#70600 From: connie Date: Sat Apr 14, 2007 6:00 am Subject: Theriigaathaa - Sisters (51) nichiconn Dear Friends, We left Vaasi.t.thii at Mithilaa (#70580) ... text: tatthaddasa bhagavanta.m antaraviithiya.m gacchanta.m danta.m gutta.m sa.myatindriya.m naaga.m. Disvaana saha dassanena buddhaanubhaavato apagatummaadaa pakaticitta.m pa.tilabhi. Athassaa satthaa sa.mkhittena dhamma.m desesi. Saa ta.m dhamma.m sutvaa pa.tiladdhasa.mvegaa satthaara.m pabbajja.m yaacitvaa satthu aa.naaya bhikkhuniisu pabbajitvaa katapubbakiccaa vipassana.m pa.t.thapetvaa gha.tentii vaayamantii paripakka~naa.nataaya na cirasseva saha pa.tisambhidaahi arahatta.m patvaa attano pa.tipatti.m paccavekkhitvaa udaanavasena- 133. "Puttasokenaha.m a.t.taa, khittacittaa visa~n~ninii; naggaa paki.n.nakesii ca, tena tena vicaariha.m. 134. "Viithisa"nkaarakuu.tesu, susaane rathiyaasu ca; acari.m tii.ni vassaani, khuppipaasaa samappitaa. 135. "Athaddasaasi.m sugata.m, nagara.m mithila.m pati; adantaana.m dametaara.m, sambuddhamakutobhaya.m. 136. "Sacitta.m pa.tiladdhaana, vanditvaana upaavisi.m; so me dhammamadesesi, anukampaaya gotamo. 137. "Tassa dhamma.m su.nitvaana, pabbaji.m anagaariya.m; yu~njantii satthuvacane, sacchaakaasi.m pada.m siva.m. 138. "Sabbe sokaa samucchinnaa, pahiinaa etadantikaa; pari~n~naataa hi me vatthuu, yato sokaana sambhavo"ti.- Imaa gaathaa abhaasi. Pruitt: There, she saw the Blessed One going down a street, tamed, controlled, his senses under control, a Naaga. Once she had seen him, at the sight of him, her madness was removed through the power of the Buddha, and she regained her normal mind. Then the Teacher taught her the Doctrine in brief. When she heard the Doctrine, she was profoundly stirred. She requested the going forth. On the order of the Teacher, she went forth among the bhikkhuniis. She fulfilled the preliminary duties; she established insight; and striving, making effort, through her matured knowledge, she attained Arahatship together with the [four] discriminations in a very short time. Looking over her attainment, she spoke these verses as a solemn utterance: 133. Afflicted by grief for my son, with a mind deranged, out of my senses, naked, and with dishevelled hair, I wandered here and there. 134. I dwelt on rubbish heaps in the streets, in a cemetary, and on highways. I wandered for three years, consigned to hunger and thirst. 135. Then I saw the Sublime One [going] towards the town of Mithilaa, the Tamer of the Untamed, the Awakened One who has no fear from any quarter. 136. Regaining my mind, I paid homage to him and sat down. In pity Gotama taught me the Doctrine. 137. I heard the Doctrine from him and went forth into the homeless state. Applying myself to the Teacher's utterance, I realized the blissful state. 138. All griefs have been cut out, eliminated, ending in this way. For I have comprehended the grounds from which [come] the origin of griefs. RD: Now here, now there, lightheaded, crazed with grief, Mourning my child, I wandered up and down, Naked, unheeding, streaming hair unkempt, (133) Lodging in scourings of the streets, and where The dead lay still, and by the chariot-roads - So three years long I fared, starving, athirst. (134) And then at last I saw Him, as He went Within that blessed city Mithilaa: Great Tamer of untame'd hearts, yea, Him, The Very Buddha, Banisher of fear. (135) Came back my heart to me, my errant mind; Forthwith to Him I went low worshipping, And there, e'en at His feet I heard the Norm. For of His great compassion on us all, 'Twas He who taught me, even GOTAMA. *258 (136) I heeded all He said and left the world And all its cares behind, and gave myself To follow where He taught, and realize Life in the Path to great good fortune bound. (137) Now all my sorrows are hewn down, cast out, Uprooted, brought to utter end, In that I now can grasp and understand The base on which my miseries were built. (138) *258 More than once in these verses - never, I believe, in prose - the family name of the Buddha is used by the faithful - e.g., Ps. liv. {c: Sister Anopama -- coming soon to a post near you} === peace, connie #70601 From: upasaka@... Date: Sat Apr 14, 2007 2:03 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: bhaavanaa and the body upasaka_howard Hi, Ken (and Scott) - > > I have created a monster! Yes, I think you have scored a hit. --------------------------------------- Howard: Excellent good humor, Ken. Great to see! -------------------------------------- > > I say, "I think," because I am not sure. Nina or Robert or any other > of our Abhidhammika friends (who are not too busy surfing) could tell > me that I was right the first time, and I wouldn't be surprised. -------------------------------------- Howard: We're never surprised when told we are right. There's just this wonderful warm, expansive feeling that wells up in us! ;-)) Actually, tough as it is, it is SO much better for us to see "Oh! I was wrong! And wrong again! And yet again!", because all our vaunted knowing really doesn't come down to a hill of beans, and we so need to be freed of views! (At least I think so! LOL!) --------------------------------------- > > When we study Dhamma we understand (intellectually) that Phala-citta > follows straight after Magga-citta. (I hope I've got that right.) > ---------------------------------------- Howard: I'd say that's a matter of dispute. Commentaries are said to say so [I only read reports of commentaries], but at least one sutta seems to suggest otherwise. For example, there is the following material in included in the Dakkhinavibhangha Sutta (findable at http://www.triplegem.plus.com/tipitaka/dakkhina.htm) in talking of offerings to 14 types of persons: - - - - - - - - - An offering made to an arahat disciple of the Tathagata is the third kind of offering made to an individual. An offering made to one who is practising to attain Arahatta Fruition (i.e. one who has attained Arahatta Magga) is the fourth kind of offering made to an individual. An offering made to one who is an Anagami is the fifth kind of offering made to an individual. An offering made to one who is practising to attain Anagami Fruition (i.e. one who has attained A nagam Magga) is the sixth kind of offering made to an individual. An offering made to one who is a Sakadagami is the seventh kind of offering made to an individual. An offering made to one who is practising to attain Sakadagami Fruition (i.e. one who has attained Sakadagami Magga) is the eighth kind of offering made to an individual. An offering made to one who is a Sotapanna is the ninth kind of offering made to an individual. An offering made to one who is practising to attain Sotapatti Fruition (i.e. one who has attained Sotapatti Magga) is the tenth kind of offering made to an individual. - - - - - - - - - - - ------------------------------------------------- With metta, Howard #70602 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Sat Apr 14, 2007 6:16 am Subject: [dsg] Re: bhaavanaa and the body. kenhowardau Hi Herman, I think understanding of the Abhidhamma is for those who want to understand it. It can't be imposed on any of us against our will. -------- H: > If there is only a present moment, how can anicca be known as a characteristic of a present dhamma? ------- With great difficulty. But I believe it can be done. First, concede there is only the present moment. Then, ask whether the conditioned dhammas that occupy it are permanent or impermanent. Ken H #70603 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Sat Apr 14, 2007 6:56 am Subject: Re: bhaavanaa and the body scottduncan2 Good Evening colette, I hope you're well. You seem in fine form, cryptographically. c: "Zoiks, you seem to take my heart away. Man, I tell ya you mix some dangerous chemicals. When I was just starting out in 1981 I got that same reputation only I knew I was deliberately, intentionally, mixing these highly volatile and extremely dangerous chemicals to mix. No kidding, people stayed quite clear of me. I just had a handful of friends when I was basically hitting a stride in L.A. and the Archdiocese of L.A. had finally had enough of how scandolous and very dangerous I was. sometimes it really takes guts to cut through all the bullshit...the Abhidhamma. It is like a child's fairey tale, like instructions for an erector set, even one of those Spaceman Spiff Decoder Rings ya get from those cereal boxs. The true question is How the hell did they have this high perf. stuff figured out so early in history? Which leads to Who were the assholes that somehow left such an important manual out of history?" Scott: Although contested, some say it was the BUDDHA himself who taught ABHIDHAMMA. I totally agree. Its the OCEAN, man. It is where the GREAT FISH can finally swim free. Left out of history and fading but still around... c: "Now Scott, Here I had to seperate the paragraph I'm speaking of. This psuedo-preface leads us into it. I have no problems with this part: Me: "I'm still 'arguing', albeit with little apparent turgidity, that, while upholding the ultimacy of the moment, the Path - that most exalted of Fruitions - " colette: "as I said, that's okay. here comes the catalyst! I mean are you in demand on the market to make atomic or nuclear weapons? Check it out: Me: "arises, as far as I can tell, in a unique process and cannot arise and eradicate defilements except by following" colette: "STOP RIGHT THERE! ENOUGH! What an explosive thought: "eradicating defilements". Are you suicidal?" Scott: I don't exist. What do you find controversial about this 'eradication of defilements', might I ask? c: "Are defilements illusions?" Scott: I think they are mental factors, which I guess means they are realities. They are the kilesa and are known as 'mind-defiling, disadvantageous qualities,' to quote Nyanatiloka. More Nyanatiloka: "There are 10 defilements, thus called because they are themselves defiled, and because they defile the mental properties associated with them. They are: greed (lobha), hate (dosa), confusion (moha), conceit (maana), speculative views (di.t.thi), skeptical doubt (vicikicchaa) mental Laziness (thiina), restlessness (uddhacca), shamelessness (aharika), and lack of Fear of Wrongdoing or unconscientiousness (anottappa)." c: "Where do defilements come from?" Scott: Whoa. That's one I don't know. Is it a BIG QUESTION? My answer to the small question is: In the moment they arise conascently with citta. c: "Why do you cling to your defiled mind or the simple illusions that you cling to in your mind to make it defiled? That is such a trap you're walking into here. I've been on the Point since 1981 because I can read, hear, see, I very good at decoding, but wow you really take chances by manifesting this insanity that defilements can be eradicated." Scott: Lobha clings, as far as I understand. Lobha defiles 'the mind'. As a mental factor which arises with citta and falls away with the same citta, having the same object as the citta it arises with, lobha is clinging because it clings. Show me the trap that I might the better escape therefrom. The Path, I've understood, ARISES and the defilements (the above listed mental factors with their characterisics and functions) are eradicated - they arise no more in the mental continuum (some or all depending on the 'level' of the Path that arises). Others can correct me if this is wrong, I'm only saying what I think it is. Is this insane? What is IT all about if not ERADICATION? c: "I just started reading a piece by Ron Epstein out of SFSU concerning the Chinese Mind-Only school Let me get into it a little more and see if it may be of any value to you because you're out on a limb there boy. You may be in my dreams, astral projections, meditations, tonight." Scott: I'll be interested to read your thoughts on the piece, should it prove to be worth disseminating. As an aside, do you think EMPTINESS is a concept? I hope, had I appeared in the night in an astrally projected form, that I was a Gentleman. You have nothing to fear, however, since I have no skill in Supernormal Abilities. Stay cool out there on the Point. As the Talking Heads sang, the year before you left for the Point: "Water dissolving...and water removing There is water at the bottom of the ocean Carry the water at the bottom of the ocean Remove the water at the bottom of the ocean!" Sincerely, Scott. #70604 From: upasaka@... Date: Sat Apr 14, 2007 3:06 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: bhaavanaa and the body. upasaka_howard Hi, Ken (and Herman) - In a message dated 4/14/07 9:18:50 AM Eastern Daylight Time, kenhowa@... writes: > -------- > H: >If there is only a present moment, how can anicca be known as a > characteristic of a present dhamma? > ------- > > With great difficulty. But I believe it can be done. First, concede > there is only the present moment. Then, ask whether the conditioned > dhammas that occupy it are permanent or impermanent. > ===================== Ken, I truly believe you should think more deeply about what is involved here, because what you are circling around is highly contradictory. It seems to me that you might see that there is much more to this matter if you would drop your believing for a moment and seriously contemplate all the aspects of this issue. It seems to me that due to having a fixed view on the matter is resulting in "letting yourself off too easy" on this. Mind you. I'm not claiming to know the reality involved here. All I claim is that there is much more to it and that the matter is FAR more subtle than our discussion suggests. You see, I don't think it is incorrect to say that there is literally no time but the present - or even no time at all, but is is also not incorrect to say there is no arising and cessation without multiple moments (often called the "flow, or chain, of time"), the very notion of anicca depending on time. So, there is subtle and deep reality involved here that escapes all our view-making. Frankly, this matter reminds me a lot of the dual particle-wave nature of energy and matter, most popularly recognized with regard to light. With metta, Howard #70605 From: sarah abbott Date: Sat Apr 14, 2007 9:42 am Subject: eCard from Morocco 2a sarahprocter... Dear Friends, (p.s. to Newcomers & Htoo's friends), Friday afternoon ============== I'll keep this one short as we're expecting Tom to come up to the roof terrace overlooking the ocean anytime now for another dhamma discussion. For the last couple of days we couldn't get an internet connection, but had a couple of real Atlas-shrugging/hugging (Connie?) surf-aris to really desert-ed beaches.....incredible landscape and very kind, hospitable people with beautiful manners. Our interest in Buddhism was one of the main topics of conversation as we drove in a jeep with a few other surfers a couple of days ago. It's been noticed that we miss out on the evening parties and yet seem to be smiling and contented all the time (hard not to be here!!). Surfer James wondered whether being Buddhist meant less enjoyment and he had in fact been on a Buddhist(?) retreat some time back – vegie food, no coffee, breathing meditation....- but that way of life is not for him. We chatted about present moment realities, whether on the surf-board or in the van and knowing more about present mental states, seeing, visible object and so on. Just as it's useless to be concerned about catching the next wave when one is in the process of surfing the present one, it's useless to think about another situation, such as the retreat, as being more conducive to knowing realities.... Our daily life approach went down quite well with these surfers. We stressed the importance of understanding tendencies and inclinations rather than thinking we should have less enjoyment. At this moment, the realities are just the same.....experiences through the sense doors and lots of mental proliferation about them. Also, lots of discussion on expectations and disappointments. Surely expectations are essential for ones work? Also questions about managing conflicts at work, running a business and maintaining values, different kinds of Buddhism – why not unity? In short, a most enjoyable surfari! ******************* to be contd Sarah ======= #70606 From: sarah abbott Date: Sat Apr 14, 2007 9:45 am Subject: eCard from Morocco 2b sarahprocter... [Dear Friends, (p.s. to Newcomers & Htoo's friends),] contd from 2a Saturday morning ============= Yest. evening, nephew Tom joined us for another lengthy discussion continuing on from the first one. He's been reflecting a lot and his ideas about consciousness have changed. He appreciates more what we were saying about cittas – one consciousness following another, on and on and on, even at the end of this life. More on choices and conditions. One might have a beer even knowing it's not good for one. There's consciousness and different conditions at work for sure, he now appreciates. He's reading a book on 'Buddhist Ethics' by Damer Keown (I think), so we discussed this, also more on present moment. Even Christians don't have to live in a church. Lots on the monk's life – different ways of life, but the path is the same. He's strong on respecting life, not harming, on appreciating how much of the day is self-oriented and with a lack of detachment. Lots on self-identity and society, prisoner dilemmas, idea of self vs attachment to self. Interestingly, he has no problem at all with what we say about conditions, anatta and present moment dhammas, such as seeing and visible object. Also, an interesting discussion on kamma-vipaka and poverty. Vipaka as moments of seeing and hearing and other sense experiences rather than how rich or poor one is, for example... More on detachment and especially detachment from point of views, such as his one a couple of days ago about consciousness. The importance of being honest with oneself.... He also particularly finds it helpful to reflect on impermanence and this gives him strength at difficult times. Onto rebirth (the stumbling block) – the distinction between consciousness and body, rebirth consciousness and how there's still an idea of 'someone' being reborn. Actually, lots of agreement in our second discussion. At this point our Moroccan (Muslim) surf guide/organiser, Karim, popped into our room, so we told him we were discussing philosophy and religion. It turns out that he has a brother-in-law who has an interest in Buddhism. Karim appreciated that he could remain a Muslim but benefit a lot from studying Buddhism. "It's more a way of life", he said. He had learnt from it that 'anger is not good' and that we create our own problems and difficulties. Again, more about Buddhism on the surf-board, being honest about one's accumulations (very sociable ones in Karim's case) and developing an understanding of present mental and physical phenomena naturally.... Metta, Sarah p.s. We've just been catching up with all the great discussions here! A special welcome to any newcomers such as James S, Cultry/Claudia and others. Pls. be sure to indicate who you're addressing posts to and to sign off with your (preferably real) name to save confusion. On anatta and other topics mentioned, you might also like to take a look at 'Useful Posts' in the files section of DSG and scroll down to 'Anatta', 'Free-will' or whatever. You'll find posts saved from the archives here. Feel free to repost anything you find which you like/disagree with/ wish to question further. Also, Htoo – good to see your posts filtering through. If Htoo replies to any post off-list, it's usually because he cannot post direct to yahoo (banned in some countries), so pls. help copy/forward his messages here for him. ====================== #70607 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Apr 14, 2007 10:01 am Subject: Perfections N, 9 nilovg Dear friends, Chapter 2 THE PERFECTION OF GIVING We read in the commentary to the Cariyãpitaka that the destruction of self—love and the development of love for others are the means for the accomplishment of the perfections. The text states: For by fully understanding all dhammas in accordance with their nature, the Great Being who has formed the resolution to attain the supreme enlightenment remains untainted by them, and his self-love thereby becomes eliminated and exhausted. Then, since through the repeated practice of great compassion he has come to regard all beings as his dear children, his lovingkindness, compassion, and affection for them increase. If one is sincere in the development of satipatthãna one will become less selfish and one will have more consideration for others. One will become more generous. Dana is one of the perfections leading to enlightenment. One may be inclined to give things to others because one has accumulated generosity, but generosity may not necessarily be a perfection. Generosity is a perfection when one has the sincere inclination to develop it together with satipatthãna in order to have less selfishness. Then one does not expect any gain for oneself, one does not expect anything in return from other people. Without right understanding generosity cannot be a perfection, but this does not mean that there has to be right understanding with each moment of giving. Sometimes there are conditions for mindfulness of nãma and rupa while we give, sometimes not. However, we should not forget our goal which is the eradication of defilements. All the perfections are necessary conditions for the attainment of this goal. It is not consistent if we just develop awareness of nãma and rupa in order to eradicate the clinging to self, and continue to be stingy and continue to keep our possessions for ourselves. We may think that "I" can develop the perfections, but it depends on the accumulated conditions which kind of kusala can arise. When we see the benefit of all the perfections there will be conditions to develop them all, without there being the need to think, I should develop the perfections. If we think in that way there is clinging to a self who can do this or that. The Bodhisatta developed the perfection of dana during countless lives, relinquishing his own possessions and giving gifts which were a source of pleasure to others. He remained unshakable in his resolution to help others even if it meant that he had to endure hardship himself. He not only gave external objects, he also gave his limbs and life. He gave the gift of fearlessness (abhaya dana) which is protection to those who had fears, dispelling their dread, panic and anxiety. He gave the gift of Dhamma, he preached about what is righteous and true. When he attained Buddhahood he gave the highest gift: he gave up all his defilements and reached supreme wisdom so that he could help other beings to walk the way leading to enlightenment. ******** Nina. #70608 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Apr 14, 2007 10:01 am Subject: Rupas ch 8, no 3 nilovg Dear friends, As to the terms “shrinkage in life and maturity of faculties”, these show the resultant nature of this decay. We read: ... Because the life of a being who has reached decay shortens, therefore decay is said to be the shrinkage in life by a figure of speech. Moreover, the faculties, such as sight, etc., capable of easily seizing their own object, however subtle, and which are clear in youth, are mature in one who has attained to decay; they are disturbed, not distinct, and not capable of seizing their own object however gross.... When we notice decay of our teeth, wrinkles of the skin and greying of our hairs, decay is obvious. However, we should remember that each rúpa that arises is susceptible to decay, that it will fall away completely. As to impermanence, aniccatå, the “Atthasåliní”, in the same section, states about it as follows : ... Fully defined, impermanence of matter has the characteristic of complete dissolution, the merging of matter as function, destruction and evanescence as manifestation, matter undergoing dissolution as proximate cause. As soon as rúpa has arisen, it is led onward to its termination and it breaks up completely, never to come back again. Remembering this is still theoretical knowledge of the truth of impermanence, different from right understanding that realizes the arising and falling away of a nåma or a rúpa. When understanding has not yet reached this stage one cannot imagine what it is like. One may tend to cling to ideas about the arising and falling away of phenomena but that is not the development of understanding. Nåma and rúpa have each different characteristics and so long as one still confuses nåma and rúpa, their arising and falling away cannot be realized. Understanding is developed in different stages and one cannot forego any stage. First there should be a precise understanding of nåma as nåma and of rúpa as rúpa so that the difference between these two kinds of realities can be clearly seen. It is only at a later stage in the development of understanding that the arising and falling away of nåma and rúpa can be directly known. ******* Nina. #70609 From: upasaka@... Date: Sat Apr 14, 2007 7:09 am Subject: Re: [dsg] eCard from Morocco 2a upasaka_howard Hi, Sarah - In a message dated 4/14/07 12:43:28 PM Eastern Daylight Time, sarahprocterabbott@... writes: > For the last couple of days we couldn't get an internet connection, but > had a couple of real Atlas-shrugging/hugging (Connie?) surf-aris to really > desert-ed beaches.....incredible landscape and very kind, hospitable > people with beautiful manners. > ==================== Good to hear from you, Sarah. What is the "Atlas Shrugged" reference, if I may ask? With metta, Howard #70610 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Apr 14, 2007 11:47 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Perfections N, no 8 nilovg Dear James and other debaters, Today was my walking day and now I am tired, lots of sun. Tomorrow I have family with music. I see to James' question which I find good, later on. If James' style would be altered he is no longer the good old James to me :-)) But I have been thinking of Lodewijk's and Howard's remarks about sati. Lodewijk thinks that it is so understandable that Howard wants a clear definition. I have been pondeirng and concluded: now I understand it so well Kh Sujin does not want to give a definition. Lots of food for thought. Actually, this issue is connected with James concern about: just awareness now. Just awareness now: we can read this in many different ways. But I need a rest now. Nina. Op 14-apr-2007, om 2:19 heeft buddhatrue het volgende geschreven: > Just awareness now, no worry, what about this, what about that", > > that is the perfection of determination, aditthäna parami. #70611 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Sat Apr 14, 2007 12:00 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] bhaavanaa and the body scottduncan2 Dear Howard, Thanks for your patience. This might take awhile as well since now, any minute, the short-order cook will be approached with breakfast requests. H: "No problem with a delay, Scott. I wish my d**n cold let me sleep!! LOL! (Uh, oh, agency-terminology for a cold! LOLOL!)" Scott: First things first, Howard. The Cold Virus (aamaya-cetasika) arises and falls away with each moment, performing its function and then falling away. Its characteristic (lakkha.na) is that of the Tormenting of a Being (satta). Its function (rasa), that of the preventing or disturbing of sleep . Its manifestation (paccupa.t.thaana), that of an increase in mucus, congestion of the nasal passages, mental agitation and sleeplessness. Its proximate cause (pada.t.thaana) is the mind-and-matter (naama-ruupa). Scott: The Dhammasa"nga.ni defines it: "The mindfulness which on that occasion is recollecting, calling back to mind; the mindfulness which is remembering, bearing in mind, the opposite of superficiality and of obliviousness; mindfulness as faculty, mindfulness as power, right mindfulness...," (p.14). Howard: "Yes, I had read that, and when starting to read it I got 'excited', hoping that here would be an actual definition. But, by the end, I saw that nothing had been defined - because there is no indication of *what* is recollected or born in mind. That is simply no good as a definition. The one that Nina gave, whether the full story or the correct story or not, definitely *is* of the right form to be a definition. Basically, it defines sati as vigilance in distinguishing wholesome from unwholesome." Scott: I'd go with Nina over me any day, but you'll continue with her. As for me, I see you wanted more than just a definition of lakha.na. In the above, sati is the recollecting, the calling back to mind, the remembering, the bearing in mind. (It is now much later - pancakes and cleaning the pantry.) I think your other concern regards that which is the object of sati. Isn't this a question of another order? Citta and cetasika arise together and take the same object. 'What can be object of sati?' seems to be the question here. Howard: "... My hypothesized definition might be rephrased as 'Vigilance in maintaining attentiveness'." Scott: Might this not actually be the function of other cetasikas? What about some of the jhaana factors such as vitakka and vicaara? I think that each mental factor has only a single function, not a multiplicity of them. I don't think sati can have both 'mindfulness' and 'maintaining attentiveness' as characteristic. One mental factor with two different functions would be 'self', in my opinion of course. I think the two are different in function and hence, are accounted for by different mental factors. H: "There is no more "I" in that than there is in "recollecting, calling back to mind." There is no more "I" in it than in Nina's clear definition. If one assumes a doer who is vigilant or non-forgetful or who recollects, that is atta-view. If, instead, one is only speaking of mental activities, of nama, that is not atta-view (unless, of course, one thinks of these namas as little actors)." Scott: I think it entirely fair to come out arguing against 'self' if I think, in my opinion of course, that I see it in something you say or have said. I'm sorry it exasperates you. I think, though, since we are discussing bhaavanaa, and since you are a known meditator (and hence have a stated position on 'bhaavanaa' which, to me, includes 'self-view') it is alright to bring this up. I don't mean, in so doing, to drag the debate any deeper into the cthonic depths of the interminable hegemonial DSG struggle between Meditators and Non-Meditators than it already is. And, while I'm at it, just because one encounters disagreement one needn't immediately cry foul. I'm not convinced, again, in my incredibly impeachable opinion, that you always do know the difference between conventional and ultimate levels of speech. I think it possible that one can claim to be speaking about ultimates while not actually doing so, and at one's convenience. And this is why I say so: Again, if you believe that, by composing the legs and sitting in 'meditation' that you can induce the mental factors to becomes just so, then, as I see it, you hold to some version of self-view. I'm just disagreeing, Howard. No need to cry foul - just muster another argument, unless to do so seems pointless or tedious or some such, in which case I don't mind breaking off. As I said: Me: "I know this corresponds to your view that someone can meditate by dint of sheer will, but I disagree with [my take on] your view regarding sati. How can you seem to see pa~n~na correctly yet diverge when it comes to sati?" Howard: "I don't know what you are talking about. You seem to be looking for an argument for no good reason that I can discern. Well, little Howie would rather not come out to play. ;-)" Scott: Oh, sorry, actually I was looking for Abuse. That's down the hall. If you don't wish to discuss this with me, and apologies again for annoying and driving you yet again to distraction, that's fine. I'm incredibly annoying. However, should you wish to discuss further, I think you know exactly what I'm talking about. Can't we just play a little bit? Me: "Mental factors, although having differing characteristics, share in common the qualities of mental factors no matter which one is under consideration." Howard: "Say *what*?" Scott: Howard, are you doing it again? I'm sure you can follow the above. Perhaps, by this point, you were becoming more impatient due to my own incessant pedantry. Sorry about that. This is what I am referring to, from the CMA (p.76): "The cetasikas are mental phenomena that occur in immediate conjunction with citta or consciousness, and assist citta by performing more specific tasks in the total act of cognition. The mental factors cannot arise without citta, nor can citta arise completely segregated from mental factors. But though the two are functionally interdependent, citta is regarded as primary because the mental factors assist in the cognition of the object depending upon citta, which is the principle cognitive element." Scott: I'm saying that, while mental factors all have 'being mental factors' in common, they are all different in function, no two having the same function nor overlap. I hope you are feeling better. We have Cold FX here, which is a great remedy for the common cold. Do you have it in the States? It enhances the immune system and actually prevents or significantly reduces the duration of a cold. I've used it and if I start it just as I feel a cold coming on, the cold actually doesn't proceed! Sincerely, Scott. #70612 From: "colette" Date: Sat Apr 14, 2007 9:50 am Subject: She who traverses the sky ksheri3 Good Morning Scot, Lets take this as quickly as possible. > Scott: I don't exist. colette: ah, my friends from Western magikal traditions apply this same technique. Unfortunately this technique is soooooooo mundane and when the higher levels of magik are entered (one may seek to consult the Mahamudras or Dzogchens or 6 Yogas of Naropa or...). So you see, MY Bijas (seeds) have defiled my mind already and I have to go through it on my own here. Now you take the position that You Do Not Exist, if that is the case, then why do you ask any questions at all? I can go bach into the msg. index and pull up all the times you've made a post. Now, if you do not exist, and you are aware of your non-existant state, condition of being, then I've seriously gotta find out what the game is that you're playing with the neophytes? Lets try to forget that you've gone and started wearing brightly colored red clothing in a jungle that's green. What do you find controversial about this > 'eradication of defilements', might I ask? colette: who said anything about "controversy", I'm speaking entirely of your physical condition. Now I hallucinate that my name is Jaq. Derrida and I am DE- CONSTRUCTING your maze. ERADICATE: to deflower such as the defolient Agent Orange, or any of thousands of chemicals the U.S. government has used and uses to kill marijuana plants growing in fields (I was a 70s child that did many speaches in school on the legalization of marijuana). DEFILE: CONTAMINATE. Eradicate sounds like a verb, an action. You intend on taking an action. You are looking for a way to do something. Still, you did bring up this momumental concept that you do not exist. Yet, "defilements" do exist. That's one negative view! Well, lets suggest that you actually do believe that you exist and the statement that you do not exist is nothing but the worm on the end of a hook. Notice how it wiggles on the hook. Mesmerizing isn't it? cONTREVERCIAL by no means, a hazardous act performed through mental illness CERTAINLY. Mental illness is found in our friend IGNORANCE. Why do you NOT TAKE POSITIVE ACTION, in that you say that you, as a non-existant being, cannot act yet these "defilements" certainly can and do act THEREFORE you ask the question concerning the defoilient that will get rid of the Defilement, much like Agent Orange. In the concept of the Mind-Only school, in the concept of karma, in the concept of many Western Theological Traditions, you are truely taking chances by thinking about not having the ability, as a non- existant being, of doing anything to DEFILEMENTS which have the ability to do whatever they choose. THAT, MY FRIEND, IS DANGEROUS. ----------------------------------------------- > > c: "Are defilements illusions?" > > Scott: I think they are mental factors, which I guess means they are > realities. colette: no guessing allowed. Either they are or they are not! Pick your poison. Accept responsibility for the choice you make, made. Not enough time, maybe tonight my roommates will allow me to use their computer. I've noticed that you inspire deep explanations and I've passed up so many from you. Soon I'm gonna have to go back and collect them all to put into a single post where I come to the library and only work on YOU. I know I want to see how many pages this quote from Nyanatiloka will run me so I can read it tonight. If it's too much then it's not gonna happen since I've got my own research and study to do. As a matter of fact, this morning as I drank my first coffee and had my first cigarette I was staring at the paper with the headings: THE TYPES OF ATTACHMENT. A) THE ATTACHMENT TO SELF B) THE ATTACHMENT TO DHARMAS toodles, colette #70613 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Sat Apr 14, 2007 2:17 pm Subject: Re: Perfections N, no 8 kenhowardau Hi James, --------------- <. . .> J: > LOL! I knew that as soon as I put forth an argument people didn't like, someone would be quick to jump on the whole "debate" issue. ;-)) I probably should have predicted it would be you first. :-) ---------------- I could see myself rising like a trout to take the bait. :-) But it wasn't because you "put forth an argument people didn't like:" it was because you argued so unfairly. I remember Scott spelt the problem out very clearly just before your recent break from DSG. You should read that post again if you can find it. -------------------------- J: > Okay, anyway, you think I don't look for deep meaning in the Dhamma. You mean like you do? You mean I am supposed to think that there is no murder, rape, suicide, etc. because there are no people, there ARE only namas and rupas? Talk about an imbecilic interpretation of the Dhamma! --------------------------- Connie pinpointed the problem with your offending message: Referring to rape, murder, stealing (etc) you wrote, "As long as it is viewed with understanding, it's all good!" Was that a fair summation of what Nina had written (about what K Sujin had said (about what she had found in the Pali texts))? No, it wasn't fair because you knew perfectly well that was not what was meant. You chose that imbecilic interpretation in order to score a cheap debating point. ----------------------------- J: > What I am pointing out is that if you let subtle akusala slide by, if you accept it, if you adopt a philosophy of "no worries" or "let it come", then it is a slippery slope to much bigger and worse things. The Buddha realized this so he taught against all defilements, great and small. Granted, we can't get rid of all of our defilements at once, but TOTAL ERRADICATION is the goal. First we begin with the gross defilements and then we move on to the subtle defilements, but at no time are we supposed to just accept defilements with "understanding". That isn't what the Buddha taught and it is a very dangerous thing to be teaching. ----------------------------- OK, maybe you genuinely can't see the point. After all these years at DSG of having it explained to you in a thousand different ways, you could be expected to at least begin to see it. But that's just my opinion. :-) Ken H #70614 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Sat Apr 14, 2007 4:07 pm Subject: Re: She who traverses the sky scottduncan2 Dear colette, Thanks for the reply. Me: "I don't exist." colette: "...Now you take the position that You Do Not Exist, if that is the case,then why do you ask any questions at all? I can go bach into the msg. index and pull up all the times you've made a post. Now, if you do not exist, and you are aware of your non-existant state, condition of being, then I've seriously gotta find out what the game is that you're playing with the neophytes?...I've noticed that you inspire deep explanations and I've passed up so many from you. Soon I'm gonna have to go back and collect them all to put into a single post where I come to the library and only work on YOU." Scott: You'll find these POSTS in the DSG COM-POST, if they haven't already blackened, crumbled and been spread on the garden. By the way, you can see, in your searches, how I was literally SAVAGED, my binary-code body a tattered wreck of ones and zeros, over use of the same LITERARY DEVICE. It is entirely and ineffably an intellectually derived statement and of course no actual ATTAINMENT. Haven't you noticed? I AM A NEOPHYTE! c: "Lets try to forget that you've gone and started wearing brightly colored red clothing in a jungle that's green." Scott: Well if you had the same kamma-conditioned colour-blindness as I do, you'd never even see me. I once dropped, personalising away, a pair of pliars with bright red handles into green grass and couldn't find them AT ALL. Me: "What do you find controversial about this 'eradication of defilements', might I ask?" colette: "who said anything about "controversy", I'm speaking entirely of your physical condition." Scott: Which one is that? The so-called being? If you get more time, please elaborate. c: "Eradicate sounds like a verb, an action. You intend on taking an action. You are looking for a way to do something. Still, you did bring up this momumental concept that you do not exist. Yet, "defilements" do exist. That's one negative view!" Scott: I am not looking for a way to do something. Can you show me how 'I' do exist? c: "Why do you NOT TAKE POSITIVE ACTION, in that you say that you, as a non-existant being, cannot act yet these "defilements" certainly can and do act THEREFORE you ask the question concerning the defoilient that will get rid of the Defilement, much like Agent Orange. In the concept of the Mind-Only school, in the concept of karma, in the concept of many Western Theological Traditions, you are truely taking chances by thinking about not having the ability, as a non- existant being, of doing anything to DEFILEMENTS which have the ability to do whatever they choose. THAT, MY FRIEND, IS DANGEROUS." Scott: Kamma is ACTION, positve and negative; eradication is the effect of magga-citta and phala-citta. And I'm making a guess here (recall neophyte status). Me: "I think they are mental factors, which I guess means they are realities." colette: "no guessing allowed. Either they are or they are not! Pick your poison. Accept responsibility for the choice you make, made." Scott: They are mental factors, which means they are realities. c: "...THE TYPES OF ATTACHMENT. A) THE ATTACHMENT TO SELF B) THE ATTACHMENT TO DHARMAS" Scott: Hey you must have been reading THE DAILY DHAMMA. I'll look forward to your next reply. Sincerely, Scott. #70615 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Sat Apr 14, 2007 4:43 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: bhaavanaa and the body. egberdina Hi KenH, On 14 Apr 2007 06:17:05 -0700, kenhowardau wrote: > > > I think understanding of the Abhidhamma is for those who want to > understand it. It can't be imposed on any of us against our will. > You would be surprised just how much of the Abhidhamma I understand and agree with. You would be unpleasantly surprised just how much of what you take as being Abhidhamma is quite unrelated to it. > -------- > H: > If there is only a present moment, how can anicca be known as a > characteristic of a present dhamma? > ------- > > With great difficulty. But I believe it can be done. First, concede > there is only the present moment. Then, ask whether the conditioned > dhammas that occupy it are permanent or impermanent. > It would be a great stupidity to concede that there is only the present moment. Especially for one who has understood that there is no such thing. I doubt that you'll be interested, but whatever you label as being the present moment, is in fact already past. Just like looking at the moon, one does not see the moon as it is, but one sees it as it was 1 second ago (due to the distance, and the speed of light). Also, while looking at the moon, one ought only to see that the moon is a flat disc that shrinks and grows. Because that is all that is available to see. No matter how much one looks at the moon, one can never get to see the other side of it. Same with consciousness. No matter how much you are in your deluded present moment, you will never see the causes for consciousness, all of the things that have already happened which create the illusion of a now, with a you smack-bang in the middle of it. The causes of consciousness are what is actually the present, the experience of consciousness is a selective and delayed misrepresentation of what has already happened. That's anatta, anicca and dukkha for you in a nutshell, baby. #70616 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Sat Apr 14, 2007 4:48 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] anatta egberdina Hi cultry, On 14/04/07, cultry1 wrote: > > > The objective of this topic is to study the true meaning of anatta > as the Buddha dispose of it, since it is quite difficult for us in the > west to understand it. > cultry > I am quite happy to discuss anatta how I understand it (from reading original Buddhist texts) Anatta isn't all that difficult, to me. It just denies that there is a soul, an executive agent that is not bound by the flow of conditions. Herman #70617 From: "colette" Date: Sat Apr 14, 2007 4:54 pm Subject: Re: She who traverses the sky ksheri3 The owner of the computer said no you won't be on it just read then get off. She's upstairs so I want to say:\ Chuckle chuckle chuckle. > Scott: Hey you must have been reading THE DAILY DHAMMA. I'll look > forward to your next reply. > colette: Nope, Ronal Epstein and his Chinese consciousness-only stuff. colette #70618 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Sat Apr 14, 2007 5:19 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Perfections N, no 8 kenhowardau Hi Herman, ------------------- <. . .> H: > What I find tiresome is something like the following being written with an unwritten requirement that it be taken seriously. "Whatever 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 not at all interested in discussing the above with Nina. But please, I am asking you, why is this statement not puerile and imbecilic? Why have you not shredded this ridiculous statement of self-view with your rapier-lie wit?. ----------------------- I was going to fix the typo for you, but then I thought maybe it was meant that way! :-) As I understand the first part - "Whatever comes, let it come" - it is referring to the conditioned dhamma that appears now as the object of consciousness. It is already there. To think of stopping or controlling it is to misunderstand the Buddha's teaching of conditionality. The rest - "No matter what will happen in our life, let us be determined to continue to develop right understanding of the present object" - is pure good advice. I think you are saying it is a statement of self view because it has the words 'our' and 'us' in it. With just a little right understanding we can see past those minor operational difficulties. Ken H #70619 From: upasaka@... Date: Sat Apr 14, 2007 1:53 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] bhaavanaa and the body upasaka_howard Hi, Scott - In a message dated 4/14/07 3:06:37 PM Eastern Daylight Time, scduncan@... writes: > Dear Howard, > > Thanks for your patience. This might take awhile as well since now, > any minute, the short-order cook will be approached with breakfast > requests. > > H: "No problem with a delay, Scott. I wish my d**n cold let me sleep!! > LOL! (Uh, oh, agency-terminology for a cold! LOLOL!)" > > Scott: First things first, Howard. The Cold Virus (aamaya-cetasika) > arises and falls away with each moment, performing its function and > then falling away. Its characteristic (lakkha.na) is that of the > Tormenting of a Being (satta). Its function (rasa), that of the > preventing or disturbing of sleep . Its manifestation > (paccupa.t.thaana), that of an increase in mucus, congestion of the > nasal passages, mental agitation and sleeplessness. Its proximate > cause (pada.t.thaana) is the mind-and-matter (naama-ruupa). -------------------------------------- Howard: Very good, Scott! ;-)) Really clever. :-) -------------------------------------- > > Scott: The Dhammasa"nga.ni defines it: > > "The mindfulness which on that occasion is recollecting, calling back > to mind; the mindfulness which is remembering, bearing in mind, the > opposite of superficiality and of obliviousness; mindfulness as > faculty, mindfulness as power, right mindfulness...," (p.14). > > Howard: "Yes, I had read that, and when starting to read it I got > 'excited', hoping that here would be an actual definition. But, by the > end, I saw that nothing had been defined - because there is no > indication of *what* is recollected or born in mind. That is simply no > good as a definition. The one that Nina gave, whether the full story > or the correct story or not, definitely *is* of the right form to be a > definition. Basically, it defines sati as vigilance in distinguishing > wholesome from unwholesome." > > Scott: I'd go with Nina over me any day, but you'll continue with > her. As for me, I see you wanted more than just a definition of > lakha.na. In the above, sati is the recollecting, the calling back > to mind, the remembering, the bearing in mind. > > (It is now much later - pancakes and cleaning the pantry.) I think > your other concern regards that which is the object of sati. Isn't > this a question of another order? Citta and cetasika arise together > and take the same object. 