#73000 From: upasaka@... Date: Mon Jun 4, 2007 7:13 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Q. re: Jhana as necessity to enlightenment upasaka_howard Hi again, Nina (and all) - In a message dated 6/4/07 8:27:18 AM Eastern Daylight Time, Upasaka writes: > Misapplying facts about dhammas to conventional activity is a danger. It is > an improper mixing of levels. It is analogous to applying truths about > quantum reality to the macroscopic, "everyday world", not as the underlying > reality but for direct application. It does not work - the levels are different. An > easier analogy: It is analogous to applying facts about hydrogen and oxygen > to water. Relatively speaking, the hydrogen and the oxygen are the underlying > realities, and there is no water other than the hydrogen and the oxygen. But > neither the hydrogen nor the oxygen will quench thirst or put out fires! > ======================== Applying this last analogy to the matter of concept and reality: We can climb a gingko tree, but we cannot climb any of the hardnesses, visible objects, occurrences of unpleasant odor, and so on, that underly the mentally concocted aggregate we call "the gingko tree". The levels cannot be mixed without nonsense resulting. With metta, Howard #73001 From: TGrand458@... Date: Mon Jun 4, 2007 7:37 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Conditions, Ch 2, no 7. TGrand458@... Hi Larry In a message dated 6/3/2007 11:36:17 P.M. Mountain Daylight Time, LBIDD@... writes: L: "Per se" is the operative term and it has everything to do with detachment. The most basic insight is the recognition of dhammas: hardness is not me because it is hardness. ............................. NEWER TG: Regarding your second sentence above... "Hardness" is just a subjective evaluation. There is no inherent "hardness" or anything else. Recognizing experiences alone does not detach the mind...hence the "per se." Recognizing affliction, recognizing that all things dear will be lost, recognizing loathsomeness ... these thing do detach the mind. Both actual experiences and conceptual imaginations can detach the mind, if, the mind is focused in the right way. ....................................................... TG: "Seeing them as "ultimate realities" certainly does not. It is insight into impermanence, affliction, and no-self that detaches. This insight can develop through means of internal phenomena, or external phenomena, or both. The development can be non-conceptual based, or conceptual based, or both. The right view of no-self will prevent the mind from seeing phenomena as existing or not existing or as realities or non-realities. The mind instead will transcend these "standpoints" and see conditions as they really are...as impermanent, afflicting, and no-self....detached and not clinging to anything." L: What is "non-conceptual"L: ....................................................... NEWER TG: Direct experience or no experience are both non-conceptual. The above refers to direct experience. ............................................... TG OUT Larry #73002 From: TGrand458@... Date: Mon Jun 4, 2007 7:41 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Conditions, Ch 2, no 7 TGrand458@... Hi Nina Best Wishes! I saved the following. Please remind me to follow up, if you wish, when you are better. TG In a message dated 6/4/2007 2:34:19 A.M. Mountain Daylight Time, vangorko@... writes: Hi TG and Larry, I have been following your interesting discussions. Because of limited physical capacities for the time being, I cannot contribute much. But TG, you certainly bring up important points. Can you not repeat them to me in a month time? As to sabhaava, there were many debates in the past. I came across: As to the experience of earth, one may experience earth and still not realize its true nature. For this, see: The Commentary to the “Muulapariyaayasuttaâ€?, Discourse on the Synopsis of Fundamentals, (M I, 1, translated by Ven. Bodhi as “The root of Existenceâ€?, B.P.S. Sarah had several posts on this important subject. See also the Elephant's Footprint, and Kindred Sayings on elements, for more suttas on hardness. I am sorry I cannot go into this now. Nina. #73003 From: "Ramesh Patil" Date: Mon Jun 4, 2007 9:25 am Subject: Re: [dsg] clinging to kusala? rameshat27 Venerable NINA, Have u some reference books on abhidhamma for study!! Please fwd ur links also and if some u have already e-books then please attach it with the attachment!! Regards Ramesh Patil Mumbai,India On 6/3/07, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Hi James, > well said James: > states which are kusala and akusala. And it also describes the > feelings which accompany each of those mental states. ....in reality, > most unwholesome mental states are accompanied by a pleasant feeling! > It usually feels very good to be bad!!> > <.....> #73004 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Mon Jun 4, 2007 3:49 pm Subject: Re: Insight is "Vision," Not Merely Experience. kenhowardau --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "colette" wrote: > > Hi Ken, > <. . .> > > Can you imagine a world in which there is only the present moment? > > colette: I read this sentence before I left and thought about it. In > the process of thinking about it I was befuddled since I had to > remove all PAST and all FUTURE rupas, namas, etc. (there cannot be a > future if there is no past, etc) > ------------------ > > > You might have to fasten your own seat belt because that is what > the > > Buddha taught! > > colette Maybe, maybe not, I've only studied this for about 3 years. > Any way, it's only your interpretation and as I've said on a Kaballah > site recently, people tend to hear the wrong things since they are > soooooo programmed to money motivation, etc. <....> > -------------------------------- > > > > If you can imagine such a world, look around. What do you see? > > colette: that's what I meant by saying that EVERYTHING CHANGES by > imagining a world without a past/future. Since this is the first time > I've experienced this technique then I cannot have much of a > statement. > -------------------------------- > > > In my opinion, the honest answer is, "I don't know what I would > see." > > Except for the few details I have already learnt from the > Abhidhamma, > > I can't possibly have any idea! > > colette: I've gotta bad feeling about that concept but I've gotta > reserve my tongue for the time being. I can't pull the rabit out of > the hat yet. > > -------------- Hi Colette, Thanks for giving it a try. There is a trick to it. What you call the rabbit in the hat is, in this case, anatta. When we try to imagine a world in which there is only the present moment there is still us who are trying, isn't there? "Us" is not a nama or a rupa. Us is not a part of the ultimate world. Therefore, as soon as us we try to imagine the real world we have failed to do so. So forget about *trying* to imagine. Is there - now, at this moment - right understanding of the real, present moment, world? No? Then why is that? Isn't it because we have not spent enough time hearing and considering the teaching of the Buddha? He was, after all, the only teacher who knew about the ultimately real world. Only his teaching can show the way out of suffering. Maybe we have squandered our opportunities up until now, and maybe we are still (as a result) uninstructed worldlings. But so what? Self is just an illusion. There are really only the presently arisen [ignorant] dhammas. No us! So it doesn't matter one iota that we are ignorant. What matters is right understanding. ----------------- C: > Ohhhhhhhh, do ya want to get into some heavy <....> from The Society of the Inner Light? When you are dreaming you have to concsiously look at your hands and you've gotta get up the next morning with a full description of the hands you saw. I admit that I'm getting into astral projections and higher material ------------ No Colette, that is not heavy. I tried it when I first read about it thirty years ago in Carlos Castaneda's books. It was a cinch! While dreaming, I remembered the instructions to look at my hands and there they were - iridescent green and yellow. So what? It proves nothing. We could devote our lives to it and it would still prove nothing. --------- C: > Time to go swim in a bottle and listen to my roommates scream the delusions that Soc. Sec. is sending me money in their name: "That's my money" etc. ha ha ha. But it's a great detonator, catalyst, etc. --------- I hope that's a joke! If it is it's very funny. But, gee, I hope it is! :-) ------------------- > C: > but I'm sure the peanut gallery is saying their > praises that I chose not to go into those de-tails. ;-) > ----------------------- > > :-) No one can go far into those details without making me and rest > of the peanut gallery squirm in our seats. colette: WHY? ----------------- Well, you said it. I was just agreeing with you. ---------- C: > The hard part for Westerners in their theology is finding the equality of the human body to that of the planet and then to the universe. I haven't had the time to think about how to get that wisdom out of me in written form but I know within myself that there is no mistaking the FACT THAT THE HUMAN BODY IS A REPRESENTATION OF THE PLANET AND OF THE UNIVERSE, all three are identicle and therefore linked together. Something links them, holds them, together, and I'm looking toward electro magnetism as the force but it's early in my studies so lets leave that as just a thought for the time being. ----------------- A point often made at DSG is 'there is not enough time for these things!' Only one way leads to nibbana. So, which way is it? Judging from past experiences, I feel confident that the Dhamma that is found in the ancient Pali texts is the way. Electro-magnetism, Mahayanaism, Confucianism, Taoism and all the rest have to be put aside, unfortunately. There simply isn't time for them. ---------------------- C:> without science we, the entire human race, would be slaves to the meglamania of the Taliban who don't like treasures carved into solid rock, in a mountain, of the Buddha, do they? <....>Without psychology we would be subject to only skimming the surface, ----------------------- To put it another way: without good deeds in the past we would be in hell right now, and we would have no chance of hearing the Dhamma. --------------------------------- C: > Somehow you associate the functions of the body with the humor others find in those functions and thus create a perverted view of the body. This is still a persons concepts and if you think that your concepts are better than their concepts well then, you sure aren't practicing Buddhism now are ya? ----------------------------------- I agree; in those circumstance I wouldn't be practising right understanding. But the fact remains; only the Dhamma shows the way out. Ken H #73005 From: "Phil" Date: Mon Jun 4, 2007 4:14 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Buddha's relic and curiosity. philofillet Hi Azita > > This sounds like the old house sagging to me, Nina! Let's rouse > our > > energy for kusala. > > azita: and how is this done, Phil? and this is a serious question. > often in daily life, I notice there is little kusala and when > opportunities arise eg to give away something I'm attached to, I > feel a great reluctance to give and then beat myself over the head > for not being more generous. I think, possibly, we're dealing with different degrees of unwholesomeness, Azita. (Perhaps I should use the English word, the Pali leads to Abdhidhamma in discussions more often than not, and the degree of wisdom implied by Abdhidhamma is not inolved in what I'm talking about here. I read the other day that the Buddha taught Adhidhamma for developing the wisdom that eradicates subtle defilements, the suttas for the concentration that eradicates medium defilements, and vinaya for morality that eradicates gross defilements. I guess "eradicates" is not the right word, but...) The kind of unwholesomeness I'm concerned by and working to overcome is not clinging when performing dana, Azita! It is cheating on my wife, it is scream violent insults at people, it is wishing for the death of US Soldiers so Bush can learn his lesson. Things like that. We're talking evil deeds here Azita, not subtle stuff. Now, these transgressions will occur whether I perform the intentional practices the Buddha taught to challenge them or not, but by following these practices, I can dramatically reduce the likelihood. the akusala just seems to flow like a > river. Yes, all the lobha with every sense-door object, all that mana that only the noble ones eradicate, and that dosa with unpleasant objects. That is the truth of Abhidhamma. But it doesn't concern me for now. I am not anywhere near being an Ariyan who eradicates such defilements, and aspiring to that kind of liberating wisdom, or even thinking seriously about it, is not helpful for me at this time. There is wholesomeness when we successfully abstain from evil deeds. Whether it is technically akusala or not because of clinging to self, for example, does not concern me. Some day it might, when conditions for that kind of refinenement are there. I see in the book on Perfections this: "SIla is twofold: as avoidance (varitta) and as performance (caritta). Sila as aavoidance is abstaining from evil. Sila as performance is the right conduct one should follow. We may bastain from akusala and not transgress the percepts, but with regard to sila as performance, we should consider the Boodhisatta's conduct..." Personally, I am more motivated by considering the evil man's conduct, and identifying and working to weaken tendencies in my mindstream that lead me in that evil man's direction. When progress that been made there, there will be a deepening of interest in the Bodhisatta's conduct. Just writing that off the top of my head. > > > We don't need to drift along on the same route that > > are conditioned already. No, no. Music is fine, but if you were > talking > > about the kind of pleasant objects I am conditioned to pursue, it > would > > be very wrong. Shall I leave DSG and spend some time drifting > through > > pornographic sites? Pleasant objects, and that is my natural > > inclination. I refuse to follow that natural inclination. "Doing > things > > naturally" for me is most definitely not the Buddha's path! Maybe > > your "doing things naturally" is different from mine. > > > azita: this made me LOL. Cannot imagine Nina cruising the porn > sites!!! Pardon me Nina, if i'm offensive but this did make me laugh. Well, you never know. She does live in Holland, you know. Very many naughty things go on in Amsterdam, in particular, and she may have been influenced. I would feel more confident of her resilience to such temptations if she lived in Edmonton, Alberta, Canada, like Scott. > > When you say, Phil, that you refuse to follow that natural > inclination, isnt that perhaps a nat. inclination to refrain? Just a > thought. Interesting. I assume it's the influence of the Buddha's clear teaching on morality in the suttas that is guiding me, but I recall that even in my earliy 20s, 25 years ago, before I came across the Buddha or the Bible (I had a period of interest in that) or any spiritual teaching, I was already telling a former girflriend about the effort I was making to stop having sexual fantasies. So you might be right. Nice talking with you, Azita. Metta, Phil #73006 From: "Phil" Date: Mon Jun 4, 2007 4:18 pm Subject: Re: Sammaadi.t.thi study corner philofillet Hi Mike > In this we are diametrically opposed but I see no virtue in debating > these points. I agree. Personally, I think maintaining a friendly tone in my posts is far more important to me these days than anything to do with the specific Dhamma content. It is also helpful to repeat things I believe, in the interest of conditioning my faith in them. The value of "parroting." I think debating just hardens views and makes us grab too hard at understanding, personally. But that's not true for everyone. Always a pleasure, Mike. Metta, Phil #73007 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Mon Jun 4, 2007 5:19 pm Subject: Re: clinging to kusala? buddhatrue Hi Nina, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Hi James, > I do not mean determinism. But there are many conditions for their > arising and all this is complex. I try to explain in my 'Conditions'. > The past plays a role, also friendship. Listening to the Dhamma helps > much for the development of kusala. James: Yes, there are many conditions for the arising of jhana. The Vism. describes them in detail (and they are different from the impediments). They are: Abode, resort, speech, person, food, climate, and posture. Vis. IV, 35-41. Perhaps I will post them later for the benefits of the members, if I have time after the Recollection of the Buddha series. > There are many degrees of equanimity, and many aspects. See Vis. Ch > IV, 156-166. James: Thank you for directing my attention to this section. According to that section, equanimity is of ten kinds and, as I wrote, they are all very high levels of kusala which are attained through meditation or enlightenment- and they are all of the same nature but different degrees, "Their difference, however, is one of position, like the difference in a single being as a boy, a youth, an adult, a general, a king, and so on." Vism. IV, 167. Metta, James #73008 From: LBIDD@... Date: Mon Jun 4, 2007 5:41 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Conditions, Ch 2, no 7. lbidd2 Hi TG, L: " "Per se" is the operative term and it has everything to do with detachment. The most basic insight is the recognition of dhammas: hardness is not me because it is hardness." TG: "Regarding your second sentence above... "Hardness" is just a subjective evaluation. There is no inherent "hardness" or anything else." L: What do you mean "subjective evaluation"? Regarding no inherent hardness, do you mean there is no experience of hardness? TG: "Recognizing experiences alone does not detach the mind...hence the "per se." " L: Well, it has in my experience. Even on a superficial level I think you can experience it. Take a minute, allow some space. Now, when you are thinking of a reply, label it "thinking". Doesn't that distance you, for at least a second, from attachment to that thought? That's satipatthana on a superficial level. Simply recognizing what is happening, objectivity rather than subjectivity. It can occasionally go deeper if you are lucky. Mere identification can make a difference in your life. L: "What is "non-conceptual"? " TG: "Direct experience or no experience are both non-conceptual. The above refers to direct experience." L: Direct experience of what? Larry #73009 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Mon Jun 4, 2007 5:48 pm Subject: Recollection of the Buddha- 4 buddhatrue Hi All, RECOLLECTION OF THE BUDDHA AS ENDOWED WITH CLEAR VISION AND VIRTUOUS CONDUCT He is endowed with [clear] vision and [virtuous] conduct. Herein, as to [clear] vision: there are three kinds of clear vision and eight kinds of clear vision. The three kinds should be understood as stated in the Bhayabherava Sutta (SN, 1) and the eight kinds as stated in the Ambattha Sutta (DN, 100). For there eight kinds of clear vision are stated, made up of the six kinds of direct-knowledge together with insight and the supernormal power of the mind-made body. [Virtuous] conduct should be understood as fifteen things, that is to say: restraint by virtue, guarding the doors of the sense faculties, knowledge of the right amount in eating, devotion to wakefulness, the seven good states, and the four jhanas of the fine-material sphere. For it is precisely by means of these fifteen things that a noble disciple conducts himself, that he goes, towards the deathless. That is why it is called `[virtuous] conduct', according as it is said `Here Mahanama, a noble disciple has virtue', etc., the whole of which should be understood as it is given in the Middle Fifty [of the Majjhima Nikaya]. Now the Blessed One is endowed with these kinds of clear vision and with this conduct as well; hence he is called `endowed with [clear] vision and [virtuous] conduct'. Herein, the Blessed One's possession of clear vision consists in the fulfillment of Omniscience, while his possession of conduct consists in the fulfillment of the Great Compassion. He knows through omniscience what is good and harmful for all beings, and through compassion he warns them of harm and exhorts them to do good. That is how he is possessed of clear vision and conduct, which is why his disciples have entered upon the good way instead of entering upon the bad way as the self-mortifying disciples of those who are not possessed of clear vision and conduct have done. To be continued….RECOLLECTION OF THE BUDDHA AS SUBLIME Metta, James #73010 From: LBIDD@... Date: Mon Jun 4, 2007 6:08 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Conditions, Ch 2, no 7. lbidd2 Hi Howard, H: "So, it seems to me, actually, that we cling most strongly to gross concept than to the underlying dhammas, which is why the chariot-decomposition, analytic approach is such an important aspect of the training. That analytic approach, if not just a matter of study and thinking, but of mind-on application in meditation and ongoing mindfulness practice, is, IMO, the technique of the Dhammasangani. The synthetic aspect of the training, when also carried out during meditation an ongoing mindfulness practice, is the technique of the Patthana, with that aspect of the training serving to loosen the more subtle hold that the dhammas, themselves, have on us." L: I agree. What is happening and why. Regarding clinging to concepts, that's what I think too, but the Buddha didn't teach it that way. He taught it as clinging to the 5 khandhas. So I'm still trying to figure that out. Larry #73011 From: LBIDD@... Date: Mon Jun 4, 2007 7:01 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Nibbaana lbidd2 Hi Htoo, Htoo: What is nibbaana? 1. is it 'ending of suffering'? yes 2. is it emptiness? yes and no 3. is it end of naama-ruupa? yes 4. is it an existance? no 5. is it an entity? no 6. is it just voidness of everything? yes 7. is it related to naama or ruupa? yes 8. is it not related to naama or ruupa? no 9. is it a naama? yes 10.is it not a naama? no Larry: Why is it naama? Larry #73012 From: "m_nease" Date: Mon Jun 4, 2007 8:33 pm Subject: Re: Sammaadi.t.thi study corner m_nease Hi Phil, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Phil" wrote: > > In this we are diametrically opposed but I see no virtue in debating > > these points. > > I agree. Personally, I think maintaining a friendly tone in my posts > is far more important to me these days than anything to do with the > specific Dhamma content. I don't think there's any reasonable question of the eminence of friendliness (my preference for translation of 'mettaa') in the texts--though I suppose I should say that understanding seems to me to trump it, being the first path-factor and all. But surely friendliness does make for a better discussion, doesn't it? > It is also helpful to repeat things I believe, > in the interest of conditioning my faith in them. The value > of "parroting." I guess I do a fair amount of that myself. > I think debating just hardens views and makes us grab > too hard at understanding, personally. The many debates in the texts are, by my reading, records of ariyapuggalaas' discussions with puthujjanaa (corrections welcomed). Those I'm thinking of are inspiringly cool, calm and courteous. > But that's not true for everyone. I suppose not, but I do think largely true for us puthujjanaa! > Always a pleasure, Mike. My pleasure, Phil, and Thanks, mike #73013 From: "Phil" Date: Mon Jun 4, 2007 9:25 pm Subject: Re: Sammaadi.t.thi study corner philofillet Hi Mike Thanks for your note. We are certainly being sickeningly friendly these days. No, it's good, not sickening. > I don't think there's any reasonable question of the eminence of > friendliness (my preference for translation of 'mettaa') in the > texts--though I suppose I should say that understanding seems to me to > trump it, being the first path-factor and all. I think we've been through this before, maybe, and sorry for not paying closer attention, but this right view that is the "first path factor", this is referring to the right view that is knowing that there are results to deeds, etc. It is defined in the suttas as this kind of mundane right view, isn't it? When the Buddha says "what is right view" he proceeds to describe a kind of right view that is quite mundane and likely to be had by anyone who accepts the Buddha's basic teachings. (I have no doubt that there are results of deeds, for example.) Is there any sutta in which it is said that the kind of right view that is about knowing all dhammas to be not-self, etc, comes first? It seems to me that this kind of "right view" is too deep and refined to possibly come first. This is not really related to the pre-eminence of friendliness, just I am still trying to sort out what kind of wrong view to be concerned about. Not concerned about not having the right view of the sotapanna, as I was saying the other day. Surely that kind of right view doesn't come first! (ie not-clinging to self doesn't come first - there is always so much talk of clinging to self, and my response is, of course there is clinging to self!) Metta, Phil #73014 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Jun 4, 2007 11:05 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: clinging to kusala? nilovg Hi James, please do so. I was thinking of your traveling. Is it July? You spoke about Kh Sujin who does not write and that you would like to answer her. She never does, only speaks. Could you not go via Bgk and arrange something with Sarah and Jon, you could meet Han there as well. I do not know their dates yet. Nina. Op 5-jun-2007, om 2:19 heeft buddhatrue het volgende geschreven: > The > Vism. describes them in detail (and they are different from the > impediments). They are: Abode, resort, speech, person, food, climate, > and posture. Vis. IV, 35-41. Perhaps I will post them later for the > benefits of the members #73015 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Mon Jun 4, 2007 11:41 pm Subject: Re: clinging to kusala? buddhatrue Hi Nina, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Hi James, > please do so. > I was thinking of your traveling. Is it July? You spoke about Kh > Sujin who does not write and that you would like to answer her. She > never does, only speaks. Could you not go via Bgk and arrange > something with Sarah and Jon, you could meet Han there as well. I do > not know their dates yet. > Nina. I travel to Phoenix toward the end of June. I am going to be busy moving to a new apartment before I travel, so I will probably need to stop posting at the end of next week or so. I am taking Sebastian (Wong), my Taiwanese bf, with me to Phoenix so I will be quite busy being a tour guide ;-))-- so I'm sure I won't have time to participate in any debates while I am in America. However, if there is anything Dhamma related, like visiting my temple (Wat Promkunaram) or something noteworthy happens, then I will post an update. I don't think that I will be visiting Thailand anytime soon (as I have been there twice already), but one never knows. I plan to visit Phil and Naomi in Tokyo, Japan next year, however. I'm glad that my participation in DSG hasn't caused you too much dosa, Nina, and that you and Sarah believe my posts have been in better form. I think so also. Taiwan has been very good for my Dhamma practice. My increased meditation practice has also been beneficial. Metta, James ps. You can check Sebastian's web blog for photos during the trip. He puts up photos all the time: http://www.wretch.cc/album/achaung (Just try to ignore the tacky wallpaper he has!! ;-)) #73016 From: "colette" Date: Mon Jun 4, 2007 10:59 pm Subject: Humourously swimming in a bottle? ksheri3 Hi Ken, Thanx for the reply. I had a flash of insight (clears throat, if Zanoni's around I got that technique from him :-}) Vipasanna) when you spoke of this "hell". Remember that I'm trying to stay in character so bare with me. This is something that I have to deal with since it relates to a lot of others as well and you'll just have to put up with my "electrical connections". > Thanks for giving it a try. There is a trick to it. What you call the > rabbit in the hat is, in this case, anatta. colette: I've always said that I shouldn't NOT DO SOMETHING simply because the status quo never did it and wouldn't do it, this buddhism is giving me quite the repetoire to apply in my theories of magik. With that as the case then it's not too far of a stretch to realize, cognize, why alchemists and those that study the esoteric have always been and still are persecuted. ---------------------- > When we try to imagine a world in which there is only the present > moment there is still us who are trying, isn't there? colette: play with me here: you suggest a complete seperation between ourselves and the world in which we live, THUS, THEREFORE, it is our mind which is cognizing us; we cognize falsely, thus, delusion. I can accept that 100% no questions asked. Sounds pretty Yogacara doesn't it? Watch out, there's a hairpin turn approaching. "Us" is not a > nama or a rupa. colette: anybody that understands the meanings behind the concepts of an Illusory world, ect. can easily see that. ------------------------ Us is not a part of the ultimate world. colette: hopefully the laws of physics will not have you leaving your stationary position in the seat on this roller coaster. I CANNOT GET PAST THAT STATEMENT. I am still trying to make sense out of what happened to me in 1978 and how the world that I knew on April 9, 1978 is soooooo different from the world I ended up waking up in after the automobile accident, approx. a month later. I am more than willing to pursue the study of such questions but those idiocies are secondary to the primary discovery of WHY the world changed, HOW did the world change, etc.? Boy you are taking the chances aren't you? I do not like being responsible for holding onto other's lives since it has been a proven fact since 1978, that I get absolutely nothing out of it, I only get <....> on while every other sentient being takes the money and squanders it for their amusement and pollution. Swimming in a bottle is a form of being polluted, isn't it? And didn't I mention that in March 2004, that it's gonna take me a while to get up to speed since I had been swimming in a bottle for a few years prior to our internet meeting? --------------------------------- Therefore, as > soon as us we try to imagine the real world we have failed to do so. colette: I agree that we fail, miserably, in identifying the real world because we have such corrupted imaginations, I don't agree with your linear motion to ariving at this statement. Watch out, you're setting up dangerous precedents since physical laws will eventually take their toll. I've been refered to as the troll that lives under the bridge, et al, and I laugh at the imagination that dreamt that schtick up. ----------------------------- > > So forget about *trying* to imagine. colette: so you're very adept at laying Anti-Personel Mines (APMs) Why should I take the mines apart, that you've laid down as entrapment, etc, when your karma will come to you for the attacks on inocent children playing in the jungle, or looking for war suveneers? -------------------- Is there - now, at this moment - > right understanding of the real, present moment, world? colette: by whom? who is the being that is doing the understanding? ----------------------- > > No? colette: it seems impossible that you can answer the question of "understanding" when you've allowed my question of whom do you speak as doing the understanding, without reply. ------------------------ Then why is that? Isn't it because we have not spent enough time > hearing and considering the teaching of the Buddha? colette: putting it in as few words as possible: YOU ARE CLINGING. No there are not any life preservers, you either sink or swim. You accept your view of the teachings of the buddha and you impose them on everybody else. Wow, are you doing LSD right now? Hey, way back in 1982 when I had to walk out of Arizona from Phoenix as I walked I kept running into people that were going to a POW-WOW at some Reservation in Arizona. We did a lot of conversation concerning the Peyote Rights, etc., Are you up to Buttons or Shrooms? toodles, colette #73017 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Jun 5, 2007 1:45 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: clinging to kusala? nilovg Hi James, why should it cause dosa? And if there would be aversion, it is in 'my' cittas, I am at fault. As Sarah always reminds us: not the outward situation, not other people, not the stories are the cause of one's aversion or uneasiness. The real cause is within ourselves. This is Abhidhamma straight in daily life. Jsu a remark: equanimity has many degrees. How could there be a high degree if there is not at first a slight degree. According to the abhidhamma each kusala citta is accompanied by at least nineteen sobhana cetasikas, and equanimity is one of them. It helps to keep the balance, to be evenminded, impartial. We sure need it for every kind of kusala. I appreciate your posts and you could become a real helper to explain Abhidhamma to others in an understandable way. I am glad Sebastian accompanies you. Photos, well I lack time to look, I hardly look even at Lodewijk's photos. Nina. Op 5-jun-2007, om 8:41 heeft buddhatrue het volgende geschreven: > I'm glad that my participation in DSG hasn't caused you too much dosa, > Nina, and that you and Sarah believe my posts have been in better > form. I think so also. Taiwan has been very good for my Dhamma > practice. #73018 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Jun 5, 2007 1:53 am Subject: Re: [dsg] clinging to kusala? nilovg Dear Ramesh, (and Sarah) please do not call me venerable, I am a student. Here are some links. You may have trouble finding the books, but Rob K mentions them in order. Survey of Paramattha dhammas is an Abh book of Kh Sujin I translated. Two webs of Rob K: http://www.abhidhamma.org/contents.htm http://www.vipassana.info/contents-vipassana.htm Alan Weller: http://www.mediamax.com/alanweller/Hosted/ For the first time you need to type a password. If you give me your postal address, we can send you a book hardcover. Or do you prefer on line? Sarah, did you get ADL in England? Alan is sending us some copies. Nina. Op 4-jun-2007, om 18:25 heeft Ramesh Patil het volgende geschreven: > Venerable NINA, > Have u some reference books on abhidhamma for study!! > Please fwd ur links also and if some u have already e-books then > please > attach it with the attachment!! #73019 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Jun 5, 2007 2:00 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Buddha's relic and curiosity. nilovg Hi Phil, LOLOL. Amsterdam has a bad name, I see. But this is true: nobody can known his former lives and the evil he did. This may still condition strong akusala today. Think of all the latent tendencies. This teaches us not to be negligent. One should not think: well I listened to the Dhamma a lot, serious things cannot happen to me. Wrong. Nina. Op 5-jun-2007, om 1:14 heeft Phil het volgende geschreven: > She does live in Holland, you know. Very > many naughty things go on in Amsterdam, in particular, and she may > have been influenced. #73020 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Jun 5, 2007 2:51 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Condiitons, Ch 2, no 7. sarahprocter... Hi TG & (Larry, Howard, Nina & all), >Nina: Hardness may appear when we touch what we call a person. Hardness is an ultimate reality with its own unchangeable characteristic. Hardness is always hardness, it can be directly experienced. ..... >TG: You'll never find this type of view or view-mongering in the Suttas. Why is it not in the Suttas? Because its not the Buddha's teaching. Period. ....... S: Firstly, what is meant by hardness? It is the characteristic of earth element (pa.thavi dhaatu), which along with temperature (tejo dhatu) and motion (vayo dhatu) can be experienced through the body-sense. These are the tangible objects. MN 1, The Mulapariyaaya Sutta (Bodhi transl with its commentary and subcommentaries, published by BPS under the title 'The Discourse on the Root of Existence') "Herein, bhikkhus, an uninstructed worldling, who is without regard for the ariyans, unskilled in the Dhamma of the ariyans, undisciplined in the Dhamma of the ariyans, who is without regard for the good men, unskilled in the Dhamma of the good men, undisciplined in the Dhamma of the good men - he perceives earth as earth (pa.thavi.m pa.thavito sa~njaanaati). Having perceived earth as earth(pa.thavi.m pa.thavito sa~n~natvaa), he conceives (himself as) earth (pa.thavi.m ma~n~nati); he conceives (himself) in earth (pa.thaviyaa ma~n~nati); he conceives (himself apart) from earth (pa.thavito ma~n~nati); he conceives 'earth is mine'(pa.thavi.m me'ti ma~n~nati); he delights in earth(pa.thavi.m abhinandati). What is the reason? Because it has not been fully understood by him (apari~n~naata.m tassaa), I declare." .... S: So here the text is also referring to pa.thavi. Although the tangible object is experienced through the body-sense for ignorant worldlings or ariyans alike, the difference is that the worldling wrongly takes such objects for 'atta', rather than rightly understanding them as transient elements not worth delighting in. The arahat 'directly knows earth as earth'. How? Only by knowing its characteristic of hardness/softness/roughness when it appears. When we touch the keyboard now as we read, what is experienced through the body-sense? Surely it is hardness, distinct from visible object or sound or other rupas. .... S:The commentary adds a lot more detail. I think you'll find it interesting! ..... " 'He perceives earth as earth (pathavi.m pathavito sa~njaanaati)' Cy: Having thus described the worldling, the Master goes on to show his manner of conceiving the bases such as earth, etc., which is the generative source of all things included in personality. Therein, earth is fourfold: characteristic earth (lakkha.napathavii), composite earth (sasambhaarapathavii), objectified earth (aaramma.napathavii), and earth as conventional designation (sammutipathavi). (1) In the passage: 'What, friends, is the internal earth element? That which is internal, belonging to oneself, hard, solid" (M.28/I, 185) - this is characteristic earth. (2) In the passage: "If he should dig the earth, or cause the earth to be dug" (Vin.iv, 33) - this is composite earth. The twenty parts of the body beginning with head-hairs, etc., and the external elements such as iron and copper are also included in composite earth. For composite earth consists of earth together with its accompanying material dhammas, such as colour, etc. (3) "Someone perceives the earth-kasina" (D.33/iii, 268) - here the objectified earth is the earth-kasina, also called the earth-sign (nimittapathavii). (4) "Earth as conventional designation": somebody who attains jhaana with the earth-kasina as basis, and is reborn in the world of the gods, gains the name "earth deity" after his means of arriving at such a state. "All these meanings of the word "earth" are relevant to the present context. For whatsoever instance among these four kinds of earth the worldling perceives as earth, he perceives (with the notion) "it is earth"; he perceives as a segment of earth (pathaviibhaagena); he perceives through a perversion of perception, seizing upon the conventional expression (and thinking) "it is earth" (lokavohaara.m gahetvaa sa~n~naavipallaasena sa~njaanaati). Or, without releasing such a segment of earth, he perceives it as a being (satta) or as belonging to a being. Why does he perceive it in this way? He seizes upon anything he can in whatever way he can. Or else, the reason is that he has no regard for the ariyans, etc.; or, as the Exalted One will say later on, "because it has not been fully understood by him."...... "Cy.: Having perceived earth thus with a perverted perception, the worldling afterwards conceives it, i.e. construes or discriminates it, through the strengthened proliferating tendencies of craving, conceit, and views, which are here called "conceivings". This accords with the statement: "Concepts due to proliferation are grounded upon perception"(Sn.v.874). He apprehends it in diverse ways contrary (to reality); hence it is said: "He conceives earth." " .... S: Lots more detail is given. In brief, at the moment of touch, only tangible object is experienced. Hardness or pathavi has a particular characteristic which can be known. We may think we touch a computer or person, but this is because of 'conceivings' or 'proliferations'. Metta, Sarah ======== #73021 From: "Ramesh Patil" Date: Tue Jun 5, 2007 2:32 am Subject: Re: [dsg] clinging to kusala? rameshat27 Dear Nina, Please Send me some copies of book hardcover...here my address is as below.. *Ramesh Wamanrao Patil* *14,Parnakuti,Vakola Pipe Line,Dutta Mandir Road,* *Santacruz(East),Mumbai- 400 055 * Also how to get password for=> Alan Weller: http://www.mediamax.com/alanweller/Hosted/ I don't have tht one.. When u r comming for pilgrimage to india..then u can stay at my residence...Here Global Pagoda is very nearer to me...also Centre for Bhuddhist study is a big centre here...in mumbai.. Also I want to take u to wellknown Vippassana International Academy at Igatpuri...(S.N.Goenka Institute) Also to Pune Jumbudvipa trust...a big org by Lokmitra,Maitreyanath.(International Network of Engaged Buddhist) So many are here for you..only waiting for you when u will come here to visit this all and all... Ok send me some hard copies..desperately waiting for the books frm u..uptill that i will read the books written by you.. With Warm Regards Ramesh Patil Mumbai,India On 6/5/07, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Dear Ramesh, (and Sarah) > please do not call me venerable, I am a student. > Here are some links. <....> #73022 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Tue Jun 5, 2007 5:35 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Sammaadi.t.thi study corner scottduncan2 Dear Nina, Thanks for your reply. N: "...BTW, right intention is not a Path factor. The translator means: right thinking, sammaa-vayama. Together with right view it is the wisdom of the eightfold Path." From the Cuu.lavedalla Sutta: 10. Ariyena nu kho ayye a.t.tha"ngikena maggena tayo khandhaa sa"ngahiitaa, udaahu tiihi khandhehi ariyo a.t.tha"ngiko maggo sa"ngahiitoti? Na kho aavuso visaakha ariyena a.t.tha"ngikena maggena tayo khandhaa sa"ngahiitaa. Tiihi ca kho aavuso visaakha khandhehi ariyo a.t.tha"ngiko maggo sa"ngahiito: yaa caavuso visaakha sammaavaacaa yo ca sammaakammanto yo ca sammaaaajiivo, ime dhammaa siilakkhandhe sa"ngahiitaa. Yo ca sammaavaayaamo yaa ca sammaasati yo ca sammaasamaadhi, ime dhammaa samaadhikkhandhe sa"ngahiitaa. ** Yaa ca sammaadi.t.thi yo ca sammaasa"nkappo, ime dhammaa pa~n~naakkhandhe sa"ngahiitaati. ** Scott: Yes, right thinking (actually sammasa"nkappo). Sincerely, Scott. #73023 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Jun 5, 2007 6:32 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Sammaadi.t.thi study corner nilovg Dear Scott, thanks, of course. Sammavayamo is right effort. Nina. Op 5-jun-2007, om 14:35 heeft Scott Duncan het volgende geschreven: > Scott: Yes, right thinking (actually sammasa"nkappo). #73024 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Jun 5, 2007 6:41 am Subject: Re: [dsg] clinging to kusala? nilovg Dear Ramesh, thank you very much for your hospitality. The whole group is coming in Oct, starting in Delhi. We have a strict schedule and will not be able to come to Mumbai. We are ending in Bodhgaya, but perhaps you can visit us on the way? However, in all these places we will not stay long, it is somewhat hurried. Any password of about seven letters will do. It is very simple. you make it up. We will send you something, but it may take some time. Nina. Op 5-jun-2007, om 11:32 heeft Ramesh Patil het volgende geschreven: > Also how to get password for=> Alan Weller: > http://www.mediamax.com/alanweller/Hosted/ #73025 From: "sukinder" Date: Wed Jun 6, 2007 2:09 am Subject: RE: [dsg] Q. re: Jhana as necessity to enlightenment sukinderpal Dear Nina, Thank you for informing me about Bhikkhu Bodhi's motive. Sorry to hear about your accident; please take good care of yourself. As it is lately you've also been talking more about getting old and dying and it would greatly trouble me to see you go anytime soon. Your presence is much valued by a great many people, and I would be happy to see both you and Lodewijk live up to 100 if not more. Really!! Metta, Sukin _____ Dear Sukin, I agree with you. Perhaps we could say: some anaagaamis and some arahats would be naturally inclined to developing jhana, wheras some others may not be. People's dispositions are different and there is no rule. Ven. Bodhi's teacher, Ven. Nyanaponika thought that the first mundane jhaana was necessary even for the attainment of the first stage of enlightenment. Ven. Bodhi made an earnest study of many suttas and came to a different conclusion. I think that going into this too much distracts us from what is necessary at this moment, you know! Nina. #73026 From: "sukinder" Date: Wed Jun 6, 2007 2:10 am Subject: RE: [dsg] Q. re: Jhana as necessity to enlightenment sukinderpal Hi Howard (Nina and James), Sorry that I couldn't find time to respond earlier. And I'm going to ramble somewhat here.. _____ Howard: This matter isn't critical to me. In fact, if mastering jhanas is not requisite even for for arahantship, so much the better, for that makes matters much easier for me and all of us. However, it seems clear to me that is *is* requisite just on the basis of "right concentration" being requisite, and it having been defined by the Buddha as the jhanas. When I add to that the unusual emphsis the Buddha put on the jhanas throughout the suttas, I am convinced of the need for jhanas - not necessarily *now*, but at some point for sure. Suk: Frankly I sometimes feel frustrated about how this thing is expressed in the Suttas. But then it may be that it is in fact the best possible way of expressing it considering the time and particular audience. We being far in time, accumulations and culture, should expect some big gap in this respect, all the more do we need the intermediary of the commentaries. ;-) My own interpretation is based on the fact that I can't see how Jhana can be a necessary part of the Path. Perhaps it is that Jhana was considered before the Buddha's time, the pinnacle of spiritual attainment and clearly this involved not only a practice in which 'concentration' was an important aspect but also it manifest as so. The Buddha, just as he did with many other concepts, gave new meaning/implication to this based on his enlightenment to the way things are which no one else saw. Besides jhana is considered second only to the Noble Eightfold Path, hence it was much valued. So on the one hand the Buddha praised Jhana in and of itself and on the other talked about what is considered a more important form of Jhana, namely the one based on insighting the Tilakkhana. Hence when spoken about alternately as per context, it is easy to mix them up and come away with an impression of one being closely related to the other or even the same. The reason I opposed B.B's article was because it just seemed to add to the confusion. Instead of trying to determine what in fact Jhana and the N8FP are and how they might be related or unrelated, he instead comes to the conclusion that it *might* be necessary for Arahatta Magga but not for the other Maggas! :-/ And this is based on stories got from the Suttas. Why did he choose to disregard any understanding that comes from Abhidhamma and why as Nina pointed out, did he ignore the Puggala Pannatti? So what really is Jhana? Is it Right concentration of the Path, if so then why is it not part of the Path and Fruit of the first three levels of Sainthood? James (and I have heard others say this too) has suggested that Jhana plays a particular role of allowing an Anagami to know of a realm beyond sense objects thereby overcoming any attachment to the latter. This does not make any sense to me. The function of the N8FP is to eradicate defilements by way of gradually developing the understanding of the conditioned nature of realities leading to insight into the three characteristics. The problem therefore is not so much attachment, but "ignorance", including that attachment itself is a 'conditioned reality'. If anything, it is the "unconditioned Nibbana" which is crucial to the experience of an Ariyan and ariyan-to-be. It is this that allows for any akusala dhammas to be eradicated. This is so because only through "knowing" the unconditioned can the conditioned be truly seen through. In other words attachment may be a problem for us who are still mired in self view, however for the ariyan it isn't. This does not mean that he sees it as desirable, of course he doesn't. However since he does not have any wrong understanding, he does not need to compare with other equally 'conditioned' states, re:Jhana, in order that he might grow disenchanted with any present one. This imo is a wrong line of reasoning. Panna "knows", "understands". "insights" with the help of the other factors of the N8FP, and this is enough for enlightenment of any level to come about. From another perspective, an Anagami does not have any attachment to sense objects, yet there may be bhava tanha for the highest levels of Jhana attainments. So what is it? Is the problem sense objects or just plain tanha? You say that this matter is not critical to you. To me it is. I can't escape the consequence of knowledge that I have so far got with regard to the conditioned nature of realities. So if lobha for example arises, am I to see its danger in terms of its particular function and how it accumulates rather than that it is only a conditioned reality? The former can be had with 'self' (and usually does when not supported by Dhamma), the latter however is the first step towards seeing dhammas in general as being anicca, dukkha and anatta. The former is not concerned with this aspect of realities; in fact it does not even see any danger in the accumulation of "ignorance" of the same. The latter on the other hand, sees both aspects. In other words vipassana panna knows what the Right Path is and sees no need for any alternative path. Jhana in fact adds more bricks to samsara; vipassana allows the removal to finally happen. The intellectual understanding about momentary conditioned realities, the practice of Satipatthana which necessarily involves momentary experience of nama and rupa, vipassanannana and magga are all in agreement, namely that Panna arises momentarily to "know/understand". And why not, if lobha does its job all in the span of one moment, why not panna? There seems to be no place for prior developed concentration or calm to come in as far as I can see. Howard, I know this is more than you asked for and I think you don't want to get into another debate, so no need to respond if you don't want to. Metta, Sukinder #73027 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Jun 5, 2007 7:18 am Subject: Visuddhimagga Ch XVII, 158-160 and Tiika. nilovg Visuddhimagga Ch XVII, 158-160 Intro: In the following sections the death-consciousness and the rebirth- consciousness are classified as similar or dissimilar as to the khandhas, objects, destiny, accompanying hetus, feelings and jhaanafactors. When there are four khandhas, it means that there is no ruupa, only naama and this is in the case of rebirth in the aruupa-brahma planes. ----------------- Text Vis.158: After knowing this, again: One ought to consider the [pair] death and birth under aggregates, object, cause, destiny, feeling, happiness, and the thinking applied and sustained, distinguishing them by unlikeness and likeness. ------------------ Text Vis. 159: The meaning is this: there is rebirth-linking that is twofold as mixed and unmixed [with materiality], and there is the death consciousness next before it, and there unlikeness and likeness according to these aggregates, etc., must be known. How? ------------- Text Vis.: 160. Sometimes, next to a four-aggregate immaterial death there is a four-aggregate rebirth-linking having a like object; -------- N: The Tiika refers to what was explained above (Vis. 144): there cannot be a pa.tisandhicitta that is ruupaavacara vipaakacitta after the death-consciousness that is aruupaavacaravipaakacitta. However, one may be reborn in a sensuous plane after having been in the plane of the aruupa-brahmas, and then one is born with three hetus: alobha, adosa and pa~n~naa. After having been in the plane of ruupa-brahmas one may be reborn in a sensuous plane with two hetus, thus, without pa~n~naa. ----------- Text Vis.: sometimes there is an exalted rebirth-linking with an internal object next to an unexalted death with an external object. This, firstly, is the method in the case of the immaterial planes. ---------- N: The Tiika explains ‘an exalted rebirth-linking with an internal object’, as pa.tisandhicitta which is the result of the second and fourth stage of aruupa-jhaana. As we have seen before, the aruupa-jhaanacitta of the second stage has as meditation subject the ‘base consisting of boundless consciousness’, which is the jhaanacitta that occurred previously with boundless space as object and which has fallen away and is thus past. Evenso, the aruupa-jhaanacitta of the fourth stage, the base consisting of neither perception nor non-perception, has as object the jhaanacitta that occurred having ‘nothingness’ as meditation subject and that has fallen away. Thus, the second and the fourth aruupa-jhaanacitta have a past object, the previous jhaanacitta, and this is called an internal object. As we have seen, the aruupaavacara kusala cittas of the first stage and the third stage have concepts as objects and they produce aruupaavacara vipaakacittas that have the same concepts as objects, called: not-so-classifiable objects. --------- Text Vis.: Sometimes there is a five-aggregate sense-sphere rebirth- linking next to a four-aggregate immaterial death. Sometimes there is a four-aggregate immaterial rebirth-linking next to a five-aggregate sense-sphere death or fine-material death. Thus there is rebirth-linking with a 'present' object next to a death with a 'past' object, there is rebirth-linking in a certain unhappy destiny next to a death in a certain happy destiny, -------- N: As to a ‘certain unhappy destiny’ (ekacccadugati), the Tiika explains that after the dying-consciousness that is aruupaavacara vipaakacitta or ruupaavacaara vipaakacitta, there cannot be rebirth in an unhappy plane because of the power of the access jhaana (upacaara). As to the expression ‘ next to a death in a certain happy destiny’, it states that rebirth in an unhappy plane (apaayapa.tisandhi) can arise after dying in a certain happy plane, not in all happy planes. That is why it is said next to a death in a certain happy destiny (ekaccasugaticutiyaa). ---------- Text Vis.: there is rebirth-linking with root-cause next to root- causeless death, there is triple-root-cause rebirth-linking next to double-root-cause death, -------- N: Root-causeless death refers to the vipaakacitta that is santiira.nacitta, which may be ahetuka akusala vipaakacitta or ahetuka kusala vipaakacitta. When the rebirth-consciousness is akusala vipaakacitta one is reborn in an unhappy plane. When the rebirth-consciousness is ahetuka kusala vipaakacitta and one is reborn a human, one is handicapped from the first moment of life. The Tiika gives as an example the deity’s son Ma.n.duuka, who was a frog in his previous life (Vis. Ch VII, 51), and who apprehended a sign in the Buddha’s voice when he heard the sound of him explaining the Dhamma. This means that he had kusala citta after hearing the sound. Next to the dying-consciousness that was akusala vipaaka, there was for him pa.tisandhicitta with three hetus, thus accompanied by pa~n~naa. We read that he, when listening to the Buddha as a deva, he attained the stage of the sotaapanna. ---------- Text Vis.: there is rebirth-linking accompanied by joy next to death accompanied by equanimity, ------- N: Thus, the feeling accompanying the cuticitta of the previous life may be different from the feeling accompanying rebirth-consciousness. ---------- Text Vis.: there is rebirth-linking with happiness (piiti, rapture) next to death without happiness, there is rebirth-linking with applied thought next to death without applied thought, there is rebirth-linking with sustained thought next to death without sustained thought, there is rebirth- linking with applied thought and sustained thought next to death without applied thought and sustained thought. In this way they can be coupled together by opposites as appropriate. --------- N: The first stage of jhaana still has the jhaanafactor vitakka, applied thought, and at the second stage (of the fivefold system) this factor has been abandoned. At the third stage sustained thought (vicaara) has been abandoned. Dying-consciousness which is the result of a certain stage of ruupa-jhaana, may be succeeded by rebirth- consciousness which is the result of a higher or a lower stage of ruupa-jhaana. As to the words, ‘ there is rebirth-linking with applied thought and sustained thought next to death without applied thought and sustained thought’, these describe rebirth-consciousness which is the result of a lower stage of ruupa-jhaana. It all depends on kamma which conditioned the last javanacittas before dying. ------- Conclusion: In the preceding sections the dying-consciousness and the rebirth- consciousness of the following life are compared. The dying- consciousness of the life that is ending is of the same type of citta as the rebirth-consciousness of that life and of all bhavangacittas of that life. The bhavangacittas keep the continuity in the life of an individual. When rebirth-consciousness arises one is no longer the same individual even if one is born in a similar plane of existence and experiences a similar object. The kamma that conditioned the last javanacittas arising before the cuticitta of the life that is ending produces the rebirth-consciousness of the following life. The example of Ma.n.duka shows us that it is possible for an animal to be reborn a deva, and even to be reborn with three hetus, with pa~n~naa, so that enlightenment can be attained. Kamma of a past life that was of a high degree could condition such rebirth. The development of pa~n~naa is never lost, sooner or later it will bear fruit. ******* Nina. #73028 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Jun 5, 2007 7:56 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Q. re: Jhana as necessity to enlightenment nilovg Hi Howard, I read your two posts and I can see that you were very careful formulating things, I appreciate that. It is the question of conventional reality and ultimate reality Lodewijk finds difficult and also Terry, TG, mentioned this. In practice I do not feel any difficulty: I still recognize Lodewijk, I do not fall into a hole on the street (although in my own room I did fall). You speak about control, and conventional control, and I have no trouble with your example: H: The Buddha taught the development of insight so that wrong of self could be eradicated. Otherwise it is always 'my kusala, my akusala'. When we have understood this, all the good counsels, also in the Sigalovada sutta take on a new dimension, such as the advice by ascetics and brahmans: Evenso, when we have learnt the basic principles of the Abhidhamma, we read the suttas differently. We have learnt about kusala cittas and kusala