#86400 From: "rjkjp1" Date: Thu May 29, 2008 7:44 pm Subject: Re: Overview of KS 3: Her Faulty Teaching rjkjp1 --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Phil" wrote: > > > She also is wrong about the "clinging to rules and rites" wrong > view that she and her students love to bash us over the head with so > often. (Again, forget the Pali.) The Buddha talks about this form of > clinging as believing in fire rites, animal sacrifice and so on, the > forms of ritual that were common in his day. Nowhere does he talk > about clinging to trying to have sati. I think you asked people to > come up with some support for this sin of clinging to having sati, > didn't you? I have not yet come across anything of the sort, > anything where the BUddha talks about trying to have sati as > being "clinging to rules and rites." ________ Dear Phil There is no attachment during actual moments of mindfulness,(assuming it is genuine sati). However, it is standard Dhamma that mindfulness can be an object for attachment. In the Patthana (Narada translation PTS Conditional relations) p13 First paragraph of the Question chapter ""25. Faultless section ii)Dependent on faultless state, may there arise faulty state by root condition?"" What is the answer? p.159 Faultless triplet ii. "Faultless state is related to faulty state by strong dependence condition. " It gives exampes "..after having offered the offering, having undertaken the precept, having fulfilled the duty of observance (one)esteems, enjoys and delights in the faultless acts forrmely well done. Taking it as estimable obect arises LUST, arises wrong views.." The Sammohavinodani (page227): "The ordinary man is like a madman and without considering 'Is this right or not' and aspiring by means of clinging ...he performs any of the kinds of kamma [includes even good kamma]... Thus silabataparamasa [clinging to rules and rituals]is a condition for all three, namely the sense desire world, fine material and immaterial kinds of existence with their divisions and what they include" endquote Thus silabataparamasa can lead to both good and bad states, it can lead even to the highest pleasant feelings experienced in jhana but it cannot lead out of samsara. All ways of kusala (wholesome) can support the development of insight, but they won't if they are clung to or mistaken as the path. Robert #86401 From: "Sukinder" Date: Thu May 29, 2008 8:20 pm Subject: Re: Overview of KS 3: Her Faulty Teaching sukinderpal Hi Phil, -------- > Also she is very poor at encouraging people to avoid > transgression. There is all this sexiness about seeing the > momentariness of akusala that has already fallen away, etc. The > Buddha gives very stern, very strong encouragement about avoiding > transgression and would never ever water down his encouragement > because of the awful sin of self at work wanting to be a better > person etc blah blah blah. The below may impress upon you as being also blah blah blah, but it doesn't hurt me to send it since I wrote it in reaction to another post, only decided at the time not to send it. ============= I'd like to clarify a little, the position where some of us are coming from. This may help you to understand us a little better. ================ Sukin: The situation with most people, of a religion or not, is that they *do* see the danger of akusala such as, aversion, miserliness, jealousy, craving, pride and so on. Hence they know also what it means to be moral and to do good such as being generous, showing loving kindness, compassion etc. Some of the other religions also know to recognize to an extent, the uselessness of rite and ritual. What the Dhamma points to which no other religion or philosophy knows about, is the danger of `Self View'. Even a child will know to some extent to differentiate good from evil, hence they can be conditioned from young to grow in awareness of more subtle manifestations of the latter. Whether or not some are taught to believe in a God, almost everyone at some point when they are older, choose to follow some religion or philosophy in order to further increase the chances of "doing good and avoiding evil". In this regard I'll say that I am often inspired by the good thoughts of people of all religions. However, no matter how "good" a person grows to be, if one does not hear about and appreciates the danger in "Self View", invariably self view *does* grow and accumulate, besides as you know, nothing ever is done in terms of underlying akusala tendencies. In other words, Buddhist and non- Buddhist, everyone relatively easily distinguishes general `good' from `evil'. A Buddhist hears about `Wrong View' and may know to see the danger in not believing in kamma – vipakka and the fact of rebirth, but even here it happens usually only after it has been well explained. And often this continues and remains at a level of `conceptual idea' or story only, in other words, mere "belief". Most Buddhist failing to go any deeper to begin recognizing `wrong view' as being `evil' as he would other forms of akusala, such as aversion and attachment, continues falling prey to it whenever it arises. This is however understandable, since he has so far been *used to* seeing only those other forms of akusala and even came to be attracted to the Buddha's teachings primarily because it also talks about these same akusala. In fact even upon reflection, he has difficulty acknowledging wrong view as having `characteristic' of akusala. In other words, he knows it by `reasoning' only and this too only with regard to certain concepts such as kamma and rebirth. Let alone gradually becoming used to characteristic of wrong view, he struggles against suggestions about this even at the level of `reasoning', especially when this concerns ideas about "doing good" and practice. I would like to suggest Phil, that self-view can gradually be understood better and better as it arises beginning with Pariyatti, to be known in much the same way as one does with reference to other forms of akusala. And once this happens, I'm sure that you *will* see it as being an evil to be particularly concerned about! Sure it is more subtle especially given that we have hardly begun to acknowledge it as being a kind of akusala. But it does arise and exhibit "characteristic" and hence can be known to some degree, even if only on hindsight. Certainly we should not allow any eagerness to `do good' blind us from the influence of self view should we? And just because we fail to see this, does not mean that others are fooling themselves when they suggest otherwise…? In any case, let us not talk as if `self view' is harmless, worse that it should be encouraged provided it leads to other levels of good being done! As suggested here many times, one can gradually learn to recognize self view at play and this would not interfere with any tendency to other kinds of kusala arising and being developed. In fact as also suggested before, Right View, and this includes moments of recognizing Wrong View, complements other kinds of kusala and also allows for more subtle levels of those to be recognized which otherwise remain hidden by virtue of self view. Besides you may need to correct your perception of any criticism made towards suggestion of self-view as being just that, that this does not in the least imply discouraging other forms of kusala! But the question now is what constitutes the "beginning" steps? It is Pariyatti. This is something you seem to not see the value of. But we will discuss this later if you want; this post is already too long. Metta, Sukin #86402 From: "pannabahulo" Date: Thu May 29, 2008 8:43 pm Subject: Overview of KS 3 - Her faulty teaching (For the too serious minded) pannabahulo Hi there (especially James. Phil, Scott etc) Hey...what's wrong with you guys?? Don't you have a sense of humour? Just because I find the postings amusing doesn't mean I am laughing AT WHAT YOU ARE SAYING!! It is true that James''Overview 1 and 2' were a bit off the mark or beside the point. Nina dealt with 'Overview 1'in a clear and concise way.I haven't read replies to 'Overview 2' yet. But as far as 'Overview 3' goes, James raises some important issues with which I find myself in agreement.Please read my post on the 'Meeting with Ajan Sujin on Friday 23rd May' which I posted yesterday. One of the greatest abilities that we have as human beings is our ability to laugh - and to laugh at ourselves.If you are so upset about someone finding your postings funny then you must have a terrific attachment to your ego and your opinions.THAT is what we all should concern ourselves with because it is attachment to 'self' that really is the cause of all our sufferings. As I quote on the bottom of all my personal mail: "All things are not-self" - when one sees this with wisdom one turns away from suffering. This is the path to purification. (The Buddha) Loosen up folks!! With metta and blessings, Pannabahulo Bhikkhu #86403 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Thu May 29, 2008 9:10 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Ignorance as "ignorance of condtionality" ( was Overview of KS 1: Background egberdina Hi Phil, 2008/5/28 Phil : > > > Hi Herman > > > >> It is because of ignorance of conditionality that we fail to reach >> what we pursue, or fail to avoid what we do not want to reach. Not >> that there's anything wrong with temporary failure, it is the means >> whereby we can learn to understand conditionality better. > > This is meaty and interesting. But even if we are *not* ignorant at> of conditionality, even if we accept conditionality, don't we still > fail to reach what we puruse, or fail to avoid what we do not want > to reach? Oh, this is too deep for right now. I'm going to think of > it as I go jogging and get back to you later. > What you are saying is also true. Sometimes we set unachievable goals, we dream impossible dreams. But not all goals are like that. Our daily life is full of planning and achieving, expectation and satisfaction. I guess it's the big picture stuff, like the pursuit of eternal happiness and wellbeing where we are quite mistaken about what is possible. >> >> But no amount of understanding of conditionality will render > anything >> we achieve or fail to achieve of any intrinsic, or ultimate value > as >> you say. Reason is in service of wanting and not-wanting, greed and >> aversion. In the absence of wanting or not-wanting, whether there > is >> ignorance or understanding of conditionality makes no difference. > > > oh, this is deep stuff and probably a lot of value in it. But I > will stick to the first paragraph for my reflection. > Thanks for considering what I wrote, Phil. The second paragraph says no more than that we want stuff first, and then work out how to get it second. Our understanding of the world is only in service of getting what we want, or avoiding what we don't want. Understanding how the world works does not result in wanting / not-wanting vanishing. That only vanishes with death. Because the body is a bundle of craving. Cheers Herman #86404 From: "Phil" Date: Thu May 29, 2008 9:33 pm Subject: Re: Overview of KS 3: Her Faulty Teaching philofillet Hi Robert I'm happy to stand corrected here. > There is no attachment during actual moments of mindfulness,(assuming > it is genuine sati). However, it is standard Dhamma that > mindfulness can be an object for attachment. I guess it is another issue whether this attachment matters compared to the huge damage done by the uncontrolled mind. Staying in samsara because of attachments, or bebrith in hell realms because of transgressions commited conditioned by a lack of control over our deeds. I have heard AS tell Sukin "what is this samsara that we fear so?" or words to that effect. I imagine she might say the same about hell rebirths, just one of so many, that sory of thing, it can't be prevented by what we do or don't do in this life because the key rebirth citta can come from past life deeds etc. I personally would reather plow ahead with attachment to the idea of being a good person etc in the hopes of improving my odds of favourable destinations. That seems the best way for a person like myself (terribly prone to the grossest of defilements) to spend my fortunate exposure to the Buddha's teaching rather than delving into the deep subtleties. But that is me But not to discuss that now...thanks. I haven't read it yet, but I see there is a post from Sukin as well. I will have to get to it later. Sorry Sukin, always doing that to you! I will drop out now. Harry Potter doesn't need his little blond girl by his side. (I forget her name - never really got into that book.) Metta, Phil #86405 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Thu May 29, 2008 10:54 pm Subject: Re: Overview of KS 3 - Her faulty teaching (For the too serious minded) scottduncan2 Dear Venerable Pannabahulo, Thanks for the following: Bh. P: "Hey...what's wrong with you guys?? Don't you have a sense of humour?" Scott: When I told colette that I had no sense of humour she had to shake me out of my pity party. Maybe you missed that post, wherein my lack of a sense of humour was discussed. As proof, the foregoing was meant to be funny. See what I mean? Bh. P: "Just because I find the postings amusing doesn't mean I am laughing AT WHAT YOU ARE SAYING!!" Scott: I got that, Venerable. No misunderstanding at this end. Bh. P: "It is true that James''Overview 1 and 2' were a bit off the mark or beside the point. Nina dealt with 'Overview 1'in a clear and concise way.I haven't read replies to 'Overview 2' yet. But as far as 'Overview 3' goes, James raises some important issues with which I find myself in agreement.Please read my post on the 'Meeting with Ajan Sujin on Friday 23rd May' which I posted yesterday..." Scott: I read that post, and quite enjoyed it. I also enjoyed reading what Rob K. posted, quoting Sammohavinodanii and especially Pa.t.thaana - that Great Ocean. James has his own reasons for posting his series but I'd like him to keep it up since then we get to read some good Dhamma that is cited in response. Also, James appreciates being invited to continue whenever he says he's going to stop. ;-) I have no doubt he will. I hope he does. I always get stuff to study in an attempt to clarify the view expressed. Bh. P: "Loosen up folks!!..." Scott: Okay! Sincerely, Scott. #86406 From: "szmicio" Date: Thu May 29, 2008 11:16 pm Subject: Re: Overview of KS 3: Her Faulty Teaching szmicio Phil > I will drop out now. Harry Potter doesn't need his little blond girl > by his side. (I forget her name - never really got into that book.) L: Maybe Luna Lovegood :> ?? #86407 From: "gazita2002" Date: Fri May 30, 2008 12:05 am Subject: bangkok gazita2002 Hello Sarah, tried to send this offline but it came bouncing rite back. I travel back to thailan Aug.21 so if you are contemplating another trip maybe we can coincide? Hope all is well for you cheers, Azita #86408 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri May 30, 2008 2:05 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Overview of KS 2: Her Appeal/Charisma nilovg Hi James, Slowly catching up after my trip. I hope you continue the series, it helps me in reflecting about different approaches. I can also complement here and there with my own memories of the time I lived in Bgk. Op 27-mei-2008, om 2:46 heeft buddhatrue het volgende geschreven: > K. Sujin promises people something which > isn't true- and the fact that it is NEW proves that. Unfortunately, > those who buy into this selling point instantly feel VERY HAPPY, and > it is difficult if not impossible to convice someone to give up that > artificial feeling of happiness. Those who have personally > experienced the benefits of silent meditation quickly scoff at what > K. Sujin teaches, and clearly see the danger in it for her > followers. But the followers, blinded by an artifical feeling of > happiness, refuse to accept the folly of K. Sujin's teaching. ------- N: People with different backgrounds will react differently. I had no Buddhist background at all, no meditation. I found it helpful that she was teaching Dhamma in the siuation of life. This is a simple example: when I was helping others she said 'This is your kusala citta'. Of cause this 'your' we have to take in the right sense, it is the kusala citta of this individual, not of that one. Now, analysing the situation: I used to think that "I" was helping, not having heard about the teachings. Now she taught me that it was kusala citta. Kusala, we also find an explanation in the suttas: what is skilfull, right, what leads to a happy result. It is citta, not me, not Nina helping. This short, simple sentence brings us right to the Abhidhamma. There is no me, no self. Only dhammas that are conditioned, that are anattaa. Abhidhamma: you do not have to think of specific texts, of seven books. What is explained in those seven books is not at all different from the contents of the suttas. If we could agreee on what Abhidhamma is it would clear up a lot of misunderstandings about Kh Sujin. At that time not many texts were translated into Thai and she used mainly the Abhidhamattha Sangaha and its Co. Gradually more texts were translated into Thai. At her last retreat she discovered that seeing in a center is not different from seeing in one's busy, daily life. Seeing here, seeing there: it experiences what is visible. Not long after that retreat I met her. She gave me A. Naeb's book, and what I found incorrect was the sitting rupa. I did not see that there was a sitting rupa. I came to her house with lists of questions I had prepared. After a while she put me to work: every two weeks I had to prepare an English radio program and for this I had to read suttas and study hard. It was not: doing nothing. As to listening: you will find a number of suttas that emphasize drawing near and listening, association with the right friend, listening, considering and applying what one heard. These were all quoted before here on dsg. Listening also includes considering and study. Also those who are interested in Samatha have to listen to the teacher who explains about the meditation subject. Nina. #86409 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri May 30, 2008 2:13 am Subject: Metta, Ch 6, no 1. nilovg Daer friends, Chapter 6, Benefits of metta. We read about eleven benefits of mettå in the Gradual Sayings (Book of the Elevens, Chapter II, §5, Advantages): Monks, eleven advantages are to be looked for from the release of heart (cetovimutti) by the practice of mettå, by making mettå to grow, by making much of it, by making mettå a vehicle and a basis, by persisting in it, by becoming familiar with it, by well establishing it. What are the eleven? One sleeps happy and wakes happy; he sees no evil dream; he is dear to human beings and non-human beings alike; the devas guard him; fire, poison or sword afflict him not; quickly he concentrates his mind; his complexion is serene; he makes an end without bewilderment; and if he has penetrated no further (to arahatship) he reaches (at death) the Brahma-world. These eleven advantages are to be looked for from the release of heart by the practice of mettå...by well establishing mettå. The same eleven benefits of the development of mettå are mentioned in the Path of Discrimination (Treatise XVI, loving-kindness). The Path of Discrimination deals with the development of mettå which is fortified by the five “spiritual faculties” or indriyas (confidence, energy, sati, concentration and understanding), and the five powers, balas. The indriyas develop in satipatthåna, and they can become firm and unshakable, they can become “powers”. If one does not develop satipatthåna in one’s daily life it is difficult to have true loving- kindness, because mettå needs the support of the indriyas and powers which develop in satipatthåna. To the degree that mettå is supported by these cetasikas, it becomes more established; there will be less disturbance by defilements and this means more calm. When mettå is well established it is unshakable, it does not waver because of defilements. Thus, for the development of mettå there must be a detailed knowledge of one’s different cittas, there must be sati sampajañña which knows when there is wavering and when mettå is firm and unshakable. In order to know this, right understanding of one’s cittas is indispensable. Defilements can only be eradicated by paññå which knows the characteristic of the reality appearing right now. Right understanding of this very moment should be developed, because what is past has gone already and the future has not come yet. Paññå which arises falls away again but because each citta which falls away is succeeded by the next one, paññå can be accumulated from moment to moment, and in this way there are conditions for paññå to become more established. When we read about the benefits of mettå we can, instead of wishing for these benefits, check to what extent we have developed mettå already. If we do not have these eleven benefits it is evident that we have not sufficiently developed mettå. ******* Nina. #86410 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri May 30, 2008 2:23 am Subject: Re: [dsg] bangkok sarahprocter... Hi Azita & all, --- On Fri, 30/5/08, gazita2002 wrote: >tried to send this offline but it came bouncing rite back. I travel back to thailan Aug.21 so if you are contemplating another trip maybe we can coincide? Hope all is well for you **** S: perfect timing - you remember that 26,27,28th August are when we've arranged extra sesions? We'll be there for that last week Aug (24th -31st). Ven P. will also be there, I believe. Maybe others? If anyone else would like to join us, pls do. Metta, Sarah p.s off to the airport a little later this evening. ============ #86411 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri May 30, 2008 2:23 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: dana a story? was: report on Bangkok... nilovg Dear Ken H, Do ask again, because when you are still wondering about something it may bother you. Op 29-mei-2008, om 2:38 heeft kenhowardau het volgende geschreven: > At KK, I asked whether sila (or dana in that case) was [also] a > single moment thing (a reality) or was it a concept? The answer was > not what I was expecting. KS replied, "There has to be an act of > dana." > > At that point I was tempted to ask "But isn't an act of dana just > a story?" But I didn't ask that because I didn't want to look like > an ignorant smart-aleck who was trying to catch KS out (by throwing > her own words back at her). > > So I'm asking you. :-) Isn't an act of dana just a story? If there > is, in ultimate reality, such a thing as dana then surely it must be > the function of a single, fleeting, citta and its cetasikas.(?) > > Sorry to be going over this again. I have driven you and Jon and > Sukin (et al) just about mad already. And I did say I would drop it > for a while. But here it is, surfaced again! --------- N: Analysing Kh Sujin answer, there is more to it. Suppose you are typing Visuddhimagga (hint, hint) with your good intention to help others, it is your kusala citta (as I said to James). Then you will really understand what generosity is, not your generosity. At this moment you are thinking of the situation of dana or sila, but wait, when kusala cita arises: no story. It is reality and not Ken. We do not have to count how many kusala cittas, impossible to count and that is thinking. Nina. #86412 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Fri May 30, 2008 3:12 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Mental states don't exist (as irreducible entities?) egberdina Hi Scott, 2008/5/28 Scott Duncan : > Dear Herman, > > Thanks for the reply: > > H: "Well, let's consider the Buddha's teaching on kamma, shall we? Do > you accept them?" > > Scott: Yes. I gather that you don't, which is fine. Your divine eye is not at all well developed, Scott. > > H: "A very significant thing he said about kamma was that it was > imponderable..." > > Scott: True. I was recalling the same thing. > > H: "So, let me ask what it is about you that makes accumulation of > kamma so self-evident. And if you are actually less than certain about > how kamma works, do you know how all the other non-Buddhas come to > understand it so penetratingly?..." > > Scott: To what end would a discussion with you on kamma be? If you > don't buy it, why should it matter? I have no interest in attempting > to change your mind. It seems as if the subject of accumulations is > brought up, not to consider it and clarify it, but rather simply as > something that, as I imagine your view, is impossible to prove and > therefore something only to be accepted or not. And, I surmise > further, that you don't accept it and for sure don't prefer to accept > anything that is not provable by experience, and for sure not on the > basis of 'authority'. Let me be as clear as I possibly can be. That I have nothing but contempt for the teaching of and belief in kamma a la jataka comic books does not mean that I don't buy kamma. Do you buy the Buddha's theory on how the weather comes about? Should I judge you on that basis? I now snip four paragraphs to get to this one below. > > Do you have any thoughts about the dynamics of this list in relation > to opposing views and the way in which one is to present them or > discuss them? What do you think of the presentation of views on a > list having a particularly clear stated aim of discussing, and in > particular, understanding the Buddha's teachings, views that so > blatantly at some times, and so very subtly at other times, proceed to > state that these teachings are wrong or primitive or ill-conceived or > whatever? How do you see a discussion between two such divergent > discussants as you and I proceeding? How can we both gain from such a > discussion? There are Buddhist sites around that are run on Stalinist principles. Dissent is not tolerated. Posts are removed. Posters are publicly questioned and criticised by moderators and replies are removed. You are free to join those lists if the fact that you share a world with six billion others is a problem for you. I am actually heartened by our discussion. We are in the same world, and you acknowledge it. > > H: "...And still I ask, what is the mechanism of accumulation?" > > Scott: Am I wrong to read you to be wanting simply to make the point > that talk of accumulations is nonsense? And that it is so because no > mechanism can be proven to exist? Whatever the view, why should I try > to convince you? Why should you seek to deconstruct it? I agree that > kamma, for example, which runs on accumulations so to speak, is said > to be imponderable. > > Is there anything the Buddha taught, that you might buy, that we could > try to understand together? Please do a little bit of research on the development of the concept of accumulation in the Pali canon. I have already done that. My research suggests that accumulation and nikayas have no common ground. That is my basis for questioning it. What is your basis for affirming it, and why does that basis warrant you making me out to be a vandal of some kind? Cheers Herman #86413 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Fri May 30, 2008 3:29 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Mental states don't exist (as irreducible entities?) egberdina Hi connie, 2008/5/29 connie : > dear herman, > > > C: PPn = Path of of Purification, Nanamoli's xltn of Buddhaghosa's VisuddhiMagga; not really a mocking text. But, Man, if you don't believe in "impurity that trickles out from the brain", I don't know why; we're all living proof of it, even if birth in this realm is considered >'good'. Belief in the concept of purity/impurity is one that damns the believer. Snot isn't impure, it is perfect snot. It is the aversion to snot that makes it impure. > > Actually, what seems to me the most important point about the body parts is still that little dividing line in "nama-rupa". > PoP = Path of Purity, PM Tin's xltn of the same book: > > << ...brain forms a separate class in the body, is non-mental, indeterminate, void (of soul), without sentience, hard, earth-element. > Of the (two kinds of) bile, fluid-bile is bound up with the life-controlling faculty, and is diffused through the whole body. Bile as organ is situated in the gall-bladder. Just as a piece of cake through which oil is diffused does not know that the oil is diffused through it, nor does the oil know that it is diffused through the cake, so the body does not know that the bile-fluid is diffused through it, nor does the bile-fluid know that it is diffused through the body. Just as a luffa-skin full of rain-water does not know that in it is the rain-water, nor does the rain-water know that it is in the luffa-skin, so the gall-bladder does not know that in it lies the organ of bile, nor does the organ of bile know that it lies in the gall-bladder. There is no mutual laying to heart, no reflection. Thus bile forms a separate class in the body, is non-mental, indeterminate, void (of soul), without sentience, fluid, cohesive in mode, water-element. > >>> > > > > "Does thinking sit?" > > > On a personal note, it just so happens I covered my mouth with my hand before sneezing on the way home from the Post Office today and sure as heck, I had to wonder What to Do about that brainy looking glob of snot stuff at the base of my thumb afterwards. > Snot is an affirmation of self, don't you know. The body purifies itself by excreting all that is not-self. Your sneeze denies the Dhamma. Cheers Herman #86414 From: "szmicio" Date: Fri May 30, 2008 3:40 am Subject: difficulties szmicio it is so hard to put attention to this present moment. Each time it goes somewhere.Each moment it looking for something pleasure. Is it OK if I cant have even one moment of samma-sati in the whole day? bye Lukas #86415 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Fri May 30, 2008 3:43 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Lessons in Detachment, Ch 5, no 2. egberdina Hi Scott, 2008/5/29 Scott Duncan : > Dear Herman, > > Thanks for the reply and clarifications: > > Me: "How are you defining 'experiences' in the above?" > > H: "As something that is seen, hear, felt, tasted etc." > > Scott: You seem to be define 'experience' as 'object' and this can't > be right - I've never read you to have said this before. Is this what > you mean? I'd have thought you'd have said 'experience' *is* the > seeing, hearing, etc. I'll wait on the clarification. > Experience = object. Objectless seeing, hearing etc is indiscriminate thinking. > H: "One of the interesting things about experience is that it is not > definable. Probably because experience is not verbal, and all > definition is in terms of something other than what is being defined. > So I would not think that right energy would be definable, as such." > > Scott: Is experience knowable? An experience is an experience because it is known. An unknown experience is like the bhavanga citta, the tripe of theorists. > > H: "The way people learn which words are used to refer to > non-definable experiences is by being judged to be having certain > experiences and being told: you felt x, y z. For example, when a > person is being instructed to silence their discursive mind, at some > point of time the instructor may say, if your body is being flooded by > a particular pleasant sensation, that is piti." > > Scott: Yes. Words that label experience are not that experience. > > H: "As to your questions about right effort, I haven't studied what > other people refer to when they use the word. So I don't know..." > > > Scott: Do you think that Path moments occur? > I have no faith in the people who talk about them as though they have known them. > H: "So how is a Path moment known? What qualities do they have?" > > Scott: My intellectual understanding is that it is pa~n~naa that > knows. Are you asking about the qualities of the Path, as in of what > does such a moment consist? Yes, I am asking about the knowing, the experience of Path moments. Cheers Herman #86416 From: upasaka@... Date: Fri May 30, 2008 12:06 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Overview of KS 3 - Her faulty teaching (For the too serious minded) upasaka_howard Hi, Bhante and James (and Phil & Scott & all) - In a message dated 5/29/2008 11:44:30 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, pannabahulo@... writes: Hi there (especially James. Phil, Scott etc) Hey...what's wrong with you guys?? Don't you have a sense of humour? Just because I find the postings amusing doesn't mean I am laughing AT WHAT YOU ARE SAYING!! -------------------------------------------------- Howard: Bhante, that was how I understood what you were saying - that you found the manner of presentation clever and (intentionally) amusing and interesting, but certainly not "a joke" in the slightest. James, I didn't interpret Bhante's reaction as an intended put-down in any way. As to what aspects of what you have been writing he has found agreeable and which not so agreeable, that is a different matter and one which he goes into a little bit in this post of his. I, myself, find an attempt by a "non-follower" to carefully present analysis of the teachings and approach to teaching by Khun Sujin (and other Dhamma teachers, for that matter) for purposes of a fair discussion of how far on/off the mark they might be, and in what respects, to be worthwhile all around. I am happiest when that is done with moderation as regards "personality," and I do believe you have been making a strong effort to adopt a largely ad-hominem-free approach, which I sure find commendable. I have also found the responses to your posts by others, most especially including devoted followers of KS, to be calm and measured as well, which is heartening to me. A priori, one might anticipate this thread becoming very heated and even nasty, and I think it bodes very well for the list that such has not occurred. ------------------------------------------------- It is true that James''Overview 1 and 2' were a bit off the mark or beside the point. Nina dealt with 'Overview 1'in a clear and concise way.I haven't read replies to 'Overview 2' yet. But as far as 'Overview 3' goes, James raises some important issues with which I find myself in agreement.Please read my post on the 'Meeting with Ajan Sujin on Friday 23rd May' which I posted yesterday. One of the greatest abilities that we have as human beings is our ability to laugh - and to laugh at ourselves.If you are so upset about someone finding your postings funny then you must have a terrific attachment to your ego and your opinions.THAT is what we all should concern ourselves with because it is attachment to 'self' that really is the cause of all our sufferings. As I quote on the bottom of all my personal mail: "All things are not-self" - when one sees this with wisdom one turns away from suffering. This is the path to purification. (The Buddha) Loosen up folks!! With metta and blessings, Pannabahulo Bhikkhu ============================ With metta, Howard #86417 From: upasaka@... Date: Fri May 30, 2008 12:27 am Subject: Re: [dsg] difficulties upasaka_howard Hi, Lukas - In a message dated 5/30/2008 6:40:58 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, szmicio@... writes: it is so hard to put attention to this present moment. Each time it goes somewhere.Each moment it looking for something pleasure. ------------------------------------------------------ Howard: It seems that right here you have shown that you see the present moment quite well! :-) Already gone, nothing to hold onto, yet grasping at anticipated pleasures - what a perfect description! If one can just see this increasingly just as it is, with less and less distraction by murkiness of mind and excitement of mind, that is excellent sati. ------------------------------------------------------ Is it OK if I cant have even one moment of samma-sati in the whole day? ------------------------------------------------------ Howard: However it is at thye moment is how it is! What would be "OK" and by whose judgement? In any case, it is clear to me that you certainly DO have many moments of mindfulness. We don't begin with things being perfect! We start where we are, not where we'd hope to be. ---------------------------------------------- bye Lukas ======================= With metta, Howard #86418 From: "pannabahulo" Date: Fri May 30, 2008 4:48 am Subject: Happiness and the realisation of anatta - James is correct pannabahulo Dear Dhamma Friends, I would like to take up a point made by James in one of his recent postings. This issue serves to illustrate, for me, the big divide that exists between a theoretical understanding of the Lord Buddha's Dhamma and the actual experience of an insight meditator.In response to a claim made in a posting James states: "Now, you say that you felt happy because you heard that there is no self; no self to do anything. Well, that is complete hogwash. No one is happy to hear that there is no self. People are upset to hear that there is no self. The Buddha's followers and non- followers were both upset and bothered to be told that there is no self- so the Buddha had to wait at just the right time to present that teaching. It is ridiculous to say that you felt happy upon hearing that there is no self". James is absolutely correct here. Any insight meditator who follows the progress through the Vipassana nanas has already understood the characteristics of Nama and Rupa; their causal relations and the three characteristics (Trilakkhana) inherent in them before the first Vipassana nana proper develops. This is the lower level arising and ceasing known as Udayabbaya Nana. This is immediately followed by the knowledge of dissolution Bhanga Nana. At this point the meditator is fully aware of the insubstantiality of Nama and Rupa. Far from being a pleasant experience the whole of a persons identity is being ripped from right under their feet.What then follows is Bhaya Nana which is the knowledge of terror. Using the Wat Mahathat guide "The Pat to Nibbana" – because I have it handy and practiced tis way for very many years – the guide lists the specific conditions a meditator will experience. Whilst abiding in Bhaya Nana (Knowledge of terror)among the list of conditions are the following: "At first the meditator acknowledges objects but the acknowledgements vanish together with the consciousness. The disappearance of Nama and Rupa and the consequent becoming nothing induces fear. The meditator now realises that Nama and Rupa which were previously considered good, are completely insubstantial. There is no feeling of happiness, pleasure or enjoyment". The next stage of insight is Adinava Nana; this is the knowledge of the disadvantages, or dangers,of Nama and Rupa. The main characteristics being: "The meditator experiences negative, irritable feelings. The meditator is aware of nothing but negativity caused by the arising, continuing and passing away of Nama and Rupa.The meditator becomes aware of Anicca,Dukkha ana Anatta". This is followed by Nibbida Nana (knowledge of contemplation on dispassion). Again: "The meditator views all objects as tiresome and ugly. The feeling of joy is absent and the meditator feels bored and sad as though he has been separated from what he loves. The practitioner may not have experienced boredom before but now he really knows what boredom is. The meditator may feel that everything is bad in every way and there is nothing that can be enjoyed. The meditator may not wish to speak to or meet anybody.He may prefer to stay in his room. The meditator may feel lonely, sad and apathetic." The realisation that there is, in essence, no self is so traumatic that the reaction is bound to be one of great terror, loss and anger. All that we know is suddenly ripped away and nothing is left to fall back on. At no time whatsoever can this possibly be a "Happy" experience. A couple of years ago I was staying at Boonkanjanaram Meditation centre (The late Ajan Naeb's centre in Jontiem. There was an elderly Irish meditator and friend of mine who practiced there regularly. He told me that some time past he had had a vivid experience of non-self. He just knew that his body did not belong to him. He reported this to the teacher who asked him how he had felt at the time. He told her he had felt calm and peaceful. Immediately the teacher changed the topic and he felt taken aback.He felt he had had a great insight but the teacher wasn't interested. Sometime later it happened to him again; this time more vividly. He again reported this to the teacher. She asked him how he had felt at the time and he said that he'd rather not tell her. At the teacher's insistence he said that he had to admit that he was swearing and cursing the Buddha and was really furious. The teacher smiled. "Now you understand" she said. With metta and every blessing to you all, Pannabahulo Bhikkhu #86419 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Fri May 30, 2008 4:48 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Mental states don't exist (as irreducible entities?) scottduncan2 Dear Herman, Thanks for the reply: H: "Your divine eye is not at all well developed, Scott." Scott: That explains why I have failed to win the lottery. I'm glad you cleared that up. I was taking this failure personally. Now I can blame the divine eye, leaving intact my boundless narcissism! H: "Let me be as clear as I possibly can be. That I have nothing but contempt for the teaching of and belief in kamma a la jataka comic books does not mean that I don't buy kamma. Do you buy the Buddha's theory on how the weather comes about? Should I judge you on that basis?" Scott: Well, we all judge each other, more's the pity. But we ought not, I suppose. I guess that goes both ways. Let me know in what way you buy kamma and we can proceed to discuss it from that basis, if you wish. I think the original concern was with 'accumulations', as you come back to below. I don't quite understand the whole weather thing, and so just tend to leave it. I do seem to have developed a literal view of the whole deva thing. That doesn't seem to have stopped me also tending to accept that dinosaurs once roamed the earth, given the fossil record (although you might suggest I'm one of them, which would really hurt my feelings)... H: "There are Buddhist sites around that are run on Stalinist principles. Dissent is not tolerated. Posts are removed. Posters are publicly questioned and criticised by moderators and replies are removed. You are free to join those lists if the fact that you share a world with six billion others is a problem for you." Scott: Tell me about it. I've seen them. And this isn't one of them, although I always wait for the off-list which sends me packing, especially when I go after the puck in the corners with the boys. But no, the views aren't the problem, at least to me. Its all about style, eh? H: "I am actually heartened by our discussion. We are in the same world, and you acknowledge it." Scott: Well, of course we are. I'm glad you are heartened, though. That's heartening. H: "Please do a little bit of research on the development of the concept of accumulation in the Pali canon. I have already done that. My research suggests that accumulation and nikayas have no common ground. That is my basis for questioning it. What is your basis for affirming it, and why does that basis warrant you making me out to be a vandal of some kind?" Scott: Can you start us off by posting a bit of this material about accumulations? I've read through the stuff in the stacks here, and can do so again. If you provide the first bit of material, I can research from that starting point and we can discuss. Oh, and about the 'vandal', thing, I simply lack trust and go by past experience, which is entirely my problem. I do notice something quite different about you this time around, but I find myself waiting for the other shoe to drop. No offense, as it hasn't. As I say, this is totally my problem, but since you asked... Sincerely, Scott. #86420 From: "Alex" Date: Fri May 30, 2008 4:55 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Mental states don't exist (as irreducible entities?) truth_aerator Hi Herman, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Herman Hofman" wrote: > > Hi Scott, > > Please do a little bit of research on the development of the concept > of accumulation in the Pali canon. I have already done that. My > research suggests that accumulation and nikayas have no common ground. > That is my basis for questioning it. What is your basis for affirming > it, and why does that basis warrant you making me out to be a vandal > of some kind? > > Cheers > I would be interested to see what you've found. I do agree that sometimes "accumulations" is an excuse. Angulimala killed 999 people, that shows that he didn't have accumulations of wisdom in Buddhist sense of the word + all the bad kamma he did. Somewhere in Sarakani sutta (or few suttas later) in SN, Buddha talks about that even trees if they can understand him can become stream-enterers.... Best wishes, Alex #86421 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Fri May 30, 2008 5:17 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Lessons in Detachment, Ch 5, no 2. scottduncan2 Dear Herman, Thanks for the reply: H: "Experience = object. Objectless seeing, hearing etc is indiscriminate thinking." Scott: This will bear some unpacking. Can you clarify? H: "An experience is an experience because it is known. An unknown experience is like the bhavanga citta, the tripe of theorists." Scott: In the moment - that very moment of experience - all of the characteristics of that experience are theoretically knowable, but, as I understand the Dhamma, Ignorance, for the undeveloped, functions and is Not Knowing, which is also experience. In other words, the presence of a particular dhamma known as ignorance imbues that moment of experience with a certain quality which prevents knowing but can't prevent 'experience'. H: "I have no faith in the people who talk about them as though they have known them." Scott: That's fine, but it doesn't address the question. I don't have faith in 'people', period. But what about whether you think that there is such a thing as a 'Path moment'. Do you? H: "Yes, I am asking about the knowing, the experience of Path moments." Scott: Actually, I was asking whether or not you were referring to the qualities of the Path - its constituents, not its experience, but this goes back to your original equation: experience=object. If you can clarify this, we might proceed. Sincerely, Scott. #86422 From: "connie" Date: Fri May 30, 2008 5:27 am Subject: Perfections Corner (168) nichiconn Dear Friends, ch.5 continues: If one develops pa~n~naa one is supported by viriya so that one perseveres in the development of pa~n~naa and all kusala dhammas. The "Expositor"(120) uses the simile of an old house that is strengthened and supported by new pillars. Evenso, when someone is supported by viriya, kusala dhammas will not decline in him. If someone at this moment is bored, lazy, drowsy or disheartened, he should know that he is like an old building that is dilapidated, because he is not able to be firm in kusala and to apply himself to it. Viriya cetasika has the characteristic of strengthening and supporting just as a pillar supports an old house so that it is stable. Thus we see the characteristic of support of viriya. The "Expositor" uses several similes so that we can understand the characteristic of viriya cetasika that arises at this moment. We read in the "Expositor" (121): "As a small army going to battle might be repulsed, then they would tell the king. The king would send a strong reinforcement. The king's army, being thus supported, would defeat the hostile army. Thus energy does not allow associated states to recede, to retreat; it uplifts, supports them. Hence has it been said that energy has the characteristic of supporting." .. to be continued, connie #86423 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri May 30, 2008 11:12 am Subject: Re: [dsg] difficulties nilovg Dear Lukas, Howard answered your post and maybe I can add something. Op 30-mei-2008, om 12:40 heeft szmicio het volgende geschreven: > it is so hard to put attention to this present moment. Each time it > goes somewhere.Each moment it looking for something pleasure. > Is it OK if I cant have even one moment of samma-sati in the whole > day? ------ N: Samma-sati is not something we can have. It arises because of its own conditions. First it is necessary to know what it is, and what object it is aware of: not a table, not a thing, not a person, not a situation or event. Only one reality as it appears through eyes, ears, nose, tongue, bodysense or mind-door, one doorway at a time. Samma-sati accompanies kusala citta with understanding, understanding of ultimate realities, different from conventional realities. It is not thinking. It can arise when there has been enough listening, study, and considering of the Dhamma. It is of no use to wish for it, it cannot be made to arise at will, because it is anatta. Nina. #86424 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri May 30, 2008 11:20 am Subject: Re: [dsg] My eye situation. to Han. nilovg Dear Han, Op 27-mei-2008, om 9:20 heeft han tun het volgende geschreven: > . I will have to stop my series on Patthaana. I am so sorry to let > you down. > > Please do not be disturbed. It is age-related kaama vipaaka over > which I have no control. ------- N: I read about your condition and I sympathize. At the same time I have a very strong confidence in kusala citta. I think that kusala citta can help the improvement of the bodily condition. It cannot perform miracles, but it can help, especially in your case where you have so many possibilities for kusala. after a while you may be able to resume Patthaana, but do not force. Best wishes for your recovery, Nina. #86425 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri May 30, 2008 11:29 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: report on Bangkok and Kaeng Krajan nilovg Hi Ken H, You asked about most commonly occurring aarammanas, well, here below you have given one. Op 29-mei-2008, om 4:04 heeft kenhowardau het volgende geschreven: > Speaking of fast, hollow waves: Last week there was a sudden > unexpected increase in swell, and Ti Tree was good without being > crowded (for once). And guess who got the wave of the day! > > For the first time in months I had a big (ish), perfectly shaped, > truly wackable wave. My hips are still OK (touch wood) but sometimes > my fifty-seven-year-old knees are not up to the task of lip wacking. ------- H: It was as if we were suddenly adopting a more "personal" (shock, horror!) approach to satipatthana with emphasis on *my* most frequent aramannas, "my* best chances of directly knowing a dhamma etc. ------ N: I think it is very natural that different people go after different objects. But they all boil down to just visible object, sound, etc. I did not notice anything special about this subject. Sometimes I hear people say that what is tangible object seems to appear most and they find visible object more difficult. They are all difficult to penetrate. Is there any doubt about this subject, or you want to discuss anything more about it? Nina. #86426 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri May 30, 2008 11:40 am Subject: Re:To Han: [dsg] Re: Perfections Corner (161) nilovg Dear Han, Do not answer, only if you are fit to do so. Op 25-mei-2008, om 2:10 heeft han tun het volgende geschreven: > In Perfections Corner (161) I find useful passages with regard to > the arising of satipa.t.thaana. > > (1) Text: Satipa.t.thaana is awareness of the dhammas which are > real in our daily life, and through satipa.t.thaana, pa~n~naa can > further develop to the degree of realizing the stages of insight. > > (2) Text: If satipa.t.thaana does not arise in our daily life, and > pa~n~naa does not investigate the characteristic of each reality > that appears, it is impossible to eliminate wrong view. > > -------------------- > > Han: According to No. (1) the arising of satipa.t.thaana > presupposes the development of pa~n~naa. According to No. (2) > satipa.t.thaana and pa~n~naa are two separate entities. > > I wish to remember them in that way. ------ N: no 1: First there has to be intellectual understanding of the present reality, what is it, when does it appear? When this kind of understanding has developed more there are conditions for sati sampaja~n~na, direct awareness and understanding that can begin to develop together. When we say satipatthana, it is actually awareness together with pa~n~naa. no 2: Again, they arise together. They are faculties, indriyas, that can become unshakable, balas or powers. They are bojjhangas, factors leading to enlightenment. Nina. #86427 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri May 30, 2008 11:46 am Subject: Re: [dsg] What are the causes of 4 great elements + space & consciousness 5-6th? nilovg Hi Alex, Op 25-mei-2008, om 0:57 heeft Alex het volgende geschreven: > what is the cause of Space element? ------------ N: Sarah answered this post, and I can add something. Space is the tiniest rupa that surrounds the different groups of rupa that can be produced by four factors: by kamma, citta, heat or nutrition. These groups arise and fall away and space does so together with these groups. Because of space the groups are differentiated from each other and the rupas of which they consist hold together. Space is originated by the same factor as the group it surrounds, thus, by one of the four. Nina. #86428 From: "szmicio" Date: Fri May 30, 2008 1:23 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] difficulties szmicio Howard and Nina thanks you very much. > N: Samma-sati is not something we can have. It arises because of its > own conditions. First it is necessary to know what it is, and what > object it is aware of: not a table, not a thing, not a person, not a > situation or event. Only one reality as it appears through