon (& Howard), --- nidive wrote: > I once suggested to Sarah that so-called "concepts" actually falls > under the aggregate of fabrications, but I think she rejected it. > > What is "Self", other than a fabrication? ... S: May I take this chance to clarify this point as I see it? What is sometimes translated as ‘the aggregate of fabrications’ is sankhara khandha in Pali as you know. If you have Nyantiloka’s dictionary, there are a few charts at the back. The second one if of “Formation Group (sankhaara kkhandha)” and under the heading it says: ‘To this group belong 50 mental formations, of which 11 are general psychological elements, 25 lofty qualities, and 14 karmically unwholesome qualities’. It then lists all the cetasikas except for sanna and vedana which are each a khandha separately. Now I realize that you may not accept this common definition of sankhara khandha if you do not accept the Abhidhamma or commentaries and we may not get very far as a result. However, the ‘accepted’ Theravada definition of the khandhas refers only to actual dhammas (realities), to conditioned formations (sankhata dhammas) and not to concepts. For this reason, ‘fabrications’ may be rather misleading as a translation, don’t you think? What is conditioned and impermanent is unsatisfactory. So the thinking about self is a conditioned dhamma, but ‘the self’ is an idea, an imaginary object of that conditioned dhamma only. .... > > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > http://accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/samyutta/sn22-081.html > > "Well then -- knowing in what way, seeing in what way, does one > without delay put an end to the effluents? There is the case where an > uninstructed, run-of-the-mill person -- who has no regard for noble > ones, is not well-versed or disciplined in their Dhamma; who has no > regard for men of integrity, is not well-versed or disciplined in > their Dhamma -- assumes form to be the self. That assumption is a > fabrication. .... S: Yes, that assumption or way of regarding form etc is a sankhara dhamma. B.Bodhi refers to the commentary which glosses ‘that regarding’ (saasamanupassamaa) as a view-formation (di.t.thi-sa’nkhaara).’ Di.t.thi (wrong view) is one of the 50 cetasikas (mental factors) included in sankhara khandha. It is a conditioned dhamma which is therefore annicca, dukkha and anatta too. When there is wrong view of self, the wrong view is real, it is sankhara khandha, but the ‘self’ conceived of is never real, it is always (erroneously) imagined. ..... >Now what is the cause, what is the origination, what is > the birth, what is the coming-into-existence of that fabrication? To > an uninstructed, run-of-the-mill person, touched by that which is felt > born of contact with ignorance, craving arises. That fabrication is > born of that. And that fabrication is inconstant, fabricated, > dependently co-arisen. That craving... That feeling... That contact... > That ignorance is inconstant, fabricated, dependently co-arisen. It is > by knowing & seeing in this way that one without delay puts an end to > the effluents. ... S: In other words, the cause of such wrong views of self is ignorance and attachment. Wrong view is rooted in attachment and it is particularly this kind of attachment which is the cause of the never ending cycles of existence in samsara. By understanding this conditioned dhamma for what it is when it arises, not anyone’s wrong view or sankhara dhamma, gradually it can be known and eradicated at the stage of sotapanna. Gradually, any dhammas appearing now can be known for what they are – merely namas or rupas, not self or belonging to self etc. I’ll be glad to hear any of your further comments. Metta, Sarah ======= 52120 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sat Nov 5, 2005 4:23am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Conditions Part 20 - Dissociation Condition (vippayutta-paccaya) jonoabb Hi Mateesha matheesha wrote: >Hi Jon, > > > >I'm including below a fuller version of the same passage. The one i >quoted previously certainly looks like it could be read the way you >mentioned. But if you see the passage below, you will see the Buddha >mentions remembering the immediate past moment of consciousness >quite seperately from mindfulness of dhammas arising now... > >Also it would not make much sense, and indeed makes much more sense, >that the first bit of this passage is about using prolonged >sati/mindfulness/awareness ('remains focused') to focus on the >dhammas arising and passing away. Focused on the origination, >focused on the passing away, focused on both speaks of the order in >which mindfulness grows in sensitivity to experience these events. > > I'm not sure I've understood your comments here, but let me explain how I see things, and hope that it addresses your points. The section on contemplation of consciousness (cittaanupassana) begins (Soma Thera transl): "Here, a bhikkhu understands the consciousness with lust, as with lust". (http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/bps/misc/wayof.html) Obviously, the 'consciousness with lust' in the above passage is akusala consciousness, while the consciousness that 'understands' is kusala consciousness. Since the two cannot occur at the same time, those moments of understanding must be separate from (i.e., must follow) the moments of consciousness with lust. I believe the same sequence of events would apply even where the consciousness of which there is understanding is kusala consciousness. I'm afraid I was unable to see in the passage you quoted here (see below at the end of this message) where the Buddha mentions remembering the immediate past moment of consciousness separately from mindfulness of dhammas arising now. Would you mind pointing it out to me. Thanks. >metta > >Matheesha >ps- :), did you think that i wouldnt understand that awareness is >vinnaana!? give me some credit here..:) > Hey, I thought I was doing you a favour ;-)). But obviously you were on top of it already. I do find it confusing when there is reference to 'being aware of awareness', where 'awareness' (the noun) is used as a synonym for consciousness while 'being aware' (the verb) does not mean 'conscious of' but refers to the occurring of sati/satipatthana. Surely there is a consistency problem here (or is it just my legal mind-set that is the problem ;-)). >I would use the two words >seperately sati/awareness to denote focusing, vinnaana/consciousness >to denote being simply conscious as we are in day to day life. > > Exactly so, awareness and consciousness are different, hence my confusion ;-)) From a textual (and technical) point of view, sati is, like panna, a wholesome mental factor, with satipatthana referring to (the fact of) it's development (BTW, I would see 'focussing' as something done in the hope of the arousing sati, as a form of 'practice', and hence not to be equated with moments of true satipatthana). Vinnana is a synonym for 'citta' which, yes, is the dhamma that we take for ordinary everyday consciousness, and it covers also those moments of consciousness that are more than ordinary everyday consciousness. I suppose what I'm trying to bring out is that terms like sati and vinnana refer to dhammas rather than to activities or processes. Hope I have managed to explain myself. Jon "In this way he remains focused internally on mental qualities in & of themselves, or externally on mental qualities in & of themselves, or both internally & externally on mental qualities in & of themselves. Or he remains focused on the phenomenon of origination with regard to mental qualities, on the phenomenon of passing away with regard to mental qualities, or on the phenomenon of origination & passing away with regard to mental qualities. Or his mindfulness that 'There are mental qualities' is maintained to the extent of knowledge & remembrance. And he remains independent, unsustained by (not clinging to) anything in the world. This is how a monk remains focused on mental qualities in & of themselves with reference to the five hindrances. 52121 From: "Joop" Date: Sat Nov 5, 2005 5:03am Subject: [dsg] Re: What has changed in 2500 years? (Was: Did Buddhaghosa formal meditate? jwromeijn Dear all Who changed the decline of sasana prophecy ? In my message #52113 I stated: " The five thousand years existing Buddha Sasana (after which it will decline) is mentioned in the Vinya. But there it was after five hundred years! Some commentary made five thousand of it, in my opinion with an opportunistic reason. The five hundred years are already gone, so we had to say: the Buddha was to modest about the impact of his Teachings (we remember that after his awakening he first would not teach at all because people should not get it)." Because "opportunistic" was somehow loosely said, I have done some google research to help my vague memory about this change. Because the prophecy plays a role in the mind of (some) DSG- participants, especially a pessimistic one and also makes a healthy discussion about the future of (Theravada-)Buddhism difficult, I think this is an important theme. My questions are: - What was the function of the original prophecy (500 years) of the Buddha? - Who changed it (in 5,000 years), and when? - What was the function of that change? - What kind of role did this prophecy play within the Theravada- community? - What to do in that prophecy in our (or: my) efforts to spread Theravada in my country and over the world? Questions enough for a PhD, if I good find the answers; and I did hardly. First the original prophecy, I quote Nina from #20878: "The Vinaya, Book of Discipline (V), Cullavagga X, Eight Important Rules for Nuns (the Brahma-faring will not last long) and the Gradual Sayings, Book of the Eights, Ch VI, The Gotamid, §1, explain about the endurance and the disappearance of the true Dhamma (saddhamma) in the dispensation of the Buddha Gotama. We read that the Buddha said to Ånanda: "If, Ånanda, women had not obtained the going forth from home into homelessness in the dhamma and discipline proclaimed by the Truth- finder, the Brahma-faring, Ånanda, would have lasted long, true dhamma would have endured for a thousand years. But since, Ånanda, women have gone forth... in the dhamma and discipline proclaimed by the Truth-finder, now, Ånanda, the Brahma-faring will not last long, true dhamma will endure only for five hundred years...." In #52087 Sarah states about the question of Hal about the sources: "… these sources are given from the Vinaya and elsewhere in messages under 'Sasana -decline' in U.P." Both points are only partly correct: only the 500, not the 5000 is given in the Vinaya and other U.P. quotes. I'm not talking about the four classes of individuals, the sources of that model are clear, but only about the prophecy. The Bodhipakkhiya Dipani of Ledi Sayadaw gives clear information about those four classes. He states then: "After the passing of the first thousand years (of the present Buddha Sasana), which constituted the times of the patisambhidha-patta arahat (arahat possessing analytical knowledge), the period of the present Buddha Sasana comprises the times of the neyya and padaparama classes of individuals alone. At the present day, only these two classes of individuals remain." But Ledi Sayadaw gives no sources of this statement. My guess till now is: the prophecy must have been changed in Sri Lanka between 1000 and 1500 years ago. I could not find if Buddhaghosa already mentioned the number 5000. In the essay: " Duration of Gotama Buddha Dispensation" Radhika Abeysekera (http://home.earthlink.net/~mpaw1236/id19.html) gives a detailed description of the steps in the 5000 years: The disappearance of the "attainments"; of the "method"; of the "learning"; of the "symbols"; and of the "relics", each during one thousand years. The details of this description gives me some clues to the functions of this decline-prophecy: Don't change anything in the "attainments"; nothing in the "method"; nothing in the "learning"; nothing in the use of the "symbols"; and nothing in the use of the "relics", And: The believe in the Metteyya Buddha on which we should wait. His source is a "Anaagata-Vamsa". He gives no name or date of this text. But one google question further I did find in "Beyond the Tipitaka; A Field Guide to Post-canonical Pali Literature" by John Bullitt: "(Mahakassapa of Cola; 12th c.?). The life story of Metteyya, the next Buddha, told in verse." And this obscure text should be the base or our pessimism? Come on, folks. I prefer to base myself on the fact that more and more translations of the Pali Canon are published (in English and other modern languages) and bought and read. Metta Joop 52122 From: upasaka@... Date: Sat Nov 5, 2005 0:12am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Conditions Part 20 - Dissociation Condition (vippayutta-paccaya) upasaka_howard Hi, Jon (and Matheesha) - In a message dated 11/5/05 7:28:27 AM Eastern Standard Time, jonabbott@... writes: > The section on contemplation of consciousness (cittaanupassana) begins > (Soma Thera transl): > "Here, a bhikkhu understands the consciousness with lust, as with lust". > (http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/bps/misc/wayof.html) > > Obviously, the 'consciousness with lust' in the above passage is akusala > consciousness, while the consciousness that 'understands' is kusala > consciousness. Since the two cannot occur at the same time, those > moments of understanding must be separate from (i.e., must follow) the > moments of consciousness with lust. > ====================== It does seem clear that the consciousness that understands a lustful state of consciousness must be other than that lustful state, for the insightful state could not be identical with the akusala lustful state. And whether "understanding" consists of an analytical process of recognition or an instantaneous flash of illuminating insight, it seems clear that it would have to be an after-the-fact event. Now suppose that we think of attention and concentrative focus as providing an illumination that can range from nil to powerful in any mindstate. When that illumination reaches a critical threshhold, it could condition an immediately following state of sharp mindfulness and of great insight, clarity, clear comprehension. That would be "after the fact," but *just* after. 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) 52123 From: "nidive" Date: Sat Nov 5, 2005 5:35am Subject: Re: Did Buddhaghosa (formal) meditate? (Was: Reasons for staying on DSG nidive Hi Sarah, > What is sometimes translated as `the aggregate of fabrications' is > sankhara khandha in Pali as you know. > ... > I'll be glad to hear any of your further comments. "Concepts" come about because of sankhara. Without sankhara, there are no "concepts". To me, "concepts" are only as real as sankhara. Therefore, "concepts" are anicca, dukkha and anatta. Regards, Swee Boon 52124 From: "Phil" Date: Sat Nov 5, 2005 6:11am Subject: Phil's abhidhamma Qus (was Re: One Month Absence) philofillet Hi Azita > the more i hear, the more i know i don't know - does that make > sense? Absolutely, I was thinking that today. And feeling absolutely drenched in lobha. This is natural I guess because I've been spending most of my Dhamma study time in the Salayatana (?) Vagga of Samyutta Nikaya. So many suttas about how much and how fast we proliferate, obsess etc following the arising of eye and form, ear and sound, mind and mental phenomenon etc. The world is burning with greed, ignorance and hatred, etc. Sobering stuff, humbling stuff. Brings up for me the "dome of lobha" A. Sujin talks about, I can really dig what she means. And where does the beginning of getting out of that dome of lobha come in, when there is that one hole pierced in it, one moment of understanding paramattha dhammas, really getting it. In any case, it makes me relaxed. There is so much lobha, and it's not going away any day soon. Hurrying up to try to dispel it would just create more. Patience, good cheer, courage, as you say. Have you heard the talk from Bangkok, around 2002, I think? Mike Niese talks about how he came to see that Dhamma was all about dosa and lobha for him. Replacing objects that caused dosa with objects that caused lobha, or words to that effect. That's what it's like for me. My dhamma books, posting here, meditating - it's all about lobha, pleasant mental feeling. Is there chanda in there? Yes, probably, at times. In any case, I will carry on studying Dhamma, because it is so pleasant. It would be foolish to stop just because there is so much lobha. And who knows, conditions may arise for a sense of urgency accompanied by understanding. i remember feeling overwhelmed in india, not unpleasantly so > more like in awe of the profoundness of the dhamma. at one point, > the realisation of just how profound it is, almost took my breath > away. Sounds rather theatrical, I know, but at that moment that is > how it affected me. That's how I feel about the suttas in SN 35. Mindboggling how eye base and form arise in a conditioned way, so that seeing consciousness can arise, and then all the proliferation. So fast, so out of control. But the Buddha penetrated it, and much deeper than that even. So very profound. We can't compare our understanding to that of the Buddha and the ancients. I'm sorry if that sound party-pooperish, all. I don't really worry about it, because I know we all have different levels of understanding, and the Dhamma is helping us all. So grateful to have had the opportunity to come across the Buddha's teaching. Phil 52125 From: "Joop" Date: Sat Nov 5, 2005 6:26am Subject: [dsg] Re: What has changed in 2500 years? (Was: Did Buddhaghosa formal meditate? jwromeijn --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Joop" wrote: > > Dear all > > Who changed the decline of sasana prophecy ? > ... It was Buddhaghosa ! (Or perhaps Sinhalese commentaries he used) I was to quick in sending message 52121 In "The Coming Buddha, Ariya Metteyya"; part 3, "The Duration of the Sasana of Buddha Gotama" (www.ubakhin.com/uchittin/arimet/ARIMET03.html) Sayagyi U Chit Tin explains: "The commentary on the Abhidhamma text, Dhammasangani, says that when the First Buddhist Council convened by Ven. Maha-Kassapa rehearsed the Pali Canon, this made it possible for the Sasana to endure for five thousand years. [Atthasalini 27]" Perhaps somebody who has a copy of the Atthasalini can explain me how this mechanism of making the duration ten times longer works. Metta Joop 52126 From: "Larry" Date: Sat Nov 5, 2005 7:54am Subject: Re: Did Buddhaghosa (formal) meditate? (Was: Reasons for staying on DSG lbidd2 Swee Boon: ""Concepts" come about because of sankhara. Without sankhara, there are no "concepts"." Hi Swee Boon, I agree that without sankhara khandha there are no concepts, but, in my opinion, concepts come about because of sa~n~naa (perception). I think concepts are signs (nimitta) and signs are the marks that perception marks when it marks its object. A sign usually points to a group but is not equal to the group. For example, the word "tree" points to a group of dhammas but the word "tree" is not that group. There is no tree to be found in the group or as the group (even group is a concept). "Tree" is the pointing finger, not the moon. "Tree" is impermanent, dukkha, not self because it arises with perception, but there is no tree, so tree could not be said to be impermanent etc. This latter is what is meant in the concept/reality distinction. The concept of self arises and ceases as concept, but there is no self that arises and ceases. However, as far as I know, mark, sign, and concept are not linked in the commentaries. So there is no textual support for this view. Larry 52127 From: upasaka@... Date: Sat Nov 5, 2005 3:39am Subject: Re: [dsg] Conditions Part 20 - Dissociation Condition (vippayutta-paccaya) upasaka_howard Hi, Jon - In a message dated 11/4/05 9:57:23 PM Eastern Standard Time, jonoabb@... writes: > Hi Howard > > --- upasaka@... wrote: > > >Hi, Jon - > > > >In a message dated 11/4/05 9:24:50 AM Eastern Standard Time, > >jonabbott@... writes: > > > >>Howard, when you say 'awareness of awareness', do you by any chance > >mean > >>awareness of consciousness (using the terminology of the passage > >quoted > >>by Mateesha)? > >> > >====================== > > Yes, of course. I'm using 'consciousness' and 'awareness' as > >synonyms. > > Thanks for clarifying this. I thought that might be the case, but I > sensed that Mateesha was not aware of your particular usage in this regard > ;-)) > > As a matter of interest, do you find 'awareness' a better term for the > Pali 'vinnana' (as in the 5 khandhas) than 'consciousness'? > -------------------------------------- Howard: My preference in this matter seems to change from moment to moment! ;-) Maybe it's a matter of context. ------------------------------------ What is your> > preferred English term