#60600 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Jun 20, 2006 3:55 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: .. All of These Are Just Different Perspectives ... Feeling & Mind sarahprocter... Hi Ken O (& Tep), You were both having a very good discussion on citta as chief. I forget if the issues were resolved? --- Ken O wrote: > k: I think the distinction of the function should be clear. Citta > is chief does not mean citta is the mafia godfather where any member > take instruction from. Chief in the sense that without it, there is > no arisen of cetasikas, chief in terms of being the one that cognise > an object. But this guy (citta) is a good chap, very obedient, it is > neither good or bad. In fact it is always bully by the cetasikas. > They are the one who tell this poor chap (citta) that they are going > to be bad or good One example is citta like water will be red or > blue depend on what kind of colour powder that mixed with the water. > We only say water is chief because without it there would not be > colour water. However it is the colour powder that determines the > type of colour and not the water. .... S: I thought this was excellent and very colourful, Ken O. It reminded me of why it is said that citta is 'pandara' or clear - even akusala cittas. Metta, Sarah ======== #60601 From: han tun Date: Tue Jun 20, 2006 4:01 am Subject: Re: [dsg] atta-vaadupaadaana. hantun1 Dear Sarah, Thank you very much for your elaborate presentation. I know only what little I have read on Abhidhammattha Sangaha. I do not even have the Abhidhamma Commentary, or Dhammasa'nganii, or Vism Tiika. Therefore, my knowledge is very much limited. It will take me days just to understand what you have written now. Therefore, I do not have any further comments to offer. What I will do is I will show your presentation to a Sayadaw who is knowledgeable in Abhidhamma, if and when I have the chance to meet one. I do not have any other ‘topic series’ to share. Currently, I am studying Nina’s Cetasikas which are very interesting. Respectfully, Han --- sarah abbott wrote: > Dear Han & Nina, (Tep, Steve & all), > > > ..... > S: Let me just add a few further comments in point > form, but let me say at > the outset that I'm on thin ice here: > > > ..... > I think that's as far as I can take this for now. > I'll be very interested to read any of your further comments (or anyone else's). Metta, Sarah p.s. Han, do you have any other 'topic series' to share? Tep, you've gone rather quiet - hope all's well. Any suttas to share? #60602 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Tue Jun 20, 2006 3:54 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Source of quote needed egberdina Hi Christine, I am not surprised to see you here. You have been on my mind all day. > "Misdeeds cannot be washed away by water, > the suffering of living beings cannot be removed with the hand, > my realization cannot be transferred to another, > but by showing the true nature of things, there will be liberation." > It is Namdrol's signature. Kind Regards Herman #60603 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Jun 20, 2006 4:26 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: MN 01 questions sarahprocter... Hi Herman, --- Herman Hofman wrote: > If you happen to spot this post before you disappear, with regards to > the trainee it is said "let him not" conceive etc etc. Can you, or > anyone else, say anything about the Pali source of that sort of > construction? .... S: I think you were too late for Dan. If you can, try to get a copy of BB's translation of the Mulapariyaya Sutta and commentaries from BPS (or elsewhere). It's a gold-mine. First of all, BB discusses the word 'ma~n~nanaa' in some detail in his introduction which helps the reading of the sutta. "But what is indicated by this word is not simple discursive thinking...the word ma~n~nanaa signifies a different, more developed type of thinking, one that is decidedly unwholesome and always involves a wrong grasp of the object. Mannana is distortional thinking.......<...> The activity of conceiving, the commentary points out, is motivated by three underlying mental factors......craving (ta.nhaa), conceit (maana), and views (di.t.thi)." S: Lots more detail is given. Here the 'views' refer to wrong views. With regard to the lines you refer to above, let me add a commentary note (translated by BB) which I think you'll find relevant: "Let him not conceive (himself as) earth (pathavi'm maa ma~n~nii) Comy: He [S:the learner/trainer, i.e sekkha - an ariyan, but not an arahant] cannot be described either as one who conceives or as one who does not conceive. What is the purport here? Because he has not abandoned any of the conceivings, the worldling is described as one who conceives. The arahat, who has abandoned them all, is described as one who does not conceive. The learner has abandoned the conceiving of views, and has diminished the others. Therefore he cannot be described as one who conceives, like the worldling, nor can he be described as one who does not conceive, like the arahat." S: The sub-comy adds more - here's just a little of it: "....he should not conceive (na ma~n~neyya)....And though the conceivings that are unabandoned have been greatly diminished by him, he still should not conceive through those........This absence of conceiving (ama~n~nanaa) is for the purpose of fully understanding the base; it is not an absence of conceiving achieved through the fully understanding of the base, as in the case with the arahat....." S:I hope this helps. Metta, Sarah ======== #60604 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Jun 20, 2006 4:36 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Endowed with Wisdom ?!? sarahprocter... Dear James (& Ven Samahita), I wanted to bring this sutta quote which Ven Samahita gave to your attention because of the reference to the five 'pollutions of the mind'. I saw it just after we had a brief (off-list)exchange on pollution in Hong Kong vs the mind. Metta, Sarah --- Bhikkhu Samahita wrote: > Friends: > > The Mental Hindrances lead only to Neglect & Ruin: > > The Blessed Buddha once said: > One whose mind is dominated by uncontrolled greed, lust, desire, envy or > jealously > will do what should not be done and neglect what should be done! As a > consequence > of that, his good reputation is lost and his contentment and happiness > falls into ruin. > Exactly and even so with anyone whose mind is overwhelmed by grumbling > evil-will... > or overcome, slowed down & stagnated by the hindrance of lethargy & > laziness... > or agitated, scattered, and worried by the hindrance of restlessness & > regret... > or perplexed, confused and bewildered by the hindrance of doubt & > uncertainty... > Such one will do what should not be done, while neglecting what should > be done. As a > result of that, his good name & status is lost & he is ruined by > depressed discontent. > But if any Noble Disciple has seen these five as contaminated pollutions > of the mind, > then he will gradually overcome & eliminate them. When doing so, he > becomes known > as one of deep understanding, of rich knowledge, clear-sighted, endowed > with wisdom. > This lack of mental hindrance is indeed exactly what is called endowment > with wisdom! > > Source (edited extract): > The Numerical Sayings of the Buddha. Anguttara Nikaya. > The Book of Fours 61: Four deeds of Merit... [II: 67] #60605 From: han tun Date: Tue Jun 20, 2006 4:42 am Subject: Re: [dsg] More Reflections on Death & Dying hantun1 Dear Sarah, Thank you very much for sharing the “Ministering to the Sick and the Terminally Ill” by Lily de Silva. It is very useful for me. I have another article by Lily de Silva, “One Foot in the World”, in which one of the chapters is on ‘Facing Death Without Fear’ which is also very useful. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/desilva/wheel337.html Respectfully, Han --- sarah abbott wrote: > Dear Han, Nina (& all in the Dakkhinavibhanga Sutta > corner*), > > I wonder if you ever read this article packed with > good sutta quotes on > 'Ministering to the Sick and the Terminally Ill'? > > http://www.buddhanet.net/help_sick.htm > #60606 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Tue Jun 20, 2006 4:47 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Knowledge of the Difference Between Naama and Ruupa: Making Theory Pra scottduncan2 Dear Sarah, Thanks for your kind reply: S: "Scott, you also mentioned in another post about 'needing to know...how others practise in sort of day-to-day terms'. I have an idea KenH has already responded, but I'm a little behind, so I'll just mention that I think however we go about our lives in 'day-to-day terms', the dhammas that arise and fall are just as ordinary and unworthy of being attached to in anyway." Got it! Sincerely, Scott. #60607 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Tue Jun 20, 2006 5:01 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Knowledge of the Difference Between Naama and Ruupa: Making Theory Pra scottduncan2 Dear Sarah, Again, I appreciate these points you make: Sarah: "...It is by understanding dhammas that are appearing now that we get a glimmer of the truth of how they really are. The dhammas which appear to insight are exactly the same as the dhammas which appear now without insight. They don't change. It's the clarity of wisdom which changes. (Remember Azita's analogy of the glasses being fitted at the optician's?)" A very important clarification. Thanks. And I had forgotten the glasses analogy. I see now. Sarah: "...Again, it's not the dhammas experienced that change with the development of insight, but the awareness and knowledge of them for what they really are that changes." As above, and this, below, is excellent: Sarah: "The reason I think this is an important topic is because people do have ideas of strange and weird experiences as being inidicative of some kind of insight when really they're just indicative of being strange and weird experiences, conditioned by different factors which *may* include a wrong idea of practice/attachment/substances or any other factor." This was exactly, I realise, a subtle sort of "wrong view" I was operating under. I think at the surface I had some superficial intellectual sense that there's no point trying for unique "spiritual experiences" but, at a deeper level, I see vestiges of an old fundamenalist christian and (shudder) even "new-age" sort of desire for weird experience to confirm something. This is a great answer! Sarah: "...sorry the Oilers didn't quite pull it off after getting so very close......Anyway, you've put them on the DSG map now. Now you can start cheering for all the soccer teams supported by DSG members - a long list: Socceroos, England, Brazil, Holland, Italy, France and so on..." I'm on it. Did you know soccer is just slow hockey played on grass with a big ball and no sticks? It's true. Sincerely, Scott. #60608 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Tue Jun 20, 2006 5:22 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Knowledge of the Difference Between Naama and Ruupa: Making Theory Pra scottduncan2 Dear Ken and Larry, K: "Yes, I think they are different. It seems to me that the advice "Look and listen," in the context of Dhamma practice, implies eternalist wrong-view. It means we should embark on a course of action aimed at developing insight. How could we do that without the idea of an abiding self?...'Look and listen' can be understood in different (non-eternalist) ways. For example, it could mean, 'Understand that insight will be conditioned to arise when the Dhamma has been correctly looked for and listened to.'" This is a good answer! K: "In between is the Middle Way - the way of conditioned cittas arising to experience dhammas with right understanding, right thought, right effort and so on." I read this yesterday in the Abhidhammattha Sangaha: "Right understanding means pa~n~na cetasika; right thoughts, right effort, right mindfulness, and right one-pointedness mean the vitakka, vaayaama, sate, and ekagataa cetasikas respectively found in the moral and indeterminate types of consciousness. Right speech, right action, and right livelihood are the three Abstinences (virati) found collectively in the supramundane consciousness and separately in mundane moral types of consciousness. The first eight are collectively found only in the eight types of supramundane consciousness - By the noble Eightfold Path are meant these eight specific mental states," (p. 376). This helped me see where you guys are coming from. When I was reminded that right understanding, for example, is a cetasika, then I'm able to see that it'll have to either arise or not dependent on conditions. Reading the above hit me good, I think based on our discussion; as per Ken's point below: K: "Conditioned dhammas practise, people don't. Whenever people purport to practise Dhamma there is the idea of a self that is practising. It's strange, but true, that striving to practice conventional disciplines (piano, football etc.) does not necessarily entail wrong view, while striving to develop insight does. But I can't imagine how anyone could deliberately (formally) practise insight. Insight is not a piano; it is a conditioned dhamma." Very well put. I like, particularily: "Insight is not a piano; it is a conditioned dhamma." Sincerely, Scott. #60609 From: "Joop" Date: Tue Jun 20, 2006 12:20 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Q. Dependent Origination ... and Alice jwromeijn Hallo Sarah S: I'll look forward to more on return. J: That's not so easy Sarah. I feel like Alice listening to the Red and the White Queen (guess who is who) and having a discussion with Humpty Dumpty: "…There is glory for you I don't know what you mean by glory, Alice said Humpty Dumpty smiled contempuously. Of course you don't - till I tell you. I meant there is a nice knock down argument for you! But 'glory' doesn't mean 'a nice knock-down argument', Alice objected. When I use a word, Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, it means just what I choose to mean - neither more nor less. The question is, said Alice, whether you can make words mean so many different things. …" The transformation of words you give is beautifull. But to me it's a proof I prefer D.O. (with its original terminology more than the system of paramattha dhammas. You are mixing them in a strange way. Metta Joop --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > > Hi Joop, > ... > In another post of yours (#60497), I'd just like to correct your > suggestion that anyone is 'denying the difference' between tanha and > upadana. No one has said they are the same. Yes, they are both lobha > cetasika, but as Nina pointed out, there are many degrees and varieties of > lobha, just as there are of dosa. > > ... > Yes, bhava in D.O. is a paramatha dhamma - cetana cetasika when performing > its role of kamma patha, I'd say. (Forget about the bhava rupas. Different > terms can have different meanings in different contexts.) > > So your step8=>9 is small lobha => big lobha > step 9=>10 is big lobha => kamma-patha > > which will lead to all sorts of results in future. > > Thanks for all the discussions, Joop. > > I'll look forward to more on return. > > Metta, > > Sarah #60610 From: "Christine Forsyth" Date: Tue Jun 20, 2006 2:53 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Source of quote needed christine_fo... --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Herman Hofman" wrote: > > Hi Christine, > > I am not surprised to see you here. You have been on my mind all day. > > > "Misdeeds cannot be washed away by water, > > the suffering of living beings cannot be removed with the hand, > > my realization cannot be transferred to another, > > but by showing the true nature of things, there will be liberation." > > > > It is Namdrol's signature. > > Kind Regards > > > Herman Hello Herman, Yes it is Namdrol's signature quote ~ but even he doesn't know much about its origin. There was some discussion, some inspired suggestions but with no conclusion. The quote sounds a little Theravadin and I had hoped that someone with a scholarly bent here might be able to assist. http://www.lioncity.net/buddhism/index.php? showtopic=31652&pid=442493&st=0&#entry442493 BTW, Patrick Kearney is living in Canberra now - it is worth attending any Retreat he oversees. I saw him at the 4th Global Conference on Buddhism in Perth 10 days ago, and he introduced me to Lama Choedak Rinpoche also from Canberra. So it seems that your neck of the woods is attracting some admirable teachers. http://www.users.bigpond.com/sakyadolmachoeling/About.html How are things with you Herman? ~ I hope you, your lady wife and family are well and happy. Nice to know I cross your mind now and then. :-) metta Christine ---The trouble is that you think you have time--- #60611 From: Illusion Date: Tue Jun 20, 2006 4:24 pm Subject: What Would Buddha Do? vvhite_illusion Dear friends, Below is an excerpt from a book I am reading titled, "What would Buddha Do? 101 Answers to Life's Daily Dilemmas" (page.42). Happy reading! __________________________________________________________ What would Buddha do about parents who don't understand? "All parents naturally love the words of their beloved children, but they don't change their minds." =Jataka 544= It is difficult to change anyone's mind about anything. How much more so a parent. Afterall, when a child is old enough to intelligently disagree with a parent, the parent is even older. Your parents remember you when you were a know-nothing little imp. In fact they remember the world before you were even born, and it seemed to get along just fine without your wisdom, thank you very much. Your parents love you, and you have no doubt taught them many things, but to change their minds about something important is one of the most difficult things in the world. In this situation it is good to remember two things. First, just as your life is your own to live, their lives are their own. Perhaps you can let them keep their own minds. Second, as Buddha hints, they naturally love you and want you to be happy. if you really need to change their minds, don't do it through words--do it by showing them how happy your way of thinking makes you over time. _______________________________________________ May these words benefit you all. -- []\/[][]D (Maya Putra) "I am nothing but the constituents of the clinging aggregates that is subject to change, decay, and unsatisfaction." #60612 From: "Phil" Date: Tue Jun 20, 2006 7:23 pm Subject: Re: We should consider more deeply? philofillet Hi again Nina I was a little hyper yesterday with those long posts. Please don't pay much attention to them. I'm not feeling serious about Dhamma discussion these days, so shouldn't launch topics that I am not really keen on carrying on discussing. I am in much more of a listening mode these days. (Still, good to bring up things I hear now and then, I suppose, in moderation...) Phil --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Phil" wrote: > > > Hi Nina > > The other day I was listening to the talk in which you describe > your strong aversion when you couldn't find Lodewijk at the candle > ceremony - "I felt like crying" you said. And the exchange continued > thus: > > #60613 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Jun 20, 2006 7:45 pm Subject: Cetasikas' study corner 480- Non-Aversion/Adosa (l) sarahprocter... Dear Friends, 'Cetasikas' by Nina van Gorkom http://www.vipassana.info/cetasikas.html http://www.zolag.co.uk/ Questions, comments and different views welcome;-) ========================================== Ch 29, Non-Aversion(Adosa)contd ***** One of the hardest things to endure is the separation from those who are dear to us. We read in the Gradual Sayings (IV, Book of the Sevens, Chapter V, § 10) about Nanda’s mother, an anågåmí, who had through the development of right understanding eradicated aversion. After she had offered dåna to the monks with Såriputta and Moggallåna at their head she testified to Såriputta about marvellous things which had happened to her. We read: * “… Rajahs, for some reason, took by force and slew my only son, Nanda, who was dear and precious to me; yet when the boy was seized or being seized, bound or being bound, slain or being slain, I knew no disquietness of heart.” “It is marvellous and wonderful, O mother of Nanda, that you should have so purged the surges of the heart.” “Nor is that all, reverend sir… When my husband died, he rose among the yakkas1 ; and he revealed himself to me in his old form; but I knew no disquietness of heart on that account.” * Nanda’s mother then spoke about her purity of síla, her attainment of the different stages of jhåna, and she declared that she had eradicated the “five lower fetters”. These fetters are eradicated at the attainment of the state of anågåmí. ***** Non-Aversion(Adosa)to be contd Metta, Sarah ====== #60614 From: "ken_aitch" Date: Tue Jun 20, 2006 11:26 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Knowledge of the Difference Between Naama and Ruupa: Making Theory Pra ken_aitch Hi Scott and Larry, Scott, this paragraph you have found is monumental: ------------ S: > I read this yesterday in the Abhidhammattha Sangaha: "Right understanding means pa~n~na cetasika; right thoughts, right effort, right mindfulness, and right one-pointedness mean the vitakka, vaayaama, sate, and ekagataa cetasikas respectively found in the moral and indeterminate types of consciousness. Right speech, right action, and right livelihood are the three Abstinences (virati) found collectively in the supramundane consciousness and separately in mundane moral types of consciousness. The first eight are collectively found only in the eight types of supramundane consciousness - By the noble Eightfold Path are meant these eight specific mental states," (p. 376). ------------ If that does it for us, we are indeed lucky people. --------------------- S: > This helped me see where you guys are coming from. When I was reminded that right understanding, for example, is a cetasika, then I'm able to see that it'll have to either arise or not dependent on conditions. --------------------- Yes, I think that sums up brilliantly where we are coming from. Another good summing-up is found in this quote from the Buddha: "I have taught you, O Bhikkhus, to see conditionality everywhere in all things." (M III (PTS) p.19) While it is nice to hear friendly, conventional Buddhist talk (of how we are all travelling the Noble Eightfold Path together and that kind of thing) nothing compares to a glimpse of conditionality. If it is wrongly understood it can be hard to bear: the comfortable image of ourselves as wise men and women, doing good works, developing insight and travelling the same path together, is cruelly supplanted by the image of a few, profoundly unsatisfactory, conditioned dhammas - arising briefly only to fall away forever. :-) What a contrast it is when we realise that conditionality is the most intimate and immediate of all teachings. Ultimately, there are only conditioned dhammas. Right now there are experiences of visible object, audible object, seeing consciousness, hearing consciousness, perception, thinking - it's all Abhidhamma! ---------------- S: > Reading the above hit me good, I think based on our discussion ---------------- As I said, it was a monumental paragraph. I am sure we all look forward to any further comments on it you might like to share. Ken H PS: Larry, you have been very quiet while we have been taking your name in vain. :-) Have we done justice to your 'look and listen' advice? #60615 From: "gazita2002" Date: Tue Jun 20, 2006 11:26 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Knowledge of the Difference Between Naama and Ruupa: gazita2002 hello Sarah and all, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > > Hi Ken H, Scott, *PHIL*, Azita, Larry & all, > .......snip.... > > And here's one for Azita: 'If there's no panna, can there be panna > tomorrow?' > > Metta, > > Sarah azita: not sure why this one is for me in particular, Sarah. However, if panna has not been accumulated in the past or in the present, then I guess there won;t be any 'tomorrow'. Anyway why put off til tomorrow what can be accumulated today, this very moment :-) There is seeing now, hearing now, and they are realities that can be known now so know them now and then there will be panna now. Lots of 'now's' but better than 'tomorrows' :-) Patience, courage and good cheer, azita. #60616 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Tue Jun 20, 2006 10:52 pm Subject: Withdrawn and Accomplished ... !!! bhikkhu_ekamuni Friends: Emancipating is Following the Accomplished Ones! The Blessed Buddha once said: Friends, those Bhikkhus who are accomplished in morality, masters in concentration, experts in understanding, consummated in release, fulfilled in the knowledge & vision of release, I tell you even just a short sight of those Bhikkhus is advantageous, even just listening to them is very profitable, even just visiting them is like a golden fortune, even attending on and helping them is productive of good, even just remembering them is valuable, & going forth after or under them is therefore worthwhile, and expedient! Why? Because, when one has heard true Dhamma from such Bhikkhus, then one dwells withdrawn calmed by two kinds of seclusion: secluded in body and secluded in mind! Source (edited extract): The Grouped Sayings of the Buddha. Samyutta Nikaya. Book [V:67] section 46: The Links. 3: Morality ... -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Bhikkhu Samahita, Sri Lanka. <...> #60617 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Jun 20, 2006 11:49 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Knowledge of the Difference Between Naama and Ruupa: sarahprocter... Hi Azita & all, --- gazita2002 wrote: > > And here's one for Azita: 'If there's no panna, can there be panna > > tomorrow?' > > > > Metta, > > > > Sarah > > azita: not sure why this one is for me in particular, Sarah. .... S: At the time when K.Sujin said it, you responded enthusiastically, so I thought it would ring a bell.....:-). I may have missed out a 'now', so it would be 'if there's no panna now, can there be panna tomorrow?'. In context, it was definitely referring to now anyway. (I'll check when I hear it again or you or Phil or someone might hear it.) > However, if panna has not been accumulated in the past or in the > present, then I guess there won;t be any 'tomorrow'. > Anyway why put off til tomorrow what can be accumulated today, this > very moment :-) .... S: Exactly so. What's the point of dreaming about how panna can arise later, tomorrow, in the forest, at the centre or whatever when dhammas are appearing now as we speak. .... > There is seeing now, hearing now, and they are realities that can be > known now so know them now and then there will be panna now. Lots > of 'now's' but better than 'tomorrows' :-) .... S: Yes, yes, yes. That's why it was for you:-) Metta, Sarah p.s We're busily trying to get the 'Pre-India' set up on the web before we leave early on Friday. You remember, we had a couple of days of good discussion just before the trip. No time to send out cds now, however - will wait for the next big posting for that. ========== #60618 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Jun 20, 2006 11:52 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Q. Dependent Origination ... and Alice sarahprocter... Hi Joop, --- Joop wrote: > J: That's not so easy Sarah. I feel like Alice listening to the Red > and the White Queen (guess who is who) and having a discussion with > Humpty Dumpty: > "…There is glory for you > I don't know what you mean by glory, Alice said > Humpty Dumpty smiled contempuously. Of course you don't - till I tell > you. I meant there is a nice knock down argument for you! > But 'glory' doesn't mean 'a nice knock-down argument', Alice objected. > When I use a word, Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, it > means just what I choose to mean - neither more nor less. > The question is, said Alice, whether you can make words mean so many > different things. > …" .... :-)) Very good! I think that studying the Dhamma's a bit like that - nothing's quite as it seems and the 'words mean so many different things', truly going against the current of our usual way of thinking. Thanks for sharing this quote - it's a long time since I heard it. Metta, Sarah ===== #60619 From: "Joop" Date: Wed Jun 21, 2006 1:12 am Subject: On rebirth jwromeijn Some days ago I said in # 60595 "Rebirth is an irrelevant topic for me". Sarah responded: "In any case, if we don't develop any understanding of dhammas at this moment as dhammas, we won't have any idea what rebirth means, as I see it." I got a little of that understanding in studying Abhidhamma plus practicing vipassana meditation the last two years. But that's all about this moment, not about what is called future, what in conventional language is about the question 'what is happening after my death'. There are four possibilities: 1. One has a (rather) eternal soul that transmigrates after death in a new body. That is most times called reincarnation-belief. It's clear that that is not what the Buddha teached (although it's nearly what Tibetan buddhists belief) 2. The rebirth according Theravada, with the Abhidhamma method to explain that there is citaa process of rebirth-linking (patisandhi) 3. The annihilistic (not the same as 'nihilistic'!) view that's out and over after physical death 4. The agnostic view (cf Stephen Batchelor) that is not so far from the view some Zen-buddhists have: we don't know what happens after death, don't worry about that. I'm on the fourth view: partly as a choice but for a bigger part as a result of disbelief. I tried to belief in rebirth because I wanted to be a Theravadin but it simply didn't come. But this view is not so far from Theravada, that has as a special characteristic that it's rebirth without atta-belief, without a 'self' or 'soul' jumping from one body to a new one. In this Theravadin rebirth view the being that died is not the same as the new born being (and not another too). So the question is: in howfar am I responsible for the fate of one being that is born after my death? Oh, yes, I have a responsibility for all human beings now and in the future (that's why I worry about the ecological crisis) but a special responsibility for ONE special not yet born being? Why? I think there are many Theravadins who wish and hope to get a heavenly rebirth, and behave morally well for that reason. That not a intrinsic reason that I prefer but an instrumental reason. I try to behave morally well without that kind of external reason; I keep the five precepts and the sila of the Noble Eightfold Path and try to guard my senses without expecting any reward in the future but because it feels better on this moment. Another question is: how about kamma without rebirth-belief? My answer is not completely clear to myself, but for this moment I say: yes, kamma works, in this moment, in this life. Metta Joop #60620 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Wed Jun 21, 2006 1:26 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Knowledge of the Difference Between Naama and Ruupa: Making Theory Pra egberdina Hi KenH, Sorry to pull you up in your exuberance :-) > > What a contrast it is when we realise that conditionality is the most > intimate and immediate of all teachings. Ultimately, there are only > conditioned dhammas. Right now there are experiences of visible > object, audible object, seeing consciousness, hearing consciousness, > perception, thinking - it's all Abhidhamma! > Just a small, but significant correction. Ultimately, there is only nibbana. Craving is pierced in one who knows; For one who sees, there is nothing. Udana VIII.2 Kind Regards Herman #60621 From: sarah abbott Date: Wed Jun 21, 2006 1:40 am Subject: Re: [dsg] The Abhidhamma Framework - My Understanding sarahprocter... Dear Howard, --- upasaka@... wrote: > Hi, all - > > I understand Abhidhamma as describing an experiential state, or > "mindstate", as the way "ones" experience is at a point in time. As I > see it, at any > time (or, as it is more often said, "on any occasion"), there are in > effect > the awareness of an object (nama or rupa) and a host of other mental > operations > associated with that object, and these, taken together, constitute the > "state" of the namarupic flow at that time. .... S: I don't think this is quite accurate, Howard. For a start, even though the citta and accompanying cetasikas only experience one object at a time (nama or rupa OR CONCEPT), there are many kalapas of rupas arising and falling away all the time which are not experienced. ..... (The sutta framework, > instead of > speaking of citta and cetasikas, speaks of the five khandhas, or of the > ayatanas.) > The Dhammasangani describes a large number of cetasikas, listing > specific ones > but allowing for more, and it characterizes states along various lines > including such "morality" characteristics as kusala and akusala, > sobhana, and so on, > and it also discusses to some extent relations holding among these > consti > tuents, while other books go into further detail, the Patthana, > discussing > inter-state relations. .... S: 'Inter-state' sounds like a train service:-) How about relations between dhammas? .... > I'm not aware of the Abhidhamma describing a state as > constituting a > discrete, static "packet" of fixed character and occurring during a > well-delimited time interval of some brief but non-zero duration. It is > my impression > that reifying states into discrete time-packets during which nothing > changes > except for (undetailed) stages of arising, stasis, and decline is > something that > does not appear in the books of the Abhidhamma, but only in > commentaries. I > stand to be corrected on this. ..... S: I'm not sure where the 'packet' and 'state' affairs have come from. I don't see any distinction in what I read in any of the texts on this - a citta and cetasikas arise, experience their object momentarily and fall away immediately, changing all the time. As I said, many other rupas are also arising and falling away, but only one nama or rupa is experienced at a time or often a concept only. Also, I followed your discussion with Tep on the 'Sheaves of Reeds' sutta and D.O. with interest, e.g #60052. I was interested to read you referring so much to 'subject' and 'object' here:-). Anyway, there were a few points I disagreed with, but rather than re-hash them (as I'm going away), I'll just link you both to a message I wrote to you not so very long ago on the same topic: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/52086 I will follow any further comments and respond if called for when I can (probably on return). Others may have further feedback in the meantime. It's always challenging to respond to your well-considered comments, Howard. Thanks! Metta, Sarah p.s Pls give us the occasional update on Sophie. ====== #60622 From: sarah abbott Date: Wed Jun 21, 2006 2:24 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Mundane and Supramundane sarahprocter... Hi Howard, --- upasaka@... wrote: > Hi, all - > > A bit more ... .... S: Likewise...:-) ..... > > ===================== > One more thought as to what right speech, action, and livelihood > could > mean "in the moment": During any time period in which "one" is > continuously > engaged in these three, one could say with some justification that s/he > is > engaged in them at each moment. (By analogy, think of a time period > during which a > vehicle is moving along a roadway: At each instant, the vehicle is in > motion.) ..... S: I think we can say that whenever the citta is kusala and one speaks, acts and so on, that it's 'right'. However, when it comes to talking about these factors as path factors, i.e at moments of satipatthana, it is the virati, the abstention from 'wrong' speech and so on that is referred to(as Jon recently) said. When we refer to the mundane path, only one can arise at a time, but at the moment of the arising of lokuttara cittas, they are said to arise together. (An arahant doesn't experience these virati cetasikas of 'right speech' and so on, because there is no abstaining from any unwholesomeness). Now, I'm not suggesting that this simple explanation is the full story here. .... >But that still is problematical with regard to the > noble-right-concentration > matter, for it would require that a moment at which such concentration > is in > effect falls within a period during which, at every moment, there is > one-pointedness, right speech, right action, and right livelihood in > effect, which for > one thing, suggests simultaneous multiple objects of consciousness. ..... S: When it comes to 'noble right concentration', we are just referring to the lokuttara cittas. So the magga citta is accompanied by noble right concentration (appana samadhi), accompanied by right understanding, the 3 viratis, right effort, right mindfulness and right thinking. The object at this moment is of course nibbana, nothing else. .... > Moreover, > relying on the understanding of "right livelihood" Jon gave on DSG, at > each > moment there must have been the resisting of an inclination or thought > of > engaging in wrong livelihood, which is a strange requirement. .... S: I forget if you have CMA. If so, read the notes on the viratis in ch 11, page 88-89 in my copy. As Joop pointed out, words take on strange meanings when it comes to the Abhidhamma:-). If we remember we are talking about cittas and cetasikas rather than conventional actions here, I think it helps. Lots in U.P, under 'Livelihood -right' for a start. Also, I'm sure under 'virati' etc. ... > In short, this whole matter of interpreting the given definition > of > 'noble right concentration' as an "ultimate" one and not a conventional > one > presents grave difficulties for me. I suspect that the Buddha was > speaking quite > conventionally here - as he often does - and that the "unpacking" of > this > conventional speech is a much more complex matter than the simple > attempt to > interpret the Buddha's definition here as an instance of paramattha > vaca. ..... S: Is 'here' just referring to the Noble 8fold Path or a particular sutta? I've lost track. At the moment of directly experiencing nibbana, the magga (and subsequent phala cittas) arise for a moment only and because of the nature of the unconditioned dhamma, experience it with concentration of the degree of jhana (appana samadhi). I may have missed your point of concern. Certainly, these are ultimate realities. Metta, Sarah ====== #60623 From: sarah abbott Date: Wed Jun 21, 2006 2:38 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Mundane and Supramundane sarahprocter... Hi Howard, I'm reading and responding to your messages in the wrong order, I've just found out:-/ --- upasaka@... wrote: > Hi, Herman (and Sarah, and Scott) - > > In a message dated 6/16/06 9:53:57 PM Eastern Daylight Time, > hhofmeister@... writes: > > > Sink your teeth into this :-) > > > > http://www.bswa.org/modules/icontent/index.php?page=94 >I have no problem with the requirements that the moment > of > one-pointedness be accompanied by right view, right intention, right > effort, and > right mindfulness at that moment, but I have difficulty with right > speech, right > action, and right livelihood. In order for there to be a moment of > "noble > right concentration" that moment must also be one of right speech, right > action, > right livelihood? How does one engage in right speech in the moment? > What > momentary "action" is samma? How does one engage in right livelihood in > the moment? .... S: So forget about the 'noble' cittas for now. At a moment when there is abstention from wrong speech with wise attention and right understanding, the concentration is also 'samma' at that moment too. Likewise, in the course of one's work, at moments of abstaining from harming, speaking falsely and so on, there can be right understanding, right concentration and so on. (Of course, this still raises the issue of the object at that moment, but let's keep it relatively simple for now). ... > And even if "right speech" were just *intention* towards right speech > (or > disgust at the opposite), and similarly for action and livelihood, need > these be > in force at that very moment for the concentration to be right? .... S: For mundane path moments, no. Right concentration arises with each moment of satipatthana, but there isn't necessarily any abstention from wrong speech, action or livelihood. Only at lokuttara moments do they all arise together. ... >Surely > speech, > action, and livelihood cannot all be the object of awareness at a single > > moment. ... S: No. The case when all the 'rights' arise together and eradicate defilements with nibbana as object is a very special case. .... >I have difficulty in seeing how this "noble right > concentration" can > be interpreted as a momentary matter. I am more than willing to be > shown, > however, how it *can* be so interpreted. .... S: Like now. Concentration is momentary and arise with every single citta, experiencing its object accordingly. At the moment of lokuttara magga citta, it's still momentary, but experiences the object in a special way. I've probably confused more than helped, but I'm not sure anyone else got back on this. I'm sure if it still doesn't make sense and you persist with it, others will help before I can get back to it. Good questions actually. I raised the topic of the viratis in more detail in India (on the 'Tep' track) if anyone wishes to listen. Metta, Sarah ======= #60624 From: sarah abbott Date: Wed Jun 21, 2006 2:45 am Subject: More on suffering... sarahprocter... Hi Howard, Also, while I have you in mind, I was going to continue our discussion on 'suffering' a little more. Too busy now, but I was going to highlight a couple of posts: Phil's #59345 in reply to Herman about whether 'suffering announces itself' and Ven Samahita's #59773 with a sutta quote: "It is frequent, careless and irrational attention to the Displeasing and Repulsive Feature of things! This is food makes absent aversion arise and feeds too the growth of already present anger....." I think this touched on our discussion about whether it's better to reflect on gross dukkha or not. Of course, again there's no rule - depends on the wise or unwise attentiont that's conditioned at the time, I think. I look forward to reading any of your responses, but to take a note out of Phil's book, I probably won't be responding to anything else substantial for now. Just posting a few 'Cetasikas'. Metta, Sarah ======== #60625 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Wed Jun 21, 2006 5:39 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Knowledge of the Difference Between Naama and Ruupa: Making Theory Pra scottduncan2 Dear Ken H., Thank you for your reply. The below is deep: K: "Another good summing-up is found in this quote from the Buddha: "I have taught you, O Bhikkhus, to see conditionality everywhere in all things." (M III (PTS) p.19)" I like what you say here: K: "While it is nice to hear friendly, conventional Buddhist talk (of how we are all travelling the Noble Eightfold Path together and that kind of thing) nothing compares to a glimpse of conditionality." "Friendly, conventional Buddhist talk" can be distracting at least, and totally not the point at worst. K: "If it is wrongly understood it can be hard to bear: the comfortable image of ourselves as wise men and women, doing good works, developing insight and travelling the same path together, is cruelly supplanted by the image of a few, profoundly unsatisfactory, conditioned dhammas - arising briefly only to fall away forever." I think that this is at a level which seems to reflect a persistence a strong belief in a self. Revelling in an emotionally tinged belief in a metaphorical conception, although comforting and holy-feeling, is not where its at. K: "What a contrast it is when we realise that conditionality is the most intimate and immediate of all teachings. Ultimately, there are only conditioned dhammas. Right now there are experiences of visible object, audible object, seeing consciousness, hearing consciousness, perception, thinking - it's all Abhidhamma!" I've not pondered this enough, but would it be fair to say that the Path, again metaphorically but with a different slant, arises? I think there are references to "Path moments," but I'm not sure. I'll have to check that out. Sincerely, Scott. #60626 From: upasaka@... Date: Wed Jun 21, 2006 3:53 am Subject: Re: [dsg] On rebirth upasaka_howard Hi, Joop - In a message dated 6/21/06 4:15:01 AM Eastern Daylight Time, jwromeijn@... writes: > 4. The agnostic view (cf Stephen Batchelor) that is not so far from > the view some Zen-buddhists have: we don't know what happens after > death, don't worry about that. > > I'm on the fourth view: partly as a choice but for a bigger part as a > result of disbelief. I tried to belief in rebirth because I wanted to > be a Theravadin but it simply didn't come. > But this view is not so far from Theravada, that has as a special > characteristic that it's rebirth without atta-belief, without > a 'self' or 'soul' jumping from one body to a new one. > In this Theravadin rebirth view the being that died is not the same > as the new born being (and not another too). > > So the question is: in howfar am I responsible for the fate of one > being that is born after my death? > ==================== As I see it, and as I believe the Buddha taught it, literally there is no being that dies and none that is reborn. Within a single kammic stream of experience, coherent, and connected by a history of kamma (and by memory to some extent), mental operations associated with changing