57000 From: nina van gorkom Date: Wed Mar 22, 2006 11:01am Subject: Visuddhimagga Ch XVII, 63, and Tiika. nilovg Visuddhimagga Ch XVII, 63 Text Vis.: Furthermore, his non-abandonment of that ignorance about the four truths in particular prevents him from recognizing as suffering the kind of suffering called the fruit of merit, which is fraught with the many dangers beginning with birth, ageing, disease and death, and so he embarks upon the formation of merit classed as bodily, verbal, and mental formations, in order to attain that [kind of suffering], like one desiring celestial nymphs [who jumps over] a cliff. ------ N: The Tiika states that the formation of merit is similar to falling down steeply (maruppapaata) because it produces birth, etc. which is the dukkha of falling down steeply. Kusala kamma produces a happy rebirth, but this is followed by old age, sickness and death. --------- Text Vis.: Also, not seeing how that fruit of merit reckoned as pleasure eventually breeds great distress owing to the suffering in its change ---------- N: As to the expression great distress, mahaapari.laaha, this is compared to a fire, a burning grass torch. ------- Text Vis.: and that it gives little satisfaction, ------ N: As to little satisfaction (appassaada), here, the fruit of merit is compared to an executioner¹s block where the big and small limbs of a being are broken up. -------- Text Vis.: he embarks upon the formation of merit of the kinds already stated, which is the condition for that very [suffering in change], like a moth that falls into a lamp's flame, and like the man who wants the drop of honey and licks the honey-smeared knife-edge. -------- N: The fruit of merit is taken for agreeable and pleasant, but in order to show its danger it is compared to the falling into a lamp¹s flame and the licking of honey from the knife¹s edge. -------- Text Vis.: Also, not seeing the danger in the indulgence of the sense desires, etc., with its results, [wrongly] perceiving pleasure and overcome by defilements, he embarks upon the formation of demerit that occurs in the three doors [of kamma], like a child who plays with filth, and like a man who wants to die and eats poison. ------- N: The Tiika quotes from the Middle Length Sayings (no. 45, Lesser Discourse on the Ways of Undertaking Dhamma), about undertaking dhamma that is happiness in the present but results in suffering in the future. This is about people who say that there is no fault in sense pleasures and who indulge in pleasures of the senses and gratify themselves with girl-wanderers. The Tiika quotes: The Tiika states that, because of wrong perception of happiness (sukhasaññaa), he does not consider the nature of foulness. Being a fool since he indulges in sense pleasure, he is like a child playing with dung. As to the expression Œovercome by defilements¹, the Tiika states that this means overcome by aversion and attachment. The Tiika explains as to the formation of demerit, that at the moment of action, just now, he takes poison, as it were wishing to die, and that in the future at the moment of fruition he will experience what is loathsome and dukkha. The citta accompanied by lobha is like playing with dung, and the citta accompanied by dosa is like taking poison, the Tiika states. --------- Text Vis.: Also, unaware of the suffering due to formations and the suffering-in-change [inherent] in kamma-results in the immaterial sphere, owing to the perversion of [wrongly perceiving them as] eternal, etc., he embarks upon the formation of the imperturbable which is a mental formation, like one who has lost his way and takes the road to a goblin city. ------- N: The kamma results of aruupajhaana may be wrongly perceived as eternal, since these are uninterrupted and because of the non-discrimination of arising and ceasing their long duration is the cause that he does not see dukkha in change and dukkha inherent in formations, the Tiika explains. He has the perversion of seeing permanence in what is impermanent (niccaavipallaasa). The embarking upon the formation of the imperturbable is like going to a goblin city. The lifespan in the aruupa brahma planes is extremely long. Since there is no ruupa in those planes, one cannot develop insight beginning at the stage of knowing the difference between naama and ruupa until one attains the stage of the sotaapanna. Conclusion: The Visuddhimagga and its Tiika use strong similes to emphasize the danger of being in the cycle, where kamma-formations that are kusala, akusala and imperturbable produce rebirth. Kusala kamma formations are like falling down steeply, or like a fire, they cause great distress. Their fruit is like an executioner¹s block. When one is born death is inevitable. Akusala kamma formations are like playing with dung, or like taking poison. One does not see at that moment that they are loathsome and dangerous, but the result is loathsome and suffering. Even inperturbable kamma formations are dangerous, they can lead to the wrong perception of permanence. One may lose one¹s way and go as it were to a goblin city. One cannot abandon unseen danger and that is why the danger of kamma formations is strongly emphasized. Otherwise one is not motivated to start walking on the Path leading to liberation from kamma formations and from rebirth. ****** Nina. 57001 From: nina van gorkom Date: Wed Mar 22, 2006 11:31am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Lodewijk's post on the long way. nilovg Ha James, the old James is back! I do not know whether it is useful to discuss with you. You have your own opinion and are entitled to that. So, why argue? I try to look up the text. Here it is: Buddhavamsa, Chronicle of Buddhas, Khuddaka Nikaaya, Sumedha, vs. 71-73: about the rejoicing of devas and men, saying, No, I am not in an unfavorable mood. I know we are different. I have great confidence in the Commentaries, and you have not. Nobody in the world can change you, just accumulations. Except, except, when you read B.B.'s commentarial notes you were not disinclined, found it even helpful. By the way, I really enjoyed your post on never happy. A good daily life example. I would say, Abhidhamma in daily life! You do not realize that this is Abhidhamma. But I am not going to brainwash you, I can't. Also this is Abhidhamma, we cannot escape it. Nina. op 22-03-2006 18:16 schreef buddhatrue op buddhatrue@...: > > James: What text is this from? Did the Buddha speak this? Frankly, > I find this to be pure superstition/fairytale type of material. 57002 From: nina van gorkom Date: Wed Mar 22, 2006 11:31am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Letter to Phil 1. Detachment. nilovg Hi Pablo, I appreciate your interest. I am glad you do not look at kamma with dosa anymore, then we would accumulate more akusala kamma. I would say, since you have many questions, put them one at a time. An idea? Nina. op 22-03-2006 19:11 schreef Pablo op cerini_pablo@...: > > I take the occasion to thank you for the beautiful explanation > of kamma you give in your "Abidhamma in daily life". 57003 From: upasaka@... Date: Wed Mar 22, 2006 0:01pm Subject: Happy News upasaka_howard Hi, all - The surgery on our granddaughter, Sophie Emma, has been completed, and it went very well! She is still on a respirator, but that will probably end later today or tomorrow. One of the two valves that were constructed has a slight leak which will have to be watched, but that will very possibly heal on its own with time. We're all very happy that conditions allowed for this happy outcome, and we're very grateful to the skilled and compassionate doctors and nurses here in Dallas, most especially the superb surgeon. Thank you all for your caring and your expressions of concern and hope. 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/ 57004 From: upasaka@... Date: Wed Mar 22, 2006 0:28pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: arahat and D.O., Larry upasaka_howard Hi, James (and TG) - -----Original Message----- From: buddhatrue To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wed, 22 Mar 2006 17:29:47 -0000 Subject: [dsg] Re: arahat and D.O., Larry Hi TG, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, TGrand458@... wrote: > Hi James > > I believe the Buddha did clearly said that arahatas could experience one > level of dukkha (pain) when a painful feeling arose but could not experience the > psychological grief, worry, etc. that usually accompanies such pain. > > TG This could very well be but I have not encountered that text, or have not seen it in that way. Could you please reference me to where the Buddha said this? Thx. metta, James ================================= James, I think there was a case of the Buddha having experienced pain (i.e., unpleasant sensation) when his foot was pierced. With metta, Howard 57005 From: han tun Date: Wed Mar 22, 2006 3:06pm Subject: [dsg] Dhamma Thread ( 884 ) hantun1 Dhamma Thread ( 884 ) (U Htoo Naing requested me to send this. Han Tun) Dear Dhamma Friends, Kamma.t.thaana: When the practitioner is absorbed into a state of 1st jhana he is said to be developing 1st jhaana. In 1st jhaana which originated from metta brahmavihaara the cittas are all 1st jhaana cittas or rupavacara rupakusala 1st jhaana cittas. All these cittas have to ground on hadaya vatthu or heart-base or they all have to base on hadaya vatthu. Their object is just one. That is any of all these 1st jhaana cittas takes the same object, which is just one. That single object is 'the idea of unlimited beings' and this is pannatti or just names. The way of application of the mind to this object is that by developing loving-kindness wishes. There are cittas or consciousness, arammana or object, vatthu or base or ground. When these cittas arise they are already accompanied by their accompaniment mental factors. These mental factors or mental accompaniments are 55 in number in case of all 1st jhaana cittas. These 55 mental factors are a) 7 universal mental factors 1. contact or phassa (contact of 1st jhana citta with unlimited being) 2. feeling or vedana (somanassa vedana or mental pleasure) 3. volition or cetana (encouragement to take the object unlimited satta) 4. perception or sanna (recognition of unlimited beings) 5. one-pointedness or ekaggata (fixity to unlimited being) 6. mental life or jivitindriya (mental supporter) 7. attention or manasikaara (attention to unlimited beings) b) 6 particular mental factors 1. initial application or vitakka (application of the mind to unlimited beings) 2. sustained application or vicaara ( sustension of the mind to unlimited beings) 3. effort or viriya (energy to exert mentally to unlimited being) 4. joy or piiti (suffused joy to all other mental factors and citta) 5. zeal or wish or chanda (enthusiasm to take unlimited beings) 6. decision or adhimokkha (clear decision to take unlimited beings as an object) c) 19 general beautiful mental factors 1. confidence or sadda 1. confidence or sadda 2. mindfulness or sati 2. balancer or tatramajjhattata 3. shame or hiri 3. non-attachment or alobha 4. fear or ottappa 4. non-aversion or adosa 5. mind-tranquility 5. mental-tranquility or citta-passaddhi or kaayapassaddhi 6. mind-lightness 6. mental-lightness or citta-lahutaa or kaaya-lahutaa 7. mind-mouldability 7. mental-mouldability or citta-mudutaa or kaaya-mudutaa 8. mind-workability 8. mental-workability or citta-kammannataa or kaaya-kammannataa 9. mind-proficiency 9. mental-proficiency or citta-pagunnataa or kaaya-pagunnataa 10.mind-uprightness 10.mental-uprightness or cittaujukataa or kaayujukataa d) special beautiful mental factor 1. pannindria cetasika or panna cetasika So there are 1. 7 universal mental factors 2. 6 particular mental factors 3.19 general beautiful mental factors 4. 1 special beautiful mental factors --- 33 mental factors or 33 cetasikas Karuna and mudita do not arise with metta jhaana. 3 virati cetasikas do not arise with metta jhaana. So in 1st jhaana of metta-brahmavihaara or loving-kindness-pure-living there are 1. 1st jhana citta ( rupaavacara ruupakusala 1st jhaana cittas) 2. 33 mental factors or 33 cetasikas 3. 1 hadaya ruupa or hadaya vatthu 4. 0 pannatti ( this is illusionary object and designated as 0) The pannatti here is 'the idea of beings of unlimited characterization (deared, hated, non-deared-non-hated) and unlimited number of 1 to infinity) This is the picture of 1st jhaana with metta brahmavihaara. Among 33 cetasikas or 33 mental factors there are 5 special cetasikas and they are designated as jhaana factors as they help to develop 1st jhaana. They are vitakka or initial-application, vicaara or sustained-application, piiti or 'suffused-joy', sukha or 'physical and mental undistressedness or pleasure', and ekaggataa or one-pointedness or 'fixity to object'. May you be free from suffering. With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing ------------------------------ Note by Han Tun: Under c) 19 general beautiful mental factors, it was listed 20 items and words were mixed up. I could not confirm this with U Htoo Naing. I have printed below the 19 general beautiful mental factors taken from an Abhidhamma book. 1. saddhaa, faith, confidence 2. sati, mindfulness 3. hiri, moral shame 4. ottappa, moral fear 5. alobha, non-attachment 6. adosa, non-aversion 7. tatramajjhattataa, equanimity, mental balance 8 kaaya-passaddhi, tranquility of mental concomitants 9. citta-passaddhi, tranquility of consciousness 10. kaaya-lahutaa, agility or lightness of mental concomitants 11. citta-lahutaa, agility or lightness of consciousness 12. kaaya-mudutaa, elasticity of mental concomitants 13. citta-mudutaa, elasticity of consciousness 14. kaaya-kammannataa, adaptability of mental concomitants 15. citta-kammannataa, adaptability of consciousness 16. kaaya-pagunnataa, proficiency of mental concomitants 17. citta-pagunnataa, proficiency of consciousness 18. kaayujjukataa, uprightness of mental concomitants 19. cittujjukataa, uprightness of consciousness Here, kaaya does not mean ‘body’. It refers to the ‘group’ of mental concomitants. ===================== 57006 From: "icarofranca" Date: Wed Mar 22, 2006 3:20pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Some Matters of Interest from MN 44 icarofranca Hi Pablo! ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > I had the chance to read a book dealing with that matter ,called > "" written by Mircea Eliade. The > book confronted Jhana with Patanjali's dhyana and the opinion > expressed was that they are identical. > The book is an anthology about the > various forms of yoga , so the author was not interested in > achieving a deep understanding of that matter, but I found interesting > the detailed parallelism beetween Dhamma and Patanjali, even if > I don't know what to think about the author's conclusions. ------------------------------------------------------------------- Mircea Eliade´s "Yoga : immortality and freedom" was one of my favorite readinds at my teens. It´s an erudite work - Mircea Eliade wasn´t an Yogi or Bhikkhu, but had a strong Eastern culture and made many travels to Índia collecting material for his scholar works. His argument - that´s the same of Georg Feuerstein´s - is that Jhana is a Pali word for deep mindfulness, originated by the sanskrit Word "Dhyana", that means the same at Patanji´s Yoga, for example. An attentive reading of the mindfulness techniques of the Vissudhimagga, for example, will bring to memory a lot of material on Yoga Sutra, Shiva Sutra, the Upanishads or The Bhagavad Gita. Is there a difference ? It´s my opinion that Buddha made many original developments on mindfulness issues, if you compare them with older techniques on Yoga Sutra, for example. Think about the own sammassati idea, for example: while Jhana and Dhyana partake so much similar constituive notes, Sammassati is a teaching entirely new and one of the best original contribuitions of Buddha to mind culture! And more: Mircea Eliade and Georg Feuerstein agree in one more point - classical hindu teachings as the Shankara´s Advaita Vedanta and many Vaishnavan cult concepts derived from the original Buddha ´s dispensation!!! Progress teaches!!!! Mettaya Ícaro 57007 From: "indriyabala" Date: Wed Mar 22, 2006 3:42pm Subject: Re: Never Happy ... Practice of the Fourth Noble Truth, How? indriyabala Hi, James (Sarah, Jon, Nina, Joop, RobK)- My apologies for the temptation to ask difficult questions that mostly are far above my head. But, when you think about the Teachings in the many suttas, don't you agree that the Buddha and the Arahants most of the time talked about 'things'("ideals") that are very far above our heads too (e.g. direct knowledge, vijja and vimutti -- and Nibbana)? Nevertheless, I want to thank you again for tolerating with me enough to give an answer that makes a lot of sense: >James: > .. live simply, with few desires, with the sense doors guarded, and with equanimity, compassion, and metta for all beings. ... I believe that we are following the Noble Eightfold Path if we try, day after day and week after week, to get closer to this ideal. > Tep: Now please allow me to offer you another way to practice the Noble Eightfold Path along with discerning of the other three Noble Truths at the same time. "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 Dulaya] How do I understand Luang Pu? -- In order to practice according to the four noble truth one would make the right effort to guard the citta(the heart) inward in the present moment, realizing that the danger of outward-turned citta is dukkha, that is due to the defilements "flowing in" through the sensing media. That is the 1st noble truth. The successful mindfulness with thorough comprehension (sampajanna) makes "direct knowing" of the citta (through samatha & vipassana) possible. -- The citta that is associated with defilements through the five doors are conditioned by 'ignorance & craving for becoming', which are the origin of dukkha. This is the 2nd noble truth. -- Cessation of the 'ignorance & craving for becoming' is attained by means of 'clear knowing & release' by means of citta-visuddhi & panna- visuddhi. This is the 3rd noble truth. -- The noble path (magga), or "the practice", that leads to clear knowing & release of the citta is through Luang Pu's satipatthana bhavana (tranquillity & insight) that guards the "heart" inward, until clear knowing & release arises ("the heart clearly seeing the heart"). I shall be pleased to hear a comment (agreement or disagreement, or neither) from anyone. This 'new Tep' promises not to argue no more. {:>)) Upekkha, Tep, your friend. ========== --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "buddhatrue" wrote: > > Hi Tep, > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "indriyabala" > wrote: > > > Tep: That's a very good conclusion ! Can you write a detailed > > instruction (in your own words) to show how the Noble Eightfold > Path should be practiced? > > > > >(snipped) > > The best way to follow the Noble Eightfold Path is to become a monk > or nun at a reputable temple. I don't care what anyone says about > this- the Buddha made it very clear. Anyone who thinks otherwise is > deluded beyond recognition. > > If one can't become a monk or nun, for whatever reason, then the > best way is to live as closely to a monk/nun's lifestyle as > possible. In other words, live simply, with few desires, with the > sense doors guarded, and with equanimity, compassion, and metta for > all beings. Of course, as a householder, most of us are very far > away from this ideal. But I believe that we are following the Noble > Eightfold Path if we try, day after day and week after week, to get > closer to this ideal. > (snipped) > Metta, > James > 57008 From: LBIDD@... Date: Wed Mar 22, 2006 4:02pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Hey Azita! /impermance lbidd2 Hi Azita, Glad to hear you're safe. Larry 57009 From: "indriyabala" Date: Wed Mar 22, 2006 4:37pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Lodewijk's post on the long way. .. Sankharanimitta indriyabala Hi, Nina - From your note I gathered the following expressions to help me define 'sankharanimitta'. But my summary might have flaws, so I hope you may let me know if you see errors. 'Sankharanimitta' is the "impression of a whole sequence of arisen-and-fallen-away of the dhamma" (phenomena) such as visible objects (ruupa). Other examples are : -- countless moments of arising-and-falling-away perceptions give the nimitta of the perceptions; -- after a succession of the arising and falling away of realities, what is left (impression) is the sign : "the nimitta of the reality that has completely gone". Khun Sujin's definition: "There are nimittas of all conditioned dhammas that appear at this moment, arising and falling away extremely rapidly." I like Khun Sujin's expression, 'Past life is like a dream, this life is like a dream'-- it summarizes the meaning of sankharanimitta very well. I appreciate your kind & helpful reply. Sincerely, Tep ======= --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, nina van gorkom wrote: > > Dear Tep, (snipped) > N: > Visible object impinges on the eyesense and after it has fallen away, what is left is the impression or sign, nimitta of visible object. > It seems that visible object lasts for a while, but in reality it arises and falls away. Acharn Sujin used the simile of a torch that is swung around. (snipped) 57010 From: LBIDD@... Date: Wed Mar 22, 2006 4:56pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: arahat and D.O., Larry lbidd2 Hi James, Thanks for your reply. I have to confess I haven't the foggiest notion of what an arahat's experience is like. And I don't know the answer to your questions regarding the source of this delineation of dukkha. Maybe there will be something in the tika to Vism.XVII,63. I was just drawing out the logic of ignorance of dukkha as a condition for dependent arising. This led me to an unexpected place: dosa, and the possibility that dukkha isn't a mistake. Of the three general characteristics (impermanence, dukkha, anatta) dukkha seems to be underemphasized (by us, not the Buddha). I think it might be a good idea to be more aware of dukkha and in particular the dukkha of dosa. I find it very illuminating that suffering is a form of hatred (dosa). It is also interesting that self view doesn't arise with dosa, but, because desire is the cause of dukkha, desire is the cause of dosa and self view does arise with desire. Bottom line: it might be more fruitful to occasionally contemplate and recognize dosa, rather than impermanence or anatta. Dosa can cease! Larry 57011 From: "indriyabala" Date: Wed Mar 22, 2006 5:04pm Subject: Re: Never Happy ... Practice of the Fourth Noble Truth, How? indriyabala Hi, all - The following typo was pretty bad : > This 'new Tep' promises not to argue no more. {:>)) > Please delete 'not' so that it reads : This 'new Tep' promises to argue no more. Thanks ! Tep ===== 57012 From: connie Date: Wed Mar 22, 2006 6:48pm Subject: Subject: Re: Never Happy buddhatrue nichiconn just interrupting james after "several articles have been written about this subject, by several qualified bhikkhus/bhikkhunis" to ask if anyone remembers the sutta where buddha says even highly respected bhikkhus with lots of followers can have wrong view. thanks in advance, connie 57013 From: connie Date: Wed Mar 22, 2006 6:48pm Subject: Re: Lodewijk's post on the long way. buddhatrue nichiconn disregard this rant. on second thought, i won't write it. at least not in that tone of voice. i'll try to remember that showing respect is a sign of intelligence. i'm here to learn. thank you for your parts in this. who is not deaf, blind and stupid in this lifetime? i would hesitate to cast doubt on the commentaries. hogwash? yes, that's what we need. to be cleansed of our pigheadedness and rooting in this filth we call home sweet home... which is where all roads lead, we say, to home... but for the one, no architect of future abodes. James: The goal is to become a sotapanna so that it doesn't take aeons! The Buddha didn't teach such an elongated path to liberation. Connie: who's to say how long seven or nine (hi, simon) might be? and since you've been so kind as to put up with me this far i'll admit a tendency to think a bit highly of myself & imagine i'm one of those streaming haired, crying across the skies in full gloom devas more often than one feeding on joy.... well, just because i seem to recall you saying something once about seeing yourself in the suttas. peace, c. p.s. o, yeah... perfect, see 57000: Visuddhimagga Ch XVII, 63, and Tiika. nilovg yikes, not the road to goblin city! 57014 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Wed Mar 22, 2006 7:30pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Lodewijk's post on the long way. scottduncan2 Dear Nina, Thank you very much for the following: "Acharn Sujin said: ³No matter whether we call it nimitta or not, it is appearing now. Whatever appears is the sign or nimitta of the dhamma that arises and falls away.²" "Last time in Bgk Kh Sujin spoke again about nimitta, it helps us to see that we live as in a dream, and this leads to detachment. She said: 'We can have a more refined understanding of nimitta. We used to know nimitta as meaning shape and form, but now that there is a succession of the arising and falling away of realities, what is left is only the sign, the nimitta of the reality that has completely gone. Just in a moment, as soon as it has arisen it is gone. Past life is like a dream, this life is like a dream.> I find, when considering nimitta I better understand the simile of the dream, and also its value. But I have not finished considering. Still in the process!" This is a very, very helpful way of understanding things! Sincerely, Scott. 57015 From: "abhidhammika" Date: Wed Mar 22, 2006 7:43pm Subject: Muditaa -- Re: Happy News abhidhammika Dear Howard and family, How are you? You wrote: "The surgery on our granddaughter, Sophie Emma, has been completed, and it went very well!" Thank you for sharing news of little Sophie Emma's successful surgery with us. Looking forward to more happy news! Regards, Suan --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: Hi, all - The surgery on our granddaughter, Sophie Emma, has been completed, and it went very well! She is still on a respirator, but that will probably end later today or tomorrow. One of the two valves that were constructed has a slight leak which will have to be watched, but that will very possibly heal on its own with time. We're all very happy that conditions allowed for this happy outcome, and we're very grateful to the skilled and compassionate doctors and nurses here in Dallas, most especially the superb surgeon. Thank you all for your caring and your expressions of concern and hope. 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/ 57016 From: sarah abbott Date: Wed Mar 22, 2006 10:18pm Subject: ‘Cetasikas' study corner 406- Confidence/saddhaa (c) 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;-) ========================================== (Ch25 - Confidence/saddhaa contd) The Atthasåliní also uses another method of defining saddhå: * "… Faith has confiding as its characteristic; purifying as its function, like the water-purifying gem, or aspiring faith as function, like the crossing of the floods; freedom from pollution or decision as its manifestation; an object worthy of faith or factors of “streamwinning” as its proximate cause." * The Visuddhimagga (XIV, 140) defines confidence in the same way as the Atthasåliní in the second method. When there is akusala citta there is no confidence in kusala. For example, when we are attached to a pleasant sight or when we have aversion towards an ugly sight, there is forgetfulness of kusala, there is no aspiration for it. Whereas, when there is faith or confidence, there is aspiration for kusala. Only when people have confidence in the value of dåna, síla or bhåvanå will they apply themselves to it. It depends on a person’s accumulations which kind of kusala he is inclined to perform. Some people have confidence in dåna and síla but they do not see the benefit of being aware right now of seeing or hearing, in order to know these realities as non-self. ***** (Ch25 - Confidence/saddhaa to be contd) Metta, Sarah ====== 57017 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Wed Mar 22, 2006 11:48pm Subject: Re: Lodewijk's post on the long way. buddhatrue --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, nina van gorkom wrote: > > Ha James, > the old James is back! > I do not know whether it is useful to discuss with you. You have your own > opinion and are entitled to that. So, why argue? Yeah, I don't want to argue either. I get more excited and bombastic about your posts because you have a great influence on people. Goodness, you have had books published and spread all over Thailand, in hotels- that is a BIG influence! K. Sujin also has a big influence with her radio broadcast. So I get more vehement with you and her in my posts. If someone else posted the same thing, I would just calmly suggest that the Buddha didn't teach that. When you post about the Buddha's path supposed to take aeons, every red flag goes off in my mind. I love the dhamma more than I am concerned about your ego or what others may think of me. That's the "old James"; I love the dhamma more than life itself. However, with this post I see that I am fighting a losing battle. I could tell you nicely or I could tell you roughly and it wouldn't matter, your mind is made up. Based on one little commentarial note, interpreted in a way extraneous to its intention, you have made up your mind that the Buddha's path is supposed to take aeons. Never mind that he specifically said otherwise; you have made up your mind and so there is no changing it. Hopefully, aeons from now, when you are sitting in meditation and you recall this life you have had as Nina VanGorkom, you will realize how much time you wasted and how much damage you had done. Thank you for the kind words about my "Never Happy" post. Glad you liked it. Sure, I guess you could say it was describing Abhidhamma- I have no problem with that. I guesss it depends on one's perspective. 57018 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Thu Mar 23, 2006 0:11am Subject: [dsg] Re: arahat and D.O., Larry buddhatrue Hi Howard, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > > TG > > This could very well be but I have not encountered that text, or > have not seen it in that way. Could you please reference me to where the Buddha said this? Thx. > metta, > James > ================================= > James, I think there was a case of the Buddha having experienced pain (i.e., unpleasant sensation) > when his foot was pierced. > With metta, > Howard Yeah, I am aware of that. I also know of an instance where the Buddha had some back pain and needed to lie down, so he had Sariputta continue a discourse for him. However, what I am really asking is if that is "dukkha"? I guess this is a semantic question. For example, this is how the Buddha defined the First Noble Truth of dukkha: "Birth is dukkha, aging is dukkha, death is dukkha; sorrow, lamentation, pain, grief, & despair are dukkha; association with the unbeloved is dukkha; separation from the loved is dukkha; not getting what is wanted is dukkha. In short, the five clinging- aggregates are dukkha." Rather than taking this statement too apart, I believe it needs to be viewed in it's entirety and according to its parallelism. The first part, "Birth is dukkha, aging is dukkha, and death is dukkha" relates to worldlings only, in my estimation. The Buddha is talking about the rounds of birth, which has stopped for an arahant. Would the death of an arahant be considered dukkha? I don't think so. Now, the second section, "sorrow, lamentation, pain, grief, and despair" needs to be viewed all together. Though this section does mention "pain", it is in the context of these other unwholesome mental factors- which an arahant doesn't experience. The next section, "association with the unbeloved is dukkha; separation from the loved is dukkha; not getting what is wanted is dukkha" obviously relates to a worling and not to an arahant. The final section "In short, the five clinging-aggregates are dukkha" refers to the clinging-aggregates which the arahant no longer possesses. He doesn't cling to the aggregates, they are simply running their course of karma. So, overall, I don't believe that the Buddha's definition for dukkha applies to an arahant in anyway. Metta, James 57019 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Thu Mar 23, 2006 0:28am Subject: [dsg] Re: Lodewijk's post on the long way. buddhatrue Hi Nina, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, nina van gorkom wrote: > > Ha James, > the old James is back! > I do not know whether it is useful to discuss with you. You have your own > opinion and are entitled to that. An addition to my other post, here is the Buddha, very early in the formation of his sangha, describing how long his path is to take: "Monks, I do not say that the attainment of gnosis is all at once. Rather, the attainment of gnosis is after gradual training, gradual action, gradual practice. And how is there the attainment of gnosis after gradual training, gradual action, gradual practice? There is the case where, when conviction has arisen, one visits [a teacher]. Having visited, one grows close. Having grown close, one lends ear. Having lent ear, one hears the Dhamma. Having heard the Dhamma, one remembers it. Remembering, one penetrates the meaning of the teachings. Penetrating the meaning, one comes to an agreement through pondering the teachings. There being an agreement through pondering the teachings, desire arises. When desire has arisen, one is willing. When one is willing, one contemplates. Having contemplated, one makes an exertion. Having made an exertion, one realizes with the body the ultimate truth and, having penetrated it with discernment, sees it." The Buddha then goes one to chastise his monks for not following this gradual method: "Now, monks, there hasn't been that conviction, there hasn't been that visiting, there hasn't been that growing close ... that lending ear ... that hearing of the Dhamma ... that remembering ... that penetration of the meaning of the teachings ... that agreement through pondering the teachings ... that desire ... that willingness ... that contemplation ... that exertion. You have lost the way, monks. You have gone the wrong way, monks. How far have you strayed, foolish men, from this Dhamma & Discipline!" Do you see anywhere in this sutta where the Buddha tells his monks that it is going to take aeons for them to fulfil his path? Is he relaxed about them not completely following his path because he knows they have countless lifetimes more to perfect it? NO! The Buddha is quite agitated with them, even calling them foolish, because they are wasting the opportunity they have been given. And,while the path is gradual but it is not supposed to take more than one lifetime to fulfil it. Nina, just as the Buddha got agitated with his monks and called them foolish, I get agitated with you and call you foolish- for teaching something so obviously contrary to the message and spirit of the Buddha. Metta, James 57021 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Thu Mar 23, 2006 0:37am Subject: [dsg] Re: arahat and D.O., Larry buddhatrue Hi Larry, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, LBIDD@... wrote: > > Hi James, > > Bottom line: it might be more fruitful to occasionally contemplate and > recognize dosa, rather than impermanence or anatta. Dosa can cease! > > Larry > I think that this is a very good point...very good point indeed. Thx! Metta, James 57022 From: TGrand458@... Date: Wed Mar 22, 2006 7:45pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Ontological Status of the Tilakkhana -- The term "Reality" TGrand458@... In a message dated 3/21/2006 6:46:21 A.M. Mountain Standard Time, suanluzaw@... writes: I hope that TG's 'terminology anxiety' would not progress to pathological proportions. :-) As Sarah pointed out, the term 'conditions' cannot replace the term 'reality' adequately. With regards, Suan Hi Suan LOL I'll try to keep it under control...or at least hope the conditions can. As I understand it, the term we are calling "reality" is Paramattha Dhamma. And as I understand it, the Buddha never used such a term. What I am puzzled by is an almost pathological obsession to use a term that the Buddha never did ... and then basically claim that's the most important aspect of his teaching. It "blows me away" in fact ... but the psychological team working on me at the clinic claims that I have not yet gone insane. :-) TG 57023 From: TGrand458@... Date: Wed Mar 22, 2006 8:18pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Understanding dhammas, understanding realities/'realities' TGrand458@... Hi Sarah In a message dated 3/22/2006 12:18:48 A.M. Mountain Standard Time, sarahprocterabbott@... writes: S: I think the point is that we can say sanna, vedana and citta are always conjoined, always arise together at every instant. The same cannot be said of wisdom. I think the commentary note here is clear. .... TG: That's clear enough but I don't know what it has to do with our conversation? > In other words, the 'conjoining' refers to the associating and > co-arising > of these states at every moment. They condition each other by arising > together (sahajata paccaya). Clearly the Buddha had no doubt about > their > particular characteristics:). ... > TG: > > This quote is speaking to a "higher truth" as the question (questioner) > is > seeking clarification as to "actuality" of the states involved! .... S: And what is the ‘actuality’ if not the five aggregates ? Can we say rupa is ‘actuality’ when it arises? The other aggregates? ... TG: I'm actually steering away from the term "actuality" now. ;-) When rupa arises I would say -- "rupa arises." And the same for the other aggregates. I am not saying that they do not arise. I am not saying that they are the same as each other. Nor am I saying that they are different from each other. There are distinguishable qualities. But I won't say "they have their own characteristics." > Sariputta > says -- "These states are conjoined, not disjoined, and it is > impossible to > separate each of these states from the others in order to describe the > difference > between them." I interpret that as meaning that the states are not > "distinct realities;" they are "conditional relativities." Therefore, > the idea of > "separate ultimate realities with their own characteristics" is IN FACT > a > "conventional understanding." The "higher truth" does not see states > in that > manner. .... S: Aren’t we discussing a conversation between the bhikkhuni Dhammadinna and Visakkha (already a sotapanna of course)? TG: No. That is MN 44. The quote above is found in MN 43. Sariputta is teaching. I think the comment you quote above indicates their co-arising, conditioned nature. Elsewhere in the sutta, I think the distinct nature of the various dhammas is made apparent such as in the elaboration of the distinct kinds of feelings. There is even a discussion of the anusayas (latent tendencies) – a lot of Abhidhamma in this sutta. What do you mean here by ‘higher truth’? Is this paramattha sacca?? What is your understanding of paramattha or higher? This is interesting. .... > They are only "separatable" for purposes of analysis. Apparently we > are > still not seeing this eye to eye. ;-) .... S: Ah well, if we saw eye to eye on all points, where would the discussion be? ;-)) TG: Exactly. LOL What is the purpose of analysis if not for the development of insight? What’s the use of any of the textual stuff if not for the development of satipatthana as we read, speak or sip coffee in between? TG: Agreed. We just don't agree on what the texts are saying. Some others were recently referring to the importance of reading texts, preferably in pali and with commentaries, studying the Vinaya in depth and so on....but when it comes down to it, the Dhamma is not in a book, not in any text. Any analysis is only as a pointer for understanding what appears right now. Pleasant feeling is quite different from unpleasant feeling, wouldn’t you say? Feeling is quite different from thinking and also from perception/marking of an object. TG: Agree with the first half. The second half gets more murky. Especially thinking being different from feeling. I think that thinking incorporates feeling. I.E., thinking is a type of feeling. I would think abhidhamma supports that position too. Good talking to you and I’ll enjoy any further comments. If you find yourself waiting a long while for a reply and have spare time, please go back and answer any of the other questions in my last post– such as the one about the difference between ‘sound’ and ‘dream of a sound’:)) Metta, Sarah TG: Good talking to you too Sarah. I saw that post and somehow have skipped it. I'll go back and look for it. I think I'll be around for a few more days, but then I'm going to be gone fore a couple of weeks, so all the best in the mean time. TG 57024 From: "Joop" Date: Thu Mar 23, 2006 1:21am Subject: Wasted time (Was:[dsg] Re: Lodewijk's post on the long way. jwromeijn Wasted time ? Hallo James, Nina, Connie, all Nina, I think "the old James" is the same one as the sensitive James! To me it's OK James that you prefer to be honest, more than being nice, but it's not easy (especially for yourself, but you know that) But the real topic is of course: who is right, does it really take "aeons" to awaken? I use quotation marks at 'aeons" because I have studies buddhist cosmology (partly the old Indian cosmology) and a eon is on the timescale of a billion of years, that is 10^9, that is 1,000,000,000 years. Our universe exist 14 billion years, our solar system and our planet Earth 5, and that system collapses in 5 billion years. So whoever is right: the term "aeons" can not be taken literal, it's an Indian exaggeration for "a long time" Or: is that a real topic? Not to me. I try to live only now, contemplating impermanence, knowing that I can die in one second. In fact i don't know what "time" is (it's not a dhamma, but a concept, so it's not important) And whem "conditations" make a streamenterer of me this life, I'm sure my intuition tells me what to do then; and when I don't get streamenterer in this life: so be it. Metta Joop --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "buddhatrue" wrote: > > Hi Nina, > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, nina van gorkom > wrote: > > > > Ha James, > > the old James is back! > > I do not know whether it is useful to discuss with you. You have > your own > > opinion and are entitled to that. > > An addition to my other post, here is the Buddha, very early in the > formation of his sangha, describing how long his path is to take: > > "Monks, I do not say that the attainment of gnosis is all at once. > Rather, the attainment of gnosis is after gradual training, gradual > action, gradual practice. And how is there the attainment of gnosis > after gradual training, gradual action, gradual practice? There is > the case where, when conviction has arisen, one visits [a teacher]. > Having visited, one grows close. Having grown close, one lends ear. > Having lent ear, one hears the Dhamma. Having heard the Dhamma, one > remembers it. Remembering, one penetrates the meaning of the > teachings. Penetrating the meaning, one comes to an agreement > through pondering the teachings. There being an agreement through > pondering the teachings, desire arises. When desire has arisen, one > is willing. When one is willing, one contemplates. Having > contemplated, one makes an exertion. Having made an exertion, one > realizes with the body the ultimate truth and, having penetrated it > with discernment, sees it." > > The Buddha then goes one to chastise his monks for not following > this gradual method: > > "Now, monks, there hasn't been that conviction, there hasn't been > that visiting, there hasn't been that growing close ... that lending > ear ... that hearing of the Dhamma ... that remembering ... that > penetration of the meaning of the teachings ... that agreement > through pondering the teachings ... that desire ... that > willingness ... that contemplation ... that exertion. You have lost > the way, monks. You have gone the wrong way, monks. How far have you > strayed, foolish men, from this Dhamma & Discipline!" > > Do you see anywhere in this sutta where the Buddha tells his monks > that it is going to take aeons for them to fulfil his path? Is he > relaxed about them not completely following his path because he > knows they have countless lifetimes more to perfect it? NO! The > Buddha is quite agitated with them, even calling them foolish, > because they are wasting the opportunity they have been given. > And,while the path is gradual but it is not supposed to take more > than one lifetime to fulfil it. > > Nina, just as the Buddha got agitated with his monks and called them > foolish, I get agitated with you and call you foolish- for teaching > something so obviously contrary to the message and spirit of the > Buddha. > > Metta, > James > 57025 From: "Joop" Date: Thu Mar 23, 2006 1:28am Subject: Re: Never Happy ... Practice of the Fourth Noble Truth, How? jwromeijn Hallo Tep, all You asked me and others) to comment. So I do: it does not resonate in me. I think it's only the language that is not mine. The Noble Eightfold Path with it's eight things to do every day again is central to me too; together with the three marks dukkha, anatta and anicca (as I said once to Sarah: hip hip hurrah for anicca!) I have problems simply to understand Luang Pu, even the english words I don't understand. And I have always problems with texts that use the term "heart" as a metaphore for something else as: a muscle, filled with blood, pumping that blood through the body. Also the concept "heart base" for the sixth sense sounds rather ridiculous to me: if the mind is somewhere in the body (but it isn't) than it is in the brains, not in the heart. Metta Joop --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "indriyabala" wrote: > > > Hi, James (Sarah, Jon, Nina, Joop, RobK)- > > My apologies for the temptation to ask difficult questions that mostly > are far above my head. But, when you think about the Teachings in the > many suttas, don't you agree that the Buddha and the Arahants most of > the time talked about 'things'("ideals") that are very far above our > heads too (e.g. direct knowledge, vijja and vimutti -- and Nibbana)? > Nevertheless, I want to thank you again for tolerating with me enough > to give an answer that makes a lot of sense: > ... > Now please allow me to offer you another way to practice the > Noble Eightfold Path along with discerning of the other three Noble > Truths at the same time. > > "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 Dulaya] > .... > How do I understand Luang Pu? > ... > > I shall be pleased to hear a comment (agreement or disagreement, or > neither) from anyone. This 'new Tep' promises [NOT]not to argue no more. {:>)) > > > Upekkha, > > > Tep, > your friend. > > > 57026 From: Bhikkhu samahita Date: Wed Mar 22, 2006 9:23pm Subject: Re: How did ignorance happen? bhikkhu_ekamuni Friend Tep indriyabala asked: >Ven. Samahita - >Why is it almost always the case that we are infested with >confusing doubt and skeptical mistrust, rather than without them? >How did these two defilements come about in the first place? Doubt, confusion, mistrust and skepticism are all diluted derivatives of ignorance... On the cause(s) of ignorance: Ignorance is not seeing and not knowing the 4 Noble Truths fully!_ As a near and proximate cause:_ Ignorance comes into being caused & conditioned by the 5 hindrances! That is right here & now: Ignorance grows up caused by desire & lust... Ignorance arises caused by aversion & ill-will... Ignorance emerges caused by lethargy & laziness... Ignorance appears caused by restlessness & regret... Ignorance comes into being caused by doubt & uncertainty... And!: _As a remote and subtle cause: _Conditioned by mental fermentation (asava) does ignorance come into being: That is multi-factorial, on the long-term, as a deeply hidden latent tendency: Ignorance is caused by the mental fermentation linked with sense-desire. Ignorance is caused by the mental fermentation associated with views. Ignorance is caused by the mental fermentation coupled with new becoming. Ignorance is caused by the mental fermentation joined with ignorance itself! Ignorance thus grows more ignorance in a fatal positively self-enhanced feedback-loop! _Sutta references: AN X 61, AN X 62 _ Bhikkhus, a beginning of ignorance cannot be pointed out in this way: Before this point in time, there was no ignorance, it came into existence afterwards. But, Bhikkhus, it can be pointed out in this way: Caused by this, ignorance comes to be. Bhikkhus, I tell you, ignorance too has a causing condition! What is the causing condition of ignorance? The five mental hindrances is the reply..._ And in MN 9:_ And what is ignorance, what is the origin of ignorance, what is the ceasing of ignorance, what is the way leading to the ceasing of ignorance? Not knowing about suffering, not knowing about the origin of suffering, not knowing about the ceasing of suffering, not knowing about the way leading to the ceasing of suffering, this is called ignorance! With the arising of the mental fermentations, there is the arising of ignorance. With the ceasing of the mental fermentations, there is ceasing of ignorance! The way leading to the ceasing of ignorance is just this Noble Eightfold Path: That is; Right view, right motivation, right speech, right action, right livelihood, right effort and right concentration. Friendship is the Greatest ... Bhikkhu Samahita, Sri Lanka. <..> 57027 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Thu Mar 23, 2006 0:35am Subject: How to Cure Ill Will ... ??? bhikkhu_ekamuni Friends: How to prevent, tranquilize, and cure Ill Will, Aversion and Enmity? Ill will is the wishing evil for others: 'May they perish! May they meet much misery...' It is a derivative of Hate usually provoked by possessive defensiveness (Greed)... What to do if such malevolent grudge recurs often ? A: 1: Develop Infinite Friendliness (Metta) by starting daily meditation. 2: Cultivate Endless Pity (Karuna) by continuous daily meditation. 3: Increase Universal Equanimity (Upekkha) by daily meditation. 4: Stop all thinking on the disliked object. Attend to liked object. 5: Know that everyone is then owner of the consequences of their actions (Kamma) whether good or bad... B: Remember the Simile of the Saw... The Blessed Buddha once said: Friends, even if bandits were to cut you up, savagely, limb by limb, with a two-handled saw, you should not be angry but do my bidding: Remain pervading them with a friendly awareness imbued with an all-embracing good will, kind, rich, expansive, and immeasurable. Free from hostility, free from ill will. Always remembering this very Simile of the Saw is indeed how you should train yourselves... Majjhima Nikaya 21 C: All phenomena are only combinations of the Elements of: Solidity, Fluidity, Heat, Motion, Space & Consciousness... Then think like this: With which of these elements am I angry and why so? Then the evil ill-will may momentarily vanish right on the spot!!! Remember & repeat this good-will-cure whenever necessary... -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 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 !!! <...> 57028 From: TGrand458@... Date: Wed Mar 22, 2006 9:34pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Understanding dhammas, understanding realities/'realities' TGrand458@... Hi Sarah In a message dated 3/22/2006 12:02:39 A.M. Mountain Standard Time, sarahprocterabbott@... writes: Hi TG, As I said, I appreciated your detailed study/reading of my post on this topic and all your comments. I'm not sure there's much more I can say of any use here, but as Howard would say, it seems impolite not to respond at all. --- TGrand458@... wrote: > Hi Sarah > > Haven't written to you in a while, hope all is well! A few (strong) > but > well meaning comments... ... S: Yes, good to talk to you and very glad to see your participation recently. I could tell your comments were well meant for which I thank you. I'll just cherry-pick a little from your reply: .... > TG: Manifest does apply to concepts. That's why concepts are mental > formations and there is no conflict. They do arise ... they manifest. .... S: Are you saying that concepts are included in sankhara khandha? Does the Buddha ever suggest this or that anything other than the khandhas arises? .... TG: Sure. Memories and thinking are conceptual. The Buddha refers to them often. > This issue regarding concepts always comes up in relation to minds that > "seeing things as real." When nama and rupa are considered "real," > concepts must > not be real. If nama and rupa were "states with their own essence," > I'd > agree. Since this is exactly what they are not, I have to disagree. > Nama and > rupa are empty, coreless, and alien, of anything "of themselves." And, > so are > concepts. .... S: Do you make any distinction at all between a sound which is heard now and a dream or a thought about a sound? How would you describe the difference in your own words? ..... TG: Sure. I'm not completely crazy. ;-) A sound heard now is a sound heard now. The thought about a sound is based on memory. It is a mental formation. > > One would be far better off trying to see 'nama and rupa' as empty as > concepts...rather than trying to build up the "substantial standing" of > nama and > rupa in relation to concepts. IMO. The former would lead to > detachment. The > latter leads to attachment. .... S: So would you say that sound heard now and a dream about sounds are equally unreal, equally empty and equally unknowable? .... TG: Who said anything about unreal? The idea of real or unreal both tarnish the Dhamma in my view. Rather ...They are conditions. Equally empty yes. Equally unknowable no. They are knowable. They are knowable as being conditioned, as being empty, as being impermanent. A dream would be far less likely to be a state whereby insight work could be accomplished. Although, I believe I have had dreams where I was being mindful in the dream. Whether such mindfulness has ANY value I cannot say. While awake, and being mindful of sound, the mind can observe conditionality in progress and the impermanent, no-self/empty, and afflicting ramifications of that state. > “And what is it, bhikkhus, that the wise in the world agree upon as > existing, of which I too say that it exists? From that is impermanent, > suffering, and subject to change: this the wise in the world agree upon > as > existing, and I too say that it exists. > Feeling...Perception...Volitional > Formations...Consciousness that is impermanent, suffering, and subject > to > change: this the wise in the world agree upon as existing, and I too > say > that it exists.â€Â? (SN 22:94). > * > TG: Here the word 'exists' would also be better suited to being > translated > as manifests or arises. .... S: I believe this is close to the Pali. When it has arisen, it exists. When it exists it manifests (we read about the function, manifestation and characteristic of dhammas). ... TG: If 'exists' merely means 'manifests,' I have no problems with it. But, if exists leads to calling it a reality and that leads to calling manifestations as ultimate realities, the plain meaning of "manifest" has been over-invested as something substantial. Some people seem to know what I mean, others seem oblivious to the importance of it. Keeping in mind that the Buddha said that > states > don't exist, nor do they not exist ... in other suttas. Paraphrasing > ... -- One > who sees the arising of the world does not believe in the non-existence > of > the world ... one who see the disintegration of the world does not > believe in > the existence of the world. -- .... S: See RobK's recent post on the Kaccayanagotta Sutta and others under this same heading in U.P. In context the Buddha was referring to views of eternalism and annihilationism, all based on the ideas of self-view. .... TG: Could this mean that the idea of "ultimate realities" is an existence, i.e., eternalism view? Based on the logic of the reasoning above...seems it would be so. > TG: But Dhammas are conditions and vice versa so I'm not sure why a > note > that distinguishes them as different is correct or of important? .... S: The terms are not inter-changeable as Suan and others have pointed out. I gave the simple example of arammana or object in another post to indicate that a concept acts as a condition by way of being the object of citta, but it's not a (paramattha) dhamma. The good deeds of an arahant are 'inoperative', they do not act as kamma condition. .... TG: Here we disagree as I see concepts as memories and therefore mental formations. There is no such thing as a "concepts referent" and I think that is what you mean by concept. The "concept itself" is merely the mental activity engaged in memory. > > Paraphrasing -- One who sees Dependent Arising sees Dhamma. One who > sees > Dhamma sees Dependent Arising. -- > > From this I gather that what the Buddha wants us to know is -- "the > principle of Dependent Arising" ... and "seeing" the manifestations > (dhammas) is > only a tool used to develop comprehension of Dependent Arising > principles...impermanence, dukkha, no-self...leading to detachment and > liberation. .... S: I think it's good that you're emphasising the importance of understanding the conditioned nature of dhammas. In this context, do you differentiate between dhammas (manifestations) and concepts or ideas about dhammas? Is the comprehension one of theory or one of direct understanding of the dhammas involved? .... TG: I can differentiate the difference between them ... but they are both manifestations. They can both be direct understandings, but whether they are theory or not is problematic. > Paraphrasing -- Two ascetics approach the Buddha...one says "I believe > all > exists." The other says "I believe nothing exists." -- The Buddha > praises > the latter view as being superior as it is closer to detachment. .... S: I think this maybe a paraphrase from a comment in the Dighanakkha Sutta (sp?)