#74200 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Jul 10, 2007 11:42 am Subject: Re: [dsg] The Bangkok Seminars - some thoughts nilovg Venerable Bhikkhu Pannabahulo, I appreciate very much your sincere and straightforward report. Op 10-jul-2007, om 15:58 heeft pannabahulo het volgende geschreven: > Last week I had the wonderful opportunity to attend 3 days of > Abhidhamma seminars with Ajan Sujin -------------- P: Wisdom is a Cetasika which can arise only when there are conditions for this to happen. This process cannot be forced because all Cetasikas are Anatta (non-self). I, and so many other meditators besides, fall into the trap of practicing to achieve something. But this is to run in the opposite direction to insight. ------- Nina: It is amazing how conditions operate. Some people never understand that wisdom cannot be made to grow by techniques and you understood after listening only for a short time. ------- P: Spending hours walking and sitting will not help the arising of wisdom at all; unless one's kammic accumulations support that arising. But if they do, then wisdom can arise just as easily when one is washing one's clothes as when one is walking and sitting. In fact, it seems to me that, whilst washing one's clothes, the expectations or lobha that is usually present in most meditating yogi's minds is probably minimal - if present at all. And as lobha and wisdom cannot coexist together, there may be better opportunities for wisdom to arise whilst performing normal daily activities. ------ N: That is why I like the details of the Vinaya, where the Buddha speaks about cleaning the dwelling place,removing cobwebs, eating manners, etc. all this is about daily life. And for a layperson: even while singing in a choir. ------ P: It is generally true; it seems to me, that meditators usually have mind states that arise together with lobha. There is greed and craving for awareness, concentration, mindfulness and attainments; and there is the terrible attachment to the "I" conceit. Most meditators, including myself, think in terms of "my" meditation practice, "my" defilements and "my" hindrances. But, whilst such remains the case, wisdom is not present and so vipassana insight cannot arise. ------ N: It is good to be reminded of the terrible attachment to the "I" conceit. Very well said. It plays tricks all the time, even when writing posts. A thought of 'I know better than him" can so easily slip in. We have to learn so much. ------- P: .... She asked me what it was that I meditated for; I replied that I wanted an end to suffering. Ajan Sujin then asked me "Are you suffering now?" and I replied "No". This is the incredible metta of Ajan Sujin; always guiding and directing her students back to the "Right Now" present moment. ------- N: An excellent example. We are thinking of the cycle and the end of dukkha instead of knowing dukkha right now. I appreciate your reactions to her guidance. She is also misunderstood. ------- P: here are those famous lines that the Ven Assaji spoke: "Of those things that arise from a cause, The Tathagata has told the cause, And also what their cessation is: This is the doctrine of the Great Recluse." ------ N: I am always impressed by this text. It demonstrates that Sariputta had accumulated such an amount of wisdom that a few lines were enough for him to penetrate the truth. How it all depends on conditions, conditions which may even stem form the far past. -------- P: ....At this point Ajan Sujin asked me what about hardness? I was resting my arms on the table and hardness – a quality of rupa and so a paramattha dhamma – was present as an object of awareness. Why note? The awareness was there. Noting involves concepts and concepts are not real. Vipassana only applies to absolute truth; not concepts. And the most damming critique is that whist a meditator is, for example, noting "Seeing, seeing, seeing", no seeing is actually going on at all. Noting is `thinking': and the meditator should then be aware of thinking!! Noting depends on past dhammas that have already fallen away. Noting has nothing to do with the present moment. ------ N: I like this example very much, always the present moment. We cannot hear about it enough. What you describe about 'noting' I have heard before. --------- P: These were my lessons; and I will devote more time to studying both Abhidhamma and the Suttas. -------- N: With much appreciation and respect, Nina. #74201 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Jul 10, 2007 11:59 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Theriigaathaa - Sisters (61) nilovg Dear Sarah, Thank you for the trouble typing this out. I have no time to go through these. I also found that Norman is more a linguist. The geography of north India not correct? But that is not a Dhamma point. I am only interested in paramattha dhammas, in the real! Nina. Op 10-jul-2007, om 12:54 heeft sarah abbott het volgende geschreven: > S: Here's the list to get your teeth stuck into! > > Norman. EV11, intro p xxxv, #37: > "It is possible to point to a number of cases where Dhammapaala did > not > understand the meaning of a word or phrase he was commenting on, e.g. > purakkhataa (199) #74202 From: Katherine Masis Date: Tue Jul 10, 2007 1:50 pm Subject: Brief Introduction twin_oceans Hello, My name is Katherine Masís and I teach philosophy at Universidad de Costa Rica in San José, Costa Rica, Central America. Among the courses I teach is an introductory survey course on Hindu and Buddhist thought. I practiced one form of Zen Buddhism for about 15 years before turning to Vipassana meditation in the Theravada tradition about 7 years ago. I am also interested in Tibetan Buddhism, but I am not as familiar with it. Even though Costa Rica is a small country, one may find many Buddhist traditions here. I know of Ch'an, Zen, Tibetan, Theravada and Pure Land groups, to name a few. I am looking forward to the postings on your list. Best wishes, Katherine Masís #74203 From: "m_nease" Date: Tue Jul 10, 2007 3:55 pm Subject: Re: Death - just like now! (Alan Driver's funeral) [7] m_nease Hi Sarah and All, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > J: It depends on those last few moments... > S: It seems terrible that so much depends on those last few moments. If by > bad fortune one is singing then instead of considering dhamma.... So > much depends on those last few moments. > > J: The last few moments depend so much on what has gone before. ... > S: These moments - such significance... I forget who 'J' is--these comments remind me that I think people often think that if they can control those 'last few moments'--recollect the Buddha, say--that this will improve their chances for the next rebirth. This probably isn't what J and S had in mind here, but--could you please elaborate? Thanks, mike #74204 From: Jaran Jainhuknan Date: Tue Jul 10, 2007 4:54 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: sensibility to the teachings, was: "Dhammas" and Impermanence. jjnbdal Dear Nina: Good to hear from you. My father visited us recently in Bangkok. He is well although his seeing is poor now even on a sunny day. I am still have my job, at least for a while. I always appreciate your comments and writings and most of all your view of things that reflect your firm devotion to understanding dhamma. Best Regards, Jaran Nina van Gorkom wrote: Dear Jaran, I am so glad to see you here. You said a lot has happened, and I hope your father is well? Your job? Everything is so unsure these days. I hear from others that they lost their job. I only have pain, no loss. This is an allusion to other discussions we had about funerals. Are you coming to India? We have planned to, but one never knows what will happen. Kamma and vipaaka. We all would be delighted if you come in here with a remark or question. All the best, Nina. Op 10-jul-2007, om 13:03 heeft Jaran Jainhuknan het volgende geschreven: > I login on the group for the first time in a long time. A lot of > things have happened. Sorry to hear about your loss and pain. #74205 From: LBIDD@... Date: Tue Jul 10, 2007 4:58 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: What is the wrong view? (References from the MN anthology) lbidd2 Hi Jon, J: "I'm still not sure about 'simple faith' as right view. What exactly do you have in mind here?" L: What I had in mind was the mundane right view of MN117, but it seems to me that any arising of faith is at least mundane right view. J: "Correct, kusala citta cannot be wrong view. However, it can be the wrong path (only kusala of the level of satipatthana is reckoned as right path)." L: Wrong view is a subset of wrong path, at least in MN 117. Larry #74206 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Tue Jul 10, 2007 5:32 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: "Dhammas" and Impermanence (The Abhidhammikas perspective?) scottduncan2 Dear TG, Thanks for your patience. I'd like to conclude our discussion, if you don't mind. Last word to you... Sincerely, Scott. #74207 From: upasaka@... Date: Tue Jul 10, 2007 2:02 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Death - just like now! (Alan Driver's funeral) [7] upasaka_howard Hi, Nina - In a message dated 7/10/07 2:07:43 PM Eastern Daylight Time, vangorko@... writes: > Hi Howard, > For vipassana nothing is an impediment. Also thinking of a melody is > real, it is conditioned. It is remembered because of sa~n~naa. > Thinking is different from hearing and we can learn more about all > these realities. Also when you are in the choir: do not forget > awareness (here is some gentle prompting). Perhaps it is your turn to > laugh! The movement of the mouth, the jaws, etc. There are different > rupas appearing. > Nina. > ======================== When the conditions for vipassana are in place, the vipassana arises. Meditation is not vipassana. It is one tool for the cultivation of vipassana. That tool of meditation is not made good use of unless proper conditions are in place for it. Obsessing, on a melody or anything else, is an impediment to it. Sometimes it is possible to overcome the impediment during "a sitting", but sometimes not. With metta, Howard With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) #74208 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Tue Jul 10, 2007 8:03 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: "Dhammas" and Impermanence (The Abhidhammikas perspective?) scottduncan2 Dear colette, HELLO! Thanks for the cheery: c: "GOOD MORNING SCOTT" Scott: Very pleasant on a fine morning! c: "...Which came first that which is known or that which knows and here, below we all can see that you've struck a note highly significant in the rhetorical delusion I posed." Scott: A variation of the old chicken and egg question...I think it all converges at once... c: "this is Pravda, truth, that the Buddha advises "seeing things as they really are" but to do that requires the process of the meditations. One of the avenues, paths, would be the Vipissana meditation, but that isn't the only avenue, path. So, THEN, since we have accepted the truth of the quality of seeing things as the really are means that we've also accepted the rigors and practices of meditations to achieve this sight. This conclusion of the course a practioner takes to reach the truth is not advocated as a means and I think is then ignored by the masses that actually believe in a "magik bullet" that will somehow transform their view in the blink of an eye." Scott: I wonder about development of dhammas and does it just go on and on and is it like this amazing succession of sentience and is it the world in an instant and then practise is actually thought of as a magik bullet don't you think? colette: "THANK YOU SCOTT! I love it I love it I love it, great angle, what is it that sees a thing as it really is and does the act of seeing, then, know? The eye consciousness is seperate from the alaya- vijnana (store house consciousness) which is defiled by the perversions it accepted at one time as being pleasurable, non- pleasurable, and neither pleasurable nor non-pleasurable." Scott: Excellent. Now you've dared to hone in on the UNSPEAKABLE, haven't you, with your unerring knack. I fear that TG would never allow this to be said - that the view discussed between he and I verged closer and closer to this very MODERN NOTION - the alaya-vijnana. All that insubstantial talk. I had wondered as much, and you confirm it. I was asking about dhammas and was getting nowhere. How can characteristics be of nothing? Talk about chicken and egg. It like being one's own grandfather. c: "Does the eye consciousness actually perceive all the characteristics of that which it sees? If so, how are the multitudes of characteristics classified, ranked, in the mind consciousness and storehouse consciousness?" Scott: This is beyond the outer limits for me - storehouse consciousness. New fangled innovation. One moment of seeing at a time. Seeing only sees. TG would rejoice to hear me say that classification is a function of thinking, I think. So concept. But thinking is real. Which TG wouldn't agree with methinks. I'm glad you enjoyed the points I was making. I hope all is well with you. "Don't let it get you down, its only castles burning..." (Some-Other-Canadian-Who-Is-Not-Me-But-Who-ROCKS-Nonetheless.) Sincerely, Scott. #74209 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Jul 10, 2007 9:22 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Death - just like now! (Alan Driver's funeral) [7] sarahprocter... Hi Howard, --- upasaka@... wrote: > > KS: By kamma, not by one's will. > =========================== > Unless she is emphasizing the "ones's", this is a very odd > statement > of Khun Sujin's,... ... S: Yes, she is emphasising that it's beyond any self's control. This was a very informal chat with Jon, myself and her sister as we sat on the boat. We understood what she was saying and had no problem with following conventional uses of 'I' etc. In another situation, with others present, there might have been more elaboration. .... > BTW, I am mightily unimpressed by the notion that singing is (an > expression of) greed. It is often mainly an expression of happiness, > even joy. ... S: As Nina has explained, singing is a manifestation of very ordinary attachment most of the time. When we travel in India on pilgrimage, many of our friends like to sing, much to Nina's dismay:-). Such happiness or dismay are common, ordinary daily life. KS certainly is not (and has never) suggested that anyone not sing or play music as Nina has said. The same with laughing. As you say, she laughs a lot herself by accumulations:). If we try not to have lobha or think it can be stopped at will, we go off-track again. Understanding is one thing, trying to control is another. This was the point of the comment on the 'avoid evil' point; no one can stop lobha arising after seeing, hearing, smelling, tasting or touching. .... >The > fact that we worldlings tend to like what is pleasant doesn't demand > that > those elements that add and express joy our life be avoided, leaving > only a > hollow, dried up husk! ... S: Exactly. The lay-life is also very different from the monk's life as Nina also pointed out. ... >If KS endorses eviction from one's mental > household of the > joy that singing expresses, she might also consider doing something > about that > smiling (and even laughing) of hers, don't you think? ... S: Well, she doesn't on either score, as we've stressed many times before!! This doesn't mean that we should kid ourselves that most of our enjoyment is kusala. ... >KS's attitude is > so > reminiscent to me of certain fundamentalist Protestant sects in parts of > the > southern U.S. that confuse goodness and spirituality with a gray > moroseness that > celebrates nothing. ... S: This is why I added the notes about laughing and smiling. Even at a funeral or even whilst carrying the ashes out to sea (in my tight clutches), we are laughing and smiling, sharing dhamma, enjoying the scenery too. All very natural. Ven Pannabahulo will tell you that during our recent discussions in Bangkok, the atmosphere was very light, pleasant, relaxed with lots of laughter too. ... > There IS healthy joy, and if it consigns one to hell, then that > is a > price I am more than willing to pay! But the people I have come across > in this > world who are good, and loving, and generous, and wise are also joyful > and > unafraid of life, and so I do not accept KS's drab dictum. ... S: You misunderstood it! If we don't sing or laugh or try to avoid lobha (impossible, of course), because we're afraid of hell, that would be a complete wrong understanding conditioned by very strong attachment to 'me' and 'my rebirth'. Understanding and seeing the truth is quite another matter. Metta, Sarah ======== #74210 From: "gazita2002" Date: Tue Jul 10, 2007 9:27 pm Subject: Re: The Bangkok Seminars - some thoughts gazita2002 Hello Bhante, read your most interesting post and totally agree that Achan Sujin teaches with great metta. I also gained much benefit from the few days spent with the group. To be reminded that it is only this present moment that can be fully known, is of lasting benefit and gain, IMHO. Achan often says that the development of understanding must go along with detachment and that there must be detachment from the beginning. This confuses some people and me included, so I asked her what she meant. Her reply was that from the beginning there must be the understanding that understanding cannot be made to arise, otherwise there is clinging to the idea that 'we' can make it happen. By knowing that citta and accompanying cetasikas cant be made to arise at will, may be a condition for understanding to grow a little - in fact it probably already is a degree of right understanding just to know that 'we' cant create conditions - arising and falling away is not controllable. Can 'we' control the citta which arises and sees? No, we cannot! Same with all realities - "we" have total NO control. This is a wonderful teaching, again IMHO. Looking forward to meeting up again with the group soon, depending on conditions! Patience, courage and good cheer, azita --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "pannabahulo" wrote: > > The Bangkok Seminars – Some Thoughts > > Last week I had the wonderful opportunity to attend 3 days of > Abhidhamma seminars with Ajan Sujin that were held in response to a > visit to Thailand by Jonothan and Sarah. > ..........snip...... > May you all be well, happy and peaceful. > With Metta, > > Pannabahulo Bhikkhu > #74211 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Jul 10, 2007 9:37 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Death - just like now! (Alan Driver's funeral) [7] sarahprocter... Hi Mike & all, --- m_nease wrote: > > J: It depends on those last few moments... > > > S: It seems terrible that so much depends on those last few moments. > If by > > bad fortune one is singing then instead of considering dhamma.... So > > much depends on those last few moments. > > > > J: The last few moments depend so much on what has gone before. > ... > > S: These moments - such significance... > > I forget who 'J' is ... S: Jon/Jonothan ... >--these comments remind me that I think people > often think that if they can control those 'last few > moments'--recollect the Buddha, say--that this will improve their > chances for the next rebirth. This probably isn't what J and S had in > mind here, but--could you please elaborate? ... S: As you say, people often think they can control those 'last few moments', but that's impossible, just as it's impossible to control seeing or hearing now. I was concerned that so much 'hung' on those last few moments (a little emotionally), which are not in anyone's control. An issue just at that time, as I recall. Jon was rightly pointing out that those last few moments, and the kamma which conditions them, don't arise by any fluke or random chance. Instead the kamma depends on what has gone before, what has been accumulated to condition that kamma with the great support of natural decisive support condition. All very 'just'! So, I'd say, in our own ways, we were stressing the opposite of what you suggest: i.e that anything can be done to control those last few moments. It was all quite a long time ago....(almost 20yrs), so it's interesting for me to go through. I don't particularly identify with the S. and J. then as being the S. and J. now. Could be anyone. Past lives at each moment! I'm glad it's a topic of interest (and controversy as usual!!). Metta, Sarah ======= #74212 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Jul 10, 2007 9:49 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] The Bangkok Seminars - some thoughts sarahprocter... Dear Ven Pannabahulo, (Ven Dhammanando, Azita & all) --- pannabahulo wrote: > The Bangkok Seminars – Some Thoughts .... S: Thank you for your wonderful and beautifully written account of the seminars and your reflections. We both found it very inspiring. We all benefitted a lot from your presence, your good questions, keen comments and humility too. It's not easy to 'start again' and yet it's what we have to do at each moment. "The base of all knowledge must be right understanding from the very beginning - otherwise it belongs to other teachers." (A.Sujin). We should also thank Azita for the arrangement as we visited at this time following her encouragement. We'll also look forward to another visit with you present. Your article makes the whole trip worthwile and especially the decision to stay in Bangkok this time (rather than out of town) for the discussions. Thank you also to Ven Dhammanando for your assistance as mentioned. May we wish you a good Vasa (Rains) season in Myanmar. I know you'll be leaving any day now and so may not have a chance to write again until your return. We'll look forward to any further reflections you have at that time. Metta & deep respect, Sarah (& Jon). ======== #74213 From: "rjkjp1" Date: Tue Jul 10, 2007 11:02 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Death - just like now! (Alan Driver's funeral) [7] rjkjp1 --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > > Hi, Robert - > > In a message dated 7/10/07 9:51:56 AM Eastern Daylight Time, rjkjp1@... > writes: > > > Dear Howard > > http://www.mettanet.org/tipitaka/2Sutta-Pitaka/4Anguttara- > > Nikaya/Anguttara1/3-tikanipata/011-sambodhivaggo-e.html > > > > Angutara Nikaya Ru.n.nasutta.m- Crying > > > > 108.Bhikkhus, singing is crying in this discipline of the noble ones > > and dancing is insanity. > > Robert > > > ========================== > Bhikkhus and bhikkhunis are single-minded practitioners, fully > dedicated to progress on the path. Singing and dancing - in general, music - is a > distraction as regards mindfulness and especially as regards jhana cultivation. A > melody that loops through ones mind while sitting for meditation can be a > real distraction. I see this as the basis for these comments. > I do presume, BTW, that you haven't banned all music from your life, > Robert. Or am I wrong in that? > ======== Dear Howard Actually Khun Sujin has asked me on a couple of occasions to explain how insight can arise even while enjoying Karaoke. However, it is good to know that singing is almost always rooted in lobha mula citta, it is akusala. Here is Johnny Cash's last recorded song, a favourite. http://youtube.com/watch?v=SmVAWKfJ4Go Robert #74214 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Jul 10, 2007 11:22 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: sensibility to the teachings, was: "Dhammas" and Impermanence. nilovg Dear Jaran, I always appreciated your remarks and help. I never forget the luncheon at our place with your friends, and how we dived into the Thai commentary afterwards. I forgot which text it was. Do you remember? A pity you are not traveling anymore. Break into any thread you feel like, such as Sarah's series Death just like now. I like your opinion about death and loss through death. I want to sonthana Dhamma with you, it helps me. Nina. Op 11-jul-2007, om 1:54 heeft Jaran Jainhuknan het volgende geschreven: > I always appreciate your comments and writings #74215 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Jul 10, 2007 11:53 pm Subject: Death - just like now! (Alan Driver's funeral) [8] sarahprocter... Dear Friends, [Discussion contd. Not on the boat as I'd thought, but at Khun Sujin's house, probably before our departure to scatter the ashes] ***** S: If there is understanding of visible object as reality, is understanding the arising and falling away of it just understanding its characteristic deeper and more precisely? KS: As nama and rupa, nobody in it. It's the way to eliminate the idea of self from seeing too, not just from the thinking only. [Then] there is no idea of what is seen must be permanent as this person. For example, when you just close your eyes now, is there any visual object appearing? S: Hmmm - no visual object.... KS: That is the rupa that should be understood, because there is no shape and form when one closes ones eyes, but still there is visual object appearing. As soon as one opens one's eyes, it just changes from one colour into different colours. Why don't you keep the understanding of visual object as just visual object when it's just one colour? Because it just changed from one into many. By this way of being aware and study[ing] and understanding what is seen now is a reality, [it] will lessen the idea of 'I am talking to someone'. Because one thinks of different colours, that's all, as different people. S: How does the understanding of different conditions at that moment help one to understand that characteristic more precisely? KS: By being aware more often and realizing, studying, turning to understand the reality as it is, as just the reality that can be seen. S: Is it just understanding the reality more often or also understanding it more precisely. KS: The understanding is the reality that should be developed - not the awareness itself only. Without awareness, right understanding cannot grow, but awareness cannot understand. That's why right understanding develops, by study. That's the meaning of study with awareness. It doesn't mean one should read or think, but study! ***** Metta, Sarah ========= #74216 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Jul 11, 2007 1:00 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Singing and awareness. was: Death - just like now! nilovg Hi Howard, As to a former post, thanks for your concern. This Saturday we are off for eight days and I can do some walking. There is improvement. As to my post on the Expositor, yes, I know you appreciate the Abhidhamma and co, except one text we talked about. That is good, because your remark was an opportunity to look more into the texts. I was thinking aloud. Howard, I like a dialogue with you on awareness now, it helps me too. In Thailand we do this, it is very relaxed and we never know where the conversation is ending. We call it sonthana dhamma. I think you should be glad with an impediment, we can learn from it. You cannot remove it always, at will. This depends on conditions. Lodewijk says that remembrance of what is past that occurs all the time is proof to him of thinking being anatta. We have no power over it. And if we think we have sometimes, also that is conditioned, thus, non-self. Even now we are thinking, then of this, then of that. The Abhidhamma can help us here. After each round of cittas with seeing, hearing etc. there is thinking of what we saw, of what we heard. There is a certain order of the cittas arising in a process and nobody can alter this. This is called citta niyama (natural order). This helps us to understand anatta. When you sit and a melody is remembered, you can contemplate anatta, that is also meditation. Is that not the goal, to learn to understand anatta? Then you can find out for yourself that this can also be considered when going about in daily life. Do you remember the melody you sung last time now? But you have to find out this for yourself, nobody should tell you what to do. We are so full of self, all of us. My thinking, my impediment, my consideration of Dhamma. How can that be lessened? You said: We often talked about these conditions. We have different ideas and that is OK. I think more understanding of no control over one's thoughts certainly helps. I think you can profit from this impediment that you cannot always overcome, as you express it. Nina. Op 11-jul-2007, om 3:02 heeft upasaka@... het volgende geschreven: > When the conditions for vipassana are in place, the vipassana arises. > Meditation is not vipassana. It is one tool for the cultivation of > vipassana. > That tool of meditation is not made good use of unless proper > conditions are in place for it. Obsessing, on a melody or anything > else, is an > impediment to it. Sometimes it is possible to overcome the > impediment during "a > sitting", but sometimes not. #74217 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Jul 11, 2007 1:17 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Death - just like now! (Alan Driver's funeral) [8] nilovg Dear Sarah and Azita (and Howard), very good discussion about visible object also when our eyes are closed. I thought of Howard who closes his eyes when meditating. I thought of mentioning this to him. One can be aware of visible object, there is something appearing, even when the eyes are closed. It is actually different from what a blind person experiences, for him there is nothing appearing through the eyes. > Very well explained. We can consider this now and then understanding will grow, be it o so slowly. Thank you, Azita, very well said: With appreciation, Nina. Op 11-jul-2007, om 8:53 heeft sarah abbott het volgende geschreven: > For example, when you just close your eyes now, is there any visual > object > appearing? > > S: Hmmm - no visual object.... > > KS: That is the rupa that should be understood, because there is no > shape > and form when one closes ones eyes, but still there is visual object > appearing. As soon as one opens one's eyes, it just changes from one > colour into different colours. Why don't you keep the understanding of > visual object as just visual object when it's just one colour? > Because it > just changed from one into many. By this way of being aware and > study[ing] > and understanding what is seen now is a reality, [it] will lessen > the idea > of 'I am talking to someone'. Because one thinks of different colours, > that's all, as different people. #74218 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Jul 11, 2007 1:31 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Brief Introduction nilovg Dear Katherine, welcome here. You studied many traditions, and now it would be interesting for this group to know what you think of Theravada. Do you find it helpful for daily life? In what way? My husband and I have no contacts in Costa Rica, and if you give me off list your postal address we can send you a book on the Perfections of the Bodhisatta. You could look into it and then pass it on to a Theravada group, if you like. The postal service is very, very slow and it may take long before it arrives, we noticed. Nina. Op 10-jul-2007, om 22:50 heeft Katherine Masis het volgende geschreven: > Even though Costa Rica is a small country, one may > find many Buddhist traditions here #74219 From: "Phil" Date: Wed Jul 11, 2007 2:38 am Subject: What other teacher teaches against selecting a meditation object? philofillet Hi Sarah and all Thanks for your encouragement. I have a very good group to discuss brahma-viharas (Antony is also a member) but can't find any general group that is active like DSG so I am compelled to continue discussing here with all the irritation that involves when discussion of practice is involved. (Hopefully I will get to those questions about the four kinds of nutrition - that is purely questions about Abhidhamma and will not involve debate. Wise Phl will come to use DSG to learn more about Abhidhamma and continue to look elsewhere for other areas of discussion.) - I guess participation at DSG will inevitably > > mean discussing AS' teaching. > .... > S: Again, she'd say it's not her teaching, but the Buddha's. Others would > say the same, so let's discuss what is said and what the Buddha taught to > find out for ourselves! OK, a very key point has come to my attention. I remember Jon was asking "what is meditation" some months ago. It seems to me that meditation means choosing by oneself or being given by a teacher a suitable meditation object that one sticks with. All the teachers I've heard discuss what meditation objects are suitable, most, including Bhikkhu Bodhi, recommending mindfulness of the body as the best starting point. (I posted once a passage in which he explained why - I can't recall it now.) If I understand correctly, the Vism lays out meditation objects and which are suitable for which temperaments. And yet Acharn Sujin says that one should *not* select or be assigned a meditation object. My question is this - has anyone heard of *any* other teacher who does not teach meditating on a meditation object that has even selected intentionally or assigned? If I come across some other teacher who teaches this, I will perhaps begin to believe that it she is about the Buddha's teaching rather than her own idiosyncratic take on it. Unless of course she is the only one who understands the Buddha's teaching and all teachers who recommend choosing or being assigned a meditation object are incorrect. That is possible - I do believe that. And if the answer is that clinging to self is involved in choosing or being assigned a meditation object put away your books and drop all your discussion threads. Of course you have all the time-tested answers to these points, probably on file. That's one of the frustrating things about DSG - you folks have all your responses on file, either literally or stored in your brains from posting the same things again and again for years. Whereas I have to struggle, as busy as I am, to try to explain myself and try to put my little bit of knowledge of the texts to use. Really a David vs Goliath situation. Have you ever seen yourself as Goliath before, Sarah? Honestly, I really dislike debating, mostly because I don't have the textual weapons other people have on hand. (The tipitaka is so vast that anyone can defend his or her opinion effectively using textutal references. Thus the debates are never won.) I hope I can get rid of the need to do so and just let people believe what they believe. We'll see if that comes. Metta, Phil p.s I am going to Canada soon but not quite yet. #74220 From: "Phil" Date: Wed Jul 11, 2007 2:52 am Subject: Virtue that is well purified and view that is straight (SN 47:3) philofillet Hi all Looking through SN 47:3 today came across this passage. The Buddha is talking to a monk who has asked for the Dhamma in brief: "Well then, bhikkhu, purify the very starting point of wholesome states. And what is the starting point of wholesome states? Virtue that is well purified and view that is straight. Then, bhikkhu, when your virtue is well purified and your view straight, based upon virtue, established upon virtue, you should develop the four establishments in a threefold way." Sounds pretty clear to me, but I wasn't born in the Buddha's day so I probably am misunderstanding. But I take this to be a clear teaching that people who are morally slack and prone to unwholesome actions of body, speech and mind cannot practice satipatthana. But for AS there can be satipatthana at any time, on any object. And what is this "view that is straight", what is this right view that we are always told must be there for satipatthana? Surely it is about insight into presently arisen dhamma, hmm? Let's look up the commentarial note: "Spk: THe view is that of one's responsibility for one's action (kammassakataaditthi) i.e belief in kamma and its fruits, which implies as well belief in rebirth." This right view is not about insight into dhammas, it is not about the wrong view that is about not having the right view of the ariyan. It is a very mundane form of right view that I feel quite close to having. BB adds. "The Buddha's statement here establishes that right view (the first factor of the Noble Eightfold Path) and right conduct (factors 3-5) are the basis for the successful practice of mindfulness meditation. Oh! I wonder what BB means by meditation???? Metta, Phil p.s you can tell I am feeling sarcastic and irritable today. Rainy season solar deprivation, maybe. #74221 From: "Phil" Date: Wed Jul 11, 2007 3:04 am Subject: Re: What is the wrong view? (References from the MN anthology) philofillet Hi Jon > Some brief extracts below with selected commentary material, to ponder > on while you're away. Thanks. The problem is that I never print out posts from DSG like I used to so never ponder what I have read. Lazy! Had better start printing things out again so I can join discussions in a proper way. I don't know about you, but I can't ponder looking at this computer screen. I have my special pondering place, and yes, a cushion is involved. :) > > Note the "descriptive" interpretation given to such terms as ardent > ("possessed of right energy"), clearly comprehending ("endowed with > knowledge") and mindful ("endowed with mindfulness"). > > Note also the reference to"preliminary practice connected with the > mundane path of mindfulness", which was the point you were wondering > about. There are plenty of further references to the mundane > path/practice/insight in the commentary material. OK. This is all over my head. I hope I will ponder further. Right now I can't even remember what we were talking about. I might have the beginning of the family alzheimer's. Metta, Phil #74222 From: "rjkjp1" Date: Wed Jul 11, 2007 3:38 am Subject: Re: What other teacher teaches against selecting a meditation object? rjkjp1 --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Phil" a very key point has come to my attention. I remember Jon was > asking "what is meditation" some months ago. It seems to me that > meditation means choosing by oneself or being given by a teacher a > suitable meditation object that one sticks with. All the teachers > I've heard discuss what meditation objects are suitable, > And yet Acharn Sujin says that one should *not* select or be > assigned a meditation object. My question is this - has anyone heard > of *any* other teacher who does not teach meditating on a meditation > object that has even selected intentionally or assigned? If I come > across some other teacher who teaches this, I will perhaps begin to > believe that it she is about the Buddha's teaching rather than her > own idiosyncratic take on it. Dear Phil Stephen Levine, A Gradual Awakening, Part 2 "When we simply see--moment to moment--what's occurring, observing without judgment or preference, we don't get lost thinking, "I prefer this moment to that moment, I prefer this pleasant thought to that pain in my knee." As we begin developing this CHOICELESS AWARENESS, what starts coming within the field of awareness is quite remarkable: we start seeing the root from which thought arises. We see intention, out of which action comes. We observe the natural process of mind and discover how much of what we so treasured to be ourselves is essentially impersonal phenomena passing by." Robert #74223 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Jul 11, 2007 5:09 am Subject: Conditions, Ch 7, no 5 nilovg Dear friends, So long as we are in the cycle of birth and death there are conditions for each citta to be succeeded by the next citta. The development of right understanding of the different characteristics of realities as they appear one at a time will eventually lead to the end of the cycle. We confuse the different doorways of sense-doors and mind-door, we do not clearly distinguish between different cittas which experience one object at a time through one doorway. Through the development of right understanding one learns that the doorways and the realities which are dependent on them are different. Seeing is completely different from hearing, it arises because of different conditions, experiences an object different from the object which hearing experiences. The aim of learning about the conditions for the realities which arise is the understanding of the truth of non-self. We read in the “Kindred Sayings”(IV, Salåyatana Vagga, Second Fifty, 5, The Chapter of the Six, § 94, Including the sixfold sense-sphere) that the Buddha said that when the six spheres of contact (the five senses and the mind) are untamed, unguarded, unwatched, unrestrained there will be dukkha, whereas when they are well tamed, well watched, well restrained [1], there will be happiness. We read in the verse: He meets with dukkha, monks, who has not tamed The sixfold impact of the sphere of sense. They who have learned the mastery of these, With faith for comrade,- they dwell free from lust. Beholding with the eye delightful things Or things unlovely, let him restrain his bent To lust for loveliness, and let him not Corrupt his heart with thoughts of “O, it is dear.” And when, again, sounds sweet or harsh he hears, Not led astray by sweetness, let him check The error of his senses. Let him not Corrupt his heart with thoughts of “O, it is sweet.” If some delightful fragrance meet the nose, And then again some foul malodorous stench, Let him restrain repugnance for that stench, Nor yet be led by lust for what is sweet. Should he taste savours that are sweet and choice, And then again what is bitter to the tongue, He should not greedily devour the sweet, Nor yet show loathing for the bitter taste. By pleasures’ impact not inebriate, Nor yet distracted by the touch of pain, To pain and pleasure both indifferent Let him be free from likings and dislikes. Obsessed (by lusts) are others: so obsessed They know and so they fare. But he dispels All the world’s vulgar fashionings of mind. And treads the path renunciation-bound. By contact of these six, if mind be trained, The heart is never shaken any more. Overcome these two, O monks,- lust and hate. Do you pass beyond the bounds of birth and death. --------- 1. We also read in other parts of the teachings that the six doors are “guarded” through satipaììhåna. Only right understanding of the reality which appears can eventually eradicate defilements. ******** Nina. #74224 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Jul 11, 2007 5:28 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: delayed letter to Howard. nilovg Dear Phil, thank you for your kind words and your concern. No frustration about you! You will be all right. As Ken wrote to you: I had this experience: a friend's funeral, 'just like now' seemed so harsh. Now I appreciate the reminder, so does Lodewijk. We all have such experiences. Very common, Phil. I am glad you return to dsg all the time. Controversies are useful, I can learn from them. I am also here to learn. Phil, have a very good trip to Canada. An opportunity to see your ailing mother. Best wishes, Nina. Op 10-jul-2007, om 2:52 heeft Phil het volgende geschreven: > You know, if people don't have conditions > to understand, they won't understand no matter how clear the teacher > is so I hope I haven't caused you any undue frustration. #74225 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Jul 11, 2007 5:19 am Subject: Listening to the Dhamma, Ch 6, no 1. nilovg Dear friends, Chapter 6 The Eradication of Defilements During our sessions in Thaton, coffee, tea and leechee juice was passed around. The leechee juice was made from fruits of the orchard belonging to the owner of the hotel. We cannot help having attachment as soon as we taste a delicious flavour. However, we cannot force ourselves not to have lobha, it arises when there are conditions for it but it can be object of right understanding. The different degrees of defilements were another topic of our discussions. Akusala citta arises more often than we realize. Many times we do not recognize akusala as akusala because we have accumulated ignorance from life to life. Through the development of vipassanå we learn that akusala is a conditioned reality, non-self. Only right understanding developed in vipassanå can eventually eradicate akusala. So long as we take it for self it cannot be eradicated. When we listen to the Dhamma and study what the Buddha taught about akusala cittas we shall have less ignorance about them. It is most beneficial to learn the details of the different types of cittas and the conditions through which they arise, otherwise we take akusala for kusala, and we do not notice that there is akusala citta when it is more subtle. By the study of the Dhamma we begin to think in the right way about realities and this can be a condition later on for the arising of sammå-sati, right mindfulness. Akusala cittas can be coarse, medium or subtle. The coarse defilements, vítikkama kilesa, are the unwholesome actions through body, speech or mind, such as killing, stealing or lying. The medium defilements, pariyutthåna [1] kilesa, are the akusala cetasikas which arise with the citta but which do not have the intensity to motivate unwholesome deeds at that moment. Akusala cittas can be classified according to their roots, hetus, in three groups: lobha- múla-cittas, which are rooted in moha, ignorance, and in attachment, lobha; dosa- múla- cittas, which are rooted in moha and dosa, aversion; moha-múla-cittas which have moha as their only root. Besides the roots there are other akusala cetasikas which arise with these akusala cittas. The subtle defilements, anusaya, do not arise with akusala citta, but they are latent tendencies; they lie dormant, they are like microbes investing the body. We do not notice them, but they are there, accumulated in the citta; they are pertinacious and they condition the arising of defilements again and again. The inherent or latent tendencies have been accumulated from life to life. The first javana cittas of every living being who is born are lobha-múla- cittas, cittas rooted in attachment. These are conditioned by the latent tendencies accumulated in the past. ---------- 1. The Påli term pari means: around, completely, and uììhati means: to arise or pervade. The pariyutthåna kilesas pervade us. ******** Nina. #74226 From: "Phil" Date: Wed Jul 11, 2007 5:40 am Subject: Re: What other teacher teaches against selecting a meditation object? philofillet Hi Robert >My question is this - has anyone > heard > > of *any* other teacher who does not teach meditating on a > meditation > > object that has even selected intentionally or assigned? If I come > > across some other teacher who teaches this, I will perhaps begin > to > > believe that it she is about the Buddha's teaching rather than her > > own idiosyncratic take on it. > Dear Phil > Stephen Levine, A Gradual Awakening, Part 2 I'm happy to see Stephen Levine quoted here, Robert! He was one of my favourites pre-DSG, is one of my favourites now. My favourite line of his is "some people try to control the mind. It is better not to allow the mind to control us." The meditation object is chosen, or assigned, and returned to diligently - but there is no intent to force the mind into place. The Buddha makes it so clear we can't do that, the line in Dhammapada and AN about nothing beings as changeable as the mind, like a fish flipping about etc. It would be nuts to think that one could force the mind to stay on a meditation object. Anyone who "meditates" finds out very quickly that that is out of the question, and is not the point. (Ah, but maybe it is in samatha/jhanas, I don't know about that.) > "When we simply see--moment to moment--what's occurring, observing > without judgment or preference, we don't get lost thinking, "I > prefer this moment to that moment, I prefer this pleasant thought to > that pain in my knee." Absolutely. I don't think any of these modern meditation teachers would say that we should or can rigidly fix our attention on one object, trying to shut out others - one is aware/mindful of whatever comes. But surely all these modern meditation teachers - I think also of Joseph Goldstein - start with a meditation object to get the ball rolling, so to speak. Goldstein is fond of the Burmese rising and falling of the abdomen, or was, at least, as he was a student of Sayadaw U Pandita - surely Levine has a principal meditation object, presumedly withing mindfulness of the body? And from there comes the "we simply see--moment to moment-- what's occuring, observing...etc." I think they all start with a principle meditation object. The purpose of this? To allow a certain degree of concentration? (khanica samadhi?) Isn't it standard Theravada, as taught in Vism, to choose or have assigned a meditation object? Or is that section in Vism only for those seeking jhanas? (samattha?) Thanks for your patience with me, Robert. Beware, a typhoon is on the way - should hit Kyushu the day after tomorrow. (You probably enjoy typhoons like I do. :) Metta, Phil p.s I remember when we met you said you feel an affinity for zen. After I posted earlier I thought that Zen is a tradition in which a principle meditation object is not chosen, but maybe it is, I don't know. I'm really out of my league talking about these subjects. I realized after posting earlier how absurd it is for me to post opinions on these subjects when I know so little about them. If I were wiser, I would be more of a lurker and reader. #74227 From: "Phil" Date: Wed Jul 11, 2007 5:45 am Subject: [dsg] Re: delayed letter to Howard. philofillet Hi Nina > thank you for your kind words and your concern. > No frustration about you! You will be all right. Thank you. I think so too. There is some process at work that is causing me to be quarrelsome but I am sure I will get through it and come to benefit from AS' great knowledge of abhidhamma without worrying so much about aspects I don't agree with. > As Ken wrote to you: something they cannot understand or don't want to hear. And it will > make sense to them later. I can't think of any examples, but I have > benefited from that sort of thing from time to time. Something I have > heard long ago - either here or on the recorded talks - will suddenly > make sense to me.> I think this will happen. But I must admit it would be more likely to happen if, when listening to other teachers, I more often heard something that made me think - that sounds like something Acharn Sujin would say! I certainly don't get that with BB or the Sayadaws. But that's ok. I will come to benefit from many angles some day. > I had this experience: a friend's funeral, 'just like now' seemed so > harsh. Now I appreciate the reminder, so does Lodewijk. We all have > such experiences. Very common, Phil. > I am glad you return to dsg all the time. Controversies are useful, I > can learn from them. I am also here to learn. > Phil, have a very good trip to Canada. An opportunity to see your > ailing mother. Thanks. I'll certainly never forget how listening to AS as I jogged helped me deal with the news about my mother. Of course, that doesn't mean she was right. We have all kinds of mechanisms to cope with bad news, and maybe AS was providing me with one that day. And maybe not. Anyways, thanks Nina. Metta, Phil #74228 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Wed Jul 11, 2007 5:48 am Subject: Re: [dsg] The Bangkok Seminars - some thoughts jonoabb Dear Ven Pannabahulo Many thanks for the detailed report and your kind words. I am glad you found the discussions useful (and I'm very impressed at what you managed to pick up from the discussion in a relatively short time). I enjoyed your description of the discussion as it unfolded. Just one comment to add. pannabahulo wrote: > ... > Ajan Sujin immediately asked me if I wanted to be aware. I said "No". > She asked me what it was that I wanted and I said I wanted to develop > understanding. She asked me what it was that I meditated for; I > replied that I wanted an end to suffering. Ajan Sujin then asked > me "Are you suffering now?" and I replied "No". > If my memory is correct, Ajarn Sujin then pointed out that in fact the present moment is suffering. As you remarked, always bringing us back to the present moment! I wish you a pleasant and fruitful vassa, and look forward to the opportunity to meet again in similar circumstances. Respectfully Jon #74229 From: "Phil" Date: Wed Jul 11, 2007 5:56 am Subject: Re: What is the wrong view? (References from the MN anthology) philofillet Hi again Jon > > Note also the reference to"preliminary practice connected with the > > mundane path of mindfulness", which was the point you were > wondering > > about. There are plenty of further references to the mundane > > path/practice/insight in the commentary material. > > OK. This is all over my head. I hope I will ponder further. Right > now I can't even remember what we were talking about. I might have > the beginning of the family alzheimer's. OK now I remember. I quoted Soma Thera's statement praising "the immediate practical benefits" of mundane satipatthana for worldlings. The commentarial material you've posted will show, I presume, that "the preliminary practice connected with the mundane path of mindfulness" is in itself quite rarefied, putting his populist statement in doubt. OK, that's fine. The teachers I listen to make it clear that what is usually called "satipatthana meditation"or "vipassana meditation" don't actually involve satipatthana or vipassana until there have been developments. BB in his talk on MN 10, which I would love to transcribe some day, says that the satipatthana doesn't actually come until the 4th patthana (frame of reference?) which is contemplation of phenomena/mental objects. I was surprised by this, heard it today. Anyways, I meditate not for satipatthana but as a way of training the mind to outgrow my worst mental tendencies, and it is working, I think. This is part of the morality training that the SN 46:3 passage I quoted in the other post gets at. I can call this kind of meditation in the modern tradition "satipatthana meditation" if I want but it is not satipatthana. That can only come when then mind has setttled, the worst tendencies outgrown, cast aside, or supressed, sublimated, I don't know. That SN 46:3 passage makes that clear. Metta, Phil #74230 From: "Phil" Date: Wed Jul 11, 2007 6:00 am Subject: Re: What is the wrong view? (References from the MN anthology) philofillet Hi again > That SN 46:3 passage makes that clear. Oops. 47:3 Metta, Phil #74231 From: connie Date: Wed Jul 11, 2007 6:01 am Subject: Theriigaathaa - Sisters (62) nichiconn Dear Friends, 9. Navakanipaato 1. Va.d.dhamaatutheriigaathaava.n.nanaa part 5 txt: Eva.m vutta-ovaada.m a"nkusa.m katvaa sa~njaatasa.mvego thero vihaara.m gantvaa divaa.t.thaane nisinno vipassana.m va.d.dhetvaa arahatta.m patvaa attano pa.tipatti.m paccavekkhitvaa sa~njaatasomanasso maatu santika.m gantvaa a~n~na.m byaakaronto- 210. "U.laara.m vata me maataa, patoda.m samavassari; paramatthasa~nhitaa gaathaa, yathaapi anukampikaa. 211. "Tassaaha.m vacana.m sutvaa, anusi.t.thi.m janettiyaa; dhammasa.mvegamaapaadi.m, yogakkhemassa pattiyaa. 212. "Soha.m padhaanapahitatto, rattindivamatandito; maataraa codito sante, aphusi.m santimuttaman"ti.- Imaa tisso gaathaa abhaasi. Pruitt: Taking this verbal instruction as a goad, a profound stirring arose in the thera. He went to his lodgings, sat down in his daytime quarters and increased his insight. He attained Arahatship, and looking over his attainment, gladness arose. He went to his mother and revealing his perfect knowledge, he spoke there three verses: 210. Truly my mother, because she was sympathetic, applied an excellent goad to me, [namely] verses connected with the highest goal. 211. I heard her utterance, my mother's instruction, and I reached a state of being profoundly stirred concerning the Doctrine, for the attainment of rest from exertion. 