object-contents arise briefly and cease. These operations and experiential contents are all there is to a "stream". (As I see it, while one namarupic stream is distinguishable from others, it is not separable from others, for they interact in complex and manifold ways via a kind of reflective interpenetration. But that is a side-issue.) Within a stream, the arising and ceasing is continual, impersonal, and conditioned, motored mainly by cetana. The ebb and flow is continual. A death-rebirth occasion is simply one point, albeit dramatic and kammically quite significant, in the process. No "being" dies, and none is born. The final state of one "lifetime" is immediately succeeded by the initial state of the next "lifetime", no differently (in its basics) from the way one experiential state is succeeded by the next at any moment. Just impersonal conditionality. With metta, Howard #60628 From: upasaka@... Date: Wed Jun 21, 2006 6:21 am Subject: Another Attempt Re: [dsg] The Abhidhamma Framework - My Understanding upasaka_howard Hi, Sarah - In a message dated 6/21/06 4:41:43 AM Eastern Daylight Time, sarahprocterabbott@... writes: > Dear Howard, > > --- upasaka@... wrote: > > >Hi, all - > > > > I understand Abhidhamma as describing an experiential state, or > >"mindstate", as the way "ones" experience is at a point in time. As I > >see it, at any > >time (or, as it is more often said, "on any occasion"), there are in > >effect > >the awareness of an object (nama or rupa) and a host of other mental > >operations > >associated with that object, and these, taken together, constitute the > >"state" of the namarupic flow at that time. > .... > S: I don't think this is quite accurate, Howard. For a start, even though > the citta and accompanying cetasikas only experience one object at a time > (nama or rupa OR CONCEPT), there are many kalapas of rupas arising and > falling away all the time which are not experienced. -------------------------------------- Howard: How would one know that? By inference? One doesn't know what can't be experienced. Pa~n~na depends on vi~n~nana, and does not exist without it. So, one can't throw in pa~n~na as a magical solution to all problems. (Conjectures that occur to me include the conjecture that includes subliminal presence of some rupas; i.e., below the level of registering. But conjecture is conjecture.) BTW, are kalapas in the suttas? In the Abhidhamma? Or only in the commentaries? ------------------------------------- > ..... > (The sutta framework, > >instead of > >speaking of citta and cetasikas, speaks of the five khandhas, or of the > >ayatanas.) > >The Dhammasangani describes a large number of cetasikas, listing > >specific ones > >but allowing for more, and it characterizes states along various lines > >including such "morality" characteristics as kusala and akusala, > >sobhana, and so on, > >and it also discusses to some extent relations holding among these > >consti > >tuents, while other books go into further detail, the Patthana, > >discussing > >inter-state relations. > .... > S: 'Inter-state' sounds like a train service:-) How about relations > between dhammas? ------------------------------------- Howard: As you prefer. :-) ------------------------------------ > .... > > I'm not aware of the Abhidhamma describing a state as > >constituting a > >discrete, static "packet" of fixed character and occurring during a > >well-delimited time interval of some brief but non-zero duration. It is > >my impression > >that reifying states into discrete time-packets during which nothing > >changes > >except for (undetailed) stages of arising, stasis, and decline is > >something that > >does not appear in the books of the Abhidhamma, but only in > >commentaries. I > >stand to be corrected on this. > ..... > S: I'm not sure where the 'packet' and 'state' affairs have come from. I > don't see any distinction in what I read in any of the texts on this - a > citta and cetasikas arise, experience their object momentarily and fall > away immediately, changing all the time. As I said, many other rupas are > also arising and falling away, but only one nama or rupa is experienced at > a time or often a concept only. > > Also, I followed your discussion with Tep on the 'Sheaves of Reeds' sutta > and D.O. with interest, e.g #60052. I was interested to read you referring > so much to 'subject' and 'object' here:-). Anyway, there were a few points > I disagreed with, but rather than re-hash them (as I'm going away), I'll > just link you both to a message I wrote to you not so very long ago on the > same topic: > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/52086 > > I will follow any further comments and respond if called for when I can > (probably on return). Others may have further feedback in the meantime. > > It's always challenging to respond to your well-considered comments, > Howard. Thanks! --------------------------------- Howard: :-) --------------------------------- > > Metta, > > Sarah > p.s Pls give us the occasional update on Sophie. > ------------------------------------ Howard: Thanks, Sarah. She's doing well: Turning over frequently - both back to front & front to back, near-crawling (sort of scootching around the floor!), still on a feeding tube, but just starting to take some solid food by mouth, and very attentive, very sweet, and, though complaining loudly when appropriate, smiling beautifully with both mouth & eyes most of the time! :-) =================== With metta, Howard #60629 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Wed Jun 21, 2006 11:29 am Subject: Another Attempt Re: [dsg] The Abhidhamma Framework - My Understanding buddhatrue Hi Sarah and Howard, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > > .... > > S: I don't think this is quite accurate, Howard. For a start, even though > > the citta and accompanying cetasikas only experience one object at a time > > (nama or rupa OR CONCEPT), there are many kalapas of rupas arising and > > falling away all the time which are not experienced. > > > -------------------------------------- > Howard: > How would one know that? By inference? One doesn't know what can't be > experienced. James: This does seem to present a problem. It was my understanding that a rupa is something that is experienced. To say that rupas arise and fall away which are not experienced is pseudo-scientific and difficult to understand in terms of the dhamma theory. > Howard: > Thanks, Sarah. She's doing well: Turning over frequently - both back > to front & front to back, near-crawling (sort of scootching around the floor!), > still on a feeding tube, but just starting to take some solid food by mouth, > and very attentive, very sweet, and, though complaining loudly when > appropriate, smiling beautifully with both mouth & eyes most of the time! :-) James: This is very nice to hear. I wish her well in her recovery. > =================== > > With metta, > Howard Metta, James #60630 From: Daniel Date: Wed Jun 21, 2006 11:27 am Subject: Re: Faith vs. Reason daniell@... Hi Howard , Jonathan and all, To Howard : Dear Howard, > Faith is not a means of obtaining knowledge. It is merely belief. The > belief may be well founded, ill founded, or something in between. Could you perhaps give examples to well founded faithes, ill-founded faithes and something in between? I would be glad if those examples would be from daily life. If possible, even not from philosophy, but from issues as simple as possible. By the way, when we see heavy smoke coming from someone's garden and we conclude that there is fire there, how would you classify it? > One more thing about faith: The name 'faith' at times suggests belief > that is clung to for dear life. That is not a "plus". We, of course, all have > various beliefs, arrived at for various reasons. Beliefs, to the extent they > are just beliefs and not irrefutable knowledge, should *not* be clung to, but > held lightly, easily, with full realization that "I could be wrong!" Some religious people say that in religious faith in God there is strong confidence and it is something "beyond reason" and therefore it should be clung to. It is something that shold give one emotional confidence, and because of that it should be clung to. What do you think of that? Even without thinking of religion, sometimes it can be scary to start questioning everything... One can become easily very confused. To Jonathan : Dear Jonathan, I am very much confused with regards to this issue as you can see. So I'm trying to figure out... :) #60631 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Wed Jun 21, 2006 11:48 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Endowed with Wisdom ?!? buddhatrue Hi Sarah, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > > Dear James (& Ven Samahita), > > I wanted to bring this sutta quote which Ven Samahita gave to your > attention because of the reference to the five 'pollutions of the mind'. I > saw it just after we had a brief (off-list)exchange on pollution in Hong > Kong vs the mind. Thanks for drawing my attention to this quote. It is very good to reflect on. Lately I have been focusing on my mental pollution of ill will. I have been pretty good at controlling bursts of anger and irritation, but I still notice ill will creeping in the back door- and it often wears the guise of Buddhism! ;-)) I find myself thinking things like "Oh, I hope he/she really gets what he/she deserves! I hope that karma catches up to that person for their evil actions." Then I have to catch myself and realize that I am wishing for bad things to happen to someone, AND THAT ISN'T GOOD! It is very difficult to eliminate the pollutions of the mind...maybe as difficult, if not more difficult, than eliminating the pollution of Hong Kong. ;-)) Metta, James p.s I really appreciate the posts of Bhikkhu Samahita! He also has a nice discussion group and web site: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Buddha-Direct/ http://what-buddha-said.net/ #60632 From: nina van gorkom Date: Wed Jun 21, 2006 11:52 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Knowledge of the Difference Between Naama and Ruupa: Making Theory Practise. nilovg Dear Scott, I quickly read some posts, just catching up. Ken H has answered your question. There is no rule of procedure at all. When you read Vis. you will notice the same. It speaks about different people with different inclinations. Some attained jhaana others did not. Some are more often aware of ruupa, others of naama. But there is not rule at all. Whatever dhamma appears to sati because of the appropriate conditions is the object of satipatthaana. The growth of paññaa cannot be directed. You quote: Vis.: I find the Nanamoli translation more comprehensible. Bending towards an object: experiencing it. Ruupa : ruppati: being molested or oppressed by cold, etc. This is a word association. But each ruupa has a different characteristic. ------- S:I'd appreciate it if one might be able to provide a phenomenological and practical description of this particular practise: how one actually proceeds in putting herself in the way of naamas and ruupas for the distinguishing. ------- N: They show their own characteristics. The first stage of insight has not come yet, it is future, and at this moment understanding can be developed of different dhammas as we go along in daily life. ----- You quoted about manasikaara, but in that quote it did not come out that one is the cetasika manasikara, which arises with each citta, it may be kusala or akusala while it performs it function. Then two kinds of manasikaara are citta: the five sense-door adverting-consciousness arising after the bhavangacitta, and the manodvaaraavajjanacitta that is followed by the javanas. Nina. #60633 From: nina van gorkom Date: Wed Jun 21, 2006 11:52 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Wissenschaftslehre? Conditions. nilovg Dear Colette, op 17-06-2006 20:38 schreef colette op ksheri3@...: I laughed continuously upon getting to page six (on my printout it starts: "or cry, when we are attached or worried, there are conditions for such moments. The Paiihana helps us to understand the deep underlying motives for our behaviour and..." I still laugh, mostly smile though, when I pick this material up. _______ N: You got the meaning, you understand the human side of the Abhidhamma. It does not consist of dry summings up, it is about life. I am glad you understand this. Nina. #60634 From: nina van gorkom Date: Wed Jun 21, 2006 11:52 am Subject: Re: [dsg] The Abhidhamma Framework - My Understanding nilovg Hi Howard, just before going off I noticed several of your posts with this subject. I appreciate your continuing interest in the Abhidhamma throughout the years. I noticed that you really have been reflecting on this subject, making an amendment to one of your posts. I have been thinking of what you said and meanwhile Sarah answered. I wonder whether I can add something. Could you give an example (taken from Cetasikas Sarah is posting or from any other source) where you feel that Abhidhamma and Commnetaries are different? Then I have a key where to begin. I thought of packets, but before you notice one it has fallen apart. No chance of making a packet. Is it the same as packedge? Nina. op 17-06-2006 20:57 schreef upasaka@... op upasaka@...: It is my impression that reifying states into discrete time-packets during which nothing changes except for (undetailed) stages of arising, stasis, and decline is something that does not appear in the books of the Abhidhamma, but only in commentaries. I stand to be corrected on this. #60635 From: nina van gorkom Date: Wed Jun 21, 2006 11:52 am Subject: Re: [dsg] We should consider more deeply? nilovg Hi Phil, I brought this up and I was relaly glad about the reminder given by Kh Sujin. No, I did not mind what you wrote at all. It depends on the citta that thinks: we should more deeply consider. It can be a reminder to oneself; how shallow we are, we think we understand, but we do not. I remember Phra Dhammadharo with a strong voice: listen more, consider more. Sorry you have a lot of stress. I see a point below: op 20-06-2006 03:14 schreef Phil op philco777@...: It is so hard to await for the arising of understanding. --------- N: Meanwhile you accumulated understanding, and it will grow, even though you do not notice this. This is all for now, I am catching up after my trip. Nina. #60636 From: "Joop" Date: Wed Jun 21, 2006 11:58 am Subject: Re: [dsg] On rebirth jwromeijn Hallo Howard, all Thanks for your reaction. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > .......... > As I see it, and as I believe the Buddha taught it, literally there is > no being that dies and none that is reborn. Within a single kammic stream of > experience, coherent, and connected by a history of kamma (and by memory to > some extent), mental operations associated with changing object- contents arise > briefly and cease. These operations and experiential contents are all there is > to a "stream". (As I see it, while one namarupic stream is distinguishable > from others, it is not separable from others, for they interact in complex and > manifold ways via a kind of reflective interpenetration. But that is a > side-issue.) Within a stream, the arising and ceasing is continual, impersonal, and > conditioned, motored mainly by cetana. The ebb and flow is continual. A > death-rebirth occasion is simply one point, albeit dramatic and kammically quite > significant, in the process. No "being" dies, and none is born. The final state of > one "lifetime" is immediately succeeded by the initial state of the next > "lifetime", no differently (in its basics) from the way one experiential state is > succeeded by the next at any moment. Just impersonal conditionality. > > With metta, > Howard The difference between this description the the Abhidhamma-system as described in the Abhidhammattha Sangaha is not so big, but subtle and important. Still I'm also agnostic on this possibility. Two remarks: - Your socalled 'side-issue' is original to me. Nearly all Theravada- texts only are about the personal level, or in your terms, about 'one stream'. Do you have more text about it, from yourself or from somebody else? - Your description is in a (or 'the') ultimate language. But my topic 'how to behave morally' in the case rebirth exist and in the case rebirth doesn't exist is in a conventional language. I think talking about morality can only take place in conventional language because it's (among other things) about behavior and behavior can only be described conventional. I remember a discussion with Jon half a year ago about 'right livelihood' one of the aspects of the Noble Eightfold Path. For Jon it was a ultimate dhamma, for me it was moral behavior. Metta Joop #60637 From: nina van gorkom Date: Wed Jun 21, 2006 12:11 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] More Reflections on Death & Dying nilovg Dear Sarah, I remember the name but that is all. I looked at the link, she writes very well, with the appropriate sutta quotes, Nina. op 20-06-2006 12:32 schreef sarah abbott op sarahprocterabbott@...: [Nina, do you remember Lily de Silva? She attended many talks and discussions when we were in Sri Lanka with K.Sujin the first time ('77)? She was the very lively and keen lady who was a Pali scholar.] #60638 From: upasaka@... Date: Wed Jun 21, 2006 8:26 am Subject: Re: Another Attempt Re: [dsg] The Abhidhamma Framework - My Understanding upasaka_howard Thanks, James! :-) With metta, Howard In a message dated 6/21/06 2:35:50 PM Eastern Daylight Time, buddhatrue@... writes: > James: This is very nice to hear. I wish her well in her recovery. > > #60639 From: nina van gorkom Date: Wed Jun 21, 2006 12:11 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Q. Roots of Good and Evil, 2. nilovg Hi Herman, we discussed more in Drenthe. Lodewijk stressed to see things in the right context, not to take them out of context. We had an example of misunderstanding: . I render more when I have time. Nina. op 20-06-2006 00:36 schreef Herman Hofman op hhofmeister@...: And consideration of Dhamma is not consideration of phonemes, or vowels, or dipthongs, it is consideration of meanings. And meanings and intentions are the same. What one person speaks, and what another person hears, is not a sequence of parramattha dhammas, but intention(s). What is conveyed in communication is intention. And there are no fragments of intention, no sub-components. Each intention is whole in itself. #60640 From: upasaka@... Date: Wed Jun 21, 2006 8:32 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Faith vs. Reason upasaka_howard Hi, Daniel - In a message dated 6/21/06 2:42:47 PM Eastern Daylight Time, daniell@... writes: > Hi Howard , Jonathan and all, > > To Howard : > > Dear Howard, > > Faith is not a means of obtaining knowledge. It is merely belief. The > >belief may be well founded, ill founded, or something in between. > > Could you perhaps give > examples to well founded faithes, ill-founded faithes and something in > between? > I would be glad if those examples would be from daily life. If possible, > even > not from philosophy, but from issues as simple as possible. > ------------------------------------- Howard: Probably no better than you could yoursdelf, Daniel. ;-) ------------------------------------ By the way, when> > we see heavy smoke coming from someone's garden and we conclude that there > is > fire there, how would you classify it? ------------------------------------- Howard: As plausible inference. ------------------------------------ > > > > One more thing about faith: The name > 'faith' at times suggests belief > >that is clung to for dear life. That is not a "plus". We, of course, all > have > >various beliefs, arrived at for various reasons. Beliefs, to the extent > they > >are just beliefs and not irrefutable knowledge, should *not* be clung to, > but > >held lightly, easily, with full realization that "I could be wrong!" > > Some religious people say that in religious faith in God there is strong > confidence and it is something "beyond reason" and therefore it should be > clung > to. It is something that shold give one emotional confidence, and because of > that it should be clung to. What do you think of that? > ---------------------------------- Howard: Not a great deal. ;-) --------------------------------- Even without thinking of> > religion, sometimes it can be scary to start questioning everything... One > can > become easily very confused. --------------------------------- Howard: We *are* confused, all of us. Knowing our confusion is a good beginning, I think. --------------------------------- > > > To Jonathan : Dear Jonathan, I am very much confused > with regards to this issue as you can see. So I'm trying to figure out... :) > > ================= With metta, Howard #60641 From: upasaka@... Date: Wed Jun 21, 2006 9:10 am Subject: Re: [dsg] The Abhidhamma Framework - My Understanding upasaka_howard Hi, Nina - In a message dated 6/21/06 2:55:57 PM Eastern Daylight Time, vangorko@... writes: > Hi Howard, > just before going off I noticed several of your posts with this subject. > I appreciate your continuing interest in the Abhidhamma throughout the > years. I noticed that you really have been reflecting on this subject, > making an amendment to one of your posts. > I have been thinking of what you said and meanwhile Sarah answered. I wonder > whether I can add something. --------------------------------- Howard: Please! :-) ------------------------------ > Could you give an example (taken from Cetasikas Sarah is posting or from > any > other source) where you feel that Abhidhamma and Commnetaries are different? > Then I have a key where to begin. ------------------------------- Howard: I doubt that the commentaries explicitly contradict Abhidhamma or the suttas. For the most part, it seems that the commentaries are expansive in the sense of going into further detail and explaining what is unclear. And that is very good! But, and there do seem to be cases of this, where the commentaries introduce concepts and detailed "facts" that don't occur in the tipitaka, examples of which are kalapas and the very lovely, very pretty, but also apparently brand new psychological theory of citta processes. Some of these forest-le aves-notions, besides being lovely, may be quite correct, but they didn't originate with the Buddha. Moreover, there is a drifting into substantialism, with the misuse of terms such as 'sabhava', and with reifying mindstates (which, after all, are pa~n~natti!) - and this is not very good. ------------------------------------------ > I thought of packets, but before you notice one it has fallen apart. > ---------------------------------------- Howard: It was never there to begin with except figuratively. Mindstates are concepts, well founded concepts, but concepts only. ----------------------------------------- No> > chance of making a packet. Is it the same as packedge? ----------------------------------------- Howard: I don't understand your question here, Nina. ----------------------------------------- > Nina. > =================== With metta, Howard #60642 From: upasaka@... Date: Wed Jun 21, 2006 9:25 am Subject: Re: [dsg] On rebirth upasaka_howard Hi, Joop - In a message dated 6/21/06 3:06:00 PM Eastern Daylight Time, jwromeijn@... writes: > The difference between this description the the Abhidhamma-system as > described in the Abhidhammattha Sangaha is not so big, but subtle and > important. > --------------------------------- Howard: No doubt. I am not an Abhidhammika. --------------------------------- Still I'm also agnostic on this possibility.> > > Two remarks: > - Your socalled 'side-issue' is original to me. Nearly all Theravada- > texts only are about the personal level, or in your terms, about 'one > stream'. Do you have more text about it, from yourself or from > somebody else? --------------------------------- Howard: You are correct. Theravada, and the Buddha himself for that matter, when speaking of "ultimates", only deals with an individual namarupic stream. Ch'an Buddhism and Tibetan Buddhism branch out from that a bit. To me, the interaction among namarupic streams is an obvious (experientially inferred) fact. My perspective on it is much influenced by writings by William James. In any case, I gave short shrift to this matter in my post precisely because it is not a mainstream topic and wasn't important with regard to the current matter under discussion. ------------------------------------- > > - Your description is in a (or 'the') ultimate language. But my > topic 'how to behave morally' in the case rebirth exist and in the > case rebirth doesn't exist is in a conventional language. I think > talking about morality can only take place in conventional language > because it's (among other things) about behavior and behavior can > only be described conventional. ------------------------------------- Howard: From my perspective, morality is independent of the issue of rebirth. Of course, kusala kamma leads to pleasant realms and akusala kamma leads to unpleasant ones, if you except rebirth as a fact. (I view that as changing to a "channel" with pleasant or unpleasant "shows"! ;-) ------------------------------------- > I remember a discussion with Jon half a year ago about 'right > livelihood' one of the aspects of the Noble Eightfold Path. For Jon > it was a ultimate dhamma, for me it was moral behavior. ------------------------------------- Howard: Well, I agree with you on that. ;-) ------------------------------------ > > Metta > > Joop > ====================== With metta, Howard #60643 From: upasaka@... Date: Wed Jun 21, 2006 10:21 am Subject: Re: [dsg] On rebirth upasaka_howard Hi, Joop - In a message dated 6/21/06 4:32:13 PM Eastern Daylight Time, upasaka@... writes: > if you except rebirth as a fact ==================== The word should have been 'accept'! :-) With metta, Howard #60644 From: upasaka@... Date: Wed Jun 21, 2006 4:13 am Subject: Re: [dsg] The Abhidhamma Framework - My Understanding upasaka_howard Hi, Sarah - In a message dated 6/21/06 4:41:43 AM Eastern Daylight Time, sarahprocterabbott@... writes: > Dear Howard, > > --- upasaka@... wrote: > > >Hi, all - > > > > I understand Abhidhamma as describing an experiential state, or > >"mindstate", as the way "ones" experience is at a point in time. As I > >see it, at any > >time (or, as it is more often said, "on any occasion"), there are in > >effect > >the awareness of an object (nama or rupa) and a host of other mental > >operations > >associated with that object, and these, taken together, constitute the > >"state" of the namarupic flow at that time. > .... > S: I don't think this is quite accurate, Howard. For a start, even though > the citta and accompanying cetasikas only experience one object at a time > (nama or rupa OR CONCEPT), there are many kalapas of rupas arising and > falling away all the time which are not experienced. -------------------------------------- Howard: How would one know that? By inference? One doesn't know what can't be experienced. Pa~n~na depends on vi~n~nana, and does not exist without it. So, one can't throw in pa~n~na as a magical solution to all problems. (Conjectures that occur to me include the conjecture that includes subliminal presence of some rupas; i.e., below the level of registering. But conjecture is conjecture.) BTW, are kalapas in the suttas? In the Abhidhamma? Or only in the commentaries? ------------------------------------- > ..... > (The sutta framework, > >instead of > >speaking of citta and cetasikas, speaks of the five khandhas, or of the > >ayatanas.) > >The Dhammasangani describes a large number of cetasikas, listing > >specific ones > >but allowing for more, and it characterizes states along various lines > >including such "morality" characteristics as kusala and akusala, > >sobhana, and so on, > >and it also discusses to some extent relations holding among these > >consti > >tuents, while other books go into further detail, the Patthana, > >discussing > >inter-state relations. > .... > S: 'Inter-state' sounds like a train service:-) How about relations > between dhammas? ------------------------------------- Howard: As you prefer. :-) ------------------------------------ > .... > > I'm not aware of the Abhidhamma describing a state as > >constituting a > >discrete, static "packet" of fixed character and occurring during a > >well-delimited time interval of some brief but non-zero duration. It is > >my impression > >that reifying states into discrete time-packets during which nothing > >changes > >except for (undetailed) stages of arising, stasis, and decline is > >something that > >does not appear in the books of the Abhidhamma, but only in > >commentaries. I > >stand to be corrected on this. > ..... > S: I'm not sure where the 'packet' and 'state' affairs have come from. I > don't see any distinction in what I read in any of the texts on this - a > citta and cetasikas arise, experience their object momentarily and fall > away immediately, changing all the time. As I said, many other rupas are > also arising and falling away, but only one nama or rupa is experienced at > a time or often a concept only. > > Also, I followed your discussion with Tep on the 'Sheaves of Reeds' sutta > and D.O. with interest, e.g #60052. I was interested to read you referring > so much to 'subject' and 'object' here:-). Anyway, there were a few points > I disagreed with, but rather than re-hash them (as I'm going away), I'll > just link you both to a message I wrote to you not so very long ago on the > same topic: > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/52086 > > I will follow any further comments and respond if called for when I can > (probably on return). Others may have further feedback in the meantime. > > It's always challenging to respond to your well-considered comments, > Howard. Thanks! --------------------------------- Howard: :-) --------------------------------- > > Metta, > > Sarah > p.s Pls give us the occasional update on Sophie. > ------------------------------------ Howard: Thanks, Sarah. She's doing well: Turning over frequently - both back to front & front to back, near-crawling (sort of scootching around the floor!), still on a feeding tube, but just starting to take some solid food by mouth, and very attentive, very sweet, and, though complaining loudly when appropriate, smiling beautifully with both mouth & eyes most of the time! :-) =================== With metta, Howard 8) #60645 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Wed Jun 21, 2006 3:01 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Mundane and Supramundane egberdina Hi Sarah, Thanks for this post. As you can tell from the delay in replying, I have stewed on it a lot. I appreciate that you are leaving for a trip soon, so please don't feel the need to reply. > S: Thanks, Herman. I did (at least, I read the first few pages). I believe > there a number of inaccuracies and misunderstandings, each one of which > would take time to discuss. If there's anything or any sutta he refers to > in particular which you'd like to discuss in this regard, go ahead and > quote the relevant paragraph. > > As we'll be going away in a few days, the discussion may not get very far > and it may turn into one of those picky threads you dislike, but you're > welcome. > > Here's a comment I came across the other day that R.Gethin makes in the > preface to his both 'The Buddhist Path to Awakening': > > "One of the things I suggested in my conclusion was that before we throw > away the Abhidhamma and the commentaries, we need to be very sure we have > understood what it is they are saying, and how it is they are actually > interpreting the earlier texts. What prompted that suggestion then was a > sense that in dealing witht he theory of the Buddhist path in the Nikayas > scholars had tended to dsimiss the views of the Abhidhamma and > commentaries without fully understanding them." > Partly because of your post, I have decided, as an act of free will (I am being deliberartely inflammatory :-)) to change my tack in posting at dsg. In future I will try and focus on the ideas that are being presented merely as ideas. I will dispense with my previous guiding principle that some of the matters that were being discussed are of actual critical importance to how one lives, and simply reflect academically on the ideas being put forward. In this way, I certainly won't have any reluctance to consider anything put forward. Enjoy the trip Kind Regards Herman #60646 From: "ken_aitch" Date: Wed Jun 21, 2006 4:03 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Knowledge of the Difference Between Naama and Ruupa: Making Theory Pra ken_aitch Hi Sarah, Thanks for chipping in - helpfully as always. In my sloppy writing style, I gave the impression I was wondering if dhammas changed as insight into them developed. Actually, that hadn't occurred to me. ------------ S: > Again, it's not the dhammas experienced that change with the development of insight, but the awareness and knowledge of them for what they really are that changes. ------------- Yes, of course. I think I see now why you are stressing this. Some people think dhammas are what we make of them. For example, they think if we like an undesirable rupa then it automatically becomes desirable. In the same way, people might think that insight into conditioned dhammas somehow changes them into the unconditioned dhamma. I may have missed the point there, but don't worry about it - enjoy your holiday! In another recent conversation we were talking about good friends and bad friends in the ultimate, Abhidhamma, sense. You were a bit concerned about those ### longboarders! I am pleased to tell you my attitude towards them has mellowed. I haven't changed my ideas on surf etiquette or basic human decency (both of which they lack to a man) but I can't get as steamed up about longboarders as I used to. After all, it's just a matter of different cittas, arising and passing away by conditions. :-) Ken H #60647 From: "ken_aitch" Date: Wed Jun 21, 2006 4:10 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Knowledge of the Difference Between Naama and Ruupa: Making Theory Pra ken_aitch Hi Herman, --------- H: > Sorry to pull you up in your exuberance :-) > > What a contrast it is when we realise that conditionality is the most > intimate and immediate of all teachings. Ultimately, there are only > conditioned dhammas. Right now there are experiences of visible > object, audible object, seeing consciousness, hearing consciousness, > perception, thinking - it's all Abhidhamma! > Just a small, but significant correction. Ultimately, there is only nibbana. --------------------- I see what you mean about pulling me up. :-) That does take the wind out of my sails. At least, it would if it were true! Or maybe we are using "ultimately" in different ways. Ultimately, in the course of time, after parinibbana, there is only nibbana. Now, however, we have the conditioned world in which, ultimately, there is no us but only the five khandhas. ------------------------------ H: > Craving is pierced in one who knows; For one who sees, there is nothing. Udana VIII.2 ------------------------------- What is meant there by "nothing?" My suggestion would be, "nothing worth craving." Are you suggesting nothing exists? Ken H #60648 From: "Phil" Date: Wed Jun 21, 2006 5:16 pm Subject: Re: We should consider more deeply? philofillet Hi Nina > It depends on the citta that thinks: we should more deeply consider. It can > be a reminder to oneself; how shallow we are, we think we understand, but we > do not. So many sobering reminders, which is good. This morning I read the sutta passage from SN 22:100: "Therefore, bhikkhus, one should often reflect upon one's mind thus : 'For a long time this mind has been defiled by lust, hatred and delusion. Through the defilements of the mind beings are defiled, with the cleansing of the mind, beings are purified.'" The accumulated tendency of modern people is to leap towards an intention to "cleanse" the mind, to purify it. But this cannot be done by cittas rooted in lobha and moha - the desire to rid the citta process of defilements is itself a defilement, except for rare moments. Another way in which Dhamma goes against the ways of this world. Patience. > I remember Phra Dhammadharo with a strong voice: listen more, consider more. His confidence is awesome, very inspiring. I guess he died 20 years ago or something like that in conventional terms, but that makes no difference whatsoever when I listen to him talk about Dhamma. > Sorry you have a lot of stress. Ph: Much better these days, thanks. Phil #60649 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Wed Jun 21, 2006 5:44 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: We should consider more deeply? egberdina Hi Phil, On 22/06/06, Phil wrote: > > So many sobering reminders, which is good. This morning I read the > sutta passage from SN 22:100: "Therefore, bhikkhus, one should often > reflect upon one's mind thus : 'For a long time this mind has been > defiled by lust, hatred and delusion. Through the defilements of > the mind beings are defiled, with the cleansing of the mind, beings > are purified.'" The accumulated tendency of modern people is to leap > towards an intention to "cleanse" the mind, to purify it. But this > cannot be done by cittas rooted in lobha and moha - the desire to > rid the citta process of defilements is itself a defilement, except > for rare moments. Another way in which Dhamma goes against the ways > of this world. Patience. > Nice to see you reading suttas. How's about this one. SN 51.15. The little intro to it, at ATO, says this: Ven. Ananda explains to Unnabha that the path of Dhamma is one with a definite goal — the abandoning of desire — which can only be attained by developing a strong desire to end desire.", but I suggest you read the whole sutta. It would be interesting to compare the source of your idea with this source. And are you suggesting that the desire for patience is somehow not a defilement? Kind Regards Herman #60650 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Wed Jun 21, 2006 6:17 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Knowledge of the Difference Between Naama and Ruupa: Making Theory Pra egberdina > > > > What a contrast it is when we realise that conditionality is the most > > intimate and immediate of all teachings. Ultimately, there are only > > conditioned dhammas. Right now there are experiences of visible > > object, audible object, seeing consciousness, hearing consciousness, > > perception, thinking - it's all Abhidhamma! > > > > Just a small, but significant correction. Ultimately, there is only > nibbana. > > --------------------- > > I see what you mean about pulling me up. :-) That does take the wind > out of my sails. At least, it would if it were true! > > Or maybe we are using "ultimately" in different ways. Ultimately, > in the course of time, after parinibbana, there is only nibbana. Now, > however, we have the conditioned world in which, ultimately, there > is no us but only the five khandhas. > Yes, we probably are using the words differently. In the absence of name there is no form, and in the absence of form there is no name, so neither name or form could be ultimate in my usage. In your usage, it seems to be the case that whatever consciousness is there is ultimate. I have a note about that below. > ------------------------------ > H: > > > Craving is pierced > in one who knows; > For one who sees, > there is nothing. > > Udana VIII.2 > > ------------------------------- > > What is meant there by "nothing?" My suggestion would be, "nothing > worth craving." Are you suggesting nothing exists? > Your reading of that fragment is quite plausible. It is very tricky to talk about "nothing" without getting tied up in verbal knots. But if Nibbana exists, then nothing exists as well. Just like a material object is delimited by space, or something else which is not-that-object, so that-which-is is delimited by that-which-is-not. For there to be the possibility of (knowing) thereness, there has to be (knowing) not-thereness. As an example, the nebulous present moment, to the extent that it is there, is delimited by the past and future, which are not-there. So I am wondering if the ultimate consciousness of the present moment is bounded by nothingness, wouldn't it be just as valid to say that it is the nothingness that is ultimate? I think these are difficult matters, but entirely central to any understanding of what is real. Kind Regards Herman #60651 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Wed Jun 21, 2006 8:03 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Knowledge of the Difference Between Naama and Ruupa: Making Theory Pra scottduncan2 Dear Ken H. and Herman, Thanks for the opportunity to study a bit of Pali. I hope you don't mind. I couldn't resist the opportunity. I actually hope that someone who actually knows Pali would jump in and help me. Craving is pierced in one who knows; For one who sees, there is nothing. Udana VIII.2 ------------------------------- K: "What is meant there by "nothing?" My suggestion would be, "nothing worth craving." Are you suggesting nothing exists?" I think the above stanza is the second of two. (I'll give the Pali for both, and work on the first for context at another time; I'm using the PTS PED): "Duddsa.m anata.m naama na hi sacca.m sudassana.m, Pa.tividdhaa tanhaa jaanato passato natthi ki~ncana.m ti." "Pa.tividdhaa" is related to "being, or having penetrated or pierced...having acquired, mastered, knowing..." "Tanhaa" is craving. "Janato passato" are together, apparently for emphasis, and imply "to know, to have gained knowledge, to be experienced, to be aware, to find out..." "Natthi ki~ncana.m ti" is tricky. I think it is something like "having thus no attachment to anything." One who is a "natthika" is a sceptic or a nihilist. "Ki~ncana" carries "the moral implication of something that sticks or adheres to the character of a man, and which he must get rid of if he wishes to attain a higher moral condition." How does all this come out? I get the impression that it means something like: "For he who has penetrated craving, who knows it by experience, there is, thus, no attachment to anything." We need not worry about the meaning of the english word "nothing" since this doesn't seem to be in the original. Someone please correct me! Sincerely, Scott. #60652 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Wed Jun 21, 2006 8:33 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Knowledge of the Difference Between Naama and Ruupa: Making Theory Pra egberdina Hi Scott, > > We need not worry about the meaning of the english word "nothing" > since this doesn't seem to be in the original. > Ahhh, the black art of translation. Next time I see Thanissaro Bhikkhu I'll pass on your sentiments re his :-) This is another transaltion I find on the Net. (I don't know who the translator was). "Hard is it to realize the essential, The truth is not easily preceived, Desire is mastered by him who knows', To him who sees (aright) all things are naught. This one is by John D Ireland. The uninclined is hard to see, The truth is not easy to see; Craving is penetrated by one who knows, For one who sees there is nothing. I guess we can to and fro about different ways of translating from Pali to English, and ways of establishing that we have captured the gist of what is being conveyed. Another thing we could do is determine what is seen when there is no craving. Kind Regards Herman #60653 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Wed Jun 21, 2006 9:02 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Knowledge of the Difference Between Naama and Ruupa: Making Theory Pra scottduncan2 Hi Herman, Sorry, I was thinking about this below and wanted to just correct something; your last point is a good one: "For he who has penetrated craving, who knows it by experience, there is, thus, no attachment to anything." I don't think "attachment" is correct, rather I'd say it would be better this way: "For he who has penetrated craving, who knows it by experience, there is, thus *no craving for anything.