'What can be object of sati?' seems to be > the question here. ------------------------------------- Howard: No, my question was simpler, namely what did the Buddha mean by 'sati'. The point was to know what the word referred to. It really makes little difference to me what is meant by it, so long as it is known what it is. --------------------------------------- > > Howard: "... My hypothesized definition might be rephrased as > 'Vigilance in maintaining attentiveness'." > > Scott: Might this not actually be the function of other cetasikas? ---------------------------------------- Howard: Sure, it certainly could be, in which case 'sati' would mean something else. --------------------------------------- > What about some of the jhaana factors such as vitakka and vicaara? I > think that each mental factor has only a single function, not a > multiplicity of them. --------------------------- Howard: I think that's true, though several of them are quite similar. --------------------------- I don't think sati can have both 'mindfulness'> > and 'maintaining attentiveness' as characteristic. > -------------------------- Howard: I didn't say it is maintaining of attentiveness. I said it is *vigilance* in maintaining attentiveness. Vigilance in anything is watchfulness/mindfulness. Vigilance in distinguishing wholesome from unwholesome is another sort of vigilance, and it is the basis for right effort. ---------------------------- One mental factor> > with two different functions would be 'self', in my opinion of course. ----------------------------- Howard: No it wouldn't. It would be simply another sort of non-reality. ----------------------------- > I think the two are different in function and hence, are accounted > for by different mental factors. > > H: "There is no more "I" in that than there is in "recollecting, > calling back to mind." There is no more "I" in it than in Nina's clear > definition. If one assumes a doer who is vigilant or non-forgetful or > who recollects, that is atta-view. If, instead, one is only speaking > of mental activities, of nama, that is not atta-view (unless, of > course, one thinks of these namas as little actors)." > > Scott: I think it entirely fair to come out arguing against 'self' if > I think, in my opinion of course, that I see it in something you say > or have said. I'm sorry it exasperates you. ----------------------------------- Howard: You can see whatever you see, but it was not there, no more so than in Nina's definition. Vigilance in maintaining attentiveness and vigilance in distinguishing whoesome from unwholesome are both impersonal mental activities, each not-self, and each without self. ----------------------------------- > > I think, though, since we are discussing bhaavanaa, and since you are > a known meditator (and hence have a stated position on 'bhaavanaa' > which, to me, includes 'self-view') it is alright to bring this up. > -------------------------------- Howard: The Buddha was a notorious meditator! In fact, a reward was posted for his arrest and conviction. The authorities eventually gave up pursuit, though, because they just couldn't trace him. --------------------------------- > > don't mean, in so doing, to drag the debate any deeper into the > cthonic depths of the interminable hegemonial DSG struggle between > Meditators and Non-Meditators than it already is. > > And, while I'm at it, just because one encounters disagreement one > needn't immediately cry foul. I'm not convinced, again, in my > incredibly impeachable opinion, that you always do know the difference > between conventional and ultimate levels of speech. I think it > possible that one can claim to be speaking about ultimates while not > actually doing so, and at one's convenience. > > And this is why I say so: Again, if you believe that, by composing > the legs and sitting in 'meditation' that you can induce the mental > factors to becomes just so, then, as I see it, you hold to some > version of self-view. > -------------------------------------- Howard: LOLOL! I don't believe you have any idea of how my body is composed while meditating! In any case, Scott, if you want to believe that I am hopelessly atta-bound, please, be my guest. :-) ----------------------------------- I'm just disagreeing, Howard. No need to cry> > foul - just muster another argument, unless to do so seems pointless > or tedious or some such, in which case I don't mind breaking off. ---------------------------------- Howard: I'm not crying anything at all. --------------------------------- > > As I said: > > Me: "I know this corresponds to your view that someone can meditate by > dint of sheer will, but I disagree with [my take on] your view > regarding sati. > ---------------------------------- Howard: I'm sorry you are unable to meditate, Scott. I can, however, and it's a wonderful part of my life. ---------------------------------- How can you seem to see pa~n~na correctly yet diverge> > when it comes to sati?" > > Howard: "I don't know what you are talking about. You seem to be > looking for an argument for no good reason that I can discern. Well, > little Howie would rather not come out to play. ;-)" > > Scott: Oh, sorry, actually I was looking for Abuse. That's down the > hall. --------------------------------- Howard: Abuse is on vacation today. Only little Howie is here today, who honestly did NOT get what you were saying. -------------------------------- If you don't wish to discuss this with me, and apologies again> > for annoying and driving you yet again to distraction, that's fine. > I'm incredibly annoying. > ------------------------------ Howard: Ahhh! Socrates would be proud of you!! ;-)) -------------------------- However, should you wish to discuss further,> > I think you know exactly what I'm talking about. ----------------------------- Howard: That borders on insult, Scott. It is calling me a liar. I did not and do not know what you meant. And I ceratinly have no desire to find out at this point. Sorry. ------------------------------- Can't we just play a> > little bit? -------------------------------- Howard: I'm afraid not. ------------------------------- > > Me: "Mental factors, although having differing characteristics, share > in common the qualities of mental factors no matter which one is under > consideration." > > Howard: "Say *what*?" > > Scott: Howard, are you doing it again? I'm sure you can follow the > above. ----------------------------------- Howard: ARE you! Well, don't be sure, I did not and do not follow it, and I WILL not pursue it. I won't pursue matters with someone who considers me a liar. I will not be reading the rest of this post, Scott. Maybe we'll talk some other time. ----------------------------------- ===================== With metta, nonetheless, Howard #70620 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Sat Apr 14, 2007 6:04 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] bhaavanaa and the body scottduncan2 Dear Howard, Thanks for the reply: H: "...I will not be reading the rest of this post, Scott. Maybe we'll talk some other time." Scott: Howard, please try to have a little patience with me. I wish you'd just engage me and not rush off mid-post in a huff... No worries, though. At least READ THIS PART: Me: "I hope you are feeling better. We have Cold FX here, which is a great remedy for the common cold. Do you have it in the States? It enhances the immune system and actually prevents or significantly reduces the duration of a cold. I've used it and if I start it just as I feel a cold coming on, the cold actually doesn't proceed!" I'll look forward to another conversation, or more of this one. Sincerely, Scott. #70621 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Sat Apr 14, 2007 6:18 pm Subject: Re: Perfections N, no 8 buddhatrue Hi Scott, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Scott Duncan" wrote: > There, stick with me, son, and soon you'll be sounding just like some > boring old Canadian goof Thanks for the lesson, but I'm not a Canadian- I'm an American. I was once in a relationship with a Canadian for five years until I got so bored I went running for the hills! ;-)) Metta, James #70622 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Sat Apr 14, 2007 6:24 pm Subject: Re: Perfections N, no 8 scottduncan2 Dear James, Good one: J: "Thanks for the lesson, but I'm not a Canadian- I'm an American. I was once in a relationship with a Canadian for five years until I got so bored I went running for the hills! ;-)" You did the right thing! How do you think we all fall asleep at night? Sincerely, Scott. #70623 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Sat Apr 14, 2007 6:28 pm Subject: Re: Perfections N, no 8 buddhatrue Hi Ken H. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "kenhowardau" wrote: > OK, maybe you genuinely can't see the point. After all these years at > DSG of having it explained to you in a thousand different ways, you > could be expected to at least begin to see it. What point? What is the point? You know, if you could just stick to specific arguments rather than having immature temper-tantrums every time you don't get your way, maybe we could get somewhere. Metta, James #70624 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Sat Apr 14, 2007 6:35 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Perfections N, no 8 buddhatrue Hi Nina, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Dear James and other debaters, > Today was my walking day and now I am tired, lots of sun. Tomorrow I > have family with music. I see to James' question which I find good, > later on. If James' style would be altered he is no longer the good > old James to me :-)) > > But I have been thinking of Lodewijk's and Howard's remarks about > sati. Lodewijk thinks that it is so understandable that Howard wants > a clear definition. I have been pondeirng and concluded: now I > understand it so well Kh Sujin does not want to give a definition. > Lots of food for thought. Actually, this issue is connected with > James concern about: just awareness now. > Just awareness now: we can read this in many different ways. But I > need a rest now. I hope you have a nice rest. I do think that this issue is related to sati and how one views it. You view sati as being aware of whatever enters the sense doors; however, I don't view sati in that way. I believe that sati is guarding the sense doors by using the four frames of reference. Here is one of my favorite suttas on that subject (since I enjoy metaphor/similie): ""For this reason, you should not wander into what is not your proper range and is the territory of others. In one who wanders into what is not his proper range and is the territory of others, Mara gains an opening, Mara gains a foothold. And what, for a monk, is not his proper range and is the territory of others? The five strands of sensuality. Which five? Forms cognizable by the eye — agreeable, pleasing, charming, endearing, fostering desire, enticing. Sounds cognizable by the ear... Aromas cognizable by the nose... Flavors cognizable by the tongue... Tactile sensations cognizable by the body — agreeable, pleasing, charming, endearing, fostering desire, enticing. These, for a monk, are not his proper range and are the territory of others. "Wander, monks, in what is your proper range, your own ancestral territory. In one who wanders in what is his proper range, his own ancestral territory, Mara gains no opening, Mara gains no foothold. And what, for a monk, is his proper range, his own ancestral territory? The four frames of reference. Which four? There is the case where a monk remains focused on the body in & of itself — ardent, alert, & mindful — putting aside greed & distress with reference to the world. He remains focused on feelings in & of themselves... mind in & of itself... mental qualities in & of themselves — ardent, alert, & mindful — putting aside greed & distress with reference to the world. This, for a monk, is his proper range, his own ancestral territory." http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn47/sn47.006.than.html Metta, James #70625 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Sat Apr 14, 2007 6:41 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Perfections N, no 8 egberdina Hi Scott, On 14 Apr 2007 05:55:43 -0700, Scott Duncan wrote: > You wrote to Howard: >I think it entirely fair to come out arguing against 'self' if > I think, in my opinion of course, that I see it in something you say > or have said. To date I find you extremely selective in where you spy self-view. Your silence on the following is deafening. "Whatever 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. " Your silence implies that you endorse the sentiment that whatever comes can be prevented and / or allowed !? Not to mention that you endorse that determination can be prevented or allowed. I might add that your definition of what constitutes respect is quite selective as well. I see plenty of manipulation in posting a la Scott, but no respect whatsoever. Herman #70626 From: upasaka@... Date: Sat Apr 14, 2007 2:45 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] bhaavanaa and the body upasaka_howard Hi, Scott - In a message dated 4/14/07 9:04:35 PM Eastern Daylight Time, scduncan@... writes: > Dear Howard, > > Thanks for the reply: > > H: "...I will not be reading the rest of this post, Scott. Maybe we'll > talk some other time." > > Scott: Howard, please try to have a little patience with me. I wish > you'd just engage me and not rush off mid-post in a huff... No > worries, though. > > At least READ THIS PART: > ===================== No, sorry. I told you why not. I meant that too. I'll get back to talking with you at some point, if at that time you also want to talk, but not at the moment. With metta, Howard #70627 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Sat Apr 14, 2007 6:48 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] bhaavanaa and the body scottduncan2 Dear Howard, H: "No, sorry. I told you why not. I meant that too. I'll get back to talking with you at some point, if at that time you also want to talk, but not at the moment." Scott: Okay. Sincerely, Scott. #70628 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Sat Apr 14, 2007 7:00 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Perfections N, no 8 scottduncan2 Dear Herman, Thanks for the reply. H: "To date I find you extremely selective in where you spy self-view." Scott: You're likely right there, Herman. H: "Your silence on the following is deafening. 'Whatever 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.' "Your silence implies that you endorse the sentiment that whatever comes can be prevented and/or allowed !?" Scott: No, just not prevented. Conditions. H: "Not to mention that you endorse that determination can be prevented or allowed." Scott: No, I don't think I do. Can you show me how this is the case? H: "I might add that your definition of what constitutes respect is quite selective as well. I see plenty of manipulation in posting a la Scott, but no respect whatsoever." Scott: I'll cop to the manipulation, Herman; I think I know what you mean. You can show me an example if you wish. I think I post 'strategically', like everyone else. If fear is akin to respect then I respect you. I don't ever feel I know enough to adequately discuss things with you. Debate team or not, you do know how to put forward and argument! I do appreciate that. I just can never keep up. Sincerely, Scott. #70629 From: "rjkjp1" Date: Sat Apr 14, 2007 8:51 pm Subject: Re: Perfections N, no 8 rjkjp1 --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, James:"Granted, we can't get rid of all of our defilements at > once, but TOTAL ERRADICATION is the goal. First we begin with the > gross defilements and then we move on to the subtle defilements, but > at no time are we supposed to just accept defilements > with "understanding". That isn't what the Buddha taught and it is a > very dangerous thing to be teaching. >_____________ Dear James, Venerable Upavanna was one of the Buddha's attendants before Ananda. He asked the Buddha (Samyutta, Salayanata Vagga 70 p.1154 Bodhi) Upavana: "In what way is the Dhamma directly visible (sanditthiko Dhamma), immediate…to be personally experienced by the wise? Buddha: Here, Upavana, having seen a form with the eye a bhikkhu experiences the form as well as lust for the form. He understands that lust for the forms exists internally thus: `there is in me lust for forms internally.' Since that is so Upavana the Dhamma is directly visible, immediate…" The sutta repeats for the other senses. What do you think of this sutta, doesn't it indicate understandning of defilements is part of the way? Robert #70630 From: "rjkjp1" Date: Sat Apr 14, 2007 9:41 pm Subject: Re: Perfections N, no 8 rjkjp1 --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "buddhatrue" wrote: > > Hi Nina, > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom > wrote: > > > > Dear friends, > > > > Whatever 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. Khun Sujin said: > > > > "Just awareness now, no worry, what about this, what about that", > > that is the perfection of determination, aditthäna parami. > > Yeah. > > Rape…let it come > Murder…let it come > Stealing…let it come > Lying…let it come > Prejudice…let it come > Hatred…let it come > Greed…let it come > Ignorance…let it come > > As long as it is viewed with understanding, it's all good! > > Just where did the Buddha teach this? If you can't quote where the > Buddha directly taught this, in the suttas, then you MUST admit that > KS is teaching something contradictory to the Buddha. > > Metta, > James Dear James, at the moments there is genuine awareness- sati sampajanna - there cannot be actions like lying or murder or stealing. The whole book by Nina is very deep and encouraging, you can read it at http://www.abhidhamma.org/perfections%20of%20enlightenment.htm here is a another section: "" We read in the commentary to the Cariyapitaka [2]: Energy devoid of wisdom does not accomplish the purpose desired since it is wrongly aroused, and it is better not to arouse energy at all than to arouse it in the wrong way. But when energy is conjoined with wisdom, there is nothing it cannot accomplish, if equipped with the proper means.... The Bodhisatta was intent on his ultimate goal while he with ardent energy developed all kinds of kusala. We read in the Sivi-Jätaka (no. 499) that the Bodhisatta, in one of his lives when he was a king, gave his own eyes to a blind brahmin who was actually Sakka, king of the devas, in disguise. Although others had tried to dissuade the Bodhisatta he was unshakable in his resolution. The pain was extreme when he had his own eyes taken out, but he endured it with heroic fortitude. We read that when his right eye had been taken out already he gazed at it with his left eye and enduring the pain he asked the brahmin to come. He said: 'The eye of omniscience is dearer than this eye a hundred fold, yes a thousand fold; there you have my reason for this action', and he gave it to the brahmin, who raised it and placed it in his own eye socket. There it remained fixed by his power like a blue lotus in bloom. When the Great Being with his left eye saw that eye in his head, he cried: 'Ah, how good is this my gift of an eye' and thrilled straightway with joy that had arisen within him, he gave the other eye also... Later on his sight was restored to him. When the Bodhisatta was intent on his ultimate goal, saying, The eye of omniscience is dearer than this eye, he did not merely think: Once I have to become a Samma-sambuddha , but he developed the conditions for it right there and then. Could he have endured such extreme pain without mindfulness of the present moment? When there is firm resolution to develop the conditions for enlightenment at this moment there is mindfulness of the present reality since this is the only way. At the same time there is right effort, and this is the perfection of energy."" endquote Robert #70631 From: han tun Date: Sat Apr 14, 2007 10:13 pm Subject: Daana Corner (39) hantun1 Dear Dhamma Friends, The following is taken from “Generosity: The Inward Dimension” by Nina Van Gorkom Questions, comments and different views welcome:-) ------------------------------ We may find it difficult to part with our possessions, but when we die we cannot take them with us. Life is short: thus when we have an opportunity for generosity we should use it in order to combat selfishness. Each moment of generosity now will condition the arising of generosity in the future. Good deeds bring about pleasant results and bad deeds bring unpleasant results. This is the law of kamma and its fruit, of cause and effect. [7] A deed (kamma) can produce result in the form of rebirth. Wholesome kamma can produce a happy rebirth and unwholesome kamma can produce an unhappy rebirth. Besides the human plane of existence, there are other planes which are happy or unhappy. Birth in the human plane or in a heavenly plane is a happy rebirth conditioned by wholesome kamma; birth in a hell plane, as a ghost or as an animal is an unhappy rebirth conditioned by unwholesome kamma. Kamma can also produce results in the form of pleasant or unpleasant sense experiences arising in the course of life. Seeing and hearing are types of consciousness that are results of kamma. We see and hear pleasant or unpleasant objects according to the kamma that produces these experiences. Stinginess can bring about — either in this life or in a future life — the very result we fear: loss of possessions. Generosity can bring about pleasant results, such as prosperity. However, when we perform acts of generosity we should not cling to pleasant results; clinging is unwholesome. Kamma will produce its appropriate result whether we think of it or not. While we are giving we can have right understanding of kamma and its result, without clinging. We may do good deeds with the understanding of what wholesomeness is. As we have seen, understanding is a beautiful root which may or may not accompany wholesome consciousness. When understanding accompanies the wholesome consciousness, it increases the degree of wholesomeness. We cannot make understanding arise at will; it arises when there are conditions for it. Learning what the Buddha taught is a condition for greater understanding. Note [7] See Kamma and Its Fruit, by Nyanaponika Thera (Wheel No. 221/224). http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/nyanaponika/kammafruit.html To be continued. metta, Han #70632 From: "cultry1" Date: Sat Apr 14, 2007 9:30 pm Subject: Re: anatta cultry1 I agree with you. Most differently from all religions in the west in Buddhism, I believe, we do not have a soul, we do not have a self, we do not have a personality called Claudia, that one day will die, and finish. I believe the cosmic energy that made that character to live will continue in the Cosmos, purely as energy, perhaps in another person, I don't know. Culty > Anatta isn't all that difficult, to me. It just denies that there is a > soul, an executive agent that is not bound by the flow of conditions. > > Herman > #70633 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Sun Apr 15, 2007 12:29 am Subject: [dsg] Re: bhaavanaa and the body. kenhowardau Hi Howard, ---- KH: > > . . . But I believe it can be done. First, concede > there is only the present moment. Then, ask whether the conditioned > dhammas that occupy it are permanent or impermanent. > H: > Ken, I truly believe you should think more deeply about what is involved here, because what you are circling around is highly contradictory. ---- I see no contradiction. I see apparent contradictions, and they form an important part of the learning process. Having first told us there is no self, the suttas pose the question, 'How, without contradicting his own teaching, can the Buddha possibly tell us (our selves) to practise satipatthana?' The secret, need I say, is in the conditioned dhammas that arise and fall in a the loka (the single moment). They do the practising of satipatthana. There is no need for a self! I really don't see how people who hear this explanation can be unmoved by it. How could they ever go back to their old conventional ideas of practice? But the vast majority of them do exactly that. They go back to conventional ideas of vipassana-meditation even though there is no mention of such practices in the texts. If I wasn't an extremely a tactful person I would say, "Such is the power of wrong view!" :-) Ken H #70634 From: sarah abbott Date: Sun Apr 15, 2007 12:44 am Subject: Re: [dsg] eCard from Morocco 2a sarahprocter... Hi Howard, --- upasaka@... wrote: > Hi, Sarah - > > In a message dated 4/14/07 12:43:28 PM Eastern Daylight Time, > sarahprocterabbott@... writes: > > > For the last couple of days we couldn't get an internet connection, > but > > had a couple of real Atlas-shrugging/hugging (Connie?) surf-aris to > really > > desert-ed beaches.....incredible landscape and very kind, hospitable > > people with beautiful manners. > > > ==================== > Good to hear from you, Sarah. What is the "Atlas Shrugged" > reference, > if I may ask? ..... S: Thx Howard! We're enjoying yours and other discussions too. I took the 'Atlas shrugged' from these earlier references below. Just a play on the phrase first mentioned by James as the book title. We're here in the Atlas mountains which come down to the desert beaches in places, such as the spot up the coast we went to..... Metta, Sarah ======== 69456 Re: [dsg] Re: Theriigaathaa - Sisters (43) ... thought it was an interesting one. :-) = Yes and yes... and yes again! Actually, it didn't impress me all that much at the time... 'atlas shrugged' ;) - Howard: ;-) - but for some reason (or none) it just came back to me when I was reading about how the different elements ... upasaka@... upasaka_howard Mar 12, 2007 10:13 pm 69430 Re: Theriigaathaa - Sisters (43) ... thought it was an interesting one. :-) = Yes and yes... and yes again! Actually, it didn't impress me all that much at the time... 'atlas shrugged' ;) but for some reason (or none) it just came back to me when I was reading about how the different elements 'support' each other ... connie connieparker@intergat... nichiconn Mar 12, 2007 10:02 am 40650 Re: Apologies ... is some info about Objectivism: Objectivism is the philosophy developed by Ayn Rand; it is presented in her novel Atlas Shrugged and in her other fiction and non-fiction works. The central ideas of Objectivism are: Reason is man's only means of ... #70635 From: "sukinder" Date: Sun Apr 15, 2007 8:04 pm Subject: RE: [dsg] A Meditation Tip sukinderpal Hi Dieter, Han, All, Sorry for taking time to respond. I can't afford to write too often, so I leave some gap. Besides I tend to be long winded and don't wish tire or scare you away :-), especially since it appears that you have not really been initiated into the Abhidhamma perspective, particularly the way it is understood here on DSG. ======================= D: thanks for your wellcome! I remember your name ( in relation to Buddhology? ) but believe we never communicated directly.. Suk: No, but some other list maybe. ======================= S: I think that you will agree that Jhana is the outcome of the development of Samatha and this refers to the 'calm' of kusala. D: yes without samatha no jhana... I think we agree :samatha = tranquility , a peaceful mind rather free from the 5 hindrances, or (- using the simile in which the Buddha compared the mind with a monkey , jumping from branch to branch day and night without rest) letting the monkey take a break Suk: I like the idea of 'taking a break from akusala' .:-) However I prefer the way of Vipassana to that of Samatha. Besides it is through satipatthana that one grows to better understand that neither of these is within control of a 'self', nor initiated because of 'intention'. What do you think? ====================== S: Therefore it is not as many seem to think, merely a matter of 'concentration' on some chosen object. It is first and foremost about understanding the danger of attachment in relation to sense objects experienced through the six doorways. D: I see samatha as a precondition for concentration, where we fix the monkey (mind) on one spot and keep it there, i.e. focus on an object, like breathing Suk: Already here I see a difference in how this concept is understood. I prefer to look at Bhavana as being just two, namely Samatha and Vipassana. Samatha when developed to the full culminates in Jhana. You seem to consider samatha as being 'means' to attain Jhana via concentration.. ========================= D: When we sit down for meditation we must let go our wordly attachments or better in detail: nivarana , the 5 hindrances ). Do you think that is not wellknown by many? Suk: Again here, you seem to see this as a consequence of intention/decision. Whereas I see it as a matter of conditions being developed and not about any 'doing' regardless. Besides your position already seems to lean toward making "concentration" a technique and there are indeed some who actually think this to be so. They believe that one only has to decide on an object of concentration, breath, kasina or whatever, and to just concentrate on that. ====================== S: How is this 'understanding' reflected and begin to develop if not now in daily life? Is there truly any seeing of attachment to kama objects so much so that a sense of urgency is aroused? Does morality come about easily as a consequence of such seeing? Does one therefore also see limitations in the household life D: ok but now you seem to suggest a far more general topic Suk: I don't think so. Of the forty (?) objects of meditation, some are suitable for daily life while some are not. However whatever the inclination, the development of all involves knowing kusala from akusala. Furthermore a suitable object itself requires a good deal of "understanding" of one's accumulations, else they can't serve their purpose of being the object of kusala cittas leading to concentration. I think it might be helpful to remember that even Sariputta was wrong in suggestion "breath" as object of meditation to Rahula. So indeed it all must start from "now", only this is the measure of one's level of understanding, otherwise one is simply lost in a dream world. Unless you think that "meditation" is a kind of technique/shortcut to Jhana/Vipassana..? ========================== S: I don't ever see anyone talking about any of this but instead there is big talk about exalted states and theories about how samatha and vipassana must be developed together. When Nina recently wrote to Han saying that samatha must go together with the development of vipassana, what she meant was that the realities involved in the development of the former, if these are not known with insight as 'conditioned realities', then it is quite useless in light of the development of the Path. In other words, the Teachings is about the need to develop the understanding of conditioned realities, all namas and rupas, and this has no particular relation to the development of samatha. D: as I am participating in DSG only recently , I don't know .. but I remember the discussion in lists about samatha and vipassana is going on since years. Assumed Han is forgiving me to copy from one of his messages to me I especially favored ( another list 2 years ago .. Hi Han , I hope you are well and hope permission subsequently granted ? ;-) ) quote: First of all, it is necessary to understand what one means by "dry insight". There are two types of meditation, namely samatha meditation and vipassana meditation. During Lord Buddha's time meditators used to practice samatha meditation first and then switched on to vipassana meditation. But now-a-days, most people find that to practice samatha meditation to attain jhana is much more difficult than to practice vipassana meditation directly to attain insight wisdom. Therefore the Sayadaws in Burma recommend the practitioners to start straight away with the vipassana meditation without wasting time to attain jhanas first. The underlying factor for samatha is samadhi and the underlying factor for vipassana is panna or wisdom. However, for a meditator who practices vipassana meditation directly, although he does not try to attain jhana first, he does not ignore the samadhi altogether. Mahasi Sayadaw said that the momentary samadhi or khanika samadhi attained by vipassana meditator is sufficient to attain insight wisdom. Therefore, it is important to note that dry insight might be equated with "non-jhanic" tradition, but it will be wrong to equate it with "non-samadhi". Thus, what I am doing is to try to get into vipassana directly, but at the same time I try to develop samadhi at least to the level of khanika samadhi. In other words I do not try to attain jhana first, but I do not ignore the development of samadhi completely. I might call it "sub-jhanic" level of samadhi which I am trying to achieve, simultaneously with insight wisdom. unquote Suk: I don't like to think in terms of dry and wet types ;-). It doesn't seem relevant except that I may learn more about different conditions. Otherwise I am content with the fact that Satipatthana is the "one way" to enlightenment. It is not a matter of choice that one develops Jhana or Vipassana. No 'self' can choose to attain without or with jhana arising in tandem, before, or after. The jhana practitioner has a need to know *present* moment realities with insight as much as does the dry insight worker. So I don't agree with Han's general idea, but he knows that already. The ongoing debate concerning samatha and vipassana that you refer to is based on the idea of 'self'. Both side of the debate seem to come from the standpoint of "control" and therefore as far as I am concerned, both are wrong! If the study of Dhamma does not increase our understanding of present moment realities as being "conditioned", then I think there must involve "wrong" reading/studying/understanding. 'Right practice' can only come from right intellectual understanding; therefore if there is wrong understanding of the Teachings, then 'wrong practice' invariably follows. Dhammas are conditioned to perform their various functions, some like avijja and miccha ditthi, gives rise to the impression of there being 'selves' making choices developing/not developing the Path. And this seems to be where most Buddhists are at.. Coming to khanika samadhi, this is the samadhi arising with each citta, performing the function of fixing the citta and the other accompanying mental factors on to the object. Why then the idea of developing this samadhi? Is it not more a matter of developing sati and panna which are particularly sobhana cetasikas? In fact why focus on developing any samadhi at all? If attachment, aversion, ignorance, doubt, envy and so on can arise and perform their specific functions in the span of one consciousness moment, then why not mindfulness, confidence, wisdom, and so on do? Reading the Texts with 'self view' creates many distortions imo. ======================= S: Buddha's Dhamma is about seeing the danger in "ignorance" unlike the development of samatha/Jhana which is focused on seeing the danger of "attachment". Therefore, while we continue to seek the development of samatha/jhana with the hope that this leads to/supports vipassana panna, we are in fact at those moments, increasing ignorance of the Four noble Truths and *not* following the Teachings! Actually, with such a view, one develops neither of these, not having sight of their differing goals, but something all together. D: now , I think it should be clear that Jhana or right concentration is part of the 3 fold Noble Path training (sila , samadhi , panna).. a step by step development with individual approaches (of perfection) to all links of the path. You will know the different types of students mentioned in the suttas Suk: Indeed the development of understanding (along with the paramis) must be very slow and gradual given the great tendency to akusala. About this idea re: Sila, Samadhi and Panna, are you referring to the distinction made in the Visuddhimagga? If so, last time I heard was that this distinction is for the purpose of teaching. But of course there is also Adhi- Sila, Citta and Panna. This corresponds to the stages of Sotapatti, Anagami and Arahatta. True that on the one hand this reflects the possibility of development, namely that concentration and wisdom cannot be perfected before morality is, on the other hand however this also shows that "panna" is needed all the way through, doesn't it? And also it is not a matter of anyone having to first develop sila, then samadhi and then panna.? And no, I don't know about the "different types of students" you refer to above. What is it? ============================ S: Actually, as far as I can see, only two persons both holding Right View can ever be said to agree with/understand each other. The rest, will at best be in the position of 'agreeing to agree' or 'agreeing to disagree', even though they may not realize this. Much of the time however, there is complete confusion. When there is "wrong understanding", what is expressed is a perversion, and so even if the two parties involved might think that they agree, in reality they are being taken in by words/ideas/explanations which both are happy to rest upon. D: there is a long way from a first understanding to perfect understanding (samma ditthi) and common understanding rather rare .. happy to rest upon .. isn't it ? ;-) Suk: Of course we must allow for different levels of understanding and even misunderstanding. But though this latter is 'natural' for all, should we be encouraging it? And if we continue to fail to identify instances of 'wrong understanding', does not the chance to "correct" it become even more remote? We are lost in the ocean of concepts with no chance of realizing it were it not for Dhamma. One of the first important steps along this path of development is to realize the difference between concept and reality. Until this happens then chances are that Dhamma ideas will be taken wrongly and any rare moments of common understanding may in fact be illusory. =============================== S: It is so easy to agree in delusion. The Moon which is pointed to, if this is not present moment realities, is a 'concept' and this is fertile ground for perversion of perception, consciousness and views! I don't think it wise to therefore 'believe in' such evaluation of experiences, let alone that 'ours' is the same as 'theirs' D: I think you misunderstood what I intended to say . The Buddha used similes/allegories for the benefit of understanding ...so the finger pointing to the moon was meant to be an analogy to bathman, water , ball of bathpowder in respect to piti and approach to the body . Suk: It looks like I have :-). Thanks for making it clear. ============================= S: This does not mean though, that we can't discuss with each other. But given the fact that we come from the position of "not knowing" and only beginning to take baby steps towards understanding, we should allow for increased precision first at the intellectual level. And more than the Suttas, the Abhidhamma allows for this to happen. D: yes , one should apply 'baby steps ' towards understanding .. remembering many failures from the past . As I see it the suttas provide an angle to translate into one's own experience , the Abhidhamma gives us the possibility to order it by categorization. ( perhaps like Aristotle in respect to Socrates ;-) ) There is a danger of an ivory tower , when the intellect uses terms /categories without connection to personal experience Suk: Were this my impression of the Abhidhamma I would have been put off quite early on. It is not in my nature to study anything that is not practical (in whatever sense). Perhaps 'practicality' in Dhamma is not so much "out there" in the Sutta, Abhidhamma or Vinaya, but more a matter of attitude of mind. In other words, the arising of right view, right thinking etc. Is there not a reality at this moment and can this not be known? Should we think instead about another time, place and situation for the development of understanding? What is the use of talking about practicality if the understanding is not concerned with this moment *now*? In fact even the idea of "applying" is too late and likely to be conditioned by self view. So it seems practicality is about understanding. This understanding is not 'time bound' as in "remembering many failures from the past", nor 'situation bound' as in "provide an angle to translate into one's own experience" (if I read you right here). It is reflected in the confidence that "this moment is the only "real" one to develop understanding". So I don't think that Abhidhamma correctly understood is encouraging of the 'ivory tower' attitude. This latter is a problem of 'philosophers' and this can be with anyone studying any part of the Tipitaka, including Sutta and Vinaya. ================================ S: This is a problem of those who *do not agree* with the Abhidhamma/Commentaries. The Abhidhamma perspective is in fact the Abhidhamma/Sutta/Vinaya/Commentaries. This understanding however, seems to leave little room for any "self" to "do" anything in order to speed up the process of development and therefore is a threat to "self view". The Sutta/Vinaya with its many 'stories' about 'people and situations' encourages an interpretation which "self" feels comfortable with, and so one without any hesitation dismisses the Abhidhamma and Commentaries. And so in making this distinction as you have made above, and choosing to be on the one side, namely, Sutta/Vinaya; one has unwittingly fallen prey to a particular aspect of Mara, doing harm to the Sasana. Sorry to be blunt here D: I would have not joined DSG if dismissing Abhidhamma /commentaries right away. In fact I respect the A. being the third basket of the Canon, however in case of doubt would rely on the Sutta (Vinaya) Nikaya . i.e. Mahapadesa, the Great References) and still believe it may be a treasure to support one's progress in wisdom. Unfortunately my impression is sometimes that there is too less listening from the A. side in order to reach a consens. Suk: OK. I did read this in your following post. The point however is that the Suttas and the Vinaya *can* be read to completely agree with the Abhidhamma. So regarding consensus, what can you expect? In fact this particular reading I believe, allows for no contradiction in any part of the Tipitaka. On the other hand those with another reading who prefer only the Sutta and Vinaya are faced with many contradiction within one or both of these, but of course they will ignore or deny this. ;-) Feel free to respond only to parts or not at all, I'll understand. I used to have what is called 'marathon posts' with Htoo and I don't wish to burden anyone. :-) With Metta, Sukinder Ps: It *is* a very long post and I considered rewriting, but this would be quite laborious. So hope you don't mind it. #70636 From: connie Date: Sun Apr 15, 2007 6:13 am Subject: Theriigaathaa - Sisters (51) nichiconn Dear Friends, The commentary on the verses Therii Vaasi.t.thii spoke in #70600: Tattha a.t.taati a.t.titaa. Ayameva vaa paa.tho, a.t.titaa pii.litaati attho. Khittacittaati sokummaadena khittahadayaa. Tato eva pakatisa~n~naaya vigamena visa~n~ninii. Hirottappaabhaavato apagatavatthataaya naggaa. Vidhutakesataaya paki.n.nakesii. Tena tenaati gaamena gaama.m nagarena nagara.m viithiyaa viithi.m vicari.m aha.m. 133. There, afflicted (a.t.taa) means afflicted (a.t.titaa). This is even an [alternative] reading. The meaning is: [she was] afflicted (a.t.titaa), oppressed. With mind deranged (khitta-cittaa) means: with her thoughts deranged (khitta-hadayaa) through the madness of grief. As a result of the departure of her normal intelligence she was out of her senses. Because of the absence of shame and the fear of wrongdoing and because her clothes had fallen off, [she was] with dishevelled hair. Here and there means: I wandered from village to village, from town to town, from street to street. Athaati pacchaa ummaadasa.mvattaniyassa kammassa parikkhaye. Sugatanti sobhanagamanattaa sundara.m .thaana.m gatattaa sammaa gadattaa sammaa ca gatattaa sugata.m bhagavanta.m. Mithila.m patiiti mithilaabhimukha.m, mithilaanagaraabhimukha.m gacchantanti attho. 135. Then means: afaterwards, with the exhaustion of the deed conducive to her madness. The Sublime One (sugata.m) means: because of leading to the good (sobhana-gamanattaa), because of going (gatattaa) to a good place, because (gatattaa) of right speech (gadattaa), he is the Sublime One, the Blessed One. [Going] towards [the town of] Mithilaa means: going in the direction of Mithilaa, towards the town of Mithilaa. Sacitta.m pa.tiladdhaanaati buddhaanubhaavena ummaada.m pahaaya attano pakaticitta.m pa.tilabhitvaa. 136. Regaining (pa.tiladdhaana) my mind (sa-citta.m) means: eliminating my madness through the power of the Buddha, regaining (pa.tilabhitvaa) my own normal mind (pakati-citta.m). Yu~njantii satthuvacaneti satthu sammaasambuddhassa saasane yoga.m karontii bhaavana.m anuyu~njantii. Sacchaakaasi.m pada.m sivanti siva.m khema.m catuuhi yogehi anupadduta.m nibbaana.m pada.m sacchi-akaasi.m. 137. Applying myself to the Teacher's utterance means: making an effort in the teaching of the Teacher, the Fully and Perfectly Awakenined One; being diligent in mental development. I realized (sacchaakaasi.m) the blissful state means: I realized (sacchi-asaasi.m) the state that is blissful, peaceful, not oppressed by the four ties, quenching. Etadantikaati eta.m idaani mayaa adhigata.m arahatta.m anto pariyosaana.m etesanti etadantikaa, sokaa. Na daani tesa.m sambhavo atthiiti attho. Yato sokaana sambhavoti yato antonijjhaanalakkha.naana.m sokaana.m sambhavo, tesa.m sokaana.m pa~ncupaadaanakkhandhasa"nkhaataa vatthuu adhi.t.thaanaani ~naatatiira.napahaanapari~n~naahi pari~n~naataa. Tasmaa sokaa etadantikaati yojanaa. Vaase.t.thiitheriigaathaava.n.nanaa ni.t.thitaa. 138. Ending in this way (etad-anikaa) means: this Arahatship that has now been obtained by me is the end (anto) of them; [it is] the end of this (pariyosaana.m etesan), ending in this way my griefs. The meaning is: there will not be any production of them now. Of those griefs, I have understood (pari~n~naataa) by means of full understanding as the know, as investigation, and as abandoing the grounds, the bases - which are synonymous with the five groups of grasping - of these grief. Therefore ending in this way my griefs. That is the connection. Here ends the commentary on the verses of Therii Vaasi.t.thii. peace, connie #70637 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Sun Apr 15, 2007 6:32 am Subject: Re: Perfections N, no 8 buddhatrue Hi Robert, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "rjkjp1" wrote: > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, > > James:"Granted, we can't get rid of all of our defilements at > > once, but TOTAL ERRADICATION is the goal. First we begin with the > > gross defilements and then we move on to the subtle defilements, > but > > at no time are we supposed to just accept defilements > > with "understanding". That isn't what the Buddha taught and it is a > > very dangerous thing to be teaching. > >_____________ > Dear James, > Venerable Upavanna was one of the Buddha's attendants before Ananda. > He asked the Buddha (Samyutta, Salayanata Vagga 70 p.1154 Bodhi) > > > Upavana: "In what way is the Dhamma directly visible (sanditthiko > Dhamma), immediate…to be personally experienced by the wise? > > Buddha: Here, Upavana, having seen a form with the eye a bhikkhu > experiences the form as well as lust for the form. He understands > that lust for the forms exists internally thus: `there is in me lust > for forms internally.' Since that is so Upavana the Dhamma is > directly visible, immediate…" > > > The sutta repeats for the other senses. What do you think of this > sutta, doesn't it indicate understandning of defilements is part of > the way? > Robert > Thanks for the sutta quote. Is this sutta available on-line? I no longer have my Nikayas to check it out. I would like to know what is said in the entire sutta. Metta, James #70638 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Sun Apr 15, 2007 6:49 am Subject: Re: Perfections N, no 8 buddhatrue Hi Robert, > Dear James, > at the moments there is genuine awareness- sati sampajanna - there > cannot be actions like lying or murder or stealing. This is a circular argument that doesn't make any sense and doesn't match what the Buddha taught. Nina wrote to just let "anything come that will come"....just see it with understanding. Well, which is it? See things with understanding (which means that there are no defilements), or allow whatever defilements which arise to arise? What happened to guarding the sense doors? Metta, James #70639 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Apr 15, 2007 7:23 am Subject: Rupas Ch 8, no 4 nilovg Dear friends, The “Atthasåliní” (in the same section) compares birth, decay and death to three enemies, of whom the first leads someone into the forest, the second throws him down and the third cuts off his head. We read: ... For birth is like the enemy who draws him to enter the forest; because he has come to birth in this or that place. Decay is like the enemy who strikes and fells him to earth when he has reached the forest, because the aggregates (khandhas) produced are weak, dependent on others, lying down on a couch. Death is like the enemy who with a sword cuts off the head of him when he is fallen to the ground, because the aggregates having attained to decay, are come to destruction of life. This simile reminds us of the disadvantages of all conditioned realities that do not last and are therefore no refuge. However, when understanding (paññå) has not realized the arising and falling away of nåma and rúpa, one does not grasp their danger. We read in the “Díghanakhasutta” (Middle Length Sayings II, no. 74) that the Buddha reminded Díghanakha that the body is susceptible to decay, impermanent and not self: But this body, Aggivessana, which has material shape, is made up of the four great elements, originating from mother and father, nourished on gruel and sour milk, of a nature to be constantly rubbed away, pounded away, broken up and scattered, should be regarded as impermanent, suffering, as a disease, an imposthume, a dart, a misfortune, an affliction, as other, as decay, empty, not-self. When he regards this body as impermanent, suffering, as a disease, an imposthume, a dart, a misfortune, an affliction, as other, as decay, empty, not-self, whatever in regard to body is desire for body, affection for body, subordination to body, this is got rid of. ******* Nina #70640 From: "rjkjp1" Date: Sun Apr 15, 2007 7:19 am Subject: Re: Perfections N, no 8 rjkjp1 > Thanks for the sutta quote. Is this sutta available on-line? I no > longer have my Nikayas to check it out. I would like to know what is > said in the entire sutta. > > Metta, > James _______ Dear James The translation by Nyanponika is at this url:http://www.geocities.com/~madg/gangessangha/roots.html 30. THE VISIBLE TEACHING 24 Once the venerable Upavana went to the Exalted One, saluted him respectfully and sat down at one side. Thus seated he addressed the Exalted One as follows: 'People speak of the "visible teaching". In how far, Lord, is the teaching visible here and now, of immediate result, inviting to come and see, onward-leading, to be directly experienced by the wise?' 