? I believe the comment was that it was 'closer' because the words sound similar to anatta, but sounding similar doesn't mean they are correct. Dighanakkha clearly had strong wrong view. .... TG: Yes, but you ignore that the other view ... that of "existence," is even more incorrect! This is after all, the whole point driving this topic. How can you not comment on that ... as that is the crucial point of the example? But its ignored and just the other view is commented on, as if somehow that leaves to 'existence' view "in the clear." > S: The sub-commentary elaborates further to stress that this > distinction > differentiates dhammas(realities), i.e the khandhas, from concepts: > > > TG: Obviously I disagree with both of these commentarial hypothesizes. .... S: !! ... > TG: Regarding the commentary above. The commentary is oblivious to > the > fact that it is engendering, and a substrate level, the same > "misconstructions" > that it is criticizing. The "misconstructions" the commentary > criticizes "as > being mere expressions" is because those states are empty of their own > essence. THE DHAMMAS ARE EMPTY OF THEIR OWN ESSENCE ALSO. They are > not "endowed > with a specific nature" as the commentary contends. What a totally > "attached > viewpoint" IMO. .... S: As the commentary made clear, sabhava refers to the characteristic of dhammas. The characteristic of seeing is quite different from the characteristic of hearing, wouldn't you agree? The Buddha refers frequently to lakkhana or characteristics. The seen is quite different from the heard, Each 'seen' is different from each other 'seen' and yet rupa khandha includes all those paramattha dhammas which are directly experienced and which cannot experience other dhammas - whether near or far, internal or external etc etc. ..... TG: Phenomena continuously reconfigure into different formations. Sometimes that results in seeing, sometimes it results in hearing. It all depends on the way conditions relate to each other. > S: It may be argued that here I’m looking at the commentaries. > However, I > see no difference in intended meaning between what is said here and > what > we read in the suttas, such as in the brief extracts above. > > TG: This is the problem IMO. You don't see the difference. ... S: Of course there's lots of detail which is way over my head, but for the most part, I don't see any difference in meaning between what the suttas say, what the Abhidhamma says and what the ancient commentaries say. The meaning is all in accordance. I have confidence that when I come across knotty points, the problem is my very limited understanding, not the texts as such. This approach is based on the fact that the little I do understand can be tested and proved at this moment. .... TG: Experiences can be experienced "at this moment." But the theories that might interpret that experience may not be correct. I believe that because you view the Suttas retrospectively through the eyes of the commentaries that the Suttas look like they are saying what the commentaries say. So you read into the Suttas what the commentaries say. Because they look very close, it looks like they are saying the same thing. I believe that there are some profound differences and that the commentaries, in some ways, steer us in the wrong direction. Maybe just ever so slightly, but maybe importantly. > TG: I believe, that some are so attached to "dhammas" which is the > same as > "being attached to self," that they just can't bear to let go of terms > like > "reality" or "own characteristic." Because...to let go of that is to > let go > of the self. Some folks seem to be holding on to those terms "for dear > life." > Why? Because they are the only things supporting > subliminal-self-views. .... S: I agree that any attachment is harmful and is not conducive to insight. That's why I don't go along with the 'depending on attachment' or 'hanging onto the raft' ideas. TG: Not sure I understand your intentions here so I'll let them go. I don't mind in the slightest what terms you or anyone else uses, but I think that to deny specific characteristics of realities which can be directly known is to deny any path to freedom. It is to see the Buddha's teachings as being about theories and conceptual constructs only - clearly not the way. I know you have a different understanding here:)) TG: You might be surprised if I said that I believe our "practice" is probably nearly identical. What is different is our mental framework of what we believe we are experiencing. I.E., basically theory. Everybody experiences phenomena directly. The difference between insight and not is -- how that experience is interpreted. On can be mindful, draw the wrong conclusions, and be lead in the wrong direction. Devadattha was an example of monk with great mindfulness, but his "theory/interpretation" led him astray. He did not overcome suffering...he jumped into aeons of it. (As I have read.) Insight is both mindfulness of experience, and correctly understanding what it is that one is mindful of. Not going too far, not going too short. Like the bow that is strung not too tight or too slack. If one's ideas is "overtightened" to the point where things are conceived beyond what is really known about them...might go astray. And, if there is no idea at all ("too slack") of what one is being mindful of, progress is limited. Experiences manifest and can be distinguished. This we can know. They are impermanent, they are conditioned, they will dissolve. this we can know. They are ultimate realities with their own characteristics? This I am not comfortable with as I feel it is "overstringing the bow." It makes "conditions" sound like "entities." Conditions have nothing of their own as far as I'm concerned. No need to ever apologise for disagreements, TG -- we're not here to necessarily agree after all! I know your comments were all intended in a friendly way and I hope you'll feel the same about mine. TG: Sure do. I'll gladly look forward to any more you have or specific sutta quotes. Metta, Sarah TG: Take care Sarah. Talk to you later. TG 57029 From: TGrand458@... Date: Wed Mar 22, 2006 9:37pm Subject: Re: [dsg] paramattha dhamma and ontology TGrand458@... In a message dated 3/22/2006 8:40:18 A.M. Mountain Standard Time, vangorko@... writes: Hi Sarah. I am glad to hear these words again. This is also helpful, that in a next life this life will be completely forgotten. All my dreams now. It is as it is. Naturally, I reflect on my life with Lodewijk, which I find so important now! I accept this intellectually, but not yet wholeheartedly. Nina. op 22-03-2006 05:41 schreef sarah abbott op sarahprocterabbott@...: > Just as our last life is like a dream or fantasy now and we have no idea > what happened then at all, so this life is just the same -- it'll all be > completely forgotten. Even this moment is just the same as the one which > has previously fallen away - it'll never come back, it'll be completely > unknown. This is the same for all the khandhas, all arising, all gone, > just leaving an impression or mark for clinging to latch on to. Hi Nina and Sarah This is a great quote. Thank you for posting it. May I ask the source? TG 57030 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Thu Mar 23, 2006 2:59am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: arahat and D.O., Larry jonoabb Hi Larry LBIDD@... wrote: >Of the three general characteristics (impermanence, dukkha, anatta) >dukkha seems to be underemphasized (by us, not the Buddha). I think it >might be a good idea to be more aware of dukkha and in particular the >dukkha of dosa. I find it very illuminating that suffering is a form of >hatred (dosa). > I've been following this long-running thread of yours with interest. To my understanding, 'dukkha' is something that is seen or understood as insight is developed, because in the ultimate sense it is an aspect of dhammas. Different kinds of dukkha require different levels of understanding of dhammas. The question is sometimes asked, 'Does an arahant still experience dukkha?' I think that question misses the point. Dukkha is not something that is 'experienced', in the sense ordinary folk experience it but arahants don't (or they do but to a lesser degree). It is something that is gradually seen more and more clearly as insight is developed. The arahant has developed panna to a level that fully penetrates the truth of dukkha, so he sees it far more clearly than the worldling does. The ending of dukkha comes only with parinibbana, not with enlightenment. Jon 57031 From: nina van gorkom Date: Thu Mar 23, 2006 3:26am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Lodewijk's post on the long way, patience, patience! nilovg Hi James, We understand each other. That is good. We have known each other for quite some time. When I think of all my faults and vices I have accumulated and of the power of the latent tendencies that can condition the arising of akusala citta so sudden, so unexpectedly, I am not surprised that it takes aeons. We can just look at ourselves during this life. We cannot say that akusala wears away fast, can't we? Nothing is fast, it is a development. This reminds me of patience, khanti. Patience is the highest ascetism (Dhammapada) as the Buddha says. Development of understanding, day after day, so very, very little at a time, not seeing fast progress, that is patience and ascetism. And if we are impatient about progress, we think of self, self who wants to attain. No wonder you are vehement, because hearing that it takes aeons to develop understanding, and patience, is against the current of ignorance and clinging. It goes right against our impatient nature. It is actually the teaching of the Abhidhamma that helps me to see my accumulated inclinations, the many moments of clinging to self, and also that only understanding of this moment can eventually lead to the wearing away of wrong view first and then of other defilements. Think of the sutta on the ship that lays on the beach and slowly, slowly it rots away. You used to like that sutta. ********* Then your second post: <"Monks, I do not say that the attainment of gnosis is all at once. Rather, the attainment of gnosis is after gradual training, gradual action, gradual practice. And how is there the attainment of gnosis after gradual training, gradual action, gradual practice? There is the case where, when conviction has arisen, one visits [a teacher]. Having visited, one grows close. Having grown close, one lends ear. Having lent ear, one hears the Dhamma. Having heard the Dhamma, one remembers it. Remembering, one penetrates the meaning of the teachings. Penetrating the meaning, one comes to an agreement through pondering the teachings. There being an agreement through pondering the teachings, desire arises. When desire has arisen, one is willing. When one is willing, one contemplates. Having contemplated, one makes an exertion. Having made an exertion, one realizes with the body the ultimate truth and, having penetrated it with discernment, sees it.> It is a gradual training, and an exhortation to the monks not to be heedless. The Buddha does not say that everybody has to realize the goal within one lifetime. He knows people's different accumulations. How could people be the same? I am not a monk living at the Buddha's time, I know myself roughly. Anyway, the sutta is a good reminder not to be heedless, even now when reading what is on the computer or typing out messages. We have to remember the Dhamma; do we, during the day when we are busy? When we are writing? Do we really listen, not passively, but developing understanding of any dhamma appearing one at a time through the six doors? Knowing that we do not see people, but see only visible object? How do we see the ultimate truth? Ultimate realities, paramattha dhammas. Seeing them as they are. Seeing nama and rupa as they are. We can scrutinize ourselves, how far off we are from this goal. Nina op 23-03-2006 08:48 schreef buddhatrue op buddhatrue@...: > Yeah, I don't want to argue either. I get more excited and > bombastic about your posts because you have a great influence on > people. 57032 From: nina van gorkom Date: Thu Mar 23, 2006 3:26am Subject: Re: Wasted time (Was:[dsg] Re: Lodewijk's post on the long way. nilovg Hallo Joop, op 23-03-2006 10:21 schreef Joop op jwromeijn@...: > So whoever is right: the term "aeons" can not be taken literal, it's > an Indian exaggeration for "a long time" ------- N: We cannot imagine what an aeon is, anyway, it is a long time. We have to think of the Buddha who had to develop the perfections for aeons, before he could become the omniscient Buddha (Cariyapi.taka, Khuddaka Nikaya). We also have to develop all the perfections, of daana, metta, detachment, patinece (yes, patience!), wisdom etc., and we know that this is not easy. Lobha is in the way.It is the enemy of all the perfections. We have to develop understanding day after day, so that we come to know when there is ignorance and other defilements, and when there is sati sampajañña. Thus satipatthana can develop and this leads to the end of the cycle. I remember that you find that the Abhidhamma is too formal and does not help you in your spiritual Path. Perhaps we could discuss more Abhidhamma, and where it is formal. Perhaps some misunderstandings could be ironed out. Nina. 57033 From: sarah abbott Date: Thu Mar 23, 2006 3:42am Subject: Re: [dsg] paramattha dhamma and ontology sarahprocter... Hi TG (& Nina), --- TGrand458@... wrote: S:> > Just as our last life is like a dream or fantasy now and we have no > idea > > what happened then at all, so this life is just the same -- it'll all > be > > completely forgotten. Even this moment is just the same as the one > which > > has previously fallen away - it'll never come back, it'll be > completely > > unknown. This is the same for all the khandhas, all arising, all > gone, > > just leaving an impression or mark for clinging to latch on to. > > > > Hi Nina and Sarah > > This is a great quote. Thank you for posting it. May I ask the > source? .... S: K.Sujin often refers to how we have no idea about what happened in our last life - it's like a dream, and how this life will be the same completely forgotten. What I wrote was my recollection/paraphrase of extracts from discussions I'd listened to that morning. It's interesting how we may hear the same words over and over again, but sometimes they have more significance for us. If I listen to my tapes from 30 years ago, she's saying just the same about dreams, stories and the imaginary world we live in. Nina, I think it's very liberating to reflect on our dream worlds and to really know how everything and everyone we hold so dear is just in this one moment of thinking. Here's a phrase I heard K.Sujin stress this morning - "becoming used to a characteristic rather than a person or thing". Slowly, slowly when sati develops, there can be more and more appreciation and understanding of characteristics, becoming more and more used to dhammas rather than people and things like usual. TG, I'd be glad to hear your comments on some of the edited audio discussions with A.Sujin, maybe starting with the 'Erik series' as we call them (the first set on www.dhammastudygroup.org). Please let me or Sukin know if you'd like a cd sent to you. In due course, you (and others)can listen to the 2 sets we're currently editing which all the dream discussions referred to are on. Metta, Sarah p.s Thanks TG for your other posts - seen but not read yet. This just caught my attention. ======== 57034 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Thu Mar 23, 2006 3:53am Subject: Re: arahat and D.O., Larry buddhatrue Hi Jon, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Jonothan Abbott wrote: > > Hi Larry > > LBIDD@... wrote: > > >Of the three general characteristics (impermanence, dukkha, anatta) > >dukkha seems to be underemphasized (by us, not the Buddha). I think it > >might be a good idea to be more aware of dukkha and in particular the > >dukkha of dosa. I find it very illuminating that suffering is a form of > >hatred (dosa). > > > > I've been following this long-running thread of yours with interest. > > To my understanding, 'dukkha' is something that is seen or understood as > insight is developed, because in the ultimate sense it is an aspect of > dhammas. Different kinds of dukkha require different levels of > understanding of dhammas. > > The question is sometimes asked, 'Does an arahant still experience > dukkha?' I think that question misses the point. Dukkha is not > something that is 'experienced', in the sense ordinary folk experience > it but arahants don't (or they do but to a lesser degree). It is > something that is gradually seen more and more clearly as insight is > developed. The arahant has developed panna to a level that fully > penetrates the truth of dukkha, so he sees it far more clearly than the > worldling does. James: This is interesting, but a little vague. > > The ending of dukkha comes only with parinibbana, not with enlightenment. James: The ending of dukkha for who? Who or what experiences dukkha when there is no self? If the arahant realizes that there is no self, who then experiences dukkha? Furthermore, the Buddha taught: "And this, monks is the noble truth of the origination of dukkha: the craving that makes for further becoming — accompanied by passion & delight, relishing now here & now there — i.e., craving for sensual pleasure, craving for becoming, craving for non-becoming." Are you saying that an arahant hasn't eliminated craving until parinibbana? The Buddha further taught: "And this, monks, is the noble truth of the way of practice leading to the cessation of dukkha: precisely this Noble Eightfold Path:..." So if arahant hasn't eliminated dukkha until parinibbana, why didn't the Buddha say that? Why did the Buddha said that the Noble Eightfold Path will lead to the cessation of dukkha? > > Jon > Metta, James 57035 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Thu Mar 23, 2006 4:13am Subject: Re: Lodewijk's post on the long way, patience, patience! buddhatrue Hi Nina, There is something you write here that is very important: "I am not a monk living at the Buddha's time, I know myself roughly." I thought that we were speaking of the dhamma in general terms, not of you specifically, or even of householders specifically. I'm afraid that perhaps I have misunderstood you. The Buddha didn't teach anything about the length of the path for householders who don't attain stream-entry, the most he taught is how they can achieve a favourable rebirth. If you believe that it takes numerous lifetimes for one to achieve the Buddha's path, then you sound like a Mahayanist who believes in the bodhisattva path to Buddhahood, and how we all have the potential to become buddhas. I was just speaking of simply becoming an arahant in the Theravada tradition, not of becoming a Buddha. We seem to be speaking at cross-purposes. Metta, James 57036 From: "indriyabala" Date: Thu Mar 23, 2006 5:49am Subject: Re: Never Happy ... Practice of the Fourth Noble Truth, How? indriyabala Hello Joop - Thank you for your consideration. So you say you have problem understanding Luang Pu and even the English. Well, then his teaching is not for you. It is a fair opinion, Joop, that I understand and appreciate. Upekkha, Tep ====== --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Joop" wrote: > > Hallo Tep, all > > You asked me and others) to comment. So I do: it does not resonate in > me. I think it's only the language that is not mine. > The Noble Eightfold Path with it's eight things to do every day again > is central to me too; together with the three marks dukkha, anatta > and anicca (as I said once to Sarah: hip hip hurrah for anicca!) > I have problems simply to understand Luang Pu, even the english words > I don't understand. > And I have always problems with texts that use the term "heart" as a > metaphore for something else as: a muscle, filled with blood, pumping > that blood through the body. > > Also the concept "heart base" for the sixth sense sounds rather > ridiculous to me: if the mind is somewhere in the body (but it isn't) > than it is in the brains, not in the heart. > > Metta > > Joop > > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "indriyabala" > wrote: > > > > > > Hi, James (Sarah, Jon, Nina, Joop, RobK)- > > > > My apologies for the temptation to ask difficult questions that > mostly > > are far above my head. But, when you think about the Teachings in > the > > many suttas, don't you agree that the Buddha and the Arahants most > of > > the time talked about 'things'("ideals") that are very far above our > > heads too (e.g. direct knowledge, vijja and vimutti -- and Nibbana)? > > Nevertheless, I want to thank you again for tolerating with me > enough > > to give an answer that makes a lot of sense: > > ... > > Now please allow me to offer you another way to practice the > > Noble Eightfold Path along with discerning of the other three Noble > > Truths at the same time. > > > > "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 Dulaya] > > .... > > How do I understand Luang Pu? > > ... > > > > I shall be pleased to hear a comment (agreement or disagreement, or > > neither) from anyone. This 'new Tep' promises [NOT]not to argue no > more. {:>)) > > > > > > Upekkha, > > > > > > Tep, > > your friend. > > > > > > 57037 From: "sukinder" Date: Fri Mar 24, 2006 1:49am Subject: RE: [dsg] Re: Understanding dhammas, understanding realities/'realities' sukinderpal Hi Howard, Glad to hear that the surgery on Sophie Emma went well. I have time to respond to your post only; TG's will have to wait. ====================================== > Insight comes from direct experience of realities and this direct > experience comes only with the correct and firm intellectual > understanding of what is and what is not the correct practice amongst > other things. Any ideas that concepts can be the object of this kind of > understanding will only make it harder for any insight to occur. > Meanwhile there will be taking for development of understanding that > which is not. ------------------------------------------- Howard: Clear understanding of conventional objects, while not itself producing wisdom and liberation, can be supportive of it. This is why, I believe the Buddha himself repeatedly pointed to the suffering, impermanence, and not-self aspects of very conventional entities such as spouses, children, ones life, and so on and so forth. Understanding such matters constitute the more commonplace, mundane aspects of what the Buddha taught, but it also is important. Of course, it is common to most religions and is not distinctively Buddhist. If you think, however, that the Buddha and his chief followers did not deal with conventional matters, consider the following for example: - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - <<[Ven. Sariputta:] "Now what, friends, is the noble truth of stress? Birth is stressful, aging is stressful, death is stressful; sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress, & despair are stressful; association with the unbeloved is stressful; separation from the loved is stressful; not getting what is wanted is stressful. In short, the five clinging-aggregates are stressful."And what is birth?.......................... Suk: Yes, concepts can be objects of wise consideration and at those moments, panna would even accumulate and grow. There is thinking about conventional reality all the time, so surely there must be from time to time, some reflecting wisely about these conventional realities. After all, conventional realities such as the ones given in the Sutta quote above are reflections of what goes on at the ultimate level. Especially since coming from a position of wrongly taking these realities as 'self', 'lasting' and 'satisfactory', it is invariable that once we hear the Dhamma, the same would be considered in new light. However, I believe that without hearing about ultimate realities and relying only on conventional examples, realization of the former is near to impossible for people of this day and age, as is evident in the teachings of most Buddhist teachers. The best of reflections may produce some level of calm and perhaps also a good strategy to deal with conventional situations by 'thinking about' and 'comparing' situations. But even this often does not happen, as people come to be attached to some kind of formal practice and mistake that which is not the practice of satipatthana for right practice. They come to 'identify with mental states' and mistake akusala for kusala and so even 'conventional wisdom' does not arise. On the other hand when anatta and conditionality is understood intellectually to refer to this very moment, the same conventional realities can remind us about the ultimate realities of this moment and in this case there would be development of understanding based on "present realities". But when ultimate realities are denied or not known about, the same conventional realities tend to 'mislead'. When the "practice" is thought to be involving observation of conventional realities, there is danger of proliferation by self-view. For example, instead of realizing that in the ultimate sense, there are only paramattha dhammas performing their functions at the present moment, one may think in terms of 'self' 'doing' and 'developing'. ========================================- > You say that the Buddha did not use the term `paramattha dhamma' and > go on to say that this is because he thought it best not to. How do you > know that he even had the option to use it or not?! His audience did not > need to be told, they were not fooled by concepts as we are likely to be. ------------------------------------------ Howard: All of his audience? How much of his audience consisted of worldlings? All those following the Buddha back then saw clearly? You really think so? Suk: No, not all his audience, surely. You and I might have been there, who knows. ;-) However the Buddha taught the 4NT and this is deep Dhamma. And one of the Noble Truths is the Path. So I think whatever he said to anybody, it was all related to this fact about the Path. The same words which may condition patipatti in one or even pativedha in another, could condition pariyatti in others. For still others, like you and I, we may have had to wait to be reborn during the time of the commentators for further elaboration. ;-) But surely, even at the pariyatti level, we must understand this difference between reality and concept. The distinction on the patipatti level won't come by without this initial understanding, I think. ====================================== > And you and others have gone on to suggest that you too don't need to > make this distinction?! ---------------------------------------- Howard: For the record, I am one for whom the distinction between concept and reality is of utmost importance. The trouble, as I see it, with the use of the term 'reality' comes in when we use it not to distinguish what is actually observable from what is merely imagined, but when we use it it to refer to an individual phenomenon as if that phenomenon were a self-existent entity, with own being (i.e., with self). Suk: How does this happen? Is it in the 'thinking' or in the 'practice', or 'both'? For someone who admits to almost never having direct experience but only, that too occasionally, "thinking in the present moment", isn't such a person admitting to the 'ungraspable', 'fleeting' and 'conditioned' hence uncontrollability nature of experiences? It is true that not having yet experienced any of the vipassana nanas one is prone to misconceive the nature of nama and rupa, hence the possibility of 'going wrong' while trying to mentally grasp the concept, this is however not a problem directly related to the concept of 'reality' itself. It will happen regardless of the term used. In any case, the solution is not in bringing in yet other 'ideas' which seem on the surface to counter such tendency to 'substantialism', such as D.O. or Emptiness. "Self view" after all, can arise at the level well before words and ideas are formed and while they are being formed and even to justify those ideas, such that this very struggle to deal with the perceived problem may be an instance of 'self view' taking effect. The solution is to 'keep on listening and considering more', admitting one's ignorance and knowing that it is only through direct experience that the true nature of these dhammas will be understood more and more clearly. =============================================== Howard: To speak of "a reality" or of "realities" IN THAT SENSE is dangerous. To use the words 'real' and 'reality' only to distinguish between actual occurrences and merely imagined occurrences, however, is fine and important. Suk: I don't think that we should put any limit to the use of 'paramattha dhammas'. Sure, we should remember the importance of distinguishing "actual occurrences and merely imagined occurrences", and here this distinction helps, however saying that this is all we need to think about in relation to the term may be an instance of arrogance on our part. We've already made a judgement about what and how much we need to hear and consider. Think about Patthana dhammas for instance, should we deny that the conditions involved are paramattha dhammas? ========================================= > On the hand, those who in many words, stress so much on > the "practice' at the expense of `theory', are in fact missing the point. > They don't realize that their idea of practice is conditioned by "wrong > theory", a theory in which pariyatti has little or no value. It manifests > as `idealism', an expression of ignorance and wrong view. And in the > meantime, these `idea'ls lead to any number of wrong practices, there > being 1001 ways of being fooled, each of which can conveniently > interpret the Dhamma to suit itself. ------------------------------------------ Howard: Most of those on DSG who emphasize practice do so not "at the expense of theory," but in response to the perceived attitude of some here that practice (or what they call "conventional practice") is ego-centered activity that should not be engaged in. Suk: By "ego-centered" do you mean mana? If so, then I think you are mistaken. Of the three proliferations, mana, lobha and ditthi, I wouldn't worry too much about the first two. Lobha however, when in connection with ideas about dhamma practice and one's ambition towards results seem to support and mutually condition ditthi. It is wrong view which I think to be the main and real problem. It is due to this that the Buddha's teachings are wrongly understood and wrong practice followed. So in fact there is a problem of 'pariyatti', and this includes what it actually means and how it relates to the patipatti. You know my interpretation of this, so I won't elaborate more here. ;-) ============================================ Howard: I for one see this as an extreme view that flies in the face of much of the Buddha's teaching, and that is why I constantly call for practice in its fullness. Practice not based on theory is practice that is likely to run afoul. It is like a ship without a rudder. However, theory without practice is like having had the ship scuttled on a barren, desert island on which those stranded will soon expire. Suk: As is evident here, your view of pariyatti and patipatti is not the same as mine. Within my understanding of these concepts, the line between pariyatti and patipatti cannot be drawn in terms of 'self'. So no one can make a decision to be 'practical'. Viewing these as momentary realities, I value every moment of pariyatti understanding and am never moved to seek more. I do see that without practice, the goal will never be reached, however this does not disturb me as I know that sati and panna are unrelated to any conventional 'doing'. The idea of someone doing something and certain results follow is only true in the conventional world, as ultimate realities are never taken into consideration. But Dhamma being about understanding realities, I think we should do well to take this into consideration, when trying to develop understanding. =============================================== > think rather, that because the *have* individual characteristics, i.e. > each one of those conditioning/conditioned dhammas that there can be > this regularity, such as lobhamula cittas are lobhamula cittas and > lokuttara cittas are lokuttara cittas. Anatta, anicca and dukkha are > characteristics of individual dhammas and not because dhammas are > conditioned. Each dhamma is anatta *and* conditioned. Anatta is not > because of D.O., but D.O. is because of anatta and the fact of individual > characteristics. --------------------------------------- Howard: Dhammas, as I see the matter don't "have" qualities. They *are* qualities. An example: In our ordinary, very flawed way of speaking, we say a tree is hard, thinking of the tree as an entity and as hardness as a characteristic of that entity. In fact, there is no tree. But the quality of hardness, that experiential quality, that dhamma, conditioned and not-self, does arise and cease. Suk: Yes you are right :-), and thanks for the reminder. Metta, Sukinder 57038 From: "Joop" Date: Thu Mar 23, 2006 6:59am Subject: Wasted time (Was:[dsg] Re: Lodewijk's post on the long way. jwromeijn Hallo Nina, James, all On my: > So whoever is right: the term "aeons" can not be taken literal, it's an Indian exaggeration for "a long time" You state: N: We cannot imagine what an aeon is, anyway, it is a long time. We have to think of the Buddha who had to develop the perfections for aeons, before he could become the omniscient Buddha (Cariyapi.taka, Khuddaka Nikaya). J: Oh, yes, we can imagine what an aeon is: In the CMA, edited and explained by Bhikkhu Bodhi c.s. (my edition of 2000), in table 5.1 (page 186/187) and in the paragraphs V 13 and V 14 (page 196-198) a kind of formulae to translate a "aeon" to human years is given. But of course the question is: is that useful? And on that question I will say: it's not useful to use the term "aeon" because we cannot trust how much time is indicated with it. And that is because we cannot not take the numers used by BB in this CMA literal, because the Big Bang, the beginning of this universe, was 14 billion years ago. But all this is not important: the Tipitaka does not have any cosmological that is astrophysical function, it only has a soteriological funtion; so can can take the word "aeon" mdetaphorical, meaning: long, compared with the life of a human being. Nina, I think you don't like this kind of scientific talk; but don't forget: I'm trying to develop a "Western buddhism", or: "A Global buddhism", not only useful in Thailand of yesterday but also in the world of tomorrow. Something different is your remark: N: "I remember that you find that the Abhidhamma is too formal and does not help you in your spiritual Path. Perhaps we could discuss more Abhidhamma, and where it is formal. Perhaps some misunderstandings could be ironed out." I did not state "does not help you in my spiritual Path"; But: "it does not help me IN THIS PHASE of my spiritual Path" It's like listening to J.S. Bach for month, every day several hours. Then there can com a moment that one says: now no more Bach for some time. For this I can say to you: have patience. More serious - from your frame of reference - is that I feel more and more at ease with some Mahayana ideas, for example that the socalled ultimate realities are in fact empty too. But I don't think that these are misunderstandings (I think you mean: of me) that can be ironed out. For Nina and James and everybody whom it concerns, the Mahacunda Sutta below: we need both Dhamma-study and meditation! Metta Joop MAHACUNDA SUTTA (Anguttara Nikaya VI.46) Thus I have heard -- On one occasion the Venerable Mahacunda was living in Ceti at Sayamjati. At that time, the Venerable Mahacunda aðressed the monks: "Monks!" "Yes, friend." "Here, friends, there are monks who are dedicated to the Dhamma that harass and disparage the meditation monks by saying: 'Those meditators, they meditate, premeditate, out-meditate, and mismeditate. Of what do they meditate upon? On account of what do they meditate? What is their motivation?' Here, neither the monks who are dedicated to the Dhamma, nor the meditation monks find contentment. Moreover, they do not practice for the good and well- being of the multitude, nor for the welfare, the good, and the well- being of gods and men. "Likewise, friends, there are meditation monks that harass and disparage the monks who are dedicated to the Dhamma by saying: 'Those monks who are dedicated to the Dhamma are conceited, arrogant, and unsteady, talkative and scattered in speech, absent-minded and unmindful, with minds wandering and faculties unrestrained. Of what are they dedicated to the Dhamma for? On account of what are they dedicated to the Dhamma? What is their motivation?' Here, neither the meditation monks, nor the monks who are dedicated to the Dhamma find contentment. Moreover, they do not practice for the good and well- being of the multitude, nor for the welfare, the good, and the well- being of gods and men. "In aðition, friends, the monks dedicated to the Dhamma speak delightful only to other monks dedicated to the Dhamma, and do not speak delightful to the meditation monks. Here, neither the meditation monks, nor the monks who are dedicated to the Dhamma find contentment. Moreover, they do not practice for the good and well- being of the multitude, nor for the welfare, the good, and the well- being of gods and men. "Likewise, friends, the meditation monks speak delightful only to other meditation monks, and do not speak delightful to the monks dedicated to the Dhamma. Here, neither the monks who are dedicated to the Dhamma, nor the meditation monks find contentment. Moreover, they do not practice for the good and well-being of the multitude, nor for the welfare, the good, and the well-being of gods and men. "Therefore, friends, the monks dedicated to the Dhamma should train themselves thus: 'We will speak in a delightful manner to the meditation monks.' Thus you should train yourself. For what reason? Friends, it is rare that one finds an extraordinary person who dwells having personally attained the deathless element. Similarly, friends, the meditation monks should train themselves thus: 'We will speak in a delightful manner to the monks dedicated to the Dhamma' Thus you should train yourself. For what reason? Friends, it is rare that one finds an extraordinary person who has come to know and pierced the profound and beneficial sayings and truly sees." 57039 From: TGrand458@... Date: Thu Mar 23, 2006 4:30am Subject: Re: [dsg] paramattha dhamma and ontology TGrand458@... Hi Sarah In a message dated 3/23/2006 4:47:31 A.M. Mountain Standard Time, sarahprocterabbott@... writes: Nina, I think it's very liberating to reflect on our dream worlds and to really know how everything and everyone we hold so dear is just in this one moment of thinking. Here's a phrase I heard K.Sujin stress this morning - "becoming used to a characteristic rather than a person or thing". Slowly, slowly when sati develops, there can be more and more appreciation and understanding of characteristics, becoming more and more used to dhammas rather than people and things like usual. TG: Here you show that you are willing to conceptualize and to consider that as also an important aspect of insight. (Correct me if I'm wrong.) This is a broader approach then what I usually feel is being expressed by you and others. I am more comfortable with a broader approach that is not so dogmatically focused on one thing. To me it more reflects the style of the Buddha and Suttas. TG, I'd be glad to hear your comments on some of the edited audio discussions with A.Sujin, maybe starting with the 'Erik series' as we call them (the first set on www.dhammastudygroup.org). Please let me or Sukin know if you'd like a cd sent to you. TG: Unfortunately my computer's audio download seems not to work with those sites. If there's a CD that's available that would be very nice. In due course, you (and others)can listen to the 2 sets we're currently editing which all the dream discussions referred to are on. Metta, Sarah Thanks Sarah TG 57040 From: "indriyabala" Date: Thu Mar 23, 2006 9:30am Subject: Wasted time .. What Is Your Thought on AN VI.46 ? indriyabala --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Joop" wrote: > > Hallo Nina, James, all > (snipped) > > For Nina and James and everybody whom it concerns, the Mahacunda > Sutta below: we need both Dhamma-study and meditation! > Tep: I am interested in knowing your deeper thought on this Mahacunda Sutta, dear Joop. Warm regards, Tep =========== 57041 From: upasaka@... Date: Thu Mar 23, 2006 10:52am Subject: Re: [dsg] Muditaa -- Re: Happy News upasaka_howard Many thanks, Suan! :-) With metta, Howard -----Original Message----- From: abhidhammika To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com Sent: Thu, 23 Mar 2006 03:43:47 -0000 Subject: [dsg] Muditaa -- Re: Happy News Dear Howard and family, How are you? You wrote: "The surgery on our granddaughter, Sophie Emma, has been completed, and it went very well!" Thank you for sharing news of little Sophie Emma's successful surgery with us. Looking forward to more happy news! Regards, Suan --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: Hi, all - The surgery on our granddaughter, Sophie Emma, has been completed, and it went very well! She is still on a respirator, but that will probably end later today or tomorrow. One of the two valves that were constructed has a slight leak which will have to be watched, but that will very possibly heal on its own with time. We're all very happy that conditions allowed for this happy outcome, and we're very grateful to the skilled and compassionate doctors and nurses here in Dallas, most especially the superb surgeon. Thank you all for your caring and your expressions of concern and hope. 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/ 57042 From: upasaka@... Date: Thu Mar 23, 2006 11:01am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: arahat and D.O., Larry upasaka_howard Hi, James - -----Original Message----- From: buddhatrue To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com Sent: Thu, 23 Mar 2006 08:11:26 -0000 Subject: [dsg] Re: arahat and D.O., Larry Hi Howard, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > > TG > > This could very well be but I have not encountered that text, or > have not seen it in that way. Could you please reference me to where the Buddha said this? Thx. > metta, > James > ================================= > James, I think there was a case of the Buddha having experienced pain (i.e., unpleasant sensation) > when his foot was pierced. > With metta, > Howard Yeah, I am aware of that. I also know of an instance where the Buddha had some back pain and needed to lie down, so he had Sariputta continue a discourse for him. However, what I am really asking is if that is "dukkha"? I guess this is a semantic question. --------------------------- Howard: I do NOT think that is dukkha - not in the Dhammic sense. -------------------------- For example, this is how the Buddha defined the First Noble Truth of dukkha: "Birth is dukkha, aging is dukkha, death is dukkha; sorrow, lamentation, pain, grief, & despair are dukkha; association with the unbeloved is dukkha; separation from the loved is dukkha; not getting what is wanted is dukkha. In short, the five clinging- aggregates are dukkha." Rather than taking this statement too apart, I believe it needs to be viewed in it's entirety and according to its parallelism. The first part, "Birth is dukkha, aging is dukkha, and death is dukkha" relates to worldlings only, in my estimation. The Buddha is talking about the rounds of birth, which has stopped for an arahant. Would the death of an arahant be considered dukkha? I don't think so. Now, the second section, "sorrow, lamentation, pain, grief, and despair" needs to be viewed all together. ------------------------------ Howard: I would say all conditioned dhammas are dukkha *in the sense* that 1) they are not sources of satisfaction, and 2) that they are *conditions*, necessary but NOT sufficient, for suffering. ------------------------------ Though this section does mention "pain", it is in the context of these other unwholesome mental factors- which an arahant doesn't experience. The next section, "association with the unbeloved is dukkha; separation from the loved is dukkha; not getting what is wanted is dukkha" obviously relates to a worling and not to an arahant. The final section "In short, the five clinging-aggregates are dukkha" refers to the clinging-aggregates which the arahant no longer possesses. He doesn't cling to the aggregates, they are simply running their course of karma. So, overall, I don't believe that the Buddha's definition for dukkha applies to an arahant in anyway. Metta, James ============================ With metta, Howard 57043 From: nina van gorkom Date: Thu Mar 23, 2006 0:01pm Subject: Re: [dsg] paramattha dhamma and ontology nilovg Hi Sarah, I put this separately in a file as food for thought. But to be honest, one would have to be anagami not to cling to persons.For the time being, it is more intellectual understanding. But this can be a support for the future. Nina. op 23-03-2006 12:42 schreef sarah abbott op sarahprocterabbott@...: > > Nina, I think it's very liberating to reflect on our dream worlds and to > really know how everything and everyone we hold so dear is just in this > one moment of thinking. Here's a phrase I heard K.Sujin stress this > morning - "becoming used to a characteristic rather than a person or > thing". Slowly, slowly when sati develops, there can be more and more > appreciation and understanding of characteristics, becoming more and more > used to dhammas rather than people and things like usual. 57044 From: nina van gorkom Date: Thu Mar 23, 2006 0:01pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Lodewijk's post on the long way, patience, patience! nilovg Hi James and Joop, Joop spoke about how many years an eaon is, but, this is hard to imagine. It is a long, long time. I speak of myself as a lay person. Thinking of the incalculable time I have wandered from life to life with ignorance, how can this long journey be over soon? Indeed, all the perfections have to be cultivated. It is good that Mahayanists see the importance of them. They lead to enlightenment but I do not think we all become Buddhas. In the Buddha's time there were four kinds of persons (See Human Types, one of the Books of the abhidhamma): those who could attain after hearing a few words, those who needed a longer explanation, those who had to be guided for a long time and needed a great deal of advice, and those who understood the theory but could not attain. Today there are only the last two kinds of persons. But it takes already long enough to become a sotaapanna. However, if we think too much about how long it takes it distracts from the task right now. True, it can remind us not to expect (with attachment) results soon. We should not think of a person who attains, there are only khandhas arising because of conditions. Future khandhas will attain. Not me who travels to a next life. Learning about paramattha dhammas (and the khandhas are paramattha dhammas) helps not to cling to me, my person who will attain. Joop, as to Abhidhamma, we should not think of a text book, but it is about our life now. This is never boring. Always something happening. The Buddha used the simile of shooting through a very small keyhole, with never a miss, and more difficult it is to penetrate the four noble Truths. The sutta Joop quoted is very good, it states that But it can be done! Nina. op 23-03-2006 13:13 schreef buddhatrue op buddhatrue@...: > There is something you write here that is very important: "I am not > a monk living at the Buddha's time, I know myself roughly." > > I thought that we were speaking of the dhamma in general terms, not > of you specifically, or even of householders specifically. I'm > afraid that perhaps I have misunderstood you. The Buddha didn't > teach anything about the length of the path for householders who > don't attain stream-entry, the most he taught is how they can > achieve a favourable rebirth. > > If you believe that it takes numerous lifetimes for one to achieve > the Buddha's path, then you sound like a Mahayanist who believes in > the bodhisattva path to Buddhahood, and how we all have the > potential to become buddhas. > > I was just speaking of simply becoming an arahant in the Theravada > tradition, not of becoming a Buddha. We seem to be speaking at > cross-purposes. 57045 From: nina van gorkom Date: Thu Mar 23, 2006 0:01pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: arahat and D.O., Larry nilovg Hi Jonothan, that is very clearly expressed. Nina op 23-03-2006 11:59 schreef Jonothan Abbott op jonabbott@...: > 'Does an arahant still experience > dukkha?' I think that question misses the point. Dukkha is not > something that is 'experienced', in the sense ordinary folk experience > it but arahants don't (or they do but to a lesser degree). It is > something that is gradually seen more and more clearly as insight is > developed. The arahant has developed panna to a level that fully > penetrates the truth of dukkha, so he sees it far more clearly than the > worldling does. > > The ending of dukkha comes only with parinibbana, not with enlightenment. 57046 From: upasaka@... Date: Thu Mar 23, 2006 0:43pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Understanding dhammas, understanding realities/'realities' upasaka_howard Hi, Sukin - There is close to nothing of what you write below that I disagree with! The exception, I guess, is our views of the pariyatti/patipatti distinction. One other comment. In part you write below <> To this "solution" I would just add constantly being mindful of what arises and ceases "in the moment", guarding the senses, and also cultivating the mind via sila and "formal" meditation, by which I mean engaging in mindful attention in a context of internal silence and peace. To save on bandwidth, and inasmuch as your entire post "exists" on the website and in many in-boxes, I'm not copying your post below. With metta, Howard P.S. Thank you for your kind words about our granddaughter! :-) -----Original Message----- From: sukinder To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com Sent: Thu, 23 Mar 2006 21:49:15 -1200 Subject: RE: [dsg] Re: Understanding dhammas, understanding realities/'realities' Hi Howard, Glad to hear that the surgery on Sophie Emma went well. I have time to respond to your post only; TG's will have to wait. 57047 From: han tun Date: Thu Mar 23, 2006 2:42pm Subject: [dsg] Dhamma Thread ( 885 ) hantun1 Dhamma Thread ( 885 ) (U Htoo Naing requested me to send this. Han Tun) Dear Dhamma Friends, Kamma.t.thaana: 1st jhaana can also be atained through the practice of unlimited compassion or karuna brahmavihaara. It is karuna kammatthaana. The implications are almost the same as in case of metta brahmavihaara but the difference is that 'the mental exertion is applied with the idea of wishing easing of beings. When we say 'easing' there always are 'uneasing load on beings'. So karuna generally goes to all those who are in needs of help in certain form. Usually beings of attention in karuna kammatthaana are 'dukkhita sattas' or 'beings in trouble'. This is the difference between karuna and mudita. When karuna goes to 'dukkhita sattas' or 'beings in trouble', muditaa goes to 'sukhita sattas' or 'beings in prosperity'. That is why karuna and mudita cannot arise together because the objects are totally different that is one is 'in trouble' while another is 'in prosperity'. Unlike karuna and mudita, metta can go to both kinds of beings. That is both beings in trouble and beings in prosperity. By the same token, upekkha-brahmavihaara can also go to both kinds of beings. Actually metta and upekkha can go to any kind of beings whether they are in trouble or not, whether they are in prosperity or not and whatever they are beheaving. May you be free from suffering. With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing 57048 From: LBIDD@... Date: Thu Mar 23, 2006 4:58pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: arahat and D.O., Larry lbidd2 Jon: "I've been following this long-running thread of yours with interest. To my understanding, 'dukkha' is something that is seen or understood as insight is developed, because in the ultimate sense it is an aspect of dhammas. Different kinds of dukkha require different levels of understanding of dhammas. The question is sometimes asked, 'Does an arahant still experience dukkha?' I think that question misses the point. Dukkha is not something that is 'experienced', in the sense ordinary folk experience it but arahants don't (or they do but to a lesser degree). It is something that is gradually seen more and more clearly as insight is developed. The arahant has developed panna to a level that fully penetrates the truth of dukkha, so he sees it far more clearly than the worldling does. The ending of dukkha comes only with parinibbana, not with enlightenment." Hi Jon, Good point. Dukkha is a general characteristic and like anicca and anatta it is therefore a concept and isn't exactly experienced even though it characterizes experience. But unlike anicca and anatta dukkha is a value. The Visuddhimagga made the point that ordinary people are _not_ aware of dukkha and the other noble truths, hence the arising of kamma formations. It is interesting that the three kinds of dukkha parallel the three general characteristics: dukkha of impermanence, dukkha of unpleasant feeling, and dukkha of formations (anicca, dukkha, anatta). It occurred to me that old age, sickness, and death might be examples of the three dukkhas in reverse order: formations, pain, impermanence. Larry 57049 From: LBIDD@... Date: Thu Mar 23, 2006 5:19pm Subject: Vism.XVII,64 lbidd2 "The Path of Purification" (Visuddhimagga), Ch. XVII 64. So formations exist only when ignorance exists, not when it does not; and that is how it can be known that these formations have ignorance as their condition. This is said too: 'Not knowing, bhikkhus, in ignorance, he forms the formation of merit, forms the formation of demerit, forms the formation of the imperturbable. As soon as a bhikkhu's ignorance is abandoned and clear vision arisen, bhikkhus, with the fading away of ignorance and the arising of clear vision he does not form even formations of merit' (cf. Sii,82) ************************* 64. eva.m yasmaa avijjaabhaavatova sa"nkhaarabhaavo, na abhaavato. tasmaa jaanitabbameta.m ``ime sa"nkhaaraa avijjaapaccayaa hontii´´ti. vuttampi ceta.m ``avidvaa bhikkhave avijjaagato pu~n~naabhisa"nkhaarampi abhisa"nkharoti, apu~n~naabhisa"nkhaarampi abhisa"nkharoti, aane~njaabhisa"nkhaarampi abhisa"nkharoti. yato ca kho bhikkhave bhikkhuno avijjaa pahiinaa, vijjaa uppannaa. so avijjaaviraagaa vijjuppaadaa neva pu~n~naabhisa"nkhaara.m abhisa"nkharotii''ti. 57050 From: LBIDD@... Date: Thu Mar 23, 2006 6:15pm Subject: "Survey" Thanks lbidd2 Hi Sarah and Sukin, Your box of books and cd arrived today, all in good condition. This is quite an excellent production! Thanks very much to Acharn Sujin, Acharn Nina, Sarah, Jon, Sukin and everyone else who had a hand in this noble work. I will send a copy to the libraries at the University of Colorado, University of California at Berkeley, and Naropa University. Anumodana!!! Larry 57051 From: "paulgrabianowski" Date: Thu Mar 23, 2006 9:20pm Subject: Can ignorance and formations be the mistaken circle of "not" knowing? paulgrabiano... Hi all, I am new to this group. I was an occasional visitor when I lived in Japan a few years back. I'm now living in Buffalo, NY. Anyway, I'm glad to be back, and I'm hoping to find time away from my studies to learn from you all. The discussion here is inspiring. If Robert Kirkpatrick is still around, hello. This is Paul from Japan. 64. Formations exist only when ignorance exists, not when it does not; and that is how it can be known that these formations have ignorance as their condition. So, if ignorance is a condition for formations, then would it be correct to say that formations like ignorance have no estimable time of origin? I'll try not to get too far from the matter, but is this another chicken (ignorance) and egg (formations) dilemma? Does ignorance persist in a sense even in the one who has studied dhamma by a mistaking of formations for ignorance and ignorance for formations? Is there not a "circularity" here that Buddha sought to severe? In this sense, is dukkha not the nama and rupa which is here burning, that which is here arising dependent upon this circularity? Also, does anyone have a more precise translation of "not knowing" or "knowing" here. Because "to know" would seem to be to already have gone beyond formations and ignorance. Therefore, knowing would always already be not self and not something which could be striven for (always beyond this circularity?). Not knowing, on the other hand, while being caught in the current of Dukkha, would also be not self (but it would not be beyond this circularity upon which all clinging to formations depends?). Paul 57052 From: han tun Date: Thu Mar 23, 2006 10:34pm Subject: Anattalakkhana Sutta: Introduction hantun1 Anattalakkhana Sutta: Introduction Dear Nina and Lodewijk, I study the Anattalakkhana Sutta which was expounded in detail by Mahasi Sayadaw. I also have the English translation, “The Great Discourse on Not Self.” But I usually refer to the original Burmese version. Now that I am communicating with non-Burmese-speaking friends I will have to read the English translation also. I will quote the English translation whenever appropriate. I will also put in my own views and comments. I never had a teacher (books and tapes are my teachers), and my personal views may or may not be in line with the proper understanding of more learned persons. If not in line with the proper understanding, kindly ignore my personal views. The Dhammacakkappavattana Sutta, the First Discourse, was delivered on the evening of the full moon day of July, more than 2,500 years ago. The discourse was repeated for five consecutive evenings and Venerables Koṇḍañña, Vappa, Bhaddiya, Mahānāma and Assaji became Sotāpannas (Stream Enterers) one after the other. But they failed to attain arahantship. Only when the Buddha delivered the Anattalakkhana Sutta on the sixth day they all became arahants. Now, several questions arose in my mind. Why didn’t the five yogis attain arahantship after the first discourse, which contains the most important essence of Buddha’s teachings, viz., Four Noble Truths and Noble Eightfold Path? The five yogis were not ordinary laypersons. They had trained themselves together with the Buddha before the latter became the Buddha. Why was it much easier for an ordinary layman like Yasa, a millionaire's son of Benares. The Buddha spoke to Yasa on generosity (dāna), morality (sīla), celestial states (sagga), the evils of sensual pleasures (kāmādinava), the blessings of renunciation (nekkhammānisamsa), and the Four Noble Truths. At the end of the discourse Yasa became a Sotāpanna. When the same discourse was repeated to Yasa’s father, on hearing it for the second time, Yasa attained arahantship. So for Yasa, an ordinary layman, it was much easier to attain arahantship than the five yogis. Why was that so? It reminds me of a story of two students approaching a teacher for lessons on how to play harp. One student had no previous lesson with regard to playing harp, while the other had some previous experience. The teacher asked more tuition fees from the student who had previous experience. When the student asked why was that so, the teacher replied that he would have to work more with the second student because he would have first to “de-learn” him what he had learned before. So also I think the five yogis had to de-learn themselves from the practice of self-mortification (attakilamathānuyoga), which they had practiced before. A better explanation was found in the English translation of the sutta. On page xii of The Great Discourse on Not Self, it was stated that: Quote [At the close of this First Sermon, Koṇdañña, the leader of the five ascetics, became a Stream Enterer (Sotāpanna). By attaining the stage of Stream Entry he removed all doubts about the truth of the Dhamma and the misconception of sakkāya, "self" or living entity. Nevertheless, self-pride (māna) still lingered in his mind.] End quote. Therefore, it might be due to the fact that self-pride or māna still lingered in their minds that prevented them from attaining arahantship after the first discourse although they had become Sotāpannas. This explanation of lingering māna is supported by the reaction of the five yogis when they saw Buddha coming towards them. I quote from The Buddha and His Teachings by Venerable Nārada Mahāthera. Quote [The five ascetics who saw Him coming from afar decided not to pay Him due respect as they misconstrued His discontinuance of rigid ascetic practices which proved absolutely futile during His struggle for Enlightenment. They remarked: "Friends, this ascetic Gotama is coming. He is luxurious. He has given up striving and has turned into a life of abundance. He should not be greeted and waited upon. His bowl and robe should not be taken. Nevertheless, a seat should be prepared. If he wishes, let him sit down." However, as the Buddha continued to draw near, His august personality was such that they were compelled to receive Him with due honour. One came forward and took His bowl and robe, another prepared a seat, and yet another kept water for His feet. Nevertheless, they addressed Him by name and called Him friend (āvuso), a form of address applied generally to juniors and equals.] End quote. Therefore, it was very likely that the self-pride or māna still lingered in the minds of the five yogis although they had become Sotāpannas. There is also another interesting passage in The Great Discourse on Not Self. On pages 123-125, Mahasi Sayadaw explained why stream enterers are instructed to contemplate not-self. Sayadaw gave three explanations. I reproduce below the one I like best. Quote [(3) This is based on an explanation offered by the Venerable Khemaka, who had already reached the stage of anāgāmi. Khemaka said that he did not cling to material form as "I am" nor to each of the other aggregates of feeling, perception, volitional formations and conscious-ness, but with regard to the five aggregates as a whole, he was still not free of the notion "I am". Just as in this explanation, for a Stream Enterer, there is no clinging as self towards any of the aggregates of form, feeling, perception, volitional formations or consciousness, but with regard to the five aggregates as a whole, a Stream Enterer is not free from the perception of them as man or woman. Not being free from this perception, the sensual passions can still arise in him, even to the extent that he may settle down to married life. Therefore it should be regarded that the monks of the Group of Five were exhorted to contemplate on not-self so as to become free from such ordinary perceptions and notions.] End quote. Another thought that occurred to me was what prompted the Buddha to deliver the Anattalakkhana Sutta? Since this sutta immediately followed Dhammacakkappavattana Sutta, one might think that this sutta was delivered because the five yogis could not attain arahantship with the Dhammacakkappavattana Sutta, and that it became necessary to augment their spiritual development with this sutta. However, I think the Buddha would deliver this sutta at the first opportune moment even if it were not necessary for the five yogis, because one of the Buddha’s missions was to refute the belief in atta. Therefore all Buddhists should study and contemplate on this sutta as one of their top priorities. I will stop here and continue my presentation of the sutta in four parts in my subsequent posts. I thank both of you very much for reading my lengthy post. With metta and deepest respect, Han ------------------------------ > Nina: I talked with Lodewijk about you and told him that you recite each day the anatta lakkhana sutta. He said he would like you to share your views and comments on the texts which you read and contemplate. I really like to listen to someone's personal experiences in the light of the teachings. =========================================== 57053 From: "gazita2002" Date: Thu Mar 23, 2006 10:50pm Subject: post cyclone gazita2002 hello dsg-ers, I'm sure you're heard the bad side of devastated far north Queensland, and I want to tell you the good stories. So many people have come forward with amazing offers of homes for the homeless, offers of bedding, clothing, food, water, not to mention the motional support affected folk need. It is wonderful to see peoples generosity and care in times like these. The man on the radio saying how the affected areas residents are all out helping each other as well. Headlines on todays local newspaper has a photo of a very damaged house, and someone has painted a big sign on a broken piece of wall "just Larried xxxx" Larry being the name of the category 5 cyclone! Patience, courage and good cheer, azita. 