212. Being resolute for exertion, not relaxing day or night, urged on by my mother, I attained supreme peace. RD: The Brother, using her exhortation as a goad, and stimulated thereby, went to his Vihaara, and, seated in his wonted resting-place, so made insight to grow that he attained Arahantship. And reflecting in happiness on his attainment, he went to his mother, and declared his A~N~NAA: O splendid was the spur my mother used, And no less merciful the chastisement She gave to me, even the rune she spoke, Fraught with its burden of sublimest good. *307 (210) I heard her words, I marked her counsel wise, And thrilled with righteous awe as she called up The vision of salvation to be won. (211) And night and day I strove unweariedly Until her admonitions bore their fruit, And I could touch Nibbana's utter peace. (212) *307 Va.d.dha's gaathaa commences with a s'loka to the same effect, using the same metaphor. Theragaathaa, ver. 335-9. txt: Atha therii attano vacana.m a"nkusa.m katvaa puttassa arahattappattiyaa aaraadhitacittaa tena bhaasitagaathaa saya.m paccanubhaasi. Eva.m taapi theriyaa gaathaa naama jaataa. Pruitt: And the therii, having made this utterance a goad for her son's attainment of Arahatship, with her mind pleased, she herself repeated the verses spoken by him. In that way, the verses came to be called the therii's. txt: Tattha u.laaranti vipula.m mahanta.m. Patodanti ovaadapatoda.m. Samavassariiti sammaa pavattesi vataati yojanaa. Ko pana so patodoti aaha "paramatthasa~nhitaa gaathaa"ti. Ta.m "maa su te, va.d.dha, lokamhii"ti-aadikaa gaathaa sandhaaya vadati. Yathaapi anukampikaati yathaa a~n~naapi anuggaahikaa, eva.m mayha.m maataa pavattinivattivibhaavanagaathaasa"nkhaata.m u.laara.m patoda.m paajanada.n.daka.m mama ~naa.navegasamutteja.m pavattesiiti attho. Pruitt: 210. There, excellent means: large, great. Goad (patoda.m) means: the goad of her sermon (ovaada-patoda.m). Applied means: properly set going. Truly is a conjunction. In reply to "But what is that goad?" he says: verses connected with the highest goal. He says that with reference to the verses beginning, May you not have, Va.d.dha, [craving] for the world. [v.204 above] Because she was sympathetic means: because she helped others. Thus my mother wielded the excellent goad, [like] a stick as a goad, which is called the verses of the explanation of continuation and returning [ie, verses 204-206 above], [and] it incited me to speedy knowledge. txt: Dhammasa.mvegamaapaadinti ~naa.nabhayaavahattaa ativiya mahanta.m bhi.msana.m sa.mvega.m aapajji.m. Pruitt: 211. I reached a state of being profoundly stirred concerning the Doctrine (dhamma-sa.mvegam aapaadi.m) means: I attained the profound stirring (sa.mvega.m) that is highly, greatly terrifying, producing dread through knowledge.* *For "rest from exertion," see the commentary above on vv. 8, 9 (p.22). {Mitaa and Bhadraa} txt: Padhaanapahitattoti catubbidhasammappadhaanayogena dibbaana.m pa.tipesitacitto. Aphusi.m santimuttamanti anuttara.m santi.m nibbaana.m phusi.m adhigacchinti attho. Pruitt: 212. Being resolute for exertion means: with my mind set on quenching through the fourfold right exertion.* I attained (aphusi.m) supreme peace (santim uttama.m) means: I attained (phusi.m), I acquired, quenching, the unsurpassed peace (anuttara.m santi.m). *p183, n2: To awaken zeal for the non-arising of unarisen evil unwholesome states, for the abandoning of arisen unwholesome states, for the arising of unarisen wholesome states, and for the continuance ... of arisen wholesome states (M II 11 [MLDB 636]). {Mahaa Pajaapatii, Cy 157. There, Buddha, Hero (viraa) means: <...snip...> conquered and won through the perfection of energy and the fourfold right exertion. ...cut... :) v.161: I see the disciples all together, putting forth energy, resolute, always with strong effort. This is homage to the Buddhas.} Va.d.dhamaatutheriigaathaava.n.nanaa ni.t.thitaa. Navakanipaatava.n.nanaa ni.t.thitaa. Here ends the commentary on the verses of Therii Va.d.dha-Maataa. Here ends the commentary on the section of nine [verses]. ============================== connie #74232 From: "abhidhammika" Date: Wed Jul 11, 2007 6:54 am Subject: Not In Pali Tipitaka Re: What other teacher teaches against selecting a med objt abhidhammika Dear Phil, Mike N, Robert K, Nina, Scott Duncan, Connie How are you? Phil wrote: "And yet Acharn Sujin says that one should *not* select or be assigned a meditation object." The above statement is not part of the Buddha's teachings preserved as Theravada in Pali Tipi.taka. So, Phil, please ignore Acharn Sujin's statement as her own idiosyncratic opinion without any backing from Pali sources. This also applies to anyone confused by careless statements like the above one. When I have more spare time in future, I will write something proper to refute her wrong view and wrong speech. Perhaps elsewhere? Phil also asked in reply to Robert K, "Isn't it standard Theravada, as taught in Vism, to choose or have assigned a meditation object? " Suan answered: YES! IT IS. (I am not shouting at you. :-)) Phil also asked: "Or is that section in Vism only for those seeking jhanas? (samattha?)" Suan answered: NO! That section in Visuddhimaggo is for anyone seeking the Right Concentration, not just for Ruupa and aruupa Jhaanas. Phil also warned: "Thanks for your patience with me, Robert. Beware, a typhoon is on the way - should hit Kyushu the day after tomorrow. (You probably enjoy typhoons like I do. :)" Are you sure? Kind kegards, Suan Lu Zaw www.bodhiology.org --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Phil" wrote: What other teacher teaches against selecting a meditation object? Hi Sarah and all Thanks for your encouragement. I have a very good group to discuss brahma-viharas (Antony is also a member) but can't find any general group that is active like DSG so I am compelled to continue discussing here with all the irritation that involves when discussion of practice is involved. (Hopefully I will get to those questions about the four kinds of nutrition - that is purely questions about Abhidhamma and will not involve debate. Wise Phl will come to use DSG to learn more about Abhidhamma and continue to look elsewhere for other areas of discussion.) - I guess participation at DSG will inevitably > > mean discussing AS' teaching. > .... > S: Again, she'd say it's not her teaching, but the Buddha's. Others would > say the same, so let's discuss what is said and what the Buddha taught to > find out for ourselves! OK, a very key point has come to my attention. I remember Jon was asking "what is meditation" some months ago. It seems to me that meditation means choosing by oneself or being given by a teacher a suitable meditation object that one sticks with. All the teachers I've heard discuss what meditation objects are suitable, most, including Bhikkhu Bodhi, recommending mindfulness of the body as the best starting point. (I posted once a passage in which he explained why - I can't recall it now.) If I understand correctly, the Vism lays out meditation objects and which are suitable for which temperaments. And yet Acharn Sujin says that one should *not* select or be assigned a meditation object. My question is this - has anyone heard of *any* other teacher who does not teach meditating on a meditation object that has even selected intentionally or assigned? If I come across some other teacher who teaches this, I will perhaps begin to believe that it she is about the Buddha's teaching rather than her own idiosyncratic take on it. Unless of course she is the only one who understands the Buddha's teaching and all teachers who recommend choosing or being assigned a meditation object are incorrect. That is possible - I do believe that. And if the answer is that clinging to self is involved in choosing or being assigned a meditation object put away your books and drop all your discussion threads. Of course you have all the time-tested answers to these points, probably on file. That's one of the frustrating things about DSG - you folks have all your responses on file, either literally or stored in your brains from posting the same things again and again for years. Whereas I have to struggle, as busy as I am, to try to explain myself and try to put my little bit of knowledge of the texts to use. Really a David vs Goliath situation. Have you ever seen yourself as Goliath before, Sarah? Honestly, I really dislike debating, mostly because I don't have the textual weapons other people have on hand. (The tipitaka is so vast that anyone can defend his or her opinion effectively using textutal references. Thus the debates are never won.) I hope I can get rid of the need to do so and just let people believe what they believe. We'll see if that comes. Metta, Phil p.s I am going to Canada soon but not quite yet. #74233 From: "Dan D." Date: Wed Jul 11, 2007 7:08 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Hmmmm.... onco111 Howard, I agree with you. How could "adopting the answer" be anything more than adopting the words of the answer and, as Bonhoeffer suggests, by confusing the words with the reality constructing an excuse for complacency and indolence? And Jon, you write: "As regards the idea of coming to a correct answer after after a long and arduous road of effort to determine for oneself through practice which Efforts are Right and which are Wrong is concerned, do you mean the old 'trial and error' approach? I do not see in that a gradual progression towards right view and diminution of wrong view. I think the chances are that wrong view would prevail at the outset and would thereafter lead one deeper into wrong view." Of course I mean the ol' trial-and-error approach. True, we can only get there by not "trying", but we also need to have a thorough understanding of what "trying" means. How can that understanding develop without "trying", so that the "trying" can really arise and be seen for what it is? Trial-error-trial-error-trial-error...on and on--all informed by the teachings. Dan --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > > Hi, Jon (and Dan) - > > In a message dated 7/10/07 7:04:01 AM Eastern Daylight Time, > jonabbott@... writes: > > > I could agree with the analogy in the sense of the Buddha coming up with > > the 'answer to a sum' after spending many lifetimes in the pursuit of > > knowledge. We are then urged to adopt that answer, to the extent we are > > capable of verifying it for ourselves, rather than put ourselves through > > the same ordeal as the Buddha. > > --------------------------------------------- > Howard: > Just "adopt" the answer on the basis of presumed authority and go to > no genuine energetic efforts to make a true verification possible? What sort of > knowing would that constitute? Not a very deep or direct one, it seems to > me,and not a transformative one. What of the following words of the Kalama Sutta? > (I mark off a relevant portion by double asterisks.) > _ _ _ _ _ _ _ > "It is proper for you, Kalamas, to doubt, to be uncertain; uncertainty has > arisen in you about what is doubtful. Come, Kalamas. Do not go upon what has > been acquired by repeated hearing; nor upon tradition; nor upon rumor; nor upon > what is in a scripture; nor upon surmise; nor upon an axiom; nor upon specious > reasoning; nor upon a bias towards a notion that has been pondered over; ** > nor upon another's seeming ability; nor upon the consideration, 'The monk is our > teacher.' Kalamas, when you yourselves know: 'These things are bad; these > things are blamable; these things are censured by the wise; undertaken and > observed, these things lead to harm and ill,' abandon them.** " > -- -- -- -- -- -- > With regard to that last sentence, for "you yourself" to know, more > than idle attempts at easy verification are needed. Sustained, serious - even > "formal" - effort is needed. As in The Sound of Music, "Nothing comes from > nothing. Nothing ever will." > ;-) > There is an urgency to put forth effort when it is possible to do so. > In SN 2.10, the Buddha taught the following: > _ _ _ _ _ _ > Get up! > Sit up! > What's your need for sleep? > And what sleep is there for the afflicted, > pierced by the arrow, > oppressed? > > Get up! > Sit up! > Train firmly for the sake of peace, > Don't let the king of death, > â€" seeing you heedless â€" > deceive you, > bring you under his sway. > > Cross over the attachment > to which human & heavenly beings, > remain desiring > tied. > Don't let the moment pass by. > Those for whom the moment is past > grieve, consigned to hell. > > Heedless is > dust, dust > comes from heedlessness > has heedlessness > on its heels. > Through heedfulness & clear knowing > you'd remove > your own sorrow. > -- -- -- -- -- -- > > Also, in AN 3.91 the Buddha expressed the urgency for expending > genuine effort as follows: > _ _ _ _ _ _ > "There are these three urgent duties of a farming householder. Which three? > "There is the case where a farming householder quickly gets his field > well-plowed & well-harrowed. Having quickly gotten his field well- plowed & > well-harrowed, he quickly plants the seed. Having quickly planted the seed, he quickly > lets in the water & then lets it out. > "These are the three urgent duties of a farming householder. Now, that > farming householder does not have the power or might [to say:] 'May my crops spring > up today, may the grains appear tomorrow, and may they ripen the next day.' > But when the time has come, the farming householder's crops spring up, the > grains appear, and they ripen. > "In the same way, there are these three urgent duties of a monk. Which three? > The undertaking of heightened virtue, the undertaking of heightened mind, the > undertaking of heightened discernment. These are the three urgent duties of a > monk. Now, that monk does not have the power or might [to say:] 'May my mind > be released from fermentations through lack of clinging/sustenance today or > tomorrow or the next day.' But when the time has come, his mind is released from > fermentations through lack of clinging/sustenance. > "Thus, monks, you should train yourselves: 'Strong will be our desire for the > undertaking of heightened virtue. Strong will be our desire for the > undertaking of heightened mind. Strong will be our desire for the undertaking of > heightened discernment.' That's how you should train yourselves." > -- -- -- -- -- -- > In the foregoing, the Buddha speaks of the urgency to cultivate the > mind, such cultivation, like the preparation and cultivation of a farmer's field > provides the conditions for fruition and ripening. > ---------------------------------------------------------- > > > > As regards the idea of coming to a correct answer after after a long and > > arduous road of effort to determine for oneself through practice which > > Efforts are Right and which are Wrong is concerned, do you mean the old > > 'trial and error' approach? I do not see in that a gradual progression > > towards right view and diminution of wrong view. I think the chances > > are that wrong view would prevail at the outset and would thereafter > > lead one deeper into wrong view. > > ----------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > I agree that random trial and error would be a fruitless approach. > --------------------------------------------------- #74234 From: upasaka@... Date: Wed Jul 11, 2007 3:12 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Death - just like now! (Alan Driver's funeral) [7] upasaka_howard Hi, Sarah (and welcome back! :-) ---- In a message dated 7/11/07 12:23:02 AM Eastern Daylight Time, sarahprocterabbott@... writes: > > BTW, I am mightily unimpressed by the notion that singing is (an > >expression of) greed. It is often mainly an expression of happiness, > >even joy. > ... > S: As Nina has explained, singing is a manifestation of very ordinary > attachment most of the time. When we travel in India on pilgrimage, many > of our friends like to sing, much to Nina's dismay:-). > ------------------------------------------ Howard: They're that bad, huh? LOLOL! ------------------------------------------- Such happiness or> > dismay are common, ordinary daily life. KS certainly is not (and has > never) suggested that anyone not sing or play music as Nina has said. The > same with laughing. As you say, she laughs a lot herself by > accumulations:). ---------------------------------------- Howard: Yes, accumulations, popularly known as "habit", "custom", or "inclination". ;-) ---------------------------------------- > > If we try not to have lobha or think it can be stopped at will, we go > off-track again. Understanding is one thing, trying to control is another. ----------------------------------------- Howard: The core of right effort, including maintaining attentiveness, IS exerting control, and there are things which do indeed need to be kept under control for the safety and welfare of self and others. Without self-control, at least to the extent that humans currently do exert, this world would be a constant hell, far worse than it presently is. An alcoholic, for example, had better try to control his/her actions - even his/her thoughts. The same for those obsessed by sex, by anger, by fear, and so on. Just imagine our world without even the modicum of control that people currently apply! ------------------------------------------- > This was the point of the comment on the 'avoid evil' point; no one can > stop lobha arising after seeing, hearing, smelling, tasting or touching. ------------------------------------------- Howard: Avoiding evil is control. Avoiding harmful and hateful reaction is control. Directing one's thoughts to love when anger arises is control. Taking all the counter-measures the Buddha urged on us is control. -------------------------------------------- > .... > > >The > >fact that we worldlings tend to like what is pleasant doesn't demand > >that > >those elements that add and express joy our life be avoided, leaving > >only a > >hollow, dried up husk! > ... > S: Exactly. The lay-life is also very different from the monk's life as > Nina also pointed out. > ... > >If KS endorses eviction from one's mental > >household of the > >joy that singing expresses, she might also consider doing something > >about that > >smiling (and even laughing) of hers, don't you think? > ... > S: Well, she doesn't on either score, as we've stressed many times > before!! This doesn't mean that we should kid ourselves that most of our > enjoyment is kusala. > ... > >KS's attitude is > >so > >reminiscent to me of certain fundamentalist Protestant sects in parts of > >the > >southern U.S. that confuse goodness and spirituality with a gray > >moroseness that > >celebrates nothing. > ... > S: This is why I added the notes about laughing and smiling. Even at a > funeral or even whilst carrying the ashes out to sea (in my tight > clutches), we are laughing and smiling, sharing dhamma, enjoying the > scenery too. All very natural. Ven Pannabahulo will tell you that during > our recent discussions in Bangkok, the atmosphere was very light, > pleasant, relaxed with lots of laughter too. -------------------------------------------- Howard: Sounds like you are all headed for Avici Hell, Sarah! ;-)) -------------------------------------------- > ... > > There IS healthy joy, and if it consigns one to hell, then that > >is a > >price I am more than willing to pay! But the people I have come across > >in this > >world who are good, and loving, and generous, and wise are also joyful > >and > >unafraid of life, and so I do not accept KS's drab dictum. > ... > S: You misunderstood it! If we don't sing or laugh or try to avoid lobha > (impossible, of course), because we're afraid of hell, that would be a > complete wrong understanding conditioned by very strong attachment to 'me' > and 'my rebirth'. Understanding and seeing the truth is quite another > matter. > > Metta, > > Sarah > ======================== With smiling metta (;-), Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) #74235 From: upasaka@... Date: Wed Jul 11, 2007 3:21 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Death - just like now! (Alan Driver's funeral) [7] upasaka_howard Hi, Robert - In a message dated 7/11/07 2:02:57 AM Eastern Daylight Time, rjkjp1@... writes: > Here is Johnny Cash's last recorded song, a favourite. > http://youtube.com/watch?v=SmVAWKfJ4Go > Robert > ===================== Thank you! Wow, I can see why it is a favorite. :-) Lovely, poignant, and deeply meaningful. I think you have fine taste, Robert!! With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) #74236 From: upasaka@... Date: Wed Jul 11, 2007 3:47 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Singing and awareness. was: Death - just like now! upasaka_howard Hi, Nina - In a message dated 7/11/07 4:00:20 AM Eastern Daylight Time, vangorko@... writes: > Hi Howard, > As to a former post, thanks for your concern. This Saturday we are > off for eight days and I can do some walking. There is improvement. > As to my post on the Expositor, yes, I know you appreciate the > Abhidhamma and co, except one text we talked about. That is good, > because your remark was an opportunity to look more into the texts. I > was thinking aloud. > > Howard, I like a dialogue with you on awareness now, it helps me too. > In Thailand we do this, it is very relaxed and we never know where > the conversation is ending. We call it sonthana dhamma. > I think you should be glad with an impediment, we can learn from it. ----------------------------------------- Howard: Yes. Akusala phenomena can oft times condition useful results. An important case-in-point: In the Upanisa Sutta the Buddha taught that "suffering is the supporting condition for faith." ------------------------------------------ > You cannot remove it always, at will. This depends on conditions. -------------------------------------------- Howard: Quite so. ------------------------------------------- > Lodewijk says that remembrance of what is past that occurs all the > time is proof to him of thinking being anatta. We have no power over > it. And if we think we have sometimes, also that is conditioned, > thus, non-self. ------------------------------------------- Howard: Indeed, IMO, nothing, quantum theory not withstanding, is random. Einstein once said that "God doesn't play dice with the universe". Whatever he meant by "God", I share his sentiments. The Buddha explained conditionality fully, as I see it, and as clearly as words can. That conditionality is the basis for not-self in every way in which it can be understood. -------------------------------------------- > Even now we are thinking, then of this, then of that. The Abhidhamma > can help us here. After each round of cittas with seeing, hearing > etc. there is thinking of what we saw, of what we heard. There is a > certain order of the cittas arising in a process and nobody can alter > this. This is called citta niyama (natural order). This helps us to > understand anatta. > When you sit and a melody is remembered, you can contemplate anatta, > that is also meditation. Is that not the goal, to learn to understand > anatta? Then you can find out for yourself that this can also be > considered when going about in daily life. Do you remember the melody > you sung last time now? But you have to find out this for yourself, > nobody should tell you what to do. > We are so full of self, all of us. My thinking, my impediment, my > consideration of Dhamma. > How can that be lessened? You said: vipassana are in place, vipassana arises. > > We often talked about these conditions. We have different ideas and > that is OK. I think more understanding of no control over one's > thoughts certainly helps. > ------------------------------------------------ Howard: I do too. I think that seeing the truth amounts to walking a razor's edge. It is also like a tightrope walk - so easy to fall off to one side or the other. We each habitually tend to list towards right or left, and we urgently need to see exactly which is our primary direction for slipping off. ------------------------------------------------ I think you can profit from this impediment > > that you cannot always overcome, as you express it. > Nina. > > Op 11-jul-2007, om 3:02 heeft upasaka@... het volgende geschreven: > > >When the conditions for vipassana are in place, the vipassana arises. > >Meditation is not vipassana. It is one tool for the cultivation of > >vipassana. > >That tool of meditation is not made good use of unless proper > >conditions are in place for it. Obsessing, on a melody or anything > >else, is an > >impediment to it. Sometimes it is possible to overcome the > >impediment during "a > >sitting", but sometimes not. > > ====================== With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) #74237 From: upasaka@... Date: Wed Jul 11, 2007 3:50 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Death - just like now! (Alan Driver's funeral) [8] upasaka_howard Hi, Nina (and Sarah & Azita) - In a message dated 7/11/07 4:18:03 AM Eastern Daylight Time, vangorko@... writes: > Dear Sarah and Azita (and Howard), > very good discussion about visible object also when our eyes are > closed. I thought of Howard who closes his eyes when meditating. I > thought of mentioning this to him. One can be aware of visible > object, there is something appearing, even when the eyes are closed. > It is actually different from what a blind person experiences, for > him there is nothing appearing through the eyes. ============================= Yes, indeed. Quite right. (In fact, the physical eyes are never closed - only the lids.) With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) #74238 From: "rjkjp1" Date: Wed Jul 11, 2007 8:16 am Subject: Re: What other teacher teaches against selecting a meditation object? rjkjp1 --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Phil" wrote: >> > "When we simply see--moment to moment--what's occurring, observing > > without judgment or preference, we don't get lost thinking, "I > > prefer this moment to that moment, I prefer this pleasant thought > to > > that pain in my knee." > > Absolutely. I don't think any of these modern meditation teachers > would say that we should or can rigidly fix our attention on one > object, trying to shut out others - one is aware/mindful of whatever > comes. > > But surely all these modern meditation teachers - I think also of > Joseph Goldstein - start with a meditation object to get the ball > rolling, so to speak. Goldstein is fond of the Burmese rising and > falling of the abdomen, or was, at least, as he was a student of > Sayadaw U Pandita - surely Levine has a principal meditation object, > presumedly withing mindfulness of the body? And from there comes > the "we simply see--moment to moment-- what's occuring, > observing...etc." I think they all start with a principle meditation > object. The purpose of this? To allow a certain degree of > concentration? (khanica samadhi?) > > > > Isn't it standard Theravada, as taught in Vism, to choose or have > assigned a meditation object? Or is that section in Vism only for > those seeking jhanas? (samattha?) > ++++++++++++ Dear Phil Read what Buddhaghosa (author of Visuddhmagga)says: In the "Dispeller of Delusion"(PTS) p 137 paragraph 564 he says: ***** "In respect of the classification of the Foundations of Mindfulness. And this also takes place in multiple consciousness in the prior stage [prior to supramundane]. For it lays hold of the body with one consciousness and with others feeling etc."****** And how fast these states arising and ceasing.. In the Vibhanga commentary (about the duration of feeling (vedanaa): "In the moment of one snapping of the fingers it arises and ceases to the number of a hundred thousand ko.tis." -- ~Naa.namoli, Dispeller of Delusion, Pt I, p.37 Yet it still seems we can direct awareness. If I think about seeing now that tends to condition an investigation of seeing or visible object. Or hearing about how lobha can be an object for sati may condition a degree of study of lobha when it arises. So what then...? Well understanding of anatta only occurs during a Buddha Sasana. If we learn that control and free will is an illusion that should support correct understanding of the dhammas at the 6 doors; and that, so I believe, leads out of samasara altogether. As the quote from the "Dispeller" indicates at one moment sati takes feelings as an object and at another rupa. Check and see that trying to make sati go to certain objects does not lead to detachment from the idea of self. And remember that sati is a cetasika, itself conditioned by various factors, and so ephemeral. And can we really decide what the next moment is? Is it seeing or hearing or feeling or dosa or metta or delusion or sound that just arose? It is all happening because of conditions that we are not even aware of and it is all happening very fast. Still when one is still thinking and studying in the present moment, I think one tends to still favour certain objects and so for some people sound becomes a little clearer, for others seeing, for others feeling. There needs to be investigation of many dhammas, though, and the reason there is/seems to be some degree of "choice" is due to deeprooted self view. And good to know that we are really only "thinking in the present moment" at that level. Whereas Khun Sujin is trying to encourage the level of direct awareness..And also the first major step is separating nama from rupa, not more than that. It is an extraordinarily fine balance- we might be afraid of 'controlling' and not even consider or study dhammas at all, not even at the level of 'thinking in the present moment'- believing that it will all just somehow happen if we listen and read Dhamma books. Robert #74239 From: "rjkjp1" Date: Wed Jul 11, 2007 8:42 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Death - just like now! (Alan Driver's funeral) [7] rjkjp1 --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > > Hi, Robert - > > In a message dated 7/11/07 2:02:57 AM Eastern Daylight Time, rjkjp1@... > writes: > > > Here is Johnny Cash's last recorded song, a favourite. > > http://youtube.com/watch?v=SmVAWKfJ4Go > > Robert > > > ===================== > Thank you! Wow, I can see why it is a favorite. :-) Lovely, poignant, > and deeply meaningful. I think you have fine taste, Robert!! > > Dear Howard Thanks , see how you like these. Ralph Stanley, Oh Death http://youtube.com/watch?v=9E8S3tCWmiQ http://youtube.com/watch?v=1e0EQlQXoEo Johnny Cash, God's Gonna Cut You Down The next three might not pass the Dhamma related test..but I love em. Diana Ross & Supremes - Stop In The Name Of Love http://youtube.com/watch?v=S_PKqgzSXAM Cocaine Blues http://youtube.com/watch?v=S9JuixrnK7o&mode=related&search= Leonard Cohen, The Future http://youtube.com/watch?v=lwb2wTywmaU Robert #74240 From: "Phil" Date: Wed Jul 11, 2007 9:16 am Subject: Re: What other teacher teaches against selecting a meditation object? philofillet Hi Robert First of all, thanks for your later post, with the Buddhaghosa (sp?) passage and your reflections. I will read it tomorrow night. Back to Levine, and sorry for being irritatingly "this'll show you" ish. I wrote: > But surely all these modern meditation teachers - I think also of > Joseph Goldstein - start with a meditation object to get the ball > rolling, so to speak. Goldstein is fond of the Burmese rising and > falling of the abdomen, or was, at least, as he was a student of > Sayadaw U Pandita - surely Levine has a principal meditation object, > presumedly withing mindfulness of the body? Googling Levine I found him writing this: "Meditation intensifies those qualities through systematic, gentle, persevering techniques. To develop concentration, we choose a single object of awareness, the primary object, that the attention is "re- minded" to return to and encouraged to stay with. A basic difference between various meditation forms--such as TM, or Sufi dancing, or confronting Zen koans, or sitting meditations, or Christian prayer, or chanting mantra, or listening to the inner sound current, or cycling light, or observing sensations in the body, or visualizing techniques, or watching the breath--is the primary object on which concentration is developed. We choose a primary object and work with it; whether it is something we generate in the conceptual realm, like a verbal repetition or the idea of loving-kindness, or something that is always present, like the sensations in the body. Mindfulness of breathing is a powerful means of developing concentration. The breath is a superb object because it's constantly a part of our experience." Re mindfulness of the breath, this is one point AS is seconded by Bhikkhu Bodhi - true awareness of it is much more difficult object than one might think. But surely there is nothing better than the breath for beginners to work with, for the reason mentionned above. I know he has a lot of critics, but I think Thannisaro Bhikkhu has wonderful talks for beginners, to get them to explore and enjoy and experiment with the breath so the mind has something to feed on rather than the crap it usually goes running after. This is not deep or sophisticated Dhamma, but it is Dhamma at the emergency ward level, first aid for people (most of us) who are constantly hurting themselves and others because of the way the let their minds run amok. The Buddha taught the end of suffering and there are different ways that "the end of suffering" can be understood for different people with different needs. I am all in favor of Dhamma first aid for people who need it. They (we, people such as me) won't get any deeper until they (we) get a handle on rampant proliferation. Using the breath as meditation object in an albeit clumsy, non-orthodox (I suspect, though I guess he teaches in line with Ajahn Lee and other Thai forest masters) way is a good way to do that and I think TB understands that and teaches the way he does in those talks out of compassion. Anyways, thanks again for the other post. Will read it tomorrow. Metta, Phil #74241 From: upasaka@... Date: Wed Jul 11, 2007 6:43 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Death - just like now! (Alan Driver's funeral) [7] upasaka_howard Hi, Robert - In a message dated 7/11/07 11:46:18 AM Eastern Daylight Time, rjkjp1@... writes: > Dear Howard > Thanks , see how you like these. > > Ralph Stanley, Oh Death > http://youtube.com/watch?v=9E8S3tCWmiQ > > http://youtube.com/watch?v=1e0EQlQXoEo > Johnny Cash, God's Gonna Cut You Down > > The next three might not pass the Dhamma related test..but I love em. > > Diana Ross &Supremes - Stop In The Name Of Love > http://youtube.com/watch?v=S_PKqgzSXAM > > Cocaine Blues > http://youtube.com/watch?v=S9JuixrnK7o&mode=related&search= > > Leonard Cohen, The Future > http://youtube.com/watch?v=lwb2wTywmaU > > Robert > ======================= Thanks you! I would love to play these, but I'm having a lot of computer trouble, and can't get to play any of these without bad hesitations and even complete halting! (I really need to get a new computer, and I plan to do that soon.) With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) #74242 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Jul 11, 2007 11:45 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Not In Pali Tipitaka Re: What other teacher teaches against selecting a med objt nilovg Dear Suan, Phil, Robert. I think some words of Kh Sujin were taken out of context and not quoted properly. I know her for a long, long time and she always checks and double checks the Pali. She does not pretend to know Pali but she has around herself several Pali experts and she keeps on asking advice. She also asks people to consult books including the commentaries. She is extremely careful. Now, when you please read Rob's post on the four satipatthanas, all this will become clearer: Rob: It is in this respect that for vipassana a kammathaana is not prescribed. As Jim once explained: kammatthaana is often used in the sense of vipassana. To me there is just one: the present reality. What else is there? Nina. Op 11-jul-2007, om 15:54 heeft abhidhammika het volgende geschreven: > "And yet Acharn Sujin says that one should *not* select or be > assigned a meditation object." > > The above statement is not part of the Buddha's teachings preserved > as Theravada in Pali Tipi.taka. > > So, Phil, please ignore Acharn Sujin's statement as her > own idiosyncratic opinion without any backing from Pali sources. > > This also applies to anyone confused by careless statements like the > above one. > > When I have more spare time in future, I will write something proper > to refute her wrong view and wrong speech. Perhaps elsewhere? > > Phil also asked in reply to Robert K, > > "Isn't it standard Theravada, as taught in Vism, to choose or have > assigned a meditation object? " > > Suan answered: > > YES! IT IS. (I am not shouting at you. :-)) #74243 From: "Leo" Date: Wed Jul 11, 2007 12:12 pm Subject: ancient stupas leoaive Hi Some time ago I was reading a book on Ancient Buddhism. It says there that originally Stupas were made out of clay. From what I see, later it turned to rock, which is actually distroys the clay. Basically later stupas were not really buddhist, even if they were considered as buddhists. I hope it is helpfull. Lea #74244 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Wed Jul 11, 2007 4:01 pm Subject: Not In Pali Tipitaka Re: What other teacher teaches against selecting a med objt kenhowardau Hi all concerned, "And yet Acharn Sujin says that one should *not* select or be assigned a meditation object." I could criticize you for quoting KS out of context, but you do not know the context, and so you are excused. :-) Even though you will not understand it, I will say for the millionth (?) time that, according to KS and her students, the Buddha's teaching is descriptive, not prescriptive. When, in this teaching, a student is assigned a meditation object there is, actually, a wholesome citta containing panna (right understanding). In other teachings (not the Buddha's teaching) the student is a permanent self that starts off unwholesome, takes a meditation object (or whatever), and becomes wholesome. If that is the kind of teaching you resolutely insist upon hearing I suggest you take up a theistic religion. It would be better to do that rather than alter the original Dhamma to suit your needs. Ken H PS: Having said that, of course, I would not want to deter anyone from taking part in DSG discussions. Whatever happens does so by conditions. #74245 From: upasaka@... Date: Wed Jul 11, 2007 12:44 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Not In Pali Tipitaka Re: What other teacher teaches against selecti... upasaka_howard Hi, Ken - In a message dated 7/11/07 7:02:24 PM Eastern Daylight Time, kenhowa@... writes: > Hi all concerned, > > "And yet Acharn Sujin says that one should *not* select or be > assigned a meditation object." > > I could criticize you for quoting KS out of context, but you do not > know the context, and so you are excused. :-) > > Even though you will not understand it, I will say for the millionth > (?) time that, according to KS and her students, the Buddha's > teaching is descriptive, not prescriptive. > ------------------------------------------- Howard: Ken, do you seriously think that this last sentence of yours is a respectful way to speak to someone? BTW, you addressed this post to "all concerned". Are you mainly speaking to a particular person who "will not understand"? I'm sure that everyone here has a good idea of the views of Khun Sujin's students, though I'm not certain that the views of all of them are perfectly identical. Are you? ------------------------------------------- When, in this teaching, a > > student is assigned a meditation object there is, actually, a > wholesome citta containing panna (right understanding). ------------------------------------------- Howard: What in the world are you talking about? When a student is assigned a meditation object, a conventional event has occurred involving many things and at least two people. ------------------------------------------- > > In other teachings (not the Buddha's teaching) the student is a > permanent self that starts off unwholesome, takes a meditation object > (or whatever), and becomes wholesome. If that is the kind of teaching > you resolutely insist upon hearing I suggest you take up a theistic > religion. It would be better to do that rather than alter the > original Dhamma to suit your needs. --------------------------------------------- Howard: Again, you do not say whom you are addressing. Is it Suan or Phil or someone else "concerned"?. Whomever it is, I don't find your manner of speaking friendly or even polite. Are you having a bad day, Ken? You surprise me, because this is not at all your usual, kindly approach. Despite all our disagreements, I do respect you and your goodness, and I find myself perplexed by the tone of your post. C'mon, my friend, lighten up. :-) --------------------------------------------- > > Ken H > > PS: Having said that, of course, I would not want to deter anyone > from taking part in DSG discussions. Whatever happens does so by > conditions. > ----------------------------------------------- Howard: LOLOL!!! ======================= With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) #74246 From: "Phil" Date: Wed Jul 11, 2007 4:48 pm Subject: [dsg] Not In Pali Tipitaka Re: What other teacher teaches against selecting a med objt philofillet Hi Nina > I think some words of Kh Sujin were taken out of context and not > quoted properly. I know her for a long, long time and she always > checks and double checks the Pali. She does not pretend to know Pali > but she has around herself several Pali experts and she keeps on > asking advice. She also asks people to consult books including the > commentaries. She is extremely careful. I have no doubt that she has huge knowledge and understanding of Dhamma. That's why I hope to move past the areas in which she stands alone so I can benefit from the areas in which she is harmony with Dhamma as it is practiced and taught by all other (I think) teachers. So the point is not really one specific quote or knowledge of Pali but whether or not she is the only teacher who says that one should not start with a principle/primary meditation object. I'm sure all teachers agree that during meditation there will be no control over what arises, and whatever arises will or can be be object of awareness, but my question in this thread is whether there are any other teachers who say *not to* choose a principle meditation object that one gently perseveres in returning to during the meditation. (Wy? In order to develop concentration, I guess, but I don't understand concentration, really.) It if were acknowledged that she stands alone on the point I could be much more comfortable and respectful of her, and learn better about her reasons for saying we shouldn't choose a principle meditation object, and perhaps come to agree as I did before. Not that that is necessary. I guess I wish it could be clarified and acknowledged that there are certain points in which she stands more or less alone, instead of having this implication that only she is teaching the true Dhamma and all the meditators of the world are suffering from wrong view. That is not helpful. Well, unless she's right. But I wouldn't believe she's right in standing alone in this way until I can see clearly just where she stands alone. Standing alone can be a great thing. Obviously, the Buddha stood alone. > Now, when you please read Rob's post on the four satipatthanas, all > this will become clearer: Rob: from the "Dispeller" indicates at one moment sati > takes feelings as an object and at another rupa. Check and see that > trying to make sati go to > certain objects does not lead to detachment from the > idea of self. And remember that sati is > a cetasika, itself conditioned by various factors, and so > ephemeral. > And can we really decide what the next moment is? Is it > seeing or hearing or feeling or dosa or metta or delusion or > sound that just arose? It is all happening because of conditions > that we are not even aware of and it is all happening very fast. I will read Rob's post later more carefully. But the above sounds similar to the Levine quote, and certainly as I said than the first thing meditation teaches us is to understand that there is nothing more fleet and changeable than the mind, in line with the Dhammapada and AN verses to this point. But the question is the principle meditation object. All teachers including the Buddha, I believe, taught and teach to choose one. Is this "trying to make sati go to a certain objects." I don't think so. Satipatthana comes later in the meditation if it comes at all. Anyone who begins to meditate thinking that he or she can "make sati go to certain objects" will soon learn otherwise. (In one of the recorded talks she is talking with Jim, I think, and there is agreement that meditators are trying to have satipatthana, trying to immediately having satipatthana, the heart of the Buddha's teaching, the gem, something like that. There is general tsk tsk ing. They should note that all meditation teachers I have heard make it clear that "satipatthana meditation" is a name only and that satipatthana doesn't enter into it from the beginning . U Silananda Sayadaw referred to it as "vicinity of vipassana" meditation, I think. So this chracterization of meditators greedily seeking satipatthana right off the bat is ungenerous and incorrect. Posting this won't change that because ungenerous chracterizations of meditators are necessary for AS to have the "wrong view" beast to beat. On the other hand, there are students of hers who are former meditators and have first hand knowledge of shortcomings of the way meditation is taught - they should always speak on this ,but this idea that all meditators are impatiently hungering after satipatthana is incorrect. There is less hungering on the cushion for me, at least, than there was with all those books, that's for sure - in my case, at least.) "No other thing do I know, O monks, that changes so quickly as the mind. It is not easy to give a simile for how quickly the mind changes." (AN I,v,8) I think meditators are given the opportunity to see into this truth more clearly than non-meditators because of that principle meditation object and how rare it is that concentration that settles on. When I started meditating a few years ago I thought "oh, I am a terrible meditator, I can't concentrate, I always fall asleep." But now I see that this hindrance drenched meditation during which there is either mental racing or falling asleep is a great gift, because it is allowing more understanding of the way the mind works, better understanding of why the Buddha taught in his third discourse that "the all is burning with hatred, greed and delusion." We can't begin to rid the mindstream of hindrances until we see them, and there is no doubt whatsoever that meditation with a principle meditation object that one returns to and so many secondary objects of awareness that arise in an uncontrollable way (usually these are the hindrances, TB says that anything that takes one away from the principle meditation object is a hindrance) is helpful in seeing the hindrances more clearly. Anyways, the point of this thread is to see if there are any other teachers who do not advocate choosing a principle meditation object. Metta, Phil #74247 From: "Phil" Date: Wed Jul 11, 2007 5:03 pm Subject: Not In Pali Tipitaka Re: What other teacher teaches against selecting a med objt philofillet Hi Ken > "And yet Acharn Sujin says that one should *not* select or be > assigned a meditation object." > > I could criticize you for quoting KS out of context, but you do not > know the context, and so you are excused. :-) There was no intention to quote her here, I just assume that this is a basic point of her approach to Dhamma. Satipatthana should be on any object, there shouldn't be a principle meditation object chosen by a meditor or assigned by a teacher. > Even though you will not understand it, I will say for the millionth > (?) time that, according to KS and her students, the Buddha's > teaching is descriptive, not prescriptive. When, in this teaching, a > student is assigned a meditation object there is, actually, a > wholesome citta containing panna (right understanding). OK. > > In other teachings (not the Buddha's teaching) the student is a > permanent self that starts off unwholesome, takes a meditation object > (or whatever), and becomes wholesome. If that is the kind of teaching > you resolutely insist upon hearing I suggest you take up a theistic > religion. It would be better to do that rather than alter the > original Dhamma to suit your needs. Hmm. Meditation allows me better to see that there is no self that can control dhammas, so I don't understand the theistic point. Here in Japan I think the Dhamma has become corrupted to the point people believe in Buddha as an intervening force (see all the talismans people put up at temples, asking Buddha to help them pass university entrance exams, etc) but I don't think that notion is common in Theravada and I don't fear being a theist. > PS: Having said that, of course, I would not want to deter anyone > from taking part in DSG discussions. Whatever happens does so by > conditions. That's true. Metta, Phil #74248 From: "Phil" Date: Wed Jul 11, 2007 5:35 pm Subject: Not In Pali Tipitaka Re: What other teacher teaches against selecting a med objt philofillet --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Phil" wrote: > > > Hi Ken > > > "And yet Acharn Sujin says that one should *not* select or be > > assigned a meditation object." > > > > I could criticize you for quoting KS out of context, but you do > not > > know the context, and so you are excused. :-) > > > > There was no intention to quote her here, I just assume that this > is a basic point of her approach to Dhamma. Satipatthana should be > on any object, there shouldn't be a principle meditation object > chosen by a meditor or assigned by a teacher. > > > > > > Even though you will not understand it, I will say for the > millionth > > (?) time that, according to KS and her students, the Buddha's > > teaching is descriptive, not prescriptive. When, in this teaching, > a > > student is assigned a meditation object there is, actually, a > > wholesome citta containing panna (right understanding). > > OK. ?@I said "OK"here because I didn't understand. Now I see what you are getting at. Sounds dubious. It sounds as though the Buddha, thought often compared to a physician, advocates dispensing meditation objects to people who already have the cure. (Right understanding.) Doesn't really make sense to me, but I see what you are getting at at least. Maybe. Probably not, for the millionth time! :) Metta, Phil #74249 From: "m_nease" Date: Wed Jul 11, 2007 5:59 pm Subject: Not In Pali Tipitaka Re: What other teacher teaches against selecting a med objt m_nease Hi Suan (and Phil), --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "abhidhammika" wrote: > Dear Phil, Mike N, Robert K, Nina, Scott Duncan, Connie > > How are you? I'm very well, thanks--how are you? Wonderful to see you here again. I continue to hope that you'll drop in more often. > Phil wrote: > > "And yet Acharn Sujin says that one should *not* select or be > assigned a meditation object." Suan, I appreciate your objection here, having read (in English translation, I'm afraid) the Visuddhimagga's part II (as I recall? It's been a while!) on concentration. That a meditation object should be assigned seems--as I recall--pretty clear. I don't recall Khun Sujin ever having suggested otherwise. As for laypeople "selecting" their own meditation objects, I don't recall anything about this in the Visuddhimagga. Is there some instruction here that I've missed or misunderstood? Or about how a layperson should select the person who should assign her/his meditation object? I'd be most grateful for for any reminders. Thank You, Sir, mike #74250 From: "Sukinder" Date: Wed Jul 11, 2007 6:34 pm Subject: Re: The Bangkok Seminars - some thoughts sukinderpal Dear Ven. Pannabahulo, I am behind in my reading. Your post made me very happy. It appears that you have grasped the essence of the Dhamma as some of us understand it, very well and in such a short time. :-) At one point, when I was still relatively new to this group, I had an idea that reason alone will not convince another to change his/her views, but I was still optimistic about the number of people who might understand this way. Now after seeing so many people here who continue to `not get it', I have no expectations at all. So when someone like you comes along who show such good grasp, I think it is something to rejoice about!! I will do some Dana on this occasion. ;-) Hope your health improves, and yes, looking at you or your photo ;-), who would know that you suffer from some ailments. You are indeed an inspiration! Please write me off-list when you next wish to visit Bangkok With respect, Sukinder --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "pannabahulo" wrote: > > The Bangkok Seminars – Some Thoughts > > Last week I had the wonderful opportunity to attend 3 days of > Abhidhamma seminars with Ajan Sujin that were held in response to a > visit to Thailand by Jonothan and Sarah. > > The first thing of note was that whole group were such kind, warm > hearted and intelligent people who have a knowledge and understanding > of the real Buddha Dhamma - and commitment to it – that is streets #74251 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Wed Jul 11, 2007 6:31 pm Subject: Re: Death - just like now! (Alan Driver's funeral) [7] kenhowardau Hi Howard, Most (not all) DSG members have been here for quite a while, and we know how to take one another. Sometimes we tend to play roles within the group. Phil (for example) plays the role of the white-haired boy who can do no wrong in our eyes: James plays the role of . . . well, James is James, but you know what I mean. :-) I see myself as the enthusiastic, would-be K Sujinnian with a broad - rather than deep - understanding of what she is saying. No one takes me too seriously, so I can take a few liberties (as in my previous post) without bringing the whole team into disrepute. If Sarah or Nina or Jon were to say what I have said we would all be shocked and appalled. :-) ------------------- <. . .> H: > Ken, do you seriously think that this last sentence of yours is a respectful way to speak to someone? -------------------- Maye not. But isn't this a case of the pot calling the kettle sootybottom? :-) ----------------------------------- H: > BTW, you addressed this post to "all concerned". Are you mainly speaking to a particular person who "will not understand"? ----------------------------------- Several people are showing signs of strain. It's a common phenomenon here: someone will express frustration with the no-controlers and the rest will join in. It's a way of letting off steam, I suppose. I was addressing anyone who is currently taking a 'no holds barred' 'tell it as you see it' approach to the discussion. Two can play at that game. -------------------------------------------------- <. . .> H: > I'm sure that everyone here has a good idea of the views of Khun Sujin's students, though I'm not certain that the views of all of them are perfectly identical. Are you? KH: > > When, in this teaching, a > > student is assigned a meditation object there is, actually, a > wholesome citta containing panna (right understanding). > > H: > What in the world are you talking about? When a student is assigned a meditation object, a conventional event has occurred involving many things and at least two people. ---------------------------------------------------- Need I say more? We see the Dhamma very differently. --------------------------------------------- <. . .> H: >Again, you do not say whom you are addressing. Is it Suan or Phil or someone else "concerned"?. Whomever it is, I don't find your manner of speaking friendly or even polite. Are you having a bad day, Ken? You surprise me, because this is not at all your usual, kindly approach. Despite all our disagreements, I do respect you and your goodness, and I find myself perplexed by the tone of your post. C'mon, my friend, lighten up. :-) --------------------------------------------- Thanks, Howard, but you will have to get used to this side of my character. :-) When you listen to K Sujin on MP3 you will hear a beautiful, friendly, cheerful voice. And yet you, Howard, felt compelled to write: "KS's attitude is so reminiscent to me of certain fundamentalist Protestant sects in parts of the southern U.S. that confuse goodness and spirituality with a gray moroseness that celebrates nothing. There IS healthy joy, and if it consigns one to hell, then that is a price I am more than willing to pay! But the people I have come across in this world who are good, and loving, and generous, and wise are also joyful and unafraid of life, and so I do not accept KS's drab dictum." (message # 74183) How should I respond to that? Should I say, as you have done, "C'mon, my friend, lighten up?" Or should I continue unaffected, as Sarah and Nina have done, with helpful well-intended Dhamma discussion? "Conditions" "accumulations" "different strokes for different folks" - call it what you will, we're stuck with the way we are. :-) Ken H #74252 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Wed Jul 11, 2007 6:52 pm Subject: Re: Sammaadi.t.thi study corner scottduncan2 Dear All, 52. "Saying, 'Good, friend," the bhikkhus delighted and rejoiced in the venerable Saariputta's words. Then they asked him a further question: 'But, friend, might there be another way in which a noble disciple is one of right view...and has arrived at this true Dhamma?' - 'There might be, friends. Saadhaavusoti kho te bhikkhuu aayasmato saariputtassa bhaasita.m abhinanditvaa anumoditvaa aayasmanta.m saariputta.m uttari.m pa~nha.m aapucchu.m: " siyaa panaavuso a~n~nopi pariyaayo yathaa ariyasaavako sammaadi.t.thi hoti ujugataassa di.t.thi, dhamme aveccappasaadena samannaagato' aagato ima.m saddhammanti?" 