'Herein, Upavana, a monk, having seen a form with his eyes, experiences the form and experiences desire for the form.25 Of the desire for forms present in him, he knows: "There is in me a desire for forms." If a monk, having seen a form with his eyes, experiencing the form and experiencing desire for the form, knows that desire for forms is present in him - in so far, Upavana, is the teaching visible here and now, of immediate result, inviting to come and see, onwardleading, to be directly experienced by the wise. 'It is similar if a monk experiences desire when he hears a sound with his ears, smells an odour with his nose, tastes a flavour with his tongue, feels a tangible with his body or cognizes an idea with his mind. If he knows in each case that desire is present in him - in so far, Upavana, is the teaching visible here and now, of immediate result, inviting to come and see, onward-leading, to be directly experienced by the wise. 'Further, Upavana, a monk, having seen a form with his eyes, experiences the form without experiencing desire for the form. Of the absent desire for form he knows: "There is in me no desire for forms." If a monk, having seen a form with his eyes, experiencing the form without experiencing desire for the form, knows that desire for forms is not present in him -in so far, too, Upavana, is the teaching visible here and now, of immediate result, inviting to come and see, onwardleading, to be directly experienced by the wise. 'It is similar if a monk does not experience desire when he hears a sound with his ears, smells an odour with his nose, tastes a flavour with his tongue, feels a tangible with his body or cognizes an idea with his mind. If he knows in each case that desire is not present in him - in so far, Upavana, is the teaching visible here and now, of immediate result, inviting to come and see, onward-leading, to be directly experienced by the wise.' Samyutta Nikaya, 35: 70 Robert #70641 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Apr 15, 2007 7:23 am Subject: Perfections N, 10 nilovg Dear friends, The Jatakas, the stories of the former lives of the Buddha, can inspire us to develop the perfections the Bodhisatta developed life after life. When we were in the train on our way from Calcutta to Gaya, Bhante Dhammadhara read to us the Sasa-Jataka (no. 316) which relates that the Bodhisatta, when he was a hare, offered his own flesh to a brahmin. The Bodhisatta was going to sacrifice himself by letting himself fall into the fire so that the brahmin did not have to commit akusala kamma in killing him. We read: Rising from his bed of kusa grass and coming to the place, he thrice shook himself so that, if there were any insects within his coat, they might escape death. Then offering his whole body as a free gift he sprang up, and like a royal swan, alighting on a cluster of lotuses, in an ecstacy of joy he fell on the heap of live coals. But the flame failed even to heat the pores of the hair on the body of the Bodhisatta, and it was as if he had entered a region of frost.... The fire did not roast him because the brahmin was actually Sakka, King of the Devas of the Thirtythree , and he had created that fire in order to test the Bodhisatta's virtue. The Bodhisatta said to him: If not only you, Sakka, but all the inhabitants of the world were to try me in this matter of almsgiving, they would not find in me any unwillingness to give. At first we may find this story somewhat strange but we should consider what its real meaning is. The Bodhisatta was consuming his self-love, giving his limbs and life with abundant joy. He gave himself wholeheartedly and completely, without holding back anything, without thinking of himself. He only thought of the welfare of others: he had lovingkindness for the brahmin, he took compassion on the insects which might be in his coat, and therefore he shook himself three times. He was always intent on his ultimate goal: to attain Buddhahood for the welfare of other beings. Often during this journey the Sasa-Jataka came to my mind and this Jataka inspired me to appreciate more the benefit of giving wholeheartedly. In a day there are many more akusala cittas than kusala cittas, but we are ignorant of them. When we do not perform dana, observe sila or apply ourselves to mental development, which comprises the development of calm and the development of right understanding, we think, act and speak with akusala cittas. There is often clinging after seeing, hearing, smelling, tasting or the experience of tangible object. We may not notice that there is clinging when it is subtle, but there are countless moments of them. Are we not attached to all the objects which are experienced through the six doors? Through satipatthana we gradually come to know the many moments of akusala citta, we come to know that we are thinking of ourselves more often than we ever thought. ******* Nina. #70642 From: "rjkjp1" Date: Sun Apr 15, 2007 7:32 am Subject: Re: Perfections N, no 8 rjkjp1 --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "buddhatrue" wrote: > > Hi Robert, > > > > Dear James, > > at the moments there is genuine awareness- sati sampajanna - there > > cannot be actions like lying or murder or stealing. > > This is a circular argument that doesn't make any sense and doesn't > match what the Buddha taught. Nina wrote to just let "anything come > that will come"....just see it with understanding. Well, which is it? > See things with understanding (which means that there are no > defilements), or allow whatever defilements which arise to arise? > > What happened to guarding the sense doors? > > Metta, > James Dear James There are many levels in Dhamma. In the context Nina was writing about it was encouraging patience about the visisitudes of life, not directly about accepting defilements. But to answer your question, elements change so rapidly, if a defilement arises then if it is known as it really is then the moment of knowing is kusala, there is tadanga nirodha, momentary cessation. As the sutta I quoted about Upavana Thera shows, the sense doors are guarded by knowing elements as they arise. Robert #70643 From: upasaka@... Date: Sun Apr 15, 2007 3:44 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: bhaavanaa and the body. upasaka_howard Hi, Ken - In a message dated 4/15/07 3:30:09 AM Eastern Daylight Time, kenhowa@... writes: > Hi Howard, > > ---- > KH: >>. . . But I believe it can be done. First, concede > >there is only the present moment. Then, ask whether the conditioned > >dhammas that occupy it are permanent or impermanent. > > > > H: >Ken, I truly believe you should think more deeply about what is > involved here, because what you are circling around is highly > contradictory. > ---- > > I see no contradiction. I see apparent contradictions, and they form > an important part of the learning process. Having first told us > there is no self, the suttas pose the question, 'How, without > contradicting his own teaching, can the Buddha possibly tell us (our > selves) to practise satipatthana?' > > The secret, need I say, is in the conditioned dhammas that arise and > fall in a the loka (the single moment). They do the practising of > satipatthana. There is no need for a self! ------------------------------------- Howard: Er, Ken, I'm confused. What was being discussed was time, not self. We are rather much in agreement with regard to the latter. That has nothing to to do with the area of contradiction I was pointing to. This is an odd turn you are taking. ------------------------------------- > > I really don't see how people who hear this explanation can be > unmoved by it. How could they ever go back to their old conventional > ideas of practice? But the vast majority of them do exactly that. > > They go back to conventional ideas of vipassana-meditation even > though there is no mention of such practices in the texts. If I > wasn't an extremely a tactful person I would say, "Such is the power > of wrong view!" :-) --------------------------------------- Howard: Ken, did I stumble into someone else's conversation? ------------------------------------ > > Ken H > > ================= With metta, Howard #70644 From: upasaka@... Date: Sun Apr 15, 2007 5:21 am Subject: Re: [dsg] eCard from Morocco 2a upasaka_howard Hi, Sarah - In a message dated 4/15/07 3:45:35 AM Eastern Daylight Time, sarahprocterabbott@... writes: > I took the 'Atlas shrugged' from these earlier references below. Just a > play on the phrase first mentioned by James as the book title. We're here > in the Atlas mountains which come down to the desert beaches in places, > such as the spot up the coast we went to..... > ================= Ah, ok - I didn't make the connection. :-) What a lovely vacation you seem to be having! That's great - enjoy!! :-) With metta, Howard #70645 From: upasaka@... Date: Sun Apr 15, 2007 5:54 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Perfections N, no 8 upasaka_howard Hi, Robert (and James) - In a message dated 4/15/07 10:29:46 AM Eastern Daylight Time, rjkjp1@... writes earlier on: > The sutta repeats for the other senses. What do you think of this > sutta, doesn't it indicate understandning of defilements is part of > the way? > ======================= Robert, I'm picking up on just this part of your earlier post. IMO, understanding the defilements in several senses - reading or hearing about them, being clearly aware of their existence in one's own mindstream, and observing how they are sources of suffering - is absolutely essential and constitutes a not-to-be-skipped first (and even 2nd and 3rd) step, which most definitely makes it a part of the way. But, and this is what I think was James' point, it is insufficient. Much, much more needs to be done, including applying sati in guarding the senses and in support of right effort, and, in my opinion (and James', and the Buddha's as well I believe), cultivating passadhi and pa~n~na by meditation, and, more generally, by the entire practice the Buddha laid out over 45 years. With metta, Howard #70646 From: "jonoabb" Date: Sun Apr 15, 2007 10:20 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Agreeable and Disagreeable jonoabb Hi Larry Apologies for the delay in replying, but our days here in Maroc (Morocco) have been fairly full ones. A collision with my surfboard this morning, however, means I'm temporarily grounded, so a good chance to do some posting. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Larry" wrote: > > Hi Jon, .. > L: I agree, but these examples all relate to body consciousness. What about eye > consciousness? Good observation, Larry. However, I would say the position as regards eye consciousness, ear consciousness, etc is pretty much the same. What is 'easy on the eye/ear' and what is harsh to the eye or ear is independent of values, cultural norms or points of view. > L: What is there to know about visible data? Even if you knew the kamma that conditioned > the arising of the consciousness of it you would still need something else to determine > whether it was agreeable or disagreeable. It would be like getting a rock from your > grandmother. You would of course love it because your grandmother gave it to you, but it > might be a diamond or a piece of costume jewelry. You wouldn't be able to evaluate how > good your grandmother (kamma) really was. To repeat, I don't see what the problem is in not knowing whether a given moment of visible object or audible object is the result of kusala or akusala vipaka. Why do you see it as being so important? > L: I agree. If a Cadillac runs over you that is definitely akusala kamma vipaka. And if you > are a chauffeur that is not quite as agreeable as being the owner. But that is a matter of mind-door perception (kusala or akusala consciousness) rather than of sense-door experiencing (vipaka consciousness), I think. Jon #70647 From: "jonoabb" Date: Sun Apr 15, 2007 10:41 am Subject: Re: [dsg] The four Right Efforts jonoabb Hi Howard --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > > Hi, Jon - ... > ------------------------------------------- > Howard: > The summaries of B & C are far too restrictive. Important aspects > relevant to my evaluation are missing. > ------------------------------------------ I'd be interested to know what those missing aspects might be. I've set out at the end of this message the whole of the passages B and C. Which particular parts of those passages do you see as necessarily referring to a "regular practice to engage in" or to "types of purposeful activity, conventional activities"?> > > Jon: > > If you take a close look at the wording you will not find any > > necessary implication of 'regular practice to engage in'. That would > > be an inference drawn from the text. Nor in fact will you find any > > necessary implication of 'purposeful activity' or 'conventional > > activities'. Let my try to explain why. > > > > In Text A, the words "There is the case where" are important. They > > indicate that a situation is being described. > > > ------------------------------------ > Howard: > Yeah, I know. You always jump on such locutions as proof of your "mere > description" interpretation. I don't buy it. Your position on the four Right Efforts is well-known, so I didn't expect you to "buy it" ;-)). You see, you've asserted that my interpretation is entirely without foundation ("taken utterly from whole cloth, without even the slightest inkling of that perspective to be found in the suttas"). I've tried to show why that's not the case. Now you may dismiss it as merely 'jumping on a locution' if you wish, but I'd also be interested in hearing a constructive/substantive comment or two on the analysis I've given. > You, of course, are welcome to > it though. OK, it sounds like you don't want to play here, either ;-))!? ... > > Text C uses similar terminology (abandon, develop). This time it is > > in the form of an imperative. It is an exhortation to abandon > > akusala and to develop kusala. But again, there is no actual > > reference to conventional activities or regular practice. > > ------------------------------------- > Howard: > > Main Entry: ex·hor·ta·tion > Function: noun > Pronunciation: "ek-"so r-'tA-sh&n, -s&r-; "eg-"zo r-, -z&r- > 1 : an act or instance of exhorting > 2 : language intended to incite and encourage > > Main Entry: ex·hort > Function: verb > Pronunciation: ig-'zo rt > Etymology: Middle English, from Middle French exhorter, from Latin exhortari, > from ex- + hortari to incite -- more at YEARN > transitive senses > : to incite by argument or advice : urge strongly > intransitive senses : to give warnings or advice : make urgent appeals > - ex·hort·er noun Sorry, but the meaning of 'exhortation' (which was my choice of wording, by the way) is not the issue here. The issue is whether the passage in question is to be read as laying down a "regular practice to engage in", "types of purposeful activity" or the like. > > To my understanding, the 4 right efforts describe kusala, not > > akusala, moments of consciousness. > > ----------------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > Yes, I know. I think that's just silly, but, hey, to each his own. ;-) > ---------------------------------------------------------- I'm sorry, but I don't see anything is silly about the idea that the 4 right efforts are describing kusala, not akusala, moments of consciousness. What did you have in mind here? > > If they were taken to be moments of consciousness that are going to > > result in kusala in the future, which is what I understand your > > reading to be, that would mean they were themselves akusala. Or do > > you see it differently? > > ---------------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > Huh? What in the world would make a right effort akusala? I don't > follow that at all. Doing what is useful, right, and wholesome is just that - > doing what is useful, right, and wholesome. > ----------------------------------------------------------- No, I'm not suggesting that right effort could be akusala. Sorry if I gave that impression. The question is whether, in setting out the 4 Right Efforts, the Buddha is referring (a) to actual moments of kusala or (b) to moments that precede the arising of kusala (and which thus, by definition, would be akusala – as I see it anyway). Jon Text B (from AN 2.19): "Abandon what is unskillful, monks. It is possible to abandon what is unskillful. If it were not possible to abandon what is unskillful, I would not say to you, 'Abandon what is unskillful.' But because it is possible to abandon what is unskillful, I say to you, 'Abandon what is unskillful.' If this abandoning of what is unskillful were conducive to harm and pain, I would not say to you, 'Abandon what is unskillful.' But because this abandoning of what is unskillful is conducive to benefit and pleasure, I say to you, 'Abandon what is unskillful.' "Develop what is skillful, monks. It is possible to develop what is skillful. If it were not possible to develop what is skillful, I would not say to you, 'Develop what is skillful.' But because it is possible to develop what is skillful, I say to you, 'Develop what is skillful.' If this development of what is skillful were conducive to harm and pain, I would not say to you, 'Develop what is skillful.' But because this development of what is skillful is conducive to benefit and pleasure, I say to you, 'Develop what is skillful.'" Text C (from AN 4.14): "There are these four exertions. Which four? The exertion to guard, the exertion to abandon, the exertion to develop, & the exertion to maintain. And what is the exertion to guard? There is the case where a monk, on seeing a form with the eye, does not grasp at any theme or variations by which — if he were to dwell without restraint over the faculty of the eye — evil, unskillful qualities such as greed or distress might assail him. He practices with restraint. He guards the faculty of the eye. He achieves restraint with regard to the faculty of the eye. (Similarly with the ear, nose, tongue, body, & intellect.) This is called the exertion to guard." #70648 From: "colette" Date: Sun Apr 15, 2007 9:37 am Subject: Re: [dsg] anatta ksheri3 Good Morning Herman, > is a > soul, an executive agent that is not bound by the flow of conditions. colette: is that how you see a "soul"? Is that all a "soul" is? That Western concept, the soul, is far more complex than reduction to this simple icon referred to as an "executive agent". That's the problem with language, it's just so limited and predjudicial. For instance I was reading in another site that Sanskrit was created by those aristocrats that didn't want to associate or be associated with those that read Pali or was it vice versa? That definition is predjudicial of predjudice. It just gets deeper the more we examine it. It doesn't get easier, much like the U.S. tax code and/or sacred scriptures. We can look at the amount of literature out there for the christian to read that totally exposes the sham that the vatican is well known for in their attempts to abscond with the money and power, or the Upanishads of the Hindu, and now I'm finding that in Buddhism there's nothing less than an unlimited supply of texts all created by and through this anatta. I, in my unlimited IGNORANCE, know for a fact that something exists after death but it is not what I am now, it's an aggregate of this now thing. And even then my simple definition has no way of being able to give you an idea of what this thing is, that I experienced when the paramedics pronounced me dead in 1978 then brought me back, or the other lesser deaths that I've had, for instance walking out of Arizona from Phoenix in 1982, or most recently having my right eye socket completely destroyed and my face torn from my head (one person that didn't know and was looking at my x-rays said "we're gonna have to find you some new friends to play with" because of the amount of titanium in my face). I can't possibly give you the correct idea since it is like a river, it's ever changing. The minute I state what it is I know, at that same second, that it's much more yet I've gotta sit down and meditate about what it is not. Then try to meditate on WHY it is not. It gets very contrived. Have you ever really examined this thing you've stated "flow of conditions"? I just recognized the potentials of that statement. I mean that, in a broad and general sense of the event, flow of conditions, we can say that they are soooooooooo DEPENDENT upon the events (conditions) preceding them. Ultimately, then, can't we say that life is nothing more than a run-on-sentence? If so, then doesn't that make this atman, or god, an illiterate imbecile since this atman or god, in manifesting a run-on-sentence has totally ignored the grammar that is such a foundational requirement for all aristocratic measurement and grading. You can understand how, on a conveyer belt garbage is taken from the garbage truck and sorted or graded, even brick is graded for those masons out there (it's either face brick or common brick) ... Thanx cultry and Herman. toodles, colette #70649 From: "Larry" Date: Sun Apr 15, 2007 11:36 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Agreeable and Disagreeable lbidd2 Hi Jon, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: > > Hi Larry > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Larry" > wrote: > > > > Hi Jon, > .. > > L: I agree, but these examples all relate to body consciousness. > What about eye > > consciousness? > > Good observation, Larry. However, I would say the position as > regards eye consciousness, ear consciousness, etc is pretty much the > same. What is 'easy on the eye/ear' and what is harsh to the eye or > ear is independent of values, cultural norms or points of view. -------------------------------- L: I disagree. For one thing there is no paramattha dhamma that corresponds to "easy on the eye". Eye consciousness only arises with neutral feeling. To some Moslems an image of the Buddha is disagreeable. -------------------------------- > > To repeat, I don't see what the problem is in not knowing whether a > given moment of visible object or audible object is the result of > kusala or akusala vipaka. Why do you see it as being so important? ---------------------------- L: I was responding to a question from Scott on how to know whether an object is agreeable or disagreeable. He was of the opinion that only panna could know. I took the view that it was a matter of conventional, consensus values, whatever lawyers think. Also, this might be a clue as to how kamma works. In my view kamma is entirely wrapped up in conventional assumptions. ---------------------------- > > L: I agree. If a Cadillac runs over you that is definitely akusala > kamma vipaka. And if you > > are a chauffeur that is not quite as agreeable as being the owner. > > But that is a matter of mind-door perception (kusala or akusala > consciousness) rather than of sense-door experiencing (vipaka > consciousness), I think. --------------------------- L: eh~ It's not kamma so it must be kamma vipaka. --------------------------- > Jon Larry #70650 From: Dieter Möller Date: Sun Apr 15, 2007 11:30 am Subject: Re: [dsg] A Meditation Tip moellerdieter Hi Sukinda , Han,All , you wrote: Sorry for taking time to respond. I can't afford to write too often, so I leave some gap. Besides I tend to be long winded and don't wish tire or scare you away :-), especially since it appears that you have not really been initiated into the Abhidhamma perspective, particularly the way it is understood here on DSG. D: please take the time at your convenience ...often more useful than offhand replies :-) don't worry about 'long winded' .. and please be patient with me : comments may sometimes appear bluntly but are well intended you are right : I haven't been initiated into the DSG Abhidhamma perspective. My motivation to participate in the list is to share , to exchange for the common benefit of better Right Understanding which includes an open mind to learn / to review. Suk: I like the idea of 'taking a break from akusala' .:-) D: the idea (of Jhana the 8h step) is taking a break from action ..the mind at 'kamma rest ' Suk:However I prefer he way of Vipassana to that of Samatha. D: when we understand vipassana as clear seeing according to reality the mind at peace (Samatha) is precondition...it is what we put into the terms .. Suk:Besides it is through satipatthana that one grows to better understand that neither of these is within control of a 'self', nor initiated because of 'intention'. What do you think? D: through satipatthana one certainly may grow to better understanding .. as well about anatta Suk: : Already here I see a difference in how this concept is understood. I prefer to look at Bhavana as being just two, namely Samatha and Vipassana. Samatha when developed to the full culminates in Jhana. You seem to consider samatha as being 'means' to attain Jhana via concentration.. D: I haven't followed the extensive discussion on the thread 'Bhavana' in detail ..the word - in my understanding - is mind cultivation corresponding to all steps of the Noble Path. My experience is that when there is peace of mind (samatha) then concentration (samadhi) is possible. But it is said that it may be vice versa.. so we would better talk about the tandem function Suk: Again here, you seem to see this as a consequence of intention/decision. Whereas I see it as a matter of conditions being developed and not about any 'doing' regardless. Besides your position already seems to lean toward making "concentration" a technique and there are indeed some who actually think this to be so. They believe that one only has to decide on an object of concentration, breath, kasina or whatever, and to just concentrate on that. D: I see the matter of conditions developed by practise as the Buddha told us .. one needs to decide on an object of concentration in order to achieve one-pointedness ...but perhaps you refer to those who lost the overall aim: panna --abolishing of ignorance? Suk: I don't think so. Of the forty (?) objects of meditation, some are suitable for daily life while some are not. D: yes.. Suk: However whatever the inclination, the development of all involves knowing kusala from akusala. D: it is said that without sila meditation is without base Suk: Furthermore a suitable object itself requires a good deal of "understanding" of one's accumulations, else they can't serve their purpose of being the object of kusala cittas leading to concentration. I think it might be helpful to remember that even Sariputta was wrong in suggestion "breath" as object of meditation to Rahula. D: do you know which sutta ? I remember a source in which the Buddha mentioned that the best suitable method of mediation to be recommended for the disciple can only done by him or somebody equal ... For us it means trial and learn by error what shows best results.. Suk: So indeed it all must start from "now", only this is the measure of one's level of understanding, otherwise one is simply lost in a dream world. D: yes, for the start penetrating the mundane right understanding , before coming to the supramundane Suk: Unless you think that "meditation" is a kind of technique/shortcut to Jhana/Vipassana..? D: I don't follow you .. I understand meditation as one part (samadhi) of the threefold path training, involving step 6,7 and 8 Suk: S: I don't ever see anyone talking about any of this but instead there is big talk about exalted states and theories about how samatha and vipassana must be developed together. When Nina recently wrote to Han saying that samatha must go together with the development of vipassana, what she meant was that the realities involved in the development of the former, if these are not known with insight as 'conditioned realities', then it is quite useless in light of the development of the Path. In other words, the Teachings is about the need to develop the understanding of conditioned realities, all namas and rupas, and this has no particular relation to the development of samatha D: I agree with Nina that samatha and vipassana must be developed together- the understanding of ' conditioned realities' or what I believe is meant by that : khanda attachment in respect to Dependent Origination is a process .. progress Suk: I don't like to think in terms of dry and wet types ;-). It doesn't seem relevant except that I may learn more about different conditions. D: it may be relevant in respect to understand different approaches to the Dhamma Suk:Otherwise I am content with the fact that Satipatthana is the "one way" to enlightenment. D: the 7th step the 'one way ' /' the only way '. .. we could probably have a new thread about it :-) Suk:It is not a matter of choice that one develops Jhana or Vipassana. No 'self' can choose to attain without or with jhana arising in tandem, before, or after. The jhana practitioner has a need to know *present* moment realities with insight as much as does the dry insight worker. So I don't agree with Han's general idea, but he knows that already. D: interesting here A.N. IV 94 transl. Bkikkhu Bodhi: These four types of individuals are to be found existing in world. Which four? There is the case of the individual who has attained internal tranquillity of awareness, but not insight into phenomena through heightened discernment. There is...the individual who has attained insight into phenomena through heightened discernment, but not internal tranquillity of awareness. There is...the individual who has attained neither internal tranquillity of awareness nor insight into phenomena through heightened discernment. And there is...the individual who has attained both internal tranquillity of awareness & insight into phenomena through heightened discernment. The individual who has attained internal tranquillity of awareness, but not insight into phenomena through heightened discernment, should approach an individual who has attained insight into phenomena through heightened discernment...and ask him: 'How should fabrications be regarded? How should they be investigated? How should they be seen with insight?' The other will answer in line with what he has seen & experienced: 'Fabrications should be regarded in this way...investigated in this way...seen in this way with insight.' Then eventually he [the first] will become one who has attained both internal tranquillity of awareness & insight into phenomena through heightened discernment. As for the individual who has attained insight into phenomena through heightened discernment, but not internal tranquillity of awareness, he should approach an individual who has attained internal tranquillity of awareness... and ask him, 'How should the mind be steadied? How should it be made to settle down? How should it be unified? How should it be concentrated?' The other will answer in line with what he has seen & experienced: 'The mind should be steadied in this way...made to settle down in this way... unified in this way...concentrated in this way.' Then eventually he [the first] will become one who has attained both internal tranquillity of awareness & insight into phenomena through heightened discernment. As for the individual who has attained neither internal tranquillity of awareness nor insight into phenomena through heightened discernment, he should approach an individual who has attained both internal tranquillity of awareness & insight into phenomena through heightened discernment...and ask him, 'How should the mind be steadied? How should it be made to settle down? How should it be unified? How should it be concentrated? How should fabrications be regarded? How should they be investigated? How should they be seen with insight?' The other will answer in line with what he has seen & experienced: 'The mind should be steadied in this way...made to settle down in this way...unified in this way...concentrated in this way. Fabrications should be regarded in this way...investigated in this way...seen in this way with insight.' Then eventually he [the first] will become one who has attained both internal tranquillity of awareness & insight into phenomena through heightened discernment. As for the individual who has attained both internal tranquillity of awareness & insight into phenomena through heightened discernment, his duty is to make an effort in establishing ('tuning') those very same skillful qualities to a higher degree for the ending of the effluents. unquote in order to avoid a too lengthy message I stop here and will continue with the remaining part later .. please feel free to comment already now or wait for it with Metta Dieter #70651 From: upasaka@... Date: Sun Apr 15, 2007 8:47 am Subject: Re: [dsg] The four Right Efforts upasaka_howard Hi, Jon - In a message dated 4/15/07 1:45:32 PM Eastern Daylight Time, jonabbott@... writes: > Hi Howard > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > > > >Hi, Jon - > ... > >------------------------------------------- > >Howard: > > The summaries of B &C are far too restrictive. Important > aspects > >relevant to my evaluation are missing. > >------------------------------------------ > > I'd be interested to know what those missing aspects might be. I've > set out at the end of this message the whole of the passages B and > C. Which particular parts of those passages do you see as > necessarily referring to a "regular practice to engage in" or to > "types of purposeful activity, conventional activities"?> ------------------------------------------- Howard: Jon, I'm afraid I'll have to beg your indulgence. I've forgotten at this point what this was about, at least in detail, and I'm feeling so poorly with this worsening cold that I'm really not up to the work required to recall and reply, except to make a couple remarks below. I'm really sorry. ---------------------------------------- > > >>Jon: > >>If you take a close look at the wording you will not find any > >>necessary implication of 'regular practice to engage in'. That > would > >>be an inference drawn from the text. Nor in fact will you find > any > >>necessary implication of 'purposeful activity' or 'conventional > >>activities'. Let my try to explain why. > >> > >>In Text A, the words "There is the case where" are important. > They > >>indicate that a situation is being described. > >> > >------------------------------------ > >Howard: > > Yeah, I know. You always jump on such locutions as proof of > your "mere > >description" interpretation. I don't buy it. > > Your position on the four Right Efforts is well-known, so I didn't > expect you to "buy it" ;-)). --------------------------------------- Howard: Well, I guess that simplifies matters. ;-)) --------------------------------------- > > You see, you've asserted that my interpretation is entirely without > foundation ("taken utterly from whole cloth, without even the > slightest inkling of that perspective to be found in the suttas"). > I've tried to show why that's not the case. Now you may dismiss it > as merely 'jumping on a locution' if you wish, but I'd also be > interested in hearing a constructive/substantive comment or two on > the analysis I've given. ---------------------------------------- Howard: I'm sorry - I'm really not up to it. If I was precipitous in my evaluation of your position or your words, I apologize. I'm just not up to going into the matter right now. -------------------------------------- > > >You, of course, are welcome to > >it though. > > OK, it sounds like you don't want to play here, either ;-))!? -------------------------------------- Howard: I would do what I could now, Jon, but, unfortunately, what I can do now is pretty much nothing. ------------------------------------ > > ... > >>Text C uses similar terminology (abandon, develop). This time it > is > >>in the form of an imperative. It is an exhortation to abandon > >>akusala and to develop kusala. But again, there is no actual > >>reference to conventional activities or regular practice. > > > >------------------------------------- > >Howard: > > > >Main Entry: ex·hor·ta·tion > >Function: noun > >Pronunciation: "ek-"so r-'tA-sh&n, -s&r-; "eg-"zo r-, -z&r- > >1 : an act or instance of exhorting > >2 : language intended to incite and encourage > > > >Main Entry: ex·hort > >Function: verb > >Pronunciation: ig-'zo rt > >Etymology: Middle English, from Middle French exhorter, from Latin > exhortari, > >from ex- + hortari to incite -- more at YEARN > >transitive senses > >: to incite by argument or advice : urge strongly > >intransitive senses : to give warnings or advice : make urgent > appeals > >- ex·hort·er noun > > Sorry, but the meaning of 'exhortation' (which was my choice of > wording, by the way) is not the issue here. The issue is whether the > passage in question is to be read as laying down a "regular practice > to engage in", "types of purposeful activity" or the like. > > >>To my understanding, the 4 right efforts describe kusala, not > >>akusala, moments of consciousness. > > > >----------------------------------------------------------- > >Howard: > > Yes, I know. I think that's just silly, but, hey, to each > his own. ;-) > >---------------------------------------------------------- > > I'm sorry, but I don't see anything is silly about the idea that the > 4 right efforts are describing kusala, not akusala, moments of > consciousness. What did you have in mind here? > ----------------------------------------- Howard: Actually, I haven't a clue, Jon! Maybe it's been too long, or I'm too under the weather. Of course any moment of right effort is wholesome. I have no idea of what I had in mind when I wrote that. I will insert a comment here that is probably an unrelated aside: For me, Jon, the four right efforts are perfectly conventional activities, and I find the Buddha's assertions with regard to these as perfectly clear in that regard. You, somehow, see the matter quite differently. That's fine. We differ in our perspective, and we each are quite sure that we are correct. You find my perspective on this particular aspect of the subect to be truly wrong, and that is how I see yours. So it goes! :-) The foregoing, however, is an issue different from whether right effort is kusala or not. Of course, it IS kusala. ----------------------------------- > > >>If they were taken to be moments of consciousness that are going > to > >>result in kusala in the future, which is what I understand your > >>reading to be, that would mean they were themselves akusala. Or > do > >>you see it differently? > > > >---------------------------------------------------------- > >Howard: > > Huh? What in the world would make a right effort akusala? I > don't > >follow that at all. Doing what is useful, right, and wholesome is > just that - > >doing what is useful, right, and wholesome. > >----------------------------------------------------------- > > No, I'm not suggesting that right effort could be akusala. Sorry if > I gave that impression. > > The question is whether, in setting out the 4 Right Efforts, the > Buddha is referring (a) to actual moments of kusala or (b) to moments > that precede the arising of kusala (and which thus, by definition, > would be akusala – as I see it anyway). ---------------------------------------- Howard: To me, a well-intentioned effort to bring about a good thing is a good thing. The efforts to bring about as-yet-unarisen wholesome states, to further already-arisen wholesome states, to abandon already-arisen unwholesome states, and to prevent arising of as-yet-unarisen unwholesome states, are, in each case, quite wholesome. --------------------------------------- > > Jon ======================= With metta, Howard #70652 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Sun Apr 15, 2007 2:41 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: bhaavanaa and the body. kenhowardau Hi Howard, ------------ <. . .> H: > Er, Ken, I'm confused. What was being discussed was time, not self. -------------- Ha ha! I can see that I took off on a complete tangent. Even at the time of writing I realised, 'This is going to look silly!' :-) My problem was that your post lacked specifics - or so it seemed to me. You mentioned "contradictions" but I couldn't see which contradictions you were referring to. So I wrote about contradictions in general. Or, should I say, I wrote about the contradictions that appear to exist in the Dhamma whenever someone doesn't understand the momentary nature of the world that the Buddha was describing. ---------------------- H: > We are rather much in agreement with regard to the latter. ---------------------- Yes, I realise that, of course. I didn't mean to imply otherwise. Actually, I have been meaning to say something to you about this. I have often noticed that people here at GSG - not just me - can't say there is no self without your replying, "But I never said there was!" When I say, "There is no self," it is often to express my understanding of whatever piece of Dhamma we are discussing. When understood correctly, everything the Buddha said will impress upon the listener that the absence of self is not only a fact, but a wonderful fact! Worth repeating! :-) You would have great difficulty taking part in a Muslim conversation - "God is great!" "But I never said he wasn't!" "God is great!" "There you go again! What is your problem?" :-) ---------------- H: > That has nothing to do with the area of contradiction I was pointing to. This is an odd turn you are taking. ---------------- My apologies again! The area of contradiction that I now see you were pointing to is not one that strikes me as relevant. As I have tried several times to explain, I am content to know that anicca is an absolute. It is not something that can be measured against a concept (such as time). Dukkha and anatta are also absolutes. We don't say that dukkha is dependent upon one thing being more unsatisfactory than another. We don't say that anatta is dependent upon exactly who it is that doesn't exist. And we don't say that anicca is dependent upon measurements of time. Ken H #70653 From: upasaka@... Date: Sun Apr 15, 2007 11:07 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: bhaavanaa and the body. upasaka_howard Hi, Ken - In a message dated 4/15/07 5:48:22 PM Eastern Daylight Time, kenhowa@... writes: > Hi Howard, > > ------------ > <. . .> > H: >Er, Ken, I'm confused. What was being discussed was time, not > self. > -------------- > > Ha ha! I can see that I took off on a complete tangent. Even at the > time of writing I realised, 'This is going to look silly!' :-) > > My problem was that your post lacked specifics - or so it seemed to > me. You mentioned "contradictions" but I couldn't see which > contradictions you were referring to. So I wrote about contradictions > in general. Or, should I say, I wrote about the contradictions that > appear to exist in the Dhamma whenever someone doesn't understand the > momentary nature of the world that the Buddha was describing. ------------------------------------- Howard: That's fine. :-) I just didn't understand what was going on. -------------------------------------- > > ---------------------- > H: >We are rather much in agreement with regard to the latter. > ---------------------- > > Yes, I realise that, of course. I didn't mean to imply otherwise. > > Actually, I have been meaning to say something to you about this. I > have often noticed that people here at GSG - not just me - can't say > there is no self without your replying, "But I never said there was!" > > When I say, "There is no self," it is often to express my > understanding of whatever piece of Dhamma we are discussing. When > understood correctly, everything the Buddha said will impress upon > the listener that the absence of self is not only a fact, but a > wonderful fact! Worth repeating! :-) ------------------------------------- Howard: Indeed worth repeating. Anatta is the core. (Hey, that's almost an oxymoron! LOL!) ------------------------------------ > > You would have great difficulty taking part in a Muslim conversation - > "God is great!" "But I never said he wasn't!" "God is great!" "There > you go again! What is your problem?" > :-) ------------------------------------- Howard: ;-)) ----------------------------------- > > ---------------- > H: >That has nothing to do with the area of contradiction I was > pointing to. This is an odd turn you are taking. > ---------------- > > My apologies again! The area of contradiction that I now see you were > pointing to is not one that strikes me as relevant. As I have tried > several times to explain, I am content to know that anicca is an > absolute. It is not something that can be measured against a concept > (such as time). ---------------------------------- Howard: Actually, I see arisng & ceasing and time to be basically synonymous. I see time as really only a conceptualization of change. ------------------------------------ > > Dukkha and anatta are also absolutes. > ----------------------------------- Howard: I don't understand what you mean by 'absolute'. I particularly don't know what it can mean with regard to dukkha, whose end is the goal of the Dhamma, and of anicca, which does not apply to nibbana, ---------------------------------- We don't say that dukkha is > > dependent upon one thing being more unsatisfactory than another. We > don't say that anatta is dependent upon exactly who it is that > doesn't exist. And we don't say that anicca is dependent upon > measurements of time. ----------------------------------- Howard: They are universals. Perhaps that is what you mean by 'absolute'. -------------------------------- > > Ken H > > ================= With metta, Howard #70654 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Sun Apr 15, 2007 3:56 pm Subject: Re: Perfections N, no 8 buddhatrue Hi Robert, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "rjkjp1" wrote: > Dear James > There are many levels in Dhamma. Yes, this is quite true....that is why I am purposefully trying to "dumb it down" to show that this teaching is not appropriate for its attended audience: 27. TO BE ABANDONED BY SEEING Which are the things, O monks, that can neither be abandoned by bodily acts nor by speech, but can be abandoned by wisely seeing them? Greed can neither be abandoned by bodily acts nor by speech; but it can be abandoned by wisely seeing it. Hatred can neither be abandoned by bodily acts nor by speech; but it can be abandoned by wisely seeing it. Delusion can neither be abandoned by bodily acts nor by speech; but it can be abandoned by wisely seeing it. Anguttara Nikaya, 101: 23 Comment 'Wisely seeing', according to the commentary, refers here to the wisdom pertaining to the paths of emancipation along with the insight that culminates in the paths. From this explanation it follows that the term abandoning has to be understood here in its strict sense, as final and total elimination, effected by realization of the paths of emancipation (stream-entry, etc.). " Those receiving Nina's and KS's message are predominately not sotapanna or higher, so it isn't appropriate for them. They will misunderstand. Metta, James #70655 From: LBIDD@... Date: Sun Apr 15, 2007 4:23 pm Subject: Vism.XVII,148 lbidd2 "The Path of Purification" (Visuddhimagga), Ch. XVII 148. It should be understood that when it occurs thus, its 'double class', etc., is 'mixed and not' and it is 'still further classified'. For example, though this [type of consciousness] occurs in one way only as rebirth-linking, still it is twofold as divided into mixed and unmixed with materiality; it is threefod as divided according to sense-desire, fine-material, and immaterial becoming (M.i,50); it is fourfold as egg-born, womb-born, putrescence- (moisture-) born, and of apparitional generation (M.i,73); it is fivefold according to destiny (M.i,73); it is sevenfold according to the stations of consciousness (D.iii,253), and it is eightfold according to the abodes of beings [excluding non-percipient beings] (see D.iii,263). **************************** 148. eva.m vattamaanassa panassa missaadiihi bhedehi duvidhaadikopi bhedo veditabbo. seyyathida.m -- ida~nhi pa.tisandhivasena ekadhaa pavattamaanampi ruupena saha missaamissabhedato duvidha.m. kaamaruupaaruupabhavabhedato tividha.m. a.n.dajajalaabuja sa.msedajaopapaatikayonivasena catubbidha.m. gativasena pa~ncavidha.m. vi~n~naa.na.t.thitivasena sattavidha.m. sattaavaasavasena a.t.thavidha.m hoti. #70656 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Sun Apr 15, 2007 4:58 pm Subject: Re: Perfections N, no 8 buddhatrue Hi Robert, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "rjkjp1" wrote: > _______ > Dear James > The translation by Nyanponika is at this > url:http://www.geocities.com/~madg/gangessangha/roots.html > 30. THE VISIBLE TEACHING 24 > Once the venerable Upavana went to the Exalted One, saluted him > respectfully and sat down at one side. Thus seated he addressed the > Exalted One as follows: > > 'People speak of the "visible teaching". In how far, Lord, is the > teaching visible here and now, of immediate result, inviting to come > and see, onward-leading, to be directly experienced by the wise?' Thanks for providing the entire sutta. Reading the entire sutta helps to put it in the proper light. This sutta is about knowing the principals of Dhamma, not about erradicating the defilements. This sutta was given early in the Buddha's career and his first attendant wanted to know how it is that one could see the teachings for himself. The Buddha replied that one could see the defilements (anger, greed, and delusion) in one's own mind, and one could also see the absence of the defilements in one's own mind. Therefore, the defilements exist and it is also possible to be without the defilements. This in no way implies the penetrating insight necessary to rid the mind of the defilements. Even a murderer can realize "Gosh, I was really angry when I killed that man" or a lecher can realize "Seeing that young girl gets me really horny"...but that in no way is the type of "seeing" necessary to rid the mind of defilements. Metta, James #70657 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Sun Apr 15, 2007 5:15 pm Subject: Re: eCard from Morocco 2a buddhatrue Hi Sarah, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: Surfer James wondered > whether being Buddhist meant less enjoyment and he had in fact been on a > Buddhist(?) retreat some time back – vegie food, no coffee, breathing > meditation....