*" Anyway, its a "black art" as you say... Sincerely, Scott. #60654 From: "Phil" Date: Wed Jun 21, 2006 8:56 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: We should consider more deeply? philofillet Hi Herman > Nice to see you reading suttas. Nice, nice, nice....suttas are so nice to read. They make everything make sense to the mind that is struggling and hungering (subtly or not) to find meaning in life. Of course they also contain the purest expression of the Buddha's understanding, but we are far, far away chronologically, and in terms of medium, and - most importantly - in terms of understanding from the folks who first got to hear them. > How's about this one. SN 51.15. The > little intro to it, at ATO, says this: Ven. Ananda explains to Unnabha > that the path of Dhamma is one with a definite goal ?Ethe abandoning > of desire ?Ewhich can only be attained by developing a strong desire > to end desire.", but I suggest you read the whole sutta. There is also the very-popular-at-DSG sutta that says craving is to be abandoned by craving - maybe this is the same one. I will stick with the discourse - the Buddha's first - that teaches us that the second noble truth is lobha. Not to be played around with in order to justify practices, in my opinion. But of course there is wholesome samvega, the wholesome desire to be done with the ways that have kept us trapped in samsara. It does arise. No doubt about that, otherwise it would be hopeless - and it is not hopeless. > > It would be interesting to compare the source of your idea with this > source. And are you suggesting that the desire for patience is somehow > not a defilement? Of course it is a defilemt. Moments that are free from defilement are few and far between. I will stop praising patience, perhaps. Thanks for the pointer! :) Phil #60655 From: "Phil" Date: Wed Jun 21, 2006 9:13 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: We should consider more deeply? philofillet Hi again > Of course it is a defilemt. Moments that are free from defilement > are few and far between. I will stop praising patience, perhaps. > Thanks for the pointer! :) I thought afterwards to point out that this word "defilement" which has such nasty, degrading connotations in English is not something to be horrified of in the Dhamma. Our citta processes have flown on rooted in lobha, dosa and moha for who knows how long? (see the Buddha's second discourse, "Burning", SN 35: twentysoemthing.) It is natural for us. So the yucky connotation of "defilement" need not apply here. It is just the way things are, for all of us, until we breathe the rarefied air of the noble Ariyans, having developed the "revulsion" that is referred to in "Burning". (And is, again, very different from what we think "revulsion" to be.) Thus endeth Phil's latest pontification! :) Phil #60656 From: "ken_aitch" Date: Wed Jun 21, 2006 9:17 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Knowledge of the Difference Between Naama and Ruupa: Making Theory Pra ken_aitch Hi Scott, You quoted the Abhidhammattha Sangaha where it explained that the path factors were simply cetasikas. That means that the path, itself, is a citta. The entire world (loka) is described in many suttas as a citta with its object and its cetasikas. In other words, it is only the momentary arising of the five khandhas, in one form or another. When, figuratively speaking, the Noble Eightfold Path is being travelled, the world is still the five khandhas. It is a citta (vinnana-khandha) with supramundane cetasikas (sankhara-khandha) sanna and vedana (s-and-v-khandhas) arising at the mind-door (I'm not sure if we can class that as rupa-khandha) and with nibbana as its object. And it is called the Path. As I was saying, this spoils our fun if we want to see our world as a place in space and time in which saintly people are performing acts of dana and sila and progressing, one factor at a time, on some kind of spiritual journey. BTW, I hope I'm not shedding a negative light on the Dhamma; sometimes I tend to overstate my case. :-) ----------------- S: > I've not pondered this enough, but would it be fair to say that the Path, again metaphorically but with a different slant, arises? I think there are references to "Path moments," but I'm not sure. I'll have to check that out. ----------------- That's right, although I wouldn't say 'metaphorically.' The Path (magga-citta) literally arises, performs its functions, and falls away. In this case, the functions are largely supramundane and the object, itself, does not fall away. But otherwise, the path is just like any other momentary arising of the five khandhas (any other moment in daily life). Ken H #60657 From: "ken_aitch" Date: Wed Jun 21, 2006 10:15 pm Subject: Re: hey all ken_aitch Hi Sutha, Your message seems to have gone unnoticed! Usually, one of the more polite DSG members would have welcomed you by now. Anyway, welcome aboard. How can I draw you and Siva into the conversations? Perhaps you could tell us what it is about DSG that you like so much. :-) Maybe not, but any comment on any of the threads will be appreciated. Ken H --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sutha shri wrote: > > hey all, > My name is Sutha, i got to know your group thru my guy Siva. He has told alot about this website, n i would like to know it personally by joining. > As abt myself, i am werking in Asia Trade press. Hobbies include, dancing, swimming N reading. > Thank you for accepting me. > Hope to gain more knowledge from all of ya :-) > > With Best Regards, > Sutha > #60658 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Wed Jun 21, 2006 9:54 pm Subject: Exceptional & Rare Arising ... !!! bhikkhu_ekamuni Friends: Exceptionally Rare is the arising of the Links to Awakening! The Blessed Buddha once said: Bhikkhus, these exquisitely refined & sophisticated Seven Links to Awakening do never arise apart from the appearance of a Well-Come-Well-Gone One, an Arahat, a Perfectly Self-Enlightened Buddha! They never emerge outside the discipline of a thus Happy & Successful One! Which seven? 1: The Awareness Link to Awakening. 2: The Investigation Link to Awakening. 3: The Energy Link to Awakening. 4: The Joy Link to Awakening. 5: The Tranquillity to Awakening. 6: The Concentration Link to Awakening. 7: The Equanimity Link to Awakening. These uniquely advanced, delicate & intricate Seven Factors of Awakening do never emerge other than after the arrival of a Tathagata, an Arahant, a Perfectly Self- Enlightened Buddha! They never emerge outside the discipline of a Fortunate One! Source (edited extract): The Grouped Sayings of the Buddha. Samyutta Nikaya. Book [V: 77] section 46: The Links. 9+10: Arising... Bhikkhu Samahita, Sri Lanka. #60659 From: nina van gorkom Date: Thu Jun 22, 2006 12:15 am Subject: death of dear ones. nilovg Dear Han, Phil, Sarah. Han, I am still thinking of your reflections on death. The other day we had a family gathering and we were talking of the death of partners. I said that I know all the answers in theory, but still, it is so hard to accept. The practice, the practice! Phil wrote a post about his pains, which I quote: < It is very unlikely, in my thinking, that the depth of our reflection on and understanding of dhammas will ever, in this lifetime, overcome the great pain, the great sadness we will feel because of events in our life, the greatest of the sad ones being losing our loved lifetime companions. Dhamma *cannot* be an antidote for this pain. The pain will come, and it will be intense and overwhelming. Then, in the midst of it, there will be moements of right understanding, I am confident of that. But the pain will inevitably be intense and overwhelming.> His pain is my pain. We listened to Sarah's post about the death of Ven. Dhammadharo, and that Kh. Sujin said that our life is like the wind that is blowing, it comes and goes so quickly. We also hear: there are only nama and rupa. Lodewijk said that we should not take this out of the context of the suttas where the Buddha speaks about life and suffering with such great compassion. I know that my lack of direct understanding of nama and rupa is the cause of much suffering. I know that there is a lot of thinking and that this is conditioned, it is nama. When we are only beginners on the Path we cannot penetrate the truth of impermanence yet. But I feel that we can find consolation when listening to the suttas and seeing these as a personal message of the Buddha to us. We can listen to his voice. But of course we are not always in the right mood for this, as Phil suggested. Han, perhaps you can say something to Phil and me about the pain caused by the loss of a partner. We like to hear your own personal observations. You are very wise. Lodewijk is already eighty years and he has cancer, although the palliative medicine helps. He can still walk very well. But I think much on death these days. Nina. #60660 From: Bhikkhu samahita Date: Wed Jun 21, 2006 11:40 pm Subject: Re: The Pollutions ... bhikkhu_ekamuni Dear friend James: > I still notice ill will creeping in the back door More metta will do the trick in time. Its like breaking a steel chain by polishing it with cloth... If jhana is attained this metta 'cloth' may be better likened to sandpaper! In all cases: One day the chain breaks !!! Then one is free... Never give up! -- vandana Friendship is the Greatest... Bhikkhu Samahita <...> #60661 From: sarah abbott Date: Thu Jun 22, 2006 12:59 am Subject: Cetasikas' study corner 481- Non-Aversion/Adosa (m) sarahprocter... Dear Friends, 'Cetasikas' by Nina van Gorkom http://www.vipassana.info/cetasikas.html http://www.zolag.co.uk/ Questions, comments and different views welcome;-) ========================================== Ch 29, Non-Aversion(Adosa)contd ***** The anågåmí or “non-returner”, who has attained the third stage of enlightenment, has no more attachment to sensuous objects and thus, when there is an unpleasant object instead of a pleasant object, he has no conditions for aversion. Nanda’s mother who was an anågåmí, had no sadness, fear or anxiety, no matter what happened to her. If we understand that attachment to people can lead to utter distress when we lose them, we may see the danger of attachment, and then we can be reminded to develop right understanding which leads to the eradication of all defilements. ***** Non-Aversion(Adosa)to be contd Metta, Sarah ====== #60662 From: "robmoult" Date: Thu Jun 22, 2006 1:58 am Subject: Re: [dsg] The Abhidhamma Framework - My Understanding robmoult Hi Howard, Hope you and Nina don't mind me butting in, but this is one of my favourite topics :-) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > > Hi, Nina - > > In a message dated 6/21/06 2:55:57 PM Eastern Daylight Time, > vangorko@... writes: > > > Hi Howard, > > just before going off I noticed several of your posts with this subject. > > I appreciate your continuing interest in the Abhidhamma throughout the > > years. I noticed that you really have been reflecting on this subject, > > making an amendment to one of your posts. > > I have been thinking of what you said and meanwhile Sarah answered. I wonder > > whether I can add something. > > --------------------------------- > Howard: > Please! :-) > ------------------------------ > > > Could you give an example (taken from Cetasikas Sarah is posting or from > > any > > other source) where you feel that Abhidhamma and Commnetaries are different? > > Then I have a key where to begin. > > ------------------------------- > Howard: > I doubt that the commentaries explicitly contradict Abhidhamma or the > suttas. For the most part, it seems that the commentaries are expansive in the > sense of going into further detail and explaining what is unclear. And that > is very good! ===== Absolutely! In general, the purpose of the commentaries is to expand upon the text of the Tipitaka. ===== > But, and there do seem to be cases of this, where the commentaries > introduce concepts and detailed "facts" that don't occur in the tipitaka, > examples of which are kalapas and the very lovely, very pretty, but also apparently > brand new psychological theory of citta processes. ===== Of course, as part of the expansion, new things are revealed which do not necessarily appear in the Pitaka. I am not sure, but I suspect that kalapas were first introduced in Buddhadatta's Ruparupavibhaga (I will have to check). The framework of citta / cetasika / rupa / Nibbana / concepts originated in the Abhidhammavarata. The theory of citta processes was first introduced in the Vimuttimagga but considerably expanded in the Abhidhammattasangaha. All of these are later additions. ===== > Some of these forest-le > aves-notions, besides being lovely, may be quite correct, but they didn't originate > with the Buddha. Moreover, there is a drifting into substantialism, with the > misuse of terms such as 'sabhava', and with reifying mindstates (which, after > all, are pa~n~natti!) - and this is not very good. ===== Howard, you seem to be passing judgement when you write, "and this is not very good". I do not view this gradual evolution of the Abhidhamma as good -> less good or accurate -> less accurate. I view this evolution as important -> less important. By "important", I mean connected to the path and to the teachings of the Buddha. I believe that we should be able to find the answers that we need in the Suttas. For many people (like me), the Abhidhamma provides a very comfortable evironment (I like structure and theory). I believe that the Abhidhamma Pitaka may not be the direct word of the Buddha, but it is pretty darn close. Material written a thousand or fifteen hundred years after the Buddha will always reflect some later influences. For this reason, I am not keen to enter into ontological arguments (for example) as I believe that these are later additions. I never tire of reading the Suttas and using the Abhidhamma Pitaka to gain a deeper understanding of them. Metta, Rob M :-) #60663 From: "Joop" Date: Thu Jun 22, 2006 3:04 am Subject: Re: [dsg] On rebirth jwromeijn --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > > Hi, Joop - > >> > > > - Your description is in a (or 'the') ultimate language. But my > > topic 'how to behave morally' in the case rebirth exist and in the > > case rebirth doesn't exist is in a conventional language. I think > > talking about morality can only take place in conventional language > > because it's (among other things) about behavior and behavior can > > only be described conventional. > > ------------------------------------- > Howard: > From my perspective, morality is independent of the issue of rebirth. > Of course, kusala kamma leads to pleasant realms and akusala kamma leads to > unpleasant ones, if you except rebirth as a fact. (I view that as changing to a > "channel" with pleasant or unpleasant "shows"! ;-) > ------------------------------------- > Hallo Howard Thanks for your information, and opinion. I will continue on one point: Howard: "From my perspective, morality is independent of the issue of rebirth." The strange fact is that I, with quit another reasoning are coming to the same conclusion. My reasoning was: getting a 'good' rebirth (in a high realm) is not a good reason for behaving in a moral way. Your reasoning - as far as I understand you - is a logical one: rebirth and moral behavior are two different topics, occurring in different 'dimensions' and should therefor not been mixed. Is that correct? Metta Joop #60664 From: nina van gorkom Date: Thu Jun 22, 2006 3:26 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: welcome to Sutha. nilovg Hi Sutha, I join ken_aitch to welcome you. Tomorrow our moderators go on vacation. I use Sarah's message with good tips to newcomers here, in case you have not seen it. <1. Introduce yourself, your interest in the Buddha's teachings and give us an idea of what you'd like to hear about or discuss. Basic questions are often the best. 2. For now, just ignore all threads which make little or no sense and focus on your own threads. 3. Go to the files section of DSG http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/files/ and scroll down to 'Useful Posts'. Here, scroll down to 'New to the list and new to Buddhism', also 'Abhidhamma-beginners', 'Kamma-beginners' and many more sections which may be relevant. [If it's all too much, just go to posts saved under 'zany' at the bottom:-)]. 4. If the Pali words are bugging you and you'd like to have help, consider printing out the simple Pali glossary in the files and having it next to your computer. 5. Keep asking people to clarify what they are talking about in simple language. You'll do everyone a favour. But we need an indication of what you're interested to have clarified first. If you give us a chance to offer you (and anyone else new to the list) a chance, you'll find a group of really friendly and helpful people who'll be glad to discuss the teachings with you anytime.> Looking forward to your input, which can be any subject, Nina. op 22-06-2006 07:15 schreef ken_aitch op ken_aitch@...: Hi Sutha, Your message seems to have gone unnoticed! How can I draw you and Siva into the conversations? Perhaps you could tell us what it is about DSG that you like so much. :-) #60665 From: nina van gorkom Date: Thu Jun 22, 2006 3:26 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Knowledge of the Difference Between Naama and Ruupa: Udana nilovg Dear Scott, Ken H, Herman, The commentary translated by Masefield: II, p. 1016/7 gives the Pali and explanation, and the meaning as you, Scott, suggested. op 22-06-2006 05:03 schreef Scott Duncan op scduncan@...: Udana VIII.2 ------------------------------- "Duddasa.m anata.m naama na hi sacca.m sudassana.m, Pa.tividdhaa tanhaa jaanato passato natthi ki~ncana.m ti." ------ N: Duddasa.m: hard to see. Explained: it is very subtle. anata.m: the uninclined. And this means nibbaana. Co: craving is spoken of as the inclined, nataa. N: think also of the word derivation of naama: namati: to bend or incline. Another derivation of anata.m: immeasurable. ------ S: "Pa.tividdhaa" is related to "being, or having penetrated or pierced...having acquired, mastered, knowing..." "Tanhaa" is craving. Text: "Janato passato" are together, apparently for emphasis, and imply "to know, to have gained knowledge, to be experienced, to be aware, to find out..." ------ N: for the person who understands and sees. The -to suffix can mean; for, or by, or as regards, with reference to, we had beautifull lessons from Jim years ago. It became our favorite suffix. ------- S:"Natthi ki~ncana.m ti" is tricky. I think it is something like "having thus no attachment to anything." One who is a "natthika" is a sceptic or a nihilist. "Ki~ncana" carries "the moral implication of something that sticks or adheres to the character of a man, and which he must get rid of if he wishes to attain a higher moral condition." ------ N: Masefield: Pierced is craving for the one who knows; for the one who beholds there is no holding (Pa.tividdhaa tanhaa jaanato passato natthi ki~ncana.m) ------- S:"For he who has penetrated craving, who knows it by experience, there is, thus, no attachment to anything." We need not worry about the meaning of the english word "nothing" since this doesn't seem to be in the original. ----- N: n'atthi: there is not. See above. The Co is longer, elaborates about piercing the four noble truths. I cannot quote all now. The Udana Commentary is worth while ordering, gives much Pali. Nina. #60666 From: han tun Date: Thu Jun 22, 2006 4:21 am Subject: Re: [dsg] death of dear ones. hantun1 Dear Nina, Lodewijk, Sarah and Phil, In Dhammacakkappavattana sutta, the Buddha’s definition of dukkha includes “piyehi vippayogo dukkho” – separation from the loved ones is suffering. Phil has also said that “the greatest of the sad ones being losing our loved lifetime companions.” This is also very true for me, and I think this separation from the loved ones will be the worst part when the time comes. I have no personal experience of death of my nearest family members. My wife, my children and my grand-children are all okay. But I am preparing for the separation “in anticipation.” Nina wrote: “The practice, the practice!” I do not exactly know what Nina meant. But I want to also say the same thing, and my idea will be to “practice for the separation.” Like rehearsals before actual act on the stage. I often consider how I would feel and how I would act if my wife dies before me. These reflections are the rehearsals in my mind preparing for the actual separation. I also practice for my wife. With every opportunity, I tell my wife what she should do if I die before her. “When I die, you must do this or do that to get your pension. Now, for your health care, I do everything to get reimbursement from the WHO for medical treatment. If I die you should do this or do that to get health insurance.” And so on ..... By repeatedly telling my wife in this way, I am “conditioning” her to be ready for my death. Actually, it is the one who is left behind when the other dies who suffers most. At times, selfishly, I wish that I die before my wife. She also says that she wants to die before me. Age and dhamma have mellowed me. I think I can take it fairly well if my wife dies before me. But I do not know for sure. I will only know how I will fare when I actually face the separation. But one thing I know is that the “time” is the best healer. Eventually, with time, I will get over my wife’s death, or she will get over my death. Meanwhile, I am doing wholesome deeds to accumulate my habitual good kamma and all the reflections on my death and on the death of my loved ones. How much successful that will be, I do not know. I am trying my best and hope for the best! Respectfully, Han P.S. I pray for Lodewijk’s well-being. --- nina van gorkom wrote: > Dear Han, Phil, Sarah. > > Han, I am still thinking of your reflections on > death. The other day we had > a family gathering and we were talking of the death > of partners. I said that > I know all the answers in theory, but still, it is > so hard to accept. The > practice, the practice! > Phil wrote a post about his pains, which I quote: > > > > > > Han, perhaps you can say something to Phil and me > about the pain caused by > the loss of a partner. We like to hear your own > personal observations. You > are very wise. Lodewijk is already eighty years and > he has cancer, although > the palliative medicine helps. He can still walk > very well. But I think much > on death these days. > Nina. > > #60667 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Thu Jun 22, 2006 4:43 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Knowledge of the Difference Between Naama and Ruupa: Udana scottduncan2 Dear Nina, Thank you for your help. I'd like to order the commentary, as well as about a hundred other texts. N: "The commentary translated by Masefield: II, p. 1016/7 gives the Pali and explanation, and the meaning as you, Scott, suggested... 'Duddasa.m anata.m naama na hi sacca.m sudassana.m, Pa.tividdhaa tanhaa jaanato passato natthi ki~ncana.m ti.' N: "Duddasa.m: hard to see. Explained: it is very subtle. anata.m: the uninclined. And this means nibbaana. Co: craving is spoken of as the inclined, nataa. Date: Thu Jun 22, 2006 4:57 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Knowledge of the Difference Between Naama and Ruupa: Making Theory Pra scottduncan2 Dear Ken H, Thanks for the below: K: "You quoted the Abhidhammattha Sangaha where it explained that the path factors were simply cetasikas. That means that the path, itself, is a citta." And, for this thread, would this be considered "supramundane?" K: "The entire world (loka) is described in many suttas as a citta with its object and its cetasikas. In other words, it is only the momentary arising of the five khandhas, in one form or another." The moment is the world or the world is the moment. Is that it? K: "When, figuratively speaking, the Noble Eightfold Path is being travelled, the world is still the five khandhas. It is a citta (vinnana-khandha) with supramundane cetasikas (sankhara-khandha) sanna and vedana (s-and-v-khandhas) arising at the mind-door (I'm not sure if we can class that as rupa-khandha) and with nibbana as its object. And it is called the Path." Okay, the cetasikas are supramundane. How are these moments considered to be transformative? In other words, how do defilements become "eradicated?" Also, if you are wondering whether the mind door is classed as ruupa-khandha, I believe I learned that the bhavanga-citta serves the function of mind door. I may have misunderstood that, though. K: "As I was saying, this spoils our fun if we want to see our world as a place in space and time in which saintly people are performing acts of dana and sila and progressing, one factor at a time, on some kind of spiritual journey." Yeah, wet blanket. K: "...The Path (magga-citta) literally arises, performs its functions, and falls away. In this case, the functions are largely supramundane and the object, itself, does not fall away. But otherwise, the path is just like any other momentary arising of the five khandhas (any other moment in daily life)." Okay, I think I follow. The "functions are largely supramundane" could be elaborated more, if you have time, since I'm not quite sure what these functions are. Also, what is the "object" in this case, and how is it that it too "does not fall away?" Is the object Nibbaana? Sincerely, Scott. #60669 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Thu Jun 22, 2006 5:01 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Knowledge of the Difference Between Naama and Ruupa: Making Theory Pra scottduncan2 Correction: "For he who has penetrated craving, who knows it by experience, there is, thus, no attachment to anything." "For he who has penetrated craving, who knows it by experience, there is, thus *no craving for anything.*" Nina suggests that the former comes closer to the meaning. Ignore this after-thought. Scott. #60670 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Thu Jun 22, 2006 5:30 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Knowledge of the Difference Between Naama and Ruupa: Making Theory Pra scottduncan2 Dear Herman, Interesting, this you have below: H: "It is very tricky to talk about "nothing" without getting tied up in verbal knots. But if Nibbana exists, then nothing exists as well. Just like a material object is delimited by space, or something else which is not-that-object, so that-which-is is delimited by that-which-is-not. For there to be the possibility of (knowing) thereness, there has to be (knowing) not-thereness. As an example, the nebulous present moment, to the extent that it is there, is delimited by the past and future, which are not-there." Of interest might be this, found in A Survey of Paramattha Dhammas, and referring to "the third stage of aruupa-jhaana": "The third stage of aruupa-jhaana is the jhaana-citta that has as object 'there is nothing,' i.e., the aaki~nca~n~naayatana jhaanacitta [aaki~nca~n~na means 'there is nothing']. When the person who cultivates this stage sees that the object of the second stage, thi infinity of consciousness, is not as subtle and refined as the object of nothingness, he transcends the object of the second stage and turns to the object of nothingness, which conditions more calm..." (p.306). I don't think, in the above, that this object ("there is nothing," or "nothingness") has anything to do with Nibbaana or its opposite but I'm likely to be wrong. These "aruupa-jhaana kusula cittas" which experience these objects - are they considered to be supramundane? If so I wonder what is their function and effect? H: "So I am wondering if the ultimate consciousness of the present moment is bounded by nothingness, wouldn't it be just as valid to say that it is the nothingness that is ultimate? I think these are difficult matters, but entirely central to any understanding of what is real." I'm not sure that "the ultimate consciousness of the present moment is bounded by nothingness." You base this statement on the conclusion that neither the past nor the future "exist" in the present and, thus, since they don't exist, there is "nothingness." This nothingness seems merely conceptual, not actual. The past moment has fallen away but it conditioned the present moment, for example, since it was actually present while arisen. Is it correct to make "nothingness" synonymous with Nibbaana? This seems to be what you are suggesting, although I've likely misunderstood you (yet again!). What do you think? Sincerely, Scott. #60671 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Thu Jun 22, 2006 6:42 am Subject: Re: [dsg] death of dear ones. scottduncan2 Dear Han, I've been appreciating your series of posts. H: "In Dhammacakkappavattana sutta, the Buddha's definition of dukkha includes 'piyehi vippayogo dukkho' separation from the loved ones is suffering. Phil has also said that 'the greatest of the sad ones being losing our loved lifetime companions.' This is also very true for me, and I think this separation from the loved ones will be the worst part when the time comes." Having experienced the dying and death of my wife I can say that it was the most difficult thing I have ever gone through and the most transformative. H: "Actually, it is the one who is left behind when the other dies who suffers most. At times, selfishly, I wish that I die before my wife. She also says that she wants to die before me." No choice really; neither in the suffering of the bereft nor in the "who goes first." Sincerely, Scott. #60672 From: nina van gorkom Date: Thu Jun 22, 2006 7:02 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Faith vs. Reason, to Daniel nilovg Hi, Daniel - Daniel wrote: > To Jonathan : Dear Jonathan, I am very much confused > with regards to this issue as you can see. So I'm trying to figure out... :) ----------- N:Jonothan is going off tomorrow, but after a while he will asnwer. I see that you feel urged to solve some issues about faith. > Daniel to Howard : > > > Faith is not a means of obtaining knowledge. It is merely belief. The > >belief may be well founded, ill founded, or something in between. Even without thinking of> > religion, sometimes it can be scary to start questioning everything... One > can> become easily very confused. -------- N: Instead of the word faith shall we use: confidence in wholesomeness? This renders more the meaning of faith (in Pali saddhaa) in the Buddhist sense, it is not blind faith. It is built upon understanding. There is no authority telling you that you have to believe this or that. You begin to have more understanding of the Dhamma and this conditions confidence. At first understanding is still weak, we begin to learn what the Buddha taught. But as understanding grows, also confidence in the Dhamma grows. The stream-enterer, sotaapanna, who has attained the first stage of enlightenment has an unshakable confidence in the Dhamma. So we understand that we are not as far yet, that we still have doubts at times. But even such moments are conditioned realities and we can learn to understand them as such. Thus, when you start questioning things, and you have doubts, but it is not scary, it is only very natural. Moreover, it does not last. A little later there may be a moment of confidence. Whatever occurs is momentary, and you can verify this for yourself. In verifying the truth doubt disappears. Everybody has to develop his own understanding. You have to be an island to yourself, a refuge to yourself, as is stated in the Parinibbana sutta. Does this make sense to you? Nina. #60673 From: upasaka@... Date: Thu Jun 22, 2006 3:14 am Subject: Re: [dsg] The Abhidhamma Framework - My Understanding upasaka_howard Hi, Larry - In a message dated 6/22/06 5:01:57 AM Eastern Daylight Time, rob.moult@... writes: > Moreover, there is a drifting into substantialism, > with the > >misuse of terms such as 'sabhava', and with reifying mindstates > (which, after > >all, are pa~n~natti!) - and this is not very good. > > ===== > > Howard, you seem to be passing judgement when you write, "and this is > not very good". I do not view this gradual evolution of the > Abhidhamma as good -> less good or accurate -> less accurate. I view > this evolution as important -> less important. By "important", I mean > connected to the path and to the teachings of the Buddha. > ======================= It is drifting into substantialism that I referred to as being "not very good," and I ceratinly do abide by that. With metta, Howard #60674 From: upasaka@... Date: Thu Jun 22, 2006 3:16 am Subject: Re: [dsg] The Abhidhamma Framework - My Understanding upasaka_howard Hi, Rob (and Larry! LOL!) - Apologies to both! I missed the the first step of good communication: knowing to whom I am writing! LOLOL! With metta, Howard In a message dated 6/22/06 10:14:21 AM Eastern Daylight Time, Upasaka writes: > Hi, Larry - > > In a message dated 6/22/06 5:01:57 AM Eastern Daylight Time, > rob.moult@... writes: > > >> Moreover, there is a drifting into substantialism, >> with the >> >misuse of terms such as 'sabhava', and with reifying mindstates >> (which, after >> >all, are pa~n~natti!) - and this is not very good. >> #60675 From: upasaka@... Date: Thu Jun 22, 2006 3:19 am Subject: Re: [dsg] On rebirth upasaka_howard Hi, Joop - In a message dated 6/22/06 6:09:40 AM Eastern Daylight Time, jwromeijn@... writes: > My reasoning was: getting a 'good' rebirth (in a high realm) is not a > good reason for behaving in a moral way. > Your reasoning - as far as I understand you - is a logical one: > rebirth and moral behavior are two different topics, occurring in > different 'dimensions' and should therefor not been mixed. Is that > correct? > ==================== No, my main reason is the same as yours. One should behave morally not primarily because of good kamma vipaka for oneself (in this or other lives) nor even because it makes one calm and better able to progress along the path, but because it is RIGHT! With metta, Howard #60676 From: nina van gorkom Date: Thu Jun 22, 2006 8:04 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Knowledge of the Difference Between Naama and Ruupa: Udana nilovg Dear Scott, op 22-06-2006 13:43 schreef Scott Duncan op scduncan@...: N: "Masefield: Pierced is craving for the one who knows; for the one who beholds there is no holding (Pa.tividdhaa tanhaa jaanato passato natthi ki~ncana.m) ------- S: "For he who has penetrated craving, who knows it by experience, there is, thus, no attachment to anything." Would the "piercing" or "penetrating" of craving be by "knowing?" Would this "knowing" be supramundane? -------- N: This can only be done by paññaa. Pativedha is the same stem: realization of the truth. It is supramundane paññaa that leads to no holding. Nina. #60677 From: nina van gorkom Date: Thu Jun 22, 2006 8:04 am Subject: Re: [dsg] death of dear ones. nilovg Dear Han and Scott, Han, I very much appreciate your post. op 22-06-2006 13:21 schreef han tun op hantun1@...: Nina wrote: “The practice, the practice! I do not exactly know what Nina meant. ------ N: I meant the application of the Dhamma, above all by the development of understanding of what appears through the six doors. In that way I can learn that in the ultimate sense there is no person. But, very difficult to realize this. I am not so far yet. I cling to persons. ------- H: But I want to also say the same thing, and my idea will be to “practice for the separation. Like rehearsals before actual act on the stage. I often consider how I would feel and how I would act if my wife dies before me. These reflections are the rehearsals in my mind preparing for the actual separation. I also practice for my wife. With every opportunity, I tell my wife what she should do if I die before her. “When I die, you must do this or do that ------ N: Yes, we also do this, to speak naturally about this, not avoiding the subject. -------- H:Actually, it is the one who is left behind when the other dies who suffers most. At times, selfishly, I wish that I die before my wife. She also says that she wants to die before me. ------ N: Yes, this is so human. ------- H: Age and dhamma have mellowed me. I think I can take it fairly well if my wife dies before me. But I do not know for sure. I will only know how I will fare when I actually face the separation. But one thing I know is that the “time is the best healer. Eventually, with time, I will get over my wife’s death, or she will get over my death. ------ N: Looking at others I doubt it that time heals. It depends on one's understanding. We have been married for 54 years and we have known each other for 61 years. As Scott says: No choice really; neither in the suffering of the bereft nor in the "who goes first." Scott: Having experienced the dying and death of my wife I can say that it was the most difficult thing I have ever gone through and the most transformative. ------- N: Scott, can you say in what way transformative? Did you experience a positive side to your suffering? This could be of help to others who suffer in a similar way or who have fears about loss and separation. We just read in the Cetasikas about Nanda's mother: One has to be an anaagaami to take this without sadness. But we are not. We cannot expect to be without sadness. --------- Han: P.S. I pray for Lodewijk’s well-being. ---------- N: How very kind of you. I so much appreciate your kind thoughts and good wishes, Nina. #60678 From: Ken O Date: Thu Jun 22, 2006 9:37 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Q. Dependent Origination ... And mrs. Sujin ashkenn2k Hi Joop <>. k: We cannot use the number of pages in the commentary just to say just because it is 19 pages it is of less value. It is like saying that taints is of less value just because it is mention less in the suttas than cravings. Such comparision is not healthy, I would rather he will discuss the content. The three times (Sammohavinodani) a. <<895 ....Ignorance in the root and feeling its end; and, as continuing into the future, craving is the root and ageing-and-death its end; thus it is twofold.>> b. <<897 the past, the present and the future are its three times. As regards these, it should be understood that, according to what has come down as proper in the Pali, the two factors, ignorance and formation are of the past time; the eight, begining with consciousness and ending with existence are of the present time and the two birth and ageing and death are of the future time.>> * These are basing on suttanta division As on the Abhidhamma division, it is based on one citta moment both divisions are the same because one using conventional form (the suttanta) to teach so that they could understand while the other the technical form. Do you like to point out the difference to me please so we can discuss it further. By way of the four paramattha dhammas, by way of the four noble Truths or by way of the DO are the same because they teach anatta, they teach conditonality and also suffering. Different methods are taught because different people prefer different ways of understanding the dhamma, just like I personally prefer the anatta sutta method while other like dukkha. Cheers Ken O #60679 From: nina van gorkom Date: Thu Jun 22, 2006 10:50 am Subject: Abhidhamma in Daily Life I. nilovg Dear friends, Lodewijk and I were discussing nama and rupa and Lodewijk said that we should always see them in the context of daily life. He asked me to take as our evening reading for a while some parts of my book Abhidhamma in Daily Life. THE FOUR PARAMATTHA DHAMMAS There are two kinds of reality: mental phenomena (nama) and physical phenomena (rupa). Nama experiences something; rupa does not experience anything. Seeing is, for example, a type of nama; it experiences visible object. Visible object itself is rupa; it does not experience anything. What we take for self are only nama and rupa which arise and fall away. The 'Visuddhimagga' ('Path of Purity', a commentary) explains (Ch. XVIII, 25): For this has been said: . 'As with the assembly of parts The word "chariot" is countenanced, So, When the khandhas are present, 'A being' is said in common usage' (Kindred Sayings I, 135. The five khandhas (aggregates) are nothing else but nama and rupa. See Ch.2.) 'ŠSo in many hundred suttas there is only mentality-materiality which is illustrated, not a being, not a person. Therefore, just as when the component parts (of a chariot) such as axles, wheels, frame, poles... are arranged in a certain way, there comes to be the mere conventional term 'chariot', yet in the ultimate sense, when each part is examined, there is no chariot, ...so too,... there comes to be the mere conventional term 'a being', 'a person', yet in the ultimate sense, when each component is examined, there is no being as a basis for the assumption ' I am' or ' I ' ; in the ultimate sense there is only mentality-materiality. The vision of one who sees in this way is called correct vision.' All phenomena in and around ourselves are only nama and rupa which arise and fall away; they are impermanent. Nama and rupa are absolute realities, in Pali: paramattha dhammas. We can experience their characteristics when they appear, no matter how we name them. Those who have developed 'insight' can experience them as they really are: impermanent and not self. The more we know different namas and rupas by experiencing their characteristics, the more we will see that 'self' is only a concept; it is not a paramattha dhamma. > Lodewijk said: ****** Nina. #60680 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Thu Jun 22, 2006 11:19 am Subject: Re: The Pollutions ... buddhatrue Venerable Samahita, Thank you for your response. Let me tell you how much I appreciate your posts and learn from them!! More to follow: --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Bhikkhu samahita wrote: > > Dear friend James: > > > I still notice ill will creeping in the back door > > More metta will do the trick in time. > Its like breaking a steel chain by > polishing it with cloth... James: Yes, I completely agree with this. I have been working on developing metta but the thing with metta is that one must first develop metta toward one's self. In our day and age with few models of self-love (perhaps Oprah?), and with my background of mental abuse, it is difficult to develop the first stage of metta meditation- love of one's self. However, I am working on it so that I can develop love toward all people and entities. > > If jhana is attained this metta 'cloth' > may be better likened to sandpaper! James: Hmmmm...not sure what you mean but would be very interested to know. > > In all cases: > One day the chain breaks !!! > Then one is free... > > Never give up! James: Thank you for the encouragement. I won't. > > -- > > vandana > > Friendship is the Greatest... > Bhikkhu Samahita > <...> > Metta, James #60681 From: nina van gorkom Date: Thu Jun 22, 2006 12:02 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] The Abhidhamma Framework - My Understanding, no 1. nilovg Hi Howard and Rob M, Howard, Consulting the dictionnary: yes, packet is packedge. Straonge notion for cetasikas, but we shall come to that. Rob, good to see you. I am glad that you still appreciate the Abh. and find it very helpful, although you think citta processes and other subjects are of later date. I am inclined not to occupy myself too much with the historical side and as people go along studying they may appreciate the wisdom and compassion of the Buddha. True, Sariputta, the General of the Dhamma was entrusted with the method of the Abhidhamma and the Path of Discrimination was composed by him, but the core of the Abhidhamma all came from the great Teacher himself. Who else could have thought out such truly amazing teaching? An ordinary human? 