53. "When, friends, a noble disciple understands mentality-materiality, the origin of mentality-materiality, the cessation of mentality-materiality, and the way leading to the cessation of mentality-materiality, in that way he is one of right view...and has arrived at this true Dhamma. Siyaa aavuso. Yato kho aavuso ariyasaavako naamaruupa~nca pajaanaati, naamaruupasamudaya~nca pajaanaati, naamaruupanirodha~nca pajaanaati, naamaruupanirodhagaamini.m pa.tipada~nca pajaanaati, ettaavataapi kho aavuso ariyasaavako sammaadi.t.thi hoti. Ujugataassa di.t.thi. Dhamme aveccappasaadena samannaagato aagato ima.m saddhammanti. 54. "And what is mentality-materiality, what is the origin of mentality-materiality, what is the cessation of mentality-materiality, and the way leading to the cessation of mentality-materiality? Feeling, perception, volition, contact, and attention - these are called mentality. The four great elements and the material form derived from the four great elements - these are called materiality. So this mentality and this materiality are what is called mentality-materiality. With the arising of consciousness there is the arising of mentality-materiality. With the cessation of consciousness there is the cessation of mentality-materiality. The way leading to the cessation of mentality-materiality is just this Noble Eightfold Path; that is, right view...right concentration. Katama.m panaavuso naamaruupa.m? Katamo naamaruupasamudayo? Katamo naamaruupanirodho? Katamaa naamaruupanirodhagaaminii pa,tipadaa?Ti. Vedanaa, sa~n~naa, cetanaa, phasso, manasikaaro - ida.m vuccataavuso naama.m. Cattaari ca mahaabhuutaani catunna~nca mahaabhuutaana.m upaadaaya ruupa.m. Ida.m vuccataavuso ruupa.m. Iti ida~nca naama.m ida~nca ruupa.m - ida.m vuccataavuso naamaruupa.m. Vi~n~naa.nasamudayaa naamaruupasamudayo. Vi~n~naa.nanirodhaa naamaruupanirodho ayameva ariyo a.t.tha"ngiko maggo naamaruupanirodhagaamin.m pa.tipadaa -seyyathiida.m: sammaadi.t.thi sammaasa"nkappo, sammaavaacaa, sammaakammanto, sammaaaajiivo sammaavaayaamo sammaasati, sammaasamaadhi. 55. "When a noble disciple has thus understood mentality-materiality, the origin of mentality-materiality, the cessation of mentality-materiality, and the way leading to the cessation of mentality-materiality...he here and now makes an end to suffering. In that way too a noble disciple is one of right view...and has arrived at this true Dhamma." 4. Yato kho aavuso ariyasaavako eva.m naamaruupa.m pajaanaati, eva.m naamaruupasamudaya.m pajaanaati, eva.m naamaruupanirodha.m pajaanaati, eva.m naamaruupanirodhagaamini.m pa.tipada.m pajaanaati, so sabbaso raagaanusaya.m pahaaya pa.tighaanusaya.m pa.tivinodetvaa asmiiti di.t.thimaanaanusaya.m samuuhanitvaa avijja.m pahaaya vijja.m uppaadetvaa di.t.theva dhamme dukkhassanta"nkaro hoti. Ettaavataapi kho aavuso ariyasaavako sammaadi.t.thi hoti. Ujugataassa di.t.thi. Dhamme aveccappasaadena samannaagato aagato ima.m saddhammanti. Sincerely, Scott. #74253 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Wed Jul 11, 2007 7:12 pm Subject: Re: Sammaadi.t.thi study corner scottduncan2 Dear All, Nyanatiloka defines mentality-materiality thusly: "Naama-raapa: lit. 'name and form': 'mind-and-body', mentality and materiality. It is the 4th link in the dependent origination see: paticcasamuppaada where it is conditioned by consciousness, and on its part is the condition of the sixfold sense-base. In two texts D. 14, 15, which contain variations of the dependent origination, the mutual conditioning of consciousness and mind-and-body is described see also S. XII, 67, and the latter is said to be a condition of sense-contact phassa; so also in Sn. 872. The third of the seven purifications see: visuddhi the purification of views, is defined in Vis.M XVIII as the; correct seeing of mind-and-body,; and various methods for the discernment of mind-and-body by way of insight-meditation vipassanaa are given there. In this context, 'mind' naama comprises all four mental groups, including consciousness. - See naama In five-group-existence pa~nca-vokaara-bhava, mind-and body are inseparable and interdependent; and this has been illustrated by comparing them with two sheaves of reeds propped against each other: when one falls the other will fall, too; and with a blind man with stout legs, carrying on his shoulders a lame cripple with keen eye-sight: only by mutual assistance can they move about efficiently see: Vis.M XVIII, 32ff. On their mutual dependence, see also paticca-samuppaada 3. With regard to the impersonality and dependent nature of mind and materiality it is said: Sound is not a thing that dwells inside the conch-shell and comes out from time to time, but due to both, the conch-shell and the man that blows it, sound comes to arise: Just so, due to the presence of vitality, heat and consciousness, this body may execute the acts of going, standing, sitting and lying down, and the 5 sense-organs and the mind may perform their various functions; D. 23. Just as a wooden puppet though unsubstantial, lifeless and inactive may by means of pulling strings be made to move about, stand up, and appear full of life and activity; just so are mind and body, as such, something empty, lifeless and inactive; but by means of their mutual working together, this mental and bodily combination may move about, stand up, and appear full of life and activity" Scott: Is this a correct definition? Any inaccuracies? Sincerely, Scott. #74254 From: "Phil" Date: Wed Jul 11, 2007 7:30 pm Subject: [dsg] Not In Pali Tipitaka Re: What other teacher teaches against selecting a med objt philofillet Hi again Nina I know your computer time is limited, so I hope you will disregard my post. All this comes up again and again anyways... Metta, Phil > I have no doubt that she has huge knowledge and understanding of > Dhamma. That's why I hope to move past the areas in which she stands > alone so I can benefit from the areas in which she is harmony with > Dhamma as it is practiced and taught by all other (I think) teachers. > #74255 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Wed Jul 11, 2007 7:51 pm Subject: Re: Sammaadi.t.thi study corner scottduncan2 "Naama-raapa" My mistake: naama ruupa. S. #74256 From: upasaka@... Date: Wed Jul 11, 2007 4:13 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Sammaadi.t.thi study corner upasaka_howard Hi, Scott - In a message dated 7/11/07 10:53:16 PM Eastern Daylight Time, scduncan@... writes: > "Naama-raapa" > > My mistake: naama ruupa. > > S. > ======================== Maybe you were thinking of Snoop Doggy Dog's latest on the charts: "Nama Rupa Rap"? Come to think of it, it was more likely that old Buddhist favorite "Dream a Little Dream of Me" by The Namas and the Rupas. ;-)) With slightly manic metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) #74257 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Wed Jul 11, 2007 8:25 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Sammaadi.t.thi study corner scottduncan2 Dear Howard, Regarding: H: "Maybe you were thinking of Snoop Doggy Dog's latest on the charts: "Nama Rupa Rap"? Come to think of it, it was more likely that old Buddhist favorite "Dream a Little Dream of Me" by The Namas and the Rupas. ;-))" Scott: I knew that had to come from somewhere! I just got the double compilation disc of covers of The Namas and the Rupas' stuff. I really dig REM's version of the old classic: 'Cakkhu-vi~n~na.na'. Not on youtube yet. Sincerely, Scott. #74258 From: upasaka@... Date: Wed Jul 11, 2007 4:38 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Sammaadi.t.thi study corner upasaka_howard Hi, Scott - In a message dated 7/11/07 11:27:45 PM Eastern Daylight Time, scduncan@... writes: > Dear Howard, > > Regarding: > > H: "Maybe you were thinking of Snoop Doggy Dog's latest on the charts: > "Nama Rupa Rap"? Come to think of it, it was more likely that old > Buddhist favorite "Dream a Little Dream of Me" by The Namas and the > Rupas. ;-))" > > Scott: I knew that had to come from somewhere! I just got the double > compilation disc of covers of The Namas and the Rupas' stuff. I > really dig REM's version of the old classic: 'Cakkhu-vi~n~na.na'. > Not on youtube yet. --------------------------------------------- Howard: LOLOLOL! You're as crazy as I am, man! ;-)) --------------------------------------------- > > Sincerely, > > Scott. > > ========================= With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) #74259 From: "colette" Date: Wed Jul 11, 2007 2:38 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: "Dhammas" and Impermanence (The Abhidhammikas perspective?) ksheri3 Hi Scott, > c: "...Which came first that which is known or that which knows and > here, below we all can see that you've struck a note highly > significant in the rhetorical delusion I posed." > > Scott: A variation of the old chicken and egg question...I think it > all converges at once... > colette: Maybe it's a misunderstanding on your part: I am very serious about the question "which came first..." above and I only applied the term, word, rhetorical as a means of suggesting that there really wasn't a need to respond to it since most responses would be nothing more than dribble that does not attempt to answer the question but deliberately avoids the question through a re- direction technique. The chicken and egg question is very similar though. The reason for knowing the order in which they occur is so fundamental to experiencing the dhamma properly. You mention TG has a problem with things I say/do but that's only because of his "vessel" in which the dhamma is contained in and he drinks from. <....> check your abhidhamma where they speak of roots and then compare Buddhism to find the Buddhism does not have it's roots in China or Tibet but in other places. ***************************************************** > c: "this is Pravda, truth, that the Buddha advises "seeing things as > they really are" but to do that requires the process of the > meditations. One of the avenues, paths, would be the Vipissana > meditation, but that isn't the only avenue, path. So, THEN, since we > have accepted the truth of the quality of seeing things as the really > are means that we've also accepted the rigors and practices of > meditations to achieve this sight. This conclusion of the course a > practioner takes to reach the truth is not advocated as a means and I > think is then ignored by the masses that actually believe in a "magik > bullet" that will somehow transform their view in the blink of an eye." > colette: I am making a different point above, than the reply you gave, below. Above I am saying that MEDITATIONS whether ya like it or not, ARE THE MOST ESSENTIAL PART OF THE DHAMMA. I go on to show that society has no patience for doing the work. It's like, say, when I graduated high school in 79, in 80 the suburbanites that were my classmates decided that work was going to be too difficult so they signed up for the Army REserves where they could reap a monthly check and educational benefits without doing any work. This system got handed down, over the next two decades to the children of my peers and they too subscribed to the easy way out of life by getting money for nothin' <...> Meditations require work, it is not easy. It is not going to be like you or others think it is going to be since it is a concept written in a manuscript. The writing has no experience to it. It is just writing. It is nothing more than a spoon full of arsanic like that which Socrates chose for his last meal. There is no life in words. Sure you can go the standard Theravadan way by taking several lifetimes to get anywhere but that too is nothing more than the CARROT & STICK METHOD OF SALESMANSHIP.<...> > Scott: I wonder about development of dhammas and does it just go on > and on collette: Dhammas are nothing more than concepts. They are a place to start though. So, as long as there are people THEN there will be dhammas. -------------- and is it like this amazing succession of sentience colette: we are the dhamma, no? --------------- and is it > the world in an instant colette: I'd like to say that it's a flash of the world at that instant. Once ya start wearring the path so that the transition gets quicker, then the practioner can begin applying it in ways to show the world constantly, to the practioner's mind. --------------- and then practise is actually thought of as a > magik bullet don't you think? > colette: when I found esoteric groups on the net in 2004 I told them that "look, when I start going on this stuff it becomes a drug to me and I loose the definition between virtue and vice, they both become the same thing", so, for me, the practice is to satiate my dependence upon this glorious view. We can say that about any formally committed monk or priest or.... They too are dependent on it. ----------------------------------- > colette: "THANK YOU SCOTT! I love it I love it I love it, great angle, > what is it that sees a thing as it really is and does the act of > seeing, then, know? The eye consciousness is seperate from the alaya- > vijnana (store house consciousness) which is defiled by the > perversions it accepted at one time as being pleasurable, non- > pleasurable, and neither pleasurable nor non-pleasurable." > > Scott: Excellent. Now you've dared to hone in on the UNSPEAKABLE, > haven't you, with your unerring knack. colette: do you mean to tell me that you are under the impression that I actually believe that certain people are divinely chosen to come out of the incubator fully clothed in the exact same pricey outfit that they will be wearing in 10 years after birth, or 20 years after birth, or 70 years after birth, or the day that they are finally born and no longer can stand before me telling me falsehoods? "...unerring knack." c'mon, you are saying that somebody has a heirarchical system, a value standard, and I am to prostrate myself to their superiority. When I prostrate myself to these robots, is that prostration on the couch, as in casting couch, or is that the Head Shrinkers couch, <...> --------------------- I fear that TG would never > allow this to be said colette: and without TG do you not suffer? Does TG write the script for your life that you are to speak every day, every second? ------------------ - that the view discussed between he and I > verged closer and closer to this very MODERN NOTION - the > alaya-vijnana. All that insubstantial talk. colette: Budo: the art of killing, or something like that. Haven't you lived much in life. Talk is for a single purpose: DELAY since in the delay then a new citta can arise and re-direct your consciousness, no? ---------------------------- I had wondered as much, > and you confirm it. colette: the only thing I confirm is that <...> happens. I am the one that got away and they've tried for more than 2 decades to eliminate me and now, well, it seams that they're just bored with wasting their time trying to kill a magikian. I wonder when I'll start thinking of myself in terms of an Adept. ----------------- I was asking about dhammas and was getting > nowhere. How can characteristics be of nothing? Talk about chicken > and egg. It like being one's own grandfather. colette: really, the more things change the more they remain the same. ---------------------- > > c: "Does the eye consciousness actually perceive all the > characteristics of that which it sees? If so, how are the multitudes > of characteristics classified, ranked, in the mind consciousness and > storehouse consciousness?" > > Scott: This is beyond the outer limits for me - storehouse > consciousness. colette: no it's not. The answer may be beyond your limitations since it may be an answer you choose to not think about or do not like thinking about but it is well within your grasp. --------------------- I've gotta go but we can talk about that last paragraph later tonight I think when I get home. toodles, colette New fangled innovation. One moment of seeing at a > time. Seeing only sees. TG would rejoice to hear me say that > classification is a function of thinking, I think. So concept. But > thinking is real. Which TG wouldn't agree with methinks. > > I'm glad you enjoyed the points I was making. I hope all is well with > you. > > "Don't let it get you down, its only castles burning..." > (Some-Other-Canadian-Who-Is-Not-Me-But-Who-ROCKS-Nonetheless.) > > Sincerely, > > Scott. > #74260 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Wed Jul 11, 2007 11:05 pm Subject: Not In Pali Tipitaka Re: What other teacher teaches against selecting a med objt kenhowardau Hi Phil, --------------------- <. . .> Ph: > There was no intention to quote her here, I just assume that this is a basic point of her approach to Dhamma. Satipatthana should be on any object, there shouldn't be a principle meditation object chosen by a meditor or assigned by a teacher. ---------------------- Oh, I see what you mean, and I think you are right with regard to satipatthana. Now is the only time for it - whatever the object. But is there anything in the texts that would contradict that interpretation ? I know samatha objects can be chosen. But even so, now is the only time for samatha. If the chosen object is not present, samatha at the level of jhana absorption will not take place. So there is a difference (from satipatthana) there. Also, let's be realistic. By whom can a samatha object be chosen, or to whom can a teacher assign one? Does it make sense that a rank beginner, who is still addicted to pleasure of the senses, should have a special object for samatha meditation? ------------------ <. . .> Ph: > Hmm. Meditation allows me better to see that there is no self that can control dhammas, so I don't understand the theistic point. ------------------- No Phil; hearing and considering the Dhamma with right understanding does that. This is what has to be understood. When there is any doubt - any nagging suspicion that maybe some sort of technique (ritual) will help - then the whole point has been missed completely. ------------------- Ph: > Here in Japan I think the Dhamma has become corrupted to the point people believe in Buddha as an intervening force (see all the talismans people put up at temples, asking Buddha to help them pass university entrance exams, etc) but I don't think that notion is common in Theravada and I don't fear being a theist. -------------------- I think a theist is anybody who thinks (however subtly) there is a self that can follow, or not follow, the 8-fold path (or any other ultimately real path). An atheist - a material atheist, that is (not a Buddhist atheist) - thinks there is a self that is going to be annihilated whatever happens. ------------------------- > > Even though you will not understand it, I will say for the > millionth > > (?) time that, according to KS and her students, the Buddha's > > teaching is descriptive, not prescriptive. When, in this teaching, > a > > student is assigned a meditation object there is, actually, a > > wholesome citta containing panna (right understanding). > > OK. Ph: I said "OK"here because I didn't understand. Now I see what you are getting at. Sounds dubious. It sounds as though the Buddha, though often compared to a physician, advocates dispensing meditation objects to people who already have the cure. (Right understanding.) Doesn't really make sense to me, but I see what you are getting at at least. Maybe. Probably not, for the millionth time! :) ----------------------------- We are still talking satipatthana objects, aren't we? There are namas and rupas arising now as we speak. If the true Dhamma has been heard (etc etc) then one if those namas and rupas might, here and now, become the object of right understanding. Otherwise, only some other form of consciousness can arise. I can at least understand that. I hope I can convince you of it too. Ken H #74261 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Jul 11, 2007 11:26 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Not In Pali Tipitaka Re: What other teacher teaches against selecting a med objt nilovg Dear Suan, Mike, Phil, Suan, I join Mike in asking you to drop in more often. Because Phil was not quoting Kh sujin, some misunderstandings arose, but these can be solved. Looking forward to what you, Suan, can tell us about kammathaana. Phil, thanks for your post. It is clear now that you did not quote Kh Sujin. Problems solved. As to the fact whether she stands alone or not, I want to tell you that I get very tired of investigating what other teachers say, comparing them. I prefer to talk just about paramattha dhammas, not about persons, so complicated and tiring. Just my personal feelings. I prefer Kh Sujin's outlook, and others have different opinions. So be it. But since this is an open forum, let everybody express his own feelings and not be afraid to do so. There is no reason to have aversion about other opinions, it can be useful to hear about them. Nina. Op 12-jul-2007, om 2:59 heeft m_nease het volgende geschreven: > Wonderful to see you here again. > I continue to hope that you'll drop in more often. #74262 From: "Phil" Date: Thu Jul 12, 2007 12:03 am Subject: Not In Pali Tipitaka Re: What other teacher teaches against selecting a med objt philofillet Hi Ken > > Oh, I see what you mean, and I think you are right with regard to > satipatthana. Now is the only time for it - whatever the object. But > is there anything in the texts that would contradict that > interpretation ? Yes, I think there is. I'm at work so don't have my books with me, but there are suttas that say the bhikkhu has sets mindfulness of the body in front of him, or something like that. I think there are suttas that praise mindfulness of the body as starting point, and all the teachers I've heard (other than AS) praise mindfulness of the body as the starting point. > > I know samatha objects can be chosen. But even so, now is the only > time for samatha. If the chosen object is not present, samatha at the > level of jhana absorption will not take place. So there is a > difference (from satipatthana) there. > > Also, let's be realistic. By whom can a samatha object be chosen, or > to whom can a teacher assign one? Does it make sense that a rank > beginner, who is still addicted to pleasure of the senses, should > have a special object for samatha meditation? Hmm. Maybe a rank beginner who is addicted to pleasure of the senses is the one who most needs to have a samatha object assigned! And maybe you are right. I have my doubts about how deep meditation can go in this day and age, but I have no doubts about the benefits of those clumsy first steps, because I have experienced them. > > ------------------ > <. . .> > Ph: > Hmm. Meditation allows me better to see that there is no self > that can control dhammas, so I don't understand the theistic point. > ------------------- > > No Phil; hearing and considering the Dhamma with right understanding > does that. This is what has to be understood. When there is any > doubt - any nagging suspicion that maybe some sort of technique > (ritual) will help - then the whole point has been missed completely. I said "helps me better to see", Ken. You don't know what does that for me. Reading an article on the Buddha's teaching of anatta and reflecting on it does that too. I'm not talking about real insight into anatta. You can tell me that sitting and observing the way the mind runs where it wants to doesn't help me better understand anatta - you can tell me that a million more times - and I will say that it does. The "ritual" you are describing is a ritual pracitced by millions of Buddhists (oh, you don't like that word, I think, sorry) around the world and I feel very fortunate to be practicing it in the very clumsy way I do. Again, I acknowledge, as always, that you might be right and everybody who praises meditation as being at the heart of the Dhamma may be wrong. As always, I say that without irony. I will keep listening to you and others and who knows, something might click. Back to work. I'll leave the last word to you. We are just going around and around, as always. Metta, Phil p.s How dare you demote me from golden haired boy to white haired boy!!!! #74263 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Jul 12, 2007 1:16 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Sammaadi.t.thi study corner nilovg Dear Scott, thank you for this and the additional quotes from the Vis. Looking at the Co. to this part: N: naama bends towards an object. As to ruupa, it is 'molested' (Dispeller, p. 3), by heat, cold, hunger etc. It is molested, oppressed, broken. As to Feeling, perception, volition, contact, and attention, the Co states: N: thus, mentality here means cetasikas. When we read about the D.O. that vi~n~naa.na conditions naama-ruupa, we should remember that naama represents here cetasikas. The Co is short and refers to the D.O. as treated in the Vis. Just as in all these passages of the Co. Nina. Op 12-jul-2007, om 3:52 heeft Scott Duncan het volgende geschreven: > "And what is mentality-materiality, what is the origin of > mentality-materiality, what is the cessation of mentality-materiality, > and the way leading to the cessation of mentality-materiality? > Feeling, perception, volition, contact, and attention - these are > called mentality. The four great elements and the material form > derived from the four great elements - these are called materiality. #74264 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Thu Jul 12, 2007 1:44 am Subject: Not In Pali Tipitaka Re: What other teacher teaches against selecting a med objt kenhowardau Hi Phil, I am going to accept your offer of the last word: ---------- <. . .> Ph:> Yes, I think there is. I'm at work so don't have my books with me, but there are suttas that say the bhikkhu has sets mindfulness of the body in front of him, or something like that. I think there are suttas that praise mindfulness of the body as starting point, and all the teachers I've heard (other than AS) praise mindfulness of the body as the starting point. ----------- But Phil, you and I have the rare privilege of being shown the version of the Dhamma THAT IS IN THE ANCIENT TEXTS. When the teachers you are talking about praise "mindfulness of the body" they are talking about the commonly known body. You know that! I know that! Let's not kid ourselves that they are talking about fleeting - trillionth of a second - rupas. They aren't. Most of them don't even know what the texts say about namas and rupas. And the ones that do know what the Abhidhamma says think they know better. How can I put that politely? The ones that know what the Abhidhamma says still think we must press on regardless - with our ritualistic practices. Otherwise (they think) we can only sit on our hands and do nothing. They can't see the middle way. -------------------------- <. . .> Ph: > > > Hmm. Meditation allows me better to see that there is no > > self that can control dhammas, so I don't understand the theistic > > point. <. . .> KH: > > When there is any > doubt - any nagging suspicion that maybe some sort of technique > (ritual) will help - then the whole point has been missed completely. > > Ph: > I said "helps me better to see", Ken. ------------- When you say "see" I assume you mean "understand." ---------------------- Ph: > You don't know what does that for me. ---------------------- I know what the Dhamma says about understanding. ------------------------------- Ph: > Reading an article on the Buddha's teaching of anatta and reflecting on it does that too. ------------------------------- Yes, if that is understood in the right way it is true. Remember though, that there is only the present moment. If we have any ideas about practising in the future (even if it is reading and reflecting) then we have lost sight of the present-moment reality, haven't we? If there is reading and reflecting now, then the dhammas that read and reflect are there to be understood. If there is something else now, then some other dhammas are there to be understood (to become objects of satipatthana). We know that because we have already (to some extent) heard the Dhamma and reflected on it in the right way. ----------------- Ph: > I'm not talking about real insight into anatta. You can tell me that sitting and observing the way the mind runs where it wants to doesn't help me better understand anatta - you can tell me that a million more times - and I will say that it does. ------------------ What mind is that, Phil? Is it the mind described by the Buddha - one fleeting citta and a number of equally fleeting cetasikas? Or are you observing the other kind of mind - the one that the Buddha said did not really exist? ------------------------------ Ph: > The "ritual" you are describing is a ritual pracitced by millions of Buddhists (oh, you don't like that word, I think, sorry) around the world ------------------------------- Two [million] wrongs don't make a right. --------------------------------------------- Ph: > and I feel very fortunate to be practicing it in the very clumsy way I do. --------------------------------------------- And I feel very fortunate to have the understanding I have acquired. Only one of us can be right, though. There is only one way. Which is it? ------------------------------- Ph: > Again, I acknowledge, as always, that you might be right and everybody who praises meditation as being at the heart of the Dhamma may be wrong. As always, I say that without irony. I will keep listening to you and others and who knows, something might click. Back to work. I'll leave the last word to you. We are just going around and around, as always. ----------------------------------------------- Thanks, Phil - for as long as we can keep it civil (as you do so well) it will always be a pleasure. Ken H #74265 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Jul 12, 2007 2:16 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Not In Pali Tipitaka Re: What other teacher teaches against selecting a med objt nilovg Hi Phil and Ken, Long ago I discussed this with Kh Sujin and she said: there cannot be just the Application of mindfulness of ruupa, there should also be mindfulness of naama, how otherwise would the difference between the two be known. Even when we read about temperaments and the four Applications, we have to remember this. Nina. Op 12-jul-2007, om 10:44 heeft kenhowardau het volgende geschreven: > When the teachers you are talking about praise "mindfulness of the > body" they are talking about the commonly known body. You know that! #74266 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Thu Jul 12, 2007 3:14 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Brief Introduction jonoabb Hi Katherine Welcome to the list from me. Thanks for the introduction. Please feel free to raise any questions you (or your students) may have. Jon Katherine Masis wrote: > Hello, > > My name is Katherine Masís and I teach philosophy at > Universidad de Costa Rica in San José, Costa Rica, > Central America. Among the courses I teach is an > introductory survey course on Hindu and Buddhist > thought. > > I practiced one form of Zen Buddhism for about 15 > years before turning to Vipassana meditation in the > Theravada tradition about 7 years ago. I am also > interested in Tibetan Buddhism, but I am not as > familiar with it. > > Even though Costa Rica is a small country, one may > find many Buddhist traditions here. I know of Ch'an, > Zen, Tibetan, Theravada and Pure Land groups, to name > a few. > > I am looking forward to the postings on your list. > > Best wishes, > Katherine Masís > #74267 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Thu Jul 12, 2007 4:03 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Virtue that is well purified and view that is straight (SN 47:3) jonoabb Hi Phil Just a couple of comments for your consideration. Phil wrote: > Hi all > > Looking through SN 47:3 today came across this passage. The Buddha > is talking to a monk who has asked for the Dhamma in brief: > > "Well then, bhikkhu, purify the very starting point of wholesome > states. And what is the starting point of wholesome states? Virtue > that is well purified and view that is straight. Then, bhikkhu, when > your virtue is well purified and your view straight, based upon > virtue, established upon virtue, you should develop the four > establishments in a threefold way." > > Sounds pretty clear to me, but I wasn't born in the Buddha's day > so I probably am misunderstanding. But I take this to be a clear > teaching that people who are morally slack and prone to unwholesome > actions of body, speech and mind cannot practice satipatthana. > Another possibility would be that the satipatthana being referred to is of a fairly advanced level, so it doesn't mean there can be no development in the absence of purified sila. > But for AS there can be satipatthana at any time, on any object. > I would put it this way: there can be the beginning of the development of satipatthana regardless of the general level of one's sila. > And what is this "view that is straight", what is this right view > that we are always told must be there for satipatthana? Surely it is > about insight into presently arisen dhamma, hmm? Let's look up the > commentarial note: "Spk: THe view is that of one's responsibility > for one's action (kammassakataaditthi) i.e belief in kamma and its > fruits, which implies as well belief in rebirth." This right view is > not about insight into dhammas, it is not about the wrong view that > is about not having the right view of the ariyan. It is a very > mundane form of right view that I feel quite close to having. > Right. So you are cleared to go, no? ;-)) Nonetheless, there cannot be the actual arising of satipatthana without the view that is straight in respect of dhammas. > BB adds. "The Buddha's statement here establishes that right view > (the first factor of the Noble Eightfold Path) and right conduct > (factors 3-5) are the basis for the successful practice of > mindfulness meditation. Oh! I wonder what BB means by meditation???? > Never mind what he means. Is that what the sutta says??? (Why doesn't he say, for example, using the words of the sutta, "... for the successful development of [the four establishments of] mindfulness"?). Jon #74268 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Thu Jul 12, 2007 4:12 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: What is the wrong view? (References from the MN anthology) jonoabb Hi Phil Phil wrote: > OK now I remember. I quoted Soma Thera's statement praising "the > immediate practical benefits" of mundane satipatthana for worldlings. > The commentarial material you've posted will show, I presume, that "the > preliminary practice connected with the mundane path of mindfulness" is > in itself quite rarefied, putting his populist statement in doubt. > Actually, that was not my purpose. I was simply responding to your request for some textual references to the mundane path/mundane insight. I grabbed the first thing I came across. > OK, that's fine. The teachers I listen to make it clear that what is > usually called "satipatthana meditation"or "vipassana meditation" don't > actually involve satipatthana or vipassana until there have been > developments. > Do they say what form of kusala it would be at the 'pre-satipatthana' stage? > BB in his talk on MN 10, which I would love to transcribe > some day, says that the satipatthana doesn't actually come until the > 4th patthana (frame of reference?) which is contemplation of > phenomena/mental objects. I was surprised by this, heard it today. > Comes as a surprise to me too. Is this his interpretation of the sutta, I wonder, or his personal experience? Nice talking to you, Phil. Always a number of interesting points in your posts. Jon #74269 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Thu Jul 12, 2007 4:38 am Subject: [dsg] Re: "Dhammas" and Impermanence (The Abhidhammikas perspective?) scottduncan2 Dear colette, Good Morning! Thanks for your reply: colette: "Maybe it's a misunderstanding on your part: I am very serious about the question 'which came first...'" Scott: Yes, for sure I misunderstood. c: "The reason for knowing the order in which they occur is so fundamental to experiencing the dhamma properly." Scott: Yeah, I think that knowing this, and I'm assuming you mean from the intellectual standpoint - the order in which they occur - is important to understanding. I'm thinking that 'understanding' here would be the function of pa~n~na (paajaanati). I'm suggesting there might be a link between correct intellectual understanding, a function of pa~n~na, and development of pa~n~na, that is, intellectual understanding, if correct, depends on pa~n~na. I'm pausing with regards to 'experiencing the dhamma', though. I'm thinking that experience is one thing and then thinking about it is another. If there is an order then it is always that way, no matter what one ends up thinking about it. There are all sorts of ways in which experience is interpreted, not all correct. c: "You mention TG has a problem with things I say/do but that's only because of his 'vessel' in which the dhamma is contained in and he drinks from." Scott: No, the things I say, not you. It was not fair to TG to imagine he would not like what I said about a similarity, however distant, between views I deem insubstantialist and alaya-vijnana, but the comment was about my opinion and not anything you say. c: "check your abhidhamma where they speak of roots and then compare Buddhism to find the Buddhism does not have it's roots in China or Tibet but in other places." Scott: 'Roots' from the abhidhamma perspective are cetasikas which serve as condition. Not the same as 'roots' of Buddhism. colette: "I am making a different point above, than the reply you gave, below. Above I am saying that MEDITATIONS whether ya like it or not, ARE THE MOST ESSENTIAL PART OF THE DHAMMA." Scott: And do these meditations go on whether one does them or not? c: "I go on to show that society has no patience for doing the work...Meditations require work, it is not easy. It is not going to be like you or others think it is going to be since it is a concept written in a manuscript. The writing has no experience to it. It is just writing. It is nothing more than a spoon full of arsanic like that which Socrates chose for his last meal. There is no life in words. Sure you can go the standard Theravadan way by taking several lifetimes to get anywhere but that too is nothing more than the CARROT & STICK METHOD OF SALESMANSHIP." Scott: 'The writing has no experience to it': I'm surprised at this use of the old saw regarding 'words'. Can you say why this statement has to be made over and over? You are not the only one who keeps repeating what seems to me to be a very self-evident thing. Do you think, perhaps, that when one reads one expects, through the act of reading, to be magickally transformed? I don't. I think that the Dhamma, as written, has to be read so that one knows the Teachings and that this seamlessly becomes part of an ongoing development of 'the mind' which is what 'meditation' is. collette: "Dhammas are nothing more than concepts. They are a place to start though. So, as long as there are people THEN there will be dhammas." Scott: I disagree, colette, with respect. Dhammas are not concepts. I mean there is the word 'dhamma' which is a word but it stands for things which are real and therefore have potential to be objects of experience. The experience of dhammas is also a function of dhammas and so on. Not concepts. colette: "we are the dhamma, no?" Scott: Ultimately no 'we' and only dhammas. colette: "I'd like to say that it's a flash of the world at that instant. Once ya start wearring the path so that the transition gets quicker, then the practioner can begin applying it in ways to show the world constantly, to the practioner's mind." Scott: 'A flash of the world' is quite different than saying 'It is the world.' If one says, 'a flash of the world' then one seems to be implying that there is another world beyond this world which one can get glimpses of now and then; with the further statements you make, the implication is then that one can 'practise' to 'see' this world 'constantly'. As I say, I stop at the borders of this land and proceed no further. Theravada, as I understand mind you, doesn't discuss worlds beyond worlds. Each moment is the world. colette: "do you mean to tell me that you are under the impression that I actually believe that certain people are divinely chosen to come out of the incubator fully clothed in the exact same pricey outfit that they will be wearing in 10 years after birth, or 20 years after birth, or 70 years after birth, or the day that they are finally born and no longer can stand before me telling me falsehoods? "...unerring knack." c'mon, you are saying that somebody has a heirarchical system, a value standard, and I am to prostrate myself to their superiority. When I prostrate myself to these robots, is that prostration on the couch, as in casting couch, or is that the Head Shrinkers couch," Scott: That's a lot of saying that wasn't said, colette. Very difficut to banter in this mode of printed words. I was just playing around. Your reading of the discussion I was having with TG lead you to discuss alaya-vijnana and I thought that this association of yours had to have been derived from some subtleties in the arguments you were reading. I think that insubstantialist arguments prefigure Mahayana philosophy somehow, and what better example of that tradition than the whole notion of alaya-vijnana? That's it. No robots or heirarchies or need to prostrate. Just banter. My apologies. colette: "and without TG do you not suffer? Does TG write the script for your life that you are to speak every day, every second?" Scott: Just banter. Either I'm going to have to stop trying to joke around or you'll have to try to figure out the way my sense of humour works... colette: "Budo: the art of killing, or something like that. Haven't you lived much in life. Talk is for a single purpose: DELAY since in the delay then a new citta can arise and re-direct your consciousness, no?" Scott: Talk is cheap (and mind-produced ruupa, to boot). Consciousness is citta, from a certain standpoint. Arising and falling away is direction because there is arising and falling away again. colette: "the only thing I confirm is that <...> happens..." Scott: Correct about the <....> that happens. Me: "This is beyond the outer limits for me - storehouse consciousness." colette: "no it's not. The answer may be beyond your limitations since it may be an answer you choose to not think about or do not like thinking about but it is well within your grasp." Scott: No, really, I stop at the border of Theravada land and go no further. It's like Tolkien's Tom Bombadil who never strays beyond the borders of his land. We can talk more of this, if you wish... See you next time. Sincerely, Scott. #74270 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Thu Jul 12, 2007 5:05 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Sammaadi.t.thi study corner scottduncan2 Dear Nina, Thanks for the Co. material: N: "...As to Feeling, perception, volition, contact, and attention, the Co states: Thus, mentality here means cetasikas. When we read about the D.O. that vi~n~naa.na conditions naama-ruupa, we should remember that naama represents here cetasikas. The Co is short and refers to the D.O. as treated in the Vis. Just as in all these passages of the Co." Scott: Consciousness or vi~n~naa.na, then, is citta in this case? And this is conascence condition? Sincerely, Scott. #74271 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Jul 12, 2007 5:39 am Subject: Conditions, Ch 8, no 1. nilovg Dear friends, Chapter 8 Decisive Support- Condition (Upanissaya -Paccaya) Part II As we have seen, there are three kinds of decisive support-condition: decisive support of object, årammanúpanissaya-paccaya, decisive support of proximity, anantarúpanissaya-paccaya, and natural decisive support-condition, pakatúpanissaya-paccaya. With regard to the third decisive support-condition, pakatúpanissaya- paccaya, the commentary to the “Patthåna” (the Pañcappakaranatthakathå) explains the term “pakata” in pakatúpanissaya. Pakata means done properly, done thoroughly. Kusala and akusala which were “done thoroughly”, often performed, can become firmly accumulated, they can become habitual. In this way they are a cogent reason, a powerful inducement for the arising of kusala and akusala later on, which are the dhammas conditioned by them, the paccayupanna dhammas. Also external conditions, such as temperature, food, dwelling place and friends one associates with can be cogent reasons for the dhammas which they cause to arise. The commentary defines in addition the term pakatúpanissaya, by explaining the word “pakati” which is connected with “pakatúpanissaya”, as naturally, by nature. The conditioning factor conditions the arising of other dhammas naturally, and it can condition them without the assistance of decisive support-condition of object or proximate decisive support-condition. For example, when there is strong confidence (saddhå) in kusala, this can be a cogent reason for the arising of kusala citta without the need to be dependent on decisive support-condition of object or proximity decisive support-condition. We read in the “Patthåna” (Faultless Triplet, VII, Investigation Chapter, Conditions Positive, § 423,c, Natural strong dependence): By the strong dependence of confidence... of precept (síla)... of learning... generosity... By the strong dependence of wisdom, (one) offers the offering, undertakes the precept, fulfils the duty of observance, develops jhåna, develops insight, develops Path, develops superknowledge, develops attainment. Confidence, precept, learning, generosity, wisdom is related to confidence, precept, learning, generosity, wisdom, by strong dependence condition. ******* Nina. #74272 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Jul 12, 2007 5:49 am Subject: Listening to the Dhamma, Ch 6, no 2. nilovg Dear friends, After many happy hours of listening to the Dhamma in the Dong Devi Temple we made a walk in the dusk, enjoying the view of the mountains. A beautiful meal was served to us outside and then we traveled to Chiang Dao where we arrived towards the evening. Here, in the hall of the Hotel where we stayed, Acharn Sujin arranged another Dhamma discussion. One of the topics was the latent tendencies. There are seven latent tendencies: the latent tendency of desire for sense pleasure (kåmarågånusaya) the latent tendency of aversion (patighånusaya) the latent tendency of conceit (månånusaya) the latent tendency of wrong view (ditthånusaya) the latent tendency of doubt (vicikicchånusaya) the latent tendency of desire for becoming (bhava-rågånusaya) the latent tendency of ignorance (avijjånusaya) Acharn Sujin pointed out that we do not have to learn this list by heart, but that we can remember them when we consider the different akusala cittas which are conditioned by them. When lobha-múla-citta arises which likes pleasant objects it is clear that there is the latent tendency of desire for sense pleasure which is unabandoned; it does not arise with the citta but it conditions the arising of lobha. So long as this latent tendency has not been eradicated it conditions attachment to sense objects again and again. Even when we walk or move our hand there is likely to be attachment. After seeing or hearing there is attachment very often, but we do not notice it. Cittas arise and fall away extremely rapidly. The lobha-múla-citta falls away again, it is gone, but there is a new accumulation of the tendency to lobha added to what was there already. Unwholesome tendencies are carried on from one moment of citta to the next one since each citta is succeeded by the next citta. If we consider this it helps us to see the danger of akusala dhammas. The study of each detail of the Dhamma is beneficial, it can be a condition to be less neglectful with regard to the development of kusala. When our objective is not dåna, generosity, síla, which includes not only abstaining from ill deeds but also helping others and paying respect, or mental development, which includes study of the Dhamma, the development of calm and of vipassanå, we act, speak and think with akusala citta. Conceit and wrong view can accompany lobha-múla-citta, but they do not accompany every lobha-múla- citta and they do not arise at the same time. When conceit or wrong view arises they are conditioned by the latent tendencies of conceit and wrong view. Clinging to rebirth accompanies lobha-múla-citta, and when it arises it is clear that the latent tendency of desire for becoming is still unabandoned. ****** Nina. #74273 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Jul 12, 2007 6:29 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Sammaadi.t.thi study corner nilovg Dear Scott, Op 12-jul-2007, om 14:05 heeft Scott Duncan het volgende geschreven: > Thus, mentality here means cetasikas. When we read about the D.O. > that vi~n~naa.na conditions naama-ruupa, we should remember that > naama represents here cetasikas. The Co is short and refers to the > D.O. as treated in the Vis. Just as in all these passages of the Co." > > Scott: Consciousness or vi~n~naa.na, then, is citta in this case? And > this is conascence condition? ------------ N: It is very detailed. See Vis. XVII, 200 and so on. Let us wait until we come to this with Larry. --------- BTW you made a very interesting mistakein spelling: raapa inst of ruupa. I discussed with Pi~n~na how difficult correcting printing proofs is. When you expect to read something, you read it, although it is misspelled. How fast sense-door processes and mind-door processes go. We think that we see, but mind-door process cittas have taken over. So, you corrected raapa, and I thought: what is he talking about? Then staring again I saw it. I expected ruupa and was reading it. Nina. #74274 From: connie Date: Thu Jul 12, 2007 6:33 am Subject: Theriigaathaa - Sisters (63) nichiconn Dear Friends, 10. Ekaadasakanipaato X. The Section of the Group of Eleven [Verses] 1. Kisaagotamiitheriigaathaava.n.nanaa 1. The commentary on the verses of Therii Kisaa-Gotamii part 1 of 15 txt: Ekaadasakanipaate kalyaa.namittataati-aadikaa kisaagotamiyaa theriyaa gaathaa. Aya.m kira padumuttarassa bhagavato kaale ha.msavatiinagare kulagehe nibbattitvaa vi~n~nuta.m patvaa ekadivasa.m satthu santike dhamma.m su.nantii satthaara.m eka.m bhikkhuni.m luukhaciivaradhaariina.m agga.t.thaane .thapenta.m disvaa adhikaarakamma.m katvaa ta.m .thaanantara.m patthesi. Pruitt: In the section of eleven [verses], the verses beginning The state of having noble friends are Therii Kisaa-Gotamii's. It is said that at the time of the Blessed One Padumuttara she was born in the home of a [good] family in the town of Ha.msavatii.* One day, after she came of age, she heard the Doctrine in the presence of the Teacher. And she saw the Teacher place a bhikkhunii in the foremost position of those who wear rough robes. She did a meritorious act and wished for that position for herself. *Her story is also given in Mp I 378-80 (WL 791-6). RD: NOW she was born, when Padumuttara was Buddha, in the city of Ha.msavatii, in a clansman's family. And one day she heard the Master preach the Dhamma, and assign foremost rank to a Bhikkhunii with respect to the wearing of rough garments. She vowed that this rank should one day be hers. txt: Saa kappasatasahassa.m devamanussesu sa.msarantii imasmi.m buddhuppaade saavatthiya.m duggatakule nibbatti. Gotamiitissaa naama.m ahosi. Kisasariirataaya pana "kisaagotamii"ti vohariiyittha. Ta.m patikula.m gata.m duggatakulassa dhiitaati paribhavi.msu. Saa eka.m putta.m vijaayi. Puttalaabhena cassaa sammaana.m aka.msu. Pruitt: She journeyed on among men and devas for a hundred thousand aeons, and in this Buddha era she was born in a poor family in Saavatthi.* She was named Gotamii, but because of her thin body (kisa-sariirataaya), she was callled Kisaa-Gotamii.** When she went to her husband's family, she was treated with contempt. They said, "You're the daughter of a poor family." She gave birth to a son, and because she had a son, they honoured her. *The first part of the version of her story at the time of the Buddha in Dhp-a II 270-2 (BL II 257f) is quite different. A merchants wealth is turned to charcoal and she is responsible for turning it back into gold, so he marries her to his son. **Mp I 378 (WL 793) explains her name by saying she was thin and weary by nature (thoka.m kilanta-dhaatukattaa). Sp I 190 says the name came from her being thin due to her having little flesh and blood (appa-ma.msa-lohitataaya kisaa). Dhp-a II 272 (BL II 258) and Sp I 190 says she was given the name because she was physically tired (kilanta-sariirataaya, translated "by reason of the leanness of her body" in BL). RD: In this Buddha-era she was reborn at Saavatthii, in a poor family. Gotamii was her name, and from the leanness of her body she was called Lean Gotamii. And she was disdainfully treated when married, and was called a nobody's daughter. But when she bore a son, they paid her honour. txt: So panassaa putto aadhaavitvaa paridhaavitvaa kii.lanakaale kaalamakaasi. Tenassaa sokummaado uppajji. Saa "aha.m pubbe paribhavapattaa hutvaa puttassa jaatakaalato pa.t.thaaya sakkaara.m paapu.ni.m ime mayha.m putta.m bahi cha.d.detumpi vaayamantii"ti sokummaadavasena mataka.levara.m a"nkenaadaaya "puttassa me bhesajja.m dethaa"ti gehadvaarapa.tipaa.tiyaa nagare vicarati. Manussaa "bhesajja.m kuto"ti paribhaasanti. Saa tesa.m katha.m na ga.nhaati. Pruitt: Then her son ran around, ran in all directions at playtime, and he died. Then the madness of grief arose in her. She said to herself, "Previously I was treated with contempt, but from the time of the birth of my son, I attained honour. They will try to throw my son away." Because of her madness from grief, she went from door to door of the houses in the village with the dead body fastened to her hip saying, "Give me a medicine for my son."* The people treated her with contempt, saying "What good is medicine?" She did not understand what they said. *From here on, the story in Dhp-a II 272-5 (BL II 258-60) is similar to the account in Thii-a. RD: Then, when he was old enough to run about and play, he died, and she was distraught with grief. And, mindful of the change in folk's treatment of her since his birth, she thought: 'They will even try to take my child and expose him.' So, taking the corpse upon her hip, she went, crazy with sorrow, from door to door, saying: 'Give me medicine for my child!' And people said with contempt: 'Medicine! What's the use?' She understood them not. ===tbc, connie. #74275 From: upasaka@... Date: Thu Jul 12, 2007 2:44 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Not In Pali Tipitaka Re: What other teacher teaches against selecti... upasaka_howard Hi, Phil (and Ken) - In a message dated 7/12/07 3:06:59 AM Eastern Daylight Time, philco777@... writes: > > > Hi Ken > > > >Oh, I see what you mean, and I think you are right with regard to > >satipatthana. Now is the only time for it - whatever the object. > But > >is there anything in the texts that would contradict that > >interpretation ? > > Yes, I think there is. I'm at work so don't have my books with me, > but there are suttas that say the bhikkhu has sets mindfulness of > the body in front of him, or something like that. I think there are > suttas that praise mindfulness of the body as starting point, and > all the teachers I've heard (other than AS) praise mindfulness of > the body as the starting point. ======================== From the Kayagatasati Sutta, there is the following: "Monks, whoever develops & pursues mindfulness immersed in the body encompasses whatever skillful qualities are on the side of clear knowing. Just as whoever pervades the great ocean with his awareness encompasses whatever rivulets flow down into the ocean, in the same way, whoever develops & pursues mindfulness immersed in the body encompasses whatever skillful qualities are on the side of clear knowing. "In whomever mindfulness immersed in the body is not developed, not pursued, Mara gains entry, Mara gains a foothold. Moreover, this sutta as a whole shows mindfulness of the body to constitute a complete path of meditative practice, leading to all attainments and awakening. (Of course, as with all the Dhammic approaches, a solid foundation of sila obtained by right effort is necessary.) With metta, Howard #74276 From: upasaka@... Date: Thu Jul 12, 2007 2:47 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Not In Pali Tipitaka Re: What other teacher teaches against selecti... upasaka_howard Hi, Ken (and Phil) - In a message dated 7/12/07 4:45:08 AM Eastern Daylight Time, kenhowa@... writes: > But Phil, you and I have the rare privilege of being shown the > version of the Dhamma THAT IS IN THE ANCIENT TEXTS. > > When the teachers you are talking about praise "mindfulness of the > body" they are talking about the commonly known body. You know that! > I know that! Let's not kid ourselves that they are talking about > fleeting - trillionth of a second - rupas. They aren't. Most of them > don't even know what the texts say about namas and rupas. And the > ones that do know what the Abhidhamma says think they know better. > > How can I put that politely? The ones that know what the Abhidhamma > says still think we must press on regardless - with our ritualistic > practices. Otherwise (they think) we can only sit on our hands and do > nothing. They can't see the middle way. > =========================== Ken, have you *read* the Kayagayasati Sutta? It is a work by the Buddha, not one of the "teachers" you are dismissing. With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) #74277 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Jul 12, 2007 6:53 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Complexity of Kamma: Unraveling the Kusala-Akusala Mix nilovg Hi Howard, you are right that also other factors condition which kamma produces which kind of result. Op 9-jul-2007, om 15:29 heeft upasaka@... het volgende geschreven: > If that birth was kusala, then we have the situation of a > kusala event serving as condition for a tragedy, which may be > "unacceptable" > to some. On the other hand, the birth may have been kusala vipaka > for child > and parents, offering great potential, and the tragic death the > kammic fruition > (in part, of course) of *other* past actions of that infant and his/ > her > parents. (I say "in part", because the immoral action of the > killers is the most > direct condition.) > When it comes to the "events of the world", it is incredibly difficult > to determine what leads to what and to distinguish "good" from > "bad". It may > be useful to consider, and I do think it is, but great caution > should be > observed in reaching conclusions, it seem to me. ---------- You write: the tragic death the kammic fruition (in part, of course) of *other* past actions of that infant and his/her parents. (I say "in part", because the immoral action of the killers is the most direct condition.) ------------- N: Kammic fruition is only personal, and it is best to see it in a paramatthic way otherwise we become confused. We should not confuse vipaaka of the child and vipaaka of father or mother. In the Vis. series Larry is posting this is really hammered in and repeated, illustrated with similes. I am glad it is so often repeated. N: < In the ultimate sense there is no person who performs kamma and no person who experiences the result of kamma. There are mere dhammas arising and falling away due to conditions, and this is true for the past, the present and the future. There is a heap or pile (pu~nja) of dhammas. Naama-dhammas arise and fall away succeeding one another in continuity. They are as it were a pile of dhammas. Past lives and the present life are all in one continuity, the continuity of the cycle of birth and death. This helps us to see that kamma is accumulated so that it bears fruit later on, also in future lives. There are mere dhammas arising because of their appropriate conditions.