cittas, and their conditions. They are cittas, not me! Cittas arise in a certain fixed order in the processes, niyama, and nobody can change this order. It shows how anatta they are. We should not wronly apply ultimates, but let us rightly apply them, they are a tremendous help. They greatly enhance morality in daily life, in our relationships with others. --------- Another matter, you wanted to know what I found helpful in Ken H's posts (or do I misquote you?). I would say: listen more to him, and this is to be applied to what I just wrote above about paramattha dhammas : Ken H (to Colette): Is there - now, at this moment - right understanding of the real, present moment, world? No? Then why is that? Isn't it because we have not spent enough time hearing and considering the teaching of the Buddha? He was, after all, the only teacher who knew about the ultimately real world. Only his teaching can show the way out of suffering. Maybe we have squandered our opportunities up until now, and maybe we are still (as a result) uninstructed worldlings. But so what? Self is just an illusion. There are really only the presently arisen [ignorant] dhammas. No us! So it doesn't matter one iota that we are ignorant. What matters is right understanding. > (end quote). Nina. Op 4-jun-2007, om 20:13 heeft upasaka@... het volgende geschreven: > We > can climb a gingko tree, but we cannot climb any of the hardnesses, > visible > objects, occurrences of unpleasant odor, and so on, that underly > the mentally > concocted aggregate we call "the gingko tree". The levels cannot be > mixed without > nonsense resulting. #73029 From: upasaka@... Date: Tue Jun 5, 2007 4:22 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Q. re: Jhana as necessity to enlightenment upasaka_howard Hi, Sukin (and Nina) - In a message dated 6/5/07 10:14:26 AM Eastern Daylight Time, sukinder@... writes: > Dear Nina, > > > > Thank you for informing me about Bhikkhu Bodhi's motive. > > Sorry to hear about your accident; please take good care of yourself. As it > is lately you've also been talking more about getting old and dying and it > would greatly trouble me to see you go anytime soon. Your presence is much > valued by a great many people, and I would be happy to see both you and > Lodewijk live up to 100 if not more. Really!! > ========================= Well said, Sukin! I share your sentiments. :-) Nina, it is true that we all should keep death in mind. But, Nina, death will come to every one of us, younger as well as older, and when it will come, and to whom, is unknown. Amusingly, in a way, death always comes as a surprise! So, yes, do keep death in mind as a reminder that this is a precious human birth that we have obtained and that should be well used and without waste of time, but please, Nina, without assuming imminent or even soon demise. Please let your thoughts be directed not so much to death itself but to the great importance of this life, right here and now, of living it to its fullest in the best Buddhist sense, and for sharing love and good will and compassion for all the beings we encounter. As many of us point out here, at any time it is only this very moment that we have. Enjoy it, Nina, you and Lodewijk together. Make it worthwhile, filled with love and the Dhamma, and without thoughts of death except as a reminder to attend to this moment all the more. There is always some fear. We can pretend not, but we'd be fooling ourselves. But I have found that the longer and more regularly I study and practice the Dhamma, the less is that fear and the greater the assurance that, ultimately, we are "safe", with nothing truly to fear. With metta, Howard #73030 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Tue Jun 5, 2007 9:09 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Q. re: Jhana as necessity to enlightenment buddhatrue Hi Sukin, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "sukinder" wrote: > The reason I opposed B.B's article was because it just seemed to add to the > confusion. Instead of trying to determine what in fact Jhana and the N8FP > are and how they might be related or unrelated, he instead comes to the > conclusion that it *might* be necessary for Arahatta Magga but not for the > other Maggas! :-/ And this is based on stories got from the Suttas. Why did > he choose to disregard any understanding that comes from Abhidhamma and why > as Nina pointed out, did he ignore the Puggala Pannatti? James: Your post leads me to ask some questions as I am really not very familiar with the Abhidhamma/Commentary position (and these are not leading questions): Of what nature is the supramundane jhana? Is it of the nature of the first, second, third, fourth, or the immaterial jhanas? Is it accompanied by the jhana factors? Does it last for just one single mind moment (one citta) or is it a succession of moments (cittas)? Is there any reference to it in the suttas? Thanks in advance. (BTW, since BB briefly explained the Abhidhamma/Commentary explanation of jhana, but didn't include it in his overall analysis, I took that as a "silent statement" that he doesn't consider it valid...but cannot say so since he is a monk. Of course, I could be mistaken about that.) > > > > So what really is Jhana? Is it Right concentration of the Path, if so then > why is it not part of the Path and Fruit of the first three levels of > Sainthood? James (and I have heard others say this too) has suggested that > Jhana plays a particular role of allowing an Anagami to know of a realm > beyond sense objects thereby overcoming any attachment to the latter. This > does not make any sense to me. It makes perfect sense to me (and it doesn't just apply to the anagami but to everyone). Did you read MN 14? Metta, James #73031 From: upasaka@... Date: Tue Jun 5, 2007 5:21 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Q. re: Jhana as necessity to enlightenment upasaka_howard Hi, Sukin - In a message dated 6/5/07 10:17:29 AM Eastern Daylight Time, sukinder@... writes: > The intellectual understanding about momentary conditioned realities, the > practice of Satipatthana which necessarily involves momentary experience of > nama and rupa, vipassanannana and magga are all in agreement, namely that > Panna arises momentarily to "know/understand". And why not, if lobha does > its job all in the span of one moment, why not panna? There seems to be no > place for prior developed concentration or calm to come in as far as I can > see. > > > > Howard, I know this is more than you asked for and I think you don't want to > get into another debate, so no need to respond if you don't want to. > ========================= Well, I'll just give my opinion of the use of jhana. It is the making of the mind into a fit tool. As the Buddha taught, jhana practice can lead to a mind "concentrated, purified, bright, unblemished, rid of defilement, pliant, malleable, steady, & attained to imperturbability." That is the state of mind perfectly fit for highest wisdom, liberating wisdom, to arise. With metta, Howard #73032 From: connie Date: Tue Jun 5, 2007 9:49 am Subject: Theriigaathaa - Sisters (57) nichiconn dear friends, To introduce the eighth set of six verses and commentary: Nina : << We read in the "Theriigaathaa" (Psalms of the Sisters) about people in the Buddha's time who were disturbed by problems and could not find mental stability. When they were taught Abhidhamma they could develop right understanding and even attain enlightenment. While one studies the elements, the sense-doors, the objects, in short, all ultimate realities (paramattha dhammas), the truth that there is no being or self becomes more evident. We read in Canto 57 about Bhikkhunii Vijayaa >> DPPN: She may be identical with the Vijayaa, mentioned in the Samyutta Nikaaya (S.i.130) a Bhikkhunii whom Maara, assuming the form of a young main, tried unsuccessfully to tempt. Vijayaatheriigaathaava.n.nanaa: 1. http://digital.library.upenn.edu/women/davids/psalms/psalms.html CAFRD: She, too, having made her resolve under former Buddhas, and heaping up good of age-enduring efficacy, was, in this Buddha-era, reborn at Raajagaha, in a certain clansman's family. When grown up she became the companion of Khemaa, afterwards Therii, but then of the laity. Hearing that Khemaa had renounced the world, she said: 'If she, as a King's consort, can leave the world, surely I can.' So to Khemaa Therii she went, and the latter, discerning whereon her heart was set, taught her the Norm so as to agitate her mind concerning rebirth, and to make her seek comfort in the system. And so it came to pass; and the Therii ordained her. 2. Aacariya Dhammapaala, Paramatthadiipanii VI. pali/txt velthuis <--: vri Catukkhattunti-aadikaa vijayaaya theriyaa gaathaa. Ayampi purimabuddhesu kataadhikaaraa tattha tattha bhave viva.t.tuupanissaya.m kusala.m upacinantii, anukkamena paribruuhitakusalamuulaa devamanussesu sa.msarantii, imasmi.m buddhuppaade raajagahe a~n~natarasmi.m kulagehe nibbattitvaa vi~n~nuta.m patvaa khemaaya theriyaa gihikaale sahaayikaa ahosi. Saa tassaa pabbajitabhaava.m sutvaa "saapi naama raajamahesii pabbajissati kima"nga.m panaahan"ti pabbajitukaamaayeva hutvaa khemaatheriyaa santika.m upasa"nkami. Therii tassaa ajjhaasaya.m ~natvaa tathaa dhamma.m desesi, yathaa sa.msaare sa.mviggamaanasaa saasane saa abhippasannaa bhavissati. Saa ta.m dhamma.m sutvaa sa.mvegajaataa pa.tiladdhasaddhaa ca hutvaa pabbajja.m yaaci. Therii ta.m pabbaajesi. 3. Wm Pruitt "The Commentary on the Verses of the Theriis" :: PTS 1999 :: p.204: The verse beginning Four [or five] times are Therii Vijayaa's. She too performed meritorious deeds under previous Buddhas and accumulated good [actions] in various lives as [her] basis for release. In due course she journeyed on among devas and men, strenghthened by her foundation of good [actions]. In this Buddha era, she was born in the home of a certain [good] family in Raajagaha. When she came of age, she was a friend of Therii Khemaa's when she was a householder. Hearing about the fact she [Khemaa] had gone forth, she said to herself, "Indeed, that great queen will go forth. Now then, why shouldn't I?" She wanted to go forth, so she approached Therii Khemaa. The therii, knowing her inclination, taught the Doctrine so that with her mind deeply stirred concerning continued existence she would have faith in the teaching. When she heard the Doctrine, a profound stirring arose, and she gained faith and asked to go forth. The therii had her go forth. [note to bootleggers -- i left a line out before up there and just below, in case you care to fix.] Having gone forth, she fulfilled the preliminary duties, she established insight, and through the maturing of the prerequisites, after a very short time she attained Arahatship together with the [four] discriminations. Then looking over her attainment, she spoke these verses as her solemn declaration: RD: She, serving as was due, and studying as was due, grew in insight, and, the promise being in her, soon attained to Arahantship, together with thorough grasp of the Norm in form and meaning. And she, reflecting thereon, exulted thus: txt: Saa pabbajitvaa katapubbakiccaa vipassana.m pa.t.thapetvaa hetusampannataaya, na cirasseva saha pa.tisambhidaahi arahatta.m patvaa attano pa.tipatti.m paccavekkhitvaa udaanavasena- ===tbc, connie. #73033 From: upasaka@... Date: Tue Jun 5, 2007 5:45 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Q. re: Jhana as necessity to enlightenment upasaka_howard Hi, Nina - In a message dated 6/5/07 11:05:01 AM Eastern Daylight Time, vangorko@... writes: > Hi Howard, > I read your two posts and I can see that you were very careful > formulating things, I appreciate that. ------------------------------------- Howard: :-) Thanks, Nina. ------------------------------------ > It is the question of conventional reality and ultimate reality > Lodewijk finds difficult and also Terry, TG, mentioned this. > In practice I do not feel any difficulty: I still recognize Lodewijk, > I do not fall into a hole on the street (although in my own room I > did fall). ------------------------------------ Howard: Yes, neither do I find a difficulty. There are two modes of speech (and thought), usually called""conventional"and "ultimate". They "hang together" but should not be mixed. ------------------------------------ > You speak about control, and conventional control, and I have no > trouble with your example: > H: control. > The underlying reality is complex, Nina, but the matter is simpler at > the conventional level. Informally, we can, even in very short order, > "control" > our thoughts. We can quickly cut short and turn away from an unwholesome > train of thought, as the Buddha specifically taught us to do. We can > "avert the > mind". > N: Yes, quite so. > H: > Doing so, of course, is conditioned activity. All activity is > conditioned, and there is no actor involved in any of this. But care > must be taken to not > push beyond the facts to a *conventional* idea of no control, and > thereby > resisting guarding the senses and other important activities. > Misapplying facts about dhammas to conventional activity is a danger. > It is an improper mixing of levels. > ------ > N: This is also an area for Phil. > I like to add. I have read about high standard morality in other > religions, such as what I heard from the Torah, and Jezus' mountain > sermon which you admire. I like to hear about it, and do quote. I > just appreciate hearing. ----------------------------------------- Howard: Yes, I love the Sermon on the Mount. It speaks directly to the heart. (BTW, I interpret 'poor in spirit' to mean "free of grasping," which indeed is blessed.) --------------------------------------- > > Now, what dimension does the Buddha add to morality we also find in > other religions? I turned to suttas for laypeople, the Vyagghapajja > Sutta, where advice is given on material and on spiritual welfare. At > the end: is wise: he is endowed with wisdom that understands the arising and > cessation (of the five khandhas); he is possessed of the noble > penetrating insight that leads to the destruction of suffering...> > > The Buddha taught the development of insight so that wrong of self > could be eradicated. Otherwise it is always 'my kusala, my akusala'. > When we have understood this, all the good counsels, also in the > Sigalovada sutta take on a new dimension, such as the advice by > ascetics and brahmans: > they persuade him to do good > they love him with a kind heart > they make him hear what he has not heard. > they clarify what he has already heard, > they point out the path to a heavenly state.> ------------------------------------------ Howard: Yes, wisdom is the pinnacle. In Kabbala as well, the two highest manifestations of the one and only reality, En Sof - the eternal, infinite, unconditioned, are, after ayin (or emptiness, which is nearly indistinguishable from En Sof), chochma and binah, respectively wisdom and understanding. That "ayin" is a no-thing-ness that is quite close in sense, I believe, to not-self. ---------------------------------------- > > > ======================= With metta, Howard #73034 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Jun 5, 2007 11:59 am Subject: Conditions, Ch 3, no 1. nilovg Dear friends, Chapter 3 Predominance-Condition (Adhipati-Paccaya) We read in the”Paììhåna” (II, Analytical Exposition, 3) about two kinds of predominance-condition: conascent-predominance (sahajåtådhipati) object-predominance (årammanådhipati) As to conascent-predominance-condition, the conditioning factor (paccaya) which has a dominating influence over the realities it conditions (paccayupanna dhammas) is conascent with these, that is, it arises together with them. A phenomenon does not arise alone, it arises simultaneously with other phenomena. Citta does not arise alone, it is accompanied by cetasikas; citta and cetasikas arise together and fall away together. There are four factors which condition other realities they arise together with by way of conascent-predominance-condition, and these are: chanda (desire-to-do) [1] viriya (energy or effort) citta vimaÿsa (investigation of Dhamma, paññå cetasika) Three of these factors, namely, chanda, viriya and vimaÿsa are cetasikas and one is citta, but not every citta can be a predominant factor as we shall see. It is due to these four factors that great and difficult enterprises can be accomplished. Whenever we wish to accomplish a task, one of these four factors can be the leader, the predominance-condition for the realities they arise together with and also for the rúpa which is produced at that moment by citta [2]. Only one of these four factors at a time can be predominant. For example, when chanda is foremost, the other three factors cannot be predominant at the same time. Chanda, viriya and citta can be predominant in the accomplishment of an enterprise or task both in a wholesome way and in an unwholesome way, whereas vimaÿsa, investigation of Dhamma, which is a sobhana cetasika, beautiful cetasika, can only be predominant in a wholesome way. -------- 1. Chanda is a cetasika which arises with cittas of the four jåtis, but it does not arise with every citta. It accompanies kusala citta as well as akusala citta. It is translated as wish-to-do, desire or zeal. 2. As we have seen, citta is one of the factors which produces rúpas of the body. ******* Nina. #73035 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Jun 5, 2007 12:04 pm Subject: Listening to Dhamma, Ch 1, no 3 nilovg Dear friends, We continued our conversation in the house of Ell and Ivan Walsh for several hours. Acharn Sujin reminded us that no matter what kind of problems arise, we can only solve them by remembering that in the ultimate sense there is no person, only citta, consciousness, cetasika, mentalfactors which accompany citta, and rúpa. Citta and cetasika are nåma. Each citta is accompanied by several cetasikas which arise together with the citta and fall away immediately together with the citta. The citta which falls away is succeeded by the next citta, and each citta conditions the next citta. Good and bad qualities are different cetasikas, they fall away together with the citta, but these qualities are accumulated from one moment of citta to the next moment of citta, from life to life. When we have more understanding that life is actually citta, cetasika and rúpa, we will be less inclined to think of a “self”, of this or that person who speaks or acts in a particular way towards “us”. We make our life complicated when we think with worry about situations, about problems concerning people, about the way we should act in this or that situation. Instead of thinking of problems we should remember that there are only citta, cetasika and rúpa. Thinking and worry are only nåmas which arise because of conditions and which are beyond control. By right understanding of citta, cetasika and rúpa problems can be solved in a more direct, effective way. Acharn Santi who was also present reminded us that listening to the Dhamma is not merely hearing, or listening passively. We should listen with attention and respect, and carefully consider what we hear. We read in the “Gradual Sayings” (III, Book of the Fives, Ch XVI, IV, The confounding of Saddhamma [1]): Monks, these five things lead to the confounding, the disappearance of Saddhamma. What five? Herein, monks, carelessly the monks hear Dhamma; carelessly they master it; carelessly they bear it in mind; carelessly they test the meaning of the things borne in mind; knowing the meaning and knowing Dhamma, carelessly they practise Dhamma by Dhamma. (But acting with care in respect to these five leads to its stability, to its being unconfounded, to its non-disappearance.) It depends on someone’s accumulated understanding to what degree he can benefit from listening. We should carefully investigate all the details of the teachings and ponder over them, we should verify in our daily life the truth of the Dhamma. In that way understanding can develop. Understanding is a cetasika arising because of its own conditions. If we expect understanding to develop rapidly there is clinging to the concept of self, whereas the goal is detachment from the self. ---------- 1. Saddhamma can be translated as true Dhamma, or good Dhamma. ******* Nina. #73036 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Jun 5, 2007 12:11 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Q. re: Jhana as necessity to enlightenment nilovg Hi Howard and Sukin, thank you both for your kind thoughts. Howard, I appreciate very much what you write here about death and the present moment. Nina. Op 5-jun-2007, om 17:22 heeft upasaka@... het volgende geschreven: > As many of us point out here, at any time it is > only this very moment that we have. Enjoy it, Nina, you and > Lodewijk together. > Make it worthwhile, filled with love and the Dhamma, and without > thoughts of > death except as a reminder to attend to this moment all the more. #73037 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Jun 5, 2007 12:32 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Nibbaana nilovg Hi Larry, naamati means: to bend. Conditioned naamas bend towards an object. Expositor (p. 501): Nina. Op 5-jun-2007, om 4:01 heeft LBIDD@... het volgende geschreven: > Larry: Why is it naama? #73038 From: "m_nease" Date: Tue Jun 5, 2007 12:36 pm Subject: Re: Sammaadi.t.thi study corner m_nease Hi Phil, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Phil" wrote: > Thanks for your note. My pleasure-- > We are certainly being sickeningly friendly > these days. Some would no doubt say so-- > No, it's good, not sickening. Agreed! > I think we've been through this before, maybe, and sorry for not > paying closer attention, but this right view that is the "first path > factor", this is referring to the right view that is knowing that there > are results to deeds, etc. Good question, one I've been trying to figure out decisively, without much luck so far. > It is defined in the suttas as this kind of > mundane right view, isn't it? My tentative conclusion so far is that 'mundane right view' can refer to 'conceptual right view' as described in the Great Forty OR as satipa.t.thaana vipassanaa--which would take a dhamma, not a concept (such as knowing that there are results to deeds, etc.), depending mainly on context. > When the Buddha says "what is right view" > he proceeds to describe a kind of right view that is quite mundane and > likely to be had by anyone who accepts the Buddha's basic teachings. (I > have no doubt that there are results of deeds, for example.) Is there > any sutta in which it is said that the kind of right view that is about > knowing all dhammas to be not-self, etc, comes first? It seems to me > that this kind of "right view" is too deep and refined to possibly come > first. If KS and company are correct (which I generally take for granted as a working hypothesis), the beginning of mundane right view (satipa.t.thaana) is direct knowledge of naama vs ruupa. Whether or not the 'conceptual right view' (results and so on) is a necessary prerequisite to satipa.t.thaana I still don't know. > This is not really related to the pre-eminence of friendliness, just I > am still trying to sort out what kind of wrong view to be concerned > about. Not concerned about not having the right view of the sotapanna, > as I was saying the other day. I agree at least to a point--though stream entry seems to me a reasonable goal (as a prerequisite of course to The Goal), direct insight into naama vs ruupa is a prerequisite to that. In other words I can't aspire directly to the right view of the sotapanna but I can aspire to the 'tender insight'--of course always into present dhammas, not concepts,--that necessarily precedes it. > Surely that kind of right view doesn't > come first! (ie not-clinging to self doesn't come first - there is > always so much talk of clinging to self, and my response is, of course > there is clinging to self!) In a sense, I think it must--that is that insight, which I take to be all-important, can't arise with atta-sa~n~naa or atta-di.t.thi--they are, I think, mutually exclusive. Each of these including insight only exists for a very brief moment at a time as I understand it and the former and the two latter dhammas are mutually exclusive. As for 'conceptual right view', I think it might be a condition for subsequent insight. Scott did some nice research and sent me this a while back, which might be pertinent: "Concept, at least according to my reading of U Naarada in his 'Guide to Conditional Relations', can be object condition: "The conditioning states are consciousness, mental factors, materiality, Nibbaana, and concepts. Of these, the first three are either of the past, present, or future and the other two, Nibbaana and concepts, are time-freed." "He also includes concept under Strong-dependence condition: "...Here the conditioning states are consciousness, mental factors, materiality and concepts, the first three being either of the past, present or future and concepts are time-freed." (Thanks again, Scott). So it may be that 'conceptual right view' as described in the Great Forty e.g.--"There is what is given and what is offered and what is sacrificed; there is fruit and result of good and bad actions; there is this world and the other world; there is mother and father; there are beings who are reborn spontaneously; there are in the world good and virtuous recluses and brahmins who have realised for themselves by direct knowledge and declare this world and the other world.' This is right view affected by taints, partaking of merit, ripening in the acquisitions."--clearly conceptual, wouldn't you agree?--might be a necessary (object or strong-dependence) condition for for subsequent insight. The way it seems to me lately--I'm still trying to corroborate this from the texts--is that this is usually or generally the case but perhaps not always. I know I'm doing a lot of rehashing here. Does any of this make sense to you? Do you think it's pertinent to our discussion? Thanks again for the good exchange. mike #73039 From: TGrand458@... Date: Tue Jun 5, 2007 9:08 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Condiitons, Ch 2, no 7. TGrand458@... Hi Sarah In a message dated 6/5/2007 3:51:56 A.M. Mountain Daylight Time, sarahprocterabbott@... writes: Hi TG & (Larry, Howard, Nina & all), >Nina: Hardness may appear when we touch what we call a person. Hardness is an ultimate reality with its own unchangeable characteristic. Hardness is always hardness, it can be directly experienced. ..... >TG: You'll never find this type of view or view-mongering in the Suttas. Why is it not in the Suttas? Because its not the Buddha's teaching. Period. ....... S: Firstly, what is meant by hardness? It is the characteristic of earth element (pa.thavi dhaatu), which along with temperature (tejo dhatu) and motion (vayo dhatu) can be experienced through the body-sense. These are the tangible objects. ..................................... NEW TG: "Hardness" is an interpretation of what the "earth element" is. Out and out claims that the "earth element" means "hardness" is arbitrary. I prefer to interpret the "earth element" as "firmness." In either case, whether we call it firmness or hardness, "they" are relative and transitory. "They" have no "characteristics of their own" but rather, are resultants based on conditional interactions. What the body actually experiences is friction. Temperature is based on relative friction. Motion is required for phenomena to "come together" to make contact ... also friction. And firmness provides structure and resistance which allows for phenomena to transform from one state to another. BTW, whether your terminology is used or mine, all these things are energy!!! ................................................ MN 1, The Mulapariyaaya Sutta (Bodhi transl with its commentary and subcommentaries, published by BPS under the title 'The Discourse on the Root of Existence') "Herein, bhikkhus, an uninstructed worldling, who is without regard for the ariyans, unskilled in the Dhamma of the ariyans, undisciplined in the Dhamma of the ariyans, who is without regard for the good men, unskilled in the Dhamma of the good men, undisciplined in the Dhamma of the good men - he perceives earth as earth (pa.thavi.m pa.thavito sa~njaanaati)- he per perceived earth as earth(pa.thavi.perceived earth as eaperceived eart (himself as) earth (pa.thavi.m ma~n~nati); he conceives (himself) in earth (pa.thaviyaa ma~n~nati); he conceives (himself apart) from earth (pa.thavito ma~n~nati); he conceives 'earth is mine'(pa.thavi.(pa.thavito ma~n~nati); he delights in earth(pa.thavi.ma~n~nati); hema~n~nati); he de reason? Because it has not been fully understood by him (apari~n~naata.r tassaa), I declare." .... S: So here the text is also referring to pa.thavi. Although the tangible object is experienced through the body-sense for ignorant worldlings or ariyans alike, the difference is that the worldling wrongly takes such objects for 'atta', rather than rightly understanding them as transient elements not worth delighting in. The arahat 'directly knows earth as earth'. How? Only by knowing its characteristic of hardness/softness/characteristic of hardness/softness/), and earth as conv (sammutipathavi)( (1) In the passage: 'What, friends, is the internal earth element? That which is internal, belonging to oneself, hard, solid" (M.28/I, 185) - this is characteristic earth. ..................................................... NEW TG: Note: the Buddha is dealing with "external and internal" phenomena and not experience. Therefore this is a conceptual teaching about conceptual things. It is not experience he is speaking about. ................................................... (2) In the passage: "If he should dig the earth, or cause the earth to be dug" (Vin.iv, 33) - this is composite earth. The twenty parts of the body beginning with head-hairs, etc., and the external elements such as iron and copper are also included in composite earth. For composite earth consists of earth together with its accompanying material dhammas, such as colour, etc. ................................. NEW TG: Same comment as above. This has nothing to do with seeing ultimate realities with their own characteristics. I think you share a similar view as Howard when you wish "hardness" to indicate experience. These definitions are of phenomena conceived as conceptual objects. The Buddha is not dealing with experience here. He is dealing with principles. ................................... (3) "Someone perceives the earth-kasina" (D.33/iii, 268) - here the objectified earth is the earth-kasina, also called the earth-sign (nimittapathavii)( (4) "Earth as conventional designation"(4) "Earth as conventional des the earth-kasina as basis, and is reborn in the world of the gods, gains the name "earth deity" after his means of arriving at such a state. "All these meanings of the word "earth" are relevant to the present context. For whatsoever instance among these four kinds of earth the worldling perceives as earth, he perceives (with the notion) "it is earth"; he perceives as a segment of earth (pathaviibhaagena)eart perceives through a perversion of perception, seizing upon the conventional expression (and thinking) "it is earth" (lokavohaara.c gahetvaa sa~n~naavipallaasengahetvaa sa~n~naavigahetvaa sa~n~naavipallaasenSn.v.874). He apprehends reality); hence it is said: "He conceives earth." " .... .......................................... NEW TG: And all this goes for the so called "dhammas" as well. Either the nature of things is seen correctly or it is not. Do not grasp after signs and features. By not grasping after the sign and feature of "earth" (or "dhammas") one would have no call for building a "false scenario" of "selfness" from that "non-action." All that appears is not what it appears to be. Being empty of "own nature," do not grasp after things, do not try to identify "their own" nature. "They" have none. There is none. ............................................. S: Lots more detail is given. In brief, at the moment of touch, only tangible object is experienced. Hardness or pathavi has a particular characteristic which can be known. ............................................... NEW TG: I guess from my perspective this is not the point of the Buddha's teaching. At best its a "sub-point" designed ... not to "penetrate the experience as an ultimate reality," but rather, to lump it in with all other phenomena as impermanent, affliction, and no-self. To turn away from it and reject it and become utterly detached from it. Thanks for the post. TG OUT ......................................... We may think we touch a computer or person, but this is because of 'conceiving's' or 'proliferations'p Metta, Sarah #73040 From: LBIDD@... Date: Tue Jun 5, 2007 4:36 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Nibbaana lbidd2 Hi Nina, Thanks very much. What does this mean: "and Nibbaana bends faultless states on to itself by means of the causal relation of the dominant influence of object." Hope you are feeling better. Larry #73041 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Tue Jun 5, 2007 5:28 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Q. re: Jhana as necessity to enlightenment buddhatrue Hi Howard (Nina, Sukin, and all), --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > Well, I'll just give my opinion of the use of jhana. It is the making > of the mind into a fit tool. As the Buddha taught, jhana practice can lead to > a mind "concentrated, purified, bright, unblemished, rid of defilement, > pliant, malleable, steady, & attained to imperturbability." That is the state of > mind perfectly fit for highest wisdom, liberating wisdom, to arise. > I like what you write here, and I agree with it, but somehow I don't think its enough. No one can disagree with this position- no one could say that jhana doesn't make the mind a fit tool, an excellent tool, for investigating dhammas- but it still leaves open the matter if jhana is a `necessary' tool for investigating dhammas. Do you believe jhana is necessary or just something nice to have? This issue makes all the difference in the world. Nina, Sukin, and others act as if jhana is a luxury item. This attitude is very anti-jhana almost to the point of saying that since jhana is a luxury item, it is contrary to the Buddha's path (or could easily be so). If you get deep into the matter, citing the texts in support of jhana, Nina starts posting about how all this talk of jhana is distracting from the Buddha's path—and if that doesn't work, she implies that all this talk of jhana is killing her! LOL! (Talk about a drama queen! ;-)) The fact is, the "dry-insight worker" (sukkha-vipassana) has achieved the first jhana- he/she hasn't perfected the first jhana, but he/she has achieved it. Access concentration is the first jhana. I have posted about this to Jon and there hasn't been a single response to my post, from anyone! I think Nina and I will both be dead before there is a direct response! ;-)) Seriously, this is an important issue and it isn't something extra to the Dhamma. I am going to keep posting about it, even if Nina, Sukin, and others like it or not. Metta, James #73042 From: "m_nease" Date: Tue Jun 5, 2007 5:34 pm Subject: Re: Sammaadi.t.thi study corner--p.s. m_nease Hi Phil (and Scott), Here's something I got recently from Robert K. that I think is pertinent to our discussion of 'conceptual right view': "There are these five rewards in listening to the Dhamma. Which five? "One hears what one has not heard before. One clarifies what one has heard before. One gets rid of doubt. One's views are made straight. One's mind grows serene. "These are the five rewards in listening to the Dhamma." http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an05/an05.202.than.html This does sound conceptual to me with an attendant bonus of calm. It does seem to me to beg the question of whether or not it (hearing the Dhamma) is a prerequisite of insight. Thanks again, Rob. mike #73043 From: "Andrew" Date: Tue Jun 5, 2007 6:16 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Condiitons, Ch 2, no 7. corvus121 Hi TG My second attempt to reply (the first one got the 'cat on keyboard' treatment halfway thru and I don't know what happened to it!). I've been quietly reading and trying to work out exactly what your issue is with Sarah's version of Dhamma. It seems to me to focus upon a linkage between "characteristics" and self-view. You wrote: > The root of the word "characteristic" is "character" which connotes a > "persona". Further resolution turns "character" to "actor." A very unfortunate > choice for a teaching that trumpets "no-self." > > Even the way you use "its characteristic" "own characteristic" etc., shows > me you are viewing these things as "micro selves." I know you don't think so > but I think so. Like any good amateur linguist, I grabbed my Shorter OED on Historical Principles and looked up "characteristic" and "character". The root word is actually the Greek meaning "to engrave" - as in, I assume, engrave symbols or characters. So the meanings you allude to are not literal but figurative. As a noun, "characteristic" means: A distinctive mark; a distinguishing peculiarity or quality 1664 In short, this sort of linguistic argument doesn't really help me much to grasp your point. Qualities are knowable. Whatever concept the reflective worldling attributes them to, there is bound to be some "lack of skill, knowing the world's parlance, but thinking of such terms as more than mere expressions" (i.e. the opposite of the Arahant). What of it? Are we to expect otherwise? If we use special words, does the root problem go away? Friction? Energy? This type of linguistic toing and froing always for me reinforces the value of the distinction between concept and reality that I see both explicitly and inherently set out in the suttas. Don't get me wrong, TG, your posts are always stimulating and thoughtful. I just don't always "get" them! BTW, is there a Pali translation issue re "friction" and "energy" or is it the case that the Buddha did not use those terms in the suttas? If the latter, does that not place them in the same boat as the "later" Abhidhamma according to your historical perspective? Best wishes Andrew #73044 From: connie Date: Tue Jun 5, 2007 7:04 pm Subject: on prayer nichiconn chris, Dhammapaala seems to pray on closing the sisters' commentary: "May the True Doctrine endure for a long time. May all beings be respectful of the Doctrine. May the [sky-]deva rain properly at the right time. May this be the means to quenching." ah, ambrosia, offer it up! invoke the recollection of deities: "Lo! let the wise hence ever ponder earnestly The might there lies in thought of them of other worlds" ... strive in great joy for insight - path of purity, ch.7 connie #73045 From: TGrand458@... Date: Tue Jun 5, 2007 3:02 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Condiitons, Ch 2, no 7. TGrand458@... Hi Andrew In a message dated 6/5/2007 7:28:41 P.M. Mountain Daylight Time, athel60@... writes: Hi TG My second attempt to reply (the first one got the 'cat on keyboard' treatment halfway thru and I don't know what happened to it!). ........................... NEW TG: That's a bummer! When that happens to me, the "firmness" of my mouse sometimes gets tested. ;-) .................................. I've been quietly reading and trying to work out exactly what your issue is with Sarah's version of Dhamma. It seems to me to focus upon a linkage between "characteristics" and self-view. You wrote: ................................. NEW TG: Not just that. But the view of "ultimate realities" and states as "existing in and of 'themselves'" seems very contrary to the Suttas presentation of D.O. ....................................... > The root of the word "characteristic" is "character" which connotes a > "persona". Further resolution turns "character" to "actor." A very unfortunate > choice for a teaching that trumpets "no-self." > > Even the way you use "its characteristic" "own characteristic" etc., shows > me you are viewing these things as "micro selves." I know you don't think so > but I think so. Like any good amateur linguist, I grabbed my Shorter OED on Historical Principles and looked up "characteristic" and "character". The root word is actually the Greek meaning "to engrave" - as in, I assume, engrave symbols or characters. So the meanings you allude to are not literal but figurative. As a noun, "characteristic" means: A distinctive mark; a distinguishing peculiarity or quality 1664 In short, this sort of linguistic argument doesn't really help me much to grasp your point. Qualities ................................ NEW TG: There you go. "Qualities" is a term I much prefer. But NOT "own qualities." ................................. are knowable. Whatever concept the reflective worldling attributes them to, there is bound to be some "lack of skill, knowing the world's parlance, but thinking of such terms as more than mere expressions" (i.e. the opposite of the Arahant). What of it? Are we to expect otherwise? If we use special words, does the root problem go away? Friction? Energy? This type of linguistic toing and froing always for me reinforces the value of the distinction between concept and reality that I see both explicitly and inherently set out in the suttas. .................................... NEW TG: My apprehensions of the abhidhammic commenntarial positions often express here has very little to do with a single term. Rather, they have to do with the creation of an ontology of "ultimate realities" and states as "things existing." That said, in my College Dictionary the term "characteristic" has far more definitions dealing with "personas" than "qualities." Therefore, its reasonable to figure that this is the predominant way the term affects most people. I concede this to be a somewhat picky point. Its just that it fits the pattern I object to ... as explained here. .............................................. Don't get me wrong, TG, your posts are always stimulating and thoughtful. I just don't always "get" them! .............................................. NEW TG: The Buddha has warned me about flattery! ;-) I don't always get them either. LOL .......................................... BTW, is there a Pali translation issue re "friction" and "energy" or is it the case that the Buddha did not use those terms in the suttas? If the latter, does that not place them in the same boat as the "later" Abhidhamma according to your historical perspective? ............................................ NEW TG: Much like abhidhamma commentaries, I go out on a limb occasionally and interpret some things in the way I see the world functioning. (The only difference is I admit it.) Friction is the rubbing/contact of two or more distinctive and dynamically interacting states. Would I be crazy to conclude that "contact, with or without consideration of phassa, contains friction and vice versa ... whether or not a book tells me so? On second thought, maybe you shouldn't answer that. ;-) ................................................. TG OUT Best wishes Andrew #73046 From: upasaka@... Date: Tue Jun 5, 2007 3:08 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Q. re: Jhana as necessity to enlightenment upasaka_howard Hi, James (and company) - In a message dated 6/5/07 8:31:40 PM Eastern Daylight Time, buddhatrue@... writes: > Hi Howard (Nina, Sukin, and all), > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > > > Well, I'll just give my opinion of the use of jhana. It is > the making > >of the mind into a fit tool. As the Buddha taught, jhana practice > can lead to > >a mind "concentrated, purified, bright, unblemished, rid of defilement, > >pliant, malleable, steady, &attained to imperturbability." That is > the state of > >mind perfectly fit for highest wisdom, liberating wisdom, to arise. > > > > I like what you write here, and I agree with it, but somehow I don't > think its enough. No one can disagree with this position- no one > could say that jhana doesn't make the mind a fit tool, an excellent > tool, for investigating dhammas- but it still leaves open the matter > if jhana is a `necessary' tool for investigating dhammas. Do you > believe jhana is necessary or just something nice to have? -------------------------------------- Howard: No, I DO think it is necessary. I think that because the jhanas constitute right concentration according to the Buddha, and right concentration is necessary. Also, IMO, without the full suppression of hindrances provided by the jhanas, especially the 4th, with its pristine equanimity, the most subtle defilements wouldn't be uprootable. The earlier ariyan paths uproot grosser defilements, and the later ones more subtle defilements that are more difficult to uproot. The final sense of self that remains, the merest whiff of self besetting the non-returner, is the most subtle of all and the hardest to uproot. I believe that without the full suppression of the hindrances afforded by the jhanas, that last excision would be impossible. ------------------------------------------------- > > This issue makes all the difference in the world. Nina, Sukin, and > others act as if jhana is a luxury item. This attitude is very > anti-jhana almost to the point of saying that since jhana is a luxury > item, it is contrary to the Buddha's path (or could easily be so). If > you get deep into the matter, citing the texts in support of jhana, > Nina starts posting about how all this talk of jhana is distracting > from the Buddha's path—and if that doesn't work, she implies that all > this talk of jhana is killing her! LOL! (Talk about a drama queen! ;-)) > > The fact is, the "dry-insight worker" (sukkha-vipassana) has achieved > the first jhana- he/she hasn't perfected the first jhana, but he/she > has achieved it. > ----------------------------------------- Howard: I'm not as persuaded of that as you are, James. (I'm not looking to debate it, though.) ---------------------------------------- Access concentration is the first jhana. I have> > posted about this to Jon and there hasn't been a single response to my > post, from anyone! I think Nina and I will both be dead before there > is a direct response! ;-)) > > Seriously, this is an important issue and it isn't something extra to > the Dhamma. I am going to keep posting about it, even if Nina, Sukin, > and others like it or not. > > Metta, > James > ======================== With metta, Howard #73047 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Tue Jun 5, 2007 8:17 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Q. re: Jhana as necessity to enlightenment buddhatrue Hi Howard, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > > The fact is, the "dry-insight worker" (sukkha-vipassana) has achieved > > the first jhana- he/she hasn't perfected the first jhana, but he/she > > has achieved it. > > > ----------------------------------------- > Howard: > I'm not as persuaded of that as you are, James. (I'm not looking to > debate it, though.) OMG! Is this a leper issue or what?? No one seems to want to touch it! ;-)) (Even B. Bodhi won't touch it). Could you just tell me what your objections/doubts are? I promise I won't respond, contradict, or debate you…I just want some more input. I don't think I have this thing completely nailed down by any means. Metta, James #73048 From: "Andrew" Date: Tue Jun 5, 2007 9:05 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Condiitons, Ch 2, no 7. corvus121 --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, TGrand458@... wrote: > NEW TG: My apprehensions of the abhidhammic commenntarial positions often > express here has very little to do with a single term. Rather, they have to > do with the creation of an ontology of "ultimate realities" and states as > "things existing." Hi TG Thanks for the further explanation. I'll let it percolate in my mind and see what comes out eventually. I notice you use the dreaded O-word. Just out of interest, I'll type a snippet of Bhikkhu Bodhi's intro to Nyanaponika's "Abhidhamma Studies" book: "Although Ven. Nyanaponika distinguishes between phenomenology and ontology and assigns the Abhidhamma to the former rather than the latter, he does so on the assumption that ontology involves the quest for 'an essence or ultimate principle, underlying the phenomenal world' (p.19) If, however, we understand ontology in a wider sense as the philosophical discipline concerned with determining what really exists, with discriminating between the real and the apparent, then we could justly claim that the Abhidhamma is built upon an ontological vision. This vision has been called the dhamma theory ... Unlike the persisting persons and objects of everyday reality, the dhammas are evanescent occurrences, momentary mental and physical happenings brought into being through conditions ... [except the unconditioned dhamma, Nibbana]". Andrew: Take the quote from the SN on The Arahant: [The Arahant] might still say, 'I speak', and he might still say, 'They speak to me'. Skilful, knowing the world's parlance, he uses such terms as mere expressions. Using BB's wider definition of 'ontology', the above sutta quote is unmistakably ontological. ... words are slippery things! Best wishes Andrew #73049 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Tue Jun 5, 2007 9:42 pm Subject: Contemplating the Dhamma! bhikkhu5 Friends: The Ten Contemplations is Daily Buddhist Routine! The Blessed Buddha once said: Bhikkhus & friends: There is one contemplation, which when often practised and developed leads to the complete turning away from the world, to detachment, to stilling, to ceasing, to Peace, to final penetrating knowledge, to Enlightenment, and thus to NibbÄ?na ... Any Noble Disciple who by progress have understood the Dhamma dwells frequently in this state. Which is that one contemplation? It is reflecting over the qualities of the Dhamma exactly like this: Perfectly formulated is this Buddha-Dhamma, visible right here & now, immediately effective, timeless, inviting each & everyone to come and see for themselves, inspect, examine & verify. Leading each & everyone through progress towards perfection. Directly observable, experiencable & realizable by each intelligence... Source: AN 1:16.1 + 6:10 More on the Deathless Dimension & the Law: NibbÄ?na & Dhamma: http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/II/Peace.htm http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/III/Nibbana_Still.htm http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/II/The_2_Nibbanas.htm http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/II/The_Deathless_Dimension.htm http://What-Buddha-Said.net/library/DPPN/wtb/b_f/dhamma.htm Contemplating the Qualities of the Dhamma! Friendship is the Greatest :-) Bhikkhu Samahita * Sri Lanka * <....> #73050 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Jun 5, 2007 11:42 pm Subject: Death - just like now! (Alan Driver's funeral) intro sarahprocter... Dear Nina & all, I recently came across our tapes from Alan Driver's funeral around 1989. (I forget the exact date, pls correct me if this is wrong.) The tapes are poor quality and parts are completely inaudible because of background noise (we may 'clean' these up some day). I can't hear Jon's eulogy at all. Mostly our discussions with Khun Sujin are brief snatches in between the 'events' on the day of the funeral and cremation and the following day when the ashes were taken out to sea. Jon had been in Bangkok for a few days already for the services. I had just arrived from Hong Kong. You've often asked me to repeat anything I remember, so I'm going to share with you some parts I can follow, a little at a time. They are very relevant to the 'just like now!' discussions. I'm hoping these posts will be good medicine:-) Perhaps we'll be able to upload the actual edited discussions to the web in time for your next birthday! I hope that you, Han, James, Rob K, Azita and anyone else who has been discussing 'death' recently will join in with any further reflections/comments. (For others - Alan Driver (ex Phra Dhammadharo) was a good Dhamma friend to many of us. He had died in a car accident in Thailand when his mother and stepfather were visiting. His mother was also killed. Please ignore this thread if it holds no interest for you!) Metta, Sarah ====== #73051 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Jun 5, 2007 11:53 pm Subject: Death - just like now! (Alan Driver's funeral) [1] sarahprocter... Dear Friends, [At the temple where the cremation was to take place. I had just arrived in tears)from the airport. Friends were chatting and smiling, plucking flowers, turning back the petals of lotus buds and eating delicious Thai food as usual!] .... KS: ....What I said to them was wherever he was born again is like the seeing, hearing, smelling, tasting.... All cittas arise and fall away, rupas, cetasikas too. So it's common not only in this life, also.... S: But we don't know, maybe he has to start again with all his development... KS: But whatever he has learnt is there accumulated. Nobody can steal from him..... ****** [A little later....] S: It's just the suddenness which is such a shock KS: they thought they would have three and a half weeks for holiday, they spent only one week. S: We can make all these plans and dreams for our holidays and work out all these ideas for our future, but we just don’t know what will happen from moment to moment. All the things we spend our time thinking and worrying about are so useless....If we're struck down at this moment... KS: Yes, Yes. It shows that thinking can think only for a moment. Whatever appears the next moment is conditioned. ****** [A little later....] S: I'm sure for Alan if he had known it was happening (the accident and death) there would have been some detachment and... KS: Don't think so. There can be great fear. We don't know.....unless he is always aware of anything which appears... as rupa and nama S: But isn't that last citta important? KS: Nobody can tell. That's why we can't tell the next life. Otherwise we can tell if we know the cittas moments before death. But since we don't know, we cannot tell the rebirth consciousness. ***** [A little later...] S: You weren't shocked at all, Khun Sujin? KS: Shocked? Not shocked. S: Not surprised? KS: It's so sudden that I realize that anything can happen at anytime and we consider that as great loss, but in reality it's only the falling away of one moment of citta and the arising of a new one. So it's not great sorrow or loss because the patisandhi citta arises and his citta now is arising and falling away like everybody, common to all. S: I think though it's a loss to the Dhamma..... But who can help. Nobody can help. What will be will be. ***** Metta, Sarah ======== #73052 From: sarah abbott Date: Wed Jun 6, 2007 12:01 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: 'Impermanent' Versus 'Inconstant' sarahprocter... Dear Nina & Howard, --- Nina van Gorkom wrote: > Howard: > As I recall, it's trying to know details of kamma that is associated > with madness, but you can extend that if you wish. :-) > ------------------------------------------------ ... S: I think this is what Howard was recalling: Acintita Sutta, Anguttara Nikaya, Bk of 4s: “There are these four unconjecturables that are not to be conjectured about, that would bring madness & vexation to anyone who conjectured about them. Which four? “The Buddha-range of the Buddhas… “The jhana-range of a person in jhana… “The [precise working out of the] results of kamma… “Conjecture about [the origin, etc., of] the world… “These are the four unconjecturables that are not to be conjectured about, that would bring madness & vexation to anyone who conjectured about them.”" ..... Metta, Sarah ======== #73053 From: sarah abbott Date: Wed Jun 6, 2007 12:20 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Condiitons, Ch 2, no 7. sarahprocter... Hi TG, I liked and agreed with a comment you made in another thread that 'this forum's greatest attribute for me is the challenge it gives us in sorting things out. And for that I'm thankful to all the folks that participate." --- TGrand458@... wrote: > NEW TG: "Hardness" is an interpretation of what the "earth element" > is. > Out and out claims that the "earth element" means "hardness" is > arbitrary. .... S: Hardness is a characteristic of 'earth element'. Right now, it can be proved. When there is touching the keyboard as I said, surely it is hardness which is experienced? Call it tangible object to include the 'full' characteristic if you prefer, just as 'visible object' may be preferable to 'colour' to indicate exactly what is seen - Howard's 'palette', perhaps. .... > I prefer to interpret the "earth element" as "firmness." In either > case, > whether we call it firmness or hardness, "they" are relative and > transitory. > "They" have no "characteristics of their own" but rather, are > resultants based > on conditional interactions. .... S: All conditioned dhammas are transitory, but I wouldn't say 'relative'. Hardness is hardness, a characteristic which is experienced, not relative to anything. Yes, it has a particular characteristic in common, but different from what is touched when we pick up the phone or pen or put our hand on a cushion. Even when we touch the keyboard, the characteristic experienced is never the same. The 'hardness' of the keyboard depends on conditions (notably, temperature), but still it has a characteristic which is experienced just when body-consciousness contacts it. The body-consciousness is a result of kamma and arises due to this and other conditions took, I agree. ... > What the body actually experiences is friction. Temperature is based > on > relative friction. Motion is required for phenomena to "come together" > to make > contact ... also friction. And firmness provides structure and > resistance > which allows for phenomena to transform from one state to another. .... S: To me this is based on science rather than the Buddha's teachings of what can be directly known and realised now. What can be experienced through the body-sense is only temperature, motion and hardness/softness. I think that friction may be a combination of these, but only one characteristic ever appears at a time. I'm glad to see Andrew T has now taken up the baton! Your posts are a good challenge for us all, TG. Needs a big team to race with them:-)) Thanks for your kind and careful consideration of my comments and quotes. Metta, Sarah ======== #73054 From: sarah abbott Date: Wed Jun 6, 2007 12:41 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: what is sati sarahprocter... Dear Nidhi, --- wisdomcompassion wrote: > >S: Thankyou also for your reference to the 1st sutta in SN about crossing > the > > flood. Not over or under-exerting - the Middle Way. > ============================ > N: I m not sure that we are meeting here again. i think buddha here is > talking of effort and non effort. the thing which we were discussing in > this post. that was the reason i thought it was a relevant sutta. .... S: As I mentioned, there is effort (viriya) with almost every citta, including all kusala and akusala cittas. So, it's not a matter of having or not-having effort, but of understanding what is right effort and what is wrong effort. The commentary adds a lot of detail to this sutta and as I mentioned there are some helpful posts on it in 'Useful Posts' under 'Flood'. This is from the first one, by Kom: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/20794 He gives some detail here from the Thai commentary to the question about how it is that by not halting and by not strainging the Buddha crossed the flood. K:"...The commentaries explained the second answer in the following different ways [each comparing the different states] a) Because of kilesa, one is said to sink. Because of abhi-sankara [bad and good kamma], one is said to be swept away. b) Because of attachment and wrong view, one sinks. Because of the rest of kilesa and abhi-sankhara, one is swept away. c) Because of attachment, one sinks. Because of dithi, one is swept away. d) Because of the wrong view of eternalism, one sinks. Because of the wrong views of annihiliation, one is swept away. This is because bhava-dithi is attached to the self [???], but vibhava-dithi is attached to what is unknown [speculative?]