'He who excludes the Abhidhamma (from the Buddha word) damages the Conquerer's Wheel of Dhamma', the Atthasaalinii states. '...he deceives an audiance anxious to learn, he obstructs (progress to) the Noble Path of Holiness.' By developed insight you can verify the truth of the Abhidhamma, in this life or in a later life. As I wrote before: the processes of citta, though not in all details, are also to be found to some extent in the Dhammasangani, in the Book of Analysis (the Vibhanga), the Pa.t.thaana, under contiguity-condition, under repetition-condition, and in the Path of Discrimination, especially under ch XVII behaviour of citta. I will not repeat it all. Rob, I am glad you say: < I never tire of reading the Suttas and using the Abhidhamma Pitaka to gain a deeper understanding of them. > op 21-06-2006 22:10 schreef upasaka@... op upasaka@...: Howard: I doubt that the commentaries explicitly contradict Abhidhamma or the suttas. .... But, and there do seem to be cases of this, where the commentaries introduce concepts and detailed "facts" that don't occur in the tipitaka, examples of which are kalapas and the very lovely, very pretty, but also apparently brand new psychological theory of citta processes. --------- N: The kalapas of rupa, I understand. Details in the Co. But in the Dhammasangani we find: the four great Elements and the derived ruupas, upaada or upaadaaya ruupas. Upaada: these are dependent on the four great elements. What does this mean? They arise and fall away together, otherwise there would not be dependence. Another of your points: duration of ruupa compared to citta. We find in the Dhammasangani and also in the Patthana under prenascence-condition Coming up soon in Vis. Ch XVII), that several cittas arise dependent on a physical base and on a ruupa that is sense object. Several cittas arising and falling away, not just one. True, details are elaborated on by the Co, but these received the material from much older commentaries. Rob K wrote posts explaining that the Co. also were rehearsed from the first great Council on. ------- H: Some of these forest-leaves notions, besides being lovely, may be quite correct, but they didn't originate with the Buddha. Moreover, there is a drifting into substantialism, with the misuse of terms such as 'sabhava', and with reifying mindstates (which, after all, are pa~n~natti!) - and this is not very good. -... Howard: It was never there to begin with except figuratively. Mindstates are concepts, well founded concepts, but concepts only. ----------------------------------------- N: I am just reposting my Meaning of Dhamma in the Pali list with some corrections, and I came across this: The Saddaniti gives a further explanation of the different meanings: N: In the Books of the Abhidhamma all realities are classified as threefold: kusala, akusala and abyaakataa, or avyaakataa. Avyaakata means not declared, not determined. They are not determined as kusala nor as akusala, they are indeterminate. Kusala dhammas are the kusala cittas with their accompanying cetasikas (mental factors). Akusala dhammas are the akusala cittas with their accompanying cetasikas. Indeterminate dhammas are: vipaakacittas (cittas which are results of kamma) and their accompanying cetasikas. Kiriyacittas, inoperative cittas, cittas which are neither cause (kusala or akusala) nor result, with their accompanying cetasikas. Ruupa, physical phenomena and nibbaana. For example, in the First Book of the Abhidhamma, the Dhammasangani, Book III, Part I, Ch 1, we read about this triple classification of all realities. They are all dhammas each with their own specific characteristic, sabhaava. > If there were no characteristics, insight could not be developed. Also you would not know the difference between kusala and akusala, or lobha and dosa. We are nowhere, just lost. without characteristics. You write: A mindstate is citta, seeing, or kusala citta performing daana. A concept? Perhaps you mean by concept something other than what I mean by concept. next time more about cetasikas. The name cetasika and all their details are in the Abhidhamma books themselves. ***** Nina. #60682 From: upasaka@... Date: Thu Jun 22, 2006 10:49 am Subject: Re: [dsg] The Abhidhamma Framework - My Understanding, no 1. upasaka_howard Hi, Nina (and Rob) - In a message dated 6/22/06 3:04:20 PM Eastern Daylight Time, vangorko@... writes: > op 21-06-2006 22:10 schreef upasaka@... op upasaka@...: > Howard: > I doubt that the commentaries explicitly contradict Abhidhamma or the > suttas. .... > But, and there do seem to be cases of this, where the commentaries > introduce concepts and detailed "facts" that don't occur in the tipitaka, > examples of which are kalapas and the very lovely, very pretty, but also > apparently > brand new psychological theory of citta processes. > --------- > N: The kalapas of rupa, I understand. Details in the Co. But in the > Dhammasangani we find: the four great Elements and the derived ruupas, > upaada or upaadaaya ruupas. Upaada: these are dependent on the four great > elements. What does this mean? They arise and fall away together, otherwise > there would not be dependence. ---------------------------------------- Howard: That doesn't follow, Nina. Conditions can precede resultant conditions. ---------------------------------------- > Another of your points: duration of ruupa compared to citta. We find in the > Dhammasangani and also in the Patthana under prenascence-condition Coming up > soon in Vis. Ch XVII), that several cittas arise dependent on a physical > base and on a ruupa that is sense object. Several cittas arising and falling > away, not just one. ----------------------------------------- Howard: I don't recall raising that issue. I have no problem with several cetasikas ceasing and new ones arising all while the same object-content, rupa or not, is present. ---------------------------------------- > True, details are elaborated on by the Co, but these received the material > from much older commentaries. Rob K wrote posts explaining that the Co. also > were rehearsed from the first great Council on. > ------- > H: Some of these forest-leaves > notions, besides being lovely, may be quite correct, but they didn't > originate > with the Buddha. Moreover, there is a drifting into substantialism, with the > misuse of terms such as 'sabhava', and with reifying mindstates (which, > after > all, are pa~n~natti!) - and this is not very good. > -... > Howard: > It was never there to begin with except figuratively. Mindstates are > concepts, well founded concepts, but concepts only. > ----------------------------------------- > N: I am just reposting my Meaning of Dhamma in the Pali list with some > corrections, and I came across this: > > The Saddaniti gives a further explanation of the different meanings: > > sabhaave dissati. > > In the passage ³wholesome dhammas, unwholesome dhammas and indeterminate > dhammas², this is explained as: with its own specific nature (or > characteristic). > -------------------------------------- Howard: What I object to is using the term 'sabhava' to mean something other than its internal structure dictates. In particular, the prefix 'sa' is dangerous, suggesting self/ownership. I'm not questioning that dhammas are distinguishable. ------------------------------------- > > N: In the Books of the Abhidhamma all realities are classified as threefold: > kusala, akusala and abyaakataa, or avyaakataa. Avyaakata means not declared, > not determined. They are not determined as kusala nor as akusala, they are > indeterminate. --------------------------------------- Howard: Okay. That's interesting and reasonable: good, bad, and neutral I guess. --------------------------------------- > > Kusala dhammas are the kusala cittas with their accompanying cetasikas > (mental factors). Akusala dhammas are the akusala cittas with their > accompanying cetasikas. Indeterminate dhammas are: vipaakacittas (cittas > which are results of kamma) and their accompanying cetasikas. Kiriyacittas, > inoperative cittas, cittas which are neither cause (kusala or akusala) nor > result, with their accompanying cetasikas. Ruupa, physical phenomena and > nibbaana. ---------------------------------------- Howard: That's all fine, Nina. I'm missing the point you are making, though. I'm sorry. ---------------------------------------- > For example, in the First Book of the Abhidhamma, the Dhammasangani, Book > III, Part I, Ch 1, we read about this triple classification of all > realities. > They are all dhammas each with their own specific characteristic, sabhaava. ---------------------------------------- Howard: So, you are saying that the Abhidhamma Pitaka itself uses the term 'sabhava' to mean nature/character? That the term wasn't just used in the commentaries? I thought that the term was not used in the Abhidhamma. If you are saying that it was, then I stand corrected. In any case, it is the use of the term I object to, not the idea that dhammas are distinguishable qualities/conditions. --------------------------------------- > > > > If there were no characteristics, insight could not be developed. > --------------------------------------- Howard: Of course. That was not my point. I certainly don't say that all dhammas are the same - except in terms of the tilakkhana, of course. --------------------------------------- Also you> > would not know the difference between kusala and akusala, or lobha and dosa. > We are nowhere, just lost. without characteristics. ---------------------------------------- Howard: This is not an issue, Nina. Hardness is one thing, visual object another, an odor different from each of these. And love and hate are quite different. Of *course* that is so. But NO dhamma has *literal* sabhava (i.e., own being, or own nature), not because of "being" or "nature" but because of "own". The existence and nature of every dhamma is borrowed. No dhamma exists for even a moment as a thing-in-itself, but as utterly dependent for its very "life" on other equally empty conditions. So, the use of the word 'sabhava' is very, very poor, wherever that usage originated. ---------------------------------------- > You write: only.> > A mindstate is citta, seeing, or kusala citta performing daana. A concept? > Perhaps you mean by concept something other than what I mean by concept. > next time more about cetasikas. > The name cetasika and all their details are in the Abhidhamma books > themselves. ----------------------------------------- Howard: Nina, the word 'citta' is used in more than one way. One meaning is "mind". That meaning is not at issue here. Another meaning is "vi~n~nana". That is one meaning that is relevant here. A third meaning is "mindstate," i.e. in the sense of an aggregate consisting of vi~n~nana plus a large set of concomitant operations (cetasikas). It is that meaning I was writing about. Any such grouping thought of as a single thing is pa~n~natti and not a paramattha dhamma. ----------------------------------------- > ***** > Nina. > > ==================== With metta, Howard #60683 From: "robmoult" Date: Thu Jun 22, 2006 4:41 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] The Abhidhamma Framework - My Understanding, no 1. robmoult Hi Howard (and Nina), --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > > Hi, Nina (and Rob) - > -------------------------------------- > Howard: > What I object to is using the term 'sabhava' to mean something other > than its internal structure dictates. In particular, the prefix 'sa' is > dangerous, suggesting self/ownership. I'm not questioning that dhammas are > distinguishable. > ------------------------------------- > Howard: > So, you are saying that the Abhidhamma Pitaka itself uses the term > 'sabhava' to mean nature/character? That the term wasn't just used in the > commentaries? I thought that the term was not used in the Abhidhamma. If you are > saying that it was, then I stand corrected. > In any case, it is the use of the term I object to, not the idea that > dhammas are distinguishable qualities/conditions. > --------------------------------------- > ===== This morning, I was reading Y Karunadasa's "The Dhamma Theory - Philosophical Cornerstone of the Abhidhamma", Wheel Publication 412/413. This excellent article gives a detailed explanation of the evolution of the use of the term "sabhava" through the Abhidhamma and commentaries. Highly recommended reading, Howard; you should be able to google it. Metta, Rob M :-) 16) #60684 From: "Phil" Date: Thu Jun 22, 2006 4:47 pm Subject: Re: death of dear ones. philofillet Hi Nina, Scott, Han and all >The other day we had > a family gathering and we were talking of the death of partners. I said that > I know all the answers in theory, but still, it is so hard to accept. The > practice, the practice! > Phil wrote a post about his pains, which I quote: > > < It is very unlikely, in my thinking, that the depth of our reflection on > and understanding of dhammas will ever, in this lifetime, overcome the great > pain, the great sadness we will feel because of events in our life, the > greatest of the sad ones being losing our loved lifetime companions. I think I wrote in an overwrought way. I guess my point was that it is so perfectly natural to grieve and become distraught, and the depth of our understanding of nama and rupa will never supercede that in this lifetime. When I came to Dhamma, I think I was looking for something that would eliminate fear of death. Perhaps I had the idea that a successful Buddhist would be one who had no need to grieve and who would never become distraught. Dhamma is not like that, obviously. We have been conditioned to go through what we will go through, like it or not, and it won't be pretty. We will often respond to life's challenges in akusala ways. There is no self holding control over that, there is no self that can give rise to kusala responses at will. But there can be moments of wise attention and heedfulness, and moments of understanding what we are going through - it's in those moments that seeds that will contribute to liberation lie are sown. Scott and others who have lost loved ones (who hasn't? maybe only me) thanks for letting me spout off about something I am not at all qualified to speak on. What a gasbag I am these days. Phil 5) #60685 From: "ken_aitch" Date: Thu Jun 22, 2006 5:01 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] The Abhidhamma Framework - My Understanding ken_aitch Hi Howard and RobM, --------- <. . .> H: > > But, and there do seem to be cases of this, where the commentaries introduce concepts and detailed "facts" that don't occur in the tipitaka, examples of which are kalapas and the very lovely, very pretty, but also apparently brand new psychological theory of citta processes. > > RM: > Of course, as part of the expansion, new things are revealed which do not necessarily appear in the Pitaka. I am not sure, but I suspect that kalapas were first introduced in Buddhadatta's Ruparupavibhaga (I will have to check). The framework of citta / cetasika / rupa /Nibbana / concepts originated in the Abhidhammavarata. The theory of citta processes was first introduced in the Vimuttimagga but considerably expanded in the Abhidhammattasangaha. All of these are later additions. ------- We are all aware of instances where, having heard the teaching in brief, people understood it in full. This happened to varying degrees. Sariputta heard only two lines of Dhamma before he became a sotapanna: Kondanna needed to hear the first half of the First Discourse. Less fortunate beings did not attain at all in that lifetime, and so they continued, listening, learning and (I would argue) asking questions. Because we DSG'ers don't understand the teaching in full, we naturally ask questions. Wouldn't it have been the same in the Buddha's day? Having understood that vipaka was not kamma, wouldn't people have wanted to know how the former consciousness fell away and became replaced by the latter, what came before, in between and after, how the object of one could also be the object of he other - and so on and so forth? You are saying that the answers we have now were "later additions." In other words, people like us in the Buddha's day received no answers to their questions. I can't believe that for a minute. ---------------- H: > > Moreover, there is a drifting into substantialism, with the misuse of terms such as 'sabhava', and with reifying mindstates (which, after all, are pa~n~natti!) - and this is not very good. RM: > Material written a thousand or fifteen hundred years after the Buddha will always reflect some later influences. For this reason, I am not keen to enter into ontological arguments (for example) as I believe that these are later additions. --------------- Maybe I can't speak as an impartial observer, but it seems to me that these perennial objections have been comprehensively dealt with at DSG every time they have been raised. But I am happy to start again. :-) Just taking one of them for now: please explain how ontological arguments could be other than central to any and every rational field of endeavour. Surely, in order that sensible, cohesive, progress can be made, all sciences and philosophies begin by settling on what is to be accepted as real and what is to be rejected as imaginary. (?) Ken H 16) #60686 From: upasaka@... Date: Thu Jun 22, 2006 1:35 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] The Abhidhamma Framework - My Understanding, no 1. upasaka_howard Hi, Rob - In a message dated 6/22/06 7:42:27 PM Eastern Daylight Time, rob.moult@... writes: > This morning, I was reading Y Karunadasa's "The Dhamma Theory - > Philosophical Cornerstone of the Abhidhamma", Wheel Publication > 412/413. This excellent article gives a detailed explanation of the > evolution of the use of the term "sabhava" through the Abhidhamma and > commentaries. > > Highly recommended reading, Howard; you should be able to google it. > ===================== Actually, I have that bookmarked. I've read it & liked it, but I've fogotten what he said with regard to that term. I'll look it over again. Thanks! With metta, Howard #60687 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Thu Jun 22, 2006 8:43 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] death of dear ones. scottduncan2 Dear Nina, All, Very kind of you to ask: N: "Scott, can you say in what way transformative? Did you experience a positive side to your suffering? This could be of help to others who suffer in a similar way or who have fears about loss and separation." I'll try to answer well. Please forgive the circumspectness of the response; I'm glossing over some details since they are not for the open forum. I mean no disrespect, nor to be cryptic for effect. Perhaps the context will help: Andrea, my wife,(I called her Andy) was diagnosed with bowel cancer in November of '03 and died at 3:00 a.m. on October 4th, '04. And, when we met, and this was years prior to any Buddhist influence for me, I knew her deeply somehow from the first moment though we had never met. The first thing I found myself learning, in the midst of my great sadness and anxiety, was the proper way to die. Andrea, a woman who was gentle, loving, and endowed with a depth of character unlike any I have ever encountered, struggled with her grief. The dying one is losing everything. One forgets this when caught up in the midst of considering life without the loved one, but she had to face the loss of every single thing in this life. And she showed such courage, grace, and love, in the midst of great pain, that I can only hope to be as composed and focused and loving on my death bed. I watched and was lucky enough to become aware that what I was seeing something marvelous in the unfolding. I recall one day, for example, and she was in the palliative care unit by then, she called me to her just after I had arrived from work. She told me, "I know your face - (by which she meant my troubled and grief-stricken look) its the same one I see when I look in the mirror." Right then I knew we understood each other. When I told her of the words I would be speaking at her funeral it was the absolutely most desolate, choking, devastating, and amazing conversation I had ever had in my entire life. And she thanked me for what I was going to say! Never in her pain did I ever see her speak in anger to another. Her concern for all the children was massive. Short hours before she would slip into the coma from which she would not awake, she took my hand and pulled me close, saying, "I'm golfing now." I knew immediately what she meant: she hated golfing with a passion and in life wouldn't have been caught dead golfing. Blissful black humour. Prior to her illness, she and I had worked hard on searching for a parcel of land and building a house in the country, in which we were planning to live and create a small organic farm. We'd been there four years. We both worked in the city and, together, the commute was delightful. With her diagnosis it became clear that life on the farm was over. I remember we spoke, deciding we'd have to pack it in out there, after all the effort, whether she lived or died because her health was extremely compromised. We sort of bitterly labelled the whole thing a pipe dream. And then I guess this was the first transformative experience I had because I suddenly felt no attachment to the place. I knew it was over. I knew that none of the dreams or things that had seemed so important and worth fighting for of any use. Again I was too caught up in grief and fear to really notice that the attachment had fallen away and that there was nothing left. Even later, when I felt totally different about all things of attachment, like as if I had no needs to speak of for much, I figured it must be psychological and grief-related. I don't think this was so. Somehow that has stuck with me. And so in this way some sort of transformation occured. The most transformative experience is the one I'll keep mostly silent about, but it occured about a month after death. Afterwards, although I had virtually no clue about the teachings of the Buddha beyond cliches and stereotypes, I knew completely that I had to pursue a Buddhist path. Inexplicably, at the time, and in the midst of grief and deep fatigue and the impossible daily tasks which, months before, were rote, I felt a deep amazement, joy, curiosity, and wonder at the apparent arising of a "spiritual" life beyond hope and apparently directly "Buddhist." Even months later, and with the unfolding of grief as it does, I am able to realise that that latter transformation was not just grief-driven and of the psyche (that is, mundane), but was a beautiful unexpected arising. I'd say this, again hopefully with the right attitude, that these experiences have shown me that incredibly transformative things just arise, are absolutely unbidden, but deeply conditioned. I guess, like the old saying goes, you had to be there. And that, in a nutshell, is why I'm here. I hesitate to offer this, and I apologise if it is inappropriate. I hope, Nina, that this is helpful. Please feel free to ask for clarification. Sincerely, Scott. #60688 From: "seisen_au" Date: Thu Jun 22, 2006 10:02 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] The Abhidhamma Framework - My Understanding, no 1. seisen_au Hi Howard, Rob and all, > > ------------------------------------- > > Howard: > > So, you are saying that the Abhidhamma Pitaka itself uses > the term > > 'sabhava' to mean nature/character? That the term wasn't just used > in the > > commentaries? I thought that the term was not used in the > Abhidhamma. > > > ===== Howard, I believe you are correct. As far as I am aware the term 'sabhava' does not occur in the Abhidhamma Pitaka. The only occurance of 'sabhava' in either the Sutta or Abhidhamma Pitaka is in the Patisambhidamagga passage on voidness. Regards Steve #60689 From: Ken O Date: Thu Jun 22, 2006 10:13 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Q. Dependent Origination ... How about upadana? And bhava ? ashkenn2k Hi Joop Bhava in the used of Buddhaghosa is kamma producing existence, which means kamma that produce three kinds of existence; sense-sphere existence, form-sphere existence, formless sphere existence. Birth is just being "born" in the three kinds of existence. Hence with craving not cease, kamma continue to accumulate (this will have to determine what kind of existence) and resulting in birth in the three different existence. Hence it is said in the sutta, SN 12.38 Volition <> Depends on one inclination. Some prefer to see suffering side of the DO, understanding that craving cause the whole mass of suffering Some prefer conditonality. With craving as condition, clinging arise, and with clinging as condition, existence arise, there is no I involve as this are just one aggregate condition the other aggregate. Some prefer impermance. As this formation is imperamanet, so is this citta.... so is this feelings... so is this clinging. Even while working, anger arise because of something, but anger cannot arise on its own, because when unplesant feelings come to be, anger arise. There is no I involved. When anger arise, unprofitable kamma accumulates, birth is condition... such is the origin of suffering. Now unpleaant feelings arise, but feeling does not last long, it will fades away, such is impermanence. Cheers Ken O #60690 From: sarah abbott Date: Thu Jun 22, 2006 10:18 pm Subject: Cetasikas' study corner 482- Non-Aversion/Adosa (n) sarahprocter... Dear Friends, 'Cetasikas' by Nina van Gorkom http://www.vipassana.info/cetasikas.html http://www.zolag.co.uk/ Questions, comments and different views welcome;-) ========================================== Ch 29, Non-Aversion(Adosa)contd ***** In the development of right understanding patience has to be applied. When there are many moments of akusala citta we should have patience to be mindful even of akusala citta. When there is aversion we may be annoyed about it, or we may take it for “my aversion”. When there is mindfulness of aversion it can be known as only a type of nåma which has arisen because of its appropriate conditions. At the moment of mindfulness there is non-aversion, adosa, instead of aversion, dosa. Loving kindness, mettå, is, as we have seen, a form of adosa which is in particular directed towards living beings. The Visuddhimagga (Chapter IX, 93) gives, apart from the definition of non-aversion, a definition of loving kindness or mettå: * "As to characteristic, etc. , loving kindness is characterized here as promoting the aspect of welfare. Its function is to prefer welfare. It is manifested as the removal of annoyance. Its proximate cause is seeing lovableness in beings. It succeeds when it makes ill-will subside, and it fails when it produces (selfish) affection." * Loving kindness can arise with right understanding or without it. Someone may be kind to others because he has accumulated kindness, but there may not be right understanding. If there is right understanding of the characteristic of loving kindness it can be developed. It can be developed as a subject of samatha, but one cannot succeed if one does not practise it in daily life. ***** Non-Aversion(Adosa)to be contd Metta, Sarah ====== #60691 From: "ken_aitch" Date: Thu Jun 22, 2006 10:46 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Knowledge of the Difference Between Naama and Ruupa: Making Theory Pra ken_aitch Hi Scott, -------------- <. . .> KH: > > That means that the path, itself, is a citta. S: > And, for this thread, would this be considered "supramundane?" --------------- Yes. -------------------- KH: > > The entire world (loka) is described in many suttas as a citta with its object and its cetasikas. In other words, it is only the momentary arising of the five khandhas, in one form or another. S: > The moment is the world or the world is the moment. Is that it? --------------------- Yes. In days gone by, it was common for DSG members to forcefully remind each other, "There is only the present moment!" Any theories that strayed from the all-encompassing rule were quickly brought into line. I might try to bring those days back again. :-) ------------------------- <. . .> S: > Okay, the cetasikas are supramundane. How are these moments considered to be transformative? In other words, how do defilements become "eradicated?" <. . .> The "functions are largely supramundane" could be elaborated more, if you have time, since I'm not quite sure what these functions are. ------------- Thirty-five cetasikas arise with every magga-citta. If you check your copy of Nina's "Cetasikas" (available on-line) you will see the functions performed by sanna, vedana, cetana, etc. (I'd quote a couple now but my computer is on the blink, and I can't find "Cetasikas.") Ten of those cetasikas, while common to mundane consciousness, are, in this instance, supramundane. The functions of the ten supramundane cetasikas are, of course, the most relevant to the Path. I like to think that we all have an idea, from experience, of how they destroy defilements. It reminds me of the conversations we have from time to time about visible object. We don't have direct understanding of visible object, but we use our eyes all day. We have some understanding that eye-consciousness experiences a certain kind of object before the thinking mind can attribute concepts to it. Similarly, all human beings have some practical experience of how panna distinguishes good from evil. With a knowledge of good and evil, people can exert 'wholesome effort' to perform acts of kindness and generosity. They can have 'wholesome mindfulness' of what they are doing. They can choose 'wholesome livelihoods,' and so on. So it is quite easy at this general-knowledge level to see how understanding, effort, mindfulness, livelihood etc., work to increase good tendencies and decrease bad tendencies. Of course, run-of-the-mill ordinary people don't understand that it is cetasikas, not people, that perform those functions. But you get my point that the conventional activities people commonly know about are recognisably the same as the functions performed by paramattha dhammas. Uniquely in supramundane path consciousness, the cetasikas don't just decrease unwholesome tendencies; they obliterate them permanently. And they don't just increase wholesome tendencies; they make them imperturbable. --------------- S: > Also, what is the "object" in this case, and how is it that it too "does not fall away?" Is the object Nibbaana? ---------------- Yes, Nibbana is unconditioned and so it is the one object that does not fall away. Cittas fall away, and so even arahants are not permanently conscious of nibbana. Ken H #60692 From: sarah abbott Date: Thu Jun 22, 2006 11:51 pm Subject: audio - Pre-India sarahprocter... Dear Friends, We've uploaded the latest edited discussions with A.Sujin in Bangkok, Oct '05 (pre-India series): http://www.dhammastudygroup.org/ Scroll down the last audio set at the end. Pls note the recording quality for the first day (morning and afternoon) is somewhat 'variable' -- Jon's recording chip had a fault in it, the Foundation's recording didn't work out, so a friend kindly lent us his tape which we worked with after some help from Tom W (thanks again Worasak and Tom!). The quality is better for the second day. For regular listeners, as usual, you'll appreciate these recordings and we can send out cds in due course. For those who aren't used to listening to discussions with A.Sujin and would like to give some a go, I recommend you start with some of the sets at the top of the audio section, such as the 'Erik series' or 'India 01'. The ones lower down are generally more detailed or weaker recording quality. With metta and our best wishes, Sarah (& Jon) ============= #60693 From: nina van gorkom Date: Fri Jun 23, 2006 2:20 am Subject: Re: [dsg] attention Suan. sabhava. The Abhidhamma Framework nilovg Hi Steve, Howard, Rob, op 23-06-2006 07:02 schreef seisen_au op seisen_@...: As far as I am aware the term 'sabhava' does not occur in the Abhidhamma Pitaka. The only occurance of 'sabhava' in either the Sutta or Abhidhamma Pitaka is in the Patisambhidamagga passage on voidness. --------- N: Suan wrote a post about this, showing its occurrence in the Tipitaka, but I am not good at searching. I found something in my file, not sure it is from Suan, on emptiness and good explanations about sabhava. It is from the Co. to the Patisambhidamagga which after all belongs to the Khuddaka Nikaya. Thus, to the Suttanta. Can this be of any help? End quote. Then follow refutations. ***** Nina. #60694 From: nina van gorkom Date: Fri Jun 23, 2006 2:20 am Subject: Visuddhimagga Ch XVII, 84 and Tiika. nilovg Visuddhimagga Ch XVII, 84 Natural Decisive Support-Condition (Pakatuupanissaya-Paccaya) Intro: As we have seen, there are three kinds of decisive support-condition: decisive support of object, aaramma.nuupanissaya-paccaya, decisive support of proximity, anantaruupanissaya-paccaya, and natural decisive support-condition, pakatuupanissaya-paccaya. Natural decisive support-condition, pakatuupanissaya-paccaya, is very wide. Kusala or akusala performed in the past that have been accumulated are cogent reasons for the arising of kusala citta and akusala citta at the present time. As we shall see kusala can condition akusala and akusala can condition kusala by way of natural decisive support-condition. Also concepts as climate, food, dwelling place and persons one associates with can be cogent reasons for the arising of kusala citta or akusala citta. ----------- Text Vis.84: (c) As to 'natural-decisive-support': the decisive-support is natural, thus it is a natural-decisive-support. Faith, virtue, etc., produced in, or climate, food, etc., habitual to, one's own continuity are called natural. Or else, it is a decisive-support by nature, thus it is a natural-decisive-support. The meaning is that it is unmixed with object and proximity. -------- N: The Tiika gives a word explanation of pakatuupanissayo, as pakata and upanissayo, or pakati and upanissayo. Pakata means done properly and pakati means naturally. As regards the term pakato, done properly, or done thoroughly (su.t.thukata), kusala and akusala which were "done thoroughly'', often performed, can become firmly accumulated, they can become habitual. In this way they are a cogent reason, a powerful inducement for the arising of kusala citta and akusala citta later on, which are the dhammas conditioned by them, the paccayupanna dhammas. The Vis. text speaks about produced in one's own continuity (attano santaane), and this refers to the continuous stream of the cittas of one¹s life, arising and falling away, succeeding one another. The accumulated kusala and akusala is carried on from moment to moment and can condition the arising again of kusala citta and akusala citta. In addition, the term "pakati'' which is connected with "pakatuupanissaya'', as naturally, by nature, has been explained: the conditioning dhamma is a cogent reason for the arising of the conditioned dhammas naturally, and it can condition them without the assistance of decisive support-condition of object or proximate decisive support-condition. The Tiika adds that this is an inward condition, stemming only from one¹s own nature (attano sabhaaveneva). For example, when there is strong confidence (saddhå) in kusala, this can be a cogent reason for the arising of kusala citta without the need to be dependent on decisive support-condition of object or proximity decisive support-condition. This is the meaning of its being Œunmixed with object and proximity¹. The Tiika elaborates on pakata, done thoroughly. As we have read in Vis. 80, decisive support-condition is not dispensed with its own fruit, its own fruit is dependent on it. The Tiika states that the coming forth of the fruit is because of a combination of causes. Confidence in kusala can lead to many kinds of kusala included in daana, siila, bhaavana. As to daana and siila that are habitual, it explains that they have been practised (upasevana) by knowing (vijaanana) and remembering (sañjanana), and by having them as habitual object. Conditioning factors of the past are cogent reasons for the arising of cittas at the present. The Tiika refers to the Pa.t.thaana, stating that jhaana is aroused by conditions of the present such as climate, food and lodging. These can be can be a natural-decisive-support-condition for jhaanacitta. -------- Text Vis.: It should be understood as variously divided up in the way beginning: 'Natural-decisive-support: with faith as decisive-support a man gives a gift, undertakes the precepts of virtue, does the duties of the Uposatha, arouses jhana, arouses insight, arouses the path, arouses direct-knowledge, arouses an attainment. With virtue ... With learning... With generosity ... With understanding as decisive-support a man gives a gift ... arouses an attainment. Faith, virtue, learning, generosity, understanding, are conditions, as decisive-support condition for [the repeated arising of] faith, virtue, learning, generosity, understanding' (P.tn.1,165). So these things beginning with faith are natural-decisive-support since they are both natural and decisive-supports in the sense of a cogent reason. ------------ N: The Tiika elaborates on the words, ŒIt should be understood as variously divided up¹. It refers to the Pa.t.thaana, which states, for example, that preceding kusala dhammas are related to some subsequent akusala dhammas by natural-decisive-support-condition. The same is said in the case of akusala dhammas that condition some kusala dhammas. The Tiika explains the expression Œfor some¹ (kesañci) which is used in the text. These words are not used in the case of contiguity-condition, where each preceding citta conditions the next citta, the Tiika states. It explains that in the case of decisive support of proximity-condition (anantaruupanissaya-paccaya), preceding kusala conditions the following kusala surely, not in some cases and not sometimes. The same is true in the case of akusala. But in the case of decisive support-condition of object, or natural-decisive-support-condition, the expression Œfor some¹ can be used, indicating that these factors operate in some cases, not always. ------ Conclusion: Accumulated unwholesome inclinations are a natural decisive support-condition for the arising of akusala citta at the present time. But even accumulated kusala can be a natural decisive support-condition for akusala citta. This shows us how deeply rooted akusala is and it reminds us of the danger of akusala. We read in the "Pa.t.thaana'' (§ 423,II b): One's knowledge of the Dhamma may be a natural decisive support-condition for conceit or for wrong view. Kusala can lead to aversion, it can be a natural decisive support-condition for aversion. When we make an effort to help someone else that person may not appreciate it and then aversion may arise. If we do not study the different conditions we may not understand how the doing of good deeds can be a condition for the arising of akusala citta. Kusala citta can lead to bodily discomfort, which is akusala vipåkacitta. This is produced by akusala kamma, but it is also conditioned by kusala citta by way of natural decisive support-condition. Phenomena which arise are not merely conditioned by one type of condition but by several types. Vipåka conditions kusala citta when one, for example, suffers bodily pain and is reminded by it that life is short and that one therefore should not delay the development of right understanding. Vipåka conditions akusala citta when one has aversion towards pain. Not only realities but also concepts can be a natural decisive support-condition for the phenomena which arise. External conditions, such as temperature, food, dwelling place and friends one associates with can be cogent reasons for the dhammas which they cause to arise. We can notice that good and bad friends condition our spiritual progress or decline. We read in the Vis. text that refers to the ŒPa.t.thaana¹ : ŒFaith, virtue, learning, generosity, understanding, are conditions, as decisive-support condition for [the repeated arising of] faith, virtue, learning, generosity, understanding' (P.tn.1,165). Learning stands for the Pali: suta, listening. When listening to the Dhamma conditons are accumulated for the arising of understanding and eventually for the arising of magga-citta. The natural decisive-support-condition demonstrates the power of accumulated kusala and akusala. Nobody can select the type of citta arising at the present moment. The natural decisive-support-condition pertains to our daily life and it reminds us of the intricacy of the manifold conditioning factors that are cogent reasons for the arising of kusala citta and akusala citta at the present time. ******** Nina. #60695 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Fri Jun 23, 2006 2:12 am Subject: Unsurpassable Seven ... !!! bhikkhu_ekamuni Friends: The Doctrine of the Seven Links to Awakening is Unmatched! Venerable Sariputta once told the Buddha: Unsurpassable is how the Blessed Buddha has taught the supreme efforts imbedded within the Seven Links to Awakening, that is: 1: The Awareness Link to Awakening. 2: The Investigation Link to Awakening. 3: The Energy Link to Awakening. 4: The Joy Link to Awakening. 5: The Tranquillity to Awakening. 6: The Concentration Link to Awakening. 7: The Equanimity Link to Awakening. Venerable Sir, among all these supreme teachings & states, this also is unsurpassable! Source (edited extract): The Exhaustive Speeches of the Buddha. Digha Nikaya. DN 28: Confirmed Conviction. Sampasadaniya Sutta. Bhikkhu Samahita, Sri Lanka. #60696 From: nina van gorkom Date: Fri Jun 23, 2006 2:40 am Subject: Re: [dsg] death of dear ones. nilovg Dear Scott, I was touched by your beautiful post. I printed it out for Lodewijk and he said that he was very impressed and found it most helpful. There are so many positive sides to this event.We can learn from this. A beautiful life ending in an examplary way: her courage, letting go of dear persons and things. Yes, the letting go must be very difficult when one faces it. And then the way you took it and finding your way to the Dhamma. It is so amazing how all such happenings are conditioned. Yes, you made it clear that it was not a flight from grief. I am impressed what you wrote: < I am > able to realise that that latter transformation was not just > grief-driven and of the psyche (that is, mundane), but was a beautiful > unexpected arising. I'd say this, again hopefully with the right > attitude, that these experiences have shown me that incredibly > transformative things just arise, are absolutely unbidden, but deeply > conditioned.> Yes, absolutely unbidden, but deeply conditioned. It shows us how anatta the events of life are. They are unbidden, we do not ask for them. The deeply accumulated conditions, also from past lives, are most powerful: natural decisive-support-condition indeed. How did your children take the loss? And now you have to think of them and this must surely also be a help for you. Nina. op 23-06-2006 05:43 schreef Scott Duncan op scduncan@...: > > The first thing I found myself learning, in the midst of my great > sadness and anxiety, was the proper way to die. #60697 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Fri Jun 23, 2006 3:15 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Knowledge of the Difference Between Naama and Ruupa: Making Theory Pra egberdina Hi KenH, Imagine the following scene. You are a philosophy lecturer, and I am a student of yours. I have doodled all over the lecture notes during one of your presentations, and left the paper behind, which you find as follows. On 22/06/06, ken_aitch wrote: > > > Hi Scott, > > You quoted the Abhidhammattha Sangaha where it explained that the path > factors were simply cetasikas. That means that the path, itself, is a > citta. > The right phrasing of the conclusion should be "That means that the path, itself, is a citta, if the path factors, in fact, are cetasikas" > The entire world (loka) is described in many suttas as a citta with > its object and its cetasikas. In other words, it is only the momentary > arising of the five khandhas, in one form or another. Cetasikas are not mentioned in the suttas. There is a mixing of metaphors going on here. > > When, figuratively speaking, the Noble Eightfold Path is being > travelled, the world is still the five khandhas. It is a citta > (vinnana-khandha) with supramundane cetasikas (sankhara-khandha) sanna > and vedana (s-and-v-khandhas) arising at the mind-door (I'm not sure > if we can class that as rupa-khandha) and with nibbana as its object. > And it is called the Path. More mixing of metaphors. Supramundane cetasikas and khandas. Nibbana as object Hmmmmm. I wonder if it's too late to switch to basketweaving. > > As I was saying, this spoils our fun if we want to see our world as a > place in space and time in which saintly people are performing acts of > dana and sila and progressing, one factor at a time, on some kind of > spiritual journey. How is citta as agent an improvement on people as agent? > > BTW, I hope I'm not shedding a negative light on the Dhamma; sometimes > I tend to overstate my case. :-) > The Dhamma of the Dhammasangani reads like a solipsist treatise. I hope it is not on th erequired reading list, or in the exams. Cheers, dude Herman #60698 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Fri Jun 23, 2006 3:31 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Knowledge of the Difference Between Naama and Ruupa: Making Theory Pra egberdina Hi Scott, On 22/06/06, Scott Duncan wrote: > > > I don't think, in the above, that this object ("there is nothing," or > "nothingness") has anything to do with Nibbaana or its opposite but > I'm likely to be wrong. These "aruupa-jhaana kusula cittas" which > experience these objects - are they considered to be supramundane? If > so I wonder what is their function and effect? I am not well up on the theory of supermundaneity and jhanas. I would rank it as useful to acquaint myself with as I would a theory of orgasm for the celibate. :-) > > H: "So I am wondering if the ultimate consciousness of the present > > moment is bounded by nothingness, wouldn't it be just as valid to say > that it is the nothingness that is ultimate? I think these are > difficult matters, but entirely central to any understanding of what > is real." > > > I'm not sure that "the ultimate consciousness of the present moment is > bounded by nothingness." You base this statement on the conclusion > that neither the past nor the future "exist" in the present and, thus, > since they don't exist, there is "nothingness." This nothingness > seems merely conceptual, not actual. The past moment has fallen away > but it conditioned the present moment, for example, since it was > actually present while arisen. Yes, I see what you mean. The interesting thing to find out, is how much of the present moment is also actually concept. > > Is it correct to make "nothingness" synonymous with Nibbaana? This > seems to be what you are suggesting, although I've likely > misunderstood you (yet again!). > I wasn't intending to equate Nibbana with nothingness, but I can see how that could be read into what I wrote. It was more about highlighting the problems associated with using the word "exist" in relation to Nibbana. > What do you think? > I think way too much for my own good :-) Thanks for asking, nonetheless Herman #60699 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Fri Jun 23, 2006 3:49 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Dependent Origination ... How about upadana? egberdina Hi KenO, > > Concepts cannot be directly experience. Because I think, one cannot > directly experience a tree but can experience the hardness of a tree > by touching it or colour of the tree. Likewise, paramathas are > objects that can be directly experience for eg a pleasant feeling. > In a sense, what cannot be directly experience, how can one know this > is suffering. And the realisation of this suffering is important as > it act as an percusor to our development. > I know that what you say here is standard theory, so nothing controversial there. I'm just wondering what direct experience is. Is it when consciousness and object are not-two? (No differentiating between nama and rupa). Kind Regards Herman #60700 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Fri Jun 23, 2006 4:07 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: ‘Cetasikas' study corner 433- mindfulness/sati (o) egberdina Hi Jon, I am using the opportunity provided by your temporary absence to get to the bottom of my intray :-) On 12/06/06, Jonothan Abbott wrote: > Hi Herman > > Herma > Yes, I think it probably comes down to words (or, to put that another > way, we are probably talking about different things ;-)). > > All I am saying is that dhammas are subject to various conditions > present and past (conditions that are for the most part beyond our > knowledge anyway), and they arise before we know it. > > The fact that things appear to go the way we direct them to is not an > observation concerning dhammas as such but is a statement concerning the > conventional world. > I am sure that you are right. We are not talking about the same things. What makes me curious is how you come to know about your dhammas and the conditions of their arising if they arise before you know them? When do you know them, if at all? > > The idea that the arising of unwanted emotions, feelings and thoughts > etc. does not have to translate into the performing of any unwanted > action is a questionable one I think. You perhaps mean there is the > potential for behavioural control, for example, by the development of > samatha to the stage that the hindrances are suppressed. But any such > suppression is not only difficult to attain, it is also difficult to > maintain (can easily be lost). > Surely you know about the Buddha's advice to cultivate the arisen and unarisen wholesome, and to eradicate the arisen and unarisen unwholesome. Was he only joking, do you think? How does the perceived difficulty come into it? > >In short, the givens of life and death do not have any fixed, determined > >actions as a necessary consequence. It is upto each person to discover what > >is a given, and what is not. The Buddha's suggestion, however, is that the > >mind is entirely a voluntary organ. > > > > In what sense do you see the mind as being an 'organ'? I don't think it > is anywhere described as such in the texts. > Is it in the texts that the mind can be brought to cessation? If that extremity is possible, then it is not inconceivable that a thought can be snuffed out before it arises, is it? Perhaps the mind is not talked of as an organ in the texts, but there is copious talk of training the mind. Let's talk about the mind as a horse, then. Is it possible to train a horse? Enjoy your holiday Herman #60701 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri Jun 23, 2006 4:29 am Subject: Cetasikas' study corner 483- Non-Aversion/Adosa (o) sarahprocter... Dear Friends, 'Cetasikas' by Nina van Gorkom http://www.vipassana.info/cetasikas.html http://www.zolag.co.uk/ Questions, comments and different views welcome;-) ========================================== Ch 29, Non-Aversion(Adosa)contd ***** The “near enemy” of loving kindness is selfish affection, attachment. Attachment tends to arise very closely after moments of loving kindness but we may not notice this. We should find out whether we want to be kind only to people we particularly like, or whether we are kind to whomever we meet, because we are truly concerned for his welfare. From our own experience we can learn to see the difference between loving kindness and selfish affection. If we are attached to someone we will miss him when he is no longer with us; attachment conditions aversion. When there is loving kindness we do not think of our own enjoyment in someone’s company. When loving kindness arises, there is detachment, alobha, and also equanimity or impartiality (tatramajjhattatå). ***** Non-Aversion(Adosa)to be contd Metta, Sarah ====== #60702 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri Jun 23, 2006 5:11 am Subject: Re: [dsg] death of dear ones. sarahprocter... Dear Scott, (Nina, Han and all), Thank you so much for sharing your very caring and moving account. It was clearly a great privilege to spend the time with Andy that you did and I'm sure the great help and support for each other was mutual. This morning I was busy running around doing last minute chores for our trip, but was able to make a little time for a coffee with a friend who's still having a difficult time after the death of both parents last year. She reminded me how quickly death comes and to really do what we can for our family and loved ones while we have the chance instead of thinking about ourselves as we are used to doing. --- Scott Duncan wrote: > The first thing I found myself learning, in the midst of my great > sadness and anxiety, was the proper way to die. Andrea, a woman who > was gentle, loving, and endowed with a depth of character unlike any I > have ever encountered, struggled with her grief. The dying one is > losing everything. One forgets this when caught up in the midst of > considering life without the loved one, but she had to face the loss > of every single thing in this life. ..... S: This is such a good reminder. So much of our concern is for ourselves, but when we're caring for the other or doing our best to help people there's no time to worry about 'life without the loved one' at those times. I think we can also see that the Dhamma really is our only refuge - understanding that all the problems in life are just in a single citta now. Sometimes we imagine all sorts of 'what if' problems, but when the time comes, as you've shown Scott, we manage, we struggle on and are often much the richer for what we learn about dhammas and priorities in life at such times. Of course we're also very fortunate if we are able to remember the wonderful qualities of the dear one who has passed away as you are, to know we did our best to assist and to be able to develop satipatthana. We're really very 'rich' if we've had the chance to hear the teachings, even in our grief and distress. Thank you all for openly sharing your concerns, reflections and transformative experiences. In an early post to DSG, Ven Dhammapiyo quoted from the Kosala Sutta, AN V, 49 (#3921). It's very moving, I find. Also the following sutta, AN V, 50, 'The Venerable Narada' is about another King whose wife had died. The King Munda didn't wash or eat or follow any of his duties, but clung day and night to her body. He was taken to see Ven Narada who reminded him of the same five truths as in the previous sutta about the inevitability of sickness, death and so on. Finally the lines (PTS transl, as in the previous sutta too): "Ungrieving, bearing all things, let him think: How now, How shall I best apply my strength to what's at hand?" After King Munda heard the discourse ending with these lines, he asked the name of it. "It is called, maharajah, the Plucker Out of Sorrow's Dart." The King (or rather maharajah) says that for him the Dhamma is 'sorrow's dart plucked out'. Then he had the body of his queen burnt and declared that from then on they'd bathe and anoint themselves, eat food and go about their daily business. Thanks again for your inspiring post and fine example, Scott. Han,Nina & others, thanks for your recent messages on the topic too. Metta, Sarah p.s In U.P. under 'Death' there are many excellent posts with helpful sutta quotes. Really closing down and leaving for the airport now:-) ======== #60703 From: Bhikkhu samahita Date: Fri Jun 23, 2006 4:35 am Subject: Re: Metta & The Pollutions ... bhikkhu_ekamuni James: Second shot: Think this about perceived 'enemy': "He has come here by his kamma... So has I! In that are we equal... Now let me guard my kamma, bodily, verbal, as mental..." -- vandana Friendship is the Greatest... Bhikkhu Samahita <....