- but that way of life is not for him. We chatted about > present moment realities, whether on the surf-board or in the van and > knowing more about present mental states, seeing, visible object and so > on. Just as it's useless to be concerned about catching the next wave when > one is in the process of surfing the present one, it's useless to think > about another situation, such as the retreat, as being more conducive to > knowing realities.... "Surfer James" LOL! I really have to smile at the irony of that one! I have never been surfing in the ocean, I wonder if surfing the internet counts?? ;-)) Anyway, you might also like to point out to surfer James that surfing is very much like sitting meditation (as you did in a round-about-KS-way ;-)): http://www.beliefnet.com/story/198/story_19802_1.html "After years of hanging out with a lot of Buddhists, a lot of surfers, and some Buddhist surfers, I've realized that many meditators are interested in surfing, and vice versa. There's an intuitive connection between the two activities. For many of you this connection will seem a little too hippy-dippy-1970's to take seriously. Nevertheless, it's my experience. I am a Buddhist surfer. And in a world where Buddhist teachings can be pricey and genuine masters as hard to find as cheap sushi, I have let the ocean be my greatest teacher. " Metta, James #70658 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Sun Apr 15, 2007 5:38 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] A Meditation Tip buddhatrue Hi Sukin, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "sukinder" wrote: I think it might be > helpful to remember that even Sariputta was wrong in suggestion "breath" as > object of meditation to Rahula. Why do you say this? Metta, James #70659 From: "Antony Woods" Date: Sun Apr 15, 2007 5:43 pm Subject: Atta views: suffering and/or happiness antony272b2 Dear Group, I decided to research the Brahmajala Sutta the other day, mainly for inspiration of the intelligence of the Buddha. I found this unexpected insight: Sixteen Kinds of Belief in the Existence of Sanna after Death (Uddhamaghatanika Sanna Vada) or that: (13) atta indeed has bliss; .. (This view is held by a person who has attained the divine power of sight, dibba cakkhu abhinna, and who by this power sees those in the three lowest rupa bhumis abiding in jhana and experiencing blissful sensation. He therefore concludes that atta indeed has and will have bliss.) or that: (14) atta indeed has suffering; .. (This view is held by a person who through divine power of sight sees those in the abodes of intense continuous suffering. He therefore concludes that atta indeed has and will have suffering.) or that: (15) atta has both happiness and suffering; (This view is held by a person who sees beings in the human world experiencing both happiness and suffering.) or that: (16) atta has neither happiness nor suffering; it does not decay after death; and it has sanna. (Here, neither happiness nor suffering means equanimity. This view is held by a person who through the divine power of sight sees the Vehapphala Brahmas who are given to abiding in the jhana of equanimity.) http://web.ukonline.co.uk/theravada/brahma2.htm#12 Burma Pitaka Association 1984 Last night I remembered #15 watching TV on Iraq whilst my Mom happily prepared dinner. So the Noble Truth of dukkha is not that atta will always suffer. What a relief. What is the best translation of atta in this sutta? Thanks / Antony. #70660 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Sun Apr 15, 2007 6:37 pm Subject: Re: Perfections N, no 8 kenhowardau Hi James, ------------- KH: > > OK, maybe you genuinely can't see the point. After all these years at > DSG of having it explained to you in a thousand different ways, you > could be expected to at least begin to see it. J: > What point? What is the point? --------------- Consciousness knows just one object. Is there right understanding of the object that is being experienced now? --------------------- J: > You know, if you could just stick to specific arguments rather than having immature temper-tantrums every time you don't get your way, maybe we could get somewhere. --------------------- Good! I am glad you can see the problem in others. Now, if you can just see it in yourself . . . . Ken H #70661 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Sun Apr 15, 2007 7:32 pm Subject: Re: Perfections N, no 8 buddhatrue Hi Ken H., --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "kenhowardau" wrote: > J: > What point? What is the point? > --------------- > > Consciousness knows just one object. James: That's the big point?!? I knew that years before joining DSG! One doesn't need to join DSG to learn that point. Is there right understanding of > the object that is being experienced now? > James: This isn't a point; this is a question. Metta, James #70662 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Sun Apr 15, 2007 7:39 pm Subject: Re: Perfections N, no 8 scottduncan2 Dear James (and Robert), I thought I'd add a few things for your consideration, if I may. From the sutta, a portion for example: "...Of the desire for forms present in him, he knows: "There is in me a desire for forms..." And the paa.li: "...Santa~nca ajjhatta.m ruupesu raaga.m atthi me ajjhatta.m ruupesu raago'ti pajaanaati..." Scott: I'm submitting that the 'he knows' used throughout the sutta is 'pajaanaati', as confirmed by the above. This is subject to correction, of course. J: "...This sutta is about knowing the principals of Dhamma, not about erradicating the defilements...This in no way implies the penetrating insight necessary to rid the mind of the defilements." Scott: Note what is stated in Atthasaalinii (p. 161), regarding 'pajaanaati', the word actually used in the sutta: "Pa~n~na means one understands (pajaanaati). What does one understand? The Ariyan Facts (or Truths) by the method: This is ill, etc. But in the Great Commentary understanding is defined as 'it causes to know (or understand). What does it cause to know? Impermanence, ill, soullessness.' Through overcoming ignorance, it is a controlling faculty in the sense of predominance..." Scott: I'm not sure whether 'pajaanaati' is defined as 'knowing the principals of Dhamma', at least according to the above noted source, unless you too were referring to some level of pa~n~na in the statement. I'm not sure, either, about whether this 'pajaanaati' refers to Path moments, but it does, I think, refer to pa~n~na of some level. Does this offer anything worth factoring in to the way you understand the sutta? Thanks for your consideration. Sincerely, Scott. #70663 From: "rjkjp1" Date: Sun Apr 15, 2007 10:06 pm Subject: Re: Perfections N, no 8 rjkjp1 --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "buddhatrue" wrote: > > Hi Robert, > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "rjkjp1" wrote: > > > _______ > > Dear James > > The translation by Nyanponika is at this > > url:http://www.geocities.com/~madg/gangessangha/roots.html > > 30. THE VISIBLE TEACHING 24 > > Once the venerable Upavana went to the Exalted One, saluted him > > respectfully and sat down at one side. Thus seated he addressed the > > Exalted One as follows: > > > > 'People speak of the "visible teaching". In how far, Lord, is the > > teaching visible here and now, of immediate result, inviting to > come > > and see, onward-leading, to be directly experienced by the wise?' > > Thanks for providing the entire sutta. Reading the entire sutta > helps to put it in the proper light. This sutta is about knowing the > principals of Dhamma, not about erradicating the defilements. This > sutta was given early in the Buddha's career and his first attendant > wanted to know how it is that one could see the teachings for > himself. The Buddha replied that one could see the defilements > (anger, greed, and delusion) in one's own mind, and one could also > see the absence of the defilements in one's own mind. Therefore, the > defilements exist and it is also possible to be without the > defilements. This in no way implies the penetrating insight > necessary to rid the mind of the defilements. > > Even a murderer can realize "Gosh, I was really angry when I killed > that man" or a lecher can realize "Seeing that young girl gets me > really horny"...but that in no way is the type of "seeing" necessary > to rid the mind of defilements. > > Metta, > James > >Yes, this is quite true....that is why I am purposefully trying to "dumb it down" to show that this teaching is not appropriate for its attended audience: 27. TO BE ABANDONED BY SEEING >Which are the things, O monks, that can neither be abandoned by bodily acts nor by speech, but can be abandoned by wisely seeing them? Greed can neither be abandoned by bodily acts nor by speech; but it can be abandoned by wisely seeing it. Hatred can neither be abandoned by bodily acts nor by speech; but it can be abandoned by wisely seeing it. Delusion can neither be abandoned by bodily acts nor by speech; but it can be abandoned by wisely seeing it. Anguttara Nikaya, 101: 23 Comment >'Wisely seeing', according to the commentary, refers here to the wisdom pertaining to the paths of emancipation along with the insight that culminates in the paths. From this explanation it follows that the term abandoning has to be understood here in its strict sense, as final and total elimination, effected by realization of the paths of emancipation (stream-entry, etc.). " >Those receiving Nina's and KS's message are predominately not sotapanna or higher, so it isn't appropriate for them. They will misunderstand. Metta, James Dear James, what is the difference between 'experiened by the wise' and 'wisely seeing' and are you saying that Nina's writings are too advanced and also too basic? Robert #70664 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Sun Apr 15, 2007 11:06 pm Subject: Re: Perfections N, no 8 buddhatrue Hi Robert, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "rjkjp1" wrote: > > Dear James, > what is the difference between 'experiened by the wise' and 'wisely > seeing' and are you saying that Nina's writings are too advanced and > also too basic? > Robert > I don't understand either of these questions. They seem to be asking about issues I haven't put forth (staw men). Metta, James #70665 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Apr 15, 2007 11:52 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] A Meditation Tip nilovg Dear Dieter and Sukin, ******* Op 15-apr-2007, om 21:03 heeft Dieter Möller het volgende geschreven: > ...helpful to remember that even Sariputta was wrong in suggestion > "breath" as > object of meditation to Rahula. > D: do you know which sutta ? *********** N: The Mahaaraahulovaadasutta. We read more details in the Co. Rahula received first teachings from the Buddha about the five khandhas. Afterwards Sariputta came along and taught him Mindfulness of Breathing. Since he came along afterwards he did not know that the Buddha had taught him about the five khandhas. : ---------- Co: Then, why did he exhort him to develop Mindfulness of Breathing? Because it is suitable for a sitting posture. It is said that the Thera had not observed that the Buddha had spoken about the meditation subject of materiality to Rahula. He thought that for Rahula who was seated in that way, steadfast and immovable, that subject of meditation in such sitting posture was suitable for him, and thus he spoke to him in that way. As regards the word, aanaapaanasati, mindfulness of breathing, he explained: "After you have comprehended inbreathing and outbreathing, and with this subject attained the fourth or the fifth stage of jhana, and you have developed insight, you should reach arahatship." ... The Buddha spoke as follows: “The person who fully develops Mindfulness of Breathing, Who gradually accumulates it as taught by the Buddha, He brightens the world as the moon that is free from clouds.” Since the Elder considered that Mindfulness of Breathing was of such great fruit he exhorted his co-resident to develop it. Thus, the Blessed One taught the meditation subject of matter, and the Elder taught Mindfulness of Breathing. When both of them had explained these subjects, they went away, and Lucky Rahula was left behind in the dwelling place. Rahula contemplated the meditation subject that was explained to him by the Blessed One before and after his meal thus: “Materiality truly is impermanent, it truly is unsatisfactory, it truly is foul, it truly is non-self”. After he had contemplated this continuously, just as someone who tries to kindle a fire, the following thoughts occurred to him towards evening: “ Since my preceptor has told me to develop mindfulness of breathing, I shall be obedient.... When he asked the Blessed One about Mindfulness of Breathing, why did the Blessed One speak about the meditation subject of materiality? He spoke so that he (Rahula) would abandon his attachment to materiality. It must have occurred to him thus: “Since attachment has arisen in Rahula on account of his body, and the meditation subject on materiality was explained to him before in brief, I shall now also make him dissect the body in fortytwo ways and thus cause him to get rid of attachment that is dependent on it and to attain the truth of Dhamma.” Why did he then explain in detail the element of space? In order to point out the derived material phenomena. Before he had spoken about the four great Elements, not about the derived physical phenomena. Therefore, in order to point these out in that way, he explained in detail the element of space. He also made known the matter that is delimitated by the internal space.... --------- N: afterwards he taught other subjects such as the Brahmavihaaras and finally mindfulness of breathing. --------- Relevant sutta passages: For you who are cultivating the mental development of loving kindness, that which is malevolence will be abandoned... For you who are cultivating the mental development of compassion, that which is harming will be abandoned... For you who are cultivating the mental development of sympathetic joy, that which is dislike will be abandoned... For you who are cultivating the mental development of equanimity, that which is anger will be abandoned... For you who are cultivating the mental development of foulness, that which is attachment will be abandoned... For you who are cultivating the mental development that is the perception of impermanence, that which is the conceit of “I am” will be abandoned.... Now the Buddha, when he explained in detail the question asked by the venerable Rahula, said, “Mindfulness of breathing...” and so on. This meditation subject, its development and the meaning of the text, has been explained in all aspects together with the exposition of its benefit, in the section on Recollections in the Visuddhimagga. The Buddha finished this discourse (spoken) for a person who needed guidance. > (end quote co.) ____________ By the way Sukin, I read whta you said about higher siila, higher samaadhi and higher pa~n~aa. I can add something, thinking of a post of Sarah. At each moment of right mindfulness there are these three, but the sotaapanna has fulfilled higher siila, the anaagaami has fulfilled higher samaadhi and the arahat has fulfilled higher pa~n~naa. Thus, there are degrees. Nina. ***** #70666 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Mon Apr 16, 2007 12:05 am Subject: [dsg] Re: bhaavanaa and the body. kenhowardau Hi Herman, --------------- H: > I doubt that you'll be interested, but ----------------- There are a lot of things I am not interested in. For example, I am not interested in finding fault with the Pali texts in order to replace them with my own wisdom. However I am interested in this: ----------- H: > whatever you label as being the present moment, is in fact already past. ----------- I agree that the meditation practice of "noting" (which might be also called labelling, I am not sure) can only label things that are long gone. That is because the citta-vithi (series of cittas ) that do the noting (or labelling) have a concept as their object. They do not experience dhammas, and therefore, they can't possibly label them. ------------------------ H: > Just like looking at the moon, one does not see the moon as it is, but one sees it as it was 1 second ago (due to the distance, and the speed of light). ------------------------ Yes, and even then, we don't exactly see moon, do we? We see a pattern of light that is reflected off the moon. Light and moon are two different things, but we take them as one. Somewhat similarly, in the Dhamma, we learn that visible object is not moon. ---------------------------------- H: > Also, while looking at the moon, one ought only to see that the moon is a flat disc that shrinks and grows. Because that is all that is available to see. No matter how much one looks at the moon, one can never get to see the other side of it. Same with consciousness. No matter how much you are in your deluded present moment, you will never see the causes for consciousness, all of the things that have already happened which create the illusion of a now, with a you smack-bang in the middle of it. ------------------------------------ This is getting too complex for me. If it is the Dhamma that is found in the texts I would like to know more (perhaps with a quote), but otherwise I really can't spare the time and energy needed to understand it. Ken H #70667 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Apr 16, 2007 12:17 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Perfections N, no 8 nilovg Dear James, Robert, James, Robert has answered most of your points, but let me think whether I can add something. It is clear that Kh. Sujin did not teach to let arise all kinds of akusala kamma. I repost what I posted before about her Perfections, on siila: < The transgression of morality, síla, such as killing, stealing, sexual misconduct, is motivated by akusala: by attachment (lobha), aversion (dosa), and ignorance (moha). When someone commits evil deeds he lacks mettå, loving-kindness towards others. All akusala kammas are conditioned by clinging to visible object, sound, smell, flavour, tangible object and the wrong view that there is self, being or person. The streamwinner who has realized the four noble Truths and attained the first stage of enlightenment, has eradicated the defilements in accordance with that stage of enlightenment. He observes the five precepts perfectly, he cannot transgress them anymore. If one is not a streamwinner which precepts can one observe? Even before we are a streamwinner, we should not transgress the precepts. The coarse defilements can be subdued and worn away until paññå will be developed to the degree of a perfection and is able to realize the four noble Truths.> If Kh Sujin would teach against the Tipitaka, do you think the Venerable Abbot of a Thai monastery in India would listen to her every day and give her a blessing? This happened last time we were in India. Just now the venerable bhikkhu who is in charge of the Wheel Publications said that they prepare a booklet based on Kh Sujin's Concepts and Realities. He asked me to check the passages on Abhidhamma. The Wheel is a respected institution, and do you think they would do this if Kh Sujin would go against the Tipitaka? is meant as a reminder not to be forgetful. Understanding has to be developed. As Robert showed with sutta texts: also akusala should be understood as it is: a conditioned dhamma, not self. At the moment of awareness of the akusala that just fell away there is kusala citta and then the six doors are guarded. As Robert explained, this is a reminder to continue the development of understanding, no matter what obstacles one may meet in one's life. Years ago I was in hospital after I fractured my wrist and I had excruciating pain. Robert wrote to me, reminding me: It is possible to consider nama and rupa when in pain. We do not have to do complicated things, but we need patience and perseverance, and this is right effort. Great losses and sorrow are in store for me in this life, but I need determination to persevere. ******* Nina. Op 14-apr-2007, om 2:19 heeft buddhatrue het volgende geschreven: > "Just awareness now, no worry, what about this, what about that", > > that is the perfection of determination, aditthäna parami. #70668 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Apr 16, 2007 12:28 am Subject: Re: [dsg] anatta nilovg Dear Claudia, First we have to know: what is it that is anatta. The mental phenomena and physical phenomena of our life that arise now are anatta. Anatta is not some theory, but it has to be verified now. For example, you may feel a little aversion about some event, you dislike it. Can you help having dislike? It has arisen already before you realize it. This shows that it is a conditioned reality, it is not Claudia who has aversion. You can investigate many phenomena arising in your life and gradually you may come to the conclusion that you cannot control them, that they are non-self. Even if you think that you can control, say, anger, also that control is a conditioned phenomenon, it has arisen because of the realisation that kusala is valuable and akusala is harmful. This evaluation is due to listening to the teachings, or to association with good friends. The more you see conditions the less you will cling to the idea of a self. Nina. Op 14-apr-2007, om 14:23 heeft cultry1 het volgende geschreven: > The objective of this topic is to study the true meaning of anatta > as the Buddha dispose of it, since it is quite difficult for us in the > west to understand it. > cultry #70669 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Mon Apr 16, 2007 1:17 am Subject: [dsg] Re: bhaavanaa and the body. kenhowardau Hi Howard, ------------ <. . .> KH : > I am content to know that anicca is an > absolute. It is not something that can be measured against a concept > (such as time). <. . .> > Dukkha and anatta are also absolutes. H: > I don't understand what you mean by 'absolute'. ------------- I would like to call them paramattha dhammas (absolute realities). However, dhammas have characteristics. Characteristics don't have characteristics, and so I can't call them paramattha dhammas. Even so (according to my understanding), they are just as real as the dhammas that bear them. So I have used the word 'absolute' (as a noun), which I believe can mean 'something that is beyond question.' ------------------------ H: > I particularly don't know what it can mean with regard to dukkha, whose end is the goal of the Dhamma, and of anicca, which does not apply to nibbana, ------------------------- Agreed; the characteristics dukkha and anicca, are not found in all dhammas. However, when they *are* found they are immutable - absolute - or whatever the word is. They are not a matter of mere opinion. They do not lie 'in the eye of the beholder.' ------------------------------------- H: > They are universals. Perhaps that is what you mean by 'absolute' ------------------------------------- Don't confuse me. :-) Ken H #70670 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Mon Apr 16, 2007 2:05 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Perfections N, no 8 buddhatrue Hi Nina, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Dear James, Robert, > James, Robert has answered most of your points, James: I don't think so- but if you do we aren't going to get too far. ;-)) but let me think > whether I can add something. > It is clear that Kh. Sujin did not teach to let arise all kinds of > akusala kamma. I repost what I posted before about her Perfections, > on siila: James: Well, of course she doesn't approve of "all kinds of akusala", but from what you have quoted from her, she does approve of mild forms of akusala- but that isn't what the Buddha taught! The Buddha taught against even minor forms of akusala. From the Dhammapada: Think not lightly of evil, saying, "It will not come to me." Drop by drop is the water pot filled Likewise, the fool, gathering it little by little, fills himself with evil. Dhammapada 121 Is that clear enough? Metta, James #70671 From: "gazita2002" Date: Mon Apr 16, 2007 2:11 am Subject: Re: Letters on Vipassana 11, no 2. gazita2002 Hello James, Well, lifetimes I do have! Firstly, why do you have such aversion to commentaries etc? For example, when I read a sutta that states: "Bhikkhus, what do you think, do you regard form thus: 'this is not mine, this I am not, this is not my self?' 'yes, venerable Sir.' 'Good, bhikkhus! Form should be seen as it really is with correct wisdom thus: This is not mine, this I am not, this is not my self.' 'do you regard feeling...perception...volitional formations...consciousness [citta] thus: 'this is not mine, this I am not, this is not my self?' Yes venerrable Sir. 'Good, bhikkhus! feeling,perception, volitional formations, consciousness should be seen as it really is with correct wisdom thus: this is not mine, this I am not, this is not my self. Seeing thus..he understands..there is no more for this state of being"....... I need a lot more information than this. Sure on a gross level I can see that form changes, feelings change, but does that really help with the understanding that eradicates wrong view. I dont think so. Therefore to find someone who is able to explain on a much deeper level how it comes about that feeling is not me, mine or self, is a remarkable 'find' - and then build on that weak understanding in daily life, without having to go anywhere special, or do anything special. I believe that the wisdom that finally eradicates defilements, has to start somewhere - from little things, big things grow. I'm being coaxed to the dinner table James, and I'm writing this on-line so must close. Patience, courage and good cheer, azita --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "buddhatrue" wrote: > > Hi Azita, ............ > > azita: probably no more, no less than your own fixed position, James. > > I'm quite comfortable to leave it at that and until next time..... > > I wouldn't really say that my position is fixed. I am willing to hear > what you have to say but you have to resort to the proper authority > for support. Only the Buddha is the proper authority- not > commnetaries, other ancient texts, or KS (a modern commentator). > > I just won't "agree to disagree"- we either agree or we disagree. > Since we disagree, I don't mind debating until we do agree....even if > it takes lifetimes!! ;-)) > > Metta, > James #70672 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Mon Apr 16, 2007 4:56 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Theriigaathaa - Sisters (51) egberdina Hi Connie, I am glad to be conversing with you again. On 14/04/07, connie wrote: > 133. Afflicted by grief for my son, with a mind deranged, out of my > senses, naked, and with dishevelled hair, I wandered here and there. > 134. I dwelt on rubbish heaps in the streets, in a cemetary, and on > highways. I wandered for three years, consigned to hunger and thirst. > 135. Then I saw the Sublime One [going] towards the town of Mithilaa, the > Tamer of the Untamed, the Awakened One who has no fear from any quarter. > 136. Regaining my mind, I paid homage to him and sat down. In pity Gotama > taught me the Doctrine. > 137. I heard the Doctrine from him and went forth into the homeless > state. Applying myself to the Teacher's utterance, I realized the blissful > state. > 138. All griefs have been cut out, eliminated, ending in this way. For I > have comprehended the grounds from which [come] the origin of griefs. > In modern parlance, the first three verses are quite descriptive of a homeless schizophrenic person. What seems to be different in modern times, is that that the resolution of schizophrenia does not depend on the utterance of an omniscient being. Not to mention the utter lack nowadays of beings who comprehend the origin of griefs, and are somehow relieved by that. As a personal opinion, I think that folkloric portrayals of the Buddha as a compasionate magician do no more than keep the ignorant ignorant. This is in no way a criticism of the series you are posting. I see the whole series as different ways that people are trying to have some sort of control over their lives. We do that today as well, whether we are schizophrenic or not. You posted the other day about the simile of the saw. Would you ever have taught your kids or grandchild that becoming angry is something to be avoided? Herman #70673 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Mon Apr 16, 2007 5:14 am Subject: Re: [dsg] anatta egberdina Yo Collette, On 15 Apr 2007 10:45:36 -0700, colette wrote: > > > Good Morning Herman, > > > is a > > soul, an executive agent that is not bound by the flow of > conditions. > > colette: is that how you see a "soul"? Is that all a "soul" is? That > Western concept, the soul, is far more complex than reduction to this > simple icon referred to as an "executive agent". That's the problem > with language, it's just so limited and predjudicial. For instance I > was reading in another site that Sanskrit was created by those > aristocrats that didn't want to associate or be associated with those > that read Pali or was it vice versa? That definition is predjudicial > of predjudice. It just gets deeper the more we examine it. It doesn't > get easier, much like the U.S. tax code and/or sacred scriptures. We > can look at the amount of literature out there for the christian to > read that totally exposes the sham that the vatican is well known for > in their attempts to abscond with the money and power, or the > Upanishads of the Hindu, and now I'm finding that in Buddhism there's > nothing less than an unlimited supply of texts all created by and > through this anatta. I, in my unlimited IGNORANCE, know for a fact > that something exists after death but it is not what I am now, it's > an aggregate of this now thing. And even then my simple definition > has no way of being able to give you an idea of what this thing is, > that I experienced when the paramedics pronounced me dead in 1978 > then brought me back, or the other lesser deaths that I've had, for > instance walking out of Arizona from Phoenix in 1982, or most > recently having my right eye socket completely destroyed and my face > torn from my head (one person that didn't know and was looking at my > x-rays said "we're gonna have to find you some new friends to play > with" because of the amount of titanium in my face). I can't possibly > give you the correct idea since it is like a river, it's ever > changing. The minute I state what it is I know, at that same second, > that it's much more yet I've gotta sit down and meditate about what > it is not. Then try to meditate on WHY it is not. It gets very > contrived. Some folks say you can not ever step into the same river twice. I know what they mean. It is what seems to be the case when you think about stuff. But when you stop thinking about stuff, you never step into the same river once. It's not a river, baby, until that's what you call it. > > Have you ever really examined this thing you've stated "flow of > conditions"? I just recognized the potentials of that statement. I > mean that, in a broad and general sense of the event, flow of > conditions, we can say that they are soooooooooo DEPENDENT upon the > events (conditions) preceding them. Ultimately, then, can't we say > that life is nothing more than a run-on-sentence? If so, then doesn't > that make this atman, or god, an illiterate imbecile since this atman > or god, in manifesting a run-on-sentence has totally ignored the > grammar that is such a foundational requirement for all aristocratic > measurement and grading. You can understand how, on a conveyer belt > garbage is taken from the garbage truck and sorted or graded, even > brick is graded for those masons out there (it's either face brick or > common brick) ... I love your posts, Colette. The run-on-sentence is a brilliant way to describe the discursive mind. The prattling mind........., what else could conceive of the Visuddhimagga. Let's purify the dirty river, shall we? > Thanx cultry and Herman. > Thanx you, actually Herman #70674 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Mon Apr 16, 2007 5:45 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: bhaavanaa and the body. egberdina Hi KenH, On 16 Apr 2007 00:05:58 -0700, kenhowardau wrote: > > > There are a lot of things I am not interested in. For example, I am > not interested in finding fault with the Pali texts in order to > replace them with my own wisdom. However I am interested in this: > > ----------- > H: > whatever you label as being the present moment, is in fact > already past. > ----------- > > I agree that the meditation practice of "noting" (which might be also > called labelling, I am not sure) can only label things that are long > gone. That is because the citta-vithi (series of cittas ) that do the > noting (or labelling) have a concept as their object. They do not > experience dhammas, and therefore, they can't possibly label them. > > This is getting too complex for me. If it is the Dhamma that is found > in the texts I would like to know more (perhaps with a quote), but > otherwise I really can't spare the time and energy needed to > understand it. > I like conversing with you, Ken. But I know that if I applied what you require of my posts to your posts, we wouldn't be conversing anymore. 'Cuz there's nothing in the texts that confirms your conception of the present moment. Or surfing. And even if the texts said in bolded 24 point that all the major arahats agreed on something, it wouldn't mean that you could claim to understand a single syllable they said. Unfortunately, there just is no vicarious understanding. Quoting authorities on the way things are is never going to match the pure ahhh-hahhh of finding out the way things are. Actually, quoting authorities will actually prevent any ahh-hahhh moment, especially when you are quoting authorities on the say-so of others, who also didn't have a clue. Take it from me, an authority in my own pyjamas. Herman #70675 From: upasaka@... Date: Mon Apr 16, 2007 1:44 am Subject: Re: [dsg] A Meditation Tip upasaka_howard Hi,Nina, Dieter, and Sukin - In a message dated 4/16/07 2:53:34 AM Eastern Daylight Time, vangorko@... writes: > Dear Dieter and Sukin, > ******* > Op 15-apr-2007, om 21:03 heeft Dieter Möller het volgende geschreven: > >...helpful to remember that even Sariputta was wrong in suggestion > >"breath" as > >object of meditation to Rahula. > >D: do you know which sutta ? > *********** > N: The Mahaaraahulovaadasutta. ======================== Nina, I have just read the sutta, and I do not see it as saying that Sariputta was wrong in suggesting that mindfulness of breath is a poor suggestion. That would make no sense given what the Buddha taught in the Anapanasati Sutta. In this sutta, in response to Rahula's question "How, lord, is mindfulness of in-&-out breathing to be developed & pursued so as to be of great fruit, of great benefit?", the Buddha replied as follows: 1) Every form should be seen as 'This is not mine. This is not my self. This is not what I am.' (The Buddha had taught this to him earlier as well, and a that time added to this when asked by Rahula that not only should form be seen so, but also "feeling & perception & fabrications & consciousness." 2) Meditation on the breath should be seen with respect to all rupas - earth, air, fire, water, space, and so on. 3) Included also in the meditation should be the brahmaviharas, and also unattractiveness and impermanence. 4) The Buddha then went on to repeat the standard instructions for meditating on the breath. There is nothing that I see in the sutta that constitutes the Buddha correcting Sariputta. With metta, Howard #70676 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon Apr 16, 2007 7:14 am Subject: eCard from Morocco 3 sarahprocter... Dear Friends, Tom joined us for another discussion yesterday evening. We discussed how we're used to taking the body and mind as 'one package' but in fact there are actually mere elements. Jon was explaining how hardness is an element, whether it's the hardness of the body or the table. We heard the steady 'call' to prayer from the Mosque around the corner and considered how sound is another element which is heard momentarily and then thought about and discerned. It is consciousness which experiences it as an element and this consciousness is another element. Whether it's the consciousness of a dog or a human, it's just an element. Tom seemed to appreciate all this discussion of elements and how in this way, it is feasible for the consciousness of a dog to be followed by the consciousness of a human. The moments of consciousness (cittas) are mere elements of experiencing. All such elements are falling away, we agreed. We see continuity and this fools us into not appreciating that really there is just a succession of moments of hardness and other elements or realities experienced. The impermanence we read about refers to the arising and falling away of these elements, not to a gradual change of a table or dog. Tom said that he had thought before that he understood Buddhism conceptually, but that he's now aware that he needs to read, consider, meditate (i.e. reflect) and understand a lot more. I stressed the importance of understanding namas and rupas (mental and physical phenomena) as the realities which can experience an object, such as seeing, hearing and thinking vs those realities which can never experience an object, such as visible object, sound and hardness. It doesn't matter what they are called, but they need to be distinguished because again it is the idea of a 'whole' that makes it impossible to understand that Tom or Sarah or tables or Mosques are concepts and that only the elements of namas and rupas actually exist and rise and fall. So the reason we use Pali terms is just for convenience because English terms for namas and rupas, as an example, don't really convey the meaning. We came back to the questions about rebirth and how the dead body is like a log consisting of physical phenomena (rupas) arising and falling away until there are no more conditions for them. There is no longer any life faculty or consciousness (citta) involved, however. Meanwhile, the cittas have continued rising and falling away in succession. The kamma which brought about the rebirth consciousness (of the next life) also conditioned further rupas. We also talked more about birth and death of elements at this moment and how rebirth isn't a carrying over of consciousness –more like a set of dominoes conditioning the next. We also briefly discussed how each citta is accompanied by mental factors (cetasikas) such as memory and feeling – each performing its role and rising and falling away with the citta. Tom reminded us of his original opening points in the first discussion and how he had come up with a rather simplistic model to try and make sense of Buddhism and the world as it appeared. He appreciates now how much deeper the teachings are. Today Tom had his last surf and has left us for a few days to explore on his own. He mentioned he'd had one of his best ever holidays and we certainly enjoyed having him and the dhamma discussions. Tom, if you read these e-cards from Morocco, pls. let us know if there are any mistakes or mis-quotes! Metta, Sarah ========= #70677 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Mon Apr 16, 2007 5:12 am Subject: Alert Abilities! bhikkhu5 Friends: What induces development of the 5 Abilities? The Blessed Buddha once said: Bhikkhus, when a Bhikkhu is established in one single thing, the five mental abilities becomes quite well developed in him. In what one thing? In alertness! What, Bhikkhus, is alertness? Here, Bhikkhus, a Bhikkhu guards the mind against the mental fermentations and against all fermented mental states... While he is guarding the mind thus: The ability of Faith goes to fulfilment by development! The ability of Energy goes to fulfilment by development! The ability of Awareness goes to fulfilment by development! The ability of Concentration goes to fulfilment by development! The ability of Understanding goes to fulfilment by development! It is in this way, Bhikkhus, that when a Bhikkhu is established in just one thing: Alertness that the five abilities becomes developed, quite well developed in him... Source (edited extract): The Grouped Sayings of the Buddha. Samyutta Nikaya. Book [V:232] section 48: The Abilities. 56: Established. Friendship is the Greatest :-) Bhikkhu Samahita * Ceylon * #70678 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Apr 16, 2007 7:47 am Subject: Perfections N, no 8 nilovg Hi James, -------- James: Well, of course she doesn't approve of "all kinds of akusala", but from what you have quoted from her, she does approve of mild forms of akusala- but that isn't what the Buddha taught! The Buddha taught against even minor forms of akusala. From the Dhammapada: Think not lightly of evil, saying, "It will not come to me." Drop by drop is the water pot filled Likewise, the fool, gathering it little by little, fills himself with evil. Dhammapada 121 -------- N: Exactly. The same is also said of kusala. Akusala and kusala are accumulated little by little. I remember that she thinks in this way. At one of the sessions Professor Somporn mentioned that even a little aversion is dangerous. It is accumulated and can lead to a deed that can produce an unhappy rebirth. How come you think she approves of it. Can you remember the quote? Maybe I can set it aright. When it has arisen already there can be awareness and understanding of it. This kind of understanding, that is, understanding developed through satipatthana, can lead to eradicatiuon of akusala. -------- J:Is that clear enough? -------- N: It couldn't be clearer. Nina. #70679 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Apr 16, 2007 7:55 am Subject: Re: [dsg] eCard from Morocco 3 nilovg Dear Sarah, I enjoyed reading about your discussions. These are basics we should be reminded of again and again. Never enough. Nina. Op 16-apr-2007, om 16:14 heeft sarah abbott het volgende geschreven: > It > doesn't matter what they are called, but they need to be distinguished > because again it is the idea of a 'whole' that makes it impossible to > understand that Tom or Sarah or tables or Mosques are concepts and > that > only the elements of namas and rupas actually exist and rise and fall. #70680 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Apr 16, 2007 7:49 am Subject: Re: [dsg] A Meditation Tip nilovg Hi Howard, ------ Op 16-apr-2007, om 14:54 heeft upasaka@... het volgende geschreven: > There is nothing that I see in the sutta that constitutes the Buddha > correcting Sariputta. ------- N: Neither do I. Did I say so? Nina. #70681 From: upasaka@... Date: Mon Apr 16, 2007 6:21 am Subject: Re: [dsg] A Meditation Tip upasaka_howard Hi, Nina - In a message dated 4/16/07 11:33:22 AM Eastern Daylight Time, vangorko@... writes: > Hi Howard, > ------ > Op 16-apr-2007, om 14:54 heeft upasaka@... het volgende geschreven: > > >There is nothing that I see in the sutta that constitutes the Buddha > >correcting Sariputta. > ------- > N: Neither do I. Did I say so? > Nina. > ========================= Well, Sukin had said << ... helpful to remember that even Sariputta was wrong in suggestion "breath" as object of meditation to Rahula.>> Dieter then asked "do you know which sutta ?" And you replied <> So, I took it you were agreeing with Sukin, With metta, Howard #70682 From: Dieter Möller Date: Mon Apr 16, 2007 10:39 am Subject: Re: [dsg] A Meditation Tip 2 moellerdieter Hi Sukinder and friends, before I continue with the remaining part of your message , once more refering to 'I think it might be helpful to remember that even Sariputta was wrong in suggestion "breath" as object of meditation to Rahula. ' Nina was so kind to specify the likely sutta you may have in mind (the Mahaaraahulovaadasutta ) and Howard rightfully states that there is no wrong suggestion rather to the contrary . Please check your source.. you wrote: The ongoing debate concerning samatha and vipassana that you refer to is based on the idea of 'self'. Both side of the debate seem to come from the standpoint of "control" and therefore as far as I am concerned, both are wrong! D: please compare with the A.N. sutta I quoted .. it is a different approach but - as the Buddha mentioned -one should try to learn from eachother . I do not see the significance of self or control here Suk:If the study of Dhamma does not increase our understanding of present moment realities as being "conditioned", then I think there must involve "wrong" reading/studying/understanding. 'Right practice' can only come from right intellectual understanding; therefore if there is wrong understanding of the Teachings, then 'wrong practice' invariably follows. Dhammas are conditioned to perform their various functions, some like avijja and miccha ditthi, gives rise to the impression of there being 'selves' making choices developing/not developing the Path. And this seems to be where most Buddhists are at.. D: as I see it the study of Dhamma means first of all penetration into the (deeper) understanding of the 4 Noble Truths for the aim of abolishing ignorance (avijja) , i.e. cessation of suffering, which we achieve by practice of the 8fold Noble Path. The first step , right understanding , starts with the mundane aspects.. You certainly know that but my purpose to point that out is that I have difficulties to relate above with the path ... easier perhaps when I understand your linking to it Moreover it seems to me necessary to talk about the I/Self ...remember only the Never -Returner realises liberation from the fetter conceit.. Quite a big issue to discuss the aspects of anatta .. detachment is not a matter of the head alone and I believe one need to be very patient in order not to 'suffocate ' the heart.. Suk: Coming to khanika samadhi, this is the samadhi arising with each citta, performing the function of fixing the citta and the other accompanying mental factors on to the object. Why then the idea of developing this samadhi? Is it not more a matter of developing sati and panna which are particularly sobhana cetasikas? In fact why focus on developing any samadhi at all? If attachment, aversion, ignorance, doubt, envy and so on can arise and perform their specific functions in the span of one consciousness moment, then why not mindfulness, confidence, wisdom, and so on do? D: sounds like why not realising enlightenment within 7 days.. the shortest period the Buddha mentioned in respect to Sati practise ... the point is only who can do ? Suk: Reading the Texts with 'self view' creates many distortions imo. D: to which texts you are refering to? Suk: Indeed the development of understanding (along with the paramis) must be very slow and gradual given the great tendency to akusala. About this idea re: Sila, Samadhi and Panna, are you referring to the distinction made in the Visuddhimagga? If so, last time I heard was that this distinction is for the purpose of teaching. D: The Buddha has mentioned Sila, Samadhi and Panna as the training ( for the purpose of practise not as a teaching advise) in numerous suttas. The sequence , corresponding to the path links 345 - 678 - 12 , is - as far as I know- only stated in a sutta concerning a dhamma lesson by a nun , which however lateron was confirmed by the Buddha. Buddhagosa made it ' a rule' ... Suk: But of course there is also Adhi- Sila, Citta and Panna. This corresponds to the stages of Sotapatti, Anagami and Arahatta. D: may be a bit far away for us ;-) Suk: True that on the one hand this reflects the possibility of development, namely that concentration and wisdom cannot be perfected before morality is, on the other hand however this also shows that "panna" is needed all the way through, doesn't it? And also it is not a matter of anyone having to first develop sila, then samadhi and then panna.? D: when we define panna as the wisdom of understanding the 4 Noble Truths, there is a gradual accumulation of insights contributing to that wisdom up to samma ditthi , on the other hand a gradual abolishment of avijja. The progress of understanding ( as well by heart ;-) means therefore too a growing panna level. Understanding is needed all the way through ..the forerunner as it is called . I had some difficulties in the past to agree with that the Noble Path should start with Sila .. but changed my mind by accepting that we are talking about training .. and training assumes the acceptance by ( a first) understanding The sequence of the training does not exclude an interrelated approach to all path links respectively it may be even the rule.. Suk: And no, I don't know about the "different types of students" you refer to above. What is it? D: there are many suttas I will have a look and quote lateron Suk: Of course we must allow for different levels of understanding and even misunderstanding. But though this latter is 'natural' for all, should we be encouraging it? And if we continue to fail to identify instances of 'wrong understanding', does not the chance to "correct" it become even more remote? D: more often than less I recognized that chance to correct misunderstandings or even wrong understandings fail in the course of communication .. but always worth a new trial, isn't it? Suk: The point however is that the Suttas and the Vinaya *can* be read to completely agree with the Abhidhamma. So regarding consensus, what can you expect? In fact this particular reading I believe, allows for no contradiction in any part of the Tipitaka. On the other hand those with another reading who prefer only the Sutta and Vinaya are faced with many contradiction within one or both of these, but of course they will ignore or deny this. ;-) D: 'Suttas and the Vinaya *can* be read to completely agree with the Abhidhamma and Sutta and Vinaya are faced with many contradiction within one or both of these' ? of course I deny the latter ( please prove your point) and are in doubt of the former.. so looking ahead for a lively discussion ;-) with Metta Dieter #70683 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Apr 16, 2007 11:03 am Subject: Perfections N, no 9 nilovg Dear friends, If one has not been generous in the past it is not easy to be generous at the present time. We read in the commentary to the Cariyapitaka that the Bodhisatta, when his mind does not leap up at the thought of giving considers the following: Surely, I have not been accustomed to giving in the past, therefore a desire to give does not arise now in my mind. So that my mind will delight in giving in the future, I will give a gift. With an eye for the future let me now relinquish what I have to those in need. Further on we read about the overcoming of worry about the loss of an object being given: When the Great Being is giving a gift, and he sees the loss of the object being given, he reflects thus: This is the nature of material possessions, that they are subject to loss and to passing away. Moreover, it is because I did not give such gifts in the past that my possessions are now depleted. Let me then give whatever I have as a gift, whether it be limited or abundant. In that way I will, in the future, reach the peak in the perfection of giving. We too may regret the loss of an object we give. However, generosity can be accumulated little by little. The Bodhisatta was not forgetful of his ultimate goal while he developed the perfections. If we develop the perfection of dana and also satipatthana we will not be forgetful of our ultimate goal: the eradication of defilements. We can notice that we have a great deal of stinginess and selfishness and thus it is beneficial to accumulate generosity. However, we cannot have generosity whenever we want it, it is a kind of nãma which arises because of its own conditions. When there is generosity it can be object of mindfulness so that it will be known as not self. In the absolute sense there is no person who is generous. Khun Sujin reminded us time and again: "Just be aware of any reality which appears." We were wondering whether this could be applied at any time. Awareness of the present moment is so difficult and would it therefore not be better to develop first other kinds of kusala and later on satipatthana? We are always trying to judge what we should or shouldn’t do. We want to make good use of our life and we are trying to reach conclusions about the way we spend it. Bhante Dhammadhara said: Why does one judge whether one spends one’s life well? Really, it should be: "Am I learning about myself?" If one always thinks in "wholes" and of "the whole situation" one has an image or picture of how one should be living. This is unrealistic and it takes us away from knowing this moment. This way of thinking is unavoidable, we can’t help it, but it is good to know we are doing it and we should realize that it is only nama. We always want to come to conclusions about ourselves, about what we are doing, by thinking, and we forget sati. Sati is the opposite of this clinging to reach conclusions. ******* Nina. #70684 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Apr 16, 2007 11:05 am Subject: Re: [dsg] A Meditation Tip nilovg Hi Howard, I just wanted to show the Co and not give any personal judgement. Nina. Op 16-apr-2007, om 19:29 heeft upasaka@... het volgende geschreven: > Dieter then asked "do you know which sutta ?" And you replied < Mahaaraahulovaadasutta.