for the Pali 'sati' as in 'satipatthana' (normally > translated as 'awareness' or 'mindfulness')? ------------------------------------- Howard: Normally 'mindfulness'. ------------------------------------- > > > Also, I am not assuming that an act of consciousness takes > >*itself* as > >object any more than I think that a mirror can directly reflect itself. > > Right. As far as I know, there is no suggestion from any quarter that a > moment of consciousness can take itself as object. My reading of the > passage from the Satipatthana Sutta quoted by Mateesha is that > consciousness accompanied by sati/panna of satipatthana may take an > immediately past moment of consciousness as object. ---------------------------------------- Howard: I think that's basically right. However, I believe that speaking of the past moment of consciousness as "object" is not literally correct. That past moment, even though it just "was", no longer "is". It *does not exist*, and what does not exist is neither an object nor a subject nor anything else. The current moment of consciousness can be analyzed as "pertaining to" the prior one, or as "being with regard to" or "concerning" the prior one, but that prior one is *gone*. To the extent that one wishes to speak of an "object" of the state of insight, which I am disinclined to do, one would have to say that it is a memory that is object. But as I see the matter, the content of the current insightful state is merely the insight. ----------------------------------------- > > >(When > >I sometimes speak of nondual awareness, I am speaking of experience > >freed of > >the subject-object split, with there being *neither* subject nor object. > >I do > >not assume a mindstate with itself as object.) > > In the texts consciousness is classified or described in various ways, > including: > - kusala or akusala > - in the case of consciousness that is akusala, with or without wrong view > of self > - in the case of consciousness that is kusala, with or without sati/panna > of the level of satipatthana > > There is no classification into dual/non-dual consciousness, I believe. > As I see it, the existence or otherwise of a subject-object relationship > between, say, consciousness and its object is something that is > independent of our perception of the matter. ------------------------------------------ Howard: There may not be an explicit classification of that sort to be found, but I believe there is an implicit one. In truth, there is no knower. And without a knower, there is no known. Accordingly, there is no sense of knower without a sense of known, and no sense of known without the sense of knower. Knowing and being known are mutually dependent, both by meaning and observation. An arahant is without any sense of knower, and hence without any sense of known, for each of these implies the other ... and there is no knower. Thus, the experience of an arahant is nondual in that sense. As I view the matter, the subject-object split constitutes the fundamental impact of avijja - the imposing of sense of self/identity - in the cognitive sphere. Craving and clinging constitute its fundamental impact in the affective sphere. ----------------------------------------- > > Jon > ======================== With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 52128 From: "nidive" Date: Sat Nov 5, 2005 8:53am Subject: Re: Did Buddhaghosa (formal) meditate? (Was: Reasons for staying on DSG nidive Hi Larry, > "Tree" is impermanent, dukkha, not self because it arises with > perception, but there is no tree, so tree could not be said to be > impermanent etc. This latter is what is meant in the concept/reality > distinction. The concept of self arises and ceases as concept, but > there is no self that arises and ceases. I think you have summarized it pretty well. The root of suffering is the "concept of self" and not "self" itself. And how does one dwell relinquishing the "concept of self"? ... There is the case where one does not assume forms to be the self, does not assume perceptions to be the self, does not assume feelings to be the self, does not assume fabrications to be the self, does not assume consciousness to be the self. In particular, there is the case where one does not assume control to be the self. He sees control as inconstant, stressful and not-self. In one who denies there is control, one denies there is "self". But since "self" is non-existent, is there a need for the act of denying it? Anyone who does so is insane and barking up the wrong tree, in my opinion. Regards, Swee Boon 52129 From: "icarofranca" Date: Sat Nov 5, 2005 10:55am Subject: Re: Did Buddhaghosa (formal) meditate? (Was: Reasons for staying on DSG icarofranca Hi Nidive! > > The root of suffering is the "concept of self" and not "self" itself. As stated before, concepts ( at least in a Buddhistic sense! ) are derivations of real external objects. Since there aren´t a Self to blame or cherish, there aren´t a "Concept of Self" to be Dukkha´s root. > In one who denies there is control, one denies there is "self". But > since "self" is non-existent, is there a need for the act of denying > it? Anyone who does so is insane and barking up the wrong tree, in my > opinion. Are the act of denying the Non-existent more insane than the act of stating its existence ? Not in my opinion! Best regards, Ícaro 52130 From: "icarofranca" Date: Sat Nov 5, 2005 11:13am Subject: Re: [dsg] Did Buddhaghosa (formal) meditate? (Was: Reasons for staying on DSG icarofranca >Fabrications fabricate themselves! As a Von Neumann Machine, I presume: robots that fabricated other robots able to replicate themselves ad infinitum. But is the "Self" structured in this way ? In my opinion, the "Self" is a fantasy Character created by the rooted human ignorance in found a correct answer about mental processes - as an Elf created by some author with the "power" (?) to inquiry the writer about his personal live: " Hey You! You made me as a character of your novel "The Realm of the Son of Hobbit thrice Winner against the Three-headed Dragon" ...but I don´t want to be an Elf! I Want to be The Lord of Dance!" Sheer nonsense!!! Best Regards, Ícaro > > And because fabrications fabricate themselves seemingly without an end > in sight, the escape from samsara is not discerned. > > But in one who sees rightly that very remainderless cessation of > fabrications, the escape from samsara is made known. > > Regards, > Swee Boon > 52131 From: "icarofranca" Date: Sat Nov 5, 2005 11:26am Subject: Re: Did Buddhaghosa (formal) meditate? (Was: Reasons for staying on DSG icarofranca The concept of self arises > and ceases as concept, but there is no self that arises and ceases. > However, as far as I know, mark, sign, and concept are not linked in > the commentaries. So there is no textual support for this view. Exact, Larry! One can reason, at Aquinas' way, that the term "Self" don´t predicate on a real being. Since Dhamma is Mind Plus Object of Mind, of what the "Self" could be predicated on ? Both ? One of them ? Neither ? At Buddhism point of view, neither ? "Mark" and "Sign" belong to Rethorics' realm only, and fall at the same Category - devoid of being. Best Regards Ícaro 52132 From: "yang" Date: Sat Nov 5, 2005 6:51am Subject: Re: [dsg] short hello from a new member of DSG wchangli Sarah: Sorry for my late replied. You can call me "Li". My research paper is more on the "texts study"(Pali & Chinese version),and find out any coherency or contradiction among the texts, from that finding I will further my study on the different analysis and explanation from other related suttas or commentary sources. I have the books as you mentioned except 'Compendium Manual of Abhidhamma' ,I will look for it. Thank you! Warmest regards, Li --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > > Hi Yang (or should I call you Li?), > > --- wong chang li wrote: > > > DSG Dhamma friends: > > > > I get to know DSG from my classmate who has registered as a member few > > weeks ago. I am a student of Chibs from Taiwan > > (http://www.chibs.edu.tw), interested in the field of Theravada > > Buddhism. > ... > S: I'm glad that Jean introduced you to DSG and thanks for telling us more > about yourself and your interests here (and off-list). > > It's great that you can read the Chinese, English and Pali texts. > .... > >At the moment I am busy on my thesis with the topic of "The > > Comparative Study of the Pali Version and Chinese Version of > > Anapanasati-samyutta"; you are welcome to let me know if you have any > > ideas or materials on this topic. Nice to meet all of you here. > ... > S: A difficult area. > > Please see 'Useful Posts' in the files section of DSG and scroll down to > 'Anapanasati'. I think you may find a lot to interest you here. > > Are you looking at the subject of anapanasati in general or the > anapanasati sutta in particular? > > Do you have Nanamoli's booklet (published by the BPS) on 'Mindfulness of > Breathing (anapanasati)' which contains various texts and commentaries? > > Also, lots in the Visuddhimagga which I'm sure you have. > > For understanding the Pali texts further, I think you'd also find BB's > translation and notes on the Abhidhamattha Sangaha, published as > 'Compendium Manual of Abhidhamma' very useful. It has also been translated > into Chinese in Malaysia and I've seen a copy. > > Tep has also been posting extracts on the 'Treatise on Breathing' from the > Patisambhida magga (Path of Discrimination), although the English > translation of this by Nanamoli is very difficult to follow. > > We'll all be glad to have you join in or start any further discussions. I > know many people, including Tep, will be interested to hear more about > your studies too. > > Metta, > > Sarah > ==== > 52133 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Sat Nov 5, 2005 1:56pm Subject: Re: Conditions Part 20 - Dissociation Condition (vippayutta-paccaya) buddhistmedi... Hi, Jon - Congratulations for your excellent interpretation of the "moments of understanding" below. > Jon : > The section on contemplation of consciousness (cittaanupassana) begins > (Soma Thera transl): > "Here, a bhikkhu understands the consciousness with lust, as with lust". > (http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/bps/misc/wayof.html) > > Obviously, the 'consciousness with lust' in the above passage is akusala consciousness, while the consciousness that 'understands' is kusala consciousness. Since the two cannot occur at the same time, those moments of understanding must be separate from (i.e., must follow) the moments of consciousness with lust. > Tep: Makes a lot of sense to me ! Now please allow me project a few steps ahead. Since the second consciousness is a kusala citta, does it mean the first akusala citta must cease for good? If it did, would it follow that the third citta (following the second) is also a kusala citta? Why, or why not? Respectfully, Tep ========= 52134 From: "Phil" Date: Sat Nov 5, 2005 3:22pm Subject: Re: Vipaka paradox philofillet Hi Howard Starting to get back to responses to my initial post, one by one. > As to your point, Phil, about the apparent paradox of wholesome action > leading to pleasant experience, but unpleasant experience leading to results > that are ultimately more useful, Ph: Of course here I mean mildly unpleasant, for mild vipaka, not being reborn in Hell realms etc. As Mateesha pointed out nothing useful about that! And if there is painful feeling, there is not yet capacity for wholesome response, not for me. Just a kneeflex response with dosa and lobha for comfort. I think there is a sutta that says something like "the worldling knows know way out of suffering except seeking comfort" Maybe it is not a sutta, but a line from someone or otherm maybe Ayya Khema whom I used to read a lot. But I do find that mildly unpleasant vipaka, such that I understand it, can help me to have a little more detachment from sense objects at a very shallow intellectual level. It's cold and rainy today. I was planning to walk in the park. I will learn a little more that dissatisfaction is the nature of things. I have the following comments: > 1) Pleasant experience can be craved or not, and unpleasant experience > can be reacted to aversively or not, depending on one's particular > inclinations. Ph: I think the craving happens very quickly, conditioned by one's accumulated tendency to crave. So, for example, in the Buddha's third discourse (or second?) SN 35:28 it is only the "instructed noble disciple" who "experiences revulsion" that leads to dispassion etc. For those of us who are not sotapanna (ie all of us, I would say, though I don't really know about that) there is burning through the six sense doors and mind doors. In another sutta (SN 35:231) we learn that "even trifling forms (etc) that enter into the range of the eye (etc) obsess the mind, not to speak of those that are prominent. For what reason? Because lust still exists and has not been abandoned, hatred (aversion) still exists and has not been abandoned, deslusion still exists and has not been abandoned." There are so many suttas like this in SN 35. So my views are being flavoured by this, I know. If I were reading Anguttara Nikaya, in which the suttas suggest a much more purposeful approach to cultivating the wholesome and eradicating the unwholesome, there would be a different Phil posting here. But it really feels to me that the Buddha teaches that what goes on goes on fast and beyond easy control, like the way flames leap up when oxygen and a spark and highly flammable fuel make contact. I'm not a fatalist though. The Buddha's teaching can act as a strong condition for our beginning to make wholesome decisions in life, certainly. But when it comes to vipaka, and the initial response to it, the initial javana cittas, I doubt there is any control over it. But that is just my view at this time. > 2) Ones own kamma is not the sole determiner of the sort of experience > that comes to one. I'm unclear about this. Is it only Abhidhamma that teaches that experiences through the sense doors (seeing consciousness etc) are vipaka? It seems implicit, at least, in the suttas as well. Correct me if I am wrong. > 3) This matter is likely more one of irony and misattribution than of > paradox. Yes, I suppose ironic is a better word for what I am thinking about than paradox. I don't understand misattribution, but that's ok. Phil 52135 From: upasaka@... Date: Sat Nov 5, 2005 10:34am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Vipaka paradox upasaka_howard Hi, Phil - In a message dated 11/5/05 6:22:44 PM Eastern Standard Time, philco777@... writes: > > 2) Ones own kamma is not the sole determiner of the sort of > experience > >that comes to one. > > I'm unclear about this. Is it only Abhidhamma that teaches that > experiences through the sense doors (seeing consciousness etc) are > vipaka? It seems implicit, at least, in the suttas as well. Correct > me if I am wrong. > ==================== It is explicitly denied by the Buddha in the suttas. 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) 52136 From: "Phil" Date: Sat Nov 5, 2005 4:08pm Subject: Re: Vipaka paradox philofillet Hi Howard > It is explicitly denied by the Buddha in the suttas. Thanks. Could you expand on this a little? Phil 52137 From: "Andrew" Date: Sat Nov 5, 2005 4:52pm Subject: New Satipatthana Book corvus121 Dear Hal, Joop, Ken H and anyone interested I've now finished reading Ven. Analayo's book "Satipatthana: The Direct Path to Realization" (Windhorse, 2004 reprint) and will give some feedback. Ven. Analayo is a German-born "meditating monk" in Sri Lanka. The book results from his Ph.D on Satipatthana from the University of Peradeniya and from his own "practical experience as a meditating monk" (p.1). Windhorse Publications, of course, was set up by members of the Western Buddhist Order in the 1970s. As I see it, the scope of the book is limited to examining the Satipatthana Sutta ("SS") in "its early Buddhist canonical and philosophical context" (p.1). It is an accepted premise of the book that the commentaries and Abhidhamma-pitaka are post-canonical (p.29). Although they are referred to, they are not treated as "centrally important source material" (p.1). The author refers to the work of modern meditation teachers like Goenka, Pandita and Mahasi, although usually only in passing and without full analysis of their methods vis-à-vis the SS. This creates what is perhaps a strange result in that the work of ancient commentators is, at times, dismissed as not being in accordance with the discourses but the same scholastic rigour doesn't seem to be applied to modern meditation teachers. This is a shame, I feel, and I hope the reasons for it are purely pragmatic. As one would expect with a Ph.D thesis, the book is well-referenced and the author generally deals with his subject in a scholarly and thorough manner. Speaking personally, the book is a valuable exercise in answering the following question: where do you end up when you read the SS using academic scholarship and without commentarial and abhidhammic guidance? For those who have a copy of the book, I think the answer is Figure 15.2 on p.270. More on that below. One of the confusing aspects of the book was a failure to clearly differentiate the following terms: meditation, formal meditation, meditation exercise, contemplation, intellectual reasoning, mental mastery. At times, "meditation" and "contemplation" appear to be synonyms. For example, Figure 15.2 depicts "satipatthana contemplations" but the descriptive text refers to "the main object of meditation". On p.115, the author states that "satipatthana meditation" is "free from intellectualization". Does this mean "free from concepts"? No. "Satipatthana practice", he says, involves a skilful use of concepts (or "labeling"), concepts being "intrinsically related to cognition (sanna)" (p. 113). Reference back to the Pali might have been useful here. "Bhavana" is in the glossary and somewhere in the text (can't put my finger on it at the moment) but doesn't appear in the index – although many other Pali words do. Given that the abhidhammic mind-moment is not accepted as a premise, I was interested in how temporal matters would be dealt with. The author seems to conclude that the "awakening factors" (bojjhangas) are developed sequentially, beginning with an "active endeavour" to set up sati (p.234); the path factors are, however, "undertaken interdependently" (p.246) with samma-sati being required to establish samma-ditthi but samma-ditthi being the basis or root of the other 7 path factors (fn 14). As I get the feeling that this interdependent undertaking isn't seen as simultaneous as in "in the same mind- moment", I would have appreciated more details on just how it is done or comes about, or an admission that this is not known (if indeed that is the case). The emphasis of the book is very much on "doing" and "processes" and "mental mastery" over processes – using the metaphor of being able to choose any garment from a full wardrobe (p.240, see M I 215 also). It isn't surprising, therefore, that the author feels compelled to address canonical instances of people lacking "mental mastery" attaining stream-entry or above. On p.255, he refers to an alcoholic layman who suddenly attained stream-entry upon personally hearing the Buddha. The author suggests that this layman must have earlier made sufficient progress before "his ethical foundation had deteriorated". I didn't find this explanation fully satisfying. The question is: how does one "lose" the mental mastery/control? How does one suddenly get it back? How to answer these questions without recourse to abhidhamma? I am a bit of a fan of Henri van Zeyst (Bhikkhu Dhammapala) and I was pleased to see him feature significantly in the bibliography. However, the author has a fair share of disagreements with Dhammapala. On p.258, he rejects Dhammapala's notion that Nibbana transcends ethical values. Quoting the Samanamandika Sutta, the author argues that arahants are the highest embodiment of kusala, but they don't identify with their kusala. This, of course, is a direct contradiction of abhidhamma which holds that arahant cittas are only vipaka and kiriya. I agree with Dhammapala. Here's what he wrote in Wheel publication 132/133/134: "As soon as the process of the arising of craving has come to a stop, the grasping of the aggregates which form an individual will cease also. When the lust for life has ceased, no rebirth will further take place and the highest state, that of an Arahat, is attained. But when the lust for life has ceased, life itself will not simultaneously disappear. Like the heat in an oven, which is produced by fire, will remain for sometime, even though that fire be extinct, - so the result of craving which produced rebirth might remain for some time, even though the fire of the passions be extinct. Thus the acts of thought of an Arahat are