> < The Tiika states that the person who performs kamma is like the seed that is planted, kamma is like the process of planting. The rebirth-consciousness of a being that arises in the continuity (of lives) is like the sprouting of a seed in one continuity. It explains that just as a specific fruit comes only from its corresponding seed, so also must the nature of the fruit of a deed committed by a being be seen. It arises in accordance with the kamma that is performed.> < A science thoroughly learnt in youth, as well as the training in arts, and the application to medicine performed in youth do just go on to mature age. They give their fruit later on in maturity because they are not of another, they are included in the continuity of life. They could not give fruit without their being thoroughly learnt in youth. Evenso is the fruit arising in a continuity not of another, nor from another kamma. By the absence of a formation process, there is no fruit.> -------- What is hammered in is this continuity in the cycle of lives. That kamma and vipaaka concerns the individual. You write: <(I say "in part", because the immoral action of the killers is the most direct condition.) > N: I would rather say: his own kamma, not the kamma of the killers. This is important, because then we do not blame others. There are mere dhammas! However, there are other factors that make it favorable or unfavorable for kamma to produce result. Dispeller of Delusion: Ch 16, p. 187, four factors can be favorable, sampatti, for kusala kamma to produce result or for akusala kamma not to produce result. They are: gati, destiny (place of rebirth), upadhi, substratum, including someone's bodily appearance, kala, the time he is born (peace time or war time), payoga, 'means' or conduct. As to the last one: when someone does good deeds, akusala kamma may not have an opportunity to produce result. Someone who is born ugly will get the blame very easily. I cannot go into all these details now. But this is as you said, there are other factors that play their part. #74278 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Jul 12, 2007 7:17 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Not In Pali Tipitaka Re: What other teacher teaches against selecti... nilovg Hi Howard and Ken, yes, true, but we should understand the implications of this sutta, otherwise we do not get the Buddha's message of being mindful right now. It is the same lesson as in the sutta on going to the world's end; in this fathom long body with its perceptions and feelings... It means awareness and understanding of nama and rupa. All dhammas are included as objects of awarness and understanding. We do not have to go far, the body is right at hand. Nina. Op 12-jul-2007, om 15:44 heeft upasaka@... het volgende geschreven: > Moreover, this sutta as a whole shows mindfulness of the body to > constitute a complete path of meditative practice, leading to all > attainments and > awakening. #74279 From: "abhidhammika" Date: Thu Jul 12, 2007 7:55 am Subject: Not In Pali Tipitaka Re: What other teacher teaches against selecting a med objt abhidhammika Dear Mike N, Nina, Robert K, Ken H, Scott Duncan, Howard, Connie How are you? Mike wrote: "I'm very well, thanks--how are you?" I discovered yesterday (11 July 2007) that I became well, recovered from recent episode of flu in the middle of winter in Canberra. How did I discover my being relatively well? For your information, I am an advanced practitioner of samathavipassanaa with Aanaapaana as the main aaramma.na (object) of Kaayanupassanaa as prescribed in Mahasatipa.t.thaana Suttam. In passing, I would like to remind that Ken H quoted K Sujin as saying the Buddha's teachings are not prescriptive. Was Ken H misquoting her or was K Sujin committing the wrong speech? The Buddha's teachings such as Mahasatipa.t.thaana Suttam do prescribe procedures for the practitioners. A prescriptive procedure contains systematic steps to take, which are designed to make the practice doable, unmistakable and experimentable. As the Buddha prescribed in Kaayanupassanaa Aanaapaanapabba in Mahasatipa.t.thaana Suttam, I regularly sit with my legs fully- crossed (pallankam aabhujitvaa) in a quiet place ( suññaagaaragato vaa nisiidati) that is my bedroom. While being unwell during the flu episode days, I noticed that I began to experience disheartening discomfort after about 50 minutes of sitting so that another 10 minutes seemed like ordeal. But, yesterday (11 July 2007), though, I began to experience heartening feeling in my sitting. So I was happy to know that I have recovered from the flu episode, and happy to know that I could sit normally as long as I like. Today (12 July 2007), I sat for one hour and 30 minutes without any disheartening discomfort. Yes, Mike, I am now well although I still have some coughing. Mike, you will notice that I was writing, rather at length, on the simple fact of me being well. That is to show how important a meditation object is in the Buddha's teachings on Satipa.t.thaana practice. I have chosen Aanaapaana (inhalation and exhalation) as the main object and followed the procedures prescribed by the Buddha in my formal sitting sessions. By practicing year after year, I came to discover many things. Two important discoveries are that I can cure some physical illnesses such as flu with formal Aanaapaana sitting sessions. Since that discovery ten years ago, I no longer need medication for flu episodes including the one I mentioned above. A meditation object in the hands of an advanced practitioner can kill viruses literally. Mike also wrote and asked: "As for laypeople "selecting" their own meditation objects, I don't recall anything about this in the Visuddhimagga. Is there some instruction here that I've missed or misunderstood? Or about how a layperson should select the person who should assign her/his meditation object? I'd be most grateful for for any reminders." The issues you raised are discussed in section 41, under the topic "Dasapalibodhava.n.nanaa", in Visuddhimaggo Volume One. 41. Katham bhaavetabboti ettha pana yo taava ayam lokiyalokuttaravasena duvidhoti-aadiisu ariyamaggasampayutto samaadhi vutto, tassa bhaavanaa nayo paññaabhaavanaanayeneva sangahito. Paññaaya hi bhaavitaaya so bhaavito hoti. Tasmaa tam sandhaaya evam bhaavetabboti na kiñci visum vadaama. Yo panaayam lokiyo, so vuttanayena siilaani visodhetvaa suparisuddhe siile pat.t.thitena yvaassa dasasu palibodhesu palibodho atthi, tam upacchinditvaa kamma.t.thaanadaayakam kalyaa.namittam upasankamitvaa attano cariyaanukuulam cattaaliisaaya kamma.t.thaanesu aññataram kamma.t.thaanam gahetvaa samaa dhibhaavanaaya ananuruupam vihaaram pahaaya anuruupe vihaare viharantena khuddakapalibodhupacchedam katvaa sabbam bhaavanaavidhaanam aparihaapentena bhaavetabboti ayamettha sankhepo. In the above Pali passage, "the person who should assign" is kamma.t.thaanadaayakam kalyaa.namittam (a good friend who can give instructions of kamma.t.thaana). In the above Pali passage, selecting of a meditation object is advised by the Pali line "attano cariyaanukuulam cattaaliisaaya kamma.t.thaanesu aññataram kamma.t.thaanam gahetvaa (choosing a certain kamma.t.thaanam (a meditation object and procedure for practice) suitable for one's disposition (attano cariyaanukuulam) from among the forty meditation objects and procedures). Mike, I hope that I have covered the issues you raised in your post. Let me know, though, if you still feel that you have been short- changed. :-) With kind regards, Suan Lu Zaw www.bodhiology.org --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "abhidhammika" wrote: > Dear Phil, Mike N, Robert K, Nina, Scott Duncan, Connie > > How are you? I'm very well, thanks--how are you? Wonderful to see you here again. I continue to hope that you'll drop in more often. > Phil wrote: > > "And yet Acharn Sujin says that one should *not* select or be > assigned a meditation object." Suan, I appreciate your objection here, having read (in English translation, I'm afraid) the Visuddhimagga's part II (as I recall? It's been a while!) on concentration. That a meditation object should be assigned seems--as I recall--pretty clear. I don't recall Khun Sujin ever having suggested otherwise. As for laypeople "selecting" their own meditation objects, I don't recall anything about this in the Visuddhimagga. Is there some instruction here that I've missed or misunderstood? Or about how a layperson should select the person who should assign her/his meditation object? I'd be most grateful for any reminders. Thank You, Sir, mike #74280 From: upasaka@... Date: Thu Jul 12, 2007 4:16 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Complexity of Kamma: Unraveling the Kusala-Akusala Mix upasaka_howard Hi, Nina - In a message dated 7/12/07 9:54:50 AM Eastern Daylight Time, vangorko@... writes: > N: Kammic fruition is only personal, and it is best to see it in a > paramatthic way otherwise we become confused. We should not confuse > vipaaka of the child and vipaaka of father or mother. and a bit later you write: > > You write: <(I say "in part", because the immoral action of the > killers is the most > direct condition.) > > N: I would rather say: his own kamma, not the kamma of the killers. > This is important, because then we do not blame others. There are > mere dhammas! ========================= Kamma vipaka, per se, is personal. It is the effect within the same mindstream of prior intention and intentional action. However, it is also clear, completely clear, crystal clear, that all actions have consequences and not only on the "same person". All actions are conditions for events in multiple mindstreams, and I am certain that no one really believes otherwise. As an obvious example, the Buddha's delivering of teachings served as beneficial condition for multitudes of beings. As a simpler example, the breast feeding of an infant, that is - all the underlying phenomena that constitute what we call "the breast feeding of an infant," serve as condition for the health and survival of the child. (The child's prior kamma also, of course, is a condition for that health and survival.) With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) #74281 From: upasaka@... Date: Thu Jul 12, 2007 4:22 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Not In Pali Tipitaka Re: What other teacher teaches against selecti... upasaka_howard Dear Suan (and all) - In a message dated 7/12/07 10:57:49 AM Eastern Daylight Time, suanluzaw@... writes: > Dear Mike N, Nina, Robert K, Ken H, Scott Duncan, Howard, Connie > > How are you? > > Mike wrote: > > "I'm very well, thanks--how are you?" > > I discovered yesterday (11 July 2007) that I became well, recovered > from recent episode of flu in the middle of winter in Canberra. > ======================= I'm pleased to hear that you have recovered and gladdened at hearing of the role Dhamma practice has played in that. May this continue to be so. :-) With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) #74282 From: "colette" Date: Thu Jul 12, 2007 7:01 am Subject: [dsg] Re: "Dhammas" and Impermanence (The Abhidhammikas perspective?) ksheri3 good Morning Scott, One thought only, no time. > Scott: 'The writing has no experience to it': I'm surprised at this > use of the old saw regarding 'words'. Can you say why this statement > has to be made over and over? You are not the only one who keeps > repeating what seems to me to be a very self-evident thing. Do you > think, perhaps, that when one reads one expects, through the act of > reading, to be magickally transformed? > I don't. colette: BOULDERDASH! lol I went to a "commuter college", UIC, for a few years from like '98- 2001, and I certain witnessed that in EVERY CLASS when there was an exam or a final, et al, there was nothing less than "group answers" a status quo of answers given to many, if not all, questions on the test. I particularly noticed that in STATISTICS there was uniformity and plenty of selective collusion going on but that wasn't the amazement I had at that science. I was amazed that it's a very clear and significant way of defining things as well as predicting behavior, outcomes, etc. BUT if ya didn't do the homework then you will be lossed since, in statistical analysis there are soooooooo many tedious little mathematical equations that have to be gone through to reach the outcome. It is those equations that make it work. As tedious as it was ya had to do it or it didn't work. Now, the student could go through the entire class without doing any of the tedium, which I certainly did and I know there were many others in my class that were on the exact same path, but when it came to putting the butter on the bread, well, I sank like a doughnut being dunked, but the others that traveled with me on the path we chose for the entire course took an off-ramp and went in the direction of collusion, the status-quo, the ole boy network, and so passed with flying colors as students have passed the tests in the same way since history has been written on paper. I cognized that the class, doctrine, worked. It worked extremely well and is an invaluable tool to society. I simply ignored the tedium and the status quo. You seem to be posing a theory that the status quo is the only way to achieve a certain goal, outcome by suggesting that society does not operate in this fashion. enough said, the owner of the computer has said that before she goes to work she wants to get on the computer and so my thought is ended. thanx. toodles, colette > I think that the > Dhamma, as written, has to be read so that one knows the Teachings and > that this seamlessly becomes part of an ongoing development of 'the > mind' which is what 'meditation' is. <....> #74283 From: "colette" Date: Thu Jul 12, 2007 10:44 am Subject: oddest of Querries ksheri3 Good Day Group, Does anybody know much of this thing I stumbled across yesterday as I was begining research into Pratyekabuddha: Pudgalavada? I figure connie has a little bit up her sleave concerning this obscure and old fashioed group of Indians. I bet even Gen. Custurd was afeared of them, but who knows Polythene Pam seems to be running hither. ROFL toodles, colette #74284 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Thu Jul 12, 2007 2:41 pm Subject: Not In Pali Tipitaka Re: What other teacher teaches against selecti... kenhowardau --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > > Hi, Ken (and Phil) - > > In a message dated 7/12/07 4:45:08 AM Eastern Daylight Time, > kenhowa@... writes: > > > But Phil, you and I have the rare privilege of being shown the > > version of the Dhamma THAT IS IN THE ANCIENT TEXTS. > > > > When the teachers you are talking about praise "mindfulness of the > > body" they are talking about the commonly known body. ... must press on regardless - with our ritualistic > > practices. Otherwise (they think) we can only sit on our hands and do > > nothing. They can't see the middle way. > > > =========================== > Ken, have you *read* the Kayagayasati Sutta? It is a work by the > Buddha, not one of the "teachers" you are dismissing. > > With metta, > Howard Hi Howard, Yes, thank you, I have read that sutta and I agree it is a work by the Buddha. It is certainly not by one of the modern day teachers I was "dismissing." So what is your point? I hope you are not reverting to that old "You might believe that, but I prefer to believe what the Buddha taught" line of argument. (Or as TG put it recently, "The Buddha's words, not mine!" Or, as someone else has put it, "CAN'T YOU READ?") :-) We can all read. The whole point of Dhamma discussions is to ascertain the *meaning* of the words we are reading. The Kayagatasati Sutta is very similar to the Satipatthana sutta, isn't it? Whenever you have quoted the Satipatthana Sutta to me as proof of conventional vipassana practices, I have asked you what you understand by the word "discerns" (or "knows" or "knows with understanding" or "knows as it really is" - depending on the translation you are using). When an uninstructed worldling (or even a dog or a jackal, to quote the commentaries) is walking he knows, in the conventional manner, that he is walking. There is nothing enlightening about that kind of knowing. Even (or especially) if he concentrates really hard on walking, there is nothing enlightening about it. However, when an instructed disciple of the Buddha is walking he knows walking as it really is. Really, there are really only dhammas. The monk in the suttas - whatever he is doing at the time - directly knows paramattha dhammas. Ken H #74285 From: upasaka@... Date: Thu Jul 12, 2007 11:06 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Not In Pali Tipitaka Re: What other teacher teaches against selecti... upasaka_howard Hi, Ken - In a message dated 7/12/07 5:42:34 PM Eastern Daylight Time, kenhowa@... writes: > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > > > >Hi, Ken (and Phil) - > > > >In a message dated 7/12/07 4:45:08 AM Eastern Daylight Time, > >kenhowa@... writes: > > > >>But Phil, you and I have the rare privilege of being shown the > >>version of the Dhamma THAT IS IN THE ANCIENT TEXTS. > >> > >>When the teachers you are talking about praise "mindfulness of > the > >>body" they are talking about the commonly known body. > ... > must press on regardless - with our ritualistic > >>practices. Otherwise (they think) we can only sit on our hands > and do > >>nothing. They can't see the middle way. > >> > >=========================== > > Ken, have you *read* the Kayagayasati Sutta? It is a work by > the > >Buddha, not one of the "teachers" you are dismissing. > > > >With metta, > >Howard > > Hi Howard, > > Yes, thank you, I have read that sutta and I agree it is a work by > the Buddha. It is certainly not by one of the modern day teachers I > was "dismissing." So what is your point? > > I hope you are not reverting to that old "You might believe that, but > I prefer to believe what the Buddha taught" line of argument. (Or as > TG put it recently, "The Buddha's words, not mine!" Or, as someone > else has put it, "CAN'T YOU READ?") :-) We can all read. The whole > point of Dhamma discussions is to ascertain the *meaning* of the > words we are reading. > > The Kayagatasati Sutta is very similar to the Satipatthana sutta, > isn't it? Whenever you have quoted the Satipatthana Sutta to me as > proof of conventional vipassana practices, I have asked you what you > understand by the word "discerns" (or "knows" or "knows with > understanding" or "knows as it really is" - depending on the > translation you are using). -------------------------------------------- Howard: Ken, please reread the sutta.It teacges the carrying out of activities, purposively. ----------------------------------------------- > > When an uninstructed worldling (or even a dog or a jackal, to quote > the commentaries) is walking he knows, in the conventional manner, > that he is walking. There is nothing enlightening about that kind of > knowing. Even (or especially) if he concentrates really hard on > walking, there is nothing enlightening about it. However, when an > instructed disciple of the Buddha is walking he knows walking as it > really is. ------------------------------------------ Howard: If one were to engage in walking meditation, then one will know walking as it really is, for then one knows first hand that what usually seems to be "walking" is earth and air, and there is nothing personal involved, and that includes the volition that propels the walking. Without engaging in walking meditation, there is no experiencing of this. ------------------------------------------- > > Really, there are really only dhammas. The monk in the suttas - > whatever he is doing at the time - directly knows paramattha dhammas. > > Ken H > ===================== With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) #74286 From: LBIDD@... Date: Thu Jul 12, 2007 4:11 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Sammaadi.t.thi study corner lbidd2 Hi Nina an Scott, Nina: "Kamma-formation consciousness..." Larry: If this follows dependent arising then both cetasikas and consciousnesses are resultant only, right? Larry #74287 From: LBIDD@... Date: Thu Jul 12, 2007 4:23 pm Subject: Vism.XVII,171 Vism.XVII,172 lbidd2 "The Path of Purification" (Visuddhimagga), Ch. XVII 171. Now it was also asked, 'Whose is the fruit, since there is no experiencer?' Herein: 'Experiencer' is a convention For mere arising of the fruit; They say 'It fruits' as convention, When on a tree appears its fruit. 172. Just as it is simply owing to the arising of tree fruits, which are one part of the phenomena called a tree, that it is said 'The tree fruits' or 'The tree has fruited', so it is simply owing to the arising of the fruit consisting of the pleasure and pain called experience, which is one part of the aggregates 'deities' and 'human beings', that it is said 'A deity or human being experiences or feels pleasure or pain'. There is therefore no need at all here for a superfluous experiencer. *********************** 171. yampi vutta.m ``upabhu~njake ca asati kassa ta.m phala.m siyaa´´ti, tattha, phalassuppattiyaa eva, siddhaa bhu~njakasammuti. phaluppaadena rukkhassa, yathaa phalati sammuti.. 172. yathaa hi rukkhasa"nkhaataana.m dhammaana.m ekadesabhuutassa rukkhaphalassa uppattiyaa eva rukkho phalatiiti vaa phalitoti vaa vuccati, tathaa devamanussasa"nkhaataana.m khandhaana.m ekadesabhuutassa upabhogasa"nkhaatassa sukhadukkhaphalassa uppaadeneva devo, manusso vaa upabhu~njatiiti vaa, sukhito, dukkhitoti vaa vuccati. tasmaa na ettha a~n~nena upabhu~njakena naama koci attho atthiiti. #74288 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Thu Jul 12, 2007 4:45 pm Subject: [dsg] Not In Pali Tipitaka Re: What other teacher teaches against selecti... kenhowardau Hi Howard, Thanks for the further explanation: ------------------- > Howard: If one were to engage in walking meditation, then one will know walking as it really is, for then one knows first hand that what usually seems to be "walking" is earth and air, and there is nothing personal involved, and that includes the volition that propels the walking. Without engaging in walking meditation, there is no experiencing of this. > -------------------- After mentioning walking, standing, sitting, lying down and "however the body is disposed" the sutta goes on to include, 'when going forward, returning, looking toward, looking away, bending limbs, extending limbs, carrying the outer cloak, carrying the upper robe, carrying an alms bowl, eating, drinking, chewing, savouring, urinating, defecating, walking, standing, sitting, falling asleep, waking up, talking and remaining silent. Are all of these activities to be formally practised? Or is it only the four postures that are singled out for intentional, deliberate practice? One question I often ask, and never get an answer to, is, 'Let's say you are, for example, walking, talking, looking towards and carrying your alms bowl: which of those activities should you be mindful of? What about the others? Should you be mindful of one and unmindful of the other three? Wouldn't that then be a practice of unmindfulness more than of mindfulness? After having it explained to me, I am delighted to know that satipatthana is a here-and-now practice. If there are any activities in the daily life of a monk that are not included in the sutta, I am sure we are meant to infer them. In other words, the list is intended to include every moment from waking up in the morning to going to sleep at night. Whatever the conventional activity may be, the time for satipatthana is here and now, and the object is whichever of the presently arisen dhammas happens - by conditions - to be taken as an object. Ken H #74289 From: "Phil" Date: Thu Jul 12, 2007 5:05 pm Subject: Re: What is the wrong view? (References from the MN anthology) philofillet Hi Jon > > OK now I remember. I quoted Soma Thera's statement praising "the > > immediate practical benefits" of mundane satipatthana for worldlings. > > The commentarial material you've posted will show, I presume, that "the > > preliminary practice connected with the mundane path of mindfulness" is > > in itself quite rarefied, putting his populist statement in doubt. > > > > Actually, that was not my purpose. I was simply responding to your > request for some textual references to the mundane path/mundane > insight. I grabbed the first thing I came across. Thanks. By "will show, I presume" I meant that I knew already that a closer look at the commentary would put his statement in doubt. > > > OK, that's fine. The teachers I listen to make it clear that what is > > usually called "satipatthana meditation"or "vipassana meditation" don't > > actually involve satipatthana or vipassana until there have been > > developments. > > > > Do they say what form of kusala it would be at the 'pre- satipatthana' stage? Ph: No, not that I recall, though if pressed by questioners I'm sure they would oblige. (BB's talks have a Q&A section every day - the MN10 talk extends over 10 sessions, I think) I personally don't worry about degrees of kusala. Perhaps I will someday, but for now if I feel a teach/practice is contributing to a lessening of gross forms of hatred, greed and delusion I press ahead with confidence. I am not pursuing eradication of latent tendencies. > > > BB in his talk on MN 10, which I would love to transcribe > > some day, says that the satipatthana doesn't actually come until the > > 4th patthana (frame of reference?) which is contemplation of > > phenomena/mental objects. I was surprised by this, heard it today. > > > > Comes as a surprise to me too. Is this his interpretation of the sutta, > I wonder, or his personal experience? Ph: Surely the former, whether mistaken or not. I see him as an academic monk for whom a study of the tipitaka is paramount. I don't know if that is true, however. He added, I think, that the reason the hindrances are first in the fourth satipatthana (mental objects/phenomena) is that it is only when the hindrances have been subdued that satipatthna can arise, something like that. > Nice talking to you, Phil. Always a number of interesting points in > your posts. Thanks Jon. After I return from Canada, and the baseball season is over, I might transcribe the MN 10 talk in its entirety. If there are contentious points you might take them up with BB directly, as I know Sarah (?) has in the past in letters re Abhidhamma details. It would be a good idea to do so, perhaps, because there is little doubt that his series of MN talks, which have already extended over 3 years, I think, will have enormous influence in the community and if there are gross examples of wrong view in them you or someone should bring them up to him, I would think. The U Silananda Sayadaw talk on Satipattha is also very good, but as you know the sayadaws promote a very specific meditation technique, so it might not be as objective a source as BB. Metta, Phil #74290 From: connie Date: Thu Jul 12, 2007 5:49 pm Subject: Vism.XVII,171 Vism.XVII,172 nichiconn Path of Purity, p.666 As regards the question: "In the absence of one who enjoys, to whom does the fruit go?" The saying: "he enjoys" comes into use, Because the fructification is made. Even so a tree is said to fructify, Because of the appearance of the fruit. For just as owing to the appearance of the fruit of a tree which is only a part of the things called trees, the tree is said to give fruit or has given fruit, so by the appearance of the fruit of ease and ill, called experience, which is only a part of the aggregates known as the devas and men, a deva or man is said to experience ease or ill. Hence there is no need for any other person who enjoys. #74291 From: "Phil" Date: Thu Jul 12, 2007 6:20 pm Subject: AN III, 53-54 The Visible Teaching philofillet HI all I'd just like to express my appreciation of this sutta, that I reflected on today. I think it might be akin to the Kalama Sutta in giving us a benchmark to access the value of a teaching and dispel doubts. This passage is the gist : "When, brahmin, a person is impassioned with lust, overwhelmed and infatuated by lust, then he plans for his own harm, for the harm of others, and for the harm of both; and he experiences in his mind suffering and grief. He also behaves badly by body, speech and mind, and he does not understand, as it really is, his own good, or the good of others, or the good of both. But when lust has been abandoned, he neither plans for his own harm, nor for the harm of others, nor for the harm of both; and he does not experience in his mind suffering and grief. He will not behave badly by body, speech and mind, and he will understand, as it really is, his own good, the good of others, and the good of both. In this way, brahmin, the Dhamma is directly visible, immediate, inviting one to come and see, worthy of application, to be personally experienced by the wise." Needless to say, "abandon" and "understand, as it really is" can be understood on various levels. I just wanted to post this passage which conditioned such gratitude for the power of Dhamma to make happy changes in people's lives. (And happy, superficial changes are often necessary - perhaps always necessary, I don't know - in order for there to be conditions for deeper liberation.) Metta, Phil #74292 From: "Phil" Date: Thu Jul 12, 2007 6:28 pm Subject: Re: AN III, 53-54 The Visible Teaching philofillet Hi again > "When, brahmin, a person is impassioned with lust, overwhelmed and > infatuated by lust, then he plans for his own harm, for the harm of > others, and for the harm of both; and he experiences in his mind > suffering and grief. Oops I forgot to add that the sutta, of course, goes on to repeat this for hatred and delusion. I guess some would say that this "delusion" in itself moots any value the sutta would have for people who want to find easy encouragement in it. They will say that if there is delusioni in the form of clinging to self, it is all moot. However, I think there are gross forms of delusion that are abandoned before deep forms of delusion (vipallasas) are abadoned. An example of gross delusion? The way my mood goes up or down depending on how a baseball team is doing. I will be dejected because of it, or giddily joyful at other times. That is gross delusion, and it can be abandoned temporarily by reflecting on the Buddha's teaching. That is already something. Metta, Phil #74293 From: sarah abbott Date: Thu Jul 12, 2007 11:41 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Sammaadi.t.thi study corner sarahprocter... Dear Scott (TG & all), Thanks for all your work in this corner and for including the Pali. --- Scott Duncan wrote: > 41. "When, friends, a noble disciple understands feeling, the origin > of feeling, the cessation of feeling, and the way leading to the > cessation of feeling, in that way he is one of right view...and has > arrived at this true Dhamma. > > Siyaa aavuso. Yato kho aavuso ariyasaavako vedana~nca pajaanaati, > vedanaasamudaya~nca pajaanaati, vedanaanirodha~nca pajaanaati, > vedanaanirodhagaamini.m pa.tipada~nca pajaanaati, ettaavatà pi kho > aavuso ariyasaavako sammaadi.t.thi hoti. Ujugataassa di.t.thi. Dhamme > aveccappasaadena samannaagato aagato ima.m saddhammanti. > > 42. "And what is feeling, what is the origin of feeling, what is the > cessation of feeling, and what is the way leading to the cessation of > feeling? These are the six classes of feeling: feeling born of > eye-contact, feeling born of ear-contact, feeling born of > nose-contact, feeling born of tongue-contact, feeling born of > body-contact, feeling born of mind contact. With the arising of > contact there is the arising of feeling. With the cessation of > contact there is the cessation of feeling. The way leading to the > cessation of feeling is just this Noble Eightfold Path; that is right > view...right concentration. <...> Sarah: And so for all other ultimate realities or dhammas. It's not a question of just understanding 'impermanence' and so on, but the impermanence of such dhammas. Each feeling is different; here classified in the six-fold way, but could be classified in many other ways, even countlessly. It is the understanding of the characteristic of a particular feeling (vedanaa) as it is, as naama, as impermanent and so on (and so for other dhammas which appear) which leads to the growth of insight and enlightenment. Without selection of course!! Thanks again, Metta, Sarah p.s Thanks for your good discussion with TG. ========= #74294 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri Jul 13, 2007 12:03 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Conditions, Ch 7, no 1. Decisive Support-Condition. sarahprocter... Dear Nina & Scott, This installment was good timing. I wrote in one of my summaries of our recent discussions, (cleaning up the spelling in the Pali)on the topic of different tastes in music which you were discussing.I mentioned that it was stressed that this is due to: a)aaramma.naadhipati (object predominance-condition) and b)aaramma.nuupanissaya (decisive support of object) A piece of music is regarded as a)a particularly desirable object, so that it becomes b)a decisive support for that object to be recognised as such again and again. It thus depends on accumulations what is seen as particularly desirable. Once you like it, it keeps being a condition for attachment again and again.This is why some people like sour foods, some sweet foods. Some like rain, some like sunshine! The following paragraph is very relevant to this: --- Nina van Gorkom wrote: <...> We see in the > “Patthåna” (Faultless Triplet, VII, Investigation Chapter, Strong > Dependence, § 423), that the objects which are the conditioning > factors are the same as in the case of object predominance-condition, > årammaùådhipati paccaya (see Ch 3), thus, they have to be desirable > objects. The cittas which are conditioned by way of decisive support > of object are also the same types as in the case of object > predominance-condition. Thus, the realities involved in these two > kinds of conditions are the same, but there is a difference in the > conditioning force of object predominance-condition and of decisive > support-condition of object. In the case of object predominance- > condition the desirable object is highly esteemed by the citta and > cetasikas concerned so that they give preponderance to it. In the > case of decisive support-condition of object the desirable object is > a powerful inducement, a cogent reason, for the arising of the citta > and cetasikas concerned, which are strongly dependent on that object. > Desirable objects which are object predominance-condition can also, > at the same time, be decisive support-condition of object, a powerful > inducement for the arising of the cittas concerned. ***** Metta, Sarah ======= #74295 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri Jul 13, 2007 2:56 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Not In Pali Tipitaka Re: What other teacher teaches against selecting a med objt sarahprocter... Hi Phil, (Ken H, Nina, Scott, Mike, Suan, Howard, Rob K & all), I've been reading your comments to me and others with interest. --- Phil wrote: Qu:> I guess I wish it could be clarified and acknowledged that there > are certain points in which she stands more or less alone... ... S: I think she does stand very much alone when it comes to not selecting a meditation object. You mention teachers like Joseph Goldstein and the use of the abdomen as a base. As it happens, he studied with Munindra around the same time I did, also teachers like Larry Rosenberg, whom Howard has studied/done a retreat, so I know that they started in the Mahasi-style (Munindra's teacher). [[[Diversion: I had this discussion quite recently with Joop: >Joop: For meditators more useful is the paragraph about nama-rupa- > pariccheda-ñana of "The Progress of Insight; A Modern Treatise on > Buddhist Satipatthana Meditation" by the Venerable Mahasi Sayadaw > (In: www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/bps/misc/progress.html) > Below <..> S: ...let's look at the beginning of the Mahasi text as it's been quoted a few times recently: > 1. Analytical Knowledge of Body and Mind > Endowed with purification of mind and continuing the practice of > noticing, the meditator now comes to know body-and-mind analytically > as follows: "The rising (upward movement) of the abdomen is one > process; the falling (downward movement) is another; sitting is > another; touching is another," etc. <...> Sarah: I don't think you'll find anything like this in any of the Tipitaka or ancient commentaries. First of all, nama-rupa pariccheda-~nana is not about analytical knowledge. It's not about noticing, it's not about the abdomen.... It's about the clear and distinct understanding of namas and rupas<]]]end diversion. **** S: As I recall, Mahasi Sayadaw's technique and focus-style meditation was extremely controversial in Burma a few decades ago. Ask Han off-list - he remembers some of these things when he was young. Now, of course it's very mainstream all over the world. Same for Goenka's tecnique. Even Ledi Sayadaw when he challenged the ancient commentaries.... Now it is teachers like A.Sujin who highly regard the commentaries as they are and don't teach the selection of objects for the development of satipatthana who are considered controversial! So, I do think you have a good point - i.e, that as a well-known Buddhist teacher, her understanding of the teachings very much goes against the stream. [I consider we're very privileged to have access to the incredibly subtle teaching, but you know all that! So, no, I'm no 'Goliath' to your David:-))](Btw, did you read Ven Pannabahulo's account of the 'seminars'? Any comments?). I also thought your 'no selection' line pretty well hit the mark and understood it wasn't intended as a direct quote. Even when it comes to the development of samatha, she stresses over and over again that any attachment is a hindrance to the development of calm. On our recent visit, I quoted a passage (quoted here recently) from a booklet of hers 'Deed of Merit'. I suggested that people might read the following and think they should practice these meditations: "The monks are accustomed to practise continuously, for a long time, four meditation subjects of samatha, in order to have calm of citta and to subdue defilements which can disturb them. Laypeople can also practise these four meditation subjects*. The Dhamma and the Vinaya which the monks practise can also be applied by layfollowers in their own situation, as a means of subduing defilements." She listened to my comment above and then the quote. At the end, she simply said firmly: "No selection." ***** The point is, as you've heard her stress so often, even for the beginning of the development of samatha, there has to be right understanding (not theoretically either) of what kusala and akusala are, what calm is, how an object conditions calm. The beginning is the direct understanding and awareness. The point is that it is the panna, not a person who just wants to develop more calm, that develops samatha. If the calm isn't known exactly when it arises, how can it be developed? I have many yoga and Buddhist friends who spend hours sitting cross-legged and focussing on breath. Is there any understanding or calm or is it all attachment? Only panna can ever tell at any moment. One thing for sure, the development of all kinds of kusala has to be in order to have less attachment and for this, there has to be wisdom from beginning to end for the development of samatha and vipassana. So now, do we know if the citta is calm? If we know, it can develop. It can be dhammanusati now while we consider the Dhamma. At any moment of understanding, the citta is calm. When we reflect wisely on the teachings, A.Sujin was stressing that this is 'the best worship of the Buddha'. So having discussion here, there can also be Buddhanussati at moments of calmness while one appreciates the virtues of the Buddha through a better understanding of the teachings. Gradually, one may become used to have such calm too when reading or reflecting on a sutta as you do. However, the understanding and awarness have to be very keen to not take the common attachment and pleasant feeling for being such kusala calm. If we become attached to moments of kusala, then again it's no longer samatha. So, there can be the development of calm of particular objects, but it's not by selecting them with the usual attachment. In other words, if there's no real understanding of dhammas and just a wondering about what object to focus on or base a practise on, it's not any bhavana at all. I asked a couple more questions about jhana, forests and seclusion. These were her responses (the usual 'classics'): "Shall we postpone the development of panna from now on?" "If there's no panna to understand this moment right now, whether it's calm or not, can anyone reach jhana, that stage of calmness? So it has to start or begin from this moment. If there is no panna at this moment, how can it grow?" ***** Hope this answers your question at the top to some extent. In India in Savatthi, I'm sure you would have heard another friend (Chris) raise just the same point about all the well-known bhikkhus teaching a practice or technique. I forget the exact response, but I remember A.Sujin just quietly turning the 'focus' to the present realities. What is the truth now as we speak? What is real now? What can be known now? Metta, Sarah *"Recollection of the excellent qualities of the Buddha, the development of mettaa (loving kindness), perception of repulsiveness and mindfulness of death." ======== #74296 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Fri Jul 13, 2007 3:20 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: What is the wrong view? (References from the MN anthology) jonoabb Hi Larry LBIDD@... wrote: > Hi Jon, > > J: "I'm still not sure about 'simple faith' as right view. What exactly > do you have in mind here?" > > L: What I had in mind was the mundane right view of MN117, but it seems > to me that any arising of faith is at least mundane right view. > I'm still not sure why you say this. Could you explain your thinking a little? Thanks. > J: "Correct, kusala citta cannot be wrong view. However, it can be the > wrong path (only kusala of the level of satipatthana is reckoned as > right path)." > > L: Wrong view is a subset of wrong path, at least in MN 117. > I cannot see the reference to wrong path you have in mind. Which part of MN 117? Jon #74297 From: "rjkjp1" Date: Fri Jul 13, 2007 3:49 am Subject: Re: What other teacher teaches against selecting a meditation object? rjkjp1 --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Phil" wrote: > > > > But surely all these modern meditation teachers - I think also > of > > Joseph Goldstein - start with a meditation object to get the ball > > rolling, so to speak. Goldstein is fond of the Burmese rising and > > falling of the abdomen, or was, at least, as he was a student of > > Sayadaw U Pandita - surely Levine has a principal meditation > object, > > presumedly withing mindfulness of the body? > > +++++++ Dear Phil I did a 5 or 6 day meditation retreat with Joseph Goldstein in 1983 or 4. As you say he was a semi-mahasi style teacher. I liked it at the time but found I had to go into the texts to understand what the Dhamma is. The ball is always rolling, and having a 'method' is adding something extra, it doesn't help clarity for me. Robert #74298 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Jul 13, 2007 5:23 am Subject: Conditions, Ch 8. no 2. nilovg Dear friends, Good and bad qualities accumulated in the past become our nature, they condition the different cittas in the present life by way of natural decisive support-condition. We read in the “Mahå-Sutasoma Jåtaka” (Jåtaka Stories V, no. 537) that the Buddha said that not only in his present life he had tamed the robber Angulimåla who had slain many people but later on attained arahatship, but also in a former life when the Buddha was King Sutasoma and Aògulimåla was the King of Båråùasí. Once the King’s cook could not obtain meat and gave him, without telling him, human flesh. We read (458): ... No sooner was a bit of the meat placed on the tip of the King’s tongue than it sent a thrill through the seven thousand nerves of taste and continued to create a disturbance throughout his whole body. Why was this? From his having previously resorted to this food.... His longing for human flesh became exceedingly strong, it determined his whole life. He was unable to give up his craving, so he abandoned his kingdom and kept on murdering for the sake of human flesh. He had accumulated greed for human flesh because in his preceding life he had been a man-eating Yakkha. His previous accumulations were the natural decisive support-condition for the arising of greed for human flesh and for his killing of human beings. He could not refrain from taking human flesh. Thus we see that deeds performed in the past are a natural decisive support-condition for deeds at the present. Akusala kamma is dangerous since it does not only produce unpleasant vipåka, but by performing akusala kamma the tendency is accumulated to perform akusala kamma again. We read in the same Jåtaka that one day the King seized Sutasoma, the Bodhisatta. Sutasoma asked permission to be temporarily released in order to fulfill a promise he had made to a brahmin, and after he had done so he returned to the man-eater without fear, and preached to him. He said (491): Of all the sweets this world can yield to me None sweeter than the joys of Truth I see: Brahmins and priests that in the Truth abide, Birth, death escaping, reach the further side. The Bodhisatta said that he was willing to give up all his wealth, his limbs and his life for the sake of truth. He converted and tamed the man-eater. The perfections (påramís) he had accumulated conditioned his heroic attitude and his preference for the truth. The Bodhisatta developed all the perfections during countless lives in order to attain Buddhahood. We may have accumulated an interest in the Dhamma but the perfections have not been accumulated to the degree that stages of insight can arise and that enlightenment can be attained. ******* Nina. #74299 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Jul 13, 2007 5:23 am Subject: Listening to the Dhamma, Ch 6, no 3. nilovg Dear friends, Thus, when we consider lobha-múla-citta, we can remember four latent tendencies which condition its accompanying akusala cetasikas: attachment to sense pleasures, wrong view, conceit and attachment to rebirth. When an unpleasant object is experienced, dosa-múla-citta is likely to arise. So long as the latent tendency of patigha, which is aversion, is unabandoned it conditions the arising of dosa-múla-citta. Ignorance arises with each type of akusala citta. So long as the latent tendency of ignorance has not been abandoned there will be akusala citta. There are two types of moha-múla-citta which have moha as their only root: one type is accompanied by doubt and one is called “accompanied by restlessness” [1]. When one has doubt about the Buddha’s teaching, about enlightenment, about nåma and rúpa, it is evident that the latent tendency of doubt is still unabandoned. When we consider the two types of moha-múla- citta which are bound to arise in our life, we can remember that the two latent tendencies of ignorance and doubt are unabandoned. Thus, the akusala cittas which are classified according to their roots and the akusala dhammas which can accompany them can remind us of the latent tendencies which are still there, unabandoned, like the germs of the disease of defilements. The latent tendencies are eradicated at different stages of enlightenment: wrong view and doubt are eradicated by the sotåpanna; desire for sense- pleasures and aversion are not eradicated by the sakadågåmí (the once- returner, who has attained the second stage of enlightenment) but they have become attenuated; these tendencies are eradicated by the anågåmí (the non- returner who has attained the third stage of enlightenment); clinging to rebirth and ignorance are eradicated by the arahat. The latent tendencies are deeply rooted and hard to eradicate. By the development of samatha to the degree of jhåna, absorption, defilements can be temporarily subdued, but the latent tendencies cannot be eradicated. Only by the development of vipassanå all latent tendencies can be completely eradicated so that there are no conditions for the arising of akusala dhammas. -------------- 1. Restlessness or agitation is in Påli uddhacca. This cetasika accompanies every akusala citta, but the second type of moha- múlacitta is called: accompanied by restlessness; in this way it can be differentiated from the first type. Moha-múlacitta accompanied by restlessness arises very often in between other types of akusala citta when there is no attachment, aversion or doubt, but there is akusala citta with forgetfulness of realities. ******* Nina. #74300 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Fri Jul 13, 2007 5:28 am Subject: [dsg] Re: "Dhammas" and Impermanence (The Abhidhammikas perspective?) scottduncan2 Dear colette, Howzitgoineh? Thanks for your reply: me: "...I think that the Dhamma, as written, has to be read so that one knows the Teachings and that this seamlessly becomes part of an ongoing development of 'the mind' which is what 'meditation' is." c: "...I cognized that the class, doctrine, worked. It worked extremely well and is an invaluable tool to society. I simply ignored the tedium and the status quo. You seem to be posing a theory that the status quo is the only way to achieve a certain goal, outcome by suggesting that society does not operate in this fashion." Scott: The theory was in response, I think, to what I thought you were saying about studying the texts. I seemed to read you to be repeating what has been noted many, many times: something to the effect that one can't achieve 'the goal' by reading, and that texts are not experience, etc. I was just responding to this fantasy of mine because it has always seemed, each time this was said, that to say so is to trot out a truism so banal as to be almost numbingly self-evident. I never could figure out why this had to be said. Of course the texts are not 'experience'. You mention "ignor[ing] the tedium". You speak out against the 'status quo'. This is good, I think. The 'status quo' evolves. I see how Sarah notes that the now controversial Kh. Sujin teaches things in a way that was once acceptable. A new status quo has arisen, one which asserts that conscious effort by someone can lead to achieving 'the goal'. I find that this approach - this new 'status quo' - is tedious. In the above I was theorising that the reading of the texts is necessary since it is in this form that the Dhamma exists - the teachings, that is. In the other sense, the dhammas are always here. As Rob K. notes: the ball is rolling. I recognise that 'I' do not read texts. It would be 'dhammas rolling' that 'read'. It would be 'dhammas rolling' that think. It would be 'dhammas rolling' that understand and misunderstand. I think this is all development of dhammas, for good or ill, and that this is the so-called 'meditation'. 'Dhammas rolling' are not 'me'. 'Dhammas rolling' are not continuous but are seamlessly contiguous. Sincerely, Scott. #74301 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Jul 13, 2007 6:42 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Complexity of Kamma: Unraveling the Kusala-Akusala Mix nilovg Hi Howard, I agree with you that other people's actions have influence on a person. But when we try to understand kamma and vipaaka we need to be precise. As you say, Vipaakacitta occurs as rebirth-consciousness and also as the experience of desirable or undesirable objects through the senses. We have to remember this! Through insight we can come to know that there is no experiencer. That is the reason that Kh Sujin always comes back to the present moment. To help us to have understanding of nama and rupa that appear now. Understanding this moment means: understanding paramattha dhammas. Take the many moments of painful feeling that arise in me. They are produced by kamma. No matter others are kind and concerned, they cannot change this vipaaka. But by their kind reminders they help me to take it in the right way, with less aversion than before. Others can influence me, with regard to kusala cittas, but they cannot avert vipaaka that has arisen already. Thus, kamma is the real cause of vipaaka, there is no other cause. We are heirs to kamma the Buddha said. Kh Sujin said that true understanding of kamma and vipaaka goes together with the stages of insight. At this moment we know in theory that seeing is naama. But we confuse seeing and visible object. How could we clearly understand the vipaakacitta of seeing? It is so true what the Vis. that was just posted states: Nina. P.S. Closing off my mail tonight for a week. Op 12-jul-2007, om 17:16 heeft upasaka@... het volgende geschreven: > Kamma vipaka, per se, is personal. It is the effect within the same > mindstream of prior intention and intentional action. However, it > is also clear, > completely clear, crystal clear, that all actions have consequences > and not > only on the "same person". All actions are conditions for events in > multiple > mindstreams, #74302 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Jul 13, 2007 6:54 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Sammaadi.t.thi study corner nilovg Hi Larry, the text was: Kamma-formation consciousness is a condition in one way only, as decisive-support condition, for the materiality of non-percipient beings, or for the kamma-born materiality in the five-constituent becoming, according to the Suttanta method.> We have to remember that here the conditioned dhamma is ruupa. See also 199: The consciousness that is the cause of mentality- materiality is reckoned to be twofold classed as resultant and not resultant. And since in the case of non-percipient beings materiality is originated by kamma, it has as its condition kamma-formation consciousness that occurred in the five-constituent becoming. This applies also to the kamma-originated materiality arising in the course of an existence in the five-constituent becoming at the moment of profitable or any other consciousness. So this is correct. This is how the exposition can also be known here 'by inclusion'. 