> #60704 From: "Joop" Date: Fri Jun 23, 2006 5:38 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Q. Dependent Origination ... How about upadana? And bhava ? jwromeijn Hallo Ken O Thanks for the information you haven given me. If you don't mind, I only make one remark on your messages #60678 and #60689 What i wanted to state is that D.O. is so a powerfull set of principles that it can be applied on three levels: - the three lifetimes application - the application within one lifetime - the application within one moment And what I, and Payutto, say is that the Suttas and (Buddhaghosa as far as I understand him) are saying the same. And the final thing I said was that in trying to understand D.O., in my daily life the one lifetime application is the most helpfull; and in reflecting on my vipassana meditation the application within one moment is helpfull. Metta Joop --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Ken O wrote: > > Hi Joop > > Bhava in the used of Buddhaghosa is kamma producing existence, which > means kamma that produce three kinds of existence; sense-sphere > existence, form-sphere existence, formless sphere existence. Birth > is just being "born" in the three kinds of existence. ..... #60705 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Fri Jun 23, 2006 5:51 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Knowledge of the Difference Between Naama and Ruupa: Making Theory Pra scottduncan2 Dear Herman, Hilarious! H: "I am not well up on the theory of supermundaneity and jhanas. I would rank it as useful to acquaint myself with as I would a theory of orgasm for the celibate." Not even the mysteries of nocturnal emission? H: "Yes, I see what you mean. The interesting thing to find out, is how much of the present moment is also actually concept." Yeah. I guess this would come down to the thinking too much aspect of things, as per your sign-off quip. ("Quip," I just realise, is a wholly ridiculous word.) At any rate, what you say brings to mind the Mahaa-Satipa.t.thaana-Sutta, where, in the section on The Contemplation of Mind Objects, is discussed The Six Internal and the Six External Sense-bases: "Herein, monks, a monk knows the eye, knows visible forms, and know the fetter that arises dependent on both (the eye and forms); he knows how the arising of the non-arisen fetter comes to be; he knows how the rejection of the arisen fetter comes to be; he knows how the non-arising in the future of the rejected fetter comes to be "Thus he dwells practising mind-object-contemplation on mind-objects internally, or externally, or both internally and externally. He dwells contemplating origination-factors in mind objects, or he dwells contemplating dissolution-factors in mind-objects, or he dwells contemplating both origination- and dissolution factors in mind-objects. Or his mindfulness that 'there are mind objects' is established in him to the extent necessary for knowledge and mindfulness. Independent he dwells, clinging to nothing in the world." It seems that what you refer to as concepts above might fall under the category "fetters" (sa.myojana). Nyanaponika lists ten fetters: personality belief, sceptisism, belief in purification through external observances, rules and rites, sensual lust, ill-will, craving for material existence, conceit, restlessness, and ignorance. Acharn Boriharnwanaket, in A Survey of Paramattha Dhammas, notes "[we] know the concept of a whole or a mass (gana pa~n~natti) because of the experience of visible object," (p. 250); and earlier, "[s]ince realties arise and fall away and succeed one another very rapidly, we cling to the shape and form of things, to a conglomeration or mass," (pp. 249-250). So what you say above is correct. Knowing "how the arising of the fetter comes to be" would be a way to avoid conceptualisation, or rather clinging to concepts. H: "I wasn't intending to equate Nibbana with nothingness, but I can see how that could be read into what I wrote. It was more about highlighting the problems associated with using the word "exist" in relation to Nibbana." Okay, sorry. Can you say more about this? H: "I think way too much for my own good" Join the club. See "concepts," above. Sincerely, Scott. #60706 From: upasaka@... Date: Fri Jun 23, 2006 3:12 am Subject: Re: [dsg] The Abhidhamma Framework - My Understanding, no 1. upasaka_howard Hi, Steve - In a message dated 6/23/06 1:03:24 AM Eastern Daylight Time, seisen_@... writes: > Hi Howard, Rob and all, > > > >>------------------------------------- > >>Howard: > >> So, you are saying that the Abhidhamma Pitaka itself uses > >the term > >>'sabhava' to mean nature/character? That the term wasn't just > used > >in the > >>commentaries? I thought that the term was not used in the > >Abhidhamma. >> > >===== > > Howard, I believe you are correct. As far as I am aware the > term 'sabhava' does not occur in the Abhidhamma Pitaka. The only > occurance of 'sabhava' in either the Sutta or Abhidhamma Pitaka is > in the Patisambhidamagga passage on voidness. -------------------------------------- Howard: Thank you, Steve. Yes, you are right that it is used there. There the meaning is apparently the literal, word-structure meaning of "own being"/"self-nature", and the PTSM denies existence to it. The PTSM, though, I understand to be a late addition to the suttas. Is it possible that the section denying sabhava was included so late as to be influenced by Nagarjuna's critique (circa 200 C.E.) of svabhava (Skt) as own being/self-nature? ------------------------------------- > > Regards > Steve > > ================== With metta, Howard #60707 From: Ken O Date: Fri Jun 23, 2006 8:54 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Dependent Origination ... How about upadana? ashkenn2k Hi Herman Citta cognize an object (an object can be an concept), hence it is one and not two. Cognizing an object does not mean it will helps us to understand the dhamma as it has no sabhava (controversial word :-)) hence one is unable to experience for himself the presence of dukkha, annatta and annicca. Just a simple quote, AN 126 by Ven Bodhi, the visible teaching <> Cheers Ken O #60708 From: Ken O Date: Fri Jun 23, 2006 9:42 am Subject: Re: [dsg] On rebirth ashkenn2k Hi Joop There are four possibilities: > 1. One has a (rather) eternal soul that transmigrates after death > in a new body. That is most times called reincarnation-belief. It's clear that that is not what the Buddha teached (although it's > nearly what Tibetan buddhists belief) > 2. The rebirth according Theravada, with the Abhidhamma method to > explain that there is citaa process of rebirth-linking (patisandhi) > 3. The annihilistic (not the same as 'nihilistic'!) view that's out > and over after physical death > 4. The agnostic view (cf Stephen Batchelor) that is not so far from > the view some Zen-buddhists have: we don't know what happens after death, don't worry about that. K: We wont know what is our next jati. A good moral behaviour in this life does not guarantee a good rebirth in the next life, but it will still bear fruits. MN 136, Greater Exposition of Action <<20. Therein Ananda, as to the person who abstains from killing living beings ... and holds right view, and on the dissolution of the body, after death, reappears in a state of deprivation...even in hell; either earlier he did an evil action to be felt as painful or later he did an evil action to be felt as painful, or at the time of death he acquired and undertook wrong view. Because of that, on the dissolution of death of the body, after death he has reappeared in a state of deprivation...even in hell. But since he has here abstained from killing living beings...and held right view, he will experience the result of that either here and now, or in his next rebirth or in some subsequent existence.>> > I think there are many Theravadins who wish and hope to get a heavenly rebirth, and behave morally well for that reason. That not a intrinsic reason that I prefer but an instrumental reason. I try to behave morally well without that kind of external reason; I keep the five precepts and the sila of the Noble Eightfold Path and try to guard my senses without expecting any reward in the future but because it feels better on this moment. k: For me as a Theravadin behaving morally is not about attaining good rebirth or because it is an instrumental thing to do, it is because only through behaving morally together with panna, then one can eventually attain the dealthless which means the elimination of all future rebirths, elimination of all sufferings. >So the question is: in how far am I responsible for the fate of one > being that is born after my death? (truncated)>Another question is: how about kamma without rebirth-belief? My answer is not completely clear to myself, but for this moment I say: yes, kamma works, in this moment, in this life. > K: Everyone is responsible for their own actions, according to Abhidhamma, an volition cause now could bear fruits in 100,000 aeons later. MN 135 Shorter Exposition of Action <<20. Beings are owners of their actions, student, heirs of their actions; they originate from their actions, are bound to their actions, have their actions as their refuge. It is action that distinguishes beings as inferior and superior>> AN 131 A Penetrative Exposition <> Cheers Ken O #60709 From: nina van gorkom Date: Fri Jun 23, 2006 9:51 am Subject: Abhidhamma in Daily Life 2. nilovg Dear friends, Nama and rupa are different types of realities. If we do not distinguish them from each other and learn the characteristic of each we will continue to take them for self. For example, hearing is nama; it has no form or shape. Hearing is different from ear-sense, but it has ear-sense as a necessary condition. The nama which hears experiences sound. Ear-sense and sound are rupas, which do not experience anything; they are entirely different from the nama which hears. If we do not learn that hearing, ear-sense and sound are realities which are altogether different from each other, we will continue to think that it is self which hears. The 'Visuddhimagga' (XVIII, 34) explains: Furthermore, nama has no efficient power, it cannot occur by its own efficient power... It does not eat, it does not drink, it does not speak, it does not adopt postures. And rupa is without efficient power; it cannot occur by its own efficient power. For it has no desire to eat, it has no desire to drink, it has no desire to speak, it has no desire to adopt postures. But rather it is when supported by rupa that nama occurs; and it is when supported by nama that rupa occurs. When nama has the desire to eat, the desire to drink, the desire to speak, the desire to adopt a posture, it is rupa that eats, drinks, speaks and adopts a posture.... Furthermore (XVIII, 36) we read: And just as men depend upon A boat for traversing the sea, So does the mental body need The matter-body for occurrence. And as the boat depends upon The men for traversing the sea, So does the matter-body need The mental body for occurrence. Depending each upon the other The boat and men go on the sea. And so do mind and matter both Depend the one upon the other. ****** Nina. #60710 From: nina van gorkom Date: Fri Jun 23, 2006 9:51 am Subject: Re: [dsg] atta-vaadupaadaana. nilovg Dear Sarah, I know you read in Switserland. Thank you for the audios, I downloaded them and will listen. I like your well thought out post on atta-vaadupaadaana. This one is important:< K. Sujin stresses that while we haven't had direct experience of the ti-lakkana, what is seen is likely to be considered as nicca, sukkha and atta. But when one of the khandhas, such as a rupa of this body is taken for self, it's sakkaaya di.t.thi. In Sammohavinodanii 2453, it refers to attaanudi.t.thi as the 'wrong view which follows self' and micchaadi.t.thi as being 'bad wrong view'. Does this have significance, I wonder?> I am glad to see the word attaanudi.t.thi, I could not find the Pali, but now I see: anu can mean: following. I enjoyed your post to Scott, with so many good reminders. Not to think too much of: if this or that happens. Happy holidays for both of you and warmest regards to your mother, Nina. op 20-06-2006 10:58 schreef sarah abbott op sarahprocterabbott@...: 1. As I mentioned, I understood from our discussions with A.Sujin that atta-vaadupaadaana doesn't only refer to sakkaaya-di.t.thi but is wider in meaning. #60711 From: nina van gorkom Date: Fri Jun 23, 2006 11:44 am Subject: Re: [dsg] The Abhidhamma Framework - My Understanding, no 2. nilovg Hi Howard, perhaps I was not clear enough on some points and I will try again. op 22-06-2006 23:49 schreef upasaka@... op upasaka@...: > --------- > N: The kalapas of rupa, I understand. Details in the Co. But in the > Dhammasangani we find: the four great Elements and the derived ruupas, > upaada or upaadaaya ruupas. Upaada: these are dependent on the four great > elements. What does this mean? They arise and fall away together, otherwise > there would not be dependence. ---------------------------------------- Howard: That doesn't follow, Nina. Conditions can precede resultant conditions. ---------------------------------------- N: certainly right, but I was thinking of sound that cannot arise alone, it needs also solidity and other ruupas. But for you this may not be a rational proof. > Another of your points: duration of ruupa compared to citta. We find in the > Dhammasangani and also in the Patthana under prenascence-condition Coming up > soon in Vis. Ch XVII), that several cittas arise dependent on a physical > base and on a ruupa that is sense object. Several cittas arising and falling > away, not just one. ----------------------------------------- Howard: I don't recall raising that issue. I have no problem with several cetasikas ceasing and new ones arising all while the same object-content, rupa or not, is present. ---------------------------------------- N: O.K. It is better to say: several cittas accompanied by cetasikas arising and falling away. -------------------------------------- Howard: What I object to is using the term 'sabhava' to mean something other than its internal structure dictates. In particular, the prefix 'sa' is dangerous, suggesting self/ownership. I'm not questioning that dhammas are distinguishable. ------------------------------------- N: Sa only indicates that they have different characteristics, there is nothing more to it. How could there be self ownership: cittas come and go unbidden, extremely fast, there is no owner of them. -------- > N: In the Books of the Abhidhamma all realities are classified as threefold: > kusala, akusala and abyaakataa, or avyaakataa. Avyaakata means not declared, > not determined. They are not determined as kusala nor as akusala, they are > indeterminate. --------------------------------------- Howard: Okay. That's interesting and reasonable: good, bad, and neutral I guess. --------------------------------------- N: Not quite. Avyaakata includes vipaakacittas, kiriyacittas, ruupa and nibbaana. ---------------------------------------- Howard: That's all fine, Nina. I'm missing the point you are making, though. I'm sorry. ---------------------------------------- N: This was in the context of my sabhava quote from the Saddaniti. See what follows here, that was my point: > For example, in the First Book of the Abhidhamma, the Dhammasangani, Book > III, Part I, Ch 1, we read about this triple classification of all > realities. > They are all dhammas each with their own specific characteristic, sabhaava. ---------------------------------------- Howard: So, you are saying that the Abhidhamma Pitaka itself uses the term 'sabhava' to mean nature/character? That the term wasn't just used in the commentaries? I thought that the term was not used in the Abhidhamma. If you are saying that it was, then I stand corrected. In any case, it is the use of the term I object to, not the idea that dhammas are distinguishable qualities/conditions. --------------------------------------- N: OK. No need to get hooked on a term. The Saddaniti is much later. Perhaps Suan will repost his old post on this. ---------------------------------------- N: You write: only.> ----------------------------------------- Howard: Nina, the word 'citta' is used in more than one way. One meaning is "mind". That meaning is not at issue here. Another meaning is "vi~n~nana". That is one meaning that is relevant here. A third meaning is "mindstate," i.e. in the sense of an aggregate consisting of vi~n~nana plus a large set of concomitant operations (cetasikas). It is that meaning I was writing about. Any such grouping thought of as a single thing is pa~n~natti and not a paramattha dhamma. ----------------------------------------- N: As was discussed before (post of Sarah's) citta, mano and vi~n~nana are the same in meaning, but in different contexts (mano, manodhaatu, etc) there is a preference for a particular term. Thus, whatever word we use, it is the chief in knowing an object, and the cetasikas fulfill each their own function. You write:< A third meaning is "mindstate," i.e. in the sense of an aggregate consisting of vi~n~nana plus a large set of concomitant operations (cetasikas). It is that meaning I was writing about. Any such grouping thought of as a single thing is pa~n~natti and not a paramattha dhamma.> ------- N: vi~n~naa.nakkhandha is citta and the other three naamakkhandhas are the accompanying cetasikas. They are classified by way of khandhas, but they are in fact citta and 52 cetasikas. They each have their own characteristic, function, manifestation and proximate cause. They are realities, not paññatti. The fourth application of mindfulness includes the five khandhas. You have to see dhamma in dhamma, that is, not a self in dhamma. How? When one citta or cetasika or ruupa that is included in the five khandhas appears to sati, then there can be right understanding of it, one dhamma at a time. Paññattis are not objects of sati and paññaa, they do not have the characteristics of impermanence, dukkha, anattaa. Lobha is included in the khandha of formations, it has to be known as not my lobha, but as a conditioned dhamma. Confidence is a sobhana cetasika, also included in the khandha of formations. When there is lobha, there are also lack of shame and lack of fear of blame, and ignorance, and restlessness. When there is mettaa, there is also confidence, detachment, sati. It is amazing how the khandhas change from moment to moment because of the proper conditions and they are real. Kamma is cetanaa cetasika, intention, how could that be a concept? It is real. It accompanies viññaa.na or citta, how could viññaa.na be a concept? Nina. #60712 From: upasaka@... Date: Fri Jun 23, 2006 8:55 am Subject: Re: [dsg] The Abhidhamma Framework - My Understanding, no 2. upasaka_howard Hi, Nina - I'm replying to the last part of your post: In a message dated 6/23/06 2:45:59 PM Eastern Daylight Time, vangorko@... writes: > You write:< A third meaning is "mindstate," i.e. in > the sense of an aggregate consisting of vi~n~nana plus a large set of > concomitant operations (cetasikas). It is that meaning I was writing about. > Any such > grouping thought of as a single thing is pa~n~natti and not a paramattha > dhamma.> > ------- > N: vi~n~naa.nakkhandha is citta and the other three naamakkhandhas are the > accompanying cetasikas. They are classified by way of khandhas, but they are > in fact citta and 52 cetasikas. They each have their own characteristic, > function, manifestation and proximate cause. > They are realities, not paññatti. -------------------------------------- Howard: But, Nina, I wasn't talking about a citta separately and cetasikas separately. Please reread what you quoted me as saying above. I was addressing a particular usage: the use of 'citta' to refer, not to instances of knowing, nor to other individual namas, but to mental packets consisting of knowing (vi~n~nana), the object known, and the other cetasikas having the same object as object, one such dhamma-aggregate following upon another, contiguously. The referring to such a packet as "a citta" is common, and such a packet is not a paramattha dhamma - it is a concept. -------------------------------------- > The fourth application of mindfulness includes the five khandhas. You have > to see dhamma in dhamma, that is, not a self in dhamma. How? When one citta > or cetasika or ruupa that is included in the five khandhas appears to sati, > then there can be right understanding of it, one dhamma at a time. Paññattis > are not objects of sati and paññaa, they do not have the characteristics of > impermanence, dukkha, anattaa. -------------------------------------- Howard: That's all just fine, Nina, but it has no bearing on what I was talking about. I'm sorry I wasn't clearer. ------------------------------------- > Lobha is included in the khandha of formations, it has to be known as not > my > lobha, but as a conditioned dhamma. Confidence is a sobhana cetasika, also > included in the khandha of formations. When there is lobha, there are also > lack of shame and lack of fear of blame, and ignorance, and restlessness. > When there is mettaa, there is also confidence, detachment, sati. It is > amazing how the khandhas change from moment to moment because of the proper > conditions and they are real. Kamma is cetanaa cetasika, intention, how > could that be a concept? It is real. It accompanies viññaa.na or citta, how > could viññaa.na be a concept? --------------------------------------- Howard: I don't think it is, Nina. :-) ======================= With metta, Howard #60713 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Fri Jun 23, 2006 3:40 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Q. Dependent Origination ... How about upadana? And bhava ? egberdina Hi Joop, On 23/06/06, Joop wrote: > > What i wanted to state is that D.O. is so a powerfull set of > principles that it can be applied on three levels: > - the three lifetimes application > - the application within one lifetime > - the application within one moment > > And what I, and Payutto, say is that the Suttas and (Buddhaghosa as > far as I understand him) are saying the same. > And the final thing I said was that in trying to understand D.O., in > my daily life the one lifetime application is the most helpfull; and > in reflecting on my vipassana meditation the application within one > moment is helpfull. > Do you, or Payutto, have any thoughts about the significance of DO with only 10 links? That is, without ignorance and formations (DN15). I am not being lazy in asking you, I have plenty to read as it is. And there is the football, of course :-) Kind Regards Herman #60714 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Fri Jun 23, 2006 3:54 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Dependent Origination ... How about upadana? egberdina Hi KenO, Thanks for the reply. Please accept that in discussing I am not arguing with YOU. I am just trying to draw out the implications of what is being said. On 24/06/06, Ken O wrote: > > > Citta cognize an object (an object can be an concept), hence it is > one and not two. Cognizing an object does not mean it will helps us > to understand the dhamma as it has no sabhava (controversial word > :-)) hence one is unable to experience for himself the presence of > dukkha, annatta and annicca. > So are you saying that the smallest packet of experience, any paramattha dhamma, is the same as seeing a tree, insofar as neither events allow for realising the 3 charactersitics? Rather it is something else that sees the 3 chrs? > Just a simple quote, > AN 126 by Ven Bodhi, the visible teaching > < when greed is absent that it is absent -- that is a way the Dhamma is > directly visible>> > Kind Regards Herman #60715 From: LBIDD@... Date: Fri Jun 23, 2006 3:54 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] The Abhidhamma Framework - My Understanding, no 2. lbidd2 Hi Howard, Regarding the simultaneous arising of several cetasikas, you are correct that commentary asserts this but it doesn't assert that a group of paramattha dhammas can be an object of one consciousness. Contrast this with the madhyamika strategy of regarding all experience as conceptual: MMK IV,1: "Apart from the cause of form, form cannot be conceived. Apart from form, the cause of form is not seen." To revisit your discussion of reason, I think all understanding, including insight knowledge, is a matter of reason. The difference between insight and other forms of understanding is purely a practical matter. Insight changes one's perceptions and values, while understanding how to drive a car enables you to buy a car and send some mechanic's children to college. Understanding always has to do with relationships. Because of that one might say all understanding is conceptual but I think that misses the point of looking for the basic elements of experience, which is Theravada's unique approach. Commentary certainly supports this. Larry #60716 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Fri Jun 23, 2006 4:25 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Knowledge of the Difference Between Naama and Ruupa: Making Theory Pra egberdina Hi Scott, On 23/06/06, Scott Duncan wrote: > > > Not even the mysteries of nocturnal emission? > :-) :-) > > H: "I wasn't intending to equate Nibbana with nothingness, but I can > > see how that could be read into what I wrote. It was more about > highlighting the problems associated with using the word "exist" in > relation to Nibbana." > > > Okay, sorry. Can you say more about this? > Understanding existence is core to the Dhamma, I think. I agree with KenH in another post somewhere that ontology, what is real, is at the heart of any Dhamma, not questions of epistemology or soteriology. I cannot say anything at all about Nibbana in respect of what it is, but only in respect of what it isn't. I think we talked before about coming to know things negatively, by a process of elimination almost. Nothingness is a good parallel. We do not know absence as a positive, it has no positive quality, no thereness ie we cannot say nothing or absence or lack exists. Nonetheless we are intimately aware of nothingness, and all our consciousness is suffused with notions of nothing and negation. So even though we do not say "nothing exists" we still acknowledge, if implicitly, that nothing is real (has reality). I hope the above is helpful. If not, keep asking. I do not (negating again :-)) have all the answers on nothing, but I would reckon knowing nothing would be as important as knowing something. Kind Regards Herman #60717 From: "Phil" Date: Fri Jun 23, 2006 4:32 pm Subject: Re: Abhidhamma in Daily Life 2. philofillet Hi Nina and all Thank you for this. As it happens, I had also taken out ADL this morning. It is best for us to returns to the basics and keep our speculations to a minimum, I think. We ahve to be aware of the tendency to want to understand much too much much too soon. Always back to the beginning. > hearing is nama; it has no form or > shape. Hearing is different from ear-sense, but it has ear-sense as a > necessary condition. I always find it helpful when I hear Acharn Sujin point out that nama is more subtle than rupa - or "refined." I think subtle is easier to understand. Rupa appears in a more apparent way? Sarah also makes a good point in a talk related to this - it depends on conditions whether one will find it easier to know nama or rupa, and of course that is a momentary thing. But generally speaking, nama is more subtle. Phil #60718 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Fri Jun 23, 2006 4:36 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] On rebirth egberdina Hi KenO, On 24/06/06, Ken O wrote: > > > K: Everyone is responsible for their own actions, according to > Abhidhamma, an volition cause now could bear fruits in 100,000 aeons > later. If the Abhidhamma says that everyone is responsible for their own actions, than I am a fan. And you have said that everyone is responsible for their own actions, so I am a fan of yours. Can I buy a T-shirt :-) Attributing kamma to conditions is kamma, not very good kamma. Denial of freedom to act or not to act is kamma, not very good kamma. Kind Regards Herman #60719 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Fri Jun 23, 2006 4:40 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Abhidhamma in Daily Life 2. egberdina Hi Phil, On 24/06/06, Phil wrote: > > > Hi Nina and all > > Thank you for this. As it happens, I had also taken out ADL this > morning. It is best for us to returns to the basics and keep our > speculations to a minimum, I think. We ahve to be aware of the tendency > to want to understand much too much much too soon. Always back to the > beginning. > I don't disagree with you at all, in fact, I agree with you. Let the record show it !! > > > hearing is nama; it has no form or > > shape. Hearing is different from ear-sense, but it has ear-sense as a > > necessary condition. > So where does the notion of ear-sense come from? How is that not speculative? Kind Regards Herman #60720 From: "Phil" Date: Fri Jun 23, 2006 4:53 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Abhidhamma in Daily Life 2. philofillet Hi Herman > > So where does the notion of ear-sense come from? How is that not speculative? Suttas, amigo. In SN 35 to begin with. Sound, ear sense and hearing. And the same triad for all the sense doors. This is what the Buddha taught, so it is not speculating if we listen, reflect on it and stop there when there is no more fruitful reflection to be had without straining our feeble understanding. Speculating starts when we try to exploit our experience to speed up the enlightenment process. We are conditioned to do that because we cling so tightly to this one lifetime and what we accomplish in it. Phil #60721 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Fri Jun 23, 2006 5:19 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Abhidhamma in Daily Life 2. egberdina Hi Phil, Thanks for your reply. > Hi Herman > > > > > So where does the notion of ear-sense come from? How is that not > speculative? > > > Suttas, amigo. In SN 35 to begin with. Sound, ear sense and hearing. > And the same triad for all the sense doors. This is what the Buddha > taught, so it is not speculating if we listen, reflect on it and stop > there when there is no more fruitful reflection to be had without > straining our feeble understanding. Do you think that the ear-sense of SN35 is anything more than just the workings of the ears? Is there any sense in there of the very fine rupa which is the later speculative view? Speculating starts when we try to > exploit our experience to speed up the enlightenment process. Yes, this may well be what underlies speculation. And speculation is merely going beyond what is experienced or experiencable. We can all directly influence the quality of our hearing by turning our heads, or covering our ears, and so arrive at a fairly safe, not-too-speculative view that hearing and the ears are causally connected. But I sincerely doubt that ear-sense of the later tradition is anything but non-verifiable speculation. Just my thoughts Kind Regards Herman #60722 From: Jaran Jainhuknan Date: Fri Jun 23, 2006 7:16 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Abhidhamma in Daily Life 2. jjnbdal Dear Nina: Learning the difference between nama and rupa begins with intellectual understanding, such as reading this post, and ends with full enlightenment. There are different levels of understanding in between. The progress is so gradual that we don't notice it. Jaran --- nina van gorkom wrote: > Dear friends, > > Nama and rupa are different types of realities. If we do not > distinguish > them from each other and learn the characteristic of each we > will continue > to take them for self. For example, hearing is nama; it has no > form or > shape. Hearing is different from ear-sense, but it has > ear-sense as a > necessary condition. The nama which hears experiences sound. > Ear-sense and > sound are rupas, which do not experience anything; they are > entirely > different from the nama which hears. If we do not learn that > hearing, > ear-sense and sound are realities which are altogether > different from each > other, we will continue to think that it is self which hears.� > > The 'Visuddhimagga' (XVIII, 34) explains: > > Furthermore, nama has no efficient power, it cannot occur by > its own > efficient power... It does not eat, it does not drink, it does > not speak, it > does not adopt postures. And rupa is without efficient power; > it cannot > occur by its own efficient power. For it has no desire to eat, > it has no > desire to drink, it has no desire to speak, it has no desire > to adopt > postures. But rather it is when supported by rupa that nama > occurs; and it > is when supported by nama that rupa occurs. When nama has the > desire to eat, > the desire to drink, the desire to speak, the desire to adopt > a posture, it > is rupa that eats, drinks, speaks and adopts a posture.... > Furthermore (XVIII, 36) we read: > > And just as men depend upon > A boat for traversing the sea, > So does the mental body need > The matter-body for occurrence. > And as the boat depends upon > The men for traversing the sea, > So does the matter-body need > The mental body for occurrence. > Depending each upon the other > The boat and men go on the sea. > And so do mind and matter both > Depend the one upon the other. > > ****** > Nina. > > #60723 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Fri Jun 23, 2006 7:33 pm Subject: Re: Knowledge of the Difference Between Naama and Ruupa: Making Theory Pra scottduncan2 Dear Herman, Thank you for the below: H: "Understanding existence is core to the Dhamma, I think. I agree with KenH in another post somewhere that ontology, what is real, is at the heart of any Dhamma, not questions of epistemology or soteriology. Okay, maybe not salvation, certainly the nature of being, or reality, and of the ultimate nature of things, and, I would say (perhaps in a qualified sense) what it means to know something or a study of knowledge and sources of knowledge is also central. H: "I cannot say anything at all about Nibbana in respect of what it is, but only in respect of what it isn't. I think we talked before about coming to know things negatively, by a process of elimination almost." We did. I did/didn't get/agree with it. Coming to know things negatively is, as I see it, the polar opposite to, shall I say, "standard" DSG-stated Theravada understanding (which is to know realities as they are), is it not? How is your idea about "knowing" to be compared and contrasted? H: "Nothingness is a good parallel. We do not know absence as a positive, it has no positive quality, no thereness ie we cannot say nothing or absence or lack exists. Nonetheless we are intimately aware of nothingness, and all our consciousness is suffused with notions of nothing and negation. So even though we do not say "nothing exists" we still acknowledge, if implicitly, that nothing is real (has reality)." I'm afraid I don't follow. Why the focus on nothingness? Why is it important to know absence? In what way is "all our consciousness suffused with notions of nothing and negation?" And how is this important? In what sense is nothing "real?" And how is this important? Please, if you can, give me your definition of the meaning of "real" or "reality." (You said ask questions.) I was unable to clarify where you were coming from above by a bit of surfing. I checked ATI under "nothingness." MN 106, MN 121, AN 9.41, MN1, MN105, AN 11.10. SN 5.6, SN 41.7, and DN9 all referred to the seventh immaterial jhaana, "the sense base of nothingness." There were like sixty five others and so I figured if the first ten in a row were consistent, then likely the same would continue. Jhaanas being states of absorption, I don't see the connection. Any suttas to recommend? I looked at "su~n~nata" finding it to mean "void, empty, devoid of lusts, evil dispositions, and kamma but especially of soul, ego," (PTS PED). I checked a related word, "aaki~nca~n~na" (same source) which is "the state of having nothing, absence of any possesions, [and] nothingness (the latter philosophical)." "Aaki~nca~n~na-aayatana" it the name of the seventh jhaana realm or sphere. Related to the just above, "vimokkha" (same source) which is "deliverance, release, emancipation, dissociation from the things of the world, Arahantship." I guess I'll need a basic, down-to-earth description of your ideas about "nothingness" in order to see where you're coming from. Are you up to it? Sincerely, Scott. #60724 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Fri Jun 23, 2006 7:53 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Buddhism & Solipsism (was death of dear ones.) egberdina Hi Sarah and all, On 23/06/06, sarah abbott wrote: > > > I think we can also see that the Dhamma really is our only refuge - > understanding that all the problems in life are just in a single citta > now. I am writing strictly academically here. I would equate the statement that the world is this single citta with a definition of solipsism. I would agree that such notions are implicit in certain revered texts. But texts that cannot or do not account for the existence of other beings/minds are solipsist. And they are extremely poor philosophy, in my book. Because the very fact of the existence of the text denies the beliefs held in them. Why write a book if there is no audience? I think that you are equating Dhamma with solipsism in the above, and I would suggest that displacing the reality of suffering from a human level to a citta level can only be temporarily maintained, and is at best a diversion. All comments welcome. Kind Regards Herman #60725 From: upasaka@... Date: Fri Jun 23, 2006 6:07 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] The Abhidhamma Framework - My Understanding, no 2. upasaka_howard Hi, Larry - In a message dated 6/23/06 6:58:05 PM Eastern Daylight Time, LBIDD@... writes: > Hi Howard, > > Regarding the simultaneous arising of several cetasikas, you are correct > that commentary asserts this but it doesn't assert that a group of > paramattha dhammas can be an object of one consciousness. ---------------------------------------- Howard: I didn't claim that it did, Larry. I simply said to Nina that a mindstate that is a bundle of awareness and a number of cetasikas is concept, and not a paramattha dhamma. ---------------------------------------- > > Contrast this with the madhyamika strategy of regarding all experience > as conceptual: > > MMK IV,1: "Apart from the cause of form, form cannot be conceived. Apart > from form, the cause of form is not seen." ------------------------------------------ Howard: Well, I am not a Mahayanist, and I certainly disagree with the notion that all experience is conceptual. ---------------------------------------- > > To revisit your discussion of reason, I think all understanding, > including insight knowledge, is a matter of reason. > ----------------------------------------- Howard: Well, we differ there. I think that pa~n~na is rather much like an uninfected sa~n~na. ---------------------------------------- The difference> > between insight and other forms of understanding is purely a practical > matter. Insight changes one's perceptions and values, while > understanding how to drive a car enables you to buy a car and send some > mechanic's children to college. Understanding always has to do with > relationships. Because of that one might say all