. e) Because of attachment, one sinks. Because of the udhacca, one is swept away. f) Because of self-torture, one sinks. Because of over-indulgence, one is swept away. g) Because of all the akusala states, one sinks. Beause of all the mundane kusala states, one is swept away." .... S: Kom adds this comment: K:"How is one not halting or straining, not sinking or not getting swept away? Through the one way: the 8-fold path. Through satipathana. When there is mindfulness of realities, one neither sinks nor floats. But the mindfulness that (I think) truly can claim of not sinking or floating is the supramundane path, for it doesn't result in rebirth (unlike the mundane mindfulness). I think the meanings of some or all of the above comparisons will become more evident as one learns what is and what isn't the path. As one is walking on the path in the beginning, one tend to fall off it by staying (sinking) or by overshooting (getting swept away). For example, in 4c), because of attachment to mindfulness, one sinks, and because of the thought that I must follow this and that ritual to have this mindfulness, one is swept away." .... S: We need to understand that even 'effort' is anatta and cannot be made to arise or cease at will. It's not a question of 'doing' or 'not-doing', but of understanding dhammas for what they are, as I see it. Metta, Sarah ======== #73055 From: sarah abbott Date: Wed Jun 6, 2007 12:49 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: what is sati sarahprocter... Dear Nidhi, > N: my friend i m talking of experience and u are quoting from > definitations. we can never meet. experience corroborates what is > written > in books. because law of nature is same for everyone. there is no other > way except watching the process of mind. now when the recepie has been > understood very well theoritically, its the time to cook, isn't it? > ====================================== ... S: Yes, law of nature is same for everyone. What exactly is experience now as we talk? When you say 'there is no other way except watching the process of mind', a)who or what is watching, b) what is the process of mind? Yes, let's get on with the cooking, but be sure we're clear on the recipe at the same time. Otherwise we may think we're cooking a delicious meal, but actually end up with something inedible. What does the recipe say about what should be known right now? Is it known right now? Metta, Sarah ========= #73056 From: sarah abbott Date: Wed Jun 6, 2007 12:53 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Abhidhamma and Reasons for Impermanence sarahprocter... Hi Herman, Hope the job's going well and that your colleagues are enjoying your wit! --- Herman Hofman wrote: > A phenomenon is an experience of qualities or characteristics, and > this is dependent on mind. Nibbana is not a phenomenon, because it has > no characteristics, ie it is not experienced, and it is not dependent > on mind. But Nibbana exists, inherently, even as we speak. .... S: (from post #72034 to Howard). I was curious - was the above known from experience or was it read in a text? If the latter, which one? Metta, Sarah ======= #73057 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Jun 6, 2007 1:24 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Death - just like now! (Alan Driver's funeral) [1] nilovg Dear Sarah, thank you for this medicine:-)) I hope also Howard will join in, since he reminded me that death always comes as a surprise. And Han, he has many good thoughts. What I quoted below: the Visuddhimagga Ch XVII, reminds me time and again that we do not know the last javanacittas of a life and the next rebirth. Nina. Op 6-jun-2007, om 8:53 heeft sarah abbott het volgende geschreven: > S: But isn't that last citta important? > > KS: Nobody can tell. That's why we can't tell the next life. > Otherwise we > can tell if we know the cittas moments before death. But since we > don't > know, we cannot tell the rebirth consciousness. #73058 From: sarah abbott Date: Wed Jun 6, 2007 1:36 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Virtue sarahprocter... Hi Robert A, I think this is an important discussion, so let's continue.... --- Robert wrote: > Sarah: > My point is that we think what you say above ('my > experience...self...having emotions' and so on)is our '*experience* > of life', but isn't it really just the distorted view of our > esperience? <...> ... > Robert A: > You speak of a distorted view of our experience, and this shows we > are using the word 'experience' differently. For me, it is > meaningless to speak of a 'view' of experience because experience is > just what it is. If I experience something as pleasant, that is my > experience. It may not conform to some theory which says this > sensation I experience as pleasant is *really* suffering, but it is > my experience, such as it is. .... S: I hear you! Let's take another example: anger. Now let's say that someone experiences (using your usage) strong anger as being good and skilful for any number of reasons. You would therefore say that it his his/her experience that it is good and skilful, regardless of what any theory says to the contrary. Using this example, can we in fact say that the anger is not good or skilful, but the perception and thinking about it, about the concept of what just occurred is an experience which makes it 'good' to the one of perverted view? If you're uncomfortable with the notion of 'perverted views' as opposed to just 'what is' without judgment, how do you read suttas in which the Buddha talks about 'perverted views' and the harm of anger? (For me, whether we're talking about anger, self-view or any other kilesa (defilements), the arguments are the same. The world as it appears to our defiled minds is not the world as it is.) ... >Sometimes it seems to me that your > insistence on seeing the 'realities' in every moment in some ways > separates you from the reality of your experience of the moment, > which would be to your loss. ... S: I don't quite insist 'on seeing the 'realities' in every moment'! That would be impossible. I do think, however, that the path is about understanding these realities when they appear and mindfulness of them arises. Of course the experiences 'of the moment' are mostly of the 'defiled' kind.....but these have to be seen as they are too. If it's self-view arising now, let it be known! Otherwise, there's no chance it'll ever be eradicated eventually. .... > Sarah: > Would you agree that there is only one way, one path of satipatthana? > > Robert: > I tend to steer away from such statements, for I really don't have > anyway of knowing the answer - whatever I said in answer to this kind > of question would just be my belief and how useful is that?. .... S: Let's put it this way: When the Buddha said there is one path of satipatthana, does it make sense to you? .... > > I take a different approach of trying to find the way to work > skillfully with whatever is my experience of the moment, even though > at the moment my experience my be very far from the theory. I have > found the Buddhist texts to be the most useful guide in figuring out > how to do that. So my relationship with Buddhism is less that I > believe whatever I read in the texts than that I use whatever I find > useful. .... S: Understood. See above. .... > > When I work with my experience in the way I do, I have found that, > over time, I can experience, in a flash, fairly dramatic shifts in > perspective and glimpses of what seems like reality that is always > there but which we cannot see when caught up in the normal ridiculous > lives we live. Maybe one day those glimpses and flashes I get now > will turn out to be just what the Abhidhamma says it is, but I won't > prejudge. ..... S: When you read comments in the texts about the need to hear the Buddha's teachings first in order to become enlightened, how would these 'sit' with your experience above? When you 'work' with your 'experience', doesn't this lead to a greater idea of 'my experience'? I'm curious here, rather than trying to challenge anything. ... > > Thank you again for your responses. ... S: Likewise, Robert. Metta, Sarah ======= #73059 From: TGrand458@... Date: Tue Jun 5, 2007 10:00 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Condiitons, Ch 2, no 7. TGrand458@... Hi Sarah In a message dated 6/6/2007 1:21:26 A.M. Mountain Daylight Time, sarahprocterabbott@... writes: Hi TG, I liked and agreed with a comment you made in another thread that 'this forum's greatest attribute for me is the challenge it gives us in sorting things out. And for that I'm thankful to all the folks that participate.t --- _TGrand458@..._ (mailto:TGrand458@...) wrote: > NEW TG: "Hardness" is an interpretation of what the "earth element" > is. > Out and out claims that the "earth element" means "hardness" is > arbitrary. .... S: Hardness is a characteristic of 'earth element'. Right now, it can be proved. When there is touching the keyboard as I said, surely it is hardness which is experienced? Call it tangible object to include the 'full' characteristic if you prefer, just as 'visible object' may be preferable to 'colour' to indicate exactly what is seen - Howard's 'palette', perhaps. .... ..................................... NEWER TG: The Buddha uses the earth element to refer to physical phenomena. He does not use it in an experientially that I am aware of. He does describe the earth element to be whatever is hard, but he is talking about the object, not the experience. Can you provide a quote where the Buddha says: -- "the experience of hardness is the earth element"? I'll go on a limb and say...I doubt it. Therefore, your interpretation of the earth element as an experiential phenomena is arbitrary and conjecture. Perhaps your "hardness" and the Buddha's "earth element" are two different things? Perhaps you are incorporating a type of phenomenology into the Suttas that the Suttas themselves do not contain or support. Perhaps its even more foreign to the Suttas than "my science." (I "passed out" once before so I know what you just went through. ;-) ) ........................................ > I prefer to interpret the "earth element" as "firmness." In either > case, > whether we call it firmness or hardness, "they" are relative and > transitory. > "They" have no "characteristics of their own" but rather, are > resultants based > on conditional interactions. .... S: All conditioned dhammas are transitory, but I wouldn't say 'relative'. Hardness is hardness, a characteristic which is experienced, not relative to anything. ............................................ NEWER TG: The experience "hardness" is relative to all the components that make up the experience. Hardness does not have one flavor/characteristic, it has a variety of flavors/qualities in dependence on and relative to the phenomena structuring the experience. It is empty of its own characteristic. It is dependant on the relative status of the supporting conditions. .............................................. Yes, it has a particular characteristic in common, but different from what is touched when we pick up the phone or pen or put our hand on a cushion. Even when we touch the keyboard, the characteristic experienced is never the same. .................................................. NEWER TG: This is why I say its relative. You didn't want to accept that earlier, but here you seem to be saying that very thing. ................................................ The 'hardness' of the keyboard depends on conditions (notably, temperature)te .......................................... NEWER TG: The Four Great Elements are equal forces. Ultimately one is no more responsible for states then the others. But as friction (temperature) is a more obvious immediate factor in the malleability of phenomena, I'll accept that. ......................................... but still it has a characteristic which is experienced just when body-consciousness contacts it. The body-consciousness is a result of kamma and arises due to this and other conditions took, I agree. ... > What the body actually experiences is friction. Temperature is based > on > relative friction. Motion is required for phenomena to "come together" > to make > contact ... also friction. And firmness provides structure and > resistance > which allows for phenomena to transform from one state to another. .... S: To me this is based on science rather than the Buddha's teachings of what can be directly known and realised now. ................................................ NEWER TG: I know many a highly educated Buddhist that think the Buddha was the greatest scientist. I agree. Quoting from one of them... "The more we learn about science, the closer it comes to Buddhism." Science is not a rigid knowledge written in stone. It evolves based on our knowledge. You seem to look at it as an enemy. Almost like Christians sometimes do. I don't get it. Just in the way I use Abhidhamma, I use science to enhance the Suttas...to bring more meaning out from them. I do not try to fit the Suttas in some scientific formulaic outlook. I'm not sure the same can be said in your case regarding Abhidhamma. At any rate, all that is experienced is friction/contact and this can be known here and now. The Buddha certainly demonstrated friction in his teachings. I can site examples if you wish. I'm not sure there is a Pali term that means friction though. ................................................................... What can be experienced through the body-sense is only temperature, motion and hardness/softness. I think that friction may be a combination of these, but only one characteristic ever appears at a time. ......................................................... NEWER TG: Actually, I think we experience them as a unit. It is only the conceptualizing of them that is limited to one at a time. .......................................................... I'm glad to see Andrew T has now taken up the baton! Your posts are a good challenge for us all, TG. Needs a big team to race with them:-)) ....................................................... NEWER TG: Thank you Sarah, that's kind ... I think? LOL ....................................................... Thanks for your kind and careful consideration of my comments and quotes. ........................................................ NEWER TG: I think we are not that far apart, but the differences are crucial. TG OUT #73060 From: sarah abbott Date: Wed Jun 6, 2007 2:37 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Condiitons, Ch 2, no 7. sarahprocter... Hi TG & all, --- TGrand458@... wrote: > --- _TGrand458@..._ (mailto:TGrand458@...) wrote: > > NEW TG: "Hardness" is an interpretation of what the "earth element" > > is. > > Out and out claims that the "earth element" means "hardness" is > > arbitrary. > .... > S: Hardness is a characteristic of 'earth element'. Right now, it can > be > proved. <...> > NEWER TG: The Buddha uses the earth element to refer to physical > phenomena. > He does not use it in an experientially that I am aware of. He does > describe the earth element to be whatever is hard, but he is talking > about the > object, not the experience. Can you provide a quote where the Buddha > says: -- > "the experience of hardness is the earth element"? I'll go on a limb > and > say...I doubt it. .... S: Yes, hardness is the characteristic of the earth element. It is a rupa which can be experienced (as object of body-consciousness). I haven't said it is 'the experience' or 'the experiencing' or 'the experiencer' for that matter. Vism X1, 31 " 'And what is the internal earth element, friends? Whatever there is internally in oneself that is hard, harsh, and clung to (acquired through kamma)......'" (M.i.185). Vism X1, 92 " ' The earth element - what are its characteristic, function, manifestation?',....: The earth element had the characteristic of hardness.....'" Vism XV, 32 "...But the tangible-data element is reckoned as three things, namely, earth, fire and air...." **** S: For me, the suttas, the Abhidhamma, the commentaries all point to the same dhamma, the same reality which can be known now, not by thinking about scientific theories or complicated conceptual analyses, but by being aware of what is experienced as tangible object. Metta, Sarah ====== #73061 From: upasaka@... Date: Wed Jun 6, 2007 12:34 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Q. re: Jhana as necessity to enlightenment upasaka_howard Hi, James - As far as I know, 'access concentration' (upacara samadhi) is only commentarial terminology, not found in the suttas, not to say that it doesn't refer to an actual stage. I understand it to refer to the stage prior to and "in the neighborhood of" the first jhana. There is no "locked in"aspect to that state, though, so far as I know, and I consider it pre-jhanic, not jhanic. With metta, Howard #73062 From: upasaka@... Date: Wed Jun 6, 2007 12:40 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: 'Impermanent' Versus 'Inconstant' upasaka_howard Hi, Sarah (and Nina) - > > Acintita Sutta, Anguttara Nikaya, Bk of 4s: > =========================== Thanks, Sarah. :-) I'm poor at citations. With metta, Howard #73063 From: upasaka@... Date: Wed Jun 6, 2007 12:59 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Condiitons, Ch 2, no 7. upasaka_howard Hi, Sarah (and TG) - In a message dated 6/6/07 3:21:55 AM Eastern Daylight Time, sarahprocterabbott@... writes: > Hi TG, > > I liked and agreed with a comment you made in another thread that 'this > forum's greatest attribute for me is the challenge it gives us in sorting > things out. And for that I'm thankful to all the folks that participate." > > --- TGrand458@... wrote: > >NEW TG: "Hardness" is an interpretation of what the "earth element" > >is. > >Out and out claims that the "earth element" means "hardness" is > >arbitrary. > .... > S: Hardness is a characteristic of 'earth element'. Right now, it can be > proved. When there is touching the keyboard as I said, surely it is > hardness which is experienced? Call it tangible object to include the > 'full' characteristic if you prefer, just as 'visible object' may be > preferable to 'colour' to indicate exactly what is seen - Howard's > 'palette', perhaps. > .... > >I prefer to interpret the "earth element" as "firmness." In either > >case, > >whether we call it firmness or hardness, "they" are relative and > >transitory. > >"They" have no "characteristics of their own" but rather, are > >resultants based > >on conditional interactions. > .... > S: All conditioned dhammas are transitory, but I wouldn't say 'relative'. > Hardness is hardness, a characteristic which is experienced, not relative > to anything. Yes, it has a particular characteristic in common, but > different from what is touched when we pick up the phone or pen or put our > hand on a cushion. Even when we touch the keyboard, the characteristic > experienced is never the same. > > The 'hardness' of the keyboard depends on conditions (notably, > temperature), but still it has a characteristic which is experienced just > when body-consciousness contacts it. The body-consciousness is a result of > kamma and arises due to this and other conditions took, I agree. > ... > >What the body actually experiences is friction. Temperature is based > >on > >relative friction. Motion is required for phenomena to "come together" > >to make > >contact ... also friction. And firmness provides structure and > >resistance > >which allows for phenomena to transform from one state to another. > .... > S: To me this is based on science rather than the Buddha's teachings of > what can be directly known and realised now. ----------------------------------------------- Howard: Sarah, given that you posit "external" matter, and not just rupic experiential content (as I do), why do you so strongly separate Dhamma from science? One could well argue that understanding the nature of rainbows - their conditioned and "unreal" nature, for example, comes not from "rainbow experience", but from explanations derived from optics. Is it that although you do not see the Dhamma as phenomenalist, you *do* see it as phenomenological? That is, you see it as concerned only with elements of experience, and not "things" beyond the merely experienced? As for me, the distinction I make between Dhamma and science is based on my assumption of the Dhamma being a species of phenomenalism, or, at the least, a species of phenomenology. That is how I interpret the Bahiya Sutta, for example. The elements in the suttas about Mount Sineru and such I consider to be "science" circa 500 BCE. So, I don't consider that part of the Dhamma, but just scientific theory less predictively adequate than current cosmology. -------------------------------------------------- > > What can be experienced through the body-sense is only temperature, motion > and hardness/softness. I think that friction may be a combination of > these, but only one characteristic ever appears at a time. ---------------------------------------- Howard: That sounds about right to me. --------------------------------------- > > I'm glad to see Andrew T has now taken up the baton! Your posts are a good > challenge for us all, TG. Needs a big team to race with them:-)) > > Thanks for your kind and careful consideration of my comments and quotes. > > Metta, > > Sarah > ======================== With metta, Howard #73064 From: upasaka@... Date: Wed Jun 6, 2007 1:38 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Death - just like now! (Alan Driver's funeral) [1] upasaka_howard Hi, Sarah (and Nina, and all) - I'll just insert a few brief comments in the following. In a message dated 6/6/07 2:55:04 AM Eastern Daylight Time, sarahprocterabbott@... writes: > Dear Friends, > > [At the temple where the cremation was to take place. I had just arrived > in tears)from the airport. Friends were chatting and smiling, plucking > flowers, turning back the petals of lotus buds and eating delicious Thai > food as usual!] > .... > KS: ....What I said to them was wherever he was born again is like the > seeing, hearing, smelling, tasting.... All cittas arise and fall away, > rupas, cetasikas too. So it's common not only in this life, also.... > > S: But we don't know, maybe he has to start again with all his > development... > > KS: But whatever he has learnt is there accumulated. Nobody can steal from > him..... ------------------------------------------- Howard: I think her reply is correct. Though he was unlikely to *consciously* continue with his development/training in his next life and his memories became likely irretrievable, the conditions were already set, with future reactions already conditioned. So, as far as conditionality and inclination were concerned, there was little "loss". -------------------------------------------- > ****** > [A little later....] > > S: It's just the suddenness which is such a shock > > KS: they thought they would have three and a half weeks for holiday, they > spent only one week. ------------------------------------------- Howard: LOL! Well, that sure trivialized the matter! ;-)) -------------------------------------------- > > S: We can make all these plans and dreams for our holidays and work out > all these ideas for our future, but we just don’t know what will happen > from moment to moment. All the things we spend our time thinking and > worrying about are so useless....If we're struck down at this moment... --------------------------------------------- Howard: That's a fact, simple fact. But it should be the basis for doing now what is wholesome and useful rather than a basis for depression. ----------------------------------------------- > > KS: Yes, Yes. It shows that thinking can think only for a moment. Whatever > appears the next moment is conditioned. > ****** > [A little later....] > > S: I'm sure for Alan if he had known it was happening (the accident and > death) there would have been some detachment and... > > KS: Don't think so. There can be great fear. We don't know.....unless he > is always aware of anything which appears... as rupa and nama ----------------------------------------- Howard: That depends on the person involved, on the person and on the current state of mind. Typically expectation of death results in fear, but that is not always so. Once I was erroneously led to believe that I would die, but, because of my mindset then, I was unafraid. That was then. What would be the case now I don't know. -------------------------------------------- > > S: But isn't that last citta important? > > KS: Nobody can tell. That's why we can't tell the next life. Otherwise we > can tell if we know the cittas moments before death. But since we don't > know, we cannot tell the rebirth consciousness. --------------------------------------------- Howard: Nobody can tell exactly what will arise at the last moment, but I do think it is important, and, accordingly, attempting to support a degree of ease in a dying person, another or oneself, is a worthwhile endeavor. That is what I attempted at my mother's passing. -------------------------------------------- > ***** > [A little later...] > > S: You weren't shocked at all, Khun Sujin? > > KS: Shocked? Not shocked. > > S: Not surprised? > > KS: It's so sudden that I realize that anything can happen at anytime and > we consider that as great loss, but in reality it's only the falling away > of one moment of citta and the arising of a new one. So it's not great > sorrow or loss because the patisandhi citta arises and his citta now is > arising and falling away like everybody, common to all. ------------------------------------------- Howard: Unless one is an advanced ariyan or doesn't really care so much about the person dying or has simply sold oneself an intellectual bill of goods, the loss of a loved one - a genuinely *loved* one is, and should be IMO, truly sorrowful. Of course, a useful mental perspective can ease the suffering and decrease its duration, but sorrow normally arises, and forcefully suppressing it, if even possible, is, IMO, not a good idea - quite the opposite, in fact. --------------------------------------------- > > S: I think though it's a loss to the Dhamma..... > > But who can help. Nobody can help. What will be will be. > ***** > > Metta, > > Sarah > ========================= With metta, Howard #73065 From: "wisdomcompassion" Date: Wed Jun 6, 2007 6:28 am Subject: [dsg] Re: what is sati wisdomcompas... Dear Sarah, > When you say 'there is no other way except watching the > process of mind', a)who or what is watching, b) what is the process of > mind? ************* a) Mind watching itself. b) all experience, all value judgements, all feelins are process of mind. As i see in meditation rupa is also mind. without mind rupa cannot be experienced. any sensation on rupa cannot be experienced without mind. once a person ( in conventional reality) investigates properly and understands and identifies that this is volition (at gross level), this is value judgement (at gross level), this is feelings (emotions), this is feeling on body/sense door (in meditation all feelings are experienced through mind door only. though ear and nose sense doors are open but these can be experienced through mind door). mind is the junction on which all five sense doors meet. so when mind watches itself and understand the how foolish it is in running after these experiences (experiences of all sense doors), and further observes that all experiences are impermanent, dukkha, and actually not self( something on which we cannot exercise control), mind sees the futility of its process. at that moment a great deal stress or dukkha arises. if that too is watched properly (i will explain this in next para) the particular tendency or habit of mind goes forever. some new knowledge/wisdom arises as a result. and this habit never comes again. what is watching properly: when a person (conventional reality) clearly identifies the volition part (at gross level) of the mind, by simply watching that part, the volition stops working for the time being. And then the feelings, thoughts, or body sensation that appear, arise and fall away. if the root or the feelings and thoughts are wathced and investigated properly, the root disintegrates, and if the watching is continued, it falls away. it never comes back again. one can go deep into one's thoughts by investigating any thought. Most of the thoughts contain feelings. and as i see, no thought occurs without attachment. so in a thought anything can be investigated: the feeling itself, the associated feelings, or the attachment. if one goes sufficiently deeply the feelings wither away. in respect to that matter it never comes. i may go on to say further that even the capability to generate that feeling goes forever. since the volition, and value judgements are at halt and whenever they arise they too are watched, there is no "me" watching. most of the human beings think of either value judgements as me, and more strongly the volition as me. but it can be seen in meditation that both are not "me". so i call it mind watching itself. it looks very difficult to describe in writing, but i think i have tried my level best. for me personally all this can be done with closed eyes, but in waking hours it is not really possible, except very few moments. since volition is not working, there is really no effort, that is the reason the dhamma that appears wither away, never to come back. if meditator looses sati for any moment, the volition works and sankhara is made. So i think understanding volition in meditation is very important.But whenever there is such slip of awareness volition can be watched. As i see this is the process, and when this process is multiplied "pahana" is possible. Absense of volition is the key to "pahana/nirodh". when the volition is completely absent there is true equanimity. As i understand vipassana 'means watching in special way'. and i think that when mind watches itself and its process, it is not conventional watching. so it must be vipassana. I hope my words are in understandable form. I havent gone at abhidhamma level (in meditation) though i m reading it, but i think i m learning, and without actually doing anything i cannot learn anything. i have no difference of opinion with what KS is suggesting, the only place where i differ with her is that when she uses the word 'understanding'. i think it must be actually understanding. and there are only two yardsticks of actual understanding, equanimity and insight. if anyone following her words is understanding reality on these two levels simultaneously, one is progressing. and any one who is understanding the reality in such a way is watching. its just different usage of words. i call it watching, she calls it understanding. metta, nidhi #73066 From: connie Date: Wed Jun 6, 2007 7:08 am Subject: Theriigaathaa - Sisters (57) nichiconn dear friends, Vijayaa, part 2: 169. "Catukkhattu.m pa~ncakkhattu.m, vihaaraa upanikkhami.m; aladdhaa cetaso santi.m, citte avasavattinii. Pruitt (p205) 169. Four times, five times, I went out from my cell, not having obtained peace of mind, being without self-mastery over the mind. RD: Four *282 times, nay five, I sallied from my cell, And roamed afield to find the peace of mind I lacked, and governance of thoughts I could not bring into captivity. (169) *282 = Ps. xxviii. and xxx. {c: respectively: Saamaa: "Delighting in vigilance because of many painful objects, I have obtained the annihilation of craving." and the 7 yr old Uttamaa, who was 'taught the Doctrine of insight that is subtle and delicate': aggregates, sense bases and elements (see next verses below). Pruitt on p.62: <... she says peace of mind with reference to the concentration of the noble path. Being without self-mastery over the mind means: because of the absence of balanced energy, I have no control over my mental development...> } txt: 170. "Bhikkhuni.m upasa"nkamma, sakkacca.m paripucchaha.m; saa me dhammamadesesi, dhaatu-aayatanaani ca. 171. "Cattaari ariyasaccaani, indriyaani balaani ca; bojjha"nga.t.tha"ngika.m magga.m, uttamatthassa pattiyaa. Pruitt: 170-171. I approached a bhikkhunii, honoured her, and questioned [her]. She taught me the Doctrine and the elements and the sense bases, the four noble truths, the sense faculties, and the powers, the constituents of awakening, and the eightfold path for the attainment of the supreme goal. RD: Then to a Bhikkhunii *283 I came and asked Full many a question of my doubts. To me she taught the Norm: the elements, (170) Organ and object in the life of sense, *284 [And then the factors of the Nobler life :] The Ariyan Truths, the Faculties, the Powers, The Seven Features of Awakening, The Eightfold Way, leading to utmost good. (171) *283 Here is a case where Atthakathaa and Gaathaa are badly welded, as he who runs may read. The commentator, nothing doubting, identifies the Bhikkhunii as Khemaa. *284 Cf. Ps. xxx., xxxviii. The following 'factors' give twenty-five of the thirty-seven known as the Bodhipakkhiyaa Dhammaa, omitting the four applications of mindfulness (satipa.t.thaanaa), the four stages of potency (iddhipaadaa), and the four right efforts (sammappadhaanaani), but introducing the doctrinal four truths. ===tbc, connie. #73067 From: "wisdomcompassion" Date: Wed Jun 6, 2007 7:31 am Subject: [dsg] Re: what is sati wisdomcompas... Dear Sarah, > S: As I mentioned, there is effort (viriya) with almost every citta, > including all kusala and akusala cittas. So, it's not a matter of having > or not-having effort, but of understanding what is right effort and what > is wrong effort. > .... > S: We need to understand that even 'effort' is anatta and cannot be made > to arise or cease at will. It's not a question of 'doing' or 'not-doing', > but of understanding dhammas for what they are, as I see it. > > Metta, > > Sarah > ======== N:I don't have any reference of sutta but as i understand, there are two types of effort. one is worldly effort, that is doing kusala and abstaining from akusala, etc. another one is spiritual effort(i don't know whether this is right word or not, but no other word is coming to my mind) . In most of the indian religious literature the word 'viriya' is used in spiritual/meditative context. i find it quite reasonable. when an emotion comes, it is very very difficult neither to indulge in it, nor to suppresss it. in meditation as well going deeper and investigating one's feelings, and value judgements is very very difficult, and the person(mind) has to exert a high degree of effort to do that.One needs very strong adhitthana parami and viriya parami. it is the mind which exerts effort, it is not self. when there is desire for result, or lobha the self gets strengthened, otherwise it is accumulating kusala or parami. there is no question of will power. if that was the case why buddha was accumulating paramis? As i see liberation is release of mind from itself "cetovimutti". When there is thought " i m doing this" , then self strengthened as there is desire, but when there is thought and feeling that "this must be done" it is accumulation of parami. when mind sees its own folly, second type of thought comes. i dont think there is atta involved here. mind needs certain qualities to release itself from its own entanglement. i dont think any such effort is strenghtening of atta. anybody studying buddhism knows that 'nothing is self'. it doesn't mean that one must stop doing anything, and be afraid of strengthening atta. I think important thing is to understand "Is there any thing as self". i don't think that buddha ever said that one must not do anything because every thing is anatta. so if one does anything one strengthen the self. i think at his time lay people left their home, to release themselves, was it an effort to strengthen "self". I think one has to start with gross, and realise that every thing is anatta (in one's body and mind), not that one starts with anatta and stops doing every effort. May be i m still not understanding your view point. and i m sure you are not understanding me either. may be these questions help as you use the word 'understanding' the realities as they appear. 1) what actually you mean by this word 2) how do u safeguard that self doesn't get strenthened, Who is it that safeguards, and most importantantly who is it that "understands" 3) what does that understanding brings. 4) what is the process of understanding. with metta nidhi #73068 From: "wisdomcompassion" Date: Wed Jun 6, 2007 8:59 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Q. re: Jhana as necessity to enlightenment wisdomcompas... Hi Howard and Nina, i really liked this post of yours Howard. so clear expression (as usual) and so well written. I try to learn art of writing one's thoughts by reading your posts. Nina how are you now, i hope u must be feeling well now. best wishes for your speedy recovery. with metta, nidhi ================= > Well said, Sukin! I share your sentiments. :-) > Nina, it is true that we all should keep death in mind. But, Nina, > death will come to every one of us, younger as well as older, and when it will > come, and to whom, is unknown. Amusingly, in a way, death always comes as a > surprise! #73069 From: "wisdomcompassion" Date: Wed Jun 6, 2007 10:36 am Subject: [dsg] Re: 'Impermanent' Versus 'Inconstant'( subconscious and unconscious mind) wisdomcompas... Dear Nina, i was really surprised to read this. As far as i remember goenkaji in his discourses says that Buddha used the word 'paritta citta' for what we understand as conscious mind, and basically the word citta is used for the totality of mind which includes both conscious and unconscious or subconscious mind. as per my understanding the word "anusaya" means what lies hidden in the subconscious mind. and as per my understanding meditation is very effective method (apart from other methods) to go into subconscious mind. this is one of the reasons of my liking of meditation. i m sorry if i m raising a non issue, but the concept of subconscious and unconscious is what is theory of kamma. what lies in subconscious or unconscious gives rise to cause and effect, and determines destiny after death and in this life as well. And as per my understanding enlightenment means "mind freeing itself by burning (pahana) all the content that lies in subconscious and unconscious mind". So when all that has died there is no cause left to give birth again. with metta nidhi ******************* --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Dear Colette and TG, > You do not have to name it colour, but it has a characteristic that > can be directly experienced, it appears through the eyes. A concept > is an object of thought, it has no characteristic that can be > directly experienced. > I find it difficult to go into subconsciousness, because this is not > in the Theravada teachings. > Nina. > Op 18-mei-2007, om 0:38 heeft colette het volgende geschreven: > > > "Colour is not a concept" = FALSE #73070 From: upasaka@... Date: Wed Jun 6, 2007 6:35 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Q. re: Jhana as necessity to enlightenment upasaka_howard Hi, Nidhi - In a message dated 6/6/07 12:02:43 PM Eastern Daylight Time, wisdomcompassion@... writes: > Hi Howard and Nina, > > i really liked this post of yours Howard. so clear expression (as > usual) and so well written. I try to learn art of writing one's > thoughts by reading your posts. -------------------------------------------- Howard: What a lovely compliment, Nidhi! Thank you. :-) ------------------------------------------ > > Nina how are you now, i hope u must be feeling well now. best wishes > for your speedy recovery. > > with metta, > nidhi > ===================== With metta, Howard #73071 From: TGrand458@... Date: Wed Jun 6, 2007 7:26 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Condiitons, Ch 2, no 7. TGrand458@... In a message dated 6/6/2007 3:37:38 A.M. Mountain Daylight Time, sarahprocterabbott@... writes: S: For me, the suttas, the Abhidhamma, the commentaries all point to the same dhamma, the same reality which can be known now, not by thinking about scientific theories or complicated conceptual analyses, but by being aware of what is experienced as tangible object. Metta, Sarah Hi Sarah Just briefly. I do see this as the fulcrum of your and Nina's view about Buddhism. I.E., being aware of what is experienced as tangible object. Since I do not find that to be the Buddha's teaching, I think we are at an impasse. TG #73072 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Jun 6, 2007 12:00 pm Subject: Fwd: ADL & Perfections nilovg To dsg members, Begin doorgestuurd bericht: > Van: "Tom Westheimer" > Datum: 6 juni 2007 15:50:09 GMT+02:00 > Aan: connie , "Jonothan Abbott" > , "Nina van Gorkom" > Onderwerp: Antw.: ADL & Perfections > > Just thought you would like to know all 25 chapters of ADL are on > the site!! http://www.westheimers.net/dsg/ > enjoy. We are off to Ireland for about a month of walking and > gawking :-) > tom and bev > > #73073 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Jun 6, 2007 11:57 am Subject: Listening to Dhamma, Ch 1, no 4. nilovg Dear friends, The next day, in the house of Kunying Nopphrath Snidwong, we discussed the nature of different types of citta. Kunying Nopphrath gives once a month in her house the opportunity for a day of Dhamma discussions with Acharn Sujin, and here Acharn Somphon and Acharn Santi assist with the explanation of ultimate realities and of the Påli terms which designate them. This time the subject of discussion was “rootless cittas”, ahetuka cittas, cittas which are neither wholesome, kusala, nor unwholesome, akusala. There is one citta at a time and each citta experiences an object. Cittas experience objects through six doors. Seeing-consciousness experiences through the eyes what is visible, visible object or colour; hearing-consciousness experiences through the ears sound; smelling-consciousness experiences through the nose odour; tasting- consciousness experiences through the tongue flavour; body-consciousness experiences through the bodysense tangible object, namely: hardness or softness, heat or cold, motion or pressure. The sixth door is the mind-door and through this door citta can experience all realities, nåmas and rúpas and also concepts which are not real in the ultimate sense. A citta which experiences an object through one of the six doors arises in a process or series of cittas all of which experience that object. Seeing, for example arises in a process of cittas succeeding one another. Seeing is neither kusala nor akusala, it is vipåkacitta, a citta which is the result of kamma, of a deed done in the past. We receive pleasant or unpleasant objects through the senses, and nobody can control which kind of objects are experienced. When a pleasant object is experienced through the senses, it is the result of kusala kamma, and when an unpleasant object is experienced it is the result of akusala kamma. After the vipåkacittas have fallen away kusala cittas or akusala cittas experience the object in a wholesome or unwholesome way. When the object which is experienced is pleasant, cittas with attachment may arise, and when it is unpleasant cittas with aversion may arise. Some cetasikas are “roots”, hetus, three of which are akusala hetus, unwholesome roots: lobha or attachment, dosa or aversion and moha or ignorance. Three hetus are sobhana hetus, beautiful roots: alobha or non- attachment, adosa or non-aversion and paññå or wisdom. Akusala citta is accompanied by several akusala cetasikas, and it can be rooted in moha and lobha, in moha and dosa, or it may have moha as its only root. Kusala citta is accompanied by several sobhana cetasikas, and it can be rooted in alobha and adosa, or in alobha, adosa and paññå. The cetasikas which are hetus are so called because they are the foundation of the citta just as the roots of a tree are its foundation. Thus, in a process of cittas which experience an object through the five senses and the mind-door, some cittas are accompanied by roots, namely akusala cittas and kusala cittas, and some are ahetuka, not accompanied by roots, and these are neither kusala nor akusala [1]. -------- 1. In Påli: avyåkata, which means: not explained. Vyåkati is: to explain. They are neither called kusala nor akusala. Avyåkata is sometimnes translated as indeterminate. ******* Nina. #73074 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Jun 6, 2007 11:56 am Subject: Conditions, Ch 3, no 2. nilovg Dear friends, The conascent predominant factors operate at the moments of javana- cittas (kusala cittas or akusala cittas in the case of non-arahats) [1] and these javana-cittas have to be accompanied by at least two roots (hetus), otherwise they would be too weak for the occurrence of predominance-condition. For instance, the two types of moha-múla- citta (citta rooted in ignorance) which are: moha-múla-citta accompanied by uddhacca (restlessness) and moha-múla-citta accompanied by kukkucca (doubt), have moha as their only root; they have no strength to accomplish a task with one of the predominant factors as predominance-condition. When one undertakes works of art, such as painting, or one applies oneself to music, one is bound to do so with lobha-múla-citta (citta rooted in attachment). Lobha is attached to the object it experiences, but it cannot accomplish an enterprise, it is not a predominant factor. Chanda, zeal or wish-to-do, which accompamies lobha-múla-citta can be a predominant factor in the accomplishment of one’s undertakings, it conditions the citta and the other cetasikas it accompanies by way of conascent-predominance. When we are generous and like to give something away, chanda, which is kusala in this case, may be predominant. There are also alobha, non-attachment, and adosa, non-aversion or kindness, but these wholesome roots cannot be predominant in the accomplishment of a generous deed. It is chanda which can be predominant in the accomplishment of the generous deed, for example, when one chooses the gift and hands it to someone else. Viriya can be a predominant factor in the accomplishment of our tasks. Preparing food may be part of our daily chores, and sometimes, when we like to do this, chanda may be predominant. At other times we may find it an effort but we may still want to cook. Then we may prepare food with viriya as predominant factor. At such moments there is likely to be lobha, but viriya is foremost in the accomplishment of cooking. ----------- 1. The javana-cittas arise in the sense-door processes of cittas and in the mind-door process, and they “run through the object”. There are usually seven javana-cittas in a process of cittas, and these are kusala cittas or akusala cittas. Arahats do not have kusala cittas or akusala cittas, they have kiriyacittas which perform the function of javana. ******** Nina. #73075 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Jun 6, 2007 12:18 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: 'Impermanent' Versus 'Inconstant'( subconscious and unconscious mind) nilovg Dear Nidhi, Mahaayana uses the word store consciousness, which is strange, because it seems that there is another citta in addition to the present citta. The term subconsciousness is not in the Tipitaka nor in the Theravada commentaries. The anusaya are the latent tendencies lying dormant in the citta and they are passed on from citta to citta. They can condition the arising of akusala citta. Kusala and akusala arising at the present time fall away and they are accumulated as inclinations. These go on from citta to citta, also to following lives. They do not stay somewhere as in a store. This subject is very vast, I cannot explain all in one post. Nina. Op 6-jun-2007, om 19:36 heeft wisdomcompassion het volgende geschreven: > As far as i remember goenkaji in > his discourses says that Buddha used the word 'paritta citta' for what > we understand as conscious mind, and basically the word citta is used > for the totality of mind which includes both conscious and > unconscious or subconscious mind. #73076 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Jun 6, 2007 12:37 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Nibbaana nilovg Hi Larry, When the conditions are right enlightenment can be attained and nobody can prevent this from happening. Lokuttara cittas arise and these have to experience nibbaana. Nibbaana bends as it were the cittas towards itself. It is a powerful object. Nibbaana is object predominance-condition for the cittas that experience it. The text states: faultless dhammas, because nibbaana cannot be object- condition for lobha-muulacittas. I wrote in my Conditions, Ch 3 (this passage coming up soon):: < We read in the same section of the “Paììhåna” (§ 416): Learners esteem and review (lower) Fruition. (They) esteem and review Nibbåna. Nibbåna is related to change-of-lineage, purification , Path by predominance-condition. Nibbåna is object-predominance-condition for the eight lokuttara cittas which experience it, and it can also be object-predominance- condition for mahå-kusala citta accompanied by paññå and mahå- kiriyacitta (of the arahat) accompanied by paññå. Lokuttara cittas can be object-predominance-condition for the cittas which arise after the attainment of enlightenment and which review, consider with paññå, the lokuttara cittas which arose. > Thank you for your kind concern. Working hard to be able to make our walking outing June 24. Nina. -------- Op 6-jun-2007, om 1:36 heeft LBIDD@... het volgende geschreven: What does this mean: > "and Nibbaana bends faultless states on to itself by means of the > causal > relation of the dominant influence of object." > > Hope you are feeling better. #73077 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Jun 6, 2007 12:09 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Q. re: Jhana as necessity to enlightenment nilovg Dear Nidhi, Thank you for your kind thoughts. I have to spend alot of time with therapy and exercising. Yes, Howard's post is really excellent. It is consoling and encouraging. Nina. Op 6-jun-2007, om 17:59 heeft wisdomcompassion het volgende geschreven: > really liked this post of yours Howard. so clear expression (as > usual) and so well written. I try to learn art of writing one's > thoughts by reading your posts. > > Nina how are you now, i hope u must be feeling well now. best wishes > for your speedy recovery. #73078 From: upasaka@... Date: Wed Jun 6, 2007 9:00 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: 'Impermanent' Versus 'Inconstant'( subconscious and unconscious... upasaka_howard Hi, Nina (and Nidhi) - In a message dated 6/6/07 3:21:20 PM Eastern Daylight Time, vangorko@... writes: > Dear Nidhi, > Mahaayana uses the word store consciousness, which is strange, > because it seems that there is another citta in addition to the > present citta. > The term subconsciousness is not in the Tipitaka nor in the Theravada > commentaries. > The anusaya are the latent tendencies lying dormant in the citta and > they are passed on from citta to citta. They can condition the > arising of akusala citta. > Kusala and akusala arising at the present time fall away and they are > accumulated as inclinations. These go on from citta to citta, also to > following lives. They do not stay somewhere as in a store. This > subject is very vast, I cannot explain all in one post. > Nina. ========================== The Mahayana notion of "store consciousness" (or "alayavijnana") seems to be a blending of the Theravadin ideas of bhavangasota and anusaya. It's primary function seems to be that of depositing and propagating of "seeds". These "seeds" seem to refer to karmic traces or accumulations. This posited store consciousness is one of two extra types of consciousness in Mahayana theory beyond the standard six. Store consciousness is counted as the 8th consciousness, with the other, the 7th, being "manas" which is the self-making operation treated as a separate mode of consciousness. This "manas" grasps at store consciousness as "self". I view these 7th and 8th consciousnesses as unnecessary. Of course, I don't see any need for bhavanga citta either (though I don't disbelieve in it), nor for *literal* accumulations! ;-) In that latter regard, repeated mental conditions, IMO, serve riight then and there, at the very time of their occurrence, for future reactions, without anything being "passed along". The effect occurs when all requisite conditions have arisen. Just as action-at-a-distance in space and time is countenced in quantum mechanics, I consider that to be the case for mental phenomena. It's just this/that conditionality, with no "seed passing" of any sort required. As for "the" subconcious, thought as a subterranean mental world, I don't buy it. But I do buy mental functioning at subliminal levels - seeing, hearing, tasting, smelling, bodily sensing, and, very much, thinking that do not rise to the level of conscious awareness. This can be noticed when, being lost in thought while driving, one suddenly notices that s/he is pulling up to their house without having been consciously aware of the last three minutes of driving. This also can be noticed when one has been intently trying to figure out a difficult problem, say in mathematics or science or medicine, but with no success, and then forgets about it, even "sleeps on it", and then, the next day, suddenly, the solution pops into one's mind. Subliminal processing has been underway. With metta, Howard #73079 From: "m_nease" Date: Wed Jun 6, 2007 1:03 pm Subject: Re: Death - just like now! (Alan Driver's funeral) [1] m_nease Hi Sarah, I think death is always a good topic for reflection. I know this is a very personal reminiscence for those of you who knew him so I hope an impersonal tangent won't be taken amiss. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > S: But we don't know, maybe he has to start again with all his > development... He? > KS: But whatever he has learnt is there accumulated. Nobody can steal > from him...and his citta now is arising and falling away like everybody, > common to all. This sounds so much like transmigration of souls, using 'his citta' as as a kind of circumlocution for 'his soul'. I'm sure neither of you meant it that way but I think it could easily be taken that way. What is 'whatever he has learnt'? Nothing conceptual, surely (such as 'conceptual right view' as defined in The Great Forty)? So what accumulations survive(?) cuti-citta to be 'reborn' with patisandhi-citta? Are they particular cetasikas? Could all the above be restated in abhidhamma terms, without getting terribly complicated? Also, someone suggested here recently that the Buddha never exaggerated. If so, then doesn't the yoke and turtle simile in the Chiggala Sutta tell us that the likelihood of a human rebirth is very near to nil? Does this have any implications for the conditioning by cetasikas accumulated during a human existence (since we can't say the 'survival' of anything) of cittas in a future, non-human existence? All of this seems to be a long way from the investigation of present dhammas...I'm probably on the wrong track... mike #73080 From: "Ramesh Patil" Date: Wed Jun 6, 2007 10:07 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: what is sati rameshat27 Dear nidhi, What a message is written by you?? It is exceptional,tremendous truth u had spoken frm it like "anybody studying buddhism knows that 'nothing is self'. it doesn't mean that one must stop doing anything, and be afraid of strengthening atta. I think important thing is to understand "Is there any thing as self". i don't think that buddha ever said that one must not do anything because every thing is anatta. so if one does anything one strengthen the self. i think at his time lay people left their home, to release themselves, was it an effort to strengthen "self". I think one has to start with gross, and realise that every thing is anatta (in one's body and mind), not that one starts with anatta and stops doing every effort. " So great great and admirable writting by you nidhi... It is really exceptional... Please give ur introduction what u do and where u from..?? How do u came in contact with d dhamma?/ With Warm Regards Ramesh Patil Mumbai,India #73081 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Wed Jun 6, 2007 4:20 pm Subject: Re: Humourously swimming in a bottle? kenhowardau Hi Colette, ---------- <. . . > C: > I am still trying to make sense out of what happened to me in 1978 and how the world that I knew on April 9, 1978 is soooooo different from the world I ended up waking up in after the automobile accident, approx. a month later. I am more than willing to pursue the study of such questions but those idiocies are secondary to the primary discovery of WHY the world changed, HOW did the world change, etc.? ------------ Yes, I think I can understand that. Thankfully, however, the study of Abhidhamma can coexist with all other concerns. For example, the internet time you spend at DSG could be devoted to Abhidhamma study, and the rest of your day could be devoted to what you call the primary discovery. That would be enough. -------------------- <. . . . .