200. 4. 'By manner of condition': here: Resultant-consciousness conditions Mentality in nine ways,... etc. ------- N: It is complicated, because we have to consider both nama, the cetasikas, and ruupa. There are many sections on this subject. In due time. Nina. Op 13-jul-2007, om 1:11 heeft LBIDD@... het volgende geschreven: > "Kamma-formation consciousness..." > > Larry: If this follows dependent arising then both cetasikas and > consciousnesses are resultant only, right? #74303 From: "Phil" Date: Fri Jul 13, 2007 7:05 am Subject: Re: What other teacher teaches against selecting a meditation object? philofillet Hi Robert (and Scott) > I did a 5 or 6 day meditation retreat with Joseph Goldstein in 1983 > or 4. As you say he was a semi-mahasi style teacher. I liked it at > the time "I liked it at the time." I think this last part is important, Robert. Other than Nina, I think everybody here has started with some meditation, not matter how clumsy, and probably liked it. Perhaps you and others have lost touched with that first feeling of liking it, but while you would call it clinging or delusion or wrong view or whatever now, at the time it pushed you in a new direction, I think, and that culminated in deeper understanding that allowed you to see through the shortcomings of those first clumsy steps. But I would really question telling other people not to take those first steps because of shortcomings in it. Who knows how your early meditation was helpful in getting at gross forms of delusion? but found I had to go into the texts to understand what the > Dhamma is. The ball is always rolling, and having a 'method' is > adding something extra, it doesn't help clarity for me. Now it doesn't. But I think people who have grossly defiled mindstreams need that method, at least at the beginning. Later, understanding will "work its way." But I believe the Buddha offered intentional practices to get the ball rolling. If meditation as popularly practiced doesn't take people any further than stress relief, fine, there weren't conditions for them to see the shortcomings of their approach, there weren't conditions for them to see deeper into Dhamma. Certainly *not* meditating wouldn't have made it any more likely that they would see deeper. And at least they got the very best kind of stress relief, which isn't very deep but is still a form of liberation from suffering that makes them less harmful to themselves and others. Scott, this is why I must say I was a bit saddened to see your depiction of meditators as cockroaches who scurry away when the lights go on. You're a mental health professional and I really believe popular forms of meditation can be so helpful to people who are suffering terribly. Actually, I just started crying a bit thinking about that. (Not crying about you, but about all those suffering people.) Are you sure you're not depriving people who might listen to you of the greatest possible self help program? Sure it's not deep and not truly liberating, but the mental health benefits are documented, aren't they? Metta, Phil p.s still haven't got back to you on the previous post., Robert. Maybe tomorrow. I guess I won't have much to say other than what I said to NIna about it, that it sounded like a deeper variation on what Levine wrote. But I'll look again. p.p.s these tears maybe be akusala technically, but I like them. They taste a little karunish. #74304 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Jul 13, 2007 7:18 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Not In Pali Tipitaka Re: What other teacher teaches against selecting a med objt nilovg Dear Sarah, The quotes from your dialogue with Kh Sujin are very useful. Op 13-jul-2007, om 11:56 heeft sarah abbott het volgende geschreven: Hi Phil, (Ken H, Nina, Scott, Mike, Suan, Howard, Rob K & all), > So, there can be the development of calm of particular objects, but > it's > not by selecting them with the usual attachment. In other words, if > there's no real understanding of dhammas and just a wondering about > what > object to focus on or base a practise on, it's not any bhavana at all. ----------- N: If we consider the paramattha arising at the present moment, the whole question of selection is superfluous. There are conditions for a certain person to develop samatha with one of the subjects as described in the Visuddhimagga, but the moment there is selection with attachment and wrong view, bhavana is gone. Very well explained. ---------- > > s: I asked a couple more questions about jhana, forests and > seclusion. These > were her responses (the usual 'classics'): > > "Shall we postpone the development of panna from now on?" > > "If there's no panna to understand this moment right now, whether it's > calm or not, can anyone reach jhana, that stage of calmness? So it > has to > start or begin from this moment. If there is no panna at this > moment, how > can it grow?" ---------- N: Also in samatha pa~n~naa has to know whether the citta is kusala citta with calm or not. This is very correct: < So it has to start or begin from this moment. If there is no panna at this moment, how can it grow?"> > ***** > S: So > having discussion here, there can also be Buddhanussati at moments of > calmness while one appreciates the virtues of the Buddha through a > better > understanding of the teachings. ------- N: This is the essence of Buddhanussati, and this does not have to be selected. There can be conditions for its arising. Nina. #74305 From: "Phil" Date: Fri Jul 13, 2007 7:18 am Subject: Meditation and mental health (was What other teachers...) philofillet Hi again Scott and all Maybe I'll open a thread on this - it's a topic I'm interested in and would appreciate hearing more from you. Not to debate, just for what the literature says about meditation in mental health treatment. Not in detail, of course, but if there are any links you could provide... > You're a mental health professional and I really believe popular > forms of meditation can be so helpful to people who are suffering > terribly. Of course I know that this doesn't apply to people who are suffering from the most severe or even somewhat severe forms of mental illness that have to do with physiological factors, brain chemistry or whatever, I don't know the details. But you get my drift... I guess the problem here is when can we say meditation is really "Buddhist" meditation....if it's not Buddhist meditation in line with Theravadin tradition it's not relevant at DSG even if it's effective, I guess. Metta, Phil p.s perhaps Christine or others who work in the field could help here as well. #74306 From: upasaka@... Date: Fri Jul 13, 2007 4:15 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Not In Pali Tipitaka Re: What other teacher teaches against selecti... upasaka_howard Hi, Sarah (and all) - In a message dated 7/13/07 5:58:22 AM Eastern Daylight Time, sarahprocterabbott@... writes: > Hi Phil, (Ken H, Nina, Scott, Mike, Suan, Howard, Rob K &all), > > I've been reading your comments to me and others with interest. > > --- Phil wrote: > Qu:> I guess I wish it could be clarified and acknowledged that there > >are certain points in which she stands more or less alone... > ... > S: I think she does stand very much alone when it comes to not selecting a > meditation object. > > You mention teachers like Joseph Goldstein and the use of the abdomen as a > base. As it happens, he studied with Munindra around the same time I did, > also teachers like Larry Rosenberg, whom Howard has studied/done a > retreat, so I know that they started in the Mahasi-style (Munindra's > teacher). ---------------------------------------------- Howard: Two brief comments on the foregoing: 1) Just to clarify, I have come across no modern teacher who in giving a meditation subject (usually the breath) advises forceful avoidance of noticing other phenomena. Typically, breath (or whatever the subject may be) becomes the centerpoint at a certain stage of a broadened awareness, though degree of focus and degree of dispersion may vary from sitting to stting or even within a single sitting. 2) Larry Rosenberg seems to have gone "beyond" the original Mahasi approach, teaching an in-tandem, samatha-vipassana-bhavana approach, and not suggesting attention to stomach motion w/breath so much as attention to breath-sensations per se. In any case, at the one brief, 2-day, daily-commuting retreat of his I attended, I was much impressed by his teaching ability, knowledge, and demeanor, and for such a brief event that retreat was one of the very best I ever attended. It was there that I came to realize the power that there can be in walking meditation. It has been a long time, however, since I have attended any retreats. I have come to prefer twice-a-day meditating in private - in seclusion. For me, meditation, unlike much of the praying in Judaism, Christianity, and Islam, and really most Dhamma practice for that matter, is an internal affair, not a social one. (For others, of course, it may be quite different.) ------------------------------------------------------ > > [[[Diversion: > > I had this discussion quite recently with Joop: > > >Joop: For meditators more useful is the paragraph about nama-rupa- > >pariccheda-ñana of "The Progress of Insight; A Modern Treatise on > >Buddhist Satipatthana Meditation" by the Venerable Mahasi Sayadaw > >(In: www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/bps/misc/progress.html) > >Below > <..> > > S: ...let's look at the beginning of the Mahasi text as it's > been quoted a few times recently: > > >1. Analytical Knowledge of Body and Mind > >Endowed with purification of mind and continuing the practice of > >noticing, the meditator now comes to know body-and-mind analytically > >as follows: "The rising (upward movement) of the abdomen is one > >process; the falling (downward movement) is another; sitting is > >another; touching is another," etc. > <...> > Sarah: I don't think you'll find anything like this in any of the Tipitaka > or ancient commentaries. First of all, nama-rupa pariccheda-~nana is not > about analytical knowledge. It's not about noticing, it's not about the > abdomen.... > > It's about the clear and distinct understanding of namas and rupas<]]]end > diversion. > **** --------------------------------------------- Howard: We find out what it's actually "about" largely by the doing of it. As for the breath, it does turn out that the sensations (body-door dhammas) experienced on what we call "in-breath" happen to differ in a variety of ways from those on what we call "out-breath", and the concomitant mental factors are seen to differ with these as well. This detailed direct observation becomes quite interesting, it happens. Most interesting of all is directly seeing the impersonality and fleeting character of the sensations and concomitant mentality. ---------------------------------------------- > S: As I recall, Mahasi Sayadaw's technique and focus-style meditation was > extremely controversial in Burma a few decades ago. Ask Han off-list - he > remembers some of these things when he was young. Now, of course it's very > mainstream all over the world. Same for Goenka's tecnique. Even Ledi > Sayadaw when he challenged the ancient commentaries.... Now it is teachers > like A.Sujin who highly regard the commentaries as they are and don't > teach the selection of objects for the development of satipatthana who are > considered controversial! ------------------------------------------- Howard: Happily, except for possibly at the Vatican, the Buddha himself is not so controversial. ;-) For me, I depend on his teachings in the Satipatthana, Kayagatasati, and Anapanasati suttas for my primary meditation instruction - these together with the "facts on the ground" come across during the meditating itself. I make no claims at perfect understanding or correctness of approach, of course, but what I am doing is very good for me, and so I persist. BTW, complementarily, another list member and I are about to embark on a two-person, slow-but-steady study of the Abhidhammata Sangaha, specifically in the form of A Comprehensive Manual of Abhidhamma, to learn what we can and give the Abhidhamma really fair and open-minded inquiry. ---------------------------------------------------- > > So, I do think you have a good point - i.e, that as a well-known Buddhist > teacher, her understanding of the teachings very much goes against the > stream. [I consider we're very privileged to have access to the incredibly > subtle teaching, but you know all that! So, no, I'm no 'Goliath' to your > David:-))](Btw, did you read Ven Pannabahulo's account of the 'seminars'? > Any comments?). > > I also thought your 'no selection' line pretty well hit the mark and > understood it wasn't intended as a direct quote. > > Even when it comes to the development of samatha, she stresses over and > over again that any attachment is a hindrance to the development of calm. > On our recent visit, I quoted a passage (quoted here recently) from a > booklet of hers 'Deed of Merit'. I suggested that people might read the > following and think they should practice these meditations: > > "The monks are accustomed to practise continuously, for a > long time, four meditation subjects of samatha, in order to have > calm of citta and to subdue defilements which can disturb them. > Laypeople can also practise these four meditation subjects*. The > Dhamma and the Vinaya which the monks practise can also be > applied by layfollowers in their own situation, as a means of > subduing defilements." > > She listened to my comment above and then the quote. At the end, she > simply said firmly: > > "No selection." > ***** > The point is, as you've heard her stress so often, even for the beginning > of the development of samatha, there has to be right understanding (not > theoretically either) of what kusala and akusala are, what calm is, how an > object conditions calm. The beginning is the direct understanding and > awareness. The point is that it is the panna, not a person who just wants > to develop more calm, that develops samatha. If the calm isn't known > exactly when it arises, how can it be developed? > > I have many yoga and Buddhist friends who spend hours sitting cross-legged > and focussing on breath. Is there any understanding or calm or is it all > attachment? Only panna can ever tell at any moment. One thing for sure, > the development of all kinds of kusala has to be in order to have less > attachment and for this, there has to be wisdom from beginning to end for > the development of samatha and vipassana. --------------------------------------- Howard: I can't speak for others. My meditating does cultivate calm and clarity as well. ---------------------------------------- > > So now, do we know if the citta is calm? If we know, it can develop. It > can be dhammanusati now while we consider the Dhamma. At any moment of > understanding, the citta is calm. When we reflect wisely on the teachings, > A.Sujin was stressing that this is 'the best worship of the Buddha'. So > having discussion here, there can also be Buddhanussati at moments of > calmness while one appreciates the virtues of the Buddha through a better > understanding of the teachings. Gradually, one may become used to have > such calm too when reading or reflecting on a sutta as you do. However, > the understanding and awarness have to be very keen to not take the common > attachment and pleasant feeling for being such kusala calm. If we become > attached to moments of kusala, then again it's no longer samatha. > > So, there can be the development of calm of particular objects, but it's > not by selecting them with the usual attachment. In other words, if > there's no real understanding of dhammas and just a wondering about what > object to focus on or base a practise on, it's not any bhavana at all. > > I asked a couple more questions about jhana, forests and seclusion. These > were her responses (the usual 'classics'): > > "Shall we postpone the development of panna from now on?" > > "If there's no panna to understand this moment right now, whether it's > calm or not, can anyone reach jhana, that stage of calmness? So it has to > start or begin from this moment. If there is no panna at this moment, how > can it grow?" > ***** > Hope this answers your question at the top to some extent. In India in > Savatthi, I'm sure you would have heard another friend (Chris) raise just > the same point about all the well-known bhikkhus teaching a practice or > technique. I forget the exact response, but I remember A.Sujin just > quietly turning the 'focus' to the present realities. What is the truth > now as we speak? What is real now? What can be known now? > > Metta, > > Sarah > ============================ With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) #74307 From: upasaka@... Date: Fri Jul 13, 2007 5:04 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Not In Pali Tipitaka Re: What other teacher teaches against selecti... upasaka_howard Hi, all - In a message dated 7/13/07 11:15:28 AM Eastern Daylight Time, Upasaka writes the following, which could be parsed in an unintended fashion: > I have come to prefer twice-a-day meditating in private - in seclusion. For > me, meditation, unlike much of the praying in Judaism, Christianity, and > Islam, and really most Dhamma practice for that matter, is an internal affair, > not a social one. (For others, of course, it may be quite different.) > ----------------------------------------- The second sentence would more clearly have been written as follows: "For me, meditation, and really most Dhamma practice for that matter, unlike much of the praying in Judaism, Christianity, and Islam, is an internal affair, not a social one." ========================== With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) #74308 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Jul 13, 2007 11:39 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Not In Pali Tipitaka Re: What other teacher teaches against selecti... nilovg Hi Howard, that is very interesting. would you share this with all of us? Nina. Op 13-jul-2007, om 17:15 heeft upasaka@... het volgende geschreven: > BTW, complementarily, another list member and I are about to embark on > a two-person, slow-but-steady study of the Abhidhammata Sangaha, > specifically > in the form of A Comprehensive Manual of Abhidhamma, to learn what > we can and > give the Abhidhamma really fair and open-minded inquiry. #74309 From: TGrand458@... Date: Fri Jul 13, 2007 9:42 am Subject: Un-Direct Mindfulness TGrand458@... Hi All From MN # 109... "Venerable sir, how does one know, how does one see, so that in regard to this body with its consciousness and all exterior signs, there is no I-making, mine-making, and underlying tendency to conceit?" "Bhikkhu, any kind of material form whatever, whether past or present, internal or external, gross or subtle, inferior or superior, far or near -- one sees ALL material form AS IT ACTUALLY IS WITH PROPER WISDOM thus: 'This is not mine, this I am not, this is not my self.' Any kind of feeling whatever ... Any kind of perception whatever ... Any kind of formations whatever ... Any kind of consciousness whatever, whether past or present, internal or external, gross or subtle, inferior or superior, far or near -- one sees ALL consciousness AS IT ACTUALLY IS with proper wisdom thus: 'This is not mine, this I am not, this is not my self.' It is when knows and sees thus that in regard to this body with its consciousness and all external signs there is no I-making, mine-making, or underlying tendency to conceit." TG's Comment: The Buddha follows the above with a teaching about the aggregates being impermanent, suffering, and nonself. In this Sutta, a Bhikkhu directly asks how to overcome seeing things as "with self." The Buddha directly answers this direct question. The answer contains a whole lot of information dealing with "knowing things that are NOT directly experiencable along with those that are directly experiencable. This is described by the Buddha as "Proper Wisdom" and "seeing the aggregates as they actually are! Therefore, seeing the aggregates AS THEY REALLY ARE does not even mean they need to be seen directly! It means, that the nature of impermanence, suffering, and nonself needs to be known, and that all aggregates, wherever they may be, are of THAT nature...including those directly experienced. Said another way... One sees ALL Material Form, All Feeling, ALL Perceptions, All Formations, ALL Consciousness, (not just directly experienced aggregates). This means that insight, in addition to direct experience, applies the principles of conditionality -- impermanence, suffering, nonself -- to any kind of aggregates...whether past, whether external, whether far, etc. (Oh dear, this seems like using conceptual/analytical insight as part of the insight practice.) The Sutta continues on to show that this type of insight leads to disenchantment, dispassion, and liberation!!! The Suttas ends by saying 60 Bhikkhus were liberated from the taints. Whether true or not, apparently the compilers thought this was a very powerful and enlightening Sutta. This is NOT a rare Sutta. Many Suttas present the matter in this manner. None, zero, nada, speak about --seeing dhammas as ultimate realities with their own characteristics. TG #74310 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Fri Jul 13, 2007 3:51 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Hmmmm.... jonoabb Hi Dan (and Howard) Dan D. wrote: > Howard, I agree with you. How could "adopting the answer" be anything > more than adopting the words of the answer and, as Bonhoeffer > suggests, by confusing the words with the reality constructing an > excuse for complacency and indolence? > What I said was that we are urged to adopt the teachings *to the extent we are capable of verifying them for ourselves*. What cannot be immediately verified remains to be realised (=verified) by the further development of insight. > And Jon, you write: "As regards the idea of coming to a correct > answer after after a long and arduous road of effort to determine for > oneself through practice which Efforts are Right and which are Wrong > is concerned, do you mean the old 'trial and error' approach? I do > not see in that a gradual progression towards right view and > diminution of wrong view. I think the chances are that wrong view > would prevail at the outset and would thereafter lead one deeper into > wrong view." > > Of course I mean the ol' trial-and-error approach. True, we can only > get there by not "trying", but we also need to have a thorough > understanding of what "trying" means. How can that understanding > develop without "trying", so that the "trying" can really arise and > be seen for what it is? Trial-error-trial-error-trial-error...on and > on--all informed by the teachings. > Yes, but "trial-error-trial-error...on and on--all informed by the teachings" means, to my way of thinking, that one stars with the "being informed". And an integral part of that is to be very clear what the Buddha had to say about any kind of "trial" ("practice"). We need to realise that wrong practice and a strong interest in the teachings can go hand in hand. I think too often it is assumed that as long as there's an interest in, or some reference from time to time to, the teachings, the practice will look after itself and right view will somehow prevail in the long run through refinement of the practice. To me this seems to be a recipe for continued wrong practice. Jon #74311 From: upasaka@... Date: Fri Jul 13, 2007 12:02 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Not In Pali Tipitaka Re: What other teacher teaches against selecti... upasaka_howard Hi, Nina - In a message dated 7/13/07 2:40:14 PM Eastern Daylight Time, vangorko@... writes: > Hi Howard, > that is very interesting. would you share this with all of us? > Nina. > Op 13-jul-2007, om 17:15 heeft upasaka@... het volgende geschreven: > > >BTW, complementarily, another list member and I are about to embark on > >a two-person, slow-but-steady study of the Abhidhammata Sangaha, > >specifically > >in the form of A Comprehensive Manual of Abhidhamma, to learn what > >we can and > >give the Abhidhamma really fair and open-minded inquiry. > > ========================= Thank you very much for suggesting it, Nina. I think that it may be best, though, if he and I go through this process largely on our own in order for us to get what is really our own understanding of the material. However, there are likely to be times, perhaps many, that he and I would like to ask something of the group, you most especially, and I do hope that it will be okay for us to freely do that. With much metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) #74312 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Fri Jul 13, 2007 4:03 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Hmmmm.... jonoabb Hi Howard upasaka@... wrote: > Hi, Jon (and Dan) - > > In a message dated 7/10/07 7:04:01 AM Eastern Daylight Time, > jonabbott@... writes: > > >> I could agree with the analogy in the sense of the Buddha coming up with >> the 'answer to a sum' after spending many lifetimes in the pursuit of >> knowledge. We are then urged to adopt that answer, to the extent we are >> capable of verifying it for ourselves, rather than put ourselves through >> the same ordeal as the Buddha. >> > > --------------------------------------------- > Howard: > Just "adopt" the answer on the basis of presumed authority and go to > no genuine energetic efforts to make a true verification possible? What sort of > knowing would that constitute? Not a very deep or direct one, it seems to > me,and not a transformative one. > I think you overlooked the words "to the extent we are capable of verifying it for ourselves" in my post. > What of the following words of the Kalama Sutta? > (I mark off a relevant portion by double asterisks.) > _ _ _ _ _ _ _ > "It is proper for you, Kalamas, to doubt, to be uncertain; uncertainty has > arisen in you about what is doubtful. Come, Kalamas. Do not go upon what has > been acquired by repeated hearing; nor upon tradition; nor upon rumor; nor upon > what is in a scripture; nor upon surmise; nor upon an axiom; nor upon specious > reasoning; nor upon a bias towards a notion that has been pondered over; ** > nor upon another's seeming ability; nor upon the consideration, 'The monk is our > teacher.' Kalamas, when you yourselves know: 'These things are bad; these > things are blamable; these things are censured by the wise; undertaken and > observed, these things lead to harm and ill,' abandon them.** " > -- -- -- -- -- -- > With regard to that last sentence, for "you yourself" to know, more > than idle attempts at easy verification are needed. Sustained, serious - even > "formal" - effort is needed. As in The Sound of Music, "Nothing comes from > nothing. Nothing ever will." > ;-) > As I said, only what can be verified (i.e., based on one's already developed panna) is to be adopted. >> As regards the idea of coming to a correct answer after after a long and >> arduous road of effort to determine for oneself through practice which >> Efforts are Right and which are Wrong is concerned, do you mean the old >> 'trial and error' approach? I do not see in that a gradual progression >> towards right view and diminution of wrong view. I think the chances >> are that wrong view would prevail at the outset and would thereafter >> lead one deeper into wrong view. > > ----------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > I agree that random trial and error would be a fruitless approach. > --------------------------------------------------- > Right. And you could say that a trial and error approach is by definition a random one. Jon #74313 From: "colette" Date: Fri Jul 13, 2007 4:10 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: "Dhammas" and Impermanence (The Abhidhammikas perspective?) ksheri3 Hi Scott, Have you noticed the list much? It seems we have created a focus on meditations. MY TWO SENSE? SCENTS?, CENTS? I try to focus on a "condition" as an object. The "condition" is an action by a person or thing such as the weather. The "condition" has physical laws applied to it. I permit the "condition" to play out, psychologically. Since I am the "vessel" I am aware of my biases and predjudices which means that when the play is done it must be restarted so as to allow for the negativity to be drained in it's meriad of plays where I can compare, contrast, then discover, and hopefully better "experience" that which I meditate on. Unfortunately it can go on and on and on and on, but at some point I have to put an end to it. I do not enjoy pre-selecting the "object" which is usually a "condition" to meditate on. When I start to meditate it usually occurs that whatever is in my head at the time is the thing that is played out. Now for Scott, sorry for interupting our discussion. > > me: "...I think that the Dhamma, as written, has to be read so that > one knows the Teachings and that this seamlessly becomes part of an > ongoing development of 'the mind' which is what 'meditation' is." > colette: no problems with that! Just remember that when you study a PRE-DETERMINED object of meditation you then fallow a "beaten path". I believe you were saying something about "beating a dead horse", something about the obviousness that text books do not have experience. Does the second sentence of PRE-DETERMINATION have any similarities to that dead horse, the horse can only die once, you can kill it again once it's dead, huh? -------------------------------- > I was just responding to this fantasy of mine because it has always > seemed, each time this was said, that to say so is to trot out a > truism so banal as to be almost numbingly self-evident. colette: but look at the problems within the educational system where a test or a final exam is given and there is nothing but collusion going on among the body of testees <...> Repeating that the books do not have experience, in my view, is nothing less than reminding those weak-minded that there isn't a easy way out of these things in Buddhism, meditation takes a lot of work, there, I've said it again, it's not easy, said it again. Do you think that later on today there WILL NOT BE a practioner that comes along and says that it's easy and that they do not have to do it? ------------------------------ I never could > figure out why this had to be said. Of course the texts are not > 'experience'. > colette: but part if not all of our youth today are under the impression that they do not have to do the work, that the Athletic Dept. will give them money, scholarships, will totally pave the way for them to be the next recruited professional at whatever it is they seek, grasp at, to become. <...> ------------------------------ > You mention "ignor[ing] the tedium". You speak out against the > 'status quo'. This is good, I think. The 'status quo' evolves. colette: There's a little too much seasoning to that dish. Don't use so many lithium tablets if ya want more salt. <...> An "evolving status quo"? "The more things change the more things remain the same". We have an obiesity problem in the U.S.A., did it just evolve naturally? Did Humpty Dumpty simply fall off the Brick Wall? lol I think the status quo is affraid of living. I think the status quo wants to remain in the same stag-nation pond where they can swat flies with that long tongue they have. Sitting on a lili pad all those years would naturally force your tongue to mutate into something other, no? Ribbet. ---------------- I > see how Sarah notes that the now controversial Kh. Sujin teaches > things in a way that was once acceptable. A new status quo has > arisen, one which asserts that conscious effort by someone can lead to > achieving 'the goal'. I find that this approach - this new 'status > quo' - is tedious. colette: lets suggest a "middle manager" with fixed costs exploading and absolutely no sign of carreer advancement, higher salary, etc, but he's gotta save his paycheck for at least one more month. What got him the job: not doing the work in college and sucking up to the boys with the silver spoons stuck between their lips. They didn't do the work because it was tedius, well, who's gonna do the work now and if they don't do the work then my job will be saved, no? -------------------------------- > > In the above I was theorising that the reading of the texts is > necessary since it is in this form that the Dhamma exists - the > teachings, that is. colette: it is certainly necessary but still, remember, the Buddha himself said that the dhammas do not exist and are not permanent. It is only a starting point. You have to travel the journey complete with the bag of tricks that the Buddha gave you through the Dhammas. ---------------------- In the other sense, the dhammas are always here. > As Rob K. notes: the ball is rolling. colette: this is where I'm at since it works so well with the Kaballah in that "the divine" is with us 100% of the time, all the time. It seems that every time I get close to finishing a complete reply of yours I get cut off and this is no exception. Sorry for the incompleteness but I'll be back hopefully tomorrow. At least it won't be Fri. 13th. Side note: Fri. 13th is unlucky because it was the day upon which Phillip the Fair of France chose to eliminate his debts to the Knights Templar by having the entire fraternity arrested and convicted of being tortured into a confession. Those Spanish Clerics of the Inquisition were so inventive, weren't they? toodles, colette > > I recognise that 'I' do not read texts. It would be 'dhammas rolling' > that 'read'. It would be 'dhammas rolling' that think. It would be > 'dhammas rolling' that understand and misunderstand. I think this is > all development of dhammas, for good or ill, and that this is the > so-called 'meditation'. 'Dhammas rolling' are not 'me'. 'Dhammas > rolling' are not continuous but are seamlessly contiguous. > > Sincerely, > > Scott. > #74314 From: LBIDD@... Date: Fri Jul 13, 2007 4:19 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: What is the wrong view? (References from the MN anthology) lbidd2 Hi Jon, I'll try again. Jon: "I'm still not sure about 'simple faith' as right view. What exactly do you have in mind here?" Larry: Faith without insight. For example: MN 117.7 "And what, bhikkhus, is right view that is affected by the taints, partaking of merit, ripening on the side of attachment? '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 on the side of attachment." L: I should also remind you that faith always arises with sati, but not always with panna (insight). J: "Correct, kusala citta cannot be wrong view. However, it can be the wrong path (only kusala of the level of satipatthana is reckoned as right path)." L: See above. Kusala citta always arises with sati. Any kusala citta is a factor of right path simply because it couldn't possibly be a factor of wrong path. A view that is not wrong view _must_ be right view. There is no other alternative. Right view is a factor of right path. Larry #74315 From: "Andrew" Date: Fri Jul 13, 2007 5:22 pm Subject: Re: Un-Direct Mindfulness corvus121 --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, TGrand458@... wrote: > TG's Comment: The Buddha follows the above with a teaching about the > aggregates being impermanent, suffering, and nonself. > > In this Sutta, a Bhikkhu directly asks how to overcome seeing things as > "with self." The Buddha directly answers this direct question. The answer > contains a whole lot of information dealing with "knowing things that are NOT > directly experiencable along with those that are directly experiencable. This is > described by the Buddha as "Proper Wisdom" and "seeing the aggregates as > they actually are! > > Therefore, seeing the aggregates AS THEY REALLY ARE does not even mean they > need to be seen directly! It means, that the nature of impermanence, > suffering, and nonself needs to be known, and that all aggregates, wherever they may > be, are of THAT nature...including those directly experienced. > > Said another way... One sees ALL Material Form, All Feeling, ALL > Perceptions, All Formations, ALL Consciousness, (not just directly experienced > aggregates). This means that insight, in addition to direct experience, applies the > principles of conditionality -- impermanence, suffering, nonself -- to any > kind of aggregates...whether past, whether external, whether far, etc. (Oh > dear, this seems like using conceptual/analytical insight as part of the > insight practice.) Hi TG Another passionate post! Good on you! But there have been alot of passionate posts from and to you in recent times and I'm wondering if you have reached the stage of acknowledging that, in all truth and honesty, one cannot take a sutta (translation or original) and declare that there is only one possible meaning to the words? We aren't dealing with meaning-monopolies, are we, but with competing interpretations. The Buddha isn't here to ask anymore, unfortunately. I think you have already acknowledged that your interpretation necessitates injecting certain meanings into the suttas just as the traditional Theravadan (and any other) interpretation does. What we need to know is why and on what basis your interpretation is to be preferred over all others (beyond a mere assertion that "that's what the Buddha said"). Take your little parenthetical snipe above - the last sentence. To begin with, the term "insight practice" as you know is capable of being read in widely different ways. Which way do you want us to read it? Going by the context, you seem to want us to accept that "insight practice" includes conceptual/analytical insight. What do you see as the controversy in that? I don't know how many times I've read on DSG about different levels of insight and that the factors conducive to insight include hearing and reflecting on the Dhamma. Either I'm slow on the uptake or you are rambling and shadow-boxing. Or more likely both! ;-)) My point is: it is good for communication on this list if we take care to set up exactly where the controversy lies and to what extent differing interpretations are incompatible and to what extent they are not. We live in a very adversarial age where the normal thing is to just put your case as forcefully as you can and leave the onlookers to rake through the aftermath. It doesn't work well, IMO. I read mountains of your material before and, at the end of it all, it seemed to boil down to a semantic view that the vocabulary associated with the "dhamma theory" was more likely to lead people to inject "self" into moments of consciousness than the vocabulary preferred by you. My question at that point was - how does TG know the manner in which others are understanding the words in that vocabulary? At any point in time, if there is understanding, does the vocabulary matter? Perhaps you can write a book: "TG for Dummies". You've sold your first copy. :) Best wishes Andrew #74316 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Fri Jul 13, 2007 6:15 pm Subject: Re: What other teacher teaches against selecting a meditation object? scottduncan2 Dear Phil, Thanks for bringing this up again: P: "...Scott, this is why I must say I was a bit saddened to see your depiction of meditators as cockroaches who scurry away when the lights go on. You're a mental health professional and I really believe popular forms of meditation can be so helpful to people who are suffering terribly. Actually, I just started crying a bit thinking about that. (Not crying about you, but about all those suffering people.) Are you sure you're not depriving people who might listen to you of the greatest possible self help program? Sure it's not deep and not truly liberating, but the mental health benefits are documented, aren't they?" Scott: This may not be what you were hoping for, Phil. The fact that I'm a mental health professional, in my opinion, has little bearing on the 'me' I am here on the list. I am no one's therapist here and I don't try to be. The closest I come, and this I can't help, is to watch the whole forum, the themes, the emotions, the interactions, the roles, the comings and goings as I would when functioning as a group psychotherapist. And I mostly keep that to myself. I'm just a guy trying to learn Dhamma and straighten the views. I am not an expert on the use of meditation as a technique in the treatment of mental ailments, so I won't be getting into that literature with you. You can search it yourself, if you wish. I am not depriving anyone with any opinion I might express - except for those who might think that the opinion is a professional one and then those people should think twice. If one needs a therapist, one should seek a real, flesh-and-blood one. The self-help industry is vast enough without me, not to mention the pop-buddhist-cum-self-help industry which, to me, is a total shame. Although I see that you can buy some really cool meditation furniture which will 'keep your body from getting in the way of your meditation'. No kidding. I saw the ad. No one who seeks this will ever be lacking. I am trained in psychoanalytic psychotherapy - long-term psychotherapy. I've undergone a psychoanalysis of some six-and-a-half years duration, four session a week. The long way. The slow way. And although many if not all of my correspondents within this forum would disagree, I found the treatment to be immensely curative - I can't describe it. One of the complex outcomes of the 'cure' was the to be open to the Dhamma. This is the therapy process which is the antithesis of the quick-fix. Just as I find it so entirely correct that one has no control as debated here, I see that one cannot hurry the psyche with techniques, tricks etc. Things come or they don't. Patience and waiting is much of the treatment. I don't go in for pop-psychology (as much as I don't go in for pop-buddhism, I guess). Many mental health therapists believe in superficial, quick-fixes. If they are getting paid good money for it, I think its a shame. But, as here, it depends on accumulations. Not everyone can do a long, slow therapy. This is why there are medications, relaxation - and I suppose meditation might fit here. This is neither my interest nor expertise. Wanting to help, appearing helpful, needing to help, trying to help - do not a mental health professional make by a long shot. It is a rigourous discipline and a dying art - I blame the increase in impatience and the lack of depth. As far as the scurrying insects, this you've misunderstood. I'm not talking about people. I was thinking, at the time, of an image of people doing 'walking meditation' - as a 'buddhist practise' - all serious and walking slow and thinking this will do something and wanting this to do something and I found it ridiculous. This was like turning the light on and seeing all the insects - frozen momentarily in the midst of whatever they were doing, before running for cover. It was a metaphor for that which was understood at the time. I don't think for one moment that deliberately formulating a set of postures and movements at a given speed and with a given aim and with a given set of cognitive operations does a thing from a Dhamma perspective. In the world, relaxation is just relaxation and achievable by many means. This is just a totally forgettable opinion, Phil. Anyway, that's a bit off the cuff. What do you think? Sincerely, Scott. #74317 From: TGrand458@... Date: Fri Jul 13, 2007 3:51 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Un-Direct Mindfulness TGrand458@... Hi Andrew In a message dated 7/13/2007 6:23:57 P.M. Mountain Daylight Time, athel60@... writes: Hi TG Another passionate post! Good on you! But there have been alot of passionate posts from and to you in recent times and I'm wondering if you have reached the stage of acknowledging that, in all truth and honesty, one cannot take a sutta (translation or original) and declare that there is only one possible meaning to the words? ....................................... NEW TG: Is there something controversial about terms such as "past," "far," "external" that I am not aware of? If not, I don't see how the point can be interpreted in another manner. Some Suttas are not as easily twisted as others. ............................................ We aren't dealing with meaning-monopolies, are we, but with competing interpretations. .......................................... NEW TG: Same comment as above. ................................................ The Buddha isn't here to ask anymore, unfortunately. I think you have already acknowledged that your interpretation necessitates injecting certain meanings into the suttas just as the traditional Theravadan (and any other) interpretation does. ................................................. NEW TG: I see you have declined to deal with the Sutta at hand, and have instead decided to deal with a "side issue" of differing interpretations. ................................................ What we need to know is why and on what basis your interpretation is to be preferred over all others (beyond a mere assertion that "that's what the Buddha said"). ....................................................... NEW TG: "My" intepretation? Just what is it about "past," "far," or "external" -- 5 aggregates, -- that requires deep interpretive skill? Please let me know how "my" interpretation is off the mark. I'd really appreciate it...if you could. You see, I am posting THE QUOTE. I am not making the MERE ASSERTION that "this is what the Buddha said." I leave THAT tactic up to those who claim the commentarial position IS the Buddha's teaching. .......................................... Take your little parenthetical snipe above - the last sentence. To begin with, the term "insight practice" as you know is capable of being read in widely different ways. Which way do you want us to read it? Going by the context, you seem to want us to accept that "insight practice" includes conceptual/analyticthat "insight do you see as the controversy in that? I don't know how many times I've read on DSG about different levels of insight and that the factors conducive to insight include hearing and reflecting on the Dhamma. ............................................. NEW TG: Then what's your problem? You should be in agreement with my post then. At least in terms of its content, not necessarily its challenging tone. I don't know how many times I've read in DSG that Insight practice is ONLY "directly knowing -- Dhammas as ultimate realities with their own characteristics." (Or if not "only," darn near close to it.) My point, disregarding the view of "ultimate realities," is that insight is so much more and more broadly presented by the Buddha. I present Suttas that show this to be the case. Why? Because their might be some folks paying attention that would benefit from something other than the "commentarial interpretive line." ...................................... Either I'm slow on the uptake or you are rambling and shadow-boxing. Or more likely both! ;-)) My point is: it is good for communication on this list if we take care to set up exactly where the controversy lies and to what extent differing interpretations are incompatible and to what extent they are not. ............................................ NEW TG: The Title of my post is "Un-Direct Mindfulness." I think that speaks for itself and makes it clear what the controversy is. Those who are confused as to what the issue is, probably are not those who have engaged the issue with me. I can't go back to the beginning in every post and explain everything from scratch. .................................................. We live in a very adversarial age where the normal thing is to just put your case as forcefully as you can and leave the onlookers to rake through the aftermath. It doesn't work well, IMO. I read mountains of your material before and, at the end of it all, it seemed to boil down to a semantic view that the vocabulary associated with the "dhamma theory" was more likely to lead people to inject "self" into moments of consciousness than the vocabulary preferred by you. ............................................ NEW TG: That is indeed one concern, but it has offshoots. One of those offshoots is that "Dhammas Theory" (Don't forget the "s" which connotes a "cosmological plurality") also tends to dis-value analytical knowledge. Although, those same folks use analysis all the time. Go figure. .......................................... My question at that point was - how does TG know the manner in which others are understanding the words in that vocabulary? ............................................... NEW TG: By paying careful attention to what they say over many occasions. Is this infallible? No. ..................................... At any point in time, if there is understanding, does the vocabulary matter? ................................................ NEW TG: To whatever extent any practice helps the mind get closer to enlightenment, it is of benefit. To whatever extent any practice thwarts getting closer to enlightenment, it is a detriment. .............................................. Perhaps you can write a book: "TG for Dummies". You've sold your first copy. :) ................................................. NEW TG: Still you offer no comments regarding the Sutta I posted; nor on my analysis of it, or why it is wrong. Just debating tactics which avoided even commenting on it. Disappointing, but not unexpected. I make a solid point backed up solidly by a Sutta ... which contradicts some commonly held views by many in this group and goes against the gist of the same. That's the issue. Nothing personal. Nevertheless, I'm glad you expressed your opinion. TG OUT #74318 From: "L G SAGE" Date: Fri Jul 13, 2007 8:23 pm Subject: Theriigaathaa - Sisters (63) nichiconn Dear Friends, sorry for the delay... 10. Ekaadasakanipaato X. The Section of the Group of Eleven [Verses] 1. Kisaagotamiitheriigaathaava.n.nanaa 1. The commentary on the verses of Therii Kisaa-Gotamii part 2 txt: Atha na.m eko pa.n.ditapuriso "aya.m puttasokena cittavikkhepa.m pattaa, etissaa bhesajja.m dasabaloyeva jaanissatii"ti cintetvaa, "amma, tava puttassa bhesajja.m sammaasambuddha.m upasa"nkamitvaa pucchaa"ti aaha. Saa satthu dhammadesanaavelaaya.m vihaara.m gantvaa "puttassa me bhesajja.m detha bhagavaa"ti aaha. Satthaa tassaa upanissaya.m disvaa "gaccha nagara.m pavisitvaa yasmi.m gehe koci matapubbo natthi, tato siddhatthaka.m aaharaa"ti aaha. Pruitt: Then a certain wise man thought, "She has become mentally deranged through grief for her son. Only the One of Ten Powers knows the medicine for her." And he said, "Mother, go to the Fully and Perfectly Awakened One to ask for medicine for your son."* She went to the monastery at the time for the discourse on the Doctrine by the Teacher and said, "O Blessed One, give me medicine for my son." The Teacher saw she possessed the basis [for attaining the goal]. "Go, enter the town," he said, "and bring some white mustard seed from any house where there has never been any death." *In Mp I 279 (WL 794) the man tells her the Buddha is residing in the main monastery (dhura-vihaara). RD: But one sagacious person thought: 'Her mind is upset with grief for her child. He of the Tenfold Power will know of some medicine for her.' And he said: 'Dear woman, go to the Very Buddha, and ask him for medicine to give your child.' She went to the Vihaara at the time when the Master taught the Doctrine, and said: 'Exalted One, give me medicine for my child!' The Master, seeing the promise in her, said: 'Go, enter the town, and at any house where yet no man hath died, thence bring a little mustard-seed.' txt: Saa "saadhu, bhante"ti tu.t.thamaanasaa nagara.m pavisitvaa pa.thamageheyeva "satthaa mama puttassa bhesajjatthaaya siddhatthaka.m aaharaapeti. Sace etasmi.m gehe koci matapubbo natthi, siddhatthaka.m me dethaa"ti aaha. Ko idha mate ga.netu.m sakkotiiti. Ki.m tena hi ala.m siddhatthakehiiti dutiya.m tatiya.m ghara.m gantvaa buddhaanubhaavena vigatummaadaa pakaticitte .thitaa cintesi- "sakalanagare ayameva niyamo bhavissati, ida.m hitaanukampinaa bhagavataa di.t.tha.m bhavissatii"ti Pruitt: "Very well, sir," she said. Pleased, she entered the town, and at the first house she said, "The Teacher has told me to bring white mustard seed as medicine for my son. If this house has never had a death, give me white mustard seed." "Who can count the dead people here?" they replied. Going to the second and third houses, she thought, "What use is white mustard seed?" Through the power of the Buddha, her madness went away, and established in her normal mind, she thought, "This will be true for the whole town. The Blessed One, who is friendly and sympathetic, saw this would be so." RD: ''Tis well, lord!' she said, with mind relieved; and, going to the first house in the town, said: 'Let me take a little mustard, that I may give medicine to my child. If in this house no man hath yet died, give me a little mustard.' 'Who may say how many have not died here?' 