understanding is > conceptual but I think that misses the point of looking for the basic > elements of experience, which is Theravada's unique approach. Commentary > certainly supports this. > > Larry > > ======================= With metta, Howard #60726 From: upasaka@... Date: Fri Jun 23, 2006 6:30 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Abhidhamma in Daily Life 2. upasaka_howard Hi, Herman (and Phil) - In a message dated 6/23/06 8:33:53 PM Eastern Daylight Time, hhofmeister@... writes: > Do you think that the ear-sense of SN35 is anything more than just the > workings of the ears? Is there any sense in there of the very fine > rupa which is the later speculative view? > ===================== RobertK once said something with regard to sense doors that made a bit of sense to me and led me to think of the physical sense doors as what might be called "locational rupas". Let me explain what I mean. A physicist or biologist would probably tell us that hearing is done by the brain - in fact, all sensing is done by the brain. But, when we hear, doesn't it seem that the hearing is associated/based at the general "ear location". Likewise, don't smells seem to be at the nose location, sights at the eye location, and so on? When we touch some sandpaper, where is it felt? Not in the brain, but in a particular bodily location. I'm not speaking in terms of physical organs, but of phenomenology. Phenomenologically, it seems to me that sensings are associated with what might well be called "locational rupas". I realize that this is a novel, perhaps very odd, way of looking at the matter - but it makes experiential sense to me. With metta, Howard #60727 From: "ken_aitch" Date: Sat Jun 24, 2006 12:13 am Subject: Re: Knowledge of the Difference Between Naama and Ruupa: Making Theory Pra ken_aitch Hi Herman, ------------- H: > Imagine the following scene. You are a philosophy lecturer, and I am a student of yours. I have doodled all over the lecture notes during one of your presentations, and left the paper behind, which you find as follows. > > > Hi Scott, > > You quoted the Abhidhammattha Sangaha where it explained that the path > factors were simply cetasikas. That means that the path, itself, is a > citta. > H: The right phrasing of the conclusion should be "That means that the path, itself, is a citta, if the path factors, in fact, are cetasikas" ------------- No prizes for guessing which student this belongs to! His corrections would have been valid if the legitimacy of the Abhidhammattha Sangaha had been in question. But it wasn't and they aren't. ----------------------------- > > The entire world (loka) is described in many suttas as a citta with > its object and its cetasikas. In other words, it is only the momentary > arising of the five khandhas, in one form or another. H: Cetasikas are not mentioned in the suttas. There is a mixing of metaphors going on here. ----------------------------- I don't know if they are called that by name, but cetasikas are mentioned throughout the suttas. As for "a mixing of metaphors," there are no metaphors in those sentences, there are only descriptions of absolute reality. A different set of terminologies is used in each of the two sentences, separated by the phrase, "in other words." ---------------------------------- > > When, figuratively speaking, the Noble Eightfold Path is being > travelled, the world is still the five khandhas. It is a citta > (vinnana-khandha) with supramundane cetasikas (sankhara-khandha) sanna > and vedana (s-and-v-khandhas) arising at the mind-door (I'm not sure > if we can class that as rupa-khandha) and with nibbana as its object. > And it is called the Path. H: More mixing of metaphors. Supramundane cetasikas and khandas. Nibbana as object Hmmmmm. I wonder if it's too late to switch to basketweaving. ---------------------------------- Nibbana can be an object of consciousness: this is elementary. Basket Weaving is a postgraduate course. ----------------- > > As I was saying, this spoils our fun if we want to see our world as a > place in space and time in which saintly people are performing acts of > dana and sila and progressing, one factor at a time, on some kind of > spiritual journey. H: How is citta as agent an improvement on people as agent? ------------------ There was no mention of citta as agent. The point was that people were attached to their conventional (illusory) worlds. ----------------------------- > > BTW, I hope I'm not shedding a negative light on the Dhamma; sometimes > I tend to overstate my case. :-) > H: The Dhamma of the Dhammasangani reads like a solipsist treatise. I hope it is not on the required reading list, or in the exams. ----------------------------- I have never read it myself. To pass this subject, students only need to know the difference between concepts and realities. Ken H (MA PhD) #60728 From: "Joop" Date: Sat Jun 24, 2006 3:30 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Q. Dependent Origination ... and football jwromeijn --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Herman Hofman" wrote: > > Hi Joop, .... Hallo Herman Guus Hiddink (and some australian boys) did a great job in football (a better word than 'soccer'). I read in a newspaper that a abbott of a Cambodian monastery has forbidden his monks to shout about results when looking football on TV, and had said that they should end monkhood when they still did that. The journalist (looking for news where there is no news) found that ridiculous. I like looking to our (dutch) team and I am at that moment patriotic. But I also know: it's a hype and very superficial; it had to be seen as 'only a game'. It's - like everything - impermanent; that brings me to your D.O. question: " Do you, or Payutto, have any thoughts about the significance of DO with only 10 links? That is, without ignorance and formations (DN15)." Well, I'm not an expert. What I know that the Buddha explained D.O. several times, and most times (as can be read in several Sutta) only some steps. It was later that commentators (who as scholastics did not like 'loose ends') made a system of 12 links of it, combining parts of several Suttas. As I understand it (but that's not scholastic nor orthodox) the Buddha prefered to explain the principles of D.O., not the 'system'. The principles: When there is this, that comes to be; with the arising of this, that arises. When this is absent, that does not come to be; with the cessation of this, that ceases. I like for example the verion in the Kaccayanagotta-sutta, because the 11 links in it are preceded by: " 'Everything exists' - this, Kaccayana, is one extreme 'Everything does not exist' - this, Kaccayana, is the second extreme Kaccayana, without appoaching either extreme, the Tathagata teaches you a doctrine by the middle." That D.O. in DN 15 ends with "namarupa" does not -as far as I understand - have a deep reason. The principle is more important the the comple 'mechanism'. Another point that interest me: the Buddha did not describe as a cycle! He did it on two ways; up and down and (what is called 'in reverse order') from down to up. The cycle (more or less the cycle of samsara) is made of it later by commentaries. Perhaps we meet each other in the final and if not: so be it. Metta Joop #60729 From: nina van gorkom Date: Sat Jun 24, 2006 5:27 am Subject: Re: [dsg]Q. Abhidhamma in Daily Life 2. nilovg Dear Jaran, I am delighted to hear from you. I hope your father is well and maybe you can make it to India next year? Jan. 13 we are in Bgk for T.A.'s birthday and then to Chiengmai, Dhammahome, all in Thai. op 24-06-2006 04:16 schreef Jaran Jainhuknan op jjnbdal@...: Learning the difference between nama and rupa begins with intellectual understanding, such as reading this post, and ends with full enlightenment. There are different levels of understanding in between. The progress is so gradual that we don't notice it. ------- N: As Phil says, we have to go back to basics all the time. We believe that we have understood intellectually about naama and ruupa, but we have to listen again, consider again. We better not think too much of the end result, that distracts from the present moment. I agree that the progress is very gradual. when we look back we may notice that we understand today more than a year ago, but when we measure, lobha will come in. Kh Sujin explains that we have to become familiar with the characteristics of nama and rupa, one by one, and then paññaa will know their difference. It is not our task, but paññaa's. ***** Nina. P.S. Since I will change computer to Mac OS 10, I like a Thai font. Could you perhaps send one off list, then the technician can help me install it. Thank you very much. #60730 From: "Joop" Date: Sat Jun 24, 2006 5:54 am Subject: Re: [dsg] On rebirth jwromeijn Hallo Ken I think there are hardly more discussion points between us. Your view is much more according Theravada then mine. No problem. The same about D.O. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Ken O wrote: > > Hi Joop > > K: We wont know what is our next jati. A good moral behaviour in > this life does not guarantee a good rebirth in the next life, but it > will still bear fruits. That is correct. But I don't worry about that at all. I try to live in this moment Metta Joop #60731 From: nina van gorkom Date: Sat Jun 24, 2006 6:08 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Q. Abhidhamma in Daily Life 2. nilovg Hi Howard, not odd at all. You yourself understand that there is a definite connection of earsense and the hearing of sound. This is the meaning of aayatana: association or meeting of several dhammas. In my answer to your remarks about what you call packet of citta and cetasikas (in Framework of Abh), I was going to touch on this subject. Hold it! For the experience of hearing there is the association of several dhammas, not concepts: sound, a rupa, impinges on the earsense, another rupa, and then there are conditions for cetasika phassa that accompanies hearing and causes hearing to 'contact' (but not physical contact) sound, so that right at that same moment hearing hears sound. The accompanying cetasikas (in this case seven in all) are also aayatanas. Aayatana, being association or meeting, is never alone, there have to be several and they are realities. You wrote in your other post: N: Now, it is the idea of packet, being a concept.Separately you consider them realities, but together they become a concept? The word packet may be confusing, at least to me. You understand and have said before that you are aware of the relations between citta and cetasikas. I am glad you appreciate relations. Citta and cetasikas arising together condition one another by way of conascence-condition, mutuality-condiiton, dependence-condition and others. They are a firm support to each other. The Patthaana describes relations between realities, not between concepts. A reality cannot become a concept, as I see it. But I try to understand why you think so. Perhaps you think: when citta and cetasikas are one at a time experienced, they are realities, but when we take citta and cetasikas together, there is a whole and this cannot be directly experienced, is thus a concept. It is a question similar to another one you had about ruupa: you do not accept as real ruupa outside in the forest arising and falling away. Remember the discussion with Sarah. You are concerned about reifying, something existing. I will not argue too much if this is your conviction. We could argue ad infinitum, it distracts from this moment. I agree that by insight one citta or one cetasika at a time can be object of understanding. Not more than one object at a time can be experienced. But the Buddha taught relations between realities, not concepts. The conascence-condition pertains to citta and cetasikas together, realities.Their being together does not change them into a concept. They arise at the same base, experience the same object, and then fall away together immediately, before you can blink an eye. That is not reification. I do not call that: exist. Only through satipatthaana their characteristics can be directly known and then it will be clearer what citta really is, what cetasika really is. Now we cannot very well distinguish them, only by thinking about them. You said to Larry: This is interesting. I listened to Kh Sujin who spoke about wrong saññaa which always remembers what is perceived as self or something, instead of realizing a reality as just ruupa or just naama. The right saññaa is perception of impermanence, dukkha, anatta. This is what you call an uninfected sa~n~na. I like the expression. Now there is mostly attaa-saññaa. She said that the term saññaa is used instead of citta because its role is so important. But when it is not realized as a type of naama it is self which remembers. Just like now: we take it so much for granted that we 'see' a table or paper, or our hand, but saññaa, not me, remembers all those things around us and remembers what they are used for. Nina. op 24-06-2006 07:30 schreef upasaka@... op upasaka@...: Phenomenologically, it seems to me that sensings are associated with what might well be called "locational rupas". I realize that this is a novel, perhaps very odd, way of looking at the matter - but it makes experiential sense to me. #60732 From: nina van gorkom Date: Sat Jun 24, 2006 6:27 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Q. Abhidhamma in Daily Life 2. nilovg Dear Phil, op 24-06-2006 01:32 schreef Phil op philco777@...: > hearing is nama; it has no form or > shape. Hearing is different from ear-sense, but it has ear-sense as a > necessary condition. I always find it helpful when I hear Acharn Sujin point out that nama is more subtle than rupa - or "refined." I think subtle is easier to understand. Rupa appears in a more apparent way? --------- N: Hardness is coarser than the body-consciousness that experiences it. Hardness appears through the body-door and can be directly experienced. The naama which experiences hardness can only be known through the mind-door. The Mind-door is not apparent now, only at the first stage of insight when there are several mind-door processes of cittas which experience nama and rupa. I have been thinking of your reminder of finding comfort in Dhamma with lobha. We are worldlings and thus it is natural that cittas with lobha arise all the time in between cittas with understanding. When the Buddha consoled bereaved people with Dhamma, they found relieve, and of course there must have been lobha. But they also listened and some understanding could begin. We may well be attached to dhamma, but, don't forget, when listening understanding can grow. This morning I listened to the MP3, Oct 5, 005, Sarah just announced and thought of you: Kh Sujin said : no need to try to know whether the citta is kusala or akusala. Who can tell what moment the citta is kusala citta or akusala citta. The distinction between kusala citta and akusala citta cannot be realized without knowing first naama as naama. This makes sense to me. I know you do not worry about this point, but I would like to remind myself not to think too much: is seeking comfort in Dhamma kusala or akusala. We know that the different moments alternate so quickly, we only know the nimitta after cittas have fallen away. ***** Nina. #60733 From: nina van gorkom Date: Sat Jun 24, 2006 6:55 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Buddhism & Solipsism (was death of dear ones.) nilovg Hi Herman, what you say is what Lodewijk and I discussed: how about our fellowmen. It seems a contradiction: only one moment of citta and: concern for our fellowmen. When I have time, I shall tell more about our discussions in Drenthe. Lodewijk thinks much in the same way as you, but, on the other hand sees the importance of the Abhidhamma, and therefore asked me to read from it each evening after dinner. He understands that there is no contradiction, but I shall be careful formulating all this. I have to reflect more, Herman. Don't watch too much football. Nina. op 24-06-2006 04:53 schreef Herman Hofman op hhofmeister@...: Sarah: > I think we can also see that the Dhamma really is our only refuge - > understanding that all the problems in life are just in a single citta > now. I am writing strictly academically here. I would equate the statement that the world is this single citta with a definition of solipsism. .... I think that you are equating Dhamma with solipsism in the above, and I would suggest that displacing the reality of suffering from a human level to a citta level can only be temporarily maintained, and is at best a diversion. #60734 From: "Larry" Date: Sat Jun 24, 2006 7:19 am Subject: Re: [dsg] The Abhidhamma Framework - My Understanding, no 2. lbidd2 Hi Howard, A couple of comments below: --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > > Hi, Larry - > > In a message dated 6/23/06 6:58:05 PM Eastern Daylight Time, LBIDD@... > writes: > > > Hi Howard, > > > > Regarding the simultaneous arising of several cetasikas, you are correct > > that commentary asserts this but it doesn't assert that a group of > > paramattha dhammas can be an object of one consciousness. > > ---------------------------------------- > Howard: > I didn't claim that it did, Larry. I simply said to Nina that a > mindstate that is a bundle of awareness and a number of cetasikas is concept, and > not a paramattha dhamma. > ---------------------------------------- L: This is where phenomenalism diverges from abhidhamma. In abhidhamma two paramattha dhammas as one object of consciousness is a concept, but two paramattha dhammas arising at the same time is reality. > > > > > Contrast this with the madhyamika strategy of regarding all experience > > as conceptual: > > > > MMK IV,1: "Apart from the cause of form, form cannot be conceived. Apart > > from form, the cause of form is not seen." > > ------------------------------------------ > Howard: > Well, I am not a Mahayanist, and I certainly disagree with the notion > that all experience is conceptual. > ---------------------------------------- > > > > > To revisit your discussion of reason, I think all understanding, > > including insight knowledge, is a matter of reason. > > > ----------------------------------------- > Howard: > Well, we differ there. I think that pa~n~na is rather much like an > uninfected sa~n~na. > ---------------------------------------- L: I agree. "This is the same as that" is sa~n~naa and I would call that reasoning. > > The difference> > > between insight and other forms of understanding is purely a practical > > matter. Insight changes one's perceptions and values, while > > understanding how to drive a car enables you to buy a car and send some > > mechanic's children to college. Understanding always has to do with > > relationships. Because of that one might say all understanding is > > conceptual but I think that misses the point of looking for the basic > > elements of experience, which is Theravada's unique approach. Commentary > > certainly supports this. > > > > Larry > > > > > ======================= > With metta, > Howard Larry #60735 From: "Charles DaCosta" Date: Fri Jun 23, 2006 5:59 am Subject: Book review -- The Buddha's Path dacostacharles Hi all, I have been reading Nina's book "The Buddha's Path" and have the following comments so far. This book is a good introduction to the abidharmic view of Buddhism. I think the back cover should have state that; because, to say the following would be misleading to most people -- "the basic principles of Buddhism for those who have no previous knowledge or experience of this way of life." I expected a basic text on the subject like most basic books, but instead it described the basic principles of the abidharmic (i.e., higher Dharma) view of Buddhism. I am making this an issue because to me, and I think the Buddha (taken from the sutras), the abidharmic view of Buddhism is not for beginners. I got to go Conclusion: A must read especially if you are new to the Abidharma or are just interested in it. Charles DaCosta #60736 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Fri Jun 23, 2006 10:19 pm Subject: The Seven Links to Awakening ... !!! bhikkhu_ekamuni Friends: Freeing from Sense-Addiction are the Links to Awakening! The Blessed Buddha once said: Bhikkhus, I do not see even one other single thing that, when developed & cultivated, leads to the leaving behind of the things that bind, so effectively & quickly as this: The Seven Links to Awakening! What seven? 1: The Awareness Link to Awakening. 2: The Investigation Link to Awakening. 3: The Energy Link to Awakening. 4: The Joy Link to Awakening. 5: The Tranquillity to Awakening. 6: The Concentration Link to Awakening. 7: The Equanimity Link to Awakening. How, Bhikkhus, are Seven Links to Awakening developed and refined so that they lead to the giving up & letting go of those things that bind? Here, when a Bhikkhu develops these seven links to awakening, joined with & dependent upon seclusion, disillusion, and ceasing, culminating in release, then these seven links to awakening, are evolved & matured in a way, so that they lead to the abandoning of the things that bind, grip, addict and obsess beings. And what, Bhikkhus, are the things that bind, grip, addict and obsess all beings? The eye, ear, nose, mouth, body and mind are things that bind, grip, addict & obsess beings! Form, sound, smell, taste, touch & thought are things that bind, grip, addict & obsess beings! Seeing, hearing, smelling, tasting, touching and thinking bind, grip, addict and obsess beings! These are called the things that bind, ensnares, entrap, enslaves, enchain & consume beings... Source (edited extract): The Grouped Sayings of the Buddha. Samyutta Nikaya. Book [V: 88-9] section 46: The Links. 29: One Thing... Bhikkhu Samahita, Sri Lanka. #60737 From: "Charles DaCosta" Date: Fri Jun 23, 2006 6:47 am Subject: RE: [dsg] Dependent Origination ... How about upadana? dacostacharles Hi Herman & Ken0, Herman, I think you asked a very important question (especially for an Abidharmists). ".what direct experience is ." Again, this is a concept and like all concepts it must be defined. So search your own heart for an answer and I will hope that it, the search, brings all closer to the truth. Charles DaCosta _____ From: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com [mailto:dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Herman Hofman Sent: Friday, June 23, 2006 12:49 To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [dsg] Dependent Origination ... How about upadana? Hi KenO, > > Concepts cannot be directly experience. Because I think, one cannot > directly experience a tree but can experience the hardness of a tree > by touching it or colour of the tree. Likewise, paramathas are > objects that can be directly experience for eg a pleasant feeling. > In a sense, what cannot be directly experience, how can one know this > is suffering. And the realisation of this suffering is important as > it act as an percusor to our development. > I know that what you say here is standard theory, so nothing controversial there. I'm just wondering what direct experience is. Is it when consciousness and object are not-two? (No differentiating between nama and rupa). Kind Regards Herman #60738 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Sat Jun 24, 2006 8:14 am Subject: Re: [dsg] death of dear ones. scottduncan2 Dear Nina, Thank you, and my kind regards to Lodewijk, for your warm consideration. I'm glad my answer was satisfactory. N: "How did your children take the loss? And now you have to think of them and this must surely also be a help for you." They took it hard, and according to their developmental levels: Rebecca, now 9, was that much more developed cognitively and emotionally. She made very deep use of her older sisters as maternal-love substitutes. She and I had to recognise that, when it came to a deep, deep attachment, we had yet to get to know one another. She had been still very much in the orbit of her mother, as it should have been. Luke, now 6, seemed much more malleable, if one can say that of a boy. He literally turned me into a mother for himself. He'd smell my head, breathing the scent in deeply, he'd "feel me up" and was focused on my "breasts and nipples," such as they are, for quite awhile. These body things helped him shift over to me, and so, I think his adjustment was that much "easier." He's gone beyond this, of course, by now, but from time to time he comes to me and makes me feel very feminine. Having the children to care for was made so much easier for me with the loss of many of my own "needs" to do things. I mean I get out once in awhile, but really I just decided that this raising of the kids is the only job I have for the next while. Luckily no real resentment or boredom dhammas of any consequent seem to arise. As Herman says(and I like it but you can't steal a guy's exit line0 Kind Regards, Scott. #60739 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Sat Jun 24, 2006 8:53 am Subject: Re: [dsg] death of dear ones. scottduncan2 Dear Nina, A small doctrinal diversion: N: "It shows us how anatta the events of life are. They are unbidden, we do not ask for them. The deeply accumulated conditions, also from past lives, are most powerful: natural decisive-support-condition indeed." The Path of Purity (my version, Pe Maung Tin trans.): "Natural sufficing condition is prepared sufficing condition. Faith, morals, and so on, accomplished in their own continuity or long accustomed season, food, and so on, are said to be prepared. Or it is a sufficing condition by nature - thus 'natural sufficing condition.' The meaning is, not mixed with (the other modes of) object and of immediacy. Its different kinds should be understood in various ways thus: 'With faith as the sufficing condition one gives alms, observes the moral code, does the sacred duties, produces Jhaana, insight, the Path, higher knowledge, attainment. With morality, learning, liberality, understanding as sufficing condition one...produces attainment. Faith, morality, learning, liberality, understanding are in the causal relation to faith, morality, learning, liberality, understanding.' "Thus these states, faith and so on, are prepared sufficing conditions in the sense of strong reasons. Thus is the natural sufficing condition," (XVII, p. 641). For me, I know I was in a state of waiting for something to happen of a "transformative" or "spiritual" nature following Andy's death. We had been seekers of some sort of "truth" but never finders, together. We had discussed this. I guess, looking now in retrospect, I had some sort of "faith" that this death would be conditioning of something. This waiting was not really a conscious, waking sort of thing,(this world was full of emotions and pragmatic details) but an unknown waiting, and conditioned by our mutual seeking for truth. Sincerely, Scott. #60740 From: upasaka@... Date: Sat Jun 24, 2006 5:04 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Q. Abhidhamma in Daily Life 2. upasaka_howard Hi, Nina - In a message dated 6/24/06 9:10:55 AM Eastern Daylight Time, vangorko@... writes: > Hi Howard, > not odd at all. You yourself understand that there is a definite connection > of earsense and the hearing of sound. This is the meaning of aayatana: > association or meeting of several dhammas. > In my answer to your remarks about what you call packet of citta and > cetasikas (in Framework of Abh), I was going to touch on this subject. Hold > it! > For the experience of hearing there is the association of several dhammas, > not concepts: sound, a rupa, impinges on the earsense, another rupa, and > then there are conditions for cetasika phassa that accompanies hearing and > causes hearing to 'contact' (but not physical contact) sound, so that right > at that same moment hearing hears sound. The accompanying cetasikas (in this > case seven in all) are also aayatanas. Aayatana, being association or > meeting, is never alone, there have to be several and they are realities. ---------------------------------------- Howard: The *coming together* of sense, sense object, and the resultant, corresponding sense conciousness, i.e., the contact, is, I agree, an experiential event, specifically a mind-door dhamma. Moreover, each of these, individually, though they are interdependent, is a distinguishable, directly experienced dhamma, as are every one of the concomitant cetasikas. [An aside: At the time all of these are present - and I do accede to that cooccurrence - each of the namas, the awareness and each of the cetasikas, is nondually noted, I believe, at the same time that the object of consciousness is known as object. I say this because after the fact we can say "Yes, it was pleasant" and "I was paying attention" and "I was so happy". And we wouldn't know all that had there not been a type of (not-as-an-object) knowing of them while these were in effect.] However, the aggregate consisting of all of these together is not something that is known as a dhamma through any sense door - it is inferred by (correct) reasoning and conceptualization. The mindstate that is the aggregate of all these dhammas is well-founded concept, but is not a paramattha dhamma. (How we think of that mindstate: as simply the bundle of citta, object, and cetasikas present at a moment, or as an unchanging, finite-but-brief-duration state starting at time A and ending at time B like a static film frame, is another issue.) --------------------------------------------- > > You wrote in your other post: > (vi~n~nana), the object known, and the other cetasikas having the same > object as > object, one such dhamma-aggregate following upon another, contiguously. The > referring to such a packet as "a citta" is common, and such a packet is not > a > paramattha dhamma - it is a concept.> > > N: Now, it is the idea of packet, being a concept.Separately you consider > them realities, but together they become a concept? > -------------------------------- Howard: Of course!! The same is true of a table or a tree or a keyboard. The dhammas underlying "a table" - the hardness, the felt textures, the seen colors and shapes, and so on beyond our reckoning - are mentally fabricated into "the table". But, in reality, there are only the dhammas, and not the table. Mindstates are like tables in that respect, Nina. They are pa~n~natti. -------------------------------- The word packet may be> > confusing, at least to me. > You understand and have said before that you are aware of the relations > between citta and cetasikas. I am glad you appreciate relations. > Citta and cetasikas arising together condition one another by way of > conascence-condition, mutuality-condiiton, dependence-condition and others. > They are a firm support to each other. The Patthaana describes relations > between realities, not between concepts. > --------------------------------- Howard: I have no problem with that in the slightest, Nina. But it isn't relevant to my point. --------------------------------- A reality cannot become a concept,> > as I see it. ------------------------------- Howard: ??? What reality, and what concept? ----------------------------- > But I try to understand why you think so. Perhaps you think: when citta and > cetasikas are one at a time experienced, they are realities, but when we > take citta and cetasikas together, there is a whole and this cannot be > directly experienced, is thus a concept. ---------------------------- Howard: Well, yes! Exactly so!! So, what is the issue, then? ----------------------------- > It is a question similar to another one you had about ruupa: you do not > accept as real ruupa outside in the forest arising and falling away. > Remember the discussion with Sarah. You are concerned about reifying, > something existing. > I will not argue too much if this is your conviction. We could argue ad > infinitum, it distracts from this moment. ------------------------------ Howard: I don't see the similarity. It is another issue, another matter. ----------------------------- > I agree that by insight one citta or one cetasika at a time can be object > of > understanding. Not more than one object at a time can be experienced. But > the Buddha taught relations between realities, not concepts. > ------------------------------ Howard: How do we come to know relations, Nina? A relation is not a dhamma. And yet relations are not unreal! ----------------------------- The> > conascence-condition pertains to citta and cetasikas together, > realities.Their being together does not change them into a concept. They > arise at the same base, experience the same object, and then fall away > together immediately, before you can blink an eye. That is not reification. > I do not call that: exist. > Only through satipatthaana their characteristics can be directly known and > then it will be clearer what citta really is, what cetasika really is. Now > we cannot very well distinguish them, only by thinking about them. > > You said to Larry: rather much like an > uninfected sa~n~na. > > This is interesting. I listened to Kh Sujin who spoke about wrong saññaa > which always remembers what is perceived as self or something, instead of > realizing a reality as just ruupa or just naama. The right saññaa is > perception of impermanence, dukkha, anatta. This is what you call an > uninfected sa~n~na. I like the expression. ----------------------------------------- Howard: That pleases me, Nina! :-) ---------------------------------------- > Now there is mostly attaa-saññaa. She said that the term saññaa is used > instead of citta because its role is so important. But when it is not > realized as a type of naama it is self which remembers. Just like now: we > take it so much for granted that we 'see' a table or paper, or our hand, but > saññaa, not me, remembers all those things around us and remembers what they > are used for. > Nina. > > op 24-06-2006 07:30 schreef upasaka@... op upasaka@...: > > Phenomenologically, it seems to me that sensings are associated with what > might well be called "locational rupas". I realize that this is a novel, > perhaps very odd, way of looking at the matter - but it makes experiential > sense to me. > > ========================= With metta, Howard #60741 From: Ken O Date: Sat Jun 24, 2006 9:32 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Dependent Origination ... How about upadana? ashkenn2k Hi Herman > > So are you saying that the smallest packet of experience, any > paramattha dhamma, is the same as seeing a tree, insofar as neither > events allow for realising the 3 charactersitics? Rather it is > something else that sees the 3 chrs? k: I am not arguing with also :-). By the way I don't really know how to differentiate discussing and arguing in email because the naunces of verbal cue are not there, so if I sound arguing do excuse me. Citta can take a tree as an object. The citta is the same but the object is different and that is very significant. Object that does not have three characteristics cannot produce the three characteristics to be directly experience. Only when suffering is know, then liberatoin can be realised. That is why in the suttas the describing liberation is always the statement of realisation of the 4NT. Cheers Ken O #60742 From: Ken O Date: Sat Jun 24, 2006 9:53 am Subject: Re: [dsg] On rebirth ashkenn2k Hi Herman > Attributing kamma to conditions is kamma, not very good kamma. > Denial of freedom to act or not to act is kamma, not very good kamma. k: The freedom to act is a very difficult issue, an issue that is always been discussing in DSG as long as I know :-). When we say a freedom to act, is there an I or me or self involved. This is something we have to keep in mind. The role of D.O is to dispell the notion of any I making. To attribute that I must do this or I must act like that to gain enlightement, isn't I is still involved. Is there an I involved, when we hear or when we see, in other words do we need an I to see or hear. Is there an I involved when we see. Only when pleasant sound arise, I like this sound, or this song is pleasant, I is involved. I must be generous, I must be compassion, isn't I already involved. It is extrememly difficult to believe that the path leading to enlightments starts from listening. In fact IMHO true selfless compassion must start from the understanding of the three characteristics. Because when one see danger in danger, then can one be compassionate for those who does not see the danger in danger. When one clearly see the I making, one can never be selfish because there is no I to make it selfish. Those who are compassion but I is still not eradicate will still have to suffer the round of rebirths even though one can enjoy good fruits. I believe in the gist of our development of the path, we always have to ask ourselves, is there an I involved. Cheers Ken O #60743 From: upasaka@... Date: Sat Jun 24, 2006 6:27 am Subject: Re: [dsg] On rebirth upasaka_howard Hi, Ken (and Herman) - In a message dated 6/24/06 12:57:27 PM Eastern Daylight Time, ashkenn2k@... writes: > Hi Herman > > >Attributing kamma to conditions is kamma, not very good kamma. > >Denial of freedom to act or not to act is kamma, not very good > kamma. > > k: The freedom to act is a very difficult issue, an issue that is > always been discussing in DSG as long as I know :-). When we say a > freedom to act, is there an I or me or self involved. This is > something we have to keep in mind. The role of D.O is to dispell the > notion of any I making. To attribute that I must do this or I must > act like that to gain enlightement, isn't I is still involved. > ------------------------------------ Howard: You are entirely correct, Ken. The corruption of I-sense is involved. And it will continue to be involved until complete awakening. The sense of self is erroneous. But a worse error than to act with corrupted mind is to conclude that that no kusala action is to be taken at all. What we know of as volitional action is quite conventional, and it consists of a complex set of conditions that we are barely aware of. Nonetheless, if the (very conventional) kusala actions do not occur, then the underlying realities do not occur, and progress towards awakening does not occur. We start where we are, Ken - unless we don't start at all, in which case the goal is never attained. ----------------------------------------- Is> > there an I involved, when we hear or when we see, in other words do > we need an I to see or hear. Is there an I involved when we see. > Only when pleasant sound arise, I like this sound, or this song is > pleasant, I is involved. I must be generous, I must be compassion, > isn't I already involved. It is extrememly difficult to believe that > the path leading to enlightments starts from listening. > > In fact IMHO true selfless compassion must start from the > understanding of the three characteristics. Because when one see > danger in danger, then can one be compassionate for those who does > not see the danger in danger. When one clearly see the I making, one > can never be selfish because there is no I to make it selfish. Those > who are compassion but I is still not eradicate will still have to > suffer the round of rebirths even though one can enjoy good fruits. I > believe in the gist of our development of the path, we always have to > ask ourselves, is there an I involved. -------------------------------------- Howard: Yes, we should always see it. But the answer to that asked question, until freedom is attained, will remain "yes". ------------------------------------- > > > Cheers > Ken O > ================== With metta, Howard #60744 From: nina van gorkom Date: Sat Jun 24, 2006 11:42 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Buddhism & Solipsism (was death of dear ones.) nilovg Hi Herman, as i said Lodewijk feels with you. He becomes at times irritated when hearing: it is all in one citta, or everything is only nama and rupa. He feels like censured, rebuffed. I like to reconcile the two points of view and I shall try. op 24-06-2006 04:53 schreef Herman Hofman op hhofmeister@...: > wrote: > > > I think we can also see that the Dhamma really is our only refuge - > understanding that all the problems in life are just in a single citta > now. H: I think that you are equating Dhamma with solipsism in the above, and I would suggest that displacing the reality of suffering from a human level to a citta level can only be temporarily maintained, and is at best a diversion. ----- N: In fact, it is true that all our worries, sadness, problems are thinking of concepts, and that citta which thinks is a reality which falls away immediately. But we make it so important, it seems to last, we think on and on. We concentrate on ourselves in that way, we are not concerned for others. Sarah and I find the following passage of the Vis. often quoted here, very consoling: (Vis. XX, 72): Understanding of naama and ruupa leads to detachment from self. This means: more openness to the needs of others, more mettaa. Less thinking of one's own comfort and pleasure. Sarah gave examples before that we blame other people or the circumstances for our unhappiness. We keep on thinking long stories with akusala cittas. But if there can be a moment of understanding of the citta that thinks, it leads to a degree of detachment, even slightly so. We shall look into ourselves as the cause of troubles in life, not other people. This helps our social life. Remember the sutta: what is the cause of all trouble in the world: lobha, dosa, moha, the three unwholesome roots. It is through the Abhidhamma that we gain more knowledge of the different types of defilements and this can lead to the growth of generosity, of siila, of all kusala. Understanding of realities is beneficial both for ourselves and for others. If we can contribute a little to it that others have more understanding of the Dhamma it is good. Herman, did you notice what Sarah did? She had to go to the airport, but still found time to have coffee with a person who had lost her parents, and she found time to answer Scott's post on death. Nina. #60745 From: nina van gorkom Date: Sat Jun 24, 2006 11:42 am Subject: Abhidhamma in Daily LIfe.3. nilovg Dear friends, There are two kinds of conditioned nama: citta (consciousness) and cetasika (mental factors arising together with consciousness). They are namas which arise because of conditions and fall away again. As regards citta, citta knows or experiences an object. Each citta must have its object of knowing, in Pali: arammana. The citta which sees has what is visible as its object. The citta which hears (hearing-consciousness) has sound as its object. There isn't any citta without an object (arammana). Even when we are sound asleep, citta experiences an object. There are many different types of citta which can be classified in different ways. Some cittas are akusala (unwholesome), some are kusala (wholesome). Akusala cittas and kusala cittas are cittas which are causes. They can motivate unwholesome or wholesome deeds through body, speech or mind. Some cittas are vipakacittas, the result of unwholesome or wholesome deeds. Some cittas are kiriyacittas neither cause nor result. Cittas can be classified by way of jati' (literally means 'birth' or 'nature'). There are four jatis: akusala, kusala, vipaka, kiriya. Both kusala vipaka (the result of a wholesome deed) and akusala vipaka (the result of an unwholesome deed) are one jati, the jati of vipaka. It is important to know which jati a citta is. We cannot develop wholesomeness in our life if we take akusala for kusala or if we take akusala for vipaka. For instance, when we hear unpleasant words, the moment of experiencing the sound (hearing-consciousness) is akusala vipaka, the result of an unwholesome deed we performed ourselves. But the aversion which may arise very shortly afterwards is not vipaka, but it arises with akusala citta. We can learn to distinguish these moments from each other by realizing their different characteristics. ***** Nina. #60746 From: nina van gorkom Date: Sat Jun 24, 2006 12:03 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Book review -- The Buddha's Path nilovg Hi Charles D, Thank you for your kind words. I appreciate your interest. As to Abhidhamma, we do not need to think of abstract classifications. It describes life in direct wording, it goes back to basics. It is hard to understand any sutta without Abhidhamma. Therefore it would be better to gently introduce beginners to the Abhidhamma first of all. Nina. op 23-06-2006 14:59 schreef Charles DaCosta op dacostas@...: I am making this an issue because to me, and I think the Buddha (taken from the sutras), the abidharmic view of Buddhism is not for beginners. I got to go Conclusion: A must read especially if you are new to the Abidharma or are just interested in it. Charles DaCosta #60747 From: upasaka@... Date: Sat Jun 24, 2006 8:09 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Buddhism & Solipsism (was death of dear ones.) upasaka_howard Hi, Nina (and Herman) - In a message dated 6/24/06 2:47:44 PM Eastern Daylight Time, vangorko@... writes: > Hi Herman, > as i said Lodewijk feels with you. He becomes at times irritated when > hearing: it is all in one citta, or everything is only nama and rupa. He > feels like censured, rebuffed. > I like to reconcile the two points of view and I shall try. > > op 24-06-2006 04:53 schreef Herman Hofman op hhofmeister@...: > >wrote: > > > > > > I think we can also see that the Dhamma really is our only refuge - > > understanding that all the problems in life are just in a single citta > > now. > > H: > I think that you are equating > Dhamma with solipsism in the above, and I would suggest that > displacing the reality of suffering from a human level to a citta > level can only be temporarily maintained, and is at best a diversion. > ----- > N: In fact, it is true that all our worries, sadness, problems are thinking > of concepts, and that citta which thinks is a reality which falls away > immediately. But we make it so important, it seems to last, we think on and > on. We concentrate on ourselves in that way, we are not concerned for > others. > Sarah and I find the following passage of the Vis. often quoted here, very > consoling: > > (Vis. XX, 72): > > Join in one conscious moment that flicks by... > No store of broken states, no future stock; > Those born balance like seeds on needle points. > Break-up of states is foredoomed at their birth; > Those present decay, unmingled with those past. > They come from nowhere, break up, nowhere go; > Flash in and out, as lightning in the sky...