neither moral nor immoral. His apperception is ineffective. Though he acts, his actions are not impelled by craving and hence they do not constitute kamma, either good or bad; they consist merely in the function (kiriya-javana) and are free from tendencies, likes or dislikes (anusaya). But where there arises no new kamma, there no further vipaka can come about." (p.84) It makes sense to me that the arahant isn't like a Christian saint, and that his moral transcendence is the very reason why he can behave with perfect equanimity towards the highly immoral. Ven. Analayo's book is a welcome addition to my library. It is stimulating and full of interesting references and insights. However, I'm not sure I can agree with Christopher Titmuss that " this root text surpasses all previous commentaries in the Theravada tradition over the past 2,000 years". He is correct, however, when he says that the book "reads like a practice manual for meditators in daily life". I'll be reading the book again several times and hope that my understanding grows. In the meantime, corrections and comments welcome. Best wishes Andrew T 52138 From: "nidive" Date: Sat Nov 5, 2005 8:08pm Subject: Re: Did Buddhaghosa (formal) meditate? (Was: Reasons for staying on DSG nidive Hi Ícaro, > > In one who denies there is control, one denies there is "self". > > But since "self" is non-existent, is there a need for the act of > > denying it? > Are the act of denying the Non-existent more insane than the act of > stating its existence ? Not in my opinion! The act of denying its existence is as insane as the act of affirming its existence, since both acts require a person to take up a Position. But this True Dhamma is not for one who takes up Positions, but for one who relinquishes this very delusion: the "concept of self". Regards, Swee Boon 52139 From: "nidive" Date: Sat Nov 5, 2005 8:33pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Did Buddhaghosa (formal) meditate? (Was: Reasons for staying on DSG nidive Hi Ícaro, > > Fabrications fabricate themselves! > > As a Von Neumann Machine, I presume: robots that fabricated other > robots able to replicate themselves ad infinitum. But is the "Self" > structured in this way ? > In my opinion, the "Self" is a fantasy Character created by the > rooted human ignorance in found a correct answer about mental > processes - as an Elf created by some author with the "power" (?) > to inquiry the writer about his personal live: " Hey You! You made > me as a character of your novel "The Realm of the Son of Hobbit > thrice Winner against the Three-headed Dragon" ...but I don´t want > to be an Elf! I Want to be The Lord of Dance!" > Sheer nonsense!!! Whether "Self" is something that replicates itself, or whether "Self" is something that questions itself, all these musings are rooted in this delusion: the "concept of self". When this is, that is; with ignorance and craving as requisite conditions, there comes this delusion. When this is not, that is not; with the remainderless cessation of ignorance and craving, there comes the remainderless cessation of this delusion. We can have one thousand and one theories about the "Self", but all of them are going to be useless. Only the relinquishing of the "concept of self" is liberating and blissful. Regards, Swee Boon 52140 From: upasaka@... Date: Sat Nov 5, 2005 4:46pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Vipaka paradox upasaka_howard Hi, Phil - In a message dated 11/5/05 7:08:48 PM Eastern Standard Time, philco777@... writes: > Hi Howard > > > > It is explicitly denied by the Buddha in the suttas. > > Thanks. Could you expand on this a little? > > Phil > ========================= The Buddha mentions 4 or so great cosmic principles, one of which is kamma, and one which is weather ;-), that are causitive of events. He specifically says that kamma alone doesn't determone all that comes to one. (I forget the sutta.) 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) 52141 From: "Antony Woods" Date: Sat Nov 5, 2005 11:10pm Subject: Re: The All: //now as we speak?// antony272b2 Dear Howard and all, A Zen expert wrote in response to a request for a one line summary of Buddhism: "Don't imagine there is something else" Joseph Goldstein once wrote: "Everything is just what it is, and only what it is." I have been enjoying practicing with this in the light of our discussion about The All. with metta / Antony. 52142 From: "Sukinder" Date: Sun Nov 6, 2005 0:04am Subject: Re: Two Items sukinderpal Hi Howard, My comment on the second item: ------------------------ Howard: My wife and I were walking through a parking lot to get to our car. As we passed behind a large, parked SUV, the driver, not seeing us, started to back out right into us. My wife hadn't noticed this. I, who have cultivated the habit of paying attention to what is happening at the moment, did notice it. I put my hand out and pushed my wife back as I also moved back out of the way. (My wife said "Wow, you actually saved my life!") a) Had I not cultivated the habit of ongoing attention, I might well have not noticed that car. Sukin: I am not sure what all is implied in your explanation. Are you saying that unlike you, your wife's attention is more focused on what is immediately ahead? After all, she does manage to avoid obstacles and is able to move around from one place to another doesn't she? It sounds to me that your own so called "habit of paying attention to what is happening at the moment" seems to involve the 'intention' to attend to more than what is 'immediately ahead'. Of course you are saying that this is a natural consequence of prior training, which constitute paying attention to feelings, sensations and so on. But does this matter? Intention accompanies each citta and takes on the object the citta takes, in this case 'concepts' different from what constitutes those of your wife's cittas or your own, prior to the training. And with the conventional understanding of what 'mindfulness' is, you may argue that your present experiences is a result of development of satipatthana, but is it? We know that satipatthana takes paramattha dhammas as object and not concepts. So would you say that your being aware of the SUV is a consequence of the development of satipatthana, or something else? ----------------------------------- Howard: b) Had I not, quite consciously, determinedly, and intentionally moved my wife and myself out of harm's way, but instead "waited for conditions" to somehow arise, I might not be here to write this. Sukin: Who would do this? I think you are misunderstanding this idea about 'conditions being all there is'. We can talk about "conditions" in the abstract and play around with the concept, but I think the correct understanding would be with reference to the 'present dhamma'. So in fact whatever arises, be it fear, bewilderment, indecision or whatever, *this* would be the conditions being referred to. A person who says to the effect "wait for conditions" is in fact misunderstanding about conditions. He fails to see that the very arising of such an idea, is "conditioned", and in this case, by wrong understanding. On the other hand though, one should not take the decision to move away from the oncoming SUV out from the context of conditionality either. The apparent control in conventional situations should be understood in light of the conditioned nature and hence 'uncontrollability' of dhammas. It is just in 'thinking' that there seem to be control. For example, no one wants to be killed by an SUV, yet different reaction will occur to different individual at different times in similar situations. And none of these cittas will be the same when any decision to move away is made. It is *these* dhammas that are conditioned beyond control, but wrong view would make most if not all come away feeling that 'control' has been the function of something other than these dhammas. There are some who though they agree in principle with this, seem not to apply this understanding when it comes to their so called 'practice', particularly the decision at any given moment to "do it". Wouldn't the correct development lead to understanding this very idea about practice as being conditioned, rather than any 'following' of those ideas? ------------------------------------- Howard: [Note to all folks who reply to posts not by addressing the content, but by instead saying "That's all concept": All mention of "I", "my", "wife", "parking lot", "SUV", "hand", etc, etc, etc is figurative language, and I know that!] Sukin: So I may be missing your point, in which case please explain further. :-) Metta, Sukin 52143 From: "Sukinder" Date: Sun Nov 6, 2005 0:06am Subject: [dsg] Re: What has changed in 2500 years? (Was: Did Buddhaghosa formal meditate? sukinderpal Hi Joop, All, Butting in to comment on one of your points: ------------------- Joop: 5. Sarah: "Many conditions lead to the decline, including accumulations. Also, of course, the chance to hear 'true dhamma'." Joop: but also many conditions can lead to the rise of Buddha Sasana, for example the fact that more and more persons see (the proofs) that the Buddha was right. That for example neuroscientific research shows that the idea of arising and falling away of phenomena is correct. Sukin: I think the Dhamma is very deep and very hard to understand even intellectually. The Tilakkhana is not at all easy to comprehend, and most of us have only the very shallow level of intellectual understanding, let alone the level got from practice. We struggle with forming the idea of what anicca, dukkha and anatta is, so I think it is a mistake to think that we have any 'correct' understanding. It can lead us the wrong way. We do have our conventional ideas about these and they may well be distinguished in our minds. But these conventional ideas do not lead to the understanding of the actual. Rather once we understand the actual characteristics of dhammas, our understanding of these conventional concepts will be different. As of now however, we are mostly just playing with "ideas". Impermanence, Suffering and Non-self are characteristics of dhammas of which we still do not understand at all. We have at best a very vague understanding of matter, feelings, perception, consciousness and formations. Rupa for example, is so different from what most of us understand as 'matter'. Mind which is much more subtle is completely different. Feeling is different from perception and seeing is different from hearing. And this is why the first real understanding occurs when mind and matter is distinguished at the first vipassananana. It is true that that which is ultimate must reflect one way or another in conventional reality. But so far our understanding of conventional reality is from the standpoint of ignorance (of dhammas). This is where Science and any modern enthusiast of Buddha Dhamma are at. So I doubt that the popularity of Buddhism and the apparent agreement between science and Dhamma should be taken as sign of the "growth" of the Sasana. For example, would science ever arrive at the conclusion that there are 28 rupas? No, I think that science is going in a totally different direction, one that is reliant upon concepts to explain other concepts and not one that will arrive at an understanding of even a *single* dhamma. In other words, who so ever sees a parallel and possible merging of science and Dhamma may in fact be far from having an understanding of the Buddha's teachings, enough to be moving in the right direction. Better to be patient with the realization that our understanding of Dhamma is very weak, better to know also that the goal is to develop our own understanding and not think too much about how other's are doing and how to encourage them. Worse still to act on the idea about 'groups' and 'peoples', which I think to be ultimately nothing but a game centered on 'self'. The Sasana stands and falls with reference not to the number of people going around calling themselves "Buddhist". Nor is it to the fact that the 'Books' are intact, which I think will last many thousands of years more. Scholars and other curious individuals will forever exist and lobha will in the name of saddha, preserve in gold or on CD the Teachings 'forever'. These are the forces which are in fact opposed to the one that actually maintains the Sasana, namely "understanding". It may be the single individual who 'understands correctly' the Dhamma in the last 500 years of the 5000 predicted who takes the Sasana along with him at his death, while millions still go on living calling themselves Buddhists, who knows? Hope there has been some food for thought here. Metta, Sukin. 52144 From: sarah abbott Date: Sun Nov 6, 2005 0:35am Subject: ‘Cetasikas' study corner 302 Aversion-dosa (k) sarahprocter... Dear Friends, 'Cetasikas' by Nina van Gorkom http://www.vipassana.info/cetasikas.html http://www.zolag.co.uk/ Questions, comments and different views welcome;-) ========================================== [Ch18 - Aversion (dosa)] Only if we develop right understanding of realities can dosa eventually be eradicated. Right understanding sees dosa as it really is: as saòkhåra dhamma, conditioned dhamma, non-self. Through mindfulness of dosa its characteristic can be known. We believe that it is easy to recognize dosa, but we usually think of the concept “dosa” or “aversion”, and then its characteristic will not be known. We will still take it for “my dosa”, instead of realizing that it is only a kind of nåma which arises because of conditions. ***** [Aversion (dosa) to be contd] Metta, Sarah ====== 52145 From: "Phil" Date: Sun Nov 6, 2005 1:24am Subject: Re: Vipaka paradox philofillet Hi Howard > The Buddha mentions 4 or so great cosmic principles, one of which is > kamma, and one which is weather ;-), that are causitive of events. He > specifically says that kamma alone doesn't determone all that comes to one. (I forget > the sutta.) Thanks. This sounds like an important point for me. I find understanding (ie thinking about) all experiences through sense doors as vipaka is very helpful towards detachment, at least at the intellectual level. Come to think of it, I don't suppose that would change much if cosmic principles such as weather were involved. Could someone supply the sutta Howard is referring to? Thanks in advance. Phil 52146 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Sat Nov 5, 2005 11:17pm Subject: At All Times bhikkhu_ekamuni Friends: Transient whether Internal, External, Past, Present or Future!!! At Savatthi, the Blessed Buddha said this: Bhikkhus, any eye & any form is impermanent, whether internal, external, past, present or future. Seeing this any educated noble disciple becomes indifferent towards any past eye & any past form, he does not search for delight in any future eye nor any future form, & he cultivates disgust for any present eye & present form in order to make it all fade away & cease... Any ear & any sound is impermanent; Any nose & any smell is impermanent; Any tongue & flavour is impermanent; Any body & any touch is impermanent; Any mind & any mental state is impermanent, whether internal, or external, past, present or future !!! Seeing this, any educated noble disciple becomes indifferent towards all past mentalities & all past mental states, he does not search for delight in any future mind nor any future mental state, & he do indeed cultivate disgust for any present mind, mood, mentality & any present mental state in order to make it fade away, be stilled, tranquilized & cease... Source: The Grouped Sayings by the Buddha. Samyutta Nikaya. IV 4-6 The group on the 6 Senses 35:7-10 Transient in all Three Times. http://www.pariyatti.com/book.cgi?prod_id=948507 http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/samyutta/index.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 !!! <...> 52147 From: "Christine Forsyth" Date: Sun Nov 6, 2005 1:53am Subject: Re: Vipaka paradox christine_fo... Hello Howard, Phil, all, Howard, I think this is what you are referring to ... but this seems to be a teaching from the Commentaries, not the Suttas? "According to Buddhism, there are five orders or processes (Niyamas) which operate in the physical and mental realms: i. Kamma Niyama, order of act and result, e.g., desirable and undesirable acts produce corresponding good and bad results. ii. Utu Niyama, physical (inorganic) order, e.g., seasonal phenomena of winds and rains. iii. Bija Niyama, order of germs or seeds (physical organic order); e.g., rice produced from rice-seed, sugary taste from sugar cane or honey etc. The scientific theory of cells and genes and the physical similarity of twins may be ascribed to this order. iv. Citta Niyama, order of mind or psychic law, e.g., processes of consciousness (Citta vithi), power of mind etc. v. Dhamma Niyama, order of the norm, e.g., the natural phenomena occurring at the advent of a Boddhisatta in his last birth, gravitation, etc. Every mental or physical phenomenon could be explained by these all- embracing five orders or processes which are laws in themselves. Kamma is, therefore, only one of the five orders that prevail in the universe. It is a law in itself, but it does not thereby follow that there should be a law-giver. Ordinary laws of nature, like gravitation, need no law-giver. It operates in its own field without the intervention of an external independent ruling agency". metta and peace, Chris ---The trouble is that you think you have time--- --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Phil" wrote: > > > > Hi Howard > > > The Buddha mentions 4 or so great cosmic principles, one of > which is > > kamma, and one which is weather ;-), that are causitive of events. He > > specifically says that kamma alone doesn't determone all that comes > to one. (I forget > > the sutta.) > > > Thanks. This sounds like an important point for me. I find > understanding (ie thinking about) all experiences through sense doors > as vipaka is very helpful towards detachment, at least at the > intellectual level. Come to think of it, I don't suppose that would > change much if cosmic principles such as weather were involved. > > Could someone supply the sutta Howard is referring to? > > Thanks in advance. > > Phil > 52148 From: "Hal" Date: Sun Nov 6, 2005 6:06am Subject: Re: New Satipatthana Book bardosein Hi Andrew, Thanks for your review. I don't have time to respond to all your points as I will also need to read the text again; however, you're right to say that his commentary is limited to the early canonical texts and that the post-canonical texts are not treated as "centrally important source material" (p.1). I've wondered how the Burmese meditation masters would respond to this, since many rely on the Vissudhimagga (and other later commentaries) for their Satipatthana practise. I was also surprised to see Nanavira Thera cited in some of Analayo's footnotes--we all know what Nanavira thought of the Abhidhamma! You say that "[g]iven that the abhidhammic mind-moment is not accepted as a premise, [you were] interested in how temporal matters would be dealt with". Does the Satipatthana method require you to accept this premise of the Abhidhamma? On the contrary, the Sattipatthana begins by paying attention to much coarser elements, beginning with the temporality of the body itself (kayanupassana). Only after this level of 'seeing' has been mastered can one begin to explore further in more detail. The study of feelings is then followed by the contemplation of even more subtle mental states. Finally, only when these three foundations have been firmly established, does the meditator begin to contemplate the higher dhammas and eventually grasp, first-hand, the momentary nature of the mind itself. You raise some good questions concerning what you see as the author's failure "to clearly differentiate the following terms: meditation, formal meditation, meditation exercise, contemplation, intellectual reasoning, mental mastery." I'll have to re-read this text again. I thought he had defined several of these terms in his second chapter, no? Not sure, but I think some experienced meditators may find that he has defined satipatthana far too narrowly. Your comments have given me a good reason to read this book again. Hal 52149 From: upasaka@... Date: Sun Nov 6, 2005 1:12am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: The All: //now as we speak?