eyes, > ears, nose, tongue, bodysense or mind-door, one doorway at a time. when vedana arise is there any activity in kaya dvara? what can we do to see the cittas which arises in sens door process? I know only that there are diffrents moments which appears when we hearing or seeing. seeing shaps, thinking about that, feeling. > Samma-sati accompanies kusala citta with understanding, understanding > of ultimate realities, different from conventional realities. It is > not thinking. I've noticed that the thinking is realy diffrent moment that sati,but this thinking still arise. > It can arise when there has been enough listening, study, and > considering of the Dhamma. It is of no use to wish for it, it cannot > be made to arise at will, because it is anatta. > Nina. I still have doubts about that. I had a few moments of right understending just because of considering and study Dhamma, but I have a lot of thinking and confusion too. good night Lukas #86429 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Fri May 30, 2008 4:43 am Subject: Re: Overview of KS 3 - Her faulty teaching (For the too serious minded) buddhatrue Hi Ven. P., Thank you for your explanation. I guess I did misunderstand what you were trying to say. You see, I was writing this series mainly for you and Nina. You were both saying that I don't understand K. Sujin and so that is why I don't agree with her. So, I wanted to show that I do understand her- I just don't agree with her. You calling my effort so funny and so entertaining could be seen as belittling. But, as you say, it wasn't. So we can just let that drop. Frankly, I don't have much more to say. I am tired; I have the flu, and I don't want to talk about K. Sujin anymore. I am done with it. Metta, James #86430 From: upasaka@... Date: Fri May 30, 2008 10:35 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Overview of KS 3 - Her faulty teaching (For the too serious min... upasaka_howard Hi, James - In a message dated 5/30/2008 4:27:23 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, buddhatrue@... writes: Frankly, I don't have much more to say. I am tired; I have the flu, and I don't want to talk about K. Sujin anymore. I am done with it. ============================== I hope you feel much better very soon! :-) With metta, Howard #86431 From: "Alex" Date: Fri May 30, 2008 4:21 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] What are the causes of 4 great elements + space & consciousness 5-6th? truth_aerator Hi Nina, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Hi Alex, > Op 25-mei-2008, om 0:57 heeft Alex het volgende geschreven: > > > what is the cause of Space element? > ------------ > N: Sarah answered this post, and I can add something. > Space is the tiniest rupa that surrounds the different groups of rupa that can be produced by four factors: by kamma, citta, heat or > nutrition. >>> What? Space is generally an absense of anything! It has lack of resistence and absense of anything in it/ >> These groups arise and fall away and space does so > together with these groups. Because of space the groups are > differentiated from each other and the rupas of which they consist > hold together. Space is originated by the same factor as the group it surrounds, thus, by one of the four. > Nina. > > I don't understand this. Lets imagine an object. Remove the object and you will see empty space. Another, a much better and modern example: Space is a "place" where things can be located. No space, no location possible for anything material. Lots of Metta, Best wishes, Alex #86432 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Fri May 30, 2008 4:24 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Brief: What We Know Versus What We Infer egberdina Hi Alex, 2008/5/30 Alex : > Hi Herman, > >> >> It is not possible to discern, without inference, what in the > present moment is there as sense data, and what is remembered or > computed. The contribution of memory to perception is immeasurable. >>>>> > > IMHO what Buddha is stating is that both feeling/perc/consc are > interlinked and not separatable. Ex: if you feel something, then you > are conscious of that feeling, and that feeling can be labelled > (percieved). If you are percieving something, then you have a feeling > happening (even a neutral one) + one is nesseserily conscious. > Although let us remember the primacy of rupa in conditonality. > Exactly so. > Ultimately Vinnana (separate from rupa) cannot condition anything by > itself. It has no resistence. It can't really move matter which has > resistence. Likewise. > > Physical cause-effect is like one ball hitting another ball. The > other ball will move through physical force. Thus matter affecting > matter can be understood. But disembodied thought doesn't weight > anything, it is like throwing a cotton ball at a 100 pound stone. It > won't move. Furthermore, where in space is the thought or > consciousness located? At which point exactly does it make contact > with matter??? Yes, I would very much like to read an example from someone that demonstrates "the mind" acting on the world. All my other comments will just be agreements after each paragraph, so I'll just sign of here. All the best, Alex #86433 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Fri May 30, 2008 4:27 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] What are the causes of 4 great elements + space & consciousness 5-6th? egberdina Hi Nina, 2008/5/31 Nina van Gorkom : > Hi Alex, > Op 25-mei-2008, om 0:57 heeft Alex het volgende geschreven: > >> what is the cause of Space element? > ------------ > N: Sarah answered this post, and I can add something. > Space is the tiniest rupa that surrounds the different groups of rupa I take it that rupa has a property of size? Cheers Herman #86434 From: "Alex" Date: Fri May 30, 2008 5:06 pm Subject: More about the Elusive mind. truth_aerator Hello all, It is interesting that we never directly percieve our own mind in the moment (we can percieve the CONTENTS, but not bare knowing without any content. Even in DN15 is is said that vinnana is ultimately not separatable from Nama-Rupa). It is also interesting that we can never see directly the other person's mind itself (not the external contents or external manifestations of it). We do can see Matter directly, but not disembodied "vinnana". Also if we see someone or something being smart and intelligent. Can we honestly be certain that other person is really conscious? A computer can be trained through instructions to a be a top-rated player in Chess for example, as good and better than 99.9% of 'intelligent, top of the food chain' humans. Chess is very intellectual game and yet a consciouslessness computer can easily wipe almost all human players off in the intellectual capacity. So externally the "mindless" computer does moves indistinguishable in quality from those done by even the highest chess players in the league of Garry Kasparov. We can say that computer merely follows set instructions and is unconscious... But what about us in the ultimate sense? Are we really conscious, at least in the way we think we are (a little men sitting in a skull observing what comes in)? Maybe our "qualia" is merely rapidly alternating pictures, sounds, feelings and instructions which we in delusion interprete as "My mind, My perceptions, My qualia"? After all, human brain is estimated to crank out 100 trillion operations per second. So plenty of instructions are happening. Even the outsiders (ie: neurobiologists) do not believe in atta, at least in theory - and some don't believe in existence of mental states at all. Best wishes, Alex #86435 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Fri May 30, 2008 5:25 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Kamma and Accumulations (wasRe: Mental states......) egberdina Hi Scott and Alex and all, 2008/5/30 Scott Duncan : > Dear Herman, > > Let me know in what way > you buy kamma and we can proceed to discuss it from that basis, if you > wish. I think the original concern was with 'accumulations', as you > come back to below. > > > Scott: Can you start us off by posting a bit of this material about > accumulations? I've read through the stuff in the stacks here, and > can do so again. If you provide the first bit of material, I can > research from that starting point and we can discuss. > Thanks for your clarifications, Scott. I'll break up what I want to write in multiple posts, so as to keep things readable, and hopefully comprehensible. You will understand that it would be very difficult to demonstrate the absence of accumulation from the nikayas. To do that I would have to quote all of them, get you to read them, and then ask "did you find reference to it anywhere?" I think that the direct answer would have to be "no", but we can discuss that if you think otherwise. But let me just quote Nyanatiloka's entry on Ä?yÅ«hana- it makes it quite clear that the notion of accumulation is exclusively commentarial. Which is my point exactly. Ä?yÅ«hana: (kammic) 'accumulation', is a name used in the commentarial literature for the wholesome and unwholesome volitional activities (kamma, q.v.) or kamma-formations (saá¹…khÄ?ra; s. paá¹?da), being the bases of future rebirth. " 'Accumulation', is a name for the kamma-formations, and signifies those volitions (cetanÄ?) which arise at the performance of a kamma, first while thinking 'I will give alms', and then while actually giving alms (e.g.) for one month or a year. The volition, however, at the time when one is handing the alms over to the recipient; is called kamma-process (kamma-bhava, s. Vis.M. XVII, IX, X). Or, the volitions during the first six impulsive-moments (javana, q.v.) depending on one and the same state of advertence (Ä?vajjana, s. viññÄ?ṇa-kicca), these are called the kamma-formations, whilst the 7th impulsive moment is called the kamma-process (kamma-bhava)... Or, each volition is called 'kamma-process' and the accumulation connected with it, 'kamma-formation'. " (Vis.M. XVII). Cf. paá¹?da (2, 10) - (App.). Now to the positive side of things ie what IS found in the nikayas. There are two ways in which kamma is presented in the nikayas, one is kamma as action in the world, and the other is kamma as intention. Kamma as action says no more than one is what one does. From SN: 599. The world is enlightened, we ask Gotama, does one become a brahmin by birth or else by actions We do not know this, enlighten us so that we may know the brahmin." 600. The Blessed One said: Vaseññha I will tell you step by step how it happens, The classification of living things in this and other births 601. Look at the grass and trees, although they are not aware, This and the other has attributes peculiar to their births 602. So also insects, grass hoppers and ants This and the other has attributes peculiar to their births.. 603. Look at the animals small and large This and the other has attributes peculiar to their births. 604. Look at the serpents with long backs going on their bellies, This and the other has attributes peculiar to their births. 605. Look at the fish too, who find food in the water. This and the other has attributes peculiar to their births. 605. Look at the fish too, who find food in the water. This and the other has attributes peculiar to their births. 606. Look at the birds flying through the air. This and the other has attributes peculiar to their births. 607. Although at the birth of these, there are various attributes In humans various attributes are not evident at birth. 608. They are not in the hair, head, ears or eyes Not in the mouth, nose, lips or eye-lashes 609. Not in the neck, flanks stomach or back, Not in the buttocks, chest, puedendum, and not in the sexual intercourse. 610. Not in the hands, feet, fingers or nails, nor in the knees and calves, Not in the hue or voice are there attributes by which to know their birth. 611. In the individual bodies of humans, these are not evident, They are designated by the activites of humans. 612. Among humans whoever makes a livelihood by looking after cattle, Và seññha, he is a farmer, not a brahmin. 613. Among humans whoever makes a livelihood doing a craft, Và seññha, he is a craftsman, not a brahmin 614. Among humans whoever makes a livelihood by trading, Và seññha , he is a merchant, not a brahmin. 615. Among humans whoever makes a livelihood working for others, Và seññha, he is a workman, not a brahmin. 616. Among humans whoever makes a livelihood out of what is not given, Và seññha, he is a robber, not a brahmin. 617. Among humans whoever makes a livelihood serving the king, Và seññha, he is a soldier, not a brahmin. 618. Among humans whoever makes a livelihood by advising the king, Và seññha, he is the adviser, not a brahmin.. 619. Among humans whoever makes a livelihood enjoying the wealth of the village and country, Vssdeññhs, he is the king, not a brahmin. 620. One born of a brahmin woman's womb is not a brahmin, by address, he is sir, he has defilements, When he has no defilements and no seizings, I call him a brahmin. --------End Quote One is what one does. And please re-read 607-611 again, for it cannot be more explicitly stated that one's birth does not determine what one will end up doing. What I do now is NOT a result of what I did or what was done to me previously. Next installment I'll get onto the result of action in the nikayas. In the meantime, please, everyone, feel free to comment and critique to your hearts content Cheers Herman #86436 From: "Antony Woods" Date: Fri May 30, 2008 5:56 pm Subject: Re: Sense-pleasures: definition? antony272b2 Sarah, I found this audio quote from Bhikkhu Bodhi: "Already at the third of the four stages of enlightenment, i.e. the stage of non-returner, One breaks the fetter of sensual desire. And so one no longer has any perception of sensual pleasures, no longer has any idea that there's any enjoyment to be obtained from the pleasures of the senses because one now has much greater happiness or joy." Antony: I am a long way from being a non-returner, but have greatly reduced lust by donating to the Rape Crisis Centre and thinking "hair of the head, hair of the body, nails, teeth and skin". I am pleased to report that I'm getting better all the time. This is the happiest time in my life so far.I have made a breakthrough in reducing my sleep from 12 to 8 hours per day by doing walking meditation instead of going back to bed (It's a bit of a secret from my parents because they might think I'll wear out the carpet I bought some warm socks so my parents won't hear me.) I have learned to walk normally again but still have trouble turning around and came up with the brilliant idea of doing a circuit of the house instead (mostly on tiles). I live in a very peaceful neighborhood and Sydney is having glorious weather at the moment (sense pleasure LOL) so ideal conditions for practice. Thanks Sarah for "looking out" for me on dsg. I've found some great suttas lately and will post about them soon. With metta / Antony. #86437 From: han tun Date: Fri May 30, 2008 6:52 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] My eye situation. to Han hantun1 Dear Nina (James), Thank you very much for wishing for my recovery, and reminding me of the strong confidence in kusala citta, and the many possibilities that I have for kusala. However, macular degeneration is irreversible. There can be no recovery. The best I can do is to slow down the progress of the disease. If I am careful, the progress of the disease may be slow, and if I am not, the progress may be faster. To slow down the progress of the disease I will have to avoid exposure to bright light, including looking at the computer monitor screen for long duration. I also received very valuable information from James, particularly the AREDS Nutritional Formula for Macular Degeneration. Research suggests that antioxidant vitamins, such as beta-carotene (vitamin A) and vitamins C and E, may protect the macula from damage. AREDS study results (National Eye Institute) released in 2001, involving more than 3,600 people, found that supplementation with vitamins C and E, beta-carotene and zinc reduced certain patients' risk of progressing to advanced AMD by about 28 percent. This number reflects those patients with large numbers of intermediate or large yellowish deposits (drusen) on their retinas, but not those with limited intermediate drusen or multiple small drusen. I intend to follow James’ advice and take the above-mentioned vitamins and mineral. I will also follow your spiritual advice and have more kusala. Respectfully, Han #86438 From: han tun Date: Fri May 30, 2008 6:56 pm Subject: Re:To Han: [dsg] Re: Perfections Corner (161) hantun1 Dear Nina (Sarah), Thank you very much for your clarifications. Based on that, I will modify my understanding as follows. (1) Text: Satipa.t.thaana is awareness of the dhammas which are real in our daily life, and through satipa.t.thaana, pa~n~naa can further develop to the degree of realizing the stages of insight. Nina: no 1: First there has to be intellectual understanding of the present reality, what is it, when does it appear? When this kind of understanding has developed more there are conditions for sati sampaja~n~na, direct awareness and understanding that can begin to develop together. When we say satipatthana, it is actually awareness together with pa~n~naa. Han: When it is said that through satipa.t.thaana, pa~n~naa can further develop to the degree of realizing the stages of insight, first there has to be intellectual understanding of the present reality, and when this kind of understanding has developed more there are conditions for sati sampaja~n~na, direct awareness and understanding that can begin to develop together. When we say satipatthana, it is actually awareness together with pa~n~naa. ---------------------- (2) Text: If satipa.t.thaana does not arise in our daily life, and pa~n~naa does not investigate the characteristic of each reality that appears, it is impossible to eliminate wrong view. Nina: no 2: Again, they arise together. They are faculties, indriyas, that can become unshakable, balas or powers. They are bojjhangas, factors leading to enlightenment. Han: If satipa.t.thaana does not arise in our daily life, and pa~n~naa does not investigate the characteristic of each reality that appears, it is impossible to eliminate wrong view. In fact, satipa.t.thaana and pa~n~naa arise together. They are faculties, indriyas, that can become unshakable, balas or powers. They are bojjhangas, factors leading to enlightenment. Thank you very much. Respectfully, Han #86439 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Fri May 30, 2008 7:18 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: report on Bangkok and Kaeng Krajan kenhowardau Hi Nina, --------- <. . .> N: > I did not notice anything special about this subject. Sometimes I hear people say that what is tangible object seems to appear most and they find visible object more difficult. They are all difficult to penetrate. Is there any doubt about this subject, or you want to discuss anything more about it? ---------------- As you say, *all* paramattha dhammas are difficult to know. So I am not sure how we can say that tangible object (or visible object) "seems" to appear most. How would we know? That's why I asked A Sujin if there was olfactory object "now." To my mind any conventional idea of there being no odours present was just that - a conventional idea. I didn't think such ideas were relevant to satipatthana. It seems me to me (or it seemed at the time) too much like formal vipassana meditation in which people "look" for dhammas. But maybe I was being overly cautious. :-) Ken H PS: Did I detect a hint about the Visudhimagga thread? :-) I have a complete mental block about it. The more I put it off the harder it is to get around to. Tomorrow! Definitely tomorrow! (I hope.) #86440 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri May 30, 2008 11:59 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Overview of KS 3 - Her faulty teaching (For the too serious min... nilovg Hi James, Op 30-mei-2008, om 23:35 heeft upasaka@... het volgende geschreven: > I hope you feel much better very soon! :-) ------ N: So do I. Do not be overwhelmed by sickness. We have to reflect every day on it, according to the Sutta, don't we? Nina. #86441 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Fri May 30, 2008 11:48 pm Subject: Buddhist Training is 3-fold! bhikkhu0 Friends: What are the Three Buddhist Trainings? All Buddha's disciples undertakes a 3-fold Training (ti-sikkhÄ?): 1: Training in higher Morality (adhi-sÄ«la-sikkhÄ?). 2: Training in higher Mentality (adhi-citta-sikkhÄ?). 3: Training in higher Understanding (adhi-pañña-sikkhÄ?). Higher Morality is 3 fold: It is Right Speech (sammÄ?-vÄ?cÄ?) It is Right Action (sammÄ?-kammanta) It is Right Livelihood (sammÄ?-Ä?jÄ«va) Higher Mentality is 3 fold: It is Right Effort (sammÄ?-vÄ?yÄ?ma) It is Right Awareness (sammÄ?-sati) It is Right Concentration (sammÄ?-samÄ?dhi) Higher Understanding is 2 fold: It is Right Motivation (sammÄ?-sankappa) It is Right View (sammÄ?-ditthi) The Blessed Buddha once said: When founded on pure morality, then concentration produces a high fruit and blessing. When based on deep concentration, then understanding brings a high fruit and blessing. Being endowed with understanding, the mind is freed from all the mental fermentations related to sensing, becoming, views/opinions and ignorance. This - in itself- is releasing! It is through not understanding, not penetrating and not attaining noble higher morality... noble higher mentality.. and noble higher understanding... that both you and I had to pass through this round of rebirths for such an immensely long time, without reaching the bliss of deliverance, the bliss of peace and, the bliss of noble higher release: Enlightenment... References: MN 44, DN 16 and AN IV 1 More good even better here ;-) http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/II/The_Way.htm http://What-Buddha-Said.net/library/DPPN/wtb/g_m/magga.htm http://What-Buddha-Said.net/library/DPPN/wtb/s_t/sikkhaa.htm Buddhist Training is 3-fold! Have a nice training day! Friendship is the Greatest * Bhikkhu Samahita * Sri Lanka :-) http://What-Buddha-Said.net #86442 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat May 31, 2008 2:28 am Subject: Metta, Ch 6, no 2. nilovg Dear friends, Question: The arahat is habitually inclined to mettå. Why did Mahå Moggallåna have to be killed through the sword? Khun Sujin: That was the result of past kamma. Of course, since the time he had become an arahat, he did not commit any more kamma. Question: I would think that since he was an arahat he could not receive such a result of kamma. Past akusala kamma would be in this case “ahosi kamma”, kamma which is ineffectual. Khun Sujin: So long as the arahat has not passed away there are still conditions for past kamma to produce result. When the arahat has finally passed away there is no more rebirth, no more arising of citta, cetasika and rúpa, and then there cannot be anymore receiving of the result of kamma. When sati arises we can find out whether there is mettå, we can know whether it is strong or weak. Sati can be aware of the characteristic of mettå, it can find out whether there is true mettå or not. The characteristic of mettå may be confused with the characteristic of lobha. If there is no sati sampajañña it cannot be known whether there is mettå or lobha. We usually want other people to be happy, but do we want this because we love them with attachment or because we have true loving-kindness for them without any selfishness? When there is sati sampajañña we will know whether there is at such a moment lobha or mettå. When we really understand the difference mettå can develop and lobha can decrease. People may doubt whether there is lobha or mettå when they want their parents to be happy, because lobha and mettå seem to be similar. When we think of the good qualities of our parents and we desire their welfare there is kusala citta with mettå. When we love our parents and we are attached to them there is lobha. It is the same with the relationship of parents towards children, when they have selfish affection or possessive love for their children, there is lobha. However, if they have listened to the Dhamma and developed satipatthåna and if they can distinguish the difference between the characteristics of mettå and of lobha, they will have more mettå towards their children and less attachment. If they do not develop mettå there will be selfishness, they consider their child as “our child”. Attachment to one’s child can even lead to harming someone else’s child. In that case there is no mettå towards one’s child but selfish affection. ******* Nina. #86443 From: han tun Date: Sat May 31, 2008 4:24 am Subject: Re: [dsg] My eye situation. to Han hantun1 Dear Nina and Tom, Thank you very much for your cetanaa. I really appreciate it. But at the moment I don’t want to do anything. I just want to take rest physically and mentally. I will contact Tom later when I am mentally prepared. Respectfully, Han #86444 From: "Phil" Date: Sat May 31, 2008 4:31 am Subject: Re: Overview of KS 3: Her Faulty Teaching philofillet Hi Sukin and all The > > Buddha gives very stern, very strong encouragement about avoiding > > transgression and would never ever water down his encouragement > > because of the awful sin of self at work wanting to be a better > > person etc blah blah blah. > > The below may impress upon you as being also blah blah blah, but it > doesn't hurt me to send it since I wrote it in reaction to another > post, only decided at the time not to send it. Ph: I regret now writing "blah blah blah" because of course when we talk about detachment from self, we are talking about the ultimate liberation taught by the Buddha, so "blah blah blah" is hardly appropriate. > ============= > > I'd like to clarify a little, the position where some of us are > coming from. This may help you to understand us a little better. > ================ > > Sukin: The situation with most people, of a religion or not, is that > they *do* see the danger of akusala such as, aversion, miserliness, > jealousy, craving, pride and so on. Hence they know also what it > means to be moral and to do good such as being generous, showing > loving kindness, compassion etc. Some of the other religions also > know to recognize to an extent, the uselessness of rite and ritual. > What the Dhamma points to which no other religion or philosophy knows > about, is the danger of `Self View'. Ph: Yes, of course I do know that, Sukin. It is what makes the Buddha's teaching superior to all others. And we should very gradually develop an understanding of anattaness of things. But you guys get way ahead of the cart or however that proverb goes. And you also, in my opinion, fail to appreciate the wonderful ways in which *conventional, mundane morality* is taught by the Buddha. It isn't taught by giving a set of rules to follow or else, as we know, commandments. It is taught through a system of developing the mind so it is trained, really, or conditioned, not to do harm. ALl the resolutions in the world are hollow unless the mind is conditioned through meditation to be less responsive to sense door objects, to be wiser in response to them. It happens. And I don't think it happens, in my opinion, through thinking about or discussing anatta. It happens through practicing in line with the Buddha's instructions. And they are very explicity. When Ken H first asked here if there were in fact explicit meditation instructions in the tipitaka, I thought he might have a point, but then I found Vism, and they are so very, very explicity, involving even counting the breaths, which I had thought was a modern technique. Leaving aside meditation, we find many suttas which are taught in terms that make no sense unless there is a sense of concern for oneself involved. It's puzzling, really. If one were to understand anatta, why would one possibly be concerned about one's destination after death? But one is. I certainly am. Phil is. Phil is involved in this. There is in fact no Phil, of course, I understand that, in ultimate terms - but it is a kind of pantomine or playacting or some other thing to think that the understanding of "no Phil" is anywhere deep enough to have real import except in thinking about anatta. Fine, if you guys are leading moral lives while doing all your thinking about anatta, fine. But if you aren't, you're in trouble, I think. I do appreciate anatta, intellectual. But it is theory for me. THe prohibition against the idea of "people doing activities" related to Dhamma is ridiculous because we are all people doing activities at our level of understanding and talking about only citta processes is overshooting. > > Even a child will know to some extent to differentiate good from > evil, hence they can be conditioned from young to grow in awareness > of more subtle manifestations of the latter. Whether or not some are > taught to believe in a God, almost everyone at some point when they > are older, choose to follow some religion or philosophy in order to > further increase the chances of "doing good and avoiding evil". In > this regard I'll say that I am often inspired by the good thoughts of > people of all religions. > > However, no matter how "good" a person grows to be, if one does not > hear about and appreciates the danger in "Self View", invariably self > view *does* grow and accumulate, besides as you know, nothing ever is > done in terms of underlying akusala tendencies. > > In other words, Buddhist and non- Buddhist, everyone relatively > easily distinguishes general `good' from `evil'. Ph: I'll stop reading here. Yes, yes, yes, I know other religions know good from evil. Dhamma is different and superior to them because the mind is developed, wholesomeness and abstention from evil are developed through Buddhist meditation, which of course extends into daily life. I'll try to shut up, Sukin. Thanks for your kind patience. Feel free to add any comment if you'd like. I've just written the same of blather (truly blah blah blah) as usual Metta, Phil #86445 From: "pannabahulo" Date: Sat May 31, 2008 4:37 am Subject: The lsat post pannabahulo Dear Dhamma Friends, This is to be my last posting on DSG. Over the past few weeks the realisation has been developing that the `Consensus DSG View' offers no practical guidance on how to weaken ignorance and develop wisdom beyond a passive listening to the Dhamma (As James has already pointed out)and (from what I glean) reading piles of books. However, there is no formal teaching at the Foundation for foreigners whatsoever. During discussions Ajan Sujin says very little; most questions get answered by others in the group. And I have come to the conclusion that the position held by the most conservative of Ajan Sujin's disciples is basically flawed. This is certainly not a personal attack whatsoever. The members of the DSG group are some of the nicest people I've ever met. But, all in all, the DSG view is extremely narrow and refuses to acknowledge there are many different ways of understanding. The worst aspect is that they believe their understanding is SUPERIOR and that only they have the TRUE DHAMMA. No one has replied to the most important point I raised in my letter about last week's meeting in Bangkok: "So in Bangkok I raised the point that the Buddha taught in both conventional and Paramattha terms - and sometimes a mixture of both - and that both ways could equally lead to arahantship. (So long as, when using conventional language, one knew that the 'I' did not refer to something that was lasting and permanent). Further, that either one of those ways was not superior or inferior to the other. They were like using different dialects. Ajan seemed to agree with that. Also, that one needed to use conventional truth to overcome the notion of self; as a friend said in Chiang Mai, "We need to have a sense of self to overcome self." The Ven Guttasila pointed out that there was a Sutta in which Sariputta says that we must use the "I am" conceit to overcome the "I am" conceit". No reply to this point because the DSG consensus view does not want to see or acknowledge it. But, not only does this make a farce out of the Buddha's long, hard struggle for, and attainment of, full enlightenment; but also all those years of tirelessly teaching in whatever way, manner or method would best suit his students. Further, this partial Abhidhammic view ignores the ways by which so many have attained to Path and Fruition in all the years following the Buddha's first discourse. Nor does it recognise the very real experiences of millions of meditators since the time of the Buddha; nor the findings of countless, dedicated insight mediation masters. James rightly says in his dispute with Sarah: "Sarah: Yes, this was my reaction. Not only happy, but very relieved to appreciate that there really was no self that could control any dhammas to arise and that efforts and attachment to having certain dhammas arise were a development of the wrong path. James: Thank you for verifying what I wrote. Those who hear K. Sujin's teaching are very happy to hear that such a thing is possible: gaining wisdom with no effort whatsoever and no sacrifice whatsoever. Who wouldn't be happy to hear that? (Well, those who know it isn't true aren't happy to hear that- they scoff at such promises.) The happiness you feel Sarah comes from attachment, not wisdom. You are happy to think that you don't have to give anything up; happy that you don't have to give up your house, car, and sensual lifestyle. You don't have to give up your time surfing and traveling to meditate or attend retreats. You are happy that you believe you can have your cake and eat it too! Now, you say that you felt happy because you heard that there is no self; no self to do anything. Well, that is complete hogwash. No one is happy to hear that there is no self. People are upset to hear that there is no self. The Buddha's followers and non- followers were both upset and bothered to be told that there is no self- so the Buddha had to wait at just the right time to present that teaching. It is ridiculous to say that you felt happy upon hearing that there is no self. You are in denial about the true cause of your happiness. Sarah, you need to be honest with yourself about what really makes you happy about K. Sujin's teaching." This is why I wrote yesterday's posting "Happiness and the realisation of anatta - James is right." And that is why I will cease posting on the DSG website. Ajan Sujin has a good point of view - but it leaves a lot else out of the picture. Why be a monk? I may as well roll around enjoying sex pleasures, watch movies and go out to good restaurants to eat whatever I want and drink wine. After all, it's just conditions. Why then, did the Buddha found a Sangha? Why did he recommend seclusion, restraint and the celibate life? Why did he ordain his son and other close members of his family? A cockroach also crawls around because of conditions. But as a human being there is the possibility of raising one's self up; of becoming a better person; of mental purification for the benefit of all beings: And finally, full enlightenment and Nibbanic bliss. That means using the "I am" conceit to work towards its destruction. Not just sitting around excusing one's present lack of progress by reference to 'accumulations' and 'conditions' over which 'I' have no control. But I must thank Ajan Sujin and her devotees – on their part albeit completely unintentionally - for providing me with the stimulus to review my past meditation practice; for leading me back to seeing the importance of 'formal meditation practice;' and for the resolve I have thus made to return to do just that. I will still attend whatever Bangkok discussions I am able to and so learn what I can. I still have a great love for the wonderful people I meet at DSG. I still wish to remain in contact with my good friends there. From time to time I will look at the DSG webpage. But I will cease posting on the DSG website and wasting my time in academic and trivial debate about books and who said what and where. And writing to those who have closed their hearts and minds to anything else but attachment to such narrow views and beliefs. We are lucky to be born as humans. I do not want to waste what lifetime there is left. We are lucky to be born in the time of the Buddha Sasana where the different approaches, laid out by the Tathagata, are still available for us to actually practice. I just wish I could lead you in that direction too. May you all be well, happy and peaceful. With metta and all the blessings of The Triple Gem. Pannabahulo Bhikkhu #86446 From: upasaka@... Date: Sat May 31, 2008 1:36 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: report on Bangkok and Kaeng Krajan upasaka_howard Hi, Ken - In a message dated 5/30/2008 10:19:01 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, kenhowardau@... writes: It seems me to me (or it seemed at the time) too much like formal vipassana meditation in which people "look" for dhammas. But maybe I was being overly cautious. :-) ============================ If I may insert some reflections on this: It seems to me that we do observe paramattha dhammas (e.g., various forms of earth element, warmth of various degrees, sights, sounds tastes, smells, etc as well as recalling, thinking, feeling (as pleasant, unpleasant, neutral), liking, disliking, fearing, etc, all the time! When we are paying attention to what's happening, there is clearer observing, but when we are not, due to tiredness, laziness, excitement, or whatever, the observing is less sharp. What we typically do *not* observe are sharp beginnings and endings of individual namas and rupas - we seems to miss the paramattha dhammas as units or packets. Perhaps that will develop, or, perhaps it is a merely theoretical (a.k.a., conceptual) construct - I don't know. I do believe, however, as it is taught in Abhidhamma (and I *think* in the suttas), that there are no consciousness gaps. (There is at most a spike in consciousness, or a steady dimming of consciousness followed by a spike, when "losing consciousness." I find it interesting to attend to the "loss of consciousness" when that is underway, for example when being put out during an endoscopy. The "dimming" is quite observable, I find, followed by what I can only call a "spike," followed immediately by alert consciousness back in effect. Really fascinating!) The matter of observing paramattha dhammas as packets aside, we certainly can, when attention and non-distraction are there, 1) observe that paramattha dhammas are present when they previously were not, that they are no longer present, having previously been present, these two being the observing of a phenomenon or its absence as "new," 2) observe that they are ungraspable, 3) observe that they are not sources of genuine satisfaction and actually hurtful if there is grasping at them or craving (emotional desire) for their elimination or for their growth, and contingent - depending utterly on conditions. Much of the "observing" of these involves a good deal of inference, but developing wisdom, precise & probing on occasion, can play an increasing role, it seems. With metta, Howard #86447 From: "connie" Date: Sat May 31, 2008 5:43 am Subject: Perfections Corner (169) nichiconn Dear Friends, continuing ch.5: Viriya is the attendant of pa~n~naa. The Venerable Saariputta explains about the development and accumulation of the perfections leading to the complete eradication of defilements at the attainment of arahatship. We read in the "Kaamasutta Niddesa" (Sutta explanation about Sense pleasures, Mahaaniddesa, Khuddaka Nikaaya): "There is a simile of two cities: the city of bandits and the city of peace. At that time the thought occurred to a general, 'So long as the city of bandits exists the city of peace is not free from danger. I shall destroy the city of bandits.' He put on his armor, took his sword and entered the city of bandits. He struck with his sword the post they had erected at the gate of the city. He destroyed the building and the widows of the gateway, removed the bolt, destroyed the wall and filled up the moat. Thereupon he took down the flag they had raised as a symbol of dignity of their city, and he set fire to the city. Then he entered the city of peace, ascended the castle, surrounded by his group of relatives, and he took delicious flavoured food. This is the simile. Personality belief, sakkaayadi.t.thi *1, can be compared to the city of bandits. Nibbaana can be compared to the city of peace. The person who applies himself to mental development can be compared to the general. He thinks, 'Personality belief is a tie and so long as I am bound by that tie I am not free from danger'. " *1 There are twenty kinds of personality belief, sakkaaya di.t.thi, which are obtained by applying four types of that belief to each of the five khandhas: the belief to be identical with them, to be contained in them, to be independent of them and to be the owner of them. Here we see that the akusala dhamma that should be eradicated first is personality belief which takes realities for self. It must be pa~n~naa which sees the difference between the city of bandits and the city of peace. The city of peace is calm, whereas the city of bandits means disturbance, confusion and restlessness. So long as there is wrong view which takes realities for self, being or person, one cannot be free from restlessness, disturbance and worry. Thus, one should understand that all defilements and dukkha are bound up with one's "own person", which is, in truth, naama dhammas and ruupa dhammas. .. to be continued, connie #86448 From: upasaka@... Date: Sat May 31, 2008 2:36 am Subject: Re: [dsg] The lsat post upasaka_howard Dear Bhante - In a message dated 5/31/2008 7:38:17 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, pannabahulo@... writes: Dear Dhamma Friends, This is to be my last posting on DSG. ============================= I personally regret that, though I think it is probably best for you as a bhikkhu to concentrate on a bhikkhu's practice. As for the content of your final post, I have little to take exception to except your presumption that the teachings of Ajahn Sujin constitutes "the DSG consensus view." Certainly her perspective on the Dhamma is shared by many on the list, but I'm not aware of a vote or poll having been taken to show it to be a "concensus" view. (I, for one, don't "consent" to that view! ;-)) With metta, Howard P. S. I will be very pleased, Bhante, should you choose to maintain occasional contact with me in the future, Sir. #86449 From: han tun Date: Sat May 31, 2008 6:56 am Subject: Re: [dsg] My eye situation. to Han hantun1 Dear Nina and Tom, Thank you very much once again. I will be grateful if Tom can contact me when he visits Bangkok next time. My residence phone number is 02-719-2993 I will come and meet Tom wherever he is staying while in Bangkok. I have zero computer knowledge. I depend entirely on my grand-daughter and her husband for the installation and operation of the computer. They are presently in America. Respectfully, Han #86450 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat May 31, 2008 7:02 am Subject: Re: [dsg] The last post nilovg Venerable Pannabahulo, Op 31-mei-2008, om 13:37 heeft pannabahulo het volgende geschreven: > "So in Bangkok I raised the point that the Buddha taught in both > conventional and Paramattha terms - and sometimes a mixture of both - > and that both ways could equally lead to arahantship. ------- N: Yes this is quite right. I read a text where this is said, but cannot trace it now. It all depends on people's accumulations. Some people only need to hear about conventional realities and it is sufficient for them, they accumulated great understanding. Acharn says sometimes very little, but it is good to ponder over her sparce words later on. Like Ken H who was wondering about dana being a concept or paramattha dhamma. Then there was Kh Sujin's answer that amounted to knowing the actual moment of generosity. Thus, this moment now. How else can we be sure. Sometimes it depends on people's questions how much or how little she says. But she will always point us to the reality appearing at this moment. This is the way to gain direct understanding of characteristics. Kh Sujin is not against meditation but she cautions people because misunderstandings can so easily arise and then one engages in micchasamaadhi. You remember what she explained about breath: tangible object conditioned by citta. So long as we are alive there is breath, and it stops when we die. It is conditioned by citta. In the case of the higher jhanas, there is no breathing. She said that when hardness or heat appears it may be conditioned by one of the four factors originating rupa: kamma, citta, heat or nutrition. Who knows for sure tangible object is breath, thus, conditioned by citta? Really very difficult to know. Hardness appearing at the upperlip maybe conditioned by heat. We have to be so careful since this subject is very subtle. She also said that it depends on sati of what object it is aware, and who can direct sati to be aware of this or that? As to listening, this is not a passive listening, or a happy feeling and a thought of not doing anything. It is developing with a sense of urgency, our life is so short. There is more to say about this, but that would be too long. But you have to find your own way. It was wonderful to have met you, and also David and Bob. I sure hope to meet you again, but that will be a long time, probably Febr. 2010, if we are still alive. With respect, Nina. #86451 From: han tun Date: Sat May 31, 2008 7:23 am Subject: Re: [dsg] My eye situation. to Han hantun1 Dear Nina and Tom, > Tom: I understand. If he wants a new keyboard then it would be ideal for me to bring it as the shipping is expensive! So maybe he should consider again at the beginning of October! Han: Yes, I would prefer a new keyboard. I will gratefully pay for it if Tom could kindly bring it along with him. Beige Large Print Keyboard - PS/2 Connector or Beige Large Print Keyboard - USB Connector, whichever Tom feels suitable. Thank you very much. Respectfully, Han #86452 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Sat May 31, 2008 8:06 am Subject: [dsg] Kamma and Accumulations (wasRe: Mental states......) scottduncan2 Dear Herman, Thanks for the reply: H: "...But let me just quote Nyanatiloka's entry on aayuuhana- it makes it quite clear that the notion of accumulation is exclusively commentarial. Which is my point exactly." Scott: I'm okay with the commentaries. H: "...There are two ways in which kamma is presented in the nikayas, one is kamma as action in the world, and the other is kamma as intention. Kamma as action says no more than one is what one does...One is what one does. And please re-read 607-611 again, for it cannot be more explicitly stated that one's birth does not determine what one will end up doing. What I do now is NOT a result of what I did or what was done to me previously." Scott: This view misunderstands action and result. What you *do* now is cause for a *result* in the future. One's birth is result. Other conditions effect what is done. Kamma is not vipaaka. Consider these suttas: SN 36 21(1) Mo.liyasiivakasutta.m Pitta.m semha~nca vaato ca sannipaataa utuni ca Visama.m opakkamiko ca kammavipaakena a.t.thamiiti. "Bile, phlegm, and also wind, Imbalance and climate too, Carelessness and assault, With kamma result as eighth." SN 12 37(7) Natumhasutta.m Naaya.m bhikkhave, kaayo tumhaaka.m. Naapi a~n~nesa.m. puraa.namida.m bhikkhave kamma.m abhisa"nkhata.m abhisa~ncetayita.m vedayita.m da.t.thabba.m. "...Bhikkhus, this body is not yours, nor does it belong to others. It is old kamma, to be seen as generated and fashioned by volition. Scott: I like the Commentaries. Note 111 (p. 757 The Connected Discourses of the Buddha, Bh. Bodhi): "Spk: It is old kamma (puraana.m ida.m kamma.m): This body is not actually old kamma, but because it is produced by old kamma it is spoken of in terms of its condition. It should be seen as generated (abhisa"nkhata), in that it is based on volition (abhisa~ncetayita), in that it is based on volition, rooted in volition; and as something to be felt (vedaniya), in that it is a basis for what is to be felt [Spk p.t: because it is a basis and object of feeling]." Now to the sutta you submit: can you please give a more precise reference? I'll want to look at it more closely. Sincerely, Scott. #86453 From: upasaka@... Date: Sat May 31, 2008 4:20 am Subject: A Paragraph that Might be of Interest upasaka_howard Hi, all - Reform Judaism has a dramatically revised prayer book that was adopted for regular use just months ago. I noticed one paragraph in it that I find to be "very Buddhist," and with the possible exception of the last sentence, I suspect that many here will rather like what is being said. The paragraph is as follows: Entrances to holiness are everywhere. The possibility of ascent is all the time, even at unlikely times and through unlikely places. There is no place on earth without the Presence. With metta, Howard #86454 From: "Alex" Date: Sat May 31, 2008 8:34 am Subject: [dsg] Kamma and Accumulations (wasRe: Mental states......) truth_aerator Hi Scott & Herman, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Scott Duncan" wrote: Scott: This view misunderstands action and result. What you *do* now is cause for a *result* in the future. One's birth is result. Other > conditions effect what is done. Kamma is not vipaaka. > But is what you *do* now, the result of what was done before? Is what you do now 100% based on what was done before? Best wishes, Alex #86455 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Sat May 31, 2008 8:43 am Subject: [dsg] Kamma and Accumulations (wasRe: Mental states......) scottduncan2 Dear Alex, Regarding: A: "But is what you *do* now, the result of what was done before?" Scott: No. Kamma is not vipaaka. A: "Is what you do now 100% based on what was done before?" Scott: What you *do* now is not based on what was *done* before. Sincerely, Scott. #86456 From: upasaka@... Date: Sat May 31, 2008 5:12 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Kamma and Accumulations (wasRe: Mental states......) upasaka_howard Hi, Scott (and Alex) - In a message dated 5/31/2008 11:43:22 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, scduncan@... writes: Dear Alex, Regarding: A: "But is what you *do* now, the result of what was done before?" Scott: No. Kamma is not vipaaka. A: "Is what you do now 100% based on what was done before?" Scott: What you *do* now is not based on what was *done* before. Sincerely, Scott. ============================= However, what occurs now is based on what occurred before. Else, there are phenomena that arise without precondition, randomly or with "self" as condition, and that is not the Buddha's teaching as I understand it. *Phenomena arise neither from themselves, nor from things distinctly other, nor without condition. Both the existence of phenomena and their interrelatedness are subtle and avoiding of extremes. With metta, Howard * Please don't ask me to define this. I cannot. I believe it can be experienced, but what we define (i.e., impose limits and boundaries on) is no longer "it". #86457 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Sat May 31, 2008 9:29 am Subject: [dsg] Kamma and Accumulations (wasRe: Mental states......) scottduncan2 Dear Howard, Thanks for the reply: H: "...what occurs now is based on what occurred before...." Scott: In general this is true. I am only referring to the specific relationship between kamma and vipaaka. I am not referring to a general case - to conditionality as a whole. Sincerely, Scott. #86458 From: "colette" Date: Fri May 30, 2008 9:24 am Subject: Re: Overview of KS 3 - Her faulty teaching (For the too serious minded) ksheri3 Hi Scott and Ven Pannabahulo, <....> I liked your approach Ven.P, too serious mindedness. <....> I believe that you heard what I spoke of to a neophyte in a Kagyu order trying to grasp the concept of Anatta through his Western psychology and rationality of Atta: he posed, from a position of Self, that Anatta is exterior and is outside himself therefore allowing him to observe it as an object and not as Sunyata, where he could grasp it and possess it? As if it were something? <....> Scott, I think and thought that you were just playing and having fun with the Path in an attempt to formulate the concepts but I think that VEn.P's advice is well worth giving the action of not grasping and clutching this soooooo closely to your person, worthy of contemplation. toodles, colette --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Scott Duncan" wrote: > > Dear Venerable Pannabahulo, > > Thanks for the following: > > Bh. P: "Hey...what's wrong with you guys?? Don't you have a sense of > humour?" > > Scott: When I told colette that I had no sense of humour she had to > shake me out of my pity party. Maybe you missed that post, wherein my > lack of a sense of humour was discussed. As proof, the foregoing was > meant to be funny. See what I mean? <....> #86459 From: "Alex" Date: Sat May 31, 2008 9:39 am Subject: [dsg] Kamma and Accumulations (wasRe: Mental states......) truth_aerator Dear Scott, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Scott Duncan" wrote: > > Dear Alex, > > Regarding: > > A: "But is what you *do* now, the result of what was done before?" > > Scott: No. Kamma is not vipaaka. > > A: "Is what you do now 100% based on what was done before?" > > Scott: What you *do* now is not based on what was *done* before. > > Sincerely, > > Scott. > Congrats for accepting "personal" accountability for Making Kamma. So there IS some aspects that can be changed. I am happy we agree :) Best wishes, Alex #86460 From: "Alex" Date: Sat May 31, 2008 10:19 am Subject: Kamma and Accumulations (wasRe: Mental states......) truth_aerator Dear Howard, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: However, what occurs now is based on what occurred before. Else, there are phenomena that arise without precondition, randomly or with "self" as condition, and that is not the Buddha's teaching as I understand it. >>>> One does NOT exclude the other. There can be what is called "co- determination", you know like "river shapes the riverbed, and the riverbed shapes the river". Nobody is arguing for 100% free volition. Of course "one" has to work with what is present. However to say that "everything is caused 100% from past causes" goes against what the Buddha has taught === "Having approached the priests & contemplatives who hold that... 