57054 From: sarah abbott Date: Thu Mar 23, 2006 11:19pm Subject: ‘Cetasikas' study corner 407- Confidence/saddhaa (d) sarahprocter... Dear Friends, 'Cetasikas' by Nina van Gorkom http://www.vipassana.info/cetasikas.html http://www.zolag.co.uk/ Questions, comments and different views welcome;-) ========================================== (Ch25 - Confidence/saddhaa contd) As we have seen, purifying has been mentioned as a function of confidence and freedom from pollution as one of its manifestations. When the citta is accompanied by confidence, it is pure, free from the hindrances. But so long as latent tendencies have not been eradicated defilements are bound to arise, time and again. The purity of confidence is in the ariyan of a higher degree than in the non-ariyan. The sotåpanna does not cling to the concept of self, he has eradicated wrong view, and thus his good deeds are purer. His síla is more purified than the síla of the non-ariyan, he has no more conditions to transgress the five precepts. ***** (Ch25 - Confidence/saddhaa to be contd) Metta, Sarah ====== 57055 From: sarah abbott Date: Thu Mar 23, 2006 11:35pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Hello - at the first temple sarahprocter... Hi Connie, Thanks for your helpful input.... I always enjoy discussions with you. Part 1 --- connie wrote: > S: Perfect in this context means under no circumstances will he infract > one of the rules. (Of course, as we know when we read the Vinaya, it is > the intention that is always the key here). > > C: Excepting the acittaka class of offenses [which carry a penalty even > tho committed unintentionally or "with incorrect perception" (?)]... .... S: Pls can you elaborate on this or give me a reference. I'm not familiar with 'acittaka' offences. Interesting. I was thinking about the sutta about the 8 Marvels in AN, 8s, 19, Pahaaraada, the asura: It starts with the first Marvel which may also be relevant to other discussions: "...just as the mighty ocean slopes away gradually, falls away gradually, shelves away gradually, with no abruptness like a precipice, even so in this discipline of Dhamma there is a graduated training, a graduated practice, a graduated mode of progress, with no abruptness such as a penetration of gnosis.." [S: the Udana commentary gives more detail about how ‘unlike the hopping motion of the frog’, there is no sudden penetration of supreme knowledge ). .... The second Marvel, which is relevant here, concerns the training rules and the ariyan disciples which we're discussing: "...just as the ocean is fixed and does not overpass its bounds; even so, when the code of training is made known by me to my disciples (According to the Udana commentary on the same Marvels, “My saavakas [disciples]: he speaks with reference to ariyapuggalas such as the sotaapanna and so on”.), they will not transgress it, even for life's sake....This is the second marvel..." S: So here there is a comment to suggest that any ariyan disciples will not deliberately transgress the Patimokkha ‘even for life’s ake’. [to be contd] Metta, Sarah ======= 57056 From: sarah abbott Date: Thu Mar 23, 2006 11:52pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Hello - at the first temple sarahprocter... Hi Connie & all, Part 2 .... > S: The perfect sila of the > sotapanna – no akusala kamma patha that can lead to an unhappy rebirth > or breaking of the precepts. Of course, still other akusala kamma. ... > C: not t-gatha, but Jewel Discourse: << Though he can still perform an > evil action / By body even, or by speech or mind, / Yet he cannot > conceal it... >> .... S: Yes, evil deeds such as idle talk! More on this topic in my post on kamma-patha to KenH recently: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/56316 I think the point about non-concealment is a very useful one to reflect on further. I heard K.Sujin stressing this too on a tape – how it’s impossible for a sotapanna to hide or cover up any misdeeds. Following your lead in the comy to the Jewel Discourse, Khuddakanikaaya V1 on the sotapanna: “...even if he takes seven [more] existences, distinguishes a noble disciple from other persons who have not abandoned being (existence), he now began to express it with the words ‘though he can still perform an evil action’, doing so by means of the special quality of absence of concealment of what he has done, which is found in one whose seeing is perfected (has excellence), even if he is negligent, [pointing out that] not only is one whose seeing is perfected unable to do the six major wrongdoings, but that he is unable after having done even the smallest evil action to conceal it.” .... I’m also thinking of the helpful passage in the commentary to the Udana, Sona chapter, 5 ‘Uposatha’ on the verse which ends with the useful words to reflect on: “It rains to excess on that which has been covered up (channam ativassati), it does not rain to excess upon that which has been divulged; therefore one should divulge that which has been covered up – thus will it not rain to excess on him.” The commentary adds that: “having committed some offence, one then, in concealing same, commits another, new offence (and) after that one, a further one, after that one, a further one – so does the rain of offences, the rain of defilements, excessively rain (ativiya vassati). On the other hand, “It does not rain to excess on that which has been divulged (viva.ta.m n’aativassati): the one who has committed an offence, in divulging same rather than concealing it, in making same manifest to his fellow Brahmacaarins, in making amends (for same), in confessing (same), in becoming rehabilitated, in accordance with the Dhamma, in accordance with the Discipline, does not (thereby) commit another, new offence – for which reason the rain of offences, the rain of the defilements, does not rain any more (puna vassati) on that which has been divulged by him. “....Thus, the implication is that the one not ‘wet’ on account of the defilements, whose morality is completely pure, will, as he comprehends (things) upon establishing vipassanaa after he has become concentrated, in due course reach nibbaana.” [to be contd] Metta, Sarah ======= 57057 From: "Cerini Pablo" Date: Fri Mar 24, 2006 0:50am Subject: [dsg] Re: Hello - the rules and displines (vinaya) cerini_pablo Hi Kom and all, "Kom Tukovinit" wrote: > > The most interesting/pressing parts about being a monk (at least a >short > term one) are basically figuring out what I am supposed to be doing, > trying to learn all the rules and disciplines that are spelled out > voluminously in the scriptures, and what I should learn to figure >out > what the Buddha said the path really was. Figuring out how to wear >the > robes was a challenge for me, > (snip) > 10) For the continuance of the true dhamma: as the Bikhhus still > keep > even the defeat rules, then the dhamma is said to continue --- as >it is > said that the rules and disciplines (vinaya) will be the last to > disappear Mudita for your experience as a monk ! It's great to see how buddhist are opened-mind in letting people experiencing monk's life. I thought that to robe and dis-robe could not be done so easily , but I have to understand that Buddhist situation is very different from Catholic one (I live in Italy so my view of monkhood has always been influenced by the Catholic prospective). That's very smart. cerini pablo p.s. What do you do to become a short-term monk ? Do you simply knock and ask for or are there procedures to be followed ? 57058 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri Mar 24, 2006 0:56am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Hello - at the first temple sarahprocter... Hi Connie & all, Part3 Still following your lead here on the sotapanna bhikkhu/bhikkhuni who cannot commit the major kinds of akusala kamma patha and cannot conceal even the ‘smallest evil actions’. You (rightly) pointed out that he/she can commit: C:> & commentary/illustrator: "such reprehensible transgressions of [training rules] made known as are called 'recoiled from by Enlightened Ones' (Vbh.246), for example, having a hut built [for himself without consulting the Community] (Vin.iii.143), sleeping in the same room [as one notfully admitted to the Community] (vin.iv.14), etc., but [at the same time always] other than and excepting the kind of intentional action reprehended in the world... S: “..and referred to by the Blessed One ‘My disciples do not transgress even for life’s sake a training rule made known to disciples by me’ (A iv 201)”. So perhaps this refers to those ‘reprehended in the world....’? .... The passage you quoted from the commentary to the Jewel Discourse, Khuddakanikaaya, PTS continues: “[And though he can still perform evil actions] by speech (vaacaaya) such as reciting the True Idea [with explanations] word by word [together with one not fully admitted] (Vin iv 13), teaching more than five or six phrases (words) of the True Ida [to a woman with no intelligent man present] (Vin iv 19), gossip, and harsh speech, [and though] he can still perform evil actions by mind (cetasaa) such as occasional arousing of greed and hate, as accepting gold and silver, and as use of robes and the other [three requisites] without reviewing [the purpose of using them], yet nevertheless he cannot conceal it (abhabbo so tassa pa.ticchaadaaya),......he acts according to the True Idea, restraining himself in what requires restraint thus ‘I shall not do that again’.” “How? ‘Bhikkhus, just as a young tender prostate infant at once draws back when he puts his hand or foot on a live coal, so too, this is essential to the idea of a person perfected in his view, that although he may commit an offence of a kind from which a way of emergence has been made known, still he at once confesses, reveals and discloses it to the teacher or to wise companions in the divine life, and having done that, he enters upon restraint for the future “ (M i.324) [S: M48, The Kosambians on the 7 factors concerning the right view of the sotapanna]] C: ... the special quality of absence of concealment of what has been done, which is found in one with excellence of seeing, even if negligent".but who, starting where we are, might be(come) that "proficient in the practice leading to the Sure Course"? one possessing the three qualities of "moderation in eating, the guarding of the six doors and vigilance". [Gradual Sayings (Book of the Threes, Chapter II, 16, The Sure Course)] ... S: ‘with excellence in Seeing (dassana)”, through the development of vipassanaa. Or can we also say, the one developing the factors of right view referred to in M48 above? Here is one of the 7 factors : “What is the strength of a person who possesses right view? This is the strength of a person who possesses right view; when the Dhamma and Discipline proclaimed by the Tathaagata is being taught, he heeds it, gives it attention, engages it with all his mind, hears the Dhamma as with eager ears.” ... > C: Punna, said to have kept perfect bhikkhuni sila under 6 earlier > buddhas, was a slave when she attained stream-entry during her last > lifetime and, later, as a bhikkhuni, arahatship so her tendency to pride > > could no longer defeat her. But Patacara was our buddha's foremost > "Keeper of Vinaya" among bhikkhunis.S: “One among bhikkhunis. .... S: Were you stressing any point with these last examples? I know this is an area you’ve studied a lot, Connie. Please share anything else you find interesting or helpful to consider further. Thanks a lot for your pointers & help, Connie. Metta, Sarah =======. 57059 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri Mar 24, 2006 1:00am Subject: Re: [dsg] Subject: Re: Never Happy buddhatrue sarahprocter... Hi Connie, --- connie wrote: > just interrupting james after "several articles have been written about > > this subject, by several qualified bhikkhus/bhikkhunis" to ask if anyone > > remembers the sutta where buddha says even highly respected bhikkhus > with > lots of followers can have wrong view. ... S: No sutta to hand, but Devadatta would be a pretty good example:) I had to explain to Jon that your reference to Simon and 7 or 9 lives was referring to James' cat:) I mention this as I have no idea how the newbies will ever get some of your deeper meanings:))lol Metta, Sarah ======== 57060 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri Mar 24, 2006 1:13am Subject: Re: [dsg] Can ignorance and formations be the mistaken circle of "not" knowing? sarahprocter... Hi Paul, --- paulgrabianowski wrote: > Hi all, > > I am new to this group. I was an occasional visitor when I lived in > Japan a few years back. I'm now living in Buffalo, NY. Anyway, I'm > glad to be back, and I'm hoping to find time away from my studies to > learn from you all. The discussion here is inspiring. If Robert > Kirkpatrick is still around, hello. This is Paul from Japan. .... S: Thank you so much for introducing yourself. I hope you're well settled back in NY and glad you're finding the discussions useful. Robert is around and I'm sure he'll reply himself. You'll also meet Phil who lives in Japan. Did you post when you were a member before (if so when was that exactly)? I don't remember your name. I'll look forward to reading the discussion on your good questions - sorry, just been called out, but I know others will have useful comments on them. Metta, Sarah p.s www.dhammastudygroup.org is probably new since you were last here if you wish to search in/read the archives anytime or download/listen to edited discussions with A.Sujin and other friends. ====== 57061 From: "Cerini Pablo" Date: Fri Mar 24, 2006 2:14am Subject: [dsg] Re: The place of "meditation" ... Viharati (corrected) cerini_pablo Hi Jonotan,Matheesha and Icaro (and all) Jonothan Abbott wrote: >J:As I have said before, where's the kusala in focussing > on an earth kasina (or 'watching' the breath, for that matter)? At least, dosa and lobha are put away for some time. And I think that you also create an inclination to alobha and adosa, becuase in the first hours following the meditation, sensual impressions keep cooler and don't cause defilements to burn as in days without formal meditation at all. This seems my experience, at least. >J: Samatha moments can occur in daily life, spontaneously, without any > 'input' from us, so there is no need to do anything special for them > to > arise. Maybe I'm wrong, but I won't call "samatha" those moments of spontaneus calm in daily life. Or, at least, I won't call every one of them "samatha" of 100% quality. I think they're just moments of calm, without any "deeper implication". But I understand that I can say this only for moments of calm occurring in *my* experience. Maybe what you experience is really samatha. So, erase this last comment :) cerini pablo 57062 From: nina van gorkom Date: Fri Mar 24, 2006 2:25am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Lodewijk's post on the long way. .. Sankharanimitta nilovg Hi Tep, op 23-03-2006 01:37 schreef indriyabala op indriyabala@...: > > 'Sankharanimitta' is the "impression of a whole sequence of > arisen-and-fallen-away of the dhamma" (phenomena) such as visible > objects (ruupa). ------- N: Yes. We read about arising and falling away of visible object, but when we learn that we only experience the sign or nimitta of visible object that has fallen away very fast, it helps us to have more understanding of the meaning of impermanence. Impossible for us to catch which visible object we experience, there is another one and then another one. I would be careful with the word sequence, because in reality there are many different processes with the seeing of visible object. It seems that there is a lasting moment of experiencing visible object, but it is just as a torch swung around and then the impression is a circle of light. In reality this circle consists of many different light impressions. --------- T: Other examples are : > -- countless moments of arising-and-falling-away perceptions give the > nimitta of the perceptions; ------ N: it seems that there is one moment of saññaa, but there are many. There is a nimitta of each of the five khandhas. --------- N: -- after a succession of the arising and falling away of realities, > what is left (impression) is the sign : "the nimitta of the reality > that has completely gone". > > Khun Sujin's definition: "There are nimittas of all conditioned > dhammas that appear at this moment, arising and falling away extremely > rapidly." > > I like Khun Sujin's expression, 'Past life is like a dream, this life > is like a dream'-- it summarizes the meaning of sankharanimitta very well. --------- N: And when we review events now like our stay in a hotel with walks, it is all gone, so quickly, like a dream. For two weeks we had painters, great confusion, books taken out, etc. And now all gone so quickly, like a dream. I have been married to Lodewijk for fiftyfour years, all gone like a dream. Then we come closer to this moment: gone immediately, like a dream. Nina. P.S. I think the Sangiitisutta is too good for reserving it only for a rainy day. But it is lack of time we both have. Often when I have to research something I turn to this sutta and Commentary. 57063 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Fri Mar 24, 2006 1:25am Subject: Links to Stream Entry ... !!! bhikkhu_ekamuni Friends: What four factors lead to entering the stream leading to Nibbâna ? The blessed Buddha once said: Bhikkhus and friends, these four things, when developed and cultivated, lead to the realization of the fruit of Stream-entry. What four? 1: Association with excellent persons, 2: Hearing & learning true Dhamma, 3: Rational and careful attention, 4: Praxis in accordance with this Dhamma. These four things, when developed and cultivated, lead to the realization of the fruit of Stream-entry ... lead to the realization of the fruit of Once-returning ... lead to the realization of the fruit of Non-returning ... lead to the obtaining of understanding ... lead to the growth of understanding ... lead to the expansion of understanding ... lead to great understanding ... lead to extensive understanding ... lead to vast understanding ... lead to deep understanding ... lead to matchless understanding ... lead to wide understanding ... lead to rich understanding ... lead to quick understanding ... lead to buoyant understanding ... lead to joyous understanding ..... lead to swift understanding ... lead to sharp understanding ... lead to penetrative understanding ... lead to transcendent understanding ... lead to great wisdom ... !!! What four? 1: Association with excellent persons, 2: Hearing & learning true Dhamma, 3: Rational and careful attention, 4: Praxis in accordance with this Dhamma. These four things, when developed and cultivated, lead to penetrative understanding... These four things, when completed, lead to the realization of the fruit of Arahat-ship: Awakening, Enlightenment, The deathless dimension: Nibbana ... !!! Source (edited extract): The Grouped Sayings of the Buddha. Samyutta Nikaya. Book V [411-2] 55: Stream Entry. Sotapatti. The fruits of Stream Entry. 55-63. 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 !!! <...> 57064 From: nina van gorkom Date: Fri Mar 24, 2006 3:27am Subject: Re: [dsg] Can ignorance and formations be the mistaken circle of "not" knowing? nilovg Hi Paul, welcome back to our group. At the moment I study the Tiika of Vis. XVII, 64, and I try to say something. op 24-03-2006 06:20 schreef paulgrabianowski op paulgrabianowski@...: > 64. Formations exist only when ignorance exists, not when it does > not; and that is how it can be known that these formations have > ignorance as their condition. > > So, if ignorance is a condition for formations, then would it be > correct to say that formations like ignorance have no estimable time > of origin? I'll try not to get too far from the matter, but is this > another chicken (ignorance) and egg (formations) dilemma? ------- N: Here conditions are being dealt with, conditions for our being in the cycle. In a sutta the Buddha said that it cannot be known when the first moment of ignorance arose. This is not relevant. So long as ignorance has not been eradicated, kamma is being performed and this produces vipaaka in the form of rebirth and sense-cognitions arising during life. In the following paras there will be more detail in what ways each of the links is a condition for the following mentioned one. ----------- P: Does > ignorance persist in a sense even in the one who has studied dhamma by > a mistaking of formations for ignorance and ignorance for formations? -------- N: Ignorance is one of the latent tendencies. It is very persistent and only the arahat has eradicated it. When we understand that ignorance conditions kamma-formations, we shall not be confused, at least in theory. -------- P: Is there not a "circularity" here that Buddha sought to severe? In > this sense, is dukkha not the nama and rupa which is here burning, > that which is here arising dependent upon this circularity? -------- N: The truth of dukkah: the arising and falling away of conditioned realities is sankhaara dukkha. Perhaps this clarifies? -------- P: Also, > does anyone have a more precise translation of "not knowing" or > "knowing" here. ------- N: See Vis. 62 and Tiika: -------- P: Because "to know" would seem to be to already have > gone beyond formations and ignorance. ------ N: text Vis. 64: Are there still unclear points? I would not think of circulatory. Nina. 57065 From: nina van gorkom Date: Fri Mar 24, 2006 3:27am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Hello - at the first temple nilovg Hi Sarah I enjoy your series. How true that the training is gradual, and that there is no sudden penetration of the truth. This shows us that the way is long. I like the quotes from the Udana and Co. What is said about the monks can also be applied by laypersons. The confessing, and making amends helps to slowly wearing out conceit. Because of clinging to the importance of self one likes to hide one's faults. Nina. op 24-03-2006 08:52 schreef sarah abbott op sarahprocterabbott@...: > > The commentary adds that: “having committed some offence, one then, in > concealing same, commits another, new offence (and) after that one, a > further one, after that one, a further one – so does the rain of offences, > the rain of defilements, excessively rain (ativiya vassati). 57066 From: nina van gorkom Date: Fri Mar 24, 2006 3:27am Subject: Re: [dsg] Anattalakkhana Sutta: Introduction nilovg Dear Han, thank you very much for your helpful comments on the Anattalakkhana Sutta. I printed them out for Lodewijk, so that we can discuss it. Nina. op 24-03-2006 07:34 schreef han tun op hantun1@...: > I study the Anattalakkhana Sutta which was expounded > in detail by Mahasi Sayadaw. 57067 From: "Kom Tukovinit" Date: Fri Mar 24, 2006 3:45am Subject: Re: Hello - moving to the second temple tikmok Dear Jon, Thanks for your comment. In regard to time, I believe the Buddha said, whenever you spend into developing sila, samadhi, and panna is an auspicious time. In regarding to place, I remember a few different circumstances that may support the importance of a place: 1) In an advice to the Bikkhus, he said if a Bikkhu is at a place where kusala doesn't develop, then the Bikkhu should leave that place regardless if the life necessities are easy to come. 2) In the famous Karineyametta suttra, when the Bikkhus were haunted by the Devas and went to the Buddha to see if they could go to a different place (where there is no haunting!) that they could reach arahatship, the answer was no, and they got sent to the same forest. 3) One of the attendants of the Buddha wanted to further his development in a forest but the Buddha disagreed with him and discouraged him from going. He went anyway, but it turned out that in this place, no development of any kinds of kusala was possible for him. In his previous life as a king, it was a royal park where he enjoyed many sensual desires as well as sending people to death. The Pakatupa-nissaya pacaya of the place was so strong for him that he cannot reach the path at the place. I think there are other circumstances which indicate the importance of a place. People's accumulations are so vastly different that a place that works for me wouldn't work for you... kom 57068 From: "Kom Tukovinit" Date: Fri Mar 24, 2006 4:13am Subject: [dsg] Re: Hello - at the first temple tikmok Dear Sarah, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott > .... > S: Perfect in this context means under no circumstances will he infract > one of the rules. (Of course, as we know when we read the Vinaya, it is > the intention that is always the key here). There are some rules that can be infracted without even the intention to infract it, and the monk still has to make amend anyway. > .... > S: But I think we can make the point that the one who had developed > satipatthana to the degree that confidence, wisdom and so on are balas > (powers), unshakeable will not err in such sila regardless, don't you > think? If he doesn't know the rule, it is definitely possible to err. If he does, then the answer isn't all that clear to me... I have seen that the number of rules that a monk follows is immense, whether or not, even a sotapanna, one can always mindful (and Sotapanna is not always mindful) to follow all of them is a question that I hope I can find an answer for myself in the future. It is clear that a sotapanna doesn't infract any rules that lead to unhappy existence. > ..... > > My suspicion is that one keeps to the rules as much as possible --- > > enough that it prevents anxiety and encourages gladness, but like I > > said, this can be a dangerous assumption for only the Buddha knows > > the benefits of following the rules, and the penalties of not > > following them. > .... > S: That's true, but I also think that the more wisdom (i.e satipatthana) > develops, the more one can also see the benefit and importance for the > Sangha. A purpose of the Patimokkha is to develop the faith of those who don't have faith, and increase the faith of the already faithful. I personally believe that developing faith however you can is important, given that people have so different accumulations. For people who are yet familiar with Satipathanna, or worse yet, going about it in the wrong way, this is perhaps all they have :-). > .... > S: That's true and that's why Patimokkha sila is not adhi sila of itself > and why restraint and following of the precepts can be out of tradition, > by special undertaking or by eradication of the inclination. Do you believe the Sila, as discussed in the first section by Visuddhimagga, to be Adhi-sila or not? > > > > And even to Sathipastthana itself, but one doesn't get rid of the > > raft before one reaches the shore, I think, so one develops all > > kusala until there is no more condition for it. > ..... > S: I think this is the nub here – isn't any clinging to be seen for what > it is? I don't think there is any disagreement that clinging should be seen, but there is a different stress that ALL other kusala should be developed however one can too, because they all support the path. > > I'd like to discuss this point more sometime with you, Kom. Maybe personally sometimes! kom 57069 From: "Kom Tukovinit" Date: Fri Mar 24, 2006 6:41am Subject: [dsg] Re: Hello - moving to the second temple tikmok Dear Icaro, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "icarofranca" wrote: > > Kom, that´s one of my questions about the Patimokkha. At the Vinaya > is stated that at least two days in a month - or two full moons - the > collective reading of the Patimokkha and the Chastissement of fault > monks could be done by all Sangha. It´s called the Uposattha day. One > can just imagine that, at older times, many monks ought to be > committed with Patthimokha´s study, memorization and public reading... > could you tell me if all the theravadins temples perform this practice > nowadays, or it is only done at certain places ? No, not all (at least in Thailand). At both temples I was at, this was done regularly. The other monks mentioned that many temples don't do this, some do only during the Vassa. The abbot at the first temple (during the Vassa) was invited by other monks at another temple to give recital as there were no one at that temple who memorized the Patimokkha. > At a first glance, this pratice was one of the greatest efforts to > raise true law commitment in ancient world...and there are some > present day Jurisprudency scholar works that appoint the Vinaya true > role on this way. Really thanks for the clear explanation, Kom!!! Plus, I think the ancient Indian teachings, Buddhism not excluded, were transmitted orally. I heard that there was evidence that writing existed during the Buddha's time. Based on the scripture, as well as another text (which are parts of the Pali Studying textbooks), it impressed me that memorization (word by word) of the Buddha's teachings were parts of the monk's life as well as some layperson's life. I believe there is a sutra that mentioned that the teachings will fade if it is not memorized, recited, well pondered, and penetrated. > Ces´t la vie! > But there´s not an easy and a smoothered paved way to learn Pali in > full. One must spend all effort, stamina and mental power to masterize > all pali grammatical details - such efforts NEVER could be diminished, > blocked, mocked, encompassed or subestimated! no kidding :-) Thanks for writing (and thank Sarah for bring this post up, which I missed). kom 57070 From: "m. nease" Date: Fri Mar 24, 2006 6:43am Subject: Re: [dsg] Anattalakkhana Sutta: Introduction mlnease Hi Han, p.s. Can you please tell us for convenience sake in which Samyutta and which Vaggo is the Anattalakkhana Sutta? Thanks, mike ----- Original Message ----- From: "han tun" To: Sent: Thursday, March 23, 2006 10:34 PM Subject: [dsg] Anattalakkhana Sutta: Introduction > Anattalakkhana Sutta: Introduction 57071 From: "Kom Tukovinit" Date: Fri Mar 24, 2006 6:49am Subject: [dsg] Re: Hello - the rules and displines (vinaya) tikmok Dear cerini pablo, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Cerini Pablo" wrote: > > > It's great to see how buddhist are opened-mind > in letting people experiencing monk's life. I thought that > to robe and dis-robe could not be done so easily , but > I have to understand that Buddhist situation is very > different from Catholic one (I live in Italy so my view of > monkhood has always been influenced by the Catholic prospective). > > p.s. What do you do to become a short-term monk ? Do you > simply knock and ask for or are there procedures to be followed ? > There are many rules about who can become a monk, but in general, if you are not a naked ascetic (who would have to go through a "trial" period), have reached 20 years of age, have consents of your parents, are not obviously disfigured, are not disqualified in some other ways, can find a qualified teacher who would take you, can find the necessities of amonk, then normally you can be a monk by the Buddhist rule. In Thailand, additional requirements often are, you need to memorize some Pali passages that you will be reciting, the teacher has be state- qualified, and can find a temple that would take you, then you can become a monk. kom 57072 From: nina van gorkom Date: Fri Mar 24, 2006 7:46am Subject: Re: [dsg] Anattalakkhana Sutta: Introduction nilovg Hi Mike, I am butting in, I just looked it up and there are two versions: Vinaya (I or IV in Horner's translation, p. 20), and in Samyutta Nikaya III, 66, here called: The Five, (in PTS p. 59 and in B.B.'s translation: p. 901). The Vinaya annotation is part I, but in PTS you have to look at part IV. Nina. op 24-03-2006 15:43 schreef m. nease op mlnease@...: > Hi Han, > > p.s. Can you please tell us for convenience sake in which Samyutta and > which Vaggo is the Anattalakkhana Sutta? 57073 From: "Kom Tukovinit" Date: Fri Mar 24, 2006 7:53am Subject: Re: Hello - at the first temple ... Gold and Diamonds tikmok Dear Tep, > Your ability to accurately recall ancient stories and the Buddha's > words from the suttas is amazing, Kom -- it is second to none, in my > opinion. O, did I mention that there were those venerable ones in Burma who have been certified to remember the entire canon, word by word? There were presumably many more who haven't been certified who must have memorized a good chunk of it. kom 57074 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Fri Mar 24, 2006 7:54am Subject: Three cheers for Kom!! buddhatrue Hi Kom, I wanted to tell you that I find your posts like a fresh breeze through all the stagnant theorizing around here (especially your last two to Jon and Sarah). Book learning is far different from actual learning. I am so glad that you found a good temple in Thailand and that you are doing so well. I am tempted to come join you there! ;-)) As you may or may not know, I went to Thailand to ordain at a temple, but I didn't have such a favorable outcome. The monks were pompous and arrogant; the abbott resented teaching the dhamma to laypeople; I was going to be kept a prisoner there (forget disrobing and returning- I was told I couldn't leave the compound for five years!!); and the place was overrun with poisonous ants! It was Wat Pah Nanachat, perhaps you have heard of it? Anyway, I left that temple after a few days and came back to the states. Now, my parents don't wish to give me permission to ordain at any other temples; and I don't think I would push to do so anyway. My father was so upset after I left for Thailand last time that he drank an entire bottle of whiskey in one night, and was in bed for several days from alcohol poisoning! I don't want to put him through that kind of upset again. But, so glad that you are having this wonderful opportunity at a fantastic temple! Please do keep in touch and post here when you can. Metta, James 57075 From: "Kom Tukovinit" Date: Fri Mar 24, 2006 8:04am Subject: Re: Hello - at the first temple ... The Other Side of the Fence.. tikmok Dear Tep, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "indriyabala" > > I think you talk like a purist. Sometimes, purists are put down by the > majority as being too theoretical, idealistic and unrealistic. But I > think purism in the Buddha-sasana is absolutely necessary (although > not sufficient) for maintaining the Dhamma closest to the Buddha's > original Teachings. The Buddha's teachings are said to be perfect in both meanings and wordings. The more perfectly we transmit the Buddha's teaching, the more purist we become! I one day hope to live my life in total dedication to the Buddha, made known by his unparalleled teachings. kom 57076 From: "rjkjp1" Date: Fri Mar 24, 2006 8:22am Subject: Re: Can ignorance and formations be the mistaken circle of "not" knowing? rjkjp1 Dear Paul, Very nice to see you here. I am still in Japan, and sometimes Ivan, who you met in Bangkok, posts on this list too. There are three rounds in dependent origination : kamma-vatta (action), vipaka-vatta(result) and kilesa-vatta (defilements such as greed, aversion, ignorance). The actual moments of experience through the doorways are vipaka (result) but immediately there is reaction which is defilement(kilesa) and this conditions kamma. These rounds are all spinning now, continually, as they always have in samsara. The three rounds are all conditioned and closely related, never ceasing, and only wisdom- according to Buddhist teachings- can bring it to a halt. Robert In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "paulgrabianowski" wrote: > > Hi all, > > I am new to this group. I was an occasional visitor when I lived in > Japan a few years back. I'm now living in Buffalo, NY. Anyway, I'm > glad to be back, and I'm hoping to find time away from my studies to > learn from you all. The discussion here is inspiring. If Robert > Kirkpatrick is still around, hello. This is Paul from Japan. > > > 64. Formations exist only when ignorance exists, not when it does > not; and that is how it can be known that these formations have > ignorance as their condition. > > So, if ignorance is a condition for formations, then would it be > correct to say that formations like ignorance have no estimable time > of origin? I'll try not to get too far from the matter, but is this > another chicken (ignorance) and egg (formations) dilemma? 57077 From: "m. nease" Date: Fri Mar 24, 2006 8:39am Subject: Re: [dsg] Anattalakkhana Sutta: Introduction mlnease Thanks Nina--I have the PTS but I also like to compare it to the Paali at Mettanet. I must get BB's translation. mike ----- Original Message ----- From: "nina van gorkom" To: Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 7:46 AM Subject: Re: [dsg] Anattalakkhana Sutta: Introduction > Hi Mike, > I am butting in, I just looked it up and there are two versions: > Vinaya (I or IV in Horner's translation, p. 20), and in Samyutta Nikaya > III, > 66, here called: The Five, (in PTS p. 59 and in B.B.'s translation: p. > 901). > The Vinaya annotation is part I, but in PTS you have to look at part IV. > Nina. > op 24-03-2006 15:43 schreef m. nease op mlnease@...: > >> Hi Han, >> >> p.s. Can you please tell us for convenience sake in which Samyutta and >> which Vaggo is the Anattalakkhana Sutta? 57078 From: han tun Date: Fri Mar 24, 2006 11:42am Subject: Re: [dsg] Anattalakkhana Sutta: Introduction hantun1 Dear Mike, The Anattalakkhana Sutta is in Samyutta Nikaya, Khandhavagga, Khandhasamyutta, sutta No. 59. In short, it is SN 22.59 Thank you for your kind words. With metta, Han --- "m. nease" wrote: > Hi Han, > > p.s. Can you please tell us for convenience sake in > which Samyutta and > which Vaggo is the Anattalakkhana Sutta? > > Thanks, > > mike 57079 From: han tun Date: Fri Mar 24, 2006 11:52am Subject: Re: [dsg] Anattalakkhana Sutta: Introduction hantun1 Dear Mike, The following is the BB’s translation. With metta, Han ================================ SN XXII.59 Anatta-lakkhana Sutta The Discourse on the Not-self Characteristic Translated from the Pali by Bhikkhu Bodhi Thus have I heard. On one occasion the Blessed One was dwelling at Baraanasi in the Deer Park at Isipatana. There the Blessed One addressed the bhikkhus of the group of five thus: “Bhikkhus!” “Venerable sir!” those bhikkhus replied. The Blessed One said this: “Bhikkhus, form is nonself. For if, bhikkhus, form were self, this form would not lead to affliction, and it would be possible to have it of form: ‘Let my form be thus; let my form not be thus.’ But because form is nonself, form leads to affliction, and it is not possible to have it of form: ‘Let my form be thus; let my form not be thus.’ “Feeling is nonself. For if, bhikkhus, feeling were self, this feeling would not lead to affliction, and it would be possible to have it of feeling: ‘Let my feeling be thus; let my feeling not be thus.’ But because feeling is nonself, feeling leads to affliction, and it is not possible to have it of feeling: ‘Let my feeling be thus; let my feeling not be thus.’ “Perception is nonself. For if, bhikkhus, perception were self, this perception would not lead to affliction, and it would be possible to have it of perception: ‘Let my perception be thus; let my perception not be thus.’ But because perception is nonself, perception leads to affliction, and it is not possible to have it of perception: ‘Let my perception be thus; let my perception not be thus.’ “Volitional formations are nonself. For if, bhikkhus, volitional formations were self, these volitional formations would not lead to affliction, and it would be possible to have it of volitional formations: ‘Let my volitional formations be thus; let my volitional formations not be thus.’ But because volitional formations are nonself, volitional formations lead to affliction, and it is not possible to have it of volitional formations: ‘Let my volitional formations be thus; let my volitional formations not be thus.’ “Consciousness is nonself. For if, bhikkhus, consciousness were self, this consciousness would not lead to affliction, and it would be possible to have it of consciousness: ‘Let my consciousness be thus; let my consciousness not be thus.’ But because consciousness is nonself, consciousness leads to affliction, and it is not possible to have it of consciousness: ‘Let my consciousness be thus; let my consciousness not be thus.’ ---------------------------- “What do you think, bhikkhus, is form permanent or impermanent? – “Impermanent, venerable sir.” – “Is what is impermanent suffering or happiness? – “Suffering, venerable sir.” – “Is what is impermanent, suffering, and subject to change fit to be regarded thus: ‘This is mine, this I am, this is my self? – “No, venerable sir.” “Is feeling permanent or impermanent? – “Impermanent, venerable sir.” – “Is what is impermanent suffering or happiness? – “Suffering, venerable sir.” – “Is what is impermanent, suffering, and subject to change fit to be regarded thus: ‘This is mine, this I am, this is my self? – “No, venerable sir.” “Is perception permanent or impermanent? – “Impermanent, venerable sir.” – “Is what is impermanent suffering or happiness? – “Suffering, venerable sir.” – “Is what is impermanent, suffering, and subject to change fit to be regarded thus: ‘This is mine, this I am, this is my self? – “No, venerable sir.” “Are volitional formations permanent or impermanent? – “Impermanent, venerable sir.” – “Is what is impermanent suffering or happiness? – “Suffering, venerable sir.” – “Is what is impermanent, suffering, and subject to change fit to be regarded thus: ‘This is mine, this I am, this is my self? – “No, venerable sir.” “Is consciousness permanent or impermanent? – “Impermanent, venerable sir.” – “Is what is impermanent suffering or happiness? – “Suffering, venerable sir.” – “Is what is impermanent, suffering, and subject to change fit to be regarded thus: ‘This is mine, this I am, this is my self? – “No, venerable sir.” ---------------------------- “Therefore, bhikkhus, any kind of form whatsoever, whether past, future, or present, internal or external, gross or subtle, inferior or superior, far or near, all form should be seen as it really is with correct wisdom thus: “this is not mine, this I am not, this is not my self.’ “Any kind of feeling whatsoever, whether past, future, or present, internal or external, gross or subtle, inferior or superior, far or near, all feeling should be seen as it really is with correct wisdom thus: “this is not mine, this I am not, this is not my self.’ “Any kind of perception whatsoever, whether past, future, or present, internal or external, gross or subtle, inferior or superior, far or near, all perception should be seen as it really is with correct wisdom thus: “this is not mine, this I am not, this is not my self.’ “Any kind of volitional formations whatsoever, whether past, future, or present, internal or external, gross or subtle, inferior or superior, far or near, all volitional formations should be seen as they really are with correct wisdom thus: “this is not mine, this I am not, this is not my self.’ “Any kind of consciousness whatsoever, whether past, future, or present, internal or external, gross or subtle, inferior or superior, far or near, all consciousness should be seen as it really is with correct wisdom thus: “this is not mine, this I am not, this is not my self.’ ---------------------------- “Seeing thus, bhikkhus, the instructed noble disciple experiences revulsion towards form, revulsion towards feeling, revulsion towards perception, revulsion towards volitional formations, revulsion towards consciousness.’ “Experiencing revulsion, he becomes dispassionate. Through dispassion [his mind] is liberated. When it is liberated there comes the knowledge: ‘It’s liberated.’ He understands: ‘Destroyed is birth, the holy life has been lived, what had to be done has been done, there is no more for this state of being.’” That is what the Blessed One said. Elated, those bhikkhus delighted in the Blessed One’s statement. And while this discourse was being spoken, the minds of the bhikkhus of the group of five were liberated from the taints by nonclinging. ================================================== --- "m. nease" wrote: > Thanks Nina--I have the PTS but I also like to > compare it to the Paali at > Mettanet. I must get BB's translation. > mike 57080 From: han tun Date: Fri Mar 24, 2006 0:31pm Subject: [dsg] Dhamma Thread ( 886 ) hantun1 Dhamma Thread ( 886 ) (U Htoo Naing requested me to send this. Han Tun) Dear Dhamma Friends, Kamma.t.thaana: Karu.na and muditaa kamma.t.thaana can also be practised as in case of metta brahmavihaara. We have discussed 1st jhaana of metta, karuna, and mudita. As in cases of kasi.na they can also be exercised and can ascend up to 3rh ruupa-jhaana (4th rupa-kusala cittas). When the practitioner reached up to the 4th ruupa jhaana then he or she has to practise up to proficient level and through masteries there will see the weakness in these three kamma.t.thaana. After thorough scrutinization the practitioner tries to ascend up to the 5th ruupa jhaana. This is done with upekkha-brahmavihaara kamma.t.thaana. As I have told the group before this can be compared with mother and her child. The mother loves her baby and put him in in chest feeding breast. This is compared with metta. The mother once sees that the child gets ill and has to be sent to hospital for appropriate treatment. At that time there is also love. But this love is compassionate one. This is compared with karu.na. When he gets well and back to good health or when he becomes rich or something like that there arise joy. This is compared with muditaa. But when the child gets matured and comes into adulthood there is just a balance thought on him. This is compared with upekkhaa. When upekkha arise there arise 5th ruupa jhaana. This again has to be practised up to proficient level. This is all about kamma.t.thaana. May you be free from suffering. With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing 57081 From: "mlnease" Date: Fri Mar 24, 2006 1:19pm Subject: Away mlnease Friends, Please excuse any late replies, I'll be away from the computer for a week or so to attend a funeral. Cheers, mike 57082 From: "paulgrabianowski" Date: Fri Mar 24, 2006 6:23am Subject: Re: [dsg] Can ignorance and formations be the mistaken circle of "not" knowing? paulgrabiano... --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, nina van gorkom wrote: > > Hi Paul, > welcome back to our group. > At the moment I study the Tiika of Vis. XVII, 64, and I try to say > something. > op 24-03-2006 06:20 schreef paulgrabianowski op > paulgrabianowski@...: > > 64. Formations exist only when ignorance exists, not when it does > > not; and that is how it can be known that these formations have > > ignorance as their condition. > > > > So, if ignorance is a condition for formations, then would it be > > correct to say that formations like ignorance have no estimable time > > of origin? I'll try not to get too far from the matter, but is this > > another chicken (ignorance) and egg (formations) dilemma? > ------- > N: Here conditions are being dealt with, conditions for our being in the > cycle. ... > P: Because "to know" would seem to be to already have > > gone beyond formations and ignorance. > ------ > N: text Vis. 64: clear vision arisen, bhikkhus, with the fading away of ignorance and the > arising of clear vision he does not form even formations of merit' (cf. > Sii,82).> > Are there still unclear points? I would not think of circulatory. > Nina. Thank you Nina. That is extremely helpful. I guess the reason why I was thinking of the circle is in the manner in which the mind clings to one thing and then another without recognizing that ignorance is a condition for the arising of formations. So that one fails to see the moment of arising as not self. N: When we understand that ignorance conditions kamma-formations, we shall not be confused, at least in theory. I find this quite interesting and perhaps perplexing (in a hopeful way). If ignorance is "not knowing" (a��aanaa) the reality of dhamma, and thus is a condition for kamma-formations, then aren't both ignorance and kamma-formations themselves a) subject to dukkha and conditionality b) not-self The circularity comes in (probably not the best term--I appoligize) in this sense: At the moment of the arising of citta, what is the difference between ignorance and kamma formations? They seem to me, at least at this moment, to be two aspects of the same conditional process. Is ignorance something exclusively volitional and kamma-formations merely the result of the interdependence of these volitional processes and other mental factors and rupas in any given moment? or something else? Paul 57083 From: "icarofranca" Date: Fri Mar 24, 2006 1:30pm Subject: Re: Away icarofranca Hi Mike! ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > Friends, > > Please excuse any late replies, I'll be away from the computer for a > week or so to attend a funeral. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Good luck, my friend! Don´t hesitate in keep your feelings on right tracks, even in such sad moments! Cetasikas don´t lie... but they must be keep on a safe level! Mettaya, Ícaro 57084 From: "Kom Tukovinit" Date: Fri Mar 24, 2006 3:00pm Subject: Re: Three cheers for Kom!! tikmok Dear James, I found your post to be amusing, for I've never thought that you would be cheering me anytime :-). I am back in Thailand, but am not at a temple. Let me give my cheers to Sarah and Connie too. Hooray! My last post to her wasn't particularly productive. Her interactions with Connie were, by contrast, pretty definitive on the subject. I am with her all the way, too, on the point that when it comes to the teachings, texts are good (even when I am not particularly good at quoting them), especially in this day and age where people widely disagree of what the path (and the Patimokkha!) is. Wat Pah Nanachart is quite famous worldwide. I have never been there myself. kom 57085 From: "indriyabala" Date: Fri Mar 24, 2006 6:13pm Subject: Re: Lodewijk's post on the long way. .. Sankharanimitta indriyabala Hi, Nina - Thank you very much for the kind reply that adds more explanations on the subtle points with regard to nimittas and their impermanence implication. As a consequence, the meaning of nimitta is clearer. Yet, there are other questions that I would like to hear your answers too. >Nina: >Impossible for us to catch which visible object we experience, there is another one and then another one. I would be careful with the word sequence, because in reality there are many different processes with the seeing of visible object. ... just as a torch swung around and then the impression is a circle of light. In reality this circle consists of many different light impressions. Tep: Do you object to the use of the word "sequence" because these multiple processes occur in parallel (simultaneously)? But, does that have anything to do with the fact that citta only senses one object at a time? The swung around circle of light is clearly sequential to our eyes (the brightness traces from one point on the circle to another and another, one point at a time), isn't it? ............................. >N: it seems that there is one moment of saññaa, but there are many. There is a nimitta of each of the five khandhas. Tep: Are these nimittas of the five khandhas simultaneously occurring, or sequentially? I think they occur simultaneously, and that the citta can only sense one nimitta at a time. ........................... >N: I have been married to Lodewijk for fiftyfour years, all gone like a dream. Then we come closer to this moment: gone immediately, like a dream. Tep: Are you sad? But sadness is a sankhara that is conditioned by tanha and avijja, isn't it? On the other hand, if you are not sad, then could you please tell me how you condition equanimity to arise every time? ................................ >N: P.S. I think the Sangiitisutta is too good for reserving it only for a rainy day. But it is lack of time we both have. Often when I have to research something I turn to this sutta and Commentary. Tep: I am glad you have left the door open! If we limit the discussion to a small number of selected dhammas from the sutta (say, about 10), will you be able to handle it? Warm regards, Tep ======= --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, nina van gorkom wrote: > > Hi Tep, > op 23-03-2006 01:37 schreef indriyabala op indriyabala@...: > > > > > 'Sankharanimitta' is the "impression of a whole sequence of > > arisen-and-fallen-away of the dhamma" (phenomena) such as visible > > objects (ruupa). (snipped) > N: And when we review events now like our stay in a hotel with walks, it is all gone, so quickly, like a dream. For two weeks we had painters, great confusion, books taken out, etc. And now all gone so quickly, like a dream. > I have been married to Lodewijk for fiftyfour years, all gone like a dream. > Then we come closer to this moment: gone immediately, like a dream. > (snipped) 57086 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Fri Mar 24, 2006 11:12pm Subject: The 3 Feelings ... !!! bhikkhu_ekamuni Friends: The Three Basic Kinds of feeling! The blessed Buddha once said: Bhikkhus and friends, there are these three feelings... What three? Pleasant feeling, Painful feeling, Neutral neither-painful-nor-pleasant feeling. These are the three basic feelings! A disciple of the Buddha, aware, Focused, comprehending clearly, Understands these three feelings. And contact as the cause of any feeling. When contact ceases they fade away & vanish, And The Noble Way leading to their destruction. With the final quenching of feeling one is without any yearning and fully stilled... Whether feeling is pleasant or painful or neither-painful-nor-pleasant, Whether internal or external; Whatever kind of feeling there is: Having known: This is also Suffering, Perishing, momentary, disintegrating... Having been touched and contacted by them, Noting their instant ceasing, one gradually loses all passion for them... There are these three feelings. What three? Pleasant feeling, painful feeling, neither-painful-nor-pleasant feeling. Buddha furthermore said: All mental states converges on feeling... 5-fold definition here: http://what-buddha-said.net/library/DPPN/wtb/u_v/vedanaa.htm Source (edited extract): The Grouped Sayings of the Buddha. Samyutta Nikaya. Book V [411-2] 36: feeling. Vedana. Focused on Pleasure. 1-2. 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 !!! <...> 57087 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri Mar 24, 2006 11:56pm Subject: ‘Cetasikas' study corner 408- Confidence/saddhaa (e) sarahprocter... Dear Friends, 'Cetasikas' by Nina van Gorkom http://www.vipassana.info/cetasikas.html http://www.zolag.co.uk/ Questions, comments and different views welcome;-) ========================================== (Ch25 - Confidence/saddhaa contd) Another manifestation of confidence is decision or resolution. When there is determination to accomplish kusala, it is evident that there is confidence in kusala. There is no self who decides for kusala, it depends on conditions whether kusala citta arises or not. When there are conditions for aversion and discouragement, there is no resolution for kusala. We may have no energy for any kind of kusala when we feel annoyed because of our shortcomings, or when we are disappointed about other people, when we feel lonely and depressed, when we find life useless and frustrating. When we are depressed we are self-centred. We want pleasant objects for ourselves and when we do not get these we feel dissatisfied with life. If there would be less clinging to the self there would be less conditions for feelings of frustration. Right understanding can eventually eradicate the clinging to the self, but it can only develop very gradually. If we are impatient because we do not notice any progress in the development of right understanding, we should remember the patience and determination of the Buddha in the lives when he was still a Bodhisatta. He was determined to develop right understanding life after life, without becoming discouraged, without coming to a halt halfway. Courage and patience are needed in order to develop understanding of the realities appearing in daily life. One has to have “aspiring confidence” like the hero who crosses the floods. It is useless to worry about the lack of mindfulness, or to think of ways to make it arise. When there is more understanding of what the object of mindfulness is, an ultimate reality, there are conditions for mindfulness now of whatever reality appears. ***** (Ch25 - Confidence/saddhaa to be contd) Metta, Sarah ====== 57088 From: "Joop" Date: Sat Mar 25, 2006 0:56am Subject: [dsg] Re: Lodewijk's post on the long way, patience, patience! jwromeijn Hallo Nina, all --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, nina van gorkom wrote: > > Hi James and Joop, ... > I speak of myself as a lay person. Thinking of the > incalculable time I have > wandered from life to life with ignorance, how can this long > journey be over soon? Joop: Of course it can: it can take one second or thousands of years, we do not know, but time is not important. ... > In the Buddha's time there were four kinds of persons > (See Human Types, one of the Books of the abhidhamma): > those who could attain after hearing a few > words, those who needed a longer explanation, those who > had to be guided for a long time and needed a great deal > of advice, and those who understood the > theory but could not attain. Today there are only the last > two kinds of persons. Joop: that the same old Indian idea that there is a degeneration of time like the decline of the sasana of which Buddhaghosa made a period of 5000 years. I simply don't believe such a dgeneration theory. I also don't believe the opposite of a quick spiritual evolution in this Aquarius Age and comparable NeW Age thinking. We simply don't know. .... > Joop, as to Abhidhamma, we should not think of a text book, > but it is about > our life now. This is never boring. Always something happening. Joop: That's a little bit an alienating remark, because: what if I experience it as boring on this phase in my life? But don't worry about my path, I'm not yet lost; on this moment I'm checking the dutch translation of the Sangaha (the CMA) on typo's, takes a lot of time. I know the Abhidhamma is not (only) a book: to me it's a superior model of reality (not reality itself), very useful as a soteriological raft. And on other moments the Heart Sutra is more useful to me; that's my buddhist intuition and I trust my intuition. > Nina. > Metta Joop 57089 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Sat Mar 25, 2006 1:02am Subject: Re: Three cheers for Kom!! buddhatrue Hi Kom, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Kom Tukovinit" wrote: > > Dear James, > > I found your post to be amusing, for I've never thought that you would be > cheering me anytime :-). Well, that goes for two of us: I never thought you would become a monk! :-) Metta, James 57090 From: han tun Date: Sat Mar 25, 2006 1:16am Subject: Anattalakkhana Sutta: Part One hantun1 Anattalakkhana Sutta: Part One Dear Nina and Lodewijk, Here is the first part of the Anattalakkhana Sutta. ------------------------------ SN XXII.59 Anatta-lakkhana Sutta The Discourse on the Not-self Characteristic Translated from the Pali by Bhikkhu Bodhi Thus have I heard. On one occasion the Blessed One was dwelling at Baraanasi in the Deer Park at Isipatana. There the Blessed One addressed the bhikkhus of the group of five thus: “Bhikkhus!” “Venerable sir!” those bhikkhus replied. The Blessed One said this: “Bhikkhus, form is nonself. For if, bhikkhus, form were self, this form would not lead to affliction, and it would be possible to have it of form: ‘Let my form be thus; let my form not be thus.’ But because form is nonself, form leads to affliction, and it is not possible to have it of form: ‘Let my form be thus; let my form not be thus.’ “Feeling is nonself. For if, bhikkhus, feeling were self, this feeling would not lead to affliction, and it would be possible to have it of feeling: ‘Let my feeling be thus; let my feeling not be thus.’ But because feeling is nonself, feeling leads to affliction, and it is not possible to have it of feeling: ‘Let my feeling be thus; let my feeling not be thus.’ “Perception is nonself. For if, bhikkhus, perception were self, this perception would not lead to affliction, and it would be possible to have it of perception: ‘Let my perception be thus; let my perception not be thus.’ But because perception is nonself, perception leads to affliction, and it is not possible to have it of perception: ‘Let my perception be thus; let my perception not be thus.’ “Volitional formations are nonself. For if, bhikkhus, volitional formations were self, these volitional formations would not lead to affliction, and it would be possible to have it of volitional formations: ‘Let my volitional formations be thus; let my volitional formations not be thus.’ But because volitional formations are nonself, volitional formations lead to affliction, and it is not possible to have it of volitional formations: ‘Let my volitional formations be thus; let my volitional formations not be thus.’ “Consciousness is nonself. For if, bhikkhus, consciousness were self, this consciousness would not lead to affliction, and it would be possible to have it of consciousness: ‘Let my consciousness be thus; let my consciousness not be thus.’ But because consciousness is nonself, consciousness leads to affliction, and it is not possible to have it of consciousness: ‘Let my consciousness be thus; let my consciousness not be thus.’ ---------------------------- Han: The original Anattalakkhana Sutta is divided into four parts. The first part deals with the teaching that the five aggregates of form, feeling, perception, volitional formations and consciousness tend to afflict and, being unmanageable, are therefore not self or inner essence. The Buddha started off with “ruupam bhikkave anattaa” which was translated by Venerable Bhikkhu Bodhi as “Bhikkhus, form is nonself.” What is anattaa? Anatta means there is no atta, What is atta? One of the meanings given by Rhys Davids Dictionary is as follows. The soul as postulated in the animistic theories held in Northern India in the 6th and 7th century B.C. It is described in the Upanishads as a small creature, in shape like a man, dwelling in ordinary times in the heart. It escapes from the body in sleep or trance; when it returns to the body life and motion reappear. It escapes from the body at death, then continues to carry on an everlasting life of its own. Other meanings include self, ego, personality, etc. Many would not agree to take atta as a creature that dwells within the body, but I mention it here because it is quite interesting. I thought it was the Buddha who mentioned the five aggregates for the first time. But later, I came to realize that the general populace before Buddha’s time already knew about the five aggregates. The sakkaaya ditthi which was prevalent before Buddha’s time was arrived at by multiplying five aggregates with four types of atta beliefs. What are the four types of atta beliefs with regard to each aggregate? According to one Burmese scholar the four atta beliefs are as follows. (1) ruupa is atta. (2) atta has ruupa (like a tree has its shadow) (3) ruupa is inside atta (like smell in the flower) (4) atta is inside ruupa (like ruby inside a box) The same four atta beliefs with four other aggregates will make up 20 sakkaaya ditthi. The author quoted Dhammasanganii Pali as the source of the above information. I do not have Dhammasanganii Pali. Nina may wish to kindly check it. Anyway, it is just a side issue. Going back to the sutta, the Buddha said: “ruupam aabaadhaaya samvattati” (form leads to affliction). How true! When I was 70, I developed three illnesses. One of them was paralytic ileus (paralysis of the muscles of the small intestine). When the muscles of the small intestine were paralyzed the semi-digested food could not be propelled along the intestinal passage causing intestinal obstruction and severe abdominal pain. The other illness was bronchial asthma which woke me up in the middle of the night with difficulty in breathing, and I had to sit up for long periods of time wheezing and gasping for breath. I had to live with these illnesses for 3-5 years. At that time I thought I would use the pain and suffering to my advantage. I thought I would apply whatever little knowledge I had gained with regard to five aggregates and vedanaanupassanaa, and decided to contemplate on the pain as follows. The paralysis of the muscles of the small intestine was due to imbalance in pathavi dhaatu and the vaayo dhaatu was trying to push the food (another pathavi) down, but being unable to do so it further stretched the intestinal wall causing pain. The pain was experienced by vedana cetasika. There was no “I” or “Han Tun” involved in the process. It was only the five aggregates doing their own tasks. When I contemplated that way taking “I” and “Han Tun” out of the equation, I had a strange feeling. The pain was still there but I did not suffer from it. There was kaayika-dukkha, but there was no cetasika-dukkha. In other words there was body pain but not the mental pain. It was a strange sensation which I cannot describe satisfactorily. But it helped me in my pain management. I contemplated in the same way during asthmatic attacks. It was the constriction of bronchioles (pathvi dhaatu) preventing the free flow of air (vaayo dhaatu) causing difficulty in breathing. This difficulty in breathing was experienced by vedana cetasika, not by “me” or “Han Tun”. By taking away “I” and “Han Tun” out of the equation, I had the same feeling as in the case of intestinal paralysis. That is to show how five aggregates can lead to affliction, and how the little knowledge of five aggregates and anatta could help me out. It may not lead to any insight wisdom but it surely had been helpful in pain management. When I told this experience to Acharn Sujin’s Discussion Group, the Group immediately dismissed it as an illusion and said that it was also a wrong vedanaanupassanaa. They may be right. But for me it had been helpful for pain management if not for anything else. I would do it all over again if such a situation presents itself. The most important point of this portion of the sutta is that the five aggregates are beyond one’s control. The Buddha said: if ruupa were atta, this ruupa would not lead to affliction, and it would be possible to have it of ruupa: ‘Let my ruupa be thus; let my ruupa not be thus’ (ruupanca hidam attaa abhavissa nayidam ruupam aabhaadhaaya samvatteyya, labbhetha ca ruupe ‘evam me ruupam hotu, evam me ruupam maa ahosiiti). But because ruupa is nonself, ruupa leads to affliction, and it is not possible to have it of ruupa: ‘Let my ruupa be thus; let my ruupa not be thus.’ (yasmaa ca kho ruupam anattaa tasmaa ruupam aabaadhaaya samvattati, na ca labbhati ruupe ‘evam me ruupam hotu, evam me ruupam maa ahosiiti’) This shows “no control” over the five aggregates. This is particularly true for major landmarks in life. I don’t want to get old but I get old. I don’t want to get sick but I get sick. I don’t want to die but I will have to die. However, within this broad framework of “no control” I think I can, to some reasonable extent, do something to prevent or mitigate the situation. Those illnesses I have described were completely cured, and I attributed it, to a large extent, to the wholesome deeds that I had performed, in particular the vipassanaa meditation and other meritorious deeds. My contention is that if my good kamma becomes strong enough by wholesome, meritorious deeds the kammaja-ruupas must also improve. Nina had warned me that apart from kamma other factors, citta, utu, aahaara, also play their parts. I agree, but out of 28 ruupas there are nine ruupas which are exclusively formed by kamma, not by citta, not by utu, and not by aahaara. These nine exclusive ruupas are: (1) cakkhu-pasaada = sensitive part of the eye (2) sota-pasaada = sensitive part of the ear (3) ghaana-pasaada = sensitive part of the nose (4) jivhaa-pasaada = sensitive part of the tongue (5) kaaya-pasaada = sensitive part of the body (6) itthi-bhaava = femininity (7) purisa-bhaava = masculinity (8) hadaya-vatthu = heart-base (9) jiivita-ruupa = life faculty They are called 9 kammaja-ekaja-ruupas. It can be seen that the sensitive parts of the body, the heart-base and life faculty are exclusively formed by kamma. They are very important ruupas. Moreover, kamma, citta, utu, and aahaara are collectively responsible for the formation of another nine ruupas, namely, pathavi, aapo, tejo, vaayo, vanna, gandha, rasa, oja, and aakaasa-dhaatu (9 kammaja-anekaja-ruupas or 9 catuja-ruupas). Pathavi, aapo, tejo, vaayo, vanna, gandha, rasa, oja are the 8 inseparable avinibbhoga-ruupas and together with jiivita-ruupa which is the physical life, they form the simplest unit of kammaja-ruupa. It is called jiivita-navaka-kalaapa. By adding the remaining 8 kammaja-ekaja-ruupas one at a time to this basic kammaja-navaka-kalaapa we get various groups of ten ruupas such as cakkhu-dasaka, sota-dasaka and so on. So the effect of kamma on the ruupas cannot be underestimated. I will stop here and continue the second part of the sutta next time. With metta and deepest, Han ------------------------------ > Nina: I talked with Lodewijk about you and told him that you recite each day the anatta lakkhana sutta. He said he would like you to share your views and comments on the texts which you read and contemplate. I really like to listen to someone's personal experiences in the light of the teachings. =========================================== 57091 From: sharad goswami Date: Sat Mar 25, 2006 1:38am Subject: Buddhism And Science pisean282311 Dear All, Buddhism goes beyond modern science in its acceptance of a wider field of knowledge than is allowed by the scientific mind. Buddhism admits knowledge arising from the sense organs as well as personal experiences gained though mental culture. By training and developing a highly concentrated mind, religious experience can be understood and verified. Religious experience is not something which can be understood by conducting experiments in a test-tube or examined under a microscope (This article was extracted from "What Buddhist Believe", written by Ven (Dr) K Sri Dhammananda. view gr8 article- http://www.cam-associates.com/articles/religion/buddha_science.htm <...> 57092 From: han tun Date: Sat Mar 25, 2006 2:21am Subject: [dsg] Anattalakkhana Sutta: Correction hantun1 Anattalakkhana Sutta: Correction Dear Nina and Lodewijk, In my last post I had written: I thought it was the Buddha who mentioned the five aggregates for the first time. But later, I came to realize that the general populace before Buddha’s time already knew about the five aggregates. The sakkaaya ditthi which was prevalent before Buddha’s time was arrived at by multiplying five aggregates with four types of atta beliefs. That was not correct. I just remember what one Sayadaw mentioned in his tape. He said that the Buddha was the first to identify the five aggregates. The other parties took up what the Buddha had said about the five aggregates and they added their wrong views to the five aggregates. With metta and deepest respect, Han --- han tun wrote: > Anattalakkhana Sutta: Part One > > Dear Nina and Lodewijk, > > Here is the first part of the Anattalakkhana Sutta. > ------------------------------ 57093 From: nina van gorkom Date: Sat Mar 25, 2006 3:36am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Lodewijk's post on the long way. .. Sankharanimitta nilovg Hi Tep, op 25-03-2006 03:13 schreef indriyabala op indriyabala@...: >> Nina: >> Impossible for us to catch which visible object we experience, there > is another one and then another one. I would be careful with the word > sequence, because in reality there are many different processes with > the seeing of visible object. ... just as a torch swung around and > then the impression is a circle of light. In reality this circle > consists of many different light impressions. > > Tep: Do you object to the use of the word "sequence" because these > multiple processes occur in parallel (simultaneously)? But, does that > have anything to do with the fact that citta only senses one object > at a time? The swung around circle of light is clearly sequential to > our eyes (the brightness traces from one point on the circle to > another and another, one point at a time), isn't it? > ............................. N: sequential: I think of one citta that is succeeded by the next citta within one process. But the processes of cittas occur one after the other extremely rapidly. ---------- > Tep: Are these nimittas of the five khandhas simultaneously occurring, > or sequentially? I think they occur simultaneously, and that the citta > can only sense one nimitta at a time. > ........................... N: When speaking about nimitta I mean the nimitta of one rupa, or of one feeling, etc. as it appears now, is gone and the nimitta of it is all that remains. Thus, the nimitta of each of the five khandhas separately. Nimitta is in connection with the dhamma that is experienced now. One at a time. -------- >> N: I have been married to Lodewijk for fiftyfour years, all gone like > a dream. Then we come closer to this moment: gone immediately, like a > dream. > > Tep: Are you sad? But sadness is a sankhara that is conditioned by > tanha and avijja, isn't it? ------- N: Some what apprehensive. I have to be honest, yes, conditioned by > tanha and avijja. Of course these have not been eradicated, how could it be otherwise? Can you prevent yourself from missing your daughter who is in Japan? -------- T: On the other hand, if you are not sad, > then could you please tell me how you condition equanimity to arise > every time? > ................................ N: It can be done by developed insight; the anagami and arahat have no more sadness. But if there is a moment of some understanding of nama and rupa, at that moment there cannot be sadness, and there is a degree of tatramajjhattataa. This cetasika arises with each kusala citta. But it cannot last. -------- >> N: P.S. I think the Sangiitisutta is too good for reserving it only > for a rainy day. > Tep: I am glad you have left the door open! If we limit the discussion > to a small number of selected dhammas from the sutta (say, about 10), > will you be able to handle it? --------- N: If it comes one by one, yes. Nina. 57094 From: nina van gorkom Date: Sat Mar 25, 2006 3:36am Subject: Re: [dsg] Can ignorance and formations be the mistaken circle of "not" knowing? nilovg Dear Paul, op 24-03-2006 15:23 schreef paulgrabianowski op paulgrabianowski@...: > > N: When we understand that ignorance conditions kamma-formations, we > shall not be confused, at least in theory. > P: I find this quite interesting and perhaps perplexing (in a hopeful > way). If ignorance is "not knowing" (a��aanaa) the reality of dhamma, > and thus is a condition for kamma-formations, then aren't both > ignorance and kamma-formations themselves a) subject to dukkha and > conditionality b) not-self ------------ N: Conditioned dhammas, thus also ignorance and kamma-formations, arise and fall away and are thus dukkha, dukkha in the sense of sa.nkhaara dukkha. Moreover, they are non-self. But ignorance does not know this. --------- P: The circularity comes in (probably not the best term--I appoligize) in > this sense: At the moment of the arising of citta, what is the > difference between ignorance and kamma formations? They seem to me, > at least at this moment, to be two aspects of the same conditional > process. ------- N: What type of citta you refer to, that is the question. I am glad Rob K reminds us of the three rounds spinning also at this moment. These rounds are mentioned in the Visuddhimagga. Rob K: Thus, when speaking about citta we have to be clear what type. Seeing now is vipaakacitta, and this may experience a desirable object or an undesirable object. Kusala cittas or akusala cittas arise on account of what is seen. Mostly akusala cittas with defilements arise, but also in kusala cittas the latent tendencies of ignorance, desire, etc. lie dormant. These can motivate kusala kamma or akusala kamma which condition vipaakacittas, and so samsara continues. -------- P: Is ignorance something exclusively volitional and > kamma-formations merely the result of the interdependence of these > volitional processes and other mental factors and rupas in any given > moment? or something else? ------- N: Kamma-formations are not results, they are kusala cetanas and akusala cetanas (volitions). I do not know whether I answered your questions satisfactorily. Nina. 57095 From: nina van gorkom Date: Sat Mar 25, 2006 3:36am Subject: Visuddhimagga Ch XVII, 64 and Tiika. nilovg Visuddhimagga Ch XVII, 64 Text Vis.: So formations exist only when ignorance exists, not when it does not; and that is how it can be known that these formations have ignorance as their condition. --------- N: The Tiika states that, in short, ignorance is the condition for the formations. But that in addition the meaning of what is said can be explained by the words of the sutta, ŒThis is said too², etc. ------- Text Vis. : This is said too: 'Not knowing, bhikkhus, in ignorance, he forms the formation of merit, forms the formation of demerit, forms the formation of the imperturbable. As soon as a bhikkhu's ignorance is abandoned and clear vision arisen, bhikkhus, with the fading away of ignorance and the arising of clear vision he does not form even formations of merit' (cf. Sii,82). ------- N: Tiika: this is the word of the sutta that is conveyed. As to Œnot knowing¹ (avidva), this means that he is ignorant, foolish. As to the expression Œin ignorance¹, this means: possessed of ignorance. This means that ignorance is unabandoned. ------- Conclusion: the Vis. text refers to the Kindred Sayings (II, Niddaanavagga, Ch 5, § 51). Further on, we read in the sutta referred to above (B.B. translation, p. 587): The Commentary to this sutta explains that ignorance is darkness and that understanding (vijjaa) is like a lamp, illuminating the darkness. It states that when there is no clinging there is no fear. There is no fear arising because of clinging, tanhaa. The commentary to the UDANA ( translation by Peter Masefield, PTS, p71,vol I, enlightenment chapter) states about ignorance: <"...it is ignorance (avijjaa) since it causes the unequivocal own nature of things not to be known (avidita.m); it is ignorance (avijjaa) since it causes beings to dart (javaapeti) among becomings and so on within samsara that is without end (antavirahite); it is ignorance (avijjaa) since it darts among those things which do not actually exist (avijjamaanesu javati), since it does not dart among those things that do exist; (and)it is ignorance (avijjaa) since it is the opposite of knowledge (vijjaaya)...> We are taken in by concepts of people and do not understand paramattha dhammas, also at this moment. It seems that persons and things appear through the eyesense all the time, not visible object. But if we begin to develop understanding of paramattha dhammas, paññaa will eventually illuminate the darkness of ignorance. ****** 57096 From: "Phil" Date: Sat Mar 25, 2006 4:46am Subject: Vipaka galore philofillet ¡¡¡¡ ¡¡¡¡Hi all I¡¯d like to share a few teachings on kamma and vipaka that have been very helpful for me lately ¨C I guess it comes down to the value of understanding, even in a shallow way, the difference between the moments of vipaka and the moments when there are fresh kilesas born of our response to vipaka. So, come to think of it, thinking about kamma doesn¡¯t enter into it ¨C that is one of the imponderables, as this passage points out; ¡°It is difficult to understand the subject of kamma in detail. It is one of the subjects that are unthinkable, subjects one cannot fathom, and therefore one should not speculate about them. (snip) Vipaka, however, the result of kamma, which experiences objects through the senses is appearing at this moment, and thus it can be known.¡± Ph: This is so, so important. There is no point speculating about kamma, about which kamma did or will cause which result. One moment of kamma in this lifetime will condition the rebirth consciousness of the next lifetime ¨C this we know. Kusala and akusala kamma patha give birth to vipaka ¨C this we know. But we know it only in theory. We cannot know more about it, we cannot penetrate it by racking our brains on the topic. But vipaka can come to be known. Seeing can be known ¨C if there are conditions for patience - hearing can be known, and the other vipakas. Every moment of every day, wherever we are, whatever we are doing, vipaka is arising, and there is the opportunity for developing understanding of it. If we try to do it, we will fail. Dhamma goes against the ways of the world, but if we stay open to the Buddha¡¯s teaching and cultivate conditions for sati, understanding will follow, in moments. This is enough. ¡°If we understand that vipaka citta that arises is the result of kamma we performed ourselves, can we still be angry with other people or blame them for the vipaka we receive.¡± Ph: ¡°If we understand..¡± Ah, those words. Understanding is everything. Understanding vipaka conditions adosa, which is metta ¨C there is no need to think about or contemplate or wish for metta whatsoever ¨C understanding conditions it. Understanding conditions sila ¨C when we understand that kilesas arise from vipaka, there will be more appreciation of the danger of akusala. Understanding conditions so many forms of kusala. We must start with understanding, and there is understanding all the way. To plunge into ¡°practice¡± without understanding of the processes at work because some guru told us to do this or that is not the way to go. But people like methods. Dhamma goes against the ways of this world. ¡°If we do not listen to the Dhamma and do not investigate realities, we shall not know when there is vipaka, the result of past kamma, and when there are kusala javana vithis cittas or akusala javana vithi cittas that arise in their own series. If we do now know this, we shall not see the danger of akusala and we shall not be inclined to develop kusasla.¡± Ph: Of course, knowing when there is vipaka and when there is javana is not so easy. But it is a good area for understanding to stretch its baby legs, I think, because it deals with experience that is constantly arising, wherever we are, whatever we are doing. ¡°Is there seeing now?¡± It also ties leads us gently toward knowing nama from rupa, the first stage of insight. (the ayatanas are rupa that help to condition the arising of the nama that is the vipaka of seeing consciousness, etc. I think it is incredibly groovy and miraculous the way this goes on.) These days I do my Dhamma study/reflection/meditation briefly in the morning, but no longer feel the strong need to do something special to ¡°set up¡± my day like I used to.¡¡(Though obviously there is still clinging to my brief morning session.) This is because I am really coming to understand that coming to understanding seeing now, hearing now, tasting, touching, smelling, thinking now ¨C this is all that matters. Anything beyond that would fall into place on its own, through conditions established by right understanding of the world through the six doors. Phil p.s I will be coming to DSG on Saturdays and dropping these rambling posts on you just in case anyone is interested. Won't have time to discuss, though. Sorry. p.p.s Nina, or others who are keen on Abhidhamma - if you see any errors in what I've written, please point them out. Thanks in advance. 57097 From: "Phil" Date: Sat Mar 25, 2006 4:49am Subject: The dhammas underlying postures philofillet Hi all On occasion I have been puzzled by the Satipatthana Sutta, the references to "the monk knows he is standing etc." The Buddha teaches so explicitly and deeply about paramattha dhammas in hundreds of suttas in Samyutta Nikaya – why would he use conventional postures as objects of mindfulness? It doesn't make sense to me, almost feels like an entirely different "religion." I think in the commentary there is the well known passage about even jackals know they are walking, something like that, and that it is deeper dhammas that are to be considered. I know this is a topic that has been discussed here at length but I have not followed. But here is a very helpful teaching that gets at what lies beneath the surface of "the monk knows he is walking" etc: "Sitting is not a reality. (Ph: I prefer "dhamma" to "reality", personally.) But there is seeing now. Why go past the eye. So we see. Seeing is not sitting, seeing sees. And there is visible object, which makes it possible for seeing to arise. So there is visible object to be aware of too. And how do you know you are sitting? Because you do not see what you call your body, in the position that you conventionally label "sitting position." You also have experiences of hardness here and there, there are tangible objects being experienced in different places where there is body sense. Then, when you think about all that information you have the idea of a person or someone as a "whole." That is what you call "sitting." But the whole purpose of the Buddha's teaching is to destroy the wrong idea of a "whole" through seeing the truth of the different realities. They are not a "whole." Seeing is not sitting. The experience of hardness at the point (? – indecipherable scrawl in my notebook) does not sit. The experience of coolness at that point does not sit. The coolness itself does not sit. "Sitting" is a conventional idea which enables us to communicate. It is not a reality." (I prefer "dhamma.") Phil 57098 From: "Phil" Date: Sat Mar 25, 2006 4:59am Subject: Re: Lodewijk's post on the long way. philofillet Hi Nina > Frankly, I find it hard to swallow that my > life with Lodewijk is like a dream (he is eighty now). As Acharn Sujin said when talking about this subject "the truth is the truth" and "no one can change the Buddha's teaching." I found something you wrote once at DSG: "I cannot tell myself not to cling to Lodewijk, that would be unrealistic and insincere. What really helps is seeing one's own wrong view for a moment. Some rare and brief moments of beiginning to understnad what seeing is as different from thinking that gives me confidence in satipatthana as the only way leading out from dukkha." Phil 57099 From: "Phil" Date: Sat Mar 25, 2006 4:52am Subject: Ephemeral feelings philofillet Hi all Hi all On occasion I have been puzzle by the Satipatthana Sutta, the references to "the monk knows his is standing etc." The Buddha teaches so explicitly and deeply about paramattha dhammas in hundreds of suttas in Samyutta Nikaya – why would he uses conventional postures as objects of mindfulness. It doesn't make sense to me, almost feels like an entirely different "religion." I think in the commentary there is the well known passage about even jackals know they are walking, something like that, and that it is deeper dhammas that are to be considered. I know this is a topic that has been discussed here at length but I have not followed. But here is a very helpful teaching that gets at what lies beneath the surface of "the monk knows he is walking" etc: "Sitting is not a reality. (Ph: I prefer "dhamma" to "reality", personally.) But there is seeing now. Why go past the eye. So we see. Seeing is not sitting, seeing sees. And there is visible object, which makes it possible for seeing to arise. So there is visible object to be aware of too. And how do you know you are sitting? Because you do not see what you call your body, in the position that you conventionally label "sitting position." You also have experiences of hardness here and there, there are tangible objects being experienced in different places where there is body sense. Then, when you think about all that information you have the idea of a person or someone as a "whole." That is what you call "sitting." But the whole purpose of the Buddha's teaching is to destroy the wrong idea of a "whole" through seeing the truth of the different realities. They are not a "whole." Seeing is not sitting. The experience of hardness at the point (? – indecipherable scrawl in my notebook) does not sit. The experience of coolness at that point does not sit. The coolness itself does not sit. "Sitting" is a conventional idea which enables us to communicate. It is not a reality." (I prefer "dhamma.") Hi all I was interested by this teaching on feelings: "At each moment of citta the condition for the accompanying feeling changes and thus feelings change all the time. It does not appear to us this when when we cling to the feeling that has fallen away. It exists no more but we keep pondering it." Very interesting. The sutta that many of us have quoted here, about feelings being like clouds passing by, or passing winds, blowing this way and that, I forget, has to be seen in a new light for me. Feelings, are much much more ephemeral than we think. There are in fact millions (billions) of feelings rising and falling away in the space of what we would conventionally think of a feeling that is being considered. Needless to say our clouded minds don't see this, so we think about feelings and form them into wholes, cling to them and make them so important although they have fallen away, are constantly falling away to exist not more. There are even feelings accompanying bhavanga cittas! The conventional mind rejects this – there cannot be feelings if they cannot be experienced, the conventional understanding says. Dhamma goes against the ways of this world. Phil 57100 From: "indriyabala" Date: Sat Mar 25, 2006 6:16am Subject: Re: Ephemeral feelings indriyabala Hi Phil (and Jon, KenH, Ken O.)- I think the main reason you have been "puzzled" by the Satipatthana in body postures (a part of kayagata-sati) is due to a incurable conflict between what the Buddha taught and what he did not teach. The followings are an example of what the Buddha did not teach. > ..even jackals know they are walking .. > > Sitting is not a reality. (Ph: I prefer "dhamma" to > "reality", personally.) But there is seeing now. > "Sitting" is a conventional idea which enables us to communicate. > It is not a reality." The Buddha taught that the 4 body postures were "body in the body" (kaye-kaya) that could be effectively used as objects of satipatthana. Same can be said about breathing/breaths. The benefit is to abandon the perceptions(sanna) related to the "household life" so that the meditator's mind becomes unified and settled inward (not wandering around like jackals). Please carefully study the following short passage from MN 119(Kayagata-sati Sutta), and you may know what the Buddha taught. "Furthermore, when walking, the monk discerns that he is walking. When standing, he discerns that he is standing. When sitting, he discerns that he is sitting. When lying down, he discerns that he is lying down. Or however his body is disposed, that is how he discerns it. And as he remains thus heedful, ardent, & resolute, any memories & resolves related to the household life are abandoned, and with their abandoning his mind gathers & settles inwardly, grows unified & centered. This is how a monk develops mindfulness immersed in the body." [end of quote] Regards, Tep, your Dhamma friend ====== --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Phil" wrote: > > > Hi all > > Hi all > > On occasion I have been puzzle by the Satipatthana Sutta, the > references to "the monk knows his is standing etc." The Buddha > teaches so explicitly and deeply about paramattha dhammas in > hundreds of suttas in Samyutta Nikaya – why would he uses > conventional postures as objects of mindfulness. It doesn't make > sense to me, almost feels like an entirely different "religion." I > think in the commentary there is the well known passage about even > jackals know they are walking, something like that, and that it is > deeper dhammas that are to be considered. I know this is a topic > that has been discussed here at length but I have not followed. But > here is a very helpful teaching that gets at what lies beneath the > surface of "the monk knows he is walking" etc: > > "Sitting is not a reality. (Ph: I prefer "dhamma" to > "reality", personally.) But there is seeing now. Why go past the > eye. So we see. Seeing is not sitting, seeing sees. And there is > visible object, which makes it possible for seeing to arise. So (snipped) 57101 From: "indriyabala" Date: Sat Mar 25, 2006 6:53am Subject: Re: Lodewijk's post on the long way. .. Sankharanimitta indriyabala Dear Nina - Thank you for giving me again some foods for thought, but most of all I appreciate your open-mindedness. Is open-mindedness a necessary paccaya for samma-ditthi? >N:sequential: I think of one citta that is succeeded by the next citta within one process. >When speaking about nimitta I mean the nimitta of one rupa, or of one feeling, etc. as it appears now, is gone and the nimitta of it is all that remains. Thus, the nimitta of each of the five khandhas separately. Nimitta is in connection with the dhamma that is experienced now. One at a time. Tep. Yes. When I say 'the citta' I mean a certain citta before it is succeeded by the next one. And this arising-and-passing-away is sequential for sure. I think past lives recollection is possible because of this sequential phenomena; it allows back tracking. ........... >N: Of course these have not been eradicated, how could it be otherwise? Can you prevent yourself from missing your daughter who is in Japan? Tep: No, I cannot. You're right about that! But whenever I have mindfulness immersed in the body (kayagata sati), there is no missing of the loved ones or missing of those good times in the past either. ............... >N: But if there is a moment of some understanding of nama and rupa, at that moment there cannot be sadness, and there is a degree of tatramajjhattataa. This cetasika arises with each kusala citta. But it cannot last. Tep: Precisely! It is because of "some understanding of nama and rupa" [that they are 'anicca, dukkha, anatta'] that sets the mind free -- yet, that understanding does not last. What about the arahant's understanding -- does it last? ............... Thank you for agreeing to discuss one dhamma (at a time) from the Sangiitisutta. I'll be back later with the first one. Sincerely, Tep ====== --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, nina van gorkom wrote: > > Hi Tep, > op 25-03-2006 03:13 schreef indriyabala op indriyabala@...: > (snipped) > > > >> N: P.S. I think the Sangiitisutta is too good for reserving it only for a rainy day. > > Tep: I am glad you have left the door open! If we limit the discussion to a small number of selected dhammas from the sutta (say, about 10), will you be able to handle it? > --------- > N: If it comes one by one, yes. > Nina. > 57102 From: nina van gorkom Date: Sat Mar 25, 2006 6:56am Subject: Re: [dsg] Anattalakkhana Sutta: conceit. nilovg Dear Han. I read your post to Lodewijk and he appreciated it very much and is looking forward to further comments from you. I find it so meaningful that a sermon is repeated again. It does not sink in the first time, and we can verify this also in our own case. Reading a sutta again later on, or hearing a tape of Kh Sujin again: what is said gains in meaning. I agree that conceit, maana can be a great hindrance. Because of conceit people may not even like to listen to the Dhamma. The fact that it took somewhat longer for the five disciples to attain arahatship shows how deeply rooted and how stubborn conceit is. I looked up conceit in the Mahaaniddesa, a.t.tada.ndasutta (in Thai). The subject of the a.t.tada.ndasutta, embraced violence is given in short in the Sutta Nipata (Ch of Eights, vs. 935). The Mahaaniddesa of the Khuddaka Nikaaya contains many treasures, but it is not translated in English. It is not well known. On conceit, it is first explained that one compares oneself to someone else (as better, equal and less). Then it explains the objects of conceit: the eight worldly conditions (lokadhammas: praise, blame, etc.) On account of the five objects: one receives pleasant ones, or unpleasant ones. On account of the senses. On account of any object there may be clinging to the importance of self. There may be comparing or not necessarily comparing. It is then stated that it can be object of vipassanaa. Since conceit arises on account of an object through each of the six doors, separately, I do not think it arises only on account of the five khandhas as a whole. It can arise because of feeling: how important is my pleasant or unhappy feeling. How important is my confidence in kusala, my saddhaa. There is coarse conceit that is more easily detectable, such as : I have more knowledge, or, how strangely dressed is he. It can also be more refined conceit, and this is very hard to perceive. Even now, when colour is seen, there may be conceit on account of colour. The very refined conceit is hard to eradicate, only the arahat has eradicated it. Nina. op 24-03-2006 07:34 schreef han tun op hantun1@...: > Therefore, it might be due to the fact that self-pride > or maana still lingered in their minds that > prevented them from attaining arahantship after the > first discourse although they had become > Sotaapannas. 57103 From: "Cerini Pablo" Date: Sat Mar 25, 2006 7:31am Subject: [dsg] Re: arahat and D.O., Larry cerini_pablo Hi Larry, James, Nina , Tg (and all) LBIDD@... wrote: > One point the Visuddhimagga is stressing in regard to ignorance is >that we are barely aware of dukkha. There is even ignorance of the >dukkha of unpleasant bodily feeling. We try to ignore it and cover it >over as much as possible. Just enter in this thread with a short comment here, because what you write about unpleasant bodily feeling and dukkha impressed me . I think that what you say is true. IMHO this mass of subtle "almost silent" unpleasant bodily feeling , like a background radiation so difficult to perceive that one may be mislead to consider as indifferent, is one of the strongest shells of avijja. I'm saying in my opinion, so correct me if I fall out of canonical paths. But sometimes one feels like "packaged" into this mass, or heavy net, of impacts, contacts , warmness,hardness, softness ... this is a whole mass of dukkha , and not becuase it causes pain but because it just breaks calm and one-pointedness. Dukkha can even not hurt in the usual sense, like a punch on your nose. Everything forbids "you" to keep one-pointedness and calm is dukkha of the most "evil" level. One thing I learnt is this : I have still many difficulties in understanding fully the 1st noble truth, because before seeing that everything is dukkha one should understand what dukkha is "really" . I think that more than seeking for dukkha in things , I should upgrade the "concept" of dukkha as to let it embrace the whole mass of the five khandas . cerini pablo p.s. Or only the latest four ? Can rupa be embraced by sati ? p.p.s hope that what I wrote makes some sense. 57104 From: TGrand458@... Date: Sat Mar 25, 2006 4:17am Subject: Re: [dsg] Ephemeral feelings TGrand458@... Hi Phil A few comments below ... In a message dated 3/25/2006 6:07:14 A.M. Mountain Standard Time, philco777@... writes: Hi all On occasion I have been puzzle by the Satipatthana Sutta, the references to "the monk knows his is standing etc." The Buddha teaches so explicitly and deeply about paramattha dhammas in hundreds of suttas in Samyutta Nikaya – why would he uses conventional postures as objects of mindfulness. It doesn't make sense to me, almost feels like an entirely different "religion." TG: As I've pointed out a lot lately, the Buddha does not teach explicitly about 'paramattha dhammas.' He doesn't even use the term 'paramattha dhammas.' The Buddha teaches a variety of things including the things being 'interpreted' by current practicing Buddhists as paramattha dhammas. Those are an important part of his teaching and I stress the word -- 'PART.' I think in the commentary there is the well known passage about even jackals know they are walking, something like that, and that it is deeper dhammas that are to be considered. I know this is a topic that has been discussed here at length but I have not followed. But here is a very helpful teaching that gets at what lies beneath the surface of "the monk knows he is walking" etc: "Sitting is not a reality. (Ph: I prefer "dhamma" to "reality", personally.) But there is seeing now. Why go past the eye. So we see. Seeing is not sitting, seeing sees. And there is visible object, which makes it possible for seeing to arise. So there is visible object to be aware of too. And how do you know you are sitting? Because you do not see what you call your body, in the position that you conventionally label "sitting position." You also have experiences of hardness here and there, there are tangible objects being experienced in different places where there is body sense. Then, when you think about all that information you have the idea of a person or someone as a "whole." That is what you call "sitting." But the whole purpose of the Buddha's teaching is to destroy the wrong idea of a "whole" through seeing the truth of the different realities. TG: The whole purpose of the Buddha's teaching is to destroy Dukkha. Discerning the so-called "realities" is just one aspect of that process. It is an important aspect, but if overblown, it becomes a "different religion/practice" than what the Buddha taught ... as you have indicated in this post in a 'reverse fashion.' They are not a "whole." Seeing is not sitting. The experience of hardness at the point (? – indecipherable scrawl in my notebook) does not sit. The experience of coolness at that point does not sit. The coolness itself does not sit. "Sitting" is a conventional idea which enables us to communicate. It is not a reality." (I prefer "dhamma.") Hi all I was interested by this teaching on feelings: "At each moment of citta the condition for the accompanying feeling changes and thus feelings change all the time. It does not appear to us this when when we cling to the feeling that has fallen away. It exists no more but we keep pondering it." Very interesting. The sutta that many of us have quoted here, about feelings being like clouds passing by, or passing winds, blowing this way and that, I forget, has to be seen in a new light for me. Feelings, are much much more ephemeral than we think. There are in fact millions (billions) of feelings rising and falling away in the space of what we would conventionally think of a feeling that is being considered. Needless to say our clouded minds don't see this, so we think about feelings and form them into wholes, cling to them and make them so important although they have fallen away, are constantly falling away to exist not more. There are even feelings accompanying bhavanga cittas! The conventional mind rejects this – there cannot be feelings if they cannot be experienced, the conventional understanding says. TG: So much of the above seems to me based on theory; and not on what can be directly experienced. The Buddha seems to me to be much more common sense oriented. Even in the highly touted Satipatthana Sutta, the Buddha uses conventional descriptions and advises conceptually based frames of analysis. All of these things are just tools to get out of samsara. Any of these tools may be more applicable than others, depending on the present frame of mind of the practitioner. Dhamma goes against the ways of this world. TG: Dhamma goes against the * delusional * ways of this world. Phil TG * Interesting comments Phil. * 57105 From: TGrand458@... Date: Sat Mar 25, 2006 4:37am Subject: Re: [dsg] Buddhism And Science TGrand458@... In a message dated 3/25/2006 2:53:12 A.M. Mountain Standard Time, pisean282311@... writes: Dear All, Buddhism goes beyond modern science in its acceptance of a wider field of knowledge than is allowed by the scientific mind. Buddhism admits knowledge arising from the sense organs as well as personal experiences gained though mental culture. By training and developing a highly concentrated mind, religious experience can be understood and verified. Religious experience is not something which can be understood by conducting experiments in a test-tube or examined under a microscope (This article was extracted from "What Buddhist Believe", written by Ven (Dr) K Sri Dhammananda. view gr8 article- http://www.cam-associates.com/articles/religion/buddha_science.htm Hi All The above paragraph could be misleading. One might interpret is as an attempt to say that "Buddhism is not at all a science." In fact, K Sri Dhamanada is very "science friendly" and has called Buddhism something along the lines of "the greatest science." The article we are led to by the link ... seems to be an extract of a longer article. This extract seems to focus on the differences between Buddhism and science and its all very legitimate but it could be misleading. Yet, even with that, note the last paragraph in the article which I have included below... "Buddhism has a complete system of mental culture concerned with gaining insight into the nature of things which leads to complete self-realisation of the Ultimate Truth - Nirvana. This system is both practical and scientific, it involves dispassionate observation of emotional and mental states. More like a scientist than a judge, a meditator observes the inner world with mindfulness." --- K Sri Dhammanada TG 57106 From: upasaka@... Date: Sat Mar 25, 2006 0:28pm Subject: Re: [dsg] The dhammas underlying postures upasaka_howard Hi, Phil - I'm accessing AOL remotely, and I'm having trouble inserting comments within the text of your post (and other posts). So, I will have to prefix my replies before the body of your post. (My apologies.) You write below <> With regard to that I would say that, no, it is all one religion. Before one knows all the dhammas underlying one's standing and the relations holding among them, one attends to the standing itself - that is, to a conceptual "reality". The 4th foundation of mindfulness is most directly concerned with immediate seeing of the dhammas, and that does not come first. You go on to say << I think in the commentary there is the well known passage about even jackals know they are walking, something like that, and that it is deeper dhammas that are to be considered. I know this is a topic that has been discussed here at length but I have not followed. But here is a very helpful teaching that gets at what lies beneath the surface of "the monk knows he is walking" etc:>> My reply there is that even with regard to the knowing of a conventional object such as one's standing, there is knowing it with keen attention as opposed to knowing it merely in the sense that one would reply "I was standing" when asked what s/he was just doing. It is heightened attention, with great clarity, that is needed to break through to the level of what is actually happening and of its unsatisfying, impermanent, and selfless nature. With metta, Howard P.S. It's the same story with the breath. At first one attends to the breath as conventional object. Later on there is knowing of the four great elements and so on. -----Original Message----- From: Phil To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sat, 25 Mar 2006 12:49:02 -0000 Subject: [dsg] The dhammas underlying postures Hi all On occasion I have been puzzled by the Satipatthana Sutta, the references to "the monk knows he is standing etc." The Buddha teaches so explicitly and deeply about paramattha dhammas in hundreds of suttas in Samyutta Nikaya ? why would he use conventional postures as objects of mindfulness? It doesn't make sense to me, almost feels like an entirely different "religion." I think in the commentary there is the well known passage about even jackals know they are walking, something like that, and that it is deeper dhammas that are to be considered. I know this is a topic that has been discussed here at length but I have not followed. But here is a very helpful teaching that gets at what lies beneath the surface of "the monk knows he is walking" etc: "Sitting is not a reality. (Ph: I prefer "dhamma" to "reality", personally.) But there is seeing now. Why go past the eye. So we see. Seeing is not sitting, seeing sees. And there is visible object, which makes it possible for seeing to arise. So there is visible object to be aware of too. And how do you know you are sitting? Because you do not see what you call your body, in the position that you conventionally label "sitting position." You also have experiences of hardness here and there, there are tangible objects being experienced in different places where there is body sense. Then, when you think about all that information you have the idea of a person or someone as a "whole." That is what you call "sitting." But the whole purpose of the Buddha's teaching is to destroy the wrong idea of a "whole" through seeing the truth of the different realities. They are not a "whole." Seeing is not sitting. The experience of hardness at the point (? ? indecipherable scrawl in my notebook) does not sit. The experience of coolness at that point does not sit. The coolness itself does not sit. "Sitting" is a conventional idea which enables us to communicate. It is not a reality." (I prefer "dhamma.") Phil 57107 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Sat Mar 25, 2006 1:11pm Subject: Re: The dhammas underlying postures buddhatrue Hi Howard (and Phil), This is one area where I disagree with you. I guess I am more of a purist when it comes to the Buddha's words. I don't like it when people put words in his mouth. You see the Satipatthana Sutta as stating that one needs to be aware of conventional activities in order to eventually become aware of arising and falling dhammas. I disagree. The sutta doesn't state that. If that is what is supposed to happen, the Buddha would have said so. The Buddha states that this is supposed to happen: "And as he remains thus heedful, ardent, & resolute, any memories & resolves related to the household life are abandoned, and with their abandoning his mind gathers & settles inwardly, grows unified & centered…" The goal is to calm and center the mind, the goal isn't to become aware of arising and passing dhammas. That awareness will come of its own, when the mind is calm and centered- and the mind becomes calm and centered simply by being aware of one bodily posture in all situations. As far as the commentary about the jackals and how even they know when they are walking, so surely there must be more to the practice than that- that is a really stupid commentary! Jackals are not aware of their walking, with clear comprehension. When jackals walk, just as when ordinary people walk, they are thinking about going somewhere, getting something to eat, going somewhere to sleep, finding sex somewhere, etc. etc.; they are thinking of everything except walking! When we focus just on the body, in and of itself, we begin to lose attachment to the body and see it as nonself- which is only mildly linked to awareness of rising and falling dhammas. Awareness of the body leads to samatha, and samatha leads to insight- as I see it. Metta, James 57108 From: han tun Date: Sat Mar 25, 2006 1:44pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Anattalakkhana Sutta: conceit. hantun1 Dear Nina and Lodewijk, Thank you very much for your post explaining about maana. I do not have Mahaaniddesa of the Khuddaka Nikaaya, but I looked up Sutta Nipata (Burmese version), and I found Attadanda Sutta. But the verses numbers may not be the same as in your book. In my book, under Attadanda Sutta verses numbers are from 942 to 961.I also found maana in the preceding sutta, Tuvataka Sutta (verses 922 to 941). I think I will have to read Sutta Nipata more in the future. But as you said, the texts in Sutta Nipata are very short. Your explanation is much better and more complete. Thank you very much. I also looked up an Abhidhamma book in Burmese by Venerable Ashin Janakaabhivamsa. Sayadaw mentioned that better people have seyya maana, equal people have sadisa maana, and lesser people have hiina maana. The proximate cause of maana is lobha without ditthi (ditthi vippayutta lobha). Ditthi attaches five aggregates as atta. Maana attaches five aggregates as “I” (aham). These two kilesas are rivals, vying each other for supremacy, and as such they cannot arise together at the same time. It is very interesting. Thank you once again for making me read more. With metta and deepest respect, Han --- nina van gorkom wrote: > I looked up conceit in the Mahaaniddesa, > a.t.tada.ndasutta (in Thai). The > subject of the a.t.tada.ndasutta, embraced violence > is given in short in the > Sutta Nipata (Ch of Eights, vs. 935). 57109 From: han tun Date: Sat Mar 25, 2006 1:52pm Subject: [dsg] Dhamma Thread ( 887 ) hantun1 Dhamma Thread ( 887 ) (This is the last thread that I have. Han Tun) Dear Dhamma Friends, After kamma.t.thaana on samatha there left vipassanaa to be discussed. This is a wide subject and it takes time to digest so that dhamma really permeate and arise on its own in reader with their true understanding. Even though all 40 kammatthanas are discussed they in their respect are not conduce to vipassanaa naana or vipassanaa knowledge. Because there is difference between samatha and vipassanaa. As there is not much time, I will not touch vipassanaa here under Dhamma Thread. But when I am back to action at Yahoo or if I have access to send messages to groups I will be trying to continue Dhamma Thread. This is the last Dhamma Thread before I resume Dhamma Thread activities. I will note that the last number is 887. So when I start vipassanaa I will start with Dhamma Thread (888) which is easy to remember for me. If there is anything to ask or discuss my mail is htoo.naing@... When writing please include the heading of the message with Htoo-private so that I can search easily. May you all be free from suffering. With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing 57110 From: LBIDD@... Date: Sat Mar 25, 2006 6:24pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: arahat and D.O., Larry lbidd2 Cerini Pablo: "Dukkha can even not hurt in the usual sense, like a punch on your nose." Hi CP, In one sense dukkha always hurts. That is its intrinsic nature. Of the three kinds of dukkha pain is dukkha because it is painful, formations are dukkha because of the distress of rise and fall, and pleasant feeling is dukkha because it is impermanent, it ends. Rupa is included in 'formations' because it is formed and we can see its ageing and desruction. However, you are right that not all pain is physical. Mental pain arises with dosa cetasika (hatred, dislike). Here's a quote from the Visuddhimagga: Vism.XVI,35: Herein, bodily and mental painful feeling are called 'intrinsic suffering' [dukkha-dukkha] because of their individual essence, their name, and their painfulness. [Bodily and mental] pleasant feeling are called 'suffering in change' [vipari.naama-dukkha] because they are the cause for the arising of pain when they change (M.i,303). Equanimous feeling and the remaining formations of the three planes are called 'suffering due to formations' [sa.nkhaara-dukkha] because they are oppressed by rise and fall. L: With the recognition of dukkha there is no more desire or hatred. We can find little examples of this in ordinary life, but a path moment is a complete reorientation of our thinking. Larry 57111 From: "Christine Forsyth" Date: Sat Mar 25, 2006 7:07pm Subject: Jataka Translations Online, at Sacred-Texts.com christine_fo... Hello all, Forward from Yuttadhammo Bhikkhu: ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ "It's good to see that someone has started to take an interest in this valuable work of Buddhist literature. The first two volumes (out of six) are available for browsing at: http://www.sacred-texts.com/bud/j1/index.htm and http://www.sacred-texts.com/bud/j2/index.htm Best wishes, Yuttadhammo" http://www.lioncity.net/buddhism/index.php?showtopic=27533 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ metta Chris ---The trouble is that you think you have time--- 57112 From: connie Date: Sat Mar 25, 2006 10:19pm Subject: Re: Hello - at the first temple - Part 1 nichiconn hi again, Sarah, > S: Perfect in this context means under no circumstances will he infract > one of the rules. (Of course, as we know when we read the Vinaya, it is > the intention that is always the key here). > > C: Excepting the acittaka class of offenses [which carry a penalty even > tho committed unintentionally or "with incorrect perception" (?)]