> C: > it seems impossible that you can answer the question of "understanding" when you've allowed my question of whom do you speak as doing the understanding, without reply. -------------------- No one does the understanding. Understanding can exist, but when it does there is no person that understands. The same applies to ignorance; there is no person who is ignorant. Back to your question; of whom do I speak as "doing the understanding?" Conditioned dhammas, of course! What else? And so that is what I devote my DSG time to. Learning about conditioned dhammas. I hope you will do the same. Ken H #73082 From: "Phil" Date: Wed Jun 6, 2007 5:01 pm Subject: Re: Sammaadi.t.thi study corner philofillet Hi Mike Finding it hard to get on the computer, as Naomi is using it for work, so this will be quik. Just want to post to tell you how much I appreciate this discussion. I think a benefit of my intentional, "feelgood"practices is that they allow me to relax about Dhamma, so I can stay open to the deeper teachings that you and others encourage me to consider. If there is clinging to self in that "feelgood" about being a wholesome person, etc, that clinging is helping to create conditions for listening to deeper Dhamma. One thing I thought this morning. We *all* seek emotional comfort from Dhamma. I find it really hard to believe that there is anyone who doesn't. When I was listening to Acharn Sujin, I was finding that emotional comfort in a way that was somewhat hidden to myself at first but became clear - thinking about deep dhamma, thinking about wisdom that sees into anattaness of paramattha dhammas. Clinging to "panna." Now my clinging is to kindness, harmlessness and other concepts. But it's more suitable. No grasping greedily at wisdom in order to get emotional comfort, so the wisdom, if it comes, can grow in a less forced way. This is true of me, not of other people who listen to Acharn Sujin. (Though it could be true, of course.) > > It is defined in the suttas as this kind of > > mundane right view, isn't it? > > My tentative conclusion so far is that 'mundane right view' can refer > to 'conceptual right view' as described in the Great Forty OR as > satipa.t.thaana vipassanaa--which would take a dhamma, not a concept > (such as knowing that there are results to deeds, etc.), depending > mainly on context. Let me know if and when your "tentative conclusion" firms up! I like listening to you because you are very open-minded about considering various angles to Dhamma, I think. > > > When the Buddha says "what is right view" > > he proceeds to describe a kind of right view that is quite mundane and > > likely to be had by anyone who accepts the Buddha's basic teachings. (I > > have no doubt that there are results of deeds, for example.) Is there > > any sutta in which it is said that the kind of right view that is about > > knowing all dhammas to be not-self, etc, comes first? It seems to me > > that this kind of "right view" is too deep and refined to possibly come > > first. > > If KS and company are correct (which I generally take for granted as a > working hypothesis), the beginning of mundane right view > (satipa.t.thaana) is direct knowledge of naama vs ruupa. Whether or > not the 'conceptual right view' (results and so on) is a necessary > prerequisite to satipa.t.thaana I still don't know. THe Burmese Sayadaws I have listened to also talk about this first insight into nama vs.. rupa, but it is just one stage of several tender insights. They don't emphasize it as much as AS. I find that she emphasizes it in such a way that her listener is likely to be trying too hard to have it. That was the case with me. Still, it is good to understand that knowing nama from rupa is not as obvious as one might think - it is a stage of insight. OH, I'll have to stop there. I'm just feeling these days that a very mundane form of right view that deals with belief in kamma and concern with doing wrong deeds is the way to go for me. It conditions the development of a more wholesome phil, and that more wholesome phil will have the non-remorse, easygoingness, sense of peace, whatever, that will allow conditions for deeper understanding to arise. I think this sort of thing is gotten at in the suttas that have mentionned here often before about sense control > sila> concentration > seeing things as they really are etc. But I don't really know about those suttas. I just know what is helpful for me now to subdue the fires of greed, hatred and deslusions. (I guess it could be said I'm feeding that last fire by trying to subdue the first two, but I think the delusion, again, refers to basic forms of wrong view, not clinging to self etc.) Metta, Phil p.s sorry always for all the typos, don't have time to proof #73083 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Wed Jun 6, 2007 5:12 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: what is sati kenhowardau Hi Ramesh and Nidhi, --------------- R: > Dear nidhi, What a message is written by you?? It is exceptional,tremendous truth u had spoken frm it like "anybody studying buddhism knows that 'nothing is self'. ------------------ I agree with you and Nidhi that anybody studying Buddhism knows (at an intellectual level) there is no self. However, only an Ariyan disciple has eradicated doubt. The rest of us are plagued by thoughts self. ------------------- N: "it doesn't mean that one must stop doing anything, and be afraid of strengthening atta. -------------------- I think Nidhi and you, Ramesh, may be of the opinion that the Abhidhamma and the commentaries (or, at least, certain people at DSG) are saying we must stop doing anything. But no, they are not saying that. The middle way is not a way of someone doing something. But nor is it a way of someone doing nothing. That is because there is no "someone." The middle way is a way of *dhammas doing something.* ----------------------------- N: "I think one has to start with gross, and realise that every thing is anatta (in one's body and mind), not that one starts with anatta and stops doing every effort. " ----------------------------- Forgive me for saying so Ramesh, but you and Nidhi seem to believe the middle way is a way of "someone" (not mere dhammas) doing something. I am glad you are prepared to talk about it. We all benefit from Dhamma discussions, so please continue. Ken H #73084 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Wed Jun 6, 2007 5:24 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Q. re: Jhana as necessity to enlightenment buddhatrue Hi Howard, Thank you so much for your input! Now, if I could ask you one more thing, from your experience (since I have never achieved a jhana having practiced the wrong type of meditation for years). You have written before that you achieved the first jhana- of which I have no doubt. Did that jhana you achieved have the type of "locked-in" quality that you could have sat all day and all night enjoying the bliss of that jhana, or was it more of a wobbly quality, like a child that falls down and gets back up again? I am not looking to debate; I am only looking for information. I could understand any reticence you might have to address this issue. Many members in this group are anti-jhana and to say you achieved jhana—well, to them, you might as well say you jumped over the moon! ;-)) Metta, James #73085 From: connie Date: Wed Jun 6, 2007 5:29 pm Subject: Theriigaathaa - Sisters (57) nichiconn dear friends, intermission: S.i.130, Ven. Bodhi: At Saavatthi. Then, in the morning, the bhikkhuni Vijayaa dressed ... she sat down at the foot of a tree for the day's abiding. *342 Then Maara the Evil One, desiring to arouse fear, trepidation, and terror in the bhikkhunii Vijayaa, desiring to make her fall away from concentration, approached her and addressed her in verse: [131] 528. "You are so young and beautiful, And I too am a youth in my prime. Come, noble lady, let us rejoice With the music of a fivefold ensemble." *343 530. "I am repelled and humiliated By this foul, putrid body, Subject to break up, fragile: I've uprooted sensual craving. *344 531. "As to those beings who fare amidst form, And those who abide in the formless, And those peaceful attainments too: Everywhere darkness has been destroyed." *345 Then Maara the Evil One, realizing "The bhikkhunii Vijayaa knows me," sad and disappointed, disappeared right there. **** *342 Thii-a 156 says that in lay life she had been a friend of Khemaa, the chief consort of King Bimbisaara. When she heard that Khemaa had gone forth under the Buddha, she visited her and was so inspired by their conversation that she too decided to take ordination. Khemaa became her preceptor. See Commentary on the Verses, pp.204-6. Her verses are at Thii 169-74. While the verses here are not among them, interestingly vv.528 and 530 (with minor differences) are found among Khemaa's verses, Thii 139 and 140. *343 Spk enumerates the five instruments: ...cut... *344 Though three eds. read paada c bhindanena, Ee2 and SS have bhindarena, which perhaps points to an historical reading bhidurena. The Thii counterpart, v.140, has aaturena, but Thii 35a contains the phrase bhiduro kaayo. Both bhindana and bhidura are glossed indentically in their respective commentaries as bhijjanasabhaava, "subject to breaking up." *345 Spk: Paada a refers to the form realm, paada b to the formless realm, and paada c to the eight mundane meditative attainments. By the mention of the two higher realms, the sensory realm is also implied. Hence she says, "everywhere the darkness of ignorance has been dispelled." ========= Mrs RD: 4. Vijayaa. *462 . . . . . Now Bhikkhunii Vijayaa . . . . . sat down at the root of a certain tree for siesta. Then Maara . . . . . addressed her in a verse: *463 'A maiden thou and beautiful - and I So young a lad! Now where to fivefold art *464 Of sounds melodious we may list, O come, Lady, and let us take our fill of joy!' Then Bhikkhunii Vijayaa thought . . . . . 'Sure 'tis Maara!' . . . . . and . . . . . replied with verses: 'Sights, sounds and tastes and smells and things to touch, Wherein the mind delights, I leave them all To thee, Maara; for such no mind have I! This body vile, this brittle, crumbling thing, Doth touch me only with distress and shame. Craving for joys of sense is rooted out. They who have come to worlds of form, and they Who dwell where form is not, and that perfect Attainment which is peace *465 - from all, From everywhere, the darkness is dispelled.' Then Maara, thinking, 'Bhikkhunii Vijayaa knows me!' vanished thence, sad and dejected. ***** *462 Vijayaa, to whom Ps lvii. is ascribed, is apparently a different person. *463 Cf. Khemaa's Psalm (lii.) *464 Five sorts of musical instruments are supposed to be implied in this idiomatic phrase - aatata.m, vitata.m, aatata-vitata.m, ghana.m, susira.m. *465 I have ventured to bridge over the hiatus, in what Professor Windisch calls the 'loose construction' of this gaathaa, by the insertion of 'from all, from. . . .' For what may have been the original, and is the more logical, ending, see Caalaa's verses below. As the gaathaa in Pali stands here, it seems to mean: '"I see life steadily, and see it whole." Trouble me not with your foolish little solicitations to sensual joys.' ======== peace, connie #73086 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Wed Jun 6, 2007 6:27 pm Subject: Re: Death - just like now! (Alan Driver's funeral) [1] buddhatrue Hi Sarah, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > > Dear Friends, > > [At the temple where the cremation was to take place. I had just arrived > in tears)from the airport. Friends were chatting and smiling, plucking > flowers, turning back the petals of lotus buds and eating delicious Thai > food as usual!] I read this dialogue between you and K. Sujin and, although I don't really disagree with anything she says (it is all appropriate Dhamma according to the texts), I think that her skillful means in teaching the Dhamma really sucks! Here you are, crying and upset from the death, and does she gently ease your mind toward the Dhamma? No, she is callous, cold, and cruel (her `cold showers' are just being unskillful). She talks of the event as if it was a trivial as turning off a light. I'm sorry, but this isn't skillful. When asked if she was shocked, she just says "No, I wasn't shocked" with no further explanation. That would have been a good time to explain why the response of shock to death isn't appropriate. When asked if the last citta is important, she responds with "Well, nobody can tell." Oh great. Doesn't she understand why questions are being asked? She speaks very high Dhamma regardless of who she is addressing or their mental state. I think she is a terrible teacher. Metta, James #73087 From: "robmoult" Date: Wed Jun 6, 2007 8:27 pm Subject: Advice to a recent widow robmoult Hi All, I recently spoke at the funeral of a good friend, who I have known for 20 years. He was a Brit living in Hong Kong who succumbed to cancer at the age of 57. Ten years ago, he married a Korean woman whom I have met a few times. I was his boss in the company and when he passed away, I made an effort to help his widow sort out insurance and other matters. They were a very private couple and did not have many friends except for each other. The funeral was simple, with no religious symbolism at all. Clearly, neither my friend nor his wife were religious. Out of respect for the widow, most of my eulogy was secular but I did mention Buddhism in passing a couple of times. Yesterday, I got an email from his widow as follows: ===== I know you are a Buddhist and you may be able to give me an answer. I've heard from many people that 49 days after someone passed away is very important. Could you please explain it to me why? Do you know what is going to happen after someone passed away? Do you believe in life after life? I feel so empty and lost. I have no desire to live long and no reason to get up in the morning. I have lost my Hubby and my best friend at the same time... I feel so devastated. To be honest, I don't know why I have to keep on living. What is the purpose of my life? I wish I don't have to live long. I wish I could go and meet XXX. I feel completely lost. I really miss XXX very much. I don't know what I am supposed to do. If you don't mind, Could you please give me an answer as a Buddhist? ===== Here is my answer to her: ===== I am pleased to share some things that I have learned about Buddhism and I hope that this makes you feel better. Yes, I do believe in life after life. Every person is born with a unique set of talents, habits, likes and dislikes. I see these as carry-overs from the previous existence. I believe that XXX and you had been very close in one or more previous existences (perhaps even husband and wife) and this is why there was a natural interest or affinity when you first met. It is possible, perhaps likely, that you and XXX will meet in future lives and when this happens, the natural interest or affinity will happen again. There are different schools of Buddhism with slightly different beliefs about what happens immediately after death. One school (the one that I belong to), believes that rebirth happens instantly. The Tibetan school (the one headed by the Dali Lama) believes that rebirth happens after seven days. The Chinese school (the one most popular in Hong Kong) believes that rebirth happens after forty-nine days. Hindus believe that rebirth happens after thirteen days. Different traditions have various rituals which are performed, but performing rituals without understanding is of limited value. So what can you do now to help XXX? There is a concept in Buddhism called "transferring of merit". It means that when you have done something good, you think to yourself, "May the merit that I have accumulated from this good act be transferred to XXX." The exact words are not important; you can even reflect in Korean if that is comfortable to you - it is the thought that counts. Merit is like love; grows when it is shared. One of the main ideas of Buddhism is that everything is impermanent. A flower is beautiful today, but one month from now it will be wilted. Youth is impermanent, health is impermanent, life is impermanent and situations are impermanent. Impermanence is natural; we see it all around us. Another of the main ideas of Buddhism is that clinging or craving causes suffering. Your words reflect the suffering in your mind. This suffering is happening because you are attached to a previous time when XXX was beside you when you woke up in the morning. It is said that there is nothing more traumatic than the loss of a spouse. The suffering that you are feeling now is natural. The suffering that you are feeling now is not "wrong", but it is unhealthy. If, when suffering happens, you allow yourself to get caught up in it, then the suffering will multiply until it consumes your entire mind. On the other hand, when suffering happens, you can take away its power by reflecting, "Suffering is happening because I am chasing after something that is impossible to catch." A woman approached the Buddha saying, "My son has died. I am overcome with grief. Can you help me?" The Buddha told her to go into the city and bring back a mustard seed from any house that had not known death. Every house that she visited turned her away because they had known death. After failing to get the mustard seed from so many houses, the woman realized that it was a natural law that life was impermanent. She returned to the Buddha saying that that this realization had helped her see things as they truly are and had taken away her grief. You need some time to heal now, but when you are stronger, my advice is that you look for things that you can do to help others and then transfer the merit of any good actions to XXX. You can start small by picking up some litter in the park or sweeping the walk in front of a community centre. You could even volunteer to help feed people at an old-folks home or massage children at a spastic centre. There are many ways that you can help others. If done with a very strong feeling, even a small donation of money is a very meritorious deed. There is so much more that I could write, but one does not take the entire bottle of medicine at once. You take medicine at regular intervals in measured doses and you sometimes vary the dosage or the medicine based on how you are feeling. Please consider this email as "your first dose of medicine for your heart". Please tell me which parts of my email make sense to you and which parts of my email do not make sense to you. Let me know what other questions you may have. When I get your feedback, I will send you a "second dose of medicine." Healing will take time. ===== I am hoping to get more advice from my friends on DSG. I welcome your input and feedback. I don't have experience in this kind of thing, so I am looking for some guidance. Metta, Rob M :-) #73088 From: upasaka@... Date: Wed Jun 6, 2007 4:32 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Q. re: Jhana as necessity to enlightenment upasaka_howard Hi, James - In a message dated 6/6/07 8:25:30 PM Eastern Daylight Time, buddhatrue@... writes: > Hi Howard, > > Thank you so much for your input! Now, if I could ask you one more > thing, from your experience (since I have never achieved a jhana > having practiced the wrong type of meditation for years). You have > written before that you achieved the first jhana- of which I have no > doubt. Did that jhana you achieved have the type of "locked-in" > quality that you could have sat all day and all night enjoying the > bliss of that jhana, or was it more of a wobbly quality, like a child > that falls down and gets back up again? I am not looking to debate; I > am only looking for information. -------------------------------------------- Howard: It was more like that child's experience. There *was* the sense of "clicking into" that state, but it was tenuous and didn't hold. It was like slipping through an opening that was tight enough to make the entry noticeable but not tight enough to prevent slipping back out. Leigh Brasington described it as "stumbling into the jhana." -------------------------------------------- > > I could understand any reticence you might have to address this issue. > Many members in this group are anti-jhana and to say you achieved > jhana—well, to them, you might as well say you jumped over the moon! ;-)) ------------------------------------------ Howard: No, I'm certain it was jhana. Leigh described it actually as a shuttling between the 2nd and 5th jhanas. That actually makes sense, given the nature of the experience. But this happened just that once. Since then I may at times get into the 1st jhana for a bit, but I'm less certain of that, because the infinite space, glorious bliss, and magnificent light is missing - it's way less dramatic. It's simply great peace and stability, with it often shifting into a completely effortless state - kind of an easy "coasting" in a state of peace and clarity. This may be 1st jhana shifting into 2nd jhana, but I'm not certain that this is jhana, whereas I have no doubt that the prior one-time experience was. --------------------------------------------- > > Metta, > James > > ====================== With metta, Howard #73089 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Wed Jun 6, 2007 8:37 pm Subject: Recollection of the Buddha- 5 buddhatrue Hi All, RECOLLECTION OF THE BUDDHA AS SUBLIME: He is called Sublime (i) because of a manner of going that is good, (ii) because of being gone to an excellent place, (iii) because of having gone rightly, and (iv) because of enunciating rightly. (i) A manner of going is called `gone', and that in the Blessed One is good, purified, blameless. But what is that? It is the Noble Path; for by means of that manner of going he has `gone' without attachment in the direction of safety- Thus he is sublime because of a manner of going that is good. (ii) And it is to the excellent place that he has gone, to the deathless nibbana- Thus he is sublime also because of having gone to an excellent place. (iii) And he has rightly gone, without going back again to the defilements abandoned by each path. For this is said: `He does not again turn, return, go back, to the defilements abandoned by the Stream-entry path, thus he is sublime…he does not again turn, return, to back, to the defilements abandoned by the Arahant path, thus he is sublime. Or alternatively, he has rightly gone from the time of [making his resolution] at the feet of Dipankara up till the Enlightenment Session, by working for the welfare and happiness of the whole world through the fulfilment of the thirty perceptions and through following the right way without deviating towards either of the two extremes, that is to say, towards eternalism or annihilationism, towards indulgence in sense pleasures or self-mortification- Thus he is sublime also because of having gone rightly. (iv) And he enunciates rightly; he speaks only fitting speech in the fitting place—Thus he is sublime also because of enunciating rightly. Here is a sutta that-confirms this: `Such speech as the Perfect One knows to be untrue and incorrect, conducive to harm, and displeasing and unwelcome to others, that he does not speak. As such speech as the Perfect One knows to be true and correct, but conducive to harm, and displeasing and unwelcome to others, that he does not speak. And such speech as the Perfect One knows to be true and correct, conducive to good, but displeasing and unwelcome to others, that speech the Perfect One knows the time to expound. Such speech as the Perfect One knows to be untrue and incorrect, and conducive to harm but pleasing and welcome to others, that he does not speak. And such speech as the Perfect One knows to be true and correct, but conducive to harm, though pleasing and welcome to others, that he does not speak. And such speech as the Perfect One knows to be true and correct, conducive to good, and pleasing and welcome to others, that speech the Perfect One knows the time to expound' (M, 395)- Thus he is sublime because of enunciating rightly. To be continued…RECOLLECTION OF THE BUDDHA AS KNOWER OF WORLDS Metta, James #73090 From: upasaka@... Date: Wed Jun 6, 2007 4:40 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Advice to a recent widow upasaka_howard Hi, Rob - In a message dated 6/6/07 11:31:04 PM Eastern Daylight Time, rob.moult@... writes: > Here is my answer to her: > ======================= Well done, Rob! I'm sure she will benefit from your well-considered and very compassionate reply. With metta, Howard #73091 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Wed Jun 6, 2007 8:46 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Advice to a recent widow buddhatrue Hi Rob M., --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > > Hi, Rob - > > In a message dated 6/6/07 11:31:04 PM Eastern Daylight Time, > rob.moult@... writes: > > > Here is my answer to her: > > ======================= > Well done, Rob! I'm sure she will benefit from your well-considered > and very compassionate reply. I agree with Howard; I think that your e-mail to her was EXCELLENT!! There are many good books on death and dying that she might like to read also, as well as counseling groups (it sounds like she needs a lot of help and fast...before she slips into a very deep depression.) I have been reading the book "The Tibetan Book of Living and Dying" by Sogyal Rinpoche. I checked it out of the library here in Taiwan. I think it is a very good book as it relates death to life and how to prepare for both- in a Buddhist sense. Metta, James #73092 From: LBIDD@... Date: Wed Jun 6, 2007 9:29 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Nibbaana lbidd2 Hi Nina, N: "Nibbåna is object-predominance-condition for the eight lokuttara cittas which experience it, and it can also be object-predominance- condition for mahå-kusala citta accompanied by paññå and mahå- kiriyacitta (of the arahat) accompanied by paññå. Lokuttara cittas can be object-predominance-condition for the cittas which arise after the attainment of enlightenment and which review, consider with paññå, the lokuttara cittas which arose." L: I thought nibbana could only be the object of lokuttara cittas. Under what circumstances can it be the object of maha-kusala cittas and maha-kiriya cittas? Can rupa be an object-predominance condition? If so, for what kinds of cittas? Larry #73093 From: "colette" Date: Wed Jun 6, 2007 9:22 pm Subject: The Bottle Dwindles ksheri3 Hi Ken, > I am more than willing to pursue the study of such questions but > those idiocies are secondary to the primary discovery of WHY the > world changed, HOW did the world change, etc.? > ------------ > > Yes, I think I can understand that. Thankfully, however, the study of > Abhidhamma can coexist with all other concerns. colette: In this case we are specifically discussing Abhidhamma. Why do choose to specify the Abhidhamma? For instance I recently was meditating and somehow I got into Tantra, oh, now I know; the meditation went something like this: I'm reflecting on my immediate surroundings, the people that took me into their home with them, their children (I meditate a lot about the parent-child relationship). The National Geographic Channel was on as "white noise". A part of the show raised my ear-consciousness since it was about mudslides. As I focused my attention on it momentarily I heard that the show was about earthquakes where the building in the Kobe Japan earthquake were between 6 and 16 stories high yet they were all destroyed. The fateful words are about to hit! lol The announcer said that the buildings were "shaken apart". Eureka!, I've discovered it! A few days ago I was attempting to bring you and others to the reality that we are the same, that we are a representation of the planet and of the universe. "Shaking apart"? THAT IS TOTALLY TANTRA, if there could ever be a better definition of the union between Shiva/Shakti, Yin/Yang, man/woman, etc. Sex magik, mind you, is where I really got started and really got some of my most astounding results, in Hollyweird California on Hollywood Blvd. pretty much but there was the Hollywood Hills, Century City, etc.. <...> Thank you Ken for coming at a moment when I don't think I would've been able to find the wording to say that stuff. Very critical timing! A lot can be said concerning this event of the Kundalini, mudras, etc, (Kamma Sutra) AND ITS DIRECT RELATIONSHIP TO THE ABHIDHAMMA! again, thank you. -------------------------- For example, the > internet time you spend at DSG could be devoted to Abhidhamma study, > and the rest of your day could be devoted to what you call the > primary discovery. colette: the time I get on the net is so very limitted and takes a lot of effort when I've gotta walk to the two libraries I can use for short periods of time each day, well, one library is a community college branch and I can only use it four days a wk. for a few hours. I have a copy from the Kandy Buddhist Publishing Society in my room -- it took me a few days to make those copies. I find that the conversations I have with people, like yourself, who are willing to converse with me and not go way out on their own personal "high horse" of delusions, polarize themselves, or get into this orthodox spam crap that, history has shown us this, that it always ends up in circular logic where the blind lead the blind and everybody refuses to accept responsibility for their actions, which always end up creating and fueling CHAOS. No matter how many times I warn about Karma, et al, they continue with their RITUAL BEHAVIOR, Obsessive Compulsive Behavior, etc. Essentially, what you speak of above, is what my entire game plan is and always has been, especially since I'm in the camp of the Kaballah and have studied that for more than 15 years continuously until I found the net and started checking out my opportunities here. ----------------------------------------- > No one does the understanding. colette: here I can say that your words, concepts are starting to make an effect on my consciousness since I've misunderstood your terminology. Tonight when I read that sentence I visualized myself talking to nobody yet I was cognizing what was said from outside of my body. Therefore I'm saying that I was detached but it was still in my mind that this took place. Somehow I feel this also relates to Shunyata but void would be a bad word to use, the emptiness is there in it's svabhava but not the body, the body is transient and therefore without substance continuously. ------------------------------------ Understanding can exist, but when it > does there is no person that understands. The same applies to > ignorance; there is no person who is ignorant. colette: didn't I just speak of this? -------------------------------- > > Back to your question; of whom do I speak as "doing the > understanding?" Conditioned dhammas, of course! colette: this is another whopper since now you change the entire situation in my mind: you actualize, personalize, "conditioned dhammas" in a way that I haven't tried before! I haven't had a second to think about what you did but I know that it's heavy and will make me smile tonight as a lay down and begin my ritual before entering the enemies territory: the accursed Land of Nod, ;-). ----------------------------------------- What else? And so > that is what I devote my DSG time to. Learning about conditioned > dhammas. I hope you will do the same. > > Ken H toodles, colette > #73094 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Wed Jun 6, 2007 9:33 pm Subject: Winning Awareness! bhikkhu5 Friends: Winning the Highest Attainments by Awareness! Once when the Venerable Anuruddha was dwelling at Savatthi in Jeta's Grove , in AnÄ?thapindika 's Park, a number of Bhikkhus went to the Venerable Anuruddha & exchanged polite greetings with him. Then they sat down & asked the Ven. Anuruddha : Venerable Sir: What has the Venerable Anuruddha developed & cultivated so that he has attained to his famous greatness of direct knowledge? It is, friends, because I have developed and cultivated these four Foundations of Awareness that I have won great direct knowledge. What four? Here, friends, I dwell constantly contemplating upon: The Body only as a formed group, neither as me, lasting or pleasure! The Feelings only as passing sensations, neither as mine, or pleasure! The Mind only as temporary mentalities, neither as I, nor any self! All Phenomena only as mental states neither as substance nor a real! while eager, clearly comprehending, & fully aware , thereby removing all desire & frustration rooted in this world! It is, friends, because I have developed & cultivated these Four Foundations of Awareness that I have become empowered with the suprahuman forces: I see & understand as it really is the present defilement, the obstruction of, the cleaning of, & the emergence of all the jhÄ?nas , all deliverances, concentrations, & higher mental attainments. Furthermore, friends, it is, because I have developed & fully refined these indeed supreme Four Foundations of Awareness that I by the full elimination of the mental fermentations, in this very life enter & dwell in the stainless release of mind, release by understanding, realizing it myself with direct knowledge, gained through direct experience... Source (edited extract): The Grouped Sayings of the Buddha. Samyutta Nikaya. [V:305-6] section 52: Anuruddha. Thread 21+24: The jhÄ?nas & fermentations! For details see: http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/What_is_Right_Concentration.htm http://www.what-buddha-said.net/library/DPPN/wtb/g_m/jhaana.htm http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/II/The_Three_Fermentations.htm http://www.what-buddha-said.net/library/DPPN/wtb/b_f/ceto_vimutti.htm http://What-Buddha-Said.net/library/DPPN/wtb/n_r/pannaa_vimutti.htm Winning Awakening itself by Awareness! Friendship is the Greatest :-) Bhikkhu Samahita * Sri Lanka * <....> #73095 From: sarah abbott Date: Wed Jun 6, 2007 10:05 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Death - just like now! (Alan Driver's funeral) [1] sarahprocter... Hi James, --- buddhatrue wrote: > I read this dialogue between you and K. Sujin and, although I don't > really disagree with anything she says (it is all appropriate Dhamma > according to the texts), I think that her skillful means in teaching > the Dhamma really sucks! Here you are, crying and upset from the > death, and does she gently ease your mind toward the Dhamma? No, she > is callous, cold, and cruel (her `cold showers' are just being > unskillful). .... S: And yet, for me at the time, it was just the right medicine. Within 5 mins (or about the time of the extracts I gave yesterday), I was smiling again and amazingly never shed another tear or felt any further grief on Alan's account. Why? It was partly the example of other good friends, very much including Jon & Ivan who'd been very close friends of Alan's, who were calm, considerate and busy being helpful to everyone including me. I realised the tears were just a kind of self-pity, being wrapped up in my own feelings. K.Sujin's words reminded me that there are only dhammas. We have long stories about people and their rebirths, but it's all just thinking and thinking. Seeing now, hearing now, on and on - common to all, whatever the rebirth. More in the next extracts. I agree that KS's words would be 'unskilful' if given to the wrong person at the wrong time. When I listen to the tapes, I'm reminded that there were many of Alan's work colleagues at the funeral. K.Sujin wasn't telling them that there are only dhammas. She was letting them talk about his good qualities, that sort of thing. Like you, she very much stresses that if Dhamma is spoken to the wrong person or when it's not requested, it's not useful at all. .... >She talks of the event as if it was a trivial as turning > off a light. I'm sorry, but this isn't skillful. When asked if she > was shocked, she just says "No, I wasn't shocked" with no further > explanation. That would have been a good time to explain why the > response of shock to death isn't appropriate. .... S: There is more on this later. For me, it was/is a reminder that death is just another moment of consciousness. Anything can happen at anytime. It really 'sobered' me up to see and hear her calm, smiling responses, 'just like now'. I would have to rate those couple of days as some of the most significant and even joyful in my life. The healthy shock... .... >When asked if the last > citta is important, she responds with "Well, nobody can tell." Oh > great. Doesn't she understand why questions are being asked? .... S: Again, more to come on this. The point is, if we want to hear the nice, comforting answers, we can turn to any friend. But, if we want to hear the truth, we turn to the good dhamma friend. The truth is that we can never say the last moments were this or that kind or what sort of rebirth followed. .... > She speaks very high Dhamma regardless of who she is addressing or > their mental state. I think she is a terrible teacher. ... S: :-) Again, I stress that for me, she's always known exactly what is appropriate and given me the medicine I request. Few people wish to take this medicine, I agree. Thx for reading and commenting. I look f/w to your further feedback. Very interesting. Metta, Sarah ======= #73096 From: sarah abbott Date: Wed Jun 6, 2007 10:24 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Death - just like now! (Alan Driver's funeral) [1] sarahprocter... Hi Mike, thx for your good feedback too. Working my way back... --- m_nease wrote: > I think death is always a good topic for reflection. I know this is a > very personal reminiscence for those of you who knew him so I hope an > impersonal tangent won't be taken amiss. ... S: I think it's dhamma or Dhamma - not personal. Very glad to hear from you on it. Some people prefer their 'personal' dhamma conversations not be shared or their past ignorant comments be deleted, but I think it's all good grist for the mill.... ... > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott > wrote: > > > S: But we don't know, maybe he has to start again with all his > > development... > > He? > > > KS: But whatever he has learnt is there accumulated. Nobody can steal > > from him...and his citta now is arising and falling away like > everybody, > > common to all. > > This sounds so much like transmigration of souls, using 'his citta' as > as a kind of circumlocution for 'his soul'. I'm sure neither of you > meant it that way but I think it could easily be taken that way. .... S: I agree. Exactly the same occurred to me as I typed it. In my case, I'm sure I was clinging desperately to a 'he'. KS was gently weaning me off 'people' and back to cittas as you'll hear as the discussions continue. here, as I said, I'd just walked into the temple from the airport. She was helping me to see for myself what the truth was... .... > > What is 'whatever he has learnt'? Nothing conceptual, surely (such as > 'conceptual right view' as defined in The Great Forty)? So what > accumulations survive(?) cuti-citta to be 'reborn' with > patisandhi-citta? Are they particular cetasikas? Could all the above > be restated in abhidhamma terms, without getting terribly complicated? ..... S: (Btw, I've been following your discussions with Scott with interest. Good stuff. I had long discussions with Dan about conceptual understanding as prelude to direct understanding of realities and gave lots of quotes. I can try to fish these out if still relevant....) Again, I think KS is being comforting...As I understand, it is not the names and Pali terms that will be of any use. I think that 'what he has learnt' refers to any development of understanding of namas and rupas. Let's say that pa~n~naa and other wholesome cetasikas accumulate from moment to moment and life to life (just as unwholesome states do too). This of course is primarily by way of pakatu-upanissaya paccaya (natural decisive support condition), the broadest, largest paccaya. No question of a person being involved, cittas and cetasikas only. .... > > Also, someone suggested here recently that the Buddha never > exaggerated. If so, then doesn't the yoke and turtle simile in the > Chiggala Sutta tell us that the likelihood of a human rebirth is very > near to nil? Does this have any implications for the conditioning by > cetasikas accumulated during a human existence (since we can't say the > 'survival' of anything) of cittas in a future, non-human existence? .... S: I don't think so. Accumulations are never 'lost'. We never know when accumulations from even aeons ago will have their effect. For example, the last kamma in life may be conditioned by deeds performed lifetimes ago by way of pakatu-upanissaya. So the kusala developed now will accumulate and bring results in future, but we never know when. It depends on all the other accumulations to date as well. .... > > All of this seems to be a long way from the investigation of present > dhammas...I'm probably on the wrong track... .... S: No, I think you're on the right track (as usual, Mike!). I think the point is that while we're thinking and speculating about people and future lives and feeling grief for 'our' loss, we forget completely about seeing and visible object and thinking now. That's all there is - for anyone (or any cittas!). Read on and keep chiming in! (Thx also for the interesting little quote you gave the other day from the tape while you were painting - back again to the importance we give to feelings and all the accumulating in order to have more pleasant feelings as I recall...) Metta, Sarah ======== #73097 From: sarah abbott Date: Wed Jun 6, 2007 10:37 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Death - just like now! (Alan Driver's funeral) [1] sarahprocter... Hi Howard, (Han & all) Glad to hear your response too. I'll just pause before the next installment in case Han or anyone else has more to add.... --- upasaka@... wrote: > > KS: But whatever he has learnt is there accumulated. Nobody can steal > from > > him..... > > ------------------------------------------- > Howard: > I think her reply is correct. Though he was unlikely to > *consciously* > continue with his development/training in his next life and his memories > > became likely irretrievable, the conditions were already set, with > future reactions > already conditioned. So, as far as conditionality and inclination were > concerned, there was little "loss". > -------------------------------------------- ... S: Nicely put. .... > > S: We can make all these plans and dreams for our holidays and work > out > > all these ideas for our future, but we just don’t know what will > happen > > from moment to moment. All the things we spend our time thinking and > > worrying about are so useless....If we're struck down at this > moment... > > --------------------------------------------- > Howard: > That's a fact, simple fact. But it should be the basis for doing > now > what is wholesome and useful rather than a basis for depression. > ----------------------------------------------- .... S: Exactly and that was how I meant it. .... > > S: I'm sure for Alan if he had known it was happening (the accident > and > > death) there would have been some detachment and... > > > > KS: Don't think so. There can be great fear. We don't know.....unless > he > > is always aware of anything which appears... as rupa and nama > > ----------------------------------------- > Howard: > That depends on the person involved, on the person and on the > current > state of mind. Typically expectation of death results in fear, but that > is not > always so. Once I was erroneously led to believe that I would die, but, > because of my mindset then, I was unafraid. That was then. What would be > the case > now I don't know. .... S: We never know. It's completely unpredictable. Even if someone seems or feels generally calm before death, we don't know (and they don't know) about the very last few cittas. Cittas arise and pass away so quickly. Useless to speculate about too. .... > > KS: Nobody can tell. That's why we can't tell the next life. Otherwise > we > > can tell if we know the cittas moments before death. But since we > don't > > know, we cannot tell the rebirth consciousness. > > --------------------------------------------- > Howard: > Nobody can tell exactly what will arise at the last moment, but I > do > think it is important, and, accordingly, attempting to support a degree > of ease > in a dying person, another or oneself, is a worthwhile endeavor. That is > what > I attempted at my mother's passing. > -------------------------------------------- .... S: I agree. It's kusala to try to help in whatever way we can as you did. However, we don't and can't say whether such help conditions wholesome ease or attachment ease or what. Conditions are beyond our control. But this never means, do nothing! .... > > ***** > > KS: It's so sudden that I realize that anything can happen at anytime > and > > we consider that as great loss, but in reality it's only the falling > away > > of one moment of citta and the arising of a new one. So it's not great > > sorrow or loss because the patisandhi citta arises and his citta now > is > > arising and falling away like everybody, common to all. > > ------------------------------------------- > Howard: > Unless one is an advanced ariyan or doesn't really care so much > about > the person dying or has simply sold oneself an intellectual bill of > goods, the > loss of a loved one - a genuinely *loved* one is, and should be IMO, > truly > sorrowful. .... S: Of course, it's natural to feel 'truly sorrowful'. Should it be so? Should unwholesome states be cultivated? That's another matter. Who is the grief for? Really? .... Of course, a useful mental perspective can ease the suffering > and > decrease its duration, but sorrow normally arises, and forcefully > suppressing it, > if even possible, is, IMO, not a good idea - quite the opposite, in > fact. .... S: I agree - certainly no one is suggesting any 'forceful suppression'. No one was suggesting I shouldn't grieve. However, I think understanding really is the best medicine and dhamma reminders are the best help and support we can give to those who can appreciate them. .... Great comments and reflections, Howard. Please continue to add them. The more who join in, the better. Metta, Sarah ======== #73098 From: sarah abbott Date: Wed Jun 6, 2007 10:43 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Death - just like now! (Alan Driver's funeral) [1] sarahprocter... Dear Nina, I'm glad you like the medicine! When we reflect on Dhamma and think about the shortness of life - just a moment now - we no longer dwell on the story of our different ailments. It's a reminder that seeing now is so brief, body consciousness now is so brief too. Just one moment and then lots and lots of thinking about what is experienced. You'll see that Howard kindly joined in. Pls encourage others too. Maybe Connie will share some of her understanding and wit at the same time:). Yes, useless to think about or be concerned about the last javana cittas. Completely beyond control. We're a bit behind with our reading of Vism installments (Jon prosecuting in court some mainland thieves who've been regularly arriving in Hong Kong in speed boats and stealing what we call 'Buddhist trees' here!) Metta, Sarah --- Nina van Gorkom wrote: > Dear Sarah, > thank you for this medicine:-)) I hope also Howard will join in, > since he reminded me that death always comes as a surprise. And Han, > he has many good thoughts. > What I quoted below: the Visuddhimagga Ch XVII, reminds me time and > again that we do not know the last javanacittas of a life and the > next rebirth. #73099 From: sarah abbott Date: Wed Jun 6, 2007 10:52 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Advice to a recent widow sarahprocter... Dear Rob M, A very beautiful and compassionate letter as James and Howard have said. Pls continue to share any further letters. Helpful for everyone. If you'd like me to arrange to give her a book such as 'The Buddha's Path' or meet her for a coffee and chat, let me know. Or maybe see if she shows interest in your letters first? Also, it sounds as though she should consider some counselling either through the very active Korean Church in Hong Kong or through something like 'St John's Counselling' service which provides a good service for mostly foreigners (like herself) in Hong Kong, I believe. Also, the 'Citizens Advice Bureau' would give any kind of telephone assistance with any practical matters. Let me know (off-list probably) if you/she wants any further details. If you're visiting Hong Kong again, perhaps she might like it if we all met together? Metta, Sarah --- robmoult wrote: > Hi All, > > I recently spoke at the funeral of a good friend, who I have known > for 20 years. He was a Brit living in Hong Kong who succumbed to > cancer at the age of 57. Ten years ago, he married a Korean woman > whom I have met a few times. #73100 From: "wisdomcompassion" Date: Wed Jun 6, 2007 11:17 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: what is sati wisdomcompas... Hi Ken, I can talk only about myself. First of all for me anatta is not intellectual thing, i have experienced it in meditation. I would not say it was deep, because after coming out of that experience, i became like i was earlier to that experience, that is immersed in self. But after that particular experience, meditiation and meaning of meditation has totally changed for me. earlier it was 'doing' meditation, now it has become 'watching' the process. Now the question arises who is watching, i may call it sati, or mind but that makes no difference, important thing is that there is no 'doer' and 'meditator'. But since root of atta is very very strong it raises its head again and again, but that too can be 'watched' by mind. So for me there is not 'someone' doing something, but mind which is so entangled in its own web, releasing itself from it. I have little bit of understanding of what Nina and Sarah are saying and what i could understand from KS audio clips and some articles on a website mentioned in files section of this group. i agree with them totally, except one point of difference. And that is a major thing as per my understanding. it is what they call as 'understanding' dhamma. I don't say they are not practioners but i have a feeling that something can be added to their practice. it is burning the 'anusaya' please don't assume i m talking of jhana here, i m rather more inclined to 'find the truth' and i think meditation is a very good opportunity to do that.However, If some one is not inclined to do it, its all right, but 'anusaya' must be burnt, and insight must be cultivated/awakened . I am not really able to go deeper into this till i get to know what actually they mean by the word 'understanding'and what is the process of it. May be they are practicing both and i m not aware of that. Because human beings are slave to words. I am not exception to that. or may be I need to add something to my current understanding. of course dhamma discussions are welcome. But here again i have a little bit of difference of opinion. As per my understanding all opinions arise because of 'moha'. we have opinion because we do not see reality. so if we watch moha, the opinion ceases and reality appears. i have tried this a little bit, and the result was satisfactory. Eradicate the 'moha' wisdom/understanding appears. metta nidhi ************** > > ------------------- > N: "it doesn't mean that one must stop doing anything, and be afraid > of strengthening atta. > -------------------- > > I think Nidhi and you, Ramesh, may be of the opinion that the > Abhidhamma and the commentaries (or, at least, certain people at DSG) > are saying we must stop doing anything. But no, they are not saying > that. The middle way is not a way of someone doing something. But nor > is it a way of someone doing nothing. That is because there is > no "someone." The middle way is a way of *dhammas doing something.* > > ----------------------------- > N: "I think one has to start with gross, and realise that every thing > is anatta (in one's body and mind), not that one starts with anatta > and stops doing every effort. " > ----------------------------- > > Forgive me for saying so Ramesh, but you and Nidhi seem to believe > the middle way is a way of "someone" (not mere dhammas) doing > something. I am glad you are prepared to talk about it. We all > benefit from Dhamma discussions, so please continue. > > > Ken H > #73101 From: TGrand458@... Date: Wed Jun 6, 2007 7:51 pm Subject: MN 49 "I did not affirm earth." -- Buddha TGrand458@... Hi All MN 49 has some interesting passages that may deal with some of our discussions... "Brahma, having directly known earth as earth, and having known that which is not partaken of by the earthness of earth, I did not claim to be earth, I did not claim to be in earth, I did not claim to be apart from earth, I did not claim earth to be "mine," I did not affirm earth." This formula is repeated for the rest of Four Great Elements as well as "all" which I take to mean "The All." This passage, similar to MN #1, contains the interesting sentence -- "I did not affirm earth." ... "I did not affirm all." Seems one could look at this and conclude that it expresses the opposite sentiment than the Abhidhamma Commentaries which view elements as "ultimate realities with their own characteristics." The Buddha seems to say here that he won't even affirm them...much less give them the lofty stature that the Abhidhamma Commentaries do. Later in the same Sutta we get this... "The consciousness that makes no showing, And in becoming about to disbecome, Not claiming being with respect to all." It seems this passage deals with being on the precipice of attaining Nibbana. The mental attitude suggested is one that does not consider things as being or not being. BB's note in MN taken from Nanamoli says -- "not predicating being in relation to 'all,'" or "not assuming of 'all' that it IS or IS NOT in an absolute sense." Finally in same Sutta... "Having seen fear in every mode of being And in being seeking for non-being, I did not affirm any mode of being, Nor did I cling to any delight." Again, the interesting phrase in relation to our discussions is -- "I did not affirm any mode of being." My reading shows this as quite contrary to the Abhidhamma Commenarial view of seeing things as -- ultimate realities with their own characteristics. To me, this Commentarial view is precisely the way we SHOULD NOT be seeing them. TG #73102 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Thu Jun 7, 2007 12:16 am Subject: Re: Death - just like now! (Alan Driver's funeral) [1] buddhatrue Hi Sarah, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: Again, I stress that for me, she's always known exactly what is > appropriate and given me the medicine I request. Few people wish to take > this medicine, I agree. > > Thx for reading and commenting. I look f/w to your further feedback. Very > interesting. Well, it seems as if I am not getting the full picture from this short extract you posted. Perhaps I can get a better picture of the situation when the entire discussion, and follow-up discussions, are posted. Perhaps this was just the right medicine for you. Perhaps, however, your subsequent understanding was more a testament to your keen mind and prior practice rather than her Dhamma teaching. It is hard to say. I would need to know how many people she turns away or "turns off" due to her `cold showers'. I guess I was unfair to say unilaterally that she "is a terrible teacher" without knowing the full picture. I don't know how it is that I keep getting pulled into discussions and analysis about this `phantom' who never posts to DSG! Urgh!! ;-)) As far as the last citta, KS was right to say that we don't know the state of Alan's last citta- but that doesn't mean that it isn't important. I am guessing that Alan died from an accident? So, there wouldn't have been time to prepare the mind for death. In that case, it would have to be the kamma which would determine the next rebirth. However, if Alan knew that death was approaching, he could have turned his mind to Dhamma to ensure a good rebirth. The Canon is full of stories of those on their death beds and how the Buddha and various other monks made a special effort to be there- to give one final teaching on the Dhamma. The last citta is important and I hope that KS isn't saying that it isn't, because that would be contrary to the Dhamma. Anyway, I will read with keen interest what you have to post next regarding this incident. I think it is very important to consider and reflect on death so as not to be unprepared when the inevitable arrives. Metta, James #73103 From: "wisdomcompassion" Date: Thu Jun 7, 2007 12:20 am Subject: [dsg] Re: what is sati wisdomcompas... Dear Rameshji, thanks for kind words, but i think i m quite a mediocre person, nothing great can ever come out of mediocrity. I stay in pune, i read about buddhism in a book, but my interest grew in it after attening vipassana course at igatpuri. then i decided to study a little bit, and till today words are Buddha are something that touches my heart deeply. with metta, nidhi *********** -- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Ramesh Patil" wrote: > > Dear nidhi, > What a message is written by you?? > It is exceptional,tremendous truth u had spoken frm it like > > "anybody studying buddhism knows that 'nothing is self'. it doesn't > mean that one must stop doing anything, and be afraid of strengthening > atta. I think important thing is to understand "Is there any thing as > self". i don't think that buddha ever said that one must not do > anything because every thing is anatta. so if one does anything one > strengthen the self. i think at his time lay people left their home, > to release themselves, was it an effort to strengthen "self". > > I think one has to start with gross, and realise that every thing is > anatta (in one's body and mind), not that one starts with anatta and > stops doing every effort. " > > So great great and admirable writting by you nidhi... > It is really exceptional... > > Please give ur introduction what u do and where u from..?? > How do u came in contact with d dhamma?/ > > With Warm Regards > Ramesh Patil > Mumbai,India > #73104 From: sarah abbott Date: Thu Jun 7, 2007 12:51 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: flashbacks and guilt sarahprocter... Dear Scott, (Antony, Phil & all), I thought your comments to Antony (#71962) on flashbacks and thoughts of strong cruelty were helpful. --- Scott Duncan wrote: > As to 'techniques' (this is just an opinion, of course): Based on > experience, I'm not a great believer in the overall efficacy of > attempts to force the products of the mind to be other than they are. > Such a statement, even though directed to 'mundane' matters such as > attempts to deal with psychological 'disturbances' such as intrusive > thoughts. > > Yes, one can imagine actively, which seems to be what you describe, > but the original thought had to come from somewhere, and anyway, > whether one thinks one thing or its opposite its all the same thing in > relation to the root (dosa, in this case). The proliferation of the > self-help industry is, in my mind, founded on the hopes of everyone > concerned that some technique or other can hasten things along. ..... S: I was reminded of these comments and also Phil's with regard to particularly unwholesome kinds of attachment when I listened to some of KS's comments which may come up later in the series from Alan's funeral. She was saying that when it's an unusual (visama lobha) as opposed to usual (sama lobha) kind, it can be a block to the development of what is useful, depending on the strength of feeling, because it can block one from association with higher understanding when one always thinks about one's 'unusual' or especially disturbing tendency or accumulation. However, listening and considering the dhamma further is the only medicine. The disturbing behaviour has to be conditioned by kamma and accumulations. Better to listen and consider more about dhammas now than to think on and on about these tendencies. .... > > No, for me, and this is again just from experience, the underpinnings > of intrusive thoughts are not easily penetrated. This is what I > understand the Commentator to be referring to when naming 'concealed > suffering' or 'unevident suffering'. The 'attack' is not evident, and > yet, I think, it comes from no more than dosa ('fever born of hate'). > To me, this goes more to a lesson in anatta: suddenly the thought is > there intruding. .... S: I agree. Best to just understand it as a dhamma, as anatta. No one can stop it. ..... > > This goes back to the whole discussion of hating hate (defilements). > Its just more hate and more clinging to hate. I see Dhamma to be > other than Psychology. 'Fever born of hate' can be known 'by > questioning' or it can be known as dosa and left at that. It will > come and go as it will by conditions. .... S: Yes, yes. And strange as it may seem, as I said, there can be clinging to the whole story of hate and cruel imagery or nightmares even. .... > > I'm afflicted with more confidence in Dhamma than wisdom in these > matters, but offer an opinion nonetheless... .... S: I know Antony will have considered your comments and let them percolate.... As I said, I'll add a little more on the sama and visama lobha comments when I get to that part of the funeral proceedings... Metta, Sarah ======== #73105 From: sarah abbott Date: Thu Jun 7, 2007 1:02 am Subject: Re: [dsg] discussion and a question, sarahprocter... Dear Nina, --- Nina van Gorkom wrote: > Dear Sarah, > thank you, I sent it on to Lodewijk. For the first meaning of only, > he may object that we should not forget that there are individuals, > each with their own accumulations. He said that the word only could > be abused. > He greatly appreciated your post on Puggala pa~n~natti, very > balanced, he said. .... S: I'm glad he liked the post on Puggala pa~n~natti - it was one of those occasional ones (for me) that was typed in haste, but came out OK. As for the first 'only' (below), I knew this was what Lodewijk would object to. What are individuals other than 'only nama and rupa'? Aren't we always trying to introduce something else, an atta, into the mix? Just mere phenomena rolling on.. "Life, person, pleasure, pain - just these alone Join in one conscious moment that flicks by. Ceased aggregates of those dead or alive Are all alike, gone never to return.....etc" .... > >S: 1) when I hear, read or use 'only nama and rupa, they are only > > elements', > > I think 'ONLY' is very significant and to be stressed. .... Metta, Sarah ========= #73106 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Jun 7, 2007 1:14 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Advice to a recent widow nilovg Dear Rob M, I greatly appreciate your letter to the widow and I am glad you share it with us. It was your kusala citta that inspired it. I hope you will share follow ups with us, Nina. Op 7-jun-2007, om 5:27 heeft robmoult het volgende geschreven: > Yes, I do believe in life after life. Every person is born with a > unique set of talents, habits, likes and dislikes. #73107 From: sarah abbott Date: Thu Jun 7, 2007 1:24 am Subject: Re: [dsg] "Dhammas" and Impermanence (The Abhidhammikas perspective?) sarahprocter... Hi TG, Back to an earlier thread... --- TGrand458@... wrote: > Hi Sarah TG: It seems to me that you see this characteristic of > impermanence in > "the dhammas themselves." I see it in the "mechanics of > conditionality" and > not a trait belonging to something specific. Does that make sense and > does > my idea of your view reflect your view? .... S: There are so many, many suttas in which the Buddha talked about the impermanence of all conditioned dhammas. Yes, they are impermanent or disintegrate because that is their nature to do so as soon as the conditions for their arising are no longer occurring. 