'Whatever a person experiences... is all caused by what was done in the past,' I said to them: 'Is it true that you hold that... "Whatever a person experiences... is all caused by what was done in the past?"' Thus asked by me, they admitted, 'Yes.' Then I said to them, 'Then in that case, a person is a killer of living beings because of what was done in the past. A person is a thief... unchaste... a liar... a divisive speaker... a harsh speaker... an idle chatterer... greedy... malicious... a holder of wrong views because of what was done in the past.' When one falls back on what was done in the past as being essential, monks, there is no desire, no effort [at the thought], 'This should be done. This shouldn't be done.' When one can't pin down as a truth or reality what should & shouldn't be done, one dwells bewildered & unprotected. One cannot righteously refer to oneself as a contemplative. This was my first righteous refutation of those priests & contemplatives who hold to such teachings, such views. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an03/an03.061.than.html === >>>> *Phenomena arise neither from themselves, nor from things distinctly other, nor without condition. Both the existence of phenomena and their interrelatedness are subtle and avoiding of extremes. >>>>> The above line isn't logical. If phenomena isn't caused by x or not- x, then it means that phenomena is UNCAUSED. But then Nagarjuna goes to refute what he said just before. Best wishes, Alex #86461 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Sat May 31, 2008 10:45 am Subject: [dsg] Kamma and Accumulations (wasRe: Mental states......) scottduncan2 Dear Alex, Regarding: A: "Congrats for accepting 'personal' accountability for Making Kamma. So there IS some aspects that can be changed." Scott: What, my good fellow, are you talking about? This view differs from the one I gave earlier. 'Personal' is your bag, man. Sincerely, Scott. #86462 From: upasaka@... Date: Sat May 31, 2008 6:52 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Kamma and Accumulations (wasRe: Mental states......) upasaka_howard Hi, Scott - In a message dated 5/31/2008 12:29:42 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, scduncan@... writes: Dear Howard, Thanks for the reply: H: "...what occurs now is based on what occurred before...." Scott: In general this is true. I am only referring to the specific relationship between kamma and vipaaka. I am not referring to a general case - to conditionality as a whole. Sincerely, Scott. ============================= Then I agree with you! :-) With metta, Howard #86463 From: upasaka@... Date: Sat May 31, 2008 6:58 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Kamma and Accumulations (wasRe: Mental states......) upasaka_howard Hi, Alex - In a message dated 5/31/2008 1:19:40 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, truth_aerator@... writes: Dear Howard, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: However, what occurs now is based on what occurred before. Else, there are phenomena that arise without precondition, randomly or with "self" as condition, and that is not the Buddha's teaching as I understand it. >>>> One does NOT exclude the other. There can be what is called "co- determination", you know like "river shapes the riverbed, and the riverbed shapes the river". Nobody is arguing for 100% free volition. Of course "one" has to work with what is present. However to say that "everything is caused 100% from past causes" goes against what the Buddha has taught ------------------------------------------------- Howard: I agree that there is co-conditioning (or interpendence) among concurrently arising phenomena, but they have prior phenomena as conditions. ---------------------------------------------- === "Having approached the priests & contemplatives who hold that... 'Whatever a person experiences... is all caused by what was done in the past,' I said to them: 'Is it true that you hold that... "Whatever a person experiences... is all caused by what was done in the past?"' Thus asked by me, they admitted, 'Yes.' Then I said to them, 'Then in that case, a person is a killer of living beings because of what was done in the past. A person is a thief... unchaste... a liar... a divisive speaker... a harsh speaker... an idle chatterer... greedy... malicious... a holder of wrong views because of what was done in the past.' When one falls back on what was done in the past as being essential, monks, there is no desire, no effort [at the thought], 'This should be done. This shouldn't be done.' When one can't pin down as a truth or reality what should & shouldn't be done, one dwells bewildered & unprotected. One cannot righteously refer to oneself as a contemplative. This was my first righteous refutation of those priests & contemplatives who hold to such teachings, such views. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an03/an03.061.than.html === >>>> *Phenomena arise neither from themselves, nor from things distinctly other, nor without condition. Both the existence of phenomena and their interrelatedness are subtle and avoiding of extremes. >>>>> The above line isn't logical. If phenomena isn't caused by x or not- x, then it means that phenomena is UNCAUSED. But then Nagarjuna goes to refute what he said just before. ----------------------------------------------- Howard: I disagree. I find it quite logical (and even true! ;-), but the problem lies, I believe, in how existence and interrelationship is usually understood (in a substantialist fashion). ------------------------------------------------ Best wishes, Alex ======================== With metta, Howard #86464 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Sat May 31, 2008 11:05 am Subject: [dsg] Kamma and Accumulations (wasRe: Mental states......) scottduncan2 Dear Howard, Regarding: H: "Then I agree with you! :-)" Scott: I thought that this was the case! Sincerely, Scott. #86465 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat May 31, 2008 11:13 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: to Ken: report on Bangkok and Kaeng Krajan nilovg Hi Ken H, Op 31-mei-2008, om 4:18 heeft kenhowardau het volgende geschreven: > N: I did not notice anything special about this subject. > Sometimes I hear people say that what is tangible object seems to > appear most and they find visible object more difficult. They are all > difficult to penetrate. Is there any doubt about this subject, or you > want to discuss anything more about it? > ---------------- > > K:As you say, *all* paramattha dhammas are difficult to know. So I am > not sure how we can say that tangible object (or visible > object) "seems" to appear most. How would we know? ------- N: They are beginning to be aware of hardness, or notice hardness, or both being aware and notice. I think it happens like that, depending on a person's accumulations. But it is of no use trying to be aware of this or that object as you know. --------- > > K: That's why I asked A Sujin if there was olfactory object "now." > To my > mind any conventional idea of there being no odours present was just > that - a conventional idea. I didn't think such ideas were relevant > to satipatthana. -------- N: I remember your question. When a person is smelling at wood or something else odour may appear. Appear to 'his' sati. It all depends on the citta at that moment. -------- > > K: It seems me to me (or it seemed at the time) too much like formal > vipassana meditation in which people "look" for dhammas. But maybe I > was being overly cautious. :-) ------- N: It depends on the individual, some may try to find dhammas, but this is not necessary, there are dhammas all the time, ready to be object of awareness, or object of ignorance. > > -------- > K: Did I detect a hint about the Visudhimagga thread? :-) I have a > complete mental block about it. The more I put it off the harder it > is to get around to. Tomorrow! Definitely tomorrow! (I hope.) ------- N: In the first place I want to say that it is good that Larry is posting all these years from the Visuddhimagga and now encouraging you and others to type out other chapters. Some people do not have confidence in the Visuddhimagga, thinking it is not in conformity with the Tipitaka. But when one makes a study of the Visuddhimagga and if possible with its Co, the Tiika, written by Dhammapala, they can see that there is nothing contradictory, that it is full of references to and quotes from the Suttanta. Like what I am doing now, the seven forms of annihilation view and eternalism, including five views of 'nibbana here and now', this refers to the Brahmajaalasutta. We find these views today. Thus, to begin with, if you see the benefit you will be motivated. Then, it is good to read the passage you will type first. Then you can meditate on something edifying you will add for the readers. You just think of helping. Nina. #86466 From: TGrand458@... Date: Sat May 31, 2008 7:15 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Kamma and Accumulations (wasRe: Mental states......) TGrand458@... Hi Howard, Alex, and Scott In a message dated 5/31/2008 11:23:54 A.M. Mountain Daylight Time, truth_aerator@... writes: Dear Howard, --- In _dhammastudygroup@dhammastudygdha_ (mailto:dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com) , upasaka@... wrote: However, what occurs now is based on what occurred before. Else, there are phenomena that arise without precondition, randomly or with "self" as condition, and that is not the Buddha's teaching as I understand it. >>>> One does NOT exclude the other. There can be what is called "co- determination"determination", you know like "river shapes the riverbed shapes the river". Nobody is arguing for 100% free volition. Of course "one" has to work with what is present. However to say that "everything is caused 100% from past causes" goes against what the Buddha has taught ....................................................... TG: One the one hand, if there was no past, then there would be no present. So, in a manner of speaking, it is correct to say that all that is present grew out of the past. There are mental tendencies driven by past interactions, and there is a whole slew of current mental and physical interactions driving the present. Things change and evolve due to the combining of these conditions. It is the conditions that are arising, becoming-otherwise, and fading away. And they change and evolve in dependence of the way the conditions meet. There is no "self" driving the process. There is nothing "free" of conditions...barring Nibbana. ............................................................. === "Having approached the priests & contemplatives who hold that... 'Whatever a person experiences.that... 'Whatever a person experi done in the past,' I said to them: 'Is it true that you hold that... "Whatever a person experiences.that... "Whatever a person experi done in the past?"' Thus asked by me, they admitted, 'Yes.' Then I said to them, 'Then in that case, a person is a killer of living beings because of what was done in the past. A person is a thief... unchaste... a liar... a divisive speaker... a harsh speaker... an idle chatterer... greedy... malicious... a holder of wrong views because of what was done in the past.' When one falls back on what was done in the past as being essential, monks, there is no desire, no effort [at the thought], 'This should be done. This shouldn't be done.' When one can't pin down as a truth or reality what should & shouldn't be done, one dwells bewildered & unprotected. One cannot righteously refer to oneself as a contemplative. This was my first righteous refutation of those priests & contemplatives who hold to such teachings, such views. _http://www.accesstohttp://www.ahttp://wwhttp://www.achttp://wwhttp_ (http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an03/an03.061.than.html) === ....................................................... TG: This quote is obviously a repudiation of those who believed that making an effort was in vain. Effort is made, based on the whole range of conditions driving the effort. If folks had the view that "effort" was fruitless, then THAT view would be a condition that would work to generate more suffering for them. The Buddha was trying to deliver conditions that would lead anyway from suffering. Hence, Buddha was supplying "motivating conditions" for "effort making." ........................................................... >>>> *Phenomena arise neither from themselves, nor from things distinctly other, nor without condition. Both the existence of phenomena and their interrelatedness are subtle and avoiding of extremes. >>>>> The above line isn't logical. If phenomena isn't caused by x or not- x, then it means that phenomena is UNCAUSED. But then Nagarjuna goes to refute what he said just before. ............................................................ TG: Conditions are not "separate things/entities." Howard, I believe, is saying there are no separate things "of themselves," also, "separate X" does not cause "separate Y" because their are no "separates" in actuality. In fact, Howard's statement makes perfect "causal sense" and is quite correct. (From a deep vantage.) TG #86467 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat May 31, 2008 11:29 am Subject: Re: [dsg] What are the causes of 4 great elements + space & consciousness 5-6th? nilovg Hi Alex and Herman, Op 31-mei-2008, om 1:21 heeft Alex het volgende geschreven: > N: These groups arise and fall away and space does so > > together with these groups. Because of space the groups are > > differentiated from each other and the rupas of which they consist > > hold together. Space is originated by the same factor as the group > it surrounds, thus, by one of the four. > What? Space is generally an absense of anything! It has lack of > resistence and absense of anything in it/ > > I don't understand this. Lets imagine an object. Remove the object > and you will see empty space. > Another, a much better and modern example: Space is a "place" where > things can be located. No space, no location possible for anything > material. -------- N: Your approach is more philosophical, or conventional, not the paramattha approach. Sure, I understand and we can use conventional terms, so do the commentaries to explain space: untouched by the four great elements, it cannot be scratched. Or the hollow space in the ear which is one of the conditions for hearing sound. But there is another approach: it is a quality of rupa that has the function of delimiting groups of rupa, kalapas, of the body. It is one of the twentyeight rupas. ------- H:I take it that rupa has a property of size? ------ N: yes, but infinitesimal. Nina. #86468 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat May 31, 2008 11:38 am Subject: Re: [dsg] A Paragraph that Might be of Interest nilovg Hi Howard, interesting. We could change Presence into dhamma. Dhamma is everywhere, no lack of dhammas, and they can be objects of awareness 'even at unlikely times and through unlikely places.' Nina. Op 31-mei-2008, om 17:20 heeft upasaka@... het volgende geschreven: > I noticed one paragraph in it that I find to > be "very Buddhist," and with the possible exception of the last > sentence, I > suspect that many here will rather like what is being said. The > paragraph is > as follows: > > Entrances to holiness are everywhere. > The possibility of ascent is all the time, > even at unlikely times and through unlikely places. > There is no place on earth without the Presence. #86469 From: "Alex" Date: Sat May 31, 2008 11:43 am Subject: [dsg] Kamma and Accumulations (wasRe: Mental states......) truth_aerator Hi Howard --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: === > "Having approached the priests & contemplatives who hold > that... 'Whatever a person experiences... is all caused by what was done in the past,' I said to them: 'Is it true that you hold > that... "Whatever a person experiences... is all caused by what was > done in the past?"' Thus asked by me, they admitted, 'Yes.' Then I > said to them, 'Then in that case, a person is a killer of living > beings because of what was done in the past. A person is a thief... > unchaste... a liar... a divisive speaker... a harsh speaker... an > idle chatterer... greedy... malicious... a holder of wrong views > because of what was done in the past.' When one falls back on what > was done in the past as being essential, monks, there is no desire, > no effort [at the thought], 'This should be done. This shouldn't be > done.' When one can't pin down as a truth or reality what should & > shouldn't be done, one dwells bewildered & unprotected. One cannot > righteously refer to oneself as a contemplative. This was my first > righteous refutation of those priests & contemplatives who hold to > such teachings, such views. > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an03/an03.061.than.html > === > > >>>> > *Phenomena arise neither from themselves, nor from things distinctly > other, nor without condition. Both the existence of phenomena and > their interrelatedness are subtle and avoiding of extremes. > >>>>> > > > The above line isn't logical. If phenomena isn't caused by x or not-x, then it means that phenomena is UNCAUSED. But then Nagarjuna goes to refute what he said just before. > ----------------------------------------------- > Howard: I disagree. I find it quite logical (and even true! ;-), but the problem lies, I believe, in how existence and interrelationship is usually understood (in a substantialist fashion). > ------------------------------------------------ It all depends on what exactly do you mean by "substantiality". The fact is that there IS difference between phenomenon. Yellow is not the same as black. Metta is different from Anger, Greed from Non- Greed etc. Furthermore, there IS an objective (as in public and mind- independent) substance. If no substance was, then nothing would exist. It doesn't matter how many zero's you add, the net result is 0. If you try to define A by B and B by C ad infinitum or in a closed loop, then one zero is used as a definition of another zero. This can't be because we clearly see the difference. In fact I see that "substantialist" view makes more sense than anti- substantialist arguments of Vasubandhu (in works such as Vimsaka Karika). IMHO, the point of Buddha's teaching is to ultimately stop craving for anything. If one believes in essenseless of all dharmas, then one could believe that a rotting corpse isn't substantially different from a beautiful corpse, or that Dukkha doesn't really exist... Or that samsara is no different than Nirvana... Etc. (If samsara is not different from Nirvana, why achieve Nirvana if it is here already?) You can't imagine yourself having a million of dollars right now, and have the money materialize. Why? Because substance is different from the thought about substance. Best wishes, Alex #86470 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat May 31, 2008 11:59 am Subject: Re: [dsg] difficulties nilovg Dear Lukas, Op 30-mei-2008, om 22:23 heeft szmicio het volgende geschreven: > when vedana arise is there any activity in kaya dvara? ------- N: Feeling accompanies each citta, and it shares the object citta experiences. Citta cognizes an object through one of the six doors, and vedana feels, it experiences the taste of the object. It is different from what we call in conventional language sensation. ---------- > > L: what can we do to see the cittas which arises in sens door process? > I know only that there are diffrents moments which appears when we > hearing or seeing. seeing shaps, thinking about that, feeling. -------- N: Nothing else can be done but developing more understanding of them. We cannot try to see these moments. We have to have more understanding of cittas and their functions. Seeing can arise only when there are eyesense (a rupa) and visible object or colour (another rupa). Seeing is a dhamma, it has no owner, no Lukas who sees. The same with hearing, no Lukas who hears. No Lukas who thinks. They are all cittas arising because of conditions, they are dhammas. --------- > > N: > Samma-sati accompanies kusala citta with understanding, > understanding > > of ultimate realities, different from conventional realities. It is > > not thinking. > > L: I've noticed that the thinking is realy diffrent moment that > sati,but > this thinking still arise. ------- N: Then it is time to have more understanding of thinking. If there were no citta there could not be any thinking at this moment. -------- > > > It can arise when there has been enough listening, study, and > > considering of the Dhamma. It is of no use to wish for it, it cannot > > be made to arise at will, because it is anatta. > ---------- > > L: I still have doubts about that. I had a few moments of right > understending just because of considering and study Dhamma, but I have > a lot of thinking and confusion too. ------ N: Everybody has, that is very common. We accumulated ignorance for countless past lives. A few moments of understanding now is good, than there are conditions for its arising again later on. Nina. #86471 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat May 31, 2008 12:05 pm Subject: Re: Q. [dsg] Overview of KS 1: Background nilovg Hi TG, Op 25-mei-2008, om 1:12 heeft TGrand458@... het volgende geschreven: > Whether you mentioned the commentaries or not is a non-factor > because your > view of Dhamma is definitely commentary driven. This makes > Abhidhamma a > necessary link for you to uphold those things in the commentaries I > mentioned > above. This make Abhidhamma more crucial for you than it > necessarily would for > someone else. ------- N: Abhidhamma is one part of the Tipitaka, so it depends on the individual how crucial that is for him. The Commentaries are commentaries to the three parts of the Tipitaka. It is best to study them so that one knows for oneself whether they are helpful or not. It is not useful to talk about them in general. Nina. #86472 From: upasaka@... Date: Sat May 31, 2008 8:20 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Kamma and Accumulations (wasRe: Mental states......) upasaka_howard Hi, Scott - In a message dated 5/31/2008 2:05:49 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, scduncan@... writes: Dear Howard, Regarding: H: "Then I agree with you! :-)" Scott: I thought that this was the case! ---------------------------------------------- Howard: Yeah, just clarifying & reaffirming. :-) ----------------------------------------------- Sincerely, Scott. ======================= With metta, Howard #86473 From: "Alex" Date: Sat May 31, 2008 12:30 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] What are the causes of 4 great elements + space & consciousness 5-6th? truth_aerator Hi Nina and all, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > N: Your approach is more philosophical, or conventional, not the > paramattha approach. Sure, I understand and we can use conventional > terms, so do the commentaries to explain space: untouched by the four > great elements, it cannot be scratched. Or the hollow space in the > ear which is one of the conditions for hearing sound. > But there is another approach: it is a quality of rupa that has the > function of delimiting groups of rupa, kalapas, of the body. It is > one of the twentyeight rupas. >>> But the Buddha has stated this "conventional" view -> ============ what is the internal space property? Anything internal, belonging to oneself, that's space, spatial, & sustained: the holes of the ears, the nostrils, the mouth, the [passage] whereby what is eaten, drunk, consumed, & tasted gets swallowed, and where it collects, and whereby it is excreted from below, or anything else internal, within oneself, that's space, spatial, & sustained: This is called the internal space property." http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.140.than.html Best wishes, Alex #86474 From: upasaka@... Date: Sat May 31, 2008 8:45 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Kamma and Accumulations (wasRe: Mental states......) upasaka_howard Hi, Alex - In a message dated 5/31/2008 2:43:45 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, truth_aerator@... writes: Hi Howard --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: === > "Having approached the priests & contemplatives who hold > that... 'Whatever a person experiences... is all caused by what was done in the past,' I said to them: 'Is it true that you hold > that... "Whatever a person experiences... is all caused by what was > done in the past?"' Thus asked by me, they admitted, 'Yes.' Then I > said to them, 'Then in that case, a person is a killer of living > beings because of what was done in the past. A person is a thief... > unchaste... a liar... a divisive speaker... a harsh speaker... an > idle chatterer... greedy... malicious... a holder of wrong views > because of what was done in the past.' When one falls back on what > was done in the past as being essential, monks, there is no desire, > no effort [at the thought], 'This should be done. This shouldn't be > done.' When one can't pin down as a truth or reality what should & > shouldn't be done, one dwells bewildered & unprotected. One cannot > righteously refer to oneself as a contemplative. This was my first > righteous refutation of those priests & contemplatives who hold to > such teachings, such views. > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an03/an03.061.than.html > === > > >>>> > *Phenomena arise neither from themselves, nor from things distinctly > other, nor without condition. Both the existence of phenomena and > their interrelatedness are subtle and avoiding of extremes. > >>>>> > > > The above line isn't logical. If phenomena isn't caused by x or not-x, then it means that phenomena is UNCAUSED. But then Nagarjuna goes to refute what he said just before. > ----------------------------------------------- > Howard: I disagree. I find it quite logical (and even true! ;-), but the problem lies, I believe, in how existence and interrelationship is usually understood (in a substantialist fashion). > ------------------------------------------------ It all depends on what exactly do you mean by "substantiality". The fact is that there IS difference between phenomenon. Yellow is not the same as black. Metta is different from Anger, Greed from Non- Greed etc. --------------------------------------------------- Howard: I agree. I have frequently asserted that being distinguishable and being separate are not the same. Distinguishability (or distinctiveness) of phenomena is a fact, but IMO separateness is not - seamlessness is. --------------------------------------------------- Furthermore, there IS an objective (as in public and mind- independent) substance. If no substance was, then nothing would exist. ------------------------------------------------- Howard: Not a view that I share. ---------------------------------------------- It doesn't matter how many zero's you add, the net result is 0. -------------------------------------------- Howard: Not such good math! ;-) The real line is of infinite extent, and it consists of points each having zero extent. -------------------------------------------- If you try to define A by B and B by C ad infinitum or in a closed loop, then one zero is used as a definition of another zero. This can't be because we clearly see the difference. ---------------------------------------------- Howard: You can't conceive of groundlessness as compatible with existence. Okay. But I have no problem with it. ---------------------------------------------- In fact I see that "substantialist" view makes more sense than anti- substantialist arguments of Vasubandhu (in works such as Vimsaka Karika). ------------------------------------------------- Howard: To each his own. --------------------------------------------- IMHO, the point of Buddha's teaching is to ultimately stop craving for anything. ----------------------------------------------- Howard: Yes, due to uprooting of ignorance. ---------------------------------------------- If one believes in essenseless of all dharmas, then one could believe that a rotting corpse isn't substantially different from a beautiful corpse, or that Dukkha doesn't really exist... Or that samsara is no different than Nirvana... Etc. -------------------------------------------------- Howard: So you say and believe. I do not. ------------------------------------------------- (If samsara is not different from Nirvana, why achieve Nirvana if it is here already?) --------------------------------------------------- Howard: My perspective on that is that samsara is "the appearance realm of separate things," and that it is nibbana misperceived. With bodhi, the complete and final removal of avijja, the misperception is gone, and there are no longer two realms to be distinguished - there is just reality. We do not "achieve" nibbana, we realize it. Nibbana is uncreated. --------------------------------------------------- You can't imagine yourself having a million of dollars right now, and have the money materialize. Why? Because substance is different from the thought about substance. ------------------------------------------------- Howard: No, substance, i.e., some "something standing under," is not involved here at all. The imagining doesn't produce what is desired, because specific effects require specific conditions. The Buddha taught Dhamma practice instead of dog-duty ascetism, because the former leads to release, and the latter does not. It's a matter of conditionality, not substance. ------------------------------------------------- Best wishes, Alex ======================== Withy metta, Howard #86475 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Sat May 31, 2008 3:40 pm Subject: Re: The lsat post kenhowardau --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "pannabahulo" wrote: > . . . > > And I have come to the conclusion that the position held by the most > conservative of Ajan Sujin's disciples is basically flawed. > > This is certainly not a personal attack whatsoever. The members of the > DSG group are some of the nicest people I've ever met. But, all in > all, the DSG view is extremely narrow and refuses to acknowledge there > are many different ways of understanding. The worst aspect is that > they believe their understanding is SUPERIOR and that only they have > the TRUE DHAMMA. > > No one has replied to the most important point I raised in my letter > about last week's meeting in Bangkok: > Dear Venerable Pannabahulo, I would like to remind you of a very old joke. A drunk is standing under a streetlamp searching the pavement for his car keys. A passer-by stops to help, but they can't find them. Eventually the passer-by asks, "Are you sure this is where you dropped your keys?" and the drunk says, "No, I dropped them on the other side of the street, but the light is better here." Do you see what I am getting at? The three characteristics, anicca dukkha and anatta, belong to paramattha dhammas, which are very difficult for uninstructed worldlings to see. Concepts are easy to see, but there is no point in looking in concepts for the three characteristics. No point at all! Discussions with A Sujin are like looking in the right (hard to see) place. Inevitably, people will plead with her to help them look 'under the streetlamp' as well. But no matter how poignantly they plead Ajahn will not comply. As I heard her say once, "There is right and there is wrong: the two do not mix." Ken H #86476 From: "Phil" Date: Sat May 31, 2008 4:20 pm Subject: Re: Overview of KS 3: Her Faulty Teaching philofillet Hi again Sukin and all I wrote: > And you also, in my opinion, fail to appreciate the wonderful ways > in which *conventional, mundane morality* is taught by the Buddha. When praising the very conventional ways in which the Buddha's approach to morality is superior to other religions (I wrote this only because AS students never fail to point out that being interested in conventional moral means one fails to appreciate what is unique about the Dhamma) I forgot to write about a very important thing. Though I don't personally feel compelled to an interest in bhavana, because my lifestyle and gross state of defilements require a more modest priority which I find in conventional morality and its stories about people and situations, it is *only* within a mind sheltered with respect to morality that bhavana will take place. This is explicitly laid out by the Buddha in such suttas as AN VI, 50, which B. Bodhi entitles "Step by Step" in his anthology. (I would like to know the Pali title and its meaning, if someone sees this parethesis, could they reply...perhaps B.Bodhi has been a bit misleading with this choice of title, or perhaps it is faithful to the Pali) "If there is no sense control, O monks, then the basis for virtue is destroyed for one who lacks sense control. If there is no virtue, then the basis for right concentration is destroyed for one who lacks virtue. If there is no right concentration, then the basis for knowledge and vision of things as they really are is destoryed for one who lacks right concentration.... ...this is like a tree wihtout branches and foliage: the budhs will not mature; nor will the bark, the greenwood and the heartwood mature. SImilarly, if sense control is absent, there will be no basis for virtue..." I have heard this sutta brought up by Sarah to AS in a recorded talk, and it was readily explained away, and it has been brought up on list here, and readily explained away, with reference to commentarial material, and perhaps the readily explaining away was correct, yes, I acknowledge that. Someday I will perhaps have time to read through the long blocks of commentarial material that are posted in response to these straightforward sutta passages and seek to determine if they are relevant, but I can't for now. I have to trust myself with straightforward sutta passages, based on confirmations I have received of their truth and trust that the Buddha taught clearly and the translators are doing a good job. Anyways, my point is that for me, conventional Buddhist morality is a satisfactory end in itslef, but for those who have conditions for developing deeper understanding, more libeating understanding, this morality is a necessary shelter for developing within. (All the neat anecdotes about murderers suddenly being enlightened should be left aside, in my opinion. They can mislead people into thinking that morality is not the first step.) As I said before, you can add something if you want, SUkin. You tend to explain your understanding of what you have learned from AS rather than use textual references, so since I don't trust AS fully, it's hard to know what to make of your thinking, or hard to treat it with full respect. Nothing personal, you know, just my lack of faith in your teacher. For you explaining things in the light of her teahcing is great, and great for her students to read. Sorry if it doesn't or can't do much for me at this time. :) Metta, Phil #86477 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Sat May 31, 2008 4:58 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Overview of KS 3: Her Faulty Teaching egberdina Hi Sukin, 2008/5/30 Sukinder : > Hi Phil, > > > In other words, Buddhist and non- Buddhist, everyone relatively > easily distinguishes general `good' from `evil'. A Buddhist hears > about `Wrong View' and may know to see the danger in not believing in > kamma – vipakka and the fact of rebirth, but even here it happens > usually only after it has been well explained. And often this > continues and remains at a level of `conceptual idea' or story only, > in other words, mere "belief". Most Buddhist failing to go any deeper > to begin recognizing `wrong view' as being `evil' as he would other > forms of akusala, such as aversion and attachment, continues falling > prey to it whenever it arises. This is however understandable, since > he has so far been *used to* seeing only those other forms of akusala > and even came to be attracted to the Buddha's teachings primarily > because it also talks about these same akusala. In fact even upon > reflection, he has difficulty acknowledging wrong view as having > `characteristic' of akusala. In other words, he knows it by > `reasoning' only and this too only with regard to certain concepts > such as kamma and rebirth. Let alone gradually becoming used to > characteristic of wrong view, he struggles against suggestions about > this even at the level of `reasoning', especially when this concerns > ideas about "doing good" and practice. > I have only quoted one paragraph, but you said in the foregoing that there is great danger in believing in a soul / enduring self. Perhaps that is so in some ways. I would say with more certainly that there is great danger in reciting an anatta mantra to oneself, when it is not at all understood. One who believes in a soul must accept personal responsibility for their actions. Eventually, this weight of responsibility will be the cause of much suffering, as one seeks to find an ethical path through the inevitable slings and arrows of outrageous fortune. On the other hand, the one who recites their anatta mantra without believing it or understanding it, is like the stupid baby boy lying on it's back, totally dependent on his environment and incapable of action. As the Buddha points out in MN78, such a being lacks any skill whatsoever. The worldlings who disavows themselves of the possibility of action in the world is not consumate in virtue, they are fools. There is a tad of difference between someone incapable of action, and the following, wouldn't you say? "Now, an individual endowed with which ten qualities is one whom I describe as being consummate in what is skillful, foremost in what is skillful, an invincible contemplative attained to the highest attainments? One endowed with the right view of one beyond training, the right resolve of one beyond training, the right speech... the right action... the right livelihood... the right effort... the right mindfulness... the right concentration... the right knowledge... the right release of one beyond training. An individual endowed with these ten qualities is one whom I describe as being consummate in what is skillful, foremost in what is skillful, an invincible contemplative attained to the highest attainments." Cheers Herman #86478 From: LBIDD@... Date: Sat May 31, 2008 5:11 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Kamma and Accumulations (wasRe: Mental states......) lbidd2 Hi all, I haven't been following this thread but I could pitch in a couple of thoughts. According to Vism., accumulation is the mechanism by which kamma from a previous life is able to condition kamma result in this life. As we have seen in the Vism.XVII thread on dependent arising, ignorance conditions all kinds of kamma; feeling with the help of latent tendencies conditions kamma in the form of craving; and clinging conditions all kinds of kamma, wholesome and unwholesome. "Accumulation" in the sense of learning would fall in the domain of perception, imo (just a guess), and perception would be active in all three areas. Larry #86479 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Sat May 31, 2008 5:16 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Lessons in Detachment, Ch 5, no 2. egberdina Hi Scott, 2008/5/30 Scott Duncan : > Dear Herman, > > Thanks for the reply: > > H: "Experience = object. Objectless seeing, hearing etc is > indiscriminate thinking." > > Scott: This will bear some unpacking. Can you clarify? > All experience is experience of something. We do not just see, we see something, we do not just hear, we hear something, we do not just feel, we feel something etc. But what we do not experience is the seeing, hearing, feeling etc, we experience the object, > H: "An experience is an experience because it is known. An unknown > experience is like the bhavanga citta, the tripe of theorists." > > Scott: In the moment - that very moment of experience - all of the > characteristics of that experience are theoretically knowable, but, as > I understand the Dhamma, Ignorance, for the undeveloped, functions and > is Not Knowing, which is also experience. In other words, the > presence of a particular dhamma known as ignorance imbues that moment > of experience with a certain quality which prevents knowing but can't > prevent 'experience'. You seem to be saying that there is more to any experience that what is experienced. If I experience walking to the fridge, that is what I experience, what else should there be? > > H: "I have no faith in the people who talk about them as though they > have known them." > > Scott: That's fine, but it doesn't address the question. I don't have > faith in 'people', period. But what about whether you think that > there is such a thing as a 'Path moment'. Do you? The other day Vicki and I had to give evidence in court about a serious assault we witnessed and broke up. The counsel for the defense spent a good 40 minutes trying to make me say things I didn't believe to be the case, and make me deny things I did believe to be the case. Now you are trying to pin me down about something I have no clue about, and I understand full well that whichever way I lean, there will be consequences. If I say I do not believe in Path moments, you will believe you have another iron with which to brand me an infidel, and sufficient reason to hand out some "Scott" treatment. If I say that I do believe in Path moments, I will be saying something that isn't true, for I don't have a clue what Path moments are. How can I reasonably take a position on what I don't know? You obviously believe it is very important that I do take a position on it. Why, may I ask? > > H: "Yes, I am asking about the knowing, the experience of Path moments." > > Scott: Actually, I was asking whether or not you were referring to the > qualities of the Path - its constituents, not its experience, but this > goes back to your original equation: experience=object. If you can > clarify this, we might proceed. This may be semantics only, but I understand any quality to be something experiencable. Do you mean quality to be something like a condition, not something experienced but a cause for the experience? Cheers Herman #86480 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Sat May 31, 2008 5:20 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Kamma and Accumulations (wasRe: Mental states......) egberdina Hi Scott, 2008/6/1 Scott Duncan : > Dear Herman, > > Thanks for the reply: > > > Now to the sutta you submit: can you please give a more precise > reference? I'll want to look at it more closely. > I will reply to your other points later. I did say in my post that my source was SN (Sutta Nipata) 599 to 620. If that is not sufficient I can give you the link to the site where I got it from. Cheers Herman #86481 From: LBIDD@... Date: Sat May 31, 2008 5:21 pm Subject: Vism.XVII,266 Vism.XVII,267 lbidd2 "The Path of Purification" (Visuddhimagga), Ch. XVII 266. Another through self-theory clinging thinks, 'This self comes to be blissful, or comes to be free from fever, in the becoming in the fortunate states in the sense sphere or in one or other of the fine-material and immaterial kinds of becoming', and he performs kamma to achieve that. That kamma of his is kamma-process becoming. The aggregates generated by the kamma are rebirth-process becoming. But the percipient, etc., kinds of becoming are included in that too. Thus this self-theory clinging is a condition for all the three, namely, becoming with their analysis and their synthesis. 267. Another [thinks] through rite-and-ritual clinging, 'This rite and ritual leads him who perfects it to perfect bliss in becoming in the fortunate states of the sense sphere or in the fine-material or immaterial kinds of becoming', and he performs kamma to achieve that. That kamma of his is kamma-process becoming. The aggregates generated by the kamma are rebirth-process becoming. But the percipient, etc., kinds of becoming are included in that, too. So rite-and-ritual clinging is a condition for all three, namely, the sense-desire, fine-material and immaterial kinds of becoming with their analysis and their synthesis. This is how the exposition should be known here according to 'which is condition for which'. ************************** 266. aparo ``aya.m attaa naama kaamaavacarasampattibhave vaa ruupaaruupabhavaana.m vaa a~n~natarasmi.m sukhii hoti vigatapari.laaho''ti attavaadupaadaanena tadupaga.m kamma.m karoti, tassa ta.m kamma.m kammabhavo. tadabhinibbattaa khandhaa upapattibhavo. sa~n~naabhavaadayo pana tadantogadhaa eva. iti attavaadupaadaana.m sappabhedaana.m saantogadhaana.m ti.n.na.m bhavaana.m paccayo hoti. 267. aparo ``ida.m siilabbata.m naama kaamaavacarasampattibhave vaa ruupaaruupabhavaana.m vaa a~n~natarasmi.m paripuurentassa sukha.m paaripuuri.m gacchatii''ti siilabbatupaadaanavasena tadupaga.m kamma.m karoti, tassa ta.m kamma.m kammabhavo. tadabhinibbattaa khandhaa upapattibhavo. sa~n~naabhavaadayo pana tadantogadhaa eva. iti siilabbatupaadaana.m sappabhedaana.m saantogadhaana.m ti.n.na.m bhavaana.m paccayo hoti. evamettha ya.m yassa paccayo hoti, tatopi vi~n~naatabbo vinicchayo. #86482 From: "connie" Date: Sat May 31, 2008 6:00 pm Subject: Vism.XVII,266 Vism.XVII,267 nichiconn Path of Purity, p.691-2: Another man, by means of the grasping of a theory of the self thinks, that what is known as the self is happy and free from torments in the becoming of attainments in a world of sense, or in one or other of the becomings of matter and non-matter, and does deeds which lead thereto. That karma of his is the becoming of karma; the aggregates which produce it [575] are the becoming of rebirth. And included therein are the becomings of perception and so on. Thus is grasping of a theory of the self the cause of the three becomings, together with their different kinds and the included states. Another man by means of the grasping of rite and ritual thinks that this rite and ritual easily reaches perfection for one who filfils it in the becoming of attainments in a world of sense, or in one or other of the becomings of matter and non-matter, and does deeds which lead thereto. That karma of his is the becoming of karma; the aggregates which produce it are the becoming of rebirth. And included therein are the becomings of perception and so on. Thus is the grasping of rite and ritual the cause of the three becoming, together with their different kinds and the included states. Thus should decision be known according to what is cause of what. #86483 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Sat May 31, 2008 9:00 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Kamma and Accumulations (wasRe: Mental states......) egberdina Hi Scott, 2008/6/1 Scott Duncan : > Dear Herman, > > > H: "...There are two ways in which kamma is presented in the nikayas, > one is kamma as action in the world, and the other is kamma as > intention. Kamma as action says no more than one is what one > does...One is what one does. And please re-read 607-611 again, for it > cannot be more explicitly stated that one's birth does not determine > what one will end up doing. What I do now is NOT a result of what I > did or what was done to me previously." > > Scott: This view misunderstands action and result. What you *do* now > is cause for a *result* in the future. One's birth is result. Other > conditions effect what is done. Kamma is not vipaaka. As an aside, it was my mistake to refer to Sutta Nipata as SN. It should have been Sn. Sorry about any confusion. The comments you make are interesting, and investigating them will allow us to get to the heart of the matter very quickly, I believe. I'm hoping that we can agree on at least some of the following: a)that the birth of a baby is not the same as the birth of a self b)that the birth of a baby is the result of the actions of it's parents c)that one is a mother or father by the results of these actions d)that the birth of a baby is neither an act of that baby or a result of an act of that baby e)that a baby has no concept of being born, or does not think in terms of a self f)that birth in the context of DO refers to the birth of a self, not the birth of a baby What do you reckon? Cheers Herman #86484 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Sat May 31, 2008 9:16 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Kamma and Accumulations (wasRe: Mental states......) egberdina Hi Howard, 2008/6/1 : > > ============================= > However, what occurs now is based on what occurred before. Else, there > are phenomena that arise without precondition, randomly or with "self" as > condition, and that is not the Buddha's teaching as I understand it. > *Phenomena arise neither from themselves, nor from things distinctly > other, nor without condition. Both the existence of phenomena and their > interrelatedness are subtle and avoiding of extremes. > You may have clarified this already further on in the thread, but what does it mean "to be based"? Saying that there was a past before this present is different to saying that the past is necessary for this present. Are you saying that the past is necessary for this present? Cheers Herman #86485 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Sat May 31, 2008 9:30 pm Subject: Re: Vism XX, 'Knowledge of What is/is not the Path' kenhowardau Hi all, Humble apologies for the delay. I had wanted to begin this instalment with a revision of what we have read in Chapter XX so far. But the truth is I find it too complicated. I know Larry, Nina and Sarah have helped to put it in perspective on many occasions, and I only need to reread their contributions. But rather than wait until I have done that I will simply go ahead. I might just add one comment, namely, that the language here is obviously 'descriptive' not 'prescriptive.' Despite constantly reading how the meditator "should do this" and "should do that" we can see that the process is purely one of understanding. It cannot be one of looking or of doing. "[Nine Ways of Sharpening the Faculties Etc.] 21. While thus engaged in inductive insight, however, if it does not succeed, he should sharpen his faculties [of faith, etc.,] in the nine ways stated thus 'The faculties become sharp in nine ways; (1) he sees only the destruction of arisen formations; (2) and in that [occupation] he makes sure of working carefully, (3) he makes sure of working perseveringly, (4) he makes sure of working suitably, and (5) by apprehending the sign of concentration and (6) by balancing the enlightenment factors (7) he establishes disregard of body and life, (8) wherein he overcomes [pain] by renunciation and (9) by not stopping halfway. He should avoid the seven unsuitable things in the way stated in the description of the Earth Kasina (Ch.IV.para55) and cultivate the seven suitable things, and he should comprehend the material at one time and the immaterial at another. [Comprehension of the Material] 22. While comprehending materiality he should see how materiality is generated, that is to say, how this materiality is generated by the four causes beginning with kamma. Herein, when materiality is being generated in any being, it is fruit generated from kamma. For, at the actual moment of rebirth-linking of a child in the womb first thirty instances of materiality are generated in the triple continuity, in other words, the decads of physical [heart] basis, body and sex. And those are generated at the actual instance of rebirth-linking consciousness's arising. And as at the instant of its arising, so too at the instant of its presence and at the instant of its dissolution. 23. Herein, the cessation of materiality is slow and its transformation ponderous, while the cessation of consciousness is swift and its transformation quick (light); hence it is said 'Bhikkhus, I see no other one thing that is so quickly transformed as the mind' (A.i,10). 