>> #70685 From: upasaka@... Date: Mon Apr 16, 2007 7:22 am Subject: Re: [dsg] A Meditation Tip upasaka_howard Hi, Nina - In a message dated 4/16/07 2:11:32 PM Eastern Daylight Time, vangorko@... writes: > Hi Howard, > I just wanted to show the Co and not give any personal judgement. > Nina. > ================== Thanks for doing so. :-) I'm sorry I misinterpreted your purpose. With metta, Howard #70686 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Apr 16, 2007 11:00 am Subject: Rupas Ch. 8, no 5. nilovg Dear friends, Integration, continuity, decay and destruction are characteristics inherent in all rúpas. They do not have their own distinct nature, thus, they are asabhåva rúpas. They are not produced by the four factors of kamma, citta, food and temperature. The “Visuddhimagga” (XIV, 79) explains: ...But “rúpa as characteristic” is called not born of anything. Why? Because there is no arising of arising, and the other two are the mere maturing and breaking up of what has arisen... Rúpas have been classified as twentyeight kinds. Summarizing them, they are: solidity (or extension) cohesion temperature motion eyesense earsense nose (smellingsense) tongue (tastingsense) bodysense visible object sound odour flavour femininity masculinity heart-base life faculty nutrition space bodily intimation speech intimation lightness plasticity wieldiness birth or integration continuity decay impermanence Rúpas can be classified as the four Principle Rúpas and the twentyfour derived rúpas. The four Principle rúpas, mahå-bhúta rúpas, are the four Great Elements. The derived rúpas, upådå rúpas, are the other twentyfour rúpas that arise in dependence upon the four Great Elements. ****** Nina. #70687 From: connie Date: Mon Apr 16, 2007 1:32 pm Subject: Re: Theriigaathaa - Sisters (51) nichiconn Hiya Herman, Whether we're schizophrenic or not, we're still madmen as long as we believe in and try to exercise control over our lives... or teach others lessons about anger, say, by calling the cops when they're caught up in that? Rather than avoidance, I'd like to think I tried to teach my daughter "consideration". Of course, that raises the interesting question of whether we ever really teach anyone anything... and I'd be inclined to say 'not'... regardless... I doubt that she and I ever ran across any holy men consumed by wisdom & it's attendants, so I can't personally say what that might be like, but there were definitely times other -uhh- auras filled the air around us... or if aura is not so acceptable (& not that I think we can pick our poisons) who wouldn't rather be infected by the contagion of laughter than anger? peace, connie #70688 From: "Sukinder" Date: Mon Apr 16, 2007 4:35 pm Subject: Re: A Meditation Tip sukinderpal Hi Nina, James, Dieter, Howard, All, Thanks Nina, for the Sutta, it must have been due to misreading the first time (here on DSG of course), that I had the impression that the Buddha gave Rahula his meditation object *after* Sariputta had given him `breath'. In any case, I appreciate more your follow up comment to Howard denying any implication that Sariputta was wrong. Actually I wasn't even sure by the time James wrote to ask me about the source, and I meant to give some qualification in a reply to him. Furthermore I reflected after my last response to Dieter, the fact of "breath" having the quality of being `common' to all human beings. I was lead to think that once anyone who practiced samatha and had reached a high level of understanding with regard to kusala / akusala distinction, at such a point `breath' might be an OK object for him. So it must have been OK for Rahula too, who after all had great accumulations. So clearly I and not Sariputta, was wrong!! :-) I mean, "how could Sariputta *be* wrong", this thought itself should have given me cause for pause. :-/ That said, I think Nina would agree with me that at the absence of the kind of wisdom, then choosing `breath' or for the matter any other object, would *not* be appropriate, which is what my discussion with Dieter was mainly about anyway. Any comments Nina? And BTW, please do add comments on the Adhi- Sila, Citta, Panna topic as well if you have time. It is a deep topic for me. Thanks Dieter, James and Howard for questioning my position here. Metta, Sukinder Ps: Dieter, please allow for big gaps between responses, this is related to a particular problem that I have. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Dear Dieter and Sukin, > ******* > Op 15-apr-2007, om 21:03 heeft Dieter Möller het volgende geschreven: > > ...helpful to remember that even Sariputta was wrong in suggestion > > "breath" as > > object of meditation to Rahula. > > D: do you know which sutta ? > *********** > N: The Mahaaraahulovaadasutta. We read more details in the Co. Rahula > received first teachings from the Buddha about the five khandhas. > Afterwards Sariputta came along and taught him Mindfulness of #70689 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Mon Apr 16, 2007 4:54 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Theriigaathaa - Sisters (51) egberdina Hi Connie, On 17/04/07, connie wrote: > Hiya Herman, > Whether we're schizophrenic or not, we're still madmen as long as we > believe in and try to exercise control over our lives. I think it is useful to distinguish between experience, and the causes of experience. Trying to exercise control is an experience that we can all relate to. We experience steering a car or bike in a certain direction, we walk towards our intended destination, and do not often find ourselves arriving at random places. Having the experience of control does not make us madmen. But rather the opposite, peoiple who do not have the experience of control, they experience arriving at random destinations, and they are seen as being madmen. But I would agree with you that what causes the experience of control is beyond control. I do not know what harm comes from being mistaken about how the world works, but certainly those mistaken beliefs are also caused, and beyond control. It would be interesting to find out how the experience of the world would become different by having an ingrained understanding that we "suffer" the world, passively, and do not create it actively. .. or teach others > lessons about anger, say, by calling the cops when they're caught up in > that? Rather than avoidance, I'd like to think I tried to teach my > daughter "consideration". Of course, that raises the interesting question > of whether we ever really teach anyone anything... and I'd be inclined to > say 'not'... regardless... I doubt that she and I ever ran across any holy > men consumed by wisdom & it's attendants, so I can't personally say what > that might be like, but there were definitely times other -uhh- auras > filled the air around us... or if aura is not so acceptable (& not that I > think we can pick our poisons) who wouldn't rather be infected by the > contagion of laughter than anger? Surely our dispositions are also caused? The experience of liking does not cause liking to happen, it is just the other way around. Herman #70690 From: "Sukinder" Date: Mon Apr 16, 2007 4:51 pm Subject: Re: A Meditation Tip sukinderpal Hi Nina, James, Dieter, Howard, All, > Furthermore I reflected after my last response to Dieter, the fact > of "breath" having the quality of being `common' to all human beings. I > was lead to think that once anyone who practiced samatha and had > reached a high level of understanding with regard to kusala / akusala > distinction, at such a point `breath' might be an OK object for him. So it > must have been OK for Rahula too, who after all had great > accumulations. ================= I would like to add a remark to the above. Though I was talking about 'breath' as object of samatha, I do not mean to imply that Sariputta gave this object to Rahula for the same purpose. His goal was vipassana. But I do think that the general idea that 'wisdom' is required for 'knowing' breath, still applies. Metta, Sukinder #70691 From: "colette" Date: Mon Apr 16, 2007 4:58 pm Subject: Re: Theriigaathaa - Sisters (51) ksheri3 Good Day connie, I can't believe you wrote that: we're still madmen as long as we > believe in and try to exercise control over our lives... or teach others > lessons about anger, colette: you sound like a "swinger" down there in FLA that has no concern for anything other than their own personal gratification at that single moment. a Libertine I believe the Label is. We most certainly have control over our lives. I am so stinking sick of these middle-class know nothings, no nothings, walking around saying "let somebody else fix it" of "let somebody else do it". I'm sick of that lousey little condition of drug dependents that is easily identified as the Denial Phase. Accept responsibility. Nobody in their right mind can expect and/or demand perfection at all times. Only the meglamaniacs of the republican national committee and republican party, a front for the Bolshevik party and the Nazi party, have the nerve to demand perfection from every other person while they cut themselves tax cuts, increase their salaries, basically just consume more of everything. How could you be so callous? toodles, colette --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, connie wrote: > > Hiya Herman, > Whether we're schizophrenic or not, we're still madmen as long as we > believe in and try to exercise control over our lives... or teach others > lessons about anger, say, by calling the cops when they're caught up in > that? Rather than avoidance, I'd like to think I tried to teach my > daughter "consideration". Of course, that raises the interesting question > of whether we ever really teach anyone anything... and I'd be inclined to > say 'not'... regardless... I doubt that she and I ever ran across any holy > men consumed by wisdom & it's attendants, so I can't personally say what > that might be like, but there were definitely times other -uhh- auras > filled the air around us... or if aura is not so acceptable (& not that I > think we can pick our poisons) who wouldn't rather be infected by the > contagion of laughter than anger? > peace, > connie > #70692 From: "colette" Date: Mon Apr 16, 2007 5:14 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Theriigaathaa - Sisters (51) ksheri3 Hi Herman, I like your reply. Sure I can work on it but I'm coming to the conclusion that I've gotta take a break from this stuff and work on my life only, for instance get a job, read, meditate without being interfered with by the computer, etc. I recognized this in reading: "THE TRANSFORMATION OF CONSCIOUSNESS INTO WISDOM IN THE CHINESE CONSCIOUSNESS-ONLY SCHOOL ACCORDING TO THE CHENG WEI-SHI LUN" It's so technical and educated that I lack the education to read it fluidly WITH UNDERSTANDING. thanx. toodles, colette #70693 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Mon Apr 16, 2007 6:23 pm Subject: Persuasion technique of KS (Re: Perfections N, no 8) buddhatrue Hi Nina, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > N: Exactly. The same is also said of kusala. Akusala and kusala are > accumulated little by little. I remember that she thinks in this way. > At one of the sessions Professor Somporn mentioned that even a little > aversion is dangerous. It is accumulated and can lead to a deed that > can produce an unhappy rebirth. > How come you think she approves of it. Can you remember the quote? The infamous post ;-)) is titled "Letters on Vipassana 11, No. 2", it is numbered 69949: "Should we hate our akusala? It is just a reality, it arises"… "I do not think, `defilements are so ugly', they are just realities. There should be understanding of them. People want to get rid of all defilements but they do not have any understanding of them. Why should our first objective not be right understanding? I do not understand why people are so much irritated by their defilements. One is drawn to the idea of self all the time, while one thinks about it whether one has less defilements or more. There is no understanding but merely thinking of kusala and akusala as `ours'. So long as there is ignorance there must be different degrees of akusala. We should just develop understanding of whatever reality appears. At the moment of developing understanding one is not carried away by thoughts about the amount of one's defilements, wondering about it how many defilements one has or whether they are decreasing. Just be aware instantly!" Contrast this with what the Buddha taught: Think not lightly of evil, saying, "It will not come to me." Drop by drop is the water pot filled Likewise, the fool, gathering it little by little, fills himself with evil. Dhammapada 121 Nina, it is difficult for some to see the harm in K. Sujin's teaching because she has the habit of mixing absolutely reasonable statements (which anyone would agree with) with outlandish statements which no one should accept. Then the reader, or listener, associates the reasonable with the unreasonable. Let's critically analyze this statement by KS. First I will list the reasonable statements and then I will list the unreasonable statements. You should then be able to clearly see how she mixes the two: REASONABLE: It is just a reality, it arises There should be understanding of them But they do not have any understanding of them Why should our first objective not be right understanding? So long as there is ignorance… We should just develop understanding of whatever reality appears Just be aware instantly! OUTLANDISH: Should we hate our akusala? I do not think defilements are so ugly People want to get rid of all defilements…[stated as a negative] I do not understand why people are so much irritated by their defilements One is drawn to the idea of self all the time while one thinks about it whether one has less defilements or more ..there must be different degrees of akusala. wondering about it how many defilements one has or whether they are decreasing Just be aware instantly! [unreasonable for most people] This mixing of the reasonable with the unreasonable is a very seductive persuasive technique. I hate to give this extreme example, but it is the only one that comes to mind at the moment: Hitler did the same thing. He would give speeches that mixed the reasonable (Germany should be strong; Germany should be proud; Germany needs to rebuild its economy, etc.) with the outlandish (Jews are corrupting our heritage; Jews are making us weak; Jews are stealing our money, etc.). So these are the types of speeches that Hitler gave: ***Germany should be strong. Jews are making us weak. Germany should be proud. Jews are corrupting our heritage. Germany needs to rebuild its economy. Jews are stealing our money.*** The listeners associate the reasonable statements with the outlandish statements. KS does exactly the same thing. In her case she associates reasonable statements about wisdom and understanding with unreasonable statements about how "self" and "effort" are the enemies. Now, Nina, don't get overly excited or hysterical that I have compared K. Sujin with Adolf Hitler. KS obviously has much better motivations. But they both use the same methods of persuasion and they both lead people astray. Metta, James #70694 From: upasaka@... Date: Mon Apr 16, 2007 2:36 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: A Meditation Tip upasaka_howard Hi, Sukin - In a message dated 4/16/07 7:58:07 PM Eastern Daylight Time, sukinder@... writes: > But I do think that the general idea that 'wisdom' is > required for 'knowing' breath, still applies. > ================= Yes, I think so too. A little wisdom at the start, and increasingly more with progress, being both fruit of the progress and spur to further progress. With metta, Howard #70695 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Mon Apr 16, 2007 7:01 pm Subject: Re: Letters on Vipassana 11, no 2. buddhatrue Hi Azita, Thanks for writing back to me!! :-) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "gazita2002" wrote: > > Hello James, > > Well, lifetimes I do have! > Firstly, why do you have such aversion to commentaries etc? James: I wouldn't really say I have an "aversion" to commentaries, per se, but I just don't trust them as much as the suttas themselves (and even those I don't always trust). Do you know who wrote the commentaries? I don't. Why should you completely trust someone and you don't even know the source? If an argument only has the commentaries as support, it is very suspect and should be thrown out. > > For example, when I read a sutta that states: > "Bhikkhus, what do you think, do you regard form thus: 'this is > not mine, this I am not, this is not my self?' > 'yes, venerable Sir.' > 'Good, bhikkhus! Form should be seen as it really is with correct > wisdom thus: This is not mine, this I am not, this is not my self.' > 'do you regard feeling...perception...volitional > formations...consciousness [citta] thus: 'this is not mine, this I > am not, this is not my self?' > Yes venerrable Sir. > 'Good, bhikkhus! feeling,perception, volitional formations, > consciousness should be seen as it really is with correct wisdom > thus: this is not mine, this I am not, this is not my self. > Seeing thus..he understands..there is no more for this state of > being"....... > > I need a lot more information than this. Sure on a gross level I > can see that form changes, feelings change, but does that really > help with the understanding that eradicates wrong view. I dont think > so. Therefore to find someone who is able to explain on a much > deeper level how it comes about that feeling is not me, mine or > self, is a remarkable 'find' James: No explanation of this sutta is really going to make you deeply understand it. All explanations only provide intellectual understanding, not direct understanding. People often confuse the two and it takes experience to really know the difference. This sutta is simply the Buddha asking his monks that if they "think" the five khandas are "self", they say no and he approves of their answer. They don't directly know anatta, they just have a conceptual understanding. It begins with a conceptual understanding and then one should follow the practice of the Noble Eightfold Path to directly know anatta. Anatta is a reality (it isn't a question that should be put aside or a meditation technique as Thanissaro teaches) but it can't be directly known until one does the practice which leads to wisdom. - and then build on that weak > understanding in daily life, without having to go anywhere special, > or do anything special. James: This is the very seductive teaching of KS which states that wisdom takes no effort. Nonsense! There is a sutta, I don't have the reference now, where a monk who died trying to attain enlightenment (but failed) appeared before the Buddha as a deva. He tells the Buddha that his Noble Eightfold Path is very difficult to follow, very difficult to practice. The Buddha simply replies that yes it is difficult to follow and to practice but there are those who follow and practice it. Does that sound like the Buddha considered his path something that requires "nothing special" or "doing nothing special"? I believe that the wisdom that finally > eradicates defilements, has to start somewhere - from little things, > big things grow. James: What "little things" do you mean? I thought you just said you believed in doing nothing special? > > I'm being coaxed to the dinner table James, and I'm writing this > on-line so must close. James: Okay, until next time.... > > Patience, courage and good cheer, > azita Metta, James #70696 From: "rjkjp1" Date: Mon Apr 16, 2007 8:17 pm Subject: Re: A Meditation Tip rjkjp1 --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Sukinder" wrote: > > So clearly I and not Sariputta, was wrong!! :-) I > mean, "how could Sariputta *be* wrong", this thought itself should > have given me cause for pause. :-/ > _________ Dear Sukinder well Sariputta did give an unsuitable meditation subject to the man who had been a goldsmith. And the Buddha gave the monk a different, pleasant object. Robert #70697 From: upasaka@... Date: Mon Apr 16, 2007 4:40 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: A Meditation Tip upasaka_howard Hi, Robert - In a message dated 4/16/07 11:18:06 PM Eastern Daylight Time, rjkjp1@... writes: > Dear Sukinder > well Sariputta did give an unsuitable meditation subject to the man who > had been a goldsmith. And the Buddha gave the monk a different, > pleasant object. > Robert > ======================= Mindfulness of the body incorporates anapanasati practice, and it, in turn, constitutes a complete implementation of the four foundations of mindfulness, incorporating both samatha and vipasssana bhavana. The Buddha ended the sutta with the standard instructions of anapanasati, and the whole sutta was a response to how that very practice is "to be developed & pursued so as to be of great fruit, of great benefit". So, what is the different meditation object the Buddha substituted? With metta, Howard #70698 From: "rjkjp1" Date: Mon Apr 16, 2007 10:30 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: A Meditation Tip rjkjp1 --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > > Hi, Robert - > > In a message dated 4/16/07 11:18:06 PM Eastern Daylight Time, > rjkjp1@... writes: > > > Dear Sukinder > > well Sariputta did give an unsuitable meditation subject to the man who > > had been a goldsmith. And the Buddha gave the monk a different, > > pleasant object. > > Robert > > > ======================= > Mindfulness of the body incorporates anapanasati practice, and it, in > turn, constitutes a complete implementation of the four foundations of > mindfulness, incorporating both samatha and vipasssana bhavana. The Buddha ended the > sutta with the standard instructions of anapanasati, and the whole sutta was a > response to how that very practice is "to be developed & pursued so as to be > of great fruit, > of great benefit". So, what is the different meditation object the Buddha > substituted? > Dear Howard Here is the translation of the Commentary http://www.tipitaka.net/tipitaka/dhp/verseload.php?verse=285 ***Dhammapada Verse 285 --------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------- The Story of a Thera who had been a Goldsmith While residing at the Jetavana monastery, the Buddha uttered Verse (285) of this book, with reference to a bhikkhu, a pupil of Thera Sariputta. Once, a young, handsome son of a goldsmith was admitted into the Order by Thera Sariputta. The young bhikkhu was given loathsomeness of the dead body as the subject of meditation by Thera Sariputta. After taking the subject of meditation he left for the forest and practised meditation there; but he made very little progress. So he returned twice to Thera Sariputta for further instructions. Still, he made no progress. So Thera Sariputta took the young bhikkhu to the Buddha, and related everything about the young bhikkhu. The Buddha knew that the young bhikkhu was the son of a goldsmith, and also that he had been born in the family of goldsmiths during his past five hundred existences. Therefore the Buddha changed the subject of meditation for the young bhikkhu; instead of loathsomeness, he was instructed to meditate on pleasantness. With his supernormal power, the Buddha created a beautiful lotus flower as big as a cart-wheel and told the young bhikkhu to stick it on the mound of sand just outside the monastery. The young bhikkhu, concentrating on the big, beautiful, fragrant lotus flower, was able to get rid of the hindrances. He was filled with delightful satisfaction (piti), and step by step he progressed until he reached as far as the fourth level of mental absorption (jhana). The Buddha saw him from his perfumed chamber and with his supernormal power made the flower wither instantly. Seeing the flower wither and change its colour, the bhikkhu perceived the impermanent nature of the flower and of all other things and beings. That led to the realization of the impermanence, unsatisfactoriness and the insubstantiality of all conditioned things. At that instant, the Buddha sent forth his radiance and appeared as if in person to the young bhikkhu and instructed him to get rid of craving (tanha).*** Robert #70699 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Mon Apr 16, 2007 10:34 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: A Meditation Tip buddhatrue Hi Howard, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > ======================= > Mindfulness of the body incorporates anapanasati practice, and it, in > turn, constitutes a complete implementation of the four foundations of > mindfulness, incorporating both samatha and vipasssana bhavana. The Buddha ended the > sutta with the standard instructions of anapanasati, and the whole sutta was a > response to how that very practice is "to be developed & pursued so as to be > of great fruit, > of great benefit". So, what is the different meditation object the Buddha > substituted? I think Robert is referring to a different sutta and a different person (not Rahula). > > With metta, > Howard Metta, James #70700 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Mon Apr 16, 2007 10:31 pm Subject: Re: A Meditation Tip buddhatrue Hi Robert and Sukin, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "rjkjp1" wrote: > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Sukinder" > wrote: > > > > So clearly I and not Sariputta, was wrong!! :-) I > > mean, "how could Sariputta *be* wrong", this thought itself should > > have given me cause for pause. :-/ > > > _________ > Dear Sukinder > well Sariputta did give an unsuitable meditation subject to the man who > had been a goldsmith. And the Buddha gave the monk a different, > pleasant object. I slightly remember that one- didn't the Buddha give the goldsmith the image of a golden lotus to meditate upon? Also, I remember clearly where the Buddha admonishes Sariputta for giving a dying brahman the four Brahma Viharas as a meditation object (because the brahman wanted to be reborn with Brahma) when the Brahman had the potential for stream entry or higher....but will miss the opportunity because he was reborn in a divine obode and will be there for thousands of years. I don't have my Nikayas so can't give the reference. So, it wasn't outlandish to think that Sariputta gave the wrong meditation object, but it didn't happen too often. BTW, even the Buddha himself gave the wrong meditation object to a group of monks who subsequently committed suicide. > Robert > Metta, James #70701 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Mon Apr 16, 2007 10:56 pm Subject: The Effort that Avoids Evil! bhikkhu5 Friends: How do the Effort to Avoid Protect against Evil? The Blessed Buddha once said: There are four efforts, Bhikkhus and friends: 1: The effort to avoid evil, 2: The effort to overcome bad, 3: The effort to develop good, 4: The effort to maintain advantage... What, Bhikkhus and friends, is the effort to avoid? When experiencing a form with the eye, a sound with the ear, a smell with the nose, a taste with the tongue, a touch with the body, or an object with the mind, the Bhikkhu neither fixes on the whole appearance nor to any of its details. Rather he works hard to dispel all these evil & disadvantageous states, such as greed and longing, that would arise if he remained with the senses unguarded. He thus watches over his senses, control his senses, and restrains his senses. This is called the effort to avoid. Source (edited extract): The Numerical Sayings of the Buddha. Anguttara Nikaya AN 4:14 http://What-Buddha-Said.net/Canon/Sutta/AN/Index.Numerical.htm The Effort that Avoids Evil! http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/III/Avoiding_Effort.htm Friendship is the Greatest :-) Bhikkhu Samahita * Ceylon * #70702 From: "colette" Date: Mon Apr 16, 2007 11:22 pm Subject: Persuasion technique of KS (Re: Perfections N, no 8), shock therapy? ksheri3 Hi James, Naw, before I go off for a rest I'd like to say that you've raised some interesting points. I'm probably guilty of a few myself. I take it that you post Nina first as a signifier that as K.Sujin's boss she, Nina, should also partake of the credit you give, whether that be positive or negative credit. > Professor Somporn mentioned that even a > little > > aversion is dangerous. colette: that small statement seems valid since the aversion is like a fertilizer or nutrient to the negative seed that has been planted and is growing. Clinging to the negative thoughts of such a thing, the aversion in particular, of that thing, only serves to solidify it's presence and validity in the alaya-vijnana. I like you quote from the Buddha, Dhammapada 121, I recall a monk, or bhikku, suggesting to me at one time to re-read the Dhammapada or was it the Dharmapala, I know it's in my notes, still, the the quote is a good one. Your methodology of examining the reasonable statements against the unreasonable statements is almost frightening. It does have merit and is a good way to show errors or erroneous tangents but it takes the thought entirely out of context and repositions it. In this case the meanings and intentions completely change. Enough knit-picking. > > This mixing of the reasonable with the unreasonable is a very > seductive persuasive technique. I hate to give this extreme example, > but colette: THANK YOU! Hitler and the Jews are such a huge resevoire to have at our disposal yet people intentionally and deliberately shy away from taking from history, past lives, the easiest of examples. Examples that are so clear that even a blind person could see them. Yet, there is a stigma attached to using these examples. I know it's the same way here when I use Pol Pot or Mau, any number of Asian egomaniacs, meglamaniacs, dictators, etc. and the moderators or the list owner will have nothing to do with posting any reference made to a past life, as if they could burn the books of history and have it deleted or as if they can and do control all karma etc. I gave up trying to stop using the word "HATE" since the more I focused on NOT USING it it seems that subliminally I was doing nothing more than letting the faucet run out of my brain, mind, I kept saying that "I HATE this or that". For a while there it was really annoying me but there wasn't anything I could do. So now I don't even bother considering not saying the word and I've almost stopped using that word. ---------- it is the only one that comes to mind at the moment: Hitler did > the same thing. He would give speeches that mixed the reasonable > (Germany should be strong; Germany should be proud; Germany needs to > rebuild its economy, etc.) with the outlandish (Jews are corrupting > our heritage; Jews are making us weak; Jews are stealing our money, > etc.). So these are the types of speeches that Hitler gave: > > ***Germany should be strong. Jews are making us weak. Germany should > be proud. Jews are corrupting our heritage. Germany needs to rebuild > its economy. Jews are stealing our money.*** colette: good example! haven't you simply evoked the method of CAUSE & EFFECT? This is how victimization takes place: the criminal is the cause and the criminal is having a negative effect on us, that type of psychology. ----------------- > > The listeners associate the reasonable statements with the outlandish > statements. KS does exactly the same thing. In her case she > associates reasonable statements about wisdom and understanding with > unreasonable statements about how "self" and "effort" are the > enemies. colette: I missed that specific example. I hope you would be kind enough to highlight this for me. The way you put it I can't help but bring up the fact that this is nothing more than DUALITY more specifically DUALITY from a Western Theological perspective. The way you put it the "self" and "effort" are not being cognized properly in the first place. If they were being properly cognized then they would not be seen as enemies but as OBSTRUCTIONS to higher states of consciousness. I'm getting into unfamiliar ground, and people know that I do not like using phraseologies that I'm not familiar with which gives me a level of comfort in applying the terminology but I believe I just read something concerning this very thought on page 3 or 4 of the paper I stated earlier that I was reading, it' like the 3rd stage of the Bodhisatva path, I think it's after the Path of Vision. The way that you've perceived, cognized, self and effort has played into the hands of Lobha by planting greater seeds as a means of uprooting some old out-dated seeds (bija). Conceiving the Self in a certain way and conceiving an effort in a certain way are both ways to manifest obscurations and cloud up the GREAT MIRROR CONSCIOUSNESS. What needs to be done is greater examinination of cognition, of conceptions, boy do I remember the discussions htoo and I had on "concepts". I still have a smile thinking of those discussions. ------------- > > Now, Nina, don't get overly excited or hysterical that I have > compared K. Sujin with Adolf Hitler. colette: I used to have to go to the Fransiscan Outreach Organization for dinner every night. that organization sponsors a lot of German youth that have some compulsory obligation to the country that causes them to leave. They all became my friends and I even told them that they're all welcome in my home if I ever get one because of their kindness to help me get at least one meal during the day. We joked about a lot of things and when I would raise issues in a joking fashion about Hitler or the Nazis they would still laugh with me but I could only take it so far before they would completely lose interest since this aspect of life doesn't really effect them anymore. The only time I recall them having a frown on their face about my jokes was when I suggested how cruel a parent would be if they named their child 'Dolf or Adolf. they immediately got a serious look on their face and made it quite clear that they couldn't believe that somebody would be so cruel to their child. I'm sure that Nina probably would still maintain a bad taste for anything Nazi. My friends really do not like me talking about the friends I have in Germany, such as Nina, or some Russians, or some Chaos magicians, etc. but then again they can't seem to get passed the reality that I do not like nor do I want to judge any person so it's not really a problem. We all have bad days and good days. KS obviously has much better > motivations. But they both use the same methods of persuasion and > they both lead people astray. colette: I do not believe this is a valid conclusion. toodles, colette Reply | Forward | Messages in this Topic (39) #70703 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Apr 17, 2007 12:38 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Persuasion technique of KS (Re: Perfections N, no 8) nilovg Hi James, I like to look just at your points you call reasonable and outlandish. Let us only talk Dhamma and not about persons or politics. I like to try to put each point in the right context. I understand people's difficulties. I can feel with you, also Lodewijk gets upset now and then. I do not feel this as an attack, there are no attackers and defenders. It just happens by conditions that we are talking dhamma now. Why should we get lost in stories about attackers and defenders. Useless. By conditions I listened for more than forty years, it just happened because of conditions, I did not ask for it. Also I learnt Thai and can follow both Thai and English. This is not to boast, but it just happened because of conditions. It was my duty to learn Thai since Bangkok was our diplomatic posting. I like to take also the reasonable points you put forward, also these need a context. I see each of your points as a little Dhamma meditation. So we should see it, we are here to talk Dhamma, nothing else. But now first I have to work on Visuddhimagga Tiika, Larry is waiting for me. I have to take my time and I will not go hastily over all your points. It is helpful if others also go over your points, each person will approach this subject in his own way and that makes it interesting. Nina. Op 17-apr-2007, om 3:23 heeft buddhatrue het volgende geschreven: > Now, Nina, don't get overly excited or hysterical that I have > compared K. Sujin with Adolf Hitler. KS obviously has much better > motivations. But they both use the same methods of persuasion and > they both lead people astray. #70704 From: han tun Date: Tue Apr 17, 2007 3:08 am Subject: Daana Corner (40) hantun1 Dear Dhamma Friends, The following is taken from “Generosity: The Inward Dimension” by Nina Van Gorkom Questions, comments and different views welcome:-) ------------------------------ There are still other ways of practicing generosity, even when we do not have things to give. The application of other people's good deeds is also a type of generosity. When we notice that someone else is doing a good deed we can appreciate his wholesomeness, and we may express this with words of approval and praise. We may be stingy not only with regard to our possessions but also with regard to words of praise. Gradually one can learn to be generous in appreciating the wholesomeness of others. In Thailand I had an opportunity to learn about this way of generosity, which I had not heard of before. I received a book that was printed on the occasion of the birthday of Her Majesty Queen Sirikit of Thailand. This book mentioned many of her good works, such as promoting the teaching of Buddhism, supporting temples, improving the standard of living of the people in the provinces by setting up different projects for them. When one reads this one can sincerely admire and rejoice in the good works of Her Majesty. In Thailand I also often heard the Thais saying, "anumodana," which means "thanks," with the inclination of their head and clasped hands. This they do when they respect and appreciate the wholesomeness of others, usually on occasions of presenting food to the monks or giving books on the Buddhist teachings. It can become a wholesome custom to express one's appreciation on such occasions. When we know about this way of generosity we may remember to speak about others with wholesome consciousness. In the development of wholesomeness one has to be farsighted. One should realize that whatever wholesomeness or unwholesomeness one accumulates today will produce its effects in the future, even in future lives. One can become more adept in evaluating the circumstances one is in and the friends one has. One will then be able to judge whether or not one's surroundings and friends are favorable for the development of wholesomeness. One will know what kind of speech should be avoided, what kind of speech cultivated. Often conversation tends to be about the bad qualities of others or about useless matters which are not helpful for the development of wholesomeness. Since we often become engaged in conversation with others, we should learn how to turn the conversation into an opportunity for wholesomeness. To be continued. metta, Han #70705 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Tue Apr 17, 2007 5:14 am Subject: Persuasion technique of KS (Re: Perfections N, no 8) scottduncan2 Dear James, Regarding: "Should we hate our akusala? It is just a reality, it arises...I do not think, 'defilements are so ugly', they are just realities. There should be understanding of them. People want to get rid of all defilements but they do not have any understanding of them. Why should our first objective not be right understanding? I do not understand why people are so much irritated by their defilements. One is drawn to the idea of self all the time, while one thinks about it whether one has less defilements or more. There is no understanding but merely thinking of kusala and akusala as 'ours'. So long as there is ignorance there must be different degrees of akusala. We should just develop understanding of whatever reality appears. At the moment of developing understanding one is not carried away by thoughts about the amount of one's defilements, wondering about it how many defilements one has or whether they are decreasing. Just be aware instantly!" To me, all this boils down to a simple statement by Kh. Sujin about equanimity (upekkhaa). I see no controversy. Please consider this: SN 46,51,(1): "...And what, bhikkhus, is the nutriment for the arising of the unarisen enlightenment factor of equanimity and for the fulfilment by development of the arisen enlightenment factor of equanimity? There are, bhikkhus, things that are the basis for the enlightenment factor of equanimity: frequently giving attention to them is the nutriment for the arising of the unarisen enlightenment factor of equanimity and for the fulfilment by development of the arisen enlightenment factor of equanimity." Scott: 'Things' is given, in the paa.li, as 'dhammaa'. 