'With such mustard, then, I have nought to do.' So she went on to a second and a third house, until, by the might of the Buddha, her frenzy left her, her natural mind was restored, and she thought: 'Even this will be the order of things in the whole town. The Exalted One foresaw this out of his pity for my good.' ===tbc, connie #74319 From: upasaka@... Date: Fri Jul 13, 2007 5:05 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: What other teacher teaches against selecting a meditation object? upasaka_howard Hi,Scott (and Phil) - In a message dated 7/13/07 9:15:42 PM Eastern Daylight Time, scduncan@... writes: > As far as the scurrying insects, this you've misunderstood. I'm not > talking about people. I was thinking, at the time, of an image of > people doing 'walking meditation' - as a 'buddhist practise' - all > serious and walking slow and thinking this will do something and > wanting this to do something and I found it ridiculous. This was like > turning the light on and seeing all the insects - frozen momentarily > in the midst of whatever they were doing, before running for cover. > It was a metaphor for that which was understood at the time. ======================= I'm confused. What *are* the scurrying insects in your metaphor? As for the alleged ridiculousness of walking meditation, it is a practice handed down from the time of the Buddha, and it is a remarkable practice,and one carried out by Theravadins, Mahayanists, and Vajrayanists alike. What I find ridiculous is making a judgement based on thinking without having experienced what is being thought about. (BTW, not all walking meditation is done slowly.) With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) #74320 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Fri Jul 13, 2007 9:26 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: What other teacher teaches against selecting a meditation object? scottduncan2 Dear Howard, Thanks for the query and comments: H: "I'm confused. What *are* the scurrying insects in your metaphor? As for the alleged ridiculousness of walking meditation, it is a practice handed down from the time of the Buddha, and it is a remarkable practice,and one carried out by Theravadins, Mahayanists, and Vajrayanists alike. What I find ridiculous is making a judgement based on thinking without having experienced what is being thought about. (BTW, not all walking meditation is done slowly.) Scott: I was just answering Phil. No big deal... Sincerely, Scott. #74321 From: han tun Date: Fri Jul 13, 2007 9:50 pm Subject: Response to E-card from Bangkok 3 (1) hantun1 Dear Sarah (and Nina), Thank you very much for making a list of discussion points at the Foundation on 4 July 2007. I will randomly pick up those discussion points which originated from my previous posts, one topic at a time, and elaborate on it. I will start with the following. Sarah: - Atta/anatta, the softness of the body or the softness of the pillow - just softness experienced, anatta! ---------- Han: It all started when I wrote, some time back, that attavaadupaadaana and sakkaaya-ditthi are synonymous. I wrote that, not without a reference. I was referring to the Abhidhammaattha Sangaha. In A Comprehesive manual of Abhidhamma by Mahaathera Naarada and Bhikkhu Bodhi, on page 267, attavaadupaadaana is explained as follws. Quote: [Clinging to a doctrine of self (attavaadupaadaana) is the adoption of personality view (sakkaya-ditthi), the identification of any of the five aggregates as a self or the accessories of a self. The Suttas mention twenty types of personality view. These are obtained by considering each of the five aggeregates in four ways, thus: "One regards materiality as self, or self as possessing materiality, or materiality as in self, or self as in materiality." The same is repeated with respect to feeling, perception, mental formations, and consciousness." End Quote. From the above quote it is very clear that attavaadupaadaana and sakkaaya-ditthi are synonymous. But Sarah wrote that they are not the same, and that attavaadupaadaana is broader than sakkaaya-ditthi. This topic was discussed at a previous meeting at the Foundation, and Ajahn Sujin explained attavaadupaadaana taking a box of biscuits as an example. I could not remember the details, and I could not understand the explanation. At the meeting on 4 July 2007, Sarah again raised the issue of attavaadupaadaana vis-a-vis sakkaaya-ditthi. The first explanation by Ajahn Sujin was a counter-question. When I said sakkaaya-ditthi is the wrong view of considering the five aggregates as atta, Ajahn Sujin, pointing at a cup on the table, asked me whether the hardness or softness of the cup was different from the hardness or softness of my body. Like the last time, when a box of biscuits was cited, I did not understand how the comparison with the cup fitted in with the discussion on the difference between attavaadupaadaana and sakkaya-ditthi. Does it mean that the cup resembles a being, and the essence or substance of the cup resembles the five aggregates of a being? Or, does it mean that the cup is an anatta, because its essence or substance (e.g. pathavi element) are anatta like the five aggregates of a being? And when a person looks at a cup and says that it is a "cup", does it mean that he is taking anatta for atta? Is this the broader aspect of attavaadupaadaana, extending beyond the five aggregates of a being and including all inanimate things, such as a box of biscuits or a cup? I do not know. When I consider attavaadupaadaana and sakkaaya-ditthi as snyonymous, it is very simple and easy to understand. But when I try to understand attavaadupaadaana in this round-about way, taking a box of bsicuits and a cup as examples, it becomes complicated for me to understand. But I did not seed further clarification at the meeting, because I was certain that whatever I said would only draw a barrage of counter-questions from Ajahn Sujin, which I might not be able to answer. Obviously, with her wealth of knowledge of Dhamma, I am sure Ajahn Sujin must have a strong basis for saying that attavaadupaadaana is broader than sakkaaya-ditthi. With my limited knowledge, I cannot and I will not argue against her. But in my heart of hearts, I find it difficult to accept. Be that as it may, at the end of the day, I will, at my own peril, go along with the Abhidhammattha Sangaha and consider that attavaadupaadaana and sakkaya-ditthi are synonymous! Respectfully, Han P.S. I still cannot use my computer at home. I am writing this at a friend's place. #74322 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Fri Jul 13, 2007 5:41 pm Subject: Re: What is the wrong view? (References from the MN anthology) indriyabala Hi Larry and Jon, - L: I should also remind you that faith always arises with sati, but not always with panna (insight). [Message #74314] T: Appropriate attention(yoniso-manasikara) is the nutriment for mindfulness and alertness. Conviction or faith(saddha) is the nutriment for appropriate attention. Listening to the Dhamma is the nutriment for conviction. See AN 10.61. http://www.purifymind.com/StreamEntry.htm Tep --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, LBIDD@... wrote: > > Hi Jon, > > I'll try again. > #74323 From: "Andrew" Date: Fri Jul 13, 2007 10:12 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Un-Direct Mindfulness corvus121 Hi TG Last first. You wrote: "Still you offer no comments regarding the Sutta I posted; nor on my > analysis of it, or why it is wrong. Just debating tactics which avoided > even commenting on it. Disappointing, but not unexpected." Just as technically you shouldn't sell something you don't own, you shouldn't comment on something you don't understand. The whole point of my post was to inform you that communication had failed in that I could not tell what you were arguing against and why. I was hoping you would develop your hints of disagreement into plain, straightforward English. If that's a debating tactic, I wish there was a heap more of it on DSG! To your questions: > NEW TG: Is there something controversial about terms such as "past," "far," > "external" that I am not aware of? If not, I don't see how the point can be > interpreted in another manner. > > Some Suttas are not as easily twisted as others. OK, I see that you *are* indeed asserting that there is only one way of interpreting this sutta. Yours. I dare say, however, that the meaning of terms such as "past" is controversial. I would expect Ken H, for example, to distinguish a momentary past from a conventional past. Others may hold that the terms are capable of many layers of meaning. Your assertion that only your interpretation is allowable is like looking at the tree in the Heartwood Sutta and declaring it has only one layer of bark! > You see, I am posting THE QUOTE. I am not making the MERE ASSERTION that > "this is what the Buddha said." I leave THAT tactic up to those who claim the > commentarial position IS the Buddha's teaching. Sorry, TG, but I feel that THAT tactic is exactly what you are using. You are posting THE QUOTE and THE ASSERTION that it has only one meaning that cannot be "twisted" i.e. "this is what the Buddha said". I'm not denying you your opinion. Just reminding you that it is your OPINION. Now, can we please get to whether your opinion is right or wrong ... > I don't know how many times I've read in DSG that Insight practice is ONLY > "directly knowing -- Dhammas as ultimate realities with their own > characteristics." (Or if not "only," darn near close to it.) > > My point, disregarding the view of "ultimate realities," is that insight is > so much more and more broadly presented by the Buddha. The above was what I was interested in. You are attacking a view that insight "practice" (you *must* know that this is a bugbear word on DSG) is ONLY (or darn near ONLY) direct knowing of dhammas. You point to a broader presentation by the Buddha on the topic. Thank you. TG, if you and I have the same model car, but you believe it runs via an internal combustion engine and I believe it runs via a little Chinaman under the bonnet, it's not going to be easy for us to discuss how to get the best performance out of our car. It's the same with Dhamma, isn't it. The basics set the tone. Where do you stand on "no control", on the place of volition and purposive "doing", on consciousness "continuity", on anatta (real or just a technique) ... No, I'm not wanting your answers. I'm just saying that one sutta can't be read in a vacuum. It has a wider context that feeds into specific interpretation. As it happens, in this particular case, I'm quite happy to agree that there are levels of insight, that the Buddha's teaching allowed for multi-layered meanings and that conceptual analysis plays an important role in the path. I'm not prepared to throw out the dhammas theory stuff because to me it is consistent with a deeper layer of meaning in the suttas. I can't go back to the beginning in every post and explain > everything from scratch. Yes, I understand that. But in a long thread or series of threads, it is easy for one after a while to succumb to inaccurate ideas of what others are saying. We all do it. > One of those > offshoots is that "Dhammas Theory" (Don't forget the "s" which connotes a > "cosmological plurality") also tends to dis-value analytical knowledge. Although, > those same folks use analysis all the time. Go figure. This is truly where I don't get it. You have the impression these people disvalue analytical knowledge. My impression has been exactly the opposite. When I ask what should I do, they always fall back on the factors for enlightenment - hearing and considering the Dhamma etc. So when you say that people into dhammas theory disvalue analytical knowledge, I don't believe you. > NEW TG: To whatever extent any practice helps the mind get closer to > enlightenment, it is of benefit. To whatever extent any practice thwarts getting > closer to enlightenment, it is a detriment. ... that word again! Practice! How many meanings does it have? :) OK, TG, you've had a go at my "twisting" and eel-wriggling. Now, it's my turn. That French Professor who became an expert on propaganda, Jacques Ellul, used to refer to 4 "great collective sociological pre-suppositions in the modern world". These pre- suppositions go unnoticed by us in all our reasoning. One of them is that history develops in endless progress. To put it another way, the modern western interpretation of Dhamma has to be superior to that of ancient bhikkhus. Right or wrong? Best wishes Andrew #74324 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Fri Jul 13, 2007 10:27 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Hmmmm.... (SN 2.10, AN 3.91) jonoabb Hi Howard upasaka@... wrote: > Hi, Jon (and Dan) - > > ... > > There is an urgency to put forth effort when it is possible to do so. > In SN 2.10, the Buddha taught the following: > _ _ _ _ _ _ > Get up! > Sit up! > What's your need for sleep? > And what sleep is there for the afflicted, > pierced by the arrow, > oppressed? > > Get up! > Sit up! > Train firmly for the sake of peace, > Don't let the king of death, > — seeing you heedless — > deceive you, > bring you under his sway. > > Cross over the attachment > to which human & heavenly beings, > remain desiring > tied. > Don't let the moment pass by. > Those for whom the moment is past > grieve, consigned to hell. > > Heedless is > dust, dust > comes from heedlessness > has heedlessness > on its heels. > Through heedfulness & clear knowing > you'd remove > your own sorrow. > -- -- -- -- -- -- > I agree there is urgency for 'heedfulness and clear knowing' to be developed. It is the effort for (i.e., of) this that is being spoken of here, I think. (BTW, I couldn't find this sutta under the reference 2:10 in CDB, the BB translation of SN. What was your source, please?) > Also, in AN 3.91 the Buddha expressed the urgency for expending > genuine effort as follows: > _ _ _ _ _ _ > "There are these three urgent duties of a farming householder. Which three? > "There is the case where a farming householder quickly gets his field > well-plowed & well-harrowed. Having quickly gotten his field well-plowed & > well-harrowed, he quickly plants the seed. Having quickly planted the seed, he quickly > lets in the water & then lets it out. > "These are the three urgent duties of a farming householder. Now, that > farming householder does not have the power or might [to say:] 'May my crops spring > up today, may the grains appear tomorrow, and may they ripen the next day.' > But when the time has come, the farming householder's crops spring up, the > grains appear, and they ripen. > "In the same way, there are these three urgent duties of a monk. Which three? > The undertaking of heightened virtue, the undertaking of heightened mind, the > undertaking of heightened discernment. These are the three urgent duties of a > monk. Now, that monk does not have the power or might [to say:] 'May my mind > be released from fermentations through lack of clinging/sustenance today or > tomorrow or the next day.' But when the time has come, his mind is released from > fermentations through lack of clinging/sustenance. > "Thus, monks, you should train yourselves: 'Strong will be our desire for the > undertaking of heightened virtue. Strong will be our desire for the > undertaking of heightened mind. Strong will be our desire for the undertaking of > heightened discernment.' That's how you should train yourselves." > -- -- -- -- -- -- > In the foregoing, the Buddha speaks of the urgency to cultivate the > mind, such cultivation, like the preparation and cultivation of a farmer's field > provides the conditions for fruition and ripening. > ---------------------------------------------------------- > I think the urgency spoken of here, analogous to the farmer's ploughing, sowing and watering, is the undertaking of the 3 kinds of of heightened development (virtue, mind, discernment). In Pali these are: adhisiila-sikkhaa, adhicitta-sikkhaa, adhipa~n~naa-sikkhaa. Apparently it refers to the development of the NEP -- see Nyanatiloka extract under 'sikkhaa' below. You emphasise the urgency aspect of both these passages. Actually, an appreciation of the urgency is one of the few things we all agree on here; it is what happens after that that we differ about ;-)). Jon From Nyanatiloka's Buddhist Dictionary: sikkhaa: the 'training', which the Buddha's disciple has to undergo, is 3-fold: - training in higher morality (adhisiila-sikkhaa), - in higher mentality (adhicitta-sikkhaa), and - in higher wisdom (adhipa~n~naa-sikkhaa). This 3-fold training refers to the 3-fold division of the the 8-fold Path in morality, concentration and wisdom (siila, samaadhi, pa~n~naa). In D. 16 and A.IV,1 it is said: "It is through not understanding, not penetrating noble morality ... noble concentration ... noble wisdom ... noble deliverance that I, as well as you, have had for such a long time to pass through this round of rebirths.'' "This then is morality, this concentration, this wisdom, this deliverance. Being endowed with morality, concentration brings high fruit and blessing. Being endowed with concentration, wisdom brings high fruit and blessing. Being endowed with wisdom, the mind becomes freed from all cankers (aasava) namely, from the sensuous canker (kaamaasava), from the canker of existence (bhavaasava) from the canker of opinions (di.t.thisava) from the canker of ignorance (avijjaasava). #74325 From: "Phil" Date: Sat Jul 14, 2007 12:41 am Subject: Re: What other teacher teaches against selecting a meditation object? philofillet Hi Scott > The fact that I'm a mental health professional, in my opinion, has > little bearing on the 'me' I am here on the list. I am no one's > therapist here and I don't try to be. The closest I come, and this I > can't help, is to watch the whole forum, the themes, the emotions, the > interactions, the roles, the comings and goings as I would when > functioning as a group psychotherapist. And I mostly keep that to > myself. I'm just a guy trying to learn Dhamma and straighten the views. > > I am not an expert on the use of meditation as a technique in the > treatment of mental ailments, so I won't be getting into that > literature with you. You can search it yourself, if you wish. Sure, that's cool. I wrote that off the cuff last night in a moment of deep interest, not to worry. I'm interested because here in Japan the suicide rate is so high and I personally think people could benefit from simple meditation techniques, but I have no reason to think so except for my own experience, and I have never suffered from any intense anxiety or anything. I also remember that famous study about how the brain is impacted by meditation, different parts of the brain become more active or "lit up" or something like that, but that's not a topic for DSG. . > > The self-help industry is vast enough without me, not to mention the > pop-buddhist-cum-self-help industry which, to me, is a total shame. I'm sure most people here would agree with you, and that's cool. I'm interested in whatever works to lessen people's suffering and think it could make them more sucsceptible to the deeper teaching. For example, these days I have a pretty self-helpy approach to Dhamma because I am listening to Thanissaro Bhikkhu talks a lot. But as a result I am relaxed and ready and able to listen to people here who talk on the the deeper teaching. If I weren't meditating, I would be a lot more hostile about other people's views, I think, becuase I have deeply accumulated tendencies for expressing overt hostility. > Although I see that you can buy some really cool meditation furniture > which will 'keep your body from getting in the way of your > meditation'. No kidding. I saw the ad. No one who seeks this will > ever be lacking. Well, this is extreme. I'm thinking more of teachers like Thich Nhat Hahn and Thanissaro Bhikkhu who are certainly within the realm of the Dhamma but take liberties in the way they present it, I think. > > I am trained in psychoanalytic psychotherapy - long-term > psychotherapy. I've undergone a psychoanalysis of some six-and-a- half > years duration, four session a week. The long way. The slow way. > And although many if not all of my correspondents within this forum > would disagree, I found the treatment to be immensely curative - I > can't describe it. One of the complex outcomes of the 'cure' was the > to be open to the Dhamma. This is the therapy process which is the > antithesis of the quick-fix. That's great. You would know. > >> As far as the scurrying insects, this you've misunderstood. Ok, thanks. I'm glad I told you about it because I had been feeling a little resentful about it. BTW,I agree about the retreats that use the forced slow motion style, the Mahasi Sayadaw approach. I like the abdomen as object of meditation, and the "noting" system, and the sayadaws are great Dhamma teachers, but I wouldn't do one of those retreats. Sounds too forced and too hungry for fast results. I believe in fast benefits of meditation, and am experiencing them, but they are not as deep as those retreats seem to promise. Ok, back to the regularly scheduled programming. I'm interested in mental health issues here in Japan, but will do my own research into what role meditation or pseudo meditation can play. Thanks again. Metta, Phil #74326 From: "Phil" Date: Sat Jul 14, 2007 12:52 am Subject: [dsg] Not In Pali Tipitaka Re: What other teacher teaches against selecting a med objt philofillet Hi Sarah > ... > S: I think she does stand very much alone when it comes to not selecting a > meditation object. Ph: Thanks. I think this can be acknowledged as you have done here. > > S: As I recall, Mahasi Sayadaw's technique and focus-style meditation was > extremely controversial in Burma a few decades ago. Ph: I think the controversy came when some teachers wanted to use breath at the nostril as object as well as or instead the abdomen, and were refused and branched off or something. I will note that Bhikkhu Bodhi, in the MN 10 talk I have often referred to, says, when asked, that the rising and falling of the abdomen is a valid meditation object in his opinion, and is in line with the tipitaka. Also, "The Heart of Buddhist Meditation" by Nyanaponika Thera devotes a large portion to what it calls "The Burmese Satipatthana Method" (It wasn't actually founded by Mahasi Sayadaw, but by another man several generations earlier.) I'm not a fierce devotee so I'll glady drop it here. Anyways, the meditation I'm doing now is even less "kosher", I suspect. My philosphy is anything that works to channel and redirect the most disruptive aspects of the mindstream. I think people in this day and age are so thoroughly polluted by a lifetime of reckless media and other sensory and mental consumption that first aid is in store - whatever works, works, kind of thing, until there are conditions for deeper approaches. I guess I've said that often enough. :) Thanks for your feedback. Sorry for all the snipping. Metta, Phil #74327 From: sarah abbott Date: Sat Jul 14, 2007 1:40 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Brief Introduction sarahprocter... Dear Katherine, I was also interested and glad to read your introduction. I believe you are the first member here from Costa Rica (who has posted at least). You obviously have keen interst in Buddhism and we'll be glad to read any of your comments in any threads. We recently met an Italian couple who had been on a surfing holiday in Costa Rica and were raving about your country and its surf too! Metta, Sarah --- Katherine Masis wrote: > Hello, > > My name is Katherine Masís and I teach philosophy at > Universidad de Costa Rica in San José, Costa Rica, > Central America. Among the courses I teach is an > introductory survey course on Hindu and Buddhist > thought. <...> #74328 From: sarah abbott Date: Sat Jul 14, 2007 1:50 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Repetitive, vigorous verbs in suttas sarahprocter... Hi Ken H (& Phil), --- kenhowardau wrote: > You might recall something that Sarah said recently about K Sujin. (I > hope I get this right:) Apparently, KS will sometimes tell people > something they cannot understand or don't want to hear. And it will > make sense to them later. I can't think of any examples, but I have > benefited from that sort of thing from time to time. Something I have > heard long ago - either here or on the recorded talks - will suddenly > make sense to me. .... S: That wasn't quite it. We were just discussing how sati is conditioned by remembrance and how sati is sometimes defined by words referring to recalling and remembering. We looked at several Pali terms. We may have read a sutta years and years ago when suddently we recall a point of relevance, for example. Or suddenly, as you imply, a point makes sense. Nina gave an example of 'just like now' for her. In other words, what has been heard and what is recalled can be a condition for sati now. This of course is why the only condition for the development of satipatthana is the listening, considering and studying of the Dhamma. I don't think KS intentionally tells people anything they can't understand or don't want to hear, though of course, that may be the effect and they may or may not appreciate the teaching later. It always comes back to accumulations. ... > I am sure the Buddha would have taught in the same way when the > occasion called for it. He certainly would not have taught a non- > anatta view of the world. That is not the way out, so why would a > Buddha teach it? > > He taught dana, sila and bhavana (do good, avoid evil and purify the > mind). He would never have taught just dana or sila without bhavana. > I am sure of it. ... S: Yes, of course we agree on all this. Metta, Sarah ====== #74329 From: sarah abbott Date: Sat Jul 14, 2007 2:06 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Complexity of Kamma: Unraveling the Kusala-Akusala Mix sarahprocter... Hi Howard, --- upasaka@... wrote: > When it comes to the "events of the world", it is incredibly > difficult > to determine what leads to what and to distinguish "good" from "bad". It > may > be useful to consider, and I do think it is, but great caution should be > > observed in reaching conclusions, it seem to me. ... S: Your musings were interesting and I agree with this conclusion. This is why in 'situational terms' we can only generalise and say this is 'good' or that is 'bad', but never understand kamma-vipaka in this way. They of course refer to momentary cittas only in an absolute sense. I thought of you and your comments the other day when I read an incredible account in the Herald Tribune about a young man from North Korea. He'd been born and lived his whole life in a Gulag there with minimal contact with family members, tough labour, tough punishments, very basic food and so on. He knew nothing about any other world and had never heard of South Korea or America. He thought this was how everyone lived and wasn't at all unhappy about it. One day he even had to sit in the front row and witness his mother being hung and his brother being shot because they'd tried to escape. Even then, his anger was towards them rather than towards the authorities, because their attempted escape led to him being tortured. One day he met a prisoner who told him all sorts of tales about the wonders of the world outside the Gulag. He was determined to escape and enjoy them and eventually succeeded. Now, in his mid-20s he's in the South. Is he happy and relieved? No, he wistfully remembers the days of his youth before he was told of any world outside, when everything was so simple, the food basic, and he understood the rules with no animosity for the guards... [His family were imprisoned for 3 generations because of assistance given to the South Koreans during the war.] Never simple as you say when we think in terms of situations and stories about the world. Metta, Sarah p.s Like Nina, I'd like to encourage you to share your discussions on the Ab. Sangaha with us here. It would be an interesting corner and no one else needs to join in the threads unless you ask us too!! ========= #74330 From: "Phil" Date: Sat Jul 14, 2007 2:39 am Subject: [dsg] Not In Pali Tipitaka Re: What other teacher teaches against selecting a med objt philofillet Hi again Just wanted to add that the attitude I express towards meditation below refers to that done by beginners, without guidance from a teacher. The principle "deeper approaches" that could arise from that is serious meditation with a qualified teacher. I'd like to learn more about serious meditation from the serious meditators here, but this is not really the forum for it. Metta, Phil >I think people in this day and > age are so thoroughly polluted by a lifetime of reckless media and > other sensory and mental consumption that first aid is in store - > whatever works, works, kind of thing, until there are conditions for > deeper approaches. I guess I've said that often enough. :) > #74331 From: sarah abbott Date: Sat Jul 14, 2007 2:45 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Sammaadi.t.thi study corner sarahprocter... Dear Scott, Nina discussed a couple of other points. On this one: --- Scott Duncan wrote: > Nyanatiloka defines mentality-materiality thusly: > The third of the seven purifications see: visuddhi the purification of > views, is defined in Vis.M XVIII as the; correct seeing of > mind-and-body,; and various methods for the discernment of > mind-and-body by way of insight-meditation vipassanaa are given there. > In this context, 'mind' naama comprises all four mental groups, > including consciousness. - See naama <...> > Scott: Is this a correct definition? Any inaccuracies? ... Sarah: I think this could be clearer. He's referring here to di.t.thi-visuddhi, the third visuddhi (purification). From Abhidhammattha Sangaha, ch 1X (Bodhi transl, CMA): "Purification of view is the discernment of mind and matter with respect to their characteristics, functions, manifestations, and proximate causes." "Lakkha.na-rasa-paccupa.t.thaana-pada.t.thaana-vasena naama-ruupapariggaho di.t.thvisuddhi naama." .... From 'Survey of Paramattha Dhammas', ch 31 by A.Sujin: "Purity of view (di.t.thi visuddhi) is the third purity. This is the stage of insight that is naama-ruupa pariccheda-~naa.na, the pa~n~naa that clearly discerns the difference between the characteristics of naama and ruupa. At that moment one does not take any reality, including the insight knowledge, for self. There is purity of view (di.t.thi visuddhi) because there was never before such clear realisation of the different characteristics of naama and ruupa as non-self." Metta, Sarah ========= #74332 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Sat Jul 14, 2007 4:15 am Subject: Re: What other teacher teaches against selecting a meditation object? scottduncan2 Dear Phil, Thanks for your kind reply: me: "...As far as the scurrying insects, this you've misunderstood..." P: "Ok, thanks. I'm glad I told you about it because I had been feeling a little resentful about it..." Scott: I'm glad you brought it up and that this is clarified. Sincerely, Scott. #74333 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sat Jul 14, 2007 5:45 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: What is the wrong view? (References from the MN anthology) jonoabb Hi Tep Tep Sastri wrote: > Hi Larry and Jon, - > > L: I should also remind you that faith always arises with sati, but not > always with panna (insight). [Message #74314] > > T: Appropriate attention(yoniso-manasikara) is the nutriment for > mindfulness and alertness. Conviction or faith(saddha) is the nutriment > for appropriate attention. Listening to the Dhamma is the nutriment for > conviction. See AN 10.61. > http://www.purifymind.com/StreamEntry.htm > Thanks for pointing this out. Larry may have some comments. It may be what he has in mind when he talks about 'simple faith'. Good to see you back! Jon #74334 From: upasaka@... Date: Sat Jul 14, 2007 1:55 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Hmmmm.... (SN 2.10, AN 3.91) upasaka_howard Hi, Jon - In a message dated 7/14/07 1:29:05 AM Eastern Daylight Time, jonabbott@... writes: > I think the urgency spoken of here, analogous to the farmer's ploughing, > sowing and watering, is the undertaking of the 3 kinds of of heightened > development (virtue, mind, discernment). In Pali these are: > adhisiila-sikkhaa, adhicitta-sikkhaa, adhipa~n~naa-sikkhaa. Apparently > it refers to the development of the NEP -- see Nyanatiloka extract under > 'sikkhaa' below. > > You emphasise the urgency aspect of both these passages. Actually, an > appreciation of the urgency is one of the few things we all agree on > here; it is what happens after that that we differ about ;-)). > ======================= Yes, I know. What the Buddha said in that same last sutta was "you should train yourselves." With metta, Howard #74335 From: upasaka@... Date: Sat Jul 14, 2007 2:23 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Complexity of Kamma: Unraveling the Kusala-Akusala Mix upasaka_howard Hi, Sarah (and Nina) - In a message dated 7/14/07 5:17:35 AM Eastern Daylight Time, sarahprocterabbott@... writes: > p.s Like Nina, I'd like to encourage you to share your discussions on the > Ab. Sangaha with us here. It would be an interesting corner and no one > else needs to join in the threads unless you ask us too!! > ===================== Thanks. :-) Whenever there are occasions that both of us, my study partner and I, agree that it would be good to ask for assistance (of various sorts - such as requesting commentarial information or an explanation of something in the work that is unclear to us) or to report possibly interesting findings of ours, we will certainly go ahead and do that. We will do both of these things whenever the two of us are in agreement to do so, and I thank you for your encouraging this. :-) With metta, Howard #74336 From: "Larry" Date: Sat Jul 14, 2007 6:46 am Subject: Re: What is the wrong view? (References from the MN anthology) lbidd2 Hi Tep, Sounds good to me. Do you see any problems with the abhidhamma assertion that saddha and sati always arise together as cetasikas with every kusala citta? Can kusala citta be a factor of wrong path? Good to see you;-) Larry --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Tep Sastri" wrote: > > > Hi Larry and Jon, - > > L: I should also remind you that faith always arises with sati, but not > always with panna (insight). [Message #74314] > > T: Appropriate attention(yoniso-manasikara) is the nutriment for > mindfulness and alertness. Conviction or faith(saddha) is the nutriment > for appropriate attention. Listening to the Dhamma is the nutriment for > conviction. See AN 10.61. > http://www.purifymind.com/StreamEntry.htm > > Tep > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, LBIDD@ wrote: > > > > Hi Jon, > > > > I'll try again. > > > #74337 From: "L G SAGE" Date: Sat Jul 14, 2007 6:53 am Subject: Theriigaathaa - Sisters (63) nichiconn dear friends, 10. Ekaadasakanipaato 1. Kisaagotamiitheriigaathaava.n.nanaa part 3 txt: sa.mvega.m labhitvaa tatova bahi nikkhamitvaa putta.m aamakasusaane cha.d.detvaa ima.m gaathamaaha- "Na gaamadhammo nigamassa dhammo, na caapiya.m ekakulassa dhammo; sabbassa lokassa sadevakassa, eseva dhammo yadida.m aniccataa"ti. (Apa. therii 2.3.82). Pruitt: She became profoundly stirred, went out and threw away her son in the cemetary*. Then she said this verse:** This is not the doctrine for a village, the doctrine of a town, nor the doctrine of a family. This is the Doctrine for the whole world of [men] and devas: all of this is impermanent. *In the Dhp-a account (II 273f. [BL II 259]) she searches all day, then in the evening leaves her son in a wood. No mention is made of her regaining her sanity through the power of the Buddha. **Ap 566 (v.28); see below, p.230 RD: And, thrilled at the thought, she left the town and laid her child in the charnel-field, saying: 'No village law *308 is this, no city law, No law for this clan, or for that alone; For the whole world - ay, and the gods in heav'n - This is the Law: ALL IS IMPERMANENT!' *308 Dhamma. txt: Eva~nca pana vatvaa satthu santika.m agamaasi. Atha na.m satthaa "laddho te, gotami, siddhatthako"ti aaha. "Ni.t.thita.m, bhante, siddhatthakena kamma.m, pati.t.thaa pana me hothaa"ti aaha. Athassaa satthaa- "Ta.m puttapasusammatta.m, byaasattamanasa.m nara.m; sutta.m gaama.m mahoghova, maccu aadaaya gacchatii"ti. (Dha. pa. 287)- Gaathamaaha Pruitt: Then having said this, she went back to the Teacher. Then the Teacher asked her, "Did you obtain white mustard seed, Gotamii?" "The task of the white mustard seed is finished, sir," she said. "Be my support." Then the Teacher said this verse to her:* Death takes away a man possessed with longing, intoxicated by children and cattle, like a great flood [takes away] a sleeping village. *Cf. Dhp 47, which begins, "Death takes away a man possessed with longing who is picking flowers...". According to Dhp-a II 275 (BL II 259), the Buddha pronounced Dhp 287. At the end, she attains Stream-Entry and many others are established in Stream-Entry, etc. RD: So saying, she went to the Master. And he said: 'Gotamii, hast thou gotten the little mustard?' And she said: 'Wrought is the work, lord, of the little mustard. Give thou me confirmation.' Then the Master spoke thus: 'To him whose heart on children and on goods *309 Is centered, cleaving to them in his thoughts, Death cometh like a great flood in the night, Bearing away the village in its sleep.' *309 'Goods' - lit., cattle or herds - is pertinent, since she had counted on her child for her improved status, which the absence of 'goods' in her own family had made of no account. ===tbc, connie #74338 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Sat Jul 14, 2007 8:25 am Subject: Re: What is the wrong view? (References from the MN anthology) indriyabala Hi, Larry - L: Good to see you;-) T: Thank you very much, Larry. L: Do you see any problems with the abhidhamma assertion that saddha and sati always arise together as cetasikas with every kusala citta? T: I have not seen any "problems" with the abhidhamma (as an important part of the Tipitaka). The only problems I have encountered sometimes are caused by different individual interpretations. According to AN 10.61, good listening conditions 'saddha' so that 'yoniso-manasikara' arises as the basis for 'sati-sampajanna' to avoid the three bad conducts and to dwell in the three good consducts. The three good conducts are the nutriment for the four foundations of mindfulness. If this mental process executes very rapidly, then the end result is a 'kusala citta' that is associated with saddha- and sati-cetasika -- as if "saddha and sati always arise together as cetasikas with every kusala citta" like you said. L: Can kusala citta be a factor of wrong path? T: No, a wrong path is associated with akusala citta and the three bad conducts. I appreciate the communication. Please correct me any time. Tep ==== #74339 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Sat Jul 14, 2007 8:39 am Subject: [dsg] Re: What is the wrong view? (References from the MN anthology) indriyabala Hi Jon - J: Good to see you back! T: It is nice to see DSG grown up a lot since the last time I was here. It is amazing to see the same active members still are very active in Dhamma discussion -- without any question, that is an exceptional achievement of this group. Tep ==== #74340 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Sat Jul 14, 2007 8:46 am Subject: Insects? Robots? Re-evaluating Walking Meditation buddhatrue Hi Scott and Howard, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > > Hi,Scott (and Phil) - > > In a message dated 7/13/07 9:15:42 PM Eastern Daylight Time, scduncan@... > writes: > > > As far as the scurrying insects, this you've misunderstood. I'm not > > talking about people. I was thinking, at the time, of an image of > > people doing 'walking meditation' - as a 'buddhist practise' - all > > serious and walking slow and thinking this will do something and > > wanting this to do something and I found it ridiculous. This was like > > turning the light on and seeing all the insects - frozen momentarily > > in the midst of whatever they were doing, before running for cover. > > It was a metaphor for that which was understood at the time. > ======================= > I'm confused. What *are* the scurrying insects in your metaphor? > As for the alleged ridiculousness of walking meditation, it is a > practice handed down from the time of the Buddha, and it is a remarkable > practice,and one carried out by Theravadins, Mahayanists, and Vajrayanists alike. What I > find ridiculous is making a judgement based on thinking without having > experienced what is being thought about. (BTW, not all walking meditation is done > slowly.) I just popped in for a quick look and this post caught my eye. Hmmm...comparing those doing walking meditation to cockroaches exposed to light...not very flattering!! ;-)) I agree with Howard that walking meditation is a 'Buddhist practice' which goes back to the Buddha. There are suttas which describe walking meditation (one is about a blind monk who kept stepping on insects during walking meditation...mentioning insects ;-)), and walking meditation is detailed in the Vism. as one of the postures suitable for jhana cultivation. Scott, I really can't see how you could so easily dismiss such an important and verifiable Buddhist practice without any basis for doing so. And, as Howard also points out, walking meditation can be done either quickly, slowly, or extremely slowly. I once had a conversation with a Zen monk (in Phoenix) who questioned the usefulness of walking meditation done at an extremely slow pace. You see, in Zen practice, walking meditation is done at a relatively brisk pace for 10 minutes or so in-between sitting sessions. This Zen monk asked me the usefulness of slow walking meditation because that is the type I practice at my temple with Theravada monks. This Zen monk said that the slow practice looked "robotic" and "unnatural". I explained to him that slow walking meditation is done for a much longer period than that done in Zen (it usually lasts as long as the sitting practice) and it usually isn't done after the sitting practice, as in Zen, but before. The slow walking meditation forces mindfulness to an extrodinary degree on the movement of the legs and the placement of the feet. This type of meditation is so effective that if mindfulness wavers for even a few moments (as in you start to think of something else during the slow walking) you will immediately lose your balance, start to wobble, and possibly fall down! So those doing slow walking meditation have very focused and concentrated minds for long periods! When I explained this to the Zen monk he then understood and said that he might try to practice some slow walking meditation. This all has to do with conditioning. Scott, you don't understand the usefulness of walking meditation because you haven't practiced it, and the Zen monk didn't understand the usefulness of slow walking meditation because he didn't practice it. However, if you keep an open mind and refuse to be lead around by your personal biases and prejudices, you could learn something useful you didn't know before. Just popping in for a moment and won't be able to comment further on this thread. Sorry. (I miss the discussions but I am very busy lately :-). Metta, James #74341 From: TGrand458@... Date: Sat Jul 14, 2007 6:34 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Un-Direct Mindfulness TGrand458@... Hi Andrew In a message dated 7/13/2007 11:12:32 P.M. Mountain Daylight Time, athel60@... writes: The basics set the tone. Where do you stand on "no control", on the place of volition and purposive "doing", on consciousness "continuity"purposive "doing", on con just a technique) ... No, I'm not wanting your answers. I'm just saying that one sutta can't be read in a vacuum. It has a wider context that feeds into specific interpretation. ................................ NEWER TG: Maybe instead of the Dhamma Study Group we should call it the "Abhidhamma Commentarial Club." That is, if the majority of folks have a wall built around their vision as tightly as someone who has no inclination whatsoever to discuss Suttas that apparently don't fit with the "clubs" views. You still have not indicated in the slightest how the Sutta I posted could be interpreted in another way. The Sutta is what I wish to discuss, not this other nonsense. I think the contribution I play along with some folks like Howard, James, Herman, etc is to give some balance to an otherwise very unbalanced discussion. In doing so, we are very focused on Suttas... Not Mahayana or other schools which we are accused of occasionally. BTW, I feel its extremely important to read the whole of the Suttas, at least the Four Great Nikayas, to get the gist of what they say. Its really one of my major points. ...................................... As it happens, in this particular case, I'm quite happy to agree that there are levels of insight, that the Buddha's teaching allowed for multi-layered meanings and that conceptual analysis plays an important role in the path. ......................................... NEWER TG: That's great. So many times I get indications of the opposite from other here. ......................................... I'm not prepared to throw out the dhammas theory stuff because to me it is consistent with a deeper layer of meaning in the suttas. I can't go back to the beginning in every post and explain > everything from scratch. Yes, I understand that. But in a long thread or series of threads, it is easy for one after a while to succumb to inaccurate ideas of what others are saying. We all do it. > One of those > offshoots is that "Dhammas Theory" (Don't forget the "s" which connotes a > "cosmological plurality") also tends to dis-value analytical knowledge. Although, > those same folks use analysis all the time. Go figure. This is truly where I don't get it. You have the impression these people disvalue analytical knowledge. My impression has been exactly the opposite. When I ask what should I do, they always fall back on the factors for enlightenment - hearing and considering the Dhamma etc. So when you say that people into dhammas theory disvalue analytical knowledge, I don't believe you. ......................................... NEWER TG: I hope I'm wrong, that is certainly my impression. It actually doesn't make sense. That's why I try to show that insight is so much more than just "Knowing ultimate realities with their own characteristics in the present moment. Awareness of the "present moment" is very important I agree, I just hope folks don't throw away other very important insight factors. The analytical insight factors of course strengthen whatever direct experience insight that occurs as well. They both build on each other. ......................................... > NEW TG: To whatever extent any practice helps the mind get closer to > enlightenment, it is of benefit. To whatever extent any practice thwarts getting > closer to enlightenment, it is a detriment. ... that word again! Practice! How many meanings does it have? :) OK, TG, you've had a go at my "twisting" and eel-wriggling. Now, it's my turn. That French Professor who became an expert on propaganda, Jacques Ellul, used to refer to 4 "great collective sociological pre-suppositions in the modern world". These pre- suppositions go unnoticed by us in all our reasoning. One of them is that history develops in endless progress. To put it another way, the modern western interpretation of Dhamma has to be superior to that of ancient bhikkhus. Right or wrong? .......................................... NEWER TG: If this is actually a question I'm supposed to be answering, I would not answer it one-sidedly. Whatever interpretation most efficiently achieves the result of the teachings, to overcome suffering, is the better interpretation. That said, I find the Buddha himself, within the Suttas, to have done 95% of all the interpretations of his own teaching that we need. I would say that THOSE are the best ancient interpretations....not those of "ancient" Bhikkhus...whatever "ancient" means in that case, I don't know. Seems like a 1000 year leeway is in place. TG OUT #74342 From: TGrand458@... Date: Sat Jul 14, 2007 8:44 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: "Dhammas" and Impermanence (The Abhidhammikas perspective?) TGrand458@... Hi Jon Sorry this reply was so long in coming. It almost got "shelved." In a message dated 7/10/2007 6:28:18 A.M. Mountain Daylight Time, jonabbott@... writes: I suspect we differ here. Could you give an example of what you mean by (a) applying principles of conditionality to phenomena as instructed in the Satipatthana Sutta, ......................................... NEW TG; In the Satipatthana, BB's translation, The "insight review" (we'll use the "mind-objects" review since I'm on that page) section talk about -- "contemplating" mind-objects as mind-objects internally, or he abides contemplating mind-objects as mind-objects externally, or he abides contemplating mind-object as mind-object both internally and externally. Or he abides contemplating in mind-objects their arising factors, or he abides contemplating in mind-objects their vanishing factors, or he abides contemplating in mind-objects both their arising and vanishing factors." First of all... the term "contemplating" means "thinking deeply about," "reflecting upon," "meditate," "consider deliberately," "to view with continued attention." Some of those definitions are acceptable as "direct experience" and others are dealing with analysis. I think the balance is great! Regarding the quote above, most 'notes' I've seen regard the "external" to be experiences "outside" of ones own experience. (I also would not understand how else "external mind-objects" could be taken.) Given that, it means a meditator would need to be using inference and analysis to be considering those events...unless one had supernormal meditative powers and could see it directly. Regarding the same quote, arising and vanishing "factors" to me means not just bare awareness, but analyzing the causes and conditions that caused those mind-objects to arise and the causes and conditions that caused those mind-objects to vanish. Without the term "factors," this conclusion might not be as credible. Also, being the "review" ends by talking about just "bare knowledge and mindfulness" indicate that the "factors" is more than JUST bare knowledge and mindfulness of the "presence" of mind-objects. If the arising factors and vanishing factors are known, then I believe the principles of conditionality are known as well. If the "external" mind-objects are understood, it is in principles of such activities that are understood IMO....unless, in the latter case, "supernormal direct knowledge" is the issue and I don't think it is. Other aspects such as the Nine Charnel grounds, the bodily parts and postures, seem all to require analysis on "their own." The insight review comments would apply to all stages of the Satipatthana. The Satipatthana is just one Sutta dealing with insight development. Others, such as the one I most recently posted would deal with the matter of principles even more easily I think. In fact, I semi recently posted a Sutta for Howard in which the actual term "principles" was used!!! This was a complex way to answer your question but its the only way I know. ......................................................... and (b) applying those principles as a direct realization of what present experiences are. On the face of it, any application of conceptual knowledge/principleOn th the present moment would not be what I would call direct understanding of a presently arising dhamma (as in our agreed 'definition' above). ................................................................. NEW TG: Without being an arahat or at least a very advanced practitioner, I don't think anyone could just observe arising experiences and have a good enough understanding of what was happening. The understanding of conditional principles must be applied to and be a part of "direct experience." THAT is where the insight is...in the understanding/knowledge. That is what "turns" "direct experience" into "direct knowledge." Direct experience is really just one method of increasing that understanding/knowledge. Its the practice. But, there is no understanding/knowledge in just "direct observing" by itself. Otherwise, a newborn baby has already achieved the goal. (A comment the Buddha occasionally made.) When knowledge becomes advanced, the principles (concepts of understanding, if you will) are so well learned that they become/are intuitive. At this point, "the mind can just "directly observe," without the need for "conceptual intrusion," and then we have real direct knowledge (because of the prior learning). Then experiences are seen and known for what they are. This is intuitive insight as I understand it. Some people are able to achieve it much faster than others. From this stage of development, I think the dispassion needed to end suffering is close at hand...with continued application. All these books we study and apply to the practice of direct observation, its all conceptual. Abhidhamma is so incredibly conceptual its mind boggling. The Suttas too. We build on that, test and further insight with direct awareness, and advance as the conditions are "put into place" to fulfil the objective. TG OUT #74343 From: "Larry" Date: Sat Jul 14, 2007 12:47 pm Subject: Re: What is the wrong view? (References from the MN anthology) lbidd2 --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Tep Sastri" wrote: > > Hi, Larry - > > L: Good to see you;-) > > T: Thank you very much, Larry. > > L: Do you see any problems with the abhidhamma assertion that > saddha and sati always arise together as cetasikas with every kusala > citta? > > T: I have not seen any "problems" with the abhidhamma (as an > important part of the Tipitaka). The only problems I have encountered > sometimes are caused by different individual interpretations. > > According to AN 10.61, good listening conditions 'saddha' so > that 'yoniso-manasikara' arises as the basis for 'sati-sampajanna' to > avoid the three bad conducts and to dwell in the three good > conducts. The three good conducts are the nutriment for the four > foundations of mindfulness. If this mental process executes very > rapidly, then the end result is a 'kusala citta' that is associated with > saddha- and sati-cetasika -- as if "saddha and sati always arise > together as cetasikas with every kusala citta" like you said. > > L: Can kusala citta be a factor of wrong path? > > T: No, a wrong path is associated with akusala citta and the three bad > conducts. > > I appreciate the communication. Please correct me any time. > > Tep > ==== > Hi Tep, I agree, but I think Jon sees it differently. His view is that mundane right view is insight knowledge only. Anything less is wrong view. I say that faith, even without insight knowledge, still falls within the category of mundane right view. And further, that any kusala citta falls within the category of right path. Kusala couldn't be wrong path, so it must be right path. Someone might say that faith isn't a view because it doesn't profess to understand. It only trusts. Therefore, it couldn't be classed as right view. But I would say that faith does understand something. It understands what is good (kusala) on an intuitive level. Here is the definition in CMA: "Faith (saddhaa): The first of the beautiful cetasikas is faith, which has the characteristic of placing faith or of trusting. Its function is to clarify, as a water-clearing gem causes muddy water to become clear; or its function is to set forth, as one might set forth to cross a flood. It is manifested as non-fogginess, i.e. the removal of the mind's impurities, or as resolution. Its proximate cause is something to place faith in, or the hearing of the Good Dhamma, etc., that constitute the factors of stream-entry." L: Compare this to MN 117.7: "And what, Bhikkhus, is right view that is affected by the taints, partaking of merit, ripening on the side of attachment? '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 on the side of attachment." L: I would say that this view is basically faith. Larry #74344 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Sat Jul 14, 2007 3:15 pm Subject: Re: What other teacher teaches against selecting a meditation object? kenhowardau Hi Phil (and Scot), <. . .> Ph: > I also remember that famous study about how the brain is > impacted by meditation, different parts of the brain become more > active or "lit up" or something like that, but that's not a topic > for DSG. No, but it is a good one. There are physical exercises that keep our bodies in good condition, and there are mental exercises that keep our minds in good condition. So, maybe meditation is one of those and should be part of normal, healthy, daily life. (Neither physical not mental exercise is the way out of samsara, of course.) Somewhere in the suttas there is a passing remark by the Buddha to Ananda that made me wonder about how people in ancient times (Buddhist and non-Buddhist alike) might have looked after their bodies. He mentioned massage as one of the basic ways of taking care of the limbs. Massage is something I have never been interested in, even though many people swear by it. Perhaps I am missing something. I am sure people in the Buddha's day practised mental exercises, as well as physical, and I wonder if meditation was one of them. In any case, a moderate amount of meditation can't hurt us can it? Provided, of course, we don't have the wrong idea (wrong view) that it is part of the 8-fold path! Ken H #74345 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Sat Jul 14, 2007 3:58 pm Subject: Re: Repetitive, vigorous verbs in suttas kenhowardau Hi Sarah (and Phil), ------------ ... KH: > > You might recall something that Sarah said recently about K Sujin. (I hope I get this right:) S:> That wasn't quite it. We were just discussing how sati is conditioned by remembrance and how sati is sometimes defined by words referring to recalling and remembering. We looked at several Pali terms. ------------- I may have misled you by saying " recently." You seem to be referring here to your recent reports from Bangkok. I was thinking of something further back. I wouldn't know how to find it - even with the new search engine - but it's not important now. Some of your passing remarks about KS catch my attention because I am still not exactly sure of how you see her. Sometimes she is spoken of as one among equals, while at other times there is a more reverential tone. ------------ <. . .