24. For the life continuum consciousness arises and ceases sixteen times while one material instance endures. With consciousness the instant of arising, instant of presence, and instant of dissolution are quick like those [of consciousness], while the instant of its presence is long and lasts while sixteen consciousnesses arise and cease." #86486 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Sat May 31, 2008 9:31 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] The substance of form - was Kamma and Accumulations egberdina Hi Alex, 2008/6/1 Alex : > Hi Howard >> ----------------------------------------------- >> Howard: > I disagree. I find it quite logical (and even true! ;-), but the > problem lies, I believe, in how existence and interrelationship is > usually understood (in a substantialist fashion). >> ------------------------------------------------ > > > It all depends on what exactly do you mean by "substantiality". > > The fact is that there IS difference between phenomenon. Yellow is > not the same as black. Metta is different from Anger, Greed from Non- > Greed etc. > > Furthermore, there IS an objective (as in public and mind- > independent) substance. If no substance was, then nothing would > exist. It doesn't matter how many zero's you add, the net result is > 0. If you try to define A by B and B by C ad infinitum or in a > closed loop, then one zero is used as a definition of another zero. > This can't be because we clearly see the difference. > > In fact I see that "substantialist" view makes more sense than anti- > substantialist arguments of Vasubandhu (in works such as Vimsaka > Karika). > I agree with you 100%, Alex. So much so, I'll hive this off as a sub-thread. I suspect there will be some disagreement :-) One of the most-maligned-metaphors (I wanted to say that :-)) in the canon is the simile of the chariot. It is absurd to ignore the fact that it is the form of a chariot that gives it the function of a chariot. To deconstruct a chariot is to deconstruct it's form, and without surprise, a deconstructed chariot cannot fulfill the function of a chariot. The conclusion that therefore aggregated forms do not exist is nonsense. Cheers Herman #86487 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Sat May 31, 2008 9:35 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Kamma and Accumulations (wasRe: Mental states......) egberdina Hi Howard, 2008/6/1 : > Hi, Alex - > ---------------------------------------------- > > It doesn't matter how many zero's you add, the net result is > 0. > -------------------------------------------- > Howard: > Not such good math! ;-) The real line is of infinite extent, and it > consists of points each having zero extent. > -------------------------------------------- I'm not a mathematician by kamma, and I'm happy to be corrected, but the length of a line segment is not a function of the points that constitute it, IMO. Cheers Herman #86488 From: upasaka@... Date: Sat May 31, 2008 5:58 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Kamma and Accumulations (wasRe: Mental states......) upasaka_howard Hi, Herman - In a message dated 6/1/2008 12:16:55 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, hhofmeister@... writes: Hi Howard, 2008/6/1 : > > ============================= > However, what occurs now is based on what occurred before. Else, there > are phenomena that arise without precondition, randomly or with "self" as > condition, and that is not the Buddha's teaching as I understand it. > *Phenomena arise neither from themselves, nor from things distinctly > other, nor without condition. Both the existence of phenomena and their > interrelatedness are subtle and avoiding of extremes. > You may have clarified this already further on in the thread, but what does it mean "to be based"? Saying that there was a past before this present is different to saying that the past is necessary for this present. Are you saying that the past is necessary for this present? Cheers Herman ============================= I'm saying nothing more than the obvious fact that the requisite preconditions for a phenomenon and its co-conditions lie in the past. With metta, Howard #86489 From: upasaka@... Date: Sat May 31, 2008 6:01 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] The substance of form - was Kamma and Accumulations upasaka_howard Hi, Herman (and Alex) - In a message dated 6/1/2008 12:32:04 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, hhofmeister@... writes: One of the most-maligned-metaphors (I wanted to say that :-)) in the canon is the simile of the chariot. It is absurd to ignore the fact that it is the form of a chariot that gives it the function of a chariot. To deconstruct a chariot is to deconstruct it's form, and without surprise, a deconstructed chariot cannot fulfill the function of a chariot. The conclusion that therefore aggregated forms do not exist is nonsense. =========================== I, for one, agree with this. I've made the same point about this metaphor myself in the past when discussing what I've called aggregations. With metta, Howard #86490 From: "colette" Date: Sat May 31, 2008 10:52 am Subject: "' Cause I'm lookin' as cool as can be" The Stray Cats ksheri3 Good Day Scott and Ven. P, I can't believe the chain of events, D.O., which led me and actually forced me grab the plastic bag of papers I have under the table next to my bed, as I began my run from my bed to the stairs and out the front door, today. I could've grabbed the bag that held the material I'm currently working with/on but grabbed this bag by mistake, which holds nothing but materials from the Ronald Epstein folder, and what should I run into as I glance at one of the papers, but it's none other than you Scott and the way you dealt me those cards of a "Before" and an "After" reality or consciousness! This led me to the realization that I'll be stirring up a whole new can of worms or thread which I'm guessing I should leave up to the neophytes and the actual members/believers of the group to do which offers me the chance to at least comment on realities we face. Without further adu: "In the Chinese Consciousness-Only School of Buddhism, Buddhahood, characterized by the perfectly enlightened mind of True Suchness (bhutatathata) is understood as the final realization of a systematic and gradual path. Buddhahood is not a goal which is attained through the acquisition of a special conceptual understanding. Rather it is the end product of a fundamental internal transformation of all mental activity. In the language of Consciousness-Only, that process is referred to as the transformation of 'consciounsess' that has attachment to distinctions as its basice nature, into 'wisdom' that is by its very nature totally free from attachment. <.....>" Ronald Epstein (Originally published in Vajra Bodhi Sea, Jan., Feb. Mar., 1985) Scott, isn't it possible that you are Ambrose Hawk, or at least using his name or appearance as a means but also, aren't you Ronald Epstein, here, since you made the point to me, at one time, that your knowledge was defitiant, lacking, before some event between us and then, later, after the event, occurance, was something other, where I asked why it is, it actually is a behavioral characteristic of certain people in relationship to me, myself, my I, that they force me to navigate impossible situations without any support, without any supply lines, without anything, as if I were nothing but a renegade and a deviant that they, as a group, as a mob, as a gang, are obligated to deny, to turn their backs on, but once I navigate the impossible situations that have been so gleefully handed to me, they THEN turn around and lay claim to my navigation and to my abilities while still maintaining the contempt, the hatred, the Lobha-Mosa- Dosa, for themselves and giving me SHIT, defication, fertilizer that Neo-Nazis use to blow up federal buildings, no? Notice, Scott, that Epstein clearly states the condition of a "Before" and an "After" which you and most other people cling to as well. I am suggesting here, that you are Epstein since you apply and have applied the same thoughts to me. R.Epstein is a noted Buddhist scholar and you appear as a noted Buddhist neophyte, but isn't that a representation of "the highest" and "the lowest", or "the Haves" and "the Have Nots", WEalth and Poverty, as above so below, on earth as it is in heaven, Samsara and Nirvana, type of thing? Clinging, isn't that what VEn. P. was refering to, in his response to you? You grasp at it as if it were something, as if it actually did possess Atta, or is that Svabhava, when in all actuality it is a mere illusion which you clutch so close to your heart and person as if it will save you from the heights of the waves you ride during the Tsunami and you aren't too surprised when that Sunya illusion, hallucination, delusion, turns out to sink like Davey Jones's Locker or like a rock (see Navy Boot Camp dialogue, "You're as smart as a freakin' rock") which, in not surprising you, also assures you of immanent death because you placed your beliefs and self in a false savior, a rock, a lie such as Weapons of Mass Destruction, et al. These concepts here are from the Mahayanist's Point of View since it certainly is not Theravadan but since I got so caught up in "discrepencies" I was wondering what Ven. P. has to say about this conflicting translation that so many in this group have with this KS person and the supposed true Buddhist path? How is it possible for this KS person to be so different through interpretation? Who is doing the clinging to a boat that no longer has a need? toodles, colette <.....> #86491 From: "colette" Date: Sat May 31, 2008 11:08 am Subject: [dsg] Kamma and Accumulations (wasRe: Mental states......) ksheri3 Hi Scott and Alex, Aren't we at "loggerheads"? Didn't I see both of you on the album cover of Led Zepplin's album Presence, back in the 70s which seriously inspried me to obtain tickets and get to see their last appearance at THE CHICAGO STADIUM, in 1977? You are two of the four people sitting at the table looking at THE OBJECT. I like Scott's confrontational style here: > Scott: What, my good fellow, are you talking about? This view differs > from the one I gave earlier. 'Personal' is your bag, man. colette: isn't Fire, a good element to know how to use? I love how you grasped that "stealy" dagger and thrust it into the heart of the message. Stealth is a highly regarded tool in arsenal of a warrior, ask any Ninja or Shogun, but that would be Japanese and I've just started going into the Zen school of thought. VEry smooth Scott! Lets also not forget your application of Cups here as well since you did honor your oponent through that Snydely Wiplash tone "my good fellow", and as we all know every tragic comedy has to have a jest here and there to lighten things up, don't they? toodles, colette ------------------------------------------------- > A: "Congrats for accepting 'personal' accountability for Making Kamma. > So there IS some aspects that can be changed." > > Scott: What, my good fellow, are you talking about? This view differs > from the one I gave earlier. 'Personal' is your bag, man. > > Sincerely, > > Scott. > #86492 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Sat May 31, 2008 10:57 pm Subject: Re: report on Bangkok and Kaeng Krajan kenhowardau Hi Howard, ---------- <. . .> H: > If I may insert some reflections on this: It seems to me that we do observe paramattha dhammas (e.g., various forms of earth element, warmth of various degrees, sights, sounds tastes,smells, etc as well as recalling, thinking, feeling (as pleasant, unpleasant, neutral), liking, disliking, fearing, etc, all the time! When we are paying attention to what's happening, there is clearer observing, ----------- No, I can't agree. No amount of attentiveness to concepts will bring understanding of dhammas. They are like cheese and chalk. I was writing this reply to you when I thought of the fellow in the joke (who chose to look under the streetlamp because the light was better). I decided to send that to Ven. P instead. But can you see how it was analogous to any formal (contrived) attempts at seeing anicca, dukkha and anatta? No amount of concept-study will ever lead to Middle Way insight. ------------------- H: > but when we are not, due to tiredness, laziness, excitement, or whatever, the observing is less sharp. What we typically do *not* observe are sharp beginnings and endings of individual namas and rupas - we seems to miss the paramattha dhammas as units or packets. Perhaps that will develop, or, perhaps it is a merely theoretical (a.k.a., conceptual) construct - I don't know. I do believe, however, as it is taught in Abhidhamma (and I *think* in the suttas), that there are no consciousness gaps. (There is at most a spike in consciousness, or a steady dimming of consciousness followed by a spike, when "losing consciousness." I find it interesting to attend to the "loss of consciousness" when that is underway, for example when being put out during an endoscopy. The "dimming" is quite observable, I find, followed by what I can only call a "spike," followed immediately by alert consciousness back in effect. Really fascinating!) --------------------- This reminds me of my meditation days when I was with the Dhammadinna House group. On one of our retreats we followed a meditation handbook that had us breaking down the sounds we heard. A brief birdcall, for example, was to be heard in three separate stages - beginning, middle and end. But that is a misreading of the texts. I know better now, and I will never return to those old days. I am just as sure of that as I am sure I will never look for keys where I know they are not to be found simply because the light is better. ----------- H: > The matter of observing paramattha dhammas as packets aside, we certainly can, when attention and non-distraction are there, 1) observe that paramattha dhammas are present when they previously were not, that they are no longer present, having previously been present, these two being the observing of a phenomenon or its absence as "new," 2) observe that they are ungraspable, 3)observe that they are not sources of genuine satisfaction and actually hurtful if there is grasping at them or craving (emotional desire) for their elimination or for their growth, and contingent - depending utterly on conditions. Much of the "observing" of these involves a good deal of inference, but developing wisdom, precise & probing on occasion, can play an increasing role, it seems. ------------- If you replace the word "observe" with "understand" then we will have more in common. Even then, however, understanding would have to be understood as a conditioned dhamma, not as something that could be controlled. Ken H #86493 From: "jonoabb" Date: Sun Jun 1, 2008 1:29 am Subject: [dsg] Re: [ dsg] Re: Kamma, was Death. jonoabb Hi Herman > I see a huge inconsistency. > > Your explanation relies on the existence of an individual stream of > consciousness, a closed system that conditions its own future > conditions. That is a good enough definition for a self, in my books. You may choose to characterise a stream of cittas as a 'self' if you like, but that does not mean an inconsistency with the notion that dhammas (including cittas) have the characteristic of 'not-self'. Over to you ;-)) Jon #86494 From: "jonoabb" Date: Sun Jun 1, 2008 1:42 am Subject: Re: Q. [dsg] Overview of KS 1: Background jonoabb Hi Alex > Regarding the suttas. The are very consistent with each other and > definately have the same message. Not so with different Abhidhamma > works. I'm not sure of the point you're making here. The main question is surely that of consistency between the suttas and the Abhidhamma. > ""... in the future, those Suttas uttered by the Tathagata, deep, > profound in meaning, transcending the world, concerning emptiness > (sunyata or illusory nature of existence): to these when uttered they > will not listen, will not give a ready ear, will not want to > understand, to recite, to master them. But those discourses made by > poets, mere poetry, a conglomeration of words and phrases, alien > (outside the Buddha's Teachings), the utterances of disciples: to > these when uttered they will listen, will give a ready ear, will want > to understand, to recite, to master them. Thus it is, monks, that the > Suttas uttered by the Tathagata, deep profound in meaning, > transcending the world, concerning emptiness, will disappear. > Therefore, monks, train yourselves, thus: To these very Suttas will > we listen, give a ready ear, understand, recite and master them." > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/samyutta/sn20-7.html Thanks for the quote. Here the word 'sutta' is used to refer to the teachings of the Buddha vs. the teachings of other persons ("outside the Buddha's Teachings"). It is not a reference to the Sutta Pitaka in particular. > Regarding Dhamma-Vinay a > "In Anguttara Nikaya Sutta 4.180, the Buddha specifically refers to > Dhamma as the Suttas (discourses). " > > "Monks, train yourselves thus: To these very Suttas will we listen, > give a ready ear, understand, recite and master them." > -Buddha, Samyutta Nikaya Sutta 20.7 > http://www.zencomp.com/greatwisdom/ebud/ebdha163.htm Perhaps you meant to give a quote from AN here, rather than from SN? > This is true, this is why there was so many different Abhidhammas in > existence, even though they agreed on the most inner concepts, yet > drastically differed on some other things. I wonder why so many > different interpretations of Buddha's word appeared... > > If Buddha clearly spelled out certain Abh teachings, then we would > not have all the controversies today. There are other versions of both Suttas and Abhidhamma, so I don't follow your reasoning here. Jon #86495 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Jun 1, 2008 1:47 am Subject: Metta, Ch 6, no 3. nilovg Dear friends, We read in the Visuddhimagga, in the section on the Divine Abiding of Mettå (IX, 11), that if a person wants to develop mettå he should extend it first towards someone who has moral excellence and other good qualities, someone he esteems and respects, such as his teacher. When we think of the qualities of such a person our mind becomes gentle, we have no thoughts of malevolence. We wish to help our teacher, to do everything for his benefit and happiness. Thus, the citta which thinks of the good qualities of one’s teacher is gentle and mellow, it is citta with mettå. When we are happy to give assistance to someone we meet in daily life, in the same way as we would give assistance to our teacher, it is evident that we have mettå towards that person. The Buddha praised the development of mettå, even if it is just for a short moment. We should not think that there is any kind of kusala which is unimportant, we should remember that even a short moment of kusala is beneficial. We read in the Kindred Sayings (II, Nidåna vagga, Chapter XX, Kindred Sayings on Parables, §4, The rich gift) that the Buddha, while he was staying at Såvatthí, at the Jeta Grove, said to the monks: If anyone, monks, were to give a morning gift of a hundred “ukkas”, and the same at noon and the same at eventide, or if anyone would develop mettå in the morning, at noon or at eventide, even if it were as slight as one pull at a cow’s udder, this practice would be by far the more fruitful of the two. Wherefore, monks, thus should you train yourselves: liberation of heart by mettå (mettå cetovimutti) we will develop, we will often practise it, we will make it a vehicle and a base, take our stand upon it, store it up, thoroughly set it going. The Buddha taught that all kusala dhammas can be gradually developed. Even if one finds it difficult to develop kusala, it can be accumulated so that it can arise more often and become more powerful. We should not think that we can have a great deal of mettå immediately, but each short moment of mettå is a condition that mettå develops. Otherwise the Buddha would not have taught that mettå even for the duration of one pull of a cow’s udder is beneficial. ****** Nina. #86496 From: "Alex" Date: Sun Jun 1, 2008 5:16 am Subject: Re: Q. [dsg] Overview of KS 1: Background truth_aerator Hi Jon, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: > > Hi Alex > > > Regarding the suttas. The are very consistent with each other and > > definately have the same message. Not so with different Abhidhamma > > works. > > I'm not sure of the point you're making here. The main question is > surely that of consistency between the suttas and the Abhidhamma. > In SN footnes notes, Bhikkhu Bodhi often says something "This is at odds with Abhidhamma". Suttas mention many things that have to be creatively interepreted to fit with Abh. > > Thanks for the quote. Here the word 'sutta' is used to refer to the > teachings of the Buddha vs. the teachings of other persons ("outside > the Buddha's Teachings"). It is not a reference to the Sutta Pitaka > in particular. > And Sutta Pitaka is the earliest we have of Buddha's teaching. Unlike many other works, suttas do say that they were spoken by Buddha or such and such direct disciple of the Buddha. While this itself isn't necesery a proof , it is much more belieavable than texts who do not claim to have been said by the Buddha. >>> > > There are other versions of both Suttas and Abhidhamma, so I don't > follow your reasoning here. > > Jon > Those other suttas are very consistent with each other. The most drastic difference is either the languge or the organization. Some suttas may contain more/less material but it is consistent with overal message. There are some minor differences, but not major. Not unlike all the various Abhidhammas. This is one of the most important proofs about the authenticity of the Sutta. That the various early traditions, separated by 1000s km and ages have very consistent message. It makes on think. The suttas overally are similiar in doctrine. The further philosophical explanations are not... There was a school that taught "Everything exists" including past/present/future , there was a school that said "Nothing ultimately exists". There were realistic and Idealistic Abh schools. There were even a school (led by Ratnakirti) that said that only your own consciousness exists, and the world, the "present moment" and other beings are an illusion (extreme solipsism). There was a school that taught almost an Atman, and there are schools today that seem awfully close. It seems that almost any (if not every) major epistemic position known to Western world was occupied by Buddhist thinkers. I wonder why? Best wishes, Alex #86497 From: "connie" Date: Sun Jun 1, 2008 5:41 am Subject: Perfections Corner (170) nichiconn Dear Friends, ch5, The Perfection of Energy, continues: One will be completely free from dukkha when one has reached arahatship and naama dhammas and ruupa dhammas will not arise anymore after death. This cannot be realized without courage, without the perfection of viriya. We read in the "Exposition of Jatuka.n.nin's Questions" (Mahaa-Niddesa, Khuddaka Nikaaya) that Jatuka.n.nin had heard that the Buddha was courageous and that he therefore was called a hero, viira. The following passage gives the reasons why he was called a hero. There is an association in meaning between the word viira, hero, and viriya, which is the state of a strong man. All that is said in the passage below refers to viriya cetasika. We read: "He had perseverance and was therefore called a hero. He was valiant and was therefore called a hero. He caused others to persevere and was therefore called a hero. He had great capacities and was therefore called a hero. He was brave and always progressing, he was not a coward, not frightened, not fearful, he did not flee, he had eliminated fear and cowardice, he was without any terror, and thus, the Exalted One was courageous. The Exalted One was without the akusala dhammas of this world, he was beyond the suffering of hell, he was endowed with energy. The Buddha had viriya, the four right efforts, he was courageous and steadfast of mind, and therefore he was called courageous." Had the Buddha not been courageous, he could not have penetrated the four noble Truths and become the Sammaasambuddha. The development of each kind of kusala and of pa~n~naa by investigating and considering the dhamma that appears now is based on viriya, energy, and perseverance. We all should have courage and perseverance so that instead of energy for akusala, energy for kusala can arise, otherwise kusala cannot be developed. Effort or energy as applied in an unwholesome way, life after life, is useless. If we are able to understand the characteristic of viriya as applied in a wholesome way and if we shall further develop this kind of energy, we shall understand the words of the above quoted commentary about viriya: someone with viriya will be progressing, he is not a coward, he is not frightened, he has no fear and he does not flee. .. to be continued, connie #86498 From: upasaka@... Date: Sun Jun 1, 2008 4:06 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: report on Bangkok and Kaeng Krajan upasaka_howard Hi, Ken - In a message dated 6/1/2008 1:57:37 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, kenhowardau@... writes: Hi Howard, ---------- <. . .> H: > If I may insert some reflections on this: It seems to me that we do observe paramattha dhammas (e.g., various forms of earth element, warmth of various degrees, sights, sounds tastes,smells, etc as well as recalling, thinking, feeling (as pleasant, unpleasant, neutral), liking, disliking, fearing, etc, all the time! When we are paying attention to what's happening, there is clearer observing, ----------- No, I can't agree. No amount of attentiveness to concepts will bring understanding of dhammas. They are like cheese and chalk. ------------------------------------------------ Howard: I said nothing about thinking about things nor about understanding. I said that we do observe hardness, warmth, sights, sounds etc, and I said that we observe them more clearly when paying attention, i.e., when not absorbed in thought or nearly asleep. But if you never observe hardness, sights, sounds etc, hey, there are lots of good doctors around to go to. ------------------------------------------------- I was writing this reply to you when I thought of the fellow in the joke (who chose to look under the streetlamp because the light was better). I decided to send that to Ven. P instead. But can you see how it was analogous to any formal (contrived) attempts at seeing anicca, dukkha and anatta? No amount of concept-study will ever lead to Middle Way insight. ---------------------------------------------------- Howard: It's a Nasrudin story. They're always good. BTW, I agree with you that no amount of concept-study will lead to Middle Way insight, and I think you might mull that statement over a lot - it's useful. ------------------------------------------------------ ------------------- H: > but when we are not, due to tiredness, laziness, excitement, or whatever, the observing is less sharp. What we typically do *not* observe are sharp beginnings and endings of individual namas and rupas - we seems to miss the paramattha dhammas as units or packets. Perhaps that will develop, or, perhaps it is a merely theoretical (a.k.a., conceptual) construct - I don't know. I do believe, however, as it is taught in Abhidhamma (and I *think* in the suttas), that there are no consciousness gaps. (There is at most a spike in consciousness, or a steady dimming of consciousness followed by a spike, when "losing consciousness." I find it interesting to attend to the "loss of consciousness" when that is underway, for example when being put out during an endoscopy. The "dimming" is quite observable, I find, followed by what I can only call a "spike," followed immediately by alert consciousness back in effect. Really fascinating!) --------------------- This reminds me of my meditation days when I was with the Dhammadinna House group. On one of our retreats we followed a meditation handbook that had us breaking down the sounds we heard. A brief birdcall, for example, was to be heard in three separate stages - beginning, middle and end. --------------------------------------------------------- Howard: But I do nothing of the sort. I just "watch". ------------------------------------------------------- But that is a misreading of the texts. I know better now, and I will never return to those old days. I am just as sure of that as I am sure I will never look for keys where I know they are not to be found simply because the light is better. ---------------------------------------------------------- Howard: Good for you - seriously. I agree with you. Please understand me, Ken - I agree with that! -------------------------------------------------------- ----------- H: > The matter of observing paramattha dhammas as packets aside, we certainly can, when attention and non-distraction are there, 1) observe that paramattha dhammas are present when they previously were not, that they are no longer present, having previously been present, these two being the observing of a phenomenon or its absence as "new," 2) observe that they are ungraspable, 3)observe that they are not sources of genuine satisfaction and actually hurtful if there is grasping at them or craving (emotional desire) for their elimination or for their growth, and contingent - depending utterly on conditions. Much of the "observing" of these involves a good deal of inference, but developing wisdom, precise & probing on occasion, can play an increasing role, it seems. ------------- If you replace the word "observe" with "understand" then we will have more in common. ---------------------------------------------------------- Howard: Understanding - real understanding - comes later. First there is just "seeing". (Oh, we can read sentences and understand them, but I'm talking about genuine knowing with insight.) ------------------------------------------------------- Even then, however, understanding would have to be understood as a conditioned dhamma, not as something that could be controlled. ---------------------------------------------------- Howard: No reason to bring that bull into the china shop. -------------------------------------------------- Ken H ========================= With metta, Howard #86499 From: "Alex" Date: Sun Jun 1, 2008 8:09 am Subject: [dsg] Kamma and Accumulations (wasRe: Mental states......) truth_aerator Hi Howard & Herman, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > > ============================= > > However, what occurs now is based on what occurred before. Else, there are phenomena that arise without precondition, randomly or with "self" as > > condition, and that is not the Buddha's teaching as I understand it. > > *Phenomena arise neither from themselves, nor from things distinctly > > other, nor without condition. Both the existence of phenomena and their > > interrelatedness are subtle and avoiding of extremes. > > > > ============================= > I'm saying nothing more than the obvious fact that the requisite preconditions for a phenomenon and its co-conditions lie in the past. > > With metta, > Howard > As I understand it, even in Abhidhamma it is taught that there are UNPROMPTED phenomena (citta). Furthermore "everything has a cause" is flawed, unless we accept rare exceptions. #1) If every cause is ALWAYS based on previous causes, then we have infinite regress of causality into the past. This infinite regress of causality is itself uncaused. So it is self contradictory concept that "everything has a cause" and this is itself uncaused (no first cause). #2) If there was infinite past, then today would have been infinite into the future. IE, wouldn't ever be reached from infinite past as it would take infinite amount of time to do so. #3) Something that has no begining has no end (see #2). Not only would today, 2008 be infinitely into the future from infinite past, the Nibbana would be as well unreachable (as the time to reach it would be infinite). Something can happen from nothing. This universe (or more accurately the proto particle that "exploded") did. This doesn't affirm Self or God, it just says that something CAN happen from nothing (although when something appeared, it will follow laws) Of course for macro events, the probability happening is so small that we may have to wait for so many millenia for some big blip (like an pink elephant falling from the sky, whatever) that the Sun will decay faster than that. So obviously, these exceptions are so rare that they have almost 0% relevance in our day to day function. Best wishes, Alex #86500 From: upasaka@... Date: Sun Jun 1, 2008 4:39 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Kamma and Accumulations (wasRe: Mental states......) upasaka_howard Hi, Alex (and Herman) - In a message dated 6/1/2008 11:09:51 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, truth_aerator@... writes: Hi Howard & Herman, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > > ============================= > > However, what occurs now is based on what occurred before. Else, there are phenomena that arise without precondition, randomly or with "self" as > > condition, and that is not the Buddha's teaching as I understand it. > > *Phenomena arise neither from themselves, nor from things distinctly > > other, nor without condition. Both the existence of phenomena and their > > interrelatedness are subtle and avoiding of extremes. > > > > ============================= > I'm saying nothing more than the obvious fact that the requisite preconditions for a phenomenon and its co-conditions lie in the past. > > With metta, > Howard > As I understand it, even in Abhidhamma it is taught that there are UNPROMPTED phenomena (citta). ------------------------------------------------- Howard: Nina could fill in the details, but that does not mean random or unconditioned. --------------------------------------------------- Furthermore "everything has a cause" is flawed, unless we accept rare exceptions. #1) If every cause is ALWAYS based on previous causes, then we have infinite regress of causality into the past. This infinite regress of causality is itself uncaused. --------------------------------------------------- Howard: This infinite regress of yours isn't a phenomenon to be caused or not. It is just an abstraction based on the fact that phenomena arise due to prior conditions. --------------------------------------------------- So it is self contradictory concept that "everything has a cause" and this is itself uncaused (no first cause). --------------------------------------------------- Howard: Only for Platonists, Aristotelians (with Aristotle's "unmoved mover), and various theists. Not for Buddhists. -------------------------------------------------- #2) If there was infinite past, then today would have been infinite into the future. IE, wouldn't ever be reached from infinite past as it would take infinite amount of time to do so. -------------------------------------------------- Howard: The only time there is (at any moment) is the present. In any case, the Buddha *never* taught of a temporal origin. Mahayana, in fact, uses the (to me) delightful phrase "from the very no-beginning of time." -------------------------------------------------- #3) Something that has no begining has no end (see #2). -------------------------------------------------- Howard: That's not Dhamma. There was no beginning to avijja, but there IS an end. What does not end, did not arise, but the converse is false and is not Buddhadhamma. -------------------------------------------------- Not only would today, 2008 be infinitely into the future from infinite past, the Nibbana would be as well unreachable (as the time to reach it would be infinite). ------------------------------------------------ Howard: You're just painting oneself into a corner of your own creation - Zeno was simply wrong. ------------------------------------------------ Something can happen from nothing. This universe (or more accurately the proto particle that "exploded") did. ------------------------------------------------- Howard: Creationism lives! Say Hallelujah! ------------------------------------------------- This doesn't affirm Self or God, it just says that something CAN happen from nothing (although when something appeared, it will follow laws) --------------------------------------------------- Howard: If this makes you feel free and empowered, enjoy. I think you are in error on this, but most certainly what you are saying is at variance with the Dhamma. That's fine, of course. There's no requirement anyone has the right to impose as to belief. --------------------------------------------------- Of course for macro events, the probability happening is so small that we may have to wait for so many millenia for some big blip (like an pink elephant falling from the sky, whatever) that the Sun will decay faster than that. So obviously, these exceptions are so rare that they have almost 0% relevance in our day to day function. Best wishes, Alex ============================== With metta, Howard #86501 From: "Alex" Date: Sun Jun 1, 2008 9:55 am Subject: [dsg] Kamma and Accumulations (wasRe: Mental states......) truth_aerator Hi Howard, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > > As I understand it, even in Abhidhamma it is taught that there are > UNPROMPTED phenomena (citta). > ------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > Nina could fill in the details, but that does not mean random or > unconditioned. > -------------------------------------------------- IMHO, Unprompted state by definition is not prompted by oneself or others. But it does require few things to exist to be able to arise or not, nama-rupa is such example. > > Furthermore "everything has a cause" is flawed, unless we accept rare > exceptions. > > > #1) If every cause is ALWAYS based on previous causes, then we have infinite regress of causality into the past. This infinite regress of > causality is itself uncaused. > --------------------------------------------------- > > Howard: This infinite regress of yours isn't a phenomenon to be caused or not. >>> So causality is not a phenomena? Are you saying that it is fiction? >>> It is just an abstraction based on the fact that phenomena arise due to prior conditions. >>> Are the "prior" conditions, fiction or not? > --------------------------------------------------- > > So it is self contradictory concept > that "everything has a cause" and this is itself uncaused (no first > cause). > --------------------------------------------------- > Howard: Only for Platonists, Aristotelians (with Aristotle's "unmoved mover), and various theists. Not for Buddhists. > -------------------------------------------------- Ok, I don't know what Plato or Aristotel had to say on this, you can tell me. However I do believe that causality exists, and independent of observer. Observer is not-self, it is part of it. > > #2) If there was infinite past, then today would have been infinite into the future. IE, wouldn't ever be reached from infinite past as it would take infinite amount of time to do so. > -------------------------------------------------- > Howard: The only time there is (at any moment) is the present. In any case, the Buddha *never* taught of a temporal origin. Mahayana, in fact, uses the (to me) delightful phrase "from the very no-beginning of time." > -------------------------------------------------- If only the "present" exists, then what "present"? In 500 BC the present was 500 BC, in 2008 AD it is 2008 AD, in 3008 AD it is 3008 AD. There has to be a "past" from which conditions condition the present. Furthermore, the whole entropy thing can be a useful marker of past ->future. > > #3) Something that has no begining has no end (see #2). > -------------------------------------------------- > Howard: That's not Dhamma. There was no beginning to avijja, but there IS an end. >>> It is geometric/math/logical fact that infinite line has no extremeties. Where did and exactly what did Buddha say about beginingless time? It very much depends on precise definition: "undiscoverable" or "infinite"? > -------------------------------------------------- > Not only > would today, 2008 be infinitely into the future from infinite past, the Nibbana would be as well unreachable (as the time to reach it > would be infinite). > ------------------------------------------------ > Howard: > You're just painting oneself into a corner of your own creation - Zeno > was simply wrong. > ------------------------------------------------ I am not very familiar with Zeno either. Regardless of who this fellow is, the > > > Something can happen from nothing. This universe (or more accurately the proto particle that "exploded") did. > ------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > Creationism lives! Say Hallelujah! > ------------------------------------------------- No. It disproves intelligent first cause. God explanation is no explanation, it just begs the question and adds more unexplained mysteries than it tries to solve. >>>>>>>>> > This doesn't affirm Self or God, it just says that something CAN > happen from nothing (although when something appeared, it will follow > laws) > --------------------------------------------------- > Howard: If this makes you feel free and empowered, enjoy. >>> Quite the opposite. It is dangerous to feel "empowered & happy", that leads to bad conceit and so on. Feeling of "helplessness" and being just a puppet in a stormy ocean is much more beneficial for realization of anatta and letting go of attachments. Best wishes, Alex #86502 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Jun 1, 2008 12:18 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Vism XX, 'Knowledge of What is/is not the Path' nilovg Dear Ken H, thank you very much, I know it was not easy for you to take up the thread. As to the context of these passages, they are part for the explanation of the third stage of tender insight, and as we have seen, the penetration of the three general characteristics predominates. Op 1-jun-2008, om 6:30 heeft kenhowardau het volgende geschreven: > I might just add one comment, namely, that the language here is > obviously 'descriptive' not 'prescriptive.' Despite constantly > reading how the meditator "should do this" and "should do that" we > can see that the process is purely one of understanding. It > cannot be one of looking or of doing. ------- N: Yes, this is right, no command that one must do this or that. ------- > > Text: "[Nine Ways of Sharpening the Faculties Etc.] > 21. While thus engaged in inductive insight, however, if it does > not succeed, he should sharpen his faculties [of faith, etc.,] in the > nine ways stated thus 'The faculties become sharp in nine ways; (1) > he sees only the destruction of arisen formations; (2) and in that > [occupation] he makes sure of working carefully, (3) he makes sure of > working perseveringly, (4) he makes sure of working suitably, and (5) > by apprehending the sign of concentration and (6) by balancing the > enlightenment factors (7) he establishes disregard of body and life, > (8) wherein he overcomes [pain] by renunciation and (9) by not > stopping halfway. -------- N: Also concentration performs its function together with understanding, it is a Path factor. It grows as pa~n~naa grows. Not stopping halfway, this is said of energy in other passages: not coming to a halt halfway. Balancing the enlightenment factors: when there is understanding they are balanced; not too much energy or too much confidence, that is, not confidence without understanding, because that is unfounded confidence. -------- > Text: He should avoid the seven unsuitable things in the > way stated in the description of the Earth Kasina (Ch.IV.para55) and > cultivate the seven suitable things, ------- N: Here is a reference to eleven things leading to the energy enlightenment factor. I quote from the 'Way of Mindfulness" to avoid typing: --------- > Text: and he should comprehend the > material at one time and the immaterial at another. ------- N: When we read this it seems theory, but it is not. It is about direct awareness of nama and rupa as they appear one at a time. They are not mixed, they have different characteristics. Sati of satipatthana can be aware of either nama or rupa. ----------- > > Text: [Comprehension of the Material] > 22. While comprehending materiality he should see how materiality is > generated, that is to say, how this materiality is generated by the > four causes beginning with kamma. ------- N: This pertains to rupas of the body. The four factors that generate them are: Kamma, citta, heat and nutritive essence. This helps us to see that rupas of the body have no owner, no possessor. ------- > Text: Herein, when materiality is being > generated in any being, it is fruit generated from kamma. For, at the > actual moment of rebirth-linking of a child in the womb first thirty > instances of materiality are generated in the triple continuity, in > other words, the decads of physical [heart] basis, body and sex. And > those are generated at the actual instance of rebirth-linking > consciousness's arising. And as at the instant of its arising, so too > at the instant of its presence and at the instant of its dissolution. ------- N: decads: the eight inseparable rupas of the four great elements and colour, odour, flavour and nutritive essense, and in addition: life faculty and either heartbase, or bodysense or sex. Thus, kamma produces three decads. Kamma keeps on producing them all the time, namely even at the three moments of citta, of its arising, presence and dissolution. ---------- > > Text: 23. Herein, the cessation of materiality is slow and its > transformation ponderous, while the cessation of consciousness is > swift and its transformation quick (light); hence it is > said 'Bhikkhus, I see no other one thing that is so quickly > transformed as the mind' (A.i,10). > 24. For the life continuum consciousness arises and ceases sixteen > times while one material instance endures. With consciousness the > instant of arising, instant of presence, and instant of dissolution > are quick like those [of consciousness], while the instant of its > presence is long and lasts while sixteen consciousnesses arise and > cease." -------- N: Here is shown that rupa lasts longer than citta, but the time it lasts is still extremely short. We cannot do anything about it, because it has gone before we realize it. It helps us to see the uncontrollability of rupa and nama. We have to remember that at this stage understanding begins to see more dhammas as impermanent, dukkha, and non-self. Over to you Ken :-) Nina. > > #86503 From: "Tep" Date: Sun Jun 1, 2008 12:20 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Panna As Indriya dhammanusarin Dear Sarah, - The following message which I lately posted at JourneyToNibbana might be of interest to you. ..................... Hi Han (and other friends), - For those who study the English translation of the suttas by Ven. Thanissaro Bhikkhu the term "discern" comes up very often. For example, take a close look at the following three sutta quotes: 'When one discerns, greed does not come into being, which is why he remains with his mind not conquered by greed.' [AN X.24, Cunda Sutta] 'When he discerns, as it actually is present, the origination, the passing away, the allure, the drawbacks, and the escape from the six sense media, then -- with regard to ignorance concerning the six sense media -- he is not obsessed with not-knowing. This is unyoking from sensuality, unyoking from becoming, unyoking from views, & unyoking from ignorance.' [AN IV.10 Yoga Sutta] 'The fact that when greed is present within you, you discern that greed is present within you; and when greed is not present within you, you discern that greed is not present within you: that is one way in which the Dhamma is visible in the here-&-now, timeless, inviting verification, pertinent, to be realized by the wise for themselves.' [AN VI.47 Sanditthika Sutta] T: What does "discern" really mean? 1. ATI Glossary: pañña [pa~n~naa]: Discernment; insight; wisdom; intelligence; common sense; ingenuity. One of the ten perfections. 