... .... S: Pls can you elaborate on this or give me a reference. I'm not familiar with 'acittaka' offences. Interesting. C: Today I'm taking from: Buddhist Monastic Code - Thanissaro Bhikkhu (1994) - << In analyzing offenses for the purpose of determining penalties, the Vibhanga divides an action into five factors: the object, the perception, the intent, the effort, and the result. The Parivara (VI.4), in reviewing the Vibhanga's five factors for analyzing offenses, devises a number of categories for classifying offenses, the most important being the distinction between rules carrying a penalty only when broken intentionally through correct perception (sacittaka), and those carrying a penalty even when broken unintentionally or through misperception (acittaka). The Parivara (IV.7.4) also lists six ways in which offenses can be committed: 1) unconscientiously, i.e., knowing that an action is contrary to the rules, but going ahead with it anyway; 2) unknowingly, i.e., not realizing that the action is contrary to the rules; 3) absentmindedly; 4) assuming something improper to be proper, e.g., drinking a glass of apple wine perceiving it to be apple juice; 5) assuming something proper to be improper, e.g., perceiving a glass of apple juice to be apple wine, and drinking it nonetheless; and 6) acting out of uncertainty, i.e., not being sure if an action is proper, but going ahead with it anyway. In this last case, if the action is improper, one is to be treated according to the relevant rule. If it is proper, one incurs a dukkata in any event for having acted irresponsibly. Another scheme introduced in the ancient commentaries for classifying offenses is the distinction between those that the world criticizes (loka-vajja) and those that only the rules criticize (pannati-vajja). The Commentary defines this distinction by saying that loka-vajja offenses are committed with an unskillful state of mind (i.e., greed, anger or delusion), whereas pannati-vajja offenses can be committed with a skillful state of mind. Thus the concepts would seem to have been developed originally to deal with the exceptional cases in which a bhikkhu would be led by mature consideration to break a rule -- e.g., where another person's life would be at stake. Under such circumstances, the world at large would not criticize his actions, although the rules would impose a penalty. ======== S: I was thinking about the sutta about the 8 Marvels in AN, 8s, 19, Pahaaraada, the asura: It starts with the first Marvel which may also be relevant to other discussions: "...just as the mighty ocean slopes away gradually, falls away gradually, shelves away gradually, with no abruptness like a precipice, even so in this discipline of Dhamma there is a graduated training, a graduated practice, a graduated mode of progress, with no abruptness such as a penetration of gnosis.." [S: the Udana commentary gives more detail about how 'unlike the hopping motion of the frog', there is no sudden penetration of supreme knowledge ). .... C: love that frog. There's also the single flavor of the sea, which is salt, & that of dammavinaya, release. "Discipline is for the sake of restraint, restraint for the sake of freedom from remorse, freedom from remorse for the sake of joy, joy for the sake of rapture, rapture for the sake of tranquillity, tranquillity for the sake of pleasure, pleasure for the sake of concentration, concentration for the sake of knowledge and vision of things as they are, knowledge and vision of things as they are for the sake of disenchantment, disenchantment for the sake of dispassion, dispassion for the sake of release, release for the sake of knowledge and vision of release, knowledge and vision of release for the sake of total unbinding without clinging." (Pv.XII.2) "'Those who are partially accomplished attain a part; those who are wholly accomplished, the whole. The training rules, I say, are not in vain.'" (A.III.88) Nor are there any at the beginning of the Order, but they are all rather like the dam of the bhikkhuni's grave ones, to keep asava at bay. ===== S: The second Marvel, which is relevant here, concerns the training rules and the ariyan disciples which we're discussing: "...just as the ocean is fixed and does not overpass its bounds; even so, when the code of training is made known by me to my disciples (According to the Udana commentary on the same Marvels, "My saavakas [disciples]: he speaks with reference to ariyapuggalas such as the sotaapanna and so on".), they will not transgress it, even for life's sake....This is the second marvel..." S: So here there is a comment to suggest that any ariyan disciples will not deliberately transgress the Patimokkha 'even for life's ake'. [to be contd] C: speaking of continuing, if a bhikkhu doesn't disrobe just so, even if he thinks he is not, he is still a bhikkhu. 57113 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Sat Mar 25, 2006 10:32pm Subject: Feeling: Causes and Effects ... !!! bhikkhu_ekamuni Friends: What is the Causes & Effects of Feeling (Vedana)? Definitions: There is Pleasant Feeling = mental joy & bodily pleasure... There is Painful Feeling = mental sadness & bodily pain... There is neither Pleasant nor Painful Feeling = Neutral equanimity... These are the 3 basic feelings! Near Cause: Contact! The immediate Cause of Feeling is Contact: Eye-contact, Ear-contact, Nose-contact, Tongue-contact, Body-contact and Mental-contact... At the momentary arising of Contact, the associated Feeling also immediately arises... At the momentary ceasing of Contact, the associated Feeling also immediately ceases... Contact between sense organ, object & consciousness is the proximate cause of feeling... Remote Causes: The distant causes of Feeling is 1: Ignorance of the fact that all feeling ultimately is suffering. In this ignorance 2: Craving for certain feelings causes feeling to arise later. The 3: Kamma (Action) of wishing (mental action) to be able to feel & be touched by various contacts later conditions feeling to arise. Ignorance, craving and past actions are thus the remote causes conditioning the arising of feeling also and even many lives later... Effects: The Effects of the phenomena Feeling is, when Unawareness is co-existent: Craving towards the object = Attraction, when the feeling is pleasant... Craving away from the object = Repulsion, when the feeling is painful... Craving towards another object = Neglect, when the feeling is neutral... If Unaware, Pleasant Feeling will thus cause the arising of Desire & Craving! If Aware, Pleasant Feeling will not thus cause the arising of neither Desire nor Craving! If Unaware, Painful Feeling will thus cause the arising of Aversion & Anger. If Aware, Painful Feeling will not thus cause the arising of neither Aversion nor Anger. If Unaware, Neutral Feeling will thus cause the arising of Neglect & Ignorance. If Aware, Neutral Feeling will not thus cause arising of neither Neglect nor Ignorance. The secondary side-effects of Feeling may thus indeed be: Greed, Hate, & Ignorance... Dynamics: Pleasant Feeling is only agreeable when arising, yet disagreeable when ceasing! Painful Feeling is only disagreeable when arising, yet agreeable when ceasing! Neutral Feeling is only quite agreeable, when one is aware of it's presence, yet it is quite dull & disagreeable, when one is unaware of it's presence! Characteristics: Feeling is - as everything else - that is conditioned & constructed: Transient, impermanent, passing, unkeepable & unmaintainable... Dissatisfactory, disappointing, frustrating, painful & miserable... Impersonal, selfless, ownerless & not-Me-nor-I-nor-Mine-nor-Self... Apparent Paradox: There exists indeed this changing phenomena Feeling, yet there is no Feeler behind it... Conditioned by contact it comes into being, without any agent creating or using it... Question: Who Feels? Answer: Nobody feels! Q: What feels? A: Feeling itself feels! Q: What does feeling feel? A: Feeling feels pleasure, pain and neither-pleasure-nor-pain! The blessed Buddha said: Everything - all mental states - come together, converges and merges on this Feeling ... -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 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 !!! <...> 57114 From: "Sukinder" Date: Sun Mar 26, 2006 4:00am Subject: Long Post Re: Understanding dhammas, understanding realities/'realities' sukinderpal Hi TG, =================================== TG: The concept vs reality issue is rarely mentioned in the Buddha's teaching... and not mentioned with the type of "reality demanding viewpoints" that we see in in some abhidhamma practitioners. |Sukin: Regarding "reality demanding viewpoints", I think aside from the fact that we are still unclear in experience, of knowing the characteristic of "thinking" and hence speak mainly from an 'intellectual' and 'conceptual' understanding of the difference between concept and reality, there is also the problem during discussions, of others stating to the effect that concepts can be objects of insight or else that one starts with the observation of concepts. I do admit though, that in light of the fact that whatever appears in the present moment, it is enough to know just that, and that it may be unnecessary to label 'reality' to this. Also I agree that doing so can be conditioned by, and/or inadvertently lead to 'self-view'. However, I think that this is more due to lack of the level of panna got from direct experience which knows precisely the nature of dhammas. I do not think however, that 'reality' and 'exist' don't in fact apply. It may be that our own understanding is too weak to speak of this with any real confidence, but I do believe that once when understanding develops to a point, 'reality' and 'exist' will be valid expressions of aspects of dhammas known by panna. But how about at this point of my development? Does this 'reality-exist' idea determine in me a 'wrong understanding'? I think there would be a danger of projection if I were to 'try' to observe realities. And I think this is the more important issue we all need to consider. No matter how much we try to be clear in thought and steer away from what we perceive to be misuse of certain concepts, if we "try to observe reality", we will end up projecting. And no amount of refining our thinking, one that has yet to understand dhammas directly, can ever be said to be 'right'. ====================================== TG: Why can't concepts be fodder for insight? The Satipatthana Sutta has many conceptual tacts...indisputable even from an Abhidhamma interpretation. Why can't the conditions and conditional history that generate a concepts(s) be traced down and understood? Granted...this process will "pull the rug out" from under the concept as the mind will become forced to pay attention to other mental states. Yes, concepts are delusion, but delusion is a state that arises. It is not a non- existent thing. |Sukin: The Satipatthana Sutta, when it talks about postures and so on, is pointing out the different situations in which we might be aware of realities, *not of the postures* themselves. Much self-view has been accumulated while we *do* things and identify with those activities, including the different postures involved. By natural decisive support condition, all these postures and acts can and often do condition 'self- view' to arise. We are therefore meant to realize instead, the dhammas underlying these activities, so that this process of self-identification will be known and gradually weakened. How can concepts be objects of insight? Firstly let me state that to me 'concept', the 'referent', 'thoughts' are more or less the same and this is different from say, the citta that 'thinks'. So concepts can be 'dealt with' only by way of 'more thinking', which means more and more concepts. Some of these concepts act as premises and some as conclusions and in between there are some taken to be 'givens' and relationships are made by virtue of yet more thoughts. This is definitely not the way to understanding, is it! This may be the way to understand conventional and conceptual realities, but you say 'tracing down', I don't think it works when it comes to understanding the nature of dhammas. So in fact, your expectation of the 'rug being pulled out' may be a matter of coming in the end to just "thinking differently" but thinking nevertheless. Is this a Zen influence? The end result of thinking is just more thinking. You either 'insight' into thinking now or you don't! So yes, delusion arises, but no, concepts do not. Sanna arises, vitakka, viccara, citta, manasikara all arise and fall, while concepts are just 'shadows' of these dhammas arising in many, many mind moments. ========================================= TG: Speaking of which, it seems abhidhammists are "in the business" of determining states as either "existing" or "non-existing." This is exactly what the Buddha did not want IMO. I've already stated the quotes. |Sukin: Yes agree, "existing" vs. "non-existing" can be the result of |proliferated thinking, but then it can also serve as a useful guideline |don't you think? On the other hand, if others are strong "in the |business" of thinking that concepts can be object of insight or that it |can lead to such, then we might have to keep at this business of ours. |;-)) ======================================== TG: Do you honestly think that everyone the Buddha spoke to in his day was clear on the issue of concepts? My goodness. They must of all been arahats in Buddha's day. |Sukin: I have expressed my opinion about this in my last reply to Howard. Hope you have read it. ========================================= TG: This is what I see happening when I compare Sutta practice and postulations with abhidhamma practice and postulations. I believe a flawed theory is misleading the abhidhamma practice and tending to make the mind grasp after dhammas ... dhammas, not really being the issue ... not grasping is the issue. By spending so much attention to "making dhammas realities," I see a mind as having little chance of detaching from them. Its a subtle disagreement, but perhaps important consequences. |Sukin: No to "grasping after dhamma". But I hope this perception is not due to your own resistance to our objection to the idea of conventional reality being object of satipatthana development. And do you really think that "not grasping" can arise or made to develop by 'thinking'? Would not any attitude thus developed only become a 'conditioned response' and not in fact lead anywhere near to insight development? As regards the Sutta/Abhidhamma difference, besides what you say about concept/reality distinction, is there anything else? ======================================= TG: Attached to my views?...perhaps. I suppose we all are to some extent until we can become arahats. |Sukin: Yes, it should be expected that such moments will arise. ======================================= TG: Existence or non-existence is just concept. Conditions don't manifest as existing or not-existing. They are more like echoes of echoes of echoes of echoes and so on. And there is nothing "standing on its own." These 'empty echoes' that arise are structured by 'other empties.' The "empty echoes" that arise are mere "resultants" 'of something else' and have nothing about themselves. Just qualities of 'altering emptiness' is what is being discerned by the mind which is also a quality of emptiness. In the final analysis, physical energies and mental energies are just as empty as concepts. |Sukin: Yes. But such ideas as 'echoes' or 'energy', aren't these also concepts? In fact they seem to be of a higher order. Exist and non-exist may be unnecessary, but 'reality-existence' can still point directly to what arises in the present moment as against what doesn't. But 'echo' begs 'echo of' and 'energy'?! What understanding do you expect to arise when hearing such a term? Is this your reaction to the reality/concept issue that you have ended up relying on concepts that take you even further away? And what of this "nothing standing on its own"? Couldn't this almost be used to deny the fact that "one reality appears' at any given moment? And "Emptiness", I wonder how well you grasp this concept, mind you though, I don't agree with the Nagarjuna/Mahayana use of this term? And what about 'empty echoes', how am I to understand this? I understand that you are coming from the idea that dhammas are conditioned, rise and fall extremely rapidly and are ungraspable. Abhidhamma does not deny this. Your reaction is valid, I would say, to any attitude which tries to 'grasp at' realities, behaving mistakenly, as if there is some 'thing' standing apart and is able to control dhammas. But the Abhidhamma states further, that one or several of these dhammas can be what is called, satipatthana which knows the characteristic of the dhamma which as just fallen away prior to that. And this being the nature of dhammas, "understanding" develops based on this satipatthana arising more and more often to know precisely the characteristic of this same just fallen away dhamma, better and better. Any idea which takes one away from the importance of this is I think, mistaken. So indeed, as far as you and I are concerned, we should do well to understand the importance of knowing dhammas by their characteristics. ================================== TG: The concepts "referent" does not arise. When you say a "tree does not exist" ... well, of course it does arise. It is physical form -- rupa. When you say a "tree" doesn't exist.... what you mean is that the concept's "referent" does not exist. The concept of "tree" is a mental formation...it arises. The "referent" tree is pure "imagination"...the imagination arises (as concept), but the "referent" of the imagination does not arise...why should it? The form that a mind interprets as a tree is rupa...is arises. |Sukin: Tree is not a rupa. What is seen is visible object, what is touched are the earth, fire and wind elements. From these experiences to proliferate into 'tree being rupa' is clearly wrong. ====================================== S: each one of those conditioning/conditioned dhammas that there can be this regularity, such as lobhamula cittas are lobhamula cittas and lokuttara cittas are lokuttara cittas. Anatta, anicca and dukkha are characteristics of individual dhammas and not because dhammas are conditioned. Each dhamma is anatta *and* conditioned. Anatta is not because of D.O., but D.O. is because of anatta and the fact of individual characteristics. TG: Care to demonstrate this last sentence with a quote from a Sutta? I base my thinking on observation and Sutta material as my primary resources. You want quotes where the Buddha say we should see things as empty, void, coreless, alien? I got a lot of those. But I haven't found a one where the Buddha says we should see things as ultimate realities ... or as with there own characteristics. The only reference to "own characteristics" appears in the pattisambhidammaga which denies it. The Buddha does advise to have a variety of "attitudes toward conditions" throughout the Suttas. I have to disagree with that comment in your above paragraph. |Sukin: No, no quotes, just some use of logic and reasoning. The fact that certain dhammas condition other dhammas in an impersonal way, suggests that it must be due to the characteristics of the dhammas involved. Were dhammas not anatta and exhibit distinct characteristics, how can D.O. be the way it is? When you say that the Buddha advised seeing things as 'empty, void, coreless, alien' etc., prior to Him saying this, does He not point to the 'knowing of dhammas'? Do we not have to know dhammas before knowing that these are indeed coreless, empty and so on? You may if you wish, quote me a sutta, the audience being non-ariyans, where the Buddha straight away talks about seeing things as empty and so on. "Attitudes" are conditioned by dhammas, for example, moha, miccha ditthi, amoha and sati. Would you not want to determine whether if indeed it is panna which holds such an attitude? ================================= S: In the past, whenever you have stated to the effect about the importance of knowing D.O. over knowing individual characteristics of dhammas, I am stirred when looking at just one link in the chain, `ignorance'. I think, "Does TG know ignorance? How can he be saying anything meaningful about the whole chain?" It seems to be that you are being driven by a theory and not taking into account what you don't know and what needs to be known. Meanwhile, ignorance as a reality ;-) is doing its job in adding bricks to samsara. TG: Well, the entire Pali Canon is a lesson in D.O. I don't know how many hundreds or thousands of times the Buddha uses the term D.O. in the Suttas. As for "individual characteristic," my understanding is the number is zero. |Sukin: Talking about Khandas for example, is to be talking about dhammas. Talking about them as being distinct and different is to be talking about their characteristics. Am I reading too much into the Buddha's words? ================================= TG: Sukinder, I like your challenging comments and analysis. Please continue to do so when you have such motivation...fire away! |Sukin: I have therefore taken the liberty to be frank. ;-) ===================================== TG: I suspect our understanding is much closer than you might think it is. I sometimes make a hard argument on a very fine point because this fine point is important and crucial in clearly realizing D.O. |Sukin: But one step at a time. Knowing D.O. can only happen after understanding that in fact 'conditionality' is true at the most basic level. And this comes only after knowing the characteristic of the dhammas involved. Long way and many steps in all this. Metta, Sukinder 57115 From: nina van gorkom Date: Sun Mar 26, 2006 4:20am Subject: Re: [dsg] Anattalakkhana Sutta: conceit. nilovg Dear Han, Lodewijk and I were very much impressed by the way you handled your grave sicknesses and could overcome them. This is clear comprehension as to purpose, satthaka sampajañña. There are four mentioned in the Co to the satipatthaanasutta. This was the first one Kh. Sujin spoke about forty years ago. She said that the bhikkhus should stretch at the right time, not sitting too long. They also could do the alley walk. Knowing what is right for one's health is a kind of paññaa. It is necessary in order to live the brahmacariya. If you had not overcome such grave sicknesses (it is really a marvel) you could not read and write on the computer about Dhamma. You know for yourself what is good and beneficial for you. I am still thinking of what else to add, but I have to go slowly about it. op 25-03-2006 23:44 schreef han tun op hantun1@...: > I also looked up an Abhidhamma book in Burmese by > Venerable Ashin Janakaabhivamsa. Sayadaw mentioned > that better people have seyya maana, equal people have > sadisa maana, and lesser people have hiina maana. ------- According to the Vibhanga there are nin ways of comparing: thinking oneself better when one is better, or when one is not better, etc. But mana is not always comparing. ---------- H: The > proximate cause of maana is lobha without ditthi > (ditthi vippayutta lobha). Ditthi attaches five > aggregates as atta. Maana attaches five aggregates as > “I” (aham). These two kilesas are rivals, vying each > other for supremacy, and as such they cannot arise > together at the same time. It is very interesting. ------ N: Later on I shall add something. Nina. 57116 From: "indriyabala" Date: Sun Mar 26, 2006 6:23am Subject: Re: Anattalakkhana Sutta: conceit. indriyabala Dear Han (and Nina) - Like Nina I also appreciate your excellent presentation of the Anattalakkhana Sutta with the commentaries. Thanks, one hundred times! >Han: I also looked up an Abhidhamma book in Burmese by Venerable Ashin Janakaabhivamsa. Sayadaw mentioned that better people have seyya maana, equal people have sadisa maana, and lesser people have hiina maana. The proximate cause of maana is lobha without ditthi (ditthi vippayutta lobha). Ditthi attaches five aggregates as atta. Maana attaches five aggregates as "I". Tep: In the Sangiti Sutta the three forms of conceit are : a. I am Better than… b. I am Equal to… c. I am Worse than… As Ven. Ashin wrote, these three correspond to 'seyya maana', 'sadisa maana', and 'hiina maana' respectively. I have no problem understanding why the thinking of oneself as worse than others is a conceit, since it still centers on 'atta-ditthi' like the other two kinds of conceit. Neither do I have any problem understanding the followings : 'Ditthi attaches five aggregates as atta. Maana attaches five aggregates as "I" ' . But what I have a problem understanding is why "the proximate cause of maana is lobha without ditthi". For example, can you (or Nina) explain why lobha is the proximate cause of 'hiina maana'? Thanks. Yours truly, Tep ======== --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, han tun wrote: > > Dear Nina and Lodewijk, > > Thank you very much for your post explaining about > maana. > > I do not have Mahaaniddesa of the Khuddaka Nikaaya, > but I looked up Sutta Nipata (Burmese version), and I > found Attadanda Sutta. But the verses numbers may not > be the same as in your book. In my book, under > Attadanda Sutta verses numbers are from 942 to 961.I > also found maana in the preceding sutta, Tuvataka > Sutta (verses 922 to 941). I think I will have to read > Sutta Nipata more in the future. > > But as you said, the texts in Sutta Nipata are very > short. Your explanation is much better and more > complete. Thank you very much. > > I also looked up an Abhidhamma book in Burmese by > Venerable Ashin Janakaabhivamsa. Sayadaw mentioned > that better people have seyya maana, equal people have > sadisa maana, and lesser people have hiina maana. The > proximate cause of maana is lobha without ditthi > (ditthi vippayutta lobha). Ditthi attaches five > aggregates as atta. Maana attaches five aggregates as > "I" (aham). These two kilesas are rivals, vying each > other for supremacy, and as such they cannot arise > together at the same time. It is very interesting. > > Thank you once again for making me read more. > > With metta and deepest respect, > Han > > > --- nina van gorkom wrote: > > I looked up conceit in the Mahaaniddesa, > > a.t.tada.ndasutta (in Thai). The > > subject of the a.t.tada.ndasutta, embraced violence > > is given in short in the > > Sutta Nipata (Ch of Eights, vs. 935). > 57117 From: han tun Date: Sun Mar 26, 2006 6:51am Subject: Re: [dsg] Anattalakkhana Sutta: conceit. hantun1 Dear Nina and Lodewijk, Thank you very much for your kind words and further explanation on the subject matter. -------------------- N: This is clear comprehension as to purpose, satthaka sampajanna. Han: Yes, I looked up in the book on The Way of Mindfulness by Ven. Soma Thera. There I found four types of sampajanna, the other three being suitability (sappaaya sampajanna), resort (gocara sampajanna), and non-delusion (asammoha sampajanna). I thank you very much for making me read more. Another person who makes me read more is my very good friend Tep.. -------------------- N: But maana is not always comparing. Han: It is a good point. I have noted it. -------------------- I will post Part Two of the sutta after giving you some time to go through Part One. With metta and deepest respect, Han --- nina van gorkom wrote: > Dear Han, > Lodewijk and I were very much impressed by the way > you handled your grave > sicknesses and could overcome them. > This is clear comprehension as to purpose, satthaka > sampajañña. 57118 From: han tun Date: Sun Mar 26, 2006 6:53am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Anattalakkhana Sutta: conceit. hantun1 Dear Tep and Nina, Tep: But what I have a problem understanding is why "the proximate cause of maana is lobha without ditthi". For example, can you (or Nina) explain why lobha is the proximate cause of 'hiina maana'? Thanks. Han: If I were to answer that question it will be my guess-work only. So I would like to request Nina to answer that question. With metta and deepest respect, Han --- indriyabala wrote: > Dear Han (and Nina) - But what I have a problem understanding is > why "the proximate > cause of maana is lobha without ditthi". > For example, can you (or Nina) explain why lobha is > the proximate > cause of 'hiina maana'? Thanks. > Yours truly, > Tep > ======== > 57119 From: nina van gorkom Date: Sun Mar 26, 2006 7:18am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Lodewijk's post on the long way. nilovg Hi Phil, Thanks for my own quote. Sometimes one forgets what one writes. Now you quote it and I read it again. It is helpful. Nina. op 25-03-2006 13:59 schreef Phil op philco777@...: >N: Frankly, I find it hard to swallow that my >> life with Lodewijk is like a dream (he is eighty now). > > As Acharn Sujin said when talking about this subject "the truth is > the truth" and "no one can change the Buddha's teaching." > > I found something you wrote once at DSG: "I cannot tell myself not to > cling to Lodewijk, that would be unrealistic and insincere. What really > helps is seeing one's own wrong view for a moment. Some rare and brief > moments of beiginning to understand what seeing is as different from > thinking that gives me confidence in satipatthana as the only way > leading out from dukkha." 57120 From: nina van gorkom Date: Sun Mar 26, 2006 7:18am Subject: Re: [dsg] Anattalakkhana Sutta: Part One nilovg Dear Han, op 25-03-2006 10:16 schreef han tun op hantun1@...: What are the four types of atta > beliefs with regard to each aggregate? > According to one Burmese scholar the four atta beliefs > are as follows. > (1) ruupa is atta. > (2) atta has ruupa (like a tree has its shadow) > (3) ruupa is inside atta (like smell in the flower) > (4) atta is inside ruupa (like ruby inside a box) > The same four atta beliefs with four other aggregates > will make up 20 sakkaaya ditthi. > The author quoted Dhammasanganii Pali as the source of > the above information. I do not have Dhammasanganii > Pali. Nina may wish to kindly check it. ---------- N: Dhammasanganii , 1003; the similes are in the Co. to the Dhammasanganii, the Atthasaalinii (Expositor). Ven. Bhikkhu Bodhi also explains these in 'The Root of Existence", Muulapriyaaya sutta and Commentary. -------- > H: That is to show how five aggregates can lead to > affliction, and how the little knowledge of five > aggregates and anatta could help me out. It may not > lead to any insight wisdom but it surely had been > helpful in pain management.... > However, within this broad framework of “no control” I > think I can, to some reasonable extent, do something > to prevent or mitigate the situation. ------ N: Yes, to some extent we can do something. That is what I meant by satthaka sampajañña. The monks had to sweep their kutis, remove cobwebs, otherwise there would be unhealthy situations. Of course we can do something, no problem. This is a point Howard keeps on explaining, and rightly so. -------- H: Those illnesses > I have described were completely cured, and I > attributed it, to a large extent, to the wholesome > deeds that I had performed, in particular the > vipassanaa meditation and other meritorious deeds. My > contention is that if my good kamma becomes strong > enough by wholesome, meritorious deeds the > kammaja-ruupas must also improve. --------- N: You considered with kusala citta the ruupas of the body, and it is kusala citta that can condition wellbeing of the body. As to kamma, it is hard to tell, I mean, kamma of the past. There were countless lives with countless kammas. But, when there is kusala kamma at present it can prevent akusala kamma to produce painful results. When considering groups of rupa, it is hard to pinpoint the kammaja rupas, these groups arise and fall away immediately. But, when we consider the intricate way the groups of rupa operate, it can lead to detachment from an idea of self who controls. Thus, the study of such details is beneficial. We can go further. The fact that you could manage pain is also conditioned. You were in the favorable circumstances of having listened to the Dhamma before, and studied it. Probably also in past lives. Therefore, you were able, even in the midst of excruciating pains to consider rupas and feelings. There were the right conditions to do so. Nina. 57121 From: han tun Date: Sun Mar 26, 2006 7:44am Subject: Re: [dsg] Anattalakkhana Sutta: Part One hantun1 Dear Nina, Thank you very much. Nina: You considered with kusala citta the ruupas of the body, and it is kusala citta that can condition wellbeing of the body. As to kamma, it is hard to tell, I mean, kamma of the past. There were countless lives with countless kammas. But, when there is kusala kamma at present it can prevent akusala kamma to produce painful results. When considering groups of rupa, it is hard to pinpoint the kammaja rupas, these groups arise and fall away immediately. But, when we consider the intricate way the groups of rupa operate, it can lead to detachment from an idea of self who controls. Thus, the study of such details is beneficial. We can go further. The fact that you could manage pain is also conditioned. You were in the favorable circumstances of having listened to the Dhamma before, and studied it. Probably also in past lives. Therefore, you were able, even in the midst of excruciating pains to consider rupas and feelings. There were the right conditions to do so. ------------------ Han: I think I understand what you meant by the above paragraph. But to make sure, I will read and re-read it. If I find any difficulty I will come back to you. With metta and deepest respect, Han 57122 From: "indriyabala" Date: Sun Mar 26, 2006 8:38am Subject: Re: Visuddhimagga Ch XVII, 64 and Tiika. indriyabala Dear Nina (Han, Howard, and James) - It is time for discussion! >Nina (quoting the commentary to the UDANA: it is ignorance (avijjaa) since it darts among those things which do not actually exist (avijjamaanesu javati), since it does not dart among those things that do exist .. Tep : What are things that do not actually exist? What are things that do exist? Are things that do not actually exist real, or imaginary? ............... >Nina: It seems that persons and things appear through the eyesense all the time, not visible object. But if we begin to develop understanding of paramattha dhammas, paññaa will eventually illuminate the darkness of ignorance. Tep: I understand that "persons and things appear(ing) through the eyesense" are just "impressions" (i.e. nimittas), so they are not paramattha dhammas -- hence, do not "exist" as realities. But I have a real (not imaginary)and existing problem understanding why the "understanding of paramattha dhammas" initially will result in paññaa that "will eventually illuminate the darkness of ignorance". Two questions : 1. What should happen between the initial state (paramattha dhamma understanding) and the evenual state (eradication of ignorance)? 2. Is understanding of the paramattha dhamma necessary and sufficient for the eventual arrival of the truths? Why? Sincerely, Tep ==== --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, nina van gorkom wrote: > > Visuddhimagga Ch XVII, 64 > (snipped) > > The commentary to the UDANA ( translation by Peter Masefield, > PTS, p71,vol I, enlightenment chapter) states about ignorance: <"...it is ignorance (avijjaa) since it causes the unequivocal own nature of things not to be known (avidita.m); it is ignorance (avijjaa) since it causes beings to dart (javaapeti) among becomings and so on within samsara that is without end (antavirahite); it is ignorance (avijjaa) since it darts among those things which do not actually exist (avijjamaanesu javati), since it does not > dart among those things that do exist; (and)it is ignorance (avijjaa) since it is the opposite of knowledge (vijjaaya)...> > > We are taken in by concepts of people and do not understand paramattha dhammas, also at this moment. It seems that persons and things appear through the eyesense all the time, not visible object. But if we begin to develop understanding of paramattha dhammas, paññaa will eventually illuminate the darkness of ignorance. > ****** > 57123 From: "indriyabala" Date: Sun Mar 26, 2006 9:01am Subject: Re: Links to Stream Entry ... !!! indriyabala Dear Venerable Samahita (and all who don't know "practice") - According to the dictionary, 'praxis' is 'practice as contrasted with theory'. But among the members here there are those who have trouble understanding practice !! > 4: Praxis in accordance with this Dhamma. > So could you please elaborate the fourth factor that leads to "entering the stream leading to Nibbâna" ? Respectfully, Tep ======= --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Bhikkhu Samahita" wrote: > > Friends: > What four factors lead to entering the stream leading to Nibbâna ? > > 1: Association with excellent persons, > 2: Hearing & learning true Dhamma, > 3: Rational and careful attention, > 4: Praxis in accordance with this Dhamma. > > These four things, when developed and cultivated, lead to penetrative understanding... > These four things, when completed, lead to the realization of the fruit of Arahat-ship: > Awakening, Enlightenment, The deathless dimension: Nibbana ... !!! > 57124 From: nina van gorkom Date: Sun Mar 26, 2006 10:46am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Anattalakkhana Sutta: conceit. nilovg Dear Tep and Han, op 26-03-2006 16:23 schreef indriyabala op indriyabala@...: > Tep: In the Sangiti Sutta the three forms of conceit are : a. I am > Better than… b. I am Equal to… c. I am Worse than… > As Ven. Ashin wrote, these three correspond to 'seyya maana', 'sadisa > maana', and 'hiina maana' respectively. ------- N: It is the Threes, XXIII, and the Co is quite long. Conceit of a king, a bhikkhu with sila and dhutangas, king's officials and slaves. Also Dispeller (Samohavinodanii, Ch 17, Minor Bases, p. 222 gives many examples). -------- T: I have no problem understanding why the thinking of oneself as worse > than others is a conceit, since it still centers on 'atta-ditthi' like > the other two kinds of conceit. -------- N: No, it is different from di.t.thi. One may cling to self with lobha, with lobha accompanied by ditthi and with lobha accompanied by conceit. One may find oneself important, but there is no wrong view involved at that moment. That is why it is said: "the proximate cause of maana is lobha without ditthi". When it arises, it cannot arise with lobha accompanied by ditthi, the objects are different. For instance: I am eternal, here is eternity belief. I am a king, I am very important, here is conceit. How I like life as a king, here may be just lobha. ------- T: For example, can you (or Nina) explain why lobha is the proximate > cause of 'hiina maana'? ------ N: One may disparage oneself: I am worth nothing. There may be dosa, but there can also be conceit that arises with lobhamulacitta. Look how lowly I am, but one sees oneself still as somebody. It is beneficial to come to know the many times conceit arises, mostly unknown. Nina. 57125 From: "indriyabala" Date: Sun Mar 26, 2006 11:09am Subject: [dsg] Re: Anattalakkhana Sutta: conceit. indriyabala Dear Nina and Han - Thank you both for replying promptly. >Nina: > When it arises, it cannot arise with lobha accompanied by ditthi, the objects are different. > For instance: I am eternal, here is eternity belief. I am a king, I am very important, here is conceit. How I like life as a king, here may be just lobha. > ------- Tep: Yes, I can understand why the liking of one's status/accomplishment can be of only lobha. Good example! ........... > > T: For example, can you (or Nina) explain why lobha is the > >proximate cause of 'hiina maana'? > ------ > N: One may disparage oneself: I am worth nothing. There may be dosa, but there can also be conceit that arises with lobhamulacitta. Look how lowly I am, but one sees oneself still as somebody. > It is beneficial to come to know the many times conceit arises, mostly unknown. Tep: Yes, dosa & maana are clearly seen since hiina is nor something one can be proud of! Warm regards, Tep ====== --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, nina van gorkom wrote: > > Dear Tep and Han, (snipped) > T: I have no problem understanding why the thinking of oneself as worse than others is a conceit, since it still centers on 'atta-ditthi' like the other two kinds of conceit. > -------- > N: No, it is different from di.t.thi. One may cling to self with lobha, with lobha accompanied by ditthi and with lobha accompanied by conceit. > One may find oneself important, but there is no wrong view involved at that moment. > That is why it is said: "the proximate cause of maana is lobha without ditthi". > When it arises, it cannot arise with lobha accompanied by ditthi, the objects are different. > For instance: I am eternal, here is eternity belief. I am a king, I am very important, here is conceit. How I like life as a king, here may be just lobha. > ------- > > Nina. > 57126 From: upasaka@... Date: Sun Mar 26, 2006 0:14pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Visuddhimagga Ch XVII, 64 and Tiika. upasaka_howard Hi, Tep (and Nina, Han, and James) - As I'm having difficulty inserting comments into the text of posts, I will give my remarks up front. In reply to your first question, Tep: What actually exists in my opinion are the phenomena comprising the five khandhas, though not as separate, self-existent entities, plus nibbana, the ultimate reality. And things that do not actually exist vary from merely imagined - that is, being entirely baseless - to conventional objects merely imputed upon realities due to particular relations holding among those realities. Also, you ask the following: _______________ Two questions : 1. What should happen between the initial state (paramattha dhamma understanding) and the evenual state (eradication of ignorance)? 2. Is understanding of the paramattha dhamma necessary and sufficient for the eventual arrival of the truths? Why? ________________ I believe that seeing through conventional objects to the actual sense impressions underlying them, and realizing the merely conventional reality of common "entities", is an essential part of one's development. It needs to come in early but is only completed at the end, when all sense of self is uprooted, including the "self" of the conventional person. But seeing through concepts to paramattha dhammas, while necessary (IMO), is insufficient, because one must also come to directly, clearly, and fully see the radical unsatisfactoriness, impermanence, and not-self nature of all conditioned (paramattha) dhammas, in order to realize nibbana including its not-self nature, and to thereby come to awakening. One matter to emphasize: At all levels, mere "knowledge about", whether pertaining to conventional objects or paramattha dhammas, will not serve to liberate. There must be vijja. With metta, Howard P.S. I checked first to see whether others had already replied to your post, Tep, but seeing no responses, I just went ahead to put in my two cents?! ;-) -----Original Message----- From: indriyabala To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sun, 26 Mar 2006 16:38:18 -0000 Subject: [dsg] Re: Visuddhimagga Ch XVII, 64 and Tiika. Dear Nina (Han, Howard, and James) - It is time for discussion! >Nina (quoting the commentary to the UDANA: it is ignorance (avijjaa) since it darts among those things which do not actually exist (avijjamaanesu javati), since it does not dart among those things that do exist .. Tep : What are things that do not actually exist? What are things that do exist? Are things that do not actually exist real, or imaginary? ............... >Nina: It seems that persons and things appear through the eyesense all the time, not visible object. But if we begin to develop understanding of paramattha dhammas, paññaa will eventually illuminate the darkness of ignorance. Tep: I understand that "persons and things appear(ing) through the eyesense" are just "impressions" (i.e. nimittas), so they are not paramattha dhammas -- hence, do not "exist" as realities. But I have a real (not imaginary)and existing problem understanding why the "understanding of paramattha dhammas" initially will result in paññaa that "will eventually illuminate the darkness of ignorance". Two questions : 1. What should happen between the initial state (paramattha dhamma understanding) and the evenual state (eradication of ignorance)? 2. Is understanding of the paramattha dhamma necessary and sufficient for the eventual arrival of the truths? Why? Sincerely, Tep ==== --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, nina van gorkom wrote: > > Visuddhimagga Ch XVII, 64 > (snipped) > > The commentary to the UDANA ( translation by Peter Masefield, > PTS, p71,vol I, enlightenment chapter) states about ignorance: <"...it is ignorance (avijjaa) since it causes the unequivocal own nature of things not to be known (avidita.m); it is ignorance (avijjaa) since it causes beings to dart (javaapeti) among becomings and so on within samsara that is without end (antavirahite); it is ignorance (avijjaa) since it darts among those things which do not actually exist (avijjamaanesu javati), since it does not > dart among those things that do exist; (and)it is ignorance (avijjaa) since it is the opposite of knowledge (vijjaaya)...> > > We are taken in by concepts of people and do not understand paramattha dhammas, also at this moment. It seems that persons and things appear through the eyesense all the time, not visible object. But if we begin to develop understanding of paramattha dhammas, paññaa will eventually illuminate the darkness of ignorance. > ****** > 57127 From: "indriyabala" Date: Sun Mar 26, 2006 1:06pm Subject: Three Suttas about Atta indriyabala Hi, Sarah (and all Sutta enthusiasts) - This post briefly presents three suttas that may be used to indicate that 'atta-ditthi' or 'sakkaaya-ditthi' (self views, personality views) is formed by the obsession with form, feeling, perception, formations and consciousness. Any comment, correction, disagreement, suggestion for improvement? 1. SN XXII.36 Bhikkhu Sutta "Whatever one stays obsessed with, that's what one is measured by. Whatever one is measured by, that's how one is classified. Whatever one doesn't stay obsessed with, that's not what one is measured by. Whatever one isn't measured by, that's not how one is classified." ................................ 2. SN XXIII.2 Satta Sutta: A Being "'A being,' lord. 'A being,' it's said. To what extent is one said to be 'a being'?" "Any desire, passion, delight, or craving for form, Radha: when one is caught up there, tied up there, one is said to be 'a being.' "Any desire, passion, delight, or craving for feeling... perception... fabrications... "Any desire, passion, delight, or craving for consciousness, Radha: when one is caught up there, tied up there, one is said to be 'a being.' ............................. 3. MN 72 Aggi-Vacchagotta Sutta "A 'position,' Vaccha, is something that a Tathagata has done away with. What a Tathagata sees is this: 'Such is form, such its origin, such its disappearance; such is feeling, such its origin, such its disappearance; such is perception... such are mental fabrications... such is consciousness, such its origin, such its disappearance.' Because of this, I say, a Tathagata � with the ending, fading out, cessation, renunciation, & relinquishment of all construings, all excogitations, all I-making & mine-making & obsession with conceit � is, through lack of clinging/sustenance, released." ............................... Tep's Notes: The self-view, or self belief, results from the clinging to and obsession with one's aggregates. A being is 'measured' by the obsession with form, feeling, perception, formations, and consciousness. Classified = identified as a being (given a 'position') by means of the five aggregates that are empty of self. Warm regards, Tep, your friend =========== 57128 From: upasaka@... Date: Sun Mar 26, 2006 1:58pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: The dhammas underlying postures upasaka_howard Hi, James - You say the following below: ________________ The goal is to calm and center the mind, the goal isn't to become aware of arising and passing dhammas. That awareness will come of its own, when the mind is calm and centered- and the mind becomes calm and centered simply by being aware of one bodily posture in all situations. Awareness of the body leads to samatha, and samatha leads to insight- as I see it. ____________________ What I infer from the foregoing, possibly mistakenly, is that you are asserting that insight arises from calm and concentration alone. I don't think that is so. I do indeed think these are requisite, but I also have come to believe, on the basis of mainly of study, and partly on the basis of practice, that from a base of calm, focus, and clarity, investigation of dhammas - "looking at them" with an attitude of inquiry - is required for insight into the tilakkhana to arise. With metta, Howard -----Original Message----- From: buddhatrue To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sat, 25 Mar 2006 21:11:45 -0000 Subject: [dsg] Re: The dhammas underlying postures Hi Howard (and Phil), This is one area where I disagree with you. I guess I am more of a purist when it comes to the Buddha's words. I don't like it when people put words in his mouth. You see the Satipatthana Sutta as stating that one needs to be aware of conventional activities in order to eventually become aware of arising and falling dhammas. I disagree. The sutta doesn't state that. If that is what is supposed to happen, the Buddha would have said so. The Buddha states that this is supposed to happen: "And as he remains thus heedful, ardent, & resolute, any memories & resolves related to the household life are abandoned, and with their abandoning his mind gathers & settles inwardly, grows unified & centered?" The goal is to calm and center the mind, the goal isn't to become aware of arising and passing dhammas. That awareness will come of its own, when the mind is calm and centered- and the mind becomes calm and centered simply by being aware of one bodily posture in all situations. As far as the commentary about the jackals and how even they know when they are walking, so surely there must be more to the practice than that- that is a really stupid commentary! Jackals are not aware of their walking, with clear comprehension. When jackals walk, just as when ordinary people walk, they are thinking about going somewhere, getting something to eat, going somewhere to sleep, finding sex somewhere, etc. etc.; they are thinking of everything except walking! When we focus just on the body, in and of itself, we begin to lose attachment to the body and see it as nonself- which is only mildly linked to awareness of rising and falling dhammas. Awareness of the body leads to samatha, and samatha leads to insight- as I see it. Metta, James 57129 From: "Paul Grabianowski" Date: Sun Mar 26, 2006 5:31pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Can ignorance and formations be the mistaken circle of "not" knowing? paulgrabiano... Hi Sarah, Thank you for your warm greeting. I don't recall if I posted before on the list. I think perhaps I didn't. I do recall that the list may not have been as vibrant and engaged as it seems to be at this moment. Paul ----- Original Message ----- From: "sarah abbott" To: Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 4:13 AM Subject: Re: [dsg] Can ignorance and formations be the mistaken circle of "not" knowing? > Hi Paul, > > S: Thank you so much for introducing yourself. I hope you're well settled > back in NY and glad you're finding the discussions useful. Robert is > around and I'm sure he'll reply himself. You'll also meet Phil who lives > in Japan. > > Did you post when you were a member before (if so when was that exactly)? > I don't remember your name. > > I'll look forward to reading the discussion on your good questions - > sorry, just been called out, but I know others will have useful comments > on them. > > Metta, > > Sarah 57130 From: "Paul Grabianowski" Date: Sun Mar 26, 2006 6:36pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Can ignorance and formations be the mistaken circle of "not" knowing? paulgrabiano... Hi Robert, It's so nice to hear from you Robert. Are you still teaching in Kumamoto? Thanks for responding to my question: You wrote: The actual moments of experience > through the doorways are vipaka (result) but immediately there > is reaction which is defilement(kilesa) and > this conditions kamma. So, is it true to say that we cannot escape vipaka-vatta and that which arises through the sense doors or through the mind door is itself a condition for the arising of kusa or akusula citta which condition further moments of vipaka-vatta? It is often difficult to see how much our experiences are a result of these dependent conditions. It's comforting, however, to see that all the Buddhist teachings lead back to how we actually relate to the world in body and mind. I've found that even practicing metta is amazingly practical in the manner in which it puts the body and the mind in a particular relation to present and future conditions. Understanding these three rounds of dependent origination can, I guess, keep us from falling into the particularly vehement vortex of "these rounds . . . spinning now." There is a sense of amazing freedom in contemplating that all nama and rupa have conditions for arising. How does one prepare oneself to face samsara, though? Certainly one should be read the teachings of the Buddha, but, should one plan ahead? If so, how so? For example, I teach on MWF and I've found that the night before I teach, right before I teach and while I'm teaching, if I recognize my responsibility as a teacher and my responsibility to my students, I will not only teach a much better class, but I find my mind much clearer and lighter and more receptive to my student's needs. The Buddha had an amazing understanding of how relationships affect thinking and thinking affects relationships. Paul 57131 From: "Paul Grabianowski" Date: Sun Mar 26, 2006 7:29pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Can ignorance and formations be the mistaken circle of"not" knowing? paulgrabiano... Dear Nina, Thank you so much for answering my questions. I'm sorry for the ambiguity of my questions. I know that I will need to study more to get my definitions correct. N: Conditioned dhammas, thus also ignorance and kamma-formations, arise and fall away and are thus dukkha, dukkha in the sense of sa.nkhaara dukkha. Moreover, they are non-self. But ignorance does not know this. P: This makes sense. These are conditioned dhammas that arise and fall continually and are beyond our control. N: Thus, when speaking about citta we have to be clear what type. Seeing now is vipaakacitta, and this may experience a desirable object or an undesirable object. Kusala cittas or akusala cittas arise on account of what is seen. P: I understand now that different cittas have different functions in sense-door and mind-door processes. I'm not sure which citta I was refering to, but I do realize that I need to study more. N: Kamma-formations are not results, they are kusala cetanas and akusala cetanas (volitions). I do not know whether I answered your questions satisfactorily. P: I might be a bit confused about this, then. Is volition a necessary condition for kamma formations? Again, as Robert wrote: The actual moments of experience through the doorways are vipaka (result) but immediately there is reaction which is defilement(kilesa) and this conditions kamma. So, kamma-formations are conditioned by ignorance, or, said differently, ignorance is a condition for kamma-formations? And is it true that kamma formations may come to fruition as vipaka-vatta(result) which is then a condition for the arising of ignorance, aversion, attachment and therefore more kamma-formations? Ignorance ("unknowing") is volitional; it is an active engaged succession of citta that does not see dukkha as non-self. Other cittas, such as the citta that sees an object or averts to an object cannot be classified as kusula or akusula--they are without volition. They are vipaka (result) and also non-self. Thus, my original line of quesioning was too ambiguous. I did not see the connection between kamma-formations and cetana. If I'm sufficiently understanding things up to this point, then this leaves me with one more small question. You write that kamma-formations "are" kusala/akusala cetanas. Does this mean that at the moment when ignorance (kusala/akusala volitional cittas) are arising and falling away kamma-formations are simultaneously rising and falling away? How do kamma-formations differ from ignorance? Is ignorance a condition for kamma formations in the sense of this follows that, or more in the sense of while there is ignorance there are kamma-formations? I hope these are not too many questions. Paul ----- Original Message ----- From: "nina van gorkom" To: Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 6:36 AM Subject: Re: [dsg] Can ignorance and formations be the mistaken circle of"not" knowing? Dear Paul, op 24-03-2006 15:23 schreef paulgrabianowski op paulgrabianowski@...: > > N: When we understand that ignorance conditions kamma-formations, we > shall not be confused, at least in theory. > P: I find this quite interesting and perhaps perplexing (in a hopeful > way). If ignorance is "not knowing" (a��aanaa) the reality of dhamma, > and thus is a condition for kamma-formations, then aren't both > ignorance and kamma-formations themselves a) subject to dukkha and > conditionality b) not-self ------------ N: Conditioned dhammas, thus also ignorance and kamma-formations, arise and fall away and are thus dukkha, dukkha in the sense of sa.nkhaara dukkha. Moreover, they are non-self. But ignorance does not know this. --------- <...