// upasaka_howard Hi, Antony - In a message dated 11/6/05 2:11:46 AM Eastern Standard Time, antony272b@... writes: > Dear Howard and all, > > A Zen expert wrote in response to a request for a one line summary of > Buddhism: > "Don't imagine there is something else" > > Joseph Goldstein once wrote: > "Everything is just what it is, and only what it is." > > I have been enjoying practicing with this in the light of our > discussion about The All. > > with metta / Antony. > ======================= That sutta, along with the Bahiya Sutta, which I see as related, is one of the very important ones for me, and I am grateful for its guidance. I have my very definite ideas on what these suttas mean. My near certainty in that regard is powerful, but, happily, I see that certainty as a red flag. What I caution myself to remember here is that what I think teachings mean is not unquestionably so but is only firm opinion, that I may be right or wrong or something in between, and that what is of great importance is to not cast what I see in terms of what I believe I "should" see, but rather, as possible, to rein in my inclination to impose view, to investigate nonjudgmentally, letting reality speak for itself, and, as another Zen expert wrote, to just "Look! Look!" :-) 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) 52150 From: upasaka@... Date: Sun Nov 6, 2005 1:29am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Two Items upasaka_howard Hi, Sukin - In a message dated 11/6/05 3:05:36 AM Eastern Standard Time, sukinder@... writes: > Hi Howard, > > My comment on the second item: > > ------------------------ > Howard: > My wife and I were walking through a parking lot to get to our car. > As > we passed behind a large, parked SUV, the driver, not seeing us, > started to > back out right into us. My wife hadn't noticed this. I, who have cultivated > the habit of paying attention to what is happening at the moment, did > notice it. I put my hand out and pushed my wife back as I also moved > back out of the way. (My wife said "Wow, you actually saved my life!") > a) Had I not cultivated the habit of ongoing attention, I might well > have not noticed that car. > > > Sukin: > I am not sure what all is implied in your explanation. Are you saying that > unlike you, your wife's attention is more focused on what is immediately > ahead? After all, she does manage to avoid obstacles and is able to > move around from one place to another doesn't she? It sounds to me > that your own so called "habit of paying attention to what is happening > at the moment" seems to involve the 'intention' to attend to more than > what is 'immediately ahead'. ------------------------------------------- Howard: It seemed to me that what I was saying was straightforward. The practice of attending cultivates attention. ----------------------------------------- > > Of course you are saying that this is a natural consequence of prior > training, which constitute paying attention to feelings, sensations and so > on. But does this matter? > ------------------------------------------ Howard: Yes. ------------------------------------------- Intention accompanies each citta and takes > > on the object the citta takes, in this case 'concepts' different from what > constitutes those of your wife's cittas or your own, prior to the training. > And with the conventional understanding of what 'mindfulness' is, you > may argue that your present experiences is a result of development of > satipatthana, but is it? ------------------------------------------ Howard: I believe so. ------------------------------------------ > > We know that satipatthana takes paramattha dhammas as object and > not concepts. So would you say that your being aware of the SUV is a > consequence of the development of satipatthana, or something else? ------------------------------------------- Howard: There is nothing but what there actually is. Our apparent observing of conventional objects such as SUV's is the result of mental processing that enables us to build relational structure into our cognition. Without that we could not function in this world. But at any time, all that actually arise are paramattha dhammas, and among these can be heightened attention to whatever arises, regardless of how the mind parses it. ------------------------------------------- > > ----------------------------------- > Howard: > b) Had I not, quite consciously, determinedly, and intentionally > moved > my wife and myself out of harm's way, but instead "waited for > conditions" to > somehow arise, I might not be here to write this. > > > Sukin: > Who would do this? ------------------------------------------ Howard: No sane person! And that applies to all facets of life, including Dhamma practice. ----------------------------------------- > I think you are misunderstanding this idea about 'conditions being all > there is'. We can talk about "conditions" in the abstract and play around > with the concept, but I think the correct understanding would be with > reference to the 'present dhamma'. So in fact whatever arises, be it > fear, bewilderment, indecision or whatever, *this* would be the > conditions being referred to. ------------------------------------------ Howard: I understand what conditions are. ----------------------------------------- > > A person who says to the effect "wait for conditions" is in fact > misunderstanding about conditions. He fails to see that the very arising > of such an idea, is "conditioned", and in this case, by wrong > understanding. On the other hand though, one should not take the > decision to move away from the oncoming SUV out from the context of > conditionality either. The apparent control in conventional situations > should be understood in light of the conditioned nature and > hence 'uncontrollability' of dhammas. > > It is just in 'thinking' that there seem to be control. ------------------------------------- Howard: There is volition and volitional action. This is kamma. It, like all dhammas, is conditioned. But it is not an unwanted step child. It does not have second-class status among the cetasikas. ------------------------------------- > For example, no one > wants to be killed by an SUV, yet different reaction will occur to > different individual at different times in similar situations. And none of > these cittas will be the same when any decision to move away is made. > It is *these* dhammas that are conditioned beyond control, but wrong > view would make most if not all come away feeling that 'control' has > been the function of something other than these dhammas. > > There are some who though they agree in principle with this, seem not > to apply this understanding when it comes to their so called 'practice', > particularly the decision at any given moment to "do it". Wouldn't the > correct development lead to understanding this very idea about practice > as being conditioned, rather than any 'following' of those ideas? > > ------------------------------------- > Howard: > [Note to all folks who reply to posts not by addressing the content, but > by > instead saying "That's all concept": All mention > of "I", "my", "wife", "parking lot", "SUV", "hand", etc, etc, etc is > figurative language, and I know that!] > > Sukin: > So I may be missing your point, in which case please explain further. :-) ------------------------------------- Howard: I can't do any better. :-) -------------------------------------- > > Metta, > > Sukin > > ======================= 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) 52151 From: upasaka@... Date: Sun Nov 6, 2005 1:34am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Vipaka paradox upasaka_howard Hi, Chris (and Phil) - In a message dated 11/6/05 4:53:19 AM Eastern Standard Time, cforsyth1@... writes: > Hello Howard, Phil, all, > > Howard, I think this is what you are referring to ... but this seems > to be a teaching from the Commentaries, not the Suttas? > > "According to Buddhism, there are five orders or processes (Niyamas) > which operate in the physical and mental realms: > > i. Kamma Niyama, order of act and result, e.g., desirable and > undesirable acts produce corresponding good and bad results. > > ii. Utu Niyama, physical (inorganic) order, e.g., seasonal phenomena > of winds and rains. > > iii. Bija Niyama, order of germs or seeds (physical organic order); > e.g., rice produced from rice-seed, sugary taste from sugar cane or > honey etc. The scientific theory of cells and genes and the physical > similarity of twins may be ascribed to this order. > > iv. Citta Niyama, order of mind or psychic law, e.g., processes of > consciousness (Citta vithi), power of mind etc. > > v. Dhamma Niyama, order of the norm, e.g., the natural phenomena > occurring at the advent of a Boddhisatta in his last birth, > gravitation, etc. > > Every mental or physical phenomenon could be explained by these all- > embracing five orders or processes which are laws in themselves. > > Kamma is, therefore, only one of the five orders that prevail in the > universe. It is a law in itself, but it does not thereby follow that > there should be a law-giver. Ordinary laws of nature, like > gravitation, need no law-giver. It operates in its own field without > the intervention of an external independent ruling agency". > > metta and peace, > Chris > ======================== Thanks for that, Chris. :-) It is what I had in mind. If I'm not mistaken, there are sutta sources for it as well. 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) 52152 From: "Hal" Date: Sun Nov 6, 2005 6:35am Subject: Re: The All: //now as we speak?// bardosein Hi Howard (& Antony), Howard: What I caution myself to remember here is that what I think teachings mean is not unquestionably so but is only firm opinion, that I may be right or wrong or something in between, and that what is of great importance is to not cast what I see in terms of what I believe I "should" see, but rather, as possible, to rein in my inclination to impose view, to investigate nonjudgmentally, letting reality speak for itself, and, as another Zen expert wrote, to just "Look! Look!" :-) --------------------------------- Or as Ludwig Wittgenstein (someone totally unrelated to these Zen experts) aptly said: "look, don't think!" Regards, Hal 52153 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Sun Nov 6, 2005 7:35am Subject: Re: The All: //now as we speak?// buddhistmedi... Hi, Hal - > Or as Ludwig Wittgenstein (someone totally unrelated to these Zen > experts) aptly said: "look, don't think!" > > Regards, Hal > What's wrong with thinking? Yours truly, Tep ====== 52154 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Sun Nov 6, 2005 8:01am Subject: Re: Did Buddhaghosa (formal) meditate? Upadana & Atta-ditthi buddhistmedi... Hi, Swee and Acaro - I thought the following excerpt might be helpful for your discussion. Upadana & Atta ----------------------- "The fundamental upadana or 'holding' is attavuda (see Majjhima ii,1 ), which is holding a belief in 'self'. The puthujjana takes what appears to be his 'self' at its face value; and so long as this goes on he continues to be a 'self', at least in his own eyes (and in those of others like him). This is bhava or 'being'. The puthujjana knows that people are born and die; and since he thinks 'my self exists' so he also thinks 'my self was born' and 'my self will die'. The puthujjana sees a 'self' to whom the words birth and death apply. In contrast to the puthujjana, the arahat has altogether got rid of asmim?na (not to speak of attavada -- see MAMA), and does not even think 'I am'. This is bhavanirodha, cessation of being. And since he does not think 'I am' he also does not think 'I was born' or 'I shall die'. In other words, he sees no 'self' or even 'I' for the words birth and death to apply to. This is jatinirodha and jaramarananirodha. (See, in Kosala Samy. i,3 , how the words birth and death are avoided when the arahat is spoken of. -- "For one who is born, lord, is there anything other than ageing-&- death? -- "For one who is born, great king, there is nothing other than ageing-&- death. Those, great king, who are wealthy warriors... wealthy divines... wealthy householders..., -- for them, too, being born, there is nothing other than ageing-&-death. Those monks, great king, who are worthy ones, destroyers of the cankers..., -- for them, too, it is the nature of this body to break up, to be laid down. "The puthujjana, taking his apparent 'self' at face value, does not see that he is a victim of upadana; he does not see that 'being a self' depends upon 'holding a belief in self' (upadanapaccaya bhavo); and he does not see that birth and death depend upon his 'being a self' (bhavapaccaya jati, and so on). The ariyasavaka, on the other hand, does see these things, and he sees also their cessation (even though he may not yet have fully realized it); and his seeing of these things is direct. Quite clearly, the idea of re-birth is totally irrelevant here. http://metta.lk/mirror/www.geocities.com/Athens/9366/noteps2.htm Best wishes, Tep ======= --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "nidive" wrote: > > Hi Ícaro, > > > > In one who denies there is control, one denies there is "self". > > > But since "self" is non-existent, is there a need for the act of > > > denying it? > (snipped) 52155 From: "Joop" Date: Sun Nov 6, 2005 8:01am Subject: Re: New Satipatthana Book jwromeijn --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Andrew" wrote: > > Dear Hal, Joop, Ken H and anyone interested > > I've now finished reading Ven. Analayo's book "Satipatthana: The > Direct Path to Realization" (Windhorse, 2004 reprint) and will give > some feedback. ... Dear Andrew, Hal Thanks for your review; it's a good one: mixture of information and opinion. I have not had (or: taken) the time to read the book entirely. But you inspire me to do soon. Two points of your review have my special attention: A: "This creates what is perhaps a strange result in that the work of ancient commentators is, at times, dismissed as not being in accordance with the discourses but the same scholastic rigour doesn't seem to be applied to modern meditation teachers. This is a shame, I feel, and I hope the reasons for it are purely pragmatic." J: I don't know if it is "scholastic rigour", because I thought especially "the work of ancient commentators" is most times called "scholastic" (this time I mean this as a neutral descriptive word). My guess is that the reason is more than pragmatic of Ven. Analayo, but I don't know which reason. Compare Nyanaponika who in his 'The Heart of Buddhist Meditation' his main essay accompanies with texts of the ancient commentators. A: "One of the confusing aspects of the book was a failure to clearly differentiate the following terms: meditation, formal meditation, meditation exercise, contemplation, intellectual reasoning, mental mastery. At times, "meditation" and "contemplation" appear to be synonyms." J: This is a very important point, not only for this review; but also for yhe permanent DSG-discussion. I have been to a study-retreat about Abhidhamma given by a Burmese monk and many times our dutch group was discussing what the monk meant when he used the term "meditation"; our conclusion was that most time he in fact talked about "contemplation": a kind of slow discursive thinking about a text or thought, again and again: concentrating but not on one point (in fact the definition of 'concentration') but on the text in all its facets. The second remark on this point of you is that I was curious when I started looking at the book if it could answer my long existing question if the SS is about "vipassana-meditation" (aka insight- meditation, aka mindfulness) òr about samatha (aka concentration- meditation, aka absorption)? But that the 'Conten' or the 'Index' did not give me an opening. Thanks and metta Joop 52156 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Sun Nov 6, 2005 8:19am Subject: Ditthi, Atta, and Kamma buddhistmedi... Hi, all - The following excerpts excellently explain relationships between ditthi (view), atta (self) and kamma or karma. I hope you find them useful too. " If one can clearly perceive the characteristic of anatta, one attains the stage of the knowledge of sotapatti magga (path of the streamwinner) wherein atta-ditthi (ego delusion) or sakkaya-ditthi (personality belief) is totally eradicated. " Atta-ditthi is the head--the chief--of the old akusala kammas that thus accompany beings incessantly. As long as sakkaya-ditthi exists, these old akusala kammas are fiery and full of strength. " All the old akusala kamma which have forever accompanied beings throughout the long and beginningless round of rebirths called samsara are completely extinguished as soon as sakkaya-ditthi, which is their head, disappears entirely. " Human beings, devas and Brahmas, who possess sakkaya-ditthi in their mental make-up may be good and virtuous beings today, but may commit an infinite number of the duccarita, such as the great panatipata kamma of matricide, patricide, or killing arahats, or the adinnadana kamma of stealing, etc., tomorrow, or the day after, or next month, or next year or in the next following existences. " Beings who clearly perceive the anatta characteristic, however, and who have rid themselves of sakkaya-ditthi, perceive that the rupa- and nama-kkhandha which arise and disappear even in the short course of one sitting as separate phenomena and not as a bonded continuum. The concept of 'my atta', which is like the thread, is no longer present. Their khandha appear to them like the string of beads from which the thread has been removed. They clearly perceive that the akusala kamma which they had committed in the past are not 'persons', or 'beings' or I or 'my kamma', and that they are that which arise and disappear in an instant. That is why these past akusala kamma disappear entirely as soon as sakkaya-ditthi disappears. " It is because of the forcible possessive act of sakkaya-ditthi that akusala kamma accompany beings throughout samsara, wherever they may be reborn, and produce resultants. Beings find that they cannot discard their akusala kamma even while they are being oppressed by their resultants and are thereby in the process of suffering great privations. These beings regard such akusala kamma as 'akusala kamma I have committed', and thus take possession of them even though they may be in the process of suffering in hell through the resultants produced by the kamma. Because beings cannot discard or relinquish such akusala kamma, these kamma cannot help but produce resultants. "In this present existence also, when external and internal dangers are encountered, and beings become greatly oppressed by diseases and ailments, they develop an attachment for these diseases and ailments through such thoughts as 'I feel pain. I feel hurt. I am oppressed by burning sensations', and thus take possession of them. This act of taking possession is an act of bondage that later prevents the riddance of themselves from diseases and ailments. It is because this act of bondage of sakkaya-ditthi is strong that in the lengthy beginningless samsara beings have found these diseases and ailments to be their inseparable companions right up to the present day. It is thus that sakkaya-ditthi develops an attachment and takes possession of even those diseases and ailments that greatly oppress beings at the present moment. Superficial and Deep Attachment ------------------------------------------------ "The attachments of tanha and mana are not attachments of ditthi. Tanha develops an attachment for all the phenomena in the three spheres of existence in the form 'It is my property'. Mana develops an attachment, for them in the form 'It is I'. In the case of beings possessing sakkaya-ditthi, tanha and mana follow the lead given by sakkaya-ditthi. In the case of stream-winners, once-returners and non-returners who have rid themselves of sakkaya-ditthi, tanha and mana follow sanna- vipallasa (hallucinations of perception) and citta-vipallasa (hallucinations of consciousness). The attachments produced by sanna and citta-vipallasa are superficial. Attachments produced by sakkaya-ditthi are deep. A Concise Description of the Advantages Arising Out of the Realisation of Anatta by The Venerable Mahathera Ledi Sayadaw ......................................................... Warm regards, Tep ===== 52157 From: "Hal" Date: Sun Nov 6, 2005 8:27am Subject: Re: The All: //now as we speak?