2. Metta.net Dictionary: discern = parijaanaati (to know accurately or for certain), pari~n~naata. Discernment = abhijaanana, pari~n~naa. 3. PTS Dictionary: pajaanaati = to know, find out, come to know, understand, distinguish D i.45 (yathaabhuutam; really, truly). Abhijaana [Sk. abhij~naana] recognition, remembrance, recollection. T: Do you see a serious problem with all these dictionaries? -- they are inconsistent among themselves and seriously contradicting with the suttas. According to the three sutta quotes above, pa~n~naa is the seeing of the phenomena (dhammas) the way they really are; it is a right view or "wisdom" or "understanding" that is way beyond the worldlings. One who has such a discernment about the conditioned dhammas, overcomes greed and wrong views: he is not tied to (unyoking from) becoming, wrong views, and ignorance. He is an ariyan! But these three dictionaries equate "discernment" mundane understanding of worldings. The terms "know", find out", "know accurately", "common sense" are inaccurate and unacceptable. Don't you think so? ...................... Yours truly, Tep === #86504 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Jun 1, 2008 12:21 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] What are the causes of 4 great elements + space & consciousness 5-6th? nilovg Hi Alex, Op 31-mei-2008, om 21:30 heeft Alex het volgende geschreven: > But the Buddha has stated this "conventional" view -> > ============ > what is the internal space property? Anything internal, belonging to > oneself, that's space, spatial, & sustained: the holes of the ears, > the nostrils, the mouth, the [passage] whereby what is eaten, drunk, > consumed, & tasted gets swallowed, and where it collects, and whereby > it is excreted from below, or anything else internal, within oneself, > that's space, spatial, & sustained: This is called the internal space > property." -------- N:yes, I also quoted this text. Here is the paramattha dhamma of space explained in a conventional way and this is very helpful to gain more understanding of it, and, to have less clinging to it. It is not beautiful. Nina. #86505 From: upasaka@... Date: Sun Jun 1, 2008 9:55 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Kamma and Accumulations (wasRe: Mental states......) upasaka_howard Hi, Alex - In a message dated 6/1/2008 12:55:55 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, truth_aerator@... writes: Hi Howard, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > > As I understand it, even in Abhidhamma it is taught that there are > UNPROMPTED phenomena (citta). > ------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > Nina could fill in the details, but that does not mean random or > unconditioned. > -------------------------------------------------- IMHO, Unprompted state by definition is not prompted by oneself or others. ---------------------------------------------------- Howard: Specifically, as it is put on one site, "A prompted citta (sasankhaarika citta) is an act of consciousness that arises either as a result of deliberation and premeditation on one's own part or through the inducement of another." This leaves rooms for *loads* of conditionality for unprompted states, including volition. What is ruled out is quite specific & limited. ---------------------------------------------------- But it does require few things to exist to be able to arise or not, nama-rupa is such example. > > Furthermore "everything has a cause" is flawed, unless we accept rare > exceptions. > > > #1) If every cause is ALWAYS based on previous causes, then we have infinite regress of causality into the past. This infinite regress of > causality is itself uncaused. > --------------------------------------------------- > > Howard: This infinite regress of yours isn't a phenomenon to be caused or not. >>> So causality is not a phenomena? Are you saying that it is fiction? ------------------------------------------------------ Howard: Conditionality is no fiction - it is relational behavior. I was referring to this concept of a unity that is an infinite chain of conditioning phenomena. The negative statement that says there is no first condition should not be transformed into the creation of some infinite "thing". What is true is simply that whatever arises does so due to prior conditions, symbolically: for-every x, there-exists y, y is-a-condition-for x & y precedes x -------------------------------------------------- >>> It is just an abstraction based on the fact that phenomena arise due to prior conditions. >>> Are the "prior" conditions, fiction or not? -------------------------------------------------- Howard: They were not when they occurred. ------------------------------------------------ > --------------------------------------------------- > > So it is self contradictory concept > that "everything has a cause" and this is itself uncaused (no first > cause). > --------------------------------------------------- > Howard: Only for Platonists, Aristotelians (with Aristotle's "unmoved mover), and various theists. Not for Buddhists. > -------------------------------------------------- Ok, I don't know what Plato or Aristotel had to say on this, you can tell me. However I do believe that causality exists, and independent of observer. Observer is not-self, it is part of it. --------------------------------------------------------- Howard: Who has disputed conditionality? Not I. I do prefer to steer clear of the term 'causality', because it usually suggests a substantialism that is not part of what the Buddha taught, but that is another matter. ------------------------------------------------------ > > #2) If there was infinite past, then today would have been infinite into the future. IE, wouldn't ever be reached from infinite past as it would take infinite amount of time to do so. > -------------------------------------------------- > Howard: The only time there is (at any moment) is the present. In any case, the Buddha *never* taught of a temporal origin. Mahayana, in fact, uses the (to me) delightful phrase "from the very no-beginning of time." > -------------------------------------------------- If only the "present" exists, then what "present"? ------------------------------------------------------ Howard: Only the present exists NOW!!! Yesterday, for sure, does not exist. It DID, but it does not. Please don't tell me you think that it still exists! If you really do, then you are the very first living Sarvastivadin I've ever met. -------------------------------------------------- In 500 BC the present was 500 BC, in 2008 AD it is 2008 AD, in 3008 AD it is 3008 AD. ------------------------------------------------ Howard: No kidding! This is supposed to come as a shock to me? LOLOL! ----------------------------------------------- There has to be a "past" from which conditions condition the present. ---------------------------------------------- Howard: There does not have to BE a past. There has to HAVE BEEN a past, i.e., a period of time that we now refer to as "the past". ---------------------------------------------- Furthermore, the whole entropy thing can be a useful marker of past ->future. > > #3) Something that has no beginning has no end (see #2). > -------------------------------------------------- > Howard: That's not Dhamma. There was no beginning to avijja, but there IS an end. >>> It is geometric/math/logical fact that infinite line has no extremeties. ---------------------------------------------------------- Howard: That's nice. -------------------------------------------------------- Where did and exactly what did Buddha say about beginingless time? It very much depends on precise definition: "undiscoverable" or "infinite"? > -------------------------------------------------- > Not only > would today, 2008 be infinitely into the future from infinite past, the Nibbana would be as well unreachable (as the time to reach it > would be infinite). > ------------------------------------------------ > Howard: > You're just painting oneself into a corner of your own creation - Zeno > was simply wrong. > ------------------------------------------------ I am not very familiar with Zeno either. Regardless of who this fellow is, the ------------------------------------------------------- Howard: He claimed the impossibility of motion or change. (In order to get from position 1 to position n, you must first go from 1 to n/2. But before you can go from 1 to n/2, you must get from 1 to n/4. But, ... . So, you can't move at all! That's his story. Of course, things do move.) -------------------------------------------------------- > > > Something can happen from nothing. This universe (or more accurately the proto particle that "exploded") did. > ------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > Creationism lives! Say Hallelujah! > ------------------------------------------------- No. It disproves intelligent first cause. God explanation is no explanation, it just begs the question and adds more unexplained mysteries than it tries to solve. >>>>>>>>> > This doesn't affirm Self or God, it just says that something CAN > happen from nothing (although when something appeared, it will follow > laws) > --------------------------------------------------- > Howard: If this makes you feel free and empowered, enjoy. >>> Quite the opposite. It is dangerous to feel "empowered & happy", that leads to bad conceit and so on. Feeling of "helplessness" and being just a puppet in a stormy ocean is much more beneficial for realization of anatta and letting go of attachments. Best wishes, Alex ============================ 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) #86506 From: "Alex" Date: Sun Jun 1, 2008 3:33 pm Subject: Kamma and Accumulations (wasRe: Mental states......) truth_aerator Hi Howard, > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@ wrote: > > > > As I understand it, even in Abhidhamma it is taught that there are > > UNPROMPTED phenomena (citta). > > ------------------------------------------------- > > Howard: > > Nina could fill in the details, but that does not mean random or unconditioned. > > -------------------------------------------------- > > IMHO, Unprompted state by definition is not prompted by oneself or > others. > ---------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > Specifically, as it is put on one site, "A prompted citta (sasankhaarika > citta) is an act of consciousness that arises either as a result of > deliberation and premeditation on one's own part or through the inducement of > another." > This leaves rooms for *loads* of conditionality for unprompted states, > including volition. What is ruled out is quite specific & limited. > ---------------------------------------------------- So unpromted is not as a result from premeditation, inducement of oneself or others. Spontaneous? > > --------------------------------------------------- > > > > Howard: > This infinite regress of yours isn't a phenomenon to be caused or > not. > >>> > > So causality is not a phenomena? Are you saying that it is fiction? > ------------------------------------------------------ > Howard: > Conditionality is no fiction - it is relational behavior. >>> Relational through time, right? >>> I was referring to this concept of a unity that is an infinite chain of conditioning phenomena. The negative statement that says there is no first condition should not be transformed into the creation of some infinite "thing". >>> okay, the conditioning phenomena has NO begining IF it is infinite in time. If it is finite, then it has a start and an end. >>>> What is true is simply that whatever arises does so due to prior conditions, symbolically: for-every x, there-exists y, y is-a- condition-for x & y precedes x > -------------------------------------------------- If Y precedes X, then what precedes Y? Y(t-1) (where t=time) What preceded Y(t-1) ? Y(t-2) and so on AD infinitum, unless there was an uncaused first cause. But even then, what happened before? > >>> > It is just an abstraction based on the fact that phenomena arise due > to prior conditions. > >>> > > Are the "prior" conditions, fiction or not? > -------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > They were not when they occurred. > ------------------------------------------------ > You mean prior conditions didn't exist when the have occured? > Howard: Who has disputed conditionality? Not I. I do prefer to steer clear of the term 'causality', because it usually suggests a substantialism that is not part of what the Buddha taught, but that is another matter. > ------------------------------------------------------ Can please explain the difference between conditionality & causality? > If only the "present" exists, then what "present"? > ------------------------------------------------------ > Howard: > Only the present exists NOW!!! Yesterday, for sure, does not exist. It DID, but it does not. Please don't tell me you think that it still exists! If you really do, then you are the very first living Sarvastivadin I've ever met. > -------------------------------------------------- > The past exists in the past, the future in the future. When you lets say drive from city A to city B, city A doesn't really disappear . It is located in different space. Similiar could be with time. General relativity DOES allow time-travel. If that is so, and time travel to the past is possible, THEN the destination must exist in that time and place. I don't say that this is so, just some ideas. > > In 500 BC the present was 500 BC, in 2008 AD it is 2008 AD, in 3008 > AD it is 3008 AD. > ------------------------------------------------ > Howard: > No kidding! This is supposed to come as a shock to me? LOLOL! > ----------------------------------------------- So which one exists? > ------------------------------------------------------- > Howard: That's his story. Of course, things do move.) > -------------------------------------------------------- As someone (not zeno) has said: -> If something moves, then it moves in the place in which it is or in the place it is not. If it moves into a place in which it is, then it isn't moving (it is remaining in the same place). But how can it move in the place in which it is not? Does the object move as a whole or stretches into the new position and then streches back from the old position? Does it move through its own agency or other? If through its own, then does it have a cause or is it uncaused? If it moves due to external reason, is that reason caused or uncaused? If everything has a cause and as Newton has said: "A physical body will remain at rest, or continue to move at a constant velocity, unless an outside net force acts upon it. " then what is the condition of the "outside net force" that conditions that object to move? Another "outside net force"? And what is the condition of that? Ad infinitum. Furthermore if the conditionality (or causality) is beginingless, then ANY point on it can never happen - since it is eternally in the future and out of reach. Thus eternal causality (or conditionality) must be better explained. BTW, I am not claiming that motion doesn't exist. -------- Regarding "substantiality" in CDB pg 949 Khandavagga 22.94 (2) Flowers sutta: "And of that which the wise in the world agree upon as existing, I too say that it exists. And what is it Bhikkhus, that the wise in the world agree upon as existing, of which I too say that it exists? Form that is impermanent, suffering, and subject to change: this the wise in the world agree upon as existing, and I too say that it exists. Feeling... Perception... Volitional formations... Consciousness that is impermanent, suffering, and subject to change: this the wise in the world agree upon as existing, and I too say that it exists. ...And what is that world-phenomena in the world to which that the Tathagata has awakened and broken to? Form... Feeling... Perception... Volitional formations... Consciousness..." As Ven. Bhikkhu Bodhi rightfully stated in the footnote 185 on page 1085 this sutta excludes the belief that Buddha has taught "illusionist view" . Best wishes, Alex #86507 From: "Alex" Date: Sun Jun 1, 2008 4:23 pm Subject: Illusionism? (additional sutta) truth_aerator Regarding "substantiality" > in CDB pg 949 Khandavagga 22.94 (2) Flowers sutta: > > "And of that which the wise in the world agree upon as existing, I > too say that it exists. > > And what is it, Bhikkhus, that the wise in the world agree upon as > existing, of which I too say that it exists? Form that is > impermanent, suffering, and subject to change: this the wise in the > world agree upon as existing, and I too say that it exists. > Feeling... Perception... Volitional formations... Consciousness that is impermanent, suffering, and subject to change: this the wise in the world agree upon as existing, and I too say that it exists. > ...And what is that world-phenomena in the world to which that the > Tathagata has awakened and broken to? Form... Feeling... > Perception... Volitional formations... Consciousness..." > > As Ven. Bhikkhu Bodhi rightfully stated in the footnote 185 on page > 1085 this sutta excludes the belief that Buddha has > taught "illusionist view" . I'd like to add: "It would be better for the uninstructed run-of-the-mill person to hold to the body composed of the four great elements, rather than the mind, as the self. Why is that? Because this body composed of the four great elements is seen standing for a year, two years, three, four, five, ten, twenty, thirty, forty, fifty, a hundred years or more. But what's called 'mind,' 'intellect,' or 'consciousness' by day and by night arises as one thing and ceases as another. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn12/sn12.061.than.html So you see, the ksanikavada doctrine may apply to mind, but not the body. Best wishes, Alex #86508 From: upasaka@... Date: Sun Jun 1, 2008 12:24 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Kamma and Accumulations (wasRe: Mental states......) upasaka_howard Hi, Alex - In a message dated 6/1/2008 6:33:38 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, truth_aerator@... writes: Hi Howard, > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@ wrote: > > > > As I understand it, even in Abhidhamma it is taught that there are > > UNPROMPTED phenomena (citta). > > ------------------------------------------------- > > Howard: > > Nina could fill in the details, but that does not mean random or unconditioned. > > -------------------------------------------------- > > IMHO, Unprompted state by definition is not prompted by oneself or > others. > ---------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > Specifically, as it is put on one site, "A prompted citta (sasankhaarika > citta) is an act of consciousness that arises either as a result of > deliberation and premeditation on one's own part or through the inducement of > another." > This leaves rooms for *loads* of conditionality for unprompted states, > including volition. What is ruled out is quite specific & limited. > ---------------------------------------------------- So unpromted is not as a result from premeditation, inducement of oneself or others. Spontaneous? ----------------------------------------------- Howard: Yes, spontaneous but only in that exact sense, not in the sense of being independent of conditions. ------------------------------------------------- > > --------------------------------------------------- > > > > Howard: > This infinite regress of yours isn't a phenomenon to be caused or > not. > >>> > > So causality is not a phenomena? Are you saying that it is fiction? > ------------------------------------------------------ > Howard: > Conditionality is no fiction - it is relational behavior. >>> Relational through time, right? ----------------------------------------------------- Howard: Given that all conditions for a phenomenon have occurred, the phenomenon occurs. I don't care for the terminology "through time" or "across time" except in an ordinary, conventional way of speaking. I suspect you mean more than that. I suspect you view spans of time as "thingies". ;-) --------------------------------------------------- >>> I was referring to this concept of a unity that is an infinite chain of conditioning phenomena. The negative statement that says there is no first condition should not be transformed into the creation of some infinite "thing". >>> okay, the conditioning phenomena has NO begining IF it is infinite in time. If it is finite, then it has a start and an end. ------------------------------------------------- Howard: Huh? ------------------------------------------------ >>>> What is true is simply that whatever arises does so due to prior conditions, symbolically: for-every x, there-exists y, y is-a- condition-for x & y precedes x > -------------------------------------------------- If Y precedes X, then what precedes Y? Y(t-1) (where t=time) What preceded Y(t-1) ? Y(t-2) and so on AD infinitum, unless there was an uncaused first cause. But even then, what happened before? ------------------------------------------------ Howard: Something is bothering you here, but I don't get it. I have no problem with any of this. -------------------------------------------- > >>> > It is just an abstraction based on the fact that phenomena arise due > to prior conditions. > >>> > > Are the "prior" conditions, fiction or not? > -------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > They were not when they occurred. > ------------------------------------------------ > You mean prior conditions didn't exist when the have occured? ------------------------------------------------------ Howard: I said that they were not fictions when they occurred. What is the problem, Alex? ----------------------------------------------------- > Howard: Who has disputed conditionality? Not I. I do prefer to steer clear of the term 'causality', because it usually suggests a substantialism that is not part of what the Buddha taught, but that is another matter. > ------------------------------------------------------ Can please explain the difference between conditionality & causality? --------------------------------------------------- Howard: Here's what I wrote to somebody about this offlist: Causality presumes a real entity that is caused, also a real self-existent phenomenon (or group of such) that is the cause, and a substantial causal-force-thing that connects them, as opposed to one phenomenon simply being one among several phenomena the occurrence of which, together, guarantees the arising of the resulting phenomenon. Neither the "causing" conditions, nor the result, nor the relation between them are self-existing entities. The result is not to be found among its conditions, nor does it arise independently of them, nor is there some underlying "force-thing" that connects them. It is merely that with the arising of the requisite conditions, the resulting phenomenon, must, as the day, the night, also arise. The presence of the conditions is already the guarantor of the result. ---------------------------------------------------- > If only the "present" exists, then what "present"? > ------------------------------------------------------ > Howard: > Only the present exists NOW!!! Yesterday, for sure, does not exist. It DID, but it does not. Please don't tell me you think that it still exists! If you really do, then you are the very first living Sarvastivadin I've ever met. > -------------------------------------------------- > The past exists in the past, the future in the future. ----------------------------------------------------- Howard: I consider this, taken literally, to be Platonic nonsense. ----------------------------------------------------- When you lets say drive from city A to city B, city A doesn't really disappear . It is located in different space. Similiar could be with time. ---------------------------------------------------- Howard: Not a chance. ---------------------------------------------------- General relativity DOES allow time-travel. If that is so, and time travel to the past is possible, THEN the destination must exist in that time and place. I don't say that this is so, just some ideas. ----------------------------------------------- Howard: Always fun! ---------------------------------------------------- > > In 500 BC the present was 500 BC, in 2008 AD it is 2008 AD, in 3008 > AD it is 3008 AD. > ------------------------------------------------ > Howard: > No kidding! This is supposed to come as a shock to me? LOLOL! > ----------------------------------------------- So which one exists? ------------------------------------------------ Howard: At any time, there is only that time. Now is now, not then! This sort of mind-play was fun in my sophomore year, but that was 49 years ago, and now that friends of mine have cancer and other ailments and I, if "fortunate", likely have no more than 20 or so more years to spend in this world, not all of which will be "great", this loses a lot of its enchantment. ;-) ---------------------------------------------- > ------------------------------------------------------- > Howard: That's his story. Of course, things do move.) > -------------------------------------------------------- As someone (not zeno) has said: -> If something moves, then it moves in the place in which it is or in the place it is not. If it moves into a place in which it is, then it isn't moving (it is remaining in the same place). But how can it move in the place in which it is not? Does the object move as a whole or stretches into the new position and then streches back from the old position? Does it move through its own agency or other? If through its own, then does it have a cause or is it uncaused? If it moves due to external reason, is that reason caused or uncaused? ------------------------------------------------------ Howard: Sounds a bit like Nagarjuna's attack on self-existence as related to motion. I like Garfield's and Kalupahana's commentaries on Nagarjuna's MMK. ----------------------------------------------------- If everything has a cause and as Newton has said: "A physical body will remain at rest, or continue to move at a constant velocity, unless an outside net force acts upon it. " then what is the condition of the "outside net force" that conditions that object to move? Another "outside net force"? And what is the condition of that? Ad infinitum. Furthermore if the conditionality (or causality) is beginingless, then ANY point on it can never happen - since it is eternally in the future and out of reach. Thus eternal causality (or conditionality) must be better explained. BTW, I am not claiming that motion doesn't exist. ----------------------------------------------------- Howard: Alex, not to be rude, but I find myself tiring of this conversation. The Buddha definitely taught all phenomena other than nibbana as arising from conditions, which precludes an unconditioned "first cause". I'm satisfied with that. I have no problem with it. -------------------------------------------------- -------- Regarding "substantiality" in CDB pg 949 Khandavagga 22.94 (2) Flowers sutta: "And of that which the wise in the world agree upon as existing, I too say that it exists. And what is it Bhikkhus, that the wise in the world agree upon as existing, of which I too say that it exists? Form that is impermanent, suffering, and subject to change: this the wise in the world agree upon as existing, and I too say that it exists. Feeling... Perception... Volitional formations... Consciousness that is impermanent, suffering, and subject to change: this the wise in the world agree upon as existing, and I too say that it exists. ...And what is that world-phenomena in the world to which that the Tathagata has awakened and broken to? Form... Feeling... Perception... Volitional formations... Consciousness..." As Ven. Bhikkhu Bodhi rightfully stated in the footnote 185 on page 1085 this sutta excludes the belief that Buddha has taught "illusionist view" . --------------------------------------------------- Howard: The middle-way ontology of the Buddha is supportive neither of substantialist self-existence nor of nihilistic non-existence. Each of these extremes is illusion, and the Buddha taught them as such. ------------------------------------------------ Best wishes, Alex ========================== With metta, Howard #86509 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Sun Jun 1, 2008 4:33 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Illusionism? (additional sutta) egberdina Hi Alex, 2008/6/2 Alex : > Regarding "substantiality" >> in CDB pg 949 Khandavagga 22.94 (2) Flowers sutta: >> >> "And of that which the wise in the world agree upon as existing, I >> too say that it exists. >> >> And what is it, Bhikkhus, that the wise in the world agree upon as >> existing, of which I too say that it exists? Form that is >> impermanent, suffering, and subject to change: this the wise in the >> world agree upon as existing, and I too say that it exists. >> Feeling... Perception... Volitional formations... Consciousness > that is impermanent, suffering, and subject to change: this the wise > in the world agree upon as existing, and I too say that it exists. >> ...And what is that world-phenomena in the world to which that the >> Tathagata has awakened and broken to? Form... Feeling... >> Perception... Volitional formations... Consciousness..." >> >> As Ven. Bhikkhu Bodhi rightfully stated in the footnote 185 on page >> 1085 this sutta excludes the belief that Buddha has >> taught "illusionist view" . > > I'd like to add: > > "It would be better for the uninstructed run-of-the-mill person to > hold to the body composed of the four great elements, rather than the > mind, as the self. Why is that? Because this body composed of the > four great elements is seen standing for a year, two years, three, > four, five, ten, twenty, thirty, forty, fifty, a hundred years or > more. But what's called 'mind,' 'intellect,' or 'consciousness' by > day and by night arises as one thing and ceases as another. > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn12/sn12.061.than.html > > So you see, the ksanikavada doctrine may apply to mind, but not the > body. > Exactly so. Well quoted. Cheers Herman #86510 From: LBIDD@... Date: Sun Jun 1, 2008 4:41 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Vism XX, 'Knowledge of What is/is not the Path' lbidd2 Hi Ken, Thanks for resuming this thread. Don't worry about forgetting stuff. We can't really hold on to anything anyway. Looking at the 9 ways of sharpening the faculties, it all hinges on seeing "only the destruction of arisen formations". From that, all else follows: working carefully, with perseverance, skill, and concentration in a balanced manner but without regard for body or life, overcoming discomfort of all kinds by renunciation, and not stopping half way. I bet there is a surfing analogy in there somewhere;-) The key point here is to see the destruction of arisen formations everywhere. Regarding the "Comprehension of the Material", I think it would be enough to say. "While comprehending materiality he should see how materiality is generated." That is to say, by way of kamma, consciousness, nutriment, and temperature. Then skip ahead to paragraph 43. "Comprehension of the Immaterial". When we started this project, I envisioned it as an abbreviated version of the remainder of the book in a relatively short time. You are certainly welcome to type out every paragraph, but it's not necessary. Just touching on the main points will be sufficient. Larry #86511 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Sun Jun 1, 2008 5:46 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] What are the causes of 4 great elements + space & consciousness 5-6th? egberdina Hi Nina, 2008/6/1 Nina van Gorkom : > Hi Alex and Herman, > > H:I take it that rupa has a property of size? > ------ > N: yes, but infinitesimal. I have read and re-read the useful posts on space. No need to say anything further if it will be a repeat of what is already there. But it seems to me that the entire commentarial doctrine on space is made necessary by the need to impose a certain elemental order on things. Even nibbana is made an element in these scholastic schemes. Clearly, the formulators of these doctrines went out of their way to avoid at all costs the notion of nothing, or absence. Because absence cannot be made into an element. However, the Buddha teaches quite eloquently that the world is empty of what is not there. MN121. Just try explaining that in terms of elements. :-) Cheers Herman #86512 From: "connie" Date: Sun Jun 1, 2008 6:00 pm Subject: Re: Kamma and Accumulations (wasRe: Mental states...... nichiconn Dear Howard, Alex, alex: As I understand it, even in Abhidhamma it is taught that there are UNPROMPTED phenomena (citta). ------------------------------------------------- Howard: Nina could fill in the details, but that does not mean random or unconditioned. --------------------------------------------------- connie: for one, I think it has bearing on the strength of the kamma created at that time, if that's how one says it. [obligatory hallelujah!] -------------------------------------------------- alex: #2) If there was infinite past, then today would have been infinite into the future. IE, wouldn't ever be reached from infinite past as it would take infinite amount of time to do so. -------------------------------------------------- Howard: The only time there is (at any moment) is the present. In any case, the Buddha *never* taught of a temporal origin. Mahayana, in fact, uses the (to me) delightful phrase "from the very no-beginning of time." -------------------------------------------------- c: "kuan ganjo"... as I recall infinity, the ultimate moebius strip. math heads are frieky. best to Mrs H, btw. --------------------------------------------------- Howard: (snip) There's no requirement anyone has the right to impose as to belief. --------------------------------------------------- c: Huh? peace, connie #86513 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Sun Jun 1, 2008 6:21 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Kamma and Accumulations (wasRe: Mental states......) egberdina Hi Alex (and Howard), 2008/6/2 Alex : > Hi Howard & Herman, > > > > #1) If every cause is ALWAYS based on previous causes, then we have > infinite regress of causality into the past. This infinite regress of > causality is itself uncaused. So it is self contradictory concept > that "everything has a cause" and this is itself uncaused (no first > cause). > > #2) If there was infinite past, then today would have been infinite > into the future. IE, wouldn't ever be reached from infinite past as > it would take infinite amount of time to do so. > > #3) Something that has no begining has no end (see #2). Not only > would today, 2008 be infinitely into the future from infinite past, > the Nibbana would be as well unreachable (as the time to reach it > would be infinite). > I think it is very important here to distinguish between causality and phenomena. Causality does not imply phenomena. Only certain combinations of conditions result in phenomena. And in the absence of the necessarry conditions, there are no phenomena. That causality has no beginning or end does not mean that phenomena have no beginning or end. As an example, the parinibbana of the Buddha was not the end of conditionality, only of certain phenomena. Cheers Herman #86514 From: "Alex" Date: Sun Jun 1, 2008 6:41 pm Subject: [dsg] Kamma and Accumulations (wasRe: Mental states......) truth_aerator Hi Herman, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Herman Hofman" wrote: > > Hi Alex (and Howard), > > I think it is very important here to distinguish between causality and> phenomena. Causality does not imply phenomena. >>>> Of course causality doesn't exactly equal phenomena. It is more of a relation between different phenomena. Causality relation between causes and effects wordnet.princeton.edu/perl/webwn Causes and Effects are "phenomena" of some sort while relation between them is causality. Only certain > combinations of conditions result in phenomena. And in the absence of the necessarry conditions, there are no phenomena. That causality has no beginning or end does not mean that phenomena have no beginning or end. >>>> So what happened before any phenomena appeared? Conditions are certain phenomena (although the relation is conditionality)... >>> As an example, the parinibbana of the Buddha was not the end of > conditionality, only of certain phenomena. > > Cheers > Herman Parinibbana after death is supposed to be unconditioned, thus not only phenomena but conditionality/causality ceased FOR HIM. Best wishes, Alex #86515 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Sun Jun 1, 2008 9:10 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: [ dsg] Re: Kamma, was Death. egberdina Hi Jon, 2008/6/1 jonoabb : > Hi Herman > >> I see a huge inconsistency. >> >> Your explanation relies on the existence of an individual stream of >> consciousness, a closed system that conditions its own future >> conditions. That is a good enough definition for a self, in my books. > > You may choose to characterise a stream of cittas as a 'self' if you > like, but that does not mean an inconsistency with the notion that > dhammas (including cittas) have the characteristic of 'not-self'. > I don't believe it is a case of me "choosing" to label anything. You are telling me there are individual streams of consciousness. That means these streams have identity. One stream is not another stream, and a stream can be cognisant of, wait for it...., itself. You maintain that only the conditions that "belong to", that identify this stream can contribute to how this stream unfolds. For all intents and purposes, this stream is a self-organising system, and the not-self characteristic refers only to the fact that there is no overal executive in charge of this system, it is interdependent with only, wait for it, ..... itself. Unless I misunderstand you, this stream of consciousness is as close to a persisting entity as one can get. And what's more, surely to anatta (God) you are not going to tell me that a stream of consciousness is it's own cause, that it conditioned it's own coming to be. And if a stream of consciousness comes into being through conditions external to or other to itself, why maintain that only conditions that belong to a stream can influence it? > Over to you ;-)) > Back to you, good buddy :-) Cheers Herman #86516 From: "connie" Date: Sun Jun 1, 2008 9:17 pm Subject: dear Han, nichiconn I hear it is better, the older we get, to suddenly lose the sense of hearing than that of sight (and better to gradually than all at once either) -- that we are more prone to accidental death (as if there is such a thing!) - the example being like ending up under traffic instead of wherever we thought we were going when we stepped into the street. never too old for samvega - the buddhist vitamin! peace, connie. #86517 From: "colette" Date: Sun Jun 1, 2008 1:59 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: [ dsg] Re: Kamma, was Death. ksheri3 Hi Jon and Herman, > > I see a huge inconsistency. A "huge inconsistency"? One single inconsistency, size does not matter, I see more than the Miss Identification of a "cause" or a seed or... What is the fundamental "consistantcy" or "constant"? A stream of consciousness isn't a rupa, under what conditions are you gonna try to pull the wool over my eyes through the shananagins of having the nerve to mock my intelligence by suggesting that any stream of consciousness is tangible? How is it that you Brits or now Chinese, in Hong Kong can try to say that you have American Dreams? If an American Dream is universal then it is an axiom and certainly cannot be considered as an American thing if it's an axiom. a closed system that conditions its own future > > conditions. colette: since when does Herman have Jon's stream of consciouness, and vice versa, which means that I'm questioning the intelligence of the computer which suggests the argument that Herman and Jon come from the exact same keyboard using the exact same microporcessor etc? They are in the exact same GPS location and address at every second of their existance. Maybe you are speaking in terms of an "Interlocking Directorate" which falls under the heading of Monopolistic Competition, and Oligopolies. > You may choose to characterise a stream of cittas as a 'self' if you > like, colette: so now the consciousness has changed to a citta, although I see Jon's humor here I'm just maintaining the character to finish the thought, if This then That, meaning that if there can be a self which is a stream then that implies that this supposed self is never, ever, at any single moment, the same as it was the moment before and will not be the same as the moment that follows, so that it maintains the characteristics of a stream. On the other hand, a consciousness can be a stream since it is very possible for a consciousness to never be the same as the moment before and not the same as the moment that follows. > but that does not mean an inconsistency with the notion that > dhammas (including cittas) have the characteristic of 'not-self'. > colette: and now we all see the joke: you are not Theravadans you are Mahayanists since you are clinging to Dhammas. You certainly are practicing the theories of the Yogacara and we all know that Yogacarans are not Theravadans. I can't wait to see this one, coming up. Nnnnext. toodles, colette #86518 From: "colette" Date: Sun Jun 1, 2008 5:43 pm Subject: Re: Illusionism? (additional sutta) ksheri3 Hi Alex and Herman, Yea, I agree, while walking on the water like a water bug, that the first perception is applicable only to mind and not to body, HOWEVER, delving into the depths of the Tathagata, the Buddha, the Sangha, the Dharma, et al, well, that would be a rash and premature axiom to establish and then defend. Remember, I still don't care that I left that boat a long time ago after I crossed the river. Something like, back in 1978 or maybe 1980, and I don't regret leaving it on the side where another person may find it and want to apply it to their return to the past and living for the dead. toodles, colette > "It would be better for the uninstructed run-of-the-mill person to > hold to the body composed of the four great elements, rather than the > mind, as the self. Why is that? Because this body composed of the > four great elements is seen standing for a year, two years, three, > four, five, ten, twenty, thirty, forty, fifty, a hundred years or > more. But what's called 'mind,' 'intellect,' or 'consciousness' by > day and by night arises as one thing and ceases as another. > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn12/sn12.061.than.html > > So you see, the ksanikavada doctrine may apply to mind, but not the > body. > > Best wishes, > > Alex > #86519 From: "colette" Date: Sun Jun 1, 2008 6:50 pm Subject: Kamma and Accumulations (wasRe: Mental states...... ksheri3 Hi Connie, Alex, and Howard, can I chime in? > alex: > As I understand it, even in Abhidhamma it is taught that there are > UNPROMPTED phenomena (citta). > ------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > Nina could fill in the details, but that does not mean random or > unconditioned. > --------------------------------------------------- colette: I have always understood the potentials for the meanings and implications of the word UNPROMPTED to clearly indicate Spontaneous and spontaneity where there is no clear CAUSATION. People spontaneously combust, burst into flames, and are consumed by the flames, which is documented fact that there is no clear causation of the fire and the death or birth. With spontaneous as a potential, THEN, we are left with the conclusion that ignorance is part of the game and that we, as humans, are not as smart as we think, as we delusion, we are. <....> ----------------------------------- > > connie: for one, I think it has bearing on the strength of the kamma created at that time, if that's how one says it. [obligatory hallelujah!] > colette: ah-ha, you're on to something huh? gotta go. thanx for the chance to comment tonight. toodles, colette #86520 From: "gazita2002" Date: Sun Jun 1, 2008 11:13 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] bangkok gazita2002 Hello Sarah, Perfect indeed. See you then, and others who can make it. Patience, courage and good cheer, azita --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > > Hi Azita & all, > > --- On Fri, 30/5/08, gazita2002 wrote: > >tried to send this offline but it came bouncing rite back. > I travel back to thailan Aug.21 so if you are contemplating another > trip maybe we can coincide? Hope all is well for you > > **** > S: perfect timing - you remember that 26,27,28th August are when we've arranged extra sesions? We'll be there for that last week Aug (24th -31st). Ven P. will also be there, I believe. Maybe others? > > If anyone else would like to join us, pls do. > > Metta, > > Sarah > p.s off to the airport a little later this evening. > ============ > #86521 From: han tun Date: Mon Jun 2, 2008 12:54 am Subject: Re: [dsg] dear Han hantun1 Dear Connie, Connie: I hear it is better, the older we get, to suddenly lose the sense of hearing than that of sight (and better to gradually than all at once either) -- that we are more prone to accidental death (as if there is such a thing!) - the example being like ending up under traffic instead of wherever we thought we were going when we stepped into the street. never too old for samvega - the buddhist vitamin! Han: Thank you very much for your advice of never too old for samvega, the Buddhist vitamin. Yes, in Burma we used to say that the loss of eyesight is the end of a man’s useful life. Of course, I have a very high respect and admiration for the blind persons who are trying to live a normal useful life. Respectfully, Han #86522 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Jun 2, 2008 1:29 am Subject: Metta, Ch 6, no 4. nilovg Daer friends, When we develop mettå we should know for what purpose we develop it. Do we develop it in order to attain calm to the degree of access concentration or attainment concentration? Or do we want to develop it in our daily life? Mettå and the other “perfections” are necessary conditions for the realisation of the four Noble Truths at enlightenment. We are bound to be for an endlessly long time in the cycle of birth and death, and we do not know when the perfections will have developed to the degree that enlightenment can be attained. Therefore, we should develop all kinds of kusala in order that eventually defilements can be completely eradicated and the state of the arahat can be attained. Only then will there be the end of the cycle of birth and death. Some people believe that defilements can be eradicated without the development of mettå. Or they believe that mettå is too difficult and therefore they do not develop it. They do not understand that mettå should be developed in order that it can arise again and again. Only if it arises time and again it can gradually be accumulated. We may believe that mettå is too difficult but we should remember that the arising of paññå which realizes the noble Truths is even more difficult. We should not be discouraged, we should not give akusala the opportunity to gain in strength by wrongly believing that mettå is too difficult, that it cannot arise and that it therefore should not be developed. When sati arises we can have right understanding of the development of mettå: we can see that it can arise, that it can be developed little by little. In this way mettå will become more powerful, it will become steadfast. There can be mettå with our actions, our speech and our thoughts. ******** Nina. #86523 From: upasaka@... Date: Sun Jun 1, 2008 11:10 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Kamma and Accumulations (wasRe: Mental states...... upasaka_howard Hi, Connie (and Alex) - In a message dated 6/1/2008 9:00:35 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, nichicon@... writes: Howard: (snip) There's no requirement anyone has the right to impose as to belief. --------------------------------------------------- c: Huh? ============================== Yeah, poorly expressed! LOL! What I should have written is "No one has the right to require of anyone the adoption of a particular belief." (Now read that and accept it as TRUTH, dammit!! LOLOL!) With metta, Howard #86524 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Mon Jun 2, 2008 4:01 am Subject: Kamma and Accumulations (wasRe: Mental states......) scottduncan2 Dear Herman, Thanks for the reference. I had given up trying to find this in the Sa.myutta Nikaaya. In the sutta, the question posed (599) was: "...does one become a brahmin by birth or else by actions..." "Jaatiyaa braahma.no hoti bhaaradvaajo iti bhaasati. Aha~nca kammanaa bruumi eva.m jaanaahi cakkhuma. Scott: Not the 'nature vs nurture question! Apparently, the more things change, the more things stay the same. The answer (-numbering differs in the Paa.li text for reasons I know not): "648. The usual way of the world is to be planned about name and clan Accumulated and co-incidentally meeting, it gets planned at the right time. [651. Sama~n~naa hesaa lokasmi.m naamagotta.m pakappita.m - Sammuccaa samudaagata.m tattha tattha pakappita.m] Scott: This is interesting; for 'naamagotta.m' (PTS PED): "Gotta (nt.)...ancestry, lineage. There is no word in English for gotta. It includes all those descended, or supposed to be descended, from a common ancestor. A gotta name is always distinguished from the personal name, the name drawn from place of origin or residence, or from occupation, and lastly from the nick -- name. It probably means agnate rather than cognate. About a score of gotta names are known. They are all assigned to the Buddha's time...With naama (name & lineage, or nomen et cognomen): naamagotta.m...: the name for recognition, the surname for lineage)..." Scott: Not to be taken literally, I would suppose. Here seems to be just a name. What's in a name? Here it is supposed that this refers to patrilineality - the lineage of the father. 649. Ignorantly entangled in views for a long time, The not knowing tell us, that by birth a brahmin is born. [652. Digharattamanusayita.m di.t.thigatamajaanata.m, Ajaanantaa te - pabruvanti jaatiyaa hoti braahmano] 650. By birth a brahmin is not born, by birth a non-brahmin is not born, By actions a brahmin is born, by actions a non-brahmin is born. [653. Na jaccaa braahma.no hoti na jaccaa hoti abraahma.no Kammanaa braahma.no hoti kammanaa hoti abraahma.no.] Scott: 'By actions' - to me this means that birth is 'caused'. I'm thinking here maybe this refers to the way in which the last moments of an existence ending are condition for the first moment of the next existence. 651. By actions a farmer is born, by actions a craftsman is born, By actions a merchant is born, by actions a workman is born. [654. Kassako kammanaa hoti sippiko hoti kammanaa, Vaa.nijo kammanaa hoti pessiko hoti kammanaa.] 652. By actions a robber is born, by actions a soldier too, By actions an adviser is born, by actions a king too. [655. Coropi kammanaa hoti yodhaajivopi kammanaa, Yaajako kammanaa hoti raajaapi hoti kammanaa.] Scott: Given that we are talking about names and lineage, are we talking about a certain station in life? I don't know. 653. Thus the wise see action as it really is, Seeing it dependently arising become clever in the results of actions. [656. Evameta.m yathaabhuuta.m kamma.m passanti pa.n.ditaa, Pa.ticca samuppaadadasaa - kammavipaakakovidaa.] 654. By actions the world rolls on, by actions the populace roll on, Beings bound to actions, go on, like the lynch pin of the wheel. [657. Kammaanaa vattati loko kammanaa vattati pajaa, Kammanibandhanaa sattaa rathassaa.niva yaayato.] 655. By austerities, leading the holy life, restraint and taming, By these a brahmin is born, that is the most noble brahmin. [658. Tapena brahmacariyena sa.myamena damena ca, Etena braahma.no hoti eta.m braahma.namuttama.m.] 656. Endowed with the three knowledges, appeased and rebirth destroyed Vaase.t.tha know it as recognizing Brahmaa and Sakha." [659. Tihi vijjaahi sampanno santo khi.naapunabbhavo, Eva.m vaase.t.thi jaanaahi brahmaa sakko vijaanatanti.] H: "One is what one does..." Scott: The sutta notes that it is by actions (kammanaa) the world rolls on. 'Beings bound to actions' (kammanibandhanaa sattaa) 'go on'. The lynch pin keeps the wheel held to the axle. Birth by actions seems to me to refer to and that birth is the result of kamma. Would you be suggesting the same by citing this sutta? Sincerely, Scott. #86525 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Mon Jun 2, 2008 4:57 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Lessons in Detachment, Ch 5, no 2. scottduncan2 Dear Herman, Thanks for the reply: Regarding your: "Experience = object. Objectless seeing, hearing etc is indiscriminate thinking." H: "All experience is experience of something. We do not just see, we see something, we do not just hear, we hear something, we do not just feel, we feel something etc. But what we do not experience is the seeing, hearing, feeling etc, we experience the object," Scott: Okay, I think I get what you are saying. Do you consider naama to be a separate reality from ruupa? H: "You seem to be saying that there is more to any experience that what is experienced. If I experience walking to the fridge, that is what I experience, what else should there be?" Scott: I'd say that there is 'experiencing' and that which is experienced. I'd not say these are one and the same. I'm not sure whether this is what you are saying. I'd say that 'fridge' and 'I walk into a fridge' are concept, and that 'hardness' (or 'temperature' if you meant literally walk 'into' a fridge) is experienced. H: "The other day Vicki and I had to give evidence in court about a serious assault we witnessed and broke up...Now you are trying to pin me down about something I have no clue about, and I understand full well that whichever way I lean, there will be consequences...If I say that I do believe in Path moments, I will be saying something that isn't true, for I don't have a clue what Path moments are. How can I reasonably take a position on what I don't know? You obviously believe it is very important that I do take a position on it. Why, may I ask?" Scott: Good question. You've got me all wrong. I don't like to discuss things just for discussion's sake. If one discusses in order to understand something, then fine. If one puts forward various arguments based on the premise that if it is not known then it doesn't have any validity, then I'm not too keen to discuss. One can try to gain an intellectual understanding of 'path moment' based on the Buddha's teachings, without having experienced a path moment. I want to have clarification of where you are coming from, since it seems as if your position is that of 'Skeptic', even possibly 'Skeptical Nihilist'. If this is the case, and that's fine, then discussions seem to be about Convincing or Debunking, which I'm not at all interested in doing. I could use views you put forward as a springboard to clarify the points in the way I want to, but then, is that a 'discussion'? It would make of me a poor discussant, should your own aims differ from mine. Why do you discuss on the list (not that you shouldn't of course - just the same question you asked me)? Please correct these impressions, which I give since you ask. I don't mind how you see it, but I just want to fine-tune an intellectual understanding of the Buddha's teachings from the point-of-view of the list. I don't want to convince or be convinced by anyone. Just the facts, as it were. Does that clarify it for you? H: "This may be semantics only, but I understand any quality to be something experiencable. Do you mean quality to be something like a condition, not something experienced but a cause for the experience?" Scott: No, I mean that a given dhamma *is* its quality, as I believe we have agreed upon in the past. And I mean that this quality is experienced, but this 'experience' would be the quality of another dhamma (whose quality it is to experience). Sincerely, Scott. #86526 From: "Alex" Date: Mon Jun 2, 2008 7:36 am Subject: Kamma and Accumulations (wasRe: Mental states......) truth_aerator Dear Scott, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Scott Duncan" wrote: > > Dear Herman, > > 649. Ignorantly entangled in views for a long time, > The not knowing tell us, that by birth a brahmin is born. > [652. Digharattamanusayita.m di.t.thigatamajaanata.m, > Ajaanantaa te - pabruvanti jaatiyaa hoti braahmano] > > 650. By birth a brahmin is not born, by birth a non-brahmin is not born, > By actions a brahmin is born, by actions a non-brahmin is born. > [653. Na jaccaa braahma.no hoti na jaccaa hoti abraahma.no > Kammanaa braahma.no hoti kammanaa hoti abraahma.no.] > > Scott: 'By actions' - to me this means that birth is 'caused'. I'm > thinking here maybe this refers to the way in which the last moments > of an existence ending are condition for the first moment of the next > existence. > No. It does NOT talk about Kamma Vipaka. Kamma is action that is done, so what the Buddha is talking about is that "one depends on what one does" As Ven. Nanavira Thera has said. He talked about the above passages (pg 57 clearing the path) Best wishes, Alex #86527 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Jun 2, 2008 7:42 am Subject: Re: [dsg] What are the causes of 4 great elements + space & consciousness 5-6th? nilovg Hi Herman, Op 2-jun-2008, om 2:46 heeft Herman Hofman het volgende geschreven: > I have read and re-read the useful posts on space. No need to say > anything further if it will be a repeat of what is already there. But > it seems to me that the entire commentarial doctrine on space is made > necessary by the need to impose a certain elemental order on things. > Even nibbana is made an element in these scholastic schemes. Clearly, > the formulators of these doctrines went out of their way to avoid at > all costs the notion of nothing, or absence. Because absence cannot be > made into an element. > > However, the Buddha teaches quite eloquently that the world is empty > of what is not there. MN121. Just try explaining that in terms of > elements. :-) ------- N: Here akaasa is used as a meditation subject of the first aruupa- jhana. This is in a context different from the rupa which is space. As meditation subject space is a concept. In this sutta abiding in the concept of emptiness is not attending to all the objects that are disturbing: village, human being, etc. In other contexts emptiness, su~n~natta, is used in the sense of empty of a self and it is synonymous with anattaa. Why is nibbaana an element? Because it is empty of a self. Dhaatu means devoid of self. Nina. #86528 From: "connie" Date: Mon Jun 2, 2008 7:57 am Subject: Perfections Corner (171) nichiconn Dear Friends, ch.5 continues: In daily life everybody has come into contact with undesirable objects: for some people these are extremely undesirable, whereas for others these are only slightly so. This may happen when one meets another person on account of whom one is disturbed or feels displeasure. If satisampaja~n~na (sati and pa~n~naa) does not arise, one does not know that there is akusala dhamma at such a moment and hence kusala viriya has no opportunity to arise and akusala viriya arises instead. There are bound to be conditions for desire and attachment so that akusala continues to arise. However, if someone has listened to the Dhamma and develops satipa.t.thaana, sati-sampaja~n~na can arise and be aware of akusala when he is irritated or displeased. We should consider more deeply the meaning of sati-sampaja~n~na. When akusala dhamma arises, sati-sampaja~n~na may consider the Dhamma and realize the disadvantage of the continuation of akusala. At that moment, it may be known that it is not proper to be irritated in whatever respect, be it on account of the action or speech of someone else, or be it because we have noticed something wrong. When, for example, akusala citta with anger arises and sati-sampaja~n~naa can be aware of its characteristic, we can see whether there is effort for giving up anger; if one continues being angry it means that akusala viriya is still strong. When kusala viriya has been further developed and awareness can arise, there are conditions for the decrease of displeasure and for mettaa. Thus, instead of anger which is an impure dhamma there can immediately be a change to kusala dhamma, dhamma which is pure. When dosa arises, we have displeasure, but sati-sampaja~n~na can arise and be aware of its characteristic and then we can see the benefit of satisampaja~n~na. .. to be continued, connie #86531 From: "colette" Date: Mon Jun 2, 2008 7:51 am Subject: Representational form of Government, Illusions of reality ksheri3 Good Morning Connie, > colette: I have always understood the potentials for the meanings and > implications of the word UNPROMPTED to clearly indicate Spontaneous > and spontaneity where there is no clear CAUSATION. People > spontaneously combust, burst into flames, and are consumed by the > flames, which is documented fact that there is no clear causation of > the fire and the death or birth. > > With spontaneous as a potential, THEN, we are left with the > conclusion that ignorance is part of the game and that we, as humans, > are not as smart as we think, as we delusion, we are. <....