35: 84 Subject to Disintegration (Bodhi transl): "...Whatever is subject to disintegration, Aananda, is called the world....And what is subject to disintegration? They eye....forms.....eye-consciousness...eye-contact....whatever feeling.....mind....etc...." ..... S: I've snipped your further comments by mistake. You mention that I'm dealing with 'individual dhammas' and 'not with the mechanics of conditionality'. In the above quote, eye-sense, visible forms, eye-consciousness...and so on, are all individual dhammas arising by conditions. See this quote (yes, from a commentary:-)) which Scott gave: Scott: >"This next constitutes my point and makes it better than I can, (bear with the quote, its short); in Sammohavinodanii, pp.90-1: "388. Furthermore, while the self of the sectarians does not exist in its own nature (sabhaavato), not so of these; but these are elements (dhaatu) since they carry (dhaarenti) their own nature (sabhaava). And as in the world the variously coloured orpiment, cinnabar, etc., being constituents of stones, are called elements, so also these elements are like those ones, for they are the variously 'coloured' constituents of knowledge and the knowable. Or, just as [the term] 'elements' is used for the juice, blood, etc. which are the constituents of the collection known as the 'body' [when they are] distinguished from each other by dissimilarity of characteristic, so also [the term] 'elements' should be understood as used for constituents of the person called 'the five aggregates'. For these things are distinguished from each other by dissimilarity of characteristics." "< **** S: You go on to rightly point out that I'll 'never have a full grasp on impermanence by just thinking....'they are impermanent'....' Exactly my point! It is only by fully understanding the characteristics of those 'individual dhammas' when they appear and the clear distinction between namas and rupas that conditionality and impermanence of those same 'individual dhammas' can ever be known directly, not by thinking. You liked the excellent passage Larry quoted on the pari~n~nas (full knowledges) from the Vism XX (#72558) and this is just what it is stressing, starting with the clear and repeated understanding of namas and rupas. As for your Superwoman/Abhidhammawoman poem to me....Loved it! Especially: "mild mannered monitor fights a never ending battle, for truth, justice, and the Abhidhamma Way!!" That would be a good eulogy, thanks in advance:-)) Metta, Sarah p.s I read all your comments with interest - apologies if I don't reply to all of them. ======= #73108 From: sarah abbott Date: Thu Jun 7, 2007 1:35 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Are we responsible for our actions? sarahprocter... Hi Elaine, You wrote the following (to Rob K,#72489): --- Sobhana wrote: > Mindfulness is like "living in the present moment", conventionally > speaking, I find that some effort (is it viriya?) is needed to keep > pulling the mind back and focus on the things that I am doing right now. .... S: I think this is a conventional idea of mindfulness or effort again. Actually, what is attended to will again depend on conditions, not on a self making a special effort. .... > I have a bad mental habit of having the mind drifting off and sometimes > stopping at mid-sentence, forgetting what I wanted to say. ... S: Sounds familiar:-) The great thing (as far as the path of satipatthana is concerned) is that it doesn't matter in the slightest! It may be inconvenient and boring for others, but sati can arise anytime at all, even when we are (conventionally) forgetful. There are still realities appearing, which can be known. For example, there's still seeing, there's still visible object, there's confusion, annoyance and many other dhammas. Any of these can be the object of awareness without any special effort or pulling back of the mind. .... >I think > mindfulness is like a mind-training exercise. I have a few books by > Thich Nhat Hanh and he writes about mindfulness in daily life and > sometimes I am sceptical about the things he wrote but it should be > doable, I'll give it a try. .... S: Maybe very doable and useful in a conventional sense again. Like memorization techniques or 'not-losing the keys' techniques. However, I don't think it has anything to do with the development of awareness and understanding of namas and rupas which have already been conditioned right now. Elaine, I'm also interested to hear more about how you are getting on with your husband's family in Canada and the old lady who you said showed some interest in the dhamma? Any more discussions? I enjoy your posts very much. Pls don't think of forgetfulness as any obstacle to the path. The only obstacle is ignorance. Metta, Sarah ========= #73109 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Jun 7, 2007 1:42 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Death - just like now! (Alan Driver's funeral) [1] nilovg Dear Sarah and friends, I could add a little bit of info about Alan's last hours I heard later on. After having been a bhikkhu he became a layperson and he said to me that he should spend more time with the Dhamma, but sometimes he would walk away when Kh Sujin was talking. This last afternoon when in Ayuthia he listened to Kh Sujin very intently and also in a very relaxed way, Kh Sujin told me. Thus, he had an opportunity to accumulate more understanding by listening and he did. The conditions were already set, as Howard put it. Nina. Op 7-jun-2007, om 7:37 heeft sarah abbott het volgende geschreven: > Howard: > > I think her reply is correct. Though he was unlikely to > > *consciously* > > continue with his development/training in his next life and his > memories > > > > became likely irretrievable, the conditions were already set, with > > future reactions > > already conditioned. So, as far as conditionality and inclination > were > > concerned, there was little "loss". #73110 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Jun 7, 2007 7:27 am Subject: Re: [dsg] discussion and a question, nilovg Dear Sarah, the same to me, I quite agree. Nina. Op 7-jun-2007, om 10:02 heeft sarah abbott het volgende geschreven: > when I hear, read or use 'only nama and rupa, they are only > > > elements', > > > I think 'ONLY' is very significant and to be stressed. > .... #73111 From: connie Date: Thu Jun 7, 2007 7:28 am Subject: Theriigaathaa - Sisters (57) nichiconn dear friends, Vijayaa, part 3: 172. "Tassaaha.m vacana.m sutvaa, karontii anusaasani.m; rattiyaa purime yaame, pubbajaatimanussari.m. 173. "Rattiyaa majjhime yaame, dibbacakkhu.m visodhayi.m; rattiyaa pacchime yaame, tamokhandha.m padaalayi.m. 174. "Piitisukhena ca kaaya.m, pharitvaa vihari.m tadaa; sattamiyaa paade pasaaresi.m, tamokhandha.m padaaliyaa"ti.- Imaa gaathaa abhaasi. Pruitt: 172. I heard her utterance, took her advice,and in the first watch of the night, I recollected that I had been born before. 173. In the middle watch of the night, I purified the divine eye. In the last watch of the night, I tore asunder the mass of darkness [of ignorance]. 174. And I then dwelt suffusing the body with joy and happiness. On the seventh day, I stretched forth my feet, having torn asunder the mass of darkness [of ignorance]. RD: I heard her words, her bidding I obeyed. While *285 passed the first watch of the night there rose Long memories of the bygone line of lives. (172) While passed the second watch, the Heavenly Eye, Purview celestial, I clarified. While passed the last watch of the night, I burst And rent aside the gloom of ignorance. (173) Then, letting joy and blissful ease of mind Suffuse my body, seven days I sat, Ere stretching out cramped limbs I rose again. Was it not rent indeed, that muffling mist? *286 (174) *285 = Ps. xlviii. {c: Patacara's 30 disciples who 'made known the fact they were grateful, and this was indeed their declaration of perfect knowledge'.} *286 This question sign is a translator's liberty. The Pali reiterates only the final stage of relief and attainment. Tattha bhikkhuninti khemaatheri.m sandhaaya vadati. Bojjha"nga.t.tha"ngika.m magganti sattabojjha"nga~nca a.t.tha"ngika~nca ariyamagga.m. Uttamatthassa pattiyaati arahattassa nibbaanasseva vaa pattiyaa adhigamaaya. 170. There, bhikkhunii means: she speaks with reference to Therii Khemaa 171. The constituents of awakening (bojja"ng') and the eightfold path (magga.m) means: the seven constituents of awakening (satta-bojjha"nga~n) and the eightfold noble path (ariya-magga.m). The attainment of the supreme goal means: the attainment of, for the attaining of Arahatship or quenching. Nina's #71060 footnote 5: The Faculties, Powers, Seven Factors of Enlightenment are wholesome qualities that develop together with satipa.t.thaana so that enlightenment can be attained. Among them are mindfulness, energy, concentration and understanding. Piitisukhenaati phalasamaapattipariyaapannaaya piitiyaa sukhena ca. Kaayanti ta.msampayutta.m naamakaaya.m tadanusaarena ruupakaaya~nca. Pharitvaati phusitvaa byaapetvaa vaa. Sattamiyaa paade pasaaresinti vipassanaaya aaraddhadivasato sattamiya.m palla"nka.m bhinditvaa paade pasaaresi.m. Katha.m? Tamokhandha.m padaaliya, appadaalitapubba.m mohakkhandha.m aggamagga~naa.naasinaa padaaletvaa. Sesa.m he.t.thaa vuttanayameva. Vijayaatheriigaathaava.n.nanaa ni.t.thitaa. Chakkanipaatava.n.nanaa ni.t.thitaa. 174. With joy and happiness (piiti-sukhena) means: happiness (sukena) and joy (piitiyaa) that is accompanied by the attainment of the fruition state. The body (kaaya.m) means: the mental body (naama-kaaya.m) associated with that [joy and happiness] and as a consequence of that [mental body], the material body (ruupa-kaaya.m). Suffusing means: suffusing or pervading. On the seventh day (sattamiyaa), I stretched forth my feet means: seven days after I began [developing] insight, I abandoned my cross-legged position, I stretched forth my feet. Having torn asunder (padaaliya) the mass of darkness [of ignorance] (tamo-khanda.m) in what way? Having torn asunder (padaaletvaa) the mass of delusion (moha-kkhandha.m) not previously torn asunder with the sword of the knowledge of the highest path. The meaning of the rest has been explained already. Here ends the commentary on the verses by Therii Vijayaa. Here ends the commentary on the section of [groups of] six [verses]. == connie #73112 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Jun 7, 2007 7:25 am Subject: Conditions, Ch 3, no 3. nilovg Dear friends, Citta can be a predominance-condition for the accompanying cetasikas, but not all cittas can be predominance-condition. As we have seen, predominance-condition can operate only when there are javana-cittas accompanied by at least two roots. Seeing, for example, is an ahetuka citta (without roots), it can only perform the function of seeing and it cannot be predominance-condition. Moha-múla-citta, which has moha as its only root cannot be predominance-condition. Lobha-múla-citta and dosa-múla-citta have each two roots (respectively moha and lobha, and moha and dosa), they can be predominance-condition; then they have a dominating influence over the accompanying cetasikas in the fulfilling of a task or enterprise in the unwholesome way. All mahå- kusala cittas (kusala cittas of the sense-sphere) and all mahå- kiriyacittas (of the arahat), always have the two roots of alobha, non-attachment, and adosa, non-aversion, and they can have in addition the root which is paññå, thus, they have two or three roots and therefore they can be predominance-condition. When we accomplish a task with cittas which are resolute, firmly established in kusala, the citta can be the predominance-condition. The jhånacittas (kusala jhånacittas and kiriya jhånacittas of the arahat) and the lokuttara cittas are always accompanied by paññå, they have three roots, and thus they can be predominance-condition. Lobha cetasika is not a predominant factor, but lobha-múla-citta, citta rooted in attachment, can be predominance-condition, as we have seen. For example, when there is wrong view and wrong practice, the citta arising at that moment is firm and steady in this way of akusala, and then that citta is predominance-condition for the accompanying dhammas. That type of citta is rooted in moha and lobha and thus it is conditioned by these two roots by way of root- condition. When we abstain from slandering, the citta which is firm in kusala can be predominant, and in that case chanda, wish-to-do, and viriya, effort, are not predominant. With regard to investigation of the Dhamma, vimaÿsa, this is paññå cetasika. When we listen to the Dhamma, consider it and are mindful of realities, vimaÿsa can condition the accompanying citta and cetasikas by way of predominance-condition. ********** Nina. #73113 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Jun 7, 2007 7:25 am Subject: Listening to Dhamma, Ch 1, no 5. nilovg Dear friends, Cittas can be of four jåtis (nature or class): kusala, akusala, vipåka and kiriya. Kiriyacittas or “inoperative cittas”, also arise in a process, such as the five-sense-door adverting-consciousness, pañca-dvåråvajjana-citta, which adverts to the object before the sense-cognition (seeing, hearing etc.) which is vipåkacitta arises in a sense-door process. The kiriyacittas which arise in a process of cittas in the case of non-arahats, are ahetuka cittas. One may find the subject of ahetuka cittas not interesting, but ahetuka cittas arise time and again in daily life. Seeing is an ahetuka citta, but we do not know that seeing is a citta so long as we take it for self. Seeing is real in the ultimate sense, it is dhamma. Everything which is real is dhamma. Visible object or colour is real, it is dhamma. Dhammas have each their own inalterable characteristic which cannot be changed. Attachment is real, it has its own characteristic. We can call it by another name, but its characteristic cannot be changed. Aversion has its own characteristic; we can call it by another name but its characteristic cannot be changed. The name seeing can be changed, but its characteristic cannot be changed: it experiences what is visible through the eyes. Colour is appearing because there is a citta which sees. Seeing is dependent on conditions: eyesense and colour are conditions for seeing. Seeing is result of kamma, vipåkacitta, and eyesense is also result of kamma, it is the physical result of kamma. If kamma would not produce eyesense we could not see. Kamma produces the senses throughout our life so that sense objects can be experienced. The dhammas which arise in our daily life are beyond control, we cannot own them. Seeing and hearing do not belong to us, they are non-self. We cannot choose what we see and hear, this depends on the appropriate conditions. After our discussions in Bangkok we went to the North of Thailand, to Chiangmai, Chiang Dao and Thaton where we continued our discussions. We had many opportunities for anumodana dåna, the appreciation of other people’s kusala, which is a way of generosity. In Chiangmai we stayed in the “Holiday Resort” of Khun Walee and Khun Chaknop Khullar. Khun Walee and her husband have adopted children of poor families and in this way they give them opportunities to learn a profession and find a job. When these children are grown up they adopt again other small children and thus far they have adopted twenty-six children. Khun Walee and her husband who greatly support the printing of books by the “Dhamma Study and Propagation Foundation” in Thailand gave our group much hospitality. Friends from Chiangmai took great trouble to cook three times daily the most delicious food for us. Listening to the Dhamma can have a great impact on one’s life. We were impressed when we heard about someone with severe alcohol problems who could start to change his life after he listened to Acharn Sujin. He moved away from where he used to live in order to avoid the company of bad friends and now he is open-minded for the Dhamma and he can gradually change his behaviour towards his wife and children. After our stay in Chiangmai we traveled to Chiang Dao, but on the way we visited the Dong Devi Temple, where Khun Sukol’s brother is the Abbot. Here we had a very beneficial discussion on the development of understanding. People who lived in the surroundings of the temple cooked lunch and dinner for us with great care and kindness. After a night in Chiang Dao we went on to Thaton near the Burmese border. We stayed in a resort near the river which belongs to a relative of Khun Sukol. Here we had Dhamma discussions morning, afternoon and evening in the most pleasant surroundings. ******* Nina #73114 From: TGrand458@... Date: Thu Jun 7, 2007 5:38 am Subject: Re: [dsg] "Dhammas" and Impermanence (The Abhidhammikas perspective?) TGrand458@... Hi Sarah In a message dated 6/7/2007 2:26:10 A.M. Mountain Daylight Time, sarahprocterabbott@... writes: Hi TG, Back to an earlier thread... --- _TGrand458@..._ (mailto:TGrand458@...) wrote: > Hi Sarah TG: It seems to me that you see this characteristic of > impermanence in > "the dhammas themselves." I see it in the "mechanics of > conditionality" and > not a trait belonging to something specific. Does that make sense and > does > my idea of your view reflect your view? .... S: There are so many, many suttas in which the Buddha talked about the impermanence of all conditioned dhammas. Yes, they are impermanent or disintegrate because that is their nature to do so as soon as the conditions for their arising are no longer occurring. ...................................... NEW TG: What you wrote is unclear to me. In your last sentence, you say it is "their nature to be impermanent" and you follow it by saying "as long as the conditions supporting them are no longer occurring." These statements are in conflict with each other IMO. If something has "its own" nature, then its impermanence need not depend on conditions. If something is dependent on conditions, then it does not have "its own" nature. What happened to the "immediate arising and then falling away" theory? If its "falling away" is dependent on conditions, and the conditions remain for a while, then the resultant condition is remaining accordingly isn't it? The first half of your sentence supports the first view, the second half supports the latter view. .................................................................... 35: 84 Subject to Disintegration (Bodhi transl): "...Whatever is subject to disintegration, Aananda, is called the world....And what is subject to disintegration? They eye....forms.eye....forms."This next constitutes my point and makes it better than I can, (bear with the quote, its short); in Sammohavinodanii, pp.90-1: "388. Furthermore, while the self of the sectarians does not exist in its own nature (sabhaavato)its own nature (sabh ................................................. NEW TG: Ahhh, my point in a nutshell ... that you reject the idea of "self" for the more obvious "constructions" yet grasp after the "idea of self" regarding these precious "dhammas." You don't see it, but it seems clear to me. The above sentence fragment has a major flaw from the get go. It already is a convolution of thinking and an "accident waiting to happen." Its already "setting up" a case for a "self viewpoint" to escape unscathed. There is no need to start making "allowances" regarding "self" as it is doing above. The bottom line is ... there is no-self PERIOD. Not regarding PEOPLE, not regarding ELEMENTS, not regarding AGGREGATES, not regarding ANYTHING. There is no self! The twisted argument this sentence is making is attempting to allow for "little tiny baby selves" to escape and "live on in the mind" of those that need to "attach" onto something. Shall we see it in action below... ............................................... but these are elements (dhaatu) since they carry (dhaarenti) their own nature (sabhaava). .................................................. NEW TG: BRAVO! THE SELF IS SAVED! ........................................................... And as in the world the variously coloured orpiment, cinnabar, etc., being constituents of stones, are called elements, so also these elements are like those ones, for they are the variously 'coloured' constituents of knowledge and the knowable. Or, just as [the term] 'elements' is used for the juice, blood, etc. which are the constituents of the collection known as the 'body' [when they are] distinguished from each other by dissimilarity of characteristic, so also [the term] 'elements' should be understood as used for constituents of the person called 'the five aggregates'. For these things are distinguished from each other by dissimilarity of characteristics.cha< **** ................................................. NEW TG: Distinguishing the elements is just a more refined practice of our conventional distinguishing. I can distinguish the difference between computer and person. I can distinguish the difference between feeling and perception (maybe). Just a more refined practice of the same thing. The Buddha (or maybe Sariputta)said that feeling and perception are only distinguishable for purposes of analysis and could not in actually be consider separate things. Why would distinguishing elements be important then? Because it is closer to the essentials of bare conditionality; and gross delusions of self should be bypassed if we are dealing with elements. If a mind ends up seeing these elements as having "own characteristics," then the practice has failed to overcome self view and failed to understand conditionality. ......................................................... S: You go on to rightly point out that I'll 'never have a full grasp on impermanence by just thinking....impermanence by just timpermanen Exactly my point! It is only by fully understanding the characteristics of those 'individual dhammas' when they appear and the clear distinction between namas and rupas that conditionality and impermanence of those same 'individual dhammas' can ever be known directly, not by thinking. ................................................... NEW TG: This fails to take into account the dozens of posts I've posted quoting the Buddha/Suttas using "thinking" as a major tool in insight development. So the Suttas quotes are not responded to; yet you deliver the above which cannot be found in the Suttas. Oh what a tangled web we weave. LOL ................................................... You liked the excellent passage Larry quoted on the pari~n~nas (full knowledges) from the Vism XX (#72558) and this is just what it is stressing, starting with the clear and repeated understanding of namas and rupas. ................................................. NEW TG: The aggregates and elements need to be seen for what they are...as impermanent, afflicting, and no-self. This is the Suttas teaching, and I can find you direct quotes. There is NO Sutta reference which states that the elements and aggregates are "ultimate realities with their own characteristics." Defining "qualities" of elements and aggregates is a provisional practice. They are not "ultimate realities." They are merely a "field for developing insight." Insight uses the knowledge of conditionality: impermanence, affliction, and no-self, to "overcome" conditions ... not to "indulge in them" ... as ultimate realities with their own characteristics. ................................................................ As for your Superwoman/AbhidhamAs for your Superwoman/Abhidham Especially: "mild mannered monitor fights a never ending battle, for truth, justice, and the Abhidhamma Way!!" That would be a good eulogy, thanks in advance:-)) ........................................................ NEW TG: Well, I thought the "Able to change the course of mighty Suttas" was a more relevant attribute. LOL ;-) TG OUT #73115 From: "sukinder" Date: Fri Jun 8, 2007 5:06 am Subject: RE: [dsg] Q. re: Jhana as necessity to enlightenment sukinderpal Hi James, This is going to be rushed as it is past my sleeping time. _____ > The reason I opposed B.B's article was because it just seemed to add to the > confusion. Instead of trying to determine what in fact Jhana and the N8FP > are and how they might be related or unrelated, he instead comes to the > conclusion that it *might* be necessary for Arahatta Magga but not for the > other Maggas! :-/ And this is based on stories got from the Suttas. Why did > he choose to disregard any understanding that comes from Abhidhamma and why > as Nina pointed out, did he ignore the Puggala Pannatti? James: Your post leads me to ask some questions as I am really not very familiar with the Abhidhamma/Commentary position (and these are not leading questions): Of what nature is the supramundane jhana? Is it of the nature of the first, second, third, fourth, or the immaterial jhanas? Is it accompanied by the jhana factors? S: I think that you are asking the wrong person this. I have a hard time remembering technical details, unless it is repeated enough to condition some understanding at the level of reflection. I am not sure what you have in mind about "supramundane jhana", but judging from the sentence following, I don't think that you mean the supramundane consciousness that are based on the 4 Jhanas. I think you are referring to what some have said about the "concentration" accompanying Path Consciousness as being equal in intensity to that of Jhana? If so, then I think that "supramundane jhana" is a misleading term. But anyway I don't know the answer to your question..:-( ================== James: Does it last for just one single mind moment (one citta) or is it a succession of moments (cittas)? Is there any reference to it in the suttas? S: Magga cittas are said to last one moment, the Phala I think, one or more. I don't know of any reference in the Suttas. ============== James: Thanks in advance. (BTW, since BB briefly explained the Abhidhamma/Commentary explanation of jhana, but didn't include it in his overall analysis, I took that as a "silent statement" that he doesn't consider it valid...but cannot say so since he is a monk. Of course, I could be mistaken about that.) S: Yes, and my own impression at the time was that he was unsure of himself. But now that Nina has informed us of his real motive, maybe he was just trying to limit his scope for the sake of being fair to those who do not accept the Abhidhamma..? =================== > So what really is Jhana? Is it Right concentration of the Path, if so then > why is it not part of the Path and Fruit of the first three levels of > Sainthood? James (and I have heard others say this too) has suggested that > Jhana plays a particular role of allowing an Anagami to know of a realm > beyond sense objects thereby overcoming any attachment to the latter. This > does not make any sense to me. James: It makes perfect sense to me (and it doesn't just apply to the anagami but to everyone). Did you read MN 14? S: No, I read it only this morning after reading your post, and thanks for pointing it out as it came at a time when I am quite immersed in the householder's life and its problems. In fact all day yesterday I was out looking for some business ideas (and I am a lousy businessman). On the one side I am also looking to close an ailing business that started going downhill about 8 years ago and which I should have closed about 5 years before. The past one year however, it has been running at substantial loss, and funnily it is for the reason that my business has been this way, that a few months ago I received a notice from the income tax department. :-/ They want to see my accounts of past 3 years which I *don't* have, suspecting how I can still keep my business open! In the meantime I had tried investing in a few things elsewhere and ended up losing about 40 percent of all my savings. And now I have accumulated much fear of 'new investments', but there is no choice, the kids are small and I can't depend on whatever I have left in the bank..Yes this is the dukkha of the typical householder. And btw, the above is less than half of all my problems. :-( And I am sure that more or less this scenario is going to be repeated in many more lives as a human being. We get what we seek for; I'd be insincere if I said that I have accumulations for the life of a recluse. :-P Regarding the Sutta, my M.N. is at work and I couldn't find the same translation on the web. What I read from it was B.B's note saying that Mahanama who was a Sakadagami, had thought that it was at this level of enlightenment that sensuous desire and aversion were eradicated. But since he saw that he still experienced these, he had to ask the Buddha about it. So it seems that it is not so much that be was 'greatly troubled' by these experiences but more because he was confused and needed clarification. True, in the same Sutta the Buddha showed the virtue of Jhana over any experience of sense pleasure and that if someone were to experience the former, he would not be attracted to the latter. But note that this does not happen in a vacuum. Even if the Buddha considered more than just the fact that Mahanama was a Once Returner but in fact also covered a non-ariyan jhanalabi, this latter would still be one with great panna. He would have seen the danger in sense contacts and therefore already "preferred" jhana. This kind of panna is however different from one which has seen with Right View the nature of conditioned realities. Mahanama being one of the latter, his wisdom was of greater consequence. I think in this particular case, the Buddha didn't advice Mahanama regarding jhana as a kind of remedy, do you think he in fact did? In any case wouldn't Mahanama have been destined to become an Anagami and then finally an Arahat anyway? Did the Buddha say that he *had to* practice jhana in order that he then reach the goal? I think if anything, this Sutta points to the non-necessity of Jhana. What if Mahanama didn't hear the Buddha talk about Jhana, would he not go further? I must go now. Metta, Sukinder #73116 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Jun 7, 2007 11:01 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Q. re: Jhana as necessity to enlightenment nilovg Hi Howard, Lodewijk read your post on death today and he was very impressed. He was touched by what you wrote. Nina. Op 5-jun-2007, om 17:22 heeft upasaka@... het volgende geschreven: > So, yes, do keep death in mind as a reminder that this is a precious > human birth that we have obtained and that should be well used and > without > waste of time, #73117 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Jun 7, 2007 11:33 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Recollection of the Buddha- 5 nilovg Hi James, thank you for this. There is a typo: the fulfilment of the thirty perceptions: should be: perfections. The ten perfections can also be seen as thirty, according to dgrees: ten basic, ten intermediate and ten ultimate. Nina. Op 7-jun-2007, om 5:37 heeft buddhatrue het volgende geschreven: > by working for the welfare and happiness of the > whole world through the fulfilment of the thirty perceptions and > through following the right way without deviating towards either of > the two extremes, #73118 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Jun 7, 2007 11:48 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: 'Impermanent' Versus 'Inconstant'( subconscious and unconscious... nilovg Hi Howard, seeing sees. it only sees. Then it falls away, no more. How could it be subliminal. As to the driving example: here sa~n~naa performed its function. Difficult to reconstruct what happened. As to Bhavanga, this keeps the continuity in the life of an individual. Also when there are no processes, there has to be citta. Next life: a different type of bhavangacitta, unless similar kamma produced a similar type. There is no longer the same individual. Tendencies lying dormant in each citta. You may like to read Ven. Nyanaponika, The Present, p. 119-121. Nina. Op 6-jun-2007, om 22:00 heeft upasaka@... het volgende geschreven: > But I do buy mental functioning at subliminal levels - seeing, > hearing, tasting, smelling, bodily sensing, and, very much, > thinking that do not rise > to the level of conscious awareness. This can be noticed when, > being lost in > thought while driving, one suddenly notices that s/he is pulling up > to their > house without having been consciously aware of the last three > minutes of > driving. #73119 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Jun 7, 2007 11:53 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Q. re: Jhana as necessity to enlightenment nilovg Dear Sukin and James, I can add a passage from Dhamma Issues, I translated from Thai. Here the question is asked whether the ariyan who has not attained jhåna is able to enter fruition attainment (experiencing nibbaana with phalacitta arising many times during his life). The answer is no. Nina. Op 8-jun-2007, om 14:06 heeft sukinder het volgende geschreven: > In any case wouldn't Mahanama have been destined to become an > Anagami and > then finally an Arahat anyway? Did the Buddha say that he *had to* > practice > jhana in order that he then reach the goal? #73120 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Jun 7, 2007 12:04 pm Subject: nibbaana. nilovg Hi Larry, --------- I thought nibbana could only be the object of lokuttara cittas. Under what circumstances can it be the object of maha-kusala cittas and maha-kiriya cittas? ------- N: The gotrabhu, change of lineage consciousness, arising just before the magga-citta, has nibbaana as object, but it is not lokuttara. Also the reviewing cittas, arising after the phalacittas have fallen away, review nibbaana. They are not lokuttara cittas. Then the object is called not so classifiable, navattaaramma.na. I do not know details about that. --------- L: Can rupa be an object-predominance condition? If so, for what kinds of cittas? ------- N:I shall come to that soon in my Conditions. I wrote: < Pleasant sense objects are desirable and they can condition lobha-múla-citta by way of object-predominance-condition. Rúpa which is a desirable object can be object-predominance-condition only for lobha-múla-citta. Rupa cannot condition kusala citta by way of object-predominance-condition, only by way of object-condition. > Nina. #73121 From: upasaka@... Date: Thu Jun 7, 2007 8:12 am Subject: Re: [dsg] MN 49 "I did not affirm earth." -- Buddha upasaka_howard Hi, TG - In a message dated 6/7/07 2:52:40 AM Eastern Daylight Time, TGrand458@... writes: Hi All MN 49 has some interesting passages that may deal with some of our discussions... "Brahma, having directly known earth as earth, and having known that which is not partaken of by the earthness of earth, I did not claim to be earth, I did not claim to be in earth, I did not claim to be apart from earth, I did not claim earth to be "mine," I did not affirm earth." This formula is repeated for the rest of Four Great Elements as well as "all" which I take to mean "The All." This passage, similar to MN #1, contains the interesting sentence -- "I did not affirm earth." ... "I did not affirm all." ------------------------------------- Howard: The "affirming" part might well suggest not attributing essence or self to any aspect of "the all". But otherwise, this seems mainly to be pointing to the impersonality of all these phenomena. As I recall, in MN 1, there was a lot along the lines of not proliferating thought with repect to these phenomena, their just being "such". ---------------------------------- Seems one could look at this and conclude that it expresses the opposite sentiment than the Abhidhamma Commentaries which view elements as "ultimate realities with their own characteristics." The Buddha seems to say here that he won't even affirm them...much less give them the lofty stature that the Abhidhamma Commentaries do. --------------------------------- Howard: It isn't real clear to me what the "affirming" might mean, but it well might mean nor attributing essence. ---------------------------------- Later in the same Sutta we get this... "The consciousness that makes no showing, And in becoming about to disbecome, Not claiming being with respect to all." -------------------------------- Howard: That's awfully hard to "parse"! Is that consciousness the "unmanifestive consciousness" mentioned elsewhere? The next line sure does have an anti-essence sense to it, though! -------------------------------- It seems this passage deals with being on the precipice of attaining Nibbana. The mental attitude suggested is one that does not consider things as being or not being. BB's note in MN taken from Nanamoli says -- "not predicating being in relation to 'all,'" or "not assuming of 'all' that it IS or IS NOT in an absolute sense." ------------------------------ Howard: Yes, I think your point is good here. --------------------------- Finally in same Sutta... "Having seen fear in every mode of being And in being seeking for non-being, I did not affirm any mode of being, Nor did I cling to any delight." ----------------------------- Howard: I wonder what that expression "in being seeking for non-being" means. ------------------------------ Again, the interesting phrase in relation to our discussions is -- "I did not affirm any mode of being." ------------------------------- Howard: Yes, that is a good point. ------------------------------- My reading shows this as quite contrary to the Abhidhamma Commenarial view of seeing things as -- ultimate realities with their own characteristics. To me, this Commentarial view is precisely the way we SHOULD NOT be seeing them. -------------------------------- :-) -------------------------------- TG ================== With metta, Howard P.S. I'm saving your post of today (Thursday, June 7), entitled <>, for further study. I suspect I can learn a lot from it. :-) Date: Thu Jun 7, 2007 8:13 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Q. re: Jhana as necessity to enlightenment upasaka_howard Hi, Nina - In a message dated 6/7/07 2:03:35 PM Eastern Daylight Time, vangorko@... writes: > Hi Howard, > Lodewijk read your post on death today and he was very impressed. He > was touched by what you wrote. > Nina. > ===================== Thanks so much, Nina. Please send my very best to Lodewijk. :-) With metta, Howard #73123 From: TGrand458@... Date: Thu Jun 7, 2007 8:24 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: 'Impermanent' Versus 'Inconstant'( subconscious and unconscious... TGrand458@... Hi Howard, Nina, All In a message dated 6/7/2007 12:51:14 P.M. Mountain Daylight Time, vangorko@... writes: Hi Howard, seeing sees. it only sees. Then it falls away, no more. How could it be subliminal. As to the driving example: here sa~n~naa performed its function. Difficult to reconstruct what happened. As to Bhavanga, this keeps the continuity in the life of an individual. Also when there are no processes, there has to be citta. Next life: a different type of bhavangacitta, unless similar kamma produced a similar type. There is no longer the same individual. Tendencies lying dormant in each citta. You may like to read Ven. Nyanaponika, The Present, p. 119-121. Nina. ...................................................... TG: There is seeing due to conditions. There is no "thing/entity" that sees. "Seeing sees" is a problem because it grammatically makes out "seeing" as a doer of seeing (which is probably not the meaning but it is confusing.) There is just seeing due to conditions. What are the conditions? The conditions are "energy structures" that ... due to an appropriate configuration, are generating seeing. What are energy structures? Energy structures = elements (most fundamentally the Four Great Elements) and aggregates and the composites generated thereby. TG #73124 From: "colette" Date: Thu Jun 7, 2007 6:17 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Are we responsible for our actions? ksheri3 Good Morning Sarah and Elaine, Lets start w/ the basic question from the subject line concerning responsibility and the actions we take. I'm speaking from the POV of my NDE in 1978 and am creating a foundation, pair of shoes of mine that you can walk a mile in. Yes, we are certainly responsible for the actions we take. I cannot even begin to think that I'm the first person to create an examination of the existing situation with all the history of alchemists, witches, scientists, etc.. From a Western perspective when we speak of responsibility we are generally taking it in the aspect of criminal behavior.<....> Since I've been studying buddhism I've found that Karma fits into a category of electro-magnetism. I'm suggesting that the actions taken by a person carry with them an electro-magnetic charge. Electro- magnetism is a universal quality in our universe, cosmos, etc. So when a person does something or thinks something they create a magnetic field ATTACHED to the action/thought. This attachment is connected to everything else in the universe as well. <....> lets move on to get to Sarah's post. S: I think this is a conventional idea of mindfulness or effort again. > Actually, what is attended to will again depend on conditions, not on a > self making a special effort. colette: Hi Sarah, long time no triffles huh? Does the infant walk before it crawls? ------------------------- > S: Sounds familiar:-) colette: my high school class voted me MOST SPACED OUT of the class of 79. At least I don't feel so alone now. ;) ---------------------------------- The great thing (as far as the path of satipatthana > is concerned) is that it doesn't matter in the slightest! It may be > inconvenient and boring for others, but sati can arise anytime at all, > even when we are (conventionally) forgetful. colette: good observation since I'm beginning to think in terms of memory being associated to "cause and conditions" which I interpret as your meaning being "conventially". This also deals with the mind-only school since a person's thoughts are the ONLY REQUIREMENT in this buddhist doctrine. I'm finding that there's a lot of mystical relationships with the West in buddhism. I think that it'll eventually just lead to a meditatives' ability to concentrate and transform the configuration of atoms. ---------------------------------- There are still realities > appearing, which can be known. For example, there's still seeing, there's > still visible object, there's confusion, annoyance and many other dhammas. > Any of these can be the object of awareness without any special effort or > pulling back of the mind. colette: <...> As I started this reply the dog was laying on his back and would twitch. I often ponder what the dog is dreaming of when he twitches. So I decided to make small noises that I know the dog is conditioned to hear and respond to, NOISES THAT ONLY I MAKE, THAT SHOW MY PRESENCE, ETC. and I watched to see if it had an effect of the dog's twitching, which it did. So, he does remember me when he's sleeping. So, he does have a consciousness. <....> > .... > >I think > > mindfulness is like a mind-training exercise. I have to go, but YES, it is mind-training! YES, the aspirant has to work on it. YES, there is reason and logic to following the methodology of the past dhamma. toodles, colette #73125 From: "sudhanadewan" Date: Thu Jun 7, 2007 7:07 am Subject: Re: Winning Awareness! sudhanadewan Hello Dhamma Friends, I am sudhana dewan from Arunachal Pradesh now living in leicester, UK. I borned in a traditional theravada buddhist family but very little knowledge of buddhism. I joined this dhammastudygroup day before yesterday. It is an amazing and wonderful platform to learn dhamma. with metta sudhana #73126 From: "Ramesh Patil" Date: Thu Jun 7, 2007 9:39 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: what is sati rameshat27 Dear Nidhi, It's ur greatness that u r calling urself mediocre person..but u can analyse the things..in proper way... Its great that u had attended the couple of courses at dhammagiri Igatpuri...and taking so much part here in dhamma discussions... Actually I worked in mumbai as s/w engg. and didn't find so much time to read all the articles..as I was engaged so much involved in prj development... I had done my BE in 1998 and ME in 2002 from PUNE..Govt. college of Engg. PUNE.. In 2002 I came here in mumbai for good job opportunity....but always engaged in dhamma works here.. ** *I got selected for Young Bodhisatva Programme in 2003 in Thailand..organised by International Network Of Engaged bhuddhist...that is one of my life achievements..* *But now in India peoples became aware abt dhamma..that is the nice thing* Pune is nice city..but mumbai is great... What u r by profession?? R u working?? Regards Ramesh Patil Mumbai,India On 6/7/07, wisdomcompassion wrote: > > Dear Rameshji, > > thanks for kind words, but i think i m quite a mediocre person, > nothing great can ever come out of mediocrity. > > I stay in pune, i read about buddhism in a book, but my interest grew > in it after attening vipassana course at igatpuri. then i decided to > study a little bit, and till today words are Buddha are something that > touches my heart deeply. > > with metta, > nidhi <....> #73127 From: "Charles DaCosta" Date: Thu Jun 7, 2007 1:43 pm Subject: RE: [dsg] A Basic Question About Mind-Door Processes dacostacharles HI Howard These are good questions. So I have to take a quick stab at it. When consciousness takes hold of something that is brought in through the mind-door, the original sensory impression (e.g., warmth) usually gets added to. Like what you alluded to by your questions. It could also be argued that the "the recognizing of it, the feeling of it, attending to it, and so on - the various cetasikas acting on it" are also mind-door processes. Charles DaCosta _____ From: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com [mailto:dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of upasaka@... Sent: Friday, May 25, 2007 01:09 To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com Subject: [dsg] A Basic Question About Mind-Door Processes Hi, all Abhidhammikas - What actually occurs when a rupa is known during a mind-door process? When, for example, warmth is known via body door, there is the knowing of it, the recognizing of it, the feeling of it, attending to it, and so on - the various cetasikas acting on it. What happens later that is different when that "same" warmth is known during the subsequent mind-door process? Is that when it is thought about? Or liked or disliked? Or craved or hated? Or what, exactly? Is it a matter of *other* cetasikas acting on the warmth? If that is not it, then what exactly *is* the difference? <....> #73128 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Thu Jun 7, 2007 3:11 pm Subject: Re: The Bottle Dwindles kenhowardau Hi Colette, "The bottle dwindles?" I'm not sure how to take that, but I hope it's good news. :-) -------------- <. . .> C: > Why do choose to specify the Abhidhamma? For instance I recently was meditating and somehow I got into Tantra, -------------- Abhidhamma explains that at all times - past, present and future - the world is ultimately a few conditioned dhammas. In a tiny fraction of a second, dhammas appear, perform their functions and fall away - never to be seen again. So that's it! The beginning, middle and end of the universe occurs in a tiny fraction of a second. According to the Abhidhamma, any universe other than that is just a concept - an illusion produced by the mind (by the citta and cetasikas of the present moment). Tantra - or any other form of Dhamma - is fine so long as it is understood in Abhidhamma terms. When there is tantra meditation there is only consciousness (citta) a number of mental factors (cetasikas) and the physical phenomena (rupas) on which they depend. Even ordinary, mundane things are the same. At any time of the day, whatever we are doing, there are really only namas and rupas. ----------------------- C: > oh, now I know; the meditation went something like this: I'm reflecting on my immediate surroundings, the people that took me into their home with them, their children A few days ago I was attempting to bring you and others to the reality that we are the same, that we are a representation of the planet and of the universe. "Shaking apart"? THAT IS TOTALLY TANTRA, -------------------- The Abhidhamma, also, is trying to tell us we are all the same. It's the greatest leveller of all. No matter who or what we think we are, there are only fleeting namas and rupas. Even the Buddha was only namas and rupas. He said anyone who knew conditioned dhammas knew him. ---------------------------- <. . .> C: > I visualized myself talking to nobody yet I was cognizing what was said from outside of my body. Therefore I'm saying that I was detached but it was still in my mind that this took place. Somehow I feel this also relates to Shunyata but void would be a bad word to use, the emptiness is there in it's svabhava but not the body, the body is transient and therefore without substance continuously. ---------------------------- When you say the body is transient and without substance you can only be talking about rupa. The commonly known [human or animal] body is neither fleeting nor without substance. Walk into a brick wall and you will soon find that out. Rupa, however, is truly fleeting (lasting about one trillionth of a second). And it lacks any property of permanence. So the rupa that arises in the present moment is not the same rupa that arose in the preceding moment or the same rupa that will arise in the following moment. Every moment is a new universe. -------------- <. . . > C: > this is another whopper since now you change the entire situation in my mind: you actualize, personalize, "conditioned dhammas" in a way that I haven't tried before! --------------- There are often arguments here at DSG about the personalizing of dhammas. Some people say it goes against the teaching of anatta (no person). But I don't see it that way. So long as we are talking about fleeting, unsatisfactory, soulless dhammas we are on the right track. It doesn't matter what we call them. ------------------------- C: > I haven't had a second to think about what you did but I know that it's heavy and will make me smile tonight as a lay down and begin my ritual before entering the enemies territory: the accursed Land of Nod, ;-). -------------------------- :-) The enemies we see in our dreams are the same as the enemies we see during the day. They are not ultimately real. The only real enemies are the unwholesome namas (namas rooted in greed, hate or delusion) that are conditioned to arise in our own consciousness. Ken H #73129 From: LBIDD@... Date: Thu Jun 7, 2007 4:23 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] nibbaana. lbidd2 Hi Nina, Thanks for the details regarding maha-kusala cittas with nibbana as object and desirable rupa as object predominance condition for lobha mula citta.Very interesting. Larry #73130 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Thu Jun 7, 2007 5:17 pm Subject: Re: Q. re: Jhana as necessity to enlightenment buddhatrue Hi Sukin (and Sarah), Thanks for getting back to me even though you are so busy. Sukin: I think that you are asking the wrong person this. I have a hard time remembering technical details, unless it is repeated enough to condition some understanding at the level of reflection. I am not sure what you havein mind about "supramundane jhana", but judging from the sentence following, I don't think that you mean the supramundane consciousness that are based on the 4 Jhanas. I think you are referring to what some have said about the"concentration" accompanying Path Consciousness as being equal in intensity to that of Jhana? If so, then I think that "supramundane jhana" is a misleading term. But anyway I don't know the answer to your question..:-( James: I asked you because you brought up the issue in your post so I thought you might be really familiar with it. I was going to ask Nina but I think I bother her too much as it is and she needs to get some rest. Yes, I was asking about the concentration which is supposed to accompany path consciousness, which I understood to be termed "supramundane jhana". But, perhaps I am mistaken about that also. Maybe Sarah could address this issue? Sukin: Even if the Buddha considered more than just the fact that Mahanama was a Once Returner but in fact also covered a non-ariyan jhanalabi, this latter would still be one with great panna. He would have seen the danger in sense contacts and therefore already "preferred" jhana. This kind of panna is however different from one which has seen with Right View the nature of conditioned realities. Mahanama being one of the latter,his wisdom was of greater consequence. I think in this particular case, the Buddha didn't advice Mahanama regarding jhana as a kind of remedy, do you think he in fact did? James: I have read this several times and I just can't follow your train of thought. I don't understand what you are saying. Sukin: In any case wouldn't Mahanama have been destined to become an Anagami and then finally an Arahat anyway? Did the Buddha say that he *had to* practice jhana in order that he then reach the goal? James: Yes, the Buddha did. Sukin: I think if anything, this Sutta points to the non-necessity of Jhana. James: Well, that is a really strange conclusion to reach! Sukin: What if Mahanama didn't hear the Buddha talk about Jhana, would he not go further? James: This is an interesting question. This implies that you believe that once anyone achieves any level of enlightment, he/she can just "coast" to nibbana. I don't think it works that way. I believe that once one becomes a stream-enterer, he/she is bound for enlightenment because of samvegga- because of a sense of urgency the practice will be continued and never abandoned. Reaching a stage of enlightenment isn't like receiving a magic spell or something "Drink this potion and in seven lifetimes you will instantly become enlightened!" ;-)). Sukin: And btw, the above is less than half of all my problems. :-( And I am sure that more or less this scenario is going to be repeated in many more lives as a human being. James: I am very sorry to hear of all of your business/financial difficulties lately. I will send good thoughts your way: May Sukin be happy! May Sukin be content! May Sukin be free from financial troubles! Namo tassa, bhagavato, arahato samma sambuddhasa Namo tassa, bhagavato, arahato samma sambuddhasa Namo tassa, bhagavato, arahato, samma sambuddhasa Metta, James #73131 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Thu Jun 7, 2007 5:24 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Recollection of the Buddha- 5 buddhatrue Hi Nina, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Hi James, > thank you for this. > There is a typo: the fulfilment of the thirty perceptions: should be: > perfections. > The ten perfections can also be seen as thirty, according to dgrees: > ten basic, ten intermediate and ten ultimate. > Nina. Thanks for pointing this out. I will try to be more careful with the remainder of the series. But, this post makes me wonder if you are taking it easy! Recently, in a couple of posts, I have been flippant about your comments regarding your impending death because I don't take them very seriously. After all, you went to the doctor and he said that you were very healthy, exceptionally healthy, and nowhere close to dying. However, he did say that you should take it easy! I hope you are following his advice! I will send some good thoughts your way: May Nina be happy! May Nina live at ease! May Nina be free from fatigue! Namo tassa, bhagavato, arahato samma sambuddhasa Namo tassa, bhagavato, arahato samma sambuddhasa Namo tassa, bhagavato, arahato, samma sambuddhasa Metta, James #73132 From: "colette" Date: Thu Jun 7, 2007 4:19 pm Subject: fresh from the stove top ksheri3 Hi Ken, Glad you got back to me before I was forced to walk home. so now I'm dealing with this fresh, I only got a little way down your response before I said to myself that it's gotta go, I've gotta get these questions out now! -------------------------- > "The bottle dwindles?" I'm not sure how to take that, but I hope it's > good news. :-) > colette: take it as you like it. We, at my establishment, pride ourselves on the return business that our clientel seems to order. Every dish we put up usually comes back as if licked clean! I always thought that they enjoy my cookin'. Please remember though, that doubt is the killer of all initiative! I used to have a good saying from Goetha that dealt with those concepts of magic, intiative, doubt, living, etc. > -------------- > Abhidhamma explains that at all times - past, present and future - colette: I've found that when I read the Abhidhamma from the Kandy Buddhist Publishing Society, and I've been focusing on making the past the present, since that is STANDARD OPERATING PROCEDURE for all robots, especially those on the assembly line of organized education. I've been getting unbelievable results, realizations, and am forced to RE-cognize so much. So, we're together up to this point. ---------------------------- > the world is ultimately a few conditioned dhammas. colette: OUCH, your experience with the dhamma has given you this Vipisanna. My freshly taken "dip" in the dhamma is refreshing but it posses so many problems and difficulties to those that have accustomed themselves to the dhamma being a certain way and only the way as they say it is. Implying that there is the potential that they may've made mistakes and are doing nothing more than perpetuating the same mistakes that their blind fathers made when they were being instructed to place their feet in the exact same footsteps as those that are already in the snow. It's a fur trapping techinque that Nanook applied when before he found the recipient of the Yellow Snow. Fathers/sons, apples/trees, they're all the same, see "ditto heads", mimiographs, xerox copies, dna modification, etc. ---------------------------------------- In a tiny fraction > of a second, dhammas appear, perform their functions and fall away - > never to be seen again. colette: I was gonna go off on ya here but as the "enter" key was pushing the other lines down I realized the humor of that statement being true. --------------------------------- > > So that's it! The beginning, middle and end of the universe occurs in > a tiny fraction of a second. colette: that was a tricky move the way you phrased the universe's "being" and then slid in "According to the Abhidhamma..." after the extra, empty, space and the period. A person reading as fast as I am forced to read through things would tend to ZOOM by the ploy. But I'm "wired" so we can go with Jeff Beck here and ask for Tood Rudgren's support. ----------------------- According to the Abhidhamma, any > universe other than that is just a concept - an illusion produced by > the mind (by the citta and cetasikas of the present moment). colette: I can't wait to incorporate that thought into my meditations! It looks VERY PROMISING! -------------------------- > > Tantra - or any other form of Dhamma - is fine so long as it is > understood in Abhidhamma terms. colette: in my case if it wasn't for my experience in Tantra THEN I would not have been able to study the Abhidhamma so easily and would not have been so attracted to it's obvious applications. Again, it may just be a resultant phenomina from my lack of experience studying these Eastern traditions, particularly the Hindu since I have been deliberately avoiding the Hindu until I get this buddhism down better. Although the Hindu still pops up through the screen every now and then. -------------------- > At any time of the day, > whatever we are doing, there are really only namas and rupas. colette: I had to cut & paste that, I have no problems with that statement of what is at all times, namas and rupas. -------------------------------- When there is tantra meditation there > is only consciousness (citta) a number of mental factors (cetasikas) > and the physical phenomena (rupas) on which they depend. Even > ordinary, mundane things are the same.