// bardosein Hi Tep, There isn't anything wrong with thinking. Wittgenstein, of all people, wouldn't have thought there was anything wrong with thinking. Otherwise, he would have also minded thinking this thought too. His remark is intended to highlight the differences between these two activities. So far as the Satipatthana method is concerned, bare awareness is needed at the outset of practice. Conceptual thinking must be restrained in order to see things as they really are. Thinking is not to be discarded entirely; it has its place within the meditative/contemplative process. However, seeing "I am not" is qualitatively different from thinking it. Only the former, will lead to the paths and fruits of practice. Hal --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Tep Sastri" wrote: > > Hi, Hal - > > > Or as Ludwig Wittgenstein (someone totally unrelated to these Zen > > experts) aptly said: "look, don't think!" > > > > Regards, Hal > > > > What's wrong with thinking? > > > Yours truly, > > > Tep > > ====== > 52158 From: "Joop" Date: Sun Nov 6, 2005 9:21am Subject: [dsg] Re: What has changed in 2500 years? (Was: Did Buddhaghosa formal meditate? jwromeijn --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Sukinder" wrote: > > Hi Joop, All, > > Butting in to comment on one of your points: > ------------------- Dear Sukinder, all Sukin: "I think the Dhamma is very deep and very hard to understand even intellectually." Joop: Sometimes I think the Dhamma is difficult to understand; and sometimes I think: the Dhamma is easy, is transparent: I in fact already knew it, the Buddha had only to remind me to it. This week I was reading the Cula-rahulovada-Sutta (Majjhima Nikaya 147) a discourse of the Buddha during which Rahula got awakened. We can make it to diffucult because we like to worry. Of course I exaggerate but still:we had to go the middle way between heavy and light. Sukin: "This is where Science and any modern enthusiast of Buddha Dhamma are at. So I doubt that the popularity of Buddhism and the apparent agreement between science and Dhamma should be taken as sign of the "growth" of the Sasana. Joop: This is not the first time we discuss about the relation Buddhism-science, and in general I agree with you: the Dhamma has an soteriological and not a scientifical intention. Sukin: "For example, would science ever arrive at the conclusion that there are 28 rupas? No …" Joop: Of course not; my opinion is that "rupa" does not mean "matter" but "by a human being experienced material quality" And further: the number 28 is not holy to me ("numbers" themselves are concepts), if it's better to combine two or to add one, it must be possible to do so (example: 'heart base'). More important to me is: there is not a cognitive dissonance between the Dhamma and scientific discoveries, it's not difficult for a scientist (or a scientific educated modern person) to be or to get a Buddhist, that's was my statement. And that's one of the reasons I'm optimistic; another is that the prophecy of the Buddha about the decline of the Buddhasasana is not correct understood. Sukin: "Hope there has been some food for thought here. Joop: Oh, yes! Metta Joop 52159 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Sun Nov 6, 2005 9:23am Subject: Re: The All: //now as we speak?// buddhistmedi... Hi, Hal - You wrote : >However, seeing "I am not" is qualitatively different from thinking it. > Only the former, will lead to the paths and fruits of practice. > > Hal > Thank you for saying the most important difference between "seeing&knowing" and "thinking&knowing". But why is such difference so drastic? Warm regards, Tep ==== 52160 From: "Joop" Date: Sun Nov 6, 2005 9:50am Subject: [dsg] Re: Vipaka paradox jwromeijn --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@a... wrote: >... > Thanks for that, Chris. :-) It is what I had in mind. If I'm not mistaken, there are sutta sources for it as well. > > With metta, > Howard > Dear Christine, Howard, all A fascinating text about it is: THE NIYAMA-DIPANI, The Manual of Cosmic Order by Mahathera Ledi Sayadaw www.ubakhin.com/ledi/MANUAL04.html I have not found a clear Sutta-source about the 'Fivefold Niyama' but a rich discussion between Ledi Sayadav and mrs. Rhys Davids about them. Metta Joop 52161 From: "Hal" Date: Sun Nov 6, 2005 10:25am Subject: Re: The All: //now as we speak?// bardosein Hi again Tep, I wouldn't say that I was discussing, as you say, the "difference between "seeing&knowing" and "thinking&knowing". Thinking and seeing are two different processes. Knowing is another matter. I was concerned with what could be known from "seeing" and what could be known through "thinking". Through direct intuition (bare attention to things as they are) the "I am not" is known, not thought. Thinking so, may follow up review of the experience. However, when it is arrived at through thinking, the "I am not" is thought, but not known. Hal --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Tep Sastri" wrote: > > > Hi, Hal - > > You wrote : > > >However, seeing "I am not" is qualitatively different from thinking it. > > Only the former, will lead to the paths and fruits of practice. > > > > Hal > > > > Thank you for saying the most important difference between > "seeing&knowing" and "thinking&knowing". > > But why is such difference so drastic? > > > Warm regards, > > > Tep > > ==== > 52162 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Sun Nov 6, 2005 11:10am Subject: Re: The All: //now as we speak?// buddhistmedi... Hi, Hal - Sorry for the short-cut that caused the confusion! Actually, "seeing&knowing" is my abbreviation for 'seeing and knowing things the way they really are' or yathabhuta-nana-dassana. Bare attention may eventually lead to 'direct knowing'(abhinna) that includes yathabhuta-nana-dassana, I believe. >Hal: However, when it is > arrived at through thinking, the "I am not" is thought, but not > known. I agree with that. Warm regards, Tep ========== In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Hal" wrote: > > Hi again Tep, > > I wouldn't say that I was discussing, as you say, the "difference > between "seeing&knowing" and "thinking&knowing". Thinking and seeing > are two different processes. Knowing is another matter. I was > concerned with what could be known from "seeing" and what could be > known through "thinking". Through direct intuition (bare attention to > things as they are) the "I am not" is known, not thought. Thinking > so, may follow up review of the experience. However, when it is > arrived at through thinking, the "I am not" is thought, but not > known. > > Hal > (snipped) 52163 From: upasaka@... Date: Sun Nov 6, 2005 7:29am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Vipaka paradox upasaka_howard Hi, Joop (and Chris) - In a message dated 11/6/05 12:51:41 PM Eastern Standard Time, jwromeijn@... writes: > > Dear Christine, Howard, all > > A fascinating text about it is: > THE NIYAMA-DIPANI, The Manual of Cosmic Order by Mahathera Ledi > Sayadaw > www.ubakhin.com/ledi/MANUAL04.html > > I have not found a clear Sutta-source about the 'Fivefold Niyama' but > a rich discussion between Ledi Sayadav and mrs. Rhys Davids about > them. > > Metta > > Joop > ========================== Thanks for that. Actually I've seen it before, but I've never studied it. Now I should. BTW, I have my own reasons for thinking that one's own kamma is not fully determinative, but it presupposes a rather detailed phenomenalist view of existence that most folks have no interest in, and so I'll skip discussing it. With metta, Howard With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 52164 From: "Joop" Date: Sun Nov 6, 2005 1:17pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Vipaka paradox jwromeijn --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@a... wrote: > > Hi, Joop (and Chris) - > ... BTW, I have my own reasons for thinking that one's own kamma is not > fully determinative, but it presupposes a rather detailed phenomenalist view of > existence that most folks have no interest in, and so I'll skip discussing it. > > With metta, > Howard > Hi Howard, This is a rather enigmatic message to me. I don't know the context. Perhaps you can just post it? Metta Joop 52165 From: upasaka@... Date: Sun Nov 6, 2005 11:10am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Vipaka paradox upasaka_howard Hi, Joop - In a message dated 11/6/05 4:18:49 PM Eastern Standard Time, jwromeijn@... writes: > Hi Howard, > > This is a rather enigmatic message to me. I don't know the context. > Perhaps you can just post it? > > Metta > > Joop > ====================== Okay, I'll spell it out, but no one will like it! ;-)) I picture "reality" as consisting of a multitude of interacting experiential streams, each of which is conventionally viewed as a "sentient being" or, equivalently, as "a world". Each such stream is actually a flow of impersonal namic and rupic conditions (paramattha dhammas) that are threads that are woven together within the given mindstream into a conceptual tapestry constituting a "world" or a "being". As the Buddha said, the world is found within this very sentient body. These experiential streams are not isolated from each other, but interact, reflecting each other much like the jewels at the interstices of the Mahayanist "Indra's net." What the experiences are that arise within a given experiential stream is conditioned not only by the volition within that stream but also by volitional activities within other streams. Apparent actions within one stream have reflected consequences within other streams. As William James would put it, when Joe and Jim shake hands, what is happening (in non-paramatthic terms) is that Joe shakes hands with "the Jim" in Joe's experiential realm, and at the same time Jim shakes hands with "the Joe" in Jim's experiential realm. So, what "happens" to each one of us is determined not only by our own cetana, but also by the cetana of others. There is a kind of reflective interpenetration. The so called human realm is actually a shared experience and the joint construct of a multitude of "beings", a cooperative kammic construct, so to speak. There! I've said it for all to hear. Weird enough for you all, folks? ;-)) 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) 52166 From: "Phil" Date: Sun Nov 6, 2005 4:35pm Subject: Re: Vipaka paradox philofillet Hi Howard > So, what "happens" to each one of us is determined not only by our own > cetana, but also by the cetana of others. There is a kind of reflective > interpenetration. The so called human realm is actually a shared experience and the > joint construct of a multitude of "beings", a cooperative kammic construct, > so to speak. > There! I've said it for all to hear. Weird enough for you all, folks? Technically speaking, I don't know if this is true but I think it is an interesting variant on an ideal that I like - the way our small acts of kindness (or unkindness) ripple through the world in unexpected ways, having conditioning effects on others that we can't begin to understand. (thus the little story I posted the other day) "what happens to us is determined not only by our own cetana, but also by the cetana of others." That seems like a reasonable statement, though, again, perhaps not true technically speaking - I don't know. I think the things that are true technically speaking are beyond us anyway, so it is not a bad thing to take a more common-sense approach at times (what happens to us has to do with others' cetana, not just our own) even as we stay open to gradually beginning to understand what the Buddha understood, which is beyond us for now. Phil 52167 From: "Andrew" Date: Sun Nov 6, 2005 6:36pm Subject: Re: New Satipatthana Book corvus121 Hi Hal and Joop Certainly the book needs to be read more than once. Some comments below (sorry for the snipping - bit of a hurry): --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Hal" wrote: > You say that "[g]iven that the abhidhammic mind-moment is not > accepted as a premise, [you were] interested in how temporal matters > would be dealt with". Does the Satipatthana method require you to > accept this premise of the Abhidhamma? You'll know from reading DSG that some members like yourself see satipatthana as a "method" and others like Ken H as a "moment". There is a divergence of view as to how satipatthana arises - by deliberate effort, by understanding, by a mixture? Ven Analayo sees Satipatthana as a method, but I think his description of how it proceeds is not so clear. On the contrary, the > Sattipatthana begins by paying attention to much coarser elements, > beginning with the temporality of the body itself (kayanupassana). > Only after this level of 'seeing' has been mastered can one begin to > explore further in more detail. The study of feelings is then > followed by the contemplation of even more subtle mental states. > Finally, only when these three foundations have been firmly > established, does the meditator begin to contemplate the higher > dhammas and eventually grasp, first-hand, the momentary nature of the > mind itself. On page 269, Ven Analayo says that the practice is flexible rather than strictly "do A then B then C ..." He also says it progresses from gross to subtle. Which way is it? (-: > > You raise some good questions concerning what you see as the author's > failure "to clearly differentiate the following terms: meditation, > formal meditation, meditation exercise, contemplation, intellectual > reasoning, mental mastery." I'll have to re-read this text again. I > thought he had defined several of these terms in his second chapter, > no? He may well provide definitions here and there, but the text I think doesn't always stick to them but reverts to using the term "meditation" as if it's meaning is self-explanatory and he tends to use it synonomously with "contemplation" - then tell us there's no intellectualizing. Confused? I was. That's why I would have liked him to explore the Pali - which he does in lots of other examples like "satipatthana" itself. Not sure, but I think some experienced meditators may find that > he has defined satipatthana far too narrowly. Does one have to be an experienced meditator to become ariyan or indeed arahant? Can one be an alcoholic? We know that alcoholics have attained. How does that work? To me it suggests that understanding (present and accumulated) is foremost among a range of conditions. An afterthought about Christopher Titmuss describing it as a practice manual for meditation in daily life - that's only true in a limited sense because the book does stress "formal meditations" i.e. setting aside special times and sitting correctly and applying effort then. But that, of course, is usually only a small part of the day. Keep reading and I look forward to more comments. Must fly now. Best wishes Andrew 52168 From: TGrand458@... Date: Sun Nov 6, 2005 5:05pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Vipaka paradox TGrand458@... In a message dated 11/06/2005 4:10:45 PM Pacific Standard Time, upasaka@... writes: So, what "happens" to each one of us is determined not only by our own cetana, but also by the cetana of others. There is a kind of reflective interpenetration. The so called human realm is actually a shared experience and the joint construct of a multitude of "beings", a cooperative kammic construct, so to speak. There! I've said it for all to hear. Weird enough for you all, folks? ;-)) With metta, Howard Hi Howard I like it. Sounds like pure causality to me. How could we not be affected by other causal "streams" that come within the realm of experience? (Rhetorical question.) Although an arahat has learned how to escape the effects I suppose. TG 52169 From: sarah abbott Date: Sun Nov 6, 2005 10:51pm Subject: ‘Cetasikas' study corner 303 Aversion-dosa (l) sarahprocter... Dear Friends, 'Cetasikas' by Nina van Gorkom http://www.vipassana.info/cetasikas.html http://www.zolag.co.uk/ Questions, comments and different views welcome;-) ========================================== [Ch18 - Aversion (dosa)] It may happen that we have so much aversion about our aversion and about the unpleasant feeling which accompanies it, that we believe that we cannot be mindful of the reality of the present moment. In theory we know that there can be mindfulness of any reality which appears now, but what about the practice? When we see the benefit of right understanding of whatever reality appears, there are conditions for the arising of mindfulness, even when it seems that we are not “in the mood“ for it. ***** [Aversion (dosa) to be contd] Metta, Sarah ====== 52170 From: sarah abbott Date: Sun Nov 6, 2005 11:24pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: RE; a short Hello! sarahprocter... Dear Wendy (& Matheesha), --- dnirodha wrote: > Dear Matheesha and Sarah: > > Thank you for your comments. It seems a common understanding in > Theravada Buddhism that brahma-viharas (BV) alone won't lead to > nibbana. That is my understanding too. But some western scholars > and some dhamma friends in Taiwan assert BV directly lead to nibbana. ... S: Without understanding any dhammas, including the brahma viharas, as namas (or rupas), not 'my' brhama viharas and so on, there will be no path leading to nibbana because there won't be any development of satipatthana. ... > I am just a beginner in this field, and still have lots of things and > dhamms to learn. According to my current understanding, when it is > said in sutra that someone practices BV and attains nibbana, it > usually accompanies with other terms, i.e. bojjhanga. I wish to > classify those sutras and find out the explanation. ... S: For example, at the end of the Metta Sutta (Khuddakkapatha), we read about the one who 'traffics not with views' (di.t.th~n ca anupagamma) etc and the commentary spells out how even after abiding in loving-kindness jhana, the various namas and rupas have to be known with insight and this is what is meant by 'he traffics not with views', realising that even this divine abidings are a mere heap of khandhas, "no creature can be found herein" (S i 135), "till he eventually becomes virtuous (siilavaa) with that kind of virtue that is supramundane since he is now perfected (sampanno) in the right view belongin to the Path of Stream Entry." Lots more detail -- the point is that all dhammas, even the very pure ones, have to be seen with detachment and understanding as being mere elements, not worthy of being clung to in anyway. The brahma viharas are not unique to the Buddha's teaching, but the development of vipassana (insight) is. .... >During the > proceeding of thesis, maybe I will revise my understanding or > reconfirm and enhance it. > > Thank for your advice. I will check related discussion of past in DSG. ... S: Please let us know how it goes and elaborate on your findings, considerations and research. Metta, Sarah p.s Matheesha, Wendy apologised off-list that her sign-off and name got left behind by mistake when she last posted to us. ================= 52171 From: sarah abbott Date: Sun Nov 6, 2005 11:32pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: kamma and its cessation sarahprocter... Hi Tep (& Larry), --- LBIDD@... wrote: > Tep: "Are functional consciousnesses not producing action (kamma) ?" > > Hi Tep, > > Kusala and akusala consciousnesses are kamma and produce kamma result in > a later life. Functional consciousnesses don't. But either could > motivate an action, as I understand it. Maybe Htoo or Sarah could > explain this better. I'm not sure of the mechanics of action. .... S: Kusala and akusala kamma which is 'completed' can produce results in either this life or future lives depending on many factors. Kiriya (often translated as 'inoperative' consciousness) never brings a result. It is neither cause nor result. So in the case of an arahant, there are kiriya cittas rather than kusala cittas. Of course good actions still take place (through body, speech and mind) but they are 'inoperative' and no results will follow in the way of further vipaka or becoming of any kind. Metta, Sarah p.s Larry, I waited for Htoo, but he seems to have gone a little quiet:). ========== 52172 From: sarah abbott Date: Sun Nov 6, 2005 11:54pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: What has changed in 2500 years? (Was: Did Buddhaghosa formal meditate? sarahprocter... Hi Joop, --- Joop wrote: > In "The Coming Buddha, Ariya Metteyya"; part 3, "The Duration of the > Sasana of Buddha Gotama" > (www.ubakhin.com/uchittin/arimet/ARIMET03.html) Sayagyi U Chit Tin > explains: > "The commentary on the Abhidhamma text, Dhammasangani, says that when > the First Buddhist Council convened by Ven. Maha-Kassapa rehearsed > the Pali Canon, this made it possible for the Sasana to endure for > five thousand years. [Atthasalini 27]" > > Perhaps somebody who has a copy of the Atthasalini can explain me how > this mechanism of making the duration ten times longer works. .... S: Do you really believe that without the rehearsing of the entire Tipitaka by the arahants at the First Council for seven months that we would be able to consider the teachings exactly as taught by the Buddha and handed down by the Sangha? I don't. When we walked up to Vulture's Peak in Rajghir, we looked over to the hills where these great arahants lived in caves rehearshing the teachings and establishing the 'uniformity of meaning' in all three baskets, including the maintaining of all the rules for the bhikkhus. Perhaps I'll have a chnace to walk up and visit that spot one day - a long, arduous walk I've read, not suitable for a large group. A little more from the Atthasalini for you then (Expositor, PTS transl p35): "And at the conclusion of the Rehearsal the great earth quaked (up to the limits of the water) repeatedly, violently, with a vertical upheaval everywhere; and various wonders manifested themselves, as though giving congratulations with well-felt delight at the thought: 'The religion