'Fulfilment by development' is given as 'bhaavanaaya paaripuuriyaa'. I think this points out that giving attention - rendered 'yonisomanasikaara' in the paa.li - to all things can be nutriment for upekkhaa to arise. Here, again, is the idea of 'development' or 'bhaavanaa', but in the sense that the repetitive arising and falling away of upekkhaa will lead to its strengthening. Atthasaalinii (p.176): "'Equanimity' (or balance of mind - tatra-majjhattataa) is neutrality regarding various states. It has the characteristic of carrying on consciousness and mental properties equally, the function of checking deficiency and excess, or of cutting off partisanship; it has the manifestation of neutrality. By virtue of its indifference regarding consciousness and mental properties it should be regarded as a charioteer who treats with impariality the well-trained horse he is driving." The Buddha clearly taught about upekkhaa. For instance, also in the Dhammapada: "Don't get entangled With what you long for or dislike. Not seeing what you long for is suffering, So also is seeing what you dislike," 210. Sincerely, Scott. #70706 From: upasaka@... Date: Tue Apr 17, 2007 1:46 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: A Meditation Tip upasaka_howard Hi, James (and Robert) - In a message dated 4/17/07 1:36:23 AM Eastern Daylight Time, buddhatrue@... writes: > I think Robert is referring to a different sutta and a different > person (not Rahula). > =========== Thanks, James. I didn't realize that. Is there supposed to be a connection, Robert, or was that just an aside? In any case, as Emily LaTella (sp?) was wont to say: "Never mind!" ;-)) With metta, Howard #70707 From: upasaka@... Date: Tue Apr 17, 2007 1:43 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: A Meditation Tip upasaka_howard Hi, Robert - Well, the story below is fine as stories go, but I don't see what it has to do with this sutta. With metta, Howard #70708 From: upasaka@... Date: Tue Apr 17, 2007 1:48 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: A Meditation Tip upasaka_howard Hi, James, Robert, Sukin, and all - In a message dated 4/17/07 1:36:46 AM Eastern Daylight Time, buddhatrue@... writes: > >Dear Sukinder > >well Sariputta did give an unsuitable meditation subject to the man > who > >had been a goldsmith. And the Buddha gave the monk a different, > >pleasant object. > > I slightly remember that one- didn't the Buddha give the goldsmith > the image of a golden lotus to meditate upon? > ======================= Ah, ok, now I realize what's going on! With metta, Howard #70709 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Apr 17, 2007 7:15 am Subject: Perfections N, no 10 nilovg Dear friends, When we hear the words, "Just be aware" it may seem like an over- simplification of life, but in fact it is the answer to all our problems and worries about how we should be living. A moment of right understanding of the reality which appears is more effective than all our planning and thinking because then detachment from the self is being developed. We may hear the words "Just be aware", but if there is no "follow up" we cannot find out whether it is true or not that satipatthana conditions one to think more often of others and to be less selfish. It will take a long time of developing satipatthana before there can be detachment from the self. However, those who have attained enlightenment have proven that right understanding conditions all kinds of kusala. The sotapanna has eradicated the wrong view of self and also all stinginess. He has pure generosity without any notion of self who is generous. In order to attain enlightenment he had to develop the perfection of dana and all the other perfections together with satipatthana. We all have different weak points and we cling to different things. Our clinging is an obstruction to generosity. I want certain situations to be as I have planned, such as Dhamma discussions. Although Dhamma discussions are helpful there can be many selfish moments when one wants to have a discussion. One may want to force such a situation when it is not the right time. When we were in the park of Taj Mahal, sitting on the grass for a Dhamma discussion, there was nothing to drink. Sarah and I went out to get some drinks and since we had to walk rather far to get them I knew that I was going to miss part of the discussion. However, at that moment there were conditions to see that helping was more beneficial than just sitting down for the discussion to suit oneself. Moreover, also while walking on a busy street with many vendors there are nama and rupa and they can be object of mindfulness. The good example of all my friends and also our previous discussions about generosity and satipatthana helped me to see the benefit of kusala. We can experience ourselves that even a small act of kindness from others can mean a great deal to us and thus, when there is an opportunity to do something for others, even something which seems insignificant, we should not overlook such an opportunity. Sarah reminded me of this fact time and again by her words and example. It is true, hearing the Dhamma, considering it and above all the development of right understanding can condition more generosity. ******* Nina. #70710 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Apr 17, 2007 7:12 am Subject: Rupas Ch 8, no 6 nilovg Dear friends, Rúpas can be classified as gross and subtle. As we have seen (in Chapter 4), twelve kinds of rúpa are gross: visible object, sound, odour, flavour and the three great elements which are tangible object (excluding cohesion), as well as the five sense-organs. They are gross because of impinging; visible object impinges on the eyesense, sound impinges on the earsense, and each of the other sense objects impinges on the appropriate sense-base. The other sixteen kinds of rúpa are subtle. What is subtle is called “far” because it is difficult to penetrate, whereas what is gross is called “near”, because it is easy to penetrate (Vis. XIV, 73). Furthermore, other distinctions can be made. Rúpas can be classified as sabhava rúpas, rúpas with their own distinct nature, and asabhava rúpas, rúpas without their own distinct nature. The twelve gross rúpas and six among the subtle rúpas that are: cohesion, nutrition, life faculty, heart-base, femininity and masculinity are rupas each with their own distinct nature and characteristic, they are sabhåva rúpas. The other ten subtle rúpas do not have their own distinct nature, they are asabhåva rúpas. Among these are the two kinds of intimation, bodily intimation and speech intimation, which are a “certain, unique change” in the eight inseparable rúpas produced by citta. Moreover, the three qualities of lightness, plasticity and wieldiness that can be classified together with the two rúpas of intimation as vikåra rúpas (rúpa as changeability or alteration). Furthermore, there is the rúpa space (akåsa or pariccheda rúpa) that delimits the groups of rúpa. Also included are the four rúpas that are characteristics of rúpa, namely birth, continuity, decay and impermanence. Rúpas can be classified as produced rúpas, nipphanna rúpas, and unproduced rúpas, anipphanna rúpas. The sabhåva rúpas are also called “produced”, whereas the asabhåva rúpas are also called “unproduced” . The “produced rúpas” which each have their own characteristic are, as the “Visuddhimagga” (XVIII, 13) explains, “suitable for comprehension”, that is, they are objects of which right understanding can be developed. For example, visible object or hardness have characteristics that can be objects of awareness when they appear, and they can be realized by paññå as they are, as non- self. The “unproduced rúpas” are “not suitable for comprehension” since they are qualities of rúpa such as changeability or the rúpa that delimits groups of rúpas. If one does not know this distinction one may be led to wrong practice of insight; someone may imagine that he can be directly aware of “unproduced rúpas”, that are not concrete matter, such as lightness of matter. ***** Nina. #70711 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Apr 17, 2007 7:08 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: A Meditation Tip nilovg Dear Sukin (and Howard, and all), As you know, I translated the entire Co to the Raahulovaadasutta. Each time I am touched by the developmen unto maturity of Raahula. He was so attached to the body, and the Buddha explained to him about the five khandhas, nama and rupa. Raahula asked: should he know only rupa? No, he should understand the nature of naama and ruupa. Meanwhile Sariputta came along and taught him mindfulness of breathing, and Raahula wanted to be obedient to his teacher. The Buddha explained many aspects of Dhamma. Rahula had to be like the earth, he had to have equanimity so that he would not be overcome by defilements. He had to learn the brahmavihaaras. After having been taught many aspects of the Dhamma the Buddha exhorted him to develop mindfulness of breathing. The Co. then refers to the passages on this subject in the Visuddhimagga. As Howard remarked, this subject pertains to both samatha and vipassanaa. Also before the Buddha's time people developed this subject. They could reach jhaana, but they could not penetrate the truth of anattaa of nama and rupa. I listened to a Thai session about this subject. Someone (Santi) asked how people could realize the nature of kusala and akusala, and the nature of cetasikas such as vitakka, thinking. It is possible, even without hearing the Dhamma. Kusala, akusala, vitakka can be directly known, they appear. They can be directly realized without naming them. But this does not mean that they are known as nama, as non-self. We need to listen more, develop understanding more, like Raahula, to know them as dhammas, as conditioned realities that are non-self. And so it is with mindfulness of breathing. The rupas that are breath, or the feelings that arise may be directly known, without naming them. But this does not mean that they are known as only dhammas, as nama and as rupa. We have to discuss this more: knowing realities as nama, as rupa. As merely dhammas. Apart from breath, we can easily be mistaken with regard to satipatthana. When feeling seem to appear so clearly, and one knows it without naming it, it does not mean that its true nature of non- self is known. There may still be an idea of 'my feeling'. It has to be known as a kind of nama, as dhamma. And that can happen only after listening and considering a lot, so that sati and pa~n~naa can arise by themselves and perform their function. When Howard is cured from his cold (I am sorry he does not sleep), I will pursue the subject of sati of satipatthaana. It is really very intricate and can easily be misunderstood. As to higher siila, samaadhi and pa~n~naa, they are present with each moment of sammaasati and sammaadi.t.thi. Thus, when the eightfold Path is being developed. At such a moment there is kusala siila, there is calm and also understanding. Siila can be seen as the right practice, not only abstention from akusala. As I said: the sotaapanna has fulfilled higher siila, he perfectly observes the precepts and he cannot commit heavy akusala kamma patha. As to the anaagaami, he is no more distracted by attachment to sense objects. He is not disturbed by the hindrances and it is his nature to have true calm. As to the arahat, he has fulfilled higher pa~n~naa. Nina. Op 17-apr-2007, om 1:35 heeft Sukinder het volgende geschreven: > That said, I think Nina would agree with me that at the absence of the > kind of wisdom, then choosing `breath' or for the matter any other > object, would *not* be appropriate, which is what my discussion with > Dieter was mainly about anyway. > > Any comments Nina? And BTW, please do add comments on the Adhi- > Sila, Citta, Panna topic as well if you have time. It is a deep > topic for > me. #70712 From: Dieter Möller Date: Tue Apr 17, 2007 6:20 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: A Meditation Tip moellerdieter Hi Howard, All, you wrote: ' Ah, ok, now I realize what's going on!' I still do not .. what kind of story is it? A fairy tale used as a simile..? When I read .. snip '..The Buddha saw him from his perfumed chamber and with his supernormal power made the flower wither instantly. ...snip ' One thing for sure the Buddha never had a perfumed chamber ..sounds very Mahayanish ..is there a trace of it within the Pali Canon? with Metta Dieter #70713 From: Dieter Möller Date: Tue Apr 17, 2007 10:14 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: A Meditation Tip - tandem moellerdieter Hi , in respect to the issue of (the tandem of ) samatha and vipassana I stumbled upon following brief sutta : Anguttara Nikaya II.30 (translation by Thanissaro Bhikkhu) "These two qualities have a share in clear knowing. Which two? Tranquillity (samatha) & insight (vipassana). "When tranquillity is developed, what purpose does it serve? The mind is developed. And when the mind is developed, what purpose does it serve? Passion is abandoned. "When insight is developed, what purpose does it serve? Discernment is developed. And when discernment is developed, what purpose does it serve? Ignorance is abandoned. "Defiled by passion, the mind is not released. Defiled by ignorance, discernment does not develop. Thus from the fading of passion is there awareness-release. From the fading of ignorance is there discernment-release." with Metta Dieter #70714 From: upasaka@... Date: Tue Apr 17, 2007 6:58 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: A Meditation Tip upasaka_howard Hi, Nina - In a message dated 4/17/07 10:36:56 AM Eastern Daylight Time, vangorko@... writes: > When Howard is cured from his cold (I am sorry he does not sleep), I > will pursue the subject of sati of satipatthaana. It is really very > intricate and can easily be misunderstood. > ===================== Thank you, Nina. Yes, the sleeping continues to be poor. But I *am* reading posts, Nina, and though my considering at the moment is not likely to be particularly *wise* considering, please don't wait just for my benefit. :-) With metta, Howard #70715 From: upasaka@... Date: Tue Apr 17, 2007 7:01 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: A Meditation Tip upasaka_howard Hi, Dieter - In a message dated 4/17/07 11:05:08 AM Eastern Daylight Time, moellerdieter@... writes: > Hi Howard, All, > > you wrote: > ' Ah, ok, now I realize what's going on!' > > I still do not .. what kind of story is it? A fairy tale used as a > simile..? > When I read .. snip '..The Buddha saw him from his perfumed chamber and > with his > supernormal power made the flower wither instantly. ...snip ' > > One thing for sure the Buddha never had a perfumed chamber ..sounds very > Mahayanish ..is there a trace of it within the Pali Canon? > > with Metta Dieter > ====================== Yes, Mahayana doen't have a monopoly on the "fantastic" and "wond rous", though it does seem to specialize in them! ;-) With metta, Howard #70716 From: upasaka@... Date: Tue Apr 17, 2007 7:12 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: A Meditation Tip - tandem upasaka_howard Hi, Dieter - In a message dated 4/17/07 1:22:46 PM Eastern Daylight Time, moellerdieter@... writes: > Hi , > in respect to the issue of (the tandem of ) samatha and vipassana I > stumbled upon following brief sutta : > > Anguttara Nikaya II.30 (translation by Thanissaro Bhikkhu) > > "These two qualities have a share in clear knowing. Which two? Tranquillity > (samatha) &insight (vipassana). > > "When tranquillity is developed, what purpose does it serve? The mind is > developed. And when the mind is developed, what purpose does it serve? Passion > is abandoned. > > "When insight is developed, what purpose does it serve? Discernment is > developed. And when discernment is developed, what purpose does it serve? > Ignorance is abandoned. > > "Defiled by passion, the mind is not released. Defiled by ignorance, > discernment does not develop. Thus from the fading of passion is there > awareness-release. From the fading of ignorance is there discernment-release." > > > > with Metta Dieter > > =========================== In my opinion, the suttas as a whole seem to suggest that a modicum of fading of passion (i.e., of gaining of calm) is needed for the cultivation of wisdom, and likewise a modicum of wisdom is needed for cultivating relinquishment of craving. However, all the calm in the world will not on its own produce liberating wisdom, whereas liberating wisdom will also result in the complete removal of craving and emotional clinging. So, ultimately, it is the sword of wisdom that cuts out all the defilements, both cognitive and emotive. With metta, Howard #70717 From: Dieter Möller Date: Tue Apr 17, 2007 11:11 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: A Meditation Tip moellerdieter Hi Howard, ' Yes, Mahayana doen't have a monopoly on the "fantastic" and "wond rous", though it does seem to specialize in them! ;-) ' you are right ;-) .. sorry , I should have written : is there any mentioning of the 'Buddha's perfumed chamber ' within the Pali Canon .. with Metta Dieter #70718 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Apr 17, 2007 11:44 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: A Meditation Tip nilovg Dear Dieter, In the Commentaries. Nina. Op 17-apr-2007, om 20:11 heeft Dieter Möller het volgende geschreven: > is there any mentioning of the 'Buddha's perfumed chamber ' within > the Pali Canon . #70719 From: Dieter Möller Date: Tue Apr 17, 2007 12:02 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: A Meditation Tip moellerdieter Dear Nina, so ' is there no mentioning of the 'Buddha's perfumed chamber ' within the Pali Canon ' but 'In the Commentaries' .. which makes that commentary very questionable , not to say false due to the 8th precept ( abstaining from the use of .. perfumes ) , isn't it? with Metta Dieter #70720 From: Dieter Möller Date: Tue Apr 17, 2007 11:47 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: A Meditation Tip - tandem moellerdieter Hi Howard, I agree with you that it is ultimately the sword of wisdom /panna.. the tandem of samatha and vipassana leading to it as far as I see it .. another tandem stated is that of Jhana and Panna.. as mentioned below There is no meditative absorption Without wisdom. There is no wisdom Without meditative absorption. With both, One is close to Nirvana. Dhammapada 372 with Metta Dieter #70721 From: upasaka@... Date: Tue Apr 17, 2007 9:51 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: A Meditation Tip upasaka_howard Hi, Dieter - In a message dated 4/17/07 2:33:23 PM Eastern Daylight Time, moellerdieter@... writes: > sorry , I should have written : is there any mentioning of the 'Buddha's > perfumed chamber ' within the Pali Canon .. ================== Oh,I have no idea! ;-) With metta, Howard #70722 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Tue Apr 17, 2007 3:38 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Perfections N, no 10 egberdina Hi Nina, On 18/04/07, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Dear friends, > > When we hear the words, "Just be aware" it may seem like an over- > simplification of life, but in fact it is the answer to all our > problems and worries about how we should be living. Is there self-view in the intention to be aware? Can such intended awareness be kusala? Herman #70723 From: connie Date: Tue Apr 17, 2007 4:48 pm Subject: Re: Theriigaathaa - Sisters (51) nichiconn hi colette, herman, to whatever extent the belief that "we most certainly have control over our lives" might hold force, more power to your best wishes. i wonder how far you think our responsibility extends. sorry i don't feel much like typing, but on top of not really feeling too well anyway, 4 of the fingers i cut earlier today still kinda hurt. your whiny, disagreeable friend, connie #70724 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Tue Apr 17, 2007 5:09 pm Subject: Re: A Meditation Tip - tandem kenhowardau Hi Howard, This is a golden oldie. :-) Thanks for bringing it up for discussion yet again: -------------------- H: > In my opinion, the suttas as a whole seem to suggest that a modicum of fading of passion (i.e., of gaining of calm) is needed for the cultivation of wisdom, -------------------- Does this mean there cannot be right understanding of the dhammas that are arising now ? In other words: does there first need to an ignorant (akusala) consciousness of a kind that is slightly less akusala than the present one? When will this process end? Or will there always need to be a faded version of the present akusala? Where - in which sutta - did the Buddha extol the virtues of akusala? (A rhetorical question, I know, but I have to ask.) :-) ------------------------------ H: > and likewise a modicum of wisdom is needed for cultivating relinquishment of craving. ------------------------------- I think you are suggesting the lessening of akusala now will lead to wisdom in the future, which will lead to a correct practice of some kind in the more distant the future. The problem is there is no permanent self. What use is all this to dhammas that will not exist in the future? I think that true wisdom (panna) knows *with urgency* that it is the presently arisen dhamma that needs to be understood. Ken H #70725 From: "Leo" Date: Tue Apr 17, 2007 4:15 pm Subject: dissapearance of dhamma leoaive Hi Some time ago I have seen about things that make dissapearance of Dhamma. It says that when iron eagle fly it is dissapearance of Dhamma. How to avoid that condition? What would be the best solution? Sincerely Leo #70726 From: "Sukinder" Date: Tue Apr 17, 2007 5:13 pm Subject: Re: A Meditation Tip sukinderpal Dear Robert, > well Sariputta did give an unsuitable meditation subject to the man who > had been a goldsmith. And the Buddha gave the monk a different, > pleasant object. Thanks for this. I remember this now and think that it must have influenced my overall impression. However I am now reluctant to use "wrong" or even "unsuitable" with regard to Sariputta's giving of meditation object. Unlike the Buddha, Sariputta was not omniscient, so he wouldn't know for sure what the "ideal object" would be. But `wrong' he couldn't have been, after all he must have known the accumulations of his students quite well wouldn't he? The objects might have been `good', only not `most suitable'. What do you think? Metta, Sukinder #70727 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Tue Apr 17, 2007 5:51 pm Subject: fingers /was Re: Theriigaathaa - Sisters (51) kenhowardau Hi Connie, I wish your fingers and the rest of you a speedy recovery. They say bad things come in threes. Howard gets a cold, Jon has a collision with his surfboard, Connie cuts her fingers. Whew! Breathe easy for a while! :-) Ken H > far you think our responsibility extends. sorry i don't feel much like > typing, but on top of not really feeling too well anyway, 4 of the fingers > i cut earlier today still kinda hurt. > your whiny, disagreeable friend, > connie > #70728 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Tue Apr 17, 2007 5:51 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Theriigaathaa - Sisters (51) egberdina Hi Connie and all, On 18/04/07, connie wrote: > hi colette, herman, > to whatever extent the belief that "we most certainly have control over > our lives" might hold force, more power to your best wishes. i wonder how > far you think our responsibility extends. sorry i don't feel much like > typing, but on top of not really feeling too well anyway, 4 of the fingers > i cut earlier today still kinda hurt. > your whiny, disagreeable friend, > connie > > Just musing aloud here, nothing too serious. SN56.48 "It's likewise a sheer coincidence that one obtains the human state. It's likewise a sheer coincidence that a Tathagata, worthy & rightly self-awakened, arises in the world. It's likewise a sheer coincidence that a doctrine & discipline expounded by a Tathagata appears in the world. Now, this human state has been obtained. A Tathagata, worthy & rightly self-awakened, has arisen in the world. A doctrine & discipline expounded by a Tathagata appears in the world. "Therefore your duty is the contemplation, 'This is stress... This is the origination of stress... This is the cessation of stress.' Your duty is the contemplation, 'This is the path of practice leading to the cessation of stress.'" SN20.2 "In the same way, monks, few are the beings reborn among human beings. Far more are those reborn elsewhere. Thus you should train yourselves: 'We will live heedfully.' That's how you should train yourselves." While it is a sheer fluke that beings are born as humans, having been born a human your responsibility extends to what you are capable of as a human. The Buddha seems to think that as a human being all the conditions are now in place for the ability to contemplate the 4 noble truths. That we suffer is our responsibility, by virtue of us being human. That's quite a responsibility, isn't it :-) Herman #70729 From: "sukinder" Date: Wed Apr 18, 2007 12:18 pm Subject: RE: [dsg] A Meditation Tip sukinderpal Hi Dieter, All, I may be away this weekend, so I try to respond now. ========================== D: you are right : I haven't been initiated into the DSG Abhidhamma perspective. My motivation to participate in the list is to share , to exchange for the common benefit of better Right Understanding which includes an open mind to learn / to review. S> Yes as you say, "for the common benefit of better Right Understanding", though I must admit to often come from the position of preconceived conclusions and reacting without reflection, so I ask you to be patient with me. =============================== Suk:However I prefer he way of Vipassana to that of Samatha. D: when we understand vipassana as clear seeing according to reality the mind at peace (Samatha) is precondition...it is what we put into the terms .. S> You are saying that calm is a precondition for insight, I disagree with this. According to my understanding, insight, which is a level of panna that knows reality *as it is*, is a result of the development of the same mental factor, 'panna' which grows in familiarity of the characteristic of such realities. This is the "practice"/Satipatthana. What leads to this practice is what is called 'pariyatti' or 'right intellectual understanding' of the way things are. This too involves the same mental factor, panna, one that is bent towards overcoming "avijja". This is why I pointed out the difference in objective between samatha and vipassana, the former being concerned with overcoming "tanha", ends up at best suppressing it even if this be for aeons. It is only through the development of vipassana that avijja is eradicated, and along with it, tanha. Besides, the tanha which is the object of samatha panna is that which arises as a result of sense contact. This panna therefore is unaware of the other more dangerous kind of tanha, namely that which accompanies 'miccha ditthi'. Hence the great importance for ditthujukamma right from the beginning. ============================= D: through satipatthana one certainly may grow to better understanding .. as well about anatta S> :-) ========================= Suk: : Already here I see a difference in how this concept is understood. I prefer to look at Bhavana as being just two, namely Samatha and Vipassana. Samatha when developed to the full culminates in Jhana. You seem to consider samatha as being 'means' to attain Jhana via concentration.. D: I haven't followed the extensive discussion on the thread 'Bhavana' in detail ..the word - in my understanding - is mind cultivation corresponding to all steps of the Noble Path. My experience is that when there is peace of mind (samatha) then concentration (samadhi) is possible. But it is said that it may be vice versa.. so we would better talk about the tandem function S> Your understanding seems to be that the factors of the N8FP is about developing these eight limbs separately. The understanding that goes around here and which to me seems to be the correct one, is that these eight factors refer to "mental factors" arising at the moment of Path consciousness when Nibbana is the object, (perhaps the reason why they are referred to as 'Noble' to begin with?). During mundane moments, which is when the 'practice'/satipatthana happens, five or six(including one of the three virati mental factors) of these arises, and *this* constitute Bhavana or development. I do not wish to go into more details about this at this point, but I would like to ask you this; "if to be taken separately, at the absence of Right View, how are the other factors developed? What determines that they do?" ====================== D: I see the matter of conditions developed by practise as the Buddha told us .. one needs to decide on an object of concentration in order to achieve one-pointedness ...but perhaps you refer to those who lost the overall aim: panna --abolishing of ignorance? S> I am glad that you appreciate the role of panna in eradicating ignorance. This idea that one-pointedness is 'required' is this based on a particular reading of the Suttas, or is it a product of your own reasoning, or both? I think it is faulty, and at this point I'll just say that there is another interpretation, one which does not create any contradictions. ;-) And no, I do not refer to "those who lost the overall aim: panna --abolishing of ignorance", I am making the point of the need to correctly understand at the 'intellectual level' first, the Dhamma, and not to be jumping in reaction to ideas unexamined, one such being the very 'need' to have an object of meditation for the development of the Path. A clue to where I am coming from with regard to 'Right Concentration'. Concentration is "Right" by virtue of the accompanying factors. There is 'right' by virtue of being simply "kusala" as in samatha/Jhana, and there is 'right' by virtue of it being a "Path" factor. "Right Concentration" which is taught by the Buddha is surely a reference to the latter. It being sometimes compared to the one which accompanies Jhana is a reference to Path moments, in which the strength (?) of these two is the same. ====================== Suk: However whatever the inclination, the development of all involves knowing kusala from akusala. D: it is said that without sila meditation is without base S> But I think our understanding is quite different from each other. ;-) ====================== Suk: Furthermore a suitable object itself requires a good deal of "understanding" of one's accumulations, else they can't serve their purpose of being the object of kusala cittas leading to concentration. I think it might be helpful to remember that even Sariputta was wrong in suggestion "breath" as object of meditation to Rahula. D: do you know which sutta ? I remember a source in which the Buddha mentioned that the best suitable method of mediation to be recommended for the disciple can only done by him or somebody equal ... S> Yes the Buddha's omniscience, what a great quality! :-) ===================== D: For us it means trial and learn by error what shows best results.. S> I think this is a dangerous idea. Like any other dhamma, wrong view accumulates. And this dhamma in particular, is the only real hindrance to seeing the Path. Wrong practice conditioned by such wrong view creates its own 'illusion of result', this in turn, turns one even more away from the Right Path. I know that you are referring to samatha which poses a different problem to the one I mention here. But since you link samatha to the development of the vipassana, I think the same caution should apply. ======================= Suk: Unless you think that "meditation" is a kind of technique/shortcut to Jhana/Vipassana..? D: I don't follow you .. I understand meditation as one part (samadhi) of the threefold path training, involving step 6,7 and 8 S> As mentioned above, the interpretation regarding what in fact the N8FP is, is different. So this idea of 'meditation' has no place in this as far as I am concerned. ========================= Suk: S: I don't ever see anyone talking about any of this but instead there is big talk about exalted states and theories about how samatha and vipassana must be developed together. When Nina recently wrote to Han saying that samatha must go together with the development of vipassana, what she meant was that the realities involved in the development of the former, if these are not known with insight as 'conditioned realities', then it is quite useless in light of the development of the Path. In other words, the Teachings is about the need to develop the understanding of conditioned realities, all namas and rupas, and this has no particular relation to the development of samatha D: I agree with Nina that samatha and vipassana must be developed together- the understanding of ' conditioned realities' or what I believe is meant by that : khanda attachment in respect to Dependent Origination is a process .. progress S> I am not sure if you understand Nina's position correctly. What I understand Nina to be saying is that vipassana is "the practice", and samatha is "another practice". The latter becomes more meaningful when developed along with the former, on its own, it leads to a different goal. Vipassana on the other hand, can be developed *without* samatha. So in fact the need is not two ways, but one. ;-) ======================== Suk: I don't like to think in terms of dry and wet types ;-). It doesn't seem relevant except that I may learn more about different conditions. D: it may be relevant in respect to understand different approaches to the Dhamma S> No I don't agree with this idea of "different approach", sorry. Putting aside who I am and what I do, in the end there are only conditioned dhammas, *all* with the characteristic of anicca, dukkha and anatta and this is what I need to realize. ====================== Suk:Otherwise I am content with the fact that Satipatthana is the "one way" to enlightenment. D: the 7th step the 'one way ' /' the only way '. .. we could probably have a new thread about it :-) S> Starting with, what is this reference to the 7th step? ======================= Suk:It is not a matter of choice that one develops Jhana or Vipassana. No 'self' can choose to attain without or with jhana arising in tandem, before, or after. The jhana practitioner has a need to know *present* moment realities with insight as much as does the dry insight worker. So I don't agree with Han's general idea, but he knows that already. D: interesting here A.N. IV 94 transl. Bkikkhu Bodhi: These four types of individuals are to be found existing in world. Which four? There is the case of the individual who has attained internal tranquillity of awareness, but not insight into phenomena through heightened discernment. There is...the individual who has attained insight into phenomena through heightened discernment, but not internal tranquillity of awareness. There is...the individual who has attained neither internal tranquillity of awareness nor insight into phenomena through heightened discernment. And there is...the individual who has attained both internal tranquillity of awareness & insight into phenomena through heightened discernment. The individual who has attained internal tranquillity of awareness, but not insight into phenomena through heightened discernment, should approach an individual who has attained insight into phenomena ...... S> I am not sure if the reference to the individuals here is ariyans, monks or everyone in general. Indicating "those who has attained neither internal tranquility of awareness" seems to point it more to the general. But it doesn't matter, since it is true that there are jhana attainers, dry vipassana attainers, those who attain neither and those who attain both. It is also true that all levels of kusala is 'good and worthy of pursuit' if and when possible. Even an ariyan who has attained through dry-insight, he could and should be encouraged to develop other forms of kusala; insight can't be expected to arise all the time after all. So with those who have attained neither. I agree with the above, so what is the problem...? Are you saying that all this is a matter of choice? I'll reply to your other post later. Nice conversing with you Dieter, Metta, Sukinder #70730 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Tue Apr 17, 2007 6:29 pm Subject: Persuasion technique of KS (Re: Perfections N, no 8) buddhatrue Hi Scott, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Scott Duncan" wrote: > > Dear James, > To me, all this boils down to a simple statement by Kh. Sujin about > equanimity (upekkhaa). I see no controversy. Please consider this: Well, of course if KS was talking about equanimity I would have no problems with that- I would even praise her. However, when she uses phrases about how defilements aren't ugly and that we shouldn't be concerned about whether our defilements are increasing or not, then it isn't equanimity she is advocating; she is advocating passivity. But, Scott, if you see this message as equanimity and you do maintain mindfulness of the defilements in your mind and notice if they are increasing or decreasing, and maintain equanimity in that mindfulness, then I don't have anything to complain about. More power to you! Metta, James #70731 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Tue Apr 17, 2007 6:31 pm Subject: Re: Perfections N, no 10 kenhowardau --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Herman Hofman" wrote: > > Hi Nina, > > On 18/04/07, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > > > Dear friends, > > > > When we hear the words, "Just be aware" it may seem like an over- > > simplification of life, but in fact it is the answer to all our > > problems and worries about how we should be living. > > Is there self-view in the intention to be aware? Can such intended > awareness be kusala? > Hi Herman, Yes, that's a good question, but it is one that Nina and other DSG people have been answering all along. I must ask you the same question I have been asking James; "Can you really not see the point that is being made, or are you just pretending in order to win a debate?" There are two views of the world: the conventional, which is shared by uninstructed worldlings everywhere, and the ultimate, which is understood only by students of the Dhamma. Right mindfulness should be *understood* to be "the answer to all our problems." When there is that right *understanding* there is right mindfulness. Right understanding is a conditioned dhamma. It will arise when the conditions for its arising are present. (There is no need for a self that 'does things' in order to 'make right mindfulness and right understanding happen.') That is the Dhamma as understood in terms of momentary, conditioned namas and rupas. There is no other right way in which to understand it! Ken H #70732 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Tue Apr 17, 2007 8:03 pm Subject: Re: Perfections N, no 10 buddhatrue Ken H. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "kenhowardau" wrote: > I must ask you the same question I have been asking James; "Can you > really not see the point that is being made, or are you just > pretending in order to win a debate?" If that's what you think I do you can just go screw yourself. If being a Buddhist is being what you are, I want no part of it. James #70733 From: "Sukinder" Date: Tue Apr 17, 2007 9:24 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: A Meditation Tip sukinderpal Dear Nina, Thank you for this. One can never hear enough of what you have to say about Dhamma. I look forward to your comments on sati and satipatthana. Metta, Sukinder --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Dear Sukin (and Howard, and all), > As you know, I translated the entire Co to the Raahulovaadasutta. > Each time I am touched by the developmen unto maturity of Raahula. He > was so attached to the body, and the Buddha explained to him about > the five khandhas, nama and rupa. Raahula asked: should he know only > rupa? No, he should understand the nature of naama and ruupa. > Meanwhile Sariputta came along and taught him mindfulness of > breathing, and Raahula wanted to be obedient to his teacher. The > Buddha explained many aspects of Dhamma. Rahula had to be like the > earth, he had to have equanimity so that he would not be overcome #70734 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Tue Apr 17, 2007 9:30 pm Subject: The Fourfold Right Speech! bhikkhu5 Friends: Good for All are The 4 Kinds of Right Verbal Action! The Blessed Buddha once said: How, Cunda , is purity of verbal action fourfold? 1: Herein, one avoids lying, abstains from false. He speaks the truth, is devoted to the truth, reliable, trustable, never deceiving anyone. Being at a meeting, among family, in society, or in the court called upon and asked as witness to tell what he knows, he answers, if he knows nothing: I know nothing; & if he knows, he answers: I know! If he has seen nothing, he answers: I have seen nothing & if he has seen something, he answers: I have seen this and that. Thus he never deliberately speaks a lie, neither for his own advantage, nor for the advantage of others, nor for the sake of any trivial gain whatsoever. 2: He avoids divisive speech, spreading rumours, tale bearing, & gossip. What he has heard here, he does not repeat there wishing to cause dissension there by splitting those united. What he has heard there, he does not tell here so to cause conflict by splitting friends here.. Rather he unites those who are divided; and those who are united he encourages. Harmony, peace, agreement & concord gladdens him. He delights and rejoices in Harmony. He spreads & grows Harmony! 3: He avoids harsh & aggressive language, he abstains from all scolding. He speaks such words that are gentle, soothing to the ear, pleasing, heart-touching, polite, dear, considerate, interesting & agreeable.. 4: He avoids vain talk, empty & small talk, void speech and idle prattle! He abstains from all babble, chitchat, tittle-tattle and evil hearsay. He speaks at the right time, in accordance with facts, speaks what is useful, speaks about the Dhamma and the Discipline; his speech is like a precious treasure, well timed, always reasoned by arguments, moderated, well formulated & full of sound reason & common sense. In this -for all- very good way, is purity of verbal action fourfold! Source (edited extract): Numerical Discourses of the Buddha. Anguttara Nikaya AN 10:176 http://what-buddha-said.net/Canon/Sutta/AN/Index.Numerical.htm More on Right Speech (SammÄ? VÄ?cÄ?): http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/What_is_Right_Speech.htm and Animal-like Talk: http://What-Buddha-Said.net/library/DPPN/wtb/s_t/tiracchaana_kathaa.htm Friendship is the Greatest :-) Bhikkhu Samahita * Ceylon * The Fourfold Right Speech! #70735 From: "rjkjp1" Date: Tue Apr 17, 2007 11:17 pm Subject: The Commentaries are false fairy stories?: A Meditation Tip rjkjp1 --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Dieter Möller wrote: > > Dear Nina, > > so ' is there no mentioning of the 'Buddha's perfumed chamber ' within the Pali Canon ' > > but 'In the Commentaries' .. > > which makes that commentary very questionable , not to say false due to the 8th precept ( abstaining from the use of .. perfumes ) , isn't it? > > with Metta Dieter > > ======= Dear Dieter, you accuse the ancient Sangha oflying, but on what basis? The Gandha-kuti (Perfumed Chamber) was built by Anathapindika, at great expense,at Jetavan park and is a historical site which can be visited in India- although the kuti no longer exists.. It was made of fine woods - like sandlewood, which are naturally perfumed, and everyday Buddhist laypeole came to give flowers with beautiful scents. None of this is against Dhamma or the eighth precept. Robert #70736 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Tue Apr 17, 2007 11:29 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] The Commentaries are false fairy stories?: A Meditation Tip egberdina Hi RobK, On 18/04/07, rjkjp1 wrote: > > The Gandha-kuti (Perfumed Chamber) was built by Anathapindika, at > great expense,at Jetavan park and is a historical site which can be > visited in India- although the kuti no longer exists.. It was made > of fine woods - like sandlewood, which are naturally perfumed, and > everyday Buddhist laypeole came to give flowers with beautiful > scents. Could you please provide the source for the above information? Herman #70737 From: "Phil" Date: Tue Apr 17, 2007 11:12 pm Subject: Re: Perfections N, no 10 philofillet Hi James and all > If that's what you think I do you can just go screw yourself. If being No, no James. This is wrong. It should be "if screwing yourself arises, understand it. What is so terrible about screwing yourself? Why hate screwing yourself?" No need to get upset. You're on the right track. And other people have faith in what they believe (and always will believe) so might as well let them carry on. Nothing you say will change what they believe, since apparently clear evidence from the suttanta doesn't do it. Live and let live. If there was any danger of Acharn Sujin's approach to Dhamma becoming widespread, then you'd be justified in going after it. Judging from DSG it picks up about one devotee per year - harldly a proliferation. Metta, Phil #70738 From: "Phil" Date: Tue Apr 17, 2007 11:18 pm Subject: E card from land of Wrong View philofillet Hi all Hope you've been well. I'd just like to report that I have gotten a deeper understanding of what wrong view is. Having become distanced from Dhamma practice by another obsession, I have felt my belief in kamma and the results of deeds waning. And this, I know clearly, is where wrong view lies. Acharn's approach to wrong view, which is basically saying that if one does not see through the vipallasas to the degree of the sotapanna one has wrong view - that is of no concern to this busy worldling. It is the wrong view that the Buddha empasized in so many suttas that I must go after. There is not samvega now, but when there is I will not be held back by any mistaken notions that view of self negates the value of the specific practices taught by the Buddha for taking one's first steps toward liberation. No more playing wannabe sotapanna for me! (Which isn't to say that it is impossible that there are people here for whom there are conditions for sotapanna - but being told to have the understanding of a sotapanna - and this is what Acharn Sujin is telling people, when you come down to it - no thanks. Have a nice spring, everyone. Metta, Phil p.s I'll check in again in a few weeks and hopefully report that my decline from the right view that deeds have results has been stopped. #70739 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Wed Apr 18, 2007 12:07 am Subject: On debating egberdina Hi KenH, On 18/04/07, kenhowardau wrote: > > I must ask you the same question I have been asking James; "Can you > really not see the point that is being made, or are you just > pretending in order to win a debate?" > I will reply to the other points in your post within the thread it was posted, but I thought this matter you raise here warrants a new thread. There is a time-honoured tradition at dsg which spurns healthy debate, and gives the floor to people who merely want to repeat what they have heard or misheard, understood or misunderstood. This tradition denies any discoverable logic and consistency to the Dhamma, but rather amplifies that statements and interpretations of those statements are true because an authority last stated them. Such an approach must eventually sound a death knell for any understanding at all. On the other hand, it would seem to me that the purpose of debate, as opposed to unchallenged, unilateral posting, is to come to an understanding of the discoverable logic and consistency in the Dhamma. It certainly is not about winning. But while on the subject, what wins a debate? Superior understanding of the internal logic of the material being debated always wins, but then again, an opposition that doesn't understand the material very well sometimes concedes victory to an undeserving argument. But what prevents even a poor discussion, let alone a poor debate, is the smug superiority of assertions made from ivory towers, and the boundless faith of their resident yodellers. That is just my poetic way of saying that people unwilling to back up their assertions in a reasoned fashion, should not post them to start with. Herman #70740 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Wed Apr 18, 2007 12:47 am Subject: Re: Perfections N, no 10 kenhowardau Hi Phil, Thanks for this nice dojo-busting post. I prefer not to reprint the obscenities, but the gist of it is that the Buddha said we should (in some circumstances) hate. Apparently, the suttas tell us that hatred of bad things is a good thing. Contrary to popular opinion, two wrongs do make a right after all. Until now, I would not have believed that any intelligent person could believe that. But, after close examination, that is my genuine understanding of what you are saying. Please correct me if I have got it wrong. Ken H #70741 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Apr 18, 2007 2:10 am Subject: Misunderstandings (was persduasion technique) nilovg Hi James, I changed the title, that is better. Perhaps I should first take what you name outlandish. --------- James quotes Kh Sujin: "Should we hate our akusala? It is just a reality, it arises"… "I do not think, `defilements are so ugly', they are just realities. There should be understanding of them. People want to get rid of all defilements but they do not have any understanding of them. Why should our first objective not be right understanding? I do not understand why people are so much irritated by their defilements. One is drawn to the idea of self all the time, while one thinks about it whether one has less defilements or more. There is no understanding but merely thinking of kusala and akusala as `ours'. So long as there is ignorance there must be different degrees of akusala. We should just develop understanding of whatever reality appears. At the moment of developing understanding one is not carried away by thoughts about the amount of one's defilements, wondering about it how many defilements one has or whether they are decreasing. Just be aware instantly!" OUTLANDISH: Should we hate our akusala? I do not think defilements are so ugly ------- N: To hate akusala means: to have aversion, and that is more akusala. There is no end to akusala in that way. When people say: defilements are so ugly they generally say this with an idea of self. Such as: 'I want to be perfect, my perfect personality. I am too good for akusala.' When one is more realistic, one understands that for all those who are not ariyans, there are all the latent tendencies of attachment, aversion, wrong view, ignorance and these latent tendencies condition the arising of akusala citta for sure. As to< I do not think defilements are so ugly> implies: not being judgemental, but seeing them as impersonal elements that have conditions for their arising. There can be understanding of them, and then there is equanimity towards them, as Scott explained. Equanimity, tatramajjhattataa arises with each kusala citta. It is also translated as mental balance, or evenmindedness. No matter what reality arises, kusala, akusala, pleasant or unpleasant, they are all dhammas that arise because of their own condiitons. Understanding of them can be developed. Equanimity goes against attachment and aversion. We learnt about equanimity towards other people's contrarious behaviour, but what about our own akusala cittas? They are also of contrarious behaviour. There can be sincerity, patience and courage to face them, that is, to understand them as they are when they arise. As you listed under reasonable: . < One is drawn to the idea of self all the time, while one thinks about it whether one has less defilements or more. There is no understanding but merely thinking of kusala and akusala as `ours'. So long as there is ignorance there must be different degrees of akusala.> N: Ignorance, moha, arises with each akusala citta. When there is a moment of understanding some of the ignorance is eliminated. As I wrote above: we think of akusala as ours, and true, we also think of kusala as ours. There is always this underlying tendency and not easy to detect. Because of ignorance, the danger of akusala is concealed, but through the development of understanding the danger of akusala is seen and the value of kusala. We read in the Suttas about the monk: , and this can also happen to laypeople who develop right understanding. But there are bound to be many moments of forgetfulness. Perhaps at first we did not think of a slight akusala as harmful. I think for example of talking about useless things, even when they are small matters and not harmful for others, such as talk about outings, trips, the weather, etc. . But what is the citta like? It is not daana, siila or bhaavanaa, thus akusala. As laypeople we talk in this way, but it is useful to realize that it is not kusala, thus, akusala. ------- James: Just be aware instantly! [unreasonable for most people] -------- N: When one sees it in the right context it can be considered as a reminder not to be neglectful. Actually, Kh Sujin repeated in connection with the satipatthaanasutta: the words 'ardent, clearly comprehending and mindful', aataapii, sampajaano, satima. Aataapii is another word for energy, or right effort. Nina. #70742 From: Dieter Möller Date: Wed Apr 18, 2007 1:32 am Subject: Re: [dsg] The Commentaries are false fairy stories?: A Meditation Tip moellerdieter Dear Robert, you wrote: 'you accuse the ancient Sangha oflying, but on what basis? The Gandha-kuti (Perfumed Chamber) was built by Anathapindika, at great expense,at Jetavan park and is a historical site which can be visited in India- although the kuti no longer exists.. It was made of fine woods - like sandlewood, which are naturally perfumed, and everyday Buddhist laypeole came to give flowers with beautiful scents. None of this is against Dhamma or the eighth precept.' I have no problem to admit when I am wrong and to apologize however would appreciate - like Herman - to get details . 