> > > Understanding of naama and ruupa leads to detachment from self. This means: > more openness to the needs of others, more mettaa. Less thinking of one's > own comfort and pleasure. > Sarah gave examples before that we blame other people or the circumstances > for our unhappiness. We keep on thinking long stories with akusala cittas. > But if there can be a moment of understanding of the citta that thinks, it > leads to a degree of detachment, even slightly so. We shall look into > ourselves as the cause of troubles in life, not other people. This helps our > social life. > Remember the sutta: what is the cause of all trouble in the world: lobha, > dosa, moha, the three unwholesome roots. > It is through the Abhidhamma that we gain more knowledge of the different > types of defilements and this can lead to the growth of generosity, of > siila, of all kusala. Understanding of realities is beneficial both for > ourselves and for others. If we can contribute a little to it that others > have more understanding of the Dhamma it is good. > > Herman, did you notice what Sarah did? She had to go to the airport, but > still found time to have coffee with a person who had lost her parents, and > she found time to answer Scott's post on death. > > Nina. ======================= Unless I'm misunderstanding Herman, I don't think he's addressing the conventional-versus-actual issue, but the matter of multiple mindstreams. Both the Sutta Pitaka and the Abhidhamma Pitaka talk in terms of the phenomena of a single namarupic stream, analyzing its elements into 5 khandhas or into ayatanas or into rupas, cittas, and cetasikas, but always within a single mindstream. I think there is a good reason for doing that, namely that this is all that is directly available within a given mindstream, and liberation is achieved within individual mindstreams, and not by inferential knowledge, but by direct knowing. But part of what occurs within a mindstream "points" to other namarupic streams, and not dealing with them and their impact on "one's own" mindstream at the "ultimate" level of analysis seems to be missing from the Dhamma, though, of course, the Dhamma recognizes other namarupic streams at the conventional level of "other beings". If one were to take the ignoring of other namarupic streams at the dhammic level of analysis to imply that there is, in fact, only one's own mindstream, that would be an instance of solipsism, the philosophical belief that "I" alone exist. With metta, Howard #60748 From: "Joop" Date: Sat Jun 24, 2006 1:57 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Q. Dependent Origination ... and cycles jwromeijn Hallo all In #60728 I said: Another point that interest me: the Buddha did not describe (D.O.) as a cycle! He did it on two ways; up and down and (what is called 'in reverse order') from down to up. The cycle (more or less the cycle of samsara) is made of it later by commentaries. Of course again a sweeping statement. The central question is: is there somewhere in the Suttas a phrase in which the Buddha said: "Old age and death is the condition for ignorance" I have not found it ! There are 12 factors in D.O; and 11 linking nidanas: between #1 and # 2; between # 2 and # 3 etc till between #11 and # 12 The link between # 12 (old age/death) and # 1 (ignorance) is not made by the Buddha. Why does everybody make this link? (I did it too till I realised it is not what the Buddha said) In many pictures the cycle is pictured beautifull: in Tibetan but also in Theravada, for example the Thai in www.vimokkha.com/paticcasamuppada.html I think the reason is the spiritual logical of combing D.O. and the cycle of samsara. But when I try to describe this cycle in terms of D.O., it should be: "Dependent on birth arises old age and death (sorrow, lamentation, pain, grief and despair)" "Dependent on old age and death (sorrow, lamentation, pain, grief and despair) arises birth" etc. Is my conclusion that D.O. and the cycle of samsara are not describing the same, correct? Or did I miss a sutta-quote about #12 => # 1 of D.O? Metta Joop A little annex. In his book 'The great discourse on causation' Bhikkhu Bodhi also uses the term 'round of existence', vatta. Nyatiloka explains this word: (1) With reference to the dependent origination (paticcasamuppáda, q.v.), Vis.M. XVII speaks of 3 rounds: the karma round …; the round of defilements …; the round of results … (2) round of rebirth = samsára (q.v.). This term 'vatta' is used in the Suttas in 'The Wheel of Dhamma', not in 'the cycle of an individual life; it's Buddhaghosa who introduced this usage. #60749 From: upasaka@... Date: Sat Jun 24, 2006 10:24 am Subject: Typo Re: [dsg] Buddhism & Solipsism (was death of dear ones.) upasaka_howard Hi again, Nina (and Herman) - In a message dated 6/24/06 3:10:29 PM Eastern Daylight Time, upasaka@... writes: > But part of what occurs within a mindstream "points" to other > namarupic streams, and not dealing with them and their impact on "one's own" > > mindstream at the "ultimate" level of analysis seems to be missing from the > Dhamma ... > What I meant to write in the foregoing was "dealing" rather than "not dealing". The passage should have read as follows: ____________________ But part of what occurs within a mindstream "points" to other namarupic streams, and dealing with them and their impact on "one's own" mindstream at the "ultimate" level of analysis seems to be missing from the Dhamma ..." ----------------------------------- With metta, Howard #60750 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Sat Jun 24, 2006 4:33 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Abhidhamma in Daily Life 2. egberdina Hi Howard, Other commitments will take precedence today, so only 1 post today. Thank you for your comments. On 24/06/06, upasaka@... wrote: > > Hi, Herman (and Phil) - > > In a message dated 6/23/06 8:33:53 PM Eastern Daylight Time, > > hhofmeister@... writes: > > > Do you think that the ear-sense of SN35 is anything more than just the > > workings of the ears? Is there any sense in there of the very fine > > rupa which is the later speculative view? > > > > ===================== > RobertK once said something with regard to sense doors that made a bit > of sense to me and led me to think of the physical sense doors as what might > be called "locational rupas". > Let me explain what I mean. A physicist or biologist would probably > tell us that hearing is done by the brain - in fact, all sensing is done by the > brain. But, when we hear, doesn't it seem that the hearing is associated/based > at the general "ear location". Likewise, don't smells seem to be at the nose > location, sights at the eye location, and so on? When we touch some sandpaper, > where is it felt? Not in the brain, but in a particular bodily location. I'm > not speaking in terms of physical organs, but of phenomenology. > Phenomenologically, it seems to me that sensings are associated with what might well be > called "locational rupas". > I realize that this is a novel, perhaps very odd, way of looking at > the matter - but it makes experiential sense to me. I think there is great value in limiting oneself to "what is experienced", if only to discover how much of what we experience is actually what we think into experience. I agree with you that location is part and parcel of many sensing experiences. And locational rupas can well be descriptive, not explanatory, in that respect. Are thought experiments allowed as a phenomenological method? :-) What are the implications for locational rupas if pain can be felt in non-existent locations? (phantom pain). And vice versa, if no pain can be felt while watching your hand being sliced open under local anaesthetic? Or visual and auditory hallucinations that are indistinguishable from the real thing apart from the lack of stimulus in the environment? (This last one wouldn't be a thought experiment, because I did have these. On reflection, the auditory hallucination, the voice, was non-directional, it didn't have a location associated with it.) Anyway, it would be good to read your further thoughts, as always Kind Regards Herman #60751 From: "Phil" Date: Sat Jun 24, 2006 4:34 pm Subject: Re: Abhidhamma in Daily Life 2. philofillet Hi Herman > Do you think that the ear-sense of SN35 is anything more than just the > workings of the ears? Is there any sense in there of the very fine > rupa which is the later speculative view? Oh, ok, I see. I don't know about that. I take the ear of the suttas to be the ear sense of Abhidhamma. If the latter is a latter view, so be it. I don't worry about that. Perhaps I should, but I don't. Perhaps I am lucky to have detachment tendencies in that regard! Or is it just laziness...or a form of self-deception...hmmm...whatever. It is helpful to understand suttas in the light of Abhidhamma and I will continue to do so, I imagine. I always remember Nina once wrote to Howard something like "cittas are momentary and rise and fall in sequence. Why is that a problem?" I only remember the last bit for sure. "Why is that a problem?" For some of us, it is not a problem. We take what is taught in Abhidhamma and accept it as the Buddha's teaching and are helped by it (well, wholesome mental factors are supported/conditioned by it.) For others, it is a problem, and that's fine. Dhamma helps different people in different ways. Phil #60752 From: "Phil" Date: Sat Jun 24, 2006 4:43 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Q. Abhidhamma in Daily Life 2. philofillet Hi Nina > N: Hardness is coarser than the body-consciousness that experiences it. Ah, this is something I haven't heard before. I will write it down and reflect on it - briefly! > Hardness appears through the body-door and can be directly experienced. The > naama which experiences hardness can only be known through the mind-door. I see. This makes sense. > The Mind-door is not apparent now, only at the first stage of insight when > there are several mind-door processes of cittas which experience nama and > rupa. I see - kind of. And that's enough for now. > I have been thinking of your reminder of finding comfort in Dhamma with > lobha. We are worldlings and thus it is natural that cittas with lobha arise > all the time in between cittas with understanding. Yes, I really sense that lobha is the air we breathe, the water we swim in. > When the Buddha consoled bereaved people with Dhamma, they found relieve, > and of course there must have been lobha. But they also listened and some > understanding could begin. > We may well be attached to dhamma, but, don't forget, when listening > understanding can grow. Yes, very gradually. I just am aware of the tendency to want to have too much understanding of nama and rupa and of being comforted by reading things such as "when one understands that it is just conditioned nama and rupa, there is less concern about stories involving people and things." Actually,I didn't read that. I just made it up but I have read many similar things in your books that have been helpful. But I am aware that there is so much lobha finding pleasure in such thinking. Finding comfort. That's ok. There is also understanding developing, I'm confident about that. There is confidence. > > This morning I listened to the MP3, Oct 5, 005, Sarah just announced and > thought of you: > Kh Sujin said : no need to try to know whether the citta is kusala or > akusala. Who can tell what moment the citta is kusala citta or akusala > citta. The distinction between kusala citta and akusala citta cannot be > realized without knowing first naama as naama. This makes sense to me. Sometimes it makes sense to me, sometimes there is doubt, but I never fret about it. I like to keep listening and reflecting to the degree that is possible at those moments. > I know you do not worry about this point, but I would like to remind myself > not to think too much: is seeking comfort in Dhamma kusala or akusala. We > know that the different moments alternate so quickly, we only know the > nimitta after cittas have fallen away. No problem there... Phil #60753 From: LBIDD@... Date: Sat Jun 24, 2006 4:55 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Q. Dependent Origination ... and cycles lbidd2 Joop: "But when I try to describe this cycle in terms of D.O., it should be: "Dependent on birth arises old age and death (sorrow, lamentation, pain, grief and despair)" "Dependent on old age and death (sorrow, lamentation, pain, grief and despair) arises birth" " Hi Joop, I think there is a very common misunderstanding here that I have made myself. Buddhaghosa does not say death conditions birth. In fact he says just the opposite. The way the Visuddhimagga explains it, when there is sorrow, lamentation, and grief there is ignorance and that ignorance conditions rebirth consciousness. So the next life is conditioned before death. Presumably "sorrow, lamentation, and grief" refer to present old age and future death or death of others. Larry #60754 From: upasaka@... Date: Sat Jun 24, 2006 1:37 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Q. Abhidhamma in Daily Life 2. upasaka_howard Hi, Phil and Nina - In a message dated 6/24/06 7:49:42 PM Eastern Daylight Time, philco777@... writes: > Hi Nina > > >N: Hardness is coarser than the body-consciousness that > experiences it. > > Ah, this is something I haven't heard before. I will write it down > and reflect on it - briefly! > ======================= I'm not clear on what, exactly, that means. Coarser by what measure? Is this not like comparing apples and oranges? And given that it is established as to what this means, and given that it is established as true, what is the significance of it? Why is it of importance to awakening and to the end of dukkha? I'm not attempting to be argumentative here. I'm really looking to see what might be the answers to these questions of mine. With metta, Howard #60755 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Sat Jun 24, 2006 9:34 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] death of dear ones. scottduncan2 Dear Sarah, Thank you very much for your kind words. I'm sorry but I have no more to say. Your are very kind. Metta, Scott. #60756 From: "Joop" Date: Sun Jun 25, 2006 12:46 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Q. Dependent Origination ... and cycles jwromeijn Hallo Larry, all --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, LBIDD@... wrote: > > .... > Hi Joop, > > I think there is a very common misunderstanding here that I have made > myself. Buddhaghosa does not say death conditions birth. In fact he says > just the opposite. The way the Visuddhimagga explains it, when there is > sorrow, lamentation, and grief there is ignorance and that ignorance > conditions rebirth consciousness. So the next life is conditioned before > death. Presumably "sorrow, lamentation, and grief" refer to present old > age and future death or death of others. > > Larry > That's exact the main question of my message yesterday: The Visuddhimagga explains it, when there is sorrow, lamentation, and grief there is ignorance. But does the Buddha say that too? Is there a quote from the Suttas, as part of a D.O. description? I think not Metta Joop 65) #60757 From: nina van gorkom Date: Sun Jun 25, 2006 2:46 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Q. Abhidhamma in Daily Life 2. nilovg Hi Phil, op 25-06-2006 01:43 schreef Phil op philco777@...: I just am aware of the tendency to want to have too much understanding of nama and rupa and of being comforted by reading things such as "when one understands that it is just conditioned nama and rupa, there is less concern about stories involving people and things." Actually,I didn't read that. I just made it up... ------ N: This morning I listened to the Thai. There was a discussion about Gradual Sayings IV, 151, Insight, eight condiitons for getting wisdom. Respect for the teacher, asking questions, calm of body and mind, etc. Kh Sujin asked the audience what they thought of calm after listening. Some answered: freedom from defilements. She reminded people of the present moment while asking questions. Perhaps they want result very soon. That is the second noble Truth. There is no calm when thinking about it when there will be sati. What is the citta like when one asks questions? We may listen, but when there is desire there is no calm. We should realize that everything is dhamma. But when they have listened there may be understanding. Paññaa is calm, freedom from desire at that moment. Last night the mp3 of Oct 005: Khun Sujin was talking about noticing a change in oneself. She said that she does not feel that she is different in her behaviour. 'It is still the same me' she said. (of course figuratively, conventionally speaking). She has friends, she watches T.V., leads her life completely naturally. When awareness arises naturally, by conditions, she sees that it is really anattaa. She has no interest to know how much she changes. No matter what will come, she can have more understanding of anattaa. Phil, I thought you would appreciate this. Her complete indifference as to herself and how much progress there is. I think this is wonderful. Nina. #60758 From: nina van gorkom Date: Sun Jun 25, 2006 2:46 am Subject: Re: [dsg] death of dear ones, natural decisive support. . nilovg Dear Scott, I use also Pe Maung Tin for comparison, but I find the Transl by Ven. Nyanamoli clearer, when comparing the Pali. See below. op 24-06-2006 17:53 schreef Scott Duncan op scduncan@...: The Path of Purity (my version, Pe Maung Tin trans.): "Natural sufficing condition is prepared sufficing condition. Faith, morals, and so on, accomplished in their own continuity or long accustomed season, food, and so on, are said to be prepared. "Thus these states, faith and so on, are prepared sufficing conditions in the sense of strong reasons. Thus is the natural sufficing condition," (XVII, p. 641). ------- N: Nyanamoli: the decisive-support is natural, thus it is a natural-decisive-support. Faith, virtue, etc., produced in, or climate, food, etc., habitual to, one's own continuity are called natural. Or else, it is a decisive-support by nature, thus it is a natural-decisive-support. The meaning is that it is unmixed with object and proximity. -------- N: The Tiika gives a word explanation of pakatuupanissayo, as pakata and upanissayo, or pakati and upanissayo. Pakata means done properly and pakati means naturally. --------- S: For me, I know I was in a state of waiting for something to happen of a "transformative" or "spiritual" nature following Andy's death. .....This waiting was not really a conscious, waking sort of thing,(this world was full of emotions and pragmatic details) but an unknown waiting, and conditioned by our mutual seeking for truth. ------ N: Seeking for the Truth and also good deeds such as daana, siila, all of them are accumulated conditions for listening to the Dhamma at present. I just quoted on the Pali list the following: The ³Expositor² (p. 76 etc.) explains numerous meanings of samaya, such as: time or occasion, concurrence of causes, moment. It explains that the should be classed as the one moment in the sense of occasion, they form the occasion for the production of merit. It states: ..... Samaya can also mean group, and this shows the simultaneous occurrence of many dhammas. The kusala citta is accompanied by many cetasikas, each performing their own function. By samaya is shown the concurrence of conditions, the mutual contribution towards the production of a common result. The Expositor explains with regard to samaya as condition: Your example is good, it shows that there is a concurrence of many conditions for the arising of the citta at the present moment. Nina. #60759 From: nina van gorkom Date: Sun Jun 25, 2006 2:46 am Subject: Re: [dsg] death of dear ones.Family life. nilovg Dear Scott, op 24-06-2006 17:14 schreef Scott Duncan op scduncan@...: N: "How did your children take the loss? ... S: They took it hard, and according to their developmental levels: Rebecca, now 9, was that much more developed cognitively and emotionally. .... She had been still very much in the orbit of her mother, as it should have been. Luke, now 6, seemed much more malleable, if one can say that of a boy. He literally turned me into a mother for himself. ------ N: So understandable that you had to be father and mother at the same time. Your family was one of warm relationship. So much conditioned. Different from what I experienced as a child. ------ S: I just decided that this raising of the kids is the only job I have for the next while. -------- N: You thought of others and that helped not to think too much of your own loss. A few words to show how different conditions are. We do not have children. But in my family: parents and children hardly touched each other, children had to go their own way. No cuddling like you describe, totally strange to me. But Lodewijk is from a more 'normal', warmer family if I can use that word. Only during the war when my father was a political hostage for four years, we came closer to my mother. I regretted the lack of warmth but during the last years my father was alive I came to appreciate more of what I learnt from them. Imagine, in the beginning of last century, this elan of socialistic ideals to make the world a better place. Leon Blum, Jean Jaures, highly etical, intellectual, cultural, Lenin, and in the Netherlands: Troelstra, Wibaut, almost forgotten now. I admire my parents' enthusiasm and their focus on intellectual education. If you want to know more, off list is better. I am just surprised that family life is so different in different families and all these circumstances, yes, also concepts, are natural decisive support-condition fot the cittas arising today. We learn form the Patthaana, especially this passage of natural decisive support-condition, not to neglect or despise concepts, life with our fellowmen. It certainly is a ocndition to be reckoned with. Nina. #60760 From: nina van gorkom Date: Sun Jun 25, 2006 2:46 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Q. Abhidhamma in Daily Life 2. nilovg Hi Howard, good you ask, gives me a chance to differentiate more. op 25-06-2006 02:37 schreef upasaka@... op upasaka@...: > >N: Hardness is coarser than the body-consciousness that > experiences it. ======================= I'm not clear on what, exactly, that means. Coarser by what measure? Is this not like comparing apples and oranges? And given that it is established as to what this means, and given that it is established as true, what is the significance of it? Why is it of importance to awakening and to the end of dukkha? ------ N: coarser: more obvious. Subtle: harder to penetrate (duddasa). Also ruupas are differentiated as coarse (o.laarika) and subtle (sukhuma). The sense organs and sense objects mutually strike each other, they are gross and near. The other ruupas such as the element of cohesion, and some others, hmm, you found difficult to grasp, life faculty, nutrition, sex, are more subtle. Hard to penetrate. Evenso, naama is more subtle compared to ruupa. Why is it important to know? Some people try very hard to know subtle ruupas such as the vikaara rupas, lightness, etc. and they believe that they can easily experience them. But they mislead themselves. Why not be aware of visible object or sound which are right at hand? See, this is the main point. Not looking for dhammas which do not appear now. We just begin to understand what seeing really is, but if we think it is easy to penetrate, we may mislead ourselves and confuse thinking about realities with direct understanding. It is good to know where the pittfalls are. This concerns the development of paññaa leading to awakening. Also, when wondering about subtle ruupas, we can understand that we should not reject what is not yet obvious. Life faculty and nutrition are subtle ruupas, you know. Nina. #60761 From: "Phil" Date: Sun Jun 25, 2006 3:09 am Subject: Re: Q. Abhidhamma in Daily Life 2. philofillet Hi Nina and all > She reminded people of the present > moment while asking questions. Perhaps they want result very soon. That is > the second noble Truth. There is no calm when thinking about it when there > will be sati. What is the citta like when one asks questions? One of the moments in the talks that I like is when Sarah, I think, passes on a question to Acharn Sujin. Someone wants to know something about the sense door/mind door point, maybe. Something subtle like that. Acharn Sujin answers "do they know?" as though to say if one doesn't know, there is no point asking the question. That sounds pretty absurd, maybe, but I really think I know what she means. Of course asking questions can be helpful but do we ask just because we want to accumulate more information, or is there a citta which at that moment is conditioned to strike on a point that will condition more real understanding. I like that dynamic Q - what is the meaning of bikkity bokkity boo. A - do you know? (ie if you don't know, there is no point asking!) > > Last night the mp3 of Oct 005: Khun Sujin was talking about noticing a > change in oneself. She said that she does not feel that she is different in > her behaviour. 'It is still the same me' she said. (of course figuratively, > conventionally speaking). She has friends, she watches T.V., leads her life > completely naturally. When awareness arises naturally, by conditions, she > sees that it is really anattaa. She has no interest to know how much she > changes. No matter what will come, she can have more understanding of > anattaa. > Phil, I thought you would appreciate this. Her complete indifference as to > herself and how much progress there is. I think this is wonderful. Yes, wonderful, though who knows, of course, what is really going on with another's cittas. You have known her for a long time so you can say "wonderful" with more confidence. I read this this morning, from a notebook.I think it is from one of your books: "When he encounters injuries imposed by beings and formations difficult to overcome, violent, sapping the vitality, since he has surrendered himselft to the Buddha he reflects: 'I have relinquished my very self to the Buddhas. Whatever comes, let it comes.' For that reason, he doesn not waver..." (ANd then you write) "What comes, let it come. No matter what will happen in our life, let us be determined to continue to develop right understanding of the present object." I am nowhere near being able to say "whatever comes, let it come." Nowhere near. All the hard stress I had last week was related to my story, career, pressure, fatigue, concern for Naomi, worry about money. Very much overwhelming any ability to say "whatever comes, let it come." Perhaps if I were on my own in life I could say that but now I feel responsible for Naomi's wellbeing as well. So I started to do my feelgood meditations/visualizations last week. I knew they would comfort the self, and they did, do, with incredible reliablity. So I gave in, in a way, or compromised, but it was wisdom at work, I think. There were not conditions at this time in my life to say "whatever comes, let it come." Not for Phil. Phil needed to take care of Phil and give him comfort and courage. If Phil had snapped or collapsed the opportunity to develop understanding would have been shot. Phil #60762 From: upasaka@... Date: Sun Jun 25, 2006 2:06 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Q. Abhidhamma in Daily Life 2. upasaka_howard Hi, Nina - Thank you for your reply (below). You explain what you mean by "coarser" clearly, and I agree that with that meaning, body-door consciousness is less coarse (I.e. subtler/harder to grasp) than its objects). Also you explain well your reason for pointing that out. With metta, Howard In a message dated 6/25/06 5:47:13 AM Eastern Daylight Time, vangorko@... writes: > > Hi Howard, > good you ask, gives me a chance to differentiate more. > op 25-06-2006 02:37 schreef upasaka@... op upasaka@...: > > >>N: Hardness is coarser than the body-consciousness that > >experiences it. > > ======================= > I'm not clear on what, exactly, that means. Coarser by what measure? > Is this not like comparing apples and oranges? And given that it is > established > as to what this means, and given that it is established as true, what is the > significance of it? Why is it of importance to awakening and to the end of > dukkha? > ------ > N: coarser: more obvious. Subtle: harder to penetrate (duddasa). > Also ruupas are differentiated as coarse (o.laarika) and subtle (sukhuma). > The sense organs and sense objects mutually strike each other, they are > gross and near. The other ruupas such as the element of cohesion, and some > others, hmm, you found difficult to grasp, life faculty, nutrition, sex, are > more subtle. Hard to penetrate. > Evenso, naama is more subtle compared to ruupa. > > Why is it important to know? Some people try very hard to know subtle ruupas > such as the vikaara rupas, lightness, etc. and they believe that they can > easily experience them. But they mislead themselves. > Why not be aware of visible object or sound which are right at hand? See, > this is the main point. Not looking for dhammas which do not appear now. > We just begin to understand what seeing really is, but if we think it is > easy to penetrate, we may mislead ourselves and confuse thinking about > realities with direct understanding. It is good to know where the pittfalls > are. This concerns the development of paññaa leading to awakening. > Also, when wondering about subtle ruupas, we can understand that we should > not reject what is not yet obvious. Life faculty and nutrition are subtle > ruupas, you know. > Nina. > #60763 From: "Charles DaCosta" Date: Sat Jun 24, 2006 1:39 pm Subject: RE: [dsg] Book review -- The Buddha's Path dacostacharles Hi Nina, Though I do think it is a good book, none of my Buddhist teachers (Theravadan, Tibetan, and Zen/Chen) ever push nor even recommended studying the Abhidhamma. In fact, one of them discouraged studying it. I reviewed it later in life and began to see the points that were made to me earlier, it is very complicated; and, all the people the sutras present as becoming enlightened or highly realized were enlightened by what was said in the sutra (e.g., the 5 ascetics). However, I like how you introduced it; I got more from your book than may others. It even cleared up a misunderstanding of Sara's posts on ". Trees ." about trees not being real - only the visual objects: color, light, etc.. Because of what I read, now I can tell Sara that realities are compounded entities and in the case of "Trees" the visual objects are in the list of aggregates that make up the entity called a Tree. The basics of Buddhism are the practice of morality, and the development of wisdom and concentration. The Abhidhamma represents an advance form of wisdom that is far from basic. The most basic concepts of wisdom in Buddhism are (1) the 3 characteristics of existence, (2) the first 3 Noble truths, and (3) the Middle Way. The Abhidhamma is like a group of dissertations on those concepts, i.e., the PhD work. Again, the Buddha called it the Higher Dharma; this is very far from meaning "basic Dharma." I do have other comments about the book could send to you or post later, .? Charles DaCosta _____ From: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com [mailto:dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of nina van gorkom Sent: Saturday, June 24, 2006 21:03 To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [dsg] Book review -- The Buddha's Path Hi Charles D, Thank you for your kind words. I appreciate your interest. As to Abhidhamma, we do not need to think of abstract classifications. It describes life in direct wording, it goes back to basics. It is hard to understand any sutta without Abhidhamma. Therefore it would be better to gently introduce beginners to the Abhidhamma first of all. Nina. 4) #60764 From: "Charles DaCosta" Date: Sun Jun 25, 2006 4:31 am Subject: RE: [dsg] Dependent Origination ... How about upadana? dacostacharles Hi Herman I liked the following quote so much that I had to repeat it (sorry Jon and Sara): If you are aware when greed is present in you, and if you are aware when greed is absent from you - This is what is meant by "Dhamma that is directly visible;" A very important goal for all of us. Source: derived from AN 126 by Ven Bodhi, (The visible teaching) Charles DaCosta _____ > Just a simple quote, > AN 126 by Ven Bodhi, the visible teaching > < when greed is absent that it is absent -- that is a way the Dhamma is > directly visible>> > #60765 From: nina van gorkom Date: Sun Jun 25, 2006 7:42 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Q. Abhidhamma in Daily Life 2. nilovg Hi Phil, But vipaaka in the form of seeing, hearing or the other sense-cognitions, desirable or undesirable, have to come, no choice. When we understand this we can gradually learn to accept vipaaka without aversion. All the same, I understand that circumstances may be very difficult and painful. But listening to the Dhamma can help to go through the process of learning. We are here to learn. Courage and good cheer. Nina. 25-06-2006 12:09 schreef Phil op philco777@...: (ANd then you write) "What comes, let it come. No matter what will happen in our life, let us be determined to continue to develop right understanding of the present object." I am nowhere near being able to say "whatever comes, let it come." Nowhere near. All the hard stress I had last week #60766 From: Daniel Date: Sun Jun 25, 2006 7:49 am Subject: Impermanence & Happiness daniell@... Send Email Hi all. I have been thinking about the first noble truth in terms of that every good thing might change. Every good possesion might be taken, every good partner must die, from every good job one can be fired, every good conditions for learning we have might change... It makes me feel a bit depressed. I had a guess that it is because I am not thinking of the other side of the coin - that the bad things are also impermanent, and that a change for good can always happen. Could anyone explain to me why it is so? I am not sure why am I not convinced in it, so I am not sure what type of explanation am I looking for... Perhaps just giving some examples would be okay... Why is it always that things can change for the better????? For example, we all have eyes with which we can see, and ears with which we can hear. But those are fragile ; one can become blind and deaf. If it will happen, discussing with people will be hardly possible ; therefore one will be hardly able to develop... No discussions on DSG in such a case; no advices from good friends in such a case... Then we will not be able to learn about kusala and akusala ; since I do not believe anyone can distinguish between them without any help from outside, the situation will probably become only worse and worse and worse.... Or, if the situation for someone changes in such a way that he is not able to have access to the dhamma - how will he learn to distinguish between kusala and akusala? How will things be able to get better and not just worse and worse? Yours, Daniel #60767 From: Ken O Date: Sun Jun 25, 2006 8:19 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Q. Dependent Origination ... and cycles ashkenn2k Hi Joop > That's exact the main question of my message yesterday: > The Visuddhimagga explains it, when there is > sorrow, lamentation, and grief there is ignorance. > But does the Buddha say that too? Is there a quote from the Suttas, as part of a D.O. description? I think not k: Sorrow, lamentation and grief all have unpleasant feelings. MN 141 Saccavibhanga Sutta << "What is grief? It is the grief, sorrow, sorrowfulness, the state of being sorry, inward sorrow, inward intense sorrow visited by some calamity or other, smitten by some kind of ill or other. This is called grief. "What is lamentation? It is the crying, the wailing, the act of crying, the act of wailing, the state of crying, the state of wailing of one visited by some calamity or other, smitten by some kind of ill or other. This is called lamentation. "What is suffering? It is bodily suffering, bodily unpleasantness, the painful and unpleasant feeling produced by bodily contact. This is called suffering. "What is misery? It is mental suffering, unpleasantness, the painful and unpleasant feeling produced by mental contact. This is called misery.>> k: Ignorance is comprised within unplesant and pleasant feelings SN 25 iii Bhumija <> J: Another point that interest me: the Buddha did not describe (D.O.) as a cycle. k: see below suttas. SN 12.9 The wise man and the fool <> AN III, 61, the three sectarian tenets <> Cheers Ken O #60768 From: Daniel Date: Sun Jun 25, 2006 8:26 am Subject: Re: On Rebirth daniell@... Send Email Hi Ken and all, > > > ________________________________________________________________________ > > 9a. Re: On rebirth > Posted by: "Ken O" ashkenn2k@... ashkenn2k > Date: Fri Jun 23, 2006 9:42 am (PDT) > > Hi Joop > > There are four possibilities: > 1. One has a (rather) eternal soul that transmigrates after death > in a new body. That is most times called reincarnation-belief. It's > clear that that is not what the Buddha teac > 2. The rebirth according Theravada, with the Abhidhamma method to > explain that there is citaa process of rebirth-linking (patisandhi) > 3. The annihilistic (not the same as 'nihilistic'!) view that's out > and over after physical deat > 4. The agnostic view (cf Stephen Batchelor) that is not so far from > the view some Zen-buddhists have: we don't know what happens after > death, don't worry about tha Could you tell me why do you think that the point of view of the Theravada is more right than the annihilistic view? I think that it is not evident ; so one needs a reason for this. Yours, Daniel #60769 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Sun Jun 25, 2006 8:29 am Subject: Re: Impermanence & Happiness scottduncan2 Dear Daniel, Interesting question. D: "...every good thing might change..." "...It makes me feel a bit depressed..." I've thought of this. Maybe you are actually experiencing an important change in your understanding of the nature of things, and in particular, in the impermanence of "self." This is accompanied by some difficult-to-bear emotions. I'd say that this was the case because of the nature of change. I say this because, with self-view, one picks and chooses, averse to the bad and clinging to the good. Change is no respecter of this dichotomy, as you are seeing. Perhaps one way to consider these concerns is in the light of seeing that your belief in self is also impermanent. And, as such, you are in a fortuitous position of being able to watch it change! And, as I see it, it is changing hence your good question. The happiness one thinks one has when one thinks that its all good is not at all permanent. It is real, I guess, but not lasting. Maybe, as you consider this further, you'll understand more. I like the following: "Those who consider the inessential to be essential And see the essential as inessential Don't reach the essential Living in the field of wrong intention. "Those who know the essential to be essential And the inessential as inessential Reach the essential, Living in the field of right intention," Dhammadada 11-12,(Fronsdal, trans.). For what its worth... Sincerely, Scott. #60770 From: Ken O Date: Sun Jun 25, 2006 8:55 am Subject: Re: [dsg] On rebirth ashkenn2k Hi Howard > ------------------------------------ > Howard: > You are entirely correct, Ken. The corruption of I-sense is > involved. And it will continue to be involved until complete awakening. The sense of self is erroneous. But a worse error than to act with corrupted mind is to conclude that that no kusala action is to be taken at all. What we know of as volitional action is quite conventional, and it consists of a complex set of conditions that we are barely aware of. Nonetheless, if the (very conventional) > kusala actions do not occur, then the underlying realities do not > occur, and progress towards awakening does not occur. We start where we are, Ken - unless we don't start at all, in which case the goal is never attained. > ----------------------------------------- k: I think your stand is that one must act to gain liberation and with the liberation the I is eradicate. My feeling is the this is the most popular practise and many accomplish writers always have this opinoin. And only in DSG, or my humble opinion is always about understanding conditionality first. As I said previously a few times ago, the underlying assumption must be correct. I feel everytime we must do something, the underlying I is always presence. We cannot used an I to eradicate an I, the middle way is about understanding conditionality (anatta) as stated "Without veering towards either of these extremes" . That is why in DSG, we always talk about paramathas dhammas (understanding conditionality) for as long as I know :-) and likewise for as long as I know we are always discussing this :-). As I said before, it is extremely difficult to understand that all development of the path comes from just listening. As what Sarah always said we are the dinosuars. Cheers. Before I pen off, please let my give these two quotes again SN 12.17 The Naked Ascetic Kassapa <> MN 2 All the Taints Sutta (sabbasava) << When he attends unwisely in this way, one of six views arises in him. The view 'self exists for me' arises in him as true and established; or the view 'no self exist for me' arise in him as true and established; or the view 'I perceive self with self' arises in him and established; or the view 'I perceive not self with self' arises in him as true and established; or the view 'I perceive self with not-self' arises in him as true and established or else he has some such view as this: "It is this self of mine that speaks and feels and experiences here and there the result of good and bad actions; but this self of mine is permanent, everlasting, eternal, not subject to change, and it will endure as long as eternity.'>> Cheers Ken O #60771 From: upasaka@... Date: Sun Jun 25, 2006 5:35 am Subject: Re: [dsg] On rebirth upasaka_howard Hi, Ken - In a message dated 6/25/06 11:55:46 AM Eastern Daylight Time, ashkenn2k@... writes: > > Hi Howard > > > >------------------------------------ > >Howard: > > You are entirely correct, Ken. The corruption of I-sense is > >involved. And it will continue to be involved until complete > awakening. The sense of self is erroneous. But a worse error than to > act with corrupted mind is to conclude that that no kusala action is > to be taken at all. What we know of as volitional action is quite > conventional, and it consists of a complex set of conditions that we > are barely aware of. Nonetheless, if the (very conventional) > >kusala actions do not occur, then the underlying realities do not > >occur, and progress towards awakening does not occur. We start > where we are, Ken - unless we don't start at all, in which case the > goal is never attained. > >----------------------------------------- > > k: I think your stand is that one must act to gain liberation and > with the liberation the I is eradicate. > -------------------------------------- Howard: My "stand" is that there is no I, but there is and will remain the sense of I until complete liberation. If I'm not mistaken, that is the Buddha's stand. -------------------------------------- My feeling is the this is> > the most popular practise and many accomplish writers always have > this opinoin. And only in DSG, or my humble opinion is always about > understanding conditionality first. > ------------------------------------ Howard: That is incorrect. All understanding Buddhists put conditionality first, for that is the core of the Dhamma. ---------------------------------- As I said previously a few times> > ago, the underlying assumption must be correct. I feel everytime we > must do something, the underlying I is always presence. -------------------------------- Howard: That is so: The sense of I is there. ------------------------------- We cannot> > used an I to eradicate an I, the middle way is about understanding > conditionality (anatta) as stated "Without veering towards either of > these extremes" . ------------------------------ Howard: There is no I to be used. But wholesome & useful action must be taken. If you are saying that there must first be no sense of I present in order to progress to liberation, then that is an insurmountable catch 22, because that amounts to the final goal being required to attain the final goal! ------------------------------ That is why in DSG, we always talk about paramathas> > dhammas (understanding conditionality) for as long as I know :-) and > likewise for as long as I know we are always discussing this :-). ----------------------------- Howard: Talk is cheap. (An old but valuable saying.) ----------------------------- > > As I said before, it is extremely difficult to understand that all > development of the path comes from just listening. > ---------------------------- Howard: I consider that to be utter nonsense! It trivializes the Buddhadhamma to an unbelievable extent! ---------------------------- As what Sarah> > always said we are the dinosuars. Cheers. Before I pen off, please > let my give these two quotes again > > SN 12.17 The Naked Ascetic Kassapa > < who experiences [the result],' [the one asserts] with reference to > one existing from the begining: 'Suffering is created by oneself.' > When one assert thus, this amount to eternalism>> > > MN 2 All the Taints Sutta (sabbasava) > < him. The view 'self exists for me' arises in him as true and > established; or the view 'no self exist for me' arise in him as true > and established; or the view 'I perceive self with self' arises in > him and established; or the view 'I perceive not self with self' > arises in him as true and established; or the view 'I perceive self > with not-self' arises in him as true and established or else he has > some such view as this: "It is this self of mine that speaks and > feels and experiences here and there the result of good and bad > actions; but this self of mine is permanent, everlasting, eternal, > not subject to change, and it will endure as long as eternity.'