of the Buddha of the Ten Powers has thus, by the Elder Mahaakassapa, been made capable of lasting a period of five thousand years.'" Thanks to these arahants, the sasana is to last longer and we are now said to be a little past half way. Recognising the decline is now optimistic or pessimistic but realistic. suggestions that you have given for the future of Theravada (#52113) are already being implemented as part of such a decline as I see it. For example, there is less and less regard for the true following of Vinaya for bhikkhus, people already interpret the texts 'metaphorically' and there is less and less true 'dhamma-study' with any wisdom. I'm not particularly concerned about any such developments, it's just the way it is. We can just do our best to share and help any little understanding of the teachings we may have. Metta, Sarah ====== 52173 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon Nov 7, 2005 0:10am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Jhana as a prerequisite for enlightenment sarahprocter... Hi Ken H (Steve & Matheesha), --- kenhowardau wrote: > Sarah: > I don't think that sevitabba here means that the unwholesome > tendency should be pursued or followed, > -------------------------------------------- > > I agree: otherwise the man in the simile would not have said, "Having > slowed to a walk, why don't I stand still?" he would have > said, "Having slowed to a walk, why don't I continue walking?" > > ------------------------------------------------------------- > Sarah: > but that the path to arahantship should be followed, 'acting > upon' any craving already arisen. If such craving is a condition for > insight and enlightenment, it doesn't drag one into rebirth at such a > time. > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > I like that explanation - although the 'running man' simile has it > happening in several stages. Perhaps I am taking it too far, but I > wonder if we could say; strong akusala can be a condition for weak > akusala - can be a condition for kusala - can be a condition for > strong kusala without panna - can be a condition for kusala with > panna - can be a condition for strong kusala with panna - can be a > condition for supramundane kusala - can be a condition for viriya > with panna. ... S: I got a little lost with your 'running man' I'm afraid. If you come across the sutta you have in mind, I'd be interested to see it. Without understanding presently arising attachment and craving which has arisen, there can't be any development of insight or any understanding of the 2nd Noble Truth as I see it. Even wrong views can never be eradicated if there are no conditions for them to arise and be known at such times. Matheesha asked (#52074) what gives rise to the result of good kamma and thought it had to be connected with desire. It's true -- without desire, there would be no rebirth and no further results of good kamma. Without desire which led to this rebirth, there could be no chance to develop wisdom. Without desire now, it could not be known. But this doesn't mean it is 'good' in any sense or to be followed. Metta, Sarah ========= 52174 From: "seisen_au" Date: Mon Nov 7, 2005 0:19am Subject: [dsg] Re: Jhana as a prerequisite for enlightenment seisen_au Hi Sarah and All, Question below > > Commentary: > > > > Based on the present craving [ta.nhaa] (i. e., desire for becoming an > > Arahant), he gives up previous craving that was the root-cause of > > (one's involvement in) the cycle of rebirth. Now (it may be asked) > > whether such present craving (for Arahantship) is wholesome [kusala] > > or unwholesome [akusala]? It is unwholesome. Should it be pursued > > or not? It should be pursued [sevitabbaa]. Does it drag one into > > rebirth [pa.tisandhi.m aaka.d.dhati] or not? It does not drag one > > into rebirth. > ... > S: Yes, this is always a difficult passage. I don't think that >sevitabba here means that the unwholesome tendency should be pursued >or followed,but that the path to arahantship should be >followed, 'acting upon' any craving already arisen. If such craving >is a condition for insight and enlightenment, it doesn't drag one >into rebirth at such a time. I'm not sure I understand your last sentence here. Is it the case that all akusala cittas that are objects of satipatthana can not be a condition for rebirth? Thanks Steve ps. I had a look at Htoos post on the craving that does not cause dukkha and i too found it a little perplexing, so i cant really offer any comments on it. 52175 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon Nov 7, 2005 0:25am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Did Buddhaghosa (formal) meditate? (Was: Reasons for staying on DSG sarahprocter... Hi Swee Boon, --- nidive wrote: > "Concepts" come about because of sankhara. Without sankhara, there are > no "concepts". .... S: OK. Is this what you meant when you suggested that concepts 'falls under the aggregate of fabrications'(i.e sankhara khandha)? And also when you asked 'What is "Self", other than a fabrication?". Did you mean that "Self" is sankhara khandha? Perhaps I'm getting confused with your use of fabrications:-/. ... > > To me, "concepts" are only as real as sankhara. Therefore, "concepts" > are anicca, dukkha and anatta. ... S: Doubt is real. Like is real. Anger is real....all the mental factors which make up sankhara khandha are real. However, 'self', 'tree', Swee Boon' and 'Sarah' are imagined. The thinking about them is anicca,dukkha and anatta, but 'self' and 'tree' are not, because they don't exist. Any disagreements? Metta, Sarah p.s I'm glad to see you're have discussions with Icaro, Howard, Larry and others on this too. Thx for finding time to reply to my comments as well. ===================== 52176 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon Nov 7, 2005 0:29am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Conditions Part 20 - Dissociation Condition (vippayutta-paccaya) sarahprocter... Hi Swee Boon, --- nidive wrote: > The Buddha was wrong because he taught a Noble Eightfold Path. The > ideal case would be a Noble Onefold Path as powerfully illustrated by > the panna conascence predominance condition. > > Therefore, the Buddha never actually attained nibbana because he got > it all wrong in the first place. He should have discovered the panna > conascence predominance condition first! Isn't the Buddha deluded? ... S: :-). Without the support of the other factors -- all conditioning each other and performing their particular roles, there would not even be one Noble factor. For example, samma ditthi may predominate or be the leader, but without samma sankappa (or vitakka cetasika) 'touching' the object and supportine it, there would be no samma ditthi arising. The same with samma samadhi etc. Metta, Sarah ======== 52177 From: "Joop" Date: Mon Nov 7, 2005 1:01am Subject: [dsg] Re: Vipaka paradox jwromeijn --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@a... wrote: > > Hi, Joop - >.... >There! I've said it for all to hear. Weird enough for you all, folks? > > With metta, > Howard > Dear Howard, TG, all It's a little weird in this Theravada-micro-cosmos in which a human being is seen as a autistic namarupa. You know I have several times tried to make possible a social dimension, to describe the fact that a human being is a social being, in Abhidhamma-terms. My conclusion: that is possible, when we add a citta to the list and accept that "anatta" should be applied to oneself, not to "the other", the "Thou" of Martin Buber. When I look with this frame of reference to your ideas, I have not problems with them. They are very fundamental, more than the "mecano- work" I did and many Abhidhammikas do. I have two problems with them: (1) It has an implicit conventional notion of "time". "Time" is a concept, not an ultimate reality in Abhidhamma (half a year ago we had a DSG-discussion about this theme) If "time" does not exist in ultimate terms, then the processes you describe are a mix of conventional and ultimate things. (2) The notion of "kamma" is nearly invisible in it in the meaning of: the effect of our volitional acts in earlier lifes. Because my belief that this effect exists is still very small (I think it's more Indian culture than Buddhism) that in fact is no problem. Perhaps you can describe more in detail the idea of "a cooperative kammic construct". Was in only meant as a metaphore? Does this "construct" have the same ethical content as the more traditional concept "kamma" has? A remark to TG, although it's another theme: "How could we not be affected by other causal "streams" that come within the realm of experience? …Although an arahat has learned how to escape the effects I suppose." Joop: That's correct, but a more dynamic consequence is that we (included arahats) can influence other beings, not only in their practical daily life but also in their spiritual path, on a spiritual level. Metta Joop 52178 From: "Joop" Date: Mon Nov 7, 2005 2:17am Subject: [dsg] Re: What has changed in 2500 years? (Was: Did Buddhaghosa formal meditate? jwromeijn Hallo Sarah Thanks for your reaction. It's clear to me - and to be honest, that does not surprise me - that we don't agree about my ideas of a wishful Theravada in future: "A. Theravada without monks (in fact that's not something I wish but think that will happen and will not give big problems) B. Taking parts of the Pali-canon not literal but metaphorical. (this is the most important point to me) C. Theravada with less ritual activities, an other kind of dhamma- study and more (formal) meditation." About the number of years I'm afraid you didn't understand me S: "Do you really believe that without the rehearsing of the entire Tipitaka by the arahants at the First Council for seven months that we would be able to consider the teachings exactly as taught by the Buddha and handed down by the Sangha? I don't." Joop: My question was how can the rehearsing of the entire Tipitaka have changed the prophecy of the Buddha (that the Buddha Sasana declines 500 years) to 5,000 years? From which source did Buddhaghosa gets this information? Not from the Tipitaka itself! A second quote from Sayagyi U Chit Tin's essay: "The commentaries on the Vinaya Pitaka and the Anguttara-nikaya say that the eight important rules which the Buddha gave to the Bhikkhuni Sangha will make his Teachings last for five thousand years rather than five hundred." That commentaries were also composed by Buddhaghosa, as far as I know. I don't understand that one mechanism (making duration of Buddha Sasana ten times longer) can so easely be given two different explanation. My statement is: the Buddha was to modest when he talked about decline after 500 years. There is not such a destiny of Buddha Sasana expressable in years. We, Theravadins, had to decide that ourselves, it depends on our activities. About that activities, I one ask time more, and then I let it go: What were your problems with the quote of Nyanaponika, below ? Metta Joop In the preface to his Abhidhamma Studies, Nyanaponika states: "There is no reason why the Abhidhamma philosophy of the Southern or Theravada tradition should stagnate today or why its further development should not be resumed. In fact, through many centuries there has been a living growth of Abhidhamma thought ... There are are a vast number of subjects in the canonical and commentarial Abhidhamma literature that deserve and require closer investigation and new presentation in the language of our time. There are many lines of thought, only briefly sketched in Abhidhamma tradition, that merit detailed treatment in connection with parallel tendencies in modern thought. … Abhidhamma is meant for enquiring spirits who are not satisfied by monotonously and uncritically repeating ready-made terms, even if these are Abhidhamma terms. Abhidhamma is for imaginative minds who are able to fill in, as it were, the columns of the tabulations, for which the canonical Abhidhamma books have furnished the concise headings. The Abhidhamma is not for those timid souls who are not content that a philosophical thought should not actually contradict Buddhist tradition, but demand that it must be expressly, even literally, supported by canonical or commentarial authority. Such an attitude is contrary to the letter and the spirit of the Buddha- Dhamma. It would mean that the Abhidhamma philosophy must remain within the limits of whatever has been preserved of the traditional exegetical literature and hence will cease to be a living and growing organism … We are convinced that the Abhidhamma, if suitably presented, could also enrich modern non-Buddhist thought, … It is … important that the Buddhist way of presenting and solving the respective problems should show modern independent thinkers new vistas and open new avenues of thought, which in turn might revive Buddhist philosophy in the East. (page XXVII-XXVIII) 52179 From: "Hal" Date: Mon Nov 7, 2005 2:47am Subject: Re: New Satipatthana Book bardosein Hi Andrew, Insightful comments. I hope to be able to find some time to get back to reading the text. Here's a quick comment: Hal: On the contrary, the Sattipatthana begins by paying attention to much coarser elements, beginning with the temporality of the body itself (kayanupassana). Only after this level of 'seeing' has been mastered can one begin to explore further in more detail. The study of feelings is then followed by the contemplation of even more subtle mental states. Finally, only when these three foundations have been firmly established, does the meditator begin to contemplate the higher dhammas and eventually grasp, first-hand, the momentary nature of the mind itself. _------------------------- Andrew: On page 269, Ven Analayo says that the practice is flexible rather han strictly "do A then B then C ..." He also says it progresses from gross to subtle. Which way is it? (-: ------------------------- Hal: Yes I would agree that I made the process sound to rigid. However, when Analayo is saying "do then A then B etc.," he talking about method in terms of what must be done, rather than the stages to be attained progressively. I don't think he means, in the quote you cited, that the path does not progress in consecutive stages, preceding from coarser to finer more subtle levels of awareness. Rather, it is the Satipatthana method itself that may allow for flexibility in the attainment of these sequential stages marked out in the four foundations. ------------------------ As Analayo states: The contemplations of the Satipatthana Sutta progress from gross to subtle aspects of experience. It should be kept in mind, however, that this discourse represents a theoretical model of satipatthana, not a case study. In actual practice, the different contemplations in the discourse can be combined in a variety of ways and it would be a misunderstanding to take the progression in the discourse as prescribing the only possible sequence for the development of Satipatthana. (p.269) ------------------ Hal: I take this to mean that one could explore the different foundations in a different order, but even so, this would still involve a progressive development from gross to subtler levels of awareness (which the theoretical presentation of the foundations themselves show). This flexibility, however, must be understood within limits. For instance, a beginning meditator may still need to begin with kayanupassana, simply because it is the easiest object for the untrained mind to contemplate. Later, as a more seasoned meditator, he or she might move through the foundation in another order entirely, but this would require that a higher stage of progress had already been mastered. Cheers, Hal 52180 From: upasaka@... Date: Mon Nov 7, 2005 0:40am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Vipaka paradox upasaka_howard Hi, Joop - In a message dated 11/7/05 4:03:21 AM Eastern Standard Time, jwromeijn@... writes: > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@a... wrote: > > > >Hi, Joop - > >.... > >There! I've said it for all to hear. Weird enough for you all, > folks? > > > >With metta, > >Howard > > > > Dear Howard, TG, all > > It's a little weird in this Theravada-micro-cosmos in which a human > being is seen as a autistic namarupa. You know I have several times > tried to make possible a social dimension, to describe the fact that > a human being is a social being, in Abhidhamma-terms. My conclusion: > that is possible, when we add a citta to the list and accept > that "anatta" should be applied to oneself, not to "the other", > the "Thou" of Martin Buber. > > When I look with this frame of reference to your ideas, I have not > problems with them. They are very fundamental, more than the "mecano- > work" I did and many Abhidhammikas do. > I have two problems with them: > > (1) It has an implicit conventional notion of "time". "Time" is a > concept, not an ultimate reality in Abhidhamma (half a year ago we > had a DSG-discussion about this theme) If "time" does not exist in > ultimate terms, then the processes you describe are a mix of > conventional and ultimate things. ---------------------------------------------- Howard: I cannot begin to describe this perspective in an entirely atemporal way. That doesn't mean that time as we know it is a reality. It only means that I know of no other way to describe the matter. Frankly, I believe that to perfectly describe reality would require saying nothing at all. As the Korean Son monk, Seung Sahn, is reported to have said: "Open mouth already a mistake!" ---------------------------------------------- > > (2) The notion of "kamma" is nearly invisible in it in the meaning > of: the effect of our volitional acts in earlier lifes. Because my > belief that this effect exists is still very small (I think it's more > Indian culture than Buddhism) that in fact is no problem. ---------------------------------------------- Howard: I think that one's own kamma, one's volition (and volition-motored "actions"), constitutes the single greatest influence on the events one encounters. But, still, it is but one of a multitude of influences. ----------------------------------------------- > Perhaps you can describe more in detail the idea of "a cooperative > kammic construct". Was in only meant as a metaphore? Does > this "construct" have the same ethical content as the more > traditional concept "kamma" has? ------------------------------------------------ Howard: No, it isn't meant as a metaphor. I consider that the combined kamma of all experiential streams is the reality that a "Creator God" is the substitute for in theistic religions. You see, and this is a critical matter for understanding my perspective, I do not presume a self-existent external realm of matter and energy, though, of course, I cannot disprove the existence of same. I think of it as projection - a mere "story" embellishing the (multi-)flow of experience, particulary of physical experience. It is my phenomenalist (and non-objectivist) perspective that makes possible my view of kamma (of the many) as creative engine. Likewise it is that perspective which makes possible for me the acceptance of experience continuing beyond one "lifetime". Were my perspective that of an objectivist-materialist, I would be unable to justify either of these views, which, of course, may well just be a limitation of mine. But that explanatory power is not the reason I hold the view. I hold it because it makes the most sense to me. --------------------------------------------- > > A remark to TG, although it's another theme: "How could we not be > affected by other causal "streams" that come within the realm of > experience? …Although an arahat has learned how to escape the effects > I suppose." > Joop: That's correct, but a more dynamic consequence is that we > (included arahats) can influence other beings, not only in their > practical daily life but also in their spiritual path, on a spiritual > level. > > Metta > > Joop > ====================== With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./      (From the Diamond Sutra) 52181 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Mon Nov 7, 2005 6:19am Subject: [dsg] Re: kamma and its cessation buddhistmedi... Hi, Sarah - I really like your explanation below ! > S: Kusala and akusala kamma which is 'completed' can produce results in either this life or future lives depending on many factors. > > Kiriya (often translated as 'inoperative' consciousness) never brings a > result. It is neither cause nor result. > > So in the case of an arahant, there are kiriya cittas rather than kusala > cittas. Of course good actions still take place (through body, speech and > mind) but they are 'inoperative' and no results will follow in the way of > further vipaka or becoming of any kind. > Thank you very much, Sarah. Warm regards, Tep ====== 52182 From: upasaka@... Date: Mon Nov 7, 2005 1:42am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: kamma and its cessation upasaka_howard Hi, Tep (and Sarah) - In a message dated 11/7/05 9:22:38 AM Eastern Standard Time, tepsastri@... writes: > Hi, Sarah - > > I really like your explanation below ! > > >S: Kusala and akusala kamma which is 'completed' can produce results > in either this life or future lives depending on many factors. > > > >Kiriya (often translated as 'inoperative' consciousness) never brings a > >result. It is neither cause nor result. > > > >So in the case of an arahant, there are kiriya cittas rather than kusala > >cittas. Of course good actions still take place (through body, speech and > >mind) but they are 'inoperative' and no results will follow in the way of > >further vipaka or becoming of any kind. > > > > Thank you very much, Sarah. > > > Warm regards, > > > Tep > ======================== Sarah, you wrote "Kiriya (often translated as 'inoperative' consciousness) never brings a result. It is neither cause nor result. So in the case of an arahant, there are kiriya cittas rather than kusala cittas. Of course good actions still take place (through body, speech and mind) but they are 'inoperative' and no results will follow in the way of further vipaka or becoming of any kind." I would like to further examine the idea of "no results" following in the wake of an arahant's actions. That, I believe, needs to be made more specfic. When the Buddha taught, others heard. When the Buddha ate, his body obtained nutrition. When the Buddha stared at a killer elephant approaching him, the animal bowed and desisted. The Buddha acted, albeit without any sense of actor, without any sense of I or mine, but he acted, and those actions had consequences even including current thoughts conditioning subsequent thoughts within his mindstream. So results do follow from the actions of an arahant. It seems to me that it is only certain *types* of result that do not - namely conditioning of the arahant's mind for "good" or "ill". The mind of an arahant is already pristine, and ever remains so, beyond the possibility of defilement or enhancement. Can you add to this (or correct it, if you disagee)? 