'Perfumed Chamber' and the acceptance of flowers sounds strange to me when recalling the precept of abstention from using flowers,perfumes and unguents.. (Mala-ghanda-vilepana-dharana-mandana-vibhusanatthana veramani). There are several sutta sources in which the Buddha explicitly pointed that out. Without doubt the monastery was of a great importance as ' Of the forty-five rainy seasons4 of his life as a teacher, the Buddha spent nineteen in Savatthi in Anathapindika's monastery in the Jeta Grove' like Hecker wrote. with Metta Dieter #70743 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Apr 18, 2007 2:23 am Subject: Visuddhimagga Ch XVII, 149 and Tiika. nilovg Visuddhimagga Ch XVII, 149 Intro: In this section rebirth-consciousness is classified by way of numbers, beginning with one and ending with eight. A sixfold classification is omitted. The purpose is to show the many variations in rebirth-consciousness which is in accordance with the kamma that produces it. ---------- Text Vis.148: It should be understood that when it occurs thus, its 'double class', etc., is 'mixed and not' and it is 'still further classified'. For example, though this [type of consciousness] occurs in one way only as rebirth-linking, still it is twofold as divided into mixed and unmixed with materiality; ---------- N: Cittas can be classified as four jaatis: kusala, akusala, vipaaka and kiriya. The rebirth-consciousness can be seen as one in as far as it is of the jaati of vipaaka. There are nineteen types of pa.tisandhicitta but all of them are vipaakacitta. As to its double class, thus, seeing it as twofold, the pa.tisandhicitta arises in different planes of existence and it may arise together with ruupa that is also produced by kamma or without ruupa. The Tiika states with regard to mixed or not (missita and amissita) that when it is mixed with materiality, the ruupa is nissaya-paccaya, foundation-condition for the citta. The heartbase is the physical base for citta and cetasikas, and at the moment of rebirth, the heartbase arises at the same time as the pa.tisandhi- citta, it is conascent foundation-condition. Moreover, at that moment, the heartbase and the rebirth-consciousness mutually condition one another. The Tiika explains that when the ruupa that is nissaya-paccaya is absent, the rebirth-consciousness is unmixed, that is, not arising together with ruupa. ---------- Text Vis.: it is threefold as divided according to sense-desire, fine- material, and immaterial becoming (M.i,50); ------- N: Kamma that is of the sensuous plane of citta can produce result by way of rebirth in a sensuous plane of existence, and kamma which is of the level of ruupajhaana or aruupajhaana produces result by way of rebirth in a ruupa-brahma plane or an aruupa-brahma plane. ---------- Text Vis.: it is fourfold as egg-born, womb-born, putrescence- (moisture-) born, and of apparitional generation (M.i,73); ------- N: The Visuddhimagga refers to the ‘Middle Length Sayings’ (I, sutta 12) where these ways of birth are explained. As to apparitional generation or spontaneous uprising (opapaatika), we read: ‘Devas, those in the Niraya Hell, and some men and some in the sorrowful state- this is called, Saariputta, the mode of life of spontaneous uprising.’ Thus, even some humans may be of spontaneous uprising. --------- Text Vis.: it is fivefold according to destiny (gati) (M.i,73); ---------- N: The five destinies (gati) are: the animal world, the realm of the departed, the human world and the devaplanes. The Tiika adds to gati: where one must go according to meritorious deeds and demeritorious deeds. ---------- Text Vis.: it is sevenfold according to the stations of consciousness (D.iii,253), -------- N: The Tiika adds as an example: beings different in body and different in perception (sa~n~naa). The Visuddhimagga refers to D. III, 253, dealing with differences of citta and of bodily characteristics of beings who are born. Details are mentioned in the Co. to the ‘Great Discourse on Causation”, translated by Ven. Bodhi. The Co explains: Seven variations are mentioned. 1. As to diverse in body and in perception, these are humans, some devas (of the six classes which are of the sensesphere), and some spirits in lower realms. Then other variations are mentioned which pertain to different births as a result of different stages of jhaana. 2. Those born in the ruupa-brahma plane as the result of the first jhaana are diverse in body but identical in sa~n~naa. Thus, they are born with the ruupaavacara vipaakacitta that is the result of the first jhaana. Their bodies are different and their lifespan is different according as their attainment of jhaana was limited, medium or superior. 3. Those born as the result of the second and third jhaana are the same in body, but different in sa~n~naa. An example is the gods of streaming radiance, devaa aabhassaraa. 4. Born as result of the fourth jhaana. They are uniform in body and sa~n~naa. 5, 6 and 7 are respectively birth in the aruupa-brahma planes as the result of the aruupa jhanas that have as subject: space is infinite, consciousness is infinite and 'there is nothing'. These are born without ruupa. ----------- Text Vis.: and it is eightfold according to the abodes of beings [excluding non-percipient beings] (see D.iii,263). ******** N: The abodes of beings are similar to the stations of consciousness, but as eighth is added: birth as result of the fourth aruupa jhaana: the sphere of neither perception nor non-perception. The Tiika adds that here is not counted birth as asa~n~na satta, who has ruupa-pa.tisandhi, birth without citta. ******* Conclusion: this section reminds us of the diversity in results of kamma. As we have seen, humans are diverse in body and diverse in perception. We read in the Co. to the ‘Great Discourse on Causation’: The pa.tisandhi-citta may be triple rooted: accompanied by alobha, adosa and pa~n`naa, or double-rooted, that is without pa~n~naa. When one is born without pa~n~naa one cannot in that life attain jhaana or enlightenment. People are born with different capacities and this is due to kamma. Some beings have a short lifespan and others a long lifespan and this is due to kamma. Kamma that produces rebirth-consciousness in the human plane is kusala kamma, but as we have seen, there are many degrees of the kusala vipaakacitta that is rebirth-consciousness. In the course of life there are other kammas that produce desirable and undesirable results. Some persons are born ugly, some handsome. When one is born ugly, akusala kammas of the past have an opportunity to produce undesirable results during life: someone may hear unpleasant sounds when others ridicule him. When someone is born handsome, others may respect him or listen to him. Good and bad deeds that are committed at present can have a far reaching effect on future lives. Kamma produces result not only at the moment of rebirth, but also in the course of life. When we consider this we can be exhorted not to be neglectful but develop kusala and pa~n~naa as much as we are able to. ********* Nina. #70744 From: Dieter Möller Date: Wed Apr 18, 2007 1:40 am Subject: Re: [dsg] A Meditation Tip moellerdieter Dear Sukinder, I think we may avoid confusion/cross postings when I wait for your answer to the rest of my mail . It may be easier to recognise the main points of difference in mutual understanding. Have a nice weekend ! with Metta Dieter #70745 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Apr 18, 2007 2:16 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Perfections N, no 10 nilovg Hi Herman, when there is self view, it is not awareness. Here the talk was about right awareness. Nina. Op 18-apr-2007, om 0:38 heeft Herman Hofman het volgende geschreven: > Is there self-view in the intention to be aware? Can such intended > awareness be kusala? #70746 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Wed Apr 18, 2007 3:05 am Subject: Re: On debating kenhowardau Hi Herman, Thanks for your reply. I am not trying to stifle debate - the more the merrier as far as I'm concerned. I was just asking people to try to see what it is they are arguing against. The "momentary" view of the world is a little hard to explain to people who have not heard it before. The point about "no control," for example, can sound like "Do nothing!" However, after repeated explanations (many, many repeated explanations) one might hope for a level of debate a bit higher than, "You are saying we should do nothing!" That's just one example. I won't go on unless you really want me to. I am in enough hot water as it is. :-) Ken H #70747 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Wed Apr 18, 2007 3:16 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Perfections N, no 10 egberdina Hi Nina, On 18/04/07, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > > Hi Herman, > when there is self view, it is not awareness. Here the talk was about > right awareness. I accept there can be awareness without self-view. But I do not accept that it is possible to say, or hear, "Just be aware" without self-view. Herman #70748 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Wed Apr 18, 2007 3:28 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: On debating egberdina Hi KenH, On 18/04/07, kenhowardau wrote: > > Hi Herman, > > Thanks for your reply. I am not trying to stifle debate - the more the > merrier as far as I'm concerned. I was just asking people to try to see > what it is they are arguing against. > > The "momentary" view of the world is a little hard to explain to people > who have not heard it before. The point about "no control," for > example, can sound like "Do nothing!" > I think the momentary view of the world is hard to explain because it is contrary to the way things are. "Just be aware" is not possible to understand in momentary terms. How is "Just be aware" in a momentary sense any different to "Just be Midge Farrelly"? Where are the ultimate realities in this? Why can you not convey ultimate realities if that is all there is? Herman #70749 From: han tun Date: Wed Apr 18, 2007 3:38 am Subject: Daana Corner (41) hantun1 Dear Dhamma Friends, The following is taken from “Generosity: The Inward Dimension” by Nina Van Gorkom Questions, comments and different views welcome:-) ------------------------------ Another way of generosity is the "sharing" of one's wholesome deeds with others. This does not mean that other people can receive the pleasant results of our good deeds. The Buddha taught that beings are "heirs" to their deeds. We each receive the results of the deeds we have done ourselves. Sharing wholesomeness with others means that our good deeds can be the condition for the arising of wholesome consciousness in others when they rejoice in our good deeds. We can share wholesomeness even with beings in other planes of existence, provided they are in planes where they can receive the benefits. The commentary to the Without the Walls Sutta [8] narrates that King Bimbisara offered a meal to the Buddha and omitted to dedicate his merits to other beings. Ghosts, his relatives in a former life, had hoped for this in vain, and because they were disappointed, in their despair they made a horrible screeching noise throughout the night. The Buddha explained to King Bimbisara why the ghosts had screeched. Then King Bimbisara made another offering and uttered the dedication, "Let this be for those relatives." The ghosts benefited from his gifts immediately; they had wholesome states of consciousness and their sufferings were allayed. Lotus-covered pools were generated for them in which they could bathe and drink, and they took on the color of gold. Heavenly food, heavenly clothing and heavenly palaces manifested spontaneously for their use. This story illustrates that one can share one's good deeds with departed ones. If one's departed relatives are not able to receive the merit, other beings can. It is understandable that we are sad when we lose loved ones, but if we know how to develop what is wholesome we can find great consolation. Instead of becoming filled with sadness and aversion, we should dedicate our good deeds to all those who are able to rejoice in them, then our consciousness will be wholesome. It can become our custom to share wholesomeness with others; we need not even specify to whom we wish to dedicate it. It is a Buddhist custom when a meal or robes are offered to monks to pour water over one's hands while the monks recite words of blessings, in order to give expression to one's intention to dedicate this deed to other beings. The water symbolizes a river which fills the ocean, and even so a wholesome deed is so plentiful that it can also be shared with others. Note [8] - In The Illustrator of Ultimate Meaning (Paramatthajotika), Commentary to the Minor Readings (Khuddakapatha). London: Pali Text Society, 1960. To be continued. metta, Han #70750 From: upasaka@... Date: Wed Apr 18, 2007 12:31 am Subject: Breaking Viscious Circles [Re: [dsg] Re: Perfections N, no 10] upasaka_howard Hi, Phil (and James, Ken, Scott, and all) - In a message dated 4/18/07 3:02:27 AM Eastern Daylight Time, philco777@... writes: > Hi James and all > >If that's what you think I do you can just go screw yourself. If > being > > No, no James. This is wrong. > > It should be "if screwing yourself arises, understand it. What is so > terrible about screwing yourself? Why hate screwing yourself?" > > No need to get upset. You're on the right track. And other people > have faith in what they believe (and always will believe) so might as > well let them carry on. Nothing you say will change what they believe, > since apparently clear evidence from the suttanta doesn't do it. Live > and let live. If there was any danger of Acharn Sujin's approach to > Dhamma becoming widespread, then you'd be justified in going after it. > Judging from DSG it picks up about one devotee per year - harldly a > proliferation. > > Metta, > > Phil > ============================ It is so natural and understandable for us to get upset when our honest assertions are greeted with distrust and accusations of lying, and to then respond in anger. This becomes, then, a viscious circle, with blame leading to recrimination and with distrust leading to distrust returned. Being falsely accused of lying, of knowingly misspeaking when not doing so is being attacked in a very hurtful way. The worst aspect of such attack is that it serves as ego-trigger and a spur to anger and "righteous indignation". It would be indeed best if at the outset no such accusations were made, but if instead of mistrust there were good will, for when good will is felt and expressed, it leads to growing trust, to an assumption of good faith on the part of others which precludes accusing them of ill intention and prevarication, and thereby never allows the initiating a crescendo of ill will. But even after the growth of a viscious circle of hurt, distrust, and ill will is well under way, it is never too late to short-circuit that growth by depriving it of sustenance. An ever-widening circle of distrust and upset can be broken at any point by letting go of the anger and felt need for self-justification that fuel its survival and growth. By withholding sustenance from it, it will shrink, shrivel, and die. Accordingly: I forgive any here who toany degree have not taken me at my word in any matter. I forgive any anger expressed towards me. Most of all, I apologize for expressing anger towards others. I recognize that expression of anger and distrust often reflects personal issues of upset that would be better met with compassion than hurt, anger, matching distrust, and "hitting back", and I vow to try to react with compassion instead of lashing out. I'm sure I will often fail in this effort, but I shall try. I encourage others to join me in this "peacemakers's vow". With metta, Howard #70751 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Wed Apr 18, 2007 4:34 am Subject: Re: Perfections N, no 10 buddhatrue Hi Phil, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Phil" wrote: > > > Hi James and all > > If that's what you think I do you can just go screw yourself. If > being > > No, no James. This is wrong. > > It should be "if screwing yourself arises, understand it. What is so > terrible about screwing yourself? Why hate screwing yourself?" ;-)) LOL! I really had to laugh out loud at this post. I felt a little bad about the post I sent to Ken H….I felt like I was letting my anger get the best of me and also letting him win in his constant attempt to break me down….but I just finally decided that I was sick and tired of this artificial, PC bs and I should just really tell him what I felt! I am so glad that you popped in at this point because I was really starting to feel outnumbered. Between Ken H., Scott, Nina, Connie, Collette…I was starting to feel very overwhelmed. But then you come along- the perfect "before and after" person, to give some substance to what I am trying to say. We cannot think lightly of the defilements/corruptions/evils. Small defilements (which are tips of an iceberg) can grow into murderous actions in the blink of an eye! And rather than focusing so much on the defilements of others, we need to focus first on our own defilements. So many of us feel the burning need to help others and instruct others, but that is because we are afraid/chicken-shit to face our own defilements. Phil, I really salute you because you have taken a break from this maddening nonsense to take a cold, hard look at your own defilements. And you have undertaken this action with the understanding that your life depends on it—because it does. I am just going to lay low for a while. I need to follow your example, Phil. Metta, James #70752 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Wed Apr 18, 2007 5:01 am Subject: Persuasion technique of KS (Re: Perfections N, no 8) scottduncan2 Dear James, Thanks for your reply. The whole text again: Kh. Sujin: "Should we hate our akusala? It is just a reality, it arises...I do not think, 'defilements are so ugly', they are just realities. There should be understanding of them. People want to get rid of all defilements but they do not have any understanding of them. Why should our first objective not be right understanding? I do not understand why people are so much irritated by their defilements. One is drawn to the idea of self all the time, while one thinks about it whether one has less defilements or more. There is no understanding but merely thinking of kusala and akusala as 'ours'. So long as there is ignorance there must be different degrees of akusala. We should just develop understanding of whatever reality appears. At the moment of developing understanding one is not carried away by thoughts about the amount of one's defilements, wondering about it how many defilements one has or whether they are decreasing. Just be aware instantly!" J: "...when she uses phrases about how defilements aren't ugly and that we shouldn't be concerned about whether our defilements are increasing or not, then it isn't equanimity she is advocating; she is advocating passivity." Scott: While advocating equanimity is imbedded or only implicit in the text above - as I think you correctly point out - and hence subject to reinterpretation (i.e. equanimity versus passivity), Right Understanding (sammaa-di.t.thi) is clearly set out and recommended: Kh. Sujin: "...I do not think, 'defilements are so ugly', they are just realities. There should be understanding of them. Why should our first objective not be right understanding?...There is no understanding but merely thinking of kusala and akusala as 'ours'...We should just develop understanding of whatever reality appears...At the moment of developing understanding one is not carried away by thoughts about the amount of one's defilements..." Right Understanding, according to Nyanatiloka, "...is the understanding of the 4 Noble Truths about the universality of suffering (unsatisfactoriness), of its origin, its cessation, and the path leading to that cessation." Scott: Consider the Sammaadi.t.thhi Sutta (MN9) - from excerpts on right view concerning the wholesome, the unwholesome, and the taints (since these bear on the text above): "...When, friends, a noble disciple understands the unwholesome and the root of the unwholesome, the wholesome and the root of the wholesome, in that way he is one of right view, whose view is straight, who has perfect confidence in the Dhamma and has arrived at this true Dhamma. "And what, friends, is unwholesome, what is the root of the unwholesome, the wholesome and the root of the wholesome? Killing living beings is unwholesome...taking what is not given...misconduct in sensual pleasures...false speech...malicious speech...harsh speech...gossip...covetousness...ill will...wrong view...And what is the root of the unwholesome? Greed is a root of the unwholesome; hate...delusion...And what is wholesome? Abstention from killing... taking what is not given...misconduct in sensual pleasures...false speech...malicious speech...harsh speech...gossip...covetousness...ill will...wrong view. And what is the root of the wholesome? Non-greed is a root of the wholesome...non-hate...non-delusion... "When a noble disciple has thus understood the unwholesome and the root of the unwholesome, the wholesome and the root of the wholesome, he entirely abandons the underlying tendency to lust, he abolishes the underlying tendency to aversion, he extirpates the underlying tendency to the view and conceit 'I am', and by abandoning ignorance and arousing true knowledge he here and now makes an end to suffering. In that way too a noble disciple is one of right view, whose view is straight, who has perfect confidence in the Dhamma, and has arrived at this true Dhamma." Scott: The same method is applied the taints (hence the elisions): "When, friends, a noble disciple understands the taints, the origins of the taints, the cessation of the taints, and the way leading to the cessation of the taints, in that way he is one of right view...There are these three taints: the taint of sensual desire, the taint of being, and the taint of ignorance...When a noble disciple has thus understood the taints, the origin of the taints, the cessation of the taints, and the way leading to the cessation of the taints, he entirely abandons the underlying tendency to lust, he abolishes the undersying tendency to aversion, he extirpates the underlying tendency to the view and conceit 'I am'..." Scott: Here, 'understands' is from the paa.li 'pajanati', which, as I think I set out before, is what pa~n~na 'does'. Again, I see no controversy. Sammaa-di.t.thi is taught by the Buddha. While the point is made that Kh. Sujin is 'is advocating passivity', I think that in making the point, what is being suggested as an alternative is aversion. This, I think, is missing the point. Sincerely, Scott. #70753 From: connie Date: Wed Apr 18, 2007 7:14 am Subject: Theriigaathaa - Sisters (52) nichiconn dear friends, Khemaatheriigaathaava.n.nanaa The commentary on the verses of Therii Khemaa Daharaa tva.m ruupavatiiti-aadikaa khemaaya theriyaa gaathaa. Aya.m kira padumuttarassa bhagavato kaale ha.msavatiinagare paraadhiinavuttikaa paresa.m daasii ahosi. Saa paresa.m veyyaavaccakara.nena jiivika.m kappentii ekadivasa.m padumuttarassa sammaasambuddhassa aggasaavaka.m sujaatatthera.m pi.n.daaya caranta.m disvaa tayo modake datvaa ta.mdivasameva attano kese vissajjetvaa therassa daana.m datvaa "anaagate mahaapa~n~naa buddhassa saavikaa bhaveyyan"ti patthana.m katvaa yaavajiiva.m kusalakamme The verses beginning You are young and beautiful are Therii Khemaa's. She lived as someone else's dependent, as the slave of others in the town of Ha.msavatii during the time of the Buddha Padumuttara. She made her living through serving others. One day, she saw Tera Sujaata, a chief disciple of the Fully Awakened One Padumuttara, wandering for alms. She gave him cakes, and that same day, she gave away her hair, making a gift of it to the thera. Then she made an aspiration: "In the future, may I be a disciple of great wisdom of a Buddha." And throughout her life, she was vigilant in doing good deeds. appamattaa hutvaa devamanussesu sa.msarantii anukkamena chakaamasagge, tesa.m tesa.m devaraajuuna.m mahesibhaavena upapannaa, manussalokepi anekavaara.m cakkavattiina.m ma.n.dalaraajuuna~nca mahesibhaava.m upagataa mahaasampattiyo She journeyed on among devas and men, and in due course was born in the six heavens of the sensual spheres as the chief queen of the various deva kings. And in the human world also she became the chief queen many times of wheel-turning monarchs and kings of countries, experiencing great successes. === to be continued, connie #70754 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Apr 18, 2007 7:20 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Perfections N, no 10 nilovg Hi Herman, I am thinking of the Buddha whose last words were: strive with earnestness. The Pali appamaada is used here, which can be translated as mindfulness. When the Buddha said: 'monks, be aware' it was meant as a reminder. Perhaps you fall over the word 'just' and I understand. We could take it thus: do not go somewhere else first, or wait for a favorable time. There is seeing right now, visible object right now. They appear as objects of which right understanding can be developed, if there is no forgetfulness. At the same time, many explications about the anattaness of sati have been given. It is obvious that one cannot say: sati, come forward. One is not master of sati, one cannot make it arise at will. But someone else's words can be a reminder. Nina. Op 18-apr-2007, om 12:16 heeft Herman Hofman het volgende geschreven: > I accept there can be awareness without self-view. But I do not accept > that it is possible to say, or hear, "Just be aware" without > self-view. #70755 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Apr 18, 2007 7:37 am Subject: Rupas Ch 9, no 1 nilovg Dear friends, Chapter 9 Groups of Rúpas Rúpas do not arise singly, they always arise collectively, in groups (kalåpas). Where there is solidity, the Element of Earth, there have to be the other three Great Elements, and also colour, flavour, odour and nutrition. These are the eight inseparable rúpas. A group of rúpas consisting of only the eight inseparable rúpas is called a “pure octad”. Pure octads of the body are produced by citta, temperature or nutrition, and pure octads outside the body are produced only by temperature. The groups of rúpas produced by kamma have to consist of at least nine rúpas: the eight inseparable rúpas and life faculty (jívitindriya), and such a group is called a “nonad”. Eyesense, earsense, smelling-sense, tasting-sense, bodysense, heart-base, femininity and masculinity are other kinds of rúpa produced by kamma and these arise together with the eight inseparable rúpas and life faculty, thus, they arise in groups of ten rúpas, decads. All rúpas of such a decad are produced by kamma. Thus, one speaks of eye-decad, ear-decad, nose-decad, tongue-decad, body-decad, heart-base-decad, femininity-decad and masculinity-decad. As to the body-decad, this arises and falls away at any place of the body where there can be sensitivity. Kamma produces groups of rúpas from the arising moment of the rebirth- consciousness (paìisandhi-citta). In the case of human beings, kamma produces at that moment the three decads of bodysense, sex (femininity or masculinity) and heart-base, and it produces these decads throughout our life. The eye-decad and the decads of ear, nose and tongue are not produced at the first moment of life but later on. Citta does not produce rúpa at the first moment of life. The citta which immediately succeeds the rebirth-consciousness, namely the life- continuum (bhavanga-citta), produces rúpa. One moment of citta can be divided into three extremely short phases: its arising moment, the moment of its presence and the moment of its falling away. Citta produces rúpa at its arising moment, since citta is then strong. At the moment of its presence and the moment of its dissolution it is weak and therefore it does not produce rúpa (Visuddhimagga XX, 32). ****** Nina. #70756 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Apr 18, 2007 7:42 am Subject: Perfections N, no 11 nilovg Dear friends, Chapter 3 THE PERFECTION OF SILA We read in the Sasa-Jãtaka that the Bodhisatta, when he was a hare, wanted to offer his own flesh to a brahmin. When he was about to let himself fall into the fire, he shook himself three times so that the insects which might be in his coat would not get hurt. During innumerable lives the Bodhisatta developed the perfection of sila, there was no slla he had not observed. He trained himself to refrain from deeds by which he could harm other beings and from speech which is untrue, harsh, slanderous and idle. We read in the commentary to the Cariyapittaka: Thus, esteeming virtue as the foundation for all achievements, as the soil for the origination of all the Buddha-qualities, the beginning, footing, head and chief of all the dhammas issuing in Buddhahood--and recognizing gain, honour and fame as a foe in the guise of a friend, a Bodhisatta should diligently and thoroughly perfect his virtue as a hen guards its eggs: through the power of mindfulness and clear comprehension in the control of bodily and vocal action, in the taming of the sense-faculties, in the purification of livelihood and in the use of the requisites. Sila is not only refraining from unwholesome actions and speech, it is also the performing of wholesome actions and speech, such as showing respect or helping others. The Bodhisatta was foremost in virtuous deeds and speech. He was always ready to help and protect other beings. He spoke words which were blameless, pleasant and beneficial, having beings' welfare in mind. The commentary to the Cariyapitaka states that the Bodhisatta had courteous conduct to those worthy of respect. He was waiting upon the sick and helping those who were in need. He inspired with talk on Dhamma those who were in need to be inspired. He was contented with little and he saw danger in the slightest faults. We have read in the quotation above that the Bodhisatta recognized gain, honour and fame as a foe in the guise of a friend. One may neglect sila because one believes to gain something, but actually there will be great loss. Neglect of sila brings unpleasant results. For different people different precepts may be difficult to observe, depending on their accumulations. During our pilgrimage we discussed several times the fifth precept, abstention from intoxicants and alcoholic drinks. If one is used to drinking beer or wine one may be unable to refrain from drinking immediately, but through consideration of the teachings one may begin to see the disadvantages of it. Bhante Dhammadhara said that alcohol seems at first to bring what is desirable, but that its effects are not desirable. Alcohol can lead to madness. It hinders one in the performing of ones daily tasks, there will be no swift recognition of the tasks to be done both in the present and in the future, and one will be inclined to sleep late in the morning. One may easily say and do very unwholesome things one regrets later on. We may talk and think about the benefits of kusala and the dangers of akusala, but discussing or thinking is not enough. ******** Nina. #70757 From: "Robert" Date: Wed Apr 18, 2007 8:51 am Subject: a question avalo1968 Dear Dhamma Study Group, May I ask a question of the group? Is this statement correct? A person suffering from frustration or anger in this moment does so because conditions were created in the past for that frustration or anger to arise. To prevent the arising of frustration or anger in the future he/she must cease to create the conditions for its arising. Thank you, Robert #70758 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Apr 18, 2007 12:08 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] a question nilovg Dear Robert Avalo (there is another Rob here too), He accumulated anger since past times again and again. The anger falls away, but it lies dormant in each citta as a latent tendency. This latent tendency conditions the arising of anger again. Only the person who has attained the third stage of enlightenment, the non-returner, has eradicated anger. He does not cling to sense objects anymore, and thus there are no conditions for aversion or anger. For us, when things are not the way we would like them to be, aversion arises. The way leading to the eradication of aversion is the development of the eightfold Path. One can begin to develop more understanding, not only of anger, but of all phenomena that appear one at a time through the six doorways. First the wrong view of self has to be eradicated, and this is at the first stage of enlightenment. We notice anger, but now there is still an idea of my anger. It can be seen as a conditioned dhamma, that is the beginning of understanding. Nina. Op 18-apr-2007, om 17:51 heeft Robert het volgende geschreven: > A person suffering from frustration or anger in this moment does so > because conditions were created in the past for that frustration or > anger to arise. To prevent the arising of frustration or anger in the > future he/she must cease to create the conditions for its arising. #70759 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Apr 18, 2007 12:19 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] The Commentaries are false fairy stories?: A Meditation Tip nilovg Dear Dieter, I understand your point. But we read that some persons offered a lotus to a Buddha or Silent Buddha. This is a sign of respect. The Buddha who received this would not decorate his body with it or sniff the odour. The Buddha had no attachment. To observe the precept is another matter. One will not for oneself indulge in these things. Nina. Op 18-apr-2007, om 10:32 heeft Dieter Möller het volgende geschreven: > Perfumed Chamber' and the acceptance of flowers sounds strange to > me when > recalling the precept of abstention from using flowers,perfumes and > unguents.. #70760 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Wed Apr 18, 2007 1:07 pm Subject: Re: a question kenhowardau Hi Robert A and Nina, ------------------- RA: > May I ask a question of the group? Is this statement correct? A person suffering from frustration or anger in this moment does so because conditions were created in the past for that frustration or anger to arise. To prevent the arising of frustration or anger in the future he/she must cease to create the conditions for its arising. -------------------- Welcome to the group, Robert. Thank you for the excellent question, and thank you, Nina, for the excellent answer - explanations of the 8- fold path are always fresh and new no matter how many times we have seen them before. I wonder what you (Robert) had in mind when you said "cease to create the conditions for its arising." Hiding away from the world - in order to avoid the people and things that annoy us - is not the answer, but sometimes it might help. There are no rules; each of us can only do what seems best in the circumstances. The important thing is that we hear, consider and understand the Buddha's teaching. That, and only that, will lead to final eradication of the defilements. Ken H #70761 From: upasaka@... Date: Wed Apr 18, 2007 11:07 am Subject: Re: Breaking Viscious Circles [Re: [dsg] Re: Perfections N, no 10] upasaka_howard Hi, all - For those who are non-native speakers of English: My apologies - the correct spelling is v i c i o u s, not what I wrote, which seems to spell a nonsensical cross between 'vicious' and 'viscous'. ;-) With metta, Howard P.S. I sent a correction earlier, but it seems to have not arrived. #70762 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Wed Apr 18, 2007 3:12 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Persuasion technique of KS (Re: Perfections N, no 8) egberdina Hi James, Scott or anybody else that wants to chip in, On 18/04/07, buddhatrue wrote: > > > > > Dear James, > > > To me, all this boils down to a simple statement by Kh. Sujin about > > equanimity (upekkhaa). I see no controversy. Please consider this: > > > Well, of course if KS was talking about equanimity I would have no > problems with that- I would even praise her. However, when she uses > phrases about how defilements aren't ugly and that we shouldn't be > concerned about whether our defilements are increasing or not, then > it isn't equanimity she is advocating; she is advocating passivity. > > But, Scott, if you see this message as equanimity and you do maintain > mindfulness of the defilements in your mind and notice if they are > increasing or decreasing, and maintain equanimity in that > mindfulness, then I don't have anything to complain about. More > power to you! > I am more than a little puzzled. Are we talking here as though we agree with the Samurai that there is merit in whatever a Samurai does, eg decapitating his opponent, if this is done with perfect equanimity? Herman #70763 From: connie Date: Wed Apr 18, 2007 4:51 pm Subject: Re: Persuasion technique of KS nichiconn Hey Herman & Rapier Twirlers, Herman: I am more than a little puzzled. Are we talking here as though we agree with the Samurai that there is merit in whatever a Samurai does, eg decapitating his opponent, if this is done with perfect equanimity? Connie: As long as it is a Samurai maintaining that a Samurai is doing something, it is being done with self-view & that famous Samurai pride, so no, I guess we're saying something else. I don't think that one's "perfect equanimity" would be the same as the "equanimity" the texts call a "perfection". peace, connie #70764 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Wed Apr 18, 2007 5:19 pm Subject: Persuasion technique of KS (Re: Perfections N, no 8) buddhatrue Hi Herman, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Herman Hofman" wrote: > > Hi James, Scott or anybody else that wants to chip in, > > On 18/04/07, buddhatrue wrote: > > > > > > > > Dear James, > > > > > To me, all this boils down to a simple statement by Kh. Sujin about > > > equanimity (upekkhaa). I see no controversy. Please consider this: > > > > > > Well, of course if KS was talking about equanimity I would have no > > problems with that- I would even praise her. However, when she uses > > phrases about how defilements aren't ugly and that we shouldn't be > > concerned about whether our defilements are increasing or not, then > > it isn't equanimity she is advocating; she is advocating passivity. > > > > But, Scott, if you see this message as equanimity and you do maintain > > mindfulness of the defilements in your mind and notice if they are > > increasing or decreasing, and maintain equanimity in that > > mindfulness, then I don't have anything to complain about. More > > power to you! > > > > I am more than a little puzzled. Are we talking here as though we > agree with the Samurai that there is merit in whatever a Samurai does, > eg decapitating his opponent, if this is done with perfect equanimity? You ask a very good question. No, the samurai would not be acting with equanimity; he would be acting with "Shamelessness of evil (ahirika)", an unwholesome mental factor. When the mind experiences equanimity, the hindrances are very much subdued and one can see the defilements with a cool and clear mind (this is normally accomplished during meditation: samatha followed by vipassana). The mind with equanimity knows the difference between good and evil and wants to avoid evil. What KS advocates in the disputed passage I quoted is clearly not equanimity. First, if it was equanimity she was advocating she would have said so. Surely, with her fast knowledge of Pali terms and Abhidhamma, she would say the word "equanimity" at least once if that is what she meant. Secondly, she states that she doesn't consider the defilements "ugly", nor should people be concerned if they are increasing or decreasing. Even a mind in equanimity would know that the defilements are "ugly", because they are ugly...they are unwholesome...they are evil; and the mind in equanimity would also be aware of the increasing and decreasing state of the defilements and would strive toward their decreasing. This is what the Buddha taught as Right Effort. Metta, James #70765 From: "Phil" Date: Wed Apr 18, 2007 5:26 pm Subject: Re: Perfections N, no 10 philofillet Hi James >But then you come > along- the perfect "before and after" person, to give some substance > to what I am trying to say. I was in a hurry, so I don't think I really added so much substance. If I had more time I would have posted some sutta passages > > We cannot think lightly of the defilements/corruptions/evils. Small > defilements (which are tips of an iceberg) can grow into murderous > actions in the blink of an eye! Yes, this is it. The Buddha said that we have to consider our mind to be an open sore, and protect it as such. There are so many suttas in which we are encouraged to assess the current state of bad tendencies,and to challenge them. I do understand what people mean when they say don'T "hate" the defilements. That doesn't help. As Scott very eloquently posted, it's about equanimity. If there has been an evil deed, kicking ourselves won't help. It's perfectly true that there is no "Phil" to kick in ultimate terms. This can be appreciatied intellectually, and it provides a balm for non-remorse. But to think that this sort of intellectual understanding is any way sufficient to fulfill the Buddha's teaching of guarding the sense doors, which is ever-so-explicit in so many suttas. No, that's not right. And rather than focusing so much on > the defilements of others, we need to focus first on our own > defilements. Absolutely. I don't think there would be debate from anyone on this point. Anyways, hang in there James, and all. No need to get angry. Ken is obviously a very good man who is - in our opinion - a bit off kilter on his Dhamma view. If we all got together and had a picnic there would be warm smiles and lots of laughter, I'm sure. The internet lends itself to harsh bites at times. Off again. Catch you later. Metta, Phil p.s > I am just going to lay low for a while. I need to follow your > example, Phil. not too low. I find that just having posted what I did yesterday got me refocused more on the Dhamma. So it is true that discussing Dhamma is very important. #70766 From: "Phil" Date: Wed Apr 18, 2007 5:33 pm Subject: Re: Perfections N, no 10 philofillet HI Ken > Thanks for this nice dojo-busting post. Yes, this is the main reason I'm reluctant to post at dSG these days. I do think it was set up as a place for Acharn Sujin's students to discuss, and I don't want to be a dojo-buster. I still do believe that. I prefer not to reprint the > obscenities, but the gist of it is that the Buddha said we should (in > some circumstances) hate. Apparently, the suttas tell us that hatred of > bad things is a good thing. Contrary to popular opinion, two wrongs do > make a right after all. > > Until now, I would not have believed that any intelligent person could > believe that. But, after close examination, that is my genuine > understanding of what you are saying. Please correct me if I have got > it wrong. You probably got it right. As I jsut posted to James, and have posted before, I disagree with his statement that we should hate defilements. There can be equanimity. But to think that our understanding of them is in some way providing guarding of the sense doors is very naive, I think, and fails to take advantage of the very , very, very explicit instructions provided by the Buddha. There are prescriptive suttas. This is utterly clear. They aren't all prescriptive, but many/most are, I don't know enough to say which quanitifier applies. Metta, Phil #70767 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Wed Apr 18, 2007 6:04 pm Subject: Persuasion technique of KS (Re: Perfections N, no 8) scottduncan2 Dear Herman, Interesting question: H: "I am more than a little puzzled. Are we talking here as though we agree with the Samurai that there is merit in whatever a Samurai does, eg decapitating his opponent, if this is done with perfect equanimity?" No. I'd say that the Samurai was completely full of himself. Atthasaalinii (p. 259): "Equanimity has the characteristic of evolving the mode of centrality as regards beings; its function is appreciation of others; its manifestation is quieting both aversion and sycophancy; its proximate cause is seeing the heritage of the occuring kamma as 'Beings are the property to their kamma. By its influence they will attain to pleasure, or be free from pain, or not fall from the prosperity already acquired*. Its consummation is the quieting of aversion and of sycophancy; its failure is the production of a profane and unintelligent indifference. "*The Muula-Tika: I.e., absence of knowledge (a~n~naa.na), may also be taken to be devoid of joy and grief." Sincerely, Scott. #70768 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Wed Apr 18, 2007 6:20 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Perfections N, no 10 egberdina Hi KenH, On 18/04/07, kenhowardau wrote: > > > > > Is there self-view in the intention to be aware? Can such intended > > awareness be kusala? > > > > Hi Herman, > > Yes, that's a good question, but it is one that Nina and other DSG > people have been answering all along. > > There are two views of the world: the conventional, which is shared > by uninstructed worldlings everywhere, and the ultimate, which is > understood only by students of the Dhamma. You seem to be oblivious to the fact that talking about ultimate realities is a conventional activity, one carried out by uninstructed worldlings everywhere. A student of Dhammas needs to be silent and secluded in order to be that. > > Right mindfulness should be *understood* to be "the answer to all our > problems." When there is that right *understanding* there is right > mindfulness. Right understanding is a conditioned dhamma. It will > arise when the conditions for its arising are present. (There is no > need for a self that 'does things' in order to 'make right > mindfulness and right understanding happen.') > Right. So why keep telling everyone what they should be understanding? > That is the Dhamma as understood in terms of momentary, conditioned > namas and rupas. There is no other right way in which to understand > it! Why spoil it by talking about it? Herman #70769 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Wed Apr 18, 2007 6:31 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Persuasion technique of KS (Re: Perfections N, no 8) egberdina Hi Scott, On 19/04/07, Scott Duncan wrote: > > > Dear Herman, > > Interesting question: > > H: "I am more than a little puzzled. Are we talking here as though we > agree with the Samurai that there is merit in whatever a Samurai does, > eg decapitating his opponent, if this is done with perfect equanimity?" > > No. I'd say that the Samurai was completely full of himself. > > Atthasaalinii (p. 259): > > "Equanimity has the characteristic of evolving the mode of centrality > as regards beings; its function is appreciation of others; What does evolving the mode of centrality mean? What is "others" in terms of dhammas? I ask because the atthasalini is a commentary on the dhammasangani, isn't it? its > manifestation is quieting both aversion and sycophancy; its proximate > cause is seeing the heritage of the occuring kamma as 'Beings are the > property to their kamma. By its influence they will attain to > pleasure, or be free from pain, or not fall from the prosperity > already acquired*. Its consummation is the quieting of aversion and > of sycophancy; its failure is the production of a profane and > unintelligent indifference. > I would certainly agree with you that our friend the samurai is full of himself, but I don't see why that follows from the above. Perhaps that will be clearer when I understand what evolving the mode of centrality means. > "*The Muula-Tika: I.e., absence of knowledge (a~n~naa.na), may also > be taken to be devoid of joy and grief." > Herman #70770 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Wed Apr 18, 2007 6:56 pm Subject: Breaking Viscious Circles [Re: [dsg] Re: Perfections N, no 10] kenhowardau Hi Howard (and fellow Peacemakers), I don't want to ignore your request, but I'm not quite ready to go along with it either. I think an apology from me along the lines you have suggested could give a wrong impression. It could suggest my motives were even more akusala than was actually the case. People who weren't offended before might suddenly take umbrage. :-) Suffice it to say; I don't see the deliberate distortion of someone else's argument as a major crime. We all do it in normal daily life: lawyers are paid big money for it: politicians are lauded for it: salesmen get the sack if they don't do it: we can't make our children do as they are told unless we manipulate their arguments to some extent. I think it is perfectly acceptable to point out to someone that maybe they aren't being perfectly fair. It's not a major crime - we all do it!. Also, I wouldn't want to discourage people from speaking their mind just because someone might be overly sensitive. That could lead to a kind of neurotic blackmail. :-) Ken H #70771 From: "colette" Date: Wed Apr 18, 2007 6:03 pm Subject: The Man From Onion Valley ksheri3 Hi connie, > i wonder how > far you think our responsibility extends. colette: Wow, that statement really plays havok with the consciousness of a non-stoned person. ;-) Lets try to bring that down out of the upper atmosphere shall we? > to whatever extent the belief that "we most certainly have control over > our lives" might hold force, more power to your best wishes. colette: okay, now I've qualified it somewhat. You contend that there is a force that somehow controls our lives, "...might hold force,". I interpret this as meaning that you suggest that force is the cause and control is the effect. As I said, Wow that statement you made is OUT THERE. I advise not taking so much of that narcotic called Nyquil or whatever drug from whatever cartel you purchase your choices from ie drug of choice. Now we've gotta qualify these concepts called "Force" and "control". Well, you'll be boxed in that corner for a little while. Lets take this astronomical lunicy in a different direction: "What does 'Vipassyana' mean? According to Kamalashila in his Bhawanakrama and Aniruddhacharya in Abhidhamathya Sanghaha 'Vi" means special or varied (vivid), total or holistic and 'passyana' is to see. English words like insight, holistic sight, sight of totality explain some of the meanings of Vipassyana. More accurately, to see or gain insight in Vastusthiti is Vipassyana." (I have a wonderful explaination of the Kagyupas and Yogacarins somewhere in the stack I currently truck to & from the library but I can't seem to locate it at the second.) So, moving on, not content to dwell in quagmires or styes, maybe you can tell that I'm moving in a certain direction, that of "mind-only" or Yogacara through a Mahamudra and/or Dzogchen. As par for the course in my tried and true way of discovery and learning, I take chances which means that I have to do a lot of guessing THEN as is par for the course of the 1st card in the Major Arcana, the Magician or Juggler, I then manipulate that which is guessed at until the correct configuration is achieved. At least the operation has been breached, started, begun, so at least I don't have to worry about those monumental tasks such as starting the project. Unfortunately, like all Geminis,(sorry, I forgot my Emerald Tablets) I have trouble with maintaining the effort which completes the project. That which confronts me is this Obscuration: > to whatever extent the belief that "we most certainly have control over > our lives" might hold force, more power to your best wishes. colette: force always preceeds control, control always follows force. I am to decide what amount of force is needed in my life to satify my desire for control of my life, no? Hmmm, "form follows function" so sayith the ole boy network. But then there's this buddhist booby-trap as a foundational called NAME & FORM. (Luckily, I'm wearing my preassure suite, so this high up won't really bother me although I hope you've heard Leon Rustle state: "I'm up on the tight wire, one side's ice and one is fire" I advise not looking down, vertigo you know). You also suggest that we, in our individuality, have NO CONTROL in the lives that we, as individuals, live. I take it that you see it as "others" possessing the control over our individual lives. This, the "object" of control and the "object" in control,is your focus, connie. I can understand that you think that way and you issue that thought to the masses but I contend it to be not even worthy of the definition of WRONG VIEW. Naturally, Sunyata's gotta play a role, no? You suggest that I relinguish the responsibility and control of the life that I have to a group, maybe a sorrority maybe a fraternity maybe a manufacturing agent such as Matel that shows Quality Control in the line of Barbie & Ken dolls that graduate from the manufacturing facility known as University? One may find that Maroon is the choice of colors for both Virginia Tech and University of Chicago. I can only think of Pultroons, whatever. I will be pondering this concept of relinguishing control of my life to that of shadowy figures tonight. thank you for the concept. I hope you will enjoy listening to some music you may find as in synchronization here, "they'll be slippin' into darkness slippin' out of sight. When it all gets too heavy. That's when they come and they go. They've got one thing in common. They've got the fire down below." toodles, colette --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, connie wrote: > > hi colette, herman, > to whatever extent the belief that "we most certainly have control over > our lives" might hold force, more power to your best wishes. i wonder how > far you think our responsibility extends. sorry i don't feel much like > typing, but on top of not really feeling too well anyway, 4 of the fingers > i cut earlier today still kinda hurt. > your whiny, disagreeable friend, > connie > #70772 From: upasaka@... Date: Wed Apr 18, 2007 3:19 pm Subject: Re: Breaking Viscious Circles [Re: [dsg] Re: Perfections N, no 10] upasaka_howard Hi, Ken - In a message dated 4/18/07 9:59:23 PM Eastern Daylight Time, kenhowa@... writes: > > Hi Howard (and fellow Peacemakers), > > I don't want to ignore your request, but I'm not quite ready to go > along with it either. I think an apology from me along the lines you > have suggested could give a wrong impression. It could suggest my > motives were even more akusala than was actually the case. People > who weren't offended before might suddenly take umbrage. :-) ------------------------------------------- Howard: While I apologized, I wasn't inviting anyone else to do so. My "invitation" went as follows: <> That calls for no apologies from anyone, and the vow, if taken by someone, needn't be proclaimed. It's what is in one's mind (and beart) that counts as far as vows are concerned. -------------------------------------------- > > Suffice it to say; I don't see the deliberate distortion of someone > else's argument as a major crime. We all do it in normal daily life: > lawyers are paid big money for it: politicians are lauded for it: > salesmen get the sack if they don't do it: we can't make our children > do as they are told unless we manipulate their arguments to some > extent. > ----------------------------------------- Howard: Well, you see the matter however you see it. We differ on this, then. ------------------------------------------ I think it is perfectly acceptable to point out to someone > > that maybe they aren't being perfectly fair. It's not a major crime - > we all do it!. > > Also, I wouldn't want to discourage people from speaking their mind > just because someone might be overly sensitive. That could lead to a > kind of neurotic blackmail. :-) ----------------------------------------- Howard: Well, all that I vowed was to do my best to react with compassion instead of lashing out.If Ican manage that, I don't consider it a serious compromise ofmy freedom of speech. But,hey, to each his own. ------------------------------------------- > > Ken H > > > ======================== With metta, Howard #70773 From: connie Date: Wed Apr 18, 2007 7:44 pm Subject: Re: fingers nichiconn Thanks Ken, KenH: I wish your fingers and the rest of you a speedy recovery. They say bad things come in threes. Howard gets a cold, Jon has a collision with his surfboard, Connie cuts her fingers. Whew! Breathe easy for a while! :-) connie: I thought the cut fingers kinda pointed out a lack of control on my part but i sure feel better thinking about them giving you a brief bit of freedom from fear! ;) take care, connie #70774 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Wed Apr 18, 2007 8:13 pm Subject: Re: Perfections N, no 10 kenhowardau Hi Phil, Thanks for looking in on us. It's always nice to have you around - no matter how obstinate you are. :-) I'll be in trouble with Jon and Sarah for mentioning dojos. They don't want DSG to be seen as a closed shop. Christians, Mahayanists, and anybody else are all welcome as long as they are prepared to discuss the Dhamma. My main gripe is with people who claim that K Sujin's students look outside the texts for authority. If you can find any point on which K Sujin "goes it alone" (so to speak) please say so. I am sure every purported example of such a thing that has ever been raised here has been dealt with comprehensively. Otherwise, we would be reminded of it every day. :-) Ken H --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Phil" wrote: > > HI Ken > > Thanks for this nice dojo-busting post. > > Yes, this is the main reason I'm reluctant to post at dSG these > days. I do think it was set up as a place for Acharn Sujin's students > to discuss, and I don't want to be a dojo-buster. I still do believe > that. > #70775 From: upasaka@... Date: Wed Apr 18, 2007 4:18 pm Subject: Re: Breaking Viscious Circles [Re: [dsg] Re: Perfections N, no 10] upasaka_howard Hi again, Ken - In a message dated 4/18/07 10:20:44 PM Eastern Daylight Time, upasaka@... writes: > ------------------------------------------- > Howard: > While I apologized, I wasn't inviting anyone else to do so. My > "invitation" went as follows: < lashing out. I'm sure I will often fail in this effort, but I shall try. I > encourage others to join me in this "peacemakers's vow".