> 57132 From: han tun Date: Sun Mar 26, 2006 9:09pm Subject: [dsg] Anattalakkhana Sutta: Part Two hantun1 Anattalakkhana Sutta: Part Two Dear Nina and Lodewijk, Here is the second part of the Anattalakkhana Sutta. ------------------------------ “What do you think, bhikkhus, is form permanent or impermanent? – “Impermanent, venerable sir.” – “Is what is impermanent suffering or happiness? – “Suffering, venerable sir.” – “Is what is impermanent, suffering, and subject to change fit to be regarded thus: ‘This is mine, this I am, this is my self? – “No, venerable sir.” “Is feeling permanent or impermanent? – “Impermanent, venerable sir.” – “Is what is impermanent suffering or happiness? – “Suffering, venerable sir.” – “Is what is impermanent, suffering, and subject to change fit to be regarded thus: ‘This is mine, this I am, this is my self? – “No, venerable sir.” “Is perception permanent or impermanent? – “Impermanent, venerable sir.” – “Is what is impermanent suffering or happiness? – “Suffering, venerable sir.” – “Is what is impermanent, suffering, and subject to change fit to be regarded thus: ‘This is mine, this I am, this is my self? – “No, venerable sir.” “Are volitional formations permanent or impermanent? – “Impermanent, venerable sir.” – “Is what is impermanent suffering or happiness? – “Suffering, venerable sir.” – “Is what is impermanent, suffering, and subject to change fit to be regarded thus: ‘This is mine, this I am, this is my self? – “No, venerable sir.” “Is consciousness permanent or impermanent? – “Impermanent, venerable sir.” – “Is what is impermanent suffering or happiness? – “Suffering, venerable sir.” – “Is what is impermanent, suffering, and subject to change fit to be regarded thus: ‘This is mine, this I am, this is my self? – “No, venerable sir.” ---------------------------- Han: The second part deals with the questions, "Are the five aggregates permanent or impermanent? Are they suffering or happiness"' and explains that it is not fitting to regard that which is not permanent, suffering, and subject to change as "mine," "me," "my self." Please note the Buddha’s question. “Is what is impermanent (anicca), suffering (dukkha), and subject to change (viparinaama) fit to be regarded thus: ‘This is mine (etam mama), this I am (eso hamasmi), this is my self (eso me attaati)? Anicca, dukkha, viparinaama are the standard formula for danger (aadinava) of five aggregates. When only one sees the danger (aadinava) of five aggregates, one will develop revulsion (nibbidaa) towards the five aggregates. The development of revulsion (nibbidaa) towards the five aggregates will come up in Part Four of this sutta. At this juncture, I wish to refer to another famous sutta where danger (aadinava) of the five aggregates is mentioned. This sutta is MN 148 Chachakka Sutta. There, in paragraph 28, it is mentioned that when a person is under the influence of ignorance (avijjaanusaya) he does not know five things with regard to each of the five aggregates. What five? (1) the origination (samudayanca) (2) the disappearance (atthangmanca) (3) the gratification or taking delight in (assaadanca) (4) the danger (aadinavanca) (5) the escape (nissarananca) The danger (aadinavanca) constitutes anicca, dukkha and viparinaama. This fact is not specifically mentioned in MN148. But in other suttas, for example in SN 22.26 Assaada Sutta, it is stated: “that form is impermanent, suffering, and subject to change: this is the danger in form” (yam ruupam aniccam dukkham viparinaama dhammam, ayam ruupassa aadinavo). Why I mention these here is to highlight the fact that the Buddha, by saying impermanent (anicca), suffering (dukkha), and subject to change (viparinaama), he is bringing out the danger (aadinava) of the five aggregates. This realization of the danger (aadinava) of the five aggregates is essential not to regard them as ‘This is mine (etam mama), this I am (eso hamasmi), this is my self (eso me attaati)”, and also it is essential in the development of revulsion (nibbidaa nana) towards the five aggregates in later part of the sutta. Coming back to ‘This is mine (etam mama), this I am (eso hamasmi), this is my self (eso me attaati)”, (1) this is mine (etam mama) means clinging to the five aggregates with craving (tanha). (2) this I am (eso hamasmi) means clinging to the five aggregates with conceit (maana). (3) this is my self (eso me attaati) means clinging to the five aggregates with wrong view (ditthi). Tanha, maana, ditthi are three papanca dhammas which prolong the samsara. Therefore, what the Buddha is saying is not to cling to the five aggregates with tanha, maana and ditthi , which are the three papanca dhammas. How to get rid of tanha, maana and ditthi? (1) to get rid of tanha one must contemplate on dukkha (dukkhaanupassanaa) (2) to get rid of maana one must contemplate on anicca (aniccaanupassanaa) (3) to get rid of ditthi one must contemplate on anatta (anattaanupassanaa) In the spirit of the Anattalakkhana Sutta, all these contemplations must lead to anattaa. However, Mahasi Sayadaw said the characteristic of nonself is not easily understood. In his book, The Great Discourse on Not Self, Sayadaw explained in detail under the chapter on Seeing Selflessness (starting from page 80). Here are some excerpts: “The characteristics of impermanence and unsatisfactoriness are well known both inside and outside the Buddhist teaching, but the characteristic of not-self is known only in the Buddhist Dispensation.” “The Commentary states that the doctrine of not-self is so deep that even the Enlightened Ones had to employ either the characteristics of impermanence or the characteristics of suffering, or both, to facilitate its teaching.” Sayadaw then went on to explain “Not-self explained by means of Impermanence” (page 82), “Seeing Not-Self through Seeing Suffering” (page 83), and “Not-Self explained in terms of both Impermanence and Suffering” (page 84). For me, anicca is most easily understood among the three characteristics. Therefore I concentrate on the arising and passing away of whatever phenomenon (kaaya, or vedanaa, or citta, or dhamma) that appears at the moment of contemplation. In this respect, I follow Mogok Sayadaw’s teachings. His teachings are very simple and easier to follow for a person like me who does not have a teacher, because Sayadaw teaches only three nanas, namely, yathaabhuta nana, nibbidaa nana, and magga nana. One of the components of yathaabhuta nana is to note the arising and falling away of conditioned things, which we call “phyit-pyet” in Burmese. (phyit = becoming, pyet = dissolution). If one contemplates on “phyit-pyet’ long enough he will get bored with the “phyit-pyet”. He will not like to have anything anymore that is constantly arising and falling away. At that stage nibbidaa nana will arise. In Burmese we call “phyit-pyet mone” (mone = to hate). When he progresses further, he will reach a stage where “phyit-pyet sone” (sone = ends), and there is no more phyit-pyet. (“phyit-pyet mone” rhymes with “phyit-pyet sone”) Now, this last statement needs some more explanation. When one says the end of arising and passing away (phyit-pyet sone), does it mean that the five aggregates of the ariya puggala do not arise and pass away anymore? No, it is not like that. The five aggregates of ariya puggala will continue to arise and fall away like any other human being until he dies, but it means the “shifting of observation”. In magga appanaa vithis, one of the four nana-sampayuttam mahaa-kusala cittas, while observing one of the three characteristics of existence, functions three times as (1) parikamma = preparation for magga, (2) upacaara = proximity of magga, and (3) anuloma = adaptation or connection, harmonizing the lower cittas with the upper cittas. Then the same mahaa-kusala citta, “shifting its observation” from the three characteristics of existence to Nibbana, functions as gotrabhu , the citta that cuts the puthujjana-lineage. Then sotaapatti-magga javana arises once observing Nibbana. Then, without any lapse in time, the fruition of the magga, i.e., sotaapatti-phala citta, functions twice as appana-javana. Then bhavanga cittas sink into life-continuum. This "shifting of observation" from three characteristic of existence to Nibbana is what Sayadaw meant by “phyit-pyet sone”. The person needs not observe, at the moment of magga appanaa vithi, the characteristic of anicca with its arising and passing away, and instead observes Nibbana where there is no more phyit-pyet. But, what about me? Where am I now? At the moment, I am still struggling with the yathaabhuta nana. I do not even know whether I will achieve nibbidaa nana in this life, let alone magga nana. Part Three of the sutta to be continued. With metta and deepest respect, Han ------------------------------ > Nina: I talked with Lodewijk about you and told him that you recite each day the anatta lakkhana sutta. He said he would like you to share your views and comments on the texts which you read and contemplate. I really like to listen to someone's personal experiences in the light of the teachings. =========================================== 57133 From: "rjkjp1" Date: Sun Mar 26, 2006 10:14pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Can ignorance and formations be the mistaken circle of "not" knowing? rjkjp1 Dear Paul, Yep, I'm still at the Prefectural Uni. here in Kumamoto, same office too. dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Paul Grabianowski" wrote: > > You wrote: > > The actual moments of experience > > through the doorways are vipaka (result) but immediately there > > is reaction which is defilement(kilesa) and > > this conditions kamma. > ======================================= > So, is it true to say that we cannot escape vipaka-vatta and that which > arises through the sense doors or through the mind door is itself a > condition for the arising of kusa or akusula citta which condition further > moments of vipaka-vatta? It is often difficult to see how much our > experiences are a result of these dependent conditions. It's comforting, > however, to see that all the Buddhist teachings lead back to how we actually > relate to the world in body and mind. I've found that even practicing metta > is amazingly practical in the manner in which it puts the body and the mind > in a particular relation to present and future conditions. Understanding > these three rounds of dependent origination can, I guess, keep us from > falling into the particularly vehement vortex of "these rounds . . . > spinning now." There is a sense of amazing freedom in contemplating that > all nama and rupa have conditions for arising. How does one prepare oneself > to face samsara, though? Certainly one should be read the teachings of the > Buddha, but, should one plan ahead? If so, how so? For example, I teach on > MWF and I've found that the night before I teach, right before I teach and > while I'm teaching, if I recognize my responsibility as a teacher and my > responsibility to my students, I will not only teach a much better class, > but I find my mind much clearer and lighter and more receptive to my > student's needs. The Buddha had an amazing understanding of how > relationships affect thinking and thinking affects relationships. ++++++++ What you say sounds good to me Paul. Reflecting on the teachings is itself highly kusala. Planning is neccessary in life and planning is also something we can be aware of while it is happening. Robert 57134 From: sarah abbott Date: Sun Mar 26, 2006 10:16pm Subject: ‘Cetasikas' study corner 409- Confidence/saddhaa (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;-) ========================================== (Ch25 - Confidence/saddhaa contd) “An object worthy of faith” is a proximate cause of confidence. The Buddha, the Dhamma and the Sangha are objects worthy of confidence. This does not mean that someone who never heard of the Dhamma cannot have confidence. Confidence is an ultimate reality with its own characteristic, it is not specifically Buddhist. Each kusala citta is accompanied by confidence; kusala is kusala, no matter what nationality or race one is, no matter what faith one professes. Also those who never heard of the Dhamma can have confidence in ways of kusala such as generosity and true loving kindness. Also good deeds are objects worthy of confidence. If one listens to the Dhamma and develops right understanding there are conditions for the eradication of akusala and thus there will be more opportunity for the development of wholesomeness. The “factors of streamwinning”, that is the factors, necessary for attaining the first stage of enlightenment, the stage of the “streamwinner” or sotåpanna, are also a proximate cause for confidence. These factors are: association with the right friend, hearing the Dhamma, wise attention and practice in accordance with the Dhamma(1). Confidence in the Buddha, the Dhamma and the Sangha starts with listening to the Dhamma as it is explained by the right friend. We read in many suttas that people first listened to the Buddha, considered what they heard and then took their refuge in the Buddha, the Dhamma and the Sangha. Their confidence was based on listening, inquiring and considering. *** 1) Dialogues of the Buddha, III, 33, Sangíti Sutta, 227. ***** (Ch25 - Confidence/saddhaa to be contd) Metta, Sarah ====== 57135 From: TGrand458@... Date: Sun Mar 26, 2006 5:46pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Long Post Re: Understanding dhammas, understanding realities/'reali... TGrand458@... Hi Sukin In a message dated 3/26/2006 5:04:29 A.M. Mountain Standard Time, sukinder@... writes: Hi TG, =================================== TG: The concept vs reality issue is rarely mentioned in the Buddha's teaching... and not mentioned with the type of "reality demanding viewpoints" that we see in in some abhidhamma practitioners. |Sukin: Regarding "reality demanding viewpoints", I think aside from the fact that we are still unclear in experience, of knowing the characteristic of "thinking" and hence speak mainly from an 'intellectual' and 'conceptual' understanding of the difference between concept and reality, there is also the problem during discussions, of others stating to the effect that concepts can be objects of insight or else that one starts with the observation of concepts. I do admit though, that in light of the fact that whatever appears in the present moment, it is enough to know just that, and that it may be unnecessary to label 'reality' to this. Also I agree that doing so can be conditioned by, and/or inadvertently lead to 'self-view'. However, I think that this is more due to lack of the level of panna got from direct experience which knows precisely the nature of dhammas. I do not think however, that 'reality' and 'exist' don't in fact apply. It may be that our own understanding is too weak to speak of this with any real confidence, but I do believe that once when understanding develops to a point, 'reality' and 'exist' will be valid expressions of aspects of dhammas known by panna. But how about at this point of my development? Does this 'reality-exist' idea determine in me a 'wrong understanding'? I think there would be a danger of projection if I were to 'try' to observe realities. And I think this is the more important issue we all need to consider. No matter how much we try to be clear in thought and steer away from what we perceive to be misuse of certain concepts, if we "try to observe reality", we will end up projecting. And no amount of refining our thinking, one that has yet to understand dhammas directly, can ever be said to be 'right'. ====================================== TG: Why can't concepts be fodder for insight? The Satipatthana Sutta has many conceptual tacts...indisputable even from an Abhidhamma interpretation. Why can't the conditions and conditional history that generate a concepts(s) be traced down and understood? Granted...this process will "pull the rug out" from under the concept as the mind will become forced to pay attention to other mental states. Yes, concepts are delusion, but delusion is a state that arises. It is not a non- existent thing. |Sukin: The Satipatthana Sutta, when it talks about postures and so on, is pointing out the different situations in which we might be aware of realities, *not of the postures* themselves. TG: Nope. It talks about "the postures themselves" and says nothing about being aware of "realities." Example... "when walking, a Bhikkhu understands: 'I am walking,' etc...." It does NOT say -- "when walking, a Bhikkhu understands: 'These are only nama dhammas with their own characteristics that are motivating the rupa,' etc." Now, another type of insight practice might indeed say the latter. But the Satipatthana Sutta does not in this case. What it says, we should say -- it says. What it doesn't say, we should say -- it doesn't say. If we want to interpret a meaning not explicitly expressed, we should say -- we are interpreting a meaning not explicitly expressed. That's my feeling. Much self-view has been accumulated while we *do* things and identify with those activities, including the different postures involved. By natural decisive support condition, all these postures and acts can and often do condition 'self- view' to arise. We are therefore meant to realize instead, the dhammas underlying these activities, so that this process of self-identification will be known and gradually weakened. How can concepts be objects of insight? Firstly let me state that to me 'concept', the 'referent', 'thoughts' are more or less the same and this is different from say, the citta that 'thinks'. TG: I disagree. A concept is a mental-formation. It is based on memory which serves as the mental-object. The "referent" does not arise at all. Based on your view, as I understand it, you would postulate a "arisen-non-arisen." There is no such thing. You are saying that this -- "arisen-non-arisen" is not really real whereas other things are really real. As I see it... the "arisen-non-arisen" is nothing (no-thing) and therefore does not belong in a discussion about realities in any way, shape, or form. To clarify -- you are saying a referent arises but is not real. I am saying a referent does not arise. I disagree that a concept is a referent and therefore do not categorize it as such. So concepts can be 'dealt with' only by way of 'more thinking', which means more and more concepts. Some of these concepts act as premises and some as conclusions and in between there are some taken to be 'givens' and relationships are made by virtue of yet more thoughts. This is definitely not the way to understanding, is it! TG: I like the exclamation point instead of the question mark. :-) In answer...that's not the way I do it anyway. Its a single level process of mindfully watching the mind work. This may be the way to understand conventional and conceptual realities, but you say 'tracing down', I don't think it works when it comes to understanding the nature of dhammas. So in fact, your expectation of the 'rug being pulled out' may be a matter of coming in the end to just "thinking differently" but thinking nevertheless. Is this a Zen influence? The end result of thinking is just more thinking. You either 'insight' into thinking now or you don't! So yes, delusion arises, but no, concepts do not. Sanna arises, vitakka, viccara, citta, manasikara all arise and fall, while concepts are just 'shadows' of these dhammas arising in many, many mind moments. ========================================= TG: I like your "shadow" word. I use it also. But it applies to all states/conditions as well as concepts. "Referents" don't arise in any way at all, so they don't even get the word "shadow" applied to them. TG: Speaking of which, it seems abhidhammists are "in the business" of determining states as either "existing" or "non-existing." This is exactly what the Buddha did not want IMO. I've already stated the quotes. |Sukin: Yes agree, "existing" vs. "non-existing" can be the result of |proliferated thinking, but then it can also serve as a useful guideline |don't you think? On the other hand, if others are strong "in the |business" of thinking that concepts can be object of insight or that it |can lead to such, then we might have to keep at this business of ours. |;-)) ======================================== TG: Do you honestly think that everyone the Buddha spoke to in his day was clear on the issue of concepts? My goodness. They must of all been arahats in Buddha's day. |Sukin: I have expressed my opinion about this in my last reply to Howard. Hope you have read it. ========================================= TG: This is what I see happening when I compare Sutta practice and postulations with abhidhamma practice and postulations. I believe a flawed theory is misleading the abhidhamma practice and tending to make the mind grasp after dhammas ... dhammas, not really being the issue ... not grasping is the issue. By spending so much attention to "making dhammas realities," I see a mind as having little chance of detaching from them. Its a subtle disagreement, but perhaps important consequences. |Sukin: No to "grasping after dhamma". But I hope this perception is not due to your own resistance to our objection to the idea of conventional reality being object of satipatthana development. And do you really think that "not grasping" can arise or made to develop by 'thinking'? Would not any attitude thus developed only become a 'conditioned response' and not in fact lead anywhere near to insight development? TG: I don't believe there is such a thing as "conventional reality." There are various levels of delusion, yes. But various levels of reality, no. Did I ever indicate that "thinking" was the sole approach to developing insight? No. As regards the Sutta/Abhidhamma difference, besides what you say about concept/reality distinction, is there anything else? ======================================= TG: Attached to my views?...perhaps. I suppose we all are to some extent until we can become arahats. |Sukin: Yes, it should be expected that such moments will arise. ======================================= TG: Existence or non-existence is just concept. Conditions don't manifest as existing or not-existing. They are more like echoes of echoes of echoes of echoes and so on. And there is nothing "standing on its own." These 'empty echoes' that arise are structured by 'other empties.' The "empty echoes" that arise are mere "resultants" 'of something else' and have nothing about themselves. Just qualities of 'altering emptiness' is what is being discerned by the mind which is also a quality of emptiness. In the final analysis, physical energies and mental energies are just as empty as concepts. |Sukin: Yes. But such ideas as 'echoes' or 'energy', aren't these also concepts? In fact they seem to be of a higher order. Exist and non-exist may be unnecessary, but 'reality-existence' can still point directly to what arises in the present moment as against what doesn't. But 'echo' begs 'echo of' and 'energy'?! What understanding do you expect to arise when hearing such a term? Is this your reaction to the reality/concept issue that you have ended up relying on concepts that take you even further away? And what of this "nothing standing on its own"? Couldn't this almost be used to deny the fact that "one reality appears' at any given moment? And "Emptiness", I wonder how well you grasp this concept, mind you though, I don't agree with the Nagarjuna/Mahayana use of this term? And what about 'empty echoes', how am I to understand this? TG: How indeed. ;-) The Buddha described states as "alien, void, like a mirage, etc.." How would you understand that may I ask? “Whatever exists therein of material form, feeling, perception, mental formations, consciousness, he sees those states as impermanent, as suffering, as a disease, as a tumour, as a barb, as a calamity, as an affliction, as alien, as disintegrating, as void, as not self." MN #64 ...so many things the Buddha says the 5 Khandas should be seen as ... but "realities" is not on the list. Your objections above are legitimate. All these terms eventually need to be flushed down the toilet. They are just tools. I am more comfortable with the terms I use because, for me, they more fully reveal the un-substantial nature of phenomena. "Realities," on the other hand, tends to "substantialize" phenomena. I understand that you are coming from the idea that dhammas are conditioned, rise and fall extremely rapidly and are ungraspable. Abhidhamma does not deny this. Your reaction is valid, I would say, to any attitude which tries to 'grasp at' realities, behaving mistakenly, as if there is some 'thing' standing apart and is able to control dhammas. But the Abhidhamma states further, that one or several of these dhammas can be what is called, satipatthana which knows the characteristic of the dhamma which as just fallen away prior to that. And this being the nature of dhammas, "understanding" develops based on this satipatthana arising more and more often to know precisely the characteristic of this same just fallen away dhamma, better and better. Any idea which takes one away from the importance of this is I think, mistaken. So indeed, as far as you and I are concerned, we should do well to understand the importance of knowing dhammas by their characteristics. TG: Except that I think to think that a dhamma has its own characteristic is a delusion. The conditions that arise are empty of anything of their own. There are "qualities of experience," but there is no essence to those qualities. ================================== TG: The concepts "referent" does not arise. When you say a "tree does not exist" ... well, of course it does arise. It is physical form -- rupa. When you say a "tree" doesn't exist.... what you mean is that the concept's "referent" does not exist. The concept of "tree" is a mental formation...it arises. The "referent" tree is pure "imagination"...the imagination arises (as concept), but the "referent" of the imagination does not arise...why should it? The form that a mind interprets as a tree is rupa...is arises. |Sukin: Tree is not a rupa. What is seen is visible object, what is touched are the earth, fire and wind elements. From these experiences to proliferate into 'tree being rupa' is clearly wrong. ====================================== TG: Hummm, the elements that constitute what we call a tree are not rupa? That does not correspond to the Suttas or abhidhamma as far as I understand it. The Buddha spoke about internal and external elements. Check out "The Exposition of the Elements" MN #140 S: each one of those conditioning/conditioned dhammas that there can be this regularity, such as lobhamula cittas are lobhamula cittas and lokuttara cittas are lokuttara cittas. Anatta, anicca and dukkha are characteristics of individual dhammas and not because dhammas are conditioned. Each dhamma is anatta *and* conditioned. Anatta is not because of D.O., but D.O. is because of anatta and the fact of individual characteristics. TG: Care to demonstrate this last sentence with a quote from a Sutta? I base my thinking on observation and Sutta material as my primary resources. You want quotes where the Buddha say we should see things as empty, void, coreless, alien? I got a lot of those. But I haven't found a one where the Buddha says we should see things as ultimate realities ... or as with there own characteristics. The only reference to "own characteristics" appears in the pattisambhidammaga which denies it. The Buddha does advise to have a variety of "attitudes toward conditions" throughout the Suttas. I have to disagree with that comment in your above paragraph. |Sukin: No, no quotes, just some use of logic and reasoning. The fact that certain dhammas condition other dhammas in an impersonal way, suggests that it must be due to the characteristics of the dhammas involved. Were dhammas not anatta and exhibit distinct characteristics, how can D.O. be the way it is? TG: Logic and reasoning??? So you are using conceptual deductions in such a manner as to produce conclusions about the Buddha's teachings that the Buddha did not state. As the Buddha said, paraphrasing -- "anything based on reasoning might be right, and it might be wrong." If the "reality" and "own characteristics" issues were so crucial, how could the Buddha not have directly said so? Why wouldn't the Buddha stress over and over again that "realities with their own characteristics need to be directly known"? I think there is a mis-match in what abhidhammists are stressing and what the Buddha stressed. When you say that the Buddha advised seeing things as 'empty, void, coreless, alien' etc., prior to Him saying this, does He not point to the 'knowing of dhammas'? TG: Nope. Not in the sense you are positing. The Buddha says to know the khandas is to know them as empty, alien, impermanent, coreless, etc. That is the knowing! Do they arise? Yes. But they arise merely as empty, alien, coreless, etc. Do we not have to know dhammas before knowing that these are indeed coreless, empty and so on? TG: Yes. We have to pay attention to experiences and see conditional structures and impermanence in progress. Does this need to lead to a conclusion that these experiences are "ultimate realities with their own characteristics? No. You may if you wish, quote me a sutta, the audience being non-ariyans, where the Buddha straight away talks about seeing things as empty and so on. TG: The following Sutta seems to have been spoken to a large gathering of monks including at least one who couldn't answer the Buddha's question in a satisfactory way. MN # 64 -- “Whatever exists therein of material form, feeling, perception, mental formations, consciousness, he sees those states as impermanent, as suffering, as a disease, as a tumour, as a barb, as a calamity, as an affliction, as alien, as disintegrating, as void, as not self. He turns his mind away from those states and directs it toward the deathless element thus: ‘This is the peaceful, this is the sublime, that is, the stilling of all formations, the relinquishing of all attachments, the destruction of craving, dispassion, cessation, Nibbana (Nirvana). Standing upon that, he attains the destruction of the taints [mental corruptions].â€? (The Buddha . . . MLDB, pg. 540, The Great Discourse to Malunkyaputta, Mahamalunkyaputta Sutta, #64) "Attitudes" are conditioned by dhammas, for example, moha, miccha ditthi, amoha and sati. Would you not want to determine whether if indeed it is panna which holds such an attitude? ================================= TG: I don't understand this question. Conditionality determines all in samsara. What you call "dhammas" are just forces configured in various formations. S: In the past, whenever you have stated to the effect about the importance of knowing D.O. over knowing individual characteristics of dhammas, I am stirred when looking at just one link in the chain, `ignorance'. I think, "Does TG know ignorance? How can he be saying anything meaningful about the whole chain?" It seems to be that you are being driven by a theory and not taking into account what you don't know and what needs to be known. Meanwhile, ignorance as a reality ;-) is doing its job in adding bricks to samsara. TG: Well, the entire Pali Canon is a lesson in D.O. I don't know how many hundreds or thousands of times the Buddha uses the term D.O. in the Suttas. As for "individual characteristic," my understanding is the number is zero. |Sukin: Talking about Khandas for example, is to be talking about dhammas. Talking about them as being distinct and different is to be talking about their characteristics. Am I reading too much into the Buddha's words? ================================= TG: Again, what you call "dhammas" are just forces configured in various formations. If that is agreed, then I can go along with the above statement.... slightly preferring to use the word "qualities" instead of "characteristics" and eliminating the word "their" that precedes them. TG: Sukinder, I like your challenging comments and analysis. Please continue to do so when you have such motivation...fire away! |Sukin: I have therefore taken the liberty to be frank. ;-) TG: Does Frank know about this? ;-) My time is limited as I'm getting ready to leave for a few weeks but wanted to respond to as much as possible. I hope my responses are helping you and others understand my position but I'm afraid they may not be. ===================================== TG: I suspect our understanding is much closer than you might think it is. I sometimes make a hard argument on a very fine point because this fine point is important and crucial in clearly realizing D.O. |Sukin: But one step at a time. Knowing D.O. can only happen after understanding that in fact 'conditionality' is true at the most basic level. TG: Agreed And this comes only after knowing the characteristic of the dhammas involved. TG: Again, what you call "dhammas" are just forces configured in various evolving formations. If this is understood, I can't disagree with your above statement. But I doubt we are seeing this in anything very close to the same way. The principles of D.O. are the key in understanding the Buddha's teaching. But the way "dhammas" are talked about indicates to me that D.O. is NOT being correctly understood. (As I understand it.) Long way and many steps in all this. Metta, Sukinder TG: Enjoyed your comments! Please feel free to point out flaws in the approach I take whenever you can and as directly as you wish! TG 57136 From: connie Date: Sun Mar 26, 2006 10:56pm Subject: Re: Hello - at the first temple part 2 nichiconn Hi Sarah & all, ....S [57056] quoting commentary to the Udana, Sona chapter, 5 'Uposatha': "....Thus, the implication is that the one not 'wet' on account of the defilements, whose morality is completely pure, will, as he comprehends (things) upon establishing vipassanaa after he has become concentrated, in due course reach nibbaana." [to be contd] ...C quoting Illustrator, vi.117: << Herein [...snip...] (nibbanti): they stop burning. Steadfast (dhiiraa): those perfected in steadfastness (dhiti). As did this lamp (yatha'yam padiipo): like this lamp. 118. What is meant? [It is like this.] The old past-time action (kamma: neut.) is, although it has already arisen and ceased, still unconsumed for [ordinary] creatures since it is still capable of inducing their rebirth-linking owing to their not having abandoned the [germ-softening] moisture of craving; [but] there are those in whom the moisture of craving has been dried out by the Arahant path and for whom that old action is [thus] consumed, [195] like germs burnt up by fire, since it is no more capable of giving any ripening in the future; then any action of theirs occurring right now as honouring the Enlightened One, etc, is called 'the new'; [but] they are those for whom it no more gives being since, owing to the abandonment of craving, it is no more capable of fruiting in the future than the flower of a plant whose roots have been cut: and these, from whose cognizance lust for new (future) being has faded with the abandoning of craving are the bhikkhus with taints consumed (exhausted) [called] '[with] the germ consumed' because the [action-resultant] rebirth-linking consciousness, stated thus 'Action is the field, consciousness is the seed' (A.i.223), has been consumed with the consumption (exhaustion) of action; and then, because the zeal that there formerly was for the renewal of being called 'growth' has been abandoned precisely by abandoning the origin [of suffering], they have no more zeal for growth as they formerly had because they are steadfast with perfection of steadfastness, they go out, as did this lamp, with the ceasing of the final consciousness. They go beyond any mode of description (cf. Sn. 1067) again such as 'with form', 'formless', and so on (cf. S. iii. 46). And, it seems, one lamp among those that had been lit to honour the city deities on that occasion, actually went out, and it was with reference to that that he said 'as did this lamp.'>> care for some dried aasava? really nutritious... peace, connie 57137 From: nina van gorkom Date: Mon Mar 27, 2006 1:09am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Q. Visuddhimagga Ch XVII, 64 and Tiika. nilovg Hi Tep, op 26-03-2006 18:38 schreef indriyabala op indriyabala@...: > >> Nina (quoting the commentary to the UDANA: > it is ignorance (avijjaa) since it darts among those things which do > not actually exist (avijjamaanesu javati), since it does not dart > among those things that do exist .. > Tep : What are things that do not actually exist? ------- N: Men, women. ------- T: What are things that do exist? ------- N:Paramattha dhammas, nama and rupa. ----------- T: Are things that do not actually exist real, or imaginary? > ............... N: Real in conventional sense, samutti sacca. We conceive or imagine them to be true but they exist in our thoughts. In the ultimate sense life is only one moment of experiencing an object through one of the six doors, and then gone immediately. But since this is hard to realize this we imagine that which disappears immediately as lasting, such as a person. ---------- T: > Nina: It seems that persons and things appear through the eyesense > all the time, not visible object. But if we begin to develop > understanding of paramattha dhammas, paññaa will eventually illuminate > the darkness of ignorance. > > Tep: I understand that "persons and things appear(ing) through the > eyesense" are just "impressions" (i.e. nimittas), so they are not > paramattha dhammas -- hence, do not "exist" as realities. ------- N: When it seems that we see a person, there is an impression of a whole. But even when visible object is seen, there is the nimitta, the sign of visible object. This is a meaning of nimitta which is more subtle. ---------- But I have > a real (not imaginary)and existing problem understanding why the > "understanding of paramattha dhammas" initially will result in paññaa > that "will eventually illuminate the darkness of ignorance". > Two questions : > > 1. What should happen between the initial state (paramattha dhamma > understanding) and the evenual state (eradication of ignorance)? --------- N: Developing more understanding of nama and rupa and this in itself is a condition for insight, direct experience of the characteristics of nama and rupa as they appear one at a time. We lead our life normally, meeting people, talking to them, helping them. The Buddha showed so much compassion to people he met, always thinking of helping them when they were in trouble. Thus, understanding paramattha dhammas does not mean that we should lead a cold, artificial life, with no attention to people. When knowing more about the different cittas we will be more able to develop mettaa and compassion. We learn more about the countless moments of self seeking, and of conceit. These arise in between kusala cittas. We can find out that there is kusala citta, but that we are also inclined to find that this feels good, or I am good. True or not? ---------- T: 2. Is understanding of the paramattha dhamma necessary and sufficient > for the eventual arrival of the truths? Why? --------- N: A basic understanding is necessary, and it depends on the individual whether he is inclined to understand more details. There is no rule. Howard says, First there will be knowledge about, but this is not sufficient. The difference between concepts and paramattha dhammas has to be understood, because the object of satipatthaana is paramattha dhammas. To come back to the question of kamma-formations of merit, which keep us in the cycle, I read in the Mahaaniddesa ( a.t.tada.ndasutta, embraced violence) about someone who inclines to nibbaana while performing kusala. He does not think of any gain for himself, but his sole aim is eradication of akusala. Then kusala is a parami, perfection. We read that a person performs daana, pays respect to the cedi, makes offerings of flowers and unguents, not fo the sake of a happy rebirth, not for success or prosperity, not for the sake of staying in the cycle, but that his citta inclines to nibbaana. It is said that he overcomes sleep, laziness, discouragement, that he is not heedless, and has no contempt. When the first vipassana ñaa.na has been reached there is a beginning of kusala that leads away from the cycle. Nina. 57138 From: connie Date: Mon Mar 27, 2006 2:03am Subject: Re: Hello - at the first temple (again) nichiconn hi, Sarah, same ocean, different beach... http://www.sacred-texts.com (thanks for news on jatakas, Chris!) NINTH KHANDHAKA. ON EXCLUSION FROM THE PAATIMOKKHA CEREMONY. Ch. 1 - Ven Moggallaana "made that man go out. The assembly is now undefiled" and the proceedings would not be invalid. Then Buddha spoke of "eight astonishing and curious qualities, by the constant perception of which the mighty creatures take delight in the great ocean" and <<'...eight marvellous and wonderful qualities in this doctrine and discipline by the constant perception of which the Bhikkhus take delight therein.' And the Blessed One, on perceiving that matter, gave forth at that time this ecstatic utterance: 'The rain falls heavily on that which is covered, not upon that which is revealed. 'Reveal, therefore, what thou hast concealed, and the rain shall touch thee not 1.'>> c. 57139 From: "Joop" Date: Mon Mar 27, 2006 2:27am Subject: Re: [dsg] Anattalakkhana Sutta: Part Two jwromeijn --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, han tun wrote: > > Anattalakkhana Sutta: Part Two > ... Dear Han, Tep, all Han, I think your contemplation on the Anattalakkhana Sutta are good, because they at the same moment personal and impersonal. Two questions that had perhaps not to do with the core of your message but are in my mind. First about several discussions I had months ago in DSG about the social dimension of Theravada; a dimension to which too less attention is paid in general. My statement was and is that one should perceive not oneself as atta but as (only) five aggregates of clinging; but that does not mean that one should perceive SOMEBODY ELSE as only five aggregates. And the Buddha said we should not think "This is mine, this I am, this is my self". But he never said that we should not think: "This is yours, this you are, this is your self" or: "This is his, this he is, this is his self". Do you agree with my conclusion that one can not have metta, karuna, mudita with "a thing" (aggregate), but that can have that only with a person, perceived as a sentient being? My second question is about your remark "For me, anicca is most easily understood among the Three characteristics. THEREFORE I concentrate on the arising and passing away of whatever phenomenon …" J: Do you mean that you use anicca as a kind of gate because it's more easy to use for you than using anatta directly as a gate? I'm asking this because to me 'anicca' is more difficult to understand than 'anatta'. To me 'anatta' is not so difficult (compared with 'anicca'), I never had a strong ego. My conclusion has a paradox: I think in DSG there is too much talk about 'anatta' If I'm correct than I can better use 'anatta' as a gate. That brings me to the 'Three Suttas about Atta', described by Tep in #57127 The theory that "'atta-ditthi' … is formed by the obsession with form, … etc." sounds correct to me, based on the Sutta you quote, Tep. It still sounds strange to me: till now I thought one should see that "I" is an illusion, that that "I" in fact is (only) five aggregates of clinging, ('dhammas' in Abhidhamma-language). But now I understand not (only) being obsessed with the I-illusion but being obsessed with the aggregates (so with the dhammas of Abhidhamma) is dangerous. Is that correct? Another question is: can one have (and I think some DSG-participants have) an obsession with anatta, that is with talking too much about anatta? Metta Joop 57140 From: han tun Date: Mon Mar 27, 2006 3:35am Subject: Re: [dsg] Anattalakkhana Sutta: Part Two hantun1 Dear Joop, Thank you very much for your good questions. Joop: My statement was and is that one should perceive not oneself as atta but as (only) five aggregates of clinging; but that does not mean that one should perceive SOMEBODY ELSE as only five aggregates. And the Buddha said we should not think "This is mine, this I am, this is my self". But he never said that we should not think: "This is yours, this you are, this is your self" or: "This is his, this he is, this is his self". Do you agree with my conclusion that one can not have metta, karuna, mudita with "a thing" (aggregate), but that can have that only with a person, perceived as a sentient being? ---------- Han: This issue will come up in the third part the sutta, where the five aggregates are classified and enumerated under eleven headings – past, future or present, internal or external, coarse or fine, inferior or superior, far or near. So this teaching of "this is not mine, this I am not, this is not my self" is applicable to other persons as well. But at the same time, I also agree with you that one may not have metta, karuna, mudita with "a thing" (aggregate), but one may have only with a person, perceived as a sentient being. Here, I think I like what Nina had said [Thus, understanding paramattha dhammas does not mean that we should lead a cold, artificial life, with no attention to people. When knowing more about the different cittas we will be more able to develop mettaa and compassion.] I must admit that I do not yet fully understand anatta – I am still trying. So I cannot tell what my thoughts will be with other persons when I have understood anatta completely and fully. ---------------------------- Joop: My second question is about your remark "For me, anicca is most easily understood among the Three characteristics. THEREFORE I concentrate on the arising and passing away of whatever phenomenon …" J: Do you mean that you use anicca as a kind of gate because it's more easy to use for you than using anatta directly as a gate? I'm asking this because to me 'anicca' is more difficult to understand than 'anatta'. To me 'anatta' is not so difficult (compared with 'anicca'), I never had a strong ego. My conclusion has a paradox: I think in DSG there is too much talk about 'anatta' If I'm correct than I can better use 'anatta' as a gate. ---------- Han: Yes, you are correct in saying that I use anicca as a kind of gate, because it's easier for me to use anicca than using anatta directly as a gate. Different persons have different mental make-ups, and some may find dukkha easier to start with, and some may find anatta easier. Therefore if you are more comfortable with anatta please go ahead with it. With metta and deepest respect, Han 57141 From: Bhikkhu samahita Date: Sun Mar 26, 2006 10:07pm Subject: Re: Both Theory & Praxis ... !!! bhikkhu_ekamuni Friend Tep indriyabala requested: >4: Praxis in accordance with this Dhamma. >So could you please elaborate the fourth factor. It is only the Actions and their Results that really counts. Reading Dhamma is "Intellectual Theory" (pariyatti). This only helps if acted in accordance with! (praxis=patipatti). Only then will the being progress and reach break-through to the Noble State of Stream Entry (penetration=pativedha). Simile: It does not help much to study traffic rules all life if you cross all the streets at the red light... Then eventually pain will follow even such proud 'traffic-rule theory expert' hihihi :-) Q: Why so ? A: Wrong praxis ! So also with the Dhamma... Friendship is the Greatest ... Bhikkhu Samahita, Sri Lanka. <...> 57142 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Mon Mar 27, 2006 0:50am Subject: Latent Tendencies ... !!! bhikkhu_ekamuni Friends: Feeling induce Latent Tendencies (Anusaya)! The Blessed Buddha once said: Bhikkhus, there are these three feelings. Which three? Pleasant feeling, Painful feeling, Neither-painful-nor-pleasant feeling. The latent tendency to lust induced by pleasant feeling should be left behind... The latent tendency to aversion induced by painful feeling should also be left... The latent tendency to ignorance induced by neither-painful-nor-pleasant feeling should also be abandoned. When, bhikkhus, a bhikkhu has abandoned the latent tendency to lust rooted in pleasant feeling, the latent tendency to aversion rooted in painful feeling, and the latent tendency to ignorance rooted in neither-painful- nor-pleasant feeling, then he is indeed called a bhikkhu freed of latent tendencies, one who sees rightly! He has stilled craving, cut off the mental chains, and by completely breaking through the conceit: 'I am', he has made an end of suffering... When one experiences pleasure, if one does not understand feeling, the tendency to lust is present in anyone not seeing the escape from it. When one experiences pain, if one does not understand feeling, the tendency to aversion is present in any one not seeing the escape from it. The One of Vast Wisdom has taught that even if one seeks delight in this peaceful neither-painful-nor-pleasant feeling, then one is still not released from suffering! But a bhikkhu who is enthusiastic, who does not neglect clear comprehension, such wise man fully understands feelings in their entirety. Having fully understood feelings, he is in this very life freed of all mental fermentation. Standing in this Dhamma, in this exquisite state, at the body's breakup such knowledge-master cannot be reckoned, assessed or estimated... Source (edited extract): The Grouped Sayings of the Buddha. Samyutta Nikaya. Book V [205-6] 36: feeling. Vedana. Focused on Pleasure. 3. 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 !!! <...> 57143 From: "indriyabala" Date: Mon Mar 27, 2006 5:24am Subject: Re: Hello - at the first temple (again) indriyabala Hi Connie and Sarah - --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, connie wrote: > > hi, Sarah, > same ocean, different beach... > Same wine in different bottles; Same song played with different violins ? But as long as the wine and the song are of best quality (like Nina has observed)there is nothing wrong (except maybe a little boring). And we should not fail to appreciate the high-quality products. Regards, Tep ======== 57144 From: "indriyabala" Date: Mon Mar 27, 2006 5:40am Subject: Re: Both Theory & Praxis ... !!! indriyabala Dear Ven. Samahita - Thank you for kindly replying to my inquiry. >Bhikkhu Samahita: > It does not help much to study traffic rules all life > if you cross all the streets at the red light... > Then eventually pain will follow even such > proud 'traffic-rule theory expert' hihihi :-) > Q: Why so ? A: Wrong praxis ! > So also with the Dhamma... > I have seen people crossing the streets at the green light, and also at places where are no traffic lights (jaywalkers)! Some of these "violators" are, believe it or not, the proud 'traffic-rule theory experts' -- violating the rules that they claim to know so well. Hee Hee.. Respectfully, Tep ======== --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Bhikkhu samahita wrote: > > Friend Tep indriyabala requested: > > >4: Praxis in accordance with this Dhamma. > >So could you please elaborate the fourth factor. > > It is only the Actions and their Results that really counts. > Reading Dhamma is "Intellectual Theory" (pariyatti). > This only helps if acted in accordance with! (praxis=patipatti). > Only then will the being progress and reach break-through > to the Noble State of Stream Entry (penetration=pativedha). > > Simile: (snipped) > Friendship is the Greatest ... > Bhikkhu Samahita, Sri Lanka. > <...> > 57145 From: "indriyabala" Date: Mon Mar 27, 2006 6:06am Subject: Re: Anattalakkhana Sutta: Part Two -- Dhamma Greedy indriyabala Dear Joop (and Han, Nina, Jon) - Han has complimented you, and I agree with him, that your questions are good. And I also have observed that Joop is more stubborn than Jon, and they both are true believers in what they want to believe! {:>|) >Han(dsg #57140): So this teaching of "this is not mine, this I am not, this is not my self" is applicable to other persons as well. But at the same time, I also agree with you that one may not have metta, karuna, mudita with "a thing" (aggregate), but one may have only with a person, perceived as a sentient being. Here, I think I like what Nina had said [Thus, understanding paramattha dhammas does not mean that we should lead a cold, artificial life, with no attention to people. When knowing more about the different cittas we will be more able to develop mettaa and compassion.] Tep: Nina and Han want to be right in two contradicting dhammas -- a dhammatanha. Like an old saying : I love the older sister but can't take my eye out of the younger sister. I think it is the matter of priority -- first thing first. When you are greedy to combine two conflicting dhammas you will end up with no solution, only confusion. Warm regards, Tep ======= --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Joop" wrote: > Dear Han, Tep, all > (snipped) > It still sounds strange to me: till now I thought one should see > that "I" is an illusion, that that "I" in fact is (only) five > aggregates of clinging, ('dhammas' in Abhidhamma-language). > But now I understand not (only) being obsessed with the I-illusion > but being obsessed with the aggregates (so with the dhammas of > Abhidhamma) is dangerous. Is that correct? > > Another question is: can one have (and I think some DSG-participants > have) an obsession with anatta, that is with talking too much about > anatta? > > Metta > > Joop > 57146 From: nina van gorkom Date: Mon Mar 27, 2006 7:06am Subject: Re: [dsg] Can ignorance and formations be the mistaken circle of"not" knowing? nilovg Dear Paul, op 27-03-2006 05:29 schreef Paul Grabianowski op paulgrabianowski@...: > > P: I might be a bit confused about this, then. Is volition a necessary > condition for kamma formations? ------ N: Kamma is volition or intention. It is mental and thus it can be accumulated, so that it can produce a result later on. When studying Dhamma with kusala citta, the citta is accompanied by wholesome volition, kusala cetanaa or kamma. When shouting angrily, the akusala citta is accompanied by unwholesome volition, akusala cetanaa or kamma. --------- P:Again, as Robert wrote: > > The actual moments of experience > through the doorways are vipaka (result) but immediately there > is reaction which is defilement(kilesa) and this conditions kamma. ------- N: They motivate kamma. We read in Vis. XVII, 298: here is more about the three rounds: ______ P: So, kamma-formations are conditioned by ignorance, or, said differently, > ignorance is a condition for kamma-formations? ------ N: Yes, also for kusala kamma, because ignorance can condition kamma in several ways as we shall see later on. -------- P:And is it true that kamma > formations may come to fruition as vipaka-vatta(result) which is then a > condition for the arising of ignorance, aversion, attachment and therefore > more kamma-formations? --------- N: See above for the round of defilements. We have to think also of kusala citta which has all the latent tendencies of defilements. This point is intricate and we have to wait until we come to this in our Vis. study. --------- Ignorance ("unknowing") is volitional; it is an > active engaged succession of citta that does not see dukkha as non-self. > Other cittas, such as the citta that sees an object or averts to an object > cannot be classified as kusula or akusula--they are without volition. ------- Ignorance is not volition, they are different cetasikas. Ignorance is not a succession of cittas, it is an akusala cetasika. It is also a latent tendency, lying dormant in each citta. Seeing is vipaaka, and aversion is akusala citta. Another point: volition arises with each citta, also with vipaakacitta (it has as function to coordinate the tasks of the other accompanying cetasikas), but when it arises with kusala citta or akusala citta it is wholesome or unwholesome intention. -------- P: You write that > kamma-formations "are" kusala/akusala cetanas. Does this mean that at the > moment when ignorance (kusala/akusala volitional cittas) are arising and > falling away kamma-formations are simultaneously rising and falling away? --------- N: As said, ignorance is not citta. In the D.O. ignorance is the condition for kamma-formations and this clarifies for us why we are in the cycle. We need to know the different types of conditions, some occurring at the same time, some before. It is complicated, but ignorance conditions kamma-formations in several ways. Ignorance arises at the same time as akusala cetanaa but not at the same time as kusala cetanaa. Still, it conditions kusala cetanaa or kamma in different ways we shall learn about later on. -------- P: How do kamma-formations differ from ignorance? Is ignorance a condition for > kamma formations in the sense of this follows that, or more in the sense of > while there is ignorance there are kamma-formations? ------- N: It depends on the type of kamma, see above. We can say in general that the fact that there are kamma-formations shows that there is ignorance that is not eradicated. Nina. 57147 From: nina van gorkom Date: Mon Mar 27, 2006 7:06am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Tep. Sankharanimitta nilovg Hi Tep, op 25-03-2006 15:53 schreef indriyabala op indriyabala@...: > Thank you for giving me again some foods for thought, but most of all > I appreciate your open-mindedness. Is open-mindedness a necessary > paccaya for samma-ditthi? ------- N: The perfection of truthfulness is indispensable in the development of the Path. One has to be very sincere as to one's akusala, otherwise one is bound to mislead oneself all the time. Even knowing this, I feel I mislead myself very often. I think of the countless moments of conceit and clinging to self that pass unnoticed. A great danger. ----------- T:>> N: But if there is a moment of some understanding of nama and rupa, > at that moment there cannot be sadness, and there is a degree of > tatramajjhattataa. > This cetasika arises with each kusala citta. But it cannot last. > > Tep: Precisely! It is because of "some understanding of nama and rupa" > [that they are 'anicca, dukkha, anatta'] that sets the mind free -- > yet, that understanding does not last. --------- N: Perhaps you mean: intellectual understanding of anicca, dukkha, anatta. That is still of the level of thinking. -------- T: What about the arahant's understanding -- does it last? -------- N: It arises and falls away with the citta. But ignorance has been eradicated. He cannot fall back. BTW the fact that paramattha dhammas and conventional realities are not contradictory is an important point. Read the suttas, and you will see. It is very important to remember that understanding of paramattha dhammas is beneficial for our social life. Here we have Joop's point. We should think of the Buddha's approach to people. In the midst of our social life understanding of seeing or hearing which occur all the time can be very naturally developed. We don't do this, it is paññaa's work. We should have confidence in the power of paññaa when we have listened to the Dhamma again and again, and deeply considered the meaning. When understanding is developed we shall have less selfish clinging to persons and that is a gain. As Sarah wrote to me: It is good to remember that our life we find so important exists merely in one moment of thinking. Citta is thinking, but only for one moment. Nina 57148 From: "Joop" Date: Mon Mar 27, 2006 7:44am Subject: Re: [dsg] Anattalakkhana Sutta: Part Two jwromeijn Hallo Han, Tep, Jon, Nina Thank you Han, for your nice respond. I wait for your contemplation on the third part of the Sutta The answers I got till now on my question about the social dimension (for example by Nina) were answers at the level of conceptual realities, not with ultimate language. Your reaction to my second question is clear. Tep, calling me more stubborn than Jon must be meant as a compliment! But was that about my first question (the poor social dimension in Theravada) or about the second (that some DSG-participants have an obsession of talking about -wrong, of course, of course - atta- belief) ? I did not know the concept 'dhammatanha'; and found one occurence of it in my personal buddhism-database: The Discourse on Right View The Sammaditthi Sutta and its Commentary Translated from the Pali by Bhikkhu Nanamoli Edited and Revised by Bhikkhu Bodhi The Wheel Publication No. 377/379 " In the section on craving, craving for forms ... craving for mind- objects (rupatanha ... dhammatanha): these are names for the kinds of craving which occur in the course of a javana cognitive process (javanavithi) in the eye door, etc." Do you mean I have dhammatanha? (Even when I say that dhammas are empty too?) You advised me: Tep: "I think it is the matter of priority -- first thing first. When you are greedy to combine two conflicting dhammas you will end up with no solution, only confusion. Joop: I don't know exactly which two you mean; But if it's between anatta and (3 of the) Brahmavihara's then my choice is the latter; but I don't think they are conflicting, when used with intelligence, without stubborness. Perhaps my choice is another one: Till now I say: I'm for two thirds a Theravadin and for one quarter a Mahayanist. Perhaps the percentage being a Mahayanist is increasing. Metta Joop 57149 From: "Cerini Pablo" Date: Mon Mar 27, 2006 8:55am Subject: [dsg] Re: Letter to Phil 1. Detachment. cerini_pablo Hi Nina (and Phil) nina van gorkom wrote: > I would say, since you have many questions, put them one at a time. >An idea? yes, I'm quite stuck on moha. I can't figure out what moha pratically (better : daily) is : it's rendered with "delusion" , but what is this delusion. If moha rests in a place so important, with dosa and lobha as one of the three primary roots of "evil", in the classification of dhammas, I doubt that moha can be reduced only to the ordinary meaning one gives to the word delusion. I can feel it has to have a deep meaning and more implications also for its application in vipassana. And I can't understand the relation beetween moha and avijja, becuase avijja sounds to me something more "metaphisical", as a "cosmic" ignorance ... I'm also surfing the digha and majjima nikaya, but I haven't found a sutta that clarify this problem yet. cerini pablo p.s. to Phil : Sorry if I jumped in your beautiful post without warnings ... what you wrote was impressive, most of all when you spoke about your parents ... It's just that sometimes I 'm far too direct to jump quickly to the point .... 