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) 52183 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Mon Nov 7, 2005 10:41am Subject: Re: kamma and its cessation buddhistmedi... Hi, Howard and Sarah : Perhaps, this post might add a useful element to the discussion. ......................................... > Tep: > > Hi, Sarah - > > > > I really like your explanation below ! > > > > >S: Kusala and akusala kamma which is 'completed' can produce results in either this life or future lives depending on many factors. > > >Kiriya (often translated as 'inoperative' consciousness) never > > > brings a result. It is neither cause nor result. > > > > > >So in the case of an arahant, there are kiriya cittas rather than kusala cittas. Of course good actions still take place (through body, speech and mind) but they are 'inoperative' and no results will follow in the way of further vipaka or becoming of any kind. > > > > > > > Thank you very much, Sarah. > > > > > Howard: > Sarah, you wrote "Kiriya (often translated as 'inoperative' > consciousness) never brings a result. It is neither cause nor result. So in the case of an arahant, there are kiriya cittas rather than kusala cittas. Of course good actions still take place (through body, speech and mind) but they are 'inoperative' and no results will follow in the way of further vipaka or becoming of any kind." I would like to further examine the idea of "no results" following in the wake of an arahant's actions. That, I believe, needs to be made more specfic. > When the Buddha taught, others heard. When the Buddha ate, his body obtained nutrition. When the Buddha stared at a killer elephant approaching him, the animal bowed and desisted. The Buddha acted, albeit without any sense of actor, without any sense of I or mine, but he acted, and those actions had consequences even including current thoughts conditioning subsequent thoughts within his mindstream. So results do follow from the actions of an arahant. It seems to me that it is only certain *types* of result that do not - namely condition(ing of) the arahant's mind for "good" or "ill". The mind of an arahant is > already pristine, and ever remains so, beyond the possibility of defilement or enhancement. Can you add to this (or correct it, if you disagee)? > .............................................. Tep: True, "results do not follow from the actions of an arahant" -- that's why the term "inoperative" (in the kamma sense). By characterizing the types of result that do not condition the arahant's mind for good or ill, it means "ethically ineffective", according to the article below. This author also explains other aspects of the arahant's mind (according to his understanding/speculation) that might answer Howard's question. 'He whose mind is not soaked (by lust) he who is not affected (by hatred), he who has transcended both good and evil[2] - for such a vigilant[3] one there is no fear.' [ Dhp 39] Note [2]. "The deeds of an Arahant, a perfect Saint, are neither good nor bad because he has gone beyond both good and evil. This does not mean that he is passive. He is active but his activity is selfless and is directed to help others to tread the path he has trod himself. His deeds, ordinarily accepted as good, lack creative power as regards himself in producing Kammic effects. He is not however exempt from the effects of his past actions. He accumulates no fresh kammic activities. Whatever actions he does, as an Arahant, are termed "inoperative" (kiriya), and are not regarded as Kamma. They are ethically ineffective. Understanding things as they truly are, he has finally shattered the cosmic chain of cause and effect." http://ohbliss.org/en/tipitaka/khuddaka/dhammapada_narada.html Sincerely, Tep ======== 52184 From: nina Date: Mon Nov 7, 2005 11:01am Subject: just back. nilovg Dear friends, I am just back with lots of tasks in the house. Sarah handed me some mails, Larry on nimitta, Hal on conceit and wrong view, several ones on conditions. I cannot do much now, Larry is also waiting with the Visuddhimagga. I did some of it in India. Sarah would like to know how we were doing after they all left, while in Kashmir. We stayed behind and had lovely mountain walks with a guide. Only, we had to cross a stream and the bridge stopped in the middle where you had to jump on stones. Our guide slipped and so did I, went with one leg into the water. It took two people to pull me out, I had quite a shock. We went slowly but steadily to high altitude where we had a picknock by a fire. One never knows what is going to happen, it can be beyond expectation. We felt some after- shock after the big earthquake that just happened before we went to Kashmir. There was also a terror attack on the highway near Siranagar. We went to Delhi and there were three violent attacks on the market near our hotel. Afterwards we went to the North: Arunachal, where the governor had invited us. His house was under construction, but when sitting on the roof we could escape the noise. I had time to go through the tapes and my notes of the many excellent discussions we had in English and Thai. Here is a good one: I try to write more systematically about our discussions, but it all takes time. Nina. 52185 From: nina Date: Mon Nov 7, 2005 11:01am Subject: Dhamma in Cambodia, Ch 7, no 1. nilovg Chapter 7 Dhamma Discussion in the Sam Paothong Temple (Part II) But Sawong: For people who develop satipatthåna it is natural that sometimes the sense-door process is hidden by the mind-door process and that one therefore cannot see realities as they are. How does that happen? I ask this to help people not to go the wrong way. Sujin: At this moment realities are appearing, such as seeing arising in the eye-door process. However, people do not know the true nature of what appears, they take what they see for people and things. Therefore, the thinking on account of what was seen, thus, the thinking of people and things, hides the truth. One does not realize that dhammas appear for an extremely short moment, that they arise and then fall away immediately. Thus, when there is thinking that arises in a mind-door process the truth of the experiences through the sense-doors is not evident. At this moment it is not evident that what appears through the eyes falls away. It seems that one sees all the time, but in reality there are cittas of a mind-door process arising and falling away in succession in between the citta that sees and the citta that hears, and these cittas arise each in a different sense-door process. When we speak about the eye-door, people understand, because they are seeing. When we speak about the ear-door, people understand because they are hearing. When we smell the fragrant odour of a flower, there is an experience through the nose-door. A delicious or an unsavoury flavour is a rúpa that appears through the tongue-door. At this moment heat, cold, softness or hardness appear through the bodysense. However, one does not know that when each of these sense-door processes has fallen away, a mind-door process has to succeed that sense-door process immediately, after there have been bhavanga-cittas in between [1]. Thus, at this moment it seems that there is seeing and then immediately hearing, and one does not know when the mind-door process arises. There are different sense-door processes arising and falling away one after the other, and this can be known because there is a mind-door process in between. However, that does not mean that one realizes the characteristic of the mind-door process. One may merely know in theory that when a sense-door process does not arise and there are only cittas which are thinking, that there are at such moments cittas arising in a mind-door process. Footnote: 1 Seeing , hearing and the other sense-cognitions arise in a series or process of cittas that each perform their own function. There are sense-door processes and mind-door processes. When a sense-door process has fallen away it is followed by a mind-door process of cittas that experience the sense object which was experienced by cittas arising in that sense-door process and which has just fallen away. Visible object, for example, that is experienced by cittas arising in the eye-door process, is also experienced by cittas arising in the following process, which is the mind-door process. These cittas just experience the visible object, they do not think about it. Thinking of shape and form, of concepts of people and things can arise later on, in other mind-door processes. ****** Nina. 52186 From: TGrand458@... Date: Mon Nov 7, 2005 6:30am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Vipaka paradox TGrand458@... In a message dated 11/7/2005 2:03:21 A.M. Mountain Standard Time, jwromeijn@... writes: A remark to TG, although it's another theme: "How could we not be affected by other causal "streams" that come within the realm of experience? …Although an arahat has learned how to escape the effects I suppose." Joop: That's correct, but a more dynamic consequence is that we (included arahats) can influence other beings, not only in their practical daily life but also in their spiritual path, on a spiritual level. Metta Joop Hi Joop Agreed. All conditions that encounter each other influence each other. This applies to materiality and mentality. The reason an arahat cannot be influenced in an ethically negative manner is that the conditions subject to that influence -- ignorance/sense-of-self, etc., no longer exist. TG 52187 From: "Charles DaCosta" Date: Mon Nov 7, 2005 11:57am Subject: RE: [dsg] Did Buddhaghosa (formal) meditate? (Was: Reasons for staying on DSG dacostacharles Hi Swee Boon, When you said the following statement, were you including the view of "other" as a self too? "Only the relinquishing of the "concept of self" is liberating and blissful." Best Regards, Charles A. DaCosta -----Original Message----- From: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com [mailto:dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of nidive Sent: Sunday, 06 November, 2005 05:33 To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [dsg] Did Buddhaghosa (formal) meditate? (Was: Reasons for staying on DSG Hi Ícaro, > > Fabrications fabricate themselves! > > As a Von Neumann Machine, I presume: robots that fabricated other > robots able to replicate themselves ad infinitum. But is the "Self" > structured in this way ? > In my opinion, the "Self" is a fantasy Character created by the > rooted human ignorance in found a correct answer about mental > processes - as an Elf created by some author with the "power" (?) > to inquiry the writer about his personal live: " Hey You! You made > me as a character of your novel "The Realm of the Son of Hobbit > thrice Winner against the Three-headed Dragon" ...but I don´t want > to be an Elf! I Want to be The Lord of Dance!" > Sheer nonsense!!! Whether "Self" is something that replicates itself, or whether "Self" is something that questions itself, all these musings are rooted in this delusion: the "concept of self". When this is, that is; with ignorance and craving as requisite conditions, there comes this delusion. When this is not, that is not; with the remainderless cessation of ignorance and craving, there comes the remainderless cessation of this delusion. We can have one thousand and one theories about the "Self", but all of them are going to be useless. Only the relinquishing of the "concept of self" is liberating and blissful. Regards, Swee Boon 52188 From: "Charles DaCosta" Date: Mon Nov 7, 2005 0:25pm Subject: RE: [dsg] Re: Did Buddhaghosa (formal) meditate? (Was: Reasons for staying on DSG dacostacharles Hi Sarah (I think) I am being my usual self an picking at some thing that was said: "Doubt is real. Like is real. Anger is real....all the mental factors which make up sankhara khandha are real. However, 'self', 'tree', Swee Boon' and 'Sarah' are imagined. The thinking about them is anicca,dukkha and anatta, but 'self' and 'tree' are not, because they don't exist. Any disagreements?" I would have to disagree, but first I would have to ask how can trees not exist and anger do exist? Do you believe that only emotions are real/exist? Or Do you believe that only what is in the mind is real/exist? Or Do you believe that only mental states/factors are real? Do you believe all existence is a mixture of the real and unreal (I assume this is what you mean by imagined)? Best Regards, Charles A. DaCosta -----Original Message----- From: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com [mailto:dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of sarah abbott Sent: Monday, 07 November, 2005 09:25 To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Did Buddhaghosa (formal) meditate? (Was: Reasons for staying on DSG Hi Swee Boon, --- nidive wrote: > "Concepts" come about because of sankhara. Without sankhara, there are > no "concepts". .... S: OK. Is this what you meant when you suggested that concepts 'falls under the aggregate of fabrications'(i.e sankhara khandha)? And also when you asked 'What is "Self", other than a fabrication?". Did you mean that "Self" is sankhara khandha? Perhaps I'm getting confused with your use of fabrications:-/. ... > > To me, "concepts" are only as real as sankhara. Therefore, "concepts" > are anicca, dukkha and anatta. ... S: Doubt is real. Like is real. Anger is real....all the mental factors which make up sankhara khandha are real. However, 'self', 'tree', Swee Boon' and 'Sarah' are imagined. The thinking about them is anicca,dukkha and anatta, but 'self' and 'tree' are not, because they don't exist. Any disagreements? Metta, Sarah p.s I'm glad to see you're have discussions with Icaro, Howard, Larry and others on this too. Thx for finding time to reply to my comments as well. ===================== 52189 From: "Charles DaCosta" Date: Mon Nov 7, 2005 0:28pm Subject: RE: [dsg] Re: Different Outcomes ... !!! dacostacharles Hi all, This makes sense to me too. Best Regards, Charles A. DaCosta --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Bhikkhu samahita wrote: > > D. wrote: > > >Why this separation presentation of two kind of desires, > >which are in nature based in the the same ignorance? > > The difference lies in their opposed outcomes: > Desire for the world => pain > Desire for the nibbana => bliss > > Friendship is the Greatest ... > Bhikkhu Samahita, Sri Lanka. > http://www.What-Buddha-Said.org/ > <...> > Thank you, that makes sense to me! D. 52190 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Mon Nov 7, 2005 2:30pm Subject: Anatta and "Free Will" buddhistmedi... Hi, KKT ( Howard, Swee, Chris, and Nina) - You introduced the idea called " free will " and it received good response. But you did not have time to reply to Howard (#48425). Per our off-list discussion you have agreed to continue the thread. I think it might be a good idea for me to give a summary of this thread to make it easier for you to take over. It all started with message # 48324 that Christine wrote to initiate a discussion on the meaning of " self " in Dhp {379; 380} : Chris: Being familiar with the Useful Posts on Anatta, with the emphasis on "no control", I found these two verses in the Dhammapada raised some questions in my mind. They seem to indicate it is not only possible, but desirable, to 'control' your own self. Any comments? "By self do you censure yourself. By self do you examine yourself. Self-guarded and mindful, O bhikkhu, you will live happily." (379) "Self, indeed, is the protector of self. Self, indeed, is one's refuge. Control, therefore, your own self as a merchant controls a noble steed." (380) Tep: There are several comments in dsg messages # 48340(Nina), 48384(Swee), 48391(Phamdluan or KKT), 48399(Howard), 48403 (Phamdluan), 48426(Swee), 49677(Sarah), and 48425 (Howard). The following passages are selected from these messages; please go to the original ones if you want all details. N: I know some people wonder about the meaning when they see these texts. The Buddha also spoke in conventional language when exhorting people. Just as we do now in daily life. But taking into account the whole context of the Tipitaka we do not misunderstand such words. ... ... So long as we understand that it is pannaa and sati that control. But do we really? .......... Swee: "NO CONTROL" is one extreme view. "A SELF THAT CONTROLS" is another extreme view. There is a middle ground to be sought after. ........... KKT : To counter the extreme view "NO CONTROL", the Buddha taught that there is FREE-WILL. To counter the other extreme view "A SELF THAT CONTROLS", the Buddha taught the theory of CONDITIONED GENESIS. So the Middle-Path consists of FREE-WILL and CONDITIONED GENESIS together put in the same basket. But the problem is: WILL, like any other thought, is CONDITIONED. Therefore, the so-called FREE-WILL cannot be FREE! So how to conciliate the two ideas of FREE-WILL and CONDITIONED GENESIS which seem to be mutually exclusive? .............. Howard to KKT : Please, where did he teach that? .............. KKT: Here is an extract from "The Message of the Buddha" by K.N. Jayatilleke, p.246: While the Buddha distinguished his causal theory from Determinism, he also faced the question of free-will and ASSERTED ITS REALITY IN NO UNCERTAIN TERMS. On one occasion, it is said, a certain brahmin (annataro brahmano) approached the Buddha and told him that he was of the opinion that there was no free-will on the part of himself (atta-kara) or others (para-kara). The Buddha admonished him and asked him how he could say such a thing when he himself of his own accord (sayam) could walk up to the Buddha and walk away from him. On this occasion, the Buddha says that there is such a thing as 'an element of initiative'(arabbha-dhatu), ... ... and that this showed that THERE WAS SUCH A THING AS FREE-WILL (Anguttara Nikaya III. 337, 338, the Pali Text Society editions). ... .... Many scholars have failed to see that Buddhism UPHELD A THEORY OF NON- DETERMINISTIC CAUSAL CONDITIONING ALONG WITH THE DOCTRINE OF FREE-WILL. .................. Swee: If free-will were "wholly conditioned", then there would be no new kamma created, we would not have been reborn endlessly, and we would not even need to come to DSG to seek for answers. But free-will is not "wholly conditioned". If you are truthful enough to yourself, you know that. Yet free-will is not self, nor implies a self. "Free-will" is just a series of mental actions over a lifetime. ................. Sarah:The word translated as free-will in KKT's post or initiative in the PTS translation is aarabbhadhaatu and PTS gives a note: aarabbha, gerund of aaraadheti, to set on foot; dhaatu, element. I'd prefer to say that the Buddha taught us that all dhammas, all elements are conditioned but not pre-determined. It is not fatalistic because good thoughts and deeds (as well as bad ones of course) are accumulated and bring results. However, 'free-will' is a misnomer as it suggests there is 'something' apart from conditioned dhammas, whereas the Buddha taught that the only unconditioned dhamma is nibbana. ............... Howard : This is a very complete and interesting answer. There is no question that there is willing. But our willing is always conditioned at least by present and past circumstances in our individual mindstreams, don't you think? Typically, a primary condition for it is tanha, but certainly not always. As to "free" will, well, that is a matter of what one means by 'free'. If it means unconditioned, I think that is not so. All ordinary mental operations, including cetana, are conditioned. In that regard, I'm not clear on the meaning of a theory of *non-deterministic* causal conditioning presented along with a notion of free will by the Buddha that you mention at the end of your post (copied below). Does "non- deterministic" imply random? And, BTW, what sort of "free will" that is random and unconditioned is desirable to anyone? If nothing else, we require that our willing, to be valued by us, be conditioned by our wishes (whether the wishes are mired in self or are a chanda free of self), don't we? ................ Tep: You started an interesting thread by introducing "free will" that is not a self, and yet it is not easy to understand. Is this concept related to the "original citta" that is not contaminated by defilements? Warm regards, Tep ====== 52191 From: "htootintnaing" Date: Mon Nov 7, 2005 2:53pm Subject: Re: just back. htootintnaing --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, nina wrote: Dear friends, I had time to go through the tapes and my notes of the many excellent discussions we had in English and Thai. Here is a good one: I try to write more systematically about our discussions, but it all takes time. Nina. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Dear Nina, I like that sentence. If one does not understand this moment then there will not be any pannaa or wisdom. If there is no wisdom or pannaa then there is no right understanding. If there is no right understanding then there is no other path-factors. If there is no path-factors then there is not approaching nibbana at all. When nibbana is not approaching then one is not going to coolness but to hotness that is hotness of sufferings and endless sufferings. I will be looking forward to seeing more discussions (if I have time). With deepest respect, Htoo Naing 52192 From: "htootintnaing" Date: Mon Nov 7, 2005 3:01pm Subject: Re: Dhamma in Cambodia, Ch 7, no 1. htootintnaing --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, nina wrote: > > Chapter 7 > > Dhamma Discussion in the Sam Paothong Temple (Part II) > > But Sawong: For people who develop satipatthåna it is natural that sometimes > the sense-door process is hidden by the mind-door process and that one > therefore cannot see realities as they are. How does that happen? I ask this > to help people not to go the wrong way. > > Sujin: At this moment realities are appearing, such as seeing arising in the > eye-door process. However, people do not know the true nature of what > appears, they take what they see for people and things. Therefore, the > thinking on account of what was seen, thus, the thinking of people and > things, hides the truth. One does not realize that dhammas appear for an > extremely short moment, that they arise and then fall away immediately. > Thus, when there is thinking that arises in a mind-door process the truth of > the experiences through the sense-doors is not evident. At this moment it is > not evident that what appears through the eyes falls away. It seems that one > sees all the time, but in reality there are cittas of a mind-door process > arising and falling away in succession in between the citta that sees and > the citta that hears, and these cittas arise each in a different sense-door > process. > > When we speak about the eye-door, people understand, because they are > seeing. When we speak about the ear-door, people understand because they are > hearing. When we smell the fragrant odour of a flower, there is an > experience through the nose-door. A delicious or an unsavoury flavour is a > rúpa that appears through the tongue-door. At this moment heat, cold, > softness or hardness appear through the bodysense. However, one does not > know that when each of these sense-door processes has fallen away, a > mind-door process has to succeed that sense-door process immediately, after > there have been bhavanga-cittas in between [1]. Thus, at this moment it > seems that there is seeing and then immediately hearing, and one does not > know when the mind-door process arises. There are different sense- door > processes arising and falling away one after the other, and this can be > known because there is a mind-door process in between. However, that does > not mean that one realizes the characteristic of the mind-door process. One > may merely know in theory that when a sense-door process does not arise and > there are only cittas which are thinking, that there are at such moments > cittas arising in a mind-door process. > > Footnote: > 1 Seeing , hearing and the other sense-cognitions arise in a series or > process of cittas that each perform their own function. There are sense-door > processes and mind-door processes. When a sense-door process has fallen away > it is followed by a mind-door process of cittas that experience the sense > object which was experienced by cittas arising in that sense-door process > and which has just fallen away. Visible object, for example, that is > experienced by cittas arising in the eye-door process, is also experienced > by cittas arising in the following process, which is the mind-door process. > These cittas just experience the visible object, they do not think about it. > Thinking of shape and form, of concepts of people and things can arise later > on, in other mind-door processes. > > ****** > Nina. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Dear Nina and all, Very good. Very good post. But for me I think I would be like someone who reads my posts in many of Pali words. When I read 'sense-door process' and 'mind-door process' in Nina's post they just came in as blanks (that is nothing). But with practice these simple English words replace Paali words in my brain. If Nina's posts write 'panca- dvaara-viithi' and 'mano-dvaara-viithi' I will easily read them all. Anyway very good post. With deepest respect, Htoo Naing 52193 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Mon Nov 7, 2005 3:10pm Subject: Re: kamma and its cessation buddhistmedi... Hi Howard (and Sarah) - I reread my own words in the earlier reply to you and they did not make sense. Please allow me to present an improved version. Tep: True, kammic "results do not follow from the actions of an arahant" -- that's why the term "inoperative" (in the kamma sense). By characterizing the types of result that do not follow the actions of an arahant as not conditioning the arahant's mind for good or ill, it means "ethically ineffective", according to the article below. The results that do follow the arahant's action are only for helping others. Does it make a better sense now? Sincerely, Tep ======== --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Tep Sastri" wrote: > > > Hi, Howard and Sarah : > (snipped) > .............................................. > > Tep: True, "results do not follow from the actions of an arahant" -- that's why the term "inoperative" (in the kamma sense). By characterizing the types of result that do not condition the arahant's mind for good or ill, it means "ethically ineffective", according to the article below. This author also explains other aspects of the arahant's mind (according to his understanding/speculation) that might answer Howard's question. > > 'He whose mind is not soaked (by lust) he who is not affected (by > hatred), he who has transcended both good and evil[2] - for such a > vigilant[3] one there is no fear.' [ Dhp 39] > > Note [2]. "The deeds of an Arahant, a perfect Saint, are neither good > nor bad because he has gone beyond both good and evil. This does not mean that he is passive. He is active but his activity is selfless and is directed to help others to tread the path he has trod himself. His deeds, ordinarily accepted as good, lack creative power as regards himself in producing Kammic effects. He is not however exempt from the effects of his past actions. He accumulates no fresh kammic activities. Whatever actions he does, as an Arahant, are > termed "inoperative" (kiriya), and are not regarded as Kamma. They > are ethically ineffective. Understanding things as they truly are, he has finally shattered the cosmic chain of cause and effect." > http://ohbliss.org/en/tipitaka/khuddaka/dhammapada_narada.html > Regards, Tep ========== 52194 From: "Andrew" Date: Mon Nov 7, 2005 3:13pm Subject: Re: Anatta and "Free Will" corvus121 --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Tep Sastri" wrote: [snip]> Tep: You started an interesting thread by introducing "free will" that is > not a self, and yet it is not easy to understand. Is this concept related to > the "original citta" that is not contaminated by defilements? Hi Tep Here's an extract from Bhikkhu Dhammapala's "Problems Bared" book. I hope it is of interest: "In the teaching of the Buddha, there is no entity of an abiding nature, neither as a physical substance nor as a spiritual soul; and therefore, all references to the mind, the will, the individual, and so on, must be understood in this light of the Buddha's teaching of anatta. There is no individual actor, but only action (kammassa karako n'atthi, Vism. XIX, s 20); there is no mind but only thought, the act of thinking; there is no will to be free or not, but only the act of willing, of desire which arises in dependence on sensation (vedana-paccaya tanha). The object of choice influences the process of choosing; and without objects there can be no choice. The choice therefore is conditioned and not free. But there is no will to be either free or determined, for desire or volition arises in dependence on conditions. Such conditions may be internal or external, inherited or acquired, and they will condition or influence the choice at the moment when sensations are awakened. But there is no pre-determination, as there is no entity to be so disposed before a choice is presented. 'Is the will determined or free?' This could be another one of those undecided questions (avyakata) 'is the world eternal or not eternal?' - questions which can never be answered, not even by the Buddha, because of the inherent wrong in the question itself. Just as there is no entity like the world to be either eternal or not, for the world is only a passing process of unsubstantial phenomena to which such attributes are not applicable - so there is no entity like a will to be either determined or free, for the will is only a process of willing which arises and passes in dependence on arising and passing conditions, and which, therefore, can be neither determined nor free." Best wishes Andrew 52195 From: "htootintnaing" Date: Mon Nov 7, 2005 3:17pm Subject: Dhamma Thread ( 573 ) htootintnaing Dear Dhamma Friends, The last stock of dhamma that I have been writing is saccaa or 'Noble Truths'. The first truth has been talked in the previous posts under Dhamma Thread. The second truth is craving or tanhaa. As in said in Dhamma Thread (572) not all craving or tanhaa are 'the cause of suffering'. There is a case that 'craving or tanhaa' itself is suffering rather than 'the cause'. So in that case 'The Truth' is 'the first truth' rather than 'the second truth'. It is 'ta.mpi iccha.m na labhati'. It is 'not obtaining what one wants'. Here this craving is suffering. There are 11 sufferings (from jaati or birth to 'not obtaining what one wants'. If the summary of suffering 'pancupadaanakkhandhaa' or '5 clinging aggregates' is counted as one suffering there are altogether 12 dukkhas or 12 sufferings. In these 12 sufferings number 11th is craving. This craving is suffering and it is not the cause of suffering. But it can well be the cause of suffering. This only happen when time frame is shifted to future. That is 'the craving -when not obtaining what one wants' causes its results in the future and when this craving is checked back from the future then this craving can well be '2nd truth'. But at the time of 'not obtaining what one wants' it is still 'the first truth' and even though it is craving it is still suffering. May you be free from suffering. With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing PS: Any comments are welcome and any queries are welcome. If there is unclarity of any meaning, please just give a reply to any of these posts on Dhamma Thread. Any adding, any correction, any support will be very helpful for all. 52196 From: upasaka@... Date: Mon Nov 7, 2005 10:22am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: kamma and its cessation upasaka_howard Hi, Tep (and Sarah) - In a message dated 11/7/05 6:15:41 PM Eastern Standard Time, tepsastri@... writes: > Hi Howard (and Sarah) - > > I reread my own words in the earlier reply to you and they did not make > sense. Please allow me to present an improved version. > > Tep: True, kammic "results do not follow from the actions of an > arahant" -- that's why the term "inoperative" (in the kamma sense). By > characterizing the types of result that do not follow the actions of an > arahant as not conditioning the arahant's mind for good or ill, it > means "ethically ineffective", according to the article below. The results > that do follow the arahant's action are only for helping others. > > Does it make a better sense now? -------------------------------------- Howard: Yes, it's clear and it makes sense. :-) ------------------------------------- > > > Sincerely, > > > Tep ======================= With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 52197 From: "htootintnaing" Date: Mon Nov 7, 2005 3:43pm Subject: Re: Conditions Part 1 htootintnaing Dear Tep (and all), Apology for my very late reply. You wrote: --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Tep Sastri" wrote: 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. --------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: About teaches core knowledge. Example 'this is eye' 'this is form' 'this is eye-consciousness'. These 3 sentences are very very simple. But very very hard to really realise. Abhidhamma explain all these. Without the knowledge of such abhidhamma things it is hard to see Dhamma. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Tep continued: And can you specifically say in what way the Abhidhamma can help, while the suttas cannot? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: Actually Suttas are also packed with many abhidhammaa. Suttas do not explain all abhidhamma things. Examples: Suttas will teach 'this is form_iti ruupam' 'this is eye_iti cakkhu' etc etc. But who deeply understand these without abhidhamma knowledge? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Tep continued: To be able to answer this question you have to know both sides very well. .......................................... Htoo: To be honest (to be very very honest and sincere), I do not know much both sides. I mean both Suttas side and Abhidhamma side. I say this because what I have been discussing are all based on abhidhammatthasangaha mostly. I have not touched all abhidhamma texts in fine details. And I have touched all Suttas in fine details. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > 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. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: Good doctors know. Example case is AIDS. AIDS came to be known as a disease only after 1981 and publicly known after 1983 and known as epidemic disease round about 1987. But there were reports that are almost exactly like AIDS even in 1958. The symdrome is the same. But the causes are different and it came out as an epidemic. Then a search was made and finally a virus was discovered. Another case is SARS. People die and die. But finally the virus was detected. It is easy to treat people. But it is difficult to really treat what is needed to treat. Example is when someone has a fever non-doctors may treat him with paracetamol. But doctors will treat him 'the same' or 'differently'. There is a difference in 'knowledge of non-doctors' and 'knowledge of doctor'. I do not say 'the current science' is good enough. I compare this with Dhamma to compare abhidhamma and simple teaching. For those who want to treach Dhamma they should master abhidhamma, I think (at least personally). ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Tep wrotew: 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. -------------------- Htoo: I do not compare everything 'in Medicine' and 'in Dhamma'. What I compare was 'details of basic'. Example: A doctor may not be able to treat a disease or may not know a new disease. But he or she has necessary background to learn more about a new disease and possibly its treatment. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Tep: This same logic applies to dhamma treatments of the defilements (kilesas). There were enlightened monks during the Buddha's time, [Htoo: I agree] who did not know the Abhidhamma. Warm regards, Tep ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: Here I think this is wrong. All arahats know abhidhammaa. Your word 'who did not know the abhidhamma' may be indicating 'the books of abhidhamma'. But no one will become an arahats without knowledge of abhidhamma. With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing 52198 From: "htootintnaing" Date: Mon Nov 7, 2005 3:47pm Subject: Re: Conditions Part 16 - Faculty Condition (indriya-paccaya) htootintnaing --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "robmoult" wrote: > > 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 :-) ---------------------------------------------------------------- Dear Rob M, Thanks for this. This is very English in deed. I have to learn these if I want to discuss in English. With respect, Htoo Naing 52199 From: "htootintnaing" Date: Mon Nov 7, 2005 3:53pm Subject: Re: Conditions Part 1 htootintnaing --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "robmoult" wrote: > > Hi All, > > The first six volumes of the Abhidhamma Pitaka focus on classifying > paramattha dhammas. This analysis supports the concept of anatta (non- > self). Once something is broken into its constituent parts, it can be > seen that there is no "self". > > The final volume of the Abhidhamma Pitaka, the Patthana (Conditional > Relations), explains the ways in which one thing can be a condition > for another thing to arise. This shows how one thing can be related > to another. These methods of synthesis must be understood to > appreciate paticcasamuppada (dependent origination). > > Before studying conditional relations, it is important to understand > concepts and realities (paramattha dhammas). For example, hearing is > conditioned by sound falling upon the ear-sense. Both sound and ear- > sense are rèpas which also arise because of their own conditions and > therefore must fall away. Therefore, the reality that they condition > (hearing) cannot last either. In spite of our study of nama and rupa, > we may still find the awareness (sati) arises very seldom. One of the > causes of lack of sati may be the fact that we did not yet study in > detail the namas and rupas with their various conditions. > > Realities do not arise by their own power; they are dependent on > other phenomenon which makes them arise. There is not any reality > which arises from a single cause; there is concurrence of several > conditions through which realities arise. For example, when tasting > food, tasting-consciousness is a vipaka citta (result) produced by > kamma. This tasting-consciousness is also dependent on the rupa > tasting-sense, which also arises because of kamma. Tasting- > consciousness also depends on the cetasika phassa (contact), without > which the tasting-consciousness would not be able to experience the > flavour. > > The Visuddhi Magga (Path of Purity) defines condition (paccaya) as: > "When a state is indispensable to another state's presence or > arising, the former is a condition for the latter. A condition has > the characteristic of assisting; for any given state that assists the > presence or arising of a given state is called the latter's > condition. Condition, cause, reason, source, originator and producer > are synonyms." > > Metta, > Rob M :-) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Dear Rob M, Coulod you please link all 'Conditions' one by one? I mean when the first post is open all other posts appear at the bottom. With respect, Htoo Naing