> > ----------------------------------- > > > > > connie: for one, I think it has bearing on the strength of the > kamma created at that time, if that's how one says it. [obligatory > hallelujah!] colette: You certainly have something here! You suggest that something is internal and becomes external. You suggest that there is velocity, maybe force, built into the "intention". I theorize that a bullet leaves the barrel of a gun at a given speed and is projected outward from the interior of a gun to the exterior world. I theorize that a train travels on a track, a predetermined coarse or flight path. Bullets and trains travel in predetermined coarses or paths. We have the Bullet Train in Japan and the TGV in France, "Bullet Trains", and they travel on predetermined paths. A few summers ago I spent a month with some people downstate in ILlinois and I was overwhelmed by the lack of buildings obscuring my view -- it seriously brought back memories of my childhood growing up in suburbia and those fateful days when I was hitchiking across the U.S.A. two and a half times. In the course of my meditations I would concentrate on contrails being created by passing aircraft and people would question me as to what I was staring so intently at. My consistant reply, until they became conditioned by the same response, was that each single contrail has a begining and at that dot, that single dot, we know that it represents hundreds of individuals. Thus we can witness and understand that there is illusion within this reality we are confronted with every second. SIDE NOTE: in the WEstern American psychological programming of robots, the objective would be or is to blame some person or some thing as a causation for this illusionary quality that only we, as buddhists, cognize. <....> Now we're at the single thought having been projected outward into the real world from the unreal world of a person's mind. What is the constitution of the force which creates the velocity at which the thought travels outward in the real world? FREE WILL? Shades of the Ordo Templi Orientus, no? toodles, colette #86532 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon Jun 2, 2008 8:51 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Panna As Indriya sarahprocter... Dear Tep, I do apologise to you (and others) for very slow responses. We have very limited and occasional dial-up internet connection in the Swiss mountains. We also seem so busy shopping, cooking, hiking and recovering from travel and jet-lag. I laugh too because I am so used to Hong Kong's pollution that my system goes into shock in the clean mountain air and I'm overwhelmed with allergies and hay-fever. It usually just last a few days or so - violent non-stop sneezing and onion-peeling eyes....:-) Back to your comments: --- On Fri, 30/5/08, Tep wrote: From: Tep T: >Thank you for taking time off your busy schedule to discuss the meanings of pa~n~nindriya in the Suttanta Pitaka & the Abhidhamma Pitaka with me. *** S: Thank you! *** >Sarah: >If you look at the Vibhanga (above) in ch. 5 ‘Analysis of the Controlling Faculties’, it lists the 22 indriyas at the beginning of the chapter. The last four of these are given as: * a) controlling faculty of wisdom (pa~n~nindriya) b) controlling faculty of ‘I am knowing the unknown’ (ana~n~naata~ n~nassaamiitindr iya) c) controlling faculty of knowng (a~n~nindriya) d) controlling faculty of one who has known fully (a~n~naataavindriya ) * >T: Yes, I have looked it up and found the items a) through d) in the Thai version too. ............ ......... ... >Sarah: Perhaps, in summary, we can say that sometimes: * a) pannindriya only refers to supramundane panna (as in certain suttas) b) pannindriya refers to mundane and supramundane panna (as in the fuller classifications in the Abhidhamma) c) pannindriya only refers to mundane panna. *** >T: The deductions b) and c) are not yet clear to me. So, will you be kind enough to quote "the fuller classifications in the Abhidhamma" which shows that "pannindriya refers to mundane and supramundane panna"? ***** S: I was referring to the quote from the Vibanga I gave(as you'd been referring to this sane text). In it, it was made clear that: b) controlling faculty of ‘I am knowing the unknown’ (ana~n~naata~ n~nassaamiitindr iya) c) controlling faculty of knowng (a~n~nindriya) d) controlling faculty of one who has known fully (a~n~naataavindriya ) were all referring to supramundane panna of the degrees quoted before, but: a) controlling faculty of wisdom (pa~n~nindriya) referred to panna of the "4 planes". These 4 planes refer to the kamavacara, rupavacara, arupavacara and the lokuttara planes. The first 3 are mundane and the last is of course supramundane. From this I concluded: "b) pannindriya refers to mundane and supramundane panna (as in the fuller classifications in the Abhidhamma)" I mentioned that there is a lot more detail in the Vibhanga and particularly its commentary, the Sammohavinodani. (I don't have any texts with me, so can't quote further now.) In any case, I think the comment about the 4 planes I mentioned was clear, but let me know if you disagree. ******* ............ ......... .. > S: I believe an example of the latter would be in the Satipatthana Sutta and commentary in the section under the 7 enlightenment factors. T: It will be very helpful to me if you can cite the passage in the Satipatthana Sutta which shows why "pannindriya only refers to mundane panna". Thank you in advance, Sarah. **** S: Again, you'll have to excuse me for not adding further quotes for now. I think it's made clear in the Satipatthana Sutta that it's the mundane path that is being referred to. Furthermore, as I quoted before, below we have the indriyas (including pannindriya) given as a condition for the arising of dhammavicaya enlightenment factor. This suggests to me that the indriyas have to be developed in order to become enlightenment factors. When satipatthana is developed, so are these indriyas ('spiritual' faculties). It's the same in the development of samatha. The indriyas are developed. >Sarah: From the commentary (Soma transl): * >“Six things lead to the arising of this enlightenment factor (dhammavicaya sambojjhaâ€?nga): Inquiring about the aggregates and so forth; the purification of the basis (namely, the cleaning of the body, clothes and so forth); imparting evenness to the (five spiritual) controlling faculties [indriyas]; avoiding the ignorant; associating with the wise; reflecting on the profound difference of the hard-to-perceive processes of the aggregates, modes (or elements), sense-bases and so forth; and the inclining (sloping, bending) towards the development of the enlightenment factor of the investigation of mental objects.â€? >T: Sounds good to me! Yes, these six things clearly support the development of dhammavicaya sambojjhanga. But this commentary is not directly related to the main discussion, I think. **** S: Pls see my comment above and let me know if it still doesn't indicate mundane panna. (If you have time, please also take a look at the chapter on 'Indriya paccaya' in Nina's book on Conditions. It's on Zolag, I know. I recall she gives more detail there about the indriyas as condition for other states in the development of samatha and satipatthana - i.e mundane wisdom). As I said before, you gave excellent sutta references pointing to supramundane panna. I just think it's one of those discussions where everyone is right - it just depends on the context which we're reading at the time. Thank you again for your patience. Metta, Sarah ======== #86533 From: upasaka@... Date: Mon Jun 2, 2008 5:03 am Subject: Re: [dsg] What are the causes of 4 great elements + space & consciousness 5-6... upasaka_howard Hi, Nina (and Herman) - In a message dated 6/2/2008 10:43:09 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, vangorko@... writes: Dhaatu means devoid of self. ================================= Nina, what is a source for that definition? I couldn't find it in any Pali dictionary. With metta, Howard #86534 From: "sarahprocterabbott" Date: Mon Jun 2, 2008 9:15 am Subject: Re: Overview of KS 3: Her Faulty Teaching sarahprocter... Hi James & Phil, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Phil" wrote: > The lack of an emphasis on mindfulness of the body > (it should be first and predominate) is a big one off the top of my > head, along with a weird emphasis on sakkaya ditthi as the main > wrong view when as we know the Buddha emphasis a more mundane > version. (I forget the Pali, the one about not believing there are > results of deeds etc - *that* is wrong view, not not-having the > right view that sees through sakkaya ditthi, i.e the right view of > the ariyan. **** S: I see the 'mindfulness of body' and sakkaya ditthi as being closely connected. Sakkaya ditthi refers to the taking of rupas (thought to be a body) as self, or self as owning body, body in self or self in body (and the same for the other khandhas). When there is an understanding of rupas, such as tangible object, as mere rupas, nothing to do with a self, and the same for the other nama khandhas, no other wrong views arise. This is why it's said that all wrong views arise because of sakkaya ditthi and that sakkaya ditthi has to be eliminated first. **** SN 41:3 (Isisdatta, Bodhi transl): "Now, householder, are you asking thus: `Venerable elder, there are various views that arise in the world: "The world is eternal"….- these as well as the sixty-two speculative views mentioned in the Brahmajaala. Now when what exists do these views come to be? When what is nonexistent do these views not come to be?' " "Yes, venerable sir." "As to the various views that arise in the world, householder, `the world is eternal'….-These as well as the sixty two speculative views mentioned in the Brahmajaala: when there is identity view, these views come to be; when there is no identity view, these views do not come to be." "But, venerable sir, how does identity view come to be?" "Here, householder, the uninstructed worldling, who has no regard for the noble ones and is unskilled and undisciplined in their Dhamma, who has no regard for the good persons and is unskilled and undisciplined in their Dhamma, regards form as self, or self as possessing form, or form as in self, or self as in form. He regards feeling as self....perception..volitional formations....consciousness as self......It is in such a way that identity view comes to be." ***** Metta, Sarah p.s I hope you're feeling better. We thought of you when we heard about the earthquake in Taiwan. I also hope you'll feel encouraged to continue your series, now that you're raising good points for discussion and being fed a few more by Phil:-). As Phil said, you give 'her students practice with patience and reflection'. True!! ========= #86535 From: "Alex" Date: Mon Jun 2, 2008 9:27 am Subject: Re: Friday 23 May - Some personal relections truth_aerator Hi Sarah, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "sarahprocterabbott" wrote: > Right understanding is the first and foremost factor of the 8-fold > Path. >>> Yes it is true that Samma-Ditthi is a must. >>> It is right understanding of namas and rupas which is to be > developed. >>> With this there is major disagreement. Please give ma sutta which teaches the understanding of Nama & Rupa as an intellectual exercise? Whenever Buddha has talked about samma-ditthi it was always in reference to suffering and its cessation or we could saying in craving and its cessation or 4NT. All of these are similiar in that they point toward experience. > > So what is nama? What is rupa? These are the questions we have to > consider carefully and really understand, not just by a book > definition. >>> Until one has removed Avijja, these questions could be unanswerable. Furthermore, ultimately, WHO CARES WHAT THEY ARE? What is more important is "What is to be done?", how to remove craving and clinging. > > Seeing now, at this very moment as we talk, is nama. It is the reality > which experiences visible object. There is no self, no person involved at all. It's an element. > But the thing is, we don't really see it. Avijja forms and underlies any ordinary states of consciousness and thus it is the Judge, the Jury and the Accused. Sati (which the Buddha has tried to and failed) by itself, doesn't really work unless one removes avijja first, either temporary or forever. If forever, then as an Arahant one doesn't need to develop Sati. Only if it is done temporary can a worldling have a glimpse which escalates into a breakthrough. What is the state that blinds Avijja (or Mara)? In MN25 we read: Jhana! Bhikkhus, what is inaccessible to Maara and the followings of Maara. Here, bhikkhus, the bhikkhu secluded from sensual thoughts and demeritorious thoughts with thoughts and thought processes and with joy and pleasaantness born of seclusion, attained to abides in the first jhaana. To this is said, that death is blindfolded, having destroyed the feetless one has gone beyond the sight of death, the evil one. http://www.budsas.org/ebud/majjhima/025-nivapa-sutta-e1.htm Furthermore, when one reaches "Nirodha Samapatti" one emerges as an Arahant. "Again, the bhikkhu overcoming all the sphere of neither-perception- nor-non-perception, attains to the cessation of perceptions and feelings and abides. Seeing it with wisdom too, desires get destroyed." During the course of progression in Jhana, one can obtain Anagamiship (if not Arahatship) from any stage of Jhana (MN64 AN9.36 etc) It is not surprising that Jhana is often derived from "Burning" [of the defilments] >>>>> Again, there is no 'thing' in it. There is no computer, no watch, no person involved. It is the element which is seen only. >>> This was NEVER taught by the Buddha and this is one of dead give aways. If Avijja = seeing concepts (such as people, trees, etc) then an Arahant would be reduced to some anoetic little child who can't reason who can't orient himself, who doesn't see "the road, the bowl, the robe, the wall, the ground, the tiger, the other monks etc" as these are 'mere' 'concepts'. ------ Mara ""Mine alone is the eye, contemplative. Mine are forms, mine is the sphere of consciousness & contact at the eye. Where can you go to escape me? Mine alone is the ear... the nose... the tongue... the body... Mine alone is the intellect, contemplative. Mine are ideas, mine is the sphere of consciousness & contact at the intellect. Where can you go to escape me?" [Buddha] "Yours alone is the eye, Evil One. Yours are forms, yours is the sphere of consciousness of contact at the eye. Where no eye exists, no forms exist, no sphere of consciousness & contact at the eye exists: there, Evil One, you cannot go. Yours alone is the ear... the nose... the tongue... the body... Yours alone is the intellect, Evil One. Yours are ideas, yours is the sphere of consciousness & contact at the intellect. Where no intellect exists, no ideas exist, no sphere of consciousness of contact at the intellect exists: there, Evil One, you cannot go." http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn04/sn04.019.than.html Thus one must detach from all things, including consciousness to totally free from Mara (Avijja). Nirodha Samapatti is a total temporary freedom that can serve as a match to develop Vijja and removed Avijja for good. Best wishes, Alex #86536 From: "colette" Date: Mon Jun 2, 2008 9:23 am Subject: AQUA VITAE or is that White Lighting (grain alcohol) ksheri3 Good Morning Group, As I pondered the post which I submitted in response to Connie's genius I came across the concept I've used in/through the Kagyu of Dakinis "churning the nectar of the gods", which caused me to ponder: How much nectar can a single Dakini churn in any given time frame? In the fleeting seconds I pondered this I realized the equality of grain alcohols, Spiritus in Poland, Aqua Vitae in many European communities, White Lighting in the Irish immigrant areas of the South U.S.A. <...> The question of the amount of amrita a single dakini can churn raised the question of the equality between Grain Alcohol and Amrita. In my youth I studied Grain Alcohol and, through the experience of drinking the concoction, formulated my own personal theories on it. Grain Alcohol and Amrita are equal through the effects they manifest in the body i.e. intoxication or bliss. Lets take Harvard University and their actions toward the scientist Professor Timothy Leary, who, through the experimentation with LSD, found equalities between the effects of LSD, a hallucinegenic, and the RESULTANT CONSCIOUSNESS desired through the actions of THE TIBETAN BOOK OF THE DEAD. MEDITATION is key here and is the bliss that I am experiencing as I write this. In order for a single thought, as I spoke to Connie about, to have the force and velocity to effect change in the exterior world the bliss of that single thought must be tremendous. How can that thought maintain the velocity or force once it enters the real world of Einstein's or Newton's Physics? <...> Is it wrong for Harvard university to discharge Timothy Leary for experimenting with the effects of LSD and the equality between those effects and the objectivity of the Tibetan Book of the Dead, AND THEN, after removing the scientist, then, turn around and continue this professors exact same research? What sutta was that: "4. Be it in the village, or in the forest, whosoever steals what belongs to others, what is not given to him -- know him as an outcast." Now since there is very little tangible proof that I exist or have ever existed (it's a quality found in obtaining employment in the Intelligence Industry, where everything is "classified" and does not exist as long as the government keeps it hidden from the public or in lets say a Vatican Library, and they won't let you have documentation that does not exist, will they?) <...> Now it's time to reflect while I taste the nectar of the Aqua Vitae or is that Grain Alcohol. toodles, colette #86537 From: upasaka@... Date: Mon Jun 2, 2008 5:48 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Overview of KS 3: Her Faulty Teaching upasaka_howard Hi, Sarah - In a message dated 6/2/2008 12:16:09 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, sarahprocterabbott@... writes: S: I see the 'mindfulness of body' and sakkaya ditthi as being closely connected. Sakkaya ditthi refers to the taking of rupas (thought to be a body) as self, or self as owning body, body in self or self in body (and the same for the other khandhas). When there is an understanding of rupas, such as tangible object, as mere rupas, nothing to do with a self, and the same for the other nama khandhas, no other wrong views arise. This is why it's said that all wrong views arise because of sakkaya ditthi and that sakkaya ditthi has to be eliminated first. =============================== Sarah, I don't understand you here. Are you expressing the opinion that kayagata-sati leads to sakkaya ditthi, or are you pointing out some other connection? With metta, Howard #86538 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon Jun 2, 2008 11:04 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Overview of KS 3: Her Faulty Teaching sarahprocter... Hi Howard, --- On Tue, 3/6/08, upasaka@... wrote: From: upasaka@... >S: I see the 'mindfulness of body' and sakkaya ditthi as being closely connected. Sakkaya ditthi refers to the taking of rupas (thought to be a body) as self, or self as owning body, body in self or self in body (and the same for the other khandhas). When there is an understanding of rupas, such as tangible object, as mere rupas, nothing to do with a self, and the same for the other nama khandhas, no other wrong views arise. This is why it's said that all wrong views arise because of sakkaya ditthi and that sakkaya ditthi has to be eliminated first. ============ ========= ========= = H: >Sarah, I don't understand you here. Are you expressing the opinion that kayagata-sati leads to sakkaya ditthi, or are you pointing out some other connection? ***** S: No, kayagati-sati, or awareness of rupas (as usually taken for the body), along with awareness of namas (commonly taken for oneself), leads to the eradication of sakkaya-ditthi. Usually we're so concerned about our body, our health and everything else relating to ourselves, that we forget that only rupas are experienced through the 5 senses and they don't belong to anyone. So when there is a stress on understanding sakkaya-ditthi when it arises now, it is through kayagati-sati (and the other foundations of mindfulness) at this very moment - the understanding of rupas and namas taken for self. This is bhavana or 'practical' meditation at this moment. For example, through the body-sense, temperature or motion or hardness/softness appears and awareness (with understanding) can be aware. This is kayagati-sati. There is no 'body' or feeling sensation or painful feeling appearing through the body-sense, no matter what is commonly accepted or thought to be the case. I'm not sure if this clarifies. As I mentioned, I'm a bit befuddled at the moment, so probably not expressing myself clearly and too tired to check:-) Metta, Sarah ======== #86539 From: "sarahprocterabbott" Date: Mon Jun 2, 2008 11:30 am Subject: [dsg] Re: report on Bangkok and Kaeng Krajan sarahprocter... Hi Ken H, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "kenhowardau" > S: > Anyway, here's the Pali: > > Sabbapaapassa akara.na"m (not to do any evil) > kusalassa upasampada (to cultivate good) > sacittapariyodapana"m (to purify one's mind) > eta"m buddhaana saasana"m (this is the Teaching of the Buddhas.) > ------------------- > K:> Thanks, that's interesting, but it doesn't change things a great deal > for me. "Not to do evil" could mean "refrain when there is an > opportunity to do evil" couldn't it? .... S: Or through understanding the Teaching of the Buddha, there will be the eradication of akusala and the cultivation of kusala... This is the way of the wise. ... > S: > like from the Perfections corner #85226 on sila as avoidance > (vaaritta) and as performance (caaritta). Lots of good detail. > -------------------------------- > K:> Yes, here is a quote from it: > "but with regard to siila as performance (caaritta), we should > consider the Bodhisatta's conduct, so that we shall further develop > kusala." > > I like that because it is present-moment oriented. At > least, "considering" is. As for the sila itself, however, that's > where I get back to the trouble I was having at the KK discussions. > > At KK, I asked whether sila (or dana in that case) was [also] a > single moment thing (a reality) or was it a concept? .... S: As you always stress, there are only ever 'single moment' realities arising and falling away. So in an absolute sense, sila and dana can only ever refer to such 'single moment' realities, but we have to use different concepts to refer to them. ..... K:>The answer was > not what I was expecting. KS replied, "There has to be an act of > dana." > > At that point I was tempted to ask "But isn't an act of dana just > a story?" But I didn't ask that because I didn't want to look like > an ignorant smart-aleck who was trying to catch KS out (by throwing > her own words back at her). .... S: The point is, I think, that usually by 'dana' we're referring to many, many 'single moment realities'. In an absolute sense, there is only ever one citta with alobha arising at a time, but when most people speak of dana or when the texts, such as those on the Perfections refer to dana, it is the act consisting of many cittas being referred to. Yes, it is a story or a concept referring to many namas and rupas. ......... > > So I'm asking you. :-) Isn't an act of dana just a story? If there > is, in ultimate reality, such a thing as dana then surely it must be > the function of a single, fleeting, citta and its cetasikas.(?) .... S; OK. Dana can refer to a 'story' about realities or to a single fleeting citta and its cetasikas or just to alobha cetasika. .... K:> Thanks. On second thoughts, pretend I didn't say the above. I won't > delete it now, but it is something I will just have to wake up to by > myself. You and the others have done more than enough already. ... S; You always have a good point. I think it's the same with regard to kamma or bhavana or almost anything else. In an absolute sense they may refer to a moment of cetana or panna, but in fact there can never be kamma consisting of just one cetana. There can never be bhavana consisting of just one panna. So,in effect, they become 'composite terms' (to use Andrew T's expression) to refer to many realities. It's helpful for me to reflect further on this with you too. As I've said to others, I'm not sure I'm making any sense now and can hardly see the screen with my 'onion-peeling' eyes, so must stop. ..... > PPS: I have just found it - 86115. It has an easy, surfing related > question in it! .... S: Loved the answer - sounded like a great one. What a lifestyle... Metta, Sarah ======== #86540 From: "Tep" Date: Mon Jun 2, 2008 11:44 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Panna As Indriya dhammanusarin Dear Sarah, - After having pondered over your kind and patient reply, I again realize the fact that 'we are what we read'. So it is not easy for you and me to see all the same details of the same subject of discussion, unless we read the same books. It is like we are in two rooms that are separated by a very thick transparent glass wall. I can see the movement of your lips, but cannot hear the words you are saying. So we should close the discussion at this point. Regards, Tep === #86541 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Jun 2, 2008 11:53 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Panna As Indriya nilovg Dear Tep, I read Sarah's post on pa~n~na as indriya, and I can quote from my Conditions. Op 2-jun-2008, om 20:44 heeft Tep het volgende geschreven: > After having pondered over your kind and patient reply, I again > realize the fact that 'we are what we read'. So it is not easy for > you and me to see all the same details of the same subject of > discussion, unless we read the same books. ------- N: The indriyas have to be developed to become balas, powers, so that they are unshakable by their opposites. As Sarah wrote, I shall come to know what was unknown before, etc. are indriyas which are lokuttara. Before I looked at the Patisambidhamagga and I saw a text with pannindriya being lokuttara, and I thought of you. It depends on the context. ------- Nina. #86542 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Jun 2, 2008 12:01 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] What are the causes of 4 great elements + space & consciousness 5-6... nilovg Hi Howard, Op 2-jun-2008, om 18:03 heeft upasaka@... het volgende geschreven: > Dhaatu > means devoid of self. > ================================= > Nina, what is a source for that definition? I couldn't find it in any > Pali dictionary. ------- N: Sure, you are right, it is more an interpretation. It is closely related to dhamma in meaning, PED. Dhamma: it bears, dharati, it bears its own charactreistic. A dhamma is devoid of self. Do you like this? Nina. #86543 From: "Tep" Date: Mon Jun 2, 2008 1:20 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Panna As Indriya dhammanusarin Dear Nina, - >N: It depends on the context. T: And the context is seen by the eye of the beholder, who has been influenced by what she has read from her favorite books. Tep === --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Dear Tep, > I read Sarah's post on pa~n~na as indriya, and I can quote from my > Conditions. #86544 From: upasaka@... Date: Mon Jun 2, 2008 9:27 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Overview of KS 3: Her Faulty Teaching upasaka_howard Hi, Sarah - In a message dated 6/2/2008 2:05:09 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, sarahprocterabbott@... writes: Hi Howard, --- On Tue, 3/6/08, upasaka@... wrote: From: upasaka@... >S: I see the 'mindfulness of body' and sakkaya ditthi as being closely connected. Sakkaya ditthi refers to the taking of rupas (thought to be a body) as self, or self as owning body, body in self or self in body (and the same for the other khandhas). When there is an understanding of rupas, such as tangible object, as mere rupas, nothing to do with a self, and the same for the other nama khandhas, no other wrong views arise. This is why it's said that all wrong views arise because of sakkaya ditthi and that sakkaya ditthi has to be eliminated first. ============ ========= ========= = H: >Sarah, I don't understand you here. Are you expressing the opinion that kayagata-sati leads to sakkaya ditthi, or are you pointing out some other connection? ***** S: No, kayagati-sati, or awareness of rupas (as usually taken for the body), along with awareness of namas (commonly taken for oneself), leads to the eradication of sakkaya-ditthi. Usually we're so concerned about our body, our health and everything else relating to ourselves, that we forget that only rupas are experienced through the 5 senses and they don't belong to anyone. ------------------------------------------- Howard: Ahh, thank goodness! ;-)) ------------------------------------------- So when there is a stress on understanding sakkaya-ditthi when it arises now, it is through kayagati-sati (and the other foundations of mindfulness) at this very moment - the understanding of rupas and namas taken for self. This is bhavana or 'practical' meditation at this moment. For example, through the body-sense, temperature or motion or hardness/softness appears and awareness (with understanding) can be aware. This is kayagati-sati. There is no 'body' or feeling sensation or painful feeling appearing through the body-sense, no matter what is commonly accepted or thought to be the case. I'm not sure if this clarifies. As I mentioned, I'm a bit befuddled at the moment, so probably not expressing myself clearly and too tired to check:-) ----------------------------------------- Howard: No, no - you're fine, Sarah. :-) -------------------------------------- Metta, Sarah =============================== With metta, Howard #86545 From: upasaka@... Date: Mon Jun 2, 2008 9:33 am Subject: Re: [dsg] What are the causes of 4 great elements + space & consciousness 5-6... upasaka_howard Hi, Nina - In a message dated 6/2/2008 3:02:22 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, vangorko@... writes: Hi Howard, Op 2-jun-2008, om 18:03 heeft upasaka@... het volgende geschreven: > Dhaatu > means devoid of self. > ================================= > Nina, what is a source for that definition? I couldn't find it in any > Pali dictionary. ------- N: Sure, you are right, it is more an interpretation. It is closely related to dhamma in meaning, PED. Dhamma: it bears, dharati, it bears its own charactreistic. A dhamma is devoid of self. Do you like this? Nina. ================================== Yes, definitely related to 'dhamma' in meaning, and I certainly agree that being devoid of self is a central characteristic of dhatus. I just was uncomfortable with saying that the word MEANS "devoid of self." (No problem, Nina.) With metta, Howard #86546 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Mon Jun 2, 2008 5:31 pm Subject: Kamma and Accumulations (wasRe: Mental states......) scottduncan2 Dear Alex, Regarding: A: "No. It does NOT talk about Kamma Vipaka. Kamma is action that is done, so what the Buddha is talking about is that "one depends on what one does"..." Scott: Alex, consider the sutta: 653. Thus the wise see action as it really is, Seeing it dependently arising become clever in the results of actions. [656. Evameta.m yathaabhuuta.m kamma.m passanti pa.n.ditaa, Pa.ticca samuppaadadasaa - kammavipaakakovidaa.] Sincerely, Scott. #86547 From: "Tep" Date: Mon Jun 2, 2008 6:07 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Panna As Indriya dhammanusarin Dear Nina (and Sarah), - My earlier message may mislead the reader to think that I reject your kind and thoughtful reply. So please allow me to replace it with the following. >N: I read Sarah's post on pa~n~na as indriya, and I can quote from my Conditions. T: Thank you. .......... >N: S: "pannindriya refers to mundane and supramundane panna (as in the fuller classifications in the Abhidhamma)". T: In my previous post I quoted the Indriya-vibhanga sutta that defines pa~n~nindriya, which is clear by itself (no need to think about a "context"). >Tep (#86361): As I have observed, panna (or pa~n~naa) is an aspect of pannindriya and the two terms are always mentioned together in the Abhidhamma Book 2 (the Vibhanga) as they are intertwined and inseparable. I understand that the kind of panna that is inseparable from indriya is well developed; it is not in the domain of the worldlings (no matter how high his/her I.Q. is). Let me support my statement by two suttas. 1) MN 117: Maha-cattarisaka Sutta. >Tep: The Buddha defined the true right view of the ariyans as follows. "And what is the right view that is without effluents, transcendent, a factor of the path? The discernment, the faculty of discernment, the strength of discernment, analysis of qualities as a factor for Awakening, the path factor of right view of one developing the noble path whose mind is noble, whose mind is free from effluents, who is fully possessed of the noble path. This is the right view that is without effluents, transcendent, a factor of the path." >Tep: The term "discernment" here is the rendition of 'pa~n~naa'. The faculty of discernment is 'pa~n~nindriya', the strength of discernment is 'pa~n~naa-bala', and the analysis of qualities as a factor for Awakening is 'dhammavicaya-sambojjhanga'. In MN 117 these terms together define the supramundane right view. 2) SN 48.10 Indriya-vibhanga Sutta. "And what is the faculty of discernment? There is the case where a monk, a disciple of the noble ones, is discerning, endowed with discernment of arising & passing away -- noble, penetrating, leading to the right ending of stress. He discerns, as it has come to be: 'This is stress... This is the origination of stress... This is the cessation of stress... This is the path of practice leading to the cessation of stress.' This is called the faculty of discernment." ................................................ T: It is clear without any context, as all definitions are, that pa~n~nindriya is noble, penetrating, leading to the right ending of stress and it is the end result of development by a "disciple of the noble ones" >N: We read in the "Kindred Sayings" (V, Book IV, Kindred Sayings on the Faculties, Ch V, § 4, Eastern Gatehouse) that the Buddha, while he was staying at Såvatthí, in Eastern Garehouse, asked Såriputta: "Do you believe, Såriputta, that the controlling faculty of faith... of energy... of mindfulness... of concentration... that the controlling faculty of insight, if cultivated and made much of, plunges into the Deathless, has the Deathless for its goal, the Deathless for its ending?" >N: The "Deathless" is nibbåna. T: Yes, I understand that "Deathless is nibbana" too. But we have to keep in mind that this sutta does not specifically state that the development of the five indriyas(faculties) arise in the worldlings. This is similar to development of the Noble Eightfold Path : it is not in the worldings, it is only for ones who are on the Path, i.e. ariya savakas. Worldings can develop mundane magga factors as explained in MN 117. Regards, Tep === #86548 From: Sukinder Date: Mon Jun 2, 2008 8:13 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Overview of KS 3: Her Faulty Teaching sukinderpal Hi Phil, Sorry for the delay in responding, I was down with food-poisoning. I’ll respond in the form of a general comment instead of in between text. This is likely going to be around more or less, the same old points, only hoping that it will ‘sound’ different this time. ;-) And if it has still not made any difference, we can leave it here and perhaps move on to discuss other things…. ================= Ph: Yes, of course I do know that, Sukin. It is what makes the Buddha's teaching superior to all others. And we should very gradually develop an understanding of anattaness of things. But you guys get way ahead of the cart or however that proverb goes. Suk: The point of my last post was not just to talk in terms of what is in ‘principle’ but also of what might be observed in ‘experience’. Put it another way: People of all religions, while seeing the value in kusala and the harm in akusala, because they are ignorant about ‘self view’, in principle and/or experientially, this gets encouraged even in the name of ‘doing’ other forms of kusala. And I believe this happens with almost every Buddhist as well. The Buddhist while he notices to some extent the characteristic and manifestation of other forms of akusala, his mind has not been trained to notice self view in the same way. I’ll add here that, not taking into account ‘conditionality’ and ‘anatta’ the kind of morality followed and taught to others becomes one that strays away from the Middle Path. This as you can imagine, can lead to all kinds of akusala, including attachment, aversion, conceit and more wrong view. Of course, these akusala don’t go away or even lessen once appreciation of anatta and conditionality has occurred. But to continue having these because of latent tendencies is one thing, but encouraging morality at the expense of self view, is to be taking a path that leads to more and not less akusala. If one goes by an idea of a ‘self’ and what it does and has to do, then yes one’s judgment being based on that, will be either positive or negative. If positive one feels good and if negative one feels bad, life goes on like this and one will never see the illusory nature of the kind of conventional thinking and the influence of self view. It is this which seems to prevent you and most others from appreciating the lessons of anatta and conditionality. It seems almost like here, whether one succeeds or not, the chance of reaching the goal seems nevertheless possible, whereas what comes out of the Abhidhamma / commentarial perspective, no great change is promised. Which I believe to be the case, given the rarity of the Dhamma compared especially to lives spent in lower realms where chance for even a little kusala is nil. Besides given even a little observation of one’s own mind and seeing the vastly greater akusala tendencies over any kusala in this life, how can one expect any great change to the other side? Judging from your reaction to gross akusala tendencies, it seems perhaps that you may have accumulated a better sense of morality than say, I have. For me however, the greater of the evils being “wrong view” which only the Buddha could point out to, this becomes the main object of interest. And this is why I react to suggestions by you which appear to overlook the fact of anatta and conditionality. As I said before, understanding anatta, including at the pariyatti level, does not lead to downplaying of Sila. It probably does lead to less thinking in terms of “I practice Sila” and such, and perhaps because Anatta and Conditionality have become objects of interest, more time is then spent in thinking about these. This does not mean however, that when faced with having to keep the precepts or not, the latter becomes more likely just because there was no “‘intention’ to keep Sila”. Or that directly or indirectly, the yet superficial understanding about anatta is taken as excuse to follow the path of least resistance or something? This above scenario may seem possible in theory, but I don’t believe that it happens in practice. The fact is that no matter which level of understanding, the reference point for the understanding of anatta and conditionality is always the “present moment”. If the object is indeed the present moment reality, the lessons learnt though perhaps still weak, would include also the fact of kusala being valuable over akusala. Only of all the lessons, the most important is of dhammas being ‘conditioned and beyond control’. And this may sometimes be expressed to sound as though it overlooks those other lessons, but I don’t believe this to be so. Also you may want to consider the fact of the relationship between the different Parami. We hear that all of the perfections must develop more or less together such that panna as a parami could not be without sila, sacca, dana, khanti and other Parami being developed also. Talking about the lessons of anatta and conditionality, we can see the difference in our reaction to the suggestion of the Buddha’s teaching on the five precepts as being ‘training rules’ (and not commandments). Wherever you start and proceed from, what follows seem to be that you then see Sila as necessarily preceding Samadhi and Panna and related to these in such a way that Samadhi is then seen as equivalent to “meditation” and Panna as being the outcome of this. I on the other hand, while seeing value in sila in and of itself, have always taken ‘training rules’ as being reflection of the importance of taking anatta and conditionality into account all the way through. The fact that one can’t be expected to have sila at will, being anatta as are all dhammas, furthermore that Sila perfects only at Stream Entry and Samadhi at Anagami, shows beside this fact, that “conditions” other than any ‘intention’ to have Sila or Samadhi, is what leads to these and Panna accumulating and finally perfecting. Therefore while I agree that sila does accumulate as one develops wisdom, and this must happen even before any stage of enlightenment, it is *not* however as you and others seem to insist, a “step” from which one moves on to higher levels of development. And neither is this the same as what you say with regard to the role of ‘meditation’ as being support for sila and vice versa. Firstly from what I see as being your and everyone else’s understanding of ‘meditation’, this does not imo, have any place in the Buddha’s teachings. Second, if you are in fact seeking samatha/Jhana, this is more like the “result” of Sila rather than a “cause” for it. In any case neither is Jhana the Path taught by the Buddha. Third, Vipassana / Satipatthana which is indeed ‘the practice’ that he taught, this follows from pariyatti and pariyatti alone. If the understanding at the pariyatti level dictates that dhammas are conditioned and anatta, the patipatti must conform to this. If one instead goes on to think in terms of ‘formal’ Vipassana meditation, this reflects in fact a conflict with the Buddha’s teaching on Anatta and conditionality and that Pariyatti understanding has perhaps yet to take root. Phil, this is probably going nowhere, so I think we can leave it here. But I am interested in discussing the concept of Pariyatti >Patipatti > Pativedha with you. This to me must point back to the basics, which I think is something you agree is worthwhile to come back to. We seem to have a different understanding of what constitutes a ‘beginner’ on the Path and I would like to go into this with you. But of course I can’t give quotes to back up my arguments, I don’t see this as being relevant though, but you have your reasons and this may be part of why you would not be interested in discussing. Besides it must be time consuming if not tiresome to read my posts, let alone responding to them. ;-) Anyway, I’m fine either way. Metta, Sukin #86549 From: "Phil" Date: Mon Jun 2, 2008 8:22 pm Subject: Re: Overview of KS 3: Her Faulty Teaching philofillet Hi Sarah You addressed the below primarily to James, I think, but I was the one who made the comments about mindfulness of the body and differeing opinions on what wrong view is stressed first by the Buddha. > S: I see the 'mindfulness of body' and sakkaya ditthi as being > closely connected. Sakkaya ditthi refers to the taking of rupas > (thought to be a body) as self, or self as owning body, body in self > or self in body (and the same for the other khandhas). When there is > an understanding of rupas, such as tangible object, as mere rupas, > nothing to do with a self, and the same for the other nama khandhas, > no other wrong views arise. This is why it's said that all wrong > views arise because of sakkaya ditthi and that sakkaya ditthi has to > be eliminated first. > **** > SN 41:3 (Isisdatta, Bodhi transl): > "Now, householder, are you asking thus: `Venerable elder, there are > various views that arise in the world: "The world is eternal"?E- > these as well as the sixty-two speculative views mentioned in the > Brahmajaala. Now when what exists do these views come to be? When > what is nonexistent do these views not come to be?' " > > "Yes, venerable sir." > > "As to the various views that arise in the world, householder, `the > world is eternal'?E-These as well as the sixty two speculative views > mentioned in the Brahmajaala: when there is identity view, these > views come to be; when there is no identity view, these views do not > come to be." > > "But, venerable sir, how does identity view come to be?" > > "Here, householder, the uninstructed worldling, who has no regard for > the noble ones and is unskilled and undisciplined in their Dhamma, > who has no regard for the good persons and is unskilled and > undisciplined in their Dhamma, regards form as self, or self as > possessing form, or form as in self, or self as in form. He regards > feeling as self....perception..volitional formations....consciousness > as self......It is in such a way that identity view comes to be." > ***** Ph: Of course you've got your files with suttas that indicate the central importance of sakkaya ditthi ready to post. I think there are many more suttas that stress the central importance of the wrong view that does not believe that there is the result of deeds etc. (I forget the Pali - I will have to make note of it since it sounds cooler and has more ooomph with Pali behind it.) You are so deep into the Dhamma, Sarah, that you have no idea what this kind of wrong view really is. You are so imbued with the Dhamma that you are immune to this kind of very destructive wrong view. It is hard for me to explain to you what it's like to have the kind of wrong view that says, for example, the Dhamma is all a concoction and there is no reason not to just go ahead and do whatever one wants, one only lives once etc. I am subject to that kind of view, and quite often. So your insistence on the deep topic of sakkaya ditthi is something that I can appreciate intellectually, but do not really respond to (though I know that developing insight into anatta is the only way to achieve real liberation) because there are more pressing matters that you cannot understand because you have outgrown them or were born with accumulated tendencies that have lifted you above them. (So to speak, you know what I mean.) Over and out on this point, as TG says.... Metta, Phil > p.s I hope you're feeling better. We thought of you when we heard > about the earthquake in Taiwan. > > I also hope you'll feel encouraged to continue your series, now that > you're raising good points for discussion and being fed a few more by > Phil:-). As Phil said, you give 'her students practice with patience > and reflection'. True!! > ========= > #86550 From: "connie" Date: Mon Jun 2, 2008 9:23 pm Subject: Representational form of Government, Illusions of reality nichiconn colette: Good Morning Connie, connie: hey, girl. As a queen of Buddhist Legends once said: << The deeds of merit we have done must partake of the nature of sins if we have a sovereign over us. >> > colette: I have always understood the potentials for the meanings and implications of the word UNPROMPTED to clearly indicate Spontaneous and spontaneity where there is no clear CAUSATION. People spontaneously combust, burst into flames, and are consumed by the flames, which is documented fact that there is no clear causation of the fire and the death or birth. > connie: the all is aflame. birth is the leading cause of death. causation is spawntaneous. nothing esoteric about jhaana... not to say those examples you mentioned document that. i mean, there's accomplished and there's Accomplished. (charlie tuna: Ask any shaman you happen to see... ) colette: > With spontaneous as a potential, THEN, we are left with the conclusion that ignorance is part of the game and that we, as humans, are not as smart as we think, as we delusion, we are. <....> > connie: well, duh! That's a prescription for V-8. > > connie: for one, I think it has bearing on the strength of the kamma created at that time, if that's how one says it. [obligatory hallelujah!] colette: You certainly have something here! connie: Not mine and I can't do it justice but i haven't found the quote again yet. colette: You suggest that something is internal and becomes external. connie: reckon i'd more likely suggest prompting could be either internal or external but yeah, intention would be internal before any external manifestations of it came about. colette: You suggest that there is velocity, maybe force, built into the "intention". connie: sure, "kammic force", but "velocity" brings up the matter of time's wrinkles and those are ironed out. colette: [...] we can witness and understand that there is illusion within this reality we are confronted with every second. connie: Just the maayaa nature of the beast, as the mahabhuta rupas have been described. For calming them, the illusion of interest is maa.na. colette: <....> Now we're at the single thought having been projected outward into the real world from the unreal world of a person's mind. What is the constitution of the force which creates the velocity at which the thought travels outward in the real world? FREE WILL? Shades of the Ordo Templi Orientus, no? connie: I don't know the Templi, but isn't Free Will a whale? how is the world of the mind any more unreal than the external world? the overwhelming constitution of the force is based on the three poison roots. which brings us back to what to the Queen said (above). peace, connie #86551 From: "connie" Date: Mon Jun 2, 2008 9:41 pm Subject: Re: Mental states don't exist (as irreducible entities?) nichiconn hi herman, "Belief in the concept of purity/impurity is one that damns the believer. Snot isn't impure, it is perfect snot. It is the aversion to snot that makes it impure." c: beliefs tend to be either damning (miccha/akusala) or leading to freedom/purity. they're where we 'get a grip'. I guess we agree that rupa is (pure) rupa and nama is nama, tho not often qualifying for the adjective "pure" (except of course, anything is purely what it is). Thinking about either/both nama/rupa rightly makes for aversion of a sort - so i believe. peace, connie #86552 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Mon Jun 2, 2008 7:09 pm Subject: Re: Overview of KS 3: Her Faulty Teaching buddhatrue Hi Sarah, > > p.s I hope you're feeling better. We thought of you when we heard > about the earthquake in Taiwan. James: Thank you for your concern. I am feeling just fine now. I didn't feel the earthquake in Taiwan at all. It happened at night and there wasn't much damage. > > I also hope you'll feel encouraged to continue your series, now that > you're raising good points for discussion and being fed a few more by > Phil:-). As Phil said, you give 'her students practice with patience > and reflection'. True!! > ========= > James: No, I have decided that I don't want to write anything more about K. Sujin. I have said all I want to say about her. Metta, James #86554 From: "colette" Date: Mon Jun 2, 2008 1:46 pm Subject: Re: AQUA VITAE or is that White Lighting (grain alcohol) ksheri3 Is an "accumulation" an "aggregate"? Is an "accumulation" a "store house"? Is an "accumulation" a "conglomerate"? Is an "accumulation" a "conclusion"? How can Karma or Kamma fit into the above potentialities? For instance if the word "accumulation" means a "store house" and it refers to thoughts or thinking, then can't we rightfully admit the Alaya-Vinjana to the set of Consciousnesses? colette --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "colette" wrote: > > Good Morning Group, > > As I pondered the post which I submitted in response to Connie's > genius I came across the concept I've used in/through the Kagyu of > Dakinis "churning the nectar of the gods", which caused me to ponder: > > How much nectar can a single Dakini churn in any given time frame? <....> #86555 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Mon Jun 2, 2008 9:42 pm Subject: Inevitable, but not the End... bhikkhu0 Friends: The inevitable fact of life is: All that is born must also face Death: <...