> colette: I need to think about that. > ----------------------- > > The Abhidhamma, also, is trying to tell us we are all the same. It's > the greatest leveller of all. No matter who or what we think we are, > there are only fleeting namas and rupas. colette: EXACTLY, EVERYTHING IS TRANSIENT! Even the air we breathe is transient since my EXPERIENCE through the NDE that only I had was akin to MIND-ONLY. My body has sooooooo many scars from soooooooo many lacerations and attempts on my life that one of the reasons I was prized so highly for my body was because of the scars: scarification is a highly prized physical atribute, it's a tattoo thing. My body has been under the knife so much that it's rediculous to even bother counting. My most recent scar attributing my Right Of Passage goes from ear to ear as they had to peal my face down to get access to the bones to reconstruct my face. I gotta lot of titanium plates and screws in my face and when it gets cold in Chicago then my face freezes, it doesn't feel too good. -------------------------- Even the Buddha was only > namas and rupas. He said anyone who knew conditioned dhammas knew him. > > colette: cool. gotta go. I'll look back at the rest of this later. toodles, colette #73133 From: han tun Date: Thu Jun 7, 2007 6:02 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Death - just like now! (Alan Driver's funeral) [1] hantun1 Dear Sarah, Nina, James, Howard and All, Sarah: I'll just pause before the next installment in case Han or anyone else has more to add.... ---------- Han: I apologize for my long silence. I do not want to bore others with my repeating of the same topic again and again, and also because I cannot write much now-a-days as the computer monitor screen hurts my eyes. But I am following your discussions. Although I have been writing many posts about death, please do not think that I have conquered the fear of death. I am just lifting myself up, like a boy soldier putting up a brave face. -------------------- By nature, I am very emotional. What I fear most about the death is the parting with my loved ones. I can put myself in place of relatives and friends of Alan Driver, and feel the same sorrow they felt. I even feel very sad when I read the Buddha’s Last Days (Mahaaparinibbaana Sutta: translated by Maurice Walshe). Here are some of the passages that move me. Page 254: Having returned from the alms-round and eaten, he [the Buddha] looked back at Vesaalii with his elephant-look and said: “Aananda, this is the last time the Tathaagata will look upon Vesaalii.” Will I know that I am looking at my loved ones for the last time, when I look at them for the last time? Probably, not. Or, probably, ‘maybe.’ A few years back, one of my friends died at a hospital in Bangkok. Just before his death I was there together with his wife and children standing around him. He could not speak because the oxygen mask was put on his face. He motioned with his hand to his wife to come near him. Then he hugged his wife for quite a long time and then let her go. He died soon after that. His wife told me that he had never hugged her before in front of other people, and it was as if he knew he was going to die soon, and was bidding farewell to her. -------------------- Page 260-261: [When the Buddha rested for a while near Kakutthaa river] Then the Lord adopted the lion-posture lying on his right side, placing one foot on the other, mindfully and with clear awareness, bearing in mind the time of awakening. Page262: [the Buddha at the Mallas’ saal-grove] Then the Lord lay down on his right side in the lion-posture, placing one foot on the other, mindful and clearly aware. If you compare the two passages, you will find that one clause is missing in the latter passage. “bearing in mind the time of awakening” (utthaana sa~n~nam manasikaritvaa) is no more there. Although it was not uttered by the Buddha himself he must have known that he was lying down for the last time. Will I know that I am lying down for the last time, when I lie down for the last time? -------------------- Perhaps, I need some reminding that Ven Aananda needed. Page 252-253: “Aananda, have I not told you before: All those things that are dear and pleasant to us must suffer change, separation and alteration? So how could this be possible? Whatever is born, become, compounded, is liable to decay – that it should not decay is impossible.” “sabbeheva piyehi manaapehi naanaabhaavo vinaabhaavo a~n~nathaabhaavo. Tam kutettha Aananda labbhaa, yam tam jaatam bhuutam sankhatam paloka dhammam. Tam vata maapalujjiiti netam thaanam vijjati.” -------------------- Dear Sarah, please do not hold up your presentation. I will be following up your discussions quietly. Respectfully, Han #73134 From: "gazita2002" Date: Thu Jun 7, 2007 6:51 pm Subject: Re: Winning Awareness! gazita2002 Hello Sudhana Dewan, welcome to dsg! I agree with you that this group is amazing and a wonderful place to learn Dhamma. I hope you feel free to ask questions as often as you need, and your questions may possibly become a topic of discussion, which is also great for others here, as it is by discussion that we can all learn more and more. Patience, courage and good cheer, azita. #73135 From: "gazita2002" Date: Thu Jun 7, 2007 7:24 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Death - just like now! (Alan Driver's funeral) [1] gazita2002 Hello Han, and all, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, han tun wrote: > > Dear Sarah, Nina, James, Howard and All, > I apologize for my long silence. I do not want to bore > others with my repeating of the same topic again and > again, and also because I cannot write much now-a-days > as the computer monitor screen hurts my eyes. But I am > following your discussions. > > Although I have been writing many posts about death, > please do not think that I have conquered the fear of > death. I am just lifting myself up, like a boy soldier > putting up a brave face. Azita: I wonder if it is only the ariyans that has no fear of death, because I think most everyone else does have fear - > By nature, I am very emotional. What I fear most about > the death is the parting with my loved ones. > I can put myself in place of relatives and friends of > Alan Driver, and feel the same sorrow they felt. > I even feel very sad when I read the Buddha's Last > Days (Mahaaparinibbaana Sutta: translated by Maurice > Walshe). Here are some of the passages that move me. > > Page 254: Having returned from the alms-round and > eaten, he [the Buddha] looked back at Vesaalii with > his elephant-look and said: "Aananda, this is the last > time the Tathaagata will look upon Vesaalii." azita: ...and we know that the Buddha would have said this with absolutly no regret whatsoever! > > Will I know that I am looking at my loved ones for the > last time, when I look at them for the last time? > Probably, not. Or, probably, `maybe.' A few years > back, one of my friends died at a hospital in Bangkok. > Just before his death I was there together with his > wife and children standing around him. He could not > speak because the oxygen mask was put on his face. He > motioned with his hand to his wife to come near him. > Then he hugged his wife for quite a long time and then > let her go. He died soon after that. His wife told me > that he had never hugged her before in front of other > people, and it was as if he knew he was going to die > soon, and was bidding farewell to her. azita: a moving story, Han. No matter how much we 'plan' for our last moments, we never know what that will be. I am acutely reminded of sudden death at the moment bec. of a train accident here in Australia which killed 11 people, some children. Alan Driver's death was sudden and I remember clearly the time and place when I was told about it. He was my first Dhamma teacher [at least in this life] and I only knew him as a monk. I recall feeling suddenly very alone as no one I was connected with at that time, knew him so I couldnt talk to anyone about him. Hoping to catch up with you in Bkk in a few weeks Han. Do you ever attend Khun Sujins english discussions at the Foundation on Saturdays? i have enjoyed your posts here on dsg. You have a gentle way of writing. Patience, courage and good cheer, Azita #73136 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Thu Jun 7, 2007 7:25 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: what is sati kenhowardau Hi Nidhi, ------------ <. . .> N: > First of all for me anatta is not intellectual thing, i have experienced it in meditation. I would not say it was deep, because after coming out of that experience, i became like i was earlier to that experience, that is immersed in self. But after that particular experience, meditiation and meaning of meditation has totally changed for me. -------------- There is another way of knowing anatta, and that is the gradual way. A person finds a teacher, listens to explanations concerning the void, and wisely considers those explanations. He/she understands that *at this very moment* there are only conditioned namas and rupas, each of which bears the inherent characteristics, anicca dukkha and anatta. After practising in this way many, many times and learning about dhammas in great detail, the student's right understanding grows to such an extent that satipatthana can be practised. This is when conditioned dhammas become the direct (not just theoretical) object of panna. The practice of satipatthana proceeds through stages, and it is not until the final stage that there is direct knowledge of anatta. This is when the Buddha's teaching has been fully penetrated and nibbana can at last be realised. So, although I know what you mean when you say you have experienced anatta in meditation (and most of us have had similar experiences) I think you must agree it is not the same experience that is reached via the gradual method. ------------------------- N: > earlier it was 'doing' meditation, now it has become 'watching' the process. Now the question arises who is watching, i may call it sati, or mind but that makes no difference, important thing is that there is no 'doer' and 'meditator'. But since root of atta is very very strong it raises its head again and again, but that too can be 'watched' by mind. So for me there is not 'someone' doing something, but mind which is so entangled in its own web, releasing itself from it. -------------------------- There are others here who have the same attitude towards 'watching.' As I understand their descriptions, sometimes 'watching' is done for the right (kusala) reasons, while at other times it is done for the wrong reasons - with akusala thoughts of gaining something (wisdom or calm etc) for oneself. The main thing, they say, is that we "Just do it!" But can that be the way taught by the Buddha? Surely akusala intentions cannot possibly form part of the Path. No, I am sure that is not the way. -------------------------------------- N: > I have little bit of understanding of what Nina and Sarah are saying and what i could understand from KS audio clips and some articles on a website mentioned in files section of this group. i agree with them totally, except one point of difference. And that is a major thing as per my understanding. it is what they call as 'understanding' dhamma. -------------------------------------- Yes, this is where the Dhamma (the Buddha's teaching) comes in. I think you will agree that Nina, Sarah and KS associate right understanding solely with the Buddha's teaching. Meditators, on the other hand, associate it with a meditation technique. Some of them will say it is not even necessary to have heard of the Dhamma; "Just meditate!" -------------------------- N: > I don't say they are not practioners but i have a feeling that something can be added to their practice. it is burning the 'anusaya' please don't assume i m talking of jhana here, i m rather more inclined to 'find the truth' and i think meditation is a very good opportunity to do that. However, If some one is not inclined to do it, its all right, but 'anusaya' must be burnt, and insight must be cultivated/awakened . I am not really able to go deeper into this till i get to know what actually they mean by the word 'understanding' and what is the process of it. May be they are practicing both and i m not aware of that. Because human beings are slave to words. I am not exception to that. or may be I need to add something to my current understanding. ---------------------------- I think your open-minded attitude shows maturity and selflessness. Most modern day Buddhists are affronted by the "no-self/no-control/no- formal-practice" version of the Dhamma. They maintain their strong opposition even after it is has been proved to them that this is the version found in the original Theravada texts. And that is understandable. The conventional version of Buddhism (in which we can "just do it!") is a cosy, commonsense, religion that is the envy of other religions. It is understandable that people with religious inclinations will cling to it. ------------------- N: > of course dhamma discussions are welcome. But here again i have a little bit of difference of opinion. As per my understanding all opinions arise because of 'moha'. we have opinion because we do not see reality. so if we watch moha, the opinion ceases and reality appears. i have tried this a little bit, and the result was satisfactory. Eradicate the 'moha' wisdom/understanding appears. ------------------- I'm not sure that is how the texts describe opinions. As I understand the term, opinions can be good and worthy. However, while they remain *mere* opinions (while they are still not confirmed by complete penetration of the Buddha's teaching) they cannot eradicate defilements, and the way out of samsara has still not been reached. Ken H #73137 From: upasaka@... Date: Thu Jun 7, 2007 3:14 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] A Basic Question About Mind-Door Processes upasaka_howard Hi, Charles - In a message dated 6/7/07 5:16:21 PM Eastern Daylight Time, dacostas@... writes: > > HI Howard > > > > These are good questions. So I have to take a quick stab at it. > > > > When consciousness takes hold of something that is brought in through the > mind-door, the original sensory impression (e.g., warmth) usually gets added > to. Like what you alluded to by your questions. It could also be argued that > the "the recognizing of it, the feeling of it, attending to it, and so on - > the various cetasikas acting on it" are also mind-door processes. > > > > Charles DaCosta ============================ I appreciate your trying to answer this, Charles. What you say sounds plausible, butI don't think that is the Abhidhamma position. The recognizing, feeling, and so on occur in the 5-sense-door cittas, not just mind-door. So, how to distinguish mind-door observation of a rupa from its prior sensing escapes me. With metta, Howard #73138 From: han tun Date: Thu Jun 7, 2007 7:55 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Death - just like now! (Alan Driver's funeral) [1] hantun1 Dear Azita, Azita: Hoping to catch up with you in Bkk in a few weeks Han. Do you ever attend Khun Sujins english discussions at the Foundation on Saturdays? i have enjoyed your posts here on dsg. You have a gentle way of writing. Han: Looking forward to seeing you in Bangkok. Yes, I had attended the meetings at the Foundation three times. I am glad to know that you like my posts. I also like your reminder “Patience, courage and good cheer.” Respectfully, Han #73139 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Jun 7, 2007 9:05 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Recollection of the Buddha- 5 nilovg Hi James, I appreciate your good wishes, really touched by them. Nina. Op 8-jun-2007, om 2:24 heeft buddhatrue het volgende geschreven: > I will send some good thoughts > your way: > > May Nina be happy! > May Nina live at ease! > May Nina be free from fatigue! #73140 From: LBIDD@... Date: Thu Jun 7, 2007 9:16 pm Subject: Vism.XVII,161 Vism.XVII,162 lbidd2 "The Path of Purification" (Visuddhimagga), Ch. XVII 161. A mere state that has got its conditions Ushers in the ensuing existence; While it does not migrate from the past, With no cause in the past it is not. 162. So it is a mere material and immaterial state, arising when it has obtained its conditions, that is spoken of, saying that it comes into the next becoming; it is not a lasting being, not a soul. And it has neither transmigrated from the past becoming nor yet is it manifested here without cause from that. ******************** 161. laddhapaccayamiti dhammamattameta.m bhavantaramupeti. naassa tato sa"nkanti, na tato hetu.m vinaa hoti.. 162. iti heta.m laddhapaccaya.m ruupaaruupadhammamatta.m uppajjamaana.m bhavantaramupetiiti vuccati, na satto, na jiivo. tassa ca naapi atiitabhavato idha sa"nkanti atthi. naapi tato hetu.m vinaa idha paatubhaavo. #73141 From: "Phil" Date: Fri Jun 8, 2007 12:24 am Subject: Re: Sammaadi.t.thi study corner philofillet Hi Mike I just want to note that I didn't get to the following in my last post, and want to next time, though I don't know when it will be. Thanks, moderators, for letting me forum space as a kind of bookmark! Metta, Phil > As for 'conceptual right view', I think it might be a condition for > subsequent insight. Scott did some nice research and sent me this a > while back, which might be pertinent: > > "Concept, at least according to my reading of U Naarada in his 'Guide to > Conditional Relations', can be object condition: > > "The conditioning states are consciousness, mental factors, materiality, > Nibbaana, and concepts. Of these, the first three are either of the > past, present, or future and the other two, Nibbaana and concepts, are > time-freed." > > "He also includes concept under Strong-dependence condition: > > "...Here the conditioning states are consciousness, mental factors, > materiality and concepts, the first three being either of the past, > present or future and concepts are time-freed." (Thanks again, Scott). > > So it may be that 'conceptual right view' as described in the Great > Forty e.g.--"There is what is given and what is offered and what is > sacrificed; there is fruit and result of good and bad actions; there > is this world and the other world; there is mother and father; there > are beings who are reborn spontaneously; there are in the world good > and virtuous recluses and brahmins who have realised for themselves by > direct knowledge and declare this world and the other world.' This is > right view affected by taints, partaking of merit, ripening in the > acquisitions."--clearly conceptual, wouldn't you agree?--might be a > necessary (object or strong-dependence) condition for for subsequent > insight. The way it seems to me lately--I'm still trying to > corroborate this from the texts--is that this is usually or generally > the case but perhaps not always. > > I know I'm doing a lot of rehashing here. Does any of this make sense > to you? Do you think it's pertinent to our discussion? > > Thanks again for the good exchange. > > mike > #73142 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Fri Jun 8, 2007 12:37 am Subject: Sangha Contemplation! bhikkhu5 Friends: The Ten Contemplations is Daily Buddhist Routine! The Blessed Buddha once said: Bhikkhus & friends: There is one contemplation which when often practised and developed leads to the complete turning away from the world, to detachment, to stilling, to ceasing, to Peace , to final penetrating knowledge, to Enlightenment , and thus to NibbÄ?na ... Any Noble Disciple who by progress have understood the Dhamma dwells frequently in this state. Which is that one contemplation? It is reflecting over the qualities of the Sangha exactly like this: Perfectly training is this Noble Sangha community of the Buddha 's Noble Disciples. Training the right way, the true way, the good way, the direct way! Therefore do these eight kinds of individuals, these four Noble pairs, deserve both gifts, self-sacrifice, offerings, much hospitality and reverential salutation with joined palms, since this Noble Sangha community of the Buddha 's Noble disciples, is indeed an unsurpassable & forever unsurpassed field of merit, in the world, for the world, to honour, support, uphold, respect and protect... Source: AN 1:16.3 + 6:10 More on the Three Jewels (Ti-Ratana) & Nobility (Ariya): http://What-Buddha-Said.net/library/DPPN/b/buddha.htm http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/The_Three_Jewels.htm http://What-Buddha-Said.net/library/DPPN/wtb/s_t/sangha.htm http://What-Buddha-Said.net/library/DPPN/wtb/s_t/ti_ratana.htm http://What-Buddha-Said.net/library/DPPN/wtb/a/ariya_puggala.htm http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/II/Peace.htm Contemplating the Qualities of the Sangha! Friendship is the Greatest :-) Bhikkhu Samahita * Sri Lanka * <....> #73143 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri Jun 8, 2007 1:27 am Subject: Death - just like now! (Alan Driver's funeral) [2] sarahprocter... Dear Friends, Extracts from discussions at a funeral - comments welcome! At the temple, before the services and cremation, contd ====================================================== J: After a person dies, death, there is still the same reality of seeing and hearing and so forth. How do we know that? ... KS: If we do not know this moment, we cannot tell that after death there are also realities like seeing and hearing. But if we think of this moment as not a permanent moment, because seeing is a conditioned reality...... Without eye sense, without visible object, there cannot be seeing, but seeing just sees for only a moment, because it's not the moment of hearing. By understanding this, after there are conditions for seeing, like this moment, it is not the same as the previous one. So after death when there are conditions for realities to arise to see again, to hear again, no one can stop the arising and falling away of realities. ... S: But when you say that 'it's so ordinary' because it's just another moment, another moment of seeing and hearing, doesn't that depend what plane it is? I mean if it's the hell plane for example, all the seeing and hearing is of unpleasant objects ... ... KS: So one has to understand what hell plane is - moments of experiencing unpleasant objects over and over again. Even in this life, one does not experience all pleasant objects, but sometimes there are unpleasant objects too. That's why that plane is full of unpleasant objects so we call it 'hell', but if there is no experiencing at all, then what is hell? No one can experience it. So even what we consider as hell or heaven, there must be the reality that experiences objects in hell, and objects in heaven too. Otherwise no one can say that there is hell, or there is this human being world or heaven. Right? Even this world, the human being world -- who experiences it? If there is no seeing at this moment, no seeing this human being world. .... Metta, Sarah ====== #73144 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Jun 8, 2007 1:38 am Subject: Re: [dsg] MN 49 "I did not affirm earth." -- Buddha nilovg Hi Howard and TG, I only want to remark that these expressions are 'stock' for the description of personality belief, sakkaaya di.t.thi. There are twenty kinds, four for each of the five khandhas. Nina. Op 7-jun-2007, om 21:12 heeft upasaka@... het volgende geschreven: > "Brahma, having directly known earth as earth, and having known > that which > is not partaken of by the earthness of earth, I did not claim to be > earth, I > did not claim to be in earth, I did not claim to be apart from > earth, I did > not > claim earth to be "mine," I did not affirm earth." > > This formula is repeated for the rest of Four Great Elements as > well as > "all" which I take to mean "The All." #73145 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Jun 8, 2007 1:43 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: 'Impermanent' Versus 'Inconstant'( subconscious and unconscious... nilovg Hi TG, not such a problem. Visible object, eyebase, kamma which produces as result seeing, the eye-door adverting-consciousness preceding seeing, these are condiitons. Problematic to call this energy :-)) Seeing sees: it is citta, but we always took it for I see. We can get used to the characteristic of seeing and gradually we shall cling less to an idea of I see. Understanding conditions helps, I find. Nina. Op 7-jun-2007, om 21:24 heeft TGrand458@... het volgende geschreven: > "Seeing sees" is a problem because it grammatically makes out > "seeing" as > a doer of seeing (which is probably not the meaning but it is > confusing.) > There is just seeing due to conditions. What are the conditions? The > conditions are "energy structures" that ... due to an appropriate > configuration, #73146 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Jun 8, 2007 1:46 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Winning Awareness! nilovg Dear Sudhana, welcome here. Arunachal Pradesh means a lot to me, we visited this area last year. We stayed in Itanagar with the Governor. I am glad you find dsg useful, do ask questions, no matter what question, always welcome. Nina. Op 7-jun-2007, om 16:07 heeft sudhanadewan het volgende geschreven: > I am sudhana dewan from Arunachal Pradesh now living in leicester, > UK. I > borned in a traditional theravada buddhist family but very little > knowledge of buddhism. I joined this dhammastudygroup day before > yesterday. It is an amazing and wonderful platform to learn dhamma. #73147 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri Jun 8, 2007 2:36 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Q. re: Jhana as necessity to enlightenment sarahprocter... Hi James, Sukin & all, --- buddhatrue wrote: >Sukin: Why did > > he choose to disregard any understanding that comes from Abhidhamma > and why > > as Nina pointed out, did he ignore the Puggala Pannatti? .... > James: <...>(BTW, since BB briefly explained the > Abhidhamma/Commentary explanation of jhana, but didn't include it in > his overall analysis, I took that as a "silent statement" that he > doesn't consider it valid... .... S: You may like to look (again) at the follow-up letter I sent him and his response. (At that time, the article was not intended for publication, but he had agreed we could read it here for discussion.) http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/39500 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/39695 This is the relevant part of his reply: From B.Bodhi: ….. >Dear Sarah, Thank you for taking the time and trouble to summarize the main points of the discussion. The point format makes it easy to follow. Your comments represent a "synthetic view," that is, an interpretation that synthesizes sutta, Abhidhamma, and commentaries, along with the mode of interpreting these developed by K. Sujin. In my paper, I wanted to confine myself to the strict standpoint of the Nikayas. To do so is not to devalue the contributions the other sources make to our understanding, but to limit one's sources to those that can reasonably be assigned to the earliest period of Buddhist textual composition. On that basis I do not see any text that explicitly admits the possibility of attaining the last two stages of realization, non-return and arahantship, without the first jhana as a minimum. One can find ways to affirm such attainments as rational possibilities, as you have done, but to do so one has to apply to the texts certain presuppositions and modes of interpretation that cannot be derived from the suttas themselves. I wouldn't reject them, and in fact I respect the commentarial recognition of a dry-visioned arahant. This type of arahant is also admitted in the North Indian Abhidharma system, under the name "dry-wisdom arhat"; apparently, since they both use the word 'dry', they likely derive from a common source and thus perhaps go back to a period before the two systems became divided. But the fact remains that such a type does not explicitly appear either under that name or under some synonymous term or description in the Pali Nikayas. There are also no texts that say that the sotapannas and sakadagamis don't have any jhana. This, again, is a conclusion that has to be derived by reasoning from the texts. But the fact that the suttas do not routinely ascribe jhanas to them gives strong support to this conclusion, as do certain other considerations militate (particularly, the fact that they take rebirth in the human and deva worlds, which seems unlikely for one who has mastered the jhanas).< .... S: Other brief exchanges in recent years have reached a similar kind of 'impasse', always congenial and pleasant however, I'd like to stress. ***** Metta, Sarah ========= #73148 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Fri Jun 8, 2007 2:03 am Subject: PS: Buddha Gotama on Goodwill! bhikkhu5 Friends: May all creatures, all breathing things, all beings one and all, without exception, experience good fortune only. May they not fall into any harm. Anguttara Nikaya II, 72 Let no one deceive another or despise anyone anywhere, or through anger or irritation wish for another to suffer. Sutta Nipata I, 8 For one who deliberately & aware develops Universal Friendliness Seeing the fading away of clinging, All chains are worn down & broken. Itivuttaka 27 Overcome the angry by friendliness; overcome the wicked by goodness; overcome the miser by generosity; overcome the liar by truth. Dhammapada 223 Who is hospitable, open, and friendly, Generous, gentle and unselfish, A guide, an instructor, a leader, Such a one to honour may attain. Digha Nikaya 31 The friend who is a helper and comrade, the friend in both good and bad times, the friend who gives good advice, the friend who never despises, these four as friends the clever keep and cherish with pure devotion as does a mother her only son. Digha Nikaya 31 Having killed anger you sleep in ease. Having killed anger you do not grieve. The noble ones praise the slaying of anger with its honeyed crest & poisoned root for having killed it you do not grieve. Samyutta Nikaya II, 70 Friendship is the Greatest :-) Bhikkhu Samahita * Sri Lanka * <...> #73149 From: "sudhanadewan" Date: Fri Jun 8, 2007 2:15 am Subject: Boddhisatvas' willingness to be reborn for the sake of many. sudhanadewan Hi all, I am wandering if anybody could clear me the idea about the Mahayana concept of Boddhisatva taking rebirtth in order to help the people cycling in the realms of samsara. I sometimes wandered, there were many Arahats during Buddha's times but none of them choose to come again to help people. Secondly, what is your views about Buddha Amitabha? who is one such Boddhisatva Buddha In the time of Lokeshwararaja long, long before Sakyamuni Buddha. (in Pureland) #73150 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Jun 8, 2007 6:55 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Q. re: Jhana as necessity to enlightenment nilovg Hi James (and Sukin), The intensity of concentration accompanying lokuttara citta has nibbaana as object, and sure, it could not be less than concentration in mundane jhana. It can be called lokuttara jhana. Further, I try to keep away from too many debates. From Sarah's quote it appeared clearly that Ven. Bodhi thinks mainly of the four Nikayas, perhaps not even of the Path of Discrimination of the Khuddaka Nikaya. James, do not worry. Dhamma is the best medicin, and also I am improving each day. I am very obedient to the therapist and he is pleased with my progress. It is kind of you to send good wishes to Sukin also. I join in them. I am also sorry to hear about his troubles. Nina. Op 8-jun-2007, om 2:17 heeft buddhatrue het volgende geschreven: > I think you are > referring to what some have said about the"concentration" accompanying > Path Consciousness as being equal in intensity to that of Jhana? If > so, then I think that "supramundane jhana" is a misleading term. But > anyway I don't know the answer to your question..:-( > > James: I asked you because you brought up the issue in your post so I > thought you might be really familiar with it. I was going to ask Nina > but I think I bother her too much as it is and she needs to get some > rest. Yes, I was asking about the concentration which is supposed to > accompany path consciousness, which I understood to be termed > "supramundane jhana" #73151 From: upasaka@... Date: Fri Jun 8, 2007 3:05 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Death - just like now! (Alan Driver's funeral) [2] upasaka_howard Hi, Sarah - The following, as you will see from my remarks, didn't elicit approving thoughts on my part. In a message dated 6/8/07 4:28:21 AM Eastern Daylight Time, sarahprocterabbott@... writes: > > Dear Friends, > > Extracts from discussions at a funeral - comments welcome! > > At the temple, before the services and cremation, contd > ====================================================== > > J: After a person dies, death, there is still the same reality of seeing > and hearing and so forth. How do we know that? > ... > KS: If we do not know this moment, we cannot tell that after death there > are also realities like seeing and hearing. But if we think of this moment > as not a permanent moment, because seeing is a conditioned reality...... ------------------------------------------ Howard: Yes? This doesn't guarantee by any means a continuation of experience, not in any way. Does not an arahant see that nothing is permanent? So, according to Theravadin teaching, must there be continued experience after the passing of an arahant? The reasoning is invalid. Look at what she said: "If we do not know this moment, we cannot tell that after death there are also realities like seeing and hearing." The implication is that if we DO know it, then we know that there will be further experience after death. There is no reason at all to conclude that. Itjust does not follow. It is simply an unjustified statement. I do believe that experience continues, but that is just belief. There is nowhere given evidence of any means by which consciousness recurs with respect to a new life associated with a new body. My phenomenalism (or "experientialism") makes "rebirth" appear plausible to me - in fact I believe it, but were I not a phenomenalist, I would not find it plausible. In any case, the "reason" Khun Sujin gives for belief in continuation of experience is no reason at all. ----------------------------------------------- > Without eye sense, without visible object, there cannot be seeing, but > seeing just sees for only a moment, because it's not the moment of > hearing. ---------------------------------------------- Howard: Completely irrelevant to this issue. In fact, the clause "Without eye sense, without visible object, there cannot be seeing" is a case against continuation of experience that materialists can raise with justification. At death, there is dissolution of all the khandhas. What happens to the media of eye, ear, nose, tongue, body at death? From a materialist or a dualist perspective, they cease. And mind? By what mechanism does kammic energy find a "new physical home"? That is the issue. In any case, what in the world does only one sense medium and one mode of cosnciousness and one type of rupa being present at a time have to do with the matter of continuation of consciousness after death? Nothing. (Simply saying anything at all doesn't constitute answering a specific question.) ---------------------------------------------- > > By understanding this, after there are conditions for seeing, like this > moment, it is not the same as the previous one. So after death > -------------------------------------------- Howard: "SO" she says? "SO"? She is reaching a conclusion? Right now, among the conditions for seeing is the working of at least one eye! After death? Hardly. Death, in fact, ends that condition! This is such spurious "reasoning" on her part. It provides nothing. ------------------------------------------- (So after death) when there> > are conditions for realities to arise to see again, to hear again, no one > can stop the arising and falling away of realities. ----------------------------------------- Howard: There is an amazing gap in the reasoning right here. She presumes that after death there is a means whereby so-called realities "arise to see again, to hear again." But that is, in fact the whole question, and she is begging that question. Don't forget, what the questioner asked was "After a person dies, death, there is still the same reality of seeing and hearing and so forth. How do we know that?" HOW DO WE KNOW? That was the question. If death ended the requisite conditions for experience, there would be no further experience. I do not believe it does. Khun Sujin does not believe it does. But the question is "How do we know?" Her answer amounts to "Because". ------------------------------------------- ========================== With metta, Howard #73152 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Jun 8, 2007 7:28 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Death - just like now! (Alan Driver's funeral) [1] nilovg Dear Han, as always I am so glad to read your posts and very much appreciate them. What a good idea to incorporate here the Buddha's Last Days. The parting is just one quick moment and then there is another life. You may have forgotten who your loved ones were. I read what Ken H wrote to Colette: I like that 'never to be seen again', it is so true and goes also for the situation of death and rebirth. It may sound harsh, but slowly we can understand more of the truth. As Larry posted today of the Visuddhimagga: <162. So it is a mere material and immaterial state, arising when it has obtained its conditions, that is spoken of, saying that it comes into the next becoming; it is not a lasting being, not a soul. And it has neither transmigrated from the past becoming nor yet is it manifested here without cause from that.> BTW your monitor screen could be adjusted to make it less glaring. Or you could ask Tom Westheimer who is a specialist in these things. Nowadays many solutions are possible. One could even talk instead of writing. Nina. Op 8-jun-2007, om 3:02 heeft han tun het volgende geschreven: > What I fear most about > the death is the parting with my loved ones #73153 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Jun 8, 2007 7:40 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Death - just like now! (Alan Driver's funeral) [2] nilovg Hi Howard, I understand your misgivings. The use of the word 'because' in Asia is different from our use, very interesting. U Nyun at ECAFE (now Escap) used it all the time, but it does not give a reason. It is a more a word in between that connects. These are broken off sentences, also because of the recording. There is not a logical discourse, but let us try to get the point. Of course Kh Sujin did not mean the continuation of any dhamma. What she often said: also in countless past lives there were seeing and hearing and there will be again seeing and hearing in future lives. As an example that so long as there are conditions, the cycle continues, endlessly. are also realities like seeing and hearing. > In other words, we have to understand citta at this moment, then we shall have more understanding of conditions for the arising of citta in a next life. It always goes back to understanding this moment, as Ken H reminds us. I hope this clarifies a little? Nina. Op 8-jun-2007, om 16:05 heeft upasaka@... het volgende geschreven: > (So after death) when there> > > are conditions for realities to arise to see again, to hear > again, no one > > can stop the arising and falling away of realities. #73154 From: upasaka@... Date: Fri Jun 8, 2007 4:22 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Death - just like now! (Alan Driver's funeral) [2] upasaka_howard Hi, Nina - In a message dated 6/8/07 10:42:24 AM Eastern Daylight Time, vangorko@... writes: > > Hi Howard, > I understand your misgivings. The use of the word 'because' in Asia > is different from our use, very interesting. U Nyun at ECAFE (now > Escap) used it all the time, but it does not give a reason. It is a > more a word in between that connects. ---------------------------------------- Howard: Ahh, thank you, Nina. That is interesting. Not only does it help (a wee bit ;-) here, but it also gives some insight into aspects of the "perfection of wisdom teachings" of Mahayana and of Nagarjuna's writings. ---------------------------------------- > These are broken off sentences, also because of the recording. There > is not a logical discourse, but let us try to get the point. Of > course Kh Sujin did not mean the continuation of any dhamma. What she > often said: also in countless past lives there were seeing and > hearing and there will be again seeing and hearing in future lives. ----------------------------------------- Howard: If one *remembered* past lives, that could serve as a basis for "how we know". But she takes past lives as a matter of faith, as she does future lives. What she says does NOT answer the questioner as to how we *know*. It just doesn't. All that Khun Sujin is saying is that since current conditions while alive lead to continued experiencing while alive, she assumes this will continue after death, despite the dissolution of the khandhas. But she gives no reason for believing this, none at all. There are arguments easily made in the opposite direction, but she doesn't address these, indicating why they need not be valid, nor even suggest *possible* means by which the renewal of consciousness after death can occur. She gives nothing. She states belief as fact. That does not safeguard the truth. (Does she ever say "I believe"?) ------------------------------------------ > As an example that so long as there are conditions, the cycle > continues, endlessly. > >are also realities like seeing and hearing. >In other words, we > have to understand citta at this moment, then we shall have more > understanding of conditions for the arising of citta in a next life. ---------------------------------------- Howard: A statement of faith, nothing more. ---------------------------------------- > It always goes back to understanding this moment, as Ken H reminds us. > I hope this clarifies a little? -------------------------------------- Howard: Nope, sorry. ;-) Your remark about 'because', however, is quite intersting! --------------------------------------- > Nina. =================== Nina, sometimes it is okay fora person to answer a question by saying "I just don't really know. I believe this to be the case for reasons ... , reasons which I find rather persuasive, but I don't know it for a fact, and, if it is indeed so, as I do believe, I don't *know* exactly how and why it is so. I have my theories, good ones I think, but they are admittedly only theories." With metta, Howard #73155 From: "sukinder" Date: Sat Jun 9, 2007 3:39 am Subject: RE: [dsg] Re: Q. re: Jhana as necessity to enlightenment sukinderpal Dear Nina and James, Thanks to you both for your good wishes. I felt a bit silly this morning about having written about my financial problems, especially since I was reminded about Ivan (Matt) who as you know, is deep in debt, at least I don't owe anybody. My main fear is for my children, both of who don't look like they are very bright. :-) Actually Ivan has reminded me a few times about them having to face their own kamma etc., but my attachment is just too strong. In other words I agree with him, but the vision gets blurred due to the attachment. In any case, it is not as bad as I made it sound, in fact the other half of the problem is *not* financial as James appears to think. But at least I gave both of you a chance to have kusala cittas ;-). Metta, Sukin Ps: Nina thanks for your elaborations and explanations. James, I'll reply to your post in a day or two. James, do not worry. Dhamma is the best medicin, and also I am improving each day. I am very obedient to the therapist and he is pleased with my progress. It is kind of you to send good wishes to Sukin also. I join in them. I am also sorry to hear about his troubles. Nina. #73156 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Jun 8, 2007 11:15 am Subject: Conditions, Ch 3, no 3. nilovg Dear friends, The rúpas produced by citta can also be conditioned by way of predominance-condition. Body intimation (kåya-viññatti) and speech intimation (vací-viññatti ) are rúpas produced by citta [1]. When we present food to the monks, citta which is firm in kusala can be the predominant factor. While we, at such an occasion, show by our gestures our intention to give, there are rúpas which are body intimation, and these are conditioned by kusala citta by way of predominance-condition. When we slander the citta which is firm in akusala may be predominance-condition, and then the rúpa which is speech intimation is conditioned by the akusala citta by way of predominance-condition. For the attainment of jhåna the predominant factors are necessary conditions, and in that case they have to be sobhana. It is extremely difficult to develop samatha to the degree of jhåna, and without the conditioning force of one of the four predominant factors one would not be able to attain jhåna. We read in the “Visuddhimagga” (III,24): ...If a bhikkhu obtains concentration, obtains unification of mind, by making zeal (chanda) predominant, this is called concentration due to zeal. If... by making energy predominant, this is called concentration due to energy. If... by making (natural purity of) citta predominant, this is called concentration due to citta. If... by making inquiry (vimamsa) predominant, this is called concentration due to inquiry (Vibhanga 216-219). So it is of four kinds as predominance. There are different degrees of the predominant factors. When these four factors have been developed to a high degree, they have become “bases of success”, iddhipådas, and then they can lead to the acquisition of supernatural powers (Visuddhimagga, Ch XII, 50-53) [2]. The rúpas produced by citta which exercises such powers are also conditioned by way of predominance-condition. In the development of vipassanå, right understanding of nåma and rúpa, one also needs the “four bases of success” for the realisation of the stages of insight wisdom and for the attainment of enlightenment. The arising of awareness and understanding of realities is beyond control, it is due to conditions. We need patience and courage to persevere studying and considering nåma and rúpa, and to be aware of them in daily life. For the accomplishment of our task, the development of right understanding, the factors which are predominant condition are indispensable. The study of the predominance-condition can be a reminder that right understanding is dependant on different kinds of conditions, that it does not depend on a “self”. --------- 1. Body-intimation is a kind of rúpa which conditions gestures and other movements of the body by which we express our intentions. Speech intimation is a rúpa which conditions speech sound by which we express our intentions. 2. Powers developed by means of samatha, such as walking on water, knowing one’s former lives, etc. ******* Nina. #73157 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Jun 8, 2007 11:15 am Subject: Listening to the Dhamma. Ch 2, no 1. nilovg Dear friends, Chapter 2 The Meaning of Dhamma In the Dong Devi Temple the Abbot reminded us of our ignorance of dhamma. We do not know the meaning of dhamma, that which is real in the ultimate sense. We should not merely say, “everything is dhamma”, without deeply considering the meaning of what dhamma is. We should come to know the characteristic of the dhamma appearing at this moment. But for the development of understanding we need patience and perseverance. It is not difficult to learn the terms of citta, cetasika and rúpa, but this is not enough. They are realities, each with their own characteristic which can be directly known when they appear at the present moment. The Abbot stressed that seeing is dhamma, that there is no “I” who sees. Hearing is dhamma, there is no “I” who hears. Seeing and hearing are nåma-elements, realities which experience something, they experience an object. Seeing experiences colour, which is rúpa, a reality which does not know anything. Sound is rúpa, a reality which does not know anything. When people hear about seeing, colour, hearing and sound, they may find this subject too ordinary. However, we are ignorant about these realities when they actually appear. We are confused with regard to ultimate truth, nåma and rúpa, and conventional truth, concepts and ideas. Seeing is a citta experiencing colour which is a kind of rúpa. However, we still think that we see people or trees. People and trees are concepts we think of but which do not appear through eyesense. On account of what is seen we can think of concepts, the thinking is conditioned by seeing. We believe that we can hear words, but hearing only hears sound, that which appears through the ears, and on account of what is heard we can think of words and their meaning. What we hear is interpreted immediately, it seems that hearing and knowing the meaning of words occur all at the same time, but in reality there is only one citta at a time which experiences one object. There are many different cittas which arise and fall away extremely rapidly, succeeding one another, but it is difficult to distinguish between them. It is the same in the case of the other sense-cognitions, we interpret immediately what kind of odour is smelt, what kind of flavour is tasted, what thing we are touching. We think of concepts for a long time, we are forgetful of ultimate realities which are non-self. We can gradually learn the difference between ultimate realities, paramattha dhammas, and concepts. When we are not thinking but seeing, paramattha dhammas are the object of citta. When we are not thinking but hearing, paramattha dhammas are the object of citta. They appear in between the moments of thinking about the meaning of what we experience. When we listen to the Dhamma we can begin to understand the meaning of anattå, non-self. Paramattha dhammas are anattå. ****** Nina. #73158 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Jun 8, 2007 11:28 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Death - just like now! (Alan Driver's funeral) [2] nilovg Hi Howard, How does 'because' help in reading Nagarjuna? I can look it up in the book you gave me. Just a few words on quote below: The teaching on the cycle is essential in the whole of the Tipitaka. However, as you say, a statement of faith is not enough. Realisation of the truth comes from the development of understanding. Understanding of what? There is only seeing, hearing or any presently reality appearing now to be understood. This will help us to have direct understanding of what the cycle of birth and death really is. All we read now in the Visuddhimagga about dying-consciousness to be followed by rebirth-consciousness, all this can be directly realized if we understand momentary birth and death of each citta. That is the clue. I know that you do not believe in annihilation of life after death. Kh Sujin said something to console us about Alan's death: the khandhas still keep on arising and falling away. In other words, life is not annihilated. When we read the teachings are there not many things we know from belief? But confidence or faith should be well founded. Nina. Op 8-jun-2007, om 17:22 heeft upasaka@... het volgende geschreven: > As an example that so long as there are conditions, the cycle > > continues, endlessly. > > there > > >are also realities like seeing and hearing. >In other words, we > > have to understand citta at this moment, then we shall have more > > understanding of conditions for the arising of citta in a next life. > > ---------------------------------------- > Howard: > A statement of faith, nothing more. #73159 From: upasaka@... Date: Fri Jun 8, 2007 9:45 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Death - just like now! (Alan Driver's funeral) [2] upasaka_howard Hi, Nina - In a message dated 6/8/07 2:35:32 PM Eastern Daylight Time, vangorko@... writes: > > Hi Howard, > How does 'because' help in reading Nagarjuna? I can look it up in the > book you gave me. ------------------------------------------- Howard: It's not that precisely the word 'because' is used so much by him, but that in a lot of places he seems to be making a conclusion for which there is no basis - and it really just may be an assertion *associated* with other things just said, not a conclusion. His work is very much in the way of a commentary on the Prajnaparamita Suttas (the "perfection of wisdom suttas"), and they are filled with non-sequiturs that *seem* like conclusions but for which there seems to be no basis. Often they use the word 'therefore' or 'thus', when no conclusion seems to actually follow. And, of course, 'therefore' is related to 'because'. ------------------------------------------ > > Just a few words on quote below: > The teaching on the cycle is essential in the whole of the Tipitaka. > However, as you say, a statement of faith is not enough. Realisation > of the truth comes from the development of understanding. > Understanding of what? There is only seeing, hearing or any presently > reality appearing now to be understood. This will help us to have > direct understanding of what the cycle of birth and death really is. > All we read now in the Visuddhimagga about dying-consciousness to be > followed by rebirth-consciousness, all this can be directly realized > if we understand momentary birth and death of each citta. That is the > clue. > I know that you do not believe in annihilation of life after death. ------------------------------------------ Howard: That's right, I do not. ----------------------------------------- > Kh Sujin said something to console us about Alan's death: the > khandhas still keep on arising and falling away. In other words, life > is not annihilated. --------------------------------------- Howard: Yes, and I think that is so. But the question is how that can be known - why it should be believed. We do NOT observe it or recall it. --------------------------------------- > When we read the teachings are there not many things we know from > belief? But confidence or faith should be well founded. -------------------------------------- Howard: Yes, it should be. The fact is that we believe what we believe. And sometimes there are plausible bases for belief, and sometimes it is just wishful thinking. Without rebirth, there would be no point to the Dhamma, IMO, and for a variety of reasons I *do* strongly believe in rebirth. But I cannot say I know it to be true, not if I respect the truth. ----------------------------------------- ======================= With metta, Howard #73160 From: LBIDD@... Date: Fri Jun 8, 2007 3:57 pm Subject: Vism.XVII,163 lbidd2 "The Path of Purification" (Visuddhimagga), Ch. XVII 163. We shall explain this by the normal process of human death and rebirth-liking. When in the past becoming a man near to a natural or violent death is unable to bear the onset of the unbearable daggers of the joints in all the limbs, his body gradually withers like a green palm leaf lying in the glare of the sun, and when the faculties of the eye, etc., have ceased and the body faculty, mind faculty, and life faculty remain on in the heart-basis alone, then consciousness, which has as its support the heart-basis still remaining at that moment, either occurs contingent upon some kamma classed as 'weighty', 'repeated', performed 'near' [to death] or previously,28 in other words, the formation that has obtained the remaining conditions, or contingent upon the objective field made to appear by that kamma, in other words, the sign of the kamma or sign of the destiny.29 And while it is occurring thus, because craving and ignorance have not been abandoned, craving pushes it and the conascent formations fling it forward30 on that objective field, the dangers in which are concealed by ignorance. And while, as a continuous process,31 it is being pushed by craving and flung forward by formations, it abandons its former support, like a man who crosses a river by hanging on to a rope tied to a tree on the near bank, and, whether or not it gets a further support originated by kamma, it occurs by means of the conditions consisting only in object condition, and so on. --------------------------- Note 28. See the classification of kamma at Ch. XIX,74ff. 'Repeated' (samaasevita) kamma is not mentioned there as such. Of 'near' kamma Pm. says, 'It is that performed next to death, or which is conspicuous in the memory then, whenever it was performed' (Pm. 617). 29. ' "Sign of the kamma" is the event (vatthu) by means of which a man accumulates kamma through making it the object at the time of accumulation. Even if the kamma was performed as much as a hundred thousand aeons ago, nevertheless at the time of its ripening it appears as kamma or sign of kamma. The "sign of destiny" is one of the visual scenes in the place where rebirth is due to take place. It consists in the visual appearance of flames of fire, etc., to one ready to be reborn in hell, and so on as already stated' (Pm. 617). 30. 'Owing to craving being unabandoned, and because the previously-arisen continuity is similarly deflected, consciousness occurs inclining, leaning and tending towards the place of rebirth-linking. The "conascent formations" are the volitions conascent with the impulsion consciousness next to death. Or they are all those that begin with contact. They fling consciousness on to that place of rebirth-linking, which is the object of the kamma and so on. The meaning is that they occur as the cause for the establishment of consciousness on the object by rebirth-linking as though flinging it there' (Pm. 617). 31. 