>> > > > Cheers > Ken O > ===================== With metta, Howard #60772 From: nina van gorkom Date: Sun Jun 25, 2006 10:28 am Subject: Abhidhamma in Daily life 4. nilovg Dear friends, ***** Nina. 1) #60773 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Sun Jun 25, 2006 11:57 am Subject: Re: Impermanence & Happiness scottduncan2 S: "Dhammadada 11-12,(Fronsdal, trans.)." Sorry, its the Dhammapada, or course. "Dhammadada" is Dhammapada for the pyslexic (for whom I mean no offense) or its the version for those anarchist post-surrealists (for whom as well, I mean no offense). Invertedly, Scott. 5) #60774 From: upasaka@... Date: Sun Jun 25, 2006 8:11 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Impermanence & Happiness upasaka_howard Hi, Scott - In a message dated 6/25/06 3:07:15 PM Eastern Daylight Time, scduncan@... writes: > S: "Dhammadada 11-12,(Fronsdal, trans.)." > > Sorry, its the Dhammapada, or course. "Dhammadada" is Dhammapada for > the pyslexic (for whom I mean no offense) or its the version for those > anarchist post-surrealists (for whom as well, I mean no offense). > > Invertedly, > > Scott. > ================== And don't forget Dhammadadda, for babyish Buddhists! ;-)) With metta, Howard #60775 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Sun Jun 25, 2006 12:17 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Impermanence & Happiness scottduncan2 Dear Howard, Yeah , of course, thanks. H: "And don't forget Dhammadadda, for babyish Buddhists!" No offense intended to babyish buddhists, whom I forgot to mention. Forgetfully, Scott. #60776 From: "Joop" Date: Sun Jun 25, 2006 12:51 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Q. Dependent Origination ... and cycles jwromeijn --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Ken O wrote: > > Hi Joop > .... Hallo Ken, all Ken, in my opinion you are mixing things a little bit. k: Sorrow, lamentation and grief all have unpleasant feelings. J: you mean, they condition unpleasant feelings? That's not that they are feelings themselves? k: Ignorance is comprised within unplesant and pleasant feelings J: I don't know what is meaned with 'comprised' here. 'Ignorance' is not a feeling, I think In his translation of SN Bhikkhu Bodhi explains: "… that ignorance, as the most basic cause of samsaric existence, is lack of knowledge of the Four Noble Truths. Although in popular accounts ignorance is often identified with the idea of self, the definitions here show that the view of self is an aspect of clinging, which is itself conditioned by craving, while the latter is in turn conditioned by ignorance." (page 728 note 8) J (yesterday): Another point that interest me: the Buddha did not describe (D.O.) as a cycle. k: see below suttas. … J: This suttas are about the samsara-cycle, not about D.O. Perhaps you are more convinced when you read this: The Wheel of Birth and Death by Bhikkhu Khantipalo The Wheel Publication No. 147/148/149 "… The History of the Wheel Dependent Arising is explained many times and in many different connections in the Discourses of Lord Buddha, but He has not compared it to a wheel. This simile is found in the Visuddhimagga ("The Path of Purification") and in the other commentarial literature. …" Metta Joop #60777 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Sun Jun 25, 2006 3:10 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Knowledge of the Difference Between Naama and Ruupa: Making Theory Pra egberdina Hi Scott, On 24/06/06, Scott Duncan wrote: > Thank you very much for the questions. I appreciate the opportunity of clarifying my own thinking in the process of discussion. > > H: "I cannot say anything at all about Nibbana in respect of what it > > is, but only in respect of what it isn't. I think we talked before > about coming to know things negatively, by a process of elimination > almost." > > > We did. I did/didn't get/agree with it. Coming to know things > negatively is, as I see it, the polar opposite to, shall I say, > "standard" DSG-stated Theravada understanding (which is to know > realities as they are), is it not? How is your idea about "knowing" > to be compared and contrasted? > > H: "Nothingness is a good parallel. We do not know absence as a > > positive, it has no positive quality, no thereness ie we cannot say > nothing or absence or lack exists. Nonetheless we are intimately aware > of nothingness, and all our consciousness is suffused with notions of > nothing and negation. So even though we do not say "nothing exists" > we still acknowledge, if implicitly, that nothing is real (has > reality)." > > > I'm afraid I don't follow. Why the focus on nothingness? Why is it > important to know absence? In what way is "all our consciousness > suffused with notions of nothing and negation?" And how is this > important? In what sense is nothing "real?" And how is this > important? Please, if you can, give me your definition of the meaning > of "real" or "reality." (You said ask questions.) > I say consciousness is suffused with nothingness and negation for the following reasons. We say that any consciousness has an object. And you say that to be an object means to be this. And that is where the party line stops. But I don't. Because to be this means to be THIS AND NOT THAT. An object is defined, bounded by WHAT IT IS NOT. The same goes for notions of identity. You are defined by what you are not. To be you means to be not anybody else. The Dhamma (the true one, the one that I know heaps about :-)), is also suffused with negation and nothingness. The 3 characteristics are framed negatively. Anatta is a negation, as is anicca, and argument could be made re dukkha in the same vein. But most significant of all, and I want to thank KenO and Charles for highlighting this, the driving force of our being is craving. I want to highlight craving for becoming and not-becoming in this regard. Why? Because this craving is simply a craving for WHAT IS NOT (yet). We are forever looking to replace what is with what is not. To be human is to be lacking. Here endeth the lesson on nothing. Hope you get something out of it :-) Kind Regards Herman #60778 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Sun Jun 25, 2006 3:13 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Dependent Origination ... How about upadana? egberdina Hi Charles, On 23/06/06, Charles DaCosta wrote: > > > Hi Herman & Ken0, > > Herman, I think you asked a very important question (especially for an > Abidharmists). ".what direct experience is ." > > Again, this is a concept and like all concepts it must be defined. So search > your own heart for an answer and I will hope that it, the search, brings all > closer to the truth. > I have always appreciated your posts, and I would like to thank you for them. Kind Regards Herman #60779 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Sun Jun 25, 2006 3:34 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] death of dear ones.Family life. egberdina Hi Nina, I cannot thank you enough for the autobiographical material you shared. Discussing in philosophical generalities is all good and well, but in the end WE are not generalities, we are all specific people, and we all have our specific history. What you wrote reminded me of my grandfather, now gone. He was a distant man, a cold man, you would never in your wildest dreams go and sit on his lap. I was very frightened of him. Some time ago I read a letter that he wrote to one of his daughters while she had an extended stay in hospital. The tone was one of respect, but there was no personal content at all, let alone love. It helped me understand how we become defined by our lacks. I only ever knew Troelstra as someone who lent their name to a street in Geldermalsen where I had to deliver the newspapers early every morning :-) Thanks again and Kind Regards to you and Lodewijk. I hope to write more about the solipsism thing later on. Thank you very much for both your comments on that. Herman #60780 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Sun Jun 25, 2006 3:39 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Q. Dependent Origination ... and football egberdina Hi Joop, Thanks for your comments. On 24/06/06, Joop wrote: > I like looking to our (dutch) team and I am at that > moment patriotic. But I also know: it's a hype and very superficial; > it had to be seen as 'only a game'. > Sure. That's how it is for me too. Just a bit of fun. > Well, I'm not an expert. What I know that the Buddha explained D.O. > several times, and most times (as can be read in several Sutta) only > some steps. > It was later that commentators (who as scholastics did not > like 'loose ends') made a system of 12 links of it, combining parts > of several Suttas. > As I understand it (but that's not scholastic nor orthodox) the > Buddha prefered to explain the principles of D.O., not the 'system'. > The principles: When there is this, that comes to be; with the > arising of this, that arises. When this is absent, that does not come > to be; with the cessation of this, that ceases. > > Another point that interest me: the Buddha did not describe as a > cycle! He did it on two ways; up and down and (what is called 'in > reverse order') from down to up. The cycle (more or less the cycle of > samsara) is made of it later by commentaries. > We see things pretty much the same way. > Perhaps we meet each other in the final and if not: so be it. > Yesterday that was a possibility, not any more :-) Kind Regards Herman #60781 From: "Phil" Date: Sun Jun 25, 2006 3:51 pm Subject: Re: Q. Abhidhamma in Daily Life 2. philofillet Hi Nina > But vipaaka in the form of seeing, hearing or the other sense- cognitions, > desirable or undesirable, have to come, no choice. Ph: Yes, it's good to be reminded of this many times. It does seem that we can intentionally shape the content of our thoughts, or thinking. A meditation on kindness rippling through the world (not Buddhist, in my opinion) does in fact make it more likely that we will respond with kind thoughts to situations later. There is no doubt about that. But this is all on the surface (and done with self clinging to emotional wellbeing in my case) and deeper, stronger conditions are at work absolutely beyond control. Vipaka in the form of seeing, hearing or other sense-cognitions have to come, no choice. Yes, good reminder. >When we understand this > we can gradually learn to accept vipaaka without aversion. Very gradually. For me, largely thinking about accepting vipaaka without aversion and being pleased by that notion. At other times, rarer times, there is the learning to accept vipaaka without aversion, the development of it. Of course, the thinking about it can be helpful, as long as we know it is just thinking with self clinging to well-being, and not bhavana. At times the thinking can be kusala as well I guess. I don't know. Nevermind. I will let this drop for a few days as my days off are coming and I will stay off the computer to work on other things. (ha! :) Phil #60782 From: "Phil" Date: Sun Jun 25, 2006 3:59 pm Subject: Citta is dark ( was Re: Abhidhamma in Daily LIfe.3.) philofillet Hi Nina and all > The citta which sees has what is > visible as its object. I'm always interested in hearing about how the citta is dark. It is only visible object that brings light into the picture. I think there is a tendency to think of citta as something that is light, penetrating the darkness. That's wrong, of course. Citta is as dark as in the womb, always. It's a very subtle point, one of those points which probably cannot be understood by trying harder to understand it, but...could I ask you to add a few thoughts on that when you have a moment, Nina? Phil #60783 From: LBIDD@... Date: Sun Jun 25, 2006 5:53 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Q. Dependent Origination ... and cycles lbidd2 Joop: "That's exact the main question of my message yesterday: The Visuddhimagga explains it, when there is sorrow, lamentation, and grief there is ignorance. But does the Buddha say that too? Is there a quote from the Suttas, as part of a D.O. description? I think not" Hi Joop, You are correct. The Buddha doesn't say, 'when there is sorrow there is ignorance', as far as I know (which isn't far). But he does say ignorance is not knowing dukkha. Therefore it seems reasonable to say when there is dukkha there is ignorance and sorrow certainly qualifies as dukkha. How do you see it? Larry #60784 From: LBIDD@... Date: Sun Jun 25, 2006 6:20 pm Subject: Vism.XVII,85 lbidd2 "The Path of Purification" (Visuddhimagga), Ch. XVII 85. (10) A state that assists by being present, having arisen previously, is a 'prenascence condition'. It is elevenfold as physical basis and object in the five doors, and as the heart-basis, according as it is said: 'The eye base is a condition, as prenascence condition, for eye-consciousness element and for the states associated therewith. The ear base ... The nose base ... The tongue base ... The body base ... The visible-data base ... The sound base ... The odour base ... The flavour base ... The tangible data base is a condition, as prenascence condition, for the body-consciousness element and for the states associated therewith. The visible data base ... The sound base ... The odour base ... The flavour base ... The tangible data base [is a condition, as prenascence condition,] for the mind element. The materiality with which as their support the mind element and mind-consciousness element occur is a condition, as prenascence condition, for the mind-element and for the states associated therewith, and it is sometimes [as in the course of an existence] a condition, sometimes [as at rebirth-linking] not a condition, as prenascence condition, for the mind-consciousness element and for the states associated therewith' (P.tn.1,4-5). *********************** 85. pa.thamatara.m uppajjitvaa vattamaanabhaavena upakaarako dhammo purejaatapaccayo. so pa~ncadvaare vatthaaramma.nahadayavatthuvasena ekaadasavidho hoti. yathaaha ``cakkhaayatana.m cakkhuvi~n~naa.nadhaatuyaa ta.msampayuttakaana~nca dhammaana.m purejaatapaccayena paccayo. sota...pe0... ghaana, jivhaa, kaayaayatana.m, ruupa, sadda, gandha, rasa, pho.t.thabbaayatana.m kaayavi~n~naa.nadhaatuyaa ta.msampayuttakaana~nca dhammaana.m purejaatapaccayena paccayo. ruupa, sadda, gandha, rasa, pho.t.thabbaayatana.m manodhaatuyaa. ya.m ruupa.m nissaaya manodhaatu ca manovi~n~naa.nadhaatu ca vattanti, ta.m ruupa.m manodhaatuyaa ta.msampayuttakaana~nca dhammaana.m purejaatapaccayena paccayo. manovi~n~naa.nadhaatuyaa ta.msampayuttakaana~nca dhammaana.m ki~ncikaale purejaatapaccayena paccayo. ki~ncikaale na purejaatapaccayena paccayo''ti (pa.t.thaa0 1.1.10). #60785 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Sun Jun 25, 2006 8:07 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Knowledge of the Difference Between Naama and Ruupa: Making Theory Pra scottduncan2 Dear Herman, Thanks for your clarifications. H: "Thank you very much for the questions. I appreciate the opportunity of clarifying my own thinking in the process of discussion." You are welcome. I may have more questions but first... H: "...We say that any consciousness has an object. And you say that to be an object means to be this. And that is where the party line stops. But I don't. Because to be this means to be THIS AND NOT THAT. An object is defined, bounded by WHAT IT IS NOT. The same goes for notions of identity. You are defined by what you are not. To be you means to be not anybody else." You are saying, then, that something is both what it is and what it is not. And you focus on the boundaries of a given thing, seeming to say that it is a thing insofar as it is itself and then, its thing-ness ends when its non-thing-ness begins. These are spatial metaphors, really, if I am following you, especially when notions of boundary are invoked. And you seem to be saying that what an object is not can also be an object. H: "The Dhamma (the true one, the one that I know heaps about :-)), is also suffused with negation and nothingness. The 3 characteristics are framed negatively. Anatta is a negation, as is anicca, and argument could be made re dukkha in the same vein." You seem to be stating that something is "suffused" with something else. This implies a thing to be suffused and suffusing thing. These are metaphors of volume (still spatial, really), or the dynamics of liquids or gases. In stating that anatta and anicca, at least, are "negations" you seem to be giving these things a dynamic force and the status of entities. You then seem to be implying that, since at least these two of the three characteristics of all conditioned dhammas are "negations" that they therefore suffuse all dhammas with this "negation" therefore all dhammas are "nothing." You essentially posit that a higher-order concept called "nothingness" which is a force and a characteristic of two if not three of the original characteristics of dhammas. H: "But most significant of all...the driving force of our being is craving. I want to highlight craving for becoming and not-becoming in this regard. Why? Because this craving is simply a craving for WHAT IS NOT (yet). We are forever looking to replace what is with what is not. To be human is to be lacking." Here you seem to be saying that since we crave something that is not what we have now - that the craving is directed to some as yet not clung to object - then the object of craving is a not-yet-object. Here you seem to, as earlier, use the concept of time to shore up your argument; at least, as in this case, the future, including its potential objects which will be then subject to craving. Please let me know if I have it or not; or please clarify what I have misunderstood. Sincerely, Scott. #60786 From: "Joop" Date: Mon Jun 26, 2006 2:04 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Q. Dependent Origination ... and cycles jwromeijn Hallo Larry, All You ended your message with a question: "You are correct. The Buddha doesn't say, 'when there is sorrow there is ignorance', as far as I know (which isn't far). But he does say ignorance is not knowing dukkha. Therefore it seems reasonable to say when there is dukkha there is ignorance and sorrow certainly qualifies as dukkha. How do you see it?" I don't have an definitive answer. The last month I tried to understand Dependent Origination; I don't know why, call it 'buddhist intuition' that I had to do it now. I tried to understand the principles behind D.O., the individual factors and the individual links between the factors. And the ways DO can be applied, three in my opinion: within one moment, within a life and three lifetimes. And all the time it was implicit evident that D.O. was a cycle (Most times the term 'wheel' is used but after my mathematics study I define a wheel as a cycle) So I was very surprised a week ago when I realised that that was not based on the Teachings of the Buddha in the Suttas. It was based on the many drawing I have seen and admired: Tibetan and Thai. But it is a mystification and I'm afraid Ven. Buddhaghosa played a role in this mystification. So now I have three questions (to myself): - A semi-scientific: why has commentators and popular buddhism made a cycle of D.O.? My answer till now: because the mechanism of D.O. is combined with the cycle of samsara. But I think D.O. describes something else as samsara. It's not possible to make simple a system of D.O.; as the Buddha said: "Ananda, do not say so. The doctrine of dependent origination is so profound that sentient beings are unable to comprehend it." So everybody who thinks to understand it, is in error. - A personal: how to understand (more or less) and apply D.O. with the new insight that's not a cycle but still the process with the links of it happen again and again in me? - A dhamma study question: what conditions ignorance? You say: "when there is dukkha there is ignorance and sorrow certainly qualifies as dukkha" But if I permit myself to be rude: that's not an answer. The same with the answer of KenO It's the not-perceiving dukkha AS dukkha (lack of knowledge of the Four Noble Truths) that has ignorance as result, not the fact that dukkha exists itself causes ignorance. Do I have an answer? On this moment it is: everybody is born with ignorance and with the possibility of seeing the things as they really are in his or her spiritual development during life. And that being born on this way is without any reason (of course there are some biological), it just is as it is. Perhaps the answer had to be: nothing else than 'human condition' OR kamma causes ignorance in a human being. There are days that I think "it's kamma" and there are days that I think "it's human condition". Not a perfect (Theravada) answer but I'm not perfect. (And a question to all DSG-participants: don't try to educate me.) Metta Joop #60787 From: nina van gorkom Date: Mon Jun 26, 2006 2:12 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Citta is dark . The bitter Truth. nilovg Hi Phil, op 26-06-2006 00:59 schreef Phil op philco777@...: > The citta which sees has what is > visible as its object. I'm always interested in hearing about how the citta is dark. It is only visible object that brings light into the picture. I think there is a tendency to think of citta as something that is light, penetrating the darkness. That's wrong, of course. Citta is as dark as in the womb, always. ------- N: When we see it seems that the world is light. Visible object is light. But seeing lasts only for an extremely short moment, and then there are other cittas. However, it seems that what appeared through the eyes is still lasting. This is because we think with perverted saññaa about what was seen, but has fallen away. Only visible object is light, it is the only object that can be seen. It seems to appear all day long, it seems to last. All the moments when other objects appear or when we are thinking of concepts of trees or persons, there is no light, there is only darkness. But in between countless moments of seeing arise and fall away, and therefore darkness is not known. This reminds us of the ephemeral nature of dhammas. This is not comforting, not giving security, but it is the truth. The truth is bitter, people do not like to hear it. Should we not prefer the truth to make believe things? When we look at a dear person, he or she seems to be there all the time. This is not true. What has been seen has completely fallen away. When we touch that person, hardness appears, but it falls away completely. This is hard to take, I know. Some people object, they ask: how can there be metta? When paññaa sees the truth, there is detachment instead of attachment. Attachment and metta do not go together. Paññaa leads to pure metta. We can still think of persons and take care of them. With more understanding and less selfishness. In this way the Brahma Vihaaras can be developed. I want to share what I heard last night: Without shame, hiri, and fear of blame, ottappa, one finds it useless to understand this moment. When hiri and ottappa arise they see the danger of not knowing realities. Ignorance and wrong view take everything for 'I'. There was a discussion about the khandhas of clinging, upadana khandhas. This moment when visible object appears, it is commonly object of clinging. When there is no right understanding, there must be clinging. ------- The truth is bitter, people prefer to hear poetry instead of Dhamma. This reminds me of the Drum Peg sutta, and I took this from Rob K's forum today. There was a kettle drum, called the summoner, that became cracked and people put pegs in. Samyutta Nikaya IX (20)7 p708 of Bhikkhu Bodhi's translation <...In the same way, in the course of the future there will be monks who won't listen when discourses that are words of the Tathagata -- deep, deep in their meaning, transcendent, connected with emptiness -- are being recited. They won't lend ear, won't set their hearts on knowing them, won't regard these teachings as worth grasping or mastering. But they will listen when discourses that are literary works -- the works of poets, elegant in sound, elegant in rhetoric, the work of outsiders, words of disciples -- are recited. ... In this way the disappearance of the discourses that are words of the Tathagata -- deep, deep in their meaning, transcendent, connected with emptiness -- will come about.> ***** Nina. #60788 From: nina van gorkom Date: Mon Jun 26, 2006 2:59 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Book review -- The Buddha's Path nilovg Hi Charles D, yes, please post any questions you have to dsg, also others are interested. I can go into some of your points now. op 24-06-2006 22:39 schreef Charles DaCosta op dacostas@...: all the people the sutras present as becoming enlightened or highly realized were enlightened by what was said in the sutra (e.g., the 5 ascetics). ------ N: They had deeply accumulated paññaa in former lives, a few words were enough for them. When we carefully read the suttas we can see that they are full of Abhidhamma. In the Kindred Sayings IV this is very obvious. -------- Ch: It even cleared up a misunderstanding of Sara's posts on ". Trees ." about trees not being real - only the visual objects: color, light, etc.. Because of what I read, now I can tell Sara that realities are compounded entities and in the case of "Trees" the visual objects are in the list of aggregates that make up the entity called a Tree. ------ N: This is not quite so, but the subject is not easy to understand. Through eyes visible object or colour appears but this falls away immediately. We keep on thinking of the shape and form of a tree and it seems to be staying in a certain place. In fact every single ruupa arises and falls away all the time. Since ruupas are replaced it seems that there is a tree everlasting. We think of the concept tree, and thinking of a concept is not always wrong. It depends on the citta that thinks, whether it is right thinking or wrong thinking. But I only want to touch a little on this subject now. ----------- Ch: The basics of Buddhism are the practice of morality, and the development of wisdom and concentration. The Abhidhamma represents an advance form of wisdom that is far from basic. The most basic concepts of wisdom in Buddhism are (1) the 3 characteristics of existence, (2) the first 3 Noble truths, and (3) the Middle Way. The Abhidhamma is like a group of dissertations on those concepts, i.e., the PhD work. ------ N: the 3 characteristics of existence, we have to know impermanence of which dhamma. It is impermanence of seeing or visible object at this moment, or of citta rooted in attachment at this moment, or of dosa at this moment. Here you need to study the Abhidhamma so that you know more precisely: impermanence of what. Not impermanence in general or thinking about arising and falling away. Some people believe they can watch dosa, how it comes and then goes. But through the Abhidhamma they will understand more about cittas arising in processes, about sati, about the development of insight in phases, and this will keep them from making themselves believe that they can watch or concentrate on a dhamma in order to realize its coming and going. They can see that watching is not the realization of the truth of dhammas, And also this realization is done by another dhamma that is non-self. This is a very important point. Nina. #60789 From: nina van gorkom Date: Mon Jun 26, 2006 2:59 am Subject: Re: [dsg] death of dear ones.Family life. nilovg Hi Herman, thank you for your kind words. I was afraid I had written too much about myself. My father was at times surprising. When I had broken my wrist he sent us a flowering tree with the wishes: keep courage (houd goede moed) and I was so touched. He could scold me: you autistic child. But Lodewijk said: he cares for you. Strange. Conditions, conditions. Perhaps I did not understand solipsism as Howard suggested. I am not trained in philosophy, but Howard explains very well. Nina. op 26-06-2006 00:34 schreef Herman Hofman op hhofmeister@...: I cannot thank you enough for the autobiographical material you shared. Discussing in philosophical generalities is all good and well, but in the end WE are not generalities, we are all specific people, and we all have our specific history. #60790 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Sun Jun 25, 2006 9:36 pm Subject: The Unsurpassable Gift ... !!! bhikkhu_ekamuni Friends: Drops of Dhamma Delight - Sabbedânam Dhammadânam Jinâti! The gift of Dhamma surpasses all other gifts... Dhp 354 -------------------------------------------------------------------------- For those looking for Devices to Progress: 4 Realizations 5-times-5 9 Stillings 10 mental perfections Acquisition of Fuel Actually Factual Advanced Right View Alone yet Free Always Different Any Kind Arahat Qualities Arousal Get Up and Going Barren Stagnation Best among Gods & Men Best Buddhist Praxis Buddha Buddha on Noble Friendship Causes of sati Clear Comprehension Climax of Calm Cohesive Co-Origination Collapsible Co-Cessation Conceit I Am Cool Calm Crucial Necessity Death Details of the Jhana Absorptions Determination Determines Disadvantageous Subjects Diversity of Contacts Double Problem Ego-Projection Elemental Analysis Entering the Stream Supreme Enthusiastic is Energy Essential Books Even is Equanimity Final Freedom Fingernail of Soil First I-dentification then Enmity! Forest BlissFourteen Teachings Free from Fear Freed by Knowing Friendliness Frees Fruits of the Noble Way Fullmoon Observance Day Giving Good I-dentification Invariable Fact Is Money Happiness ? Levels of Leaving Behind Luminous is Mind Metta Mighty is Morality Mindfulness Nibbana or non-return No-Agent but Dependence Noble 8-fold Way Definition Not Yours Observance Ontology Openhanded Generosity Out=in Patient is Tolerance Prime Benefits Prison of Pride! Reaching Peace Rebirth Rejoicing Bliss = Mudita Requisites for Jhana Absorption Rough Realism SammaSamBuddho!!! Samma-Samadhi Sati Studies Saving Rescue Seeking Delight Selfless Friendship is Sweetest Slaying Anger Solid Siam Supreme Stream of Essence The 3 Ultimate Facts! The 3 Universal Characteristics The 5 Clusters of Clinging The 7 Links to Awakening The 10 Helpers The Divine Eye The Elimination of Anger The Event of Awakening The Leash The Monkey passing the Banana The Noble 8-Fold Way The Proximate Cause The Seven invisible Diamonds The Skin! Name & Fame The Three Jewels The Latent Tendencies The Rhinocero's Horn 1 The Rhinocero's Horn 2 The Rhinocero's Horn 3 The Rhinocero's Horn 4 The Rhinocero's Horn 5 The Rhinocero's Horn 6 The Rhinocero's Horn 7 Truth Triumphs! Understanding is the Chief Unintentional Action Vesak 2005 message What is Advantageous ? What is Right View ? What is Right Motivation ? What is Right Speech ? What is Right Action ? What is Right Livelihood ? What is Right Effort ? What is Right Awareness ? What is Right Concentration ? What Exists ? Why Not ? Winning Vision Witdrawal Wins Wisdom -------------------------------------------------------------- Bhikkhu Samahita, Sri Lanka. #60791 From: "jjnbdal" Date: Mon Jun 26, 2006 4:33 am Subject: Re: [dsg]Q. Abhidhamma in Daily Life 2. jjnbdal Dear Nina: Thank you for asking. My father is well although he is having difficulties seeing at night. Accordingly, I don't know if it is convenient for him to travel to india. I will ask him. I missed the chance to join you Jan 13 as I was out of Thailand. I am sure you had a good time. > N: As Phil says, we have to go back to basics all the time. We believe that > we have understood intellectually about naama and ruupa, but we have to > listen again, consider again. We better not think too much of the end > result, that distracts from the present moment. > I agree that the progress is very gradual. when we look back we may notice > that we understand today more than a year ago, but when we measure, lobha > will come in. That's it. We don't know the characteristics of this dhamma, but the wanting to know the progress is a the banner of lobha. The reason I am asking about this is because many people tend to think that the end is very near. > P.S. Since I will change computer to Mac OS 10, I like a Thai font. Could > you perhaps send one off list, then the technician can help me install it. Please give me two weeks. I am not in Thailand now. Best Regards, jaran #60792 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Mon Jun 26, 2006 7:00 am Subject: Re: [dsg] death of dear ones.Family life. scottduncan2 Dear Nina, I've not been on this forum for that long, but I know that your communications, despite the ether, convey a warmth and kindness which I appreciate and which enhances the "conceptual relations" here. Thanks again for your diligent and careful consideration of us all! N: "I am just surprised that family life is so different in different families and all these circumstances, yes, also concepts, are natural decisive support-condition fot the cittas arising today. We learn form the Patthaana, especially this passage of natural decisive support-condition, not to neglect or despise concepts, life with our fellowmen. It certainly is a condition to be reckoned with." This is a good and surprising way of considering human relations: families, family-life, life with our fellowmen - conceptual relations and definitely "a condition to be reckoned with." I'll be considering your words today for sure... Sincerely, Scott. #60793 From: Jaran Jainhuknan Date: Mon Jun 26, 2006 4:16 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Q. Abhidhamma in Daily Life 2. jjnbdal Dear Nina: Thank you for your explanation. Learning that everything is dhamma to be known and experienced somehow prompts us to 'observe' and 'study' their true characteristics. Most of the time just 'thinking' and comtemplating about them. These classification somehow do not make any difference for me. When we think we have experienced the true dhamma, I think it is almost always mere speculation. At least for me. What seems to be most important message from the book is that all things we have thought 'things' and 'ours', consisted of dhamma at most basic level. No-Self. Best Regards, jaran > Why is it important to know? Some people try very hard to know > subtle ruupas > such as the vikaara rupas, lightness, etc. and they believe > that they can > easily experience them. But they mislead themselves. > Why not be aware of visible object or sound which are right at > hand? See, > this is the main point. Not looking for dhammas which do not > appear now. > We just begin to understand what seeing really is, but if we > think it is > easy to penetrate, we may mislead ourselves and confuse > thinking about > realities with direct understanding. It is good to know where > the pittfalls > are. This concerns the development of paññaa leading to > awakening. > Also, when wondering about subtle ruupas, we can understand > that we should > not reject what is not yet obvious. Life faculty and nutrition > are subtle > ruupas, you know. > Nina. > #60794 From: upasaka@... Date: Mon Jun 26, 2006 3:01 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Abhidhamma in Daily Life 2. upasaka_howard Hi, Herman - In a message dated 6/24/06 7:37:46 PM Eastern Daylight Time, hhofmeister@... writes: > I think there is great value in limiting oneself to "what is > experienced", if only to discover how much of what we experience is > actually what we think into experience. I agree with you that location > is part and parcel of many sensing experiences. And locational rupas > can well be descriptive, not explanatory, in that respect. > > Are thought experiments allowed as a phenomenological method? :-) -------------------------------------- Howard: Well, I'm not sure who wrote the phenomenology rule book! ;-) More seriously: I do engage in some thought experirments, but not so much in terms of imagining situations, but remembering what has been experienced, and analyzing that. I do think that can be useful. --------------------------------------- > > What are the implications for locational rupas if pain can be felt in > non-existent locations? (phantom pain). And vice versa, if no pain can > be felt while watching your hand being sliced open under local > anaesthetic? ------------------------------------- Howard: I don't know what sort of implications you'd like to consider. Phantom pain may usefully suggest specific things to a neurologist. I don't know about the anaesthesia example. What are you thinking about? ------------------------------------ > > Or visual and auditory hallucinations that are indistinguishable from > the real thing apart from the lack of stimulus in the environment? > (This last one wouldn't be a thought experiment, because I did have > these. On reflection, the auditory hallucination, the voice, was > non-directional, it didn't have a location associated with it.) > > Anyway, it would be good to read your further thoughts, as always -------------------------------------- Howard: I would suppose that such hallucinations must be mind-door phenomena. What are you aiming at? ------------------------------------ > > > Kind Regards > > > > Herman > ===================== With metta, Howard #60795 From: upasaka@... Date: Mon Jun 26, 2006 2:47 am Subject: Re: [dsg] The Unsurpassable Gift ... !!! upasaka_howard Dear Bhikkhu Samahita - I thought I would mention to you that on some lists, DSG being an example, links are not clickable. On this post of yours, for example, all we see on DSG is a list: For those looking for Devices to Progress: 4 Realizations 5-times-5 9 Stillings etc So in order for links to be usable, and not just functionless titles, there would be a need to also (or instead) type the web addresses. With metta, Howard #60796 From: "Joop" Date: Mon Jun 26, 2006 7:08 am Subject: Bhikkhu Bodhi and Buddhaghosa jwromeijn Hallo all In a interview with the journal 'Inquiring Mind' Bhikkhu Bodhi tells about his translation work of the Suttas ( www.inquiringmind.com/Articles/Translator.html ) But also he answers a question that interest me too: the role of Buddhaghosa in Theravada. A quote that give me the impression that BB is less buddhaghosian (some don't like the term 'orthodox) than I thought. It's a reason again to prefer the Suttas more than commentaries on it. Metta Joop IM: Some people feel that the commentaries, especially those by Buddhaghosa, present a different viewpoint—a more narrow interpretation of Dhamma practice—than the suttas. How do you see the basic Dhamma understanding of the suttas as compared to that in the commentaries? In what ways are they the same or different? BB: The relationship between the suttas and the commentaries is an extremely complex one and it is risky to make blanket judgments about it. The commentaries are not original works by Buddhaghosa, but edited versions of more ancient commentaries that had been preserved in Sri Lanka. Their historical origins are obscure, but clearly they begin with the suttas themselves; that is, there are suttas that are commentaries on other suttas (e.g. MN 141, SN 12:31, SN 22:3, 4). … To understand what the commentaries are doing at the doctrinal level, we have to remember that the suttas themselves are not uniquely Theravada texts. They are the Theravadin transmission of a class of scriptures common to all the early Buddhist schools, each of which must have had its own way of interpreting them. The commentaries that come to us from Buddhaghosa (and others) take up the task of interpreting these texts from the standpoint of the Theravada school. Their view is thus necessarily narrower than that of the suttas because it is more specific: they view the thought-world of the suttas through the lens of the methods of exegesis developed by the early Theravadin teachers, using these methods to explicate and elaborate upon the early teachings. If we compare the suttas to a vast expanse of open territory, reconnoitered from above as to the main features of its topography but with its details only lightly sketched, then we might compare the commentaries to a detailed account of the lay of the land. The question is: Are the commentaries simply coming in and describing the landscape in greater detail, or are they bringing in construction crews and building housing schemes, shopping malls and highways on the virgin territory. The answer, I think, would be a combination of both. To be brief, I would say there are two extreme attitudes one could take to the commentaries. One, often adopted by orthodox Theravadins, is to regard them as being absolutely authoritative almost on a par with the suttas. The other is to disregard them completely and claim they represent "a different take on the Dhamma." I find that a prudent middle ground is to consult the commentaries and use them, but without clinging to them. Their interpretations are often illuminating, but we should also recognize that they represent a specific systematization of the early teaching. They are by no means necessitated by the early teaching, and on some points even seem to be in tension with it #60797 From: Ken O Date: Mon Jun 26, 2006 7:34 am Subject: Re: [dsg] On rebirth ashkenn2k Hi Howard >> ------------------------------ > Howard: > There is no I to be used. But wholesome & useful action must > be taken. If you are saying that there must first be no sense of I present in order to progress to liberation, then that is an insurmountable catch 22, because that amounts to the final goal being required to attain the final goal! > ------------------------------ k: We must have mundane right view that is any I involved in any action will lead to more underlying tendency to arise. You have to excuse me of not pursuing in discussing this issue. The popular notion of developing is understandable because in the sutta there is always an exhortation to develop this and that. As I said, we in the DSG are coming to extinction and as far as I know we are the only group that loves reading, discussing and listening and everyday life as the path to development. This is quite nostalgic as it reminds me of the talk in Bangkok in 2004 where one person discusses jhanas issue with Ahjan Sujin and she will reply that about reality, about simple aspect of life like seeing, hearing. Hmmm, listening, seeing are simple things but very deep and profound dhamma :-) Cheers Ken O #60798 From: Ken O Date: Mon Jun 26, 2006 9:31 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Q. Dependent Origination ... and cycles ashkenn2k Hi Joop > k: Sorrow, lamentation and grief all have unpleasant feelings. > J: you mean, they condition unpleasant feelings? That's not that > they are feelings themselves? k: They are sufferings and they are unplesant feelings. These words are used to describe the various ways we express sufferings. > J: I don't know what is meaned with 'comprised' here. 'Ignorance' > is not a feeling, I think > In his translation of SN Bhikkhu Bodhi explains: "… that ignorance, > as the most basic cause of samsaric existence, is lack of knowledge > of the Four Noble Truths. Although in popular accounts ignorance is > often identified with the idea of self, the definitions here show > that the view of self is an aspect of clinging, which is itself > conditioned by craving, while the latter is in turn conditioned by > ignorance." (page 728 note 8) k: In the aksuala dhamma, the arisen of pleasant feelings is craving and the arisen of unpleasant feelings is dosa. Ignorance is comprised within meant it arise together with these feelings. k: Ignorance in short is not knowing suffering. If one knows suffering in sensual pleasure, I dont think one will crave these sensual pleasures. Craving will not arise without ignorance because it is ignorance that conceals suffering and that is why we keep craving. Likewise for dosa. > J: This suttas are about the samsara-cycle, not about D.O. k: I think you are separating samasara cycle from D.O. We know in the origin of suffering what starts samara cycle, is ignorance and craving. These ignorance and craving are part of the D.O, similarly formations and jati are part of D.O.. The origin of suffering is used the same way it is in D.O as I shown you in AN III, 61, the three sectarian tenets. I would like to know how does the author separate the two because it is already said in AN III that 4NT and D.O they carry the same meaning. Buddha has also said "orignation orignation" "cessation cessation" in SN 10.1 and 10.2. And it will be interesting if the author will discuss how in the suttas that samasara cycle is not about D.O.. I have indicated using suttas quotes that they are the same, I felt it is only fair to me and the commentarians especially that you have indicated many times that the commentarians may not be correct, to use suttas quotes to tell me how they are different. Regards Ken O #60799 From: nina van gorkom Date: Mon Jun 26, 2006 10:54 am Subject: Abhidhamma in Daily life 5. nilovg Dear friends,