> The Blessed Buddha once said: While alive, then he is untroubled, & when he dies too, then he is not worried! A recluse who has seen the goal, lives undisturbed even in a sorrowful world... Ud 46 Wherever he goes, there he is unafraid.. Wherever he sleeps, there he is unalarmed. The nights and days does neither touch nor burn him. He sees nothing in this world that is to be kept or lost. Therefore his mind dwells in goodwill and gentle kindness towards all beings, until he falls asleep. SN I 110 REJOICING Here he rejoices. So too after death he rejoices. The one having done good works rejoices both places! Remembering, looking back, seeing & thinking: "Oh I have done good works, well done" he enjoys the bliss of the happy worlds even more ... Dhammapada Illustration 18 Background Story 18 MOMENTARY Whosoever knows this body to be as temporary as a bubble, as insubstantial as the mirror image, such one will break the flower tipped arrows of Mara and cannot be seen by this King of Death ... Dhammapada 46 SURPRISE Death carries off the man while distracted by gathering flowers of sensual pleasures, exactly & even so as a great flood carries away a sleeping village. Dhammapada 47 OFF GUARD Death sweeps away the man distracted, not yet had his fill of sensual pleasures, even as he gathers these flowers. Dhammapada 48 END-MAKER Neither in the highest heaven, nor in the deepest ocean, nor in the darkest cave, can anyone escape the overcoming fact of Death ...!!! Dhammapada 128 GAIN Whoever never injures, with weapon nor stick, beings searching for their happiness - when after death - seeking same happiness, such clever & kind one always gain it! Dhammapada 132 DRIVEN Exactly as a cowherd drives the cows forward, even & exactly so do aging, sickness & death drive all beings forwards towards the End! Dhammapada 135 FORM This body is worn out, a fragile form, a nest of disease, a rotting mass of deception since its life surely ends in Death ... Dhammapada 148 MY BODY It is a bag held up by bones, plastered with flesh, blood and skin. In it lives aging, sickness, death, pride & deceit. Dhammapada 150 UNSEEN As lasting as a bursting bubble; As illusive as a mirage; One regarding worldly life quite so is forever unseen even by the King of Death. Dhammapada 170 RETURN The friend who returns from a long journey is welcomed back by friends & family. Even & exactly so when the doer of good at death passes to the next state, there his merits receives him, awaits him like friends & family. Dhammapada 219-20 FINAL BLISS The homeless sages, always restrained in both action & body, finally pass to the deathless state where sorrow is not. Dhammapada 225 ENGAGED-ENCAGED When a man is in love with sons, friends and family, and other flocks his mind is passionately absorbed therein. So distracted the King of Death carry him off as a raging torrent sweeps away the sleeping village. Dhammapada 287 LONGING Sons, children, family cannot provide any refuge nor shelter for the being prone to Death. [Even though they live it is as if they exist not. How much less can they provide any protection nor safety against death ?] Dhammapada 288 PLEASANT Pleasant are friends when a need arises. Pleasant is all fun when shared with friends. Pleasant is the stored merit of good works at the moment of death. Pleasant is it to leave behind all Suffering. Pleasant is being a Father. Pleasant is being a Mother. Pleasant is being a Bhikkhu. Pleasant is the state of the accomplished. Pleasant is a prior righteous life when old. Pleasant is faith firmly established, unshakable by doubt. Pleasant is the arising of Insight. Pleasant is the avoidance of Evil. Yeah! Dhammapada 331-33 PLEASURE, BIRTH, DECAY & DEATH Flowing freely like greasy glue is the delight of beings. Humans obsessed with this pleasure, always searching the satisfaction not lasting, come to birth, decay, aging, sickness and death ever again & again. Dhammapada 341 LETTING GO Let the past be past. Relinquish the future. Let the present be just as it is. Having so gone to the far shore of being, mind is freed from all attachments, from any substrate of existence & never returns to birth, aging nor death. Dhammapada 348 DEATHLESS The one who has no longings, who fully understands, who is without doubt, who is established immersed in the deathless state, such one I call a Holy One. Dhammapada 411 Unworried Yeah! Have a nice day! Friendship is the Greatest * Bhikkhu Samahita * Sri Lanka :-) .... #86556 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Jun 3, 2008 1:42 am Subject: Metta, Ch 6, no 5. nilovg Dear friends, When we begin to develop mettå it is necessary to first see the disadvantage of dosa, aversion or anger. Dosa is the dhamma which is opposed to mettå. Whenever dosa arises it is evident that mettå is lacking. Dosa is the dhamma (reality) which is harsh, it causes harm to ourselves and to others. When dosa arises it overwhelms the citta, it inflames citta like a fire. The destructive power of dosa causes people to harm others through body and speech, in various degrees in accordance with its strength. We read in the Kindred Sayings (I, Sagåthå-vagga, I, The Devas, 8, Slaughter suttas, §1) that a deva asked the Buddha: What must we slay if we would live happily? What must we slay if we would weep no more? What is it above all other things, whereof The slaughter you approve, Gotama? The Buddha answered: Wrath must you slay if you would live happily, Wrath must you slay if you would weep no more. Of anger, deva, with its poisoned root And fevered climax which is sweet, That is the slaughter by the ariyans praised; That must you slay to weep no more. This shows that when anger arises there is disturbance of mind, we are unhappy. We have unkind thoughts or even malevolence, we may harm the person we are angry with through body or speech so that he will suffer. We can harm him in different ways, for example by violence, by hitting him and causing him to suffer bodily injuries. Or we may utter harsh, fierce words. When we have injured someone else through body and speech we may be satisfied with what we have done. The Buddha said that wrath has a poisonous root and a sweet tip. The feeling of satisfaction we have when we have done harm to someone else is compared to the sweet tip of anger, but its root is poisoned. Each person will receive the result of his action. When dosa conditions someone to do harm to another person there is akusala kamma which has a poisonous root: akusala kamma produces an unpleasant result for the person who performs it in the form of loss and other unpleasant experiences. It can cause rebirth in unhappy planes such as a hell plane, the plane of ghosts (petas) or demons (asuras), or rebirth as an animal, depending on the degree of that akusala kamma. ****** Nina. #86557 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Jun 3, 2008 2:27 am Subject: Visuddhimagga Ch XVII, 266, 267 and Tiika. nilovg Visuddhimagga Ch XVII, 266, 267. Intro: in the previous section it was explained that conditioned by clinging to annihilation view someone performs kamma with the belief that the self will be annihilated in a happy sensuous plane, in a ruupa-brahma plane or an aruupa-brahma plane. The result of the kamma he performs is sense-desire becoming, fine-material becoming, and immaterial becoming. In the following section it is explained that self-theory clinging leads to sense-desire becoming, fine-material becoming, and immaterial becoming. The Tiika refers to the five kinds to clinging to the idea of nibbaana here and now (di.t.thadhammanibbaanavaada), as explained in the Brahmajaalasutta. This is a kind of wrong view that sees nibbaana as directly visible, here and now, as release from sorrow for an existing being. The adherents of the first wrong view of nibbaana here and now believe that this can be attained through the enjoyment of all sense pleasures. The following four wrong views see the attainment of nibbaana here and now as the happiness and bliss of the four stages of ruupa-jhaana. Section 267 explains that clinging to rite and ritual (siilabbata paraamasa) can lead to sense-desire becoming, fine-material becoming, and immaterial becoming. ---------- Text Vis. 266: Another through self-theory clinging thinks, 'This self comes to be blissful, or comes to be free from fever, in the becoming in the fortunate states in the sense sphere ------- N: As to becoming in happy sense sphere planes, this is with reference to the first wrong view of nibbaana here and now. As to being ‘free from fever’, the Tiika explains that when the longing for sense pleasures has been satisfied, the fever for them is subsided and this is the attainment of nibbaana here and now. --------- Text Vis.: or in one or other of the fine-material and immaterial kinds of becoming', and he performs kamma to achieve that. -------- N: As to the four following kinds of wrong view, those who adhere them see the unsatisfactoriness of sense pleasures and see the happiness of jhaana as the attainment of nibbaana here and now. They see this as the termination of suffering. Each higher stage of jhaana is more satisfactory as the former one. The fourth stage of jhaana has no pleasure or pain but equanimity instead. The Tiika explains that also aruupa-jhaana is included in the fourth jhaana. The person who cultivates aruupajhaana and clings to nibbaana here and now wishes for becoming in aruupa-brahma planes and sees that as continuous happiness. ---------- Text Vis.: That kamma of his is kamma-process becoming. The aggregates generated by the kamma are rebirth-process becoming. But the percipient, etc., kinds of becoming are included in that too. Thus this self-theory clinging is a condition for all the three, namely, becoming with their analysis and their synthesis. -------- N: The Text refers to the percipient, etc., kinds of becoming, and this means: percipient, non-percipient, neither-percipient-nor-non-percipient. As we have seen, non-percipient refers to rebirth the asa~n~na satta plane where there is only ruupa, no naama. Neither-percipient-nor-non- percipient refers to rebirth that is the result of the fourth stage of aruupa jhaana. ---------- Text Vis. 267: Another [thinks] through rite-and-ritual clinging, 'This rite and ritual leads him who perfects it to perfect bliss in becoming in the fortunate states of the sense sphere or in the fine-material or immaterial kinds of becoming', and he performs kamma to achieve that. --------- N: As to the sentence: 'This rite and ritual leads him who perfects it to perfect bliss in becoming...’ , the Tiika states that whatever worldly siila and also jhaana, because of taking these for the Path of Purity, is the rite and ritual leading to perfect bliss. The Tiika remarks that here the order of teaching of the kinds of clinging is not followed, since clinging to rite and ritual is dealt with after clinging to self theory, attavaadupaadaana. Usually clinging to self theory is mentioned last. The reason is that rite- and-ritual clinging is not being engaged in as often as the clinging to self theory, and the latter is a condition for rite-and-ritual clinging. ------- Text Vis.: That kamma of his is kamma-process becoming. The aggregates generated by the kamma are rebirth-process becoming. But the percipient, etc., kinds of becoming are included in that, too. So rite-and-ritual clinging is a condition for all three, namely, the sense-desire, fine-material and immaterial kinds of becoming with their analysis and their synthesis. This is how the exposition should be known here according to 'which is condition for which'. ------- Conclusion: As we have read before in the the text of the Visuddhimagga, the ordinary person, the non-ariyan, is like a madman. He will not follow the right Path that leads to liberation from the cycle. Motivated by clinging to happiness, he desires to achieve it in happy sensuous planes, or he develops jhaana which has as result fine-material becoming and immaterial becoming. He sees nibbaana as a state to be experienced here and now and clings to different kinds of wrong view about nibbaana here and now. Or he clings to rite and ritual, taking the wrong Path for the right Path in order to achieve perfect bliss in becoming in happy sensuous planes, in ruupa-brahma planes and aruupa brahma planes. All such kinds of clinging we still find today in this world. If one’s goal is the end of defilements, there is only one Path leading to it: the eightfold ariyan Path as taught by the Buddha. ------------- Nina. #86558 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Tue Jun 3, 2008 3:15 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Kamma and Accumulations (wasRe: Mental states......) egberdina Hi Alex, 2008/6/2 Alex : > Hi Herman, > > > Causes and Effects are "phenomena" of some sort while relation > between them is causality. We use the word phenomena in different ways. For me, to be a phenomenon is to be experienced. There are lots of things happening, lots of causes and effects, that are completely unknown. But they still happen. A tree falling in the forest is cause and effect, but it becomes a phenomenon only when there is also an observer of that. > > Only certain >> combinations of conditions result in phenomena. And in the absence > of the necessarry conditions, there are no phenomena. That causality > has no beginning or end does not mean that phenomena have no > beginning or end. >>>>> > > So what happened before any phenomena appeared? Conditions are > certain phenomena (although the relation is conditionality)... > Phenomena are not necessary to causality. Sentient beings have not always been, they arise and cease due to conditions, which precede them. >>>> > As an example, the parinibbana of the Buddha was not the end of >> conditionality, only of certain phenomena. >> >> Cheers >> Herman > > > Parinibbana after death is supposed to be unconditioned, thus not > only phenomena but conditionality/causality ceased FOR HIM. I do not think conditions belong to beings, but beings belong to conditions. Under certain conditions there is a being, under other conditions there isn't. The absence or cessation of a being does not mean that conditions have ceased. Cheers Herman #86559 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Tue Jun 3, 2008 3:29 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Kamma and Accumulations (wasRe: Mental states......) egberdina Hi Scott, 2008/6/2 Scott Duncan : > Dear Herman, > 650. By birth a brahmin is not born, by birth a non-brahmin is not born, > By actions a brahmin is born, by actions a non-brahmin is born. > [653. Na jaccaa braahma.no hoti na jaccaa hoti abraahma.no > Kammanaa braahma.no hoti kammanaa hoti abraahma.no.] > > Scott: 'By actions' - to me this means that birth is 'caused'. I'm > thinking here maybe this refers to the way in which the last moments > of an existence ending are condition for the first moment of the next > existence. It seems to me that you are overlaying something which is fairly straightforward with something very convoluted. There is the following, which might be a trifle alarming for you: :-) AN 4:159 "This body comes into being through sexual intercourse. Sexual intercourse is to be abandoned. With regard to sexual intercourse, the Buddha declares the cutting off of the bridge." > > H: "One is what one does..." > > Scott: The sutta notes that it is by actions (kammanaa) the world > rolls on. 'Beings bound to actions' (kammanibandhanaa sattaa) 'go > on'. The lynch pin keeps the wheel held to the axle. Birth by > actions seems to me to refer to and that birth is the result of kamma. > > Would you be suggesting the same by citing this sutta? No, I am suggesting that one becomes a father or mother through sexual intercourse, and that a baby is an effect, not a cause of that sexual act. Feel free to believe that a being causes their own conception by making their prospective parents have sex. I have no need to convince you otherwise. Cheers Herman #86560 From: upasaka@... Date: Mon Jun 2, 2008 11:48 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Overview of KS 3: Her Faulty Teaching upasaka_howard Hi, Phil (and Sarah) - In a message dated 6/2/2008 11:22:47 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, philco777@... writes: You are so deep into the Dhamma, Sarah, that you have no idea what this kind of wrong view really is. You are so imbued with the Dhamma that you are immune to this kind of very destructive wrong view. It is hard for me to explain to you what it's like to have the kind of wrong view that says, for example, the Dhamma is all a concoction and there is no reason not to just go ahead and do whatever one wants, one only lives once etc. I am subject to that kind of view, and quite often. ============================== I suspect that for all of us, from time to time skeptical doubt and even outright wrong view arise. But for most of us, I believe, it is more often unseen or barely seen or seen-but-pushed-away & ignored. So, what I see prominent in you, Phil, is not so much the occasional skeptical doubt and wrong view that do arise as the following phenomena: courage to look at what is really there in oneself, honesty with oneself as to what is seen, and the courage and honesty to admit this to others, which implies at least the virtues of mindful introspection, courage, resistance to aversion, honesty & integrity. Not bad, Phil, not bad! :-) With metta, Howard #86561 From: upasaka@... Date: Mon Jun 2, 2008 11:56 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Representational form of Government, Illusions of reality upasaka_howard Hi, Connie - In a message dated 6/3/2008 12:23:42 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, nichicon@... writes: connie: the all is aflame. birth is the leading cause of death. causation is spawntaneous. ================================ LOLOL! I love it, Connie. Clever. :-) With metta, Howard #86562 From: "Phil" Date: Tue Jun 3, 2008 4:24 am Subject: Re: Overview of KS 3: Her Faulty Teaching philofillet Hi Howard Thank you for the below. It was encouraging. So what does one do to have right view, to believe that there is a result to deeds, that there is rebirth and so on? We can't just believe it out of desperation, or fear, as is often the case with other religions. So it is by seeing the positive changes that come from sense control and morality, by diligently and struggling-ly dropping unwholesome proliferation and finding that, as a result, one is happier. I mean, very basic stuff - as Thich Nhat Hahn says, if you are depressed look at what you have been consuming, the reason will lie there. And when one finds through this kind ofself- scrutiny or summing up of where one is at (the "blemish" sutta in AN, I think, encourages this kind of self-analysis, asking of oneself if one is often lustful, hateful, deluded etc, or not) that there has been a wholesome shifting of some kind, this gives confidence in the whole Dhamma, and makes it easier to have faith things that can't be confirmed, such as rebirth. So this is why I insist on very conventional, non-paramattha aspects of Dhamma as being very helpful whether there is clinging to self involved (as there most certainly is for me) or not. It is through this kind of conventional morality, conventional cleanging out of the worst kind of crap accumulating in one's behaviour in body, speech and mind that conditions are created for a gradual deepning of some kind. So I resent and regret teachings that deny the importance of this very conventional approach, which does indeed bear similarities to other religions and to grandmother(s common sense, but does me so much good, and, more importantly, does so many people so much good. I wonder if I am a mahayanist or something. Whatever. Anways, thanks Howard. Metta, Phil > I suspect that for all of us, from time to time skeptical doubt and even > outright wrong view arise. But for most of us, I believe, it is more often > unseen or barely seen or seen-but-pushed-away & ignored. So, what I see > prominent in you, Phil, is not so much the occasional skeptical doubt and wrong > view that do arise as the following phenomena: courage to look at what is really > there in oneself, honesty with oneself as to what is seen, and the courage > and honesty to admit this to others, which implies at least the virtues of > mindful introspection, courage, resistance to aversion, honesty & integrity. > Not bad, Phil, not bad! :-) > #86563 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Tue Jun 3, 2008 4:31 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Lessons in Detachment, Ch 5, no 2. egberdina Hi Scott, 2008/6/2 Scott Duncan : > Dear Herman, > > Thanks for the reply: > > Regarding your: "Experience = object. Objectless seeing, hearing etc > is indiscriminate thinking." > > H: "All experience is experience of something. We do not just see, we > see something, we do not just hear, we hear something, we do not just > feel, we feel something etc. But what we do not experience is the > seeing, hearing, feeling etc, we experience the object," > > Scott: Okay, I think I get what you are saying. Do you consider naama > to be a separate reality from ruupa? If you are talking about that which knows versus that which is known, then, yes they are different, but I wouldn't call both of them realities. Because that which is known is known as it's qualities, but that which knows can't be known, because it doesn't have any qualities. In short, ruupa is, and naama isn't. They are different, but one is real and the other isn't. > > H: "You seem to be saying that there is more to any experience that > what is experienced. If I experience walking to the fridge, that is > what I experience, what else should there be?" > > Scott: I'd say that there is 'experiencing' and that which is > experienced. I'd not say these are one and the same. I'm not sure > whether this is what you are saying. I'd say that 'fridge' and 'I > walk into a fridge' are concept, and that 'hardness' (or 'temperature' > if you meant literally walk 'into' a fridge) is experienced. I would say that experiencing is concept, and that object is experienced. The "I", observer, point of view, mind, nama whatever you want to call them, are all conceptual. They have no reality. Fridge is a conceptual reference to very real complexes of experience, that are different in knowable ways to other very real complexes of experience that are not conceptually refered to as fridge. (eg shoe, black-box-flight-recorder) > > One can try to gain an intellectual understanding of 'path moment' > based on the Buddha's teachings, without having experienced a path > moment. I want to have clarification of where you are coming from, > since it seems as if your position is that of 'Skeptic', even possibly > 'Skeptical Nihilist'. If this is the case, and that's fine, then > discussions seem to be about Convincing or Debunking, which I'm not at > all interested in doing. I could use views you put forward as a > springboard to clarify the points in the way I want to, but then, is > that a 'discussion'? It would make of me a poor discussant, should > your own aims differ from mine. Why do you discuss on the list (not > that you shouldn't of course - just the same question you asked me)? > Please correct these impressions, which I give since you ask. > > I don't mind how you see it, but I just want to fine-tune an > intellectual understanding of the Buddha's teachings from the > point-of-view of the list. I don't want to convince or be convinced > by anyone. Just the facts, as it were. Does that clarify it for you? Yes, it does. I do not consider Path moments to be relevant to me at all, so I am happy to drop the topic. > H: "This may be semantics only, but I understand any quality to be > something experiencable. Do you mean quality to be something like a > condition, not something experienced but a cause for the experience?" > > Scott: No, I mean that a given dhamma *is* its quality, as I believe > we have agreed upon in the past. And I mean that this quality is > experienced, but this 'experience' would be the quality of another > dhamma (whose quality it is to experience). I see. It seems to me no different than the idea of a homunculus, the little man whose function it is to make mind/body dualism a sensible way of thinking about the world. But seeing as the homunculus is a conceptual device, and not a reality, (because he is nowhere to be found), I think that basing world views on him does not lead to an understanding of the world. Which is probably the main reason why I participate on this list. Cheers Herman #86564 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Tue Jun 3, 2008 4:33 am Subject: [dsg] Kamma and Accumulations (wasRe: Mental states......) scottduncan2 Dear Herman, Thanks for the reply: H: "It seems to me that you are overlaying something which is fairly straightforward with something very convoluted. There is the following, which might be a trifle alarming for you: :-) Scott: I laughed uproariously. And then I went totally deaf, dumb, and blind... AN 4:159 "This body comes into being through sexual intercourse. Sexual intercourse is to be abandoned. With regard to sexual intercourse, the Buddha declares the cutting off of the bridge." "Methunasambhuuto aya.m bhagini kaayo, methune ca setughaato vutto bhagavataa" ti. Scott: OMG. And then what, no Santa Claus? According to the commentaries Aananda knew that the bhikkhuni was in love with him and therefore spoke on the foulness of the body to 'free her from her passion' (Numerical Discourses of the Buddha, Bh Bodhi, p. 294). The sutta also suggests that this body comes into being through food (aahaarasambhuuto), through craving (ta.nhaasambhuuto), and through conceit (maanasambhuuto). How would you explain these? H: "No, I am suggesting that one becomes a father or mother through sexual intercourse, and that a baby is an effect, not a cause of that sexual act. Feel free to believe that a being causes their own conception by making their prospective parents have sex." Scott: Oh. That's so, uh, conventional of you, Herman! Not to mention conceptual. Aananda teaching the birds and the bees to bhikkhunis. :-) Sincerely, Scott. #86565 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Tue Jun 3, 2008 4:50 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Lessons in Detachment, Ch 5, no 2. scottduncan2 Dear Herman, Thanks for the reply: H: "...Because that which is known is known as it's qualities, but that which knows can't be known, because it doesn't have any qualities. In short, ruupa is, and naama isn't. They are different, but one is real and the other isn't...I would say that experiencing is concept, and that object is experienced. The 'I', observer, point of view, mind, nama whatever you want to call them, are all conceptual. They have no reality. Fridge is a conceptual reference to very real complexes of experience, that are different in knowable ways to other very real complexes of experience that are not conceptually refered to as fridge. (eg shoe, black-box-flight-recorder)...It seems to me no different than the idea of a homunculus, the little man whose function it is to make mind/body dualism a sensible way of thinking about the world. But seeing as the homunculus is a conceptual device, and not a reality, (because he is nowhere to be found), I think that basing world views on him does not lead to an understanding of the world. Which is probably the main reason why I participate on this list." Scott: Ruupa is real, naama is not. Naama is the same as 'I', 'observer', 'point of view' 'mind' and not 'real'. Is this the view you present? A form of materialism or physicalism? Sincerely, Scott. #86566 From: upasaka@... Date: Tue Jun 3, 2008 12:51 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Overview of KS 3: Her Faulty Teaching upasaka_howard Hi, Phil - In a message dated 6/3/2008 7:25:19 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, philco777@... writes: Hi Howard Thank you for the below. It was encouraging. So what does one do to have right view, to believe that there is a result to deeds, that there is rebirth and so on? We can't just believe it out of desperation, or fear, as is often the case with other religions. So it is by seeing the positive changes that come from sense control and morality, by diligently and struggling-ly dropping unwholesome proliferation and finding that, as a result, one is happier. I mean, very basic stuff - as Thich Nhat Hahn says, if you are depressed look at what you have been consuming, the reason will lie there. And when one finds through this kind ofself- scrutiny or summing up of where one is at (the "blemish" sutta in AN, I think, encourages this kind of self-analysis, asking of oneself if one is often lustful, hateful, deluded etc, or not) that there has been a wholesome shifting of some kind, this gives confidence in the whole Dhamma, and makes it easier to have faith things that can't be confirmed, such as rebirth. So this is why I insist on very conventional, non-paramattha aspects of Dhamma as being very helpful whether there is clinging to self involved (as there most certainly is for me) or not. It is through this kind of conventional morality, conventional cleanging out of the worst kind of crap accumulating in one's behaviour in body, speech and mind that conditions are created for a gradual deepning of some kind. So I resent and regret teachings that deny the importance of this very conventional approach, which does indeed bear similarities to other religions and to grandmother(s common sense, but does me so much good, and, more importantly, does so many people so much good. ------------------------------------------------- Howard: First of all, I think you do very well! As for "what to do" to have right view, I'd say study the Dhamma, contemplate it, and calm the mind through that contemplation, through sila, through guarding the senses, and through meditation. Most of all, I think that, with mind calmed and steeped in the teaching, staying present with whatever arises in mind and body on as regular a basis as possible, both while in restricted "meditation mode" and "at ordinary times," is the central vehicle. -------------------------------------------------- I wonder if I am a mahayanist or something. ------------------------------------------------- Howard: Buddha forbid! ;-)) More seriously, I see nothing in your perspective that spells out 'Mahayana' any more than 'Theravada'. ---------------------------------------------- Whatever. Anways, thanks Howard. Metta, Phil ============================== With metta, Howard > I suspect that for all of us, from time to time skeptical doubt and even > outright wrong view arise. But for most of us, I believe, it is more often > unseen or barely seen or seen-but-pushed-away & ignored. So, what I see > prominent in you, Phil, is not so much the occasional skeptical doubt and wrong > view that do arise as the following phenomena: courage to look at what is really > there in oneself, honesty with oneself as to what is seen, and the courage > and honesty to admit this to others, which implies at least the virtues of > mindful introspection, courage, resistance to aversion, honesty & integrity. > Not bad, Phil, not bad! :-) > #86567 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Tue Jun 3, 2008 5:02 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Kamma and Accumulations (wasRe: Mental states......) egberdina Hi Scott, 2008/6/3 Scott Duncan : > Dear Herman, > > Thanks for the reply: > > H: "It seems to me that you are overlaying something which is fairly > straightforward with something very convoluted. There is the > following, which might be a trifle alarming for you: :-) > > Scott: I laughed uproariously. And then I went totally deaf, dumb, > and blind... > > AN 4:159 > > "This body comes into being through sexual intercourse. Sexual > intercourse is to be abandoned. With regard to sexual intercourse, the > Buddha declares the cutting off of the bridge." > > "Methunasambhuuto aya.m bhagini kaayo, methune ca setughaato vutto > bhagavataa" ti. > > Scott: OMG. And then what, no Santa Claus? > > According to the commentaries Aananda knew that the bhikkhuni was in > love with him and therefore spoke on the foulness of the body to 'free > her from her passion' (Numerical Discourses of the Buddha, Bh Bodhi, > p. 294). > > The sutta also suggests that this body comes into being through food > (aahaarasambhuuto), through craving (ta.nhaasambhuuto), and through > conceit (maanasambhuuto). How would you explain these? Certainly not by inventing spooky forces that act under no other constraint than the imagination of their authors. > H: "No, I am suggesting that one becomes a father or mother through > sexual intercourse, and that a baby is an effect, not a cause of that > sexual act. Feel free to believe that a being causes their own > conception by making their prospective parents have sex." > > Scott: Oh. That's so, uh, conventional of you, Herman! Not to > mention conceptual. Aananda teaching the birds and the bees to > bhikkhunis. :-) > Well, at least he told her something that was true. Unlike the shameless halfwit who recited into the canon that the weather is caused by devas. There's nothing conventional about conditionality, Scott. Nor ignorance of it. Cheers Herman #86568 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Tue Jun 3, 2008 5:12 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Lessons in Detachment, Ch 5, no 2. egberdina Hi Scott, 2008/6/3 Scott Duncan : > Dear Herman, > > Thanks for the reply: > > H: "...Because that which is known is known as it's qualities, but > that which knows can't be known, because it doesn't have any > qualities. In short, ruupa is, and naama isn't. They are different, > but one is real and the other isn't...I would say that experiencing is > concept, and that object is experienced. The 'I', observer, point of > view, mind, nama whatever you want to call them, are all conceptual. > They have no reality. Fridge is a conceptual reference to very real > complexes of experience, that are different in knowable ways to other > very real complexes of experience that are not conceptually refered to > as fridge. (eg shoe, black-box-flight-recorder)...It seems to me no > different than the idea of a homunculus, the little man whose function > it is to make mind/body dualism a sensible way of thinking about the > world. But seeing as the homunculus is a conceptual device, and not a > reality, (because he is nowhere to be found), I think that basing > world views on him does not lead to an understanding of the world. > Which is probably the main reason why I participate on this list." > > Scott: Ruupa is real, naama is not. Naama is the same as 'I', > 'observer', 'point of view' 'mind' and not 'real'. Is this the view > you present? A form of materialism or physicalism? "That which knows is a reality that can be known". Is that the view you present? Something Nina heard KS say? What can you tell me about this "that which knows" that doesn't end up being the same self-evidence that is the basis for the profound illusion of self, this present moment, the continuity of experience and every other confusion known only by the confused? Cheers Herman #86569 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Tue Jun 3, 2008 5:39 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Lessons in Detachment, Ch 5, no 2. scottduncan2 Dear Herman, Me: "Ruupa is real, naama is not. Naama is the same as 'I', 'observer', 'point of view' 'mind' and not 'real'. Is this the view you present? A form of materialism or physicalism?" Scott: I'm just wondering if this is a fair representation of the view you put forward. I'm not trying to dispute it... Sincerely, Scott. #86570 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Tue Jun 3, 2008 5:45 am Subject: [dsg] Kamma and Accumulations (wasRe: Mental states......) scottduncan2 Dear Herman, Me: "The sutta also suggests that this body comes into being through food (aahaarasambhuuto), through craving (ta.nhaasambhuuto), and through conceit (maanasambhuuto). How would you explain these? H: "Certainly not by inventing spooky forces that act under no other constraint than the imagination of their authors." Scott: No, I'm just wondering how you see food, craving, and conceit to cause the body to 'come into being'? Sincerely, Scott. #86571 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Tue Jun 3, 2008 5:46 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Overview of KS 3: Her Faulty Teaching egberdina Hi Sarah, 2008/6/3 sarah abbott : > Hi Howard, > > ***** > S: No, kayagati-sati, or awareness of rupas (as usually taken for the body), along with >awareness of namas (commonly taken for oneself), leads to the eradication of sakkaya-ditthi. I hope you and Jon are enjoying yourselves in the Alps. Hope your allergic reactions settle down real soon. What is awareness of namas? Is that namas with namas as object? Cheers Herman #86572 From: upasaka@... Date: Tue Jun 3, 2008 1:56 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Lessons in Detachment, Ch 5, no 2. upasaka_howard Hi, Herman (and Scott) - In a message dated 6/3/2008 8:13:00 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, hhofmeister@... writes: Hi Scott, 2008/6/3 Scott Duncan : > Dear Herman, > > Thanks for the reply: > > H: "...Because that which is known is known as it's qualities, but > that which knows can't be known, because it doesn't have any > qualities. ---------------------------------------------------- Howard: Why do you speak of "that which knows" instead of just "the knowing". I don't believe in a literal "that which knows," but I sure do believe in knowing. That's why I use the word 'experience'. You, yourself have distinguished between unexperienced things and phenomena. That distinction certainly depends on knowing being real. The activity of knowing does not imply a personal self. That reification of knowing and identifying "it" as a soul is Sati's error, but that being an error doesn't imply that there is no knowing. When aware of warmth, is there not experiencing that warmth? And when you recall that, after the fact, and conceptually categorize it as having felt warmth, is there no mental knowing involved in that? In short, as you have said yourself, there are no phenomena (in the philosophical sense) without there being experiencing. -------------------------------------------------- In short, ruupa is, and naama isn't. They are different, > but one is real and the other isn't...I would say that experiencing is > concept, and that object is experienced. ---------------------------------------------------- Howard: I see no basis for that. Also, is there no experiencing involved with conceptualizing? When you say that nama isn't real, I would gave to ask how you KNOW that! I find your position self-contradictory. ---------------------------------------- The 'I', observer, point of > view, mind, nama whatever you want to call them, are all conceptual. > They have no reality. ---------------------------------------- Howard: That "I/observer point of view" is a different issue. You reify the activity of knowing, identify it with a personal self, and then depend on that very error as a basis for denying that knowing occurs. -------------------------------------- Cheers Herman ========================== With metta, Howard #86573 From: "connie" Date: Tue Jun 3, 2008 6:02 am Subject: Perfections Corner (172) nichiconn Dear Friends, ch.5 continues (more or less along the lines of Sukin to Phil recently) : If someone has listened to the Dhamma and is not inert but immediately gives up akusala, kusala viriya performs at that moment its task of refraining from anger. This kind of viriya is different from thinking that one should refrain from anger. It arises at the moment of sati-sampaja~n~na, when energy or effort refrains from anger, and it is known that mettaa is the opposite of anger. This is effort to forgive, effort for mettaa. At such a moment we can remember that everybody, including ourselves, makes mistakes. Therefore, we should not have anger or displeasure on account of someone else or of dhammas which arise and then fall away. However, feeling and remembrance, sa~n~naa, are conditions for being slow and inert in letting go of one's thoughts about circumstances and events and in that case akusala dhammas have the opportunity to arise. When viriya has been further developed, additional aspects and degrees can be discerned, for instance: viriya as a predominant factor (adhipati), as a basis of success (iddhi-paada) *1, as a faculty (indriya) or a power (bala). *1 There are four realities which can be predominance-condition, adhipatipaccaya: wish-to-do (chanda), energy (viriya), citta, which stands for firmness of citta or concentration, and investigation which is pa~n~naa (viima'msa). The same four factors can also be classified as bases of success, iddhi-paada. They are among the factors pertaining to enlightenment. When viriya has not reached those degrees, one cannot understand the characteristic of viriya that accompanies satipa.t.thaana and that has become strong. .. to be continued, connie #86574 From: "Alex" Date: Tue Jun 3, 2008 8:34 am Subject: Detaching from semantic steam rollers and linguistic acrobatics truth_aerator To ALL, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Scott Duncan" wrote: > > Dear Herman, > > Me: "Ruupa is real, naama is not. Naama is the same as 'I', > 'observer', 'point of view' 'mind' and not 'real'. Is this the view > you present? A form of materialism or physicalism?" > > Scott: I'm just wondering if this is a fair representation of the view > you put forward. I'm not trying to dispute it... > > Sincerely, > > Scott. > I hear this thing called "Real" being thrown around here and there. But what EXACTLY do you mean by the word "real" ? This would clear up a lot of mess. Best wishes, Alex P.S. If you can read this, then your monitor is real, 'you' are real and so 'am I'. Solipsists and idealists can Rest in peace. #86575 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Jun 3, 2008 10:34 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Friday 23 May - Some personal relections sarahprocter... Dear Ven Pannabahulo & all, I'd like to re-post my reply to you which I sent yesterday. I'd been unable to post as usual from my personal account and when I copied the text to post at the website, I see a chunk was lost. Also the 'Ven.' in the salutation was absent. I apologise for all of this. As I still had a copy of the original, let me just send it now: ******************* Dear Ven Pannabahulo & all, There was one point in your reflections I wished to respond to. It's with regard to the topic of meditation. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "pannabahulo" wrote: > But some alternatives are completely out for me: Particularly this > "Meditation vs NO meditation plus piles of books" approach which is > followed by some who, I believe, wrongly interpret Ajan Sujin's > position. Meditation is integral to the Lord Buddha's Dhamma. ... S: I'd like to suggest that no one has denied 'meditation' here and no one has referred to a 'pile of books' approach either. For example, earlier I wrote the following to you: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/81781 >S:"You also mentioned that you had difficulty understanding why I was 'so strongly against meditation'. I'd like to just stress again, as I have in several messages, that I have nothing at all against 'meditation' per se, but we have to clarify and define what we mean by the term. The Buddha referred two kinds - samatha and vipassana bhavana. I am very interested in such 'meditation' as taught by the Buddha."< We also had the following exchange before on practice and meditation: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/81583 >Ven P. " I am also vey confused as to what you mean by: > "I think this is the practice, the meditation: to understand what > reality is now. Without coming back to seeing now, visible object > now, hearing now, disturbance now and so on, there will never be any > development of understanding or bhaavanaa" > > I would greatly appreciate some clarification on this one when you > have time." ... >"S: Thank you very much for this good question/request. Yes, please ask us anytime to clarify/simplify/express in more detail anytime. It is indeed the Dhamma and such dhammas I'm most interested in discussing as this is the practice, as I see it. Right understanding is the first and foremost factor of the 8-fold Path. It is right understanding of namas and rupas which is to be developed. In another thread, Larry is quoting and discussing what 'ditthi-visuddhi' (Purification of View) is. It's made clear that it is purification of view with regard to understanding *any nama or rupa which appears now*. This is the practice, the development of satipatthana, the basis for the development of insight. So what is nama? What is rupa? These are the questions we have to consider carefully and really understand, not just by a book definition. Seeing now, at this very moment as we talk, is nama. It is the reality which experiences visible object. There is no self, no person involved at all. It's an element. Visible object which is seen now is a rupa. Again, there is no 'thing' in it. There is no computer, no watch, no person involved. It is the element which is seen only. This may sound technical and theoretical, but it's pointing to the practice at this very moment. Without any words or special attention of any kind, there can be the direct understanding and awareness now of any nama or rupa which appears without any selection, labelling, slowing down or idea of any position or technique. If it weren't possible, the Buddha wouldn't have taught it!"< ********* S: Finally, I'd like to suggest that how we react or respond to hearing the teachings, such as those on anatta, depends entirely on our different accumulations. When I wrote to James and said that my reaction had been similar to the Cambodians in that hearing true Dhamma has always been a source of joy, happy rather than unhappy feelings, it wasn't to suggest that this is how it is for everyone. Even as a teenager when I came across a book on different religions, it was the chapter on Buddhism with the reference to no-self and no God that I rejoiced in. For others, reactions of fear and aversion are common. No rule about it. However, one point I'd like to suggest is that whenever there is any understanding of any kind or level, whether it's pariyatti, patipatti or pativedha, there cannot be unhappy feeling with the understanding. Of course, the understanding may be followed by unhappy feeling with aversion, but not at moments of understanding or insight themselves. I was sorry to read in your later letter that you felt the need to stop writing here. I appreciate our discussions. We look forward to seeing you at the end of August. With metta and respect, Sarah ========= #86576 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Jun 3, 2008 10:54 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Overview of KS 3: Her Faulty Teaching sarahprocter... Hi James & Phil, --- On Tue, 3/6/08, buddhatrue wrote: >James: Thank you for your concern. I am feeling just fine now. I didn't feel the earthquake in Taiwan at all. It happened at night and there wasn't much damage. .... S: I think you were a long way away too... .... >James: No, I have decided that I don't want to write anything more about K. Sujin. I have said all I want to say about her. .... S: In that case, perhaps you'll consider a new series? Maybe Phil can give you some suggestions.... **** PHIL, thanks for your reply yesterday which I may or may not respond to....