'As a continuous process consisting of death, rebirth-linking, and the adjacent consciousnesses' (Pm. 617). ******************* tayida.m paaka.tena manussacutipa.tisandhikkamena pakaasayissaama. atiitabhavasmi.m hi sarasena upakkamena vaa samaasannamara.nassa asayhaana.m sabba"ngapacca"ngasandhibandhanacchedakaana.m maara.nantikavedanaasatthaana.m sannipaata.m asahantassa aatape pakkhittaharitataalapa.n.namiva kamena upasussamaane sariire niruddhesu cakkhaadiisu indriyesu hadayavatthumatte pati.t.thitesu kaayindriyamanindriyajiivitindriyesu ta"nkha.naavasesahadayavatthusannissita.m vi~n~naa.na.m garukasamaasevitaasannapubbakataana.m a~n~natara.m laddhaavasesapaccayasa"nkhaarasa"nkhaata.m kamma.m, tadupa.t.thaapita.m vaa kammanimittagatinimittasa"nkhaata.m visaya.m aarabbha pavattati. tadeva.m pavattamaana.m ta.nhaavijjaana.m appahiinattaa avijjaapa.ticchaaditaadiinave tasmi.m visaye ta.nhaa naameti, sahajaatasa"nkhaaraa khipanti. ta.m santativasena ta.nhaaya naamiyamaana.m sa"nkhaarehi khippamaana.m orimatiirarukkhavinibaddharajjumaalambitvaa maatikaatikkamako viya purima~nca nissaya.m jahati, apara~nca kammasamu.t.thaapita.m nissaya.m assaadayamaana.m vaa anassaadayamaana.m vaa aaramma.naadiihiyeva paccayehi pavattatiiti. #73161 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Fri Jun 8, 2007 4:03 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Death - just like now! (Alan Driver's funeral) [2] buddhatrue Hi Howard (and all), --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > Nina, sometimes it is okay fora person to answer a question by saying > "I just don't really know. I believe this to be the case for reasons ... , > reasons which I find rather persuasive, but I don't know it for a fact, and, if > it is indeed so, as I do believe, I don't *know* exactly how and why it is so. > I have my theories, good ones I think, but they are admittedly only theories." I think that this is a Thai thing. I experienced the same type of thing with my meditation teacher, Ajahn Somporn (also Thai). He would really crack me up because when a westerner asked him a question which required a simple answer, he would go on and on and on with a mini lecture about the Dhamma (usually not directly related to the question) and when a westerner asked a question which required a detailed and elaborate answer, he would answer in a very brief and simple way! LOL! I think that this came about because of a cultural difference in the expectation of how questions should be answered. Since I don't know a lot about Thai culture, I can't really explain why. Metta, James p.s. To all, I have some other posts to me but I will respond to them on Monday. #73162 From: upasaka@... Date: Fri Jun 8, 2007 12:56 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Death - just like now! (Alan Driver's funeral) [2] upasaka_howard Hmmm, interesting: That and 'because'! ;-) Have a good weekend, James! :-) With metta, Howard #73163 From: han tun Date: Fri Jun 8, 2007 5:37 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Death - just like now! (Alan Driver's funeral) [1] hantun1 Dear Nina, Thank you very much for your very useful comments which I have noted, and also your kind advice about the computer monitor screen. Respectfully, Han #73164 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Fri Jun 8, 2007 6:29 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Death - just like now! (Alan Driver's funeral) [2] kenhowardau --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > > Hi, Sarah - > > <...> > > J: After a person dies, death, there is still the same reality of seeing > > and hearing and so forth. How do we know that? > > ... > > KS: If we do not know this moment, we cannot tell that after death there > > are also realities like seeing and hearing. But if we think of this moment > > as not a permanent moment, because seeing is a conditioned reality...... > > ------------------------------------------ > Howard: > Yes? This doesn't guarantee by any means a continuation of experience, > not in any way. Hi Howard, KS was asked, "How do we know that?" You didn't like her answer, but I wonder how the question could be answered differently. Surely, the only way of knowing anything (the only way of gaining true knowledge) is by hearing and understanding the Dhamma. As KS explained, if we "do not know this moment" then we cannot possibly know how moments will be in the future. If we *do* know this moment, then we *will* know how moments will be in the future. What could be a more correct way of answering the question? How could you find fault with that? ---------------------------- H: > Does not an arahant see that nothing is permanent? So, according to Theravadin teaching, must there be continued experience after the passing of an arahant? The reasoning is invalid. ----------------------------- Right Understanding (the first factor of the 8-fold path) is not a cause of rebirth and future suffering. Surely you didn't think KS was saying it was! If we can put wrong understanding aside for a moment, and stop thinking of the present as something permanent or lasting, then we can consider the Buddha's description of the present moment - fleeting conditioned namas and rupas. That is the only way that leads to "knowing" anything. All other ways lead to wrong view or, at best, to mere speculation. ------------------------- H: > Look at what she said: "If we do not know this moment, we cannot tell that after death there are also realities like seeing and hearing." The implication is that if we DO know it, then we know that there will be further experience after death. There is no reason at all to conclude that. It just does not follow. --------------------------- If we do not know this moment, how can we know what future moments will be like? Again, this is perfectly good, straightforward, Dhamma. If we *do* know this moment - if we know dhammas and the conditions for their arising and non arising - then we will know what future moments will be like. This is undeniable, surely! -------------------------------------- H: > It is simply an unjustified statement. I do believe that experience continues, but that is just belief. -------------------------------------- What if you had direct knowledge of the arising of a paramattha dhamma, the causes of its arising, and the only way by which similar dhammas will permanently cease to arise in the future? What then? ------------------------------------------ H: > There is nowhere given evidence of any means by which consciousness recurs with respect to a new life associated with a new body. My phenomenalism (or "experientialism") makes "rebirth" appear plausible to me - in fact I believe it, but were I not a phenomenalist, I would not find it plausible. In any case, the "reason" Khun Sujin gives for belief in continuation of experience is no reason at all. ------------------------------------------ "Right understanding here and now!" I think that was the answer suggested by KS, and I don't see how there could be any other answer. --------------------- > Without eye sense, without visible object, there cannot be seeing, but > seeing just sees for only a moment, because it's not the moment of > hearing. Howard: Completely irrelevant to this issue. --------------------- It is not irrelevant to the answer given. K Sujin's answer was (in effect), "by correctly understanding the present moment," and this is the way the present reality should be understood. ----------------------- H: > In fact, the clause "Without eye sense, without visible object, there cannot be seeing" is a case against continuation of experience that materialists can raise with justification. ----------------------- The eye sense arose (momentarily) because the conditions for its arising were (momentarily) present. They had been put in place. Conditions for the arising of dhammas will always be put in place while the 8-fold path has not been travelled. There is no other way of stopping rebirth. -------------------- H: > At death, there is dissolution of all the khandhas. What happens to the media of eye, ear, nose, tongue, body at death? From a materialist or a dualist perspective, they cease. And mind? By what mechanism does kammic energy find a "new physical home"? That is the issue. --------------------- By conditions! Conditionality is the answer to all (past, present and future) arising and passing away. ------------------------- H: > In any case, what in the world does only one sense medium and one mode of cosnciousness and one type of rupa being present at a time have to do with the matter of continuation of consciousness after death? Nothing. (Simply saying anything at all doesn't constitute answering a specific question.) -------------------------- That is the way things are. Right understanding of the way things are now is the key to all right understanding. ----------------------- > > By understanding this, after there are conditions for seeing, like this > moment, it is not the same as the previous one. So after death > Howard: "SO" she says? "SO"? She is reaching a conclusion? Right now, among the conditions for seeing is the working of at least one eye! After death? Hardly. Death, in fact, ends that condition! This is such spurious "reasoning" on her part. It provides nothing. ------------------------ Your phrase "at least one eye" suggests you are rejecting the teaching of conditioned dhammas and insisting on a conventional explanation. This is a massive shifting of the goal posts! Jon's question was asked in the context of Theravada Buddhism. He was not asking how someone who rejected Theravada Buddhism could become convinced about rebirth. ----------------------------------------- (So after death) when there> > are conditions for realities to arise to see again, to hear again, no one > can stop the arising and falling away of realities. Howard: There is an amazing gap in the reasoning right here. She presumes that after death there is a means whereby so-called realities "arise to see again, to hear again." But that is, in fact the whole question, and she is begging that question. ----------------------------------------- No; her sentence began with "So." Just as dhammas are conditioned to arise now, so too, they will be conditioned to arise in the future. No one can stop them now, and no one wil be able to stop them in the future. This is basic Abhidhamma! ---------------- H: > Don't forget, what the questioner asked was "After a person dies, death, there is still the same reality of seeing and hearing and so forth. How do we know that?" HOW DO WE KNOW? That was the question. If death ended the requisite conditions for experience, there would be no further experience. I do not believe it does. Khun Sujin does not believe it does. But the question is "How do we know?" Her answer amounts to "Because". ----------------- By knowing the present reality; that's how! And how do we know the present reality? By conditions! And what are the conditions by which there can be right knowing now? If the true Dhamma has been heard and wisely considered (etc., etc). Ken H #73165 From: TGrand458@... Date: Fri Jun 8, 2007 2:29 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: 'Impermanent' Versus 'Inconstant' (ENERGY) TGrand458@... Hi Nina I thought you wanted some "time off" but since your posting responses to my posts, I'll respond... In a message dated 6/8/2007 2:43:36 A.M. Mountain Daylight Time, vangorko@... writes: Hi TG, not such a problem. Visible object, eyebase, kamma which produces as result seeing, the eye-door adverting-consciousresult seeing, the eye-door these are condiitons. Problematic to call this energy :-)) ..................................... NEW TG: What is your and Sarah's problem with "energy"??? Its this simple --- Phenomena that are dynamically interacting ARE energies. Period. Simple. Where's the problem??? This applies to all conditionality. Conditionality just might as well mean --- energy. Its the same thing. Please explain to me your problem with energy. Is it merely because you do not see the term "energy" in a Buddhist text? All phenomena (conditioned phenomena) are energies. .............................................. Seeing sees: it is citta, but we always took it for I see. .............................................. NEW TG: This is a different topic. ................................................ We can get used to the characteristic of seeing and gradually we shall cling less to an idea of I see. ........................................ NEW TG: The Suttas say that -- "We can get used to the characteristics of seeing and gradually we shall cling less to an idea of I see"? I don't think so. Now, If you mean that by understanding the principles of conditionality and applying that knowledge to the experience of seeing ... that this will result in clinging less; then I agree. But in such a case I think any focus on the "characteristic of seeing" is off the mark. Unless that "characteristic" is "conditionality" pure and simple. ............................................ Understanding conditions helps, I find. ............................................... NEW TG: Understand conditions is essential. Much more than "just a help." This is the heart of the practice/insight (and science) of Buddha's teaching. .................................................. TG OUT Nina. Op 7-jun-2007, om 21:24 heeft _TGrand458@..._ (mailto:TGrand458@...) het volgende geschreven: > "Seeing sees" is a problem because it grammatically makes out > "seeing" as > a doer of seeing (which is probably not the meaning but it is > confusing.) > There is just seeing due to conditions. What are the conditions? The > conditions are "energy structures" that ... due to an appropriate > configuration, #73166 From: TGrand458@... Date: Fri Jun 8, 2007 2:51 pm Subject: ENERGY TGrand458@... Hi All One more note on ENERGY... ENERGY is anything with the POWER to AFFECT anything. Hence, all of CONDITIONALITY is ENERGY. TG #73167 From: connie Date: Fri Jun 8, 2007 8:09 pm Subject: Sisters (55) nichiconn Hi Jon, Pruitt: Then Gotami and the other bhikkhuniis paid homage to the Conqueror, and they arose from their seats and returned [to their monastery]. Together with a great group of people, the Supreme Leader of the World, the Hero, accompanied his aunt as far as the gateway [of the city]. Jon: Interesting that the Buddha accompanied her to the gates of the monastery after she had taken her final leave. Perhaps unique in the texts? connie: is it? literally, there was going to be no 'gate way'/mind door for a succeeding process / following. or did you mean the walking r/t the stopping? as in buddhas point the way but ... nah. sorry, did you want to make something of it? cy 161 (p185): "....the noble discioples who have become the embodiment of the Doctrine ..." peace, connie #73168 From: connie Date: Fri Jun 8, 2007 8:09 pm Subject: Theriigaathaa - Sisters (58) nichiconn Dear friends, 7. Sattakanipaato VII. The Section of the Group of Seven [Verses] 1. Uttaraatheriigaathaava.n.nanaa 1. The Commentary on the verses of Therii Uttaraa (2) Sattakanipaate musalaani gahetvaanaati uttaraaya theriyaa gaathaa. Ayampi purimabuddhesu kataadhikaaraa tattha tattha bhave viva.t.tuupanissaya.m kusala.m upacinantii, anukkamena sambhaavitakusalamuulaa samupacitavimokkhasambhaaraa paripakkavimuttiparipaacaniiyadhammaa hutvaa, Pruitt: In the section of seven [verses], the verses [beginning] [Young brahmans] take pestles are Therii Utaaraa's. She too performed good [actions] in various lives as [her] basis for release. In due course, through producing the foundation of good [actions] together with the accumulation of the requisites for liberation, the qualities leading to freedom were mature [in her]. imasmi.m buddhuppaade saavatthiya.m a~n~natarasmi.m kulagehe nibbattitvaa uttaraati laddhanaamaa anukkamena vi~n~nuta.m patvaa pa.taacaaraaya theriyaa santika.m upasa"nkami. Therii tassaa dhamma.m kathesi. Saa dhamma.m sutvaa sa.msaare jaatasa.mvegaa saasane abhippasannaa hutvaa pabbaji. Pabbajitvaa ca katapubbakiccaa pa.taacaaraaya theriyaa santike vipassana.m pa.t.thapetvaa bhaavanamanuyu~njantii upanissayasampannataaya indriyaana.m paripaaka.m gatattaa ca na cirasseva vipassana.m ussukkaapetvaa saha pa.tisambhidaahi arahatta.m paapu.ni. Pruitt: In this Buddha era, she was born in the home of a [good] family in Saavatthi. She received the name Uttaraa. In due course she came of age and approached Therii Pa.taacaaraa. The therii taught her the Doctrine. When she heard the Doctrine, a profound stirring arose in her concerning continued existence. Having faith in the teaching, she went forth. And after going forth, she fulfilled the preliminary duties and established insight in the presence of Therii Pa.taacaaraa. [Practicing] mental development diligently, she possessed the prerequisites and arrived at the maturity of her faculties. She eagerly practised insight and in a very short time attained Arahatship together with the [four] discriminations. === tbc, connie #73169 From: "m_nease" Date: Fri Jun 8, 2007 8:22 pm Subject: Re: Sisters (55) m_nease Hi Connie and Jon, Sorry to butt in, but-- --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, connie wrote: > they arose from their seats and returned [to their monastery]. > Together with a great group of people, the Supreme Leader of the World, > the Hero, accompanied his aunt as far as the gateway [of the city]. > > Jon: Interesting that the Buddha accompanied her to the gates of the > monastery after she had taken her final leave. Perhaps unique in the texts? > > connie: is it? literally, there was going to be no 'gate way'/mind door > for a succeeding process / following. or did you mean the walking r/t > the stopping? as in buddhas point the way but ... nah. sorry, did you > want to make something of it? I took this to be an account of the Buddha just accompanying her to the gate, which does seem unprecedented to me and also a lovely 'personal' touch of the kind I really appreciate in the texts. Guess I made somethin' of it-- mike #73170 From: "robmoult" Date: Fri Jun 8, 2007 11:14 pm Subject: Advice to a recent widow - Part II robmoult Hi All, I recently posted an emotional letter from a recent widow and my reply. Following is her reply to my message and my reply again to her. I would greatly appreciate any advice on how I can handle the situation better. ===== Thank you so much for your kind reply. I am very impressed by your Buddhism. It is good to know that there is life after life. If every person is born again after death, are they going to be born again as a human being or animal or nature (like wind or rain)? If this is what is going to happen to everybody, how can I meet XXX again up there someday? It seems to me that it would be almost impossible to see him again unless I die soon. "Suffering is happening because I am chasing after something that is impossible to catch." I keep thinking about this sentence. It really makes sense. I am suffering because I keep thinking about XXX and I keep wishing XXX would be here with me. I keep thinking about lots of memory we shared together. I really miss him a lot. I wish I could see him again even if it is just a dream. If I can see him and if I can be with him again, I would do anything. I wish I could die soon so I could be with him. When XXX was with me, I thought 'This is a wonderful world.' Now it seems like it doesn't mean anything to me. If I could be sick without too much pain, it would be great. I am not afraid of dying any more. I am afraid that I may have to live long until I can see him again. What if he doesn't remember me? Memories are all I've got. They are so precious and important to me at the moment. It really hurts me so much. The pain what I am going through is beyond words. I can't even describe it. However, memories will never be gone until I die. Memories may bother me for the rest of my life. They may give me strength to carry on until my time comes. Maybe that's why I am still alive. I can never forget about them. The problem is how long am I going to suffer? I have a certain numbness inside. I don't think my brain functions properly. I have no appetite so I have to force myself to eat. I don't feel like sleeping so I just wait until I can fall asleep. There must be a reason I am still here without XXX. Why am I alone here? Have I done something really bad? Is this my punishment? Sorry for nonsense. Thank you for listening to me. ===== I am so glad that you find that Buddhism makes some sense to you. I hope that it can help you cope with the difficult situation that you are facing. I sense from your words that losing XXX has left a big, painful hole in you. Reflecting on the truth of the statement, "Suffering is happening because you are chasing after something that is impossible to catch." can help the hole from getting any bigger and that is our first priority. When you are strong enough, helping others will begin to fill in the hole so that you can be whole again. What is it that continues from life to life? Obviously, it is not the body. It is the mind with its habits, accumulations and inclinations. Buddhists believe that we can be reborn as animals or humans, but we can also be reborn in a heavenly realm or a hell realm. We cannot be born as nature (wind or rain) because these things do not have a mind. Each of the rebirths are temporary, whatever is born will also die. Buddhists believe that we have experienced countless previous rebirths and we are destined for countless more rebirths. This cycle of rebirths only stops when we become enlightened. Dying soon will not allow you to meet XXX any sooner. I believe that you and XXX had been close companions in many previous existences. This is why when conditions supported your meeting in this existence, there was a natural attraction. At some time in the future, I believe that there is a very good chance that you will meet again, though you will have different names at that time. And when you do meet in the future, you will know in your heart that you were destined to be together and support each other again for a time in that existence. At the funeral, I briefly mentioned that according to Buddhism, the state of mind at the time of death could have an impact on where the person was reborn. I praised your devotion to XXX, especially in his final months and I told you that XXX had shared with me how happy you had made him. I genuinely believe that your actions helped XXX to a positive rebirth. I really want you to have a positive rebirth too. I believe that the best thing that you can do to improve the chances of meeting XXX again is to make yourself whole again so that your next rebirth is positive. Making yourself whole again will take some time. The hole inside you seems to be always with you. Be gentle with yourself, be kind and compassionate towards yourself. Loving- kindness, first towards yourself and later towards others, will make the hole shrink and speed your recovery. Some days will be better than others. Please relax and please try not to chase after something that is impossible to catch. Please let me know if you have any questions, which of my words are helpful to you and which of my words seem inappropriate (I apologize in advance for any inappropriate words). Your friend, ===== Looking forward to advice from my friends on DSG. Metta, Rob M :-) #73171 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Jun 9, 2007 12:07 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Death - just like now! (Alan Driver's funeral) [2] nilovg Hi James, exactly. I remember you mentioned your teacher. Another way of appraoching problems, questions and answers. You know, Lodewijk also feels so frustrated when he asks Kh Sujin a question. He says that he never receives a straight answer. I try to help him, but this may be his personal inclinations. Other people are very satisfied with her answers. Maybe Sarah and others can help out here. I send him your post. I said that I listened a lot also to her Thai lectures, mainly to her Thai lectures, and this makes a difference. Lodewijk said, next time when there are English discussions he will not say anything anymore. I said: never say never. Who know how conditions work out? But I am glad Howard and you brought this up. I am still thinking of ways to help. I take it to heart because (because!) I think of Lodewijk. Nina. Op 9-jun-2007, om 1:03 heeft buddhatrue het volgende geschreven: > > I think that this is a Thai thing. I experienced the same type of > thing with my meditation teacher, Ajahn Somporn (also Thai). He would > really crack me up because when a westerner asked him a question which > required a simple answer, he would go on and on and on with a mini > lecture about the Dhamma (usually not directly related to the > question) and when a westerner asked a question which required a > detailed and elaborate answer, he would answer in a very brief and > simple way! LOL! I think that this came about because of a cultural > difference in the expectation of how questions should be answered. > Since I don't know a lot about Thai culture, I can't really explain > why. > #73172 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Sat Jun 9, 2007 3:22 am Subject: Seeing the past Causes and present Effects! bhikkhu5 Friends: Seeing the past Causes & their present Effects! Once when the Venerable Anuruddha was dwelling at Savatthi in Jeta's Grove , in AnÄ?thapindika 's Park, a number of Bhikkhus went to the Venerable Anuruddha & exchanged polite greetings with him. Then they sat down & asked the Ven. Anuruddha : Venerable Sir: What has the Venerable Anuruddha developed & cultivated so that he has attained to his famous greatness of direct knowledge? It is, friends, because I have developed and cultivated these four Foundations of Awareness that I have won great direct knowledge. What four? Here, friends, I dwell constantly contemplating upon: The Body as a formed group, neither as me, lasting nor pleasure! The Feelings as passing sensations, neither as mine, nor pleasure! The Mind as temporary mentalities, neither as I, nor as any soul! All Phenomena as mental states neither as substance nor any real! while eager, clearly comprehending, & fully aware , thereby removing all desire & frustration rooted in this world! It is, friends, because I have developed & cultivated these Four Foundations of Awareness that I have become empowered with the suprahuman forces: With the divine eye , which is purified & surpasses the human, I see beings passing away and being reborn, as inferior or superior, beautiful or ugly, fortunate & unfortunate, and I understand how beings travel on in accordance with their actions (=kamma ) thus: The beings who misbehaved bodily, verbally & mentally, who reviled the Noble Ones, held wrong view, and did actions based on their wrong view, with the break-up of their body, right after death, they have been reborn in a state of misery, in a painful destination, in the lower worlds, even in hell! But these other beings who engaged in good behaviour bodily, verbally and mentally, who did not revile the Noble Ones, who held right view, and undertook actions based on this right view, with the break-up of their body, after death, they are reborn in a superior and happy destination, even a divine world! Thus with the divine eye , which is purified and surpasses the human, I see beings passing away and being reborn, inferior and superior, beautiful & ugly, fortunate and unfortunate, and I understand how beings are reborn and fare on in this round all in accordance with their past kamma (behaviour). Source (edited extract): The Grouped Sayings of the Buddha. Samyutta Nikaya. [V:305] section 52: Anuruddha. Thread 23: The Divine Eye! About AbhiññÄ?: The 6 suprahuman forces, higher powers, or supernormal knowledge's see: http://What-Buddha-Said.net/library/DPPN/wtb/a/abhinna.htm About Kamma: The accumulation of intentional causes, which may have spurious effects see: http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/III/Kamma_and_Fruit.htm http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/III/Kamma_is_improvable.htm http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/III/Inevitable_Consequences.htm http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/Rebirth.htm About the Divine Eye: The Dibba-Cakkhu see: http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/The_Divine_Eye.htm http://What-Buddha-Said.net/library/DPPN/wtb/b_f/dibba_cakkhu.htm Buddha once said: It is kamma that separates beings into inferiority and superiority! MN iii 203 Seeing the past Causes and present Effects! Friendship is the Greatest :-) Bhikkhu Samahita * Sri Lanka * <....> #73173 From: upasaka@... Date: Sat Jun 9, 2007 1:25 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Death - just like now! (Alan Driver's funeral) [2] upasaka_howard Hi, Ken - > > KS was asked, "How do we know that?" You didn't like her answer, but > I wonder how the question could be answered differently. Surely, the > only way of knowing anything (the only way of gaining true knowledge) > is by hearing and understanding the Dhamma. As KS explained, if > we "do not know this moment" then we cannot possibly know how moments > will be in the future. If we *do* know this moment, then we *will* > know how moments will be in the future. ------------------------------------------ Howard: We will know in the future if there is any knowing at all.That is the question, in fact. In any case, as to the question of how we know, the answer is thatr we do NOT know, but there are a number of good reasons to *believe* it I think. That craving results in suffering can be known here and now. That whatever arises ceases can be known here and now. That whatever arises does so on the basis of causes and conditions and is impersonal can be known here and now. What we do NOT in fact know but only believe should be stated as such, with the various reasons for the belief being given. This is my point, and I think it is correct. I DO believe in rebirth - in continuation of experience, for a variety of reasons. My dissatisfaction was not due to Khun Sujin giving a *wrong* answer for how we know, but in giving *any* answer, for we do NOT know. She should have said so and gone on to say why she sees good reason to believe in continuation of experience after death. ----------------------------------------------- > > What could be a more correct way of answering the question? How could > you find fault with that? ------------------------------------------------ Howard: Had you read my prior post more carefully, you would have noted it ending with <> That, Ken, would have been a better answer. Or you can read what I said above. Another answer might be "We cannot know now, but I believe that once we achieve a certain ariyan stage it will then become clear that this is a fact. I have good reason, on the basis of confidence due to the wonderful effect the Dhamma has had in my life and based on what I AM able to directly verify of the Buddha's teachings, to trust that the Buddha knew what he was saying in areas that I cannot verify at this time. That, together with several other reasons of mine, serves to bolster a strong belief in me in rebirth, and though it is not something that I know for a fact and cannot see a way to know it with certainty, I do feel justified in my belief." ------------------------------------------------ > > ---------------------------- > H: >Does not an arahant see that nothing is permanent? So, according > to Theravadin teaching, must there be continued experience after the > passing of an arahant? The reasoning is invalid. > ----------------------------- > > Right Understanding (the first factor of the 8-fold path) is not a > cause of rebirth and future suffering. Surely you didn't think KS was > saying it was! ------------------------------------------ Howard: Nope. I was saying that the reasoning was invalid. It is. -------------------------------------------- > > If we can put wrong understanding aside for a moment, and stop > thinking of the present as something permanent or lasting, then we > can consider the Buddha's description of the present moment - > fleeting conditioned namas and rupas. That is the only way that leads > to "knowing" anything. All other ways lead to wrong view or, at best, > to mere speculation. ---------------------------------------------- Howard: I know, Ken - you believe in the Dhamma. So do I. Next? ---------------------------------------------- > > ------------------------- > H: >Look at what she said: "If we do not know this moment, we cannot > tell that after death there are also realities like seeing and > hearing." The implication is that if we DO know it, then we know that > there will be further experience after death. There is no reason at > all to conclude that. It just does not follow. > --------------------------- > > If we do not know this moment, how can we know what future moments > will be like? Again, this is perfectly good, straightforward, Dhamma. -------------------------------------- Howard: It is classical illogic to infer from this that if we do know this moment, we can know future moments. Itis invalid reasoning,and as death is concerned, it begs the question. ------------------------------------- > > If we *do* know this moment - if we know dhammas and the conditions > for their arising and non arising - then we will know what future > moments will be like. This is undeniable, surely! > > -------------------------------------- > H: >It is simply an unjustified statement. I do believe that > experience continues, but that is just belief. > -------------------------------------- > > What if you had direct knowledge of the arising of a paramattha > dhamma, the causes of its arising, and the only way by which similar > dhammas will permanently cease to arise in the future? What then? ------------------------------------------ Howard: Then I would know what is the case now. NOW, with all sense doors intact. In any case, we do NOT have such direct knowledge, and it is merely a matter of belief that there is such knowledge. I have that belief, and you have that belief, but we do NOT know it. Confusing belief, even sure belief, with knowing, is not seeing things as they are. Such conflation is the mark of the dogmatic believer. If I saw, as the Buddha said he saw on the night of his awakening, my own past lives and beings being reborn into various realms, then I would *know*. ------------------------------------------ > > ------------------------------------------ > H: >There is nowhere given evidence of any means > by which consciousness recurs with respect to a new life associated > with a new body. My phenomenalism (or "experientialism") > makes "rebirth" appear plausible to me - in fact I believe it, but > were I not a phenomenalist, I would not find it plausible. In any > case, the "reason" Khun Sujin gives for belief in continuation of > experience is no reason at all. > ------------------------------------------ > > "Right understanding here and now!" I think that was the answer > suggested by KS, and I don't see how there could be any other answer. ----------------------------------------- Howard: An appropriate answer is to say that we do not know this as fact, but there are good reasons for believing it. ------------------------------------------ > > --------------------- > >Without eye sense, without visible object, there cannot be seeing, > but > >seeing just sees for only a moment, because it's not the moment of > >hearing. > > > Howard: > Completely irrelevant to this issue. > --------------------- > > It is not irrelevant to the answer given. K Sujin's answer was (in > effect), "by correctly understanding the present moment," and this is > the way the present reality should be understood. ------------------------------------------ Howard: But the question didn't pertain to present reality, but to what happens after the dissolution of the khandhas! -------------------------------------------- > > ----------------------- > H: >In fact, the clause "Without eye > sense, without visible object, there cannot be seeing" is a case > against continuation of experience that materialists can raise with > justification. > ----------------------- > > The eye sense arose (momentarily) because the conditions for its > arising were (momentarily) present. They had been put in place. > Conditions for the arising of dhammas will always be put in place > while the 8-fold path has not been travelled. There is no other way > of stopping rebirth. ---------------------------------------- Howard: Chapter and verse, Ken, with no explanation of how rebirth as fact is knowable. ------------------------------------------ > > -------------------- > H: >At > death, there is dissolution of all the khandhas. What happens to the > media of eye, ear, nose, tongue, body at death? From a materialist or > a dualist perspective, they cease. And mind? By what mechanism does > kammic energy find a "new physical home"? That is the issue. > --------------------- > > By conditions! Conditionality is the answer to all (past, present and > future) arising and passing away. ------------------------------------------------ Howard: It can be argued that the conditions for experience have then ceased. In any case, to say that current conditions will lead to continuation of experience, including a reconstitution of the requisite sense media is to assert a belief. It is a belief I share, but the question was how to KNOW that rebirth is a fact. The answer is that we have good reason to beleive it, but we do NOT know it. -------------------------------------------------- > > ------------------------- > H: >In any case, what in the world does only one sense medium and > one mode of cosnciousness and one type of rupa being present at > a time have to do with the matter of continuation of consciousness > after death? > Nothing. (Simply saying anything at all doesn't constitute answering a > specific question.) > -------------------------- > > That is the way things are. Right understanding of the way things are > now is the key to all right understanding. ---------------------------------------- Howard: Ken have you now adopted the the technique of saying anything at allas an answer,even when it has no bearing on the question? ------------------------------------------ > > ----------------------- > > > >By understanding this, after there are conditions for seeing, like > this > >moment, it is not the same as the previous one. So after death > > > > Howard: > "SO" she says? "SO"? She is reaching a conclusion? Right now, among > the conditions for seeing is the working of at least one eye! After > death? > Hardly. Death, in fact, ends that condition! This is such > spurious "reasoning" > on her part. It provides nothing. > ------------------------ > > Your phrase "at least one eye" suggests you are rejecting the > teaching of conditioned dhammas and insisting on a conventional > explanation. This is a massive shifting of the goal posts! Jon's > question was asked in the context of Theravada Buddhism. He was not > asking how someone who rejected Theravada Buddhism could become > convinced about rebirth. -------------------------------------------- Howard: I didn't realize that the questioner was Jon. As I recall, it just said "J:" Well, whatever satisifies Jon is goodenough for Jon. I don't consider the reply useful in the slightest. If the reply was intended for a true-believer Buddhist as such, she could have just said "The Buddha knew it to be so". If I were Jon, I would not have been satisfied. The Buddha taught a "come and see" doctrine, and I took Jon's question to be one of how it is possible to do so with regard to rebirth. I suppose Jon could best indicate what he was actually after in asking his question. ------------------------------------------- > > ----------------------------------------- > (So after death) when there> > >are conditions for realities to arise to see again, to hear again, > no one > >can stop the arising and falling away of realities. > > > Howard: > There is an amazing gap in the reasoning right here. She presumes that > after death there is a means whereby so-called realities "arise to > see again, to hear again." But that is, in fact the whole question, > and she is begging that question. > ----------------------------------------- > > No; her sentence began with "So." > ----------------------------------------- Howard: Yes, it does.That means "therfore". It indicates a conclusion. --------------------------------------- Just as dhammas are conditioned to > > arise now, so too, they will be conditioned to arise in the future. -------------------------------------- Howard: Nonsense. Things change. The dissolution of the khandhas is a BIG change in conditions.That the sun has been rising every day is no guarantee that it will do so in the future. The reasoning is invalid. It establishes nothing. Itis an asssertion of belief and nothing more. ---------------------------------------- > No one can stop them now, and no one wil be able to stop them in the > future. This is basic Abhidhamma! -------------------------------------- Howard: And you (and I ) BELIEVE it! We do NOT know it. -------------------------------------- > > ---------------- > H: >Don't forget, what the questioner asked was "After a person > dies, death, there is still the same reality of seeing and hearing > and so forth. > How do we know that?" HOW DO WE KNOW? That was the question. > If death ended the requisite conditions for experience, there would be > no further experience. I do not believe it does. Khun Sujin does not > believe it does. But the question is "How do we know?" Her answer > amounts to "Because". > ----------------- > > By knowing the present reality; that's how! ----------------------------------------- Howard: This is a slogan, Ken, absolutely nothing more. --------------------------------------- > > And how do we know the present reality? By conditions! And what are > the conditions by which there can be right knowing now? If the true > Dhamma has been heard and wisely considered (etc., etc). -------------------------------------------- Howard: Ken, itis important to come to distinguish belief from knowledge. ------------------------------------------- > > Ken H > ======================== With metta, Howard #73174 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Jun 9, 2007 6:05 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Death - just like now! (Alan Driver's funeral) [2] nilovg Hi Howard, James, Ken H., this is a good and useful discussion, perhaps it can help Lodewijk. I thought more on the way Kh Sujin answers questions. She pays attention mainly to the citta of the questioner, how to help, how to make him think of what is true and right. She does not need to counter the questioner's logical reasoning with arguments. No need, life is far, far too short. Maybe the questioner meets her only once, can listen only once. She may ask a counterquestion to make him realize the truth, or talk in general: what is dhamma, and this is is so basic to understand. Then Howard (understandably) will say: this is not the issue. It is true that it does not work in the same way for all. In order to help she will bring the issue to the present moment. Let us look at Ken H's post: --------- N: See, Howard, how true. This answers your issue on rebirth. Through insight, especially the second stage of tender insight, conditions are seen more clearly, it is direct knowledge. Then confidence, well- based faith, becomes much stronger. But even now, if we consider more Abhidhamma in relation to the present moment things will be clearer. We can understand more that seeing is a citta, that seeing is different from thinking of what is seen, that thinking is never neutral: either kusala or akusala. We gain more understanding of the sobhana cetasikas that assist the kusala citta: alobha, detachment, hiri, ottappa, adosa, saddha, confidence in kusala. We also gain more understanding of the different degrees of lobha and dosa. There are many things we can verify already. This makes it more easy to accept those things we cannot verify yet. Continue with Ken H: <"Right understanding here and now!" I think that was the answer suggested by KS, and I don't see how there could be any other answer.> <> seeing just sees for only a moment, because it's not the moment of > hearing. Howard: Completely irrelevant to this issue. --------------------- Ken: It is not irrelevant to the answer given. K Sujin's answer was (in effect), "by correctly understanding the present moment," and this is the way the present reality should be understood.> ---------- N: See Howard, at first sight you may think: this is not the issue, but delving a bit more deeply we may see: yes, it is the issue. All this is not to win an argument. I take all your questions too much to heart, I also think of Lodewijk, how to help him. ----------- Ken: ---------- H: But the question is "How do we know?" Her answer amounts to "Because". ----------------- Ken H: -------- Nina. Op 8-jun-2007, om 22:45 heeft upasaka@... het volgende geschreven: > Without rebirth, there would be no point to the Dhamma, IMO, and for a > variety of reasons I *do* strongly believe in rebirth. But I cannot > say I > know it to be true, not if I respect the truth. #73175 From: "colette" Date: Sat Jun 9, 2007 6:12 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Death - just like now! (Alan Driver's funeral) [2] ksheri3 Good Morning Howard and Sarah, Maybe I shouldn't be butting in so late in the conversation but I've noticed this thread for several days now and decided that this morning I'd go back and find out what all this concern is concerning a person's demise. I only got to this sentence in Howard's post. This is all I've read up to this point so I'm only concerned with Howard's post at this point. Don't go further thinking that I've been keeping up on EVERYTHING. The sentences below are concerned with the existance after the Bardo (Bardo = intermediate stage, a psuedo-pergatory). In applying my EXPERIENCE to the statements made I have to disagree that there is no evidence of an existance after the moment of death. I've discovered a new definition of the clear light, it is an occurance at that split second of the bodies death where EVERYTHING is seen as it is, svabhava & all. What has always struck me as very hard to determine is how long that split second takes, at the moment of the bodies experation. For instance, during my experience I found that I went to bed on April 9th 1978, but woke up a month later, which is not what my consciousness experienced, I woke up "consciously" as always, the next morning. Yet an entire month of my life is gone! I can't account for it, I can't find it anywhere. My physical body was in the hospital but I was still, NOT THERE. That month is nothing more than a single night's rest, to me. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: There is no reason at all to conclude that. Itjust does not > follow. It is simply an unjustified statement. colette: I can understand that and support that thinking, logic. ------------------------- I do believe that experience > continues, but that is just belief. colette: it's experience based on the past experience, what has been stored and is known. It's like you're drawing on those past experiences as a resevoire to drink from. I think that we've gone into new territory here. We're actually examining new things and I'm learning new things, particularly the Bardos. I look forward to continuing this discussion. toodles, colette <....> #73176 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Jun 9, 2007 7:12 am Subject: Conditions, Ch 3, no 4. nilovg Dear friends, We read in the “Kindred Sayings” (V, Mahå-vagga, Book VII, Kindred Sayings on the Bases of Psychic Power (Bases of Success), Ch I, 2, Neglected): By whomsoever, monks, the four bases of psychic power are neglected, by them also is neglected the ariyan way that goes on to the utter destruction of dukkha. By whomsoever, monks, the four bases of psychic power are undertaken, by them also is undertaken the ariyan way that goes on to the utter destruction of dukkha.... It is then explained what the four bases of psychic power (iddhipådas) are. They arise together with right concentration and with right effort. Right effort in vipassanå is right effort to be aware of whatever reality appears at this moment. As we have seen, there are two kinds of predominance-condition: conascent-predominance-condition and object-predominance- condition. In the case of conascent-predominance-condition the conditioning factor arises simultaneously with the conditioned dhammas, but this is not so with object-predominance-condition. As regards object- predominance-condition (årammanådhipati-paccaya), not every object citta experiences is object-predominance-condition. An object which is predominance-condition is highly regarded by citta and the accompanying cetasikas so that they give preponderance to it. The predominant object is the conditioning factor (paccaya), and the citta and cetasikas which experience that object are the conditioned dhammas (paccayupanna dhammas). Object-predominance-condition is different from object-condition. For example, when we like the colour of a certain cloth, but we do not particularly want to possess it, that object conditions the lobha- múla-citta by way of object-condition. When we like that cloth very much and want to possess it, that object conditions the lobha-múla- citta by way of object-predominance-condition. We then give preponderance to that object. Certain objects cannot be object-predominance-condition, because they are undesirable. Among them is the type of body-consciousness which is akusala vipåka, accompanied by painful feeling [1]. The two types of dosa-múla-citta (one type unprompted and one type prompted, c.f. Appendix 2) cannot be object-predominance-condition. They are accompanied by unpleasant feeling and thus they are not desirable. The two types of moha-múla-citta, one associated with doubt and one associated with restlessness, cannot be object-predominance- condition, they are not desirable. The akusala cetasikas which accompany dosa-múla-citta and moha-múla-citta are not desirable either, thus, they cannot be object-predominance-condition. One could not esteem regret, jealousy or stinginess, akusala cetasikas which may accompany dosa-múla-citta. -------- 1. Body-consciousness is vipåkacitta which experiences pleasant or unpleasant tangible objects. When it is kusala vipåka it is accompanied by pleasant bodily feeling and when it is akusala vipåka it is accompanied by unpleasant bodily feeling. ******** Nina. #73177 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Jun 9, 2007 7:28 am Subject: Listening to the Dhamma, Ch 2, no 2. nilovg Dear friends, We are used to thinking of “my body”, “I see”, “I hear”, “I think”. We have to consider carefully what the Buddha taught about nåma and rúpa so that understanding of the truth can develop. Our life consists of nåma and rúpa which are impermanent and non-self. We are attached to the idea of “my body”, “my hand”, “my feet”, but the body consists of different kinds of rúpas which arise and then fall away. The rúpas which have fallen away are replaced by new rúpas so long as there are conditions. It seems that the body lasts for some time, but in reality there are only different rúpas which are impermanent. There are four factors which produce rúpas of the body: kamma, citta, temperature (or heat) and nutrition. These factors keep on producing rúpas throughout our life. The body as a whole is a concept we can think of, it is not real in the ultimate sense. One characteristic of rúpa at a time such as hardness or heat can be experienced and these are ultimate realities. Gradually the difference between ultimate realities and concepts can be understood. Also understanding is impermanent and non-self, it is a cetasika which arises for a moment and then falls away, but it can be accumulated so that understanding can arise again. The Buddha classified realities in different ways in order to help people to develop understanding of them. He classified realities as four paramattha dhammas, ultimate realities, namely as citta, cetasika, rúpa and the unconditioned reality which is nibbåna [1]. Another way of classification is by way of åyatanas, sometimes translated as bases or sources. They are: eye visible object ear sound nose odour tongue flavour bodysense tangible object mind-base (manåyatana) mind-object (dhammåyatana) Manåyatana includes all cittas, and dhammåyatana includes objects which can be experienced only through the mind-door, namely: subtle rúpas [2], cetasikas and nibbåna. Visible object “meets” the eye-base so that there can be seeing, the experience of visible object. It is the same with sound and the other sense- objects, they “meet” the respective sense-bases so that the sense- cognitions arise. The association of objects with the different bases occurs at this moment, we can verify the truth of the Buddha’s teachings. --------- 1. Nibbåna is the nåma which does not arise and fall away. It can be experienced at the moment of enlightenment. 2. There are twentyeight kinds of rúpa in all: the sense objects which can be experienced through the senses and also the sense organs themselves are gross rúpas, the other rúpas are subtle rúpas. ******** Nina. #73178 From: upasaka@... Date: Sat Jun 9, 2007 4:46 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Death - just like now! (Alan Driver's funeral) [2] upasaka_howard Hi, Nina - In a message dated 6/9/07 9:09:21 AM Eastern Daylight Time, vangorko@... writes: > Hi Howard, James, Ken H., > this is a good and useful discussion, perhaps it can help Lodewijk. > > I thought more on the way Kh Sujin answers questions. She pays > attention mainly to the citta of the questioner, how to help, how to > make him think of what is true and right. She does not need to > counter the questioner's logical reasoning with arguments. No need, > life is far, far too short. Maybe the questioner meets her only once, > can listen only once. She may ask a counterquestion to make him > realize the truth, or talk in general: what is dhamma, and this is is > so basic to understand. Then Howard (understandably) will say: this > is not the issue. It is true that it does not work in the same way > for all. ------------------------------------------ Howard: A Buddha, and perhaps an arahant, or even perhaps any ariyan can successfully use such "skillful means". Do you believe Khun Sujin qualifies, Nina? ------------------------------------------ > In order to help she will bring the issue to the present moment. > > Let us look at Ken H's post: only way of knowing anything (the only way of gaining true knowledge) > is by hearing and understanding the Dhamma. As KS explained, if > we "do not know this moment" then we cannot possibly know how moments > will be in the future. If we *do* know this moment, then we *will* > know how moments will be in the future.> ------------------------------------------ Howard: Hearing and understanding the Dhamma is not the same as knowing this moment. In any case, that there is continued experience after death is not known now. And nothing that is said here explains how life after death is to be known now. According to the Dhamma, past lives and the rebirthing of beings can be known from the base of the 4th jhana. Well, anybody care to testify as to their personal experience with this? Nina, the question is not why is it reasonable to believe in rebirth, but how it is *knowable* as fact. ----------------------------------------------- > --------- > N: See, Howard, how true. This answers your issue on rebirth. Through > insight, especially the second stage of tender insight, conditions > are seen more clearly, it is direct knowledge. Then confidence, well- > based faith, becomes much stronger. ----------------------------------------------- Howard: WHAT is true? And what question about rebirth did I have? Yes, *if* rebirth is a fact, and *if* we become able to know it, then we will know it. This, of course, says close to nothing. In any case, I've already responded to that statement of Khun Sujin's. This is all empty talk, Nina, that and invalid reasoning. Sorry, but it is so. ------------------------------------------------ --- > But even now, if we consider more Abhidhamma in relation to the > present moment things will be clearer. We can understand more that > seeing is a citta, that seeing is different from thinking of what is > seen, that thinking is never neutral: either kusala or akusala. We > gain more understanding of the sobhana cetasikas that assist the > kusala citta: alobha, detachment, hiri, ottappa, adosa, saddha, > confidence in kusala. We also gain more understanding of the > different degrees of lobha and dosa. There are many things we can > verify already. This makes it more easy to accept those things we > cannot verify yet. ------------------------------------------ Howard: I agree with that. I've said the same myself in a previous post. The confidence we have in the Buddha due to directly verifying what is directly verifiable leads to belief in other assertions of the Buddha that are not, at least at present, directly verifiable. It leads to *belief*. That is not the same as knowing. It is very, very important to distinguish the two. That is how truth is safeguarded for ourselves and others. (But, you know, we are getting into repetition now, Nina, which usually suggests that it is time to bring a thread to a close.) ----------------------------------------- > > Continue with Ken H: <"Right understanding here and now!" I think > that was the answer > suggested by KS, and I don't see how there could be any other answer.> > <>seeing just sees for only a moment, because it's not the moment of > >hearing. > Howard: > Completely irrelevant to this issue. > --------------------- > Ken: It is not irrelevant to the answer given. K Sujin's answer was (in > effect), "by correctly understanding the present moment," and this is > the way the present reality should be understood.> > ---------- > N: See Howard, at first sight you may think: this is not the issue, > but delving a bit more deeply we may see: yes, it is the issue. > --------------------------------------- Howard: No, not at first sight, or second, or third. -------------------------------------- All > > this is not to win an argument. I take all your questions too much to > heart, I also think of Lodewijk, how to help him. -------------------------------------- Howard: My belief in rebirth is very strong, and I have several reasons for that belief, reasons I deem plausible. I would not be a Buddhist if I didn't believe in rebirth (my position, not necessarily others), and I am a died-in-the-wool Buddhist. Pretending, however, that one KNOWS that rebirth is a fact, however, is, for us folks, at best silly nonsense. --------------------------------------- > ----------- > Ken: conditioned to > arise now, so too, they will be conditioned to arise in the future. > No one can stop them now, and no one wil be able to stop them in the > future. This is basic Abhidhamma!> > ---------- > H: But the question is "How do we know?" Her answer > amounts to "Because". > ----------------- > > Ken H: And how do we know the present reality? By conditions! And what are > the conditions by which there can be right knowing now? If the true > Dhamma has been heard and wisely considered (etc., etc).