57150 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Mon Mar 27, 2006 11:33am Subject: [dsg] Re: The dhammas underlying postures buddhatrue Hi Howard, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > > > Hi, James - > > You say the following below: > ________________ > The goal is to calm and center the mind, the goal isn't to become > aware of arising and passing dhammas. That awareness will come of > its own, when the mind is calm and centered- and the mind becomes > calm and centered simply by being aware of one bodily posture in all > situations. > > > > > Awareness of the body leads to samatha, and samatha leads to insight- > as I see it. > ____________________ > > What I infer from the foregoing, possibly mistakenly, is that you are asserting that insight arises from calm and concentration alone. I don't think that is so. I do indeed think these are requisite, but I also have come to believe, on the basis of mainly of study, and partly on the basis of practice, that from a base of calm, focus, and clarity, investigation of dhammas - "looking at them" with an attitude of inquiry - is required for insight into the tilakkhana to arise. > > With metta, > Howard You have cut out a big chunk of my post. I was explaining, as I see it, what the Buddha said in the Satipatthana Sutta. You cut out everything about the Buddha. When you take my words out of context, since I was responding to the Buddha's words, then the conversation will go astray. But I will throw you a small bone: I am not overly concerned about insight into the tilakkhana (I think that's your favourite word ;- )). I am more concerned about insight into nibbana. Nibbana is the absence of craving- so I am focused on the absence of craving. Metta, James 57152 From: "indriyabala" Date: Mon Mar 27, 2006 0:05pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Anattalakkhana Sutta: Part Two indriyabala Dear Joop (and Jon) - Thank you for your patience -- giving me another opportunity to explain. {:>) > Joop: > Tep, calling me more stubborn than Jon must be meant as a >compliment! But was that about my first question >(the poor social dimension in Theravada) or about the second >(that some DSG-participants have an obsession of talking about > -wrong, of course, of course - atta- belief) ? Tep: It is neither a compliment nor a reprimand. Jon is stubborn (not willing to change his views) about the dhamma in which he has believed as right or wrong (e.g. Jon always puts down jhana as not necessary for enlightenment, even after I have shown him several suttas that contradict with his views.) But he rarely continues to debate the same issues (that have been debated several times) over and over again like you do. ............... >Joop: > I did not know the concept 'dhammatanha'; and found one occurence of > it in my personal buddhism-database: > The Discourse on Right View > The Sammaditthi Sutta and its Commentary > Translated from the Pali by Bhikkhu Nanamoli > Edited and Revised by Bhikkhu Bodhi > The Wheel Publication No. 377/379 > " In the section on craving, craving for forms ... craving for mind- > objects (rupatanha ... dhammatanha): these are names for the kinds of craving which occur in the course of a javana cognitive process > (javanavithi) in the eye door, etc." > > Do you mean I have dhammatanha? > (Even when I say that dhammas are empty too?) Tep: We all have dhammatanha -- craving for pleasures that arise from the various pleasing mind-objects. Paramatthadhamma (ultimate realities) are incompatible with lovingkindness, as you have pointed out yourself. Yet, Nina, for example, wants to combine them (see her earlier post), and I call that dhammatanha : the craving for pleasure or satisfaction that she can give the combined answer that (she thinks) avoids the conflict. >Joop: > You advised me: Tep: "I think it is the matter of priority -- first > thing first. When you are greedy to combine two conflicting dhammas > you will end up with no solution, only confusion. > Joop: I don't know exactly which two you mean; > But if it's between anatta and (3 of the) Brahmavihara's then my > choice is the latter; but I don't think they are conflicting, when > used with intelligence, without stubborness. > Tep: Yes, the two dhammas: anatta and lovingkindness. They are conflicting (you, yourself have stated it many times before) because there are no beings in the anatta (a paramattha dhamma). Now, can you advise me how intelligence might be used? Thanks. .............. >Joop: > Perhaps my choice is another one: > Till now I say: I'm for two thirds a Theravadin and for one quarter a Mahayanist. Perhaps the percentage being a Mahayanist is increasing. > Isn't there at least one conflict between Theravadin and Mahayan? Don't you think you have dhammatanha-- being "greedy" to try to have them both? Regards, Tep, your friend. P.S. Please ignore a very similar post that I already deleted (because of some typos). ========== 57153 From: upasaka@... Date: Mon Mar 27, 2006 1:42pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: The dhammas underlying postures upasaka_howard Hi, James - I apologize about the omission. I had no ill intention in that. With regard to your statements "But I will throw you a small bone: I am not overly concerned about insight into the tilakkhana (I think that's your favourite word ;-)). I am more concerned about insight into nibbana. Nibbana is the absence of craving- so I am focused on the absence of craving," it has been my impression that it is insight into the tilakkhana that leads to the radical letting go required for the realization of nibbana. But my main point was that calm & concentration unassisted by investigation of dhammas won't result in awakening. After all, Gotama's teachers attained considerable calm and concentration, but only he became an arahant. With metta, Howard -----Original Message----- From: buddhatrue To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com Sent: Mon, 27 Mar 2006 19:33:23 -0000 Subject: [dsg] Re: The dhammas underlying postures Hi Howard, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > > > Hi, James - > > You say the following below: > ________________ > The goal is to calm and center the mind, the goal isn't to become > aware of arising and passing dhammas. That awareness will come of > its own, when the mind is calm and centered- and the mind becomes > calm and centered simply by being aware of one bodily posture in all > situations. > > > > > Awareness of the body leads to samatha, and samatha leads to insight- > as I see it. > ____________________ > > What I infer from the foregoing, possibly mistakenly, is that you are asserting that insight arises from calm and concentration alone. I don't think that is so. I do indeed think these are requisite, but I also have come to believe, on the basis of mainly of study, and partly on the basis of practice, that from a base of calm, focus, and clarity, investigation of dhammas - "looking at them" with an attitude of inquiry - is required for insight into the tilakkhana to arise. > > With metta, > Howard You have cut out a big chunk of my post. I was explaining, as I see it, what the Buddha said in the Satipatthana Sutta. You cut out everything about the Buddha. When you take my words out of context, since I was responding to the Buddha's words, then the conversation will go astray. But I will throw you a small bone: I am not overly concerned about insight into the tilakkhana (I think that's your favourite word ;- )). I am more concerned about insight into nibbana. Nibbana is the absence of craving- so I am focused on the absence of craving. Metta, James 57154 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Mon Mar 27, 2006 1:58pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: The place of "meditation" ... Viharati (corrected) jonoabb Hi Icaro My apologies for 'losing' your post in one of my folders. icarofranca wrote: >Hi Jon! > >--------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > >>Thanks for mentioning Buddhaghosa, whose Vism is full of learned >>detail. I don't know the particular passage you are referring to >here >>-- a reference would be of interest, if you have it. >> >> >--------------------------------------------------------------------- > > As your wish, Sir! > > I will take as a starting point the main idea of Gotrabhuu - the >"Change of Lineage", as a difference between mindfulness based on >Samatha and Vipassana. Buddhaghosa mentions the Gotrabhuu in some >passages of Vism, mainly,IV 74, XIII 5, XIV 28, 121 ( PTS edition), >but I will focus on XXI,126: > > "But while this name is inadmissible by the Abhidhamma method, it´s >admissible by the Suttanta method; for, they say, by that method >change-of-lineage takes the name "signless" by making the signless >Nibbana its object, and while remaining at the arrival point, it gives >its name to the Path.Hence the path is called signless.And its >fruition can be called signless too according to the path´s way of >arrival". > > Well, from the Vism. Chapters IV for VII, all the mindfulness ways >are described as signal ones, even the Jhanas - access sign, learning >sign and absorption. Then, suddenly, Buddhaghosa changes his way, >mentioning directly the signless methods, Change-of-lineage included. >My argument is that the sign ways are Samatha and the signless methods >are basically Vipassana, which are in concordance with the Abhidhamma >Sangaha, Chpt. IX,"Samathasangaha" and "Vipassanasangaha". > >--------------------------------------------------------------------- > > To my understanding, Nibbana is said to be signless ('animitta'), so that would explain why this term appears in the section on enlightenment. The point relevant to our earlier discussion is that both jhana consciousness and path consciousness are preceded by change-of-lineage mental factor. But the change of lineage is different in each case. Nice talking to you Jon 57155 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Mon Mar 27, 2006 2:09pm Subject: Re: [dsg]Q. Control or No control? jonoabb Hi Phil Phil wrote: > I like the dynamic implied in this sentence that I came >across: "The truth of the Dhamma...we shall know this when the >characteristics of realities can be know as they are." > Yes, I think this neatly encapsulates something that came up in a post of Howard's lately, how all things known by panna are an aspect of the understanding of dhammas. >When there are >conditions for satipatthana - realites *may/can* be known as they are - >we will/shall/are bound to see the truth of the Dhamma. It is by trying >to force the matter that the "project" goes wrong. Patience is the key, >but there is so little patience in this day and age. (One of the many >ways in which Dhamma goes against the ways of the world.) > > Yes, patience is certainly key (but there was plenty of lack of patience around in the time of the Buddha also!!) Jon 57156 From: upasaka@... Date: Mon Mar 27, 2006 3:11pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: The dhammas underlying postures upasaka_howard Hi again, James - As evidence for what I said about insight into the tilakkhana being entree to realization of nibbana, I'd like to point to two matters. One is that there is spoken of three doors to liberation: the door/gate of wishlessness (associated with insight into dukkha), that of signlessness (associated with insight into impermanence), and that of voidness (associated with insight into not-self). The second thing I'd like to point to are the following verses from the Dhammapada: 277-279 When you see with discernment, 'All fabrications are inconstant' ? you grow disenchanted with stress. This is the path to purity. When you see with discernment, 'All fabrications are stressful' ? you grow disenchanted with stress. This is the path to purity. When you see with discernment, 'All phenomena are not-self' ? you grow disenchanted with stress. This is the path to purity. 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/ 57157 From: LBIDD@... Date: Mon Mar 27, 2006 4:29pm Subject: Vism.XVII,65 Vism.XVII,66 lbidd2 "The Path of Purification" (Visuddhimagga), Ch. XVII 65. Here it might be said: 'Let us then firstly agree that ignorance is a condition for formations. But it must now be stated for which formations, and in which way it is a condition'. Here is the reply: 'Twenty-four conditions have been stated by the Blessed One as follows'. [The 24 Conditions] 66. '(1) Root-cause condition, (2) object condition, (3) predominance condition, (4) proximity condition, (5) contiguity condition, (6) conascence condition, (7) mutuality condition, (8) support condition, (9) decisive-support condition, (10) prenascence condition, (11) postnascence condition, (12) repetition condition, (13) kamma condition, (14) kamma-result condition, (15) nutriment condition, (16) faculty condition, (17) jhana condition, (18) path condition, (19) association condition, (20) dissociation condition, (21) presence condition, (22) absence condition, (23) disappearance condition, (24) non-disappearance condition' (P.tn.1,1). **************************** pa.t.thaanapaccayakathaa 65. etthaaha -- ga.nhaama taava eta.m avijjaa sa"nkhaaraana.m paccayoti, ida.m pana vattabba.m katamesa.m sa"nkhaaraana.m katha.m paccayo hotiiti. tatrida.m vuccati, bhagavataa hi 66. ``hetupaccayo, aaramma.napaccayo, adhipatipaccayo, anantarapaccayo, samanantarapaccayo, sahajaatapaccayo, a~n~nama~n~napaccayo, nissayapaccayo, upanissayapaccayo, purejaatapaccayo, pacchaajaatapaccayo, aasevanapaccayo, kammapaccayo, vipaakapaccayo, aahaarapaccayo, indriyapaccayo, jhaanapaccayo, maggapaccayo, sampayuttapaccayo, vippayuttapaccayo, atthipaccayo, natthipaccayo, vigatapaccayo, avigatapaccayo''ti (pa.t.thaa0 1.1.paccayuddesa) catuviisati paccayaa vuttaa. 57158 From: "indriyabala" Date: Mon Mar 27, 2006 4:51pm Subject: Re: Tep. Sankharanimitta indriyabala Hi Nina (and Joop)- You wrote the following things: -- The perfection of truthfulness ... One's own sincerity about akusala ... A great danger of misleading oneself. ..Thinking about moments of conceit and clinging. Putting these pieces together I can see that mindfulness is being developed through the awareness of akusala and seeing the danger. >Nina: Even knowing this, I feel I mislead myself very often. I think of the countless moments of conceit and clinging to self that pass unnoticed. Tep: Even with such knowing there still are "contless moments" of not-enough mindfulness! Is there a way to reduce those lost moments using the hindsight? .......... > > T: Precisely! It is because of "some understanding of nama and rupa" [that they are 'anicca, dukkha, anatta'] that sets > >the mind free -- > > yet, that understanding does not last. --------- >N: Perhaps you mean: intellectual understanding of anicca, dukkha, anatta. That is still of the level of thinking. Tep: It must be better than intellectual understanding, otherwise that kind of understanding cannot 'set the mind free' (from wrong views). ........... > > T: What about the arahant's understanding -- does it last? -------- >N: It arises and falls away with the citta. But ignorance has been >eradicated. He cannot fall back. Tep: I see. Since avijja is completely gone, there will be no mental formations. Then how does another understanding arise in his mind, after the previous one has fallen away? I think I do not know exactly what I am asking -- but hopefully you may know what I meant to ask. .......... >N: BTW the fact that paramattha dhammas and conventional realities are not contradictory is an important point. Read the suttas, and you will see. Tep : They are contradictory in the mind of a person who does not yet have yatha-bhuta-nana-dasana. He will keep on asking the questions like Joop has asked (e.g. on sending metta to other beings that are 'not self' -- No Htoo, no Tep, No Nina, No Phil, then whom are we sending the metta to? Who would benefit from the metta exercise?). >N: It is good to remember that our life we find so important exists merely in one moment of thinking. Citta is thinking, but only for one moment. Tep: That sounds like you are preaching down from the top of an ivory Dhamma Tower to me , a worldling who is standing on the ground. Should I explain to a person who asks the above question that he is sending 'his metta' to "one moment of thinking", not a person who suffers, say because of illness or lost of family members? That is what I meant by "contradiction" between paramattha dhammas and conventional realities. Warm regards, Tep ======= --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, nina van gorkom wrote: > > Hi Tep, (snipped) > > As Sarah wrote to me: > > > It is good to remember that our life we find so important exists merely in one moment of thinking. Citta is thinking, but only for one moment. > > Nina > 57159 From: "indriyabala" Date: Mon Mar 27, 2006 5:52pm Subject: Re: Visuddhimagga Ch XVII, 64 and Tiika. indriyabala Hi Howard (and Nina and Joop) - Howard wrote: "P.S. I checked first to see whether others had already replied to your post, Tep, but seeing no responses, I just went ahead to put in my two cents?! ;-) Tep: Thank you very much for the 'two cents' that are worth to me like two kilograms of gold. >Howard: In reply to your first question, Tep: What actually exists in my opinion are the phenomena comprising the five khandhas, though not as separate, self-existent entities, plus nibbana, the ultimate reality. And things that do not actually exist vary from merely imagined - that is, being entirely baseless - to conventional objects merely imputed upon realities due to particular relations holding among those realities. Tep: Yes. I think the five khandhas exist for sure. Nibbana must also exist, as well as being permanent, because there would be no Bhuddhas if Nibbana did not exist (as a reality, an object of the citta). .............. [1. What should happen between the initial state (paramattha dhamma understanding) and the evenual state (eradication of ignorance)?] >Howard: .. seeing through conventional objects to the actual sense impressions underlying them, and realizing the merely conventional reality of common "entities", is an essential part of one's development. It needs to come in early but is only completed at the end, when all sense of self is uprooted, including the "self" of the conventional person. Tep: Yes. In other words, it is important to be aware that the "true seeing" of the ultimate realities is at the end, where we want to be, and that the development of 'full understanding' must start from knowledge of the conventional realities, at our present level, now. Otherwise, there will be (mental) conflicts between the two types of realities. ............. >Howard: ..seeing through concepts to paramattha dhammas, while necessary (IMO), is insufficient, because one must also come to directly, clearly, and fully see the radical unsatisfactoriness, impermanence, and not-self nature of all conditioned (paramattha) dhammas, in order to realize nibbana including its not-self nature, and to thereby come to awakening. One matter to emphasize: At all levels, mere "knowledge about", whether pertaining to conventional objects or paramattha dhammas, will not serve to liberate. There must be vijja. Tep: I totally agree with you. :-) But, many times some preachers do not care to make it clear (to a worldling) that it takes a huge leap from the ground to the top of the ivory Dhamma Tower. Vijja does not arise at random. Thank you for sharing the beautiful thoughts with me. Warm regards, Tep ====== --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > > > Hi, Tep (and Nina, Han, and James) - > > As I'm having difficulty inserting comments into the text of posts, I will give my remarks up front. > In reply to your first question, Tep: What actually exists in my opinion are the phenomena comprising the five khandhas, though not as separate, self-existent entities, plus nibbana, the ultimate reality. And things that do not actually exist vary from merely imagined - that is, being entirely baseless - to conventional objects merely imputed upon realities due to particular relations holding among those realities. > Also, you ask the following: > _______________ > Two questions : > > 1. What should happen between the initial state (paramattha dhamma > understanding) and the evenual state (eradication of ignorance)? > 2. Is understanding of the paramattha dhamma necessary and sufficient > for the eventual arrival of the truths? Why? > ________________ (snipped) 57160 From: "Paul Grabianowski" Date: Mon Mar 27, 2006 6:31pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Can ignorance and formations be the mistaken circleof"not" knowing? paulgrabiano... Dear Nina, I think I'm beginning to understand the difference between kamma, ignorance and the triple round. Thank you so much for your responses. I hope I'm not overwhelming you with questions? N: When studying Dhamma with kusala citta, the citta is accompanied by > wholesome volition, kusala cetanaa or kamma. When shouting angrily, the > akusala citta is accompanied by unwholesome volition, akusala cetanaa or > kamma. P: Let me see if I'm beginning to make sense out of this: So, both kamma and ignorance are cetisikas, and ignorance must be operative in all cittas that are kusala or akusala. (But, the cetasika ignorance is not simultaneous with cetisika of volition--perhaps because kusala citta is momentary not deluded by attachment to a self. All kusala and akusala cittas have latent defilements in the one who has not reached enlightenment. In addition, kamma is volition and is a cetisika that arises with a kusala or akusala citta. It would not be correct to think of kamma/volition as something that eminates from a self. Rather, it is the result of ignorance in the sense that formations "form the formed." These formations (the formed which is formed) which are non-self are "the condition for consciousness." When one experienes an object, say one's favorite pair of shoes, there are some cittas which see the object that have volition as one of its cetisikas (this appears to be the result of birth in a realm with the sense of sight) which fasten the mind to the complex arrangment of nama and rupa (a kind of formation similar but distint from kammic formations). After a succession of vipaka cittas that establish seeing and contact with the object, cittas with the cetisika of feeling arise. The cittas which arise with cetasikas of feeling are also attended by cetasikas which are ignorance (this is always so in the case of akusala) and kamma (as well as other cetasikas). These are classified as akusala and kusala cittas. So, without the cetisikas of volition and ignorance, it appears that these cittas could not be classified as akusala or kusala? Kamma appears to assure that nama and rupa reach their full fruition. Craving and clinging arise (if I'm reading the Visuddhimagga correctly, XVII, 301) because feeling is a condition for craving and the results of ignorance (by reason of our birth) must have already started the round of kamma (formations-becoming). Is ignorance, then, found in all cittas or only those that are akusala and kusala? I would guess only in cittas that are kusala or akusala because other cittas which have the function of seeing an object are not accompanied by the cetisika of feeling. But, I am not 100% sure about this. Thank you again for all your generous responses. Paul ----- Original Message ----- From: "nina van gorkom" To: Sent: Monday, March 27, 2006 10:06 AM Subject: Re: [dsg] Can ignorance and formations be the mistaken circleof"not" knowing? > Dear Paul, > op 27-03-2006 05:29 schreef Paul Grabianowski op > paulgrabianowski@...: > >> >> P: I might be a bit confused about this, then. Is volition a necessary >> condition for kamma formations? > ------ > N: Kamma is volition or intention. It is mental and thus it can be > accumulated, so that it can produce a result later on. > When studying Dhamma with kusala citta, the citta is accompanied by > wholesome volition, kusala cetanaa or kamma. When shouting angrily, the > akusala citta is accompanied by unwholesome volition, akusala cetanaa or > kamma. ... 57161 From: "indriyabala" Date: Mon Mar 27, 2006 7:17pm Subject: Re: Q. Visuddhimagga Ch XVII, 64 and Tiika. indriyabala Hi Nina (and Howard)- I appreciate your reply that is long -- indicative of your skill in dhamma vicaya. There are several points in your posts, and the 'in-line dialogue' is not the best way to communicate. So please let me summarize the points, and respond to them as the whole. Nina's Points : 1. Men, women are things that do not actually exist. -- i.e. we conceive or imagine them to be true but they exist in our thoughts. ... we imagine that which disappears immediately as lasting, such as a person. Things that do not actually exist are real in conventional sense, samutti sacca. Paramattha dhammas, nama and rupa are things that do exist. [Question1 : What should happen between the initial state (paramattha dhamma understanding) and the evenual state (eradication of ignorance)?] 2. Developing more understanding of nama and rupa and this in itself is a condition for insight, direct experience of the characteristics of nama and rupa as they appear one at a time. 3. We lead our life normally, meeting people, talking to them, helping them. The Buddha showed so much compassion to people he met, always thinking of helping them when they were in trouble. Thus, understanding paramattha dhammas does not mean that we should lead a cold, artificial life, with no attention to people. When knowing more about the different cittas we will be more able to develop mettaa and compassion. We learn more about the countless moments of self seeking, and of conceit. These arise in between kusala cittas. We can find out that there is kusala citta, but that we are also inclined to find that this feels good, or I am good. True or not? [Question 2. Is understanding of the paramattha dhamma necessary and sufficient for the eventual arrival of the truths? Why?] 4. A basic understanding is necessary, and it depends on the individual whether he is inclined to understand more details. First there will be knowledge about (whether pertaining to conventional objects or paramattha dhammas -- Howard), but this is not sufficient. The difference between concepts and paramattha dhammas has to be understood, because the object of satipatthaana is paramattha dhammas. 5. We read that a person performs daana, pays respect to the cedi, makes offerings of flowers and unguents, not fo the sake of a happy rebirth, not for success or prosperity, not for the sake of staying in the cycle, but that his citta inclines to nibbaana. It is said that he overcomes sleep, laziness, discouragement, that he is not heedless, and has no contempt. When the first vipassana ñaa.na has been reached there is a beginning of kusala that leads away from the cycle. ............... Tep : It is good that you've kindly defined existence and reality both in the conventional sense (samtti) and the ultimate reality sense. Now I know what you mean when you say these things do not exist, and when you say nama and rupa are things that "do exist". Is the reason that people do not exist because they are mentally formed, and that nama & rupa exist because they are not contaminated by the mind? Isn't citta-sankhara a nama that also exists "in our thoughts"? I agree with 2. and 5. With regard to 3. It is clear to me that clear understanding of paramattha-dhammas only comes to a meditator who is rather advanced, and that Brahmavihara meditation (e.g. sending lovingkindness to all beings who suffer) is to be practiced at an early stage. Similarly, all meritorious deeds are developed by householders and the noble disciples, but not by the arahants. The emptiness of beings and not-self is not clear to a non-ariya person. With regard to 4., I think we all agree that it is necessary to know paramattha-dhammas (via reading, listening, contemplating). But the true understanding comes much later. Warm regards, Tep ====== --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, nina van gorkom wrote: > > Hi Tep, (snipped) > But I have > > a real (not imaginary)and existing problem understanding why the > > "understanding of paramattha dhammas" initially will result in paññaa that "will eventually illuminate the darkness of ignorance". > > Two questions : > > > > 1. What should happen between the initial state (paramattha dhamma > > understanding) and the evenual state (eradication of ignorance)? > --------- (snipped) > > To come back to the question of kamma-formations of merit, which keep us in > the cycle, I read in the Mahaaniddesa ( a.t.tada.ndasutta, embraced > violence) about someone who inclines to nibbaana while performing kusala. He > does not think of any gain for himself, but his sole aim is eradication of akusala. Then kusala is a parami, perfection. > > We read that a person performs daana, pays respect to the cedi, makes offerings of flowers and unguents, not fo the sake of a happy rebirth, not for success or prosperity, not for the sake of staying in the cycle, but that his citta inclines to nibbaana. > It is said that he overcomes sleep, laziness, discouragement, that he is not heedless, and has no contempt. > When the first vipassana ñaa.na has been reached there is a beginning of kusala that leads away from the cycle. > Nina. > 57162 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon Mar 27, 2006 10:19pm Subject: ‘Cetasikas' study corner 410- Confidence/saddhaa (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;-) ========================================== (Ch25 - Confidence/saddhaa contd) We read in the Middle Length Sayings (I, no. 4, Discourse on Fear and Dread) that the Buddha, while staying near Såvatthí, in the Jeta Grove, spoke to the Brahman Jåùussoùi about his living in the forest without fear and dread, and his attainment to Buddhahood. Jåùussoùi, after he listened to the Buddha, took his refuge in the Buddha, the Dhamma and the Sangha with the following words: * "… Excellent, good Gotama, excellent, good Gotama. It is as if one might set upright what had been upset, or might disclose what was covered, or show the way to one who had gone astray, or bring an oil-lamp into the darkness so that those with vision might see material shapes— even so in many a figure has dhamma been made clear by the reverend Gotama. Thus I am going to the reverend Gotama for refuge, to the Dhamma and to the Order of monks. May the reverend Gotama accept me as a layfollower going for refuge from today forth for as long as life lasts." * Some people have confidence to become a lay-disciple and others have confidence to become a monk, it depends on one’s accumulated inclinations. There are also people who are inclined to listen, but who do not gain enough confidence to practise the teachings. It may not be the right time for them to begin with the development of the Path, but in a future life they may listen again and then gain enough confidence to practise the teachings. We should find out for ourselves whether our confidence is to the degree that we apply the Dhamma we have heard or not yet. If one has enough confidence one will continue to develop right understanding until enlightenment is attained and all doubt and wrong view are eradicated. ***** (Ch25 - Confidence/saddhaa to be contd) Metta, Sarah ====== 57163 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon Mar 27, 2006 10:34pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Hello - at the first temple sarahprocter... Dear Kom, Connie & all, --- Kom Tukovinit wrote: >I have seen that the > number > of rules that a monk follows is immense, whether or not, even a > sotapanna, one can always mindful (and Sotapanna is not always > mindful) to follow all of them is a question that I hope I can find an > answer for myself in the future. It is clear that a sotapanna doesn't > infract any rules that lead to unhappy existence. ..... S: This may help. Here is a relevant sutta which clearly inidcates that the sotapanna only transgresses 'trifling observances' or those outside the four parajikas: (AN, Bk of 3s, 85, 'Recital', PTS transl) " 'Monks, this recital is to be made twice a month amounts to more than one hundred and fifty rules wherein are trained clansmen who are eager for their welfare. Now all these combine together to make these three forms of training. What three? The higher morality, the higher thought and the higher insight. [S: adhi sila, adhi citta and adhi panna]. Herein are combined one and all of these rules. "Now, Monks, in this matter a monk keeps the laws of morality in full, he is moderately given to mental concentration, moderately given to striving for insight. [S: a description of the sotapanna who has perfected adhi sila, but not yet adhi citta or adhi panna]. "Whatever minor, trifling* observances he may transgress, he is cleared of them. Why so? I do not declare him to be rendered unfit because of them, for he strictly observes the rudiments (aadibrahmacariyakaani) of the holy life, the constituents of the holy life: he is stablished in morality, he trains himself in the rules of training by undertaking them. Such an one, by destroying three fetters is a stream-winner, one not doomed to the Downfall, one assured, one bound for enlightenment.” ... *khuddaanukhuddakaani, those outside the four paaraajikaani or serious offences. Cf Vin texts, i,3)[S: khudda – small, inferior, khuddaanukhuddaka –lesser and minor precepts, Buddhadatta dict] <....> S: Finally to the arahant: "Lastly, in this matter a monk keeps the laws of morality in full, he practices concentration in full, he practices the acquiring of insight in full. Whatever minor, trifling observances he may transgress, he is cleared of them. I do not declare him to be rendered unfit because of that. He strictly observes the rudiments of the holy life, the constituents of the holy life, he is established in morality, he trains himself in the rules of the training by undertaking them. Such an one, by destroying the aasavas, in this very life himself comes to know thoroughly the heart's release, the release by insight, and attaining it abides therein. "Thus, monks, the partial fulfiller (of observances) attains partially: the perfect observer attains in full. Not barren of result are these rules of the training, I declare.' " ***** Thus we see here that 'established in morality' or having perfected adhi-siila does not preclude the transgression of minor offences. There is no hiding of such, he is 'cleared' of these and this, I understand, is true for the ariyan disciples too. Thanks to you both for helping me to consider further. to be contd Metta, Sarah ======== 57164 From: "Cerini Pablo" Date: Mon Mar 27, 2006 10:42pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Some Matters of Interest from MN 44 cerini_pablo Hi Icaro "icarofranca" wrote: > Is there a difference ? > It´s my opinion that Buddha made many original developments on > mindfulness issues, if you compare them with older techniques on Yoga > Sutra, for example. Think about the own sammassati idea, for >example: > while Jhana and Dhyana partake so much similar constituive notes, > Sammassati is a teaching entirely new and one of the best original > contribuitions of Buddha to mind culture! Yes ! Thank you for your interesting notes, also. cerini pablo 57165 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon Mar 27, 2006 10:53pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Hello - at the first temple sarahprocter... Hi Kom, Connie & all, 2 contd. --- Kom Tukovinit wrote: >A purpose of the Patimokkha is to develop the faith of those who don't have faith, and increase the faith of the already faithful. I personally believe that developing faith however you can is important, given that people have so different accumulations. For people who are yet familiar with Satipathanna, or worse yet, going about it in the wrong way, this is perhaps all they have :-). < .... S: I know what you mean. Of course there is saddhaa or faith whenever there is kusala of any kind, even for non-Buddhists, with or without any understanding. When it comes to faith in the teachings, this can only be developed with satipatthana as I see it. Here is an extract from a post I wrote fairly recently: >S: We know that only the sotapanna (whether a bhikkhu or lay-person) has attained higher sila (adhi-sila) and is now a trainer or noble learner(sekha)who follows the training precepts or steps(sikkhaapada) without fail. Nyantiloka in his dictionary quotes from Vism XV111 "that 'Purification of morality (siila-visuddhi) consists of the 4-fold purity of morality (catu-paarisuddhi-siila), namely, restraint with regard to the Disciplinary Code (paatiimokkhasa'mvara-siila), sense-restraint (indriyasa'mvara-siila), purity of livelihood (aajiiva-paarisuddhi-siila), morality with regard to the 4 requisites (paccaya-sannissita-siila". In the commentary to the Udana (Meghiya chapter, Masefield transl), there are several pages on this very topic of the Patimokkha under 'one possessing morality' (being the second factor after association with a kalyaa.namitto as conducive to liberation for one 'capable of being guided'. The other three given are ultra-effacement (abhisallekhataa), the initiation of energy and penetrative insight). Under the long section on sila and the Patimokkha, we read: ***** "The meaning of morality (siila.t.tho) is that of head (sira.t.tho), that of cool (siitala.t.tho), that of restraint (sa.mvara.t.tho). Since such morality, either to the extent of being completely fulfilled, or to excess, is his, he is 'one possessing morality' (siilavaa), meaning 'one possessed of morality' (siilasampanno). And to indicate how the one possessing morality is one possessed of morality, he said 'As one restrained by the Paatimokkha rstraint' and so on. "Herein: the Paatimokkha (paatimokkha.m) is the morality associated with the items of the training. For it is the Paatimokkha (paatimokkha.m) since whoever keeps watch over (paati), guards, this, him it frees (mokkheti), sets free, from dukkhas such as those belonging to the states of loss and so on. "Restraint (sa.mvaro)is restraining (sa.mvara.na.m), being non-transgression through body or speech. It is the 'Paatimokkha restraint' since the Paatimokkha is itself restraint. He is restrained by the Paatimokkha restraint since he is one who is restrained thereby, one whose body and speech are held in check - this is a complete elucidation of his being established in that morality. "He dwells (viharati) is a complete elucidation of his being possessed of a dwelling (vihaara) conforming therewith. Being one possessed of proper conduct and pasturage (aacaaragocarasampanno) is a complete elucidation of the serviceable nature of the above Paatimokkha restraint and of his link, as below, with (states of) distinction. "Being one seeing fear in sins even the size of an atom (a.numattesu vajjesu bhayadassaavii) is a complete elucidation of his non-liability to fall from the morality associated with the Paatimokkha. Undertaking (samaadaaya) is a complete elucidation of his taking (upon himself) without remainder the items of the training. He trains himself (sikkhati) is a complete elucidation of his possession of the training. The items of the training (sikkhaapadesu) is a complete elucidation of the things in which he is to train himself." ***** S: So I think we can read the references to the Patimokha with the wider meaning of referring to the perfection of sila possessed by the ariyans,starting with the sotapannas, who see the 'fear in sins even the size of an atom' through the development of the eightfold path, eradication of grosser defilements and thereby no longer liable to rebirth in lower realms, regardless of whether they be bhikkhus or lay people. By contrast, the quote continues with regard to worldlings: ***** "A further method - it is the one whose habit is that of falling(patina) many times into the states of loss on account of the powerful nature of the defilements, on account of the easiness with which evil acts are performed and on account of the difficulty with which meritorious acts are performed, who is the faller (paatii), (that is to say), the putthujjana." To be contd. Metta, Sarah ======== 57166 From: "Cerini Pablo" Date: Mon Mar 27, 2006 11:43pm Subject: Re: Lodewijk's post on the long way. cerini_pablo Hi James and Nina (and all) "buddhatrue" wrote: >Based on one little commentarial > note, interpreted in a way extraneous to its intention, you have > made up your mind that the Buddha's path is supposed to take >aeons. I take the occasion of James's post to ask one thing. I'm really appreciating your books, Nina, because they are clear , well argued and well documented (with detailed references to texts and commentaries) . For people new to abidhamma they're a great help. But sometimes even a guy who really is learning lot from them can feel puzzled about a sense of *passivity* that you seem to suggest. I'm ok with humble attitude, respect of commentaries and of different accumulations . I'm also ok that uprooting all the defilements will take long time. But sometimes reading your books I think that one seems really to have no mean of action, just waiting for conditions. Why effort ? Why sila or meditation? If every action of the "self" turns to akusala because of this sense of "self",just do your daily routine and wait for conditions to raise. Sometimes seems that your teaching is this. (I think this caused James to be so direct in his post). Please tell me if I am misleading your attitude or if I'm not understanding well your books or the dhamma itself. Or if my urgency it's only a desire for results dued to deceit. Please I'm just asking. Not criticizing (I wont' really dare to). Just trying to understand. cerini pablo 57167 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon Mar 27, 2006 11:39pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Hello - at the first temple sarahprocter... Hi Kom, Connie & all, 3 contd --- Kom Tukovinit wrote: Do you believe the Sila, as discussed in the first section by Visuddhimagga, to be Adhi-sila or not? .... S: In C.M.A we read about how the following of the precepts can be followed out of natural inclination, habit or through insight. Under the elaboration of the Visuddhis, it also mentions Patimokkha sila under sila visuddhi, clearly with insight in context. In Vism 1,41, it also refers to natural virtue, customary virtue and virtue due to previous causes. Only virtue with insight is 'established' or adhi-sila of course. Like we read in A.N, 7s,70, our life is like a dew-drop or water-bubble, 'insignificant, trifling, fraught with much ill and trouble' and this was said when life was 'sixty thousand years' and humans had only six afflictions, i.e cold, heat, hunger, thirst and twofold excrement. Even in the arupa-brahma realms, life is insignificant and fraught with trouble because the namas which experience objects continue to rise and fall. Still, truly dukkha. Back to the Vism, 1, 42, where it repeats the lines about Patimokklha restraint I quoted in my last post and 'seeing fear in the slightest fauult' etc. Later (1,52) it elaborates further: "one who has the habit (siila) of seeing fear in the faults of the minutest measure, of such kinds as unintentional contravening of a minor rule of the Patimokkha, as an unprofitable thought. He trains himself by undertaking (samaadaaya) the precepts of training." I wrote a post before on siila and samaadaaya and how this wasn't just a matter of following, like children might follow the taking of precepts, but by reflecting deeply and understanding the value. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/44853 Of course, even with an understanding of the value, this can be with or without satipatthana, as you say I think that anything we read in the Visuddhimagga (or other texts) is about dhammas, realities which are conditioned and ultimately insignificant and a lot of trouble. This is true of the all kusala states too and the reason why even these have to be understood with detachment from the start, rather than with attachment. .... Kom: >I don't think there is any disagreement that clinging should be seen, but there is a different stress that ALL other kusala should be developed however one can too, because they all support the path.< .... S: As I see it, through the development of understanding, through the development of satipatthana, kusala will be developed naturally. For example, metta can only develop by clearly understanding the clear distinction between it and attachment when it arises now. When we wish to develop kusala of any kind (rather than just understanding what has been conditioned already), isn’t this a clinging to being one developing/having more kusala in life? A subtle point perhaps:) Thanks again to both of you – I always find any discussion like this helpful for further reflection. Metta, Sarah ======= 57168 From: "Cerini Pablo" Date: Mon Mar 27, 2006 11:59pm Subject: [dsg] Re: arahat and D.O., Larry cerini_pablo Hi Jonotan and Larry Jonothan Abbott wrote: > The question is sometimes asked, 'Does an arahant still experience > dukkha?' I think that question misses the point. Dukkha is not > something that is 'experienced', in the sense ordinary folk >experience > it but arahants don't (or they do but to a lesser degree). It is > something that is gradually seen more and more clearly as insight >is > developed. The arahant has developed panna to a level that fully > penetrates the truth of dukkha, so he sees it far more clearly than >the > worldling does. > > The ending of dukkha comes only with parinibbana, not with >enlightenment. sadhu ! best expression of this concept I've ever heard. cerini pablo 57169 From: "Cerini Pablo" Date: Tue Mar 28, 2006 0:25am Subject: [dsg] Re: Lodewijk's post on the long way, patience, patience! cerini_pablo Hi Nina, Larry and all nina van gorkom wrote: > > When I think of all my faults and vices I have accumulated and of >the power of the latent tendencies that can condition the arising of >akusala citta so sudden, so unexpectedly, I am not surprised that it >takes aeons. We can just look at ourselves during this life. We > >cannot say that akusala wears away fast, can't we? Nothing is fast, >it is a development. This reminds >me of > patience, khanti. Patience is the highest ascetism (Dhammapada) as >the Buddha says. Development of understanding, day after day, so >very, very little at a time, not seeing fast progress, that is >patience and >ascetism. > And if we are impatient about progress, we think of self, self who >wants to attain. This already answers to my questions. I undersatnd. Balancing viriya with khanti. Enlightning and well said. Thank you. cerini pablo 57170 From: "Joop" Date: Tue Mar 28, 2006 0:43am Subject: Re: [dsg] Anattalakkhana Sutta: Part Two jwromeijn --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "indriyabala" wrote: > > Dear Joop (and Jon) - > > Thank you for your patience -- giving me another opportunity to > explain. {:>) ... Hallo Tep (Nina, Han, all) You adressed me in this message and in #57158. I will mainly concentrate to what for me is the main topic: Tep: "… the two dhammas: anatta and lovingkindness. They are conflicting (you, yourself have stated it many times before) because there are no beings in the anatta (a paramattha dhamma)." Two remarks on it.: You also said: " Paramatthadhamma (ultimate realities) are incompatible with lovingkindness" Joop: That's an misunderstanding, lovingkindness (metta) is a paramatthadhamma, it also is called adosa. Anatta and lovingkindness for a sentient being are not conflicting dhammas. "Anatta" is not an objective existing entity, it is that I again and again had to realize that the idea that there exists an "I" is an illusion, that "I" is a concept. Anatta is not a dhamma, it does not occur in the lists of the 89 cittas+52 cetasikas+28 rupas+1 nibbana. (Perhaps I'm kicked out DSG but 'anatta' is a concept) But of course more important is the question: is the suffering sentient being for whom I have metta or karuna only an illusion, created by my mind? Can I deny that suffering by expressing the mantra "this is not mine, this I am not, this is not my self", applied to that being? I agree I don't have the language to combine the two but I'm convinced it's possible. Perhaps it out of the frame of reference of many DSG-participants but I state that the Theravada Abhidhamma is not complete, it only describes phenomena on the individual level, not on the interpersonal level. So there had some dhammas and processes been added to it. Something else is the question if there is a "contradiction" between paramattha dhammas and conventional realities. Not to me. The difference between this two ways of experiencing realities - the two languages - is gradual and not absolute. And there is a link between the two. All texts about Abhidhamma from the Dhammasangani till my silly messages are a mixture of the two languages, without that mixture it's impossible to communicate. Tep: "Isn't there at least one conflict between Theravadin and Mahayan? Don't you think you have dhammatanha-- being "greedy" to try to have them both?" Joop: Is everybody who thinks that Theravada is not a 100% correct raft, FOR THAT REASON, greedy? Haven't you never studied the history of buddhism in the first centuries after the passing away of the Buddha. There were many schools, the most of them disappeared, from one of them Theravada evolved, from another of them Mahayana evolved. Why should we not create our own buddhism, with elements of the traditions, leaving the old Indian culture (for example their cosmology) that is mixed with it? I don't have the illusion that that will give a contradiction-free mixture, but so what? BTW Will you please not use too much Pali to me, English is already difficult enough to understand. And when a phenomena really exists (so when it's not an illusion in the mind of somebody) then it's expressable in every language. But for the rest: I like to discuss with you! Metta Joop 57171 From: "rjkjp1" Date: Tue Mar 28, 2006 2:10am Subject: [dsg] Re: Lodewijk's post on the long way, patience, patience! rjkjp1 --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Cerini Pablo" wrote: > > > I undersatnd. Balancing viriya with khanti. > Enlightning and well said. > Thank you. > > cerini pablo +++++++++ Dear Cerino , And understanding is itself samma patipatti- right practice. It is bhavana as in ditthiujukamma- straightening of view. This is a high degree of kusala. Robert 57172 From: nina van gorkom Date: Tue Mar 28, 2006 2:14am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: ignorance, moha nilovg Hi Cerini Pablo Is Cerini your first name? op 27-03-2006 18:55 schreef Cerini Pablo op cerini_pablo@...: > I can't figure out what moha pratically (better : daily) is : > it's rendered with "delusion" , but what is this delusion. ------- N: It can be translated as delusion, but more important than knowing the English translations is understanding its characteristic and function. In the context of D.O. the term avijja is used. I give you a link to Rob K's Web, to my cetasikas. If anything is not clear, please ask: -------- C: I can feel it has to have a deep meaning > and more implications also for its application in vipassana. ------ N: Yes, very important. We have to learn when there is ignorance of nama and rupa, even now. When there is unawareness there is also moha. I add texts about moha in Visuddhimagga and its Tiika: ***** Text Vis. 163: 'Delusion' has the characteristic of blindness, or it has the characteristic of unknowing. ------------ N: The Tiika explains that blindness of citta is not seeing the nature of dhammas (dhammasabhaava) as they truly are. Unknowing (aññaa.na.m) is the opposite of understanding. Understanding illuminates the object that is experienced, whereas moha darkens it. The Pali term andha used here means blind or dark. -------------- Text Vis.: Its function is non-penetration, or its function is to conceal the individual essence of an object. ------------- N: Moha is unable to penetrate the four noble Truths. Its function is to conceal the true nature of the object that is experienced. We read in the Co. to the ŒAbhidhammattha Sangaha¹ (T.A. p. 58,59): ------------- Text Vis.: It is manifested as the absence of right theory (sammaapa.tipatti, see Ch. XVII,52), ---------------- N: Absence of right theory is the translation of asammaa-pa.tipatti. Pa.tipatti literally means practice. The translator refers to Ch. XVII, 52 which deals with Œno theory¹, as not knowing about dukkha, etc. In this context we should not think of pa.tipatti as mere book knowledge or theory. It refers to right understanding of the true nature of the dhamma that appears. When there is moha there is absence of right understanding of the dhamma that appears. ------------- Text Vis.: or it is manifested as darkness. ----------- N: The Tiika explains the manifestation of darkness (andhakaaro) as darkening that which arises. Moha darkens the true nature of visible object, sound, of all realities that arise at this moment. ---------------- Text Vis.: Its proximate cause is unwise (unjustified) attention. --------------- N: Unwise attention, ayoniso manaasikaara, is the proximate cause of all akusala that arises. ------------------ Text Vis.: It should be regarded as the root of all that is unprofitable. ---------------- N: Moha is the root of all akusala. When we do not apply ourselves to daana, siila, samatha or vipassanaa, we act, speak or think with akusala citta and this is always accompanied by moha. Whenever we are attached to visible object, sound or another sense object, there is also moha which causes blindness. It conceals the true nature of the object that is experienced. Moha arises countless times in a day, but we do not realize this. Ignorance is a latent tendency which conditions the arising of akusala citta time and again. Moha does not know what kusala and akusala are, it is ignorant of the conditions for their arising. It is ignorant of kamma and vipaaka. It does not realize the impurity and the danger of akusala which can bring an unpleasant result. Moha does not know naama and ruupa as they are. It does not know the difference between ultimate realities and concepts. Moha is ignorant of the four noble Truths, of dukkha, of its origination, of its ceasing and of the way leading to its ceasing. So long as there is ignorance we have to continue in the cycle of birth and death. Ignorance is the first link of the Dependent Origination. ****** Nina. 57173 From: nina van gorkom Date: Tue Mar 28, 2006 2:14am Subject: Re: [dsg] Anattalakkhana Sutta: Part Two, I. nilovg Dear Han, thank you very much. I shall consider your post part by part, not all at once. op 27-03-2006 07:09 schreef han tun op hantun1@...: > The second part deals with the questions, "Are the > five aggregates permanent or impermanent? Are they > suffering or happiness"' and explains that it is not > fitting to regard that which is not permanent, > suffering, and subject to change as "mine," "me," "my > self." ----------- N: Also in the Samyutta Nikaya IV (Salaayatanavagga, the beginning) the connection between the three characteristics is explained. --------- > H: At this juncture, I wish to refer to another famous > sutta where danger (aadinava) of the five aggregates > is mentioned. This sutta is MN 148 Chachakka Sutta. > There, in paragraph 28, it is mentioned that when a > person is under the influence of ignorance > (avijjaanusaya) he does not know five things with > regard to each of the five aggregates. What five? > (1) the origination (samudayanca) > (2) the disappearance (atthangmanca) > (3) the gratification or taking delight in > (assaadanca) > (4) the danger (aadinavanca) > (5) the escape (nissarananca) > > The danger (aadinavanca) constitutes anicca, dukkha > and viparinaama. This fact is not specifically > mentioned in MN148. But in other suttas, for example > in SN 22.26 Assaada Sutta, it is stated: “that form is > impermanent, suffering, and subject to change: this is > the danger in form” (yam ruupam aniccam dukkham > viparinaama dhammam, ayam ruupassa aadinavo). ------- N: Yes, very important. Also in the Guide, Nettippakkara,na, PTS, p. 13, this is explained as a method of conveying a teaching. Ven. Bodhi, in the Brahmajalasutta and Co. (p. 39) deals with this mode of conveyance of a sutta. ------- H: Why I mention these here is to highlight the fact that > the Buddha, by saying impermanent (anicca), suffering > (dukkha), and subject to change (viparinaama), he is > bringing out the danger (aadinava) of the five > aggregates. This realization of the danger (aadinava) > of the five aggregates is essential not to regard them > as This is mine (etam mama), this I am (eso hamasmi), > this is my self (eso me attaati), and also it is > essential in the development of revulsion (nibbidaa > nana) towards the five aggregates in later part of the > sutta. ------- N: Three later stages of insight; after contemplating the arising and falling away, and contemplating dissolution, these are: Awareness of fright (bhayatuupa.t.thaana), Contemplation of danger (aadiinavaanupassanaa) and contemplation of aversion (being averse), (nibbidaanupassanaa). --------- > > Coming back to ‘This is mine (etam mama), this I am > (eso hamasmi), this is my self (eso me attaati)”, > (1) this is mine (etam mama) means clinging to the > five aggregates with craving (tanha). > (2) this I am (eso hamasmi) means clinging to the five > aggregates with conceit (maana). > (3) this is my self (eso me attaati) means clinging to > the five aggregates with wrong view (ditthi). ---------- Explained in the Vibhanga, Ch 17, and also in the Commentaries. Thus, we cling to ourselves by way of one of the three above-mentioned ways. It is not all the time with wrong view that we cling to ourselves. I find, often when we talk about others and the citta is not kusala, it is with conceit. We give a kind of judgement, with the thought: I would not do this. When Lodewijk and I notice this within ourselves we cry out: conceit, conceit! We like ourselves so much, and this is an accumulated inclination since countless past lives. Only insight can know such moments precisely, but just now we can notice them now and then. ---------- > H: > However, Mahasi Sayadaw said the characteristic of > nonself is not easily understood. > In his book, The Great Discourse on Not Self, Sayadaw > explained in detail under the chapter on Seeing > Selflessness (starting from page 80). Here are some > excerpts: > > “The characteristics of impermanence and > unsatisfactoriness are well known both inside and > outside the Buddhist teaching, but the characteristic > of not-self is known only in the Buddhist > Dispensation.” ------- The Co. to the Vibhanga, the Sammoha Vinodanii (Dispeller of Delusion, p. 58, under aayatanas) explains exactly the same. Impermanence and dukkha are more obvious. We see a whole of a person, and we forget that there are only namas and rupas arising and falling away. I think this is the most difficult, to know exactly when naama appears and when ruupa appears, and to know naama as naama and ruupa as ruupa. Only when sati sampajañña arises this can be known. Perhaps this point could be discussed more, so that it is not merely theory. This is all for now, Nina. > 57174 From: "Cerini Pablo" Date: Tue Mar 28, 2006 2:29am Subject: Re: Three cheers for Kom!! cerini_pablo Hi James and Kom "buddhatrue" wrote: > I am so glad that you found a good temple in Thailand and that you > are doing so well. I am tempted to come join you there! ;-)) As > you may or may not know, I went to Thailand to ordain at a temple, > but I didn't have such a favorable outcome. The monks were pompous > and arrogant; the abbott resented teaching the dhamma to laypeople; > I was going to be kept a prisoner there (forget disrobing and > returning- I was told I couldn't leave the compound for five > years!!); and the place was overrun with poisonous ants! It was Wat > Pah Nanachat, perhaps you have heard of it? What you wrote leaves me shocked. Not for the poisonous ants, but for what you said about monks being pompous and arrogant . Are you really speaking about the monks who trained under Ajan Chah ? Ajan Sumedho's chronicles of life in Wat Pah Nanachat are quite famous , and I always thought that Wat Pah Nanachat could be a good place to pratice dhamma (if not the best place at all) . Consider that theravada presence in Italy (my nation) is almost entirely dued to monks coming from Ajan Chah's lineage. I consider Wat Pah Nanachat something like the "source" of Italian Theravada Buddhism. Hearing that monks in Wat Pah Nanachat are pompous and arrogant is a serious wound for my faith in dhamma ... It would be very very interesting if you could tell more about your experience at Wat Pah Nanachat, or at least about the monks' behaviour there. I'm sorry for your father. I say this because my parents too don't like my engagement in Dhamma . Not for Dhamma itself, they just think that religions in general are drugs for losers trying to escape from difficulties of real life. They are very pragmatic people :) By the way, but why is parents' agreement required for one who wants to become a monk ? There are situation (like mine) where one 'd never get this agreement, not because if he gets enrobed he leaves debts, sons or unresolved troubled situations,but just because his parents are full of wrong views. If some one has clues about this, I'll be very happy to hear his opinion. cerini pablo 57175 From: "icarofranca" Date: Tue Mar 28, 2006 3:15am Subject: [dsg] Re: The place of "meditation" ... Viharati (corrected) icarofranca Hi Jon! ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > To my understanding, Nibbana is said to be signless ('animitta'), so > that would explain why this term appears in the section on >enlightenment. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Right on! ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > The point relevant to our earlier discussion is that both jhana > consciousness and path consciousness are preceded by change-of-lineage > mental factor. But the change of lineage is different in each case. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Buddhaghosa´s frame text is very classical, but it seemed to me that Gotrabhuu - Change-of-lineage - occurs sometimes at the end of the gradual path consciousness (at Vipassana´s for example), sometimes as a step of some specific Jhana process, as the Buddha, Dhamma and Sangha´s Recollections: in this cases Jhana consciousness would be preceeded by Change-of-lineage. But at the Vipassana path it can be better found at the end, as Buddhaghosa´s text at Vism. may suggest, due its signless - animitta - classification. Corrections are welcome and it will be interesting if some other members of DSG (with more expertise on Visuddhimagga, as Nina)could clarify this matter! ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Nice talking to you ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Always a pleasure, Jon!!!! Mettaya Ícaro 57176 From: han tun Date: Tue Mar 28, 2006 4:19am Subject: Re: [dsg] Anattalakkhana Sutta: Part Two, I. hantun1 Dear Nina, Thank you ever so much. I really appreciate it. I will wait for your subsequent posts. With metta and deepest respect, Han --- nina van gorkom wrote: > Dear Han, > thank you very much. > I shall consider your post part by part, not all at > once. > 57177 From: "Cerini Pablo" Date: Tue Mar 28, 2006 5:07am Subject: [dsg] Re: arahat and D.O., Larry cerini_pablo Hi Larry, LBIDD@... wrote: > > In one sense dukkha always hurts. That is its intrinsic nature. Of > I agree. Thanks for the explanatory quote from Vism. Pablo 57178 From: "Joop" Date: Tue Mar 28, 2006 6:20am Subject: Re: [dsg] Anattalakkhana Sutta: Part Two jwromeijn --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Joop" wrote: > >> ... > > Hallo Tep (Nina, Han, all) > > You adressed me in this message and in #57158. > I will mainly concentrate to what for me is the main topic: > Tep: "… the two dhammas: anatta and lovingkindness. They are > conflicting (you, yourself have stated it many times before) because > there are no beings in the anatta (a paramattha dhamma)." .... Tep, all One addition to my message #57170 You asked me how intelligence might be used so that 'anatta' and 'having metta' do not conflict. My answer: use another kind of logic. The famous statement of the Buddha "this is not mine, this I am not, this is not my self" is not a ontological statement but a soteriological one, aiming to awaken the mine/I/my. The statement does not exist 'as such' but only in the person who is trying to understand it, applied to himself/herself. Metta Joop 57179 From: nina van gorkom Date: Tue Mar 28, 2006 7:11am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Q. Visuddhimagga Ch XVII, 64 and Tiika. nilovg Hi Tep, You have a series of posts with very good points. I just select one and see when I can answer the others later on. op 28-03-2006 05:17 schreef indriyabala op indriyabala@...: > > Tep : It is good that you've kindly defined existence and reality both > in the conventional sense (samutti) and the ultimate reality sense. > Now I know what you mean when you say these things do not exist, and > when you say nama and rupa are things that "do exist". Is the reason > that people do not exist because they are mentally formed, and that > nama & rupa exist because they are not contaminated by the mind? Isn't > citta-sankhara a nama that also exists "in our thoughts"? -------- N: I find the word exist not the best choice. One may forget that a dhamma goes immediately. What we take for a person are namas and rupas that do not last. But we are bound to have a wrong interpretation of realities, we think that they are lasting. You say, citta-sankhara a nama that also exists "in our thoughts"?> I do not see it this way, I am not thinking of a separate mind which contaminates nama and rupa. Or nama that exists in our thoughts. Nama arises and is then gone. -------- T: With regard to 3. It is clear to me that clear understanding of > paramattha-dhammas only comes to a meditator who is rather advanced, > and that Brahmavihara meditation (e.g. sending lovingkindness to all > beings who suffer) is to be practiced at an early stage. -------- N: But understanding can begin. All kinds of kusala are to be encouraged, with the aim to be less self seeking. As to metta: to be practised in daily life. We have to distinguish metta from selfish affection, and this at the very moment we meet people. Otherwise we cannot learn its characteristic. -------- T: Similarly, > all meritorious deeds are developed by householders and the noble > disciples, but not by the arahants. The emptiness of beings and > not-self is not clear to a non-ariya person. ------ N: But the arahat performs wholesome deeds with kiriyacittas. It is his nature and he has no obstructions. He has the greatest compassion for people he meets. -------- > T: With regard to 4., I think we all agree that it is necessary to know > paramattha-dhammas (via reading, listening, contemplating). But the > true understanding comes much later. N: It begins and it grows little by little. Not as fast as we would like to. If we want it to be fast, we hinder its growth. Nina. 57180 From: nina van gorkom Date: Tue Mar 28, 2006 7:11am Subject: Re: [dsg] Can ignorance and formations be the mistaken circleof"not" knowing? nilovg Dear Paul, op 28-03-2006 04:31 schreef Paul Grabianowski op paulgrabianowski@...: > > P: Let me see if I'm beginning to make sense out of this: So, both kamma > and ignorance are cetisikas, and ignorance must be operative in all cittas > that are kusala or akusala. ------ N: It does not arise with kusala citta. But it is there as a latent tendency. --------- P: (But, the cetasika ignorance is not simultaneous > with cetisika of volition--perhaps because kusala citta is momentary not > deluded by attachment to a self. -------- N: Not simultaneous with kusala volition. -------- P: All kusala and akusala cittas have latent > defilements in the one who has not reached enlightenment. In addition, > kamma is volition and is a cetisika that arises with a kusala or akusala > citta. It would not be correct to think of kamma/volition as something that > eminates from a self. Rather, it is the result of ignorance in the sense > that formations "form the formed." These formations (the formed which is > formed) which are non-self are "the condition for consciousness." -------- N: Formations is used differently in different contexts. When speaking of sankhaarakkhandha, they are cetasikas. When they are kamma formations, sankhaara or abhisankhaara, they are kusala kamma or akusala kamma. I do not remember the context of they form the formed, but I find the term formations not so clear. Viññaana which is the link following upon kamma-formations, it is vipaakacitta, rebirth consciousness or sense-cognitions during life. -------- C: When one > experienes an object, say one's favorite pair of shoes, there are some > cittas which see the object that have volition as one of its cetisikas (this > appears to be the result of birth in a realm with the sense of sight) which > fasten the mind to the complex arrangment of nama and rupa (a kind of > formation similar but distint from kammic formations). After a succession > of vipaka cittas that establish seeing and contact with the object, cittas > with the cetisika of feeling arise. The cittas which arise with cetasikas > of feeling are also attended by cetasikas which are ignorance (this is > always so in the case of akusala) and kamma (as well as other cetasikas). > These are classified as akusala and kusala cittas. So, without the > cetisikas of volition and ignorance, it appears that these cittas could not > be classified as akusala or kusala? -------- N: Seeing is vipaakacitta and it only sees visible object or colour, no shoes. Thinking of shoes arises later on, and when thinking is not with the objective of dana (giving your shoes to a beggar) or siila (not hitting anybody with your shoes but restraint, even when an enemy is approaching), or bhaavana, developing understanding of dhammas appearing right at that moment, then the citta which thinks is akusala. Feeling arises with each citta. When you like your shoes there is akusala citta with pleasant feeling or indifferent feeling. -------- C: Kamma appears to assure that nama and > rupa reach their full fruition. Craving and clinging arise (if I'm reading > the Visuddhimagga correctly, XVII, 301) because feeling is a condition for > craving and the results of ignorance (by reason of our birth) must have > already started the round of kamma (formations-becoming). ------- N: I think you go too fast in trying to understand the Dependant Origination. We have to look at all these dhammas that are mentioned and understand the different types of conditions first. We have to go very slowly. Kamma can produce vipaaka later on. At the moment of rebirth also rupas are produced by kamma, but we cannot speak of full fruition in the case of rupa. -------- C: Is ignorance, > then, found in all cittas or only those that are akusala and kusala? I > would guess only in cittas that are kusala or akusala because other cittas > which have the function of seeing an object are not accompanied by the > cetisika of feeling. But, I am not 100% sure about this. ------- N: Again, feeling is one of the seven cetasikas that accompany each citta. And ignorance does not accompany kusala citta. Perhaps when you follow the Visuddhimagga studies things may become clearer. But it is very meaningful that in the chapters before the Ch XVII on D.O. the khandhas, elements and aayatanas were explained in detail. The cittas, also by which cetasikas they are accompanied, the different rupas, all is explained in detail. 57181 From: nina van gorkom Date: Tue Mar 28, 2006 7:11am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Lodewijk's post on the long way. nilovg Dear Cerini, You said that you understood the balance between khanti and viriya. But I still think that you bring up a good point, this was also a point for other dsg members. Robert wrote: So, understanding has to be emphasized. See below. op 28-03-2006 09:43 schreef Cerini Pablo op cerini_pablo@...: > I'm also ok that uprooting all the defilements will take long time. > But sometimes reading your books I think that one seems really > to have no mean of action, just waiting for conditions. -------- N: As I said before to others, understanding that also sati and paññaa arise when there are the right conditions does not mean that one should be idle, just waiting for them to arise. Studying, listening, discussing, considering realities does not mean being idle. It is the straightening of views. Effort or energy is important, and we can learn that is is a conditioned dhamma, that we cannot exercise power over it. We cannot exercise power over awareness, over any dhamma. For the arising of each kind of kusala there is a concurrence of conditions, some stemming from the past. Perhaps I did not answer all your questions, let me know. Nina. > Why effort ? Why sila or meditation? If every action of the "self" > turns to akusala because of this sense of "self",just do your daily > routine and wait for conditions to raise. Sometimes seems that > your teaching is this. 57182 From: nina van gorkom Date: Tue Mar 28, 2006 11:08am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Tep. Sankharanimitta nilovg Hi Tep, op 28-03-2006 02:51 schreef indriyabala op indriyabala@...: > > -- The perfection of truthfulness ... One's own sincerity about > akusala ... A great danger of misleading oneself. ..Thinking about > moments of conceit and clinging. > > Putting these pieces together I can see that mindfulness is being > developed through the awareness of akusala and seeing the danger. ------- N: Any dhamma that appears can be studied with mindfulness, but it is not easy. --------- T: >> Nina: Even knowing this, I feel I mislead myself very often. I think > of the countless moments of conceit and clinging to self that pass > unnoticed. > > Tep: Even with such knowing there still are "countless moments" of > not-enough mindfulness! Is there a way to reduce those lost moments > using the hindsight? -------- N: Then we are still thinking of 'my' wasted moments, and that does not help. There is a better way. Lack of mindfulness can teach us that sati is so anattaa, that we cannot have it at will. In this way we learn to become more detached. This is an important point that should not be neglected. We should not mind lack of sati, and if we mind, it shows clinging. > --------- T: . Since avijja is completely gone, there will be no mental > formations. Then how does another understanding arise in his mind, > after the previous one has fallen away? I think I do not know exactly > what I am asking -- but hopefully you may know what I meant to ask. ------- N: The arahat's wisdom accompanies the kiriyacitta, he has inoperative citta instead of kusala citta. That citta is accompanied by sobhana cetasikas, accompanied also by pañña cetasika, but not all the time. Four types of mahaakiriyacittas are accompanied by paññaa, four are not. > .......... > T: > N: BTW the fact that paramattha dhammas and conventional realities > are not contradictory is an important point. Read the suttas, and you > will see. > > Tep : They are contradictory in the mind of a person who does not yet > have yatha-bhuta-nana-dasana. He will keep on asking the questions > like Joop has asked (e.g. on sending metta to other beings that are > 'not self' -- No Htoo, no Tep, No Nina, No Phil, then whom are we > sending the metta to? Who would benefit from the metta exercise?). N: You think with metta citta of others, helping them. Both you and the others profit. I do not think of metta as an exercise, or of sending out metta. When I meet a person there can be metta. But I do not need to think of metta. We also need sati. Often we have opportunities to have metta, to help, but we may be lazy and just let it go. When sati arises it uses the opportunity, it is non-forgetful. We can think of persons, we do all the time. Citta can think of them with akusala citta or with kusala citta. Person, a concept, can be the object of citta. Thinking of concepts does not mean that the citta is with wrong view, not at all. Do you see the connection of paramattha dhammas and conventional realities now? Some people believe that they have to separate daily life with people and their vipassana life, or meditation life. In that way their life becomes very forced. We develop understanding of our daily life. Otherwise, what is the use? -------- > >> N: It is good to remember that our life we find so important exists > merely in one moment of thinking. Citta is thinking, but only for one > moment. > > Tep: That sounds like you are preaching down from the top of an ivory > Dhamma Tower to me , a worldling who is standing on the ground. Should > I explain to a person who asks the above question that he is sending > 'his metta' to "one moment of thinking", not a person who suffers, say > because of illness or lost of family members? That is what I meant > by "contradiction" between paramattha dhammas and conventional realities. ------- N: This is not at all my intention, see above. When we think with metta of someone, our life is thinking, when there is seeing of visible object, our life is seeing. It is good to remember the momentariness of life. As the often quoted Vis. text states: It is consoling. In case of a loss, we would keep on dwelling on our sadness. But sadness goes, and then there is the next moment. When citta sees, citta cannot mourn at the same time. I think this is really helpful. Nina. 57183 From: upasaka@... Date: Tue Mar 28, 2006 0:22pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Tep. Sankharanimitta upasaka_howard Hi, Nina (and Tep) - You wrote the following to Tep: "When we think with metta of someone, our life is thinking, when there is seeing of visible object, our life is seeing. It is good to remember the momentariness of life. As the often quoted Vis. text states: It is consoling. In case of a loss, we would keep on dwelling on our sadness. But sadness goes, and then there is the next moment. When citta sees, citta cannot mourn at the same time. I think this is really helpful." Nina, I find this to be one of the most original and fresh statements you have written, and one of the best I have read anywhere! It doesn't ignore at all the "reality," such as it is, of the conventional person and his/her life, but it shifts and directs the reader's attention away from the conventional notions of a person and a person's life to the at-the-moment reality that it comes down to. What you wrote beautifully bridges the gap between "the two truths." IMHO, sadhu x 3!!! :-) 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/ -----Original Message----- From: nina van gorkom To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tue, 28 Mar 2006 21:08:03 +0200 Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Tep. Sankharanimitta Hi Tep, op 28-03-2006 02:51 schreef indriyabala op indriyabala@...: > > -- The perfection of truthfulness ... One's own sincerity about > akusala ... A great danger of misleading oneself. ..Thinking about > moments of conceit and clinging. > > Putting these pieces together I can see that mindfulness is being > developed through the awareness of akusala and seeing the danger. ------- N: Any dhamma that appears can be studied with mindfulness, but it is not easy. --------- 57184 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Tue Mar 28, 2006 1:10pm Subject: Re: The dhammas underlying postures buddhatrue Hi Howard, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > > > Hi, James - > > I apologize about the omission. I had no ill intention in that. Oh, I'm sure you had no ill intention, I just wanted to point out what I thought was important. I quoted the Buddha, then provided my own commentary as far as how I understood his words; but then you completely cut out the heart of my message and focused on my commentary. If you had focused on his words, and explained a different interpretation, I would have been totally cool with that. Now, as far as your main point: do I believe that a calm and concentrated mind will lead to insight? YES!!!! Do I believe that this insight MUST be of the tickleanna (or whatever that Pali word is)? No. I believe that this insight could be of, what is commonly referred to in this group, concepts. Now, do I want to turn this into a long, drawn out discussion? NO, NO, NO! ;-)) My first point, yes, you are correct in saying that there were other folks during the Buddha's time developing a calm and concentrated mind, and yet they didn't become enlightened. So? (I am surprised, Howard, that you would use this argument. I think you might have been somewhat brainwashed by too much involvement in this group!! ;- )) just kidding). Siddhartha had a sense that the ascetic life, which included developing a calm and concentrated mind, would lead to liberation- and he wasn't mistaken. What was the difference in Siddhartha? The difference is that he didn't automatically assume what everyone else assumed. He didn't assume that there was a self, he didn't assume that there was a Great Brahma to be united with, he didn't assume that other people had all the answers. A calm and concentrated mind looking for a SELF is going to just remain temporarily calm and concentrated; a calm and concentrated mind looking for TRUTH has the potential to be liberated. My second point is that there were folks during the Buddha's time who became enlightened simply through listening to a sutta (Sariputta for example). I don't believe that these folks were concentrating on the tickleanna (or whatever) when this happened. Listening to words and forming ideas in the mind is all conceptual. What these folks did is lose their attachment to the false idea of a self. This wasn't a matter of dhammas vs. concepts, this was a matter of craving and attachment. Howard, I suspect that you will respond to this post- and I will let you have the last word. ;-)) Metta, James Ps. I am so glad to hear that little Sophie is doing better. I keep rooting for her! 57185 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Tue Mar 28, 2006 1:16pm Subject: Re: Lodewijk's post on the long way. buddhatrue Hi Cerini, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Cerini Pablo" wrote: > > Hi James and Nina (and all) > > "buddhatrue" wrote: > >Based on one little commentarial > > note, interpreted in a way extraneous to its intention, you have > > made up your mind that the Buddha's path is supposed to take > >aeons. > > I take the occasion of James's post to ask one thing. > I'm really appreciating your books, Nina, because they are > clear , well argued and well documented (with detailed > references to texts and commentaries) . > For people new to abidhamma they're a great help. > But sometimes even a guy who really is learning lot from > them can feel puzzled about a sense of *passivity* that > you seem to suggest. > I'm ok with humble attitude, respect > of commentaries and of different accumulations . > I'm also ok that uprooting all the defilements will take long time. > But sometimes reading your books I think that one seems really > to have no mean of action, just waiting for conditions. > Why effort ? Why sila or meditation? If every action of the "self" > turns to akusala because of this sense of "self",just do your daily > routine and wait for conditions to raise. Sometimes seems that > your teaching is this. > (I think this caused James to be so direct in his post). Yes, Nina is a great writer and very articulate. She is also very knowledgeable. However, her passive approach is not what the Buddha taught. Metta, James 57186 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Tue Mar 28, 2006 1:43pm Subject: Re: Three cheers for Kom!! buddhatrue Hi Cerini, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Cerini Pablo" wrote: > > Hi James and Kom > What you wrote leaves me shocked. James: Well, please don't be too shocked. That wasn't my intention. Not for the poisonous ants, > but for what you said about monks being pompous and arrogant . > Are you really speaking about the monks who trained under Ajan > Chah ? James: I don't believe that any of the monks there, including the abbott, had trained under Ajan Chah. After Ajan Chah's death, most of the monks left to other temples. From what I read, it was somewhat painful for them to remain without Ajahn Chah around (attachment I know, but monks are people too). Ajan Sumedho's chronicles of life in Wat Pah Nanachat are > quite famous , and I always thought that Wat Pah Nanachat could be a > good place to pratice dhamma (if not the best place at all) . James: So did I!!! That's why I gave up everything in the United States and flew there to ordain. But, the reality doesn't quite match the expection. > Consider that theravada presence in Italy (my nation) is almost > entirely dued to monks coming from Ajan Chah's lineage. > I consider Wat Pah Nanachat something like the "source" > of Italian Theravada Buddhism. > Hearing that monks in Wat Pah Nanachat are pompous and arrogant > is a serious wound for my faith in dhamma ... James: Well, it certainly shouldn't be a wound for your faith in dhamma. I went there, experienced that nonsense, and still my faith in dhamma wasn't wounded. If you have faith in the Buddha and what he taught, it doesn't matter that there are some arrogant monks in a temple in Thailand. > It would be very very interesting if you could tell more > about your experience at Wat Pah Nanachat, or at least about > the monks' behaviour there. James: Well, I was only there for a couple of days, but I am somewhat psychic so I could pick up a lot of impressions. But I could tell you some of the visual things I observed: First, when the monks walked around, they didn't walk in a dignified manner with their arms to their sides and their eyes cast downward (as is detailed in the Vinaya). They walked with their arms swinging out from their sides and their legs taking huge strides. In their flip- flop shoes, they looked and acted like vacationeers at a beach! I was quite shocked, honestly. The second incident happened after a group meditation. One of the parishoners had pushed a cart of coffee and tea and drinks to the back of the meditation area. When the meditation was over, the abbott excused everyone to go have drinks. I saw all the monks at the cart so I approached, thinking that that was were I was supposed to go. All of the monks glared at me and then one of the monks snarled (and, yes, I mean snarled), "This is not for you. You need to go back to the temple." Excuse me?? Well, obviously, I didn't stay there very long. > > > I'm sorry for your father. I say this because my parents too > don't like my engagement in Dhamma . > Not for Dhamma itself, > they just think that religions in general are drugs for losers > trying to escape from difficulties of real life. They are very > pragmatic people :) James: Well, we each have our difficulties. My parents are just indifferent to the whole thing. > > By the way, but why is parents' agreement required for one > who wants to become a monk ? James: That is one of the rules the Buddha created when a parent complained to him about taking their only son in the sangha. And, since I am an only son and an only child, that rule especiallly hits home. > There are situation (like mine) where one 'd never get this > agreement, not because if he gets enrobed he leaves debts, > sons or unresolved troubled situations,but just because his parents > are full of wrong views. James: Well, that's the breaks. You have to get your parents permission. > If some one has clues about this, I'll be very happy to hear > his opinion. James: My opinion is that it is a wise rule. Parents depend on their children and children have a responsibility to their parents. If one enters the sangha and there isn't an agreement, it couldn't be a good situation for either party. > > cerini pablo > Metta, James 57187 From: upasaka@... Date: Tue Mar 28, 2006 3:13pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: The dhammas underlying postures upasaka_howard Hi, James - Hi Howard, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > > > Hi, James - > > I apologize about the omission. I had no ill intention in that. Oh, I'm sure you had no ill intention, I just wanted to point out what I thought was important. I quoted the Buddha, then provided my own commentary as far as how I understood his words; but then you completely cut out the heart of my message and focused on my commentary. If you had focused on his words, and explained a different interpretation, I would have been totally cool with that. --------------------------- Howard: :-) -------------------------- Now, as far as your main point: do I believe that a calm and concentrated mind will lead to insight? YES!!!! Do I believe that this insight MUST be of the tickleanna (or whatever that Pali word is)? No. I believe that this insight could be of, what is commonly referred to in this group, concepts. Now, do I want to turn this into a long, drawn out discussion? NO, NO, NO! ;-)) -------------------------- Howard: Me either. ;-) ------------------------- My first point, yes, you are correct in saying that there were other folks during the Buddha's time developing a calm and concentrated mind, and yet they didn't become enlightened. So? (I am surprised, Howard, that you would use this argument. I think you might have been somewhat brainwashed by too much involvement in this group!! ;- )) just kidding). ------------------------ Howard: Well, ya never know! Due to a couple recent posts of mine I've been thinking that Jon might be licking his lips at an anticipated convert! LOL! (Sorry for the flippancy here, Jon - I just could resist! Mara made me do it! ;-) ------------------------ Siddhartha had a sense that the ascetic life, which included developing a calm and concentrated mind, would lead to liberation- and he wasn't mistaken. What was the difference in Siddhartha? The difference is that he didn't automatically assume what everyone else assumed. He didn't assume that there was a self, he didn't assume that there was a Great Brahma to be united with, he didn't assume that other people had all the answers. A calm and concentrated mind looking for a SELF is going to just remain temporarily calm and concentrated; a calm and concentrated mind looking for TRUTH has the potential to be liberated. --------------------------------- Howard: Well, just as I omitted part of your post, you have omitted the parts of mine that mentioned the classic three entrees to awakening and the Dhammapada statements about the "tickleanna"! (And who, BTW, is that "Anna", and why do you make her sound so kinky? ;-) -------------------------------- My second point is that there were folks during the Buddha's time who became enlightened simply through listening to a sutta (Sariputta for example). I don't believe that these folks were concentrating on the tickleanna (or whatever) when this happened. Listening to words and forming ideas in the mind is all conceptual. What these folks did is lose their attachment to the false idea of a self. This wasn't a matter of dhammas vs. concepts, this was a matter of craving and attachment. ------------------------------ Howard: And I have always assumed, starting well before my DSG days, BTW ;-), that "instant awakening" at hearing a teaching of the Buddha, or, as in the Ch'an/Zen tradition, at hearing a "turning word" or even the crack of a pebble hitting bamboo, is always due to the listener being "primed" and ready due to prior cultivation in that or previous lifetimes. ------------------------------ Howard, I suspect that you will respond to this post- and I will let you have the last word. ;-)) ------------------------------- Howard: Actually, I wasn't going to reply, because I really didn't have much of import to say, until I read that last sentence - and then I HAD to reply! LOLOL! (It needn't be the final word, of course.) ------------------------------- Metta, James Ps. I am so glad to hear that little Sophie is doing better. I keep rooting for her! ------------------------------- Howard: Thank you so much, James. I'm very, very happy to report that she came home this afternoon! The doctors said she should be the poster child for rapid recovery! She was in the hospital a total of only six days!! Her echocardiogram taken yesterday has shown very good valve functioning, and the one of the two (constructed) valves that was known at the outset to be leaky has now been determined to have an extremely minimal leakage! So, she's really doing well. Now she just needs to gain some weight. ======================= 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/ 57188 From: Eddie Lou Date: Tue Mar 28, 2006 3:45pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Three cheers for Kom!! LosAngeles retreat alternative! eddielou_us Hi, James, Your experience sounds scarry with those pompous, arrogant monks in Thailand. A true buddhist, let alone monk, should not be like that. But I have 'heard' some horror stories like that before. Do not put your dad through that kind of upset again. It is pretty heavy Akusala, or bad karma, as I know it. I do not know where you live, if you are in USA or Calif. here is one place you can try, 'I believe' is good and respectable because I have not actually stay or live there, it is a Myanmar or Burmese temple called 'Progressive Buddhist Association' in Los Angeles. Tel: (626)969-2118. Fax: (626)969-5959. Give them a call and feel out if you will like it. Many there speak English. They often have Vipassana meditation retreat in the compound. I believe, they also are non profit. My other less crowded (so I can find your return email easier) email address is edl200408@.... Tell me what you think. Good luck. buddhatrue wrote: Hi Kom, but I didn't have such a favorable outcome. The monks were pompous and arrogant; the abbott resented teaching the dhamma to laypeople; ...It was Wat Pah Nanachat, perhaps you have heard of it? Anyway, I left that temple after a few days and came back to the My father was so upset after I left for Thailand last time that he drank an entire bottle of whiskey in one night, and was in bed for several days from alcohol poisoning! I don't want to put him through that kind of upset again. But, so glad that you are having this wonderful opportunity at a fantastic temple! Please do keep in touch and post here when you can. Metta, James 57189 From: Eddie Lou Date: Tue Mar 28, 2006 4:11pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Three cheers for Kom!! HumanRealm is the ONLY LAUNCH PT.toNirvana. eddielou_us Hi, All, My personal understanding is Buddhism is the REAL truth revealing so far that I can find, for all the many still unresolved or unresolvable revelations. We are on the right way, but the true way looks painful but the make believe world most of us are living is in reality even or many numbty times tougher and painful. But with delusion, pride, or lobha, dosa and moha, in general ignorance, we keep on going forever in Sasamra or rebirth cycles. I would not have believed very much of Buddha's teachings, have it not been the immense 'structured' NUMBERED details in the teachings. Impressive. Just considered it will be stepping in missteps all over the place if with loopholes and mistakes in all those teachings. So far after over 2,500 years of sure scrutiny by all interested smart or normal people there is still no gaping holes in their credibility, except for the unverifiable teachings like other remaining 29 realms or planes of existences. altogether there are 31 such realms Another big reason for me to look deeper is according to Buddha, just to be born into human realm is no easy chance, and only from human realm we currently are in, can we attain Nirvanna or end that rebirth cycle, no other realm, neither Brahma or heavenly realms, or supernatural realms let alone animal realm that we are able to interact with, nor hell realms. So SEIZE THE HUMAN realm OPPORTUNITIES, at least reach for sotapan enlightenment level if we can. Only way to achieve that is through true practice, true experience, which James and Kom are already doing way ahead of me, I am still a THEORETICAL DHAMMA guy. Cheers! Here there is this dilemma with most folks, how do we balance the daily life with practice, and be not tempted with tanha or temptations surrounding us by media, daily events, etc. Metta, Eddie Lou Cerini Pablo wrote: Hi James and Kom "buddhatrue" wrote: > I am so glad that you found a good temple in Thailand and that you > are doing so well. I am tempted to come join you there! ;-)) As about your experience at Wat Pah Nanachat, or at least about the monks' behaviour there. ,, sons or unresolved troubled situations,but just because his parents are full of wrong views. If some one has clues about this, I'll be very happy to hear his opinion. cerini pablo 57190 From: Eddie Lou Date: Tue Mar 28, 2006 4:32pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Three cheers for Kom!! eddielou_us Hi, Additions here, I was able to quickly read through what you have described, if the drink is alcoholic I think it is not in tune with the 'pragmatic but altruistic' rules of Buddha for monk, no intoxicating drink in the very basic rule of 5 precepts. Anyway that is their violations, good you left soon, very observant, courageous and decisive of you. Even with all the teachings, there can be such things in monkhood. We, laypeople I understand. Actually in Kalama Sutra, Buddha himself said NEVER NEVER believe anything ANYTHING period, without analysing and checking it out YOURSELF, yes YOURSELF, and only if it makes sense, and good for as many people as possible than accept it. Like I said, try the Progressive Buddhist Monastry calling them up talk to them. Let me know the outcome. It is VERY IMPORTANT that all involved parties have consensus, agreement especially your parents must agree before you do such thing, in my opinion. Do not do that on your parents again, it is tough for them to take it. Parental love is great, so make them understand that it is good karma or in fact the GREATEST karma (Kusala) that a son or daughter can bring for their benefactors namely parents. Eddie Lou buddhatrue wrote: Hi Cerini, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Cerini Pablo" wrote: > > his opinion. James: My opinion is that it is a wise rule. Parents depend on their children and children have a responsibility to their parents. If one enters the sangha and there isn't an agreement, it couldn't be a good situation for either party. > > cerini pablo > Metta, James 57191 From: "icarofranca" Date: Tue Mar 28, 2006 5:30pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Three cheers for Kom!! icarofranca Hi Eddie --------------------------------------------------------------------- > I was able to quickly read through what you have described, if the >drink is alcoholic I think it is not in tune with the 'pragmatic but >altruistic' rules of Buddha for monk, no intoxicating drink in the >very basic rule of 5 precepts. Anyway that is their violations, good >you left soon, very observant, courageous and decisive of you. ------------------------------------------------------------------- I think that´s no alcohol involved in this scene... as James had wrote, only Coffee, tea and some drinks as refreshment. But he stumbled on a very important matter of etiquette: monks have priority over laypeople, and must be approached with uppermost respect. "But they didn´t showed any of these "respect" with him!" "Again, they are monks and YOU ought to show respect!" These are clear rules and our dearest James failed in this point! --------------------------------------------------------------------- > Even with all the teachings, there can be such things in monkhood. We, laypeople I understand. --------------------------------------------------------------------- I hope so, or Kom could be ashamed with James´lack of social tract! --------------------------------------------------------------------- > Like I said, try the Progressive Buddhist Monastry calling them up >talk to them. Let me know the outcome. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- That could be a good idea! A good oportunity for James exercise good diplomacy! Mettaya Ícaro 57192 From: "icarofranca" Date: Tue Mar 28, 2006 5:42pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Three cheers for Kom!! HumanRealm is the ONLY LAUNCH PT.toNirvana. icarofranca Hi Eddie! -------------------------------------------------------------------- > Here there is this dilemma with most folks, how do we balance the >daily life with practice, and be not tempted with tanha or >temptations surrounding us by media, daily events, etc. --------------------------------------------------------------------- That´s no dilemma, "Carissimus Eddie"! I am a layman on Buddhism. I am not able to follow any buddhistic precept in full or in parts, in any time or any opportunity. If I were a Bhikkhu I could try to do it, but I am not. So I am totally unable to copy with any of the five precepts or applying them rightly on daily life or fight against tanha, lobha, dosa and moha, etc. And you are in the same level. And all DSG members are at the same situation except Kom, that is a Buddhist Monk now! And back to Abhidhamma!!!! Mettaya Ícaro 57193 From: "indriyabala" Date: Tue Mar 28, 2006 6:16pm Subject: Re: Anattalakkhana Sutta: Part Two indriyabala Dear Joop - >Joop: That's an misunderstanding, lovingkindness (metta) is a paramatthadhamma, it also is called adosa. Anatta and lovingkindness for a sentient being are not conflicting dhammas. Tep: Just by its label alone, you may say metta is a paramattha dhamma. However, the "conflict" here is in terms of their interpretations (in the mind). If 'anatta' means 'there is no Joop, or Tep anywhere', then how could metta be practiced? Nina also has tried to address this issue. What do you think of her explanation? ------------------ >Joop: Anatta is not a dhamma, it does not occur in the lists of the 89 cittas+52 cetasikas+28 rupas+1 nibbana. Tep: Anything is a dhamma: either conditioned(sankhata) or unconditioned(asankhata). The whole Teachings consists of nothing but dhammas, e.g. beings are defined by the khandhas that are associated with clinging [see below]. So, I can rightfully say that khandhas of the Arahant are 'not self', 'empty of self', or 'anatta'. When one contemplates, 'this is not mine, not I, not my self', it is for the purpose of abandoning clingings (there are 4 types). SN XXIII.2 Satta Sutta: A Being --------------------------------- "'A being,' lord. 'A being,' it's said. To what extent is one said to be 'a being'?" "Any desire, passion, delight, or craving for form, Radha: when one is caught up there, tied up there, one is said to be 'a being.' "Any desire, passion, delight, or craving for feeling... perception... fabrications... "Any desire, passion, delight, or craving for consciousness, Radha: when one is caught up there, tied up there, one is said to be 'a being.' ..................... >Joop: >But of course more important is the question: is the suffering sentient being for whom I have metta or karuna only an illusion, created by my mind? Can I deny that suffering by expressing the mantra "this is not mine, this I am not, this is not my self", applied to that being? Tep: The khandhas of the "being" who suffers are real. The suffering(dukkha) is real -- it is a noble truth. Therefore, your metta will not be in vain. Why? You'll gain big because your aversions are abandoned at least in that moment. I am not sure whether the being's suffering would be "gone" by your lovingkindness or not. I don't know. ................... >Joop: Perhaps it out of the frame of reference of many DSG-participants but I state that the Theravada Abhidhamma is not complete, it only describes phenomena on the individual level, not on the interpersonal level. So there had some dhammas and processes been added to it. Tep: The whole Tipitaka is complete. ................ >Joop: Something else is the question if there is a "contradiction" between paramattha dhammas and conventional realities. Not to me. The difference between this two ways of experiencing realities - the two languages - is gradual and not absolute. And there is a link between the two. Tep: The contradiction is seen by me whenever I mix the two -- just like when you look at electrons, protons and empty space in a piece of iron (through a powerful electron microscope), you will not see "the iron", and you will only see the iron when you step back from the device. ............... > >Tep: "Isn't there at least one conflict between Theravadin and > >Mahayan? Don't you think you have dhammatanha-- being "greedy" to > >try to have them both?" >Joop: Is everybody who thinks that Theravada is not a 100% correct >raft, FOR THAT REASON, greedy? Tep: We are addressing two different issues, I guess. ................. >Joop: BTW Will you please not use too much Pali to me, English is already difficult enough to understand. And when a phenomena really exists (so when it's not an illusion in the mind of somebody) then it's expressable in every language. But for the rest: I like to discuss with you! Tep: I apologize for my sincere attempt to be precise; however, it was not because I wanted to show off my elementary knowledge of the Pali words. {:>) I like to discuss the Dhamma with you too. When I reflect back on myself, I must confess that I am a very stubborn person too. Thank you for bearing with me. May our appropriate attention to the Dhamma grow each and every day, Tep ======= --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Joop" wrote: > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "indriyabala" > wrote: > > > > Dear Joop (and Jon) - > > > > Thank you for your patience -- giving me another opportunity to > > explain. {:>) > ... > > Hallo Tep (Nina, Han, all) > > You adressed me in this message and in #57158. > I will mainly concentrate to what for me is the main topic: > Tep: "… the two dhammas: anatta and lovingkindness. They are > conflicting (you, yourself have stated it many times before) because > there are no beings in the anatta (a paramattha dhamma)." > Two remarks on it.: > > You also said: " Paramatthadhamma (ultimate realities) are > incompatible with lovingkindness" > Joop: That's an misunderstanding, lovingkindness (metta) is a > paramatthadhamma, it also is called adosa. > Anatta and lovingkindness for a sentient being are not conflicting > dhammas. "Anatta" is not an objective existing entity, it is that I > again and again had to realize that the idea that there exists an "I" > is an illusion, that "I" is a concept. > Anatta is not a dhamma, it does not occur in the lists of the 89 > cittas+52 cetasikas+28 rupas+1 nibbana. (Perhaps I'm kicked out DSG > but 'anatta' is a concept) > But of course more important is the question: is the suffering > sentient being for whom I have metta or karuna only an illusion, > created by my mind? Can I deny that suffering by expressing the > mantra "this is not mine, this I am not, this is not my self", > applied to that being? > I agree I don't have the language to combine the two but I'm > convinced it's possible. > (snipped) 57194 From: "indriyabala" Date: Tue Mar 28, 2006 6:20pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Anattalakkhana Sutta: Part Two indriyabala --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Joop" wrote: > (snipped) > > Tep, all > > One addition to my message #57170 > You asked me how intelligence might be used so that 'anatta' > and 'having metta' do not conflict. > My answer: use another kind of logic. The famous statement of the > Buddha "this is not mine, this I am not, this is not my self" is not > a ontological statement but a soteriological one, aiming to awaken > the mine/I/my. The statement does not exist 'as such' but only in the person who is trying to understand it, applied to himself/herself. > > Metta > > Joop > Dear Joop : Our understandings are getting closer more than before ! Thanks. Tep, your friend. ============== 57195 From: "indriyabala" Date: Tue Mar 28, 2006 6:43pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Tep. Sankharanimitta indriyabala Dear Howard & Nina - I think it is important to acknowledge that conventional reality is the domain for lovingkindness contemplation, while the ultimate reality is another domain for 'not-self' contemplation (anattanupassana). The two domains are not separable, however. This is analogous to the fact that the molecular domain of a material (say a gram of iron) is nested inside the material itself. Yet, there are certain properties that are unique to each domain and are not defined in the other domain. Warm regards, Tep ====== --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > > Hi, Nina (and Tep) - > > You wrote the following to Tep: "When we think with metta of someone, our life is thinking, when there is seeing of visible object, our life is seeing. It is good to remember the momentariness of life. > As the often quoted Vis. text states: It is consoling. In case of a loss, we would keep on dwelling on our sadness. But sadness goes, and then there is the next moment. When citta sees, citta cannot mourn at the same time. I think this is really helpful." > Nina, I find this to be one of the most original and fresh statements you have written, and one of the best I have read anywhere! It doesn't ignore at all the "reality," such as it is, of the conventional person and his/her life, but it shifts and directs the reader's attention away from the conventional notions of a person and a person's life to the at-the-moment reality that it comes down to. What you wrote beautifully bridges the gap between "the two truths." IMHO, sadhu x 3!!! :-) > > With metta, > Howard > 57196 From: "indriyabala" Date: Tue Mar 28, 2006 8:14pm Subject: Re: Tep. Sankharanimitta .. Satipatthana & Ultimate Realities indriyabala Hi, Nina - It seems to me that your posts nowadays are about other things that are not ultimate realities as much as you used to write in the past. Is my observation incorrect? > >Tep: Even with such knowing there still are "countless moments" of > >not-enough mindfulness! Is there a way to reduce those lost moments > >using the hindsight? -------- >N: Then we are still thinking of 'my' wasted moments, and that does not help. There is a better way. Lack of mindfulness can teach us that sati is so anattaa, that we cannot have it at will. In this way we learn to become more detached. >This is an important point that should not be neglected. We should not mind lack of sati, and if we mind, it shows clinging. Tep: This has been an unscratched itching spot! I will not stop asking questions until you finally get the idea behind: how do noble disciples develop mindfulness . You seem to suggest that we forget about those moments of lost mindfulness because it is not self, a conditioned dhamma, and so there is no way that mindfulness may become sati-bala (through development, bhavana). This view contradicts to the several suttas (on indriya and bala) that I already have reviewed and discussed with at least Sarah and Matheesha. BTW I don't know how to learn to be "more detached" such that the mindfulness faculty becomes "sati-bala". Can you elaborate a bit, based on a sutta? ............... > >T: . Since avijja is completely gone, there will be no mental > >formations. Then how does another understanding arise in his mind, > after the previous one has fallen away? I think I do not know exactly > >what I am asking -- but hopefully you may know what I meant to ask. ------- >N: The arahat's wisdom accompanies the kiriyacitta, he has inoperative citta instead of kusala citta. That citta is accompanied by sobhana cetasikas, accompanied also by pañña cetasika, but not all the time. Four types of mahaakiriyacittas are accompanied by paññaa, four are not. > .......... Tep: So you say 'pañña cetasika' in the arahant also falls away. My question has been: how does another understanding arise if there are no mental formations and if pañña cetasika is impermanent? In other words, how does paññaa arise to accompany the mahaakiriyacittas ? ....................... > >Tep: > like Joop has asked (e.g. on sending metta to other beings that are > 'not self' -- No Htoo, no Tep, No Nina, No Phil, then whom are we > sending the metta to? Who would benefit from the metta exercise?). >N: You think with metta citta of others, helping them. Both you and the others profit. Tep: But there are 'no you' and 'no others', according to the 'no self' principle: it says only rupa and nama are arising and dissolving every nano-second. So, then who may benefit? .................. >N: We can think of persons, we do all the time. Citta can think of them with akusala citta or with kusala citta. Person, a concept, can be the object of citta. Tep: Yes, we can think of persons -- but, isn't that a wrong thought, wrong view, because there are no Htoo and no Nina? Yes. A person, or a concept, can be the object of citta, but that is not the point! ................ >N: Thinking of concepts does not mean that the citta is with wrong view, not at all. Do you see the connection of paramattha dhammas and conventional realities now? Tep: No. I don't. According to you and some DSG members have been saying over the years, there are only nama & rupa, only paramattha dhammas are real -- no person exists; therefore, seeing a self in paramattha-dhamma is a wrong view. Why should anyone who contemplates a paramattha-dhamma (as the object of satipatthana) be thinking of concepts (it sounds like walking backward)? Even breathing meditation that was recommended by the Buddha and the arahants has not been accepted by several DSG members (please look back at the many old posts in the archive), because breaths are not an ultimate reality. Have you forgotten all these arguments over the years? .............. >N: We develop understanding of our daily life. Otherwise, what is the use? Tep: Developing understanding of the Dhamma to be used in the daily life is of course the main purpose of any Buddhist. But the recurring problem at this forum has been in about how to do it the "right way" -- otherwise the atta and lobha demons will come out. ............... >N: When we think with metta of someone, our life is thinking, when there is seeing of visible object, our life is seeing. It is good to remember the momentariness of life. As the often quoted Vis. text states: It is consoling. In case of a loss, we would keep on dwelling on our sadness. But sadness goes, and then there is the next moment. When citta sees, citta cannot mourn at the same time. I think this is really helpful. Tep: The "our life is thinking" is about the conventional truth, not the ultimate one where there is only emptiness of "persons", emptiness of "someone", and there is no "life" (because life is a concept -- not a reality). Is such thinking of conventional truth about life more popular than the old talk about satipatthana bhavana on ultimate realities? With due respects, Tep ======== --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, nina van gorkom wrote: > > Hi Tep, > op 28-03-2006 02:51 schreef indriyabala op indriyabala@...: > > > (snipped) > > > T: > N: BTW the fact that paramattha dhammas and conventional realities > > are not contradictory is an important point. Read the suttas, and you > > will see. > > > > Tep : They are contradictory in the mind of a person who does not yet > > have yatha-bhuta-nana-dasana. He will keep on asking the questions > > like Joop has asked (e.g. on sending metta to other beings that are > > 'not self' -- No Htoo, no Tep, No Nina, No Phil, then whom are we > > sending the metta to? Who would benefit from the metta exercise?). > > N: You think with metta citta of others, helping them. Both you and the > others profit. I do not think of metta as an exercise, or of sending out > metta. When I meet a person there can be metta. But I do not need to think > of metta. We also need sati. Often we have opportunities to have metta, to > help, but we may be lazy and just let it go. When sati arises it uses the > opportunity, it is non-forgetful. > We can think of persons, we do all the time. Citta can think of them with > akusala citta or with kusala citta. Person, a concept, can be the object of > citta. Thinking of concepts does not mean that the citta is with wrong view, > not at all. Do you see the connection of paramattha dhammas and conventional > realities now? > Some people believe that they have to separate daily life with people and > their vipassana life, or meditation life. In that way their life becomes > very forced. We develop understanding of our daily life. Otherwise, what is > the use? > -------- > > > (snipped) 57197 From: connie Date: Tue Mar 28, 2006 8:45pm Subject: first temple studyhall nichiconn thanks for udana cty, sarah. you might enjoy http://www.ancient-buddhist-texts.net not all of it all the time, eh Joop? for myself, no denying i harvest outcroppings of dosa in the 'pali' fields, and better self indulgence then would be the the pali / english pages... among them, bhikkhu aananadajoti's pali/english (oct 2004) udana sutta: www.ancient-buddhist-texts.net/Texts-and-Translations/Udana/js-index.htm lots more there. in the 'meditation section' of the site, for instance, Dhammacakkappavattanasutta.m (The Discourse that Set the Dhamma Wheel Rolling) from Vinaya Mahaavagga 1. anyway, the old sitezip i had was 2002 and the venerable was gracious enough to send me the new address even tho i admitted i'd had the old one 3 yrs and not looked at it properly yet. these are (i beg your pardon) examples of passive behaviour on both our parts. peace, c. 57198 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Mar 28, 2006 10:40pm Subject: ‘Cetasikas' study corner 411- Confidence/saddhaa (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;-) ========================================== (Ch25 - Confidence/saddhaa contd) There is still another aspect to confidence, saddhå, and that is the aspect of indriya, controlling faculty. An indriya exercises leadership over the dhammas it accompanies. There are five wholesome cetasikas, indriyas, called the “spiritual faculties”, which should be developed. They are: confidence, energy, mindfulness, concentration and wisdom. These faculties overcome the defilements which are their opposites. Confidence governs the accompanying dhammas, citta and cetasikas, in its quality of purifying and of confiding in kusala. It overcomes lack of confidence in kusala. Without confidence kusala citta and its accompanying cetasikas could not arise. The Atthasåliní (I, Part IV, Chapter I, 119) states: * “From the overcoming of lack of faith, faith is a controlling faculty in the sense of predominance, or in its characteristic of decision it exercises lordship (over associated states).” * When the “spiritual faculties” have been developed they become “powers” or “ strengths” (balas). Then they have become firm and unshakable, they cannot be shaken by the defilements which are their opposites. The same cetasikas which can be considered under the aspect of indriya can also be considered under the aspect of power. We read in the Dhammasangaùi about confidence as faculty, indriya, and as power, bala: * "The faith which on that occasion is a trusting in, the professing confidence in, the sense of assurance, faith, faith as a faculty and as a power— this is the faith that there then is." * The Atthasåliní (I, Part IV, Chapter II, 145) explains this passage and states that assurance is abundant assurance in the virtues of the Buddha. Such assurance is not based on mere theoretical understanding of the Buddha’s teachings. There can only be abundant confidence in the Buddha’s virtues when right understanding of realities has been developed. ***** (Ch25 - Confidence/saddhaa to be contd) Metta, Sarah ====== 57199 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Mar 28, 2006 11:28pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Hello - moving to the second temple sarahprocter... Dear Kom, Icaro & all, You’ve both encouraged me to look at the rules regarding the recitation of the Patimokkha. wrote: > > Kom, that´s one of my questions about the Patimokkha. At the Vinaya > is stated that at least two days in a month - or two full moons - the > collective reading of the Patimokkha and the Chastissement of fault > monks could be done by all Sangha. It´s called the Uposattha day. ... S: In the Introduction to ‘The Paatiimokkha’(PTS), it says: “A number of regulations regarding the recitation are given in the second section of the Mahavagga. The Buddha reduced the Uposatha days for reciting the Patimokkha to two in a month on either the 14th or 15th day fo the fortnight. All the bhikkhus of one residence should come together for the recitation, which led to the establishing of boundaries and a hall for the Uposatha. "For the recitation of the Patimokkha, it must be the right day (Vin 1, 117), there must be a minimum of four bhikkhus (Vin 1, 124), the bhikkhus present must not be guilty of the same offence (Vin1 126f), and no unsuitable person should be present (Vin 1, 115, 135f). If only two or three bhikkhus are present, they simply make a declaration of their purity. If a bhikkhu is alone, he should do the four preliminary duties, then make a determination that the day is an Uposatha day for an individual (Vin 1, 124). Before the recitation, any bhikkhu who has committed an offence must confess it to another bhikkhu (Vin 1, 125-8). <...> The Patimokkha is normally recited by a thera, but if a thera is not able to do so, an experienced, competent bhikkhu may recite it. (Vin 1, 116). There are five ways of reciting the Patimokkha (Vin 1, 112f): 1)the introduction is recited, and the rest is announced without being recited; 2) the introduction and the first four rules are recited and the rest is announced; 3) the thirteen sa’nghaadisesa rules are added to the second type of recitation; 4) the two indefinite rules are added to the third type of recitation; 5) the entire Patimokkha is recited.” ***** S: Kom, perhaps you would tell us which method was used at the temples you lived in and if either of you (or anyone else, of course) has any other comments. to be contd Metta, Sarah =======