(I know you're not holding your breath waiting....probably praying that I won't get round to it:-). Anyway, yes, it would have been more appropriate to have addressed my post to "Phil (& James)". I may have started off intending to write to James and ended up writing to you with just a p.s to James. Happens sometimes....especially when jet-lagged with onion-peeling eyes:-). Anyway, a little less befuddled today and Jon no longer has his altitude headache, so no more excuses! Still, however befuddled, however much or little clarity, sick, healthy....just seeing,visible object, thinking and the usual realities to be known. Yes, I do rejoice in the teachings about anatta. There's no use at all in trying to change what has been conditioned to arise at this very moment and which falls away immediately. These realities couldn't be any other way. I think that appreciating this helps us to live at ease. Btw, I liked Howard's encouragement to you....Wrong view and doubt are common. If they don't arise, they can't be known and therefore can't be eradicated. I also like the way you both question whatever your read and hear. This careful considering and reflection is very important. Phil, if you have time, listen to the edited recordings from Feb 2006, Bangkok. I was listening to them on our flight here and heard our friend Vince strongly disagreeing with K.Sujin at times. I thought of you and how you'd like that part. Again, I was only half-with-it at the time, so can't give the date or track, but will try to find it if you're interested. Metta, Sarah ======= #86577 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Jun 3, 2008 11:01 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Overview of KS 3: Her Faulty Teaching sarahprocter... Hi Herman, --- On Tue, 3/6/08, Herman Hofman wrote: > S: No, kayagati-sati, or awareness of rupas (as usually taken for the body), along with >awareness of namas (commonly taken for oneself), leads to the eradication of sakkaya-ditthi. .... H:>I hope you and Jon are enjoying yourselves in the Alps. Hope your allergic reactions settle down real soon. .... S: Thanks Herman for this and your earlier good wishes. As I write this from our little, basic chalet, I can look out onto Mt Matterhorn in the evening sunshine.... lots of attachment to the peaceful and quiet environment:-) .... H:> What is awareness of namas? Is that namas with namas as object? ... S: How about you tell me what you understand first, so I know where this is heading:-) Is there any reason, do you think, why namas cannot have other namas (one at a time, of course) as object? Metta, Sarah ======== #86578 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Jun 3, 2008 12:17 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Panna As Indriya nilovg Dear Tep, Op 3-jun-2008, om 3:07 heeft Tep het volgende geschreven: > T: Yes, I understand that "Deathless is nibbana" too. But we have > to keep in mind that this sutta does not specifically state that the > development of the five indriyas(faculties) arise in the worldlings. > This is similar to development of the Noble Eightfold Path : it is > not in the worldings, it is only for ones who are on the Path, i.e. > ariya savakas. Worldings can develop mundane magga factors as > explained in MN 117. -------- N: I think you agree that for the Path to become lokuttara it has to be mundane first. But it does not matter what names we use for the development of understanding, from the beginning to the end. In the Co. to the Satipatthanasutta (the Way of mindfulness) the four foundations are called preliminary to the lokuttara Path. I am especially interested in the beginning: how to begin to develop the Path leading to the Deathless? So I am all for it to approach the matter in a practical way. At the same time I am encouraged by texts such as S.N. V, Kindred Sayings on the Faculties: Ch 6, sutta 7: "These five controlling faculties, if cultivated and made much of, do plunge into the Daethless..." This is often repeated: if cultivated and made much of. And now I come to a phrase you like and quoted before, in the Satipatthanasutta: atapii (with ardent energy), sampajano (with understanding), satima (with mindfulness): part of the quote from the Co. to the satipatthanasutta is from the subco: I do not think of higher and higher attainments, but I am interested, as a beginner, in the beginning of the development. And this I see as the right beginning: listening with understanding, considering very often nama and rupa as they appear in daily life. First we have to know the difference between a moment of sati (no thinking) and a moment without sati. The other day I posted part of Metta and I was so struck by the following: It is a strong reminder that the development of metta is a necessary condition for enlightenment. When there is metta one does not think of one's own gain, no place for lobha, wishing to reach this or that, which is a great hindrance for the attainment of the goal. Nina. #86579 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Tue Jun 3, 2008 3:52 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Kamma and Accumulations (wasRe: Mental states......) egberdina Hi Scott, 2008/6/3 Scott Duncan : > Dear Herman, > > Me: "The sutta also suggests that this body comes into being through > food (aahaarasambhuuto), through craving (ta.nhaasambhuuto), and > through conceit (maanasambhuuto). How would you explain these? > > H: "Certainly not by inventing spooky forces that act under no other > constraint than the imagination of their authors." > > Scott: No, I'm just wondering how you see food, craving, and conceit > to cause the body to 'come into being'? The body does not come into being all at once. From a single fertilised cell an organism of billions and billions of cells develops. Without the proper nutrients to provide the building blocks of this development, it can't happen. Craving is not just craving. Amongst others, it is also craving for being, and not just being, but being in a certain way. Cells that lack the mechanisms for growing and reproducing in a certain way do not contribute to a healthy body. Way before there is the psychological craving to be, there is a somatic craving to be a certain way. And so too with conceit. Way before there is the psychological distinction self / not-self, the body distinguishes between self / not-self. It is this biological conceit (I am this, and not that) that is the basis for the immune system, and the reason why people sneeze and produce snot when they are infected by foreign (not-self) organisms. Without sexual intercourse there is no zygote. Without food, craving and conceit, no zygote would live long enough to become larger than the head of a pin. Cheers Herman #86580 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Tue Jun 3, 2008 4:04 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Lessons in Detachment, Ch 5, no 2. egberdina Hi Scott, 2008/6/3 Scott Duncan : > Dear Herman, > > Me: "Ruupa is real, naama is not. Naama is the same as 'I', > 'observer', 'point of view' 'mind' and not 'real'. Is this the view > you present? A form of materialism or physicalism?" > > Scott: I'm just wondering if this is a fair representation of the view > you put forward. I'm not trying to dispute it... > I'm sorry I misunderstood you. No, I am not a materialist or physicalist. If I fit into any pigeonhole, it would probably be the epiphenomenalist one. In simple terms, this is no more than the view that the relationship between conditionality and experience is like the relationship between an object and it's shadow. Experience, like a shadow, is an effect, not a cause. Which doesn't deny the reality of experience, or shadows, but denies that experience causes experience to happen. Hope that clarifies Cheers Herman #86581 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Tue Jun 3, 2008 4:46 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Lessons in Detachment, Ch 5, no 2. egberdina Hi Howard, Nina, Scott, 2008/6/3 : > Hi, Herman (and Scott) - > >> >> H: "...Because that which is known is known as it's qualities, but >> that which knows can't be known, because it doesn't have any >> qualities. > ---------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > Why do you speak of "that which knows" instead of just "the knowing". This is a paraphrase of Nina's way of distinguishing between rupas and namas. Rupas are known, but they don't know anything themselves, while namas are what knows rupas. I > don't believe in a literal "that which knows," Nor do I. >but I sure do believe in > knowing. That's why I use the word 'experience'. You, yourself have distinguished > between unexperienced things and phenomena. That distinction certainly > depends on knowing being real. The activity of knowing does not imply a personal > self. That reification of knowing and identifying "it" as a soul is Sati's > error, but that being an error doesn't imply that there is no knowing. When aware > of warmth, is there not experiencing that warmth? And when you recall that, > after the fact, and conceptually categorize it as having felt warmth, is > there no mental knowing involved in that? In short, as you have said yourself, > there are no phenomena (in the philosophical sense) without there being > experiencing. We have no disagreements here. > -------------------------------------------------- > > In short, ruupa is, and naama isn't. They are different, >> but one is real and the other isn't...I would say that experiencing is >> concept, and that object is experienced. > ---------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > I see no basis for that. Also, is there no experiencing involved with > conceptualizing? When you say that nama isn't real, I would gave to ask how you > KNOW that! I find your position self-contradictory. > ---------------------------------------- If I understand all the foregoing correctly, then you are saying that by nama you mean knowing. And I think that would definitely refer to something that happens, although I would have to add that it is always the knowing of something that happens, not just "bare" knowing. But in my discussion with Scott, I do not get the feeling that he is talking about nama as knowing, he is talking about nama being a something, namely something that which knows. Knowing in general, objectless knowing doesn't happen. Vinnana in a vacuum is conceptualising, thinking. It doesn't happen. Thinking about it does happens. That thinking is real. But the vinnana isn't. If you still believe I am being self-contradictory, please let me know. > > The 'I', observer, point of >> view, mind, nama whatever you want to call them, are all conceptual. >> They have no reality. > ---------------------------------------- > Howard: > That "I/observer point of view" is a different issue. You reify the > activity of knowing, identify it with a personal self, and then depend on that > very error as a basis for denying that knowing occurs. No, I don't do that. There are others, one of whom I am discussing with at the moment, who reify knowing etc. What I will deny point blank everytime though is that a reference to knowing that doesn't refer back to the known objects is a reference to a reality, because it isn't anything other than abstract thinking. And I believe we have agreed on that previously. Cheers Herman #86582 From: "Alex" Date: Tue Jun 3, 2008 5:25 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Lessons in Detachment, Ch 5, no 2. truth_aerator --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Herman Hofman" wrote: > If I understand all the foregoing correctly, then you are saying that by nama you mean knowing. And I think that would definitely refer to something that happens, although I would have to add that it is always the knowing of something that happens, not just "bare" knowing. >>> Nina, Scott, Howard and Herman: I would like to know the EXACT definition of "knowing". Does knowing know itself? What exactly does it mean "to know" ? Best Wishes, Alex #86583 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Tue Jun 3, 2008 5:34 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Detaching from semantic steam rollers and linguistic acrobatics egberdina Hi Alex and all, 2008/6/4 Alex : > To ALL, > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Scott Duncan" > wrote: >> >> Dear Herman, >> >> Me: "Ruupa is real, naama is not. Naama is the same as 'I', >> 'observer', 'point of view' 'mind' and not 'real'. Is this the view >> you present? A form of materialism or physicalism?" >> >> Scott: I'm just wondering if this is a fair representation of the view >> you put forward. I'm not trying to dispute it... >> >> Sincerely, >> >> Scott. >> > > I hear this thing called "Real" being thrown around here and there. > > But what EXACTLY do you mean by the word "real" ? > > > This would clear up a lot of mess. I think you point to a genuine problem. Like you, I think that the problem is caused by conflicting definitions. On one side we have varying understandings of how paramattha dhammas should be understood, and on the other side we have richly varying experience, none of which has the characteristic of being a member of this category or that category. Of course, all experience is real in that it happens. And what is it that happens? Everything happens. There are no categories in experience, there is no difficulty of what is real and not real there. The difficulties start with the segmenting of experience into separate chunks. That is the introduction of something that isn't there, a boundary that turns unity into separateness. And herein lies the crux of the matter. What can it mean for something to NOT be there? And how can something that isn't there have such an impact on what is there, namely everything that happens? I don't have an easy answer for that, and look forward to everyone's thoughts on the matter. Cheers Herman #86584 From: "Tep" Date: Tue Jun 3, 2008 6:24 pm Subject: Re: Panna As Indriya dhammanusarin Dear Nina (and Sarah), - I truly appreciate your reply every time when it is directly referencing relevant suttas. What we worldings think, believe and say is of much less value (even less than 1/16 of 1/16 of the Buddha's words). >N: I think you agree that for the Path to become lokuttara it has to be mundane first. But it does not matter what names we use for the development of understanding, from the beginning to the end. In the Co. to the Satipatthanasutta (the Way of mindfulness) the four foundations are called preliminary to the lokuttara Path. T: Of course, a mundane level is below the supramundane one. But, yes, it matters since we are referencing the Buddha's words in the suttas, and you know that He was very precise. For example, again, in MN 117 He precisely separated the mundane right view from the supramundane right view. [I have quoted this sutta so often that anyone who ever reads my posts probably can recall every single word in it!] However, by stating that the four foundations are "preliminary" to the penetration of the ariya sacca, you are telling me that the "satipatthana way" is mundane. ............. >N: I am especially interested in the beginning: how to begin to develop the Path leading to the Deathless? So I am all for it to approach the matter in a practical way. At the same time I am encouraged by texts such as S.N. V, Kindred Sayings on the Faculties: Ch 6, sutta 7: "These five controlling faculties, if cultivated and made much of, do plunge into the Deathless..." This is often repeated: if cultivated and made much of. T: That's a very good question for all Buddhists ! Please note your quote: "if cultivated and made much of, do plunge into the Deathless". I believe it means cultivation of the five indriyas (controlling faculties) on the lokuttara Path to take the trainers (ariya savakas below the Arahant) to the Deathless. To explain let's examine Satindriya (in the Indriya Vibhanga Sutta SN 48.10) : "And what is the faculty of mindfulness? There is the case where a monk, a disciple of the noble ones, is mindful, highly meticulous, remembering & able to call to mind even things that were done & said long ago. He remains focused on the body in & of itself — ardent, alert, & mindful — putting aside greed & distress with reference to the world. He remains focused on feelings in & of themselves... the mind in & of itself... mental qualities in & of themselves — ardent, alert, & mindful — putting aside greed & distress with reference to the world. This is called the faculty of mindfulness." T: It is clear that Satindriya, the faculty of mindfulness, is the same as the right mindfulness, which is the 7th magga factor of the one who is on the supramundane path. Further, the faculty of concentration(Samadhindriya) is exactly the right concentration [see DN 22 and MN 141, for example.], i.e. the 8th magga factor of the one who is on the supramundane path. .............. >N: I do not think of higher and higher attainments, but I am interested, as a beginner, in the beginning of the development. And this I see as the right beginning: listening with understanding, considering very often nama and rupa as they appear in daily life. First we have to know the difference between a moment of sati (no thinking) and a moment without sati. T: I think you may be downplaying the importance of the Buddha's words in the suttas! Sati in a worlding who considers "nama and rupa as they appear in daily life" is not satindriya (faculty of mindfulness). The "right beginning" that you are talking about is not yet the beginning of right mindfulness, the Path factor. "And what is right mindfulness? There is the case where a monk remains focused on the body in & of itself — ardent, alert, & mindful — putting aside greed & distress with reference to the world. He remains focused on feelings in & of themselves... the mind in & of itself... mental qualities in & of themselves — ardent, alert, & mindful — putting aside greed & distress with reference to the world. This is called right mindfulness." [MN 141: Sacca Vibhanga]. It is clear that "right mindfulness" is identical to the faculty of mindfulness in the Indriya Vibhanga Sutta ! So, that's why I have said that you maybe downplaying the importance of the Buddha's words. However, I absolutely agree with you that "we have to know the difference between a moment of sati (no thinking) and a moment without sati" as a right beginning at the worldling level. I think worldlings have to develop indriya-samvara that supports the cultivation of satipatthana as seen in several suttas (e.g. Samyutta Nikaya V. The Great Book (Mahaavagga) 46. Bojjha.ngasa.myutta 6 (6) Ku.n.daliya]. .................. On one occasion the Blessed One was dwelling at Saaketa in the Deer Park at the A~njana Grove. Then the wanderer Ku.n.daliya approached the Blessed One and exchanged greetings with him. When they had concluded their greetings and cordial talk, he sat down to one side and said to the Blessed One: "Master Gotama, I am one who stays around monastic parks and frequents assemblies. After the meal, when I have finished my breakfast, it is my custom to roam and wander from park to park, from garden to garden. There I see some ascetics and Brahmins engaged in discussion for the benefits of rescuing their own theses in debate and condemning [the theses of others]. [note 67] But what is the benefit that Master Gotama lives for?" "Ku.n.daliya, the Tathaagata lives for the benefit and fruit of true knowledge and liberation." [note 68] "But, Master Gotama, what things, when developed and cultivated fulfil true knowledge and liberation?" "The seven factors of enlightenment, Ku.n.daliya, when developed and cultivated, fulfil true knowledge and liberation." "But, Master Gotama, what things, when developed and cultivated, fulfil the seven factors of enlightenment?" "The four establishments of mindfulness, Ku.n.daliya, when developed and cultivated, fulfil the seven factors of enlightenment." "But, Master Gotama, what things, when developed and cultivated, fulfil the four establishments of mindfulness?" "The three kinds of good conduct, Ku.n.daliya, when developed and cultivated, fulfil the four establishments of mindfulness." "But, Master Gotama, what things, when developed and cultivated, fulfil the three kinds of good conduct?" "Restraint of the sense faculties, Ku.n.daliya, when developed and cultivated, fulfils the three kinds of good conduct." [endquote] .............. T: The restraint of the sense faculties is Siila. So it seems that the whole "practice" is supported by Siila. Siila supports the three good conducts. The four establishments of mindfulness cannot be developed by people who have not cultivated the three good conducts (bodily, verbally, mentally). Tep === #86585 From: upasaka@... Date: Tue Jun 3, 2008 4:40 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Lessons in Detachment, Ch 5, no 2. upasaka_howard Hi, Herman (and Scott) - In a message dated 6/3/2008 7:46:32 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, hhofmeister@... writes: If I understand all the foregoing correctly, then you are saying that by nama you mean knowing. And I think that would definitely refer to something that happens, although I would have to add that it is always the knowing of something that happens, not just "bare" knowing. But in my discussion with Scott, I do not get the feeling that he is talking about nama as knowing, he is talking about nama being a something, namely something that which knows. ----------------------------------------------- Howard: I have no problem with the foregoing in the slightest. ---------------------------------------------- Knowing in general, objectless knowing doesn't happen. Vinnana in a vacuum is conceptualising, thinking. It doesn't happen. Thinking about it does happens. That thinking is real. But the vinnana isn't. ----------------------------------------------- Howard: A so-called vi~n~nana that isn't the knowing (or the experiential presence) of something isn't real - I agree. I imagine Scott does too. --------------------------------------------- If you still believe I am being self-contradictory, please let me know. > > The 'I', observer, point of >> view, mind, nama whatever you want to call them, are all conceptual. >> They have no reality. > ---------------------------------------- > Howard: > That "I/observer point of view" is a different issue. You reify the > activity of knowing, identify it with a personal self, and then depend on that > very error as a basis for denying that knowing occurs. No, I don't do that. There are others, one of whom I am discussing with at the moment, who reify knowing etc. What I will deny point blank everytime though is that a reference to knowing that doesn't refer back to the known objects is a reference to a reality, because it isn't anything other than abstract thinking. And I believe we have agreed on that previously. -------------------------------------------- Howard: We still do. :-) ------------------------------------------- Cheers Herman ======================== With metta, Howard #86586 From: "Phil" Date: Tue Jun 3, 2008 9:59 pm Subject: Re: Overview of KS 3: Her Faulty Teaching philofillet Hi Howard > I wonder if I am a mahayanist or something. > ------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > Buddha forbid! ;-)) More seriously, I see nothing in your perspective > that spells out 'Mahayana' any more than 'Theravada'. > ---------------------------------------------- I don't know. Perhaps I am being misled into misconeptions about what Theravada is all about. But I have a feeling of Mahayana being warmer, somehow. Not as strictly adherent to the Buddha's teaching, but warmer about bringing people into the fold, relieving of them of there worst forms of suffering. That goes to an extreme here in Japan where some sects are barely recognizable as Buddhist, mind you, but I think there is something to be said for a way that offers relief of suffering to a great many people. I reflected on this last night. I said that your post to me was "encouraging", but the truth be known I was so moved that I broke down in tears and cried for a couple of minutes? Why? I thought about it afterwards. I think it was just so good to come across a post that was not about technical accuracy re the texts or deep subjects, but was just a friendly encouragement to someone to carry on challenging akusala and making positive changes in his life. I think that kind of "warm" Dhamma is very important. It doesn't lead directly to liberation but it conditions more confidence and diligence. Today I've been feeling very, very diligent, conditioned by your post. Despite the friendliness of the moderators and other AS students, friendliness in terms of greetings and enquiries about what's up, and friendly welcomes to new members, the Dhamma that they offer is *cold*, it is too intent on perfection and penetrative wisdom, it is too orthodox and strict and unforgiving of loose and warm approaches to Dhamma. It is too soon to expect or insist on people going through life seeing things in paramattha terms, it is unwise to insist on detachment from the beginning. The Buddha certainly didn't teach that way. As we know, from suttas such as the one where he met a leper, he *****only taught the teaching that was particular to the Buddha when he had determined that his listener's mind was ready for it**** That can't be stressed by enough asterixes. But here we find people telling newcomers to Buddhism that there is no point going any further unless they accept from the beginning that there are only nama and rupa (ken) and we have people saying that they would have been better off not knowing Dhamma at all if they hadn't heard the "true Dhamma" (sarah.) There is such a cold inistence that only the Dhamma taught by AS (or by orthodox Theravada if AS is indeed correct in teaching it) is the true Dhamma. I remember Robert K telling me that he had seen so many people drift away from the Foundation, from Bangkok, because they were unable to see that it is only the present moment that matters, and it really felt like he was equating the Foundation with the True Dhamma. I am fed up with it. I want warm Dhamma, that's what I need, Dhamma that encourages me to get on diligently with doing the straight forward things that need to be done to cause less suffering to myself and others. On the other hand, I will miss not hearing of the deep, deep Dhamma that only the Buddha taught. But my sobbing last night was such a relief and told me that it is time for me to get back to a warmer and fuzzier Dhamma that can help more people. I don't know if it is Mahayana or not, but I think I am more likely to find it at other forums, where people can come out with problems and not be told that they are just stories, there is only nama and rupa, etc. I am not ready for that kind of Dhamma. Maybe I will be someday. Amyways, the moderators and AS students are very friendly in terms of saying hello and greeting people and asking about where they live and so on, but perhaps there will be conditions for them to reflect on whether they present the Dhamma to newcomers correctly. If the Buddha himself didn't teach the Dhamma that is particular to the Buddha until he knew that the listener was ready, who on earth are AS and her followers to be teaching anatta right from the beginning, detachment right from the beginning? I wonder if they will be able to reflect on this and come to develop a way of presenting the Dhamma that is more in line with the Buddha's gradual training? I think of one example. When a grieving woman came to the Buddha and asked him to give her dead son back, he didn't talk about nama and rupa, because he knew she wasn't ready. He used the mustard seed parable that got across the message in such a warm and gentle way that it has me in tears again! Metta, Phil. This is one of my periodic departures, so won't be able to see responses. #86587 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Tue Jun 3, 2008 11:35 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Overview of KS 3: Her Faulty Teaching egberdina Hi Sarah, 2008/6/4 sarah abbott : > Hi Herman, > > --- On Tue, 3/6/08, Herman Hofman wrote: > >> S: No, kayagati-sati, or awareness of rupas (as usually taken for the body), along with >awareness of namas (commonly taken for oneself), leads to the eradication of sakkaya-ditthi. > .... > H:>I hope you and Jon are enjoying yourselves in the Alps. Hope your > allergic reactions settle down real soon. > .... > S: Thanks Herman for this and your earlier good wishes. As I write this from our little, basic chalet, I can look out onto Mt Matterhorn in the evening sunshine.... lots of attachment to the peaceful and quiet environment:-) > .... > > H:> What is awareness of namas? Is that namas with namas as object? > ... > S: How about you tell me what you understand first, so I know where this is heading:-) Is there any reason, do you think, why namas cannot have other namas (one at a time, of course) as object? What I understand is that nama is a collective term that refers to the knowing of objects or characteristics of all kinds. But knowing "itself" it not an object, it has no characteristic. Whats more, different kinds of knowing have nothing in common with each other. The knowing of a sight has nothing in common with the knowing of a sound, for example. The meaning of knowing does not come from the act, but from the object of the act. Now to namas of namas. If I have understood correctly, and nama is the knowing of an object, what is the object or characteristic of a nama so that a nama may know it? I hope that is clear. If not, feel free to say so. Cheers Herman #86588 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Jun 4, 2008 1:47 am Subject: Metta, Ch 6, no 6. nilovg Dear friends, If we see the disadvantage of akusala citta and akusala kamma we will develop mettå in order to diminish the accumulation of the different akusala dhammas. We should consider the benefit of patience, patience for the development of kusala and perseverance with it, so that akusala can be eliminated. We read in the Middle Length Sayings (I, no. 21, Discourse on the Parable of the Saw) that the Buddha, while staying near Såvatthí, at the Jeta Grove, said to the monks: There are, monks, these five ways of speaking in which others when speaking to you might speak: at a right time or at a wrong time; according to fact or not according to fact; gently or harshly; on what is connected with the goal or on what is not connected with the goal; with a mind of friendliness or full of hatred. Monks, when speaking to others you might speak at a right time or at a wrong time; monks, when speaking to others you might speak according to fact or not according to fact; monks, when speaking to others you might speak about what is connected with the goal or about what is not connected with the goal; monks, when speaking to others you might speak with a mind of friendliness or full of hatred. Herein, monks, you should train yourselves thus: “Neither will our minds become perverted nor will we utter an evil speech, but kindly and compassionate will we dwell, with a mind of friendliness, void of hatred; and we will dwell having suffused that person with a mind of friendliness; and, beginning with him, we will dwell having suffused the whole world with a mind of friendliness that is far-reaching, widespread, immeasurable, without enmity, without malevolence.” This is how you must train yourselves, monks. In this sutta several similes are used to show that when there is mettå there cannot be any anguish. Mettå-citta is for example compared to a cat- skin bag which is supple and well cured. Even when someone hits it with a piece of wood no noise at all can be heard. In the same way, when there is mettå-citta, there cannot be anything which could cause the arising of dosa. We read that the Buddha said: Monks, as low-down thieves might carve one limb from limb with a double- handled saw, yet even then whoever sets his mind at enmity, he, for this reason, is not a doer of my teaching... ****** Nina. #86589 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Wed Jun 4, 2008 4:29 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Lessons in Detachment, Ch 5, no 2. scottduncan2 Dear Herman, Thanks for the clarification: H: "...If I fit into any pigeonhole, it would probably be the epiphenomenalist one. In simple terms, this is no more than the view that the relationship between conditionality and experience is like the relationship between an object and it's shadow. Experience, like a shadow, is an effect, not a cause. Which doesn't deny the reality of experience, or shadows, but denies that experience causes experience to happen." Scott: If I'm following, this view has it that mentality cannot cause anything, it merely arises secondarily. Is this an adequate paraphrase? Sincerely, Scott. #86590 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Tue Jun 3, 2008 6:58 pm Subject: Why Meditation? [dsg] buddhatrue Hi Sarah, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > > Hi James & > >James: No, I have decided that I don't want to write anything more > about K. Sujin. I have said all I want to say about her. > .... > S: In that case, perhaps you'll consider a new series? Maybe Phil can give you some suggestions.... > **** Hmmm....write another series? Well, the last one caused much more negative reaction than I anticipated. However, I will comment on one thing. I read in your recent post to Ven. P that your main issue with his farewell post is the subject of "meditation". What is "meditation"? I guess this is a subject I could take up for the moment without too many members freaking out. :-) Here is my definition of meditation: any means used to supress or overcome the hindrances. The hindrances are: Sensual Desire, Ill- will, sloth and torpor, restlessness and remorse, and doubt. These are the hindrances to insight and happiness. Directing the mind toward a neutral or inspiring object overcomes these hindrances. The Vism. describes 40 such objects and how to use them to supress the hindrances. The ultimate goal is to overcome the hindrances in all positions: walking, sitting, standing, and lying. Meditation, therefore, is done in all bodily positions. I can relate a funny, but telling, story. Yesterday, I was teaching a class when my co-teacher got up from her seat and turned up the airconditioning in the room. Frankly, I was very irritated with her for doing that. The room is hot, humid, and stuffy with 35 students and I depend on the airconditioning to keep the environment comfortable. As the room started getting hotter and more uncomfortable, I started to get more and more irritated at her. In my mind, I told myself that I needed to calm down, forget about it, and not let my anger get the best of me. However, that didn't do much good. I was pissed off at her for the rest of the class. Later that day, during a free period, I was sitting in my classroom (with the airconditioning on) practicing mindfulness of breathing meditation. I sat in the classic pose with my back straight, legs folded crossways, and my eyes slightly open. I can close the curtains in my classroom and practice meditation whenever I want (and have a mat). I focused on the sensation of the breath entering and exiting my nostrils. I did that for about 15 minutes or so until I felt my whole body was at ease and comfortable. Then I practiced metta meditation. I wished all beings happiness and well- being, and the teacher from earlier in the day just popped into my mind. I also wished her happiness and well-being, and I genuninely felt it! Just one hour before I was about ready to punch her face in ;-)), and now I was genuinely wishing her happiness and well- being. Why? Because my breath meditation had supressed the hindrances enough for me to wish my enemy happiness. Truly, it was a beautiful feeling! Granted, the next time I meet that teacher, I probably won't be exuding metta toward her- especially if she messes with my airconditioning again! ;-)) But, I will be a little less pissed off at her. If I continue to practice in this way, gradually and gradually, I can purify my mind until I could completely overcome the hindrances. No matter what anyone does to me, I could feel metta toward them. It is possible! But, it is only possible through meditation. Meditation is crucial for purifying the mind. This cannot be done during everyday life (as the above example illustrates). Metta (unless you screw with my airconditioning! ;-)), James #86591 From: "Phil" Date: Tue Jun 3, 2008 11:38 pm Subject: Re: Overview of KS 3: Her Faulty Teaching philofillet Hi again Writing again, predictably enough, to apologize for the hysterical tone of the previous post. But there was stuff in there I want to keep thinking about. What does the Dhamma mean for me? Does it mean an interest in penetrative insight? No. It is about the relieving of suffering for others, and myself. What does the latter mean and how does Dhamma do it in a more real way than new age stuff, that I don't know yet. But I am now understanding there will be a shift away from the wisdom wing back onto the compassion wing. (I don't know where these two wings come from - Tibetan Buddhism? - but I can rememeber when I was active in a very good brahma-viharas related group I started getting into DSG and Abhidhamma and posting in those terms, and someone there warned me about getting too deep into Abhidhamma, and falling from the compassion wing too deep into the wisdom wing, or something like that. Now I have a better idea what he was talking about. Not a perfectly clear idea, but better. For the time being I will focus on Dhamma practices with regard to what they do to relieve suffering, and not as strict about whether they are in line with the deep teachings. Thereby "GOING WRONG" as is so often warned about. So be it. What will happen to me and my cittas as I delve deep into the musky groves of Wrong View? What kind of rosy eyed atta-bound fool will emerge!?! We shall see.... :) Metta, Phil --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Phil" wrote: > > > > Hi Howard > > > > I wonder if I am a mahayanist or something. > > ------------------------------------------------- > > Howard: > > Buddha forbid! ;-)) More seriously, I see nothing in your > perspective > > that spells out 'Mahayana' any more than 'Theravada'. > > ---------------------------------------------- > > > I don't know. Perhaps I am being misled into misconeptions about > what Theravada is all about. But I have a feeling of Mahayana being > warmer, somehow. Not as strictly adherent to the Buddha's teaching, > but warmer about bringing people into the fold, relieving of them of > there worst forms of suffering. That goes to an extreme here in > Japan where some sects are barely recognizable as Buddhist, mind > you, but I think there is something to be said for a way that offers > relief of suffering to a great many people. > #86592 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Wed Jun 4, 2008 4:45 am Subject: [dsg] Kamma and Accumulations (wasRe: Mental states......) scottduncan2 Dear Herman, Thanks for the clarifications: H: "The body does not come into being all at once. From a single fertilised cell an organism of billions and billions of cells develops. Without the proper nutrients to provide the building blocks of this development, it can't happen." Scott: Basic biology, then. I've heard of these things. ;-) H: "...Way before there is the psychological craving to be, there is a somatic craving to be a certain way." Scott: Would you suggest that, since all mentality is secondary to the physical, then all 'craving' is, essentially, 'somatic craving'? H: "And so too with conceit. Way before there is the psychological distinction self / not-self, the body distinguishes between self / not-self. It is this biological conceit (I am this, and not that) that is the basis for the immune system, and the reason why people sneeze and produce snot when they are infected by foreign (not-self) organisms." Scott: Again, mentality being epiphenomenal, it is the physical that is central in this view. H: "Without sexual intercourse there is no zygote. Without food, craving and conceit, no zygote would live long enough to become larger than the head of a pin." Scott: Overall, then, the view seems to attribute mental properties to physical or material properties and processes, but in the sense that these mental states only arise or seem to arise secondarily. One has, then biological craving, biological conceit - in effect biological mentality. And this mentality is merely shadow, somehow real but ineffective - effect but not cause. Does this reflect the view as stated? Sincerely, Scott. #86593 From: "colette" Date: Tue Jun 3, 2008 10:00 am Subject: Re: Detaching from semantic steam rollers and linguistic acrobatics ksheri3 Chuckles & Chortles from the Peanut Gallery. Good one Alex. Without that Penn State, though, you might've been in for a little "rollin' in the dirt", what was that song by Robert Cray: "Playin' in the Dirt"? I'll think about that since, I believe you understand what it is I'm speaking of, like Herman understands something through his shock at what the implications are that I continually propose, and so you're giving me room to operate? thanx. toodles, colette --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Alex" wrote: <...> > I hear this thing called "Real" being thrown around here and there. > > But what EXACTLY do you mean by the word "real" ? > > > This would clear up a lot of mess. > > > Best wishes, > > Alex > > P.S. > > If you can read this, then your monitor is real, 'you' are real and > so 'am I'. Solipsists and idealists can Rest in peace. > #86594 From: "R. K. Wijayaratne" Date: Tue Jun 3, 2008 3:41 pm Subject: The Great Discourse on the Lion's Roar - III * rwijayaratne  Namo Tassa Bhagavato Arahato Sammâ Sambuddhassa!  <....>______________________________ Taken from AccessToInsight.org1 Translated from Pali by Ñanamoli Thera & Bhikkhu Bodhi THE GREAT DISCOURSE ON THE LION'S ROAR - III Majjhima Nikâya 12 - Maha-sihanada Sutta2 Ten Powers of a Tathâgata (Buddha), Powers 6 - 10Continued from previous instalment Commentary: This is the continuation of the 10 powers, all of which, only a Samma-Sambuddha possesses. See the first five powers here.   15. (6) "Again, the Tathâgata understands as it actually is the disposition of the faculties of other beings, other persons. That too is a Tathâgata's power...3 Explanation: Power 6 - The Lord Buddha understands the various levels of development of the five faculties of faith/cofidence (saddhâ), energy (viriya), mindfulness (sati), concentration (samâdhi) and wisdom (paññâ) of all beings and this allows him to claim the highest place among all beings, speak fearlessly in any assembly and allows him to set rolling the Wheel of the Dhamma (teach/expound the Dhamma teachings).   16. (7) "Again, the Tathâgata understands as it actually is the defilement, the cleansing and the emergence in regard to the jhanas, liberations, concentrations and attainments. That too is a Tathâgata's power...4 Explanation: Power 7 - The Lord Buddha understands how the mind becomes defiled, how the mind is cleansed and the cleansing and the emergence of the mind from jhânas, liberations (vimutti), concentrations (samâdhi) and attainments and this allows him to claim the highest place among all beings...   17. (8) "Again, the Tathâgata recollects his manifold past lives, that is, one birth, two births, three births, four births, five births, ten births, twenty births, thirty births, forty births, fifty births, a hundred births, a thousand births, a hundred thousand births, many aeons of world-contraction, many aeons of world-expansion, many aeons of world-contraction and expansion: 'There I was so named, of such a clan, with such an appearance, such was my nutriment, such my experience of pleasure and pain, such my life-term; and passing away from there, I reappeared elsewhere; and there too I was so named, of such a clan, with such an appearance, such was my nutriment, such my experience of pleasure and pain, such my life-term; and passing away from there, I reappeared here.' Thus with their aspects and particulars he recollects his manifold past lives. That too is a Tathâgata's power... Explanation: Power 8 - The Lord Buddha is able to re-collect many of his past lives with details including his clan and name in each life time, the food/drink that he consumed, the pleasures/pains experienced, his life-term and where he was re-born next with those details and this allows him to claim the highest place among all beings...   18. (9) "Again, with the divine eye, which is purified and surpasses the human, the Tathâgata sees beings passing away and reappearing, inferior and superior, fair and ugly, fortunate and unfortunate, and he understands how beings pass on according to their actions thus: 'These worthy beings who were ill-conducted in body, speech and mind, revilers of noble ones, wrong in their views, giving effect to wrong view in their actions, on the dissolution of the body, [71] after death, have reappeared in a state of deprivation, in a bad destination, in perdition, even in hell; but these worthy beings who were well-conducted in body, speech and mind, not revilers of noble ones, right in their views, giving effect to right view in their actions, on the dissolution of the body, after death, have reappeared in a good destination, even in the heavenly world.' Thus with the divine eye, which is purified and surpasses the human, he sees beings passing away and reappearing, inferior and superior, fair and ugly, fortunate and unfortunate, and he understands how beings pass on according to their actions. That too is a Tathâgata's power... Explanation: Power 9 - The Lord Buddha is capable of seeing other beings as they are born and pass away that are inferior/superior, attractive/unattractive and unfortunate/fortunate according to their negative or positive actions in mind, speech and body (kamma), such as reviling or revering noble ones (Comy. 'higher' beings along the Noble Eightfold Path) and having incorrect or correct ideas and as a result of these ideas acting in a negative or positive way and this allows him to claim the highest place among all beings....   19. (10) "Again, by realizing it for himself with direct knowledge, the Tathâgata here and now enters upon and abides in the deliverance of mind and deliverance by wisdom that are taintless with the destruction of the taints. That too is a Tathâgata's power that a Tathâgata has, by virtue of which he claims the herd-leader's place, roars his lion's roar in the assemblies, and sets rolling the Wheel of Brahma. Explanation: Power 10 - The Lord Buddha enters and dwells in the deliverance/emancipation/release/unbinding (Nibbâna) of the mind, which is free of defilments, through direct knowledge and this allows him to claim the highest place among all beings....   20. "The Tathâgata has these ten Tathâgata's powers, possessing which he claims the herd-leader's place, roars his lion's roar in the assemblies, and sets rolling the Wheel of Brahma. Explanation: The Lord Buddha has these 10 powers that allow him to claim the highest place among all beings, speak fearlessly in any assembly and allows him to set rolling the Wheel of the Dhamma (teach/expound the Dhamma teachings).   21. "Sâriputta, when I know and see thus, should anyone say of me: 'The recluse Gotama does not have any superhuman states, any distinction in knowledge and vision worthy of the noble ones. The recluse Gotama teaches a Dhamma (merely) hammered out by reasoning, following his own line of inquiry as it occurs to him' — unless he abandons that assertion and that state of mind and relinquishes that view, then as (surely as if he had been) carried off and put there he will wind up in hell.5 Just as a bhikkhu possessed of virtue, concentration and wisdom would here and now enjoy final knowledge, so it will happen in this case, I say, that unless he abandons that assertion and that state of mind and relinquishes that view, then as (surely as if he had been) carried off and put there he will wind up in hell. Explanation: The Lord Buddha explains to Ven. Sâriputta that if anyone were to wrongly say that the Lord Buddha did not have any superhuman powers, higher knowledges that a high/noble one can have and only teaches the Dhamma from reasoning, following a line of investigation and if that person does not abandon this opinion/view, then as if s/he were carried off and put there s/he would go to hell after death; in the same way a monk who posses virtue/morality (sîla), concentration (samâdhi) and wisdom (paññâ) would be assured of final knowledge/realization (Nibbâna) right here and now. <....> Notes1. More suttas from AccessToInsight.org can be found here http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sutta.html 2. This sutta can be found in full here http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.012.ntbb.html and an alternate translation of this sutta can be found here http://www.mettanet.org/tipitaka/2Sutta-Pitaka/2Majjhima-Nikaya/Majjhima1/012-ma\ hasihanada-sutta-e1.html 3. Vbh. Sections 814-27 gives a detailed analysis. Comy. states the meaning more concisely as the Tathagata's knowledge of the superiority and inferiority of beings' faculties of faith, energy, mindfulness, concentration and wisdom. 4.Vbh. Section 828: "The defilement (sankilesa) is a state partaking of deterioration; cleansing (vodana) is a state partaking of distinction; emergence (vutthana) is both cleansing and the rising out of an attainment. The eight liberations (vimokkha) are enumerated, e.g., at DN 15/ii,70-71, and comprise three liberations pertaining to the realm of material form, the four immaterial attainments, and the cessation of perception and feeling. The nine attainments (samapatti) are the four jhanas, the four immaterial attainments, and cessation. 5. The idiom yathabhatam nikkhitto evam niraye is knotty; the rendering here follows the gloss of Comy.: "He will be put in hell as if carried off and put there by the wardens of hell." Although such a fate may sound excessively severe merely for verbal denigration, it should be remembered that he is maligning a Fully Enlightened Buddha with a mind of hatred, and his intention in so doing is to discourage others from entering upon the path that could lead them to complete liberation from suffering. <.....> #86595 From: "connie" Date: Wed Jun 4, 2008 5:30 am Subject: Perfections Corner (173) nichiconn Dear Friends, ch. 5 continues: As we have seen, viriya has been classified among the faculties, indriyas (leaders each in their own field). These are: the faculty of confidence, saddhaa, the faculty of sati, the faculty of pa~n~naa, the faculty of energy, viriya, the faculty of concentration, samaadhi. These faculties arise together and thus, the faculty of viriya which arises together with confidence, sati, pa~n~naa and samaadhi must be kusala viriya. Realities can be classified in different ways, for example, by way of the four bases of success, iddhi-paada (leading to enlightenment): wish-to-do (chanda) energy (viriya) citta (firmness of citta or concentration) investigation (viima'msa). Thus we see that there are different aspects of viriya. The cetasikas which are faculties are not identical with the cetasikas which are bases of success. Such classifications are very detailed, but they show us that kusala viriya is of different degrees. We read in the "Kindred Sayings"(V, Mahaa-vagga, Book IV, Kindred Sayings on the Faculties, Ch I, §8, Point of view) about the five controlling faculties, indriyas: "Monks, there are five controlling faculties. What five? The controlling faculty of faith, of energy, of sati, of concentration and of pa~n~naa..." These are dhammas that are rulers or leaders (indriyas), each in their own field, and they arise at the moment of satipa.t.thaana, when satisampaja~n~na (awareness and understanding) considers the characteristics of realities. We read in the above quoted Sutta about the controlling faculty of faith: "But from what point of view, monks, should the controlling faculty of faith be regarded? From that of the four limbs of Streamwinning..." ..to be continued, connie #86596 From: "Alex" Date: Wed Jun 4, 2008 6:05 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Lessons in Detachment, Ch 5, no 2. truth_aerator Dear Scott and Herman, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Scott Duncan" wrote: > Scott: If I'm following, this view has it that mentality cannot cause > anything, it merely arises secondarily. Is this an adequate paraphrase? > > Sincerely, > > Scott. > Remember that DSG line: "You cannot *do* anything" ? That answers it. Best wishes, Alex #86597 From: "Alex" Date: Wed Jun 4, 2008 6:38 am Subject: [dsg] Kamma and Accumulations (wasRe: Mental states......) truth_aerator Dear Scott, In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Scott Duncan" wrote: > H: "...Way before there is the psychological craving to be, there is a > somatic craving to be a certain way." > > Scott: Would you suggest that, since all mentality is secondary to the physical, then all 'craving' is, essentially, 'somatic craving'? > I would like to add few things: It seems that lust has almost 100 (if not 100%) physical basis. The self/not-self distinction operates subconsciously (or non consciously) even at a molecular level. Self preservation and replication is found at that level as well. Intelligent behaviour or choices are not signs of consciousness or mind as we like to picture it. A computer can make VERY intelligent chess moves that would beat 99.9% of intelligent humans. Does the computer really understand what is going on? No. It is just following instructions. It is also interesting to know how a little child learns. Mother shows the child objects and names them by name. Ultimately the child learns how this and that is called + the proper usage of verbs, nouns, adjectives etc. Kinda like an advanced neural network. But do we really know what this or that word means? Could it be simply an instruction that we follow, like a computer playing chess? You may talk about AI limitations, but that is due to current technological limitations. Our brains can process 100 trillion instructions per second. A 3GHz PC has only 3 billion, ~3,333 slower. A mouse has much more processing power than PC. Best wishes, Alex #86598 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Wed Jun 4, 2008 5:16 am Subject: Re: Overview of KS 3: Her Faulty Teaching buddhatrue Hi Phil, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Phil" wrote: > I don't know. Perhaps I am being misled into misconeptions about > what Theravada is all about. But I have a feeling of Mahayana being > warmer, somehow. Not as strictly adherent to the Buddha's teaching, > but warmer about bringing people into the fold, relieving of them of > there worst forms of suffering. That goes to an extreme here in > Japan where some sects are barely recognizable as Buddhist, mind > you, but I think there is something to be said for a way that offers > relief of suffering to a great many people. > > I reflected on this last night. I said that your post to me > was "encouraging", but the truth be known I was so moved that I > broke down in tears and cried for a couple of minutes? Why? I > thought about it afterwards. I think it was just so good to come > across a post that was not about technical accuracy re the texts or > deep subjects, but was just a friendly encouragement to someone to > carry on challenging akusala and making positive changes in his > life. I read your recent post to Howard and I was just floored! And let me tell you, it takes a lot to floor me! (or at least I hope) ;-)) Your post was just so wonderful and so touching! Gosh, I was without words after I read it....but I will try to find them. First, like Howard, I want to thank you for being so genuine. Being genuine is extremely rare and difficult these days. I salute you for being so brave! Secondly, I want to point something out to you. Those people who you identify as being "cold", they are not really cold at all. Actually, they are very warm and loving people. That is why being pissed off at them doesn't seem to last very long. ;-)) But, they follow a teacher (who I refuse to name) who doesn't reveal his/her personal feelings and achievements to his/her followers. This is a problem. Hopefully, you could see why it would be difficult for them to reveal their feelings or insights to anyone else. "Cold Showers", etc....I have written about it many times. Blah, Blah, But, they don't completely represent Theravada...or what "Theravada" means today- the original teachings of the Buddha. Mahayana and Vijarana tried to resolve difficulties they found in the original teachings and the followers of the original teachings. But, more often than not, they tried to resolve difficulties they found within themselves. Same old story. Sure, we could argue texts and subtexts forever, but it all comes down to the truth. Who presented the truth? The Buddha presented the truth. He didn't create the truth, he just presented it. But what about all of this extra, superfluous baggage added to the Buddha's teachings? Ignore it and dismiss it. Trust your heart and your instincts- that was the Buddha's final advice on his deathbed to everyone. Phil, now is not the time for tears, for self of for others, now is the time for action! Let us all work together to make the Buddha's wish a reality! Metta, James #86599 From: upasaka@... Date: Wed Jun 4, 2008 3:41 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Lessons in Detachment, Ch 5, no 2. upasaka_howard Hi, Alex (and Scott & Herman) - In a message dated 6/3/2008 8:25:58 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, truth_aerator@... writes: Nina, Scott, Howard and Herman: I would like to know the EXACT definition of "knowing". --------------------------------------------------- Howard: Hmm, well there's always a lot of dictionaries to choose among. ;-) A bit more seriously, I presume by this statement you mean not that you don't understand what it means to be conscious of things, but that you have some difficulty with the mechanics or the details. For this sort of question, and not just pertaining to consciousness, I think that it's generally difficult to know what sort of an answer will be satisfactory. I'll just make a couple comments, for whatever they may be worth. --------------------------------------------------- Does knowing know itself? What exactly does it mean "to know" ? --------------------------------------------------- Howard: Let me take a crack at both of these: First of all, I consider that knowing in general is a sort of "shining of light" that provides experiential content. I think that there is more the one mode of knowing. The most commonly discussed mode of vi~n~nana is the knowing of content as an object. That is, I believe, the only mode of knowing rupas, at least for non-arahants. It is also a common way of knowing mental operations after-the-fact, but in that mode, it is actually a recollecting of an already-ceased operation, and not the direct knowing of a phenomenon currently in effect. This knowing-as-an-object is what 'vi~n~nana' typically refers to, and it is the mode of knowing that is usually defiled by reification of dhammas and aggregations (such as the person). I believe that it is this knowing-as-an-object that is commonly defiled by sense-of-self (the knowing seeming to be a "knower" and the content seeming to be a self-existent entity grasped by "the knower".) I also believe that there is a mode of knowing, a very-much-everyday mode of knowing, that is not the knowing-as-an-object but is what I tend to call a "participative knowing". This is a being conscious of a mental, object-taking activity while it is in effect. The activity is experienced, but not as an object. In a way, it is self-experiencing, though that is misleading, for it suggests a subject-object split. An example is being "participatively" aware of (the activity of) feeling pleasant warmth at the time that the warmth is the rupic object of vedana (and, of course, of vi~n~nana). It is, I believe, the *basis* for our being able to report after-the-fact that we just felt a pleasant warmth. If that participative awareness of the activity of feeling (as pleasant in my example) were not in effect, with there being no simutaneous consciousness of that affective knowing, then subsequent recollection also would lack that knowing. Having written these last two paragraphs, I can now give my opinion on your question "Does knowing know itself?" My answer is that as an object, it does not! No act of knowing takes itself as object. If it did, there would be more than one object at a time. A subsequent state can consist of recalling the present knowing as its object, but that does not constitute self-knowing. On the other hand, there is the participative experience of knowing as it occurs, else we would never even conceive of knowing of anything. When we, for example, are terribly afraid of something, that "something" is the object, but the fear is "felt" as well, at the very same time, participatively, and not as an object. Probably all namas are participatively known, but that is quite different from knowing-of-an-object. ----------------------------------------------------------. Best Wishes, Alex =============================== With metta, Howard