> > -------- > Nina. > =========================== With metta, Howard #73179 From: "Robert" Date: Sat Jun 9, 2007 10:24 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Virtue avalo1968 Hello Sarah, You said this is an important discussion, and I agree, but the fact is that we are going around in circles, which is not so useful. Let me try to bring things into focus. I extracted this from a recent posting by Nina. "As we have seen, there are two kinds of predominance-condition: conascent-predominance-condition and object-predominance-condition. In the case of conascent-predominance-condition the conditioning factor arises simultaneously with the conditioned dhammas, but this is not so with object-predominance-condition. As regards object- predominance-condition (årammanådhipati-paccaya), not every object citta experiences is object-predominance-condition. An object which is predominance-condition is highly regarded by citta and the accompanying cetasikas so that they give preponderance to it. The predominant object is the conditioning factor (paccaya), and the citta and cetasikas which experience that object are the conditioned dhammas (paccayupanna dhammas)." The first point is that this might as well be in Swahili for all I am going to understand of it, and the second point is that I am absolutely convinced that the first point has zero relevance for my ability to put the Buddhist teachings into practice in a meaningful and life-changing way. I feel the practice is about learning to see, and learning to see is not dependent on an intellectual grasp of any creed. There is no such thing as a Buddhist catechism - to me this is a contradiction. I am interested in learning how to see for myself, not how to believe what someone else was able to see. Here is an exchange from our last discussion: .... > Sarah: > Would you agree that there is only one way, one path of satipatthana? > > Robert: > I tend to steer away from such statements, for I really don't have > anyway of knowing the answer - whatever I said in answer to this >kind of question would just be my belief and how useful is that?. .... S: Let's put it this way: When the Buddha said there is one path of satipatthana, does it make sense to you? .... How could I know if there is one path or more than one path? Why does it matter? It is not about what makes sense to me as a concept or an idea, but what I actually know to be true in a totally different way. I am sorry that I cannot describe this very well, and I understand it could all be my delusion, but I still need to go with what feels right. This also is from our last exchange: >Robert: Sometimes it seems to me that your > insistence on seeing the 'realities' in every moment in some ways > separates you from the reality of your experience of the moment, > which would be to your loss. ... S: I don't quite insist 'on seeing the 'realities' in every moment'! That would be impossible. I do think, however, that the path is about understanding these realities when they appear and mindfulness of them arises. Of course the experiences 'of the moment' are mostly of the 'defiled' kind.....but these have to be seen as they are too. If it's self-view arising now, let it be known! Otherwise, there's no chance it'll ever be eradicated eventually. .... Let them be known! But known how, intellectually or in some other way? Should they be known by reading about them in a book and then evaluating your experience and trying to match the words from the book to moments of your experience, or should the be known by going beyond words to the actual experience, where words just get in the way. A long time ago, when I first encountered Buddhism, I was told that everything is impermanent, suffering, and not-self, and that when I recognize this was true I would no longer cling. However, it did not take long to figure out that I could sit inside reading all day long about everything being impermanent, suffering, and not-self and then go outside and make a complete fool of myself with the first really attractive woman I met. So, it was clear there was more to it than just reading about it. As time went on, I came to feel that what was missing was the capacity to see in a way that really made a difference in my experience of my world. As I persisted, it seemed to me that when I did certain practices including things like generousity, patience, restraint, and meditation, I could occasionally somehow develop that capacity to see things in a way that changed my experience of life independent of changing the circumstances of life, which was quite a revelation. I have to apologize because I do such a bad job of putting what I am trying to say into words. Let me just say that it will be in a moment of practicing metta or generousity that happiness will arise and with it the seeing. Is it delusion? When I speak of working with an experience, one of the ways I use that phrase is coming to know what is real. Can I explain how I know it is real. Sorry, I cannot. You made this comment in our last exchange: S: When you 'work' with your 'experience', doesn't this lead to a greater idea of 'my experience'? The fact is that I am going to mostly live my life today as 'my experience'. It ceases to be 'my experience' when I have the capacity to see and those moments do occasionally arise, and when they do arise, when a moment of not-self arises, it is of zero consequence if I recognize it as "oh, this is not-self just like I read about". The experience is beyond words. It is perfectly valid to say that unless you stay within the bounds of the Abhidhamma the risk is too great you will get lost in the fog of your own delusion. I understand this concern, but have chosen to take my chances with a knowing that does not know how it knows. Thank you for you continued patience in trying to make your ideas intelligible to me. Robert A. #73180 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Jun 9, 2007 11:53 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Death - just like now! (Alan Driver's funeral) [2] nilovg Hi Howard, what is died in the wool Buddhist? You need not answer this thread if you find it enough. You remarked: Nina, the question is not why is it reasonable to believe in rebirth, but how it is *knowable* as fact. H: You were wondering how Kh Sujin could be so assured, suggesting that she should say: she believes, instead of knows. You said to Ken: N: Not an ariyan stage, but sooner, the second stage of insight. One thing is true: through insight doubt disappears, it depends on the strength of a person's insight. As said, at the second stage of tender insight doubt about past and future lives is eliminated, and this does not have to do anything with the fourth jhana as a base for supernatural powers. Insight is always understanding of the present reality, all stages, until enlightenment is attained. I found an interesting passage in Vis. XIX, 5 and 6. It explains how doubt disappears. ------- N: See that it begins with understanding seeing. There is seeing now! One can become really assured of the truth. Just one more thing about D.O.: Ken: Just as dhammas are conditioned to > > arise now, so too, they will be conditioned to arise in the future. -------------------------------------- Howard: Nonsense. Things change. The dissolution of the khandhas is a BIG change in conditions ------- N: This is D.O., Howard. A serious matter. Khandhas arise and dissolve at each moment, also now. Vis. XX, 72: The same ones do not return, but there are conditions again for the arising of new khandhas so long as we are in the cycle. Nina. Op 9-jun-2007, om 17:46 heeft upasaka@... het volgende geschreven: > I am a > died-in-the-wool Buddhist. Pretending, however, that one KNOWS that > rebirth is a fact, > however, is, for us folks, at best silly nonsense. #73181 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Jun 9, 2007 12:04 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Virtue nilovg Dear Robert A, understandable that you reacted in that way, not seeing the relevance. These are details about conditions and leave them aside if you find them not relevant. When I read the beginning to my husband Lodewijk, he also protested. I had to explain carefully and go back to the beginning again and again. There are twentyfour conditions. But having more understanding in general that whatever happens to you in life, including your own experiences, reactions are conditioned, can be helpful. It can help when you have to face difficulties and troubles. You may wonder: why does this have to happen to me? It had to happen, it is conditioned. It helps patience. Nina. Op 9-jun-2007, om 19:24 heeft Robert het volgende geschreven: > I extracted this from a recent posting by Nina. > > "As we have seen, there are two kinds of predominance-condition: > conascent-predominance-condition and object-predominance-condition. #73182 From: LBIDD@... Date: Sat Jun 9, 2007 4:36 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Death - just like now! (Alan Driver's funeral) [2] lbidd2 Hi Nina, N: "what is died in the wool Buddhist?" L: "Died" is a misspelling. A cloth may be dyed in the wool before it is woven, meaning thoroughly and completely "set" in its color. Definition: 1. wholeheartedly and stubbornly attached to something: wholeheartedly and stubbornly attached to a set of beliefs, political party, or philosophy and totally convinced of its merits 2. dyed before weaving: dyed before weaving into cloth Larry #73183 From: "Robert" Date: Sat Jun 9, 2007 5:09 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Virtue avalo1968 Dear Nina, Thank you for your comments. Nina: understandable that you reacted in that way, not seeing the relevance. These are details about conditions and leave them aside if you find them not relevant. When I read the beginning to my husband Lodewijk, he also protested. I had to explain carefully and go back to the beginning again and again. There are twentyfour conditions. But having more understanding in general that whatever happens to you in life, including your own experiences, reactions are conditioned, can be helpful. It can help when you have to face difficulties and troubles. You may wonder: why does this have to happen to me? It had to happen, it is conditioned. It helps patience. Robert A: Patience I can understand and have always found to be a useful practice. That things happened due to conditions I can understand, and have always found it useful to be aware of conditions I am creating with my thoughts, words, and deeds. I just have never found the need to make it any more complicated than that. I respect the study you have done and the learning you have acquired, but we have a different approach. May we both find understanding, each in our own way. With metta, Robert A. #73184 From: "m_nease" Date: Sat Jun 9, 2007 6:18 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Death - just like now! (Alan Driver's funeral) [2] m_nease Hi Nina (and Howard) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > H: however, is, for us folks, at best silly nonsense. Personally I've never found any of Nina's or Khun Sujin's comments either pretentious or silly or nonsense even at worst, much less at best. Just my opinion, of course-- > You were wondering how Kh Sujin could be so assured, suggesting that > she should say: she believes, instead of knows. > You said to Ken: believe that once > we achieve a certain ariyan stage it will then become clear that this > is a > fact.> > N: Not an ariyan stage, but sooner, the second stage of insight. > > One thing is true: through insight doubt disappears, it depends on > the strength of a person's insight. As said, at the second stage of > tender insight doubt about past and future lives is eliminated, and > this does not have to do anything with the fourth jhana as a base for > supernatural powers. > Insight is always understanding of the present reality, all stages, > until enlightenment is attained. > > I found an interesting passage in Vis. XIX, 5 and 6. It explains how > doubt disappears. > After discerning the material body's condition in this way, he again > discerns the mental body in the way, beginning: 'Due to eye and > visible object eye consciousness arises'(S.II, 72; M1, 111). > When he has thus seen that the occurrence of mentality-materiality is > due to condiitons, then he sees that, as now, so in the past too its > occurrence was due to conditions, and in the future too its > occurrence will be due to condiitons. > When he sees in this way, all his uncertainty is abandoned, that is > to say, the five kinds of uncertainty about the past stated thus "Was > I in the past?...(M.1.8), and also the five kinds of uncertainty > about the future states thus 'Shall I be in the future?....> Just a couple of questions, Nina--first, with regard to 4. Knowledge of Arising and Passing Away: The Ten Corruptions of Insight [27] When the meditator, in the exercise of noticing, is able to keep exclusively to the present body-and-mind process, without looking back to past processes or ahead to future ones, then, as a result of insight, (the mental vision of) a //brilliant light// will appear to him. To one it will appear like the light of a lamp, to others like a flash of lightning, or like the radiance of the moon or the sun, and so on. With one it may last for just one moment, with others it may last longer. Is this light, according to the texts, experienced visually or mentally or both? And, is the stage of tender insight subject to the corruptions of insight? Thanks in Advance, mike #73185 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Sat Jun 9, 2007 7:19 pm Subject: Re: Death - just like now! (Alan Driver's funeral) [2] buddhatrue Hi Nina (Howard and Ken H), --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Hi Howard, James, Ken H., > this is a good and useful discussion, perhaps it can help Lodewijk. > > I thought more on the way Kh Sujin answers questions. She pays > attention mainly to the citta of the questioner, how to help, how to > make him think of what is true and right. She does not need to > counter the questioner's logical reasoning with arguments. No need, > life is far, far too short. Maybe the questioner meets her only once, > can listen only once. She may ask a counterquestion to make him > realize the truth, or talk in general: what is dhamma, and this is is > so basic to understand. Then Howard (understandably) will say: this > is not the issue. It is true that it does not work in the same way > for all. > In order to help she will bring the issue to the present moment. I will say a bit more on this subject this morning while I have the memories fresh in my mind. Nina, I think that what you have said here about KS is going way too far. You are assigning a very strong level of psychic awareness and wisdom to KS that only a Buddha is capable of having. Only a Buddha is able to teach the Dhamma in the way that you describe above- knowing the citta of each person she meets and fitting the teaching to bring about the best level of insight. It is not possible for her to do that! Not even a Silent Buddha, Arahant, or Noble Disciple can teach the Dhamma to the skill level you are describing, only a Buddha can. The fact that you look at KS as having the qualities equal to a Buddha really scares me. But anyway, that's your business. (and poor Lodewijk who doesn't share your hero worship- and so is stuck in the middle). As I wrote, I don't believe that this has anything to do with masterful skill at teaching the Dhamma, it is simply a cultural issue. The other thing I didn't mention about my temple is that every time I met my teacher, Ajahn Somporn, I was expected to ask a question. Even if I didn't have a question in my mind, I was expected to ask a question anyway (other monks explained this to me). This makes sense because monks are only allowed to talk about the Dhamma, nothing else. So, in order to talk to my teacher, to have a dialogue, I would have to begin by asking a question about the Dhamma. I couldn't very well approach him and say, "Hey Ajahn Somporn, how are you doing? Seen any good movies lately? How about this weather? Etc." and he couldn't do the same with me. So, if we didn't want to sit and look at each other in an uncomfortable silence, I would have to start the ball rolling by asking a question about the Dhamma. This, of course, would lead to the condition of Ajahn Somporn to sometimes view the asking of questions as a type of small talk, and a chance to teach the Dhamma. This is perfectly acceptable to Thai culture. However, in Western culture, when we ask a question we expect a direct and expedient answer, not small talk on the Dhamma. So, it can lead to misunderstandings, but nothing so difficult that it can't be overcome. It seems to me that Jon's question about "How can we know there is rebirth?" is the perfect type of question to open a "small talk" Dhamma discussion. After all, it can't be directly answered! If KS had answered "Well, we can't know unless we have developed the psychic ability to recall past lives." That would end the discussion right there, so KS took this question as a chance to lecture on "the present moment" (yet once again ;-)). Okay, the above is just some more input from my perspective. Maybe it sheds light on the issue, maybe not. It seems to me that within Thai social strata, KS is viewed as a Buddhist nun. The female Sangha has died out and can't be resurrected, so she is a modern Buddhist nun. Therefore, she handles herself like a Buddhist nun with all of the social expectations which surround that position. Metta, James #73186 From: upasaka@... Date: Sat Jun 9, 2007 3:42 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Death - just like now! (Alan Driver's funeral) [2] upasaka_howard Hi, Nina - In a message dated 6/9/07 2:54:51 PM Eastern Daylight Time, vangorko@... writes: > Hi Howard, > what is died in the wool Buddhist? -------------------------------------- Howard: The expression 'died in the wool' means "essentially ineradicable". A died in the wool Buddhist is a Buddhist who is so confident in the truth of the Dhamma that his/her trust in the Dhamma is unwavering. ------------------------------------- > You need not answer this thread if you find it enough. > You remarked: Nina, the question is not why is it reasonable to > believe in rebirth, > but how it is *knowable* as fact. > > H: however, is, for us folks, at best silly nonsense.> > You were wondering how Kh Sujin could be so assured, suggesting that > she should say: she believes, instead of knows. > You said to Ken: believe that once > we achieve a certain ariyan stage it will then become clear that this > is a > fact.> > N: Not an ariyan stage, but sooner, the second stage of insight. > > One thing is true: through insight doubt disappears, it depends on > the strength of a person's insight. As said, at the second stage of > tender insight doubt about past and future lives is eliminated, and > this does not have to do anything with the fourth jhana as a base for > supernatural powers. > Insight is always understanding of the present reality, all stages, > until enlightenment is attained. --------------------------------------- Howard: But the issue is not doubt versus certainty. The issue is that of knowing as fact. The question was not how can we become certain, but how can we *know*. ----------------------------------------------- > > I found an interesting passage in Vis. XIX, 5 and 6. It explains how > doubt disappears. -------------------------------------- Howard: I'm not concerned in this discussion about doubt or certainty. The issue is the question of KNOWING as fact. Not of being sure, but of actually knowing. I don't know how many times I have to make this point, Nina. The question was how it can be *known* that rebirth is a fact, how that can be established not as belief but as uncontestable truth -------------------------------------- > After discerning the material body's condition in this way, he again > discerns the mental body in the way, beginning: 'Due to eye and > visible object eye consciousness arises'(S.II, 72; M1, 111). > When he has thus seen that the occurrence of mentality-materiality is > due to condiitons, then he sees that, as now, so in the past too its > occurrence was due to conditions, and in the future too its > occurrence will be due to condiitons. > When he sees in this way, all his uncertainty is abandoned, that is > to say, the five kinds of uncertainty about the past stated thus "Was > I in the past?...(M.1.8), and also the five kinds of uncertainty > about the future states thus 'Shall I be in the future?....> > ------- > N: See that it begins with understanding seeing. There is seeing now! > One can become really assured of the truth. -------------------------------------------- Howard: Nina, do you KNOW that rebirth is a fact? Do you KNOW it? Does Khun Sujin KNOW it? ------------------------------------------ > Just one more thing about D.O.: > > Ken: Just as dhammas are conditioned to > > >arise now, so too, they will be conditioned to arise in the future. > > -------------------------------------- > Howard: > Nonsense. Things change. The dissolution of the khandhas is a BIG > change in conditions > ------- > N: This is D.O., Howard. A serious matter. ------------------------------------------ Howard: What is your point, Nina? I do strongly believe in D.O., in rebirth, in all the basic concepts of the Dhamma. I have strong belief in these things. Some of them I KNOW as fact. Others I just believe. I will NOT accede to saying that I know for a fact when I do not, no matter how much you or Ken or anyone else would like me to. What I know , I know. What I do not know, I DO NOT KNOW. As far as I'm concerned, neither you nor Khun Sujin knows that rebirth is a fact. You both believe it, as do I, but you DO NOT KNOW. To say one knows when one only believes with great certainty is not to safeguard the truth. From MN 95 there is the following: "But to what extent, Master Gotama, is there the safeguarding of the truth? To what extent does one safeguard the truth? We ask Master Gotama about the safeguarding of the truth." "If a person has conviction, his statement, 'This is my conviction,' safeguards the truth. But he doesn't yet come to the definite conclusion that 'Only this is true; anything else is worthless.' To this extent, Bharadvaja, there is the safeguarding of the truth. To this extent one safeguards the truth. I describe this as the safeguarding of the truth. But it is not yet an awakening to the truth. "If a person likes something... holds an unbroken tradition... has something reasoned through analogy... has something he agrees to, having pondered views, his statement, 'This is what I agree to, having pondered views,' safeguards the truth. But he doesn't yet come to the definite conclusion that 'Only this is true; anything else is worthless.' To this extent, Bharadvaja, there is the safeguarding of the truth. To this extent one safeguards the truth. I describe this as the safeguarding of the truth. But it is not yet an awakening to the truth. "Yes, Master Gotama, to this extent there is the safeguarding of the truth. To this extent one safeguards the truth. We regard this as the safeguarding of the truth." ------------------------------------------------------- > > Khandhas arise and dissolve at each moment, also now. > Vis. XX, 72: Are all alike, gone, never to return;> ---------------------------------------- Howard: This has no relevance to rebirth. It says that ceases is gone. So? ------------------------------------------ > The same ones do not return, but there are conditions again for the arising > of new khandhas so long as we are in the cycle. ------------------------------------------- Howard: Yes, Nina. I believe this as well. That is not the issue. ---------------------------------------- > Nina. > > =================== With metta, Howard #73187 From: upasaka@... Date: Sat Jun 9, 2007 3:44 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Death - just like now! (Alan Driver's funeral) [2] upasaka_howard Hi, Larry (and Nina) - In a message dated 6/9/07 7:38:00 PM Eastern Daylight Time, LBIDD@... writes: > L: "Died" is a misspelling. A cloth may be dyed in the wool before it is > woven, meaning thoroughly and completely "set" in its color. > ======================= Whoops! ;-)) Thanks, Larry! With metta, Howard #73188 From: connie Date: Sat Jun 9, 2007 8:30 pm Subject: Theriigaathaa - Sisters (58) nichiconn dear friends, 7. Sattakanipaato, 1. Uttaraatheriigaathaava.n.nanaa, part 2: Arahatta.m pana patvaa attano pa.tipatti.m paccavekkhitvaa udaanavasena- 175. "Musalaani gahetvaana, dha~n~na.m ko.t.tenti maa.navaa; puttadaaraani posentaa, dhana.m vindanti maa.navaa. 176. "Gha.tetha buddhasaasane, ya.m katvaa naanutappati; khippa.m paadaani dhovitvaa, ekamanta.m nisiidatha. 177. "Citta.m upa.t.thapetvaana, ekagga.m susamaahita.m; paccavekkhatha sa"nkhaare, parato no ca attato. 178. "Tassaaha.m vacana.m sutvaa, pa.taacaaraanusaasani.m; paade pakkhaalayitvaana, ekamante upaavisi.m. 179. "Rattiyaa purime yaame, pubbajaatimanussari.m; rattiyaa majjhime yaame, dibbacakkhu.m visodhayi.m. 180. "Rattiyaa pacchime yaame, tamokkhandha.m padaalayi.m; tevijjaa atha vu.t.thaasi.m, kataa te anusaasanii. 181. "Sakka.mva devaa tidasaa, sa"ngaame aparaajita.m; purakkhatvaa vihassaami, tevijjaamhi anaasavaa"ti.- Imaa gaathaa abhaasi. Pruitt: Then looking over her attainment, she spoke these verses as her solemn declaration: 175. "Having taken pestles, young brahmans grind grain. Nourishing wives and children, young brahmans find wealth. 176. "Strive after the Buddha's teaching. Having done it, one does not repent. Wash your feet quickly and sit down on one side. 177. "Summoning up the mind, intent and well concentrated, consider the formations as other and not as self." 178. Having heard her utterance, the advice of Pa.taacaara, having washed my feet, I sat down on one side. 179. In the first watch of the night, I purified the divine eye. 180. In the last watch of the night, I tore asunder the mass of darkness [of ignorance]. Then I stood up in the triple knowledge. Your advice has been taken. 181. I have taken your advice. I shall dwell honouring you like the thirty dieties honouring Sakka, who is unconqured in battle. I have the triple knowledge. I am without taints. RD: And, reflecting on her attainment, she exulted thus: 'Men in their prime, with pestle and with quern Are busied pounding rice and grinding corn. Men in their prime gather and heap up wealth, To have and nourish wife and children dear. *287 (175) Yours is the task to spend yourselves upon The Buddha's will which bringeth no remorse. Swiftly bathe ye your feet, then sit ye down (176) Apart. Planting your minds in Steadfastness, With concentrated effort well composed, Ponder how what ye do, and say, and think, Proceeds not from a Self, is not your Self.' *288 (177) The will of her who spake - Pa.taacaaraa - I heard and marked and forthwith carried out. Bathing my feet, I sat me down apart. (178) While passed the first watch of the night there rose Long memories of the bygone line of lives. While passed the second watch, the Heavenly Eye, Purview celestial, I clarified. (179) While passed the third watch of the night, I burst And rent aside the gloom of ignorance. Now rich in Threefold Wisdom I arose: 'O Lady! verily thy will is done. (180) And like to Sakka o'er the thrice ten gods, Chieftain unconquered in celestial wars, I place thee as my chief, and so shall live. The Threefold Wisdom have I gotten now. From deadly drugs my soul is purified.' (181) *** *287 See Ps. xlvii., xlviii. *288 Lit., consider the sankhaaras as other, not as self. connie: for verse 175 cy, we go back to read, in part: cy v112 ...Thus in this world, an individual man's action bears fruit and is profitable. cy 117 ...But this work of theirs is inferior, belonging to the villages,... TS: "Wisdom is to be considered better than any kind of property, it is the most beneficial in life. I think that wisdom can develop." Dhp 155: Where no God-life is led, nor in their youth was treasure gained, like herons grown infirm o'ver perished fish in shallow pool, they brood. 156: Where no God-life is led, nor in their youth was treasure gained, like bows unstrung they lie, bewailing things that now are past and gone. (Minor Anthologies p55) ===tbc, c. #73189 From: "rjkjp1" Date: Sat Jun 9, 2007 8:33 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Death - just like now! (Alan Driver's funeral) [2] rjkjp1 --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > > > Howard: > I'm not concerned in this discussion about doubt or certainty. The > issue is the question of KNOWING as fact. Not of being sure, but of actually > knowing. I don't know how many times I have to make this point, Nina. The question > was how it can be *known* that rebirth is a fact, how that can be established > not as belief but as uncontestable truth > -------------------------------------- Dear Howard, What are uncontestable facts for you? How do you know you aren't actually a lump of matter kept in testube controlled by scientist conducting an experiment- who make little prods to evoke reactions? Or maybe a powerful demon is in control of your mind and you are completely unaware of him. How do you know the earth goes around the sun, yet don't you believe that? Do you live your life as if the earth will keep going around the sun, and gravity will keep working. But you would say "NO, tommorwo gravity may reverse and the earth stop revloving". Me I am more sure of rebirth, that it wil happen - not so sure about the earth, that it won't explode this very day. Yet for some reason, all my speech and actions confirms that I believe gravity will keep working. Am I liar? Robert #73190 From: "sukinder" Date: Sun Jun 10, 2007 7:18 pm Subject: RE: [dsg] Death - just like now! (Alan Driver's funeral) [2] sukinderpal Hi Howard, Nina, Ken H, all,. I was supposed to reply to a post of yours today, but now I'd like to first respond to this one, hope you don't mind. My response is not in the order that you have written. ================ Howard: Another answer might be "We cannot know now, but I believe that once we achieve a certain ariyan stage it will then become clear that this is a fact. Suk: In implication, is the above statement of yours much different to A. Sujin's when she said to the effect that one needs to know present moment realities before one can have any real understanding about rebirth? ================ Ken: > If we do not know this moment, how can we know what future moments > will be like? Again, this is perfectly good, straightforward, Dhamma. -------------------------------------- Howard: It is classical illogic to infer from this that if we do know this moment, we can know future moments. Itis invalid reasoning,and as death is concerned, it begs the question. Suk: I know that you are now talking in terms of logical reasoning, but putting that aside, am I to understand that in fact your's and A. Sujin's statement above are quite different in implication, since I think Ken is saying the same thing too? What according to you would be the basis for an ariyan's being "clear" about rebirth if not through understanding present moment realities / conditionality? ======================= Ken: > It is not irrelevant to the answer given. K Sujin's answer was (in > effect), "by correctly understanding the present moment," and this is > the way the present reality should be understood. ------------------------------------------ Howard: But the question didn't pertain to present reality, but to what happens after the dissolution of the khandhas! Suk: What *does* happen after the dissolution of the khandhas, what *is* the arising of the present khandhas and what happened to the one just past? With regards to cittas arising and falling away by conditions, what is the difference between death-rebirth and any two consecutive moments now? Past kamma conditions 'seeing' at this moment, how different is rebirth consciousness with regard to this? Yes to us it is to a good extent 'belief' or even 'speculation', but does it have to be only this? What is the basis of our following the Dhamma at all and why this confidence in the way of Satipatthana / Vipassana? Is this not because we understand at one level that through a better understanding of the present moment realities, that we may finally "know" beyond doubt much if not all of what the Buddha taught including the fact of rebirth? Can any valid statement be made about Dhamma without some level of right understanding? So why not factor this into the equation? Why do you think after all, that 'belief' in kamma and rebirth is necessary measure as to whether if one in fact understands the Teachings? I think this is because it is closely tied to the way one will understand the present moment. Can an annihilationist after all, be expected to understand that this moment is conditioned? On the other hand, though a Hindu for example, believes in rebirth, his is with 'self view'. Would you say that his 'belief' is at the same level as a Buddhist who has at least a level of intellectual right understanding? And what if the Buddhist has had moments of satipatthana or even vipassana? And why do you presume to know A. Sujin's level of understanding? I think the following may give a clue as to our difference on this matter: ====================== Howard: If I saw, as the Buddha said he saw on the night of his awakening, my own past lives and beings being reborn into various realms, then I would *know*. Suk: You seem to be saying that if you somehow experienced visions of your past lives, this would be enough for you to have no more doubts regarding rebirth. I don't think so. Neither this nor the experience of say, being somehow transported to another realm, could condition "knowing" as in "understanding", in fact this is akin to only "belief"! One must distinguish between the modes of 'knowing' with regard to sanna, citta and panna. Merely having visions of the past or traveling to another realm conditions at best a conviction by way of 'conscious experience' and 'memory'. It is no different to 'knowing' anything conventional, for example, the taste of mango. Loss of the memory can cause the loss of that 'knowing'. The experience of past lives by way of the supernormal powers, the conviction in this case is by way of understanding and this is different from the above. But even this does not necessarily carry over to the future, doubt having not been eradicated. Vipassana panna on the other hand, in increasing understanding of 'conditioned realities', wears away doubt till at Sotapanna the understanding becomes "firm". This is unaffected by loss of memory now or in future rebirths. It is this kind of understanding that is stressed by A. Sujin and some of us. Do the above give indication regarding any difference in our respective outlook on this matter? This is not to say that I do not make the distinction between 'belief' and 'knowledge based on direct understanding'. But I would rather see it as the difference between belief based on 'intellectual understanding' and one that is based on 'direct understanding'. You also said elsewhere, that your phenomenalist outlook was the basis for your own belief in rebirth. Maybe I can learn something of where you are coming from if you explained this? Metta, Sukinder Ps: I just saw that you've got many responses, but I've spent too much time on this reply so I'm sending this off first. #73191 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Sat Jun 9, 2007 11:31 pm Subject: Sila Contemplation! bhikkhu5 Friends: The Ten Contemplations is Daily Buddhist Routine! The Blessed Buddha once said: Bhikkhus & friends: There is one contemplation, which when often practised and developed leads to the complete turning away from the world, to detachment, to stilling, to ceasing, to Peace , to final penetrating knowledge, to Enlightenment, and thus to NibbÄ?na ... Any Noble Disciple who by progress have understood the Dhamma dwells frequently in this state. Which is that unique contemplation? It is reflecting over the qualities of own purity exactly like this: The Noble Disciple reviews & recollects his own morality S Ä«la , which is unbroken, immaculate, unspotted, unsoiled, productive of release, praised by the clever, not proud opinion, leading to concentration... Source: AN 6:10 More on this crucial first base of Morality (SÄ«la): http://What-Buddha-Said.net/library/DPPN/wtb/s_t/siila.htm http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/Mighty_is_Morality.htm http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/II/Sila_1_to_5.htm http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/What_is_Right_Speech.htm http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/What_is_Right_Action.htm http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/What_is_Right_Livelihood.htm http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/III/Optimal_Observance_I.htm http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/III/Optimal_Observance_II.htm http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/III/Optimal_Observance_IV.htm Contemplating the purity of own Morality! Friendship is the Greatest :-) Bhikkhu Samahita * Sri Lanka * <....> #73192 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Sun Jun 10, 2007 12:05 am Subject: Corpse Blessings! bhikkhu5 Meditation on disgusting objects dispels lust In the Buddha's words devotees must trust Those corpses that are swollen bluish black It changes minds about getting in the sack A rotten corpse gnawed and eaten by worms Our body is of this nature~it surely confirms For those who lust after beauty and form A swollen corpse should help us reform If it's beauty of skin and of the complexion A discoloured corpse will change our direction Craving for bodies of sweet smelling scents A festering corpse is offered and prevents If lusting after fullness and fleshy breasts A mangled corpse~the blessed one suggests A passion for those graceful body motions A dismembered corpse prevents erotic notions If you identify that the body is me and mine A worm infested corpse should be just fine If you're still wanting those titillating activities. It's advised to partake in safe sex festivities Friend Alton #73193 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Jun 10, 2007 3:03 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Death - just like now! (Alan Driver's funeral) [2] nilovg Hi Howard, (and James, at end), shall we replace 'knowing' by 'understanding', pajanati, seeing by pa~n~naa? This clarifies that we should not think of or know the story of rebirth, but rather: understand rebirth in the ultimate sense. Only this leads to the end of dukkha. This eradicates doubt, and here I do not mean doubt in conventional sense, doubt about stories such as rebirth, but doubt about ultimate realities. That is the akusala cetasika doubt which can be eradicated by pa~n~naa. An example. In Sri Lanka they investigated cases of children who could exactly remember facts of a former life, they could even prove the correctness of these. This may be true, but it does not cure doubt of paramattha dhammas, it has nothing to do with the development of pa~n~naa. I quoted a text 'Was I in the past?...' (M.1.8) and this is a sutta text in conventional language. But as in all suttas the message is pointing to paramattha dhammas. It is not the story that matters, but the reality of rebirth. If we forget this, we are moving into the wrong direction. Take the Vis. passages on death and rebirth. The tiika reminds us: person stands for vi~n~naa.na. As to the expression, ‘it comes’, this, according to the Tiika, is an expression of conventional language (vohaara). Therefore he said, ‘ it is not a lasting being, not a soul.’ The meaning is that there is arising by means of transition to a next life when there are conditions. What matters: the rebirth-consciousness succeeds the dying- consciousness. These are cittas, not persons. Citta is an ultimate reality. I had to think of M. 63, Lesser Discourse to Maalunkyaa. A man is pierced by an arrow and does not want it to be pulled out before he knows who shot it, and before he knows all the details about the bow, the arrow itself etc. But the Buddha teaches dukkha and the ending of dukkha. The real goal should not be forgotten, whatever we may discuss. May our discussions be fruitful! James, thank you for sharing your experiences, having a question each day you met the venerable bhikkhu. Very good. As to Kh Sujin's skill: oh no, not a Buddha's skill. It is more this way: answering with metta and karuna. If one through strong insight sees people more and more as citta, cetasika and rupa, there is less clinging to stories about them, and this conditions more metta. No aversion if they do not react favorably. There is a genuine intention to help others as well to see the truth. That is why she will always try to direct people to this moment. Not everybody is ready, but no disappointment if that is the case. Conditions, conditions. Nina. Op 10-jun-2007, om 4:42 heeft upasaka@... het volgende geschreven: > But the issue is not doubt versus certainty. The issue is that of > knowing as fact. The question was not how can we become certain, > but how can we > *know*. #73194 From: "Ramesh Wamanrao Patil" Date: Sun Jun 10, 2007 4:23 am Subject: Relation between the Four Noble Truths and interdependent origination!! rameshat27 !!Namo Tassa Bagavato Arahato Samma Sum Bhuddassa!! On the basis of the Buddha's own statements, we can see a very close relation between the Four Noble Truths and interdependent origination. What is it that these two formulas have in common? The principle they have in common is the principle of causality – the law of cause and effect, of action and consequence. I want to mentioned that the Four Noble Truths are divided into two groups – the first two (suffering and the cause of suffering) and the last two (the end of suffering and the path to the end of suffering). In both these groups, it is the law of cause and effect that governs the relationship. In other words, suffering is the effect of the cause of suffering, and the end of suffering is the effect of the path to the end of suffering. Here, too, with interdependent origination, the fundamental principle at work is that of cause and effect. In interdependent origination, we have a more detailed description of what actually takes place in the causal process. Let us take a few examples that illustrate the nature of interdependent origination used by the Buddha himself. The Buddha said the flame in an oil lamp burns dependent on the oil and the wick: when the oil and wick are present, the flame burns, but if either is absent, the flame will cease to burn. Let us also take the example of the sprout: dependent on the seed, earth, water, air, and sunlight, the sprout arises. There are innumerable examples of interdependent origination because there is no existing phenomenon that is not the effect of interdependent origination. All these phenomena arise dependent on a number of causal factors. Very simply, this is the principle of interdependent origination. Of course, we are particularly interested in the principle of interdependent origination insofar as it concerns the problem of suffering and rebirth. We are interested in how interdependent origination explains the situation in which we find ourselves here and now. In this sense, it is important to remember that interdependent origination is essentially and primarily a teaching that has to do with the problem of suffering and how to free ourselves from suffering, and not a description of the evolution of the universe. (References from the tree of enlightment by Peter Del Santina..Indian Institue of Technology Delhi) Ramesh Patil Mumbai India #73195 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Jun 10, 2007 6:11 am Subject: Our dialogues in Paris, 3. nilovg Dialogues in Paris, part 3. Lodewijk said that he finds it frightening that there is such an amount of akusala. After seeing or after hearing we think of what we experience and at those moments there are mostly akusala cittas that think. When the objective is not dana, sila or bhavana, the cittas that act, speak or think are akusala cittas. When akusala is not strong we do not notice it. I said that realizing this can be a condition for the arising of sati. I read to him the passage about samaya in the Expositor (I, p. 81). Samaya has several meanings. Samaya can mean group, and this shows the simultaneous occurrence of many dhammas. The kusala citta is accompanied by many cetasikas, each performing their own function. By samaya is shown the concurrence of conditions, the mutual contribution towards the production of a common result. The Expositor explains with regard to samaya as condition: 'By this word showing thus the condition, the conceit of one who believes that states unconditionally follow one‘s own will is subdued.' When we learn about all the different factors that are necessary conditions for the arising of one moment of kusala citta with paññaa we are reminded that kusala citta does not belong to us and that it falls away immediately. Kusala citta is very rare and even more so kusala citta with paññaa. We have accumulated a great amount of akusala and thus there are conditions for its arising very often. This is a pungent reminder to develop all kinds of kusala for which there is an opportunity. This may show us the concurrence of many favorable conditions, necessary for the development of pañña. It can grow, so long as we do not obstruct it by wanting, wishing, clinging to a fast result. Lodewijk said that he finds it so difficult to know the difference between intellectual understanding and direct understanding. He wondered what direct understanding is. When the first stage of insight is attained the difference between the characteristic of nama and of rupa is directly understood. At this moment we may feel hot. We know in theory that heat is rupa, and bodyconsciousness that experiences heat is nama, but we take nama and rupa as a whole and are clinging to an idea of self who feels hot. Through insight rupa is known as rupa and nama as nama as they appear one at a time, without having to think about them. That is the difference. But even now, at this moment we can learn the difference between the moments that we are thinking of a situation, of concepts such as a restaurant, the food, the wine, and the moments that only one dhamma appears through one doorway at a time. When odour appears, we do not always have to think of the name or the source of it, such as a specific dish. We can begin to learn what the characteristic of odour is without having to name it. This is the way to understand the difference between paramattha dhammas and concepts. Lodewijk was discouraged and said that so little is remembered of what he heard, and that he is already studying the Dhamma for fortyfive years. I said that what one learnt is never lost, it is accumulated. Pa~n~naa grows very gradually in the course of aeons, and fortyfive years is nothing compared to the aeons we have accumulated ignorance and wrong view. We also discussed a conversation Robert K. had with Kh. Sujin. Robert said that he knows when there is dosa, but that this is only thinking, not knowing its characteristic. Kh. Sujin explained that everyone can know when there is anger, but that anger should be known as a type of nama. At the first stage of insight it is clearly known what the characteristic of nama is, as different from the characteristic of rupa. So long as that stage has not been reached we are inclined to think of dosa as ‘my dosa’. We do not realize it yet as a type of nama. Lodewijk often asked how we know when there is right awareness. The only answer is when the difference is known between the moments of unawareness and of awareness. As Kh. Sujin explained, doubt arises when understanding has not yet been developed sufficiently, when there is not enough detachment. Before we heard the Buddha’s teachings we always thought of seeing as ‘I see’. Through the teachings we have learnt that it is seeing that sees. Seeing is different from hearing, these cittas experience different objects through different doorways. We do not have to think of doorways, but we can begin to consider their different characteristics. We can consider realities and then there can be a little more understanding. We cannot expect more than that. Contentness with the little understanding we have does not mean laziness. We realize that understanding grows little by little and that nobody can make it grow faster. The more we listen to the teachings, the more we see the danger of ignorance and wrong view. This in itself can be a condition to persevere with the development of right understanding of nama and rupa. Kh Sujin said that when we realize how deep and subtle the Dhamma is, and how little we know, this is a way of praising the wisdom of the Buddha. The development of right understanding is a way of giving honour and respect to the Buddha. This is the best way of paying respect to him. ****** Nina. #73196 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Jun 10, 2007 7:00 am Subject: Conditions, Ch 3, no 5 nilovg Dear friends, We read in the “Patthåna” (Faultless Triplet, VII, Investigation Chapter, Conditions: Positive, 1, Classification Chapter, Predominance, 10, § 413): ... After having offered the offering, having undertaken the precept, having fulfilled the duty of observance, (one) esteems and reviews it. (One) esteems and reviews (such acts) formerly well done... Wholesomeness can be object-predominance-condition for kusala citta which esteems and considers the wholesome deed which was done. In this case one gives preponderance to that object. When we have been generous we can recollect our generosity and then there can be the arising again of kusala cittas. We read in the same section (§ 414) that dåna, síla and jhåna can be object-predominance-condition also for akusala citta. When we have performed generous deeds with kusala citta we may find that citta highly desirable, we may be pleased with our own generosity. There may be attachment and wrong view on account of our good deeds. If we do not know the different conditions for kusala citta and akusala citta we may take for kusala what is actually akusala. Thus, kusala can be object of clinging, it can even be object-predominance- condition for clinging. Anything can be object of clinging, except Nibbåna. As we have seen (in Ch 2), Nibbåna and the eight lokuttara cittas which experience it cannot be object-condition for lobha-múla- citta; neither can they be object-predominance-condition for lobha- múla-citta. We read in the same section of the “Patthåna” (§ 416): Learners esteem and review (lower) Fruition. (They) esteem and review Nibbåna. Nibbåna is related to change-of-lineage, purification [1], Path by predominance-condition. Nibbåna is object-predominance-condition for the eight lokuttara cittas which experience it, and it can also be object-predominance- condition for mahå-kusala citta accompanied by paññå and mahå- kiriyacitta (of the arahat) accompanied by paññå. Lokuttara cittas can be object-predominance-condition for the cittas which arise after the attainment of enlightenment and which review, consider with paññå, the lokuttara cittas which arose. ---------- 1. Change-of-lineage or adaptation is the mahå-kusala citta accompanied by paññå preceding the lokuttara citta of the sotåpanna and purification is the mahå-kusala citta accompanied by paññå preceding the lokuttara citta of the three higher stages of enlightenment. ******* Nina. #73197 From: upasaka@... Date: Sun Jun 10, 2007 3:08 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Death - just like now! (Alan Driver's funeral) [2] upasaka_howard Hi, Robert - In a message dated 6/9/07 11:39:40 PM Eastern Daylight Time, rjkjp1@... writes: > Dear Howard, > What are uncontestable facts for you? How do you know you aren't > actually a lump of matter kept in testube controlled by scientist > conducting an experiment- who make little prods to evoke reactions? > Or maybe a powerful demon is in control of your mind and you are > completely unaware of him. > How do you know the earth goes around the sun, yet don't you believe > that? Do you live your life as if the earth will keep going around > the sun, and gravity will keep working. But you would say "NO, > tommorwo gravity may reverse and the earth stop revloving". Me I am > more sure of rebirth, that it wil happen - not so sure about the > earth, that it won't explode this very day. > > Yet for some reason, all my speech and actions confirms that I > believe gravity will keep working. Am I liar? > Robert > ========================= Robert, everything is a matter of degree, of course. What is fact and known to be so is what I'm discussing. And you are quite correct. What we think we know may well not be what we know, of course. Some Moslems will claim to know that murder under certain circumstances is justified and even rewarded. Is what they claim to know true? They believe it so strongly however that they say they know it. Do they know it? Some Christians and Jews not only believe in a personal deity who is/ was creator of the world, but speak of it as fact and claim to know it. Do they know it, or do they just strongly believe it? Some Buddhists speak of various things as fact - as though they *know* them to be true. The Buddha did say not to do that, but instead to say that this is one's confident belief instead. I believe almost all of (what I consider to be) the Dhamma - as distinguished from various cultural artifacts. Some little bits of it I seem, on the basis of experience, to *know* to be true. But, yes, Robert, it is possible to only *think* one knows, and to be, in fact, mistaken. And, of course, the things I experienced may not have been what I understood them to be, though there is no doubt of the events, whatever they "were". So, indeed, care must even be taken in asserting knowing even when there has been what seems to be direct experience. How much more care, then, should be taken in asserting unexperienced things as fact? What you are saying, Robert, merely supports my point. With metta, Howard #73198 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Jun 10, 2007 7:16 am Subject: Listening to the dhamma, Ch 2, no 3. nilovg Dear friends, If visible object would not meet the eye-base, seeing could not arise. Visible object and the eye-base are rúpas. The eyesense is a rúpa in the eye which is capable to receive visible object or colour, so that seeing can experience it. Rúpa arise and falls away, but it does not fall away as rapidly as citta. Visible object is experienced by seeing and by several other cittas arising in a process of cittas, the eye-door process. When a pleasant visible object is experienced attachment is likely to arise and when an unpleasant object is experienced aversion is likely to arise and this happens already during the eye-door process, before we think of the meaning of what we experience. It all occurs because of conditions, it is beyond control what type of citta arises within the processes of cittas. The cittas arising in the different processes do so according to a specific order and nobody can change this order. After the sense-door process of cittas is over, the same object is experienced through the mind-door, and after that mind-door processes of cittas may arise which think about the object. One rúpa lasts as long as it takes seventeen cittas to arise and fall away in succession [1]. Visible object and the eye-base have not fallen away yet when the cittas of the eye-door process arise and experience visible object. Thus we see that the conditions for the different cittas which arise are very intricate. Visible object does not meet the ear-base, it can only meet the eye-base. When there is seeing, there cannot be at the same time the meeting of sound and the ear- base. This is a difficult subject we discussed for many hours while we were in Thaton. However, we did not only sit, we were also walking in between the sessions on the terrace above the river. Acharn Sujin thinks of the welfare of everybody, she arranges for agreeable places to stay. She also thought of my husband Lodewijk who does not understand Thai and could not follow the sessions. One should not torture oneself by sitting all day, that is not the “Middle Way”. She herself took a short boat trip on the river. Lodewijk was reading my “Abhidhamma in Daily Life” on a terrace above the river, while we were having our sessions in the garden under an awning. Here we were somewhat protected from the cold wind which was blowing in the early morning and in the evening. --------- 1. When a sense object, a rúpa, impinges on one of the senses, the sense-cognition such as seeing or hearing does not arise immediately. Several cittas arise and fall away before it arises and after it has arisen several more cittas arise and fall away. Seventeen cittas arise and fall away from the time that a sense object has impinged on the relevant sense organ. When this process of cittas has come to an end also that rúpa has fallen away. Thus, the time one rúpa lasts can be compared with the time citta lasts: one rúpa lasts as long as seventeen moments of citta. ******* Nina. #73199 From: upasaka@... Date: Sun Jun 10, 2007 3:22 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Death - just like now! (Alan Driver's funeral) [2] upasaka_howard Hi, Sukin - In a message dated 6/10/07 3:18:48 AM Eastern Daylight Time, sukinder@... writes: > Hi Howard, Nina, Ken H, all,. > > > > I was supposed to reply to a post of yours today, but now I'd like to first > respond to this one, hope you don't mind. > > My response is not in the order that you have written. > > ================ > > Howard: > Another answer might be "We cannot know now, but I believe that once we > achieve a certain ariyan stage it will then become clear that this is a > fact. > > Suk: In implication, is the above statement of yours much different to A. > Sujin's when she said to the effect that one needs to know present moment > realities before one can have any real understanding about rebirth? ------------------------------------- Howard: Did you note my words "I believe"? ------------------------------------ > > ================ > > Ken: > > >If we do not know this moment, how can we know what future moments > >will be like? Again, this is perfectly good, straightforward, Dhamma. > -------------------------------------- > Howard: > It is classical illogic to infer from this that if we do know this > moment, we can know future moments. Itis invalid reasoning,and as death is > concerned, it begs the question. > > > > Suk: I know that you are now talking in terms of logical reasoning, but > putting that aside > ------------------------------------- Howard: Why put it aside?That is what my comment pertained to, a logically invalid argument. ----------------------------------------- , am I to understand that in fact your's and A. Sujin's > > statement above are quite different in implication, since I think Ken is > saying the same thing too? What according to you would be the basis for an > ariyan's being "clear" about rebirth if not through understanding present > moment realities / conditionality? ------------------------------------------ Howard: Sukin, when and if one recalled past lives, "saw" beings being reborn, or what fully awake and aware during the rebirth process, one would "know" the truth of rebirth. Otherwise, on the basis of reasoning, tradition, trust in the Buddha, etc, etc, one would merely have confidence in it, and should merely say so. This is, in fect, the Buddha'steaching on safeguarding truth. ------------------------------------------- > > ======================= > > Ken: > > >It is not irrelevant to the answer given. K Sujin's answer was (in > >effect), "by correctly understanding the present moment," and this is > >the way the present reality should be understood. > > ------------------------------------------ > Howard: > But the question didn't pertain to present reality, but to what happens > after the dissolution of the khandhas! > > > > Suk: What *does* happen after the dissolution of the khandhas, what *is* the > arising of the present khandhas and what happened to the one just past? With > regards to cittas arising and falling away by conditions, what is the > difference between death-rebirth and any two consecutive moments now? Past > kamma conditions 'seeing' at this moment, how different is rebirth > consciousness with regard to this? ---------------------------------------- Howard: Do you know? I do not. You and I can quote whatever we wish - whatever we find persuasive. That is fine for attempting to persuade people of a position. But we do not know what is what, and we shouldn't claim to. Sukin, I'm tired of this ongoing discussion. Most of what folks are writing to me is irrelevant to what I have been discussing, and it is all quite repetitive at this point.So, I am going to stop. I will, of course, read the rest of this post of yours, bu tprobably Iwon't add any further comments. I do thank you for writing me! :-) --------------------------------- > > ===================== I thank you very much for writing, Sukin. :-) With metta, Howard