>> That calls for no > > apologies from anyone, and the vow, if taken by someone, needn't be > proclaimed. It's > what is in one's mind (and beart) that counts as far as vows are concerned. > -------------------------------------------- > ============================= What I quoted there got transmitted poorly. It was: << I vow to try to react with compassion instead of lashing out. I'm sure I will often fail in this effort, but I shall try. I encourage others to join me in this "peacemakers's vow". >> With metta, Howard #70776 From: "Robert" Date: Wed Apr 18, 2007 9:07 pm Subject: Re: a question avalo1968 Dear Nina, Thank you very much for your answer. You state things in a very clear and helpful way. Robert A. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Dear Robert Avalo (there is another Rob here too), > > He accumulated anger since past times again and again. The anger > falls away, but it lies dormant in each citta as a latent tendency. > This latent tendency conditions the arising of anger again. #70777 From: "Robert" Date: Wed Apr 18, 2007 9:50 pm Subject: Re: a question avalo1968 Hello Ken H, Thank you for your kind reply. You did hit on the key phrase in my question when you cited "cease to create the conditions for its arising". I believe the example you mentioned - trying to avoid the things that annoy us is useful if you recognize that a situation is beyond your capacity to deal with skillfully. In that case avoidance is the best choice. On the other hand, if there is an annoyance in your life that is something you can train with and use to investigate the way your mind works, it can be very useful and to avoid it is to lose the opportunity to train. But the generic answer is, as Nina suggested in her reply, is to work to loosen our clinging to all things, since whatever frustration and anger arises does so because there is something we want that we cannot get. So, to cease to create the conditions for its arising would be to cease to do those things that strengthen our attachment. Regards, Robert A #70778 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Wed Apr 18, 2007 9:43 pm Subject: The Chief Ability! bhikkhu5 Friends: What is the Chief Ability inducing Awakening? The Blessed Buddha once said: Bhikkhus, red sandalwood is known as the best among fragrant and sweet-scented heartwoods. It is declared to be their chief... Similarly, among the various states conducive to enlightenment the Ability of Understanding is declared to be the best & their chief, that is, for the rapt attainment of this sublime Enlightenment...!!! And what, Bhikkhus, are the states conducive to Enlightenment? The Ability of Faith is a state leading to Awakening!! The Ability of Energy is a state leading to Awakening!! The Ability of Awareness is a state leading to Awakening!! The Ability of Concentration is a state leading to Awakening!! The Ability of Understanding is a state leading to Awakening!! Bhikkhus, these five abilities, developed and cultivated, if unarisen, do not arise except after the arrival of a Perfectly Enlightened One, a Tathagata, an Arahat! These five abilities, advanced and refined, do not arise apart from the Discipline & Teaching of Well Gone One! Source (edited extract): The Grouped Sayings of the Buddha. Samyutta Nikaya. Book [V:231-236] section 48: The Abilities: 55+58+60. Friendship is the Greatest :-) Bhikkhu Samahita * Ceylon * The Chief Ability! #70779 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Apr 19, 2007 1:08 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Persuasion technique of KS (Re: Perfections N, no 8) nilovg Dear Scott, thank you for your post which I saved in my files. It is food for thought. He has perfect confidence: I like to think this over. Such confidence stems from direct knowledge by which the Truth of the Dhamma is verified. We read about kusala and akusala, we have intellectual understanding of them, but their characteristics can be known as a kind of dhamma, as nama, when they actually appear. Perfect confidence is the confidence of the sotaapanna who has developed direct understanding of nama and rupa up to the stage of enlightenment. He 'has arrived at this true Dhamma'. But we can begin, in being mindful of whatever appears, not being selective as to the object of awareness and right understanding. In this way all realities can be faced with equanimity. Wharever appears has arisen because of conditions. Nina. Op 18-apr-2007, om 14:01 heeft Scott Duncan het volgende geschreven: > Scott: Consider the Sammaadi.t.thhi Sutta (MN9) - from excerpts on > right view concerning the wholesome, the unwholesome, and the taints > (since these bear on the text above): > > "...When, friends, a noble disciple understands the unwholesome and > the root of the unwholesome, the wholesome and the root of the > wholesome, in that way he is one of right view, whose view is > straight, who has perfect confidence in the Dhamma and has arrived at > this true Dhamma. #70780 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Apr 19, 2007 2:17 am Subject: Re: [dsg] disappearance of dhamma nilovg Dear Leo, True, there will be the disappearance of the Dhamma. In one of the suttas the Buddha said that people will prefer poetry to the teachings, and also in the Co. we find many details. The Book of the Pa.t.thana (conditions) is the first to go and then follow other parts, the Vinaya being the last. But it is not time yet and we still have the opportunity to hear true Dhamma. Let us not waste this opportunity, life is so short. The four noble Truths is specifically the teaching of the Buddhas. When we develop right understanding of all realities that appear we follow the way leading to the realization of the four noble Truths. That is the highest respect we can pay to the Buddha. So long as there is right practice the Dhamma has not yet disappeared. Nina. Op 18-apr-2007, om 1:15 heeft Leo het volgende geschreven: > Some time ago I have seen about things that make dissapearance of > Dhamma. It says that when iron eagle fly it is dissapearance of > Dhamma. How to avoid that condition? > What would be the best solution? #70781 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Apr 19, 2007 2:22 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Visuddhimagga Ch XVII, 149 and Tiika. nilovg Dear Connie, Larry and friends, the Vis. title had the wrong number, it should be Ch XVII, 148, as can be seen within the post. Connie, can this be altered? Nina. Op 18-apr-2007, om 11:23 heeft Nina van Gorkom het volgende geschreven: > Visuddhimagga Ch XVII, 149 #70782 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Apr 19, 2007 2:03 am Subject: what is sati nilovg Dear Lodewijk, Howard and all who are interested in sati, I continue with a quote from my Visuddhimagga study. Last time I tried to explain sati of the levels of daana and siila: sati does not waste an opportunity for kusala. Usually we are forgetful when there is an opportunity for dana, or helping (which is a kind of siila), but when sati arises it 'remembers' wholesomeness. ------- Quote: N: Firm remembrance is the proximate cause of sati. When one listens to the Dhamma and considers it again and again there can be firm remembrance of what one has heard, and thus, there are conditions for the arising of sati which is mindful of the naama or ruupa appearing at the present moment. Text Vis. : or its proximate cause is the foundations of mindfulness concerned with the body, and so on (see M. Sutta 10). N: The four Applications of Mindfulness include all naamas and ruupas that can be the objects of mindfulness. When they have become the objects or bases for sati they are the proximate cause of mindfulness. The four Applications of Mindfulness remind us that naama and ruupa occurring in daily life are the objects of mindfulness. We are reminded to be aware of naama and ruupa no matter whether we are walking, standing, sitting of lying down. Also when akusala citta arises it can be object of mindfulness, it is classified under the Application of Mindfulness of citta. One should learn to see citta in citta and not take akusala citta for self. ************************************************** N: When we read definitions of sati we can have intellectual understanding of it. There are different ways of translating the term sati, such as vigilance or watchfulness. But there can be vigilance with an idea of self who is vigilant. When we have listened to the Dhamma and we have heard about the objects of satipatthana: one naama or ruupa at a time as it appears through one doorway, there is intellectual understanding. We can begin to see that nama and rupa arise because of their own conditions, and that nobody can create them or make them appear. We have learnt that all realities are anattaa, non-self, but this knowledge has to be applied to the dhammas that appear. It has to be applied to sati of satipa.t.thaana, in other words, sati of the level of vipassanaa. This level of sati arises together with right understanding. Sati arises with kusala citta, and kusala citta is also accompanied by non-attachment, alobha. Sati can arise when there is no longing for it, no trying. It arises unexpectantly, without preparation, and at such a moment pa~n~naa can know that there is sati, and that such a moment is different from the many moments of cittas with forgetfulness of realities. For example, sound may arise and appear to sati, there can be awareness of it. One does not try to be aware, it cannot be helped that awareness arises. Or hearing, or thinking can be objects of awareness, nobody can tell. I heard the following during a Thai session: N: Sati and pa~n~naa can realize the characteristic of hardness, that means: as a ruupa, not a thing or the body that is hard. Quote: < Pa~n~naa knows the difference when there is awareness of hardness and when not. This is the way to become detached, to let go of clinging to a result. With direct awareness of a characteristic of a reality pa~n~naa can grow. It grows little by little.> N: I could add: usually we pay attention to words spoken by other people, or we notice the sound of people or dogs, but sometimes there can be awareness of just sound. We have heard: 'Sati is very natural, let it arise' and this means that we should not put obstacles in its way. When it arises unexpectantly, we can begin to understand the difference between the moments of sati and the moments without sati. ***** Nina. #70783 From: "Leo" Date: Thu Apr 19, 2007 3:10 am Subject: Re: [dsg] disappearance of dhamma leoaive Hi Thanks for respond. It looks to me there is a big issue with solitude and practice. Leo #70784 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Thu Apr 19, 2007 4:17 am Subject: Re: a question kenhowardau Hi Robert A, Thanks for continuing the discussion. --------------- RA: > You did hit on the key phrase in my question when you cited "cease to create the conditions for its arising". I believe the example you mentioned - trying to avoid the things that annoy us is useful if you recognize that a situation is beyond your capacity to deal with skillfully. In that case avoidance is the best choice. On the other hand, if there is an annoyance in your life that is something you can train with and use to investigate the way your mind works, it can be very useful and to avoid it is to lose the opportunity to train. , ----------------- I agree with both of those points. But may I suggest they were well known before the time of the Buddha? Although they don't contradict his teaching, they do fall well short of it. In the First Discourse (Dhammacakkappavattana Sutta) we read: "Thus, O Bhikkhus, with respect to things unheard before, there arose in me the eye, the knowledge, the wisdom, the insight and the light." So what were the "things unheard before?" I believe they were the conditioned dhammas (citta, cetasika and rupa) and the unconditioned dhamma (nibbana). Those things exist in the ultimately real world, which is unknown to ordinary people. It is natural for us to do the things you are referring to - avoiding difficult situations we think we can't handle and tackling difficult situations we think we can handle. That is the way well-meaning people go about their daily lives. However, they are not the things that lead to perfect morality and wisdom. While we are going about our daily lives, fleeting, soulless mental and physical phenomena (cittas, cetasikas and rupas) are arising, performing their functions and falling away. It is by learning about these - and, eventually, knowing them directly - that perfect morality and wisdom are accomplished. -------------------- RA: > But the generic answer is, as Nina suggested in her reply, to work to loosen our clinging to all things, since whatever frustration and anger arises does so because there is something we want that we cannot get. So, to cease to create the conditions for its arising would be to cease to do those things that strengthen our attachment. --------------------- The only sure way to loosen our clinging to things is to see them the way the Buddha uniquely described them. One of Nina's best known books is Abhidhamma in Daily Life. If you haven't already read it, I recommend it. Ken H #70785 From: upasaka@... Date: Thu Apr 19, 2007 1:09 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: a question upasaka_howard Hi, Ken - In a message dated 4/19/07 7:18:20 AM Eastern Daylight Time, kenhowa@... writes: > In the First Discourse > (Dhammacakkappavattana Sutta) we read: "Thus, O Bhikkhus, with > respect to things unheard before, there arose in me the eye, the > knowledge, the wisdom, the insight and the light." > > So what were the "things unheard before?" I believe they were the > conditioned dhammas (citta, cetasika and rupa) and the unconditioned > dhamma (nibbana). Those things exist in the ultimately real world, > which is unknown to ordinary people. > ====================== It is natural that you would think that to be what was alluding to, but I suspect that what he was alluding to was the four noble truths. That makes sense given the sutta we are talking about. Moreover, in that sutta he taught the following: _____________________ Bhikkhus, the spiritual eye arose, insight arose, wisdom arose, true knowledge arose, and light arose regarding Dhamma we had never heard before, that the noble truth of dukkha is just like this, that this noble truth of dukkha should be fully understood, and that this noble truth of dukkha has been fully understood. Bhikkhus, the spiritual eye arose, insight arose, wisdom arose, true knowledge arose, and light arose regarding Dhamma we had never heard before, that the noble truth of dukkha's origin is just like this, the noble truth that dukkha's origin should be abandoned and the noble truth that dukkha's origin has been abandoned. Bhikkhus, the spiritual eye arose, insight arose, wisdom arose, true knowledge arose, and light arose regarding Dhamma we had never heard before, that the noble truth of dukkha's quenching is just like this, this noble truth of dukkha's quenching should be realized, and that this noble truth of dukkha's quenching has been realized. Bhikkhus, the spiritual eye arose, insight arose, wisdom arose, true knowledge arose, and light arose regarding Dhamma we had never heard before, that the noble truth of the way leading to dukkha's quenching is just like this, that this noble truth of the way leading to dukkha's quenching should be developed, and that this noble truth of the way leading to dukkha's quenching has been developed. With metta, Howard #70786 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Thu Apr 19, 2007 5:23 am Subject: Re: Breaking Viscious Circles [Re: [dsg] Re: Perfections N, no 10] egberdina Hi KenH (and Howard), On 19/04/07, kenhowardau wrote: > > Hi Howard (and fellow Peacemakers), > > I don't want to ignore your request, but I'm not quite ready to go > along with it either. I think an apology from me along the lines you > have suggested could give a wrong impression. It could suggest my > motives were even more akusala than was actually the case. People > who weren't offended before might suddenly take umbrage. :-) > > Suffice it to say; I don't see the deliberate distortion of someone > else's argument as a major crime. We all do it in normal daily life: > lawyers are paid big money for it: politicians are lauded for it: > salesmen get the sack if they don't do it: we can't make our children > do as they are told unless we manipulate their arguments to some > extent. I think it is perfectly acceptable to point out to someone > that maybe they aren't being perfectly fair. It's not a major crime - > we all do it!. > > Also, I wouldn't want to discourage people from speaking their mind > just because someone might be overly sensitive. That could lead to a > kind of neurotic blackmail. :-) > I think this was a very good and useful post. I'm all for honest communication. In no way is this meant to detract from Howard W's peacemaking efforts. On a personal level, I have no problem whatsoever with angry speech. I know that it is honest. On the other hand, I have enormous problems with manipulative speech, the kind of speech that is intended to create guilt, and thereby control. Cheers Herman #70787 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Thu Apr 19, 2007 5:26 am Subject: [dsg] Persuasion technique of KS (Re: Perfections N, no 8) scottduncan2 Dear Herman, Thanks for the reply, and the good question. Atthasaalinii (p. 259): "Equanimity has the characteristic of evolving the mode of centrality as regards beings; its function is appreciation of others; its manifestation is quieting both aversion and sycophancy; its proximate cause is seeing the heritage of the occuring kamma as 'Beings are the property to their kamma. By its influence they will attain to pleasure, or be free from pain, or not fall from the prosperity already acquired'. Its consummation is the quieting of aversion and of sycophancy; its failure is the production of a profane and unintelligent indifference. H: "What does evolving the mode of centrality mean?" Scott: I hope to be corrected on this since I'm not totally sure about the answer. I'd understood the phrase 'evolving the mode of centrality as regards beings' to refer to the taking, by upekkhaa, of being or concept as object. The mode of conveyance would then be that of referring to concept. I'd just assumed that this was similar to the methodology used to describe the Brahma-vihaaras (one of which is related to equanimity), where it is also 'being' or concept which is the object of these abidings. I think that this methodology is part of the exegetical tradition of commentarial writing; there are, for example, sixteen 'modes of conveyance'. In Note 14, Visuddhimagga I, (p.752): "'He stops at what is merely seen': according to the Sutta method 'The seen shall be merely seen' (Ud 8). As soon as the colour basis has been apprehended by the consciousnesses of the cognitive series with eye consciousness he stops; he does not fancy any aspect of beauty, etc., beyond that... In one who fancies as beautiful, etc., the limbs of the opposite sex, defilements arisen with respect to them successively become particularised, which is why they are called 'particulars'. But these are simply modes of interpreting (sannivesaakaara) the kinds of materiality derived from the (four) primaries that are interpreted (sannivi.t.tha) in such and such wise; for apart from that there is, in the ulimate sense no such thing as a hand and so on' (Pm.40-41)." Scott: The above shows a relationship between ultimate and conventional, in my opinion, and is a methodology for considering 'conceptual relations'. H: "What is "others" in terms of dhammas?" Scott: To me, this is just the difference between discourse based on the conventional versus the ultimate. 'Others' is concept. That concept is object isn't to mean that concept then is given a different status in terms of paramattha dhammas. Again, according to my limited understanding, when equanimity is said to have 'the characteristic of evolving the mode of centrality as regards beings', this suggests to me that, when present, upekkhaa conditions citta and allows for a certain kind of experience of an object, in this case 'being' or concept. Quieting of aversion and sycophancy would be the effect on a given moment of consciousness, and this would, in turn, effect the way in which concepts are thought of, and related to in terms of body and speech intimation. This would not include the removing of heads when upekkhaa was a faculty. H: "I would certainly agree with you that our friend the samurai is full of himself, but I don't see why that follows from the above. Perhaps that will be clearer when I understand what evolving the mode of centrality means." Scott: Again, I'm likely wrong with the above, but until this is shown, I think he's full of himself because he's lopping off heads while deluding himself that he 'has' equanimity. Since citta with upekkhaa must be 'quiet' as to aversion and sycophancy, citta for the Samurai must, as James noted, be under the influence some other set of mental factors to condition such acts. Hopefully others can provide the correct answer here. Until then, I wouldn't mind a critique of these above arguments as to internal consistency and whatnot, since I'd enjoy learning more about this from you. Sincerely, Scott. #70788 From: connie Date: Thu Apr 19, 2007 6:04 am Subject: Theriigaathaa - Sisters (52) nichiconn dear friends, More Sister Khema. anubhavitvaa vipassissa bhagavato kaale manussaloke uppajjitvaa vi~n~nuta.m patvaa, satthu santike dhamma.m sutvaa pa.tiladdhasa.mvegaa pabbajitvaa dasavassasahassaani brahmacariya.m carantii bahussutaa dhammakathikaa hutvaa bahujanassa dhammakathanaadinaa pa~n~naasa.mvattaniyakamma.m katvaa tato cavitvaa sugatiisuyeva sa.msarantii imasmi.m kappe bhagavato ca kakusandhassa bhagavato ca ko.naagamanassa kaale vibhavasampanne kule nibbattitvaa vi~n~nuta.m patvaa mahanta.m sa"nghaaraama.m kaaretvaa buddhappamukhassa bhikkhusa"nghassa niyyaadesi. At the time the Blessed One Vipassii arose in the human world, when she came of age, she heard the Doctrine in the Teacher's presence. She was profoundly stirred and went forth. She led the holy life for ten thousand years, becoming one of great learning and a teacher of the Doctrine. She performed the action leading to knowledge, teaching many people the Doctrine, etc. After dying there, she journeyed on only in good realms, and in this era, she was born in wealthy families at the time of the Blessed One Kakusandha and of the Blessed One Ko.naagamana. When she came of age, she had a great residence built for the Order and presented it to the Order of Bhikkhus with the Buddha at the head. Bhagavato pana kassapadasabalassa kaale kikissa kaasira~n~no sabbaje.t.thikaa sama.nii naama dhiitaa hutvaa, satthu santike dhamma.m sutvaa pa.tiladdhasa.mvegaa agaareyeva .thitaa, viisati vassasahassaani komaaribrahmacariya.m carantii sama.naguttaadiihi attano bhaginiihi saddhi.m rama.niiya.m parive.na.m kaaretvaa buddhappamukhassa bhikkhusa"nghassa niyyaadesi. Evameva tattha tattha bhave aayatanagata.m u.laara.m pu~n~nakamma.m katvaa sugatiisuyeva sa.msaritvaa imasmi.m buddhuppaade maddara.t.the saakalanagare raajakule nibbatti. Khemaatissaa naama.m ahosi, suva.n.nava.n.naa ka~ncanasannibhattacaa. Saa vayappattaa bimbisaarara~n~no geha.m gataa. Satthari ve.luvane viharante ruupamattaa hutvaa "ruupe dosa.m dassetii"ti satthu dassanaaya na gacchati. Raajaa manussehi ve.luvanassa va.n.ne pakaasaapetvaa deviyaa vihaaradassanaaya citta.m uppaadesi. Then at the time of the Blessed One Kassapa of the Ten Powers, she was the eldes of all the daughters of Kikii, the king of Kaasi, and her name was Samanii. She heard the Doctrine in the Teacher's presence and was profoundly stirred. While living at home, she lived the holy life as a virgin for twenty thousand years, and together with her sisters Sama.naguttaa, etc, she had a delighful monastery built and presented it to the Order of Bhikkhuniis with the Buddha at the head. In this way, she made great merit in various existences in connection with dwelling places. Journeying on only in happy existences, she was reborn in this Buddha era in the toyal family of the town of Saakalaa in the kingdom of Madda. She was named Khemaa, and she had a golden complexion, her skin resembling gold. When she came of age, she went to the home of King Bimbisaara. The Teacher was living in Ve.luvana, but she did not go to see the Teacher because she was intoxicated with her own beatuy and thought, "He points out the fault in beauty." The king had people speak of the beauties of the Ve.luvana, and that caused the queen to think about seeing the monastery. === more to come. connie #70789 From: "jonoabb" Date: Thu Apr 19, 2007 8:09 am Subject: eCard from England (Second series) jonoabb Hello All We're in Sussex, England again enjoying a couple of days' rest and (surprisingly) warm sunshine before heading back to Hong Kong this weekend. Very much enjoying the spirited discussion that has been taking place on the list, and appreciating the friendly and harmonious tone (KenH, I'll be writing to you off-list about one or two matters, my man; enough said for now ...). Phil, good to see you dragging yourself away from the baseball. I know we can't compete in terms of pure excitement, but you know your presence here is always appreciated. Thanks especially for offering reinforcement to James when most needed ;-)) Herman, keep up the good work in challenging established perspectives. Your take is always a refreshing one. Best wishes to other regulars, and to the newbies and lurkers too. Jon (and Sarah) PS Sarah is still tied up with family duties but will be back on- list as soon as we're safely home. #70790 From: Dieter Möller Date: Thu Apr 19, 2007 9:23 am Subject: Re: [dsg] The Commentaries are false fairy stories?: A Meditation Tip moellerdieter Hi Nina (Robert....), thanks for the feedback .. you wrote: understand your point. But we read that some persons offered a lotus to a Buddha or Silent Buddha. This is a sign of respect. The Buddha who received this would not decorate his body with it or sniff the odour. The Buddha had no attachment. To observe the precept is another matter. One will not for oneself indulge in these things yes , the Buddha had no attachment ..but he had critics from other faithes who always were prepared to find fault.. one can easily imagine the talking ' there is this Bhikkhu Gotama who demands from his disciples to abstain from the use of flowers and perfume , though he is residing in the Ghanda (Perfume) -Kuti in Savatthi and takes flowers from his followers' .... ;-) you are right , it is tradition to offer monks a lotus as a sign of respect / high symbolic perhaps the exception at that age .. no 'flower power' otherwise . So far I understand that there is only mentioning of the 'Buddha's Ghanda -Kuti /flowers receiving' in the commentaries. The story , Robert introduced to provide evidence for Sukinder's remark that the Buddha corrected the breathing meditation advise , seemed to me bit odd .. in a way it could have happened but it did not.. altogether not really a big issue .. ;-) with Metta Dieter #70791 From: "jonoabb" Date: Thu Apr 19, 2007 11:21 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Agreeable and Disagreeable jonoabb Hi Larry --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Larry" wrote: > > Hi Jon, ... > L: I disagree. For one thing there is no paramattha dhamma that corresponds to "easy on > the eye". Eye consciousness only arises with neutral feeling. To some Moslems an image of > the Buddha is disagreeable. > -------------------------------- When I talk about a visible object being 'easy on the eye' I don't mean conventional objects (such as the Buddha) that are agreeable or disagreeable in the sense of being or not welcome to the beholder. Visible object is not the 'thing/s seen' but is simply that reality which is experienced through the eye-door, sometimes referred to as 'visible data'. To my understanding, there is no conventional object in (mere) visible data, and thus the 'agreeableness' or otherwise of the latter in no way depends on the person's perception towards the former. Similarly, I would say the quality of the audible object is independent of the meaning of what is heard and the listener's perception of that meaning. Audible object is the reality that is experienced by ear-sense. > L: I was responding to a question from Scott on how to know whether an object is > agreeable or disagreeable. He was of the opinion that only panna could know. I took the > view that it was a matter of conventional, consensus values, whatever lawyers think. But the passage you quoted from CMA does not actually say that. > Also, > this might be a clue as to how kamma works. In my view kamma is entirely wrapped up in > conventional assumptions. > ---------------------------- I'm not with you here. I don't see how kamma can be a matter of conventional assumptions, or in some way related to them. Would you mind explaining a bit further? Thanks. > > But that is a matter of mind-door perception (kusala or akusala > > consciousness) rather than of sense-door experiencing (vipaka > > consciousness), I think. > --------------------------- > L: eh~ It's not kamma so it must be kamma vipaka. > --------------------------- I don't agree;-)). A person's mind-door perception of a given situation is kamma in the sense that kamma is the intention that arises in the javana process. It is certainly not vipaka, to my understanding. Jon #70792 From: "jonoabb" Date: Thu Apr 19, 2007 11:27 am Subject: Re: [dsg] The four Right Efforts jonoabb Hi Howard --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > > Hi, Jon - ... > ------------------------------------------- > Howard: > Jon, I'm afraid I'll have to beg your indulgence. I've forgotten at > this point what this was about, at least in detail, and I'm feeling so poorly > with this worsening cold that I'm really not up to the work required to recall > and reply, except to make a couple remarks below. I'm really sorry. > ---------------------------------------- No problem. I'm happy to let this thread drop. I hope you make a quick recovery from your cold. I'll snip the rest of your post and go to the one part that I'd like to comment on. > > The question is whether, in setting out the 4 Right Efforts, the > > Buddha is referring (a) to actual moments of kusala or (b) to moments > > that precede the arising of kusala (and which thus, by definition, > > would be akusala â€" as I see it anyway). > > ---------------------------------------- > Howard: > To me, a well-intentioned effort to bring about a good thing is a good > thing. The efforts to bring about as-yet-unarisen wholesome states, to > further already-arisen wholesome states, to abandon already-arisen unwholesome > states, and to prevent arising of as-yet-unarisen unwholesome states, are, in each > case, quite wholesome. > --------------------------------------- It may seem axiomatic that a well-intentioned effort to bring about kusala would itself be kusala. Unfortunately, however, there is no mention of such an idea in the texts. Kusala is classified in the suttas as dana, sila or bhavana (samatha or vipassana). The 'well-intentioned effort' to bring about dana, for example, is not itself dana, and obviously could not be sila or bhavana either. What we take for well-intentioned effort to bring about kusala is really akusala of some form or other. This is why we do not find in the texts intention given as one of the necessary conditions for the development of kusala (although the intention that arises together with kusala is of course itself kusala). Similar considerations apply as regards the mental factor of effort. Jon #70793 From: "jonoabb" Date: Thu Apr 19, 2007 11:32 am Subject: Re: a question jonoabb Hi Robert Welcome to the list from me, and thanks for posting such an interesting question. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert" wrote: > > Dear Dhamma Study Group, > > May I ask a question of the group? > > Is this statement correct? > > A person suffering from frustration or anger in this moment does so > because conditions were created in the past for that frustration or > anger to arise. To prevent the arising of frustration or anger in the > future he/she must cease to create the conditions for its arising. As Nina and KenH have pointed out, anger arises because there is the accumulated latent tendency for anger. As long as that accumulated tendency remains, there is no way that anger can be prevented from arising. Of course, defilements such as anger can be temporarily suppressed (by the development of jhana), but that knowledge and practice is not something that is unique to the teaching of a Buddha. The path taught by the Buddha is not a path of 'dealing with' unwholesome tendencies in some manner. Rather it is a path of the development of insight that sees dhammas as they truly are. It is this insight that eventually, when fully developed, results in the eradication of the accumulated unwholesome latent tendencies (that eradication is the function of the enlightenment moment of consciousness). So anger and the other defilements are going to be with us for a long time yet ;-)). Jon PS Please feel free to give a short self-introduction some time, e.g., where you're from and how you came to be interested in the Dhamma. #70794 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Apr 19, 2007 11:36 am Subject: Perfections N, no 12 nilovg Dear friends, If one does not develop satipatthana, right understanding of the namas and rupas of our life, it is impossible to acquire perfection of sila. We should remember that it is not self who abstains from evil. When we refrain from unwholesome action or unwholesome speech there are particular mental factors arising with the kusala citta (virati cetasikas) which perform the function of abstention. They are abstention from wrong action, abstention from wrong speech and abstention from wrong livelihood, which is wrong action or speech committed for the sake of our livelihood. These wholesome mental factors can only arise when there are the appropriate conditions, not because of a self who wants to exert control. Also sati accompanies the kusala citta which abstains from evil. Each kusala citta is accompanied by sati which is non-forgetful of wholesomeness, which prevents akusala. There is sati of different levels, of the level of dana, of sila, of samatha and of vipassana. Sati of vipassana is mindful of nãma and rupa so that right understanding of them can be developed. When there is abstention from evil there must be sati, but not necessarily of the level of satipatthãna. There is not satipatthana each time when there is kusala citta, but if satipatthana is being developed it also conditions sati of other levels. It conditions generosity, the observing of sila, mettã and other wholesome qualities. There is more often unwholesome consciousness, akusala citta, than wholesome consciousness, kusala citta. After seeing, hearing and the other sense-impressions there is often clinging, aversion and ignorance. When there is right mindfulness of what appears through one of the six doors one is not taken in by the object which appears. It is sati which is watchful. There is at that moment actually a threefold training (sikkhã), namely in higher sila, samãdhi (concentration) and pa~n~na, which are those of the eightfold Path. We do not have to think, I should have sila, but at the moment of satipatthana one does not commit akusala. There is also calm without there being the need to try to have calm, because there is no disturbance by akusala. If there is the threefold training sila can be brought to perfection. If there can be awareness of more kinds of realities we will acquire a more detailed knowledge of our different types of cittas. We will know the many moments of akusala citta, also when akusala does not have the intensity so as to motivate unwholesome speech and action. The understanding of the Dhamma can help us to see the truth of our own unwholesomeness. The perfection of truthfulness or sincerity has to be developed as well. We should not have the idea that we need to develop one perfection only, the perfections support one another and all of them are needed for the attainment of enlightenment. ****** Nina. #70795 From: "Robert" Date: Thu Apr 19, 2007 5:47 am Subject: Re: a question avalo1968 Hello Ken H, Thank you for your reply. KenH:> The only sure way to loosen our clinging to things is to see them the way the Buddha uniquely described them. One of Nina's best known books is Abhidhamma in Daily Life. If you haven't already read it, I recommend it. RA:> Study of the Abhidhamma is, I am sure, a very useful thing to do, but one of the realities of my own life is that I don't do very well academically - I never have been much of a student. Is there a way to train in loosening our clinging to things and ideas without an intellectual understanding of all that is contained in the Abhidhamma? Thank you, Robert A. #70796 From: "Robert" Date: Thu Apr 19, 2007 7:40 am Subject: Re: what is sati avalo1968 Hello Nina, I found this post very interesting and helpful, but I have one question. Nina: 'Sati is very natural, let it arise' and this means that we should not put obstacles in its way. Robert A: Can you give me some examples of the obstacles we put in the way of sati? Thank you, Robert A #70797 From: "jonoabb" Date: Thu Apr 19, 2007 11:42 am Subject: Re: [dsg] The Commentaries are false fairy stories?: A Meditation Tip jonoabb Hi Dieter --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Dieter Möller wrote: > > Dear Robert, .. > I have no problem to admit when I am wrong and to apologize however would appreciate - like Herman - to get details . > 'Perfumed Chamber' and the acceptance of flowers sounds strange to me when > recalling the precept of abstention from using flowers,perfumes and unguents.. > (Mala-ghanda-vilepana-dharana-mandana-vibhusanatthana veramani). > There are several sutta sources in which the Buddha explicitly pointed that out. I understand your concern here but, like Nina, I think it is misplaced. The explanation is really quite simple. As a result of the perfections developed over many aeons, the Buddha experienced in his last lifetime a lot of kusala vipaka in the form of pleasant sense-door experiences. This in no sense suggests that there was any attachment on his part to these sense-door experiences (just as there was no aversion when there were unpleasant experiences such as ill-health or injury). Jon PS Enjoying your ongoing exchange with Sukin, and looking forward to further instalments. #70798 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Apr 19, 2007 11:31 am Subject: Rupas, Ch 9, no 2 nilovg Dear friends, When the citta succeeding the rebirth-consciousness, the life- continuum, arises, it produces a pure octad. Later on citta produces, apart from pure octads, also groups with bodily intimation, with speech intimation and with the three rúpas of lightness, plasticity and wieldiness, which always have to arise together. These three kinds of rúpa also arise in a group together with bodily intimation and speech intimation. In the case of speech intimation, also sound arises together with speech intimation in one group. Throughout life citta produces rúpa, but not all cittas can produce rúpa. As we have seen, the rebirth-consciousness does not produce rúpa. Among the cittas that do not produce rúpa are also the sense- cognitions of seeing, hearing, etc. Seeing only sees, it has no other capacity. Some cittas can produce rúpas but not bodily intimation and speech imtimation, and some cittas can produce the two kinds of intimation. Among the cittas that can produce the two kinds of intimation are the kusala cittas of the sense-sphere (thus not those that attain absorption or jhåna and those that realize enlightenment), and the akusala cittas. Temperature (heat-element) can produce groups of rúpas of the body as well as groups of rúpas of materiality outside. In the case of materiality outside it produces groups that are “pure octads” and also groups with sound [3]. Rúpas that are not of the body are solely produced by temperature, they are not produced by kamma, citta or nutrition. When we see a rock or plant we may think that they last, but they consist of rúpas originated by temperature, arising and falling away all the time. Rúpas are being replaced time and again, but we do not realize that rúpas which have fallen away never come back again. As regards groups of rúpas of the body, temperature produces pure octads and also groups with lightness, plasticity and wieldiness. As we have seen, kamma produces in a living being rúpa from the moment the rebirth-consciousness arises. Kamma produces rúpa at the three moments of citta: at its arising moment, at the moment of its presence and at the moment of its falling away. In each group of rúpas produced by kamma there is the element of heat (utu), and this begins to produce new rúpas at the moment of presence of rebirth- consciousness, thus, not at the arising moment of rebirth- consciousness. The element of heat produces other rúpas during the moments of its presence, it cannot produce rúpas at its arising moment [4] . It originates a pure octad and from that moment on it produces, throughout life, rúpas during the moments of its presence [5] . ---------------- footnotes: 3. Sound can be produced by temperature or by citta. 4.Temperature and nutrition, rúpas which produce other rúpas, do not produce these at the moment of their arising, since they are then weak, but they produce rúpas during the moments of presence, before they fall away. The duration of rúpa, when compared with the duration of citta, is as long as seventeen moments of citta, thus there are fifteen moments of presence of rúpa. Citta, however, produces rúpas at its arising moment since it is then strong. 5. The heat-element present in a group which is produced by temperature, no matter whether of materiality outside or of the body, can, in its turn, produce a pure octad and in this way several occurrences of octads can be linked up. In the same way, the heat- element present in groups of rúpas of the body, produced by kamma or citta can, in its turn, produce a pure octad, and the heat-element present in that octad can produce another octad, and so on. In this way several occurrences of octads are linked up . Temperature produced by nutrition can also, in its turn, produce another octad. ****** Nina. #70799 From: "jonoabb" Date: Thu Apr 19, 2007 11:49 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Perfections N, no 10 jonoabb Hi Herman --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Herman Hofman" wrote: > > Hi Nina, ... > I accept there can be awareness without self-view. But I do not accept > that it is possible to say, or hear, "Just be aware" without > self-view. No-one here is claiming to be free of self-view, as far as I know ;-)) When discussing the meaning of the words spoken by the Buddha, the consciousness may be kusala or it may be akusala. I don't think it matters. What matters is the attempt to communicate as best we can the meaning of the words spoken by the Buddha as understood by us. Jon