> KH: > > He taught dana, sila and bhavana (do good, avoid evil and purify the mind). He would never have taught just dana or sila without bhavana. I am sure of it. S: > Yes, of course we agree on all this. ------------- Not all! Ask Phil, for example. :-) Ken H #74346 From: "colette" Date: Sat Jul 14, 2007 1:00 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: What other teacher teaches against selecting a meditation object? ksheri3 Hi Scott, Phil, and Howard, Walking? Life would not be life if I didn't have any place where I could walk, just walk. Lets say I have a specific address I want to get to, is there only one way to get to that address? It's the exercise, different views, different scenary, and who knows what may or may not pop up in my mind as I walk. On a deeper level one may say that I enjoy having the wind blow through me so as to get rid of that musty old smell. Some people throw their arms up in the air so as to allow those "pits" to air out, some people toss their hair around, me, I like to just open up and allow the wind to pass directly through me. Keeps those nasty anachrids off center so they can't build many cobwebs, too. lol In the action of walking I have certainly noticed that I can have an effect of certain EXTERIOR things that I see. I do get lossed in meditations sometimes and it's only because of the robotics of "walking" that has allowed me the chance to regain my orientation. It is in these deep states of concentration and slow continuous, monotinous, movements that I have had some of my most interesting interactions with this thing that some call "the divine". We all have different ways to keep tract of what's ours. Some people put specicial markings on their possessions, number sequences, letter sequences, et al. In the act of walking AND, what I call, letting the wind blow through me, I enter into a deep state of meditation but it's almost as if I'm having a conversation with an entity OUTSIDE of myself, something OTHER. There are times when I'll in this state of consciousness and there, right before my very eyes, will jump out of the cosmos or is it the logos, a reply to some questions I've been posing to my own consciousness (I feel that to say that I pose these questions to myself would just get the knit-pickers up in the isles asking for their money back, so I use "consciousness"). Meditation is a kind, a version, of "talking to yourself" or talking with yourself, but here I AM SAYING that I get replies to my questions, to my confusion, to my quandery, etc., and the answers ARE VERBALIZED in the form of the PHYSICAL WORLD or PHYSICAL ACTIONS. THAT, to me girls and boys, IS STRANGE and definately needs, REQUIRES, investigation to find out if it is PRAVDA or is it a manifestation of my own unconsciousness, ID, super-subconsciousness, ALAYA-VIJNANA, et al. since it is a known fact that Scott and I have had a chit chat going on lately then we can easily see that I thought his application of the jest "turning the light on and seeing all the insects -- frozen momentarily in the midst of whatever it is they were doing..." IS a good application, rather lightening for the topic and course of the path chosen by minds. I chortled, oops, people don't like me using archaic words, I chuckled. But they have no problems with using and applying archaic words and worlds to me and my life so that they win a gambit and retain their financial position of wealth and the hallucination of power through the hording of wealth (I know you're out the Mr. & Mrs. Conspiracy Theorists, but the conspiracy that both of you entered into by having the state give you a marriage certificate clearly shows that you are two seperate entities agreeing to the terms of the contract and joining together as a means of creating a single power, which is collusion and THUS manifests a CONSPIRACY, as J.Geils Band once said: "Two by two and side by side. Loves gonna find you YES IT IS. You just can't hide.") I thought Scott's reference was very applicable for the time and in that space. I even laughed, broke a smile, a smirk, a shit-eatin' grin (did I hear a Cheshire Cat?) I also enjoyed Scott's use of the concepts of the RESULTANT CONDITION expected from the walking meditations: "...this to do something and wanting this to do something" is very mature about the act and actions. He shows that people anticipate something to occur from the act of meditationing, if they invest the time in meditating then meditating will return to them this or that value, qid pro quo type of deal as if they are negociating with the divine. After Scott showed that this behavior of delusional thought is the status quo he goes on to show the "GRASPING" FOR THE SUNYA-EMOTIONAL VALUE OF "DESIRE" by suggesting that people "want" the meditation to do something for them. As you yourself put it Howard, "as for the" the insanity of handing things down from generation to generation, in this case Howard was using the theory in practice of the walking meditation, I would just like to show that if we look at Howard's basic fundamental principle of "handing things down" and of taking thousands of lifetimes to achieve anything close to resembling ENLIGHTENMENT, then I will show the angle, the POINT OF VIEW, that shows that we have how many Land Fills in the U.S.A.? Each landfill is filled with the garbage of a previous generation. <...> toodles, colette --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > > Hi,Scott (and Phil) - > > In a message dated 7/13/07 9:15:42 PM Eastern Daylight Time, scduncan@... > writes: > > > As far as the scurrying insects, this you've misunderstood. <...> #74347 From: "colette" Date: Sat Jul 14, 2007 1:31 pm Subject: Re: What is the wrong view? (References from the MN anthology) ksheri3 Hi Larry, Only enough time to make a quick observation: Your reply to Tep is such a clasic definition of "a priori" view. You are suggesting that there is something inate in the human condition that instinctively KNOWS the difference between RIGHT and WRONG at it's inception. I won't go further, at this time, into it since your reply has CAUSED a psuedo-BIG BANG in my mind-consciousness. I think you certainly know and understand what you are suggesting here. This is a VERY REFRESHING view of one of the most tired and old, musty, saws from "way back when". Thank you. toodles, colette > I agree, but I think Jon sees it differently. His view is that mundane right view is insight > knowledge only. Anything less is wrong view. I say that faith, even without insight > knowledge, still falls within the category of mundane right view. And further, that any > kusala citta falls within the category of right path. Kusala couldn't be wrong path, so it > must be right path. <...> #74348 From: "colette" Date: Sat Jul 14, 2007 3:53 pm Subject: Re: What other teacher teaches against selecting a meditation object? ksheri3 Good Day Ken H., Wow, you sparked something from another site that I encountered years ago, we were discussing "initiation rights" and their efficacy and one Fr. said something to the effect that "the more adepts then the better our world would be" concerning initiating as many people as possible. Phil opened, began, the process of illumination by raising the topic of brain composition, chemistry, and function, which was curtailed as soon as it arose. You, Ken H., then furthered the thought of a single brain's functioning capabilities by raising Yoga practices and meditation practices. You echoed the Zen concept of "mind-body- spirit" being a single "thing", this too is part of THE 3 KAYAS, or bodies of the buddha. Very Skillful! See Below: > Ph: > I also remember that famous study about how the brain is > > impacted by meditation, different parts of the brain become more > > active or "lit up" or something like that, but that's not a topic > > for DSG. > > > No, but it is a good one. There are physical exercises that keep our > bodies in good condition, and there are mental exercises that keep > our minds in good condition. colette: very good, you see there are reasons and rationale for practicing THE YOGAS OF THE MIND ie. 6 Yogas of Naropa, Mahamudra, Dzogchen, et al. Flexibility is always ceasing atrophe, and stag- nation. So, maybe meditation is one of those and > should be part of normal, healthy, daily life. > colette: DON'T GIVE ME THAT "MAYBE" <...>! GET OFF THE DAMNED FENCE. Do you think that society can maintain this hectic ORDERED lifestyle where every second of the day is pre-planned weeks in advance and there is no room for deviation? Look at todays children that have no time to be children since their parents are too busy scheduling the day before the child has a chance to even conceive of another day as being tomorrow. <...> Luckily, we in the study of buddhism have transcended DUALITY. ----------------------------------- > (Neither physical not mental exercise is the way out of samsara, of > course.) > colette: and that is how it should be. Notice if you will, that the buddha continually reminds followers and practioners that he was always trying to ease or relieve suffering not eliminate or eradicate samsara-nirvana. ---------------------------------- > Somewhere in the suttas there is a passing remark by the Buddha to > Ananda that made me wonder about how people in ancient times > (Buddhist and non-Buddhist alike) might have looked after their > bodies. He mentioned massage as one of the basic ways of taking care > of the limbs. Massage is something I have never been interested in, > even though many people swear by it. colette: certainly, massage is right up there in the practices of Tantra and the raising of the Kundalini in the Shashumna through the chakras, etc. but now , if you did get off that fence and did choose one side or the other side, then it seems that the perversions of the Kama Sutra would now be in your site and raising an entire host of WRONG VIEWS. The Kama Sutra, however, is not a guide to promiscuity. ------------------------- Perhaps I am missing something. > I am sure people in the Buddha's day practised mental exercises, as > well as physical, and I wonder if meditation was one of them. > colette: meditation had to be one of the ways people took care of themselves. ------------------------- > In any case, a moderate amount of meditation can't hurt us can it? colette: This is the exact sentence that raised the words of Fr. I.o.C. in my consciousness from 2004. ---------------------------- > Provided, of course, we don't have the wrong idea (wrong view) that > it is part of the 8-fold path! Thanx for the wonderful view and the wonderful thoughts. toodles, colette #74349 From: LBIDD@... Date: Sat Jul 14, 2007 6:06 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: What is the wrong view? (References from the MN anthology) lbidd2 Hi Colette, Colette: "Your reply to Tep is such a classic definition of "a priori" view. You are suggesting that there is something innate in the human condition that instinctively KNOWS the difference between RIGHT and WRONG at it's inception." Larry: I do. What is faith going to have faith in if not the good? But we have to remember that faith starts out good. Good knows good when it sees it. Of course what you have faith in may not seem so good to me, and vice versa. Maybe you trust the democrats and I trust the republicans. Our trust is the same and what we actually see in the other is the same, i.e. goodness, aka "the beautiful" (sobhana). It is our past good kamma that lets us see it. The good is 25 mental actions: faith, mindfulness, shame, fear of wrong, non-greed, non-hatred, neutrality of mind, tranquility of mental body, tranquility of consciousness, lightness of mental body, lightness of consciousness, malleability of mental body, malleability of consciousness, wieldiness of mental body, wieldiness of consciousness, proficiency of mental body, proficiency of consciousness, rectitude of mental body, rectitude of consciousness, right speech, right action, right livelihood, compassion, appreciative joy, wisdom. Plus the mental factors of wise attention, right intention, right action, and right concentration. Then there is nibbana, which is beyond good. Larry #74350 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Sat Jul 14, 2007 7:32 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: What other teacher teaches against selecting a meditation object? scottduncan2 Dear colette, Thanks for your reply: c: "...I thought Scott's reference was very applicable for the time and in that space. I even laughed, broke a smile, a smirk, a shit-eatin' grin (did I hear a Cheshire Cat?)" Scott: Yes, and the beauty is that I'm merely OPINING, METAPHORISING and IMAGINING. And these are not worth anything in the world. I am NO ONE to be saying anything that I say and NO ONE need get up in arms. It is NOTHING PERSONAL. Any notions I ever had that walking more slowly, quickly, deliberately, or any other way for the purpose of hastening the arising of dhammas beyond control vanished on the day in question when, seeing the photo in the magasine of the 'walking meditators', the thought of the cockroaches came like a REVELATION. I compared this, then new, understanding with EXPERIENCE - with EXPERIENCE I hasten to note. Walking slowly, trying to stay aware, was not necessary!!! c: "I also enjoyed Scott's use of the concepts of the RESULTANT CONDITION expected from the walking meditations: "...this to do something and wanting this to do something" is very mature about the act and actions. He shows that people anticipate something to occur from the act of meditationing, if they invest the time in meditating then meditating will return to them this or that value, qid pro quo type of deal as if they are negociating with the divine. After Scott showed that this behavior of delusional thought is the status quo he goes on to show the "GRASPING" FOR THE SUNYA-EMOTIONAL VALUE OF "DESIRE" by suggesting that people "want" the meditation to do something for them." Scott: Exactly. This is exactly what is wanted. Of this there can be no doubt whatsoever. c: "As you yourself put it Howard, "as for the" the insanity of handing things down from generation to generation, in this case Howard was using the theory in practice of the walking meditation, I would just like to show that if we look at Howard's basic fundamental principle of "handing things down" and of taking thousands of lifetimes to achieve anything close to resembling ENLIGHTENMENT, then I will show the angle, the POINT OF VIEW, that shows that we have how many Land Fills in the U.S.A.? Each landfill is filled with the garbage of a previous generation." Scott: I APPLAUD the above statement. CHEERING. STANDING 'O'. I came to Buddhism three years ago and, like a chick belonging to Konrad Lorenz, ETHOLOGIST PAR EXCELLENCE, imprinted on THIS VERY IMPORTANT VIEW! No years of wandering in the WILDERNESS OF VIEWS collecting and construing VIEWS TO CLING TO, or TO STRUGGLE TO PUT ASIDE! The Buddha certainly did not teach 'walking meditation' a-la the MODERN MISUNDERSTOOD VERSION. How tedious, to have such obvious OPINIONS marked as being those of the Buddha. I would refer you, colette, to the Useful Posts section, under 'walking meditation'. There are some good points made. There is, in my opinion, no point discussing this further, at least for me, since I am convinced BY EXPERIENCE - BY EXPERIENCE, mind you - that mental development (BHAAVANAA) can proceed at all times, given THE RIGHT CONDITIONS, under every conceivable circumstance, posture, action, and what have you imaginable. This is EXCITING! This is FREEDOM! In modern parlance, for example, this would mean that one has sitting 'meditation', swimming 'meditation', defecating 'meditation', ironing 'meditation', driving 'meditation', copulation 'meditation', typing 'meditation', showering 'meditation', shaving 'meditation', flatulence 'meditation', laundry 'meditation', and so much, much more. THIS IS NOT A JOKE. THIS IS NOT SATIRE. Well, there you have it, colette. THEY will now descend on me like RAIN, pouring out VINDICTIVENESS to VINDICATE the views contradicted. And this will not matter one whit since the puppet will take the blows and perhaps, CONDITIONS being conducive, this will be PERSECUTION 'meditation'. Sincerely, Scott. #74351 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Sat Jul 14, 2007 7:39 pm Subject: Re: What is the wrong view? (References from the MN anthology) indriyabala Hi Larry (and Jon) - L: Someone might say that faith isn't a view because it doesn't profess to understand. It only trusts. Therefore, it couldn't be classed as right view. But I would say that faith does understand something. It understands what is good (kusala) on an intuitive level. T: I think you might mean to say that 'saddha' is guided by understanding and the two cannot be separated in practice. ATI's Glossary says that saddha is a confidence in the Buddha that "gives one the willingness to put his teachings into practice". Such definition clearly separates faith from understanding, but it doesn't have to be a foolish faith. The definitions in Patisambhidamagga for the faith faculty(indriya) and the understanding faculty are also clear cut. "Through its meaning of resolution(adhimokkha), the faith faculty is to be directly known . ... Through its meaning of seeing(dassana), the understanding faculty is to be directly known." [Patisambhidamagga, I 41] You also say that the mundane right view in MN 117 "is basically faith". I agree with you somewhat, since the understanding that "there is this world and the other world; ..." etc. is built upon faith. But I like the following clear-cut definition of right view better. "Herein, what is right view(samma ditthi)? It is knowledge(~naana) of sufferring, knowledge of the origin of suffering, knowledge of the cessation of suffering, knowledge of the way leading to the cessation of suffering. This is what is called right view." [Patisambhidamagga, I 241] Tep ==== #74352 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Sat Jul 14, 2007 8:31 pm Subject: Re: Sammaadi.t.thi study corner scottduncan2 Dear All, 56. "Saying, 'Good friend,' the bhikkhus delighted and rejoiced in the venerable Saariputta's words. Then they asked him a further question: 'But friend, might there be another way in which a noble disciple is one of right view...and has arrived at this true Dhamma?' - 'There might be, friends. Saadhaavusoti kho te bhikkhuu aayasmato saariputtassa bhaasita.m abhinanditvaa anumoditvaa aayasmanta.m saariputta.m uttari.m pa~nha.m aapucchu.m: " siyaa panaavuso a~n~nopi pariyaayo yathà ariyasaavako sammaadi.t.thi hoti ujugataassa di.t.thi, dhamme aveccappasaadena samannaagato' aagato ima.m saddhammanti?" 57. "When, friends, a noble disciple understands consciousness, the origin of consciousness, the cessation of consciousness, and the way leading to the cessation of consciousness, in that way he is one of right view...and has arrived at this true Dhamma. Siyaa aavuso. Yato kho aavuso ariyasaavako vi~n~naa.na~nca pajaanaati, vi~n~naa.nasamudaya~nca pajaanaati, vi~n~naa.nanirodha~nca pajaanaati, vi~n~naa.nanirodhagaamini.m pa.tipada~nca pajaanaati, ettaavataapi kho aavuso ariyasaavako sammaadi.t.thi hoti. Ujugataassa di.t.thi. Dhamme aveccappasaadena samannaagato aagato ima.m saddhammanti. 58. "And what is consciousness, what is the origin of consciousness, what is the cessation of consciousness, what is the way leading to the cessation of consciousness? There are these six classes of consciousness: eye-consciousness, ear-consciousness, nose-consciousness, tongue-consciousness, body-consciousness, mind-consciousness. With the arising of formations there is the arising of consciousness. With the cessation of formations there is the cessation of consciousness. The way leading to the cessation of consciousness is just this Noble Eightfold Path; that is right view...right concentration. Katama.m panaavuso vi~n~naa.na.m? Katamo vi~n~na.nasamudayo? Katamo vi~n~naa.nanirodho? Katamaa vi~n~naa.nanirodhagaaminii pa.tipadaa?Ti. Chayime aavuso vi~n~naa.nakaaya: cakkhuvi~n~naa.na.m, sotavi~n~naa.na.m, ghaanavi~n~naa.na.m, jivhaavi~n~naa.na.m, kaayavi~n~naa.na.m, manovi~n~naa.na.m, sa"nkhaarasamudayaa vi~n~naa.nasamudayo sa"nkhaaranirodhaa vi~n~naa.nanirodho. Ayameva ariyo a.t.tha"ngiko maggo vi~n~naa.nanirodhagaaminii pa.tipadaa - seyyathiida.m :sammaadi.t.thi sammaasa"nkappo, sammaavaacaa, sammaakammanto, sammaaaajiivo sammaavaayaamo sammaasati, sammaasamaadhi. 59. "When a noble disciple has thus understood consciousness, the origin of consciousness, the cessation of consciousness, and the way leading to the cessation of consciousness...he here and now makes and end of suffering. In that way too a noble disciple is one of right view...and has arrived at this true Dhamma." Yato kho aavuso ariyasaavako eva.m vi~n~naa.na.m pajaanaati, eva.m vi~n~naa.nasamudaya.m pajaanaati, eva.m vi~n~naa.nanirodha.m pajaanaati, eva.m vi~n~naa.nanirodhagaamini.m pa.tipada.m pajaanaati, so sabbaso raagaanusaya.m pahaaya pa,tighaanusaya.m pa.tivinodetvaa asmiiti di.t.thimaanaanusaya.m samuuhanitvaa avijja.m pahaaya vijja.m uppaadetvaa di.t.theva dhamme dukkhassanta"nkaro hoti. Ettaavataapi kho aavuso ariyasaavako sammaadi.t.thi hoti. Ujugataassa di.t.thi. Dhamme aveccappasaadena samannaagato aagato ima.m saddhammanti. Sincerely, Scott. #74353 From: "Sukinder" Date: Sat Jul 14, 2007 8:46 pm Subject: Re: What other teacher teaches against selecting a meditation object? sukinderpal Hi Howard (Scott and Ken), You commented to Scott: <> And you wrote to Ken in message no. 74285 : Howard: If one were to engage in walking meditation, then one will know walking as it really is, for then one knows first hand that what usually seems to be "walking" is earth and air, and there is nothing personal involved, and that includes the volition that propels the walking. Without engaging in walking meditation, there is no experiencing of this. ----------------------------------- My question to you: What is it in the `walking meditation' that makes it different from normal walking? What are the particular conditions involved in that "earth and air" are observable in the one and not possible in the other? You know my position with regard to Mahayana, Vajrayana, Zen and so on, namely that I have little or no respect for their views. The very fact that they came to be at all, is reflection of wrong understanding of the original Teachings, and lack of respect for it. What others may consider small difference which can be overlooked, I consider crucial, one which operates at the level of "view". And view is either `right' or it is `wrong'. This then also means that I disagree with 90+% of the interpretations within the Theravada itself. ;-) In the above two quotes, you are saying to the effect, that neither Scott nor Ken, because they don't "do" walking mediation, will ever "know" earth or air elements or know the intentions involved while walking. I of course say that because both Scott and Ken give great importance to the process of `correcting one's views' with reference to the original texts, and which have allowed them so far, to have a more or less correct attitude toward present moment experiences, that theirs is the *right* cause which would lead ultimately to the right result, namely "knowing the `elements' as they are". On the other hand, yours and those of the Mahayanists etc, being inclined toward giving priority to conventional activities, without regard for the need to correctly understand the Dhamma and continue to develop that at the intellectual level, is *not* the right cause that would lead to the same end. Comments please. ;-) Metta, Sukinder #74354 From: "Phil" Date: Sat Jul 14, 2007 9:02 pm Subject: Re: What other teacher teaches against selecting a meditation object? philofillet Hi Robert Ph: Thanks for this. Whenever I read or hear about deep aspects of sila it always goes above my head, but I will try my best. > > Isn't it standard Theravada, as taught in Vism, to choose or > have > > assigned a meditation object? Or is that section in Vism only for > > those seeking jhanas? (samattha?) > > ++++++++++++ > > Dear Phil > Read what Buddhaghosa (author of Visuddhmagga)says: > > In the "Dispeller of Delusion"(PTS) p 137 paragraph > 564 he says: Ph: First of all, I think my question still stands - isn't it standard in Theravada, in Vism, to choose or have a meditation object assigned by a teacher, a meditation object that one pursues diligently as one's principal meditation object? I think it is. So what is the sati that is involved in the initial pursuit of that meditation object? I've heard that there are many kinds or degrees of sila, and what is just remembering, like one remembers a teaching from a sutta. I guess for the beginning meditator (whether misguided or not) or even the more experienced meditator (whether misguided or not) sati is remembering to be mindful of a certain object, a post- it not stuck on the mind. > > ***** "In respect of the classification of the > Foundations of Mindfulness. And this also takes place > in multiple consciousness in the prior stage [prior to > supramundane]. For it lays hold of the body with one > consciousness and with others feeling etc."****** > > And how fast these states arising and ceasing.. > In the Vibhanga commentary (about the duration of feeling (vedanaa): > > "In the moment of one snapping of the fingers it arises and > ceases to the > number of a hundred thousand ko.tis." > -- ~Naa.namoli, Dispeller of Delusion, Pt I, p.37 I am still open to and interested in the Abdhimma approach, the dhamma theory, as BB calls it I think in the introduction to his translation of CMA. But as long as my experience is at a level that sati is something less ephemeral, less momentary, I will have to pay more attention to that. While keeping open to learning more about the dhamma theory as taught in the commentaries. But I think it's premature to become absorbed entirely in an approach to Dhamma that relies on an understanding of cittas rising and falling away in split seconds. I think that would just be the mind, hungering as it always does, hungering now for something more refined and deeper sounding to cling to. That's the way it feels for me. I think understanding of and interest in parammatha dhammas should come very gradually. This morning for the first time in a while I took out the CMA and read about some dhammas. It just felt *so much more* hungry, so much more self-at-work than when I just sit and watch the breath or whatever comes and goes. I know that that is just thinking too, for now at least, but it feels like hungry, less ravenous to me. That's my experience, not yours. We all have different conditions at work. > Yet it still seems we can direct awareness. If I think about > seeing now that tends to condition an investigation of seeing > or visible object. Or hearing about how lobha can be an object for > sati may condition a degree of study of lobha when it arises. Ph: "tends to condition an investigation of seeing or visible object.." But how do you know that - how do you know that it doesn't just condition a lot of thinking about seeing rooted in lobha wanting comfort by building up a logically soothing model of the way things work, a model that is made even nicer by conceit about having seen into it? I guess I have temporarily, at least, lost faith in the pariyatti >>> patipati process, especially since I'm not convinced that the bare minimum of samadhi necessary for insight (khannica samadhi =momentary samadhi?) is at all likely to be present in daily life, and had best be cultivated through meditation. I know there is samadhi with every cittta, but what of this khannica samadhi? BTW, I remember seeing that you posted a question at another Yahoo Group where monks answer questions, you asked something about khannica samadhi, but I think there was no answer. Do you remember what I'm referring to. It is a Yahoo group featuring Burmese sayadaws, I think. > So what then...? > > Well understanding of anatta only occurs during a Buddha Sasana. > If we learn that control and free will is an illusion that should > support correct understanding of the dhammas at the 6 doors; and > that, so I believe, leads out of samasara altogether. But I think self is still at work when we are studying and discussing paramattha dhammas, but it is more observably at work when one sets up the observation post of a principal meditation object. I don't know. I do want to deepen my understanding of anatta, but I don't know understand why choosing a meditation object should interfere with that because it means trying to force sati on to an object any more than reading about a paramattha dhamma interferes with actually understanding it by forcing panna on to it. Again, this is because I have lost faith (or no longer understand) the pariyatt > patipati process as taught by AS. I haven't heard it taught in the same way elsewhere, which certainly doesn't mean it's not right, or that other teachers don't teach it. It just hasn't come to my attention, which makes it harder for me to have faith in it. > > As the quote > from the "Dispeller" indicates at one moment sati > takes feelings as an object and at another rupa. Check and see that > trying to make sati go to > certain objects does not lead to detachment from the > idea of self. There is the principal object, but sati doesn't stick to it, the mind flops around, there is nothing fleeter than the mind, nothing harder to control. Meditation makes that clearer to me, which I think personally can help condition a little more detachment from the idea of self because it confirms that teaching (the fish above) from Dhammapada, and the "nothing more changeable than the mind" teaching from AN. I find the Buddha's teaching of anatta confirmed in this way by my simple meditation. The attempt to stick sati on to an object fails, deepening my appreciation of anatta, or something like that. I say this as a meditator who is technically not-good-at- it. Maybe it is incorrect to be finding more appreciation of anatta by virtue of *not* being able to have meditative attainments, but that's where I am now. And remember that sati is > a cetasika, itself conditioned by various factors, and so > ephemeral. > And can we really decide what the next moment is? Is it > seeing or hearing or feeling or dosa or metta or delusion or > sound that just arose? It is all happening because of conditions > that we are not even aware of and it is all happening very fast. Right. I think the meditation I do confirms this rather than disproves it. > Still when one is still thinking and studying in the > present moment, I think one tends to still favour certain > objects and so for some people sound becomes a little clearer, > for others seeing, for others feeling. There needs > to be investigation of many dhammas, though, and the reason > there is/seems to be some degree of "choice" is due to > deeprooted self view. And good to know that we are really > only "thinking in the present moment" at that level. Whereas Khun > Sujin is trying to encourage the level of direct awareness..And also > the first major step is separating nama from rupa, not more than > that. > > It is an extraordinarily fine balance- we might be afraid > of 'controlling' and not > even consider or study dhammas at all, not even at the level > of 'thinking in the present moment'- believing that it will all > just somehow happen if we listen and read Dhamma books. > Thanks Robert. You help me broach deep subjects. I will stay open and keep listening to what you have to say. But there is no rushing it. Metta, Phil p.s I rambled a lot as usual. If you want to choose or two points that you think would be worth continuing on, that would be great. #74355 From: "Phil" Date: Sat Jul 14, 2007 9:06 pm Subject: Re: What other teacher teaches against selecting a meditation object? philofillet Hi again >I've heard that there are many kinds or degrees > of sila, and what is just remembering, like one remembers a teaching > from a sutta. Correction - "I've heard that there are many kinds or degrees of sati, and one is just remembering, like one remembers a teaching from a sutta." Metta, Phil #74356 From: "Phil" Date: Sat Jul 14, 2007 9:09 pm Subject: Re: What other teacher teaches against selecting a meditation object? philofillet Hi again again another correction. > Ph: Thanks for this. Whenever I read or hear about deep aspects of > sila it always goes above my head, but I will try my best. Sila out, sati it. And for any further references to sila in this post! :) Metta, Phil p.s I really should proof read but I am afraid of losing posts so just send things off. #74357 From: "L G SAGE" Date: Sat Jul 14, 2007 9:52 pm Subject: Re: oddest of Querries nichiconn dear literate friend, colette: Does anybody know much of this thing I stumbled across yesterday as I was begining research into Pratyekabuddha: Pudgalavada? I figure connie has a little bit up her sleave concerning this obscure and old fashioed group of Indians. I bet even Gen. Custurd was afeared of them, but who knows Polythene Pam seems to be running hither. ROFL connie: short sleeves today, colette! (in keeping with which a simple 'no' would answer you, nevertheless & all the more:) pratyeka(buddha). pacceka? "separate; each; various; single" some might say 'the silent type'... Bhikkhu Bodhi reads in his talk on the Muni Sutta -- << without an abode and without intimacy, this indeed is the vision / perspective of the silent sage >>. pudgala(vada). puggala? "the individual; person". attan, jiiva, satta, paa.na, naama-ruupa. The visuddhimagga mentions 'beings' in the section on the mind deliverance of lovingkindness (see ch. ix, 52-58 [309-312]). vada? "theory; saying; creed controversy" maybe some day you'll be able to walk me through the Points of Controversy. we'll be better educated then, friend, won't we, on how wrong we are now! wrong? illogical? :) something anyway. serious, even reading the talk is tough for me, let alone trying to walk it. for today, i'm reading "former birth tales". catering to my sense of (arrested if ever there was any) development. (on a scale of one pull to seven years?) I always like this from "rukkhadhamma jaataka": << Once on a time when Brahmadatta was reigning in Benares, the first King Vessavana died, and Sakka sent a new king to reign in his stead. After the change, the new King Vessavana sent word to all trees and shrubs and bushes and plants, bidding the tree-fairies each choose out the abode that liked them best. In those days the Bodhisatta had come to life as a tree-fairy in a Sal-forest in the Himalayas. His advice to his kinsfolk in choosing their habitations was to shun trees that stood alone in the open, and to take up their abodes all round the abode which he had chosen in that Sal-forest. Hereon the wise tree-fairies, following the Bodhisatta's advice, took up their quarters round his tree. But the foolish ones said,--"Why should we dwell in the forest? let us rather seek out the haunts of men, and take up our abodes outside villages, towns, or capital cities. For fairies who dwell in such places receive the richest offerings and the greatest worship." So they departed to the haunts of men, and took up their abode in certain giant trees which grew in an open space. Now it fell out upon a day that a mighty tempest swept over the country. Naught did it avail the solitary trees that years had rooted them deep in the soil and that they were the mightiest trees that grew. Their branches snapped; their stems were broken; and they themselves were uprooted and flung to earth by the tempest. But when it broke on the Sal-forest of interlacing trees, its fury was in vain; for, attack where it might, not a tree could it overthrow. The forlorn fairies whose dwellings were destroyed, took their children in their arms and journeyed to the Himalayas. There they told their sorrows to the fairies of the Sal-forest, [329] who in turn told the Bodhisatta of their sad return. "It was because they hearkened not to the words of wisdom, that they have been brought to this," said he; and he unfolded the truth in this stanza:-- United, forest-like, should kinsfolk stand; The storm o'erthrows the solitary tree. >> end quote. vol.1, bk 1, no.47 -- www.sacred-texts.com i love that phrase: < the haunts of men >. haunt: (m.) aasaya. (nt.) niccasevita.t.thaana. (v.t.i.) adhivasati; abhi.nham aacarati. (pp.) adhivuttha; abhi.nham aacarita. as with the (foolish) cow's gocara: "pasture; fodder; food (in common); sense object; suitable place". open mind, open range? but here, fallen trees & hills always closing in ('yea, tho i walk ...' - king james?). the din of hells bells, "pun ti vuccati nirayo, tasmi? galanti ti puggala" [vsm 310], reminds us of ordinary gravity! is it live or memorex?... that is, what might be the dying out of the chiming (in) might rather be the arising of an echo. either way & (seemingly) endlessly, there's the disturbed, haunting beat of bhavanga. [drummerboy on the sugar_fly label, for those interested, contact Pm. 478 or vsm/path of purification xiv, notes 45-6 under '14 modes of occurrence of consciousness' (which are listed in xiv, 110)] for now, connie #74358 From: "rjkjp1" Date: Sat Jul 14, 2007 9:54 pm Subject: Re: What other teacher teaches against selecting a meditation object? rjkjp1 --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Phil" wrote: > > ? I guess I have temporarily, at least, lost faith in > the pariyatti >>> patipati process, especially since I'm not > convinced that the bare minimum of samadhi necessary for insight > (khannica samadhi =momentary samadhi?) is at all likely to be > present in daily life, and had best be cultivated through > meditation. I know there is samadhi with every cittta, but what of > this khannica samadhi? BTW, I remember seeing that you posted a > question at another Yahoo Group where monks answer questions, you > asked something about khannica samadhi, but I think there was no > answer. Do you remember what I'm referring to. It is a Yahoo group > featuring Burmese sayadaws, I think. > > +++++++ Dear Phil There is khanika samadhi all the time with either kusala or akusala citta. It is true that at moments of insight, especially vipassana nana, the samadhi is of a much stronger level than usual moments, but this can't be controlled. If one tries to concentrate on the stream of changing moments they may increase samadhi - but it is likely to be miccha-samadhi that comes with attachment. This type of samadhi may eventually develop side effects such as strange experiences, even in extreme cases bodily trembling and involuntary movements, but the deluded will take this as a sign of progress and continue on gathering more strange experiences. Robert #74359 From: "colette" Date: Sat Jul 14, 2007 7:02 pm Subject: Aren't we both full of it today. ksheri3 Somebody check that preacher, I don't need him saying "I now pronounce you man and wife" only to have the clan come out with a mess of shotguns pointed in my direction making me an offer I can't refuse. This prelude, no, not quaylude, is in response to Larry's first two words after the introduction: "I do." Now I can respond to Larry. Hi Larry, Thanks for the reply. Did you ever work for KPMG accounting? Maybe Arthur Anderson? I say this because of that list you ended your response with. It even had a rythm to it but when the reader, at least myself, when I got goin' too fast on reading I got tongue tied ie. "wise attention and right intention" are not the exact same concept but attention and intention are closely related however. Good observation and phraseology on your part: "...faith starts out good." I want to ponder this for a while and get back to ya on that but we can view the superficial side of "faith" since it is common knowledge that people can and do place their faith in corrupt individuals and their acts of corruption <......> I question the ability to "see" goodness in a thing, in this case a sentient being, when they are both opposed to each other. Luckily, you save the question since instead of applying the word "faith", in this case, you applied the word "trust" in reference to the sorry state of our political systems ie Dem vs Rep, vice versa. I've been pondering karma, but you apply the word kamma in a sense as though they were equals of equal meaning and intentions. I believe that if a person meditates on doing the right things and consciously remains cognizant of their wrong doings etc. then they are attracting the positive things to them through an electro-magnetic capability. It could also be the same with moths and their interest in getting close to fire. Thanx for the feedback! toodles, colette > > Colette: "Your reply to Tep is such a classic definition of "a priori" > view. You are suggesting that there is something innate in the human > condition that instinctively KNOWS the difference between RIGHT and > WRONG at it's inception." > > Larry: I do. What is faith going to have faith in if not the good? But > we have to remember that faith starts out good. Good knows good when it > sees it. Of course what you have faith in may not seem so good to me, > and vice versa. Maybe you trust the democrats and I trust the > republicans. Our trust is the same and what we actually see in the other > is the same, i.e. goodness, aka "the beautiful" (sobhana). It is our > past good kamma that lets us see it. <....> #74360 From: "colette" Date: Sat Jul 14, 2007 9:11 pm Subject: Re: What other teacher teaches against selecting a meditation object? ksheri3 Hi Sukinder, My,my, it seems I'm striking cords here. I also appreciate Scott's reply to me but ponder the "...standing O" but don't think that questioning that reference would lead us anywhere. You have some strong opinions here. I'm glad you tempered your disgust with Mahayana, Vajrayana, and Zen, by exhibiting your lack of appreciation for the Theravadan. Could you develope the last paragraph a little more by gleaning it down to specific problems you have with Howard's out look. I have problems with it myself as was evident when I compared his advocacy of the Theravadan methodology to that of the handing down through tradition the remains of dead bodies buried in cemetaries and landfill, garbage dumps, that the now dead bodies created when they were verticle. Thanks for the approach. toodles, colette --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Sukinder" wrote: > > Hi Howard (Scott and Ken), > > You commented to Scott: > > < As for the alleged ridiculousness of walking meditation, it is a practice > handed down from the time of the Buddha, and it is a remarkable > practice,and one carried out by Theravadins, Mahayanists, and > Vajrayanists alike. What I find ridiculous is making a judgement based > on thinking without having experienced what is being thought about. > (BTW, not all walking meditation is done slowly.)>> <...> #74361 From: "Phil" Date: Sat Jul 14, 2007 11:06 pm Subject: Re: What other teacher teaches against selecting a meditation object? philofillet Hi Robert > There is khanika samadhi all the time with either kusala or akusala > citta. It is true that at moments of insight, especially vipassana > nana, the samadhi is of a much stronger level than usual moments, > but this can't be controlled. OK, thanks. I guess the references I've seen to khanika samadhi were referring to this stronger level. I agree that this stronger level can't be forced to arise, but I think that conditions can be set by meditation to ready the ground for it arising, increase the probability of it arising, or something like that. I have trouble believing that it will arise in a mind that is a fetid bog like mind, but I don't know. (I know there are sacred anecdotes about it arising in all kinds of situations.) Metta, Phil #74362 From: LBIDD@... Date: Sat Jul 14, 2007 11:16 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Aren't we both full of it today. lbidd2 Hi Colette, The "I do" was a bit ambiguous. Perhaps I should have said "I do think that". As for the rest, there is some controversy that may as well remain controversial, or at least obscure. But I can clear up a few things. To begin, what we are discussing is, by definition, wholesome mental states. So any kind of faith or anything else that is not wholesome is unwholesome and not what we are talking about. Even though wise attention and right intention sound similar, they are very different. Wise attention is attentiveness to experience as experience rather than as problem or opportunity. Right intention is not wanting anything from experience, a kind of surrender. Kamma and karma are the same. One is pali the other is sanskrit. It is a physical, verbal, or mental willful act. Kama is sensuality. A delight in the inherent desirability of the objects of the 6 senses. I agree with this : Colette: "I believe that if a person meditates on doing the right things and consciously remains cognizant of their wrong doings etc. then they are attracting the positive things to them through an electro-magnetic capability." Seeya Larry #74363 From: LBIDD@... Date: Sat Jul 14, 2007 11:30 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: What is the wrong view? (References from the MN anthology) lbidd2 Hi Tep, Thanks for the references. I agree that faith has many dimensions, ranging from something very modest to the faith of a sotapanna. I particularly like this: "Through its meaning of resolution(adhimokkha), the faith faculty is to be directly known . ... Through its meaning of seeing(dassana), the understanding faculty is to be directly known." [Patisambhidamagga, I 41] Larry #74364 From: sarah abbott Date: Sun Jul 15, 2007 2:29 am Subject: Pa.tipadaa Sutta (was: What is the wrong view? ...) sarahprocter... Hi Larry & all, --- LBIDD@... wrote: > L: .... Kusala citta always arises with sati. Any kusala citta is > a factor of right path simply because it couldn't possibly be a factor > of wrong path. A view that is not wrong view _must_ be right view. There > is no other alternative. Right view is a factor of right path. ... S: As usual, it's never so simple! Take SN, Nidaanasa.nyutta, 12:3(Bodhi transl): "The Two Ways" [Pa.tipadaa Sutta] "At Saavatthi. 'Bhikkhus, I will teach you the wrong way and the right way. .....And what, bhikkhus, is the wrong way? With ignorance as condition, volitional formations [come to be]; with volitional formations as condition, consciousness....Such is the origin of this whole mass of suffering. This, bhikkhus, is called the wrong way. "And what, bhikkhus, is the right way? With the remainderless fading away and cessation of ignorance comes cessation of volitional formations......Such is the cessation of this whole mass of suffering. This, bhikkhus, is called the right way." ***** Here, the Buddha is comparing the micchaa-pa.tipadaa with the samma-pa.tipadaa. Can any kusala be included in the wrong way? I believe the commentary (Pali below) makes it clear that any states which do not lead out of samsara are included here in the wrong way of practice (micchaapa.tipada). These include meritorious deeds (pu~n~naabhisankhaara), even jhana states, the 5 mundane abhinnas (pa~ncaabhi~n~naa) and the 8 attainments of jhana (atthi aane~njaabhisa'nkhaara), I think. This wrong path prolongs the cycle of rebirth (va.t.tapakkiya etc). Perhaps others would like to help translate the Pali here and make any corrections : (from the commentary to 12:3): Tatiye micchaapa.tipadanti aya'm taava aniyyaanikapa.tipadaa. Nanu ca avijjaapaccayaa pu~n~naabhisa'nkhaaropi atthi aane~njaabhisa'nkhaaropi, so kathaṃ micchaapa.tipadaa hotiiti. Va.t.tasiisattaa. Ya~nhi ki~nci bhavattayasa'nkhaataṃ va.t.taṃ patthetvaa pavattitaṃ, antamaso pa~ncaabhi~n~naa a.t.tha vaa pana samaapattiyo, sabbaṃ taṃ va.t.tapakkhiya.m va.t.tasiisanti va.t.tasiisattaa micchaapa.tipadaava hoti. ... The right path is that of satipatthana, the development of insights, leading to the eradication of ignorance and craving and the cycle of rebirth. Metta, Sarah ====== #74365 From: "colette" Date: Sun Jul 15, 2007 12:00 am Subject: [dsg] Re: What is the wrong view? (References from the MN anthology) ksheri3 Hi Larry and Tep, One last thing before I catch the last bus leading to the Land Of Nod. Could you give me the msg. # you're refering to in your reply to Tep, or maybe Tep wouldn't mind helping me out since, at one time, Tep and I had good relations. Let me take this apart here: Direct Knowledge or Directly Knowing implies a RESULTANT CONDITION or CONSCIOUSNESS through EXPERIENCING that which is to be known through a physical action. Faith is a belief in something, as Larry phrased it to me, a kindof, trust. Resolving issues is a way of concluding things. The conclusion can be a physical conclusion which denotes ENDING or a conclusion can be a state of consciousness through the Mind-door. I cannot bring myself to placing the ending of an issue in the form of physically knowing a condition exists AND THEN IDENTIFYING that knowledge as being FAITH. It's a personal thing. Even Lucy Safford's definition, that I still have from a Western Mysteries site is a bit amiguous to me. Maybe it's just late and my brain is too taxed. toodles, colette --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, LBIDD@... wrote: > > Hi Tep, > > Thanks for the references. I agree that faith has many dimensions, > ranging from something very modest to the faith of a sotapanna. > > I particularly like this: > > "Through its meaning of resolution(adhimokkha), the faith faculty is to > be directly known . ... Through its meaning of seeing(dassana), the > understanding faculty is to be directly known." [Patisambhidamagga, I > 41] > > Larry > #74366 From: "colette" Date: Sun Jul 15, 2007 12:21 am Subject: Re: oddest of Querries ksheri3 Hi connie, Why is it that I've caused such a change in CONDITION? The sauces that I've placed on the back burners to simmer seem to be now reaching a bit of a boil. I've noticed air bubbles flowing to the surface and popping. Sometimes I could use the umberella from those popping sauces and they go retaining on their Mary way retaining the heat. It's a 6 Yogas of Naropa thing. I'm sure you've seen a tomato sauce with too much paste retain heat, ;). And what is this change in lable, Name & Form, business: L G SAGE connie...? As I told Larry, I'm tired and wish to retire for the evening but before departing for Nod I want to thank you for bringing a little humor to my night, darkness. The story of the tree-fairies was delightful. I'll be getting back to you on this probably Monday since all the kids will be using the computer tomorrow. As for a Pratyekabuddha I found, in the only response for a google search was a wikipedia post concerning the definition of a self made, self realized, buddha. Kindof like a "stand alone" buddha or a "loose cannon" buddha, no? toodles, colette --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "L G SAGE" wrote: <...> > connie: short sleeves today, colette! (in keeping with which a simple 'no' would answer you, nevertheless & all the more:) > > pratyeka(buddha). pacceka? "separate; each; various; single" some might say 'the silent type'... Bhikkhu Bodhi reads in his talk on the Muni Sutta -- << without an abode and without intimacy, this indeed is the vision / perspective of the silent sage >>. > > pudgala(vada). puggala? "the individual; person". attan, jiiva, satta, paa.na, naama-ruupa. The visuddhimagga mentions 'beings' in the section on the mind deliverance of lovingkindness (see ch. ix, 52- 58 [309-312]). > vada? "theory; saying; creed controversy" > > maybe some day you'll be able to walk me through the Points of Controversy. we'll be better educated then, friend, won't we, on how wrong we are now! wrong? illogical? :) something anyway. <...> #74367 From: sarah abbott Date: Sun Jul 15, 2007 3:30 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Repetitive, vigorous verbs in suttas sarahprocter... Hi Ken H, --- kenhowardau wrote: > I may have misled you by saying " recently." You seem to be referring > here to your recent reports from Bangkok. I was thinking of something > further back. I wouldn't know how to find it - even with the new > search engine - but it's not important now. .... S: OK, understood. Yes, I took it to be referring to my recent reports. As you say, not important and I'm sure you're right:). ... > > Some of your passing remarks about KS catch my attention because I am > still not exactly sure of how you see her. Sometimes she is spoken of > as one among equals, while at other times there is a more reverential > tone. ... S: One among equals in terms of anatta-less khandhas, just like 'us', just like now. I also have the greatest respect for the wisdom she shares with us and her personal example which I've benefited from so much over the years. As for the tone, when I first knew her, the foreigners all addressed her rather informally with 'Khun', so many of us are used to this. The Thais have tended to address her more formally and nowadays, most people, including foreigners, address her with 'Ajahn' (teacher) or 'Tahn Ajahn' ('esteemed' teacher). Of course, needless to say, she doesn't mind how she's addressed at all. When she stayed with my family in England, she asked everyone to just call her 'Sujin'. If I'm speaking to Thais or friends who are used to a more formal address, I tend to adopt the same if I think it'll make them feel more comfortable. Here there are many westerners who prefer the 'one among equals' approach, so I tend to a more informal manner. I think Jon and Nina do something similar. Once after I'd stayed with her for several weeks, sharing her bedroom even, I asked how I could ever repay the kindness and help. She'd simply say that the keen interest and study of the teachings is the best respect to the Buddha or his followers. I have confidence that this is true. That was long-winded - let's hope it's cleared up! Metta, Sarah =========== #74368 From: sarah abbott Date: Sun Jul 15, 2007 3:37 am Subject: Re: [dsg] thank you card from omak sarahprocter... Dear Connie, Thanks for letting us know that the books arrived safely. Glad you liked the postcard from Varanasi of the funeral pyres by the Ganges. I thought you would. You'd enjoy the real thing too, I'm sure. I once spent a couple of hours sitting watching the burning of the bodies there, but last time to Varanasi, I didn't even bother to leave the hotel. Conditions! So how's your mom doing with 'Buddha's Path'? So glad she picked it up. Again, thank you again for all your wonderful support and help to DSG behind the scenes. I used to really worry about the loss of the archives, but since you stepped in to do the laborious work of backing them up, no more panic attacks! Accumulations, kamma and assistance from friends: the complexity of conditions Howard was describing! Metta, Sarah --- connie wrote: > > Dear Jon and Sarah, > > Thank you for the books and Clown's lovely card in blues and browns > depicting a "Ceremonial goodbye to those who have left the world to > merge > with ashes" in Varanasi. The perfect 'adventitious embellishment' to > keep > in the blue book of Cetasikas. (Vism VI, 88: ...For a living body is > just > as foul...). > > Mom started reading Buddha's Path first thing. #74369 From: sarah abbott Date: Sun Jul 15, 2007 3:55 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Not In Pali Tipitaka Re: What other teacher teaches against selecti... sarahprocter... Hi Howard & all, --- upasaka@... wrote: > > S: I think she does stand very much alone when it comes to not > selecting a > > meditation object. > > > > You mention teachers like Joseph Goldstein and the use of the abdomen > as a > > base. <..> > Howard: > Two brief comments on the foregoing: > 1) Just to clarify, I have come across no modern teacher who in > giving > a meditation subject (usually the breath) advises forceful avoidance of > noticing other phenomena..... ... S: I didn't intend to suggest otherwise at all. I don't disagree with any of your comments about what such practices are composed of or how impressive the teaching manner, demeanour and so on are of the teachers. Quite the contrary. I was just agreeing with Phil that KS is unusual as a Buddhist teacher today in not advocating any of this. As for your suggestion that 'the praying in Judaism, Christianity, and Islam' is more of a social affair - I'd think that might be controversial. What about those who go on retreats in these religions or pray quietly at home? Recently Lodewijk was mentioning how even he and Nina used to go to Benedictine monasteries on retreats before becoming interested in Buddhism. Hardly a social affair, I'd think. Christian friends here go on silent retreats and I remember my grandmother used to do so too every year. For others, of course, it is more of a social affair as you suggest. Metta, Sarah ====== #74370 From: sarah abbott Date: Sun Jul 15, 2007 4:04 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Insects? Robots? Re-evaluating Walking Meditation sarahprocter... Hi James, Howard (Scott & all), Good to see you popping in, James. You said you wouldn't be able to comment further, so that make me a little bold:-)) --- buddhatrue wrote: > > As for the alleged ridiculousness of walking meditation, it > is a > > practice handed down from the time of the Buddha, and it is a > remarkable > > practice,and one carried out by Theravadins, Mahayanists, and > Vajrayanists alike. .... S: Ooh, a very controversial topic is walking meditation. Of course, there's lots in U.P. under 'Walking, walking meditation'. The first saved post on it is one of Nina's: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/14172 A quote from it: >>Howard: I don't know about the speed or the details, but the texts certainly > do talk of walking meditation. For example there is the following from the > Bahiya Sutta: "At that time, a large number of monks were doing walking > meditation in the open air." > Nna: Dear Howard and all, My translation PTs does not have walking meditation: walking about in the open air, and this must be in Pali: cankamana. The Buddha himself and also the monks had to change posture after sitting for a long time, that was good for the body. We read this in the "daily routine of the Buddha". The monks knew that there can be mindfulness in any posture, thus, also when walking: there are only nama and rupa. There could also be talk on Dhamma while walking. We read in the K, II, on Elements 2, § 15 Conduct, that the monks walked in groups, and that each group consisted of monks with the same inclinations, such as righteous converse or strict observance, etc. It was all very natural, nothing formal about it, no rules.<< ***** S: Lots more on cankamana and so on. Connie may like to chime in, I remember she got into her stride on this one. Hope you're having some good hikes in the States. Don't walk too slowly, otherwise Sebastien won't find it fun at all and you may get some strange looks:)). Metta, Sarah ======== #74371 From: "Phil" Date: Sun Jul 15, 2007 4:59 am Subject: satipatthana as island of refuge philofillet Hi all Can anyone point me toward the sutta that speaks of satipatthana as an island, as a refuge? Thanks in advance Metta, Phil #74372 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Sun Jul 15, 2007 5:51 am Subject: [dsg] Re: What is the wrong view? (References from the MN anthology) indriyabala Hello Colette, - The "message" that Larry was referring to is DSG # 74351 which contains some short passages from the book "The Path of Discrimination", the Enlish translation of the Patisambhidamagga (a discourse of the great Arahant Sariputta). I hope that helps. Tep ==== #74373 From: sarah abbott Date: Sun Jul 15, 2007 5:34 am Subject: Re: [dsg] satipatthana as island of refuge sarahprocter... Hi Phil, > Can anyone point me toward the sutta that speaks of satipatthana as > an island, as a refuge? ... New S: I recently wrote the following to you in: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/73669 >S: "Those bhikkhus of mine, Aananda, who now or after I am gone, abide as an island unto themselves, as a refuge unto themselves, seeking no other refuge; having the Dhamma as their island and refuge, seeking no other refuge; it is they who will become the highest*, if they have the desire to learn." (Mahaa Parinibbaana Sutta, (BPS, Sister Vajira and Francis Story transl). In the paragraph before, the Buddha makes it clear that it is through the development of the four satipatthanas that desire and sorrow are overcome and 'he is an island unto himself...< .... NEW S: The paragraph before was: "When he dwells contemplating the body in the body, earnestly, clearly comprehending, and mindfully, after having overcome desire and sorrow in regard to the world;...........feelings.....mind........mental objects....., then, truly, he is an island unto himself, a refuge unto himself, seeking no external refuge; having the Dhamma as his island, the Dhamma as his refuge, seeking no other refuge." Metta, Sarah ===== #74374 From: "L G SAGE" Date: Sun Jul 15, 2007 6:34 am Subject: Theriigaathaa - Sisters (63) nichiconn dear friends, 10. Ekaadasakanipaato 1. Kisaagotamiitheriigaathaava.n.nanaa part 4 txt: Gaathaapariyosaane yathaa.thitaava sotaapattiphale pati.t.thaaya satthaara.m pabbajja.m yaaci. Satthaa pabbajja.m anujaani. Saa satthaara.m tikkhattu.m padakkhi.na.m katvaa vanditvaa bhikkhunupassaya.m gantvaa pabbajitvaa upasampada.m labhitvaa nacirasseva yonisomanasikaarena kamma.m karontii vipassana.m va.d.dhesi. Athassaa satthaa- "Yo ca vassasata.m jiive, apassa.m amata.m pada.m; ekaaha.m jiivita.m seyyo, passato amata.m padan"ti. (Dha. pa. 114)- Ima.m obhaasagaathamaaha. PRUITT: At the end of the verse, just as she was standing there, she stood firm in the fruition state of Stream-Entry, and she asked to go forth. Then the Teacher gave permission for her to go forth. She [went around] the Teacher three times, keeping him on the right, paid homage, and went to the bhikkhunii's monastery. She went forth and then received the full ordination. She devoted herself to paying careful attention, and in very short time made her insight increase. Then the Teacher said this verse of radiance to her:* And if anyone lives a hundred years not seeing the undying state, it would be better to live one day seeing the undying state. [Dhp 114] *According to the Dhp-a account (II 275 [BL II 260]), she established insight by observing the flame of a lamp. RD: When he had spoken, she was confirmed in the fruition of the First (the Stream-entry) Path, and asked for ordination. He consented, and she, thrice saluting by the right, *311 went to the Bhikkhuniis, and was ordained. And not long afterwards, studying the causes of things, she caused her insight to grow. Then the Master said a Glory-verse: *312 'The man who, living for an hundred years, Beholdeth never the Ambrosial Path, Had better live no longer than one day, So he behold within that day the Path.' *313 *311 Cf. Ps. lxviii., ver. 307. {Caapaa} *312 Cf. Ps. ii. and ff. {Muttaa} *313 Cf. Ps. xlvii. {Pa.taacaaraa} ===tbc, connie #74375 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Sun Jul 15, 2007 6:38 am Subject: Re: [dsg] satipatthana as island of refuge indriyabala Hello Sarah (and Phil) - I was about to log off when I saw your interesting message. S: (quoting Mahaa Parinibbaana Sutta) "When he dwells contemplating the body in the body, earnestly, clearly comprehending, and mindfully, after having overcome desire and sorrow in regard to the world;..........." S: In the paragraph before, the Buddha makes it clear that it is through the development of the four satipatthanas that desire and sorrow are overcome and 'he is an island unto himself.. T: Does the development of the four satipatthanas overcome desire and sorrow, or is the development of the four satipatthanas commence after disire and sorrow have been overcome? Thanks. Tep ==== --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > > Hi Phil, > > > Can anyone point me toward the sutta that speaks of satipatthana as > > an island, as a refuge? > ... #74376 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Sun Jul 15, 2007 6:40 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Insects? Robots? Re-evaluating Walking Meditation buddhatrue Hi Sarah, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > > Hi James, Howard (Scott & all), > > Good to see you popping in, James. James: Thanks. You said you wouldn't be able to > comment further, so that make me a little bold:-)) James: Well, I wasn't going to, but your lightly smug tone is practically guaranteed to get a rise out of me! ;-)) > > --- buddhatrue wrote: > > > As for the alleged ridiculousness of walking meditation, it > > is a > > > practice handed down from the time of the Buddha, and it is a > > remarkable > > > practice,and one carried out by Theravadins, Mahayanists, and > > Vajrayanists alike. > .... > S: Ooh, a very controversial topic is walking meditation. Of course, > there's lots in U.P. under 'Walking, walking meditation'. James: I took a look and most of the posts are in regard to the Satipatthana Sutta and a commentary which appears to some to contradict what the sutta states (something about how jackals know that they are walking, etc., etc...). Really, I am more interested in jhana cultivation these days, so I didn't find anything too useful. What I had in mind is this quote from the Vism.: "Postures: walking suits one, standing or sitting or lying down another. So he should try them, like the abode, for three days each, and that posture is suitable in which his unconcentrated mind becomes concentrated or his concentrated mind more so. Any other should be understood as unsuitable." Vism. IV, 41 I think that this is pretty straight forward in advocating walking meditation. (Of course, it wouldn't surprise me in the slightest if there is a commentary or sub-commentary or sub-sub-commentary which could be spun in some odd way to seemingly contradict this passage ;-)) > ***** > S: Lots more on cankamana and so on. Connie may like to chime in, I > remember she got into her stride on this one. > > Hope you're having some good hikes in the States. James: Well, I haven't been hiking too much as it gets up to 112 F during the day. ;-)). Don't walk too slowly, > otherwise Sebastien won't find it fun at all and you may get some strange > looks:)). James: I don't know why, but I seem to always walk slower than most people, and Sebastian is no exception. I'm always trying to catch up. I couldn't even keep up with you, Sarah, in Hong Kong! ;-)) > > Metta, > > Sarah > ======== > Metta, James #74377 From: "Larry" Date: Sun Jul 15, 2007 7:26 am Subject: Re: Pa.tipadaa Sutta (was: What is the wrong view? ...) lbidd2 Hi Sarah, S: "Here, the Buddha is comparing the micchaa-pa.tipadaa with the samma-pa.tipadaa. Can any kusala be included in the wrong way?" L: It looks to me like patipada is a figure of speech and he is comparing suffering and the end of suffering. But, interpretations will vary. The alternative is that your own faith in your interpretation is wrong path. In other words you undermine your own position unless it is based on insight knowledge in the Sarah continuum. Larry #74378 From: upasaka@... Date: Sun Jul 15, 2007 3:50 am Subject: Mindfulness of Walking and General Deportment of the Body upasaka_howard Hi all - The following, from the Kayagatasati Sutta, leading off with mindfulness of walking and extending to all deportment, and further to general bodily activities, refers, as some have mentioned (re: jackals), not to ordinary knowledge that walking etc is going on, but to a direct "seeing" of what is transpiring from a base of calm and detailed clarity, with intensity, focus, and nondistractedness: <> With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) #74379 From: "Larry" Date: Sun Jul 15, 2007 7:55 am Subject: [dsg] Re: What is the wrong view? (References from the MN anthology) lbidd2 --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "colette" wrote: > > Hi Larry and Tep, > > One last thing before I catch the last bus leading to the Land Of > Nod. Could you give me the msg. # you're referring to in your reply > to Tep, or maybe Tep wouldn't mind helping me out since, at one time, > Tep and I had good relations. > > Let me take this apart here: > > Direct Knowledge or Directly Knowing implies a RESULTANT CONDITION or > CONSCIOUSNESS through EXPERIENCING that which is to be known through > a physical action. > > Faith is a belief in something, as Larry phrased it to me, a kindof, > trust. > > > Resolving issues is a way of concluding things. The conclusion can be > a physical conclusion which denotes ENDING or a conclusion can be a > state of consciousness through the Mind-door. > > I cannot bring myself to placing the ending of an issue in the form > of physically knowing a condition exists AND THEN IDENTIFYING that > knowledge as being FAITH. It's a personal thing. Even Lucy Safford's > definition, that I still have from a Western Mysteries site is a bit > amiguous to me. Maybe it's just late and my brain is too taxed. > > toodles, > colette Hi Colette, The message # is 74351. Btw, everything is 'amiguous'. The more precise we try to be, the more obvious that becomes. I've been reading "Journey Without Goal" by Chogyam Trungpa. Here's a snippet: p.23 "We are trying to find ourselves, but we are not able to do so, and we feel enormously flat and heavy and in the way. Something is being a nuisance, but we cannot put our finger on exactly what it is. Nevertheless, something, somewhere, is being a nuisance. Or is it? If we view this with humor, we begin to find that even that flatness, the lack of inspiration, the solidity, and the confusion are dancing constantly. We need to develop a sense of excitement and dance with our humor, our apparent stupidity becomes somewhat uplifted. However, we do not know for sure whether we are just looking at ourselves humorously while our stupidity grows heavier all the time, or whether we might actually be able to cure ourselves. There is still something that is uncertain, completely confused, and very ambiguous. "At that point, we finally could start to relate with the ambiguity. In the tantric tradition, discovering that ambiguity is called "discovering the seed syllable." Ambiguity is called a "seed syllable" when it becomes a starting point rather than a source of problems. When we accept uncertainty as the working base, then we begin to discover that we do not exist...." Larry #74380 From: upasaka@... Date: Sun Jul 15, 2007 4:14 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: What other teacher teaches against selecting a meditation object? upasaka_howard Hi, Sukin (and Scott & Ken) - In a message dated 7/14/07 11:47:45 PM Eastern Daylight Time, sukinder@... writes: > Hi Howard (Scott and Ken), > > You commented to Scott: > > < As for the alleged ridiculousness of walking meditation, it is a practice > handed down from the time of the Buddha, and it is a remarkable > practice,and one carried out by Theravadins, Mahayanists, and > Vajrayanists alike. What I find ridiculous is making a judgement based > on thinking without having experienced what is being thought about. > (BTW, not all walking meditation is done slowly.)>> > > > And you wrote to Ken in message no. 74285 : > > Howard: > If one were to engage in walking meditation, then one will know walking > as it really is, for then one knows first hand that what usually seems to > be "walking" is earth and air, and there is nothing personal involved, > and that includes the volition that propels the walking. Without engaging > in walking meditation, there is no experiencing of this. > ----------------------------------- > My question to you: > > What is it in the `walking meditation' that makes it different from normal > walking? What are the particular conditions involved in that "earth and > air" are observable in the one and not possible in the other? ------------------------------------------- Howard: What is different is one's state of mind. What is involved is specific intention, attention, nondistractedness, focus, intensity, and settledness. But talking about this doesn't come close to properly conveying the facts. ------------------------------------------ > > You know my position with regard to Mahayana, Vajrayana, Zen and so > on, namely that I have little or no respect for their views. > ------------------------------------------- Howard: So? Why is that an issue? My point was that walking meditation is a practice of all schools of Buddhism and one of long standing. In any case, I'm not looking for a debate on this. I rely on the Satipatthana, Anapanasati, and Kayagatasati Suttas for my meditation instruction. I am content to continue my practice and to further it, but I have no intention to try to force such practice on anyone else. If you don't believe the Buddha urged meditation but only urged thinking over his teachings, that's fine with me. Whatever suits you and whatever is helpful to you is great. ------------------------------------------ The very fact > > that they came to be at all, is reflection of wrong understanding of the > original Teachings, and lack of respect for it. What others may consider > small difference which can be overlooked, I consider crucial, one which > operates at the level of "view". And view is either `right' or it is > `wrong'. > This then also means that I disagree with 90+% of the interpretations > within the Theravada itself. ;-) ------------------------------------------ Howard: You have every right to think however you think. ------------------------------------------ > > In the above two quotes, you are saying to the effect, that neither Scott > nor Ken, because they don't "do" walking mediation, will ever "know" > earth or air elements or know the intentions involved while walking. I of > course say that because both Scott and Ken give great importance to > the process of `correcting one's views' with reference to the original > texts, and which have allowed them so far, to have a more or less > correct attitude toward present moment experiences, that theirs is the > *right* cause which would lead ultimately to the right result, > namely "knowing the `elements' as they are". ---------------------------------------------- Howard: I do indeed maintain that the actual nature of things cannot be known by ordinary observation. In my reply to Scott, I criticized judging what is unobserved, and in my post to Ken, I pointed out that the realities underlying the conventional activity of walking can only be actually known by looking at them with enhanced mental vision. I believe this on the basis of what I consider to be common sense and on the basis of experience. I see no reason for apologizing for reporting that. But you and Scott and Ken are certainly free to doubt the correctness of my perception with regard to this matter. ------------------------------------------------ > On the other hand, yours and those of the Mahayanists etc, > ----------------------------------------------- Howard: This witch-hunt approach that you and others have applied to TG and me would be sickening were it not so laughable. I am not a Mahayanist. But if I were, that would not be a basis for attack. -------------------------------------------- being > > inclined toward giving priority to conventional activities, without regard > for the need to correctly understand the Dhamma and continue to > develop that at the intellectual level, is *not* the right cause that would > lead to the same end. > > Comments please. ;-) ------------------------------------------ Howard: Already done. ---------------------------------------- > > > Metta, > > Sukinder > ===================== With metta, Howard #74381 From: upasaka@... Date: Sun Jul 15, 2007 4:32 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Not In Pali Tipitaka Re: What other teacher teaches against selecti... upasaka_howard Hi, Sarah - In a message dated 7/15/07 6:56:10 AM Eastern Daylight Time, sarahprocterabbott@... writes: > As for your suggestion that 'the praying in Judaism, Christianity, and > Islam' is more of a social affair - I'd think that might be controversial. > What about those who go on retreats in these religions or pray quietly at > home? Recently Lodewijk was mentioning how even he and Nina used to go to > Benedictine monasteries on retreats before becoming interested in > Buddhism. Hardly a social affair, I'd think. Christian friends here go on > silent retreats and I remember my grandmother used to do so too every > year. For others, of course, it is more of a social affair as you suggest. > ======================== It is my understanding that in all these religions, community prayer is the primary practice. But I really should only address myself to Judaism, for, of the theistic religions, it is only of that that I have direct knowledge. Prayer in Judaism is done both privately and communally, but communal prayer and ritual is by far primary in Judaism. For any "official" prayer service, whether for a birth or a death or for celebrating the sabbath or any other holiday or just for any of the standard daily services, to even commence the service a "minion" of at least ten men (ten adults in Reform Judaism) must be present. In mystical Judaism, it is urged that prior to prayer, whether in a group or on one's own, however, there be a private meditative preparation engaged in, for purpose of cultivating "kavannah," a mindful state of calm and clarity. With metta, Howard #74382 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sun Jul 15, 2007 11:30 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: What is the wrong view? (References from the MN anthology) jonoabb Hi Phil Phil wrote: >> Do they say what form of kusala it would be at the 'pre- >> satipatthana' stage? >> > Ph: No, not that I recall, though if pressed by questioners I'm > sure they would oblige. (BB's talks have a Q&A section every day - > the MN10 talk extends over 10 sessions, I think) I personally don't > worry about degrees of kusala. Perhaps I will someday, but for now > if I feel a teach/practice is contributing to a lessening of gross > forms of hatred, greed and delusion I press ahead with confidence. I > am not pursuing eradication of latent tendencies. I was really raising the question of whether the 'pre-satipatthaana' stage would be kusala of any kind at all at. If it's not satipatthana, it would have to be samatha, or sila, or dana. There is no 'pre-satipatthana' kusala (just as there is no pre-samatha or pre-sila or pre-dana kusala). >>> BB in his talk on MN 10, which I would love to transcribe >>> some day, says that the satipatthana doesn't actually come until >>> the 4th patthana (frame of reference?) which is contemplation of >>> phenomena/mental objects. I was surprised by this, heard it >>> today. >> Comes as a surprise to me too. Is this his interpretation of the >> sutta, I wonder, or his personal experience? >> > > Ph: Surely the former, whether mistaken or not. From what you are saying, then, he sees the section on mindfulness of the body as not talking about actual satipatthaana. I find that a little difficult to imagine. > I see him as an > academic monk for whom a study of the tipitaka is paramount. I don't > know if that is true, however. Relative to some others, no doubt so. > He added, I think, that the reason the hindrances are first in the > fourth satipatthana (mental objects/phenomena) is that it is only > when the hindrances have been subdued that satipatthna can arise, > something like that. > This is the idea that the hindrances have to be subdued, by the development of samatha to the level of access concentration, before mundane insight of any kind can arise. That would be a departure from the position I understood him to hold previously. >> Nice talking to you, Phil. Always a number of interesting points >> in your posts. > > Thanks Jon. After I return from Canada, and the baseball season is > over, I might transcribe the MN 10 talk in its entirety. If there > are contentious points you might take them up with BB directly, as I > know Sarah (?) has in the past in letters re Abhidhamma details. It > would be a good idea to do so, perhaps, because there is little > doubt that his series of MN talks, which have already extended over > 3 years, I think, will have enormous influence in the community and > if there are gross examples of wrong view in them you or someone > should bring them up to him, I would think. You are most welcome to bring up points for discussion. As for taking up contentious points with BB, I'd be happy to if a suitable occasion occurs (but I'm not sure how likely that would be). > The U Silananda Sayadaw talk on Satipattha is also very good, but > as you know the sayadaws promote a very specific meditation > technique, so it might not be as objective a source as BB. Nevertheless, you are welcome to bring up points for discussion. Jon #74383 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sun Jul 15, 2007 11:43 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Hmmmm.... (SN 2.10, AN 3.91) jonoabb Hi Howard upasaka@... wrote: > Hi, Jon - > > In a message dated 7/14/07 1:29:05 AM Eastern Daylight Time, > jonabbott@... writes: > > >> I think the urgency spoken of here, analogous to the farmer's ploughing, >> sowing and watering, is the undertaking of the 3 kinds of of heightened >> development (virtue, mind, discernment). In Pali these are: >> adhisiila-sikkhaa, adhicitta-sikkhaa, adhipa~n~naa-sikkhaa. Apparently >> it refers to the development of the NEP -- see Nyanatiloka extract under >> 'sikkhaa' below. >> >> You emphasise the urgency aspect of both these passages. Actually, an >> appreciation of the urgency is one of the few things we all agree on >> here; it is what happens after that that we differ about ;-)). >> > ======================= > Yes, I know. What the Buddha said in that same last sutta was "you > should train yourselves." > Quite so. "Thus, monks, you should train yourselves: 'Strong will be our desire for the undertaking of heightened virtue. Strong will be our desire for the undertaking of heightened mind. Strong will be our desire for the undertaking of heightened discernment.' That's how you should train yourselves." The training in question is the arising of 'strong desire' for the undertaking of the 3-fold training ('sikkha'), which in turn seems to mean the NEP. This refers I suppose to an appreciation of the urgency that you highlighted. The exhortation to 'train oneself' does not have to be read as an instruction to undertake any kind of intentional practice. Jon #74384 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Sun Jul 15, 2007 12:53 pm Subject: Re: Mindfulness of Walking and General Deportment of the Body scottduncan2 Dear All, Howard cites Kaayagataasati Sutta, MN 119 (unknown translation): "Furthermore, when walking, the monk discerns [pajaanaati] that he is walking. When standing, he discerns [pajaanaati] that he is standing. When sitting, he discerns [pajaanaati] that he is sitting. When lying down, he discerns [pajaanaati] that he is lying down. Or however his body is disposed, that is how he discerns [pajaanaati] it. And as he remains thus heedful, ardent, & resolute, any memories & resolves related to the household life are abandoned, and with their abandoning his mind gathers & settles inwardly, grows unified & centered. This is how a monk develops mindfulness immersed in the body. "Furthermore, when going forward & returning, he makes himself fully alert [sampajaanakaarii hoti]; when looking toward & looking away... when bending & extending his limbs...when carrying his outer cloak, his upper robe & his bowl... when eating, drinking, chewing, & savoring... when urinating & defecating... when walking, standing, sitting, falling asleep, waking up, talking, & remaining silent, he makes himself fully alert [sampajaanakaarii hoti]. And as he remains thus heedful, ardent, & resolute, any memories & resolves related to the household life are abandoned, and with their abandoning his mind gathers & settles inwardly, grows unified & centered. This is how a monk develops mindfulness immersed in the body." ~Naa.namoli/Bodhi: "(The Four Postures) "5. Again, bhikkhus, when walking, a bhikkhu understands [pajaanaati]: 'I am walking'; when standing, he understands [pajaanaati]: 'I am standing'; when sitting, he understands [pajaanaati]: 'I am sitting'; when lying down, he understands [pajaanaati]: 'I am lying down'; or he understands [pajaanaati] accordingly however his body is disposed. As he abides thus diligent, ardent, and resolute, his memories and intentions based on household life are abandoned...That too is how a bhikkhu develops mindfulness of the body. (Full Awareness) "6. Again, bhikkhus, a bhikkhu is one who acts in full awareness [sampajaanakaarii hoti] when going forward and returning; who acts in full awareness [sampajaanakaarii hoti] when looking ahead and looking away; who acts in full awareness [sampajaanakaarii hoti] when flexing and extending limbs; who acts in full awareness [sampajaanakaarii hoti] when wearing his robes and carrying his outer robe and bowl; who acts in full awareness [sampajaanakaarii hoti] when eating, drinking, consuming food, and tasting; who acts in full awareness [sampajaanakaarii hoti] when defecating and urinating; who acts in full awareness [sampajaanakaarii hoti] when walking, standing, sitting, falling asleep, waking up, talking, and keeping silent. As he abides thus diligent, ardent, and resolute, his memories and intentions based on the household life are abandoned...That is how a bhikkhu develops mindfulness of the body." The Paa.li: Puna ca para.m bhikkhave, bhikkhu gacchanto vaa gacchaamiiti pajaanaati. .Thito vaa .thitomhiiti pajaanaati. Nisinno vaa nisinnomhiiti pajaanaati. Sayaano vaa sayaanomhiiti pajaanaati. Yathaa yathaa vaa panassa kaayo pa.nihito hoti. Tathaa tathaa na.m pajaanaati. Tassa eva.m appamattassa aataapino pahitattassa viharato ye gehasitaa sarasa"nkappà , te pahiiyanti. Tesa.m pahaanaa ajjhattameva citta.m santi.t.thati, sannisiidati, ekodi hoti, samaadhiyati. Evampi bhikkhave, bhikkhu kaayagata.m sati.m bhaaveti. Puna ca para.m bhikkhave, bhikkhu abhikkante pa.tikkante sampajaanakaarii hoti. Aalokite vilokite sampajaanakaarii hoti. Sammi~njite pasaarite sampajaanakaarii hoti. Sa"nghaa.tipattaciivaradhaara.ne sampajaanakaarii hoti. Asite piite khaayite saayite sampajaanakaarii hoti. Uccaarapassaavakamme sampajaanakaarii hoti. Gate .thite nisinne sutte jaagarite bhaasite tu.nhibhaave sampajaanakaarii hoti. Tassa eva.m appamattassa aataapino pahitattassa viharato ye gehasitaa sarasa"nkappaa te pahiiyanti: tesa.m pahaanaa ajjhattameva citta.m santi.t.thati, sannisiidati, ekodi hoti, samaadhiyati. Evampi bhikkhave, bhikkhu kaayagata.m sati.m bhaavati. Scott: Note that the unknown translator in the first text chooses to use 'discern' for 'pajaanaati', whereas ~Naa.namoli/Bodhi favour 'understand'. Are these synonyms? Perhaps, but with significantly different nuances... The Oxford: "discern: verb 1. recognize or find out. 2. distinguish with difficulty by sight or with the other senses." "understand: verb (past and past part. understood) 1. perceive the intended meaning of (words, a language, or a speaker). 2. perceive the significance, explanation, or cause of. 3. interpret or view in a particular way. 4. infer from information received. 5. assume that (something) is present or is the case." Scott: So, not quite synomymous, at least in English. But one has to look at the Paa.li. In the PTS PED, for pajaanaati, one has: "Pajaanaati [pa+jÄ?nÄ?ti] to know, find out, come to know, understand, distinguish..." Scott: So, the word 'distinguish' comes close to 'discern'; the Oxford has: "distinguish: verb 1 recognize, show, or treat as different. 2 manage to discern (something barely perceptible). 3 be an identifying characteristic of. 4 (distinguish oneself) make oneself worthy of respect." Scott: 'Discern' comes closer to the meaning of 'sati' (PTS PED): "Sati (f.)... memory, recognition, consciousness..." Scott: The fine disctinctions between sati and pa~n~na are being blurred in the translation. 'Pajaanaati' is synonymous with pa~n~na (corrections welcome). So here we are dealing with pa~n~na. The Atthasaalinii (p.161) notes: "Pa~n~na means one understands (pajaanaati). But what does one understand? The Ariyan Facts (or Truths) by the method: This is ill, etc. But in the Great Commentary understanding is defined as 'it causes to know (or understand). What does it cause to know? Impermanence, ill, soullessness.' Through overcoming ignorance, it is a controlling faculty in the sense of predominance. It exercises government (over associated states) by the characteristic of vision, hence it is a controlling faculty and gives the compound 'understanding-faculty'. It has illuminating and understanding as characteristic." Scott: 'Understand' is closer to the pali than 'discern', in my opinion. In the unknown translation has 'he makes himself fully alert' for [sampajaanakaarii hoti], whereas ~Naa.namoli/Bodhi have 'one who acts in full awareness' for 'sampajaanakaarii hoti'. Neither attempt is true to the meaning of 'sampajaanakaarii', which is: "...sampajaanakaarin acting with consideration or full attention..." And is related to: "Sampajaanaati [saÅ‹+pajÄ?nÄ?ti] to know..." which is, again, pa~n~na. The former, as well as the latter, translator are either translating conventionally, or are editorialising that is is a person who can do these things - the former more than the latter. Sampajaanakaarii hoti implies that this develops (hoti being related to bhaveti). A similar term, 'sampaja~n~na' (..."i. e. *sampajaanya] atten- tion, consideration, discrimination, comprehension, circumspection...") seems to relate, but is not in the original Paa.li. If someone can clarify the Paa.li, that would be great. It is dhammas with characteristics, not a person, that are under consideration. And 'walking' is not walking H: "The following, from the Kayagatasati Sutta, leading off with mindfulness of walking and extending to all deportment, and further to general bodily activities, refers, as some have mentioned (re: jackals), not to ordinary knowledge that walking etc is going on, but to a direct "seeing" of what is transpiring from a base of calm and detailed clarity, with intensity, focus, and nondistractedness..." Scott: In the Paa.li, it is pa~n~na, and it is not 'walking' but individual dhammas with characteristics that pa~n~na takes as objects. Sincerely, Scott. #74385 From: upasaka@... Date: Sun Jul 15, 2007 10:44 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Hmmmm.... (SN 2.10, AN 3.91) upasaka_howard Hi, Jon - In a message dated 7/15/07 2:46:15 PM Eastern Daylight Time, jonabbott@... writes: > > Yes, I know. What the Buddha said in that same last sutta was "you > >should train yourselves." > > > > Quite so. > > "Thus, monks, you should train yourselves: 'Strong will be our desire for > the > undertaking of heightened virtue. Strong will be our desire for the > undertaking of heightened mind. Strong will be our desire for the > undertaking of > heightened discernment.' That's how you should train yourselves." > > > The training in question is the arising of 'strong desire' for the > undertaking of the 3-fold training ('sikkha'), which in turn seems to > mean the NEP. > > This refers I suppose to an appreciation of the urgency that you > highlighted. > > The exhortation to 'train oneself' does not have to be read as an > instruction to undertake any kind of intentional practice. > > Jon > > ===================== Not unless one speaks Yankee English, whis is evidently a greater corruption of the Mother Tongue than I had realized! ;-)) With metta, Howard #74386 From: "colette" Date: Sun Jul 15, 2007 10:21 am Subject: [dsg] Re: What is the wrong view? (References from the MN anthology) ksheri3 Hi Larry, Thanx for the msg. #, as I told Tep, earlier. So that I don't take up too much available time until the owners go somewhere with all the kids, in reference to Journey Without Goal I stand filled with joy and happiness, so much so that I openly laugh because of the ALTERNATIVE VIEW given to that nueters those afflicted with Meglamania and are compelled (see the movie THE EXORCIST and the mantra: "the power of christ compells you") and the CRAZY WISDOM the small portion of the book you've offered us here. It's sooooooo reassuring to find, through written words, that there are others that know and accept the ignorance that is inherent in the human organism. It is through their view of being able to see the ignorance that afflicts us, their acceptance of our flaws BUT the ultimate desire to attempt to change, alter, the disease that afflicts us. Later today I'll have more time. thanx. toodles, colette > The message # is 74351. > > Btw, everything is 'amiguous'. The more precise we try to be, the more obvious that > becomes. I've been reading "Journey Without Goal" by Chogyam Trungpa. Here's a snippet: > > p.23 "We are trying to find ourselves, but we are not able to do so, and we feel enormously > flat and heavy and in the way. <...> #74387 From: "colette" Date: Sun Jul 15, 2007 7:23 am Subject: Re: What is the wrong view? (References from the MN anthology) ksheri3 Good Morning Tep, I've gotta answer you like this since the owners of this computer are not interested in the OFFICE program such as Word Processing, etc, so they aren't part of my screen and I don't have the time to read any of their instructions if I could find or have the manuals, thus I go with what I got. Also, the kids seem to be tired at from their day at the WaterPark and so I have a few minutes as long as I don't type to loudly. > Hi Larry (and Jon) - > > L: Someone might say that faith isn't a view because it doesn't profess > to understand. colette: Larry, I cannot believe that you fell into a trap like this! Didn't you read any of the conversation that Scott and I were having since it did concern a parallel: I repeated a old adage that Scott's sick of, that text books do not have within themselves Svabhava experience, the experience which is and of itself, inherent existance. I hope you are not falling into the trap of suggesting that "faith" is this cure-all for what ails ya, similar to POMPOUS MINISTRY'S MAGIC CURE ALL guaranteed to leave your bank account so empty that you won't have time to be sick from anything else <....>. How can faith act since faith does not have what we humans consider to be a body in which to act from? No matter how much I hallucinate, and I've done my fair share of hallucinating back in the 70s with lots of LSD so I can definately distinguish, COGNIZE, when I am and am not hallucinating. I just don't have the ability to picture having a conversation with "faith" so that I can find out if "faith" prosteletizes and professes anything at all. <...> It only trusts. Therefore, it couldn't be classed as right > view. colette: ORDER, ORDER. <...> Larry, how do you know that Faith has a heart? maybe Faith is one of those three travelers that escorted Dorothy to find the Wizard of Oz, no? <...> I have to go. toodles, colette thanx Tep! But I would say that faith does understand something. It > understands what is good (kusala) on an intuitive level. > > T: I think you might mean to say that 'saddha' is guided by > understanding and the two cannot be separated in practice. <....> #74388 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Sun Jul 15, 2007 3:35 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Hmmmm.... (SN 2.10, AN 3.91) kenhowardau --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > > Hi, Jon - > ... > > The exhortation to 'train oneself' does not have to be read as an > > instruction to undertake any kind of intentional practice. > > > > Jon > > > > > ===================== > Not unless one speaks Yankee English, which is evidently a greater > corruption of the Mother Tongue than I had realized! ;-)) > Hi Howard, Please bear in mind that the Buddha taught a profound, unique, difficult to see, Dhamma in which there is no self (no person) to train. I know that you get a little irritated when people tell you there is no self - as if you didn't already know that - but it is the key to seeing 'training' in a uniquely different way. Ken H #74389 From: "Phil" Date: Sun Jul 15, 2007 6:05 pm Subject: Seeking discussion on meditation methods/techniques philofillet Hi all (especially keen meditators.) These days I'm primarily intereseted in meditation ("formal meditation" if you prefer) and various methods and techniques, and experiences of meditators using various methods and techniques. I don't think DSG is the right forum to discuss this sort of thing (though it's always interesting to discuss whether "formal meditation" itself is wrong view, not in line with the tipitaka etc - certainly valid discussion points.) For example, several years ago Howard posted a post that was something like "an interesting meditation" about one of his sittings. That is the sort of thing I'm thinking about. I'd like to tap into the experience of more experienced (and still enthusiastic) "formal" meditators such as Howard, Han, Tep, James, Matheesha TG (I assume) Colette Robert(not K ;)and others (is Larry a meditator? I don't know, he skillfully keeps that to himself) and hear about what they've learned from their teachers and more importanlty from their sittings/walkings. I don't know if an internet forum can be a useful aid to meditation, but I guess I'd like to find out. I've checked other Yahoo groups such as Dhamma-List and Triple Gem but they seem very moribund. Perhaps if people were interested I could propose that we discuss meditation at one of those groups. If not, that's cool. Sarah and Jon, you might propose that such a discussion can be held at DSG, but unless it was a "closed thread" or something like that, I don't see how it could possibly avoid being derailed by well- intentionned interjections from the "meditation is wrong view" folks. And a "closed thread" would be weird, I think. Needless to say, I want to continue discussing the tipitaka at DSG. Anyways, I'll just pop this out there and see what people have to say. Really, no problem if folks aren't interested or don't think it would be helpful. (I can see a problem with it would be thinking "I want to post about this!" during meditation.) Metta, Phil #74390 From: "Phil" Date: Sun Jul 15, 2007 6:08 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] satipatthana as island of refuge philofillet Hi Sarah Thanks. I was going to ask for a pointer back to this post, actually. I just didn't have time or patience to get into a lot of DSG discussions on the topic at that point. Still don't. But thanks for the sutta reference! Metta, Phil --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > > Hi Phil, > > > Can anyone point me toward the sutta that speaks of satipatthana as > > an island, as a refuge? > ... > New S: I recently wrote the following to you in: > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/73669 > #74391 From: "Phil" Date: Sun Jul 15, 2007 9:18 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] satipatthana as island of refuge philofillet Hi again Sarah and all I found another one that is probably the one I was thinking of. (The one you were kind enough to refer me to is in DN, and those DN suttas are just too long for me to dig into these days. But thanks again.) This is from SN 47:13, Cunda. (BB anthology version) "Therefore, Ananda, each of you should remain with your self as an island, your self as your refuge, without anything else as a refuge. Remain with the Dhamma as an island, the Dhamma as your refuge, without anything else as a refuge. And how does a monk remain with his self as an island, his self as his refuge, without anything else as a refuge? How does he remain with the Dhamma as an island, the Dhamma as his refuge, without anything else as a refuge? There is the case where a monk remains focused on the body in & of itself — ardent, alert, & mindful — putting aside greed & distress with reference to the world. He remains focused on feelings... mind... mental qualities in & of themselves — ardent, alert, & mindful — putting aside greed & distress with reference to the world. This is how a monk remains with his self as an island, his self as his refuge, without anything else as a refuge, with the Dhamma as an island, the Dhamma as his refuge, without anything else as a refuge. For those who — now or after I am gone — remain with their self as an island, their self as their refuge, without anything else as a refuge, with the Dhamma as an island, the Dhamma as their refuge, without anything else as a refuge, they will be the highest of the monks who desire training." I like reflecting on this in conjunction with SN 35:228, in which the sense impressions are described as an ocean which submerges us. Satipatthana is akin to an island, a refuge, in that ocean...I guess. Metta, Phil #74392 From: LBIDD@... Date: Sun Jul 15, 2007 9:22 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: What is the wrong view? (References from the MN anthology) lbidd2 Hi Colette, I don't understand this. Can you say it again differently: "L: Someone might say that faith isn't a view because it doesn't profess to understand. "colette: Larry, I cannot believe that you fell into a trap like this! Didn't you read any of the conversation that Scott and I were having since it did concern a parallel: I repeated a old adage that Scott's sick of, that text books do not have within themselves Svabhava experience, the experience which is and of itself, inherent existance. I hope you are not falling into the trap of suggesting that "faith" is this cure-all for what ails ya, similar to POMPOUS MINISTRY'S MAGIC CURE ALL guaranteed to leave your bank account so empty that you won't have time to be sick from anything else <....>. How can faith act since faith does not have what we humans consider to be a body in which to act from? No matter how much I hallucinate, and I've done my fair share of hallucinating back in the 70s with lots of LSD so I can definately distinguish, COGNIZE, when I am and am not hallucinating. I just don't have the ability to picture having a conversation with "faith" so that I can find out if "faith" prosteletizes and professes anything at all." Larry: I was thinking of faith more as a stepping stone, something to get you started, a resort when in doubt, and at least a wholesome view without really understanding anything. It is more that faith confesses rather than professes. What do you have a conversation with? If a "who", then what is a "who"? Larry #74393 From: upasaka@... Date: Sun Jul 15, 2007 5:35 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Mindfulness of Walking and General Deportment of the Body upasaka_howard Hi, Scott - In a message dated 7/15/07 3:53:44 PM Eastern Daylight Time, scduncan@... writes: > Dear All, > > Howard cites Kaayagataasati Sutta, MN 119 (unknown translation): > ====================== Thank you for the detailed post. My reference is http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.119.than.html . With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) #74394 From: sarah abbott Date: Sun Jul 15, 2007 9:42 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] satipatthana as island of refuge sarahprocter... Hi Phil, --- Phil wrote: > This is from SN 47:13, Cunda. (BB anthology version) > > "Therefore, Ananda, each of you should remain with your self as an > island, your self as your refuge, without anything else as a refuge. > Remain with the Dhamma as an island, the Dhamma as your refuge, > without anything else as a refuge. <...> > I like reflecting on this in conjunction with SN 35:228, in which > the sense impressions are described as an ocean which submerges us. > Satipatthana is akin to an island, a refuge, in that ocean...I guess. ... S: Great! Thx for bringing this one to my attention and to join the collection of 'islands'. I also appreciated the one you posted (with comments)in #74291. Metta, Sarah ======== #74395 From: "L G SAGE" Date: Sun Jul 15, 2007 9:49 pm Subject: Re: oddest of Querries nichiconn dear colette, colette: Why is it that I've caused such a change in CONDITION? The sauces that I've placed on the back burners to simmer seem to be now reaching a bit of a boil. I've noticed air bubbles flowing to the surface and popping. Sometimes I could use the umberella from those popping sauces and they go retaining on their Mary way retaining the heat. It's a 6 Yogas of Naropa thing. I'm sure you've seen a tomato sauce with too much paste retain heat, ;). And what is this change in lable, Name & Form, business: L G SAGE connie...? connie: Now who's this megalomaniacal I? ;) first, names. the change is from dial-up to broadband. a gift from LGS to cbpj & set up while i was at work so i didn't have any input there, but the name umbrella more or less reflects our living arrangement anyway (i type, hearing her footfalls overhead). other names -- tree-fairies :) the ironwood- or naaga- aka fairy- tree. I don't remember whether I answered before that arahats, snakes, elephants, yakkhas and mountains or forests could all be called naagas. Glad you liked the bedtime story. Strictly speaking, it wasn't really anything to do with paccekabuddhas other than that even they have to have heard a sammasambuddha's teaching in former times. peace, connie colette: As I told Larry, I'm tired and wish to retire for the evening but before departing for Nod I want to thank you for bringing a little humor to my night, darkness. The story of the tree-fairies was delightful. I'll be getting back to you on this probably Monday since all the kids will be using the computer tomorrow. As for a Pratyekabuddha I found, in the only response for a google search was a wikipedia post concerning the definition of a self made, self realized, buddha. Kindof like a "stand alone" buddha or a "loose cannon" buddha, no? #74396 From: sarah abbott Date: Sun Jul 15, 2007 9:53 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Seeking discussion on meditation methods/techniques sarahprocter... Hi Phil, --- Phil wrote: > Sarah and Jon, you might propose that such a discussion can be > held at DSG, but unless it was a "closed thread" or something like > that, I don't see how it could possibly avoid being derailed by well- > intentionned interjections from the "meditation is wrong view" > folks. And a "closed thread" would be weird, I think. ... S: Well, I think if you and others make it clear whom you are addressing, like you did at the top of this message, then generally people respect that. Of course, if it's a 'Dear All & Sundry', then All & Sundry are likely to respond:). Derailing....well... Anyway, you're welcome to make it clear you only want to hear from other 'meditators' anytime. Make it as 'closed' as you like - your corner, pal! (I meant just the same to Howard with his CMA corner.) ... > Needless to say, I want to continue discussing the tipitaka at DSG. ... S: Snipped the last lines that were back to the 'meditators' corner:). Metta, Sarah ======= #74397 From: upasaka@... Date: Sun Jul 15, 2007 5:41 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Seeking discussion on meditation methods/techniques upasaka_howard Hi, Phil - I think that Dhamma List is a likely venue for what you have in mind. It's being relatively moribund won't matter provided that current members (like me) and new members such as those you have named start an active discussion there. That will immediately bring the list to life! With metta, Howard #74398 From: "Leo" Date: Sun Jul 15, 2007 10:00 pm Subject: on arts leoaive To Whom It May Concern I was doing a research since 1994 and during my research I find that in ancient times Buddha suggested on Buddhist art to make it on cloth/fabric. Also, Benares, where Buddha spoke to first students, is very famous for fine fabrics. In one Sutta Buddha said that rock can make hole in a wet clay. I suppose it can distroy dishes too. In another Sutta Sariputta put rock in one line with weapon. In Medicine Master Buddha Sutra, Buddha put rocky cliff in the same line with snake, tiger and other threats. In life rock is used in many way sometimes in good way, sometimes in strange way, like building to kill animal, jails, restrooms and so on. It is not really respectfull to make real things out of it. I was thinking about possible ways for Buddha image on fabric, like it was in ancient times. So I would like to share it with you that creation, I think it looks very nice and very helpfull to others. It should be a big gazebo or wooden frame with a roof or double roof (for more light, made in safe way for others). On the sides of that, there are many plants, bushes and flowers are making the walls. Entrances can be from the side with a special design. Inside of it there is a wooden stand with a frame, with rounded corners and wooden things for attaching garlands. Buddha painting on cloth is placed on that wooden frame. Fabric can be a rain proof long lasting cotton.So all together it will be a Buddha Painting on fabric inside of that green house. There are some ways to make it without diging the soil. I think it is very nice and hope you will like it and it can be usefull. Beside that it is a good place to take a break in the summer day heat. Another way for Buddha on cloth is to make it on curtains. In regards to rock art: I was making research on rock or metal art too. My fiindings for rock/metal art are: 1) agressive man with super long hair, which are to and on a ground with an crocodile or wild animal as a friend and right suport. 2) A disrespectful man 3) He enjoy a very little tiny light 4)He likes many locks 5)he likes to sit inside of super big bowl 6)having leather strip on a shoulder, he is showing split teeth 7)he like to collect horns and keep them on his shoulders 8)he likes rocky surface for sitting 9)He likes inner super darkness and path of misery 10) He is a king of super (self) delusion 11 He is lover of self-prison. 12) He likes small tree with small branches and no leafs 13) He like all activities in a moonlight and mystic walks. 14) man on a donkey with sward and wires intertaining donkey with low quality instrument. 15)Runnning constantly in a darkness. Always like to run and no rest. 16)He likes to look at the rock facing down 17)A clown/performer/pourer of rain 18)The one who likes low quality and worhless things 19)The one who is keeping arms always up 20)The one who bend feet in abnormal way 30) The one with ears somewhere going up 31)The one making fingers and toes in a strange way 32)Alsways sleeping man 33)The one who binds others together for spiritual non-freedom 34)The one who likes little space and no room for anything 34) The one who likes the wheels sometimes in normal way, but sometimes in abnormal and diformed way. Sometimes even one on one a right way. Or sometimes all wheels lined up inside the fence 35) The one, who like always to look into the space and nothing else 36) The one who like to touch or hold the star(s). 37) The one who likes to spin around 38) The on who like to twist around Additional possible rock or metal art 1.Marine Monster 2.Gobling 3.Great Serpent 4.Produced by magic 5.Inconceivable miracle of magic 6.King of mauntains 7.King of tsunami/big wave 8.King of drum-sound of clouds 9.Moon god 10.Moon light being 11.Demon 12.Sorcerer 13.Ghost 14.Spectre 15.Gnome-sorcerer 16.Magician 17.King of Speculations 18.Marine monster 19.King of water 20.Turner of sun 21.Man with noisy musical instruments, with rain of lotuses (suppose big bells are musical instruments too) 22.Top rain, bottom fire 23.Man with fearless beasts 24.Man with snakes 25.Dancer 26.Athlete 27.Man seeing pleasure in worldly philosophy 28.Vendor of meet 29.Poultrer 30.Mutton butcher 31.Pork butcher 32.Jewel tree man 33.Profilgate 34. Spoted body 35.Blind-flat nose-disgusting lips 36.Being non-human 37.Musicians, Performers, Pourers of Rain 38. Unreal, unnatural 39. One with cat or owl eyes 40. One with strange eyes 41. One with ears somewhere up 42. One with a tail 43. One with strange eyes 44. One with no rest for the head 45. One with face of animal 46. One with restlessness 47. One with jewelry hanging on toes 48. One with many hands holding up. 49. One that belives in philosophical life and results from skys and space coming at night. Basically, the logic is following: If the rock is not good or strange and if you make it something good out of it, it becomes like telling: Good is bad or strange. So whatever is made of rock, should be in a strange way representing as nothing smart about rock as relic or make it high. People should like human kind things, not whatever can kill that can turn against. Also, based on Suttas/Sutras, Tathagatha like cakes, his touch is soft. touch of rock is not, so whatever is made aout of rock or metal should be in unnatural and strange way, so that no grasping to it existed by wise man. I hope my findings will help you Sincerely Lea #74399 From: "dhammasaro" Date: Sun Jul 15, 2007 11:12 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Angry Monks dhammasaro Good friends, Please forgive this very belated message on this topic. I am catching up on this valuable study group. IMHO, monks are simply human beings trying to be better persons... at least in my experience... most have not achieved the different levels... hence, they have many human frailties... some find being a monk is an easier existence than being a rice farmer!!! This is my experience in being allowed to be a monk for a year and a week. Last April this ole, argumentive Texican requested permission to disrobe after only one year of study as I was a "temporary" monk. I disrobed on 6 May 2550 (2007) at my wat in Bangkok. Please remember the monks in your chanting/meditation/prayer. They need it as much as we laypersons (householders). If this message is not in keeping with your rules; please, immediately delete. offered with metta (maitri), Chuck .................................. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Christine Forsyth" wrote: > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, TGrand458@ wrote: > > > > > > In a message dated 5/26/2007 5:42:22 P.M. Mountain Daylight Time, > > rob.moult@ writes: > > > > I would not want to take as a teacher somebody who is driven by > > anger, no matter how smart they are. > > > > Metta, > > Rob M :-) > > > Hello Rob, TG, all, > > This is interesting. What is 'anger'? Serious question, not smart > remark. I think correct definition is important. So often we label > something as 'anger' when it is something else ... something that > makes us uncomfortable, or affronts us. > > Say a little child is running across the footpath towards a busy road > and certain death or injury. I cannot reach him in time but scream > in my most penetrating and strong voice "Stop! naughty!". The child > stops and bursts into inconsolable tears and, pointing, tells his > mother, who had her back turned, that "the lady" is angry with him. > > The Buddha could have been viewed as angry when talking to and about > the Bhikkhu Sati. Bhikkhu Sati definitely felt embarrassed and > uncomfortable "drooping shoulders and eyes turned down". > "Foolish man, to whom do you know me having taught the Dhamma like > this. Haven't I taught, in various ways that consciousness is > dependently arisen. Without a cause, there is no arising of > consciousness. Yet you, foolish man, on account of your wrong view, > you misrepresent me, as well as destroy yourself and accumulate much > demerit, for which you will suffer for a long time." Then the Blessed > One addressed the bhikkhus: "Bhikkhus, what do you think, has this > this bhikkhu Sati, son of a fisherman, learned anything from this > dispensation?" "No, venerable sir." When this was said the bhikkhu > Sati became silent, unable to reply back, and sat with drooping > shoulders and eyes turned down. Then the Blessed One, knowing that > the bhikkhu Sati had become silent, unable to reply back, and was > sitting with drooping shoulders and with eyes turned down; Foolish > man, you will be known on account of this pernicious view;" > http://leighb.com/mn38.htm > > Other traditions have the idea of 'wrathful compassion' ~ which seems > to align with the modern idea of 'tough love'. > > Doesn't it